October surprise: FAA does not care what your hangar costs

The FAA rejected both the complainant’s and AOPA's requests for reconsideration of its determination that the increase in T-hangar rent from $660 to $1,200 that took effect in April—and the rapid exodus of piston airplane owners from Denver jetCenter hangars at Centennial Airport since—is "fair and reasonable" and not a violation of federal grant assurances.

It did not take long for the message that the FAA does not view itself as responsible for enforcing the federal grant assurances in question to get around. On September 17, less than a month after the agency's ruling on the Part 13 complaint filed by the Centennial Airport Pilots Association, 56 hangar tenants at Salt Lake City International Airport were advised that single-hangar rates will increase 84 percent in January, and then by 168 percent compared to 2026 rates as of July 1, with similar increases for end units and twin hangars—up to $1,254 per month for a twin hangar end unit.

As was the case in Denver, the justification provided was minimal at best: "Base rental rates at SLCIA haven't increased for many years. The City recently undertook market analysis for several areas of SLCIA, including hangars, and found that the current rental rates are well below market rates. To continue supporting necessary maintenance and improvements, the City is increasing rental rates for general aviation hangars at SLCIA."

AOPA responded with a detailed letter to the city on September 25, outlining the same fundamental issues and concerns expressed in the Denver case, including a lack of public information to substantiate the "market analysis" conducted by the city, or any information about the costs associated with maintaining the hangars. AOPA Northwest Mountain Regional Manager Brad Schuster was directed by city officials to request records under the state's Government Records Access and Management Act process, which he has done.

AOPA General Counsel Fernando Campoamor noted in the now-rejected request for reconsideration of the Denver Part 13 complaint that the FAA's circular logic renders the Part 13 process moot. The FAA contends that it is up to tenants to provide evidence, including financial information such as the cost of constructing and maintaining hangars, occupancy rates, and other factual information needed to make an objective determination of compliance, or noncompliance, when rates and charges are challenged.

"If that allocation of proof becomes the new operating standard for informal complaints, then as a practical matter no airport user will likely ever substantiate a rates and charges complaint; not because such complaints lack merit, but because the evidence needed to prove them is, in nearly every case, held exclusively by the sponsor and its service provider," Campoamor wrote to the FAA on September 29. "Whether the former $660 rent was genuinely below market, whether it failed to cover the cost of operating 46 unheated metal T-hangars, and whether real demand exists at $1,200 are all answerable questions—but only from records maintained by DJC and the Sponsor. The publicly observable facts point the other way: comparable Denver-area T-hangars rent for roughly $450 to $475 at BJC and $458 at CFO; one-third of the hangars (15 of 45) at Centennial were vacated when the rate took effect; the waitlist fell from 108 to 64; and—as a significant red flag—only one replacement lease was in place two months later. Complainants brought forward what they could obtain, and only the FAA can and should obtain the rest."

FAA Regional Compliance Program Manager Peter Doyle, in his October 7 response, rejected the notion that the agency should not take at face value claims from an FBO or an airport sponsor that rates and charges are justified, and repeated that the burden falls on tenants:

"The FAA's role as fact-finder does not transform the Part 13 process into an obligation for the FAA to develop, at the complainant's request, the evidentiary case necessary to establish an allegation that the complainant itself has not substantiated," Doyle wrote, including the emphasis. "More importantly, much of the information identified in the Request is information that the complainants contend is necessary to substantiate their own allegations. The inability or unwillingness of the complainants to obtain such information independently does not, by itself, establish a violation or require the FAA to undertake an open-ended investigation for the purpose of developing evidence on the complainants' behalf."

Campoamor said the catch-22 created by the agency leaves pilots with few options to counter price gouging.

"I do fully expect a number of other airports will soon see tremendous rate hikes," Campoamor said.

AOPA Senior Vice President of Government Affairs and Advocacy Jim Coon said that while pilots understand that airports need to collect revenue to operate safely, the FAA has lost touch with the purpose and meaning of public-use airports.

"Allowing public-use airports to charge outrageous rates and fees is wrong," Coon said. "These airports were created to serve the public, and they are not supposed to be profit centers. They are expected to cover their expenses. Charging these exorbitant hangar rates or allowing airports to charge $25,000 parking fees is outrageous. Most airports carry a significant surplus, and businesses that operate on those airports take millions of dollars in profits out of those airports every year. The entire system needs to be rebalanced."

If something at your airport is of concern, consider reaching out to your AOPA regional manager or Airport Support Network volunteer. If your airport does not have an ASN volunteer, consider joining our ranks to engage with, promote, and protect your airport today at aopa.org/asn.