99–006

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 2d Session 107–531

AIRPORT STREAMLINING APPROVAL PROCESS ACT 

OF 2002

JUNE 25, 2002.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, from the Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 4481] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom 

was referred the bill (H.R. 4481) to amend title 49, United States 

Code, relating to airport project streamlining, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 

an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Airport Streamlining Approval Process Act of 2002’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds that—

(1) airports play a major role in interstate and foreign commerce; 

(2) congestion and delays at our Nation’s major airports have a significant 

negative impact on our Nation’s economy; 

(3) airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports are a national 

priority and should be constructed on an expedited basis; 

(4) airport capacity enhancement projects must include an environmental review process that provides local citizenry an opportunity for consideration of 

and appropriate action to address environmental concerns; and 

(5) the Federal Aviation Administration, airport authorities, communities, 

and other Federal, State, and local government agencies must work together to 

develop a plan, set and honor milestones and deadlines, and work to protect the 

environment while sustaining the economic vitality that will result from the 

continued growth of aviation. 

SEC. 3. PROMOTION OF NEW RUNWAYS. 

Section 40104 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 

the following: 

‘‘(c) AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS AT CONGESTED AIRPORTS.—In 

carrying out subsection (a), the Administrator shall take action to encourage the 

2

construction of airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports as those 

terms are defined in section 47179.’’. 

SEC. 4. AIRPORT PROJECT STREAMLINING. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 471 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 47153 the following: 

‘‘SUBCHAPTER III—AIRPORT PROJECT STREAMLINING 

‘‘§ 47171. DOT as lead agency 

‘‘(a) AIRPORT PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS.—The Secretary of Transportation shall 

develop and implement a coordinated review process for airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports. ‘‘(b) COORDINATED REVIEWS.—The coordinated review process under this section 

shall provide that all environmental reviews, analyses, opinions, permits, licenses, 

and approvals that must be issued or made by a Federal agency or airport sponsor 

for an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport will be conducted 

concurrently, to the maximum extent practicable, and completed within a time period established by the Secretary, in cooperation with the agencies identified under 

subsection (c) with respect to the project. ‘‘(c) IDENTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES.—With respect to each airport 

capacity enhancement project at a congested airport, the Secretary shall identify, as 

soon as practicable, all Federal and State agencies that may have jurisdiction over 

environmental-related matters that may be affected by the project or may be required by law to conduct an environmental-related review or analysis of the project 

or determine whether to issue an environmental-related permit, license, or approval 

for the project. ‘‘(d) STATE AUTHORITY.—If a coordinated review process is being implemented 

under this section by the Secretary with respect to a project at an airport within 

the boundaries of a State, the State, consistent with State law, may choose to participate in such process and provide that all State agencies that have jurisdiction 

over environmental-related matters that may be affected by the project or may be 

required by law to conduct an environmental-related review or analysis of the 

project or determine whether to issue an environmental-related permit, license, or 

approval for the project, be subject to the process. ‘‘(e) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The coordinated review process developed under this section may be incorporated into a memorandum of understanding 

for a project between the Secretary and the heads of other Federal and State agencies identified under subsection (c) with respect to the project and the airport sponsor. ‘‘(f) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINE.— ‘‘(1) NOTIFICATION OF CONGRESS AND CEQ.—If the Secretary determines that 

a Federal agency, State agency, or airport sponsor that is participating in a coordinated review process under this section with respect to a project has not 

met a deadline established under subsection (b) for the project, the Secretary 

shall notify, within 30 days of the date of such determination, the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, the Council on 

Environmental Quality, and the agency or sponsor involved about the failure to 

meet the deadline. ‘‘(2) AGENCY REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after date of receipt of a notice 

under paragraph (1), the agency or sponsor involved shall submit a report to 

the Secretary, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Council on Environmental Quality explaining why 

the agency or sponsor did not meet the deadline and what actions it intends 

to take to complete or issue the required review, analysis, opinion, license, or 

approval. ‘‘(g) PURPOSE AND NEED.—For any environmental review, analysis, opinion, permit, license, or approval that must be issued or made by a Federal or State agency 

that is participating in a coordinated review process under this section with respect 

to an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport and that requires 

an analysis of purpose and need for the project, the agency, notwithstanding any 

other provision of law, shall be bound by the project purpose and need as defined 

by the Secretary. 

