Enhancing Airport Access with Emerging Mobility (2025)
Chapter: Appendix D: Laws and Regulations in Airport Ground Transportation
APPENDIX D
Laws and Regulations in Airport Ground Transportation
Communications at Airports
As airport owners may seek to separate CAV traffic from other modes at these early stages of integration, the challenge becomes how to ensure non-CAVs are prevented from accessing dedicated areas and how to enforce dedicated curb assignments. Furthermore, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) are not certain yet how law enforcement will interact with vehicles, raising concerns for operational control of traffic. It is therefore suggested that a dedicated communication channel is established to report incidents associated with CAV operations, with a laid-out action plan to identify the root cause of the incident and the solution. Another potential solution that may help monitor emerging modes of transportation at an airport is the establishment of a ground vehicle control tower, similar to air traffic control, in which various fleets and vehicles can be monitored, dispatched, and routed. The tower could be located on-airport or in a remote location, allowing airports and operators to continuously monitor and test operations of new fleets and services within their access roads, mitigate safety and operational concerns, and ensure a positive passenger experience.
The risk of electronic devices interfering with critical aviation systems has long been a safety consideration for the FAA; portable electronic devices (PEDs) with communication could not be used on board until late 2013, when it was recommended that those rules be relaxed to allow PEDs to operate in airplane mode (Portable Electronic Devices Aviation Rulemaking Committee 2013). Willful interference with aviation communication or navigation frequencies is prohibited by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 47 CFR § 333. And concerns with aircraft radio altimeters operating at frequencies similar to 5G telecommunications systems have led the FAA to mandate retrofits of these altimeters to filter out 5G signals.
Most communications in the United States—including at airports—are regulated by the FCC, which is tasked with allocating frequency bands to avoid signal interference. Communications used by connected vehicles are not the exception: The ITS band was established in 1999 to accommodate vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications (not limited to CAVs) through the dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) service; both concepts are codified in 47 CFR § 90 (Federal Communications Commission 2022). Cellular vehicle-to-everything (C-V2X) communications, which leverage 4G LTE and 5G network technologies, are expected to gradually replace DSRC as the communications framework for CAVs, with the FCC proposing the transfer of a section of the ITS band to C-V2X in 2020 (Federal Communications Commission 2020).
Ground Transportation Providers at Airports
Airports comprise both aeronautical and non-aeronautical facilities, and they are subject to federal, state, and local laws. At the federal level, the FAA does not regulate ground transportation providers directly, but three grant assurances for projects funded by FAA (2022a) grants concern ground transportation and access:
- Grant Assurance 24 requires that airports establish fee and rental structures for the use of their facilities and services to establish self-sufficiency, and it specifically forbids using grant funds as part of these structures. This effectively requires airports to charge fair-market rates and includes fee collection for the use of parking facilities, TNC waiting lots, etc. These structures might require revision as other ground access alternatives emerge.
- Grant Assurance 25 requires airport revenues (including those generated from ground access) to be only expended toward capital or operating expenses for the airport or the airport system to which it belongs. It also states that these revenues can go to “other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the airport and which are directly and substantially related to the actual air transportation of passengers” (emphasis added) (Federal Aviation Administration 2022a). Sun (2020) suggests that language could allow some ground transportation projects to be funded with airport revenues.
- Grant Assurance 36 requires airport owners and operators to facilitate airport access to “intercity buses or other modes of transportation” as far as practicable, but it does not mandate the airport to fund or develop infrastructure for them (Federal Aviation Administration 2022a).
The FAA is also tasked with evaluating the impact that development at or near airport property might have on airspace safety (as an obstacle to air navigation, interference with navigation aids, or both), but it has no power to enforce land use control (Federal Aviation Administration 2002). 14 CFR § 77.9 requires notification to the FAA of any proposed development, including rights-of-way for ground access technologies, if the combination of the maximum elevation (including an allowance for vehicle height) and runway proximity warrant it or if the construction is taking place within airport property. 14 CFR § 77.7 requests that this take place 45 days prior to start of construction through filing Form 7460-1.
