Aviation Conspiracy: 1991 Airport Capacity (Increase) "Act" Challenged!!!

The graphic (website) version of this newsletter can be accessed at:
http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter474.htm

Aviation Conspiracy Newsletter
#474........................................................................March
30, 2008 Past newsletters can be accessed at:
http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/ACNewsmenu.htm If you want to get the
newsletter sent to you every week, sign up to AviationWatch. Bill Mulcahy
rockaway@prodigy.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote of the Week: "Imagine that in the comfort of your home, one day the
government decides to turn up the volume by running jet planes overhead."
comment in a story this week by New Jersey Senator Menendez on the FAA's
Airspace Redesign

---------------------------------------------------------------------
1991 Airport Capacity (Increase) "Act" Challenged!!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------
As Bill Sees It (Editorial): Burbank, California's Airport Could Challenge
The Obscene Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1991; Ever since this airport
expansion and pro-noise pollution law was passed by the aviation industry's
paid political flunky's, communities have been unable to get nighttime
curfews on "their" airports. Since this law there has been no way to stop
the increasing aviation noise pollution from damaging people's health and
quality-of-life. This may be changing if California's Burbank Airport and
the City of Burbank go through the expensive, long process to quiet their
nights by getting a nighttime curfew instituted. You can be sure the
Aviation Cabal (the airline and their paid political stooges and the FAA)
will pull out all the stops to prevent this community from gaining any kind
of control over their own airport's operations!!!

Politicians Fighting Airport Expansion Make Mistake Focusing On Safety And
Not Health!!! I don't understand why politicians in New Jersey and
elsewhere keep talking about aviation safety issues instead of the health
issues associated with aircraft noise. They must know the FAA is the final
authority on aviation safety issues and they have no chance of winning in
that arena. Could it be that they think this sells with their noise impacted
constituents who (they feel) live in an airport's fight path and are dumb
enough to think this will stop the noise increases? However, maybe the
politicians are starting to pay attention to their constituents. I saw a
story on the FAA's Airspace Redesign scheme where New Jersey Senator's
Lautenburg and Menendez where they talked about how it would "introduce a
new level of ambient noise to towns directly beneath the flight path of
arriving and departing flights." That's what they should be talking about
instead of the "flight safety and performance" issues they have previously
been dealing with.

What Are The Environmental And Health Impacts Of The TODAY'S U.S./EU Open
Skies Agreement? Today the new U.S./EU Open Skies Agreement goes into
effect. Apparently no Environmental Impact Study has been done to calculate
the health impacts on Americans. Where are the many environmental groups
that once inhabited the American landscape? No doubt they are pushing "feel
good" environmental issues like replacing plastic and paper bags with canvas
ones in supermarkets. When it comes to aviation pollution; once again this
proves that corporate America and their politician agents have "co-opted"
the environmental movement in the U.S. They do this by grant money and
control of these groups by corrupt (democrat) political hacks.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Burbank, California, Tries To Get A Night Flight Curfew On "Their"
Airport!!! Most night flights at Bob Hope Airport in Burbank would be banned
under a proposed curfew meant to reduce nighttime noise for nearby
residents. Beginning Monday, the public will have 45 days to comment on a
proposal by the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority to ban flights
between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Currently, about 22 planes a night takeoff from
the airport and 23 land. Under the so-called curfew, only aircraft involved
in law enforcement, firefighting, medical emergencies, the military or those
with in-flight emergencies would be exempt from the curfew. An eight-year
cost-benefit study found a curfew could cost airlines, cargo carriers and
passengers about $55 million, but save $67 million, mostly from a reduced
need for residential acoustical treatment near the airport. Under Federal
Aviation Administration requirements, aviation restrictions are required to
have a positive cost-benefit ratio, although achieving a positive ratio is
not a guarantee the FAA will approve a proposed curfew. If approved, the
curfew would be the nation's first restriction of Stage 3 jets since
Congress passed the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, which barred
airport imposition of new access restrictions unless approved by the FAA.
The public has 45 days to comment on a proposed plan to ban all night
flights into and out of Burbank Airport. The Public comment period begins on
Monday March 31st. To make a comment, or get more information, go to the
link below and click on the "airport Noise Issues" link.
http://ktla.trb.com/news/ktla-burbanknightflights,0,4849877.story