‘‘(h) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.—The Secretary shall determine the reasonable alternatives to an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport. Any 

other Federal or State agency that is participating in a coordinated review process 

under this section with respect to the project shall consider only those alternatives 

to the project that the Secretary has determined are reasonable. 

3

‘‘(i) SOLICITATION AND CONSIDERATION OF COMMENTS.—In applying subsections (g) 

and (h), the Secretary shall solicit and consider comments from interested persons 

and governmental entities. 

‘‘§ 47172. Categorical exclusions 

‘‘Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary 

of Transportation shall develop and publish a list of categorical exclusions from the 

requirement that an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement be prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.) for projects at airports.

‘‘§ 47173. Access restrictions to ease construction 

‘‘At the request of an airport sponsor for a congested airport, the Secretary of 

Transportation may approve a restriction on use of a runway to be constructed at 

the airport to minimize potentially significant adverse noise impacts from the runway only if the Secretary determines that imposition of the restriction— ‘‘(1) is necessary to mitigate significant noise impacts and expedite construction of the runway; ‘‘(2) is the most appropriate and a cost-effective measure to mitigate the environmental impact of the runway, taking into consideration any environmental 

tradeoffs associated with the restriction; and ‘‘(3) would not adversely affect service to small communities, adversely affect 

safety or efficiency of the national airspace system, unjustly discriminate 

against any class of user of the airport, or impose an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce. 

‘‘§ 47174. Airport revenue to pay for mitigation 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 47107(b), section 47133, or any other 

provision of this title, the Secretary of Transportation may allow an airport sponsor 

carrying out an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport to make 

payments, out of revenues generated at the airport (including local taxes on aviation 

fuel), for measures to mitigate the environmental impacts of the project if the Secretary finds that—

‘‘(1) the mitigation measures are included as part of, or are consistent with, 

the preferred alternative for the project in the documentation prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); 

‘‘(2) the use of such revenues will provide a significant incentive for, or remove an impediment to, approval of the project by a State or local government; 

and 

‘‘(3) the cost of the mitigation measures is reasonable in relation to the mitigation that will be achieved. 

‘‘(b) MITIGATION OF AIRCRAFT NOISE.—Mitigation measures described in subsection (a) may include the insulation of residential buildings and buildings used 

primarily for educational or medical purposes to mitigate the effects of aircraft noise 

and the improvement of such buildings as required for the insulation of the buildings under local building codes. 

‘‘§ 47175. Airport funding of FAA staff 

‘‘(a) ACCEPTANCE OF SPONSOR-PROVIDED FUNDS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may accept 

funds from an airport sponsor, including funds provided to the sponsor under section 47114(c), to hire additional staff or obtain the services of consultants in order 

to facilitate the timely processing, review, and completion of environmental activities associated with an airport development project. 

‘‘(b) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION.—Instead of payment from an airport sponsor 

from funds apportioned to the sponsor under section 47114, the Administrator, with 

agreement of the sponsor, may transfer funds that would otherwise be apportioned 

to the sponsor under section 47114 to the account used by the Administrator for activities described in subsection (a). 

‘‘(c) RECEIPTS CREDITED AS OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS.—Notwithstanding section 

3302 of title 31, any funds accepted under this section, except funds transferred pursuant to subsection (b)—

‘‘(1) shall be credited as offsetting collections to the account that finances the 

activities and services for which the funds are accepted; 

‘‘(2) shall be available for expenditure only to pay the costs of activities and 

services for which the funds are accepted; and 

‘‘(3) shall remain available until expended. 

‘‘(d) MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.—No funds may be accepted pursuant to subsection 

(a), or transferred pursuant to subsection (b), in any fiscal year in which the Federal 

Aviation Administration does not allocate at least the amount it expended in fiscal 

4

year 2002, excluding amounts accepted pursuant to section 337 of the Department 

of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002 (115 Stat. 862), for 

the activities described in subsection (a). 

‘‘§ 47176. Authorization of appropriations 

‘‘In addition to the amounts authorized to be appropriated under section 106(k), 

there is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation, out of the 

Airport and Airway Trust Fund established under section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9502), $2,100,000 for fiscal year 2003 and $4,200,000 

for each fiscal year thereafter to facilitate the timely processing, review, and completion of environmental activities associated with airport capacity enhancement 

projects at congested airports. 

