National Parks Air Tour Management Act: More Flexibility and	 
Better Enforcement Needed (27-JAN-06, GAO-06-263).		 
                                                                 
Primarily because of concerns that noise from air tours over	 
national parks could impair visitors' experiences and park	 
resources, Congress passed the National Parks Air Tour Management
Act of 2000 to regulate air tours. The act requires the Federal  
Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Park Service to	 
develop air tour management plans for all parks where air tour	 
operators apply to conduct tours. A plan may establish controls  
over tours, such as routes, altitudes, time of day restrictions, 
and/or a maximum number of flights for a given period; or ban all
air tours. GAO was asked to (1) determine the status of FAA and  
the Park Service's implementation of the act; (2) assess how the 
air tour operators and national parks have been affected by	 
implementation; and (3) identify what issues, if any, need to be 
addressed to improve implementation.				 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-06-263 					        
    ACCNO:   A45857						        
  TITLE:     National Parks Air Tour Management Act: More Flexibility 
and Better Enforcement Needed					 
     DATE:   01/27/2006 
  SUBJECT:   Air transportation 				 
	     Federal law					 
	     Interagency relations				 
	     National parks					 
	     National recreation areas				 
	     Strategic planning 				 
	     Tourism						 
	     Program implementation				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-263

     

     * Report to Congressional Requesters
          * January 2006
     * NATIONAL PARKS AIR TOUR MANAGEMENT ACT
          * More Flexibility and Better Enforcement Needed
     * Contents
          * Results in Brief
          * Background
          * FAA and the Park Service Have Begun to Implement the Act, but No
            ATMPs Have Been Completed
               * FAA and the Park Service Have Taken Actions to Implement the
                 Act and Resolved Some Differences That Slowed ATMP
                 Development
               * Key Implementation Issues Have Yet to Be Addressed
          * Act's Implementation Has Limited Air Tour Operators' Ability to
            Make Major Business Decisions but Had Little Effect on National
            Park Units
               * Air Tour Operators' Ability to Make Major Business Decisions
                 Has Been Limited by the Implementation Process
                    * Agencies' Slow Implementation Has Limited Air Tour
                      Operators' Expansion
                    * Operators Are Uncertain About Transferability of Air
                      Tour Allocations
                    * Operators Have Generally Opted to Invest Resources to
                      Meet Higher Standards and Avoid the Five-Tour Limit
               * Act's Implementation Has Had Little Effect on National Park
                 Units
          * Issues Remain to Improve Implementation and Enforcement of the
            Act
               * Lack of Flexibility for Determining Which Park Units Should
                 Develop ATMPs
               * Absence of Park Service Funding for Its Share of ATMP
                 Development Costs
               * Limited Ability to Verify and Enforce the Number of Air
                 Tours
               * FAA's Inadequate Guidance Concerning the Act's Safety
                 Requirements
          * Conclusions
          * Matter for Congressional Consideration
          * Recommendations for Executive Action
          * Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
     * Scope and Methodology
     * Survey Instrument and Results from 112 National Park Units
     * Applications for Operating Authority by National Park Unit
     * Applications for Operating Authority by Air Tour Operator
     * Air Tours Authorized under Interim Operating Authority by National
       Park Unit
     * Comments from the Department of the Interior
          * GAO Comments
     * GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
     * PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf
          * Order by Mail or Phone

Report to Congressional Requesters

January 2006

NATIONAL PARKS AIR TOUR MANAGEMENT ACT

More Flexibility and Better Enforcement Needed

Contents

Tables

Figure

January 27, 2006Letter

Congressional Requesters

Primarily because of concern that noise from air tours over our national
park units could impair visitors' experiences and natural, cultural, and
historic resources, the Congress passed the National Parks Air Tour
Management Act of 2000 (the act) to regulate commercial air tours (air
tours) over units of the national park system.1 To regulate air tours, the
act requires the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), in cooperation
with the National Park Service (Park Service), to develop air tour
management plans (ATMPs) for national park units and abutting tribal lands
where air tour operators apply for authority to conduct air tours. The
purpose of an ATMP is to develop acceptable and effective measures to
mitigate or prevent significant adverse impacts, if any, of air tours on
national park units' natural and cultural resources and visitors'
experiences, and on abutting tribal lands. An ATMP may establish controls
over tours, including flight routes, altitudes, time of day restrictions,
and maximum number of flights for a given time period, or prohibit air
tours altogether.

In October 2002, FAA notified companies that conduct air tours (air tour
operators) of the need to apply for authority to conduct air tours over
national park units.2 Before approving an air tour operator's application
for authority to fly over a park unit (operating authority), the two
agencies must create an ATMP for that park unit. When an operator that
conducted air tours over the park unit before the act (i.e., an existing
operator) applies for operating authority for that park unit, FAA must
grant the existing operator interim operating authority, which lasts until
180 days after the ATMP is completed. In accordance with the act, the
number of air tours FAA approves under interim operating authority is
based on either an air tour operator's total number of air tours during
the 12-month period before the act was passed, or the average number of
annual air tours conducted in the 36 months before the act was passed,
whichever is greater. The act also contains provisions for granting
interim operating authority to operators who had not conducted air tours
over a particular national park unit before the act (new entrants) and for
granting increases in interim operating authority for existing operators
over and above their pre-act level of activity. Once an ATMP is created
for a park unit, an air tour operator may or may not be granted final
operating authority, depending upon the restrictions the ATMP imposes. In
addition, the act generally requires air tour operators to meet a
specified level of safety certification, if they are not already
certified.

As of November 2005, FAA had active applications for operating authority
at 94 of the 388 national park units: applications from 77 existing
operators for authority to conduct air tours at a total of 85 park units,
and from 16 new entrants at some park units with existing operators, as
well as 9 additional park units.3 FAA and the Park Service have not
completed any ATMPs, and thus FAA has not granted final operating
authority to any operator. In issuing its regulations codifying the act,
FAA stated that all operators seeking to conduct air tours had to file an
application for operating authority and have interim operating authority
before January 23, 2003, almost 3 years after the act's passage, in order
to avoid a break in operations. In oversight hearings in 2002 and 2004,
Congress raised concerns primarily about the agencies' lengthy
implementation process-the agencies had not completed any ATMPs-and the
validity of the air tour data being used to establish ATMPs.4

In this context, you asked us to (1) determine the status of FAA and the
Park Service's implementation of the act; (2) assess how the air tour
operators and national park units have been affected by the implementation
of the act; and (3) identify what issues, if any, remain to be addressed
to improve the implementation of the act. You also asked us to report on
compliance regarding payment of fees for air tours over national park
units. We will report on the fee issue separately because the air tour fee
legislation is distinct from the National Parks Air Tour Management Act,
and air tour fees are currently charged at only three national park units.

To determine the status of implementation, we analyzed FAA and Park
Service policy and guidance documents, reports, data, and applicable laws
and regulations. We also assessed the agencies' budget data, and FAA's
data on both the number of air tours authorized under interim operating
authority and the number of new entrant operators; we determined that
these data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. To
assess how the air tour operators are affected by the implementation of
the act, we interviewed a sample of 29 air tour companies that conduct
tours at 12 different national park units. This sample included different
sizes of existing air tour operators based on the number of air tours they
conduct annually, as well as all new entrant operators and existing
operators that have requested increases in operating authority. To assess
effects on national park units, we surveyed (and received responses from)
all of the 112 national park units where applications for operating
authority were valid as of July 2005. Since then, two operators withdrew
their applications for operating authority at 15 park units, and FAA
withdrew authority for one operator at 3 park units where there were no
other applicants. This reduced the number of park units needing ATMPs to
94, as of November 2005. See appendix III for a list of the 94 park units.
When reporting survey results, we refer to all 112 park units that were
surveyed. Ten tribal lands within or abutting national park units have
also been identified as needing to be part of the ATMPs developed at the
relevant park units, but our review is limited to the implementation of
the act at national park units. We also interviewed Park Service officials
at 12 different national park units selected through nonprobability
sampling.5 We selected these park units because 9 of the 12 were the first
park units for which FAA and the Park Service chose to develop ATMPs, and
the other 3 faced circumstances that differed from the first 9: one had a
military flight restriction, one was a potential candidate for an
alternative method for developing an ATMP, and one believed an ATMP was
not needed because it had few air tours. To identify issues that remain to
be addressed to improve the implementation of the act, we analyzed the
agencies' policies, guidance, reports, and applicable regulations and
laws. We also interviewed FAA and Park Service officials at headquarters
and at field offices. A more detailed description of our scope and
methodology is presented in appendix I, and the survey instrument and
aggregate results are presented in appendix II. We performed our work from
January 2005 through January 2006 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.

Results in Brief

While FAA and the Park Service have taken some important steps to
implement the provisions of the National Parks Air Tour Management Act of
2000, implementation has been slow and some key requirements of the act
have yet to be addressed. Specifically, as the act requires, in April
2001, the agencies established the National Parks Overflights Advisory
Group to advise them on the act's implementation. In October 2002, FAA
issued a final rule that completed the definition of an air tour and
informed air tour operators that they must apply for operating authority
over national park units. Finally, in January 2003, FAA and the Park
Service began developing ATMPs for nine park units. Officials at both
agencies told us that implementation was initially slow because FAA needed
to address airline security after the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks and because the agencies disagreed over the procedures necessary
to implement the act in compliance with environmental laws, such as
determining what constitutes a significant impact on park resources.
Agency officials expect to establish ATMPs more quickly in the future
because they now have a draft implementation plan that will guide their
creation. According to the agencies' current plans, it could take 5 more
years to complete the development of ATMPs for all the 94 national park
units with active applications from air tour operators. Furthermore, some
key requirements of the act have not been fully implemented. Specifically,
the act requires that FAA and the Park Service include in ATMPs (1) a
competitive bidding process for awarding final operating authority if an
ATMP limits the number of air tours over a national park unit and (2)
incentives for air tour operators to adopt technologies that make aircraft
quieter. The agencies expect to address these requirements on a
park-unit-by-unit basis as each ATMP is developed.

