Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aviation Adsb Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill barring airports from using ADS‑B data for third‑party billing
Summary
The Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee voted to report House Bill 387 favorably after testimony that third‑party ADS‑B billing discourages flight training and could prompt pilots to disable safety equipment; airports’ trade group urged targeted fixes to avoid unintended consequences.
Representative Bankson introduced House Bill 387 to prohibit airports and their contractors from using automatic dependent surveillance–broadcast (ADS‑B) tracking data to generate third‑party invoices for landing or use fees on general aviation aircraft up to 12,499 pounds. Bankson said the FAA’s 2020 ADS‑B mandate was intended for safety and traffic data, and not for automated billing practices that he and supporters say discourage flight training and prompt some pilots to turn off ADS‑B transponders.
Supporters told the subcommittee that third‑party billing has begun in some Florida airports, most prominently Kissimmee. John Vasquez of Kilo Niner Aviation and other pilots described notices and “plane‑pass” charges tied to entering a five‑mile radius or executing touch‑and‑go training, saying surprise invoices and per‑event charges make training less financially feasible. Donald Frano and pilot Ron Creel testified that pilots who receive late bills or face per‑touch charges may avoid using ADS‑B or avoid practicing approaches, increasing safety risks.
Tiffany King, president and CEO of the Florida Airports Council, provided an informational briefing and urged caution. She said Vertower — the state contractor that collects ADS‑B data — provides data to airports, and Vector is a private company that bills on behalf of airports when the airport directs it to do so. King said a Kissimmee review showed roughly 6,700 landing‑fee records with only about five errors (approximately a 0.8% error rate) and warned that the bill’s current language could sweep in other fee types beyond landing fees, such as customs or parking fees.
Sponsor Bankson and other proponents stressed the bill’s safety rationale. They proposed the bill would protect general aviation and training operations by preventing third‑party automated billing tied directly to ADS‑B tracking, while preserving airports’ ability to set and collect fees by other means. Witnesses and members discussed alternatives such as flat monthly or weight‑based fees and suggested local airports and pilots negotiate options that avoid third‑party reliance on live ADS‑B data.
After questioning and debate, including members’ requests that sponsors work with local airports to refine language, the committee took a roll call and reported HB 387 favorably.
Authorities and actions recorded in committee proceedings were limited to committee testimony and the roll call; no final floor language or amendments were adopted in committee.
