FAA Kills Financing for LAX Program : Aviation: Dispute with city over jet noise rules will indefinitely delay plan to soundproof homes near the airport.

Federal aviation officials have followed through on a threat to withhold funds from the city of Los Angeles because of a dispute involving Los Angeles International Airport, indefinitely delaying a program to soundproof up to 8,800 homes near the airport.

The Federal Aviation Administration has blocked money for the soundproofing program in response to Los Angeles’ pursuit of an ambitious policy to ban noisy jets.

The $56-million, 15-year soundproofing program will not go ahead until Los Angeles agrees to comply with the federal government’s looser policy on noisy aircraft, an FAA spokesman said this week. The city has been pushing to phase out older, noisier planes more quickly than federal regulators want.

“The action the city is trying to do is contrary to the national noise policy,” said FAA spokesman Fred O’Donnell. “Therein lies the problem.”

Under the soundproofing program, Los Angeles residents near the airport would be eligible, free of charge, to have their walls and attics insulated and their doors and windows treated with special coatings. Airport officials have said they would spend another $14 million of their own funds to augment the program.

City Councilwoman Ruth Galanter, who serves the airport area, angrily protested the holdup of the federal funds. It is “unconscionable for the FAA to subject thousands of residents to higher noise levels simply to make a point and to demonstrate its macho penchant for absolute control,” Galanter wrote in a letter of protest to U.S. Transportation Secretary Samuel Skinner.

Federal officials sought to downplay the disagreement, saying they expect the soundproofing funds to be released to the airport within a year, assuming agreement is reached on the noise regulations.

The first indication that the city might lose the federal money came in June, when the Los Angeles City Council began to consider the jet noise law.

The city and federal government have proposed banning some older jets--including some types of Boeing 727s, 737s and 747s, by the year 2000. But the city and FAA disagree on how quickly to reach that goal.

Under the city ordinance, at least half of each airline’s fleet would have to be composed of newer, quieter jets by Jan. 1, 1994. By 1996, at least 75% of the fleets would have to be made up of the quieter jets. Under the FAA regulations, those deadlines come two years later.

The FAA also could waive the deadlines in some cases. One instance would be an airline’s showing that buying the newer planes would cause financial hardship.

City Council members were told at a June hearing that the federal government would not tolerate the more stringent local rules. A patchwork of local ordinances across the nation would unduly restrict airlines operations, said Dean McGrath Jr., the Department of Transportation’s acting general counsel.

The government emphasized its point by threatening to withhold money for airport-related programs.

Faced with that threat, the City Council postponed consideration of the law. City and federal officials have since been trying to negotiate a policy acceptable to both sides.

Galanter said she was particularly galled that the soundproofing money is being blocked, despite the fact the City Council backed off its proposal on noisy jets.

“Not only did the FAA blackmail the city,” Galanter said, “but when we agreed to their ransom, they shot us anyway.”

The withholding of the funds became apparent when the federal fiscal year ended Sept. 30, without approval of the money for Los Angeles. Local officials said that when they applied for the money in February they were told it was likely to be approved in a month.

The city had asked for $56 million to be spent over about 15 years, with at least $2 million this year to get the project started.

As many as 8,800 homes near the airport would be eligible. Only homeowners who volunteer will have their homes insulated free.

FAA spokesman O’Donnell conceded there were no problems with the city’s application and that the money had been temporarily cut off only because of the disagreement over restrictions on noisy planes.

O’Donnell said that by delaying the program, “Our people are . . . trying to prevent the scenario where (Los Angeles) tries to enforce a policy that is contrary to national noise policy.”