FAA and the Park Service's slow implementation of the act has limited the
ability of air tour operators to make major decisions such as expanding or
selling their businesses, while implementation has had little effect on
the 112 national park units we surveyed in July 2005. Specifically,
existing operators cannot expand their air tour businesses over national
park units, and new entrants cannot enter the business, because FAA, in
cooperation with the Park Service, has granted neither increases in
interim operating authority to existing operators nor interim operating
authority to any new entrants. The agencies have not agreed on whether or
how they will grant any increases to existing operators, or operating
authority to new entrants, before the appropriate ATMPs have been
completed. Furthermore, air tour operators face uncertainty about whether
they can legally transfer their authority to conduct air tours-which they
believe should be valued in the marketplace-and are therefore having
difficulty making decisions, such as whether to sell their businesses. In
addition, the act requires operators to obtain a specified level of
certification that has more stringent safety standards than some operators
had previously met, and which takes an investment of resources to obtain.
Otherwise, as an exception to this safety requirement, the act limits the
number of air tours conducted by operators that do not meet this level of
certification to a total of five tours per park unit per month with the
agencies' approval. In contrast to these effects on air tour operators,
the implementation of the act has had little effect on the 112 national
park units we surveyed. Most park units responded to the survey that they
had not experienced any positive or negative effect from the act's
implementation, or they were uncertain or did not know the extent of the
effect. In written comments in the survey, 14 park units attributed this
lack of effect to their unit not having air tours. Only 15 percent
reported a positive effect to some extent, while 13 percent reported a
negative effect to some extent. However, 47 percent of the 112 park units
also responded that they need an ATMP to mitigate or prevent potential
adverse impacts on park unit resources, visitor experiences, and air
safety. The agencies plan to first develop ATMPs at park units on the
basis of the presence of new entrants, higher levels of air tour activity,
and other factors.

We identified four key issues to be addressed by the Congress and the
agencies to improve implementation of the act. Specifically:

o Lack of flexibility for determining which park units should develop
ATMPs. The act requires that an ATMP be developed for any park unit for
which an application for operating authority is filed, regardless of the
requested number of air tours or their impact on the park unit. The number
of air tours authorized at each park unit under interim operating
authority ranges from more than 35,000 air tours per year to 5 air tours
per year. In addition, when asked in our survey to identify the one or two
types of overflights that had the most negative effect on their park unit,
more park units reported general aviation (56 park units) and military (44
park units) overflights than air tours (33 park units). More than half of
the 112 park units responded either that they did not need an ATMP or that
they were unsure, despite the act's current requirement. In our
discussions with both agencies and air tour operators, we found that
voluntary agreements at some park units had successfully established air
tour routes and elevation levels to minimize impacts from air tours. These
voluntary agreements, some of which were adopted prior to the act, are
good management practices that could be replicated at other park units.
However, the act does not provide the agencies with any flexibility to
exclude some park units from the requirement. The agencies have raised
questions about whether it is cost-effective to develop an ATMP for some
park units-the first nine plans average an estimated $405,000 each,
implying a potential $38 million cost for 94 ATMPs in current dollars. To
save time and money in developing future plans, the agencies are
considering alternatives to the ATMP approach used at the first nine park
units, such as an expedited process at park units where there is little
air tour activity or public controversy. The Congress may also wish to
consider amending the act to give the agencies authority to determine
which park units should develop ATMPs.

o Absence of Park Service funding for its share of ATMP development costs.
The Park Service, in an interagency memorandum of understanding with FAA,
agreed to fund 40 percent of the cost of developing ATMPs. However, the
Park Service had not requested or received any dedicated funding for the
ATMP program until fiscal year 2006, although it had contributed staff
time. In contrast, by the end of fiscal year 2005, FAA had contributed $29
million for the ATMP program-$27 million to a contractor to record and
analyze sounds in park units and other activities, and the remaining $2
million for staff salaries, travel expenses, equipment and supplies, and
in-house contractors. At that level, FAA has already received about 67
percent of the total estimated ATMP cost for the 94 park units. If the
Park Service does not meet its obligation within the next 2 years,
officials from both agencies said implementation may be hindered.

o Limited ability to verify and enforce the number of air tours. The
agencies lack a mechanism to verify the number of air tours conducted
before or since the act because FAA and existing laws and regulations do
not require operators to record and report the number of air tours they
conduct over national park units. Without these data, FAA and the Park
Service cannot determine whether operators actually conducted the number
of air tours prior to the act that they reported in their applications for
operating authority, nor whether operators are violating their interim
operating authority. As a result, the agencies are limited in their
ability to enforce the act. We determined that 3 of the 25 existing
operators we interviewed were exceeding the number of air tours they were
authorized to conduct under interim operating authority, flying over park
units for which they did not have authority, or both. For example, one air
tour operator told us it was exceeding its interim operating authority by
more than 3,000 tours per year over a major national park unit.

o FAA's inadequate guidance concerning the act's safety requirements. FAA
has not clearly communicated to its district offices or air tour operators
how to interpret the act's requirement for operators to obtain a specified
level of safety certification. The act allows an exception for operators
not meeting this requirement to be restricted to a combined total of five
air tours per park unit per month if they get approval from both agencies.
However, we found three operators had neither applied for the increased
safety certification nor met the conditions of the exception. Officials in
FAA's district offices either were not aware of these circumstances or
believed the operators were in compliance with the act. However, FAA
headquarters officials disagreed, indicating these operators were in
violation.

To allow more cost-effective implementation of the National Parks Air Tour
Management Act, Congress may wish to consider amending the act to
authorize FAA and the Park Service to determine which park units should
develop ATMPs. In addition, we recommend that FAA take a number of actions
to improve compliance, enforcement, and implementation of the act. In
commenting on a draft of this report, the Department of Transportation
agreed with our findings and agreed to consider our recommendations as
they move forward with the program. The Department of the Interior
(Interior), which oversees the Park Service, generally agreed with our
findings and recommendations, but it questioned whether Congress needs to
amend the act to give the agencies greater flexibility. However, Interior
stated that it "... would agree to a general grant of authority which
would provide the agencies discretion to make such determinations based on
agency developed criteria that goes beyond simply the level of air tour
activity." See the "agency comments and our evaluation" section and
appendix VI for Interior's comment letter and our evaluation of these
comments.

Background

Primarily out of concern that noise from air tours over national park
units could impair visitors' experiences and park unit resources, the
Congress passed the National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 to
regulate air tours conducted over national park units. The act mandates
new responsibilities for FAA and the Park Service, including developing
ATMPs for all national park units where air tour operators apply for
authority to conduct air tours.6 The purpose of an ATMP is to develop
acceptable and effective measures to mitigate or prevent the significant
adverse impacts, if any, from air tours on the natural and cultural
resources and visitor experiences at national park units, and on abutting
tribal lands. To implement the act, FAA and the Park Service must, among
other things:

o establish an advisory group to provide continuing advice and counsel on
air tours over and near national park units;

o establish an ATMP at any national park unit whenever an air tour
operator applies for authority to conduct an air tour over the park unit;

o grant interim operating authority to existing air tour operators to
provide annual authorizations to operators until 180 days after an ATMP is
developed at the relevant park unit;

o develop an open, competitive process for air tour operators interested
in providing air tours over a park unit whenever an ATMP limits the number
of air tours during a specified time frame;

o include incentives in an ATMP for air tour operators to adopt technology
that makes aircraft quieter for tours over park units; and

o submit a report to Congress by April 5, 2002, on the effectiveness of
the act in providing incentives for the development and use of quiet
aircraft technology.

The act requires FAA and the Park Service to prepare each ATMP in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). NEPA
requires each federal agency to prepare an environmental impact statement
to assess proposed actions that will have a significant impact on the
environment. If the agency is unsure whether the proposed action will have
a significant impact, it prepares a briefer document called an
environmental assessment. If the assessment concludes the action will have
a significant impact, the agency must then prepare an environmental impact
statement-otherwise it issues a "finding of no significant impact." The
act requires both FAA and the Park Service to approve the NEPA decision
document associated with each ATMP; agency officials believe they will
need to prepare an environmental assessment for most ATMPs.

The act defines an "air tour" as any flight conducted for compensation or
hire in an aircraft where a purpose of the flight is sightseeing over a
national park unit or within one-half mile outside the boundary of any
national park unit-the agencies further defined air tours to include only
flights below 5,000 feet above ground level. The act defines two types of
air tour operators: existing and new entrant operators. Existing operators
are those that were providing air tours over a national park unit at any
time during the 12-month period ending April 5, 2000. A new entrant is an
air tour operator that applies for operating authority but did not provide
air tours over a national park unit during the same 12-month period.
Before an ATMP is developed for a park unit, the act instructs FAA to
grant interim operating authority to any existing air tour operator that
applies for operating authority, which lasts until 180 days after an ATMP
is developed. Interim operating authority provides existing air tour
operators with an annual number of tours that can be conducted over a park
unit. The number of tours authorized is equal to the number of air tours
conducted by the operator during the 12-month period prior to the act's
passage on April 5, 2000, or the average number of air tours per 12-month
period conducted by the operator for the 36 months before the
act-whichever is greater. The act allows FAA and the Park Service to grant
increases in interim operating authority to existing operators, and to
grant interim operating authority to new entrant operators, under certain
circumstances, but the agencies have chosen not to do so.

For safety reasons, the act requires certain air tour operators-known as
Part 91 operators because they operate under safety rules in Part 91 of
Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations-to apply for the more
stringent operational and safety rules outlined in Part 135. Some of the
more stringent safety rules under Part 135 include passing an annual
flight check, passing an instrument proficiency check every 6 months,
maintaining copies of the aircraft's maintenance log, and flying no more
than 8 hours in a 24-hour period. The act's ATMP and safety certification
requirements do not apply to Part 91 operators that obtain a letter of
agreement from FAA and the relevant park unit's superintendent describing
the conditions under which their air tours will be conducted. The act
limits air tours by Part 91 operators under this provision to no more than
five air tours per park unit (not per operator) in any 30-day period.

