 |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
By |
||||
 |
March 17, 2009 – The Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority in California has received notice from the Federal Aviation Administration Acting Associate Administrator for Airports, Catherine Lang, in a March 5, 2009 letter that the Authority’s Part 161 Study and Application for a Proposed Curfew at Bob Hope Airport “meets the requirements for a complete application…except for one element of the environmental analysis.”
Lang requested
supplemental information within 30 days. Airport Authority President
Bill Wiggins welcomed news of the FAA’s findings and said that the
Authority will respond promptly.
“The Authority
will certainly provide the requested information within the 30-day time
frame set forth by the FAA so we can continue to pursue the curfew. We
have spent over eight years and $6.5 million attempting to do what no
other airport in the country has been able to do.
|
|||
|
“We know the biggest challenge is still in front of us,” Wiggins added.
“The regulations in Part 161, established very difficult requirements
before a new restriction can be put into effect, and the FAA is the sole
judge of whether we have met them. We believe our Part 161 Study shows
that a curfew at
The technical corrections requested by the FAA include adjustment of two
tables listing forecast aircraft operations at
Neither correction is expected to affect the overall analysis of noise
impacts contained in the report, according to Jacobs Consultancy, the
firm that prepared the study. After the FAA receives the supplemental
information that finalizes the study, the FAA will begin a more
substantive 180-day review of the application leading to its final
decision.
|
||||
|
The Airport
Authority proposes to adopt a mandatory curfew prohibiting all takeoffs
and landings between 10:00 p.m. and 6:59 a.m., with limited exceptions.
The two less
restrictive curfews studied, while not satisfying the Airport
Authority’s goal as completely as the full curfew, would achieve part of
the goal in significantly reducing nighttime noise and should also
satisfy the six statutory conditions set forth in Part 161 for FAA
approval.
Assuming FAA
approval of the proposed curfew, the Airport Authority would adopt a
binding resolution implementing the curfew, including the following
schedule of fines and penalties.
1st Violation –
fine of $3,671, which is based on the existing Airport Noise Rule 9
2nd Violation in a
12-month period – 200% of the fine for 1st violation ($7,342)
3rd Violation in a
12-month period – 300% of the fine for 1st violation ($11,013) 4th Violation in a 12-month period – 400% of the fine for 1st violation ($14,684) and action to ban access or terminate lease for a 12-month period
In keeping with
Airport Authority policy, the fines would be adjusted annually on (See FAA Concluded Santa Monica's City Ordinance In Violation) |
©AvStop
Online Magazine
Contact
Us
Return To News
|
|
