User fees on aviation

Air traffic upgrades essential, but funds are tight

Published May 18, 2007 at midnight

Text size

More Editorials

The United States' air-traffic control system needs an overhaul, and soon. Upgrading the ATC network, which continues to rely on radar rather than GPS or other more-precise technologies, will require at least $5 billion more over the next decade than the current regime of passenger charges, fuel taxes and other fees can raise.

The funding shortfall will become particularly acute in the next few years, as the volume of "flight operations" (takeoffs and landings) at U.S. airports is expected to surge from 45,000 today to 61,000 by 2016. With several major hub airports already operating near capacity, new technologies that can use airspace safely and more efficiently are a must.

Congress will almost certainly change the financing system this year, since the current funding mechanisms expire Sept. 30. But how Washington collects the money matters, and user fees should be included. Commercial airlines, cargo transporters and private, general aviation flyers should pay for the upgrades, with fees linked to the amount of stress users place on ATC facilities.

One way to do that is with congestion pricing; it should cost more to fly in and out during peak hours, so that traffic can be more evenly spaced throughout the day.

The Federal Aviation Administration drafted model legislation based on this principle (as well as the idea that aircraft size and weight be related to the size of fees). But in the Senate, lawmakers have their own ideas, driven more by aviation interests than consumers, and the results have been disappointing so far.

S. 1300, which passed a committee vote on Wednesday, would be at best a slight improvement over the status quo. It would impose a flat user fee of $25 for every flight other than those involving small, piston-engine airplanes. Congestion pricing is not in the bill; nor are charges based on a plane's weight.

Even getting a flat user fee included in the Senate bill was tough. An amendment to strip it from the bill failed on a vote of 11-12. The general aviation lobby opposes any user fees, because even a modest nod in that direction would shift more costs in its direction.

But general aviation should pay more; the FAA says it provides only 3 percent of the financing for the air-traffic control system, yet it accounts for roughly 17 percent of its use.

The bill also includes one unacceptable provision: It would give the air-traffic controllers' union the right to demand arbitration if it can't work out a labor agreement with the FAA.

This could eventually put passengers at risk. The union could use its leverage in labor talks to make it tougher for the FAA to introduce new technologies, especially if they require workers to handle tasks that aren't covered in their contracts.

Even if S. 1300 passes the Senate, the House is expected to craft its own FAA bill over the next couple of weeks.

It's crucial for the House to get its version right. It should incorporate a more balanced user fee system, and ensure that the controllers' union can't hold modernization of the air-traffic control system hostage.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News