To implement the act, FAA directed its Western Pacific Region to work with
the Park Service's Natural Sounds Program. FAA's mission is to provide the
safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world, which now includes
managing air tours over national park units. It is pursuing its mission
with an annual budget of over $14 billion for fiscal year 2005,
approximately $8 million of which was budgeted for air tour management;
FAA has provided a total of about $29 million for implementing the act for
fiscal years 2001 through 2005. The Volpe Center, a fee-for-service
organization in the Department of Transportation, performs work primarily
for the department, as well as other entities, and covers such issues as
safety, mobility, security, and noise pollution. FAA contracted with the
Volpe Center to perform, among other things, sound monitoring,
environmental analyses, and economic analysis in support of creating
ATMPs; FAA has allocated $27 million of its $29 million in funding to the
Volpe Center for these activities.

The National Park Service is responsible for conserving the scenery, the
natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in national park units, and
for providing for the enjoyment of national park units in ways that leave
them unimpaired for future generations. To accomplish its mission, the
Park Service received a budget from Congress of about $1.7 billion for
fiscal year 2006, $1.4 million of which is allocated to the Natural Sounds
Program, according to a program official. The Park Service established the
Soundscapes Program Center in 2000 (now the Natural Sounds Program)
primarily to work with FAA's Western Pacific Region Manager to develop
ATMPs, though the Natural Sounds Program's mission is not limited to
creating ATMPs. The Natural Sounds Program works to protect, maintain, or
restore natural sounds in the national park units by working in
partnership with park units to increase scientific and public
understanding of the value and character of sounds that are appropriate
for a park unit and to eliminate or minimize noise intrusions. The program
provides technical assistance to park units in managing sounds and
assessing impacts from noise, and performing outreach and education on
sounds.

FAA and the Park Service Have Begun to Implement the Act, but No ATMPs
Have Been Completed

FAA and the Park Service have taken steps to implement the act, but
implementation has been slow and some of the act's key requirements have
not been addressed. Implementation of the act has been slow, in part, due
to disagreements between FAA and the Park Service over the procedures
necessary to implement the act in compliance with NEPA. While agency
officials expect to develop ATMPs more quickly in the future now that they
have drafted an implementation plan, they acknowledge that issues must
still be addressed before the first ATMP is completed.

FAA and the Park Service Have Taken Actions to Implement the Act and
Resolved Some Differences That Slowed ATMP Development

FAA and the Park Service have taken several actions to implement the act
and addressed some of its requirements. Specifically:

o As the act requires, the agencies established the National Parks
Overflights Advisory Group (advisory group) in April 2001 to provide,
among other things, continuing advice and counsel about air tours over and
near national park units. The advisory group is composed of a balanced
group of representatives of general aviation, air tour operators,
environmental concerns, and Indian tribes. Since 2001, the advisory group
has met periodically to discuss issues related to implementation, such as
interim operating authority, increases in operating authority, and noise
monitoring in the park units.

o In October 2002, FAA issued a final rule that completed the definition
of an air tour and informed air tour operators that they must file an
application for operating authority over national park units by January
23, 2003, in order to avoid a break in conducting such tours.7 Operators
that conducted tours prior to April 5, 2000, may still apply for operating
authority and may be granted interim operating authority. Owing in part to
some confusion over application requirements on the part of air tour
operators, in January 2005 FAA notified air tour operators that they could
self-correct the information they provided in their applications for
operating authority.8 In June 2005, FAA published in the Federal Register
for public comment the list of air tour operators and the number of annual
air tours each operator received under interim

operating authority; the comment period closed October 31, 2005.9

o To meet the act's requirement for developing ATMPs, the agencies began
developing plans in January 2003 for nine national park units-reduced to
six in July 2005-for which air tour operators had applied for operating
authority, with the goal of completing ATMPs at all park units by
approximately 2010.10

Despite the progress made, officials at both agencies said that
implementation has been slow because of (1) other priorities that took
precedence over ATMP development and (2) disagreements between FAA and the
Park Service over how to implement NEPA in assessing the impact of noise
on park units. According to FAA officials, the agency temporarily
suspended work on many rulemaking projects, including air tour management,
and refocused its resources to address air passenger safety and security
in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. In addition,
FAA and Park Service officials said the agencies' differing missions and
environmental policies have delayed some actions to implement the act. For
example, FAA and the Park Service have some procedural differences over
how to implement NEPA in assessing noise impacts on park units, including
the appropriate noise model to use and the noise metrics that are
applicable. While NEPA requires the preparation of an environmental impact
statement for actions having significant environmental impacts, the
agencies could not agree on the criteria to use in determining when noise
from aircraft would have a significant impact on the environment and park
unit resources. To resolve their differences, the agencies developed new
methodologies to assess the potential adverse impacts of air tour noise on
park unit resources and visitors' experiences and agreed to a combination
of FAA and Park Service guidance and practices to implement NEPA. Agency
officials explained that the slow implementation was also due in part to
the unexpected complexities of meeting some of the act's requirements.
Thus, it took time to resolve these and other issues between the agencies.
For example, FAA and the Park Service developed new procedures to
calculate emissions for aircraft that conduct air tours.

FAA and the Park Service have taken steps to mitigate their disagreements
and increase the efficiency of ATMP development. To establish a framework
for cooperation and participation in implementation, the agencies signed a
memorandum of understanding that addresses, among other things, the scope
of work, financial terms, the process for developing and approving ATMPs,
and outlines a dispute resolution process. Officials are to resolve their
disagreements at the program level and elevate them to higher levels if
they cannot resolve them. At the time of this report, the agencies had
elevated one disagreement and were still working to resolve their
differences over the language used in the environmental compliance
documents that describes the purpose and need for an ATMP at a park unit.
The lack of resolution on this issue could cause further delays, according
to agency officials. Furthermore, the agencies drafted an implementation
plan in September 2005 that will guide them through the process of
developing ATMPs for the remaining park units that need them.11 The draft
implementation plan establishes criteria for determining the order in
which park units will develop ATMPs, the roles and responsibilities of FAA
and the Park Service in developing ATMPs, how to develop ATMPs and the
supporting environmental compliance documents, how ATMPs will be
implemented and enforced once completed, and how the plans can be changed.
As a result, agency officials expect the implementation plan, once
finished, to help them develop ATMPs at the remaining park units in less
time than it is taking to develop ATMPs for the first set of park units.
However, according to FAA officials, it may take 5 more years before all
of the 94 national park units begin developing ATMPs. Figure 1 summarizes
the steps taken to implement the act, as of November 2005.

Figure 1: Factors Affecting FAA and the Park Service's Implementation of
the Act as of November 2005

Key Implementation Issues Have Yet to Be Addressed

Despite the progress made, some of the act's key requirements have not
been fully implemented. First, at the time of our review, it was unclear
whether any of the six park units currently developing ATMPs will limit
the number of air tours authorized, and if so, how competitive bidding
will be handled. As agency officials acknowledge, they will eventually
need to address this issue in the implementation plan and in ATMPs.
Second, the agencies have not identified incentives for air tour operators
to adopt technology that make aircraft quieter, such as enclosed tail
rotors on helicopters. In general, air tour operators and FAA officials
said that incentives are needed because of the high cost of retrofitting
old aircraft with quiet technology or purchasing new aircraft already
equipped with quiet technology. However, according to FAA officials,
before incentives can be provided in an ATMP, noise studies must be
conducted to determine what impact, if any, quiet technologies would have
on park unit resources.12 Although the draft implementation plan broadly
addresses quiet technology incentives, it acknowledges that such
incentives are yet to be devised for the first ATMPs underway. FAA and
Park Service officials said they expect to develop a competitive bidding
process and quiet technology incentives on a park-unit-by-unit basis and
will address these issues before the first ATMP is drafted in fiscal year
2007.

Act's Implementation Has Limited Air Tour Operators' Ability to Make Major
Business Decisions but Had Little Effect on National Park Units

FAA and the Park Service's implementation of the act has limited the
ability of air tour operators to make major decisions, such as expanding
or selling their businesses. FAA, in cooperation with the Park Service,
has not granted increases in interim operating authority to existing
operators, nor interim operating authority to new entrants. Furthermore,
air tour operators face uncertainty about whether they can legally
transfer their authority to conduct air tours. As a result of the slow
implementation of the act and the current time frame for developing ATMPs,
these adverse effects on operators have been prolonged. In addition, as a
safety requirement of the act, Part 91 operators must apply for more
stringent safety certification from FAA in order to initiate or continue
conducting air tours. In contrast to these effects on operators, the
implementation of the act has so far had little effect on the 112 national
park units we surveyed in July 2005. Specifically, more than half of the
park units reported that the act's implementation had no positive or
negative effect on their park unit, and about 30 percent were uncertain or
did not know.

Air Tour Operators' Ability to Make Major Business Decisions Has Been
Limited by the Implementation Process

FAA and the Park Service's implementation of the act has limited the
ability of air tour operators to make major business decisions because
FAA, in cooperation with the Park Service, has not granted (1) increases
in interim operating authority to existing operators who applied for such
increases or (2) interim operating authority to new entrants. Furthermore,
air tour operators face uncertainty about whether they can legally
transfer their authority to conduct air tours-which they believe should be
valued in the marketplace-both during the interim operating period and
once an ATMP is established. In addition to these uncertainties, in order
to maintain the level of air tour activity they held prior to the act,
Part 91 operators have generally decided to invest resources for their
operations to meet the more stringent level of safety certification
required by the act.

Agencies' Slow Implementation Has Limited Air Tour Operators' Expansion

According to FAA data, four existing operators have applied to FAA for a
total increase of 7,860 air tours during interim operating authority at
two park units (see table 1). Although the act allows FAA, in cooperation
with the Park Service, to grant increases if certain conditions are met,
the agencies have not done so. As a result, existing operators have not
been able to expand their air tour businesses over national park units.
For example, one air tour operator told us it had expanded its air tour
business over Hawaii Volcanoes National Park at an average annual rate of
22 percent in the 4 years before it applied for operating authority in
2003. FAA granted the operator interim operating authority based on its
activity during the year prior to the act, and the operator then requested
an increase in the annual number of tours authorized. Since no increases
have been granted, the operator has had to reduce the number of tours in
order to remain compliant with the act.

