Federal Noise Study OKd for Burbank Airport

Hoping to end years of strife between Burbank Airport and its noise-protesting neighbors, the airport’s governing body Monday unanimously approved a measure that could eventually lead to a federally ordered curfew.

The Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority voted 8 to 0 to initiate a so-called Part 161 study, an exhaustive and expensive federal review needed to convert the airport’s voluntary restriction on flights between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. to a ban.

A mandatory curfew has been the goal of many Burbank residents and their political leaders. Airport officials said they would separately consider a proposal from the city of Burbank to pay up to $250,000 of the study’s expense.

The seeming move toward reconciliation did not bring an immediate truce in the years-long feud, however. Burbank officials said the city reserves the right to oppose the results of the study, and the city would not relent in its opposition to the authority’s plans for a new terminal.

That generated fresh criticism from airport representatives, who insisted the city should have to live with the results of the federal study.

Airport officials contend the terminal is needed to accommodate future passenger demand. Burbank noise protesters argue the terminal will bring more flights, causing more noise.

The authority’s action follows a decision by the Air Transport Assn., which represents five of Burbank’s six airlines, to reject the airport authority’s request for an ironclad curfew. The association said the airlines need flexibility in flight times to respond to such unpredictable factors as customer demand, mechanical problems and the weather.

Although only a handful of flights now take off before 7 a.m., those flights particularly annoy many neighbors. The airport authority had asked the airlines to agree to a curfew without exceptions. The authority hoped to reach a compromise that would make unnecessary the trouble and expense of the Part 161 process, the only way under federal aviation law that a mandatory curfew can be imposed.

In the absence of a deal with the airlines, the airport authority Monday passed the resolution favoring a study and directed the panel’s legal committee to determine the scope of the study and who will be hired to conduct it.

Officials on both sides concede that setting the parameters for the study is likely to emerge as a central topic of debate between the three Burbank members of the authority and the six others, representing the cities of Glendale and Pasadena.

“The real issue is whether the study is going to be done to make Burbank a full partner and achieve the noise mitigation measures this community needs,” said Peter Kirsch, Burbank’s airport issues lawyer.

“If the authority attaches conditions or moves ahead without us, we have no confidence it will resolve the present dispute.”

Airport authority lawyer Richard Simon said he believes Burbank officials will be pleased with the actions the authority takes, if they keep their expectations in check.

“I expect Burbank to participate in the study, but I doubt they will be given control,” said Simon, who added that he was concerned over the city’s “continuing refusal to accept the federal process, and their insistence on linking the terminal [plans] to noise.”