‘‘§ 47177. Judicial review 

‘‘(a) FILING AND VENUE.—A person disclosing a substantial interest in an order 

issued by the Secretary of Transportation or the head of any other Federal agency 

under this part or a person or agency relying on any determination made under this 

part may apply for review of the order by filing a petition for review in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or in the court of appeals of the United States for the circuit in which the person resides or has its principal place of business. The petition must be filed not later than 60 days after the 

order is issued. The court may allow the petition to be filed after the 60th day only 

if there are reasonable grounds for not filing by the 60th day. ‘‘(b) JUDICIAL PROCEDURES.—When a petition is filed under subsection (a) of this 

section, the clerk of the court immediately shall send a copy of the petition to the 

Secretary or the head of any other Federal agency involved. The Secretary or the 

head of such other agency shall file with the court a record of any proceeding in 

which the order was issued. ‘‘(c) AUTHORITY OF COURT.—When the petition is sent to the Secretary or the head 

of any other Federal agency involved, the court has exclusive jurisdiction to affirm, 

amend, modify, or set aside any part of the order and may order the Secretary or 

the head of such other agency to conduct further proceedings. After reasonable notice to the Secretary or the head of such other agency, the court may grant interim 

relief by staying the order or taking other appropriate action when good cause for 

its action exists. Findings of fact by the Secretary or the head of such other agency 

are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. 

‘‘(d) REQUIREMENT FOR PRIOR OBJECTION.—In reviewing an order of the Secretary 

or the head of any other Federal agency under this section, the court may consider 

an objection to the action of the Secretary or the head of such other agency only 

if the objection was made in the proceeding conducted by the Secretary or the head 

of such other agency if there was a reasonable ground for not making the objection 

in the proceeding. 

‘‘(e) SUPREME COURT REVIEW.—A decision by a court under this section may be 

reviewed only by the Supreme Court under section 1254 of title 28. 

‘‘(f) ORDER DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘order’ includes a record of decision 

or a finding of no significant impact. 

‘‘§ 47178. Definitions 

‘‘In this subchapter, the following definitions apply: 

‘‘(1) AIRPORT SPONSOR.—The term ‘airport sponsor’ has the meaning given the 

term ‘sponsor’ under section 47102. 

‘‘(2) CONGESTED AIRPORT.—The term ‘congested airport’ means an airport that 

accounted for at least 1 percent of all delayed aircraft operations in the United 

States in the most recent year for which such data is available and an airport 

listed in table 1 of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Airport Capacity 

Benchmark Report 2001. 

‘‘(3) AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.—The term ‘airport capacity 

enhancement project’ means—

‘‘(A) a project for construction or extension of a runway, including any 

land acquisition, taxiway, or safety area associated with the runway or runway extension; and 

‘‘(B) such other airport development projects as the Secretary may designate as facilitating a reduction in air traffic congestion and delays.’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The analysis for chapter 471 of such title is 

amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘SUBCHAPTER III—AIRPORT PROJECT STREAMLINING 

‘‘47171. DOT as lead agency. 

‘‘47172. Categorical exclusions. 

‘‘47173. Access restrictions to ease construction. 

‘‘47174. Airport revenue to pay for mitigation. 

5

‘‘47175. Airport funding of FAA staff. 

‘‘47176. Authorization of appropriations. 

‘‘47177. Judicial review. 

‘‘47178. Definitions.’’.

SEC. 5. GOVERNOR’S CERTIFICATE. 

Section 47106(c) of title 49, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in paragraph (1)—

(A) by inserting ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon at the end of subparagraph 

(A)(ii); 

(B) by striking subparagraph (B); and 

(C) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B); 

(2) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking ‘‘stage 2’’ and inserting ‘‘stage 3’’; 

(3) by striking paragraph (4); and 

(4) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4). 

SEC. 6. CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN AIRPORT CAPACITY PROJECTS. 

