|
Recent Press Activity
PRESS RELEASE
|
Air Traffic Controllers - Airspace Redesign is Dangerous
"What the FAA's plan seems to be doing is pumping more airplanes into the air faster, without having more controllers responsible for those aircraft, which could lead to a degradation of safety," New York union representative Dean Iacopelli said.
Rather than just adjusting flight patterns to allow more aircraft to take off more quickly in the Northeast, changes need to be made throughout the country to ensure that once planes leave this region, other air traffic control facilities will be able to accept them, controllers said.
New York union representative Julio Henriques likened it to a four-lane highway that narrows to one lane. If you only change one end of the flow, he said, it won't matter, "because it's going to back up all the way. It's a Band-Aid on the delay issue, and unfortunately I don't think it's going to work," he said.
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Apr 21, 2008 New York- The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) refuses to release public information on aircraft overflight. Historical data on overflight is used to create noise contours of communities. Noise contours help local governments understand normal traffic flows and gauge quantitative impact of airspace design changes.
Withholding this information allows the The FAA effectivly ignor due process and environmental law and hide airspace design changes from impacted communities. With benchmarked data on current air traffic, the FAA will be forced into following due process and environmental law. Aircarriers will be held accountable for introducing air and noise pollution to communities and more likly to engage in noise mitigation measures.
"Historical data on overflight was promised to us in a face to face meeting with the FAA in November of 2007," says Heather Wolf, director of OurAirspace.org an advocacy group based in New York.
"We specifically requested 2 years of data on overflight. A Month overdue, the FAA delivered us a short illustrated Power Point presentation containing a handpicked selection of days." said Wolf. "This is absolutely not acceptable. "
"Our community is very concerned about recent low altitude overflight. We need a baseline, a noise contour for our community," said Wolf. "This is public information which they outright refuse to give to us."
"The FAA clearly wants to keep communities in the dark when it comes to aircraft utilizing our airspace. The largest airspace redesign in 60 years is underway and the FAA refuses to show how we will be impacted. By withholding previous overflight data, the FAA seeks to keep us in the dark, further violating due process. "
We call on the GAO to deliver us this data on overflight. We seek transparency in government.
Here is the actual technical request the FAA refuses to deliver on. Communities need this data to get baselines.:
Request for raw data on low altitude overflight for your community for LAG Arrivals, and HPN arrivals and Departures delivered as .XLS Comma or tab-delimited file format:
- Technical instructions:
Select Departure Airport, Arrival Airport, Time, Date, Tail Number, Minimum Altitude
From Datawarehouse
Where the Overflight Area is {Your Community}
and Where the Altitude is Less than 3000 feet
and where dates are between (June 2005 and present)
This will produce a report full of data detailing low altitude flight over pound ridge. This will be our baseline.
Congressman John Hall (D) structured the meeting with the Town of Pound Ridge and the FAA to discuss the recent changes to flight paths and altitudes in October of 2007. The FAA flatly denied that any changes occured which was in strict opposition to public testimony and data on overflight gathered through public Flight tracking systems.
In a letter circulated to residents this week, Congressman Hall writes "I share your frustration at the continued lack of responsiveness from FAA, and I assure you that I will continue pushing FAA officials until they fully understand the aircraft noise problem you face, and agree to hold a long-overdue public meeting."
FROM CONGRESSMAN ENGEL
News from
Congressman Eliot Engel
Representing the Bronx, Westchester, and Rockland Counties
Offices in the Bronx, Mount Vernon and West Nyack
2161 Rayburn HOB, Washington, DC 20515
Contact: Joseph O’Brien 718 796-9700, 917 880-0392 (cell)
For release: Thursday, Sept. 6, 2007
|
ENGEL BLASTS DECEITFUL FAA ON THEIR NUMBERS GAME
Congressman Eliot Engel Thursday blasted the Federal Aviation Administration for using deceitful numbers in reporting the number of people who objected to their airspace redesign plans for the northeast corridor.