Table 1: Park Units Where Existing Operators Have Applied for an Increase
in Air Tours as of November 2005

                                        

         Park unit          Number of existing operators Number of additional 
                                  requesting an increase  air tours requested 
Glacier National Park                               2                   64 
Hawaii Volcanoes                                    2                7,796 
National Park                                         

Source: FAA.

Existing operators have faced uncertainty about their potential to expand
their air tour businesses for a longer period of time than expected:
nearly 6 years after the act's passage, no ATMPs have been completed, and
the process for developing the vast majority of plans has not even begun.
FAA officials told us they would like to grant increases in interim
operating authority, and Park Service officials told us they would
consider such increases in order to minimize the negative effects of the
act's slow implementation on air tour operators. The act allows increases
in interim operating authority only if it is agreed to by both agencies,
and promotes safe air tour operations and the protection of national park
unit resources. Park Service officials said that because such increases
could have significant environmental impacts, the agencies would either
have to prepare an environmental assessment or collect additional data on
where operators propose conducting more tours-such as flight paths,
frequency of tours, and times of day-to evaluate those impacts prior to
approving the requested increase in air tours. The two agencies have not
reached an agreement on how they will handle increases during interim
operating authority; due to the time and cost involved with an assessment,
the agencies may not be able to determine whether increases can be granted
until the assessment associated with the relevant park's ATMP is
developed.

The agencies also have not issued interim operating authority to 16 new
entrants that have applied for authority to conduct tours over a combined
46 national park units (see table 2). As a result, 10 operators have not
been able to begin flying tours over any national park units, and 6
existing operators have not been able to expand their businesses to
include additional park units. Among the former, for example, are two new
entrant companies in Hawaii that told us they had refrained from flying
within a half-mile of park units, despite customer demand and their own
desire to grow their businesses. These two new entrants also said they
were still waiting for official responses from FAA about the applications
they filed in January 2003. The longer it takes to fully implement the act
in developing ATMPs, the longer these and other new entrants may be
impaired.

Table 2: Park Units Where New Entrants Have Applied for Operating
Authority as of November 2005

                                        

               Park unit              Number of new entrants Number of annual 
                                       that have applied for        air tours 
                                         operating authority       requesteda 
Arches National Park                                    3              104 
Aztec Ruins National Monument                           1                8 
Bryce Canyon National Park                              6              956 
Canyon de Chelly National                               2              840 
Monument                                                  
Canyonlands National Park                               4              104 
Capitol Reef National Park                              2          unknown 
Casa Grande Ruins National                              1                8 
Monument                                                  
Cedar Breaks National Monument                          4              104 
City of Rocks National Reserve                          2          unknown 
Colorado National Monument                              1                8 
Crater Lake National Park                               1                8 
Craters of the Moon National                            2          unknown 
Monument and Preserve                                     
Death Valley National Park                              3                6 
Devils Postpile National Monument                       1                8 
Dinosaur National Monument                              1          unknown 
Fort Laramie National Historic                          1          unknown 
Site                                                      
Gila Cliff Dwellings National                           1                8 
Monument                                                  
Glen Canyon National Recreation                         4              944 
Area                                                      
Golden Spike National Historic                          1          unknown 
Site                                                      
Grand Teton National Park                               1          unknown 
Great Basin National Park                               1          unknown 
Hagerman Fossil Beds National                           1          unknown 
Monument                                                  
Haleakala National Park                                 2            4,140 
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park                          1              600 
Hovenweep National Monument                             2          unknown 
Joshua Tree National Park                               1                8 
Lake Mead National Recreation                           4            1,740 
Area                                                      
Mesa Verde National Park                                1                8 
Mount Rainier National Park                             1          unknown 
Natural Bridges National Monument                       2          unknown 
Navajo National Monument                                3                8 
North Cascades National Park                            1          unknown 
(includes Lake Chelan National                            
Recreation Area)                                          
Olympic National Park                                   2               48 
Organ Pipe Cactus National                              1                8 
Monument                                                  
Petrified Forest National Park                          1          unknown 
Pipe Spring National Monument                           3                8 
Rainbow Bridge National Monument                        2              104 
Sequoia & Kings Canyon National                         2               16 
Park                                                      
Sunset Crater Volcano National                          1          unknown 
Monument                                                  
Timpanogos Cave National Monument                       1          unknown 
Walnut Canyon National Monument                         1          unknown 
Wright Brothers National Memorial                       1          unknown 
Wupatki National Monument                               2          unknown 
Yellowstone National Park                               3                8 
Yosemite National Park                                  2          unknown 
Zion National Park                                      6              959 

Source: FAA.

aMany of the new entrant operators did not request a specific number of
air tours in their applications for operating authority, resulting in
"unknown" for some of the park units listed in this table.

The act gives FAA, in cooperation with the Park Service, the authority to
grant interim operating authority to new entrants if certain conditions
are met: (1) FAA determines the authority is necessary to ensure
competition, (2) the authority would not create a safety or noise problem,
and (3) the ATMP has not been developed within 2 years of the act's
passage. Although the third condition has been met in all cases, and the
first condition might be met in some cases, Park Service officials told us
they interpret the clause regarding noise as triggering the same
environmental analysis that is needed for an ATMP-unless new entrants
provide more data about when and where they propose flying. Because the
agencies have not reached an agreement on how they will handle new
entrants during interim operating authority, they may not be able to
determine whether new entrants can be accommodated until they develop the
relevant ATMPs. In the meantime, new entrants-like existing operators
seeking increases in interim authority-are not able to make important
decisions regarding their air tour businesses.

Operators Are Uncertain About Transferability of Air Tour Allocations

Air tour operators are uncertain about whether they can legally transfer
their flight allocations under the act, both during the period of interim
operating authority and once an ATMP is completed, because FAA has not
adequately communicated its opinion on this subject to operators and its
field offices. As a result, operators have not been able to make major
business decisions such as retiring or selling their businesses-or have
made inappropriate decisions to transfer, sell, or buy air tour
allocations. FAA's opinion is that operating authority is not a property
right or interest. However, as both FAA and aviation members of the
advisory group stated at their June 2005 meeting, operators believe they
should be able to transfer their air tour allocations if, for instance, an
operator wants to go out of business. Now that air tours over national
park units are regulated, they said, an existing operator's value lies in
its pre-2000 level of activity, as well as in its pilots and personnel,
equipment, reputation, and other business assets. If an operator is not
able to transfer its air tour allocations, advisory group members said
there might not be any business to sell.

FAA officials told us that operators' uncertainty about their ability to
transfer their air tour allocations stems from the fact that the act,
regulations, and formal FAA guidance to its flight standards district
offices and air tour operators have not addressed this subject. The air
tour community is aware that while regulations for air tours over Grand
Canyon National Park specify that operators have no property interest in
air tour allocations, the regulations nevertheless allow such transfers
subject to FAA control. And in practice, operators have successfully
bought and sold allocations for that park unit with FAA's knowledge. In
addition, air tour operators have learned that some operators have
successfully transferred or sold air tour allocations to other operators
for other park units, causing further confusion about their
permissibility. For example, we found one air tour operator had paid
another operator in January 2003 for 10,911 air tours the latter conducted
over 11 national park units prior to the act, including 7 park units over
which the purchasing operator had not previously flown. Subsequently, the
purchasing operator included all but three of these tours in its
application for operating authority, with the FAA district office's
knowledge. FAA granted the operator interim operating authority to conduct
a number of tours based on its own historical activity, plus the tours
purchased from the other operator.

FAA senior officials and attorneys told us that transfers of air tour
allocations, whether during the interim period or once an ATMP is
established, are generally not allowed but should be handled on a
case-by-case basis. In a letter to one air tour operator in January 2003,
FAA described the limited circumstances under which an operator could
obtain the existing operator status of another operator for the purposes
of applying for operating authority. Specifically, FAA said both the
operator and the purchased entity would have to be corporations, and the
purchased corporation would have to continue to exist as its own legal
entity, in order for the new owner to obtain the existing operator status.
However, this letter did not address the broader issue of transferring air
tour allocations once interim or final operating authority is granted. FAA
headquarters officials told us they had not widely communicated this
letter or the agency's broader position to its district offices or to air
tour operators because the confusion had not been brought to their
attention until our review. As a result of this lack of communication, the
district offices have addressed this issue inconsistently, and there may
be deviations from headquarters' position. For example, one operator in
South Dakota acquired an existing air tour operator in 2001 and applied
for operating authority, considering its predecessor's history of air tour
activity to be an acquired asset. The FAA district office and headquarters
officials initially considered this operator to be a new entrant and
denied it interim operating authority, causing it to pursue alternative
sources of income for 2-1/2 years. Then, in mid-2005, FAA headquarters
investigated the case and granted the purchasing operator interim
operating authority because it had met the agency's requirements for
obtaining existing operator status. But in the example mentioned earlier
in which one air tour operator paid another operator for 10,911 air tours,
another district office was aware of the transfer before it issued
operating authority. Finally, under the jurisdiction of a third district
office, we found one operator with two companies has allowed one of his
companies to use the other company's air tour allocations over several
park units-effectively making an inappropriate transfer, according to
FAA's position.

Operators Have Generally Opted to Invest Resources to Meet Higher
Standards and Avoid the Five-Tour Limit

FAA officials told us that in order to continue their historic levels of
air tour activity and income, Part 91 operators have to meet the higher
standards of Part 135 regulations. According to FAA data, 68 of the 77
existing operators have been allowed to maintain their pre-2000 level of
air tour activity over national park units because they were already
certified under Part 135 regulations. Eight of the remaining nine
operators that were Part 91 operators have applied for Part 135
certification, and one operator chose to remain a Part 91 operator. These
eight operators have to invest resources in additional pilot training and
check rides, aircraft inspections, safety manuals, record-keeping, and
other activities to meet the Part 135 safety requirements that go beyond
those required under Part 91 regulations.13 Although the amount of
investment required to meet Part 135 standards varies from one operator to
another, FAA officials told us the initial cost can vary from hundreds to
tens of thousands of dollars.