Section 47504(c)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by aligning the margins of subparagraphs (C) and (D) with the margins 

of subparagraphs (A) and (B); 

(2) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subparagraph (C); 

(3) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D) and inserting ‘‘; 

and’’; and 

(4) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(E) to an airport operator of a congested airport (as defined in section 

47178) and a unit of local government referred to in paragraph (1)(A) or 

(1)(B) of this subsection to carry out a project to mitigate noise in the area 

surrounding the airport if the project is included as a commitment in a 

record of decision of the Federal Aviation Administration for an airport capacity enhancement project (as defined in section 47178) even if that airport has not met the requirements of part 150 of title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations.’’. 

SEC. 7. LIMITATIONS. 

Nothing in this Act, including any amendment made by this Act, shall preempt 

or interfere with—

(1) any practice of seeking public comment; and 

(2) any power, jurisdiction, or authority of a State agency or an airport sponsor has with respect to carrying out an airport capacity enhancement project.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this legislation is to reform the approval process 

for airport runway capacity projects at our Nation’s most congested 

airports. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

Over the last 20 years, air travel in the United States has grown 

faster than any other mode of transportation. Unfortunately, airport runway capacity has not kept pace with the growth. Last year, 

FAA released the Airport Capacity Benchmarks Report 2001, 

which indicates that many of our Nation’s busiest airports are at 

or above capacity for at least some portion of the day. 

Insufficient airport runway capacity has led to chronic and worsening congestion. In the summer of 2001, one out of every four 

commercial flights experienced a significant delay or a cancellation. 

In recent weeks, the demand for airline travel has begun to rise 

again. Passenger traffic is returning and will soon reach pre-September 11th levels. It is not a question of if, but rather when, gridlock will return to our busiest airports. 

Even with the apparent national need for additional runway capacity, airports have had difficulty building new runways. In the 

last decade, only six of our Nation’s largest airports managed to 

complete new runway projects. 

6

The current runway planning and approval process routinely 

takes ten years and can take much longer. To build a runway, an 

airport must coordinate with dozens of Federal, state and local 

agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the 

Park Service, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Advisory Council 

on Historic Preservation, state historical preservation offices and 

state air and water pollution agencies. Airports must also comply 

with over 40 Federal laws, often with conflicting and confusing 

mandates. 

According to FAA data, the average environmental impact statement (EIS) takes three and one half years to complete. There are 

several additional Federal environmental planning and permitting 

requirements outside of the EIS process that can add significant 

delays. For example, FAA completed the EIS for Seattle’s third 

runway in 1997 in less than three years, yet construction has been 

delayed for the last five years due to the Clean Water Act permitting requirements. Legal challenges to environmental documents 

can also add significant delays to the process. 

H.R. 4481, the Airport Streamlining Approval Process Act of 

2002, is intended to cut through red tape and eliminate duplication 

without diminishing existing environmental laws or limiting local 

input or control over these critical projects. It will ensure that once 

a community reaches consensus on a critical capacity project, the 

review process will not unnecessarily delay construction. It designates the Department of Transportation as the lead agency for 

the project review process, and it directs the Secretary of Transportation to develop a coordinated review process for major airport capacity projects that will ensure that all environmental reviews by 

government agencies will be conducted at the same time, whenever 

possible. 

SUMMARY

Section 1.—Short title 

Provides that the Act may be cited as the ‘‘Airport Streamlining 

Approval Process Act of 2002’’. 

Section 2.—Findings 

Makes a number of findings regarding our Nation’s major airports and the environmental review process for airport capacity 

projects at congested airports. 

Section 3.—Promotion of new runways 

Amends section 40104 of Title 49, United States Code, by adding 

a new subsection, which provides that the Administrator shall take 

action to encourage the construction of airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports. This is designed to encourage 

the FAA to take a more proactive approach in encouraging the construction of new runways when it determines that it would be in 

the national interest. 

7

Section 4.—Airport project streamlining 

Amends Chapter 471 of Title 49, United States Code, by adding 

after section 47153 a new ‘‘Subchapter III—Airport Project Streamlining’’ with the following new sections: 

Section 47171, ‘‘DOT as lead agency,’’ subsection (a) requires the 

Secretary to develop and implement an airport project review process for airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports. 

Subsection (b) provides for a coordinated review process for all 

environmental reviews, analyses, opinions, permits, licenses, and 

approvals to be conducted concurrently and completed within a 

time period established by the Secretary in cooperation with the 

agencies involved. 

