https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-06-15/pdf/2016-14133.pdf Two big points: 1) Airport sponsor may permit nonaeronautical items to be stored in hangars provided the items do not interfere with the aeronautical use of the hangar. 2) FAA will consider the construction of amateur-built or kitbuilt aircraft as an aeronautical activity. Airport sponsors must provide reasonable access to this class of users, subject to local ordinances and building codes.
Whodathunk...a reasonable policy from the FAA. As someone who is on a years long hangar waiting list...this goes along with my feelings...as long as there is an airplane in the hangar, should not matter what else is in there.
I read the policy as it is ultimately up to the local airport still, but there is no longer the mandate that it can ONLY be aviation related items as some interpreted it as. Local policy still would prevail but gives airports flexibility to allow additional items as long as they follow the FAA guidelines should they permit it.
As an airport operator and pilot I am glad to see this, although I haven't read it all yet. I know some guys were up in arms, but the last official policy was no non aeronautical storage period. Even a couch could find the airport in a bind with the FAA.
That was never actually policy, although some compliance enforcement was hardly consistent nationwide. A letter in response to an airport sponsors questions associated with a corrective action plan went viral in the airport community and became de-facto FAA policy. That's what started the effort to recalibrate the hangar policy.
So hangar tiki bars with a couch and huge stereo with a stack of Jimmy Buffett CDs is still good if the 150 is kept in there?
Pretty much, as long as your airport manager doesn't have a problem with it (and most don't, provided the FAA doesn't have a problem with it, which as now stated in published policy, they don't). I'd recommend a Grumman amphib, however.
I assume this only applies to airports that receive federal funding. there's one nearby airport who's hangers are filled with auto body shops, crap storage, and other BS. Not not airplanes.
Essentially, yes. Grant assurances do not apply to an airport that is not federally obligated (either through federal funding or transfer of surplus property). That said, some privately owned, public-use airports receive state funding, and some states may have similar provisions (particularly if they paid for the hangars).
The same way they have been for years, grant assurances. If your airport accepts federal grant money, they are tied to the FAA for the next 20+ years. The FAA does visit airports occasionally, and more often they receive complaints from other pilots that they investigate. The FAA can then either block future grants to the airport or demand the prior grants be returned. Other non-aeronautical uses the FAA has had issues with in the past include allowing drag racing on the airport, R/C model flying, or even allowing the local police to conduct driver training on the airport. Other grant assurances include keeping the airport open and not restricting aeronautical activity.
Exactly. Generally airport compliance issues surface through part 13 informal complaints and part 16 formal complaints. The FAA also conducts land use inspections at obligated airports from time to time.
The local Fire department may have issues with that. the airport has to comply with the local fire codes. this leads to how much and how flammables are stored.
By unreasonable FAA positions and airport authority efforts to comply. FAA positions were the subject of training sessions at every FAA/Airports conference that I ever attended. For the Washington lawyers, everything was totally black or white. The enforcement threat was continued eligibility for FAA grants.
I was talking my camping gear...not illegal hazardous materials. There are still rules and laws to comply with. Sorry that was not obviously stated that I though explosives should not be allowed.
As long as there is an aviation usage in the hangar your camp gear should never have been a problem anyway. Now that the FAA's policy has been clarified you should be GOOD TO GO.
That's it. Now it's dead on the airport managers, and the direction they get from higher authority. Port Commissioners don't always understand the FAA's guidance.
Wonder how long the guy who seems to be running a fork lift repair operation two hangars down from me will be in business Several vacant hangars on the field so it's not really a problem to get one if you need one. Cheers