Rep. Engel said, “The FAA reported that five comments were received about their airspace redesign plan from Rockland residents, a number that is disingenuous at best and outright lying at worst. The ‘five’ comments included the more than 1,000 people who attend a Town Hall meeting I sponsored in August in Rockland as one comment.
“Not one person of the scores who addressed the FAA at that meeting spoke in favor of the FAA plan, not one. In addition some 59 others signed statements objecting to the overflight plan.
“This is part of an apparent pattern of deceit by the FAA. Earlier it spoke of the average noise level of the lower flying jets as acceptable. Only upon questioning was it made clear that the average included hours when planes were not flying. We still don’t know what the noise level of an individual plane is, so we have no idea of what people will be subjected to each day.”
The FAA said it also counted the multiple comments submitted by the law firm of Holland and Knight and Rockland County as one comment.
Rep. Engel noted that the Town Hall meeting had more people waiting to speak when time constraints ended the meeting. “It is unconscionable that a federal agency feels it has to mislead people this way. I don’t know who they were trying to fool, but it certainly wasn’t the people in Rockland who for months have been fighting the FAA plan.
“I demand an apology from the FAA for my Rockland constituents. Not only has the FAA imposed a plan on them to wreck the quality of their lives, but now it diminishes their voice, dismissing it as ‘only five comments.’
“Shame on them.”
|
Rally & Clean Air Concert Wednesday August 29, 2007 in New Canaan
The New Canaan Environmental Group is hosting an end-of-summer concert and “clear skies” and “clean energy” rally on the steps of Town Hall, 77 Main Street, at 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, August 29.
Rally Sunday August 26, 2007 in Rockland County
What: Rally to protest proposal to increase flights over Rockland
When: Noon today
Where: Route 59 and Middletown Road in Nanuet
Information: Call Thomas Sullivan at 845-480-1088.
Oct 16, 2007 8:00 PM South Salem Town Board Presentation on redesign
Industry Related Press:
| • In a Federal Register Notice on August 29, 2007, the FAA announced a National Parks Overflights Advisory Group (NPOAG) meeting is scheduled to be held on September 25-26, 2007. The meetings will take place in the 3rd floor conference room at the National Park Service’s Natural Resource Program Center which is located at 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80525. |
Governmental Letters and Press releases:
Community Press Releases:
- Bergen County's letter to the Port Authority
- Eastern Region Press Release
For Immediate Release
May 30, 2006
Contact: Arlene Murray or Jim Peters
Phone: (718) 553-3015
FAA Extends Public Comment Period for New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign Draft Environmental Impact Statement
JAMAICA, NY — The Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will extend the public comment period to July 1, 2006 for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign Project. The public comment period had been scheduled to end June 1, 2006. FAA decided to extend the comment period for an additional 30 days based on the numerous requests it received from elected officials and others who sought additional time to study and assess the noise impacts of the project on their communities.
Written comments can continue to be submitted by U.S. mail to:
Mr. Steve Kelley, FAA-NAR
C/o Michael Merrill
12005 Sunrise Valley Road
Reston, VA 20191
Comments can also be sent to the following e-mail address: faa.deis@ngc.com
-
-
Too Many Flaws in Airspace Redesign
To the Editor of the New York Times: Published: September 30, 2007
“What’s That in the Sky? A Plane?,” by Kate Stone Lombardi (column, Sept. 23), led readers to believe that our opposition to the Federal Aviation Administration’s airspace redesign is about protecting our own backyard.
This notion is potentially dangerous to the 29 million people who stand to be affected across five states. The consequences of implementing a flawed plan of this scope will have far-reaching negative effects both economically and environmentally.
The risks and flaws of this design are on public record. Concerns over its safety and effectiveness warrant further study by the inspector general, and lawsuits are filed in all affected states.
The plan reduces safe distance between planes when near-misses are critically high. Low-altitude landing approach over populated areas carries fuel jettison risk.
Many affected communities are not aware of this plan. The F.A.A. has apparently been conducting test runs over our area for two months. This provides a unique opportunity to see and consider the actual effects.
