Airline Coalition Joins Fray Over El Toro Airport

An influential coalition of 23 major airlines has jumped into the controversy over the use of El Toro Marine Corps Air Station after it closes, and questioned Orange County’s plan to convert the facility into a passenger and cargo airport.

In a letter to the county’s Environmental Management Agency, the Air Transport Assn. expressed fears that an airport at the base could lead to worse air traffic congestion over Southern California and create a safety hazard.

The Washington-based group, which has thrown its weight in other airport disputes around the country, also said that noise limits, restrictions on takeoffs, crosswinds in the area, nearby mountains and housing developments could make it economically unwise to use the base for cargo operations.

The concerns raised by the association in the letter dated May 15 marked the first time that airlines have entered into the airport debate.

“Air traffic management and capacity in Southern California are serious ongoing problems. . . . Any significant traffic numbers in and out of El Toro would obviously exacerbate this situation,” said the letter, signed by J. Roger Fleming, the association’s senior vice president for operations and services. The letter did not contain any figures concerning the number of flights out of area airports.

The coalition’s remarks drew quick response from opponents and supporters of the airport plan.

Opponents said the letter bolsters their argument that Orange County is ignoring what they call serious obstacles for the proposed airport. County officials and airport supporters said they welcomed the letter because the association raises issues that need to be addressed in an upcoming environmental impact report.

The association recently demonstrated its influence on airport construction in Chicago, where the group has succeeded in blocking the construction of a third commercial airport in Peotone, 35 miles from downtown. Chicago is currently serviced by O’Hare International and Midway airports, and the Illinois Legislature has been trying to approve construction of a third airport for two years.

“The comparison between these two communities [Peotone and Orange County] are almost interchangeable. The questions that need to be asked are the same. Does this new airport expansion make sense from a capacity, safety and economic standpoint?” said Roger Cohen, the association’s managing director of state and government affairs in Washington.

Association officials said Tuesday that the letter was meant to alert county authorities to the need for additional studies before a final airport plan is adopted.

The current plan calls for two options for an airport.

Under Alternative A, El Toro would become the county’s commercial aviation facility, serving an estimated 38 million passengers yearly by the year 2020, while John Wayne Airport would be converted to a general aviation facility. Under Alternative B, El Toro would handle only cargo aircraft and general aviation, while John Wayne would handle all commercial passenger service.

The airline coalition found problems with both alternatives.

A third alternative, which calls for the base to be developed for light manufacturing and entertainment use when the Marines leave by 1999, was not addressed in the coalition’s letter.

The letter emphasized “special concerns” about the county’s plans to use the facility for handling cargo, which is usually flown at night and in the early morning, when communities near an airport are more sensitive to aircraft noise.

“These schedules make them particularly vulnerable to noise mitigation measures. . . . Any significant noise constraints would render El Toro undesirable for cargo operations,” the letter said.

The letter also pointed out that carriers are worried about investing in a facility that might not be ideally suited for handling cargo and freight and added that the county’s “current forecasts of potential commercial use of El Toro may be overly optimistic.”

Despite those concerns, the association did not oppose the concept of converting the air base into a commercial airport. It said that John Wayne Airport might not be able to handle the area’s transportation needs beyond 2005 and that officials in Orange County have to meet those future needs.

The group’s letter pointedly told local officials that they need the air carriers’ endorsement before going through with plans to build a commercial airport at the Marine base.

“We also understand that the proponents of [a commercial] airport at El Toro need the support of the carriers to go forward,” the letter said.

Neil Bennett, an association spokesman in Los Angeles and one of 13 members of the El Toro Airport Citizens Advisory Commission, said the airline group’s letter should not be interpreted as opposition to an airport, but rather as a request for further studies.

“We’re not saying ‘No’ to an airport. We’re saying that we’re on board, now let’s see what’s going on and what needs to be done,” Bennett said.

But he added the association has “seldom, if ever, supported two major airports side by side because of the dilution of resources.”

If built, an airport at El Toro would be eight miles from John Wayne Airport.

Doyle Seldon, a Leisure World resident and longtime airport opponent, said the association’s letter had injected “economic reality” into “the commercial airport debate.”

“This report from the firms that operate the passenger and cargo airline raises serious economic questions,” Seldon said. “It is a shame that Orange County voters did not have this information before they voted on Measure A in November 1994. . . . The county’s planning statistics cast doubt on the economic wisdom of trying to build and operate a commercial airport.”

Measure A requires the county to build a commercial airport at the base when it closes.

Airport proponents pointed out that the association’s letter was submitted as part of public input into the beginning of the review process called Notice of Preparation of Environmental Impact Report.

John Wayne Airport spokeswoman Courtney Wiercioch said county officials viewed the letter as part of that process.

“We hope to work with the association and other interested parties in addressing these issues,” Wiercioch said. “We’re in the very early stage of the planning process. Before the airlines can endorse the facility, they need a great deal more information.

“We want the best [environmental report] possible, and it is made better because people ask questions and raise concerns,” she added.

* CHANGE IS NO CHANGE: Clinton order won’t affect El Toro, Tustin base closures. B5

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Air Carrier Concerns

The Air Transport Assn., representing the major air carriers serving Southern California, sent county officials a list of concerns about the use of El Toro as a commercial airport. While not endorsing Alternative A or B for the proposed airport, the association outlined some operational, safety and economic concerns and agreed that further study is warranted. Air carrier concerns:

CROWDED SKIES: Operational conflicts with John Wayne Airport. Traffic flow and management around Los Angeles Basin already a problem.

NOISE: Because of freight and package carriers’ early morning and nighttime operations, noise restrictions during those hours would make El Toro undesirable for them.

CARGO: Spacing between runways may not be adequate to accommodate wide-body freight aircraft. General aircraft on other runway subject to significant wake turbulence limitations.

Restrictions limiting runway usage would impair El Toro’s utility as air freight facility.

TERRAIN: Freight carriers fear aircraft performance and payloads might have to be limited due to surrounding terrain. Recommend a full aircraft performance analysis.

WIND: Crosswinds are an issue

Source: Air Transport Assn. letter to Environmental and Project Planning Division