Slight Change In Wording Could Cause Major Changes In Airport Access

The FAA's new Airport Compliance Manual adversely affects every federally funded airport by telling local airports how to deal with their neighbors, according to the advocacy group "Through The Fence".  The new policy would appear to forbid local airport authorities from entering into new "through-the-fence" agreements with surrounding land owners, and requires non-renewal of current agreements at the end of their contract term.  The rule, which replaces the word "discourage" with "prohibit", affects thousands of businesses, pilots, aircraft hangars, and hangar homes connected by gated taxiways to airport property.

Brent Blue, the creator of www.throughthefence.org, told ANN the FAA, in responding this week to two Freedom of Information Act requests, could not provide any data to support new prohibitions on "through-the-fence" (TTF) agreements.  The new prohibitions were announced in the Airport Compliance Manual 5190.6B unveiled September 30, 2009, which was prepared without any public input or comment.

A "though-the-fence" agreement permits the owner of private land next to an airport to have taxiway access to the runway via a gate.  The owner of the land, which may include a business, hangar, or hangar home, pays the airport a TTF fee for this access and uses on airport services such as fuel and maintenance.  The agreements provide significant income to the airport authority and loss of this funding threatens the economic viability of some airports. 

Blue contends airport access generally increases the value of the private land increasing property taxes benefiting the general public. Hangar homes, where pilots live in adjoining residences to aircraft hangars, provide increased security due to their presence as interested observers of airport activity day and night.

"The new TTF prohibition rules look like FAA staffers made them up as they went along based on their own prejudices without one iota of supporting data" said Blue.  "This is a classic example of government gone wrong."

One of the two FOIA requests asked for any documentation of noise complaints from owners of hangar homes, one of the reasons FAA personnel gave for why they have prohibited TTF hangar homes at federally funded airports.  The FAA's Director of Airport Compliance Randall Fiertz could only state "we were not able to locate any records or files pertaining to your specific request, and we are unaware of any other federal offices likely to possess responsive records" in a December 16th letter to Blue. 

The second FOIA asked for "any and all records…that went into the formulation of FAA policy related to "hangar homes/residences" and "through the fence" agreements."  Blue stated "the response to the second FOIA was even more absurd.  The FAA's response was public documents of their current decisions and their attempts in the past to stifle TTF activity, but not one shred of material which supports the establishment of the prohibition.  It is obvious they have no supporting data for the rule change."  

Although the FAA does not have any specific jurisdiction over airports, the Agency does have the power to withhold Airport Improvement Grant money, and can request re-payment of those grants if an airport is found not to be in compliance.  The FAA's policy does not allow for airport authorities to decide for themselves what the best relationship with surrounding private properties and property owners should be.  According to Betsy Johnson, an Oregon State Senator and former Manager of Oregon Aeronautics Division, the FAA's new TTF prohibition is "bad for airports, bad for the economy, and bad for the future of aviation."

FMI: www.throughthefence.org