Transport Canada has recently published an
issue paper that admits that its National Airports Policy (NAP) is flawed and
needs fixing.
For many years COPA has criticized the NAP for its lack of a coherent national
air transportation vision and its abandonment of smaller airports, leaving the
fate of the national system of airports to local airport authorities.
Former Transport Minister David Collenette always defended the policy stating
that he was “proud of what it had accomplished”.
The issue paper was presented at the March 30 – April 1st meeting of the
Canadian Aviation Regulations Advisory Committee Part III Airports and
Aerodromes Technical Committee held in Ottawa.
Senior TC Aerodrome Programs staff presented the paper, which said, under the
subject of Airports Designated As Alternates For ETOPS (Extended Range
Operations By Aeroplanes With Two Turbine Power Units): “The issue of lack of
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting protection at airports selected as alternate
airports for overflying traffic has been raised by stakeholders, specifically
following the Air France B777 diversion to Churchill (Manitoba). The shortage of
adequate alternate airports in Canada’s remote regions has a significant impact
on international aviation costs and on the environment. The shortage of adequate
alternate airports arises primarily from a lack of services adequate for
unscheduled international use at remote airports, which are usually focused on
local needs.”
Senior TC staff stated that the NAP “has some serious holes in it.”
The NAP is fundamentally based on airports being directed by local needs and not
national requirements. The NAP policy document says: “Locally-owned and operated
airports are able to function in a more commercial and cost-efficient manner,
are more responsive to local needs and are better able to match levels of
service to local demands.”
The B777 incident involved an airliner that had to divert to its alternate when
technical problems arose with the aircraft in flight.
They arrived at their enroute ETOPS-required alternate, Churchill, to find
completely inadequate fire fighting response and other facility shortfalls at
that TC-operated airport.
Fortunately the flight landed uneventfully and the passengers suffered nothing
worse than some inconvenience as a result. With facilities at Churchill below
the level required for ETOPS airliners, the alternative is for the planes to
carry much more fuel to hold other more distant airports as alternates or to not
use ETOPS twin-engined airliners on the North Atlantic routes.
Several airport operators at the CARAC Part III meeting noted that there is a
fundamental problem under the NAP in providing fire fighting and other airport
services for airliners that just use the airport as an alternate. The equipment,
personnel and facilities required are expensive and aircraft that just use the
airports as alternates very rarely land there. That means that the airport
derives no fees for those aircraft with which to pay for the facilities
required.
The obvious solution is that since the existence of adequate alternate airports
is not a local community issue, but is in the national interest, TC should fund
the provision of services at alternate airports, something the NAP prevents.
COPA applauds TC finally admitting in writing that the NAP is flawed and is in
need of review and rethinking.
Other issues discussed at the three day CARAC Part III meeting included Airside
Access and Vehicle Control planning at airports, disposition of dissents against
standards for water airports, incorporation of TP312 airport standards into the
CARs and fire fighting issues related to CAR 303. Many of these issues have the
potential to impact personal aviation at airports and so COPA is monitoring
these issues and participating in the debates on them with the aim of keeping
costs down for airports.
COPA participates in all nine CARAC Technical Committees to represent COPA
members to Transport Canada in the CAR rulemaking process.
COPA is the only association that represents non-commercial aircraft owners and
pilots that participates on all CARAC Technical Committees, ensuring that COPA
members’ interests are heard in Ottawa.