Connecticut Attorney General's Office

Press Release

Attorney General Presents Oral Argument In Fight Against FAA Flight Paths Over Southwestern CT

May 11, 2009

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal -- appearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today -- presented oral argument today in his lawsuit to block a new Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airspace redesign project that routes more large planes over southwestern Connecticut.

The new routes will cause increased air traffic by as many as 150 additional planes per day, larger holding patterns over Fairfield County, likely increasing noise levels and threatening air pollution.

Blumenthal's legal action, filed as part of a joint state-municipal alliance, asks the court to rescind the new flight paths because the FAA failed to acknowledge, let alone analyze, the impact of increased noise on residents and state parks. In doing so, the FAA violated the National Environmental Policy Act and other statutes.

"We had a full and fair opportunity to present our arguments and we did it aggressively and precisely," Blumenthal said. "The court's questions were pointed and penetrating -- showing that it understands the core of our challenge.

"These FAA flight paths fly in the face of reason and law -- completely disregarding the impact of noise levels on highly populated areas throughout the Northeast. The FAA knew that it had defective data on noise and traffic, but then inexplicably refused to correct its facts.

"Great efficiency and safety need not mean more noise and air pollution -- endangering millions of people throughout Connecticut and other states. The roar of low-flying aircraft and chemicals from their emissions are unnecessary and unacceptable.

"Our argument in court is that the FAA disregarded its own rules, plain facts, and federal law -- infecting the result with clear error. I ask the court to reject the FAA's plan because better solutions would reduce flight delay without damaging our air and environment. The FAA plan -- which we urge the court to send back -- will produce more air traffic and congestion, spewing more noise and air pollution."

Blumenthal argued that the FAA deviated from FAA rules and law requiring that it project noise levels, implement night-ocean routing as an alternative, use proper air traffic data, and monitor noise impacts.

The FAA also failed to address the disproportionate noise impacts on minority populations or include a noise compliance monitoring provision in its plan.