Alternatively, if Part 91 operators had decided not to apply for the Part
135 standards required by the act, and they had a high level of air tours
prior to 2000, their loss of air tour business could have been
significant. For example, one air tour operator applied for operating
authority under Part 135 and reported that it had conducted 5,200 tours
over Mount Rushmore National Memorial strictly under Part 91 regulations
in the year before the act. FAA then issued interim operating authority to
this operator for 5,200 tours annually over that park unit because the
operator applied for Part 135 certification.14 But if this operator had
not applied for authority under Part 135, it would have been restricted to
five or fewer tours per month over that park unit-if it had acquired a
letter of agreement signed by both agencies. At the time of our review,
FAA data showed that only one Part 91 operator had not applied for Part
135 certification and had received a letter of agreement from FAA for up
to five flights per month at one park unit. However, Park Service
officials said this operator had not obtained a letter of agreement from
the Park Service.

Act's Implementation Has Had Little Effect on National Park Units

A majority of the 112 park units we surveyed in July 2005, as well as Park
Service officials we spoke with, reported that FAA and the Park Service's
implementation of the act has had neither a positive or negative effect on

the park units, yet many still want an ATMP.15 Specifically, 62 (55
percent) of the park units reported that the act's implementation had no
positive effect on their park unit, and 64 (57 percent) reported no
negative effect, while only 17 (15 percent) reported a positive effect to
some extent and 14 (13 percent) reported a negative effect to some extent.
Another 33 (29 percent) and 34 (30 percent) park units responded that they
were uncertain or did not know the effect, positive or negative,
respectively. In written comments in the survey, 14 of the 112 park units
attributed this lack of effect to their unit not having air tours.16

The act's implementation may result in positive, negative, or no effects
on park units because the level of air tour activity has been held
constant over park units under interim operating authority. For those park
units wanting to reduce air tours, interim operating authority has
preserved a level of activity that those park units already consider too
high. On the other hand, for those park units where a low level of air
tour activity currently exists (as defined by those park units), freezing
the level of air tours under interim operating authority has prevented the
growth of air tours. Finally, some park unit officials told us there has
been no effect and that the status quo is acceptable.

Regarding the act's requirement that FAA and the Park service establish
ATMPs at all park units where applications for operating authority are
made, 53 (47 percent) park units responded in the survey that they need an
ATMP to mitigate or prevent potential adverse impacts on park unit
resources, visitor experiences, and air safety. Fifty-nine (53 percent) of
the park units stated that they had air tours over their park units and
identified how air tours are affecting park unit resources. For example,
as shown in table 3, 23 (39 percent) of the 59 park units reported a
negative effect on visitors' experiences, and 3 (5 percent) reported a
positive effect.17 Because the agencies plan to first develop ATMPs at
park units on the basis of the presence of new entrants, higher levels of
air tour activity, and other priorities, some park units are not likely to
have a complete ATMP until

2012.18 Some park units we visited told us this delay does no harm because
they are not substantially affected by air tours, and they are therefore
satisfied with the act's limited implementation and the time frame for
developing ATMPs.

Table 3: Effects of Air Tours on Park Unit Resources Reported by 59 Park
Units in July 2005

                                        

                          Number of   
                          park units  
                          reporting   
                          effects of  
                         air tours on 
                          park unit   
                          resources   
Park resource             Positive Negative Both None Uncertain/       No 
                                                         Don't know response 
Visitors' experience             3       23   15    5         13        0 
Cultural/Historical              2       15    0   16         25        1 
resources                                                                 
Natural                          1       23    1    9         24        1 
resources/Wildlife                                                        
Number of visitors               3        3    1   23         27        2 
to the park unit                                                          
Other resources                  1        4    1    0          4       49 

Source: GAO survey results for the 59 park units that responded there were
air tours over their park unit.

Issues Remain to Improve Implementation and Enforcement of the Act

We identified four key issues to be addressed by the Congress and the
agencies to improve implementation of the act: (1) a lack of flexibility
for determining which park units should develop ATMPs, (2) an absence of
Park Service funding for its share of ATMP development costs, (3) limited
ability to verify and enforce the number of air tours, and (4) FAA's
inadequate guidance concerning the act's safety requirements.

Lack of Flexibility for Determining Which Park Units Should Develop ATMPs

The act requires an ATMP to be developed for any park unit where an
application for operating authority is made, regardless of the size of the
park unit, the number of air tours or operators at a park unit, or their
impact. Thus FAA and the Park Service are not authorized to exclude any
park units from the ATMP process. The number of air tours authorized at
park units under interim operating authority ranges from more than 35,000
to 5 air tours per year.19 Of the 94 park units currently expected to
develop ATMPs, 49 park units (52 percent) have 61 or more authorized air
tours per year under interim operating authority. Of the remainder, 36
park units (38 percent) have 60 or fewer authorized air tours per year,
and 9 park units (10 percent) have no authorized air tours because only
new entrants applied for authority at those park units.

According to the 112 park units we surveyed, more park units have other
types of aviation than air tours, and more park units cited those other
types of aviation as their biggest aviation concern. Specifically, more
national park units reported having military, general aviation, and
high-altitude commercial flights than air tours over their park units:20
89 park units (79 percent) had military overflights, 97 park units (87
percent) had general aviation overflights, and 95 park units (85 percent)
had high-altitude commercial overflights.21 In contrast, 59 park units (53
percent) reported having air tours, and 59 park units had other types of
overflights, such as pesticide spraying, search and rescue, and Park
Service research flights.22 Furthermore, when asked to identify the one or
two types of overflights that had the most negative effect on their park
unit, 56 park units cited general aviation and 44 park units reported
military flights, compared with the 33 park units that cited air tours.23

More than half of the 112 park units we surveyed responded either that
they did not need an ATMP or they were unsure if they needed one, despite
the act's current requirement. Specifically, 43 park units (38 percent)
reported not needing an ATMP, and 16 park units (14 percent) did not know
or were uncertain about the need for a plan. In our discussions with Park
Service and FAA officials and air tour operators, we found that voluntary
agreements at some park units, such as Haleakala and Badlands National
Parks and the Statue of Liberty National Monument, had successfully
established air tour routes and elevation levels to minimize impacts from
air tours on park unit resources and visitors on the ground. These
voluntary agreements, some of which were adopted prior to the act, are
good management practices that could be replicated at other park units.
For example, Haleakala officials started working with air tour operators
in the early 1990s in response to visitors' complaints about noise from
helicopter tours over the park unit's crater, while recognizing that such
tours provide an alternative means for visitors to enjoy the park unit. In
1998, the Haleakala officials and operators signed an agreement
establishing routes that keep air tours outside the crater and away from
visitor centers but still allow air visitors to enjoy the crater from 500
feet above ground level within one mile of its southern boundary. In
addition, the helicopter companies agreed to take punitive action against
pilots if there are complaints of violations, and Park Service officials
and helicopter companies meet once a month to discuss issues. As a result
of this agreement, Haleakala officials and air tour operators told us
complaints have decreased substantially, and operators have been able to
maintain their tour businesses.

If some park units find that they do not need ATMPs, then the agencies
will save federal dollars if they have the option of not developing such
plans. FAA estimates spending an average of $405,000-ranging from $257,000
to $681,000-on the environmental analyses required at each of the first
nine

park units that started developing ATMPs,24 compared with the agency's
original estimate of an average $300,000 per park unit. Based on the
current cost and the number of park units currently expected to develop
ATMPs, the development of such plans could cost the federal agencies an
estimated $38 million in current dollars. Officials from both agencies and
members of the federal advisory group have expressed concern about the
cost and time required to fully implement the act by developing ATMPs at
all 94 park units where applications for operating authority were still
active as of November 2005. In particular, officials at both agencies have
questioned whether it is cost-effective to develop ATMPs for park units
where there is a low level of air tour activity or where there is greater
concern about other environmental impacts, such as vehicular traffic or
other types of aviation.

Within the confines of the act, officials from both agencies said they are
considering alternatives to the ATMP development approach used at the
first nine park units-alternatives that these officials believe would
fulfill the act's requirements but potentially save the agencies time and
money in developing the plans. Under NEPA, agencies may adopt procedures
to determine which actions usually do not have any significant impact on
the environment and therefore need not be the subject of an environmental
assessment or impact statement; these actions are referred to as
categorical exclusions. In cases where the stakeholders agree there are no
significant impacts from air tours, agency officials said they may be able
to issue ATMPs using their respective categorical exclusion procedures or
they could issue an abbreviated environmental assessment. With this in
mind, FAA has proposed creating an aviation rulemaking committee to pursue
an expedited ATMP process at park units where there is low air tour
activity and little public controversy. FAA envisions this rulemaking
committee could be chaired by a park unit's superintendent and would
comprise stakeholders from both agencies, the aviation community,
environmental groups, the nearby residential community, and any other
appropriate interest groups. The committee would hold a public hearing and
create an ATMP that would be published for comment and then issued as a
final rule. As precedent for this proposal, FAA officials pointed to the
success of a rulemaking committee it convened in 1999 to address issues
surrounding the regulation of operations conducted by fractional owners
and managers.25 That committee, composed of 27 representatives of the
aviation community and relevant federal agencies, drafted proposed
regulations and provided the necessary funding to conduct environmental
and economic analyses of the proposed regulations.

