Proposed ADS-B bill will protect general aviation

GUEST EDITORIAL By Jim Coon

The Guest Editorial “Proposed ADS-B bill will harm aviation” by Shaun Germolus suggesting legislation aimed at prohibiting airports from using ADS-B data in collecting user fees will harm aviation is, unfortunately, a bit of hyperbole.

The arguments outlined by Mr. Germolus do not accurately reflect legislation, known as the Pilot and Aircraft Privacy Act (PAPA), which would prohibit the use of ADS-B data for billing purposes. Moreover, Mr. Germolus also appears to conflate the needs of air carrier airports versus general aviation airports.

PAPA, H.R. 4146 and S. 2175, simply seeks to keep our skies safe and protect the privacy of pilots. U.S. Senator Ted Budd and U.S. Representative Bob Onder authored this legislation. Both are active GA pilots, and I know the last thing they want is to harm aviation.

GA pilots spent more than half a billion dollars to meet the FAA’s 2020 ADS-B Out mandate. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), along with other industry partners, supported this mandate after the FAA conveyed that ADS-B data would only be used for airspace safety and air traffic efficiencies. Now, airports are getting into the game and contracting with third-party for-profit companies to track and access your personal information to send you an invoice.

This invasive practice, which was never an intended use of ADS-B, not only invades privacy, but also acts as a disincentive for others to equip their aircraft with this safety-enhancing technology. It is simply wrong. We must not put economics over safety.  

You and I would be breaking the law today if we used someone’s license plate number to access DMV records to obtain your home address. It is the same concept with aviation where third-party companies are gleaning ADS-B data and running your N-number through the FAA’s aircraft registry to obtain your personal information. 

The misinformation about the PAPA legislation being pushed by Mr. Germolus and others in the halls of Congress, as well as those with a financial interest in obtaining a pilot’s personal information, is frustrating.

To clarify, in short, the bill would prohibit the use of ADS-B data to impose fees. When the bill becomes law, airports will still have the ability to impose reasonable fees at their discretion, but they would not be allowed to use ADS-B data for this purpose.  

Moreover, the bill does not prevent any of the other uses listed in Mr. Germolus’ guest editorial. PAPA would also require airports to be transparent before imposing user fees on pilots, analyze any impact they would have, and make transparent the airport’s intended use of the fees — hardly burdensome or unfair requirements.

States are also starting to take action. Montana recently enacted a law to prevent the use of ADS-B data to collect fees. Minnesota has introduced legislation, and other states will likely follow. Although these initiatives are significant, a cohesive nationwide strategy is essential to avoid a patchwork of laws, highlighting the critical role of the federal PAPA Act. 

No other organization supports our nation’s airports, especially our small GA airports, more than AOPA.

AOPA’s seasoned Airports and State Advocacy team and our Airport Support Network, made up of more than 2,300 AOPA volunteers around the country, work hand in hand with airport managers and communities each and every day.

We strive to achieve success through building relationships, mutual cooperation, understanding, and communication. We prefer to work together with airports for the betterment of general aviation. We do not always agree on everything, but we do agree that we need one another.

AOPA is committed to supporting the freedom to fly and maintaining a robust aviation ecosystem. The last thing we need — and, unfortunately, it is starting to happen — is U.S. airports attempting to follow the broken and devastating model of other countries by simply imposing more and more user fees on pilots, which has resulted in drastic declines in general aviation. 

We recognize that product and service costs have risen, which can present financial challenges for some airports, and we work with each airport individually to explore solutions.

Let us also acknowledge that an airport’s first obligation is to ensure a safe environment for aircraft operations on the ground. 

To help achieve this airport safety goal, GA piston pilots currently pay a 19 cents per gallon federal fuel tax, non-commercial jet operators pay a 21.9 cents per gallon federal tax, and commercial airlines pay 4.4 cents per gallon. Taxing fuel at the pump is a very efficient method of collection.

When these fuel taxes are combined with other excise taxes, user fees, and airline passenger charges, collectively they are estimated to have generated more than $20 billion in revenue during the past year.

