Attorneys representing six Paulding County residents have asked the FAA for a seven-day stay before allowing work to begin on a Terminal Area Expansion Project (TAEP). The project is currently on the Paulding County Airport Authority’s short list of projects.
The PCAA met last week regarding the TAEP Bid review and will vote on an agenda item this week during their regular meeting to give the board chair the authority to sign the construction contract for the TAE piping project to local contractor Thompson Grading in an amount not to exceed $900,000 with initial funding not to exceed $450,000, pending review and approval by attorney.In a letter dated May 4 to the FAA Office of Regional Council’s Michael Fineman, Attorney Peter Steenland contends that the PCAA want to begin TAEP construction this month in order to avoid the June 30, 2017 expiration of its existing Clean Water Act permit and that Airport Director Terry Tibbitts is seeking approval outside of an FAA Environmental Assessment as a special written approval that allows work to begin.
The letter further contends that the PCAA plan to initiate the site prep phase for the project, which will consist of 2,830 linear feet of trout stream and filling 1.07 acres of forested wetlands and 6.5 acres of protected stream buffer “…in an attempt to better position the project for an extension of its permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.”
Steenland asserts that the approval would be premature and unjustified prior to FAA final approval.
“…as you recall, this Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) was initiated by the FAA pursuant to the settlement of litigation with my client, Attorney Peter Steenland states in the letter. “We understood that the PCAA would be barred from conducting any work on the TAEP unless and until a final EA was issued and a finding of ‘No Significant Impact’ was approved. Instead, it appears the FAA intends to strip the TAEP out of the pending Draft EA process and authorize the TAEP by processing and approving a written re-evaluation….” Steenland asked for the seven-day extension to “delay the effectiveness of any written re-evaluation…”
Steenland cites numerous environmental concerns connected with an approval to the PCAA to move forward with the work.
“Because the PCAA intends to act immediately on or after May 15, we may have no opportunity after the FAA releases the Written Re- Evaluation to seek an administrative stay from the FAA pursuant to Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Irreparable injury is likely to occur almost immediately upon release of the FAA written re-evaluation. These irreparable injuries include harm, not only to the stream about to be piped, but also to protected species, ecological habitats, aquatic resources and my clients."
Steenland adds that “…because the PCAA’s development plans for Paulding’s airport (PUJ) were conceived in stealth and nurtured in secrecy, the FAA should use the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process as a regulatory disinfectant and provide full, contemporary of the entire proposal.”
“Whenever (if ever) the FAA acts, its decisions are normally effective immediately. That means work could begin at once. Here, we are asking the FAA to impose a 7-day stay on the effectiveness of its approval,” explained Sue Wilkins, one of six residents represented by Attorneys Sidley Austin LLP. “In essence, the FAA would say, ‘Okay, we approve your project, but you can’t start work for seven more business days.’ That request allows us to get back to the agency for reconsideration (a requirement before going to court) and then to the court to stop the project before it can begin.”

(Photo: submitted)