The chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has announced that he is working to separate air traffic control (ATC) functions from the FAA as part of the ongoing FAA reauthorization process.
In his June 15 remarks before the Aero Club of Washington, Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pennsylvania), proposed creating a not-for-profit, federally chartered corporation to operate and modernize ATC.
That corporation, he said, would be governed by a board of system users and would be funded through a user fee system separate from the congressional appropriations cycle.
The FAA would continue to set standards and oversee safety of the system.
“It’s one of our leading industries in this country and if we don’t do something transformational, we’ll start to lose that leadership in the world,” Shuster told the Washington Post before unveiling the plan Monday at the Aero Club in Washington. “We need to do something different.”
Shuster, in his speech to the Aero Club, acknowledged that other lawmakers and industry groups don’t always agree on the proposed changes at FAA.
“But we agree that continuing on the present course is the surest path to failure,” he said.
Officials at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) haven’t seen details of the proposed legislation. But in a released statement, AOPA Senior Vice President for Government Affairs Jim Coon said the association “believes the current method of collecting revenues through a tax on aviation fuel is not broken,” reiterating AOPA’s longstanding opposition to user fees for general aviation. “Moreover, we believe any air traffic system must preserve GA access to airports and airspace on a first-come, first-served basis, like we enjoy today.”
Shuster suggested that legislation to create a separate ATC organization as part of a larger FAA reauthorization proposal could be considered on the House floor in July. Before any reauthorization legislation can become law, it must also be approved by the Senate, which has not yet indicated whether it would support creating a separate ATC organization or announced a timeline for considering reauthorization legislation. Current FAA programs expire Sept. 30.
Many in the aviation community agree that the current system is less effective and efficient than it could be, but GA groups and some airlines are concerned about the potential impacts of creating a separate user-fee funded organization to manage air traffic.
“There is no doubt that the FAA has spent billions over the years on efforts to modernize our air traffic control system, and we recognize that change is needed to ensure continued U.S. leadership in aviation,” said Coon. “But we must avoid any unintended consequences for general aviation. We’ve seen issues in other countries where general aviation has been put aside and we can’t allow that to happen in this country.”
NASA – utilizing private contractors to build, manage and operate a system to get us from going into space to the moon in the span of 10 years worked pretty well.
current funding methods don’t have to change. the efficiencies alone could eliminate the need to discuss user fees.
Amtrak. USPS. Enough said.
The first thought that ran through my mind is exactly what Greg W expressed. The USPS should be offered as a counter point to Rep Shuster as to why the government should not try to run a chartered not for profit corporation. One other point is not for profit makes no statement about the operational cost of the new system nor the resulting user fees that would be imposed. Operational costs can be inflated to eliminate profits necessitating annual user fee increases.
Plus there’s going to be one person to write the fee form, one person to print it, one person to stack it, one person to put it in an envelope, one person to mail it to the airport, one person to open it, one person to stack it again, one person to hand it to the pilot, one person to take it from the pilot, one person to file it…
If anyone thinks this non-profit organization is going to streamline anything they’re dreaming. This is going to Patronage Jobs, Inc. Name one thing the GOP has ever done to reduce the cost of government, one. [crickets]
Defeat hundreds of bills by the Democrats to increase the cost of government.
NextGen won’t work as designed, and is heading straight toward a $40B train wreck. GA will never be able to afford using the present ATS system if the present heavy subsidies are ever cut back. A vastly less expensive as well as safer and better ATS system affording better assured access to GA is readily possible today, …but NOT with FAA’s current seriously flawed plans for dysfunctional, wasteful, and already obsolete NextGen. Elements like an unnecessary and obsolete $4B WAAS (now that we’ll have “SA off” and will have almost 60 SVs operational with GPS+Galileo), and FAA’s ridiculous overspecified poorly conceived and outrageously expensive ADS-B, are terrible for GA. If sustained in the present FAA they will do nothing but crush GA. So busting up FAA, and splitting out ATS services, and completely scrapping FAA’s present AVS organization, and rebuilding FAA’s certification and Flight Standards functions from scratch, is essential to GA’s very survival. The user fee issues and costs are tightly coupled, and so GA needs to be vigilant in the transition to be sure massive waste at the present FAA is properly culled. But busting up FAA, re-formulating it from first principles, as well as splitting out ATS separately, is now the right answer for GAs very survival, as well as for survival and efficient operation of all the rest of US aviation from UAVs to BizAv… BUT IF and ONLY IF IT IS DONE WISELY, CORRECTLY, AND WITH ALL AIRSPACE USER INPUT, AND NOT LED BY FAA.
This is just an attempt to “end run” around the fistfight this present administration has had to put up with when trying to introduce user fees.
Mike you are right on “correct”! Remember anything the government tries to improve, revamp or otherwise mess with they instead always screw it up and make things worse!
So a REPUBLICAN proposes this, after a REPUBLICAN administration included user fees in its budget for 8 straight years, and you’re blaming Obama? Classic. It’s hilarious watching this play out among the “Republican good, Democrat bad” crowd. It’s been obvious for years that if a working class American were on fire, the GOP wouldn’t pee on them to put it out, and you guys literally can’t wrap your head around the obvious: you mean nothing to your political heroes. Zilch. They have the opportunity to put to you to the benefit of big corporations, and put it to you they will. And your brain literally can’t even process it. You can’t even admit to yourself that it’s the guys with (R) next to their names that are selling you down the river. If it weren’t so serious it’d be funny.
This is folly, “creating a not-for-profit, federally chartered corporation”, sure has worked great for the Post Office. The USPS has been a “wholly owned not for profit government corporation” since 1971, since that time prices have gone up and service has declined. It is also seen by law makers as a revenue source despite the mandate to be non-profit. This was accomplished by requiring pre-funding of retiree heath benefits, adding debt to the Postal budget and removing it from the Federal budget, thereby showing reduction in the National Debt.
Doing a similar thing to ATC will likely cause similar problems. Increasing of cost, decreasing services and likely exclusion to airspace of those aircraft that do not equip with new expensive gear,(improving the efficient use of that air space). This will all be in the name of efficiency and safety of course. The individual airports are doing a fine job of excluding light G.A. aircraft with fee structures without official help from a govt. corporation or privatization of ATC.
Perhaps something needs to be done to allow only the commercial buss and trucking companies along with the military to use the interstate highway system, that would help with transport efficiency prevent many deaths in those small private cars, and reduce wear on the roads thereby reducing maintenance cost. Does anyone think that would be good, if not, then why would it be good for the airways?
A user-fee system will compromise safety and likely herald the eventual demise of GA in the US. I’s rather keep ATC under the FAA that create yet another inefficient and even more-expensive government entity. The US national airspace system functions well, the services are good and, except for enhancements, should continue as is, using the fuel excise tax for funding. It is not a broken system…but you can almost guarantee that significant issues and rising costs will also accompany this proposal.