The City of Burlington already has the FAA-delegated power to cancel the F-35
The City of Burlington already has the power to stop the F-35 training at BTV. Nobody outside the City needs to be persuaded before the City uses this power. Not the FAA. Not the Air Force. Not the governor. Not the legislature. The FAA has already delegated this power to the City.
Are you shocked?
If you are shocked by this statement after years of feeling powerless about the F-35, you are not alone. Take a look at the FAA Grant Assurances though. They spell out this power of all airport owners (what the FAA calls “airport sponsors.”) The relevant passages from the FAA Grant Assurances are at the end of this article. (A two-minute read).
The power
Under FAA Grant Assurances, as airport owner, the City is authorized by the FAA to set a legally enforceable noise standard for all aircraft using BTV. The City, on its own, can establish the FAA’s existing standard for civilian aircraft as the universal standard for all aircraft flying in and out of BTV.
The FAA does not itself have authority to regulate military aircraft. But the FAA did the next best thing in its grant assurances: it specifically authorized airport owners, like the City of Burlington, to set standards for safety, so long as the standards apply to all aircraft using the airport without discrimination.
With this power openly on the table, a new Mayor could certainly meet with Air Force officials, including the Secretary of the Air Force, to request that the Air Force supply a new mission for the Vermont Air National Guard. One that conforms to the FAA noise standard for civilian aircraft. The Air Force has numerous flying and non-flying missions. It could supply the Vermont Air National Guard with a different flying mission that meets the noise standard. Or it could supply the Guard with a non-flying mission.
What is non-negotiable is that Vermont children and adults stop being subjected to dangerous aviation noise that was banned by the FAA long ago. What is also non-negotiable is that the airport continues to have a double standard: The one for the military aircraft that defeats the whole point of the FAA noise standard for civilian aircraft—to protect people living in or near the flight path.
A cooperative process to accomplish this is better than an adversarial one. With a new mayor it might well result in a mission for the Vermont Air National Guard of which everyone can be safe and everyone can be proud.
FAA grant assurances state:
22. Economic Nondiscrimination.
h. The sponsor [The sponsor is what the FAA calls the airport owner; for BTV the sponsor is City of Burlington] may establish such reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, conditions to be met by all users of the airport as may be necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the airport.
i. The sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kind or class of aeronautical use of the airport [that means any kind of airplane] if such action is necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public.
This means the city already has authority to set a standard for the safe operation of the airport so long as it applies to all users of the airport. By “users” of the airport the FAA means the owners of aircraft flying in and out of the airport (not the passengers).
27. Use by Government Aircraft
It will make available all of the facilities of the airport developed with Federal financial assistance and all those usable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for use by Government aircraft in common with other aircraft at all times without charge.
Inclusion of the phrase, “in common with other aircraft,” means the government is not seeking special exemption. The government already agreed to comply with standards that apply to other aircraft.
Consistent with the FAA grant assurances, the agreement between the City of Burlington and the US Air Force provides that the Vermont Air National Guard “shall have the use, in common with other users of the Airport, present and prospective, of the Jointly Used Flying Facilities.”
“In common with other users of the Airport” again means the US Air Force already agreed that its use of the airport shall be consistent with what other users of the airport are allowed to do. Other users of the Airport are civilian, and they are already required to meet the aircraft noise standard established by the FAA, which is much much quieter than the F-35.
If the City uses its FAA-provided authority nobody will disagree: not other civilian aircraft owners, because they all already conform to the FAA noise standard. Not the military, because their lease already requires them to conform in common with other users. And not the FAA, because the FAA granted the City with this authority. It’s just a question of electing a mayor who wants to stop the dangerous noise of the F-35 now.