Automated Vehicles’ Liability on Airport Curbsides
As automated vehicles become more prevalent, the issue of liability and responsibility is becoming increasingly important (Di et al. 2019). Determining liability and responsibility in the event of an accident on the curbside of an airport can be a complex issue, particularly when it comes to automated vehicles. In most cases, liability will depend on a variety of factors, including the cause of the accident, the parties involved, and the specific laws and regulations that govern the operation of vehicles in that particular jurisdiction (Table 45). In some cases, the vehicle manufacturer may be held liable if the accident was caused by a defect in the vehicle or its software.
Table 45. Automated Vehicle Liability Regulation
| Policy | Applicable States |
|---|---|
| High minimum liability coverage for AVs | Alabama ($2M); Louisiana ($2M); Tennessee ($5M) |
| Manufacturer liable for accidents under ADS control | Tennessee |
| Removal/reduction of manufacturer liability if AV is modified or if non-AV is given AV features | Michigan; Nevada; Washington, DC |
Alternatively, the operator of the vehicle may be held responsible if they were driving in violation of any applicable laws or regulations.
To mitigate these risks, airports may need to consider implementing clear guidelines and regulations for automated vehicles at the curbside. This could include requirements for vehicle operators to carry adequate insurance coverage, as well as guidelines for determining liability in the event of an accident. Additionally, airports could consider implementing safety features, such as automated parking systems or remote monitoring, to help make sure that vehicles are parked in a safe and legal manner.
Freedom of Movement and Airport Curbside Pricing
Freedom of movement is a fundamental human right that is protected in the United States (United Nations Human Rights 2018). This right is not absolute—access to some locations can be conditioned on fee payment or not permitted altogether. Integration of taxis, ground transportation companies, and TNCs onto airport curbsides offer a convenience to travelers and airport workers. Coupled with the availability of access alternatives (travelers and employees can access the airport through private vehicles) and the airport’s need to raise revenue to maintain its curbside infrastructure, this draws parallels with the tolling system used on select highways in the U.S.
Tolling and Pricing Regulations
Public authorities are required to have a tolling agreement with the FHWA in order to impose tolls (Federal Highway Administration 2012). Toll programs, established through the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, likely require new legislation. This act authorized the creation of the Interstate Highway System and allowed states to collect tolls on highways, and these tolls were required to be used for construction, maintenance, and operation payments. As shown in Table 46, there have been many updates to regulate the pricing of tolls.
Table 46. Toll Pricing Regulations
| Toll Programs | Regulations |
|---|---|
| The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 | This law authorized the creation of the Interstate Highway System and allowed states to collect tolls on interstate highways. However, it also required that tolls be used to pay for the construction, maintenance, and operation of the toll facility (Weingroff 1996). |
| ISTEA | This law allowed states to use toll revenues for a wider range of transportation projects, including mass transit and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. It also required that toll facilities be priced in a way that reflects the true cost of using the facility (Schweppe 2001). |
| TEA-21 | This law continued the provisions of ISTEA and provided additional funding for transportation infrastructure. It also required states to establish tolling policies that promote efficiency, equity, and environmental sustainability (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency n.d.). |
| MAP-21 | This law established a program called the Value Pricing Pilot Program, which encourages states to use tolls to manage traffic congestion by varying toll rates based on time of day or traffic volume (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 2012). |
Regulating Curbside Access
Airports are typically able to charge for the utilization of their curbside areas, as these spaces are often in high demand and require significant maintenance and upkeep (LeighFisher Inc. et al. 2015). However, the specific regulations that govern curbside pricing can vary widely depending on the location and jurisdiction of the airport.
The prices for curbside utilization are typically based on a variety of factors, including the level of demand, the cost of maintaining the curbside area, and any applicable taxes or fees. In some cases, airports may also offer discounts or incentives for individuals who use alternative transportation options, such as shuttle services or public transit. This can be seen at airports like Boston Logan International Airport (BOS) where the airport provides free shuttles and buses to get to the major public transit options, as well as free transit buses from the airport (Massport n.d.). Additionally, Mitman et al. (2022) suggest that airports might implement dynamic pricing models that adjust fees based on the time of day and level of demand in order to help manage congestion and make sure that the curbside remains accessible to all users. Dynamic pricing for tolls was discussed in MAP-21 in 2012 as a mechanism to manage traffic congestion by varying toll rates based on time of day or traffic volume. The goal of curbside pricing regulations is to make sure that airports are able to efficiently manage their resources while still providing an accessible and affordable transportation option for travelers.