Bush Opens Up U.S. Skies To European "Open Skies" Flights Today!!! On
Sunday, the new EU-US Air Transport Agreement will take effect. For the
first time, European airlines can fly without restrictions from any point in
the EU to any point in the US. "This marks the start of a new era in
transatlantic aviation. This Agreement will bring more competition and
cheaper flights to the US," said Jacques Barrot, vice-president of the
European Commission in charge of transports. He called the agreement "the
most ambitious air services deal ever negotiated". The two biggest aviation
markets, encompassing 60 per cent of world traffic, will cooperate closer in
all fields of aviation policy. Direct flights to the US In May 2008, the
European Commission will engage in second-stage negotiations with the US. "A
fully Open Aviation Area between the EU and the US must remain our
objective," Barrot added. All EU airlines are now able to operate direct
flights to the US from anywhere in Europe and not just from their home
country. The Open Skies agreement removes all restrictions on routes,
prices, or the number of weekly flights. Many airlines will increase the
number of flights and destinations on Sunday. Flights between
London-Heathrow and the US, for example, will increase about 20 per cent
compared to April 2007. With about 50 million annual passengers between the
EU and the US, the agreement covers by far the biggest international air
transport market. Editor's Note: I wonder what the "restrictions" are now
that they are eliminating? As many U.S. airports are already at maximum
capacity already look for more air cargo flights at night and more
"regional" airport expansions.

Adelaide, Australia: Air Cargo Industry Wants To End Night Time Curfew!!!
ADELAIDE Airport's restrictive and antiquated night curfew is strangling
local business and hindering South Australia's economic development, a
report says The South Australian Freight Council report said the Federal
Government should review the current laws restricting flights in and out of
Adelaide's main airport between 11pm and 6am. "South Australia is failing to
maximize its true economic potential due to a restrictive and antiquated
night curfew at Adelaide Airport," freight council chairman Vincent Tremaine
said. "While we recognise that the airport's metropolitan location requires
measures to protect surrounding residents from unreasonable levels of noise,
the state's economic prospects are being slowly eroded by this current
out-dated regime. "We keep hearing how South Australia's economy is taking
off thanks to the growth of tourism, mining and the export of fresh
produce - but many of these industries depend on the effective and efficient
operation of the state's main airport." Noise for residents living near the
airport has been an issue for many years. While maintaining the current
flight restrictions, the previous Federal Government helped to sound-proof
650 homes at a cost of about $50 million. Steve Georganas, the federal
member for Hindmarsh, which includes the airport, said he did not believe
the new Labor Government would change the current regulations. Editor's
Note: The air freight industry criminals have once again has showed
themselves to be a public enemy concerned only with their profit margin and
uncaring about the severe health impacts from night flights over residential
communities. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23434461-29277,00.html

New Jersey Politicians Call For Halt In Airspace Redesign Scheme!!! WEST
DEPTFORD - Three New Jersey lawmakers called on the Federal Aviation
Administration on Tuesday to stop a multi-phase redesign of the congested
airspace between Philadelphia and New York, citing concerns about noise and
safety. U.S. Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez, and Rep. Rob
Andrews, all D-N.J., said they feared new flight paths implemented in
December put planes at risk. Their fears were echoed by leaders of the
National Air Traffic Controllers Association. The new takeoff procedures
have caused confusion among air traffic controllers and pilots, said Don
Chapman, president of the union's Philadelphia chapter. The new procedures
involve changes to an automated system that gives pilots their flight path
before takeoff. In several instances, Chapman said, pilots were given
last-minute changes to their flight paths, which resulted in flights veering
off course. The FAA defended the project in a statement Tuesday, and said
air traffic controllers have been involved in planning since the inception
of the project in 1998. The new headings -- which allow planes to fan out
and take off at the same time instead of waiting in line -- won't
necessarily cut flight delays because planes often have to wait before
landing, he said. The lawmakers also reiterated Gloucester County residents'
concerns about increased airplane noise.
http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080326/NEWS01/803260364/1006

New York Judges Kill Passenger Bill Of Rights: NEW YORK (AP) - State
lawmakers moved quickly after thousands of passengers were stuck for hours
in parked planes at John F. Kennedy International Airport during a 2007
winter storm. Within six months, New York had enacted the nation's first law
requiring airlines to provide food, water, clean toilets and fresh air to
passengers trapped in delayed planes for more than three hours. A federal
appeals court struck down the law Tuesday, saying despite admirable aims, it
interferes with federal law governing the price, route or service of an air
carrier. "If New York's view regarding the scope of its regulatory authority
carried the day, another state could be free to enact a law prohibiting the
service of soda on flights departing from its airports, while another could
require allergen-free food options on its outbound flights, unraveling the
centralized federal framework for air travel," the court wrote. It said that
while the goals of the law were "laudable," and the circumstances prompting
its adoption "deplorable," only the federal government has the authority to
impose such regulations. The ruling was a victory for the Air Transport
Association of America, the industry trade group representing leading U.S.
airlines. The association argued the law could lead to an unmanageable
hodgepodge of state statutes. Editor's Note: What are they talking about? Do
these corrupt judges mean to say that the aviation industry is exempt from
ANY local controls over how they mistreat people. Once again the airlines
know they can
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jI20MR3Xinejtid51wrBxNvyg7FwD8VL2J1O6