We conducted research and met with elected officials, industry experts, environmental directors, pilots, airport managers and aviation subcommittees. What we found was alarming. Ourairspace.org includes links to these scientific studies, background, legislation and further research.
|
| La Guardia Airport: Can the Airport and the Community Coexist by Rep. J. Crowley |
Aircraft noise disturbs the normal activities of airport neighbors--their conversation,
sleep, and relaxation--and degrades their quality of life. Depending on the use of land
contiguous to an airport, noise may also affect education, health services, and other
public activities.
In response to the issue of noise pollution in the communities surrounding LaGuardia
airport, members of the Queens Congressional delegation introduced legislation that
would mandate quieter aircraft engines. The Silent Skies Act of 1999, called on the
Department of Transportation to the standard for Stage 4 aircraft - the next generation of
quieter engines and mandates that all aircraft to in compliance with Stage 4 noise levels
no later than the year 2012.
Stage 3 legislation, passed in 1990, mandated that all aircraft use engines at the Stage 3
noise level by the end of 1999. In the past decade, under Stage 3 requirements, aircraft
engines have become 50 % quieter. With the Stage 3 goal achieved, members of the
delegation seek to push for further restrictions on aircraft noise with the Silent Skies Act, which would reduce aircraft noise by an additional 40%.10
Airlines have sought to sidestep the Stage 3 requirements by fitting aircraft with hush
kits. A hush kit forces engine exhaust through a nozzle into an ejector shroud, decreasing the velocity of the exhaust and thus theoretically making it quieter. The reality is that hush kits induce weight and performance penalties, which translate into 50 percent more fuel consumption on take-off and significantly worse noise standards than current technology aircraft. The Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) is a fee imposed on air travelers departing from LaGuardia Airport. This $3 fee can be used by the Port Authority for airport and other transportation related improvements. Though part of this revenue is being used for the construction of the JFK AirTrain, some consideration of these funds should be given for noise abatement strategies. The Port Authority is eligible for approximately $5 million per year from the Federal Aviation Administration for noise mitigation.11
Other airports in the country have already initiated aggressive noise abatement programs. For example, in February 1992, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) of Minneapolis-St. Paul commenced residential sound insulation program to preserve and improve neighborhoods, while making the internal environment of the home compatible with the exterior aircraft noise. From 1992 to 1999, the MAC has insulated more than 5,300 homes at a cost to the MAC of $127.6 million. An average of $33,500 was spent on each home. The MAC Part 150 study was funded from airport and airline generated funding sources, including passenger facility charges and federal Airport Improvement
10. Source: Silent Skies Act, House of Representatives, 1999
11. Port Authority of New York/New Jersey, Airtrain
Program (AIP) funds. No general fund, property taxes or state income taxes are used for the program.12
|
NJCAAN Statement SEPT 9 2007
Airspace Redesign Increases Airport Capacity
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) states that the Airspace Redesign does not increase airport capacity. However, the agency repeatedly states the exact OPPOSITE in promotional and aviation industry documents. (See below for sections of a selection of a couple of these documents.)
We believe that the FAA does not wish to illustrate this issue because the Airspace Redesign plan WILL increase area aircraft noise and emissions. The New Jersey Coalition Against Aircraft Noise (NJCAAN) believes that the agency rigs its analysis of the projects impacts in order to EXCLUDE appropriate emissions and aircraft noise mitigation measures that would be required to expand airport capacity. The agency also structures its analysis in other environmental reports in a similar manner, which leaves the public vulnerable to “significant” environmental impacts generated by the aviation industry. We believe that the US Congress should mandate an investigation into this egregious agency behavior.
Robert Belzer
President, NJCAAN
rbelzer@njcaan.org
Vote to cut funding for this project in the House of representatives
- Find out if your congressmen voted FOR or AGAINST the amendment to cut funding for this program. If they voted agaist this amendment then it's time to contact them directly. View voting record here
Blogs
OurAirspace
www.OurAirspace.org
Contact@OurAirspace.org
|
|