The FAA Airport Compliance Manual – Order 5190.6B, Chapter 14 contains the meat and potatoes of what is surrounding the argument.
a. Type, Kind, or Class. Grant Assurance 22(i) refers to the airport sponsor’s limited ability to prohibit or limit aeronautical operations by whole classes or types of operation, not individual operators. If a class or type of operation may cause a problem, all operators of that type or class would be subject to the same restriction. For example, if the sponsor of a busy airport finds that skydiving unacceptably interferes with the use of the airport by fixed-wing aircraft, and the FAA agrees, the sponsor may ban skydiving at the airport. However, the sponsor could not ban some skydiving operators and allow others to operate. If a sponsor believes there is a safety issue with the flight operations of an individual aeronautical operator, rather than a class of operations, the sponsor should report the issue to the Flight Standards Service as well as bringing it to the attention of the operator’s management.
The town thinks skydiving is dangerous and is trying to use this argument to secure a waiver that would prevent skydiving even though the airport receives grant money and must adhere to Grant Assurances (22) Economic Nondiscrimination rules.
This is a great example of why donations to the USPA Airport Access And Defense Fund are so important.
The Donor-supported AAD Fund helps safeguard skydiving’s rights to be free from unnecessary government burden and to access the nation’s airspace and federally funded airports. Donations are not tax-deductible.
Show your support for Skydive Cape Cod, attend board meetings, talk to your selectmen.