Subsection (c) requires that for each airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport, the Secretary shall identify all 

Federal and state agencies that may have jurisdiction over environment-related matters, may be required by law to conduct an environment review, or may have jurisdiction to determine whether to 

issue an environment-related permit, license, or approval for the 

project. The Committee recommends that this section be implemented in a manner consistent with Council on Environmental 

Quality regulations and policy guidance.

Subsection (d) allows a State and its associated agencies, consistent with State law, to choose to participate in the coordinated 

review process for a project at an airport within that State. 

Subsection (e) allows the coordinated review process for a project 

to be incorporated into a Memorandum of Understanding between 

the Secretary and the heads of other Federal and State agencies 

identified in Subsection (c), and the airport involved. 

Subsection (f) sets forth the notification and reporting requirements should the Secretary determine that a Federal agency, state 

agency, or airport sponsor participating in the coordinated review 

process has not met a deadline established under subsection (b). 

Subsection (g) provides that for any environmental review process or approval issued or made by a Federal or state agency participating in a coordinated review process requiring an analysis of the 

purpose and need for a project, the agency is bound by the project’s 

purpose and need as defined by the Secretary. 

Subsection (h) provides that the Secretary shall determine the 

reasonable alternatives to an airport capacity enhancement project 

at a congested airport and any other Federal or state agency participating in a coordinated review process shall consider only those 

alternatives to the project that the Secretary has determined are 

reasonable. 

The Committee recognizes that the Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration have significant expertise and experience on transportation-related matters. Therefore, the Committee believes that in conducting environmental reviews within the jurisdiction of the DOT, the Secretary should play 

a lead role in determining which analytical methods are reasonable 

for use in determining the transportation impacts and benefits of 

project alternatives, particularly in the area of noise impacts. Other 

agencies have expertise in determining the environmental impacts 

of transportation projects, and the Secretary should rely on the expertise of these agencies in analyzing these impacts. The Committee believes that, to the maximum extent possible, all Federal 

8

and state agencies participating in the coordinated review process 

should use a common set of data for their analyses in carrying out 

their responsibilities to conduct environmental reviews under Federal law. 

Subsection (i) states that in applying subsections (g) and (h), the 

Secretary shall solicit and consider comments from interested persons and governmental entities. 

Section 47172, ‘‘Categorical exclusions,’’ states that not later than 

120 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary 

shall develop and publish a list of categorical exclusions from the 

requirement that an environmental assessment or an environment 

impact statement be prepared for projects at airports. The Committee notes that the FAA has a process, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act, whereby it excludes certain types 

of projects from the environmental review process. 

The Committee has been made aware of an issue regarding the 

environmental review of air carrier operations specifications. Operations specifications govern the class and size of aircraft to be operated by an air carrier at specific airports to ensure that those specific aircraft can be operated safely at those airports, but do not 

control the frequency or timing of operations. FAA environmental 

procedures allow for operations specifications to be categorically excluded from NEPA review, unless the FAA determines that approval may significantly change the character of the operational environment of an airport. In that case, FAA will conduct the necessary environmental review of the proposed operations specifications. However, the Committee has been informed that the data 

and analysis required to determine whether the approval or 

amendment of an operations specification should be categorically 

excluded has not been consistently applied throughout the FAA offices responsible for conducting such reviews, which has added to 

the cost and time of processing operations specifications. The Committee strongly urges the FAA to issue guidance to ensure consistent and timely review of all applications for operations specifications approvals/amendments. 

In addition, the Committee is concerned that the environmental 

review requirements place an unfair burden on new entrants to a 

market. The Committee will revisit this issue in the reauthorization process and assess whether further legislative action is needed 

to address the problems identified. 

Section 47173, ‘‘Access restrictions to ease construction,’’ provides 

that at the request of an airport sponsor for a congested airport, 

the Secretary may approve a restriction on use of a runway to be 

constructed at the airport to minimize potentially significant adverse noise impacts from the runway only if the Secretary determines that the imposition of the restriction is (1) necessary to mitigate significant noise impacts and expedite construction of the runway; (2) the most appropriate and cost-effective measure to mitigate those impacts, taking into consideration any environmental 

tradeoffs; and (3) would not adversely affect service to small communities, adversely affect safety or efficiency of the national airspace system, unjustly discriminate against any class of user of the 

airport, or impose an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce. 

