Airport(s):
Tweed-New Haven Airport (HVN)
Abstract:
The Office of the Chief Counsel responded to an inquiry as to whether the Town of East Haven, not an airport proprietor, may use its police powers (through a Stop Work Notice and Cease and Desist Order) to prevent the Tweed-New Haven Regional Airport Authority, the sponsor of the Tweed-New Haven Airport (Connecticut), from enlarging the runway safety areas (RSAs) at each end of the runway. The enlargement was conducted to comply with FAA standards, and the area for enlargement was within the Airport’s boundaries. The Airport is located in both East Haven and the City of New Haven. (pp. 1-2).|RSAs are unobstructed areas along the sides and at the end of a runway, with dimensions determined by the type of aircraft that use the airport. RSAs primarily enhance the safety of the pilot and passengers by providing: (1) grass or another prepared surface to safely accommodate an aircraft that makes an excursion from the runway, and (2) direct access for firefighting and rescue equipment and personnel during such incidents. RSAs must be capable of supporting aircraft without causing structural damage to the aircraft or injury to the occupants. (p. 3)|Under 49 U.S.C. § 44706, the Airport must hold a valid airport operating certificate as it serves air carriers operating aircraft designed for at least 31 passengers. The Airport’s operating certificate requires it to meet federal RSA standards. The Airport had been allowed to operate with sub-standard RSAs at both ends of the runway through a grandfather provision in the federal regulation; however, in 2005 Congress amended 49 U.S.C. § 44706 requiring all certificated airports (including the Airport) to come into compliance with current RSA standards by 2015. (pp. 3-4).|Runway development and placement, which necessarily includes RSAs to the extent practicable, has a direct effect on flight operations and substantially affects the use of airspace. (p. 4).|As a non-proprietor, the town of East Haven is federally preempted from using its police powers to regulate airport and aircraft safety. East Haven’s regulation of the construction of the RSAs unlawfully prevented the Airport from increasing the margin of safety within the Airport’s existing boundaries and had the effect of overriding Congress’ will and the FAA’s safety decisions. (p. 15).|East Haven’s use of its police powers to prevent the Airport from expanding its RSAs within the existing boundaries of the Airport was also preempted by FAA’s exclusive control of aircraft safety and navigable airspace. Its enforcement has the effect of overriding safety and airspace efficiency decisions which are the sole province of the FAA. (p. 15).|This opinion is based, in part, on the decision in Burbank–Glendale Pasadena Airport Authority v. City of Los Angeles, 979 F.2d 1339 (9th Cir. 1992), where the court held that “proper placement of taxiways and runways is critical to the safety of takeoffs and landings and essential to the efficient management of the navigable airspace. The Court stated that Federal aviation safety interests preempted control of airport ground facilities. The Court held that non-proprietor jurisdictions may not abuse their land use powers by delaying a safety project and withholding a building permit until the FAA and the airport proprietor agree to aircraft noise control terms.” (p. 16-17).
Index Terms:
Non-proprietor|Preemption|Safety