Save The Sound To Appeal FAA’s Tweed Airport Expansion Go-Ahead

NEW HAVEN, CT —Save the Sound will appeal the Federal Aviation Administration’s decision accepting the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact on the proposed expansion of Tweed New Haven Airport, the New Haven-based environmental organization announced late Wednesday.

In late December 2023, the FAA issued a final decision approving an EA finding that the proposed Runway Extension and Terminal Expansion project at Tweed New Haven Airport would have no significant environmental impacts. And, the FAA declined to require a full Environmental Impact Statement.

Save the Sound had previously submitted comments to the FAA addressing the Draft Environmental Assessment’s substantial flaws and calling on the FAA to complete a full EIS. Numerous other concerned parties, including municipalities, residents, and federal and state governmental agencies, submitted similar comments.

East Haven Mayor Joseph A. Carfora, state Rep. Joe Zullo, Save the Sound and others vowed to appeal the federal agency's "Finding of No Significant Impact" at the site as part of the $165 million terminal and runway expansion project.

The Final Environmental Assessment addressed few, if any, of the concerns raised and made no meaningful changes, Save the Sound contends in its court filing.

"Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46110, Save the Sound will be appealing the FAA’s decision to finalize the Tweed Airport Expansion’s woefully inadequate EA and its failure to require a full EIS under the National Environmental Policy Act," the organization wrote in a news release.

Wednesday, the environmental organization submitted its petition for judicial review to the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Read that document here:

Tweed FAA Decision Petition... by Ellyn Santiago

>

“This failure to study the true impacts on the community is an environmental injustice to the surrounding neighborhoods," Roger Reynolds, senior legal director at Save the Sound, said. "As we have been saying for two years, this project demands the greater scrutiny of an Environmental Impact Statement."

According to Reynolds, the "gross inadequacies have been pointed out throughout the process not only by Save the Sound but by the EPA, the Department of Health and Human Services, CT DEEP, the Town of East Haven, multiple environmental organizations, and the neighbors who will be directly affected."

"The environmental assessment was widely criticized as fundamentally deficient, but the FAA’s ‘finding of no significant impact’ failed to remedy these shortcomings, and instead accepted the severely flawed document almost in its totality," Reynolds said. "Given this disregard, and the significant impacts to air quality, wetland destruction, water quality degradation, and flooding that the proposed expansion may entail, we have no choice but to appeal the decision.”

Jorge Roberts, CEO of Avports, said that he's "confident in the thorough process undertaken by the FAA, which resulted in an official finding of no significant impact to the environment."

"Legal challenges are a normal part of the process, and the FAA has an excellent track record on appeals of this type," Roberts was quoted as saying. "The project can and will continue to advance as this legal process plays out – design is already well underway and we will continue toward permitting. We’re excited to keep moving forward at HVN.”

Matt Hoey, the Tweed New Haven Airport Authority chair, echoed Roberts' sentiment.

“The airport and its authority have taken part in the detailed, multi-year process for this project, which is overseen by federal and state agencies," Hoey was quoted as saying. "The FAA thoroughly reviewed a detailed Environmental Assessment, and subsequently gave their approval. While the federal legal process plays out, we will continue to work with Avports and the State of Connecticut to continue the design and permitting phase, as required under our lease agreement.”

Save the Sound's says there are "deficiencies in the EA." Those include the EA: failed to consider the true impacts to environmental justice, air quality, wildlife, and water quality because they failed to discuss the reasonably foreseeable increase in demand for airline and cargo services due to the expanded runway, parking, and terminal; failed to analyze the impact on tidal wetlands because they failed to consider the reasonably foreseeable cumulative impact of taxiways which will be a necessary safety feature of the extended runway; failed to meaningfully consider water quality impacts and potential mitigation; failed to meaningfully consider specific wetland mitigation; and failed to meaningfully analyze the flood control consequences of the project.

"Most remarkably, the EA concludes that expanding the airport will be better for air quality than not expanding the airport, based on an assumption that expanding the airport's capacity will not increase passenger demand for flights," the organization added. "Under this assumption, the EA notes that using larger aircraft means fewer planes will be needed to cover passenger demand, and that fewer planes mean lesser impacts. The whole point of the expansion, however, including a vastly expanded parking lot, is to increase the airport’s use. The increased capacity will logically lead to more flights (both passenger and freight) from larger airplanes which will worsen air quality and increase environmental impacts."