There’s nothing guaranteed
to make steam pour from the ears of a GA pilot quite like a discussion about
the price of fuel and services at some airports. But that’s just what
the AOPA did earlier this year. They began asking questions about
pricing and airport access and conferenced in the FAA. The result was this
week’s publication of the agency’s, “Q&As – FBO Industry Consolidation
and Pricing Practices," a practical guide for airport sponsors.
AOPA’s General Counsel Ken
Mead said, “In late 2015 we started getting complaints from members and
non-members about pricing practices at certain airports around the U.S., mostly
those with a single FBO. The complaint meter got loud enough that we started to
take a deep dive into the issue late in 2016 and early 2017.” Mead said the
complaints began to increase following the last round of FBO consolidations
that ended with Signature Flight Support acquiring Landmark Aviation. He was
quick to point out that Signature was not the only company about which members
complained.
The complaints focused
around high fuel and airport service prices, as well as airport access. In some
cases, pilots couldn’t easily determine the prices at some airports, while in others,
they said prices changed between the time they called an FBO and when they
arrived. Mead said the association saw a pattern where only a single FBO ran
everything and set rules that included the need to purchase high-priced fuel or
pay a ramp fee after landing. He said some airports even told tenants they’d
need to buy fuel from the single airport FBO or face eviction. Mead said AOPA
began talking to FAA in early 2017 because these airports accepted AIP money.
The grant assurances that came with the money demanded fair pricing policies,
if the airport sponsor was correctly handling its due diligence
responsibilities of course.
The FAA’s Q&A was the
result of many months of discussions. While it offers airport sponsors details
on what they can and cannot do in relation to prices and access, the inside
message is that airport sponsors have not been paying close enough attention to
operations on their airports, perhaps due to fear of overstepping their
authority. This new FAA document holds the airport sponsors as accountable
while also putting FBOs on notice about the un-crossable lines of authority.
Question 6 in the FAA
document offers 11 steps any airport sponsor can consider when trying to
resolve pricing or access, or simply while conducting their local due
diligence. Items like publicly disclosing rates and charges for airport access
and services, retaining exclusive control over ramp areas and perhaps
establishing different categories of FBOs on the same airport that provide
different levels of service.
Justin Barkowski, another
AOPA attorney told the story of Heber City airport (HCR) southeast of Salt Lake
City, the facility that received more complaints than any other airport. In an
attempt to quash user complaints over high prices, airport management initiated
steps to install a self-serve fuel system, although that move would have
violated the airport’s minimum standards already in place. The airport worked
with local city governance and amended the minimum standards to allow
self-serve fueling. In response, Barkowski said the current FBO sued the
airport to halt the self-serve installation.
While not all problems on
any airport can be easily solved with the publication of the FAA’s document,
Mead said, “I think the FAA has taken a very important first step and it was
welcome and very much needed. I think AOPA has awakened FAA to this problem and
they needed to be awakened. Airports should be about transparency [of
operations] and getting [sponsors] smart about what tools are in their toolbox
to promote competition and exercise their own due diligence and oversite. I
hope this document will do that.”
“AOPA plans to push very
hard on alternative airport access because that represents a lot of economic
power,” he continued. He also mentioned speaking on access and pricing at a
recent NATA conference. “I think they listened and we had a good healthy
dialogue. We’ll be in conversations with NATA over the coming months. We’re all
in this boat together.”
(Evangle Luo of TTFLY shared with you)
没有评论:
发表评论