On February 2, 2009, the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority voted unanimously to submit an application to the FAA to ban flights at Bob Hope Airport between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.  All commercial, cargo, and private flights—except military, emergency, and medical flights—would be affected by the curfew.  The application states that the curfew could realize $67 million in benefits as opposed to $48 million in costs.  The application represents the first time an airport sponsor has applied for a full nighttime curfew under FAR Part 161.  The application is the result of an 8-year, $6 million study to solve the noise problem around Bob Hope Airport.  The FAA has one month to determine whether the study is complete and six months to decide whether or not to approve the curfew.  To view the application online, visit the City of Burbank’s website, and click on the link to the Airport Authority.

On January 14, 2009, Nancy Sutley—Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)—confirmed CEQ’s intention to issue guidance on the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change in environmental review documents prepared under NEPA.  In response to an inquiry from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Sutley wrote, “CEQ believes that it is appropriate and necessary to consider the impact of significant Federal actions on greenhouse gas emissions and the potential for climate change to affect Federal activities evaluated through NEPA and different approaches for managing those effects.”  CEQ gave no specific timeline for publishing draft guidance.

On January 13, 2009, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) released a standardized self-assessment measuring the security threats and vulnerability of General Aviation airports.  The assessment will be available for 60 days and the results will be made available sometime thereafter.  TSA has committed to treat the results as Sensitive Security Information.  While there is no guarantee of any federal grant funding to improve GA security based on the assessment, the results may lead to funding in the future.

On December 19, 2008, the FAA issued a Record of Decision authorizing airfield expansion at the Ft. Lauderdale – Hollywood International Airport.  The most significant improvement would be extension of Runway 9R/27L from 5,300 feet to 8,000 feet and construction of Engineered Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) at both runway ends.  The FAA determined that the project will have significant noise and wetlands impacts and ordered mitigation of these impacts.  The FAA rejected the airport sponsor’s proposed action, which contained the same capital improvements but also would have involved operational noise abatement measures.  Neighboring communities have stated their intent to appeal the FAA’s decision.

On December 18, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the FAA’s decision that the rerouting of flights at Boston Logan International Airport is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NEPA).  The court in Town of Marshfield v. FAA upheld the FAA’s interpretation of its order on the application of NEPA (Order 1050.1E) with respect to the categorical exclusion, the method of noise modeling, and the assessment of cumulative impacts.  The court also rejected petitioner’s claims under NEPA and the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

On November 14, 2008, the FAA dismissed a Part 16 complaint filed against Firm client, the Port of Seattle.  A concessioner at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport alleged that the Port had discriminated against him because of his race, in violation of 49 C.F.R. Part 23.  Some of the complainant’s allegations concerned the Port’s selection of concessions for the Central Terminal, a retail and restaurant venue that was substantially renovated and reopened in 2005.  The FAA correctly determined that the Port did not discriminate against the complainant in violation of federal law.

On October 30, 2008, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) published its proposal for new security requirements on aircraft operators and airport operators engaged in general aviation.  According to TSA, the proposed rule would affect 10,000 aircraft operators flying 15,000 aircraft and 315 private and public airports.  The proposed security requirements are too numerous to summarize adequately.  Kaplan Kirsch & Rockwell has prepared a detailed summary of the proposed rule and its potential impacts.  Interested parties will have 60 days—until December 29, 2008—to submit comments.

On October 30, 2008, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida rejected an environmental interest group’s challenge to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ issuance of dredge-and-fill permits for construction of the new Panama City Airport.  In Florida Clean Water Network v. Grosskruger, the court rejected plaintiffs’ challenges to the Corps’ definition of the project purpose and its consideration of alternatives and mitigation.  Another suit (NRDC v. FAA) challenging the FAA’s Record of Decision for the new Airport remains pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

On October 24, 2008, a federal district court in Connecticut ruled that the Town of East Haven is preempted from regulating the construction of runway safety areas at the Tweed-New Haven Airport.  The court in Tweed-New Haven Airport Authority v. Town of East Haven, found that under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, the FAA occupies the field of aviation safety, and that, as a result, the Town of East Haven could not regulate the construction of runway safety areas on airport property.  This decision follows a long line of cases on the extent of local government land use regulation of airports.