Proponents Of New FL Airport Go Before Federal Panel | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-06.23.25

Airborne-NextGen-06.24.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.25.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-06.26.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.27.25

Fri, Jan 25, 2008

Proponents Of New FL Airport Go Before Federal Panel

Relocation Faces Opposition From Three Organizations

The new Panama City-Bay County International Airport in Florida has faced what proponents hope will be the final legal hurdle to the start of construction. On Wednesday, airport proponents went before a three-judge federal panel in New York City to confront three organizations trying to stop construction of the new, 1,300-acre facility.

As ANN reported, the airport was approved by the FAA for a $72 million airport improvement grant last May, and got its final sign-off from the US Army Corps of Engineers in August. At that point, it was set to become the first new commercial airport built in the US in a decade.

In an odd sort of "reverse-NIMBY" battle, new homes were built too close to the old Bay County International Airport, making it impossible to build a runway extension needed to accommodate large airliners. Then, when plans were made to close and relocate the airport to the south, residents protested the resulting longer drive to catch flights. Some taxpayers also complained about the new facility's $330 million price tag.

Wednesday's arguments, however, took place between the Airport Authority and US Justice Department on the side of the airport, and The Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Defenders of Wildlife, and a pilots group called Friends of PFN against the relocation. The Panama City News Herald reports  he three groups sued to overturn the FAA’s "record of decision," claiming the decision was arbitrary, violated established procedures, and would lead to destruction of environmentally sensitive wetlands in the West Bay area.

Airport Authority attorney Michael Duncan told the paper in a phone interview after the hearing that he was in the courtroom, and after going through the entire record of decision, "we are still confident that the FAA was not arbitrary or capricious in its actions."

Duncan says this was the final hearing on the merits of the suit, but there was no word from the three appellate judges on when a decision might be expected.

FMI: www.pcairport.com, www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

Airborne 06.30.25: US v ADS-B Misuse, Nat’l STOL Fire, Volocopter Resumes

Also: Netherlands Donates 18 F16s, 2 737s Collide On Ramp, E-7 Wedgetail Cut, AgEagle's 100th In S Korea The Pilot and Aircraft Privacy Act was introduced in the House by Represent>[...]

NTSB Prelim: Piper PA-23

Pilot Also Reported That Due To A Fuel Leak, The Auxiliary Fuel Tanks Were Not Used On June 4, 2025, at 13:41 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA-23, N2109P, was substantially damage>[...]

ANN FAQ: Submit a News Story!

Have A Story That NEEDS To Be Featured On Aero-News? Here’s How To Submit A Story To Our Team Some of the greatest new stories ANN has ever covered have been submitted by our>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: One Man’s Vietnam

From 2023 (YouTube Edition): Reflections on War’s Collective Lessons and Cyclical Nature The exigencies of war ought be colorblind. Inane social-constructs the likes of racis>[...]

Klyde Morris (06.30.25)

What Goes Around, May Yet Come Back Around, Klyde FMI: www.klydemorris.com>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC