Reimbursable Work Agreements

The FAA argues that the fee in question is approved because the Agency may enter into other transactional agreements “under the conditions that the administrator deems appropriate.” Additional response (discussion and paraphrasation 49 U.S.C. The FAA believes that this authority is sufficient to allow the Agency to reimburse the services it provides. Additional answer. [5] We disagree. It is responding to a request for a decision on a recoverable FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) work agreement with an airline prior to fiscal 2019. Letter from David Price, representative of the House of Representatives on Appropriations, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies, to Comptroller General (May 22, 2019). The application raises two questions: (1) whether the FAA violated the anti-deficiency law when it provided services in accordance with the agreement during the expiry of the funds; and (2) if the FAA had the authority to charge for the services it provided under the agreement. Anti-defiance law is not involved in the concept when an agency freely engages the available budgetary authority, even if other agencies or programs within an agency simultaneously suffer a loss of resources. B-330720, February 6, 2019, at 2-3 a.m. As mentioned above, the 2018 GJ Congress has acquired FAA amounts for transactions that remained available until September 30, 2019.

pub. No. 115-141, 132 Stat. to 976. In this regard, the FAA has made available the amounts available in its operating resources for the costs incurred by faA for the provision of services in accordance with the December agreement. As noted above, these funds are available for “air safety activities.” Id. FAA typically uses funds available for aviation safety activities to perform the work required to add aircraft to an airline`s operating specifications. Additional answer. Because the funds contained sufficient balances to fund services and were available for these specific activities, the FAA did not violate the Anti-Edion Act when it had obligations for the services it provided under the agreement. The FAA has specific legal authority to collect royalties for some of the services it provides.

See e.B. 49.S.C 45305 (FAA clearance to pay fees for a wide range of services, including issuing flight certificates and recording aircraft safety interests); 49 U.S.C No. 45301 (FAA`s clearance to levy royalties on certain services to foreign governments). However, we do not know anything, but the FAA does not have specific legal authority to impose user fees to require airlines to do the work required to add aircraft to their airline operating specifications. That is why we need to look at whether the FAA can charge for these services within a more general authority. In fiscal 2019, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) entered into a refundable work agreement for the implementation of aircraft certification services for an airline.