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Important Aviation News
Stories This Week

N.Y.'s Passenger Bill of Rights struck down

Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, March 26, 2008
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/25/MN5IVQ7MD.DTL

(03-25) 16:14 PDT NEW YORK -- States can't require airlines to provide food,
water and fresh air to passengers stuck on the ground during long delays, a
federal appeals court ruled Tuesday in overturning a New York law that is
similar to legislation pending in California.

New York's Passenger Bill of Rights, which would apply to runway delays of
more than three hours, conflicts with a 1978 federal law that prohibits
states from regulating airline prices, routes or services, the Second U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said in a 3-0 ruling.

"We have little difficulty concluding that requiring airlines to provide
food, water, electricity and restrooms to passengers during lengthy ground
delays relates to the services of an air carrier," the court said. "Only the
federal government has the authority to enact such a law."

The ruling is binding only on federal courts in New York, Vermont and
Connecticut. It does not apply to California, where the state Assembly is
considering a virtually identical measure sponsored by Assemblyman Mark
Leno, D-San Francisco.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in a separate
case in 1998 that the federal law covered only airline transportation
services and left states free to regulate such amenities as in-flight
beverages, baggage handling and personal assistance to passengers. That
court would review Leno's bill if it became law and were challenged.

Leno said Tuesday that he would press ahead with his measure, AB1943, which
cleared its first Assembly committee vote Monday.

"We have crafted our bill very narrowly so it just deals with the health and
well-being of the passenger ... fresh air, water, light, snack foods and
working bathrooms," Leno said.

Kate Hanni of Napa, who became a passengers' rights activist after being
kept on a runway in Texas for more than nine hours in 2006, said she
supports bills such as Leno's but believes Tuesday's ruling should focus
attention on whether the federal government will act. The House has already
passed legislation that would require airlines to provide food, water, fresh
air and functional restrooms during any preflight delays.

"We need to get the federal government to recognize that these things are
happening every week," said Hanni, who has testified in support of both the
California and federal measures. "The federal government is going to have to
take this on. You've got passengers screaming and crying out for protection.
All we're asking for is food and water and freedom."

Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, a leading sponsor of the House-approved
measure, said he has urged airline representatives to work with him on
passenger-protection legislation and avoid stronger state-by-state
regulation. Thompson said he hopes Tuesday's ruling will bring increased
public attention to the issue and lead to action in the Senate.

The Air Transport Association, which represents major U.S. airlines, said
the ruling should send "a strong message to other states that are
considering similar legislation."

The court vindicated the airlines' position that "airline services are
regulated by the federal government and that a patchwork of laws by states
and localities would be impractical and harmful to consumer interests," the
trade group, which sued to overturn the New York law, said in a statement.

Asked about federal regulation, Victoria Day, spokeswoman for the airline
association, said the group would oppose "draconian measures that may have
unintended consequences." She said the association is working with the U.S.
Department of Transportation to address onboard delays.

The New York law, the first of its kind, was passed in response to lengthy
delays on New York runways during the winter of 2006-07, during which some
passengers went without water and food.

The law required airlines to provide adequate food, drinking water and
refreshments, electricity needed for fresh air and lights, and waste-removal
service for restrooms any time passengers are kept in a plane for more than
three hours before takeoff.

The appeals court said the law "substitutes New York's commands for
competitive market forces," contrary to the intent of the 1978 federal law,
which deregulated the airline industry. "Onboard amenities, regardless of
whether they are luxuries or necessities, still relate to airline service,"
the court said.

If New York could require airlines to provide food and water, the court
said, other states might ban soda or require allergen-free food options on
flights leaving from their airports, "unraveling the centralized federal
framework for air travel."

The three-judge panel in New York, all appointees of President Bush,
overturned a ruling issued in December by U.S. District Judge Lawrence Kahn,
who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.

[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]