On June 3, 2005, the D.C. Circuit upheld the Naples Airport Authority ban on stage 2 aircraft. The Appellate Court reversed the FAA decision that the ban was unreasonable. The D.C. Circuit found that the FAA did not have evidence to rebut the Naples Airport Authority’s conclusion that the ban on stage 2 aircraft was justified. The FAA had argued that the stage 2 ban was illegal and had withheld the Airport Authority’s grant funding on that basis.

In February 2005, firm client, the City of Burbank, agreed to a 10-year cease-fire in its sporadic 36-year old battle with the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority. The peace treaty defers for at least 10 years the planning for a new terminal but allows the Airport Authority to purchase a nearby parking lot, to realign the Airport access road and to build routine projects for the next seven years. The agreement was the result of nearly a year of negotiations. Both sides concluded that nighttime noise relief and routine airport projects would be better accomplished if the City and the Authority cooperated rather than fought in the courts. The Authority committed to cooperate with the City in working toward nighttime noise relief. A summary of the complex and comprehensive deal is available to download.

On September 15, 2004, our client, Westchester County, New York, which has had a terminal capacity limit at the airport for 20 years, renewed the limitation after extensive negotiations with the carriers and the FAA. The County was able to renew the restrictions without complying with Part 161 after the FAA agreed that the restrictions are grandfathered and that recodification of the restrictions would not be more restrictive than those previously in effect.  Copies of the press release and the adoption of the new local law are available.

On August 24, 2004, the FAA proposed modifications to the Airport Improvement Program grant assurances. The deadline for comments has expired, but a final version has not been issued.

In a January 20, 2004 decision, a federal court in Idaho dismissed a lawsuit against firm client, the Friedman Memorial Airport (SUN), that challenged the airport’s weight limit on use of its runways. The plaintiff—an operator of a Boeing Business Jet—claimed that the weight limit violated both the Airport Noise and Capacity Act and the Airport and Airway Improvement Act (AIP Grant Program). The court held that there is no private right of action under either statute, meaning that a private party cannot sue an airport proprietor for violation of either law. The decision is important because it reinforces long-held views (that have never been considered by a court) that an aircraft operator cannot sue to require an airport to prepare a Part 161 study for a noise or access restriction.