Alaska Aircraft Registration Program Proposed

Update: Nov 27, 2017
The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT) has released draft regulations proposing an Aircraft Registration Program.  If adopted, this regulation requires aircraft owners to complete a registration application and pay an annual fee of $150 for non-commercial aircraft, or $250 for aircraft used in commerce.  Exemptions would exist for aircraft primarily operating in interstate commerce, or to foreign countries.  Aircraft transiting the state are also exempt, along with those owned by the federal government or unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds.  A waiver could be obtained for dismantled or not airworthy aircraft, or aircraft registered in other states, and not in Alaska for more than 180 days a year.  Details are available:

Analysis of the proposal
While no one wants to see the cost to fly increase, the state’s financial situation is serious, with the decline of oil revenues that have funded about 90% of state services for several decades.  While reducing their operating budget 22% since 2015, there is still a huge deficit to operate the 240 airports owned by DOT.  The Governor’s Aviation Advisory Board looked at options to increase revenues, and supported increasing the aviation motor fuel tax, as the most efficient way to improve the situation, without expanding state government. See “Alaska Aviation Motor Fuel Tax Increase Under Discussion” for more details.

In a recent poll conducted by AOPA, the Alaska Airmens Association and the National Business Aviation Association, pilots across the state favored the motor fuel tax increase over either a registration fee or landing fees, although a significant number of people responding commented that they opposed any increased fees or taxes.

Please share your comments on this proposal with AOPA, as we navigate these challenging times to find the right balance to support aviation in Alaska.

To comment on this regulation
There are several ways to comment on this proposal.  DOT will hold three hearings to take comments on the proposed regulation:

  • November 9th   1st Floor Conference Room
    Alaska DOT&PF
    3132 Channel Drive, Juneau
  • November 14th  Airport Response Center
    Fairbanks International Airport
    5195 Brumbaugh Blvd, Fairbanks
  • November 20th Central Region Main Conference Room
    Alaska DOT&PF
    4111 Aviation Ave, Anchorage

UPDATE:  Additional hearing scheduled for December 9, 10 am to noon
              Coast International
              3450 Aviation Avenue, Anchorage

Comments may also be submitted by mail to:
Rich Sewell, Aviation Policy Planner
Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
PO Box 196900
Anchorage, AK 99519

Or via email to:  [email protected]   Please send AOPA a copy of your comments by emailing them to: [email protected]

Comments must be received by 5:00 pm Alaska Standard Time on January 5, 2018.


  1. Seems obvious to me that the fuel tax would be the fairest as that way all users would be supporting the infrastructure not just those living in Alska. If you fly there you have to help out.

  2. Makes more sense to me to cut back on the oil dividend checks the are given to all Alaskans
    annually. Why should pilots and air craft owners subsidize so called entitlements.

  3. Shelly N Paul Tappen

    November 7, 2017 at 6:06 pm

    They’re always rooting for more money. Everybody understood the oil money would run out someday, but there wasn’t support to reduce spending. Certainly not enough support to save revenue for the future. Instead, spend now was, and is, the feeling.

    We fly out of our hayfields, don’t use ATC (there is no ATC outside the populated areas), and park in our barn. We do not ask for anything, and we prefer to be left alone.

    Alaska is the last place of freedom, it shouldn’t be ruined.

  4. I don’t think cutting the dividend would be at all fair to subsidize a special interest group (which is what we are). Otherwise, we would have lost that a long time ago to pay for some other group’s needs. I lived in the bush for many years and agree that freedom is enjoyed in Alaska more than anyplace else in America. But “freedom ain’t free” and someone has to pay for this stuff. I agree with Joe. Seems like a fuel tax would be most equitable. You fly more, you pay more. If you don’t fly much, you only pay for your tie-down or hangar. In Shelly N Paul’s case, you don’t pay anything. For those 135 ops, they will pass the cost on to their customers. Kinda just the way it is. My two cents.

Comments are closed.