The two agencies are also considering three other approaches to expedite
the ATMP process: (1) group several park units under one plan, (2) perform
one environmental analysis to support multiple ATMPs, or (3) develop an
environmental impact statement that could be used for as many ATMPs as
possible nationwide. However, at the time of our review, the agencies had
not committed to any of these approaches or agreed on when and where they
might be applied; thus it is too early to know what results may come from
these efforts. Furthermore, even if they are successful, the agencies will
still have the responsibility of developing an ATMP for each park unit
where an operator proposes to conduct air tours, then monitoring air tour
operators' compliance with an ATMP and enforcing the ATMP's requirements.
These responsibilities require resources beyond the creation of the ATMP.
As a result, FAA and the Park Service have discussed the benefit of
legislative changes to the act in order to give the agencies authority to
determine which park units need an ATMP. FAA officials expressed concern
that if the agencies were to recommend a legislative change to the
Congress, it may trigger an environmental review under NEPA that is
similar to what is already being done to develop the ATMPs, which is both
costly and time-consuming.26 This would effectively diminish the benefits
of seeking such a change. FAA and Park Service officials concurred that
this is an issue the Congress should handle without a formal legislative
proposal from the agencies.

Absence of Park Service Funding for Its Share of ATMP Development Costs

The Park Service has not funded its share of the cost of developing ATMPs,
despite its agreement with FAA to fund 40 percent of this effort. In a
memorandum of understanding between FAA and the Park Service, the agencies
agreed that FAA would fund 60 percent and the Park Service would fund 40
percent of the cost of developing ATMPs. The agreement describes the
qualifying costs as external contractor costs required to produce ATMPs.
These qualifying costs exclude staff salaries, benefits, and travel for
agency personnel; agency equipment and supplies; and any costs for
in-house contractors hired by either agency. From fiscal year 2001 through
fiscal year 2005, FAA has funded 100 percent of the initial ATMPs'
development, which amounts to $27 million through distinct budget
appropriations,27 while the Park Service had not requested or received any
dedicated funding for the program until fiscal year 2006 when Congress
provided $500,000 toward air tour management. Although the Park Service
has also contributed staff time to work with FAA on the development of
ATMPs, the cost of doing so does not count toward its 40 percent
obligation, according to the memorandum of understanding. FAA officials
said at the current estimate of an average $405,000 per park unit for ATMP
development, the agency estimates it will cost an additional $13 million
for fiscal years 2006 through 2010, for a total program cost since 2001 of
about $38 million for 94 ATMPs. At that level, FAA has already received
about 67 percent of the total ATMP cost-if the Park Service receives funds
for the remaining $13 million that FAA estimates is needed, that will be
just 33 percent of the total cost. If the Park Service does not meet its
obligation within the next 2 years, according to FAA and Park Service
officials, implementation may be hindered. However, officials from both
agencies said adoption of alternative approaches to the ATMP process could
lower costs.

Limited Ability to Verify and Enforce the Number of Air Tours

FAA and existing laws and regulations do not require operators to record
and report the number of air tours they conduct over national park
units.28 Consequently, FAA and the Park Service lack a mechanism to verify
the number of air tours conducted over national park units, both
historically and under interim operating authority. Of the 25 existing
operators we interviewed, 23 told us they had used a variety of documents,
such as flight logs and ticket sales receipts, to estimate their pre-2000
air tour activity in their applications for operating authority. However,
FAA officials and operators said the quality of these data varied since
there is no record-keeping requirement, and two operators told us they had
no records of their pre-2000 activity. In addition, we found two operators
had deliberately inflated their estimates to ensure some growth in future
years-even though that action ran counter to the act's intent.
Specifically:

o According to one air tour operator, because of the act's passage in
2000, the operator started keeping track of its air tours and deliberately
inflated the number reported in its application for operating authority in
2003 to allow for future expansion. Without the documentation to verify
this information, FAA issued interim operating authority to this operator
for the inflated amount, and this operator has not had to limit its tours
in recent years as it might have if it had reported actual numbers.

o Another operator with one pilot applied for operating authority at
dozens of park units spanning 6 Western states totaling more than 1,500
air tours annually. FAA and Park Service officials said it was unlikely
this operator could have conducted that many tours, and in their view, the
company had inflated the amount of tours it reported. However, without
reliable data to prove or disprove the operator's claim, FAA granted the
company interim operating authority for the reported activity.

In addition, without reliable air tour data, FAA and the Park Service
cannot determine whether operators are violating their interim authority.
As a result, the agencies are limited in their ability to enforce the act.
We determined 3 of the 25 existing operators we interviewed were exceeding
the number of tours they were authorized to conduct under interim
operating authority, flying over park units for which they did not have
authority, or both. For example, one owner told us his company was
exceeding its interim operating authority by more than 3,000 tours per
year over a major national park unit, and was conducting tours over two
other park units for which it had no authority.

According to FAA officials, it is in an operator's best interest to keep
records of its tours over national park units to verify the number of
tours conducted, and some operators are doing so as a good business
practice. Without a requirement for operators to maintain and report such
records, however, the agencies cannot take appropriate action to enforce
the act or deter violations. Consequently, those operators who
deliberately inflated their pre-2000 flight activity in their applications
enjoy higher levels of activity under interim operating authority than the
act intended, and thus may have a competitive advantage over operators who
provided more accurate data.

To address this problem, FAA told us, legislation or rulemaking is needed
to require operators to maintain and report records during the interim
operating period. Once an ATMP for a park unit is completed, agency
officials believe each ATMP should include reporting requirements in order
to make the act enforceable. However, at the time of our review, FAA, as
the agency responsible for regulating air tour operators, had not decided
how it would implement a reporting requirement.

FAA's Inadequate Guidance Concerning the Act's Safety Requirements

FAA has not instructed its flight standards district offices or air tour
operators on how to interpret and enforce the act's requirements for Part
91 operators, which are now required to meet the safety standards of Part
135 regulations. Under an exemption in the act, Part 91 operators may
continue to be regulated under Part 91 if they obtain a letter of
agreement from FAA and the relevant park unit's superintendent and are
limited to a combined total of five air tours per park unit per month. We
found that 3 of the 29 companies we interviewed had not taken steps for
all their pilots and aircraft to meet Part 135 standards, had not obtained
letters of agreement from the two agencies, and were exceeding the
five-tour limit using pilots and/or aircraft qualified only for Part 91
operations. Furthermore, we found that the number of tours conducted by
one operator's Part 91 pilots and aircraft exceeded its interim operating
authority. Specifically, this operator employed a single pilot and a
single helicopter qualified for Part 135 operations, and seven pilots and
three helicopters under Part 91 regulations, to conduct tours within a
half-mile of a major national park unit. The operator's manager estimated
those Part 91 pilots and aircraft had given hundreds of tours within one
half-mile of a national park unit in the previous year. The manager
believed the interim operating authority applied only to himself and his
one Part 135-certified helicopter, and did not apply to the other pilots
and aircraft.

Officials in the two FAA flight standards district offices overseeing the
three operators mentioned above were either not aware of these
circumstances or believed the operators were in compliance with the act
because they had at least a single pilot and single aircraft that were
Part 135-certified. According to officials at the district office who were
aware of the circumstances, the fact that those operators used additional
pilots and aircraft qualified for only Part 91 operations was immaterial
and not a violation of the act. FAA attorneys and other agency managers
disagreed, indicating the operators mentioned above were in violation.
They interpreted the act to mean that unless an operator chose to operate
under the Part 91 restrictions, all pilots and aircraft conducting tours
over national park units should meet Part 135 standards in order to
increase safety. Until our review, FAA officials said the issue had not
been brought to their attention, and they agreed that interpretation of
the act by some FAA district offices seemed to be inconsistent.

We found that the guidance FAA headquarters provided to district offices
and air tour operators regarding the requirements for operating authority
applications was not clear about this issue. For instance, the guidance
did not require the companies to identify the number of pilots they
employed, or what specific certification level those pilots and their
aircraft were qualified for. In the three cases where we found the
companies were exceeding the five-tour limit using Part 91 pilots and
aircraft, their applications for operating authority did not disclose
their additional pilots, they did not specify the level of certification
their aircraft met, or both. Furthermore, both the act and FAA guidance
routinely use the term "operator," which is broadly defined to refer to
companies, corporations, individuals, and other entities. Agency officials
said the scope of the act's intentions was not clear on this matter, and
the common use and interpretation of the term "operator" as a business-not
an individual-could have caused confusion within the aviation community.

Conclusions

The National Parks Air Tour Management Act provided FAA and the Park
Service with new authority to regulate air tours over national park units
to ensure that the noise from such tours does not impair visitors'
experiences or damage park unit resources. However, some of the act's
requirements, and FAA's and the Park Service's slow implementation, have
had unintended consequences on air tour operators and relevant park units.

The level of air tours over the park units has been held constant under
interim operating authority at pre-2000 levels for nearly 6 years because
no ATMPs have yet been completed. FAA and the Park Service, air tour
operators, and some members of Congress did not envision that so many park
units and air tour operators would be operating under interim operating
authority for so long. Maintaining the level of air tour activity for
those park units that were adversely affected by air tours may be
justified while the agencies try to assess their impacts. However,
according to the 112 park units we surveyed, many of the park units
currently scheduled to get an ATMP may not need one for the foreseeable
future-but the act does not provide the agencies with any flexibility to
determine which park units do not need ATMPs. While the agencies are
currently considering more cost-effective methods for developing ATMPs
within the confines of the act, it is too early to know what results may
come from those efforts. Amending the act to authorize the agencies to
determine which park units should develop ATMPs would go a long way to
addressing the unintended consequences of the act at a number of park
units, and could save federal dollars by not requiring the development of
ATMPs for some park units. Park units identified as needing an ATMP would
continue to be regulated under the act as they are now, while the other
park units that do not currently need an ATMP would become unregulated,
thus allowing existing operators at those park units to grow their
businesses and new entrants to begin operating. At any time in the future,
should the level of air tour activity at an unregulated park unit expand
to such a level so as to warrant the development of an ATMP, the agencies
would have the necessary authority to begin regulating the air tours at
that park unit. This flexibility would also encourage park units and air
tour operators, under the threat of becoming regulated, to negotiate and
comply with voluntary agreements to mitigate the impacts of air tours.

