The leader of the U.S. air traffic controllers union, Paul Rinaldi, called upon Washington leaders to transform the country's ATC system, but he stopped short of endorsing a model similar to those adopted by other countries and declined to back a specific funding mechanism. Rinaldi, speaking to the Aero Club of Washington on April 20, said status quo and uncertain funding is unacceptable. “Any stakeholder in this room that says differently or thinks differently is governed by his own colloquial interest rather than what’s best for the U.S. airspace system,” he told attendees.
ATC reorganization has become a central theme in Washington as lawmakers debate the next FAA reauthorization bill. Several members of Congress, along with some industry leaders, have pushed for either a separate government or private corporation to run ATC functions.
Rinaldi, who recently became the first person elected to a third term as the president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, warned that the current authorization will expire September 30 while the next round of government-wide sequestration cuts take effect October 1.
“Projections for the upcoming October 1 sequestration cuts to the FAA’s operational budget will be much larger than what we saw in 2013,” he said, adding that in 2013 the FAA had to make drastic cuts. “We recall they burned the furniture. In 2015 there’s no more furniture to burn; there’s no more fat left to cut.
“We cannot continue these starts and stops in planning and lack of funding," he added. The National Airspace System should not be burdened with furloughs and staffing shortages, or threats of closing towers.”
Rinaldi echoed several themes expressed by FAA Administrator Michael Huerta, who testified before the Senate Commerce Committee this month on reauthorization.
Like Huerta, he said the next reauthorization must provide a predictable, stable funding stream. Rinaldi also said he would not discount discussing different organizational concepts, but he warned that any new system must guarantee precision, safety and protection from “unintended consequences.”
Acknowledging growing interest in the NavCanada model, Rinaldi noted the comparatively small size of the Canadian system. Canada has one of the busiest 10 airports in the world; the U.S. has eight of the top 10 and 16 of the top 30. “It’s easy for them to modernize when they have one major airport they need to worry about,” he said.
The same holds true with ATC facilities, only 42 of which exist in Canada compared with 342 in the U.S. NavCanada manages 12 million operations a year, while the U.S. manages 140 million. “I don’t know if it’s scalable,” he said. “I’m willing to roll up my sleeves and look at it and see if it’s scalable.”
Any model must include a stable flow of funding that can support modernization and system growth and must ensure the continuation of services to all segments of the aviation system, Rinaldi said.
But, he also warned against any effort to run ATC as a profit center. “We will fight, and oppose, any model that derives to make a profit from air traffic control services,” he said. Noting that such a model would just create another funding problem, Rinaldi also stressed the need for a "seamless" transition to a new system.
When asked what funding mechanism the controllers would like to see in place, he declined to give an opinion, deferring that matter to other "stakeholders."
While debate continues on a potential new air traffic control organization model, Representative John Mica (R.-Fla.) has introduced a bill to estabish a private organization to run air traffic control. Mica, who formerly chaired the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said other attempted reforms, such as the establishment of an ATC chief operating officer, have not made resulted in the needed improvements. His bill would give controllers a share in the new organization, but, with the exception to a reference to the issuance of securities, it does not address funding.