There are 5,146 public-use airports in the United States, all which are eligible to receive federal funding through the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). Congress created this program in 1982 to support airside construction and maintenance, funding it with taxes and fees from airline passengers, airlines, business, and general aviation operators.

Since the beginning of the Airport Improvement Program, more than $90 billion in grants have been provided to airports throughout the United States.

Last year, Congress, with support from AOPA, raised AIP funding to $4 billion annually from the previous amount of $3.35 billion. Most of this increase is allocated to general aviation airports that do not provide commercial service.

Public-use airports are also eligible for state project funding to ensure safe operations, which equates to a total of more than $1.5 billion each year.

The state of Florida, where Mr. Germolus manages Kissimmee Gateway Airport (KISM), provided airports with $269 million last year.

Many airports also receive additional revenues through their local government, FBO lease agreements, fuel sales, hangar leases, concessions, and more.

The FAA estimates that commercial service airports (more than 10,000 commercial passenger boardings a year) that impose a fee on airline passengers generate another $4 billion each year through the passenger facility charge (PFC). AOPA has supported efforts to increase the PFC to help offset airport costs.

A number of airports also make millions each year from parking and ground transportation fees. Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), for example, generates more than $150 million each year from these fees. And many large, medium, and small hub airports across the country also receive significant income from parking and other fees. These types of fees can be applied to airport operational costs. 

Since the safety side of airports is largely addressed through billions in federal, state, and local contributions each year, it appears that Mr. Germolus is opposing the PAPA legislation in order to address the local budget pressures that town and community officials impose on airport managers to reduce or maintain operational costs — salaries, benefits, maintenance, insurance, lawn services, etc.

He argues that using ADS-B data, intended for airspace safety, will create user fee collection efficiencies, yet he does not outline the costs associated with contracting with a third-party for-profit company or how much of those user fees are actually staying on the airport.

Again, the bill does not prohibit airports from collecting fees — it just says you cannot use ADS-B data to do so.

Those in the aviation industry often say every airport is unique — if you have seen one airport, you have seen one airport. So, depending upon the situation, and with a goal of increasing flying and increasing revenues, airport managers and pilots must educate local elected officials and communities on the importance of the airport and explore alternative revenue sources.

Airport managers should consider focusing on non-aeronautical income streams, such as leasing land for business parks or offering services like on-site restaurants, working with local or state economic development authorities, and developing partnerships with local businesses. Airports can also host events or provide venue rentals for community functions to attract local users and visitors.

Collaborating with local elected officials, businesses, tourism boards, and community organizations to promote the airport as a destination and a gateway to the area is another option airport managers should consider before imposing additional costs on pilots.

Let us join forces on how best to address the enormous hangar shortage across the country and help grow general aviation. This could have a substantial impact on thousands of airports across the country.

Airports that receive federal funding must ensure all user fees are “fair and reasonable,” but this vague standard often leads to excessive and egregious charges. We all understand airports need fees to operate, but we need the FAA to implement guidelines. No one should have to pay $600 or $800 for tie-down fees or hundreds of dollars to park your plane for an hour or so, or $25,000 to attend a “special event.” One wonders how many millions in fees each year are being taken off airports by businesses that sign long-term agreements with airports.

Without question, we must all work together to ensure a viable and long-term general aviation sector in this nation and to keep our airports operating to serve the public. Airports are vital for communities to attract businesses, create local jobs, provide medical transport, law enforcement, disaster relief, agriculture and firefighting services.

We must advocate for better communication, collaboration, and transparency with airport managers, local elected officials, local residents, and the users of these public-use facilities. Public-use airports are akin to our interstate highway system and our nation’s national parks. Their purpose is to serve the public and that is why they all receive significant public funding each year.

The Pilot and Aircraft Privacy Act will do nothing to harm aviation as Mr. Germolus suggests. It will, however, safeguard a pilot’s privacy while ensuring that the safety tool required by the FAA for aircraft operating in controlled airspace — and funded by pilots — is used for its intended purpose and not for economic gain.  

Jim Coon is Senior Vice President of Government Affairs and Advocacy for the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. Prior to his position with AOPA, he served 25 years on Capitol Hill in several senior positions, including staff director for the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.