In amending the act, the Congress could consider different processes and
criteria for the agencies to determine which park units will develop
ATMPs. For example, Congress, in consultation with the agencies, could
establish a process with specific criteria that the agencies use to
determine which park units should have ATMPs. Other options Congress could
consider are a nomination process with approval by the National Parks
Overflights Advisory Group, or a process whereby the agencies could assess
the need for an ATMP based on the likelihood of potential significant
adverse impacts.

FAA has determined, but not effectively communicated or consistently
enforced, the circumstances under which air tour operators may or may not
transfer or sell their air tour allocations. As a result, air tour
operators do not know if they should plan to expand, reduce, or even sell
their business. Since some air tour operators have assumed that their air
tour allocations can be transferred or sold, they have been doing so, with
the knowledge and approval of their local FAA flight standards district
offices, contrary to the position of FAA headquarters.

For consistent enforcement of the number of air tours authorized under
interim operating authority, and ultimately under ATMPs, FAA and the Park
Service must be able to verify the number of air tours conducted over a
national park unit by each authorized operator. Since air tour operators
are currently not required to maintain and report information on their air
tours, FAA and the Park Service are unable to enforce the air tour
allocations. By not enforcing the air tour allocations, the agencies are
allowing operators that are exceeding their allocations to have an unfair
business advantage over those operators that are complying with the act
and may also have adverse impacts on visitors' experiences and park unit
resources.

Finally, consistent enforcement of air tour operators' allocations over
national park units, both under interim operating authority and once an
ATMP is established, is vital to controlling the impacts from air tour
noise on the national park units and in ensuring a level playing field
among all the air tour operators. Nearly 6 years after the passage of the
act, a great deal of confusion remains regarding the act's safety
requirements. FAA has not provided definitive guidance to its flight
standards district offices on how they should interpret and enforce the
act's safety requirements and exemption for Part 91 operators. As a
result, this provision has generally not been enforced, and some air tour
operators are not in compliance with act.

Matter for Congressional Consideration

To allow more cost-effective implementation of the National Parks Air Tour
Management Act, Congress may wish to consider amending the act to
authorize the agencies to determine which park units should develop ATMPs.

Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve compliance, enforcement, and implementation of the National
Parks Air Tour Management Act, we recommend that the Secretary of
Transportation direct the Administrator of FAA to take the following three
actions:

o Communicate the agency's position to its district offices on whether
operating authority is transferable or sellable under both interim and
final operating authority, and if so, under what conditions.

o Establish a procedure for air tour operators to record and report to FAA
and the Park Service the number of air tours they conduct over national
park units, under both interim and final operating authority.

o Clearly communicate to FAA district offices how to interpret, and thus
enforce, the act's requirements for Part 91 air tour operators.

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided the Departments of Transportation and the Interior with a
draft of this report for review and comment. The Department of
Transportation offered technical comments and otherwise generally agreed
with the findings of this report and agreed to consider our
recommendations as they move forward with the program. The Department of
the Interior provided written comments that are included in appendix VI,
along with our specific response. Interior generally agreed with our
findings and recommendations, but it questioned whether Congress needs to
amend the act to give the agencies greater flexibility. Interior commented
that it was concerned that amending the act could "unnecessarily or
unwittingly" jeopardize the protection of park resources and visitor
enjoyment by excluding some park units from the ATMP process solely based
on their level of air tour activity. Furthermore, Interior commented that
there are several administrative remedies available to the agencies that
might be best used to address those park units with low air tour activity.
We agree that any amendments to the act should preserve the Park Service's
authority to develop an ATMP at any park unit it deems necessary and that
park units should not be arbitrarily excluded from the process solely
based on their level of air tour activity. However, we disagree that
existing administrative remedies would provide the flexibility that is
needed to achieve the most effective and efficient implementation of the
act. The purpose of providing flexibility in the act is not to exclude
park units that need ATMPs, but rather to provide the agencies the
flexibility not to develop ATMPs for park units where the agencies deem
them to be unnecessary. In its comments, Interior suggested support for
this approach by stating that it "... would agree to a general grant of
authority which would provide the agencies discretion to make such
determinations based on agency developed criteria that goes beyond simply
the level of air tour activity."

Interior also provided technical comments and editorial suggestions that
we have incorporated throughout the report, as appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Transportation
and the Interior, and other interested parties. We will also make copies
available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be
available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov . Contact
points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may
be found on the last page of this report.

If you or your staff have questions about this report, please contact me
at (202) 512-3841 or [email protected] . Key contributions to this report
are listed in appendix VII.

Robin M. Nazzaro Director, Natural Resources   and Environment

List of Requesters

The Honorable Daniel Inouye Co-Chairman Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation United States Senate

The Honorable Jeff Bingaman Ranking Minority Member Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources United States Senate

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on
National Parks Committee on Energy and Natural Resources United States
Senate

The Honorable Lamar Alexander United States Senate

The Honorable John McCain United States Senate

Scope and Methodology Appendix I

We identified and analyzed applicable laws, regulations, policies, and
procedures to determine what actions the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) and the National Park Service (Park Service) have taken to implement
the act and what remains to be addressed. Specifically, we used the act to
identify what actions the agencies were required to take. To learn what
actions FAA and the Park Service have taken to implement the act's
requirements, we reviewed notices and regulations published in the Federal
Register and agency documents, and interviewed agency officials at FAA and
Park Service headquarters, FAA district offices, and national park units,
and air tour operators. We selected a nonprobability sample of 12 park
units to visit because 9 of the 12 were the first park units FAA and the
Park Service chose to develop air tour management plans (ATMPs), and the
other 3 faced circumstances that differed from the first 9: one had a
military flight restriction, one was a potential candidate for an
alternative method for developing an ATMP, and one believed an ATMP was
not needed because it had so few air tours. The 12 park units are: Great
Smoky Mountains, Hawaii Volcanoes, Haleakala, and Badlands National Parks;
Kalaupapa, Pu'uhonau o Honaunau, and Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical
Parks; Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Site; the USS Arizona Memorial;
Lake Mead National Recreation Area; and Mount Rushmore National Memorial.

We assessed budget data describing the Park Service's requests for annual
appropriations and FAA's funding dedicated to developing ATMPs, including
those funds obligated to the Volpe Center. This budget information covered
the fiscal years 2001 through 2006 and were obtained from budget
appropriation reports, the agencies' budget requests, and budget summaries
provided by FAA and the Volpe Center. We determined that these data were
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. We also assessed
data describing the number of air tours by operators over various national
park units. Of interest were data on numbers of air tour operators,
including existing operators, new entrants, and total applicants, as well
as numbers of annual authorized air tours and new or increased authority
requested. We interviewed agency officials regarding a series of data
reliability questions addressing areas such as data entry, data access,
quality control procedures, and data accuracy and completeness. We asked
follow-up questions whenever necessary. We determined that these data were
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report.

To assess how air tour operators have been affected by the implementation
of the act, we reviewed FAA and Park Service documents, documents provided
by air tour operators, and interviewed a sample of 29 operators at the 12
different park units we visited. Where appropriate, we used documents
provided by the operators, FAA, and the Park Service to corroborate
information we collected from interviews with the air tour operators. To
choose the operators to interview, we divided the operators at each park
into 3 groups based on the number of annual air tours they were granted
under interim operating authority-small (3,000 or fewer air tours), medium
(between 3,001 and 10,000 air tours), and large (more than 10,000 air
tours). Next, we randomly selected operators in each group and met with at
least three in each group; we also met with all new entrant operators
regardless of the number at each park unit. The air tour operators we
interviewed are: Adventure Air, LC.; Air Grand Canyon, Inc.; American
Aviation, Inc.; Aris, Inc.; Aviation Ventures, Inc.; Badger Helicopters,
Inc.; Big Island Air, Inc.; Black Hills Aerial Adventures, Inc.; Call Air,
Inc.; Eagle Aviation, Inc.; Grand Canyon Airlines, Inc.; Great Smoky
Mountains Helicopter, Inc.; Helicopter Consultants of Maui, Inc.; K & S
Helicopters, Inc.; King Airelines, Inc.; Manuiwa Airways, Inc.; Maverick
Helicopters, Inc.; Mauiscape Helicopters, Inc.; Mokulele Flight Service,
Inc.; Rainbow Pacific Helicopters, Ltd.; Rambo Helicopter Charter, Inc.;
Rushmore Helicopters, Inc.; Safari Aviation, Inc.; Scenic Airlines, Inc.;
Schuman Aviation, Co. Ltd.; Vista Helicopter Services, Inc.; Skycraft Air
Maintenance, Ltd.; Sunshine Helicopters, Inc.; and Windrock Aviation, LLC.

To assess how the national park units have been affected by implementation
of the act, we reviewed FAA and Park Service documents, conducted a survey
of all 112 national park units identified to develop ATMPs as of July
2005, interviewed representatives of the 12 park units we visited, and
also interviewed FAA and Park Service officials at their headquarters
offices. We surveyed all national park units where air tour operators had
applied for operating authority, which includes existing and new entrant
operators. Ten tribal lands within or abutting national park units were
also identified as needing to be part of the ATMPs developed at the
relevant park units, but our review is limited to the implementation of
the act at national park units. Since our survey was conducted, some air
tour operators withdrew their applications and other corrections were made
by FAA, which resulted in a reduced number of park units that have been
identified to develop ATMPs-as of November 2005, there are 94 park units
identified to develop ATMPs, which are listed in appendix III.

We designed our survey with the assistance of a GAO methodologist. During
its design, we reviewed a similar survey conducted by the National Parks
Conservation Association and also obtained input from FAA and Park Service
officials. Even though we surveyed all 112 national park units identified
to develop ATMPs as of July 2005, the practical difficulties of conducting
any survey may introduce other types of errors, commonly referred to as
"nonsampling error." For example, differences in how a particular question
is interpreted or the sources of information available to respondents can
introduce unwanted variability into the survey results. We included steps
in both the data collection and data analysis stages for purposes of
minimizing such nonsampling errors. We pretested the content and format of
the survey with three national park units. We also had the survey
independently reviewed by a GAO survey specialist. Based on the results of
these pretests and reviews, we revised the survey instrument as
appropriate. All returned surveys were reviewed, and we called respondents
to obtain follow-up information when questions were not answered or
clarification was needed.

