A new government watchdog report has found that a transition to an independent organization to run the U.S. air traffic control system would be “a difficult, complex, challenging” effort that could stretch out seven years. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, conducted at the behest of key Democrats who have opposed such a reform effort, also reveals mixed views on how that organization should be funded.
The GAO, which released the report this week, based its findings on surveys and interviews with nearly 70 industry stakeholders; industry, financial and air traffic experts; air navigation service providers and other officials.
Officials involved in restructuring ATC organizations in other countries generally reported that the results were ultimately positive, but the GAO warned, “given the key transition issues involved, a restructuring of any kind could be more complicated than in other countries, because the U.S. ATC system is bigger and more diverse than any other system in the world.”
Financing was a key consideration, and the GAO pointed to lessons learned from other organizations, such as the UK system, which was forced to refinance and restructure, relax the caps on user fees and find a new investor after traffic dropped following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Any new organization must have in place a funding structure that would mitigate such financial risks, the investigative organization said in the report.
Most of the respondents falling in the “expert” category—think tanks, academia, former government officials, current government organizations and financial institutions, among others—backed the concept of a user-fee system for an ATC organization. They also indicated that the airlines, business aviation and cargo operators should be covered under a scheme such as a weight and distance formula. But many of those experts believed that general aviation should not be covered.
There was less consensus among industry stakeholders, however. Fewer than half of the stakeholder respondents favored a user-fee system, with opponents citing concerns about increased costs and complexity.
The FAA said it believes that if user fees were applied equally, costs would increase for business and general aviation, as well as cargo users. The Department of Defense, meanwhile, noted that its contributions—and benefits received—also would need to be taken into consideration.
The experts believe that such as system would provide more stable funding. But some stakeholders and the FAA raised concerns about how the rest of the aviation functions would be funded.
As far as organization, experts agreed the responsibilities of the FAA and new organization need to be clearly delineated and documented. The FAA also stressed that issues such as security, Defense Department contributions and environmental impact must be addressed. Many agreed that safety functions should remain with the FAA, but there was less consensus on flight standards responsibilities, such as new performance-based navigation procedures, and on harmonization responsibilities. But the experts also noted a need to ensure coordination and collaboration between the FAA and any new organization.
The GAO report also emphasizes the need to build in an adequate amount of planning and implementation time, noting that transitions involving other countries took up to seven years. “There are many multifaceted, substantial transition issues involved, and views on how a restructuring should be organized vary,” the GAO concluded.