Attorney General Seeks Review of FAA Flight Paths

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, in a formal petition filed Tuesday, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia wrongly upheld new Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) flight paths.

The new flight paths will route more large planes over southwestern Connecticut, damaging the region's environment, according to a news release from Blumenthal's office.

The legal battle on this issue began at least two years ago and was initially funded by Westport and other nearby communities.

First Selectman Gordon F. Joseloff is the Westport representative on the Alliance for Sensible Airspace Planning, a group that opposes the new flight paths because of the health, environmental, safety, noise and quality-of-life impacts. In addition to Westport, other Connecticut communities in the alliance include Bridgewater, Danbury, Darien, Greenwich, New Canaan, New Milford, Norwalk, Redding, Ridgefield, Stamford, Weston and Wilton.

Westport joined the coalition in 2007 and contributed $79,000 to the lawsuit, according to a previous story published on WestportNow.com.

Blumenthal, joined by these local governments and concerned citizens, said the new flight paths will unnecessarily increase noise and pollution and the FAA failed to follow its own rules and procedures by ignoring vital data and public input.

"We are asking the Supreme Court to ...  override the FAA and its failure to follow the law and its own rules," Blumenthal said in the release. "The FAA is flying above the law, enabled by a bad appeals court ruling.

"The FAA based its new flight paths on defective data concerning noise and traffic -- disregarding the impact on millions of residents in the region, and dismissing less damaging alternatives. Our coalition of public officials, environmental advocates and concerned citizens are determined to redirect these flight paths," Blumenthal continued.

The appeals court ruled against Blumenthal and the other plaintiffs on June 10. Blumenthal and fellow plaintiffs asked the court to reconsider its denial, but the court declined the request for reconsideration, letting stand its original denial.

To see the appeals court's decision, click here.