Our survey response rate was 100 percent. All survey data were keypunched,
and then an additional sample of the data were verified as an added check
for accuracy of the information. The data were then summarized and
tabulated, and the aggregate results are included in appendix II. It is
worth noting that not all park units surveyed responded to question 6. In
this question, park units were asked to identify what effect, if any, air
tours over the park unit have had on the following resources: visitors'
experience, cultural/historical resources, natural resources/wildlife,
number of visitors to the park unit, and other resources. Fifty-one park
units indicated that they do not have air tours, which would imply that
the remaining 61 of the 112 park units surveyed do have air tours. Yet, 59
park units responded that they do have air tours and 2 park units did not
respond because they were unsure whether the flights over their park units
were air tours or some other type of flight.

We conducted our work from January 2005 through January 2006 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Survey Instrument and Results from 112 National Park Units Appendix II

Applications for Operating Authority by National Park Unit Appendix III

Source: FAA.

aMany of the new entrant operators did not request a specific number of
air tours in their applications for operating authority, resulting in
"unknown" for some of the park units listed in this table.

Note: Since our survey in July 2005, when 112 park units were expected to
develop ATMPs, 15 park units have been eliminated due to two operators'
withdrawing their applications for authority to conduct tours over those
park units. The two operators had been the sole applicants at the
following 15 park units: Bent's Old Fort National Historic Site; Cabrillo
National Monument; Channel Islands National Park; Charles Pinckney
National Historic Site; Chiricahua National Monument; Curecanti National
Recreation Area; Gateway National Recreation Area; Lava Beds National
Monument; Lower East Side Tenement Museum National Historic Site;
Manhattan Sites (which includes Castle Clinton National Monument, Saint
Paul's Church National Historic Site, Federal Hall National Memorial,
General Grant National Memorial, Hamilton Grange National Memorial, and
Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace National Historic Site); Manzanar National
Historic Site; Pinnacles National Monument; Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area; Tonto National Monument; and Whiskeytown
National Recreation Area. In addition, FAA withdrew interim operating
authority in October 2005 for one operator at three park units where there
were no other applicants. Those three park units are: John Muir National
Historic Site, Redwood National and State Parks, and Rosie the
Riveter/World War II Home Front National Historical Park. This information
reflects applications for operating authority that were still active as of
November 2005.

Applications for Operating Authority by Air Tour Operator Appendix IV

Source: FAA.

Note: This information reflects applications for operating authority that
were still active as of November 2005.

Air Tours Authorized under Interim Operating Authority by National Park
Unit

Source: FAA.

aAt the time of our review, FAA officials believed that many of the tours
authorized at Lake Mead National Recreation Area were actually
transportation-only flights en route to the Grand Canyon National Park.
Such flights are exempt from the National Parks Air Tour Management Act,
but operators nonetheless applied for operating authority because of their
uncertainty.

Note: This information reflects applications for operating authority that
were still active as of November 2005.

Comments from the Department of the Interior Appendix VI

The following are GAO's comments on the Department of the Interior's
(Interior) letter dated January 5, 2006.

GAO Comments

1.While it is true that FAA and the Park Service could not agree on what
constitutes a significant impact, we did not include specifics of the
disagreement because, according to agency officials and the implementation
plan, the problem has been resolved. Furthermore, the agencies' slow
implementation of the act has been discussed in past congressional
hearings and we concluded that we could not provide any new information.

2.We agree that Congress, in amending the act, should preserve the Park
Service's authority to develop an ATMP for any park unit it deems
necessary. Our intent for suggesting that Congress consider amending the
act was to provide the agencies with the flexibility not to develop ATMPs
for park units where the Park Service deems them to be unnecessary. That
flexibility currently does not exist in the act. As we discuss in the
report, an ATMP may be unnecessary for a specific park unit for a variety
of reasons, including (1) a low level of air tour activity, (2) an
existing voluntary agreement governing air tour activities, or (3) more
significant effects by other types of overflights at the park unit. We
agree that whether or not an ATMP is necessary for a specific park unit
could depend on a number of factors and not just solely on the level of
air tour activity. Furthermore, we agree that in amending the act Congress
should not arbitrarily exclude park units from the ATMP process solely on
the basis of their level of air tour activity. We believe that such an
exclusion would be an oversimplification of a complex issue, and we did
not imply such a solution in this report.

3.We disagree that programmatic approaches taken by the agencies could
provide the same flexibility as a legislative amendment. As Interior
acknowledges in its comments, the act does not give the agencies the
authority to exclude any park unit from the ATMP process. In the matter
for congressional consideration, we offer the point that Congress may wish
to give the agencies such authority.

4.We disagree with Interior's characterization of our survey results as
"anecdotal." We surveyed all 112 park units that were expected to develop
ATMPs as of July 2005, and we received a 100 percent response rate. Per
our instructions, the survey was to be completed by Park Service officials
with the most knowledge of the subject area. We believe that our
methodology was sound and that we gathered the most authoritative data
currently available from Park Service officials with first-hand knowledge
of the different causes of noise at their respective park units. However,
since only a small number of park units have completed sound monitoring
studies as part of the development of an ATMP, we acknowledge that the
responses provided were generally based on the survey respondents'
first-hand knowledge and years of experience rather than scientific data.
Nevertheless, the survey results clearly indicate that there are a number
of park units currently scheduled to develop ATMPs that may not need them.
We agree with Interior's comments that the survey results should not be
"used to imply that low levels of air tour activity alone equates to
little or no adverse effects."

5.We agree with this comment and we have revised the discussion of this
issue in the final report accordingly.

6.We agree, and note in the report, that the Park Service needs additional
information in order to grant increases in air tour allocations under
interim operating authority. FAA confirmed that it does have authority to
collect this data from air tour operators, as it is the agency with
jurisdiction over operators and could require operators to provide the
necessary information if an operator wants to increase its air tours under
interim operating authority. The agencies would have to evaluate the
information and determine whether an environmental analysis is necessary.

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments Appendix VII

Robin M. Nazzaro, (202) 512-3841, [email protected]

In addition to the individual named above, Jeffery D. Malcolm, Assistant
Director, Josey Ballenger, Alisha Chugh, Richard Johnson, Cathy Hurley,
Wyatt R. Hundrup, Judy Pagano, Carol Herrnstadt Shulman, and Monica
Wolford made key contributions to this report. Also contributing to the
report were Roy Judy and Steve Martin.

(360540)

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt? GAO-06-263 .

To view the full product, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact Robin M. Nazzaro at (202) 512-3841 or
[email protected].

Highlights of GAO-06-263 , a report to congressional requesters

January 2006

NATIONAL PARKS AIR TOUR MANAGEMENT ACT

More Flexibility and Better Enforcement Needed

Primarily because of concerns that noise from air tours over national
parks could impair visitors' experiences and park resources, Congress
passed the National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 to regulate air
tours. The act requires the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the
National Park Service to develop air tour management plans for all parks
where air tour operators apply to conduct tours. A plan may establish
controls over tours, such as routes, altitudes, time of day restrictions,
and/or a maximum number of flights for a given period; or ban all air
tours.

GAO was asked to (1) determine the status of FAA and the Park Service's
implementation of the act; (2) assess how the air tour operators and
national parks have been affected by implementation; and (3) identify what
issues, if any, need to be addressed to improve implementation.

What GAO Recommends

To allow more cost-effective implementation, Congress may wish to consider
amending the act to give the agencies authority to determine which parks
should develop plans. GAO also recommends that FAA take several actions to
improve compliance, enforcement, and implementation.

In commenting on the draft report, the Departments of Transportation and
the Interior generally agreed with our recommendations.

FAA and the Park Service have taken some steps to implement the National
Parks Air Tour Management Act, but almost 6 years after its passage, the
required air tour management plans have not been completed. FAA issued
regulations implementing the act and the agencies began developing plans
at nine parks. But implementation has been slow, in part, because FAA
needed to address airline security after the September 11, 2001, attacks
and because the two agencies disagreed over how to comply with
environmental laws. Agency officials expect that future plans will be
developed more quickly since they have drafted an implementation plan to
guide their development. Nevertheless, because no plans have been
completed, it is unclear how some of the act's key requirements will be
addressed, such as creating incentives for air tour operators to adopt
quiet aircraft technology.

FAA and the Park Service's slow implementation of the act has limited the
ability of air tour operators to make major decisions, such as expanding
or selling their businesses, while it has had little effect on the parks.
For example, operators have been unable to increase their number of air
tours beyond their pre-2000 levels or expand to additional parks. Also,
air tour operators face uncertainty about whether they can legally
transfer their authority to conduct air tours. In contrast, the
implementation of the act has so far had little effect on the 112 national
parks we surveyed. Most of the parks responded that they had not
experienced any positive or negative effect of the implementation of the
act, or that they were uncertain or did not know the extent of the effect.
Nonetheless, 47 percent responded that their park could benefit by having
a plan to mitigate or prevent potential adverse impacts on park resources,
visitor experiences, and air safety.

GAO identified four key issues that need to be addressed to improve
implementation of the act:

           o  Lack of flexibility for determining which parks should develop
           plans. Not all parks required to develop a plan may need one
           because they have few air tours or are more affected by other
           types of flights. Yet, the act does not provide the agencies with
           any flexibility to exclude some parks.
           o  Absence of Park Service funding for its share of plan
           development costs. The Park Service has not requested nor received
           funding for its share of the costs of developing plans.
           o  Limited ability to verify and enforce the number of air tours.
           Air tour operators are not required to report the number of tours
           they conduct. As a result, the agencies are limited in their
           ability to enforce the act. Based on information provided by
           operators, GAO found some operators had inappropriately exceeded
           their number of authorized tours.
           o  FAA's inadequate guidance concerning the act's safety
           requirements. FAA has not instructed its district offices or air
           tour operators on how to interpret the act's requirement that
           operators meet a specified level of safety certification.

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: [email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
D.C. 20548

Public Affairs

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington,
D.C. 20548
*** End of document. ***