Judges Say Study Was Flawed, But Accurate

Connecticut State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal will seek a re-hearing by the full U.S. Court of Appeals after a three-judge panel ruled the FAA essentially got it right when it proposed changing flight paths over Fairfield County, Connecticut. The case was first brought to the courts in 2007. In that suit, Stamford and other Fairfield County towns claimed the FAA disregarded environmental effects and increased noise over Fairfield County in redrawing the flight paths.

The FAA re-drew the corridors after a study forecasting future air traffic in the region. The Connecticut Post reports that the three judge panel wrote in its decision "The FAA concluded the forecast, although not perfect, still captured the general flow and magnitude of the traffic in a way that can show differences among the proposed alternatives." FAA spokesman Jim Peters said the decision "speaks for itself."

But town officials are not giving up without a further fight. Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy told the paper "We do not believe the FAA acted appropriately under their own rules and regulations with regard to hearings and considering the impact on residents, but ultimately that's a decision for the courts to make." And Weston First Selectman Woody Bliss believes the FAA violated its own rules in re-drawing the corridors. "It's actually pretty scary because the FAA did not comply with the law, and it seems the court went out of its way to ignore it and approve the plans," he said.

If Blumenthal does not get an answer he agrees with from the full US Court of Appeals, he says he'll petition the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. He says its important to pursue it because the FAA did not consider all the alternatives when it drew up the plan. "This court decision would leave the FAA unchecked and unaccountable for its failures to consider less damaging alternatives," Blumenthal said.

But he admits getting a Supreme Court hearing is a long shot. "The odds are always against a challenge to a federal agency administrative decision, and certainly more so when review is sought before the U.S. Supreme Court."

FMI: http://www.ct.gov/ag/site/default.asp