A User Fee, To Support Losses From Other User Fees

If you've ever asked someone what's good about aviation user fees, there's a pretty good chance you'll hear something about NAV CANADA -- the commercial air traffic control entity that charges pilots directly for its services. But AOPA says... look a little closer.

Since its inception, NAV CANADA has been on the financial edge. Its rainy-day fund is now $116 million in the red, and managers now wants to impose new user fees on general aviation to make up the shortfall.

Under the new proposal, aircraft weighing less than 6,075 pounds would be charged a daily fee for the use of eight Canadian airports. The fee would start out at $5 Canadian per day, and would go up to $10 by 2008.

NAV CANADA says commercial operators like the idea, because it would be a deterrent to GA pilots who use those eight major airports. Instead, they'd be encouraged to use reliever airports.

"Many commercial operators believe that the charges should be substantially increased" for small GA aircraft, notes the NAV CANADA proposal obtained by AOPA. "An additional charge would also serve as an incentive for small aircraft to use reliever airports... [which] would have an efficiency benefit for air carrier traffic using the major international airports."

Of course, you have to keep in mind that four seats on the NAV CANADA board belong to commercial operators. One seat is reserved for general and business aviation interests -- making the board not exactly the fairest of courts for GA.

"This proposal underscores why AOPA opposes a user fee-based system in the United States," said Andy Cebula, AOPA executive vice president of government affairs. "It illustrates why a user fee system does not provide stable funding and reinforces AOPA's stance that Congress (or Parliament in the case of Canada) is the appropriate 'board of directors' for a national air transportation system."

Cebula says the best idea for the US is to continue relying on the fuel tax for FAA revenue, and to stop fooling around with the idea of charging directly for services rendered.

"A user fee system can generate sufficient funds during the good times, but it falls apart during an economic downturn, which is exactly what happened to NAV CANADA after 9/11," said Cebula. "The US national air transportation system is well served by the stable funding stream provided by the existing combination of taxes and general fund contributions."

"We find no reason to support a different funding system in a foreign country, and we encourage NAV CANADA to reconsider the proposal and not implement the proposed new fees," added Cebula, speaking on behalf of US pilots who fly north of the border.

FMI: www.navcanada.ca, www.aopa.org