Enforcement of curbside pricing is typically managed by the airport authority or local government. This can include the use of parking attendants or automated systems to monitor and enforce payment of fees. In some cases, penalties may be assessed for individuals who fail to pay or who park in restricted areas. Additionally, airports may use signage or other methods to communicate pricing information and regulations to users to make sure that they are aware of the rules and expectations for using the curbside.
Both conventional ground transportation providers and TNCs are required to abide by applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Airports can impose further regulations on these providers’ activities within airport property, with the goals of maintaining a safe curbside operating environment for people and drivers alike and reducing the impact on curbside congestion caused by these activities. These regulations tend to focus on airport facility usage, including designating specific locations for pick-up and drop-off, which requires TNCs to use commercial vehicle lanes in some cases, identification of vehicles as TNC providers, geofencing to facilitate airport usage fee collection, and limiting dwell time (the time spent at staging areas while awaiting a ride). Other operational requirements, such as driver criminal background checks (following Fair Credit Report Act criteria) and emissions standards compliance, are only mandated by a minority of airports (Leiner and Adler 2020).
Permits and Fees
Increases in the market share of TNCs as a ground access mode have led to decreases in parking revenue (historically a strong contributor to airports’ non-aeronautical revenue). This and the FAA Grant Assurance 24 requirement of financial self-sufficiency have prompted airports to establish and enforce policies to subject TNCs to similar conditions as other ground transportation providers through permit systems.
Most airports in the United States limit commercial ground transportation to providers that have subscribed to a formal business agreement with the airport. This mechanism allows airports to confirm that prospective providers comply with airports’ operating requirements prior to them starting operations within their property; it also allows airport authorities to suspend or revoke operating permits in case of noncompliance. Some airports enforce an activation fee on
TNCs at the time of signing, which allows airports to receive compensation for TNCs’ operations prior to establishing an agreement, with fees as high as $100,000 reported.
Airports can also impose one or more of the following fees on TNC operations:
- Annual fees: fixed amounts required to renew TNCs’ right to conduct business at the airport.
- Per-trip fees: fixed cost added to pick-ups or drop-offs and charged to riders who request a ride that starts or ends within an agreed-upon geofence representative of airport property or a section thereof (Figure 123). TNCs are required to keep track and report. As TNCs see high levels of driver turnover, deployment of automatic identification tags or access cards—used to track conventional ground transportation fleet movements and bill accordingly—is not possible.
- Minimum annual guarantee: Airports can set a minimum required payment amount in place of the collected per-trip fees. In these cases, TNCs must pay (in addition to the annual fees, where applicable) either the minimum annual guarantee or the sum of per-trip fees, whichever is greater.
Airports rely on these operators to self-report the number of vehicle trips crossing airport-specific geofences established by each company. Some airports charge a fee according to vehicle dwell time; this is a mechanism used to avoid congestion, especially in peak hours.
Monitoring Curbside Pricing and Mobility
Airport operators that wish to monetize curbside access establish automated systems to monitor ground access activity by mode and control access to restricted areas while controlling for dwelling times for modes idling near the terminal curbside. Traffic access management is particularly important for airports implementing access fees to record the number of vehicles.
Geofencing and Vehicle-Tracking Systems
Airports have established strategies to monitor vehicles, and geofencing is a common tool that provides a virtual boundary, defined by GPS coordinates, to monitor the trips made by operators that are subject to fees for utilizing airport premises. Airport operators and TNCs can combine geofencing and GPS tracking data to track TNC vehicles entering and exiting the geofence and
calculate the dwell time and distance driven within airport property. The latter two allow airports to enforce time limits on vehicle loitering within the airport boundary or in designated areas within it.
Other tools that allow for vehicle tracking are the utilization of radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags or transponders as part of the operator’s permit (Figure 124). These tags can be tracked with airport sensors and provide a trip count, and even a dwell-time tracker, for these operators.
Enforcement
In addition to geofencing and vehicle-tracking systems, airports tend to utilize their resources to verify compliance with the standards set by the airport. If an operator is found not in compliance, and if the finding is supported by local jurisdiction, then the airport is able to fine drivers who are not abiding by the set standard.
