FAA Publishes final Hangar use policy

Brad Z

Brad Z

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
7,042
Location
Alexandria VA
Display Name
Display name:
Brad Z
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.
 
Well that sounds pretty good for us GA folk
 
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.
 
Shawn said:
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.
Click to expand...
Send those people who made that decision to Oklahoma City...
 
So this means it's cool to store my boat in the hangar with the plane?
 
weilke said:
What does your lease say?
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:
The airport manager may choose to be more restrictive.

c. Provided the hangar is used primarily for aeronautical purposes, an airport sponsor may permit nonaeronautical items to be stored in hangars provided the items do not interfere with the aeronautical use of the hangar.
d. While sponsors may adopt more restrictive rules for use of hangars, the FAA will generally not consider items to interfere with the aeronautical use of the hangar unless the items:.....
Click to expand...
 
midcap said:
So this means it's cool to store my boat in the hangar with the plane?
Click to expand...

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.
 
midwestpa24 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
Gucci Pilot said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
JCranford said:
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.
Click to expand...

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).
 
Brad Z said:
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.
Click to expand...

SkyDog58 said:
Yeah... you need to match the decor to the airplane.
Click to expand...

Yeah a Widgeon would do nicely.
 
meth lab is safe since I'm still sanding the wings to the plane I've been building since 2003.
 
coloradobluesky said:
And just how is the FAA going to enforce this policy????
Click to expand...

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.
 
midwestpa24 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Shawn said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Brad Z said:
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).
Click to expand...
In many states when you are the landlord you must comply with fire codes for the rental property.
 
Every one remember how/why this issue got started?
 
Tom-D said:
Every one remember how/why this issue got started?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Tom-D said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Shawn said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Graueradler said:
By unreasonable FAA positions
Click to expand...
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:rolleyes:

Several vacant hangars on the field so it's not really a problem to get one if you need one.

Cheers
 
Gucci Pilot said:
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?
Click to expand...
God I hope so! Or I'll be in big trouble....!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top