9

Section 47174, ‘‘Airport revenue to pay for mitigation,’’ subsection 

(a) states, that the Secretary may allow an airport sponsor carrying 

out an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport 

to make payments out of revenues generated at the airport for 

measures to mitigate the environmental impacts of the project if 

the Secretary finds that (1) the mitigation measures are included 

as part of, or are consistent with, the preferred alternative for the 

project in the documentation prepared for NEPA; (2) the use of 

such revenues will provide a significant incentive for, or remove an 

impediment to, approval of the project by a State or local government; and (3) the cost of the mitigation measures is reasonable in 

relation to the mitigation that will be achieved. 

Subsection (b) describes what the mitigation measures described 

in Subsection (a) may include. 

Section 47175, ‘‘Airport funding of FAA staff,’’ subsection (a) provides that the Administrator of the FAA may accept funds from an 

airport sponsor to hire additional staff or obtain the services of consultants to facilitate the timely processing, review, and completion 

of environmental documents associated with an airport development project. 

Subsection (b) allows the Administrator, with agreement of the 

airport sponsor, to transfer funds that would otherwise be apportioned to the sponsor under section 47114 to the account used by 

the Administrator for activities described in subsection (a).

Section 47176, ‘‘Authorization of appropriations,’’ authorizes 

funds to be appropriated to the Secretary out of the Airport and 

Airway Trust Fund appropriations for fiscal year 2003 and each fiscal year thereafter. 

Section 47177, ‘‘Judicial review,’’ subsection (a) provides that a 

person disclosing a substantial interest in an order issued by the 

Secretary or the head of any other Federal agency under this part 

or a person or agency relying on any determination made under 

this part may apply for review of the order by filing a petition for 

review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or in the court of appeals of the United States for 

the circuit in which the person resides or has its principal place of 

business. Requires that the petition must be filed not later than 60 

days after the order is issued and that the court may allow a late 

filing if there are reasonable grounds. 

Subsection (b) sets forth the requirements for the court to immediately send a copy of the petition to the Secretary or the head of 

any other Federal agency involved, and for the Secretary or the 

head of such other Federal agency to file a record of any proceeding 

in which the order was issued with the court. 

Subsection (c) provides for the exclusive jurisdiction of the court 

and permits the court to require further proceedings and to grant 

interim relief when good cause exists. The findings of fact by the 

Secretary or the head of such other agency are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. 

Subsection (d) states that in reviewing an order the court may 

consider an objection to the action only if the objection was made 

in the proceeding conducted by the Secretary or the head of such 

other agency or if there was a reasonable ground for not making 

the objection in the proceeding. 

10

Subsection (e) states that only the Supreme Court may review a 

decision by a court under this section. 

Subsection (f) provides that the term ‘‘order’’ includes a record of 

decision or a finding of no significant impact. 

Section 47178, ‘‘Definitions,’’ provides a list of definitions of 

terms used in the subchapter. 

Section 5.—Governor’s certificate 

Repeals the requirement in section 47106(c)(B) that the Governor 

of the state in which the project is located certifies in writing to 

the Secretary that there is reasonable assurance that the project 

will be in compliance with applicable air and water quality standards. 

Section 6.—Construction of certain airport capacity projects 

Authorizes the issuance of a grant to an airport operator of a 

congested airport and a unit of local government to carry out a 

project to mitigate noise in the area surrounding the airport if the 

project is included as a commitment in a record of decision of the 

FAA for an airport capacity enhancement project. 

Section 7.—Limitations 

States that nothing in the Act shall preempt or interfere with 

any practice of seeking public comment and any power, jurisdiction, 

or authority that a state agency or an airport sponsor has with respect to carrying out an airport capacity enhancement project. Of 

course, this does not overrule any specific directive in the reported 

bill. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY AND COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On May 24, 2001 the Aviation Subcommittee held a hearing on 

Airport Runway Construction Challenges. 

On April 24, 2002, the Full Committee met in open session and 

ordered H.R. 4481 reported with amendments, by voice vote with 

a quorum present. There were no recorded votes taken during 

Committee consideration of H.R. 4481. 

ROLLCALL VOTES

Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives requires 

each committee report to include the total number of votes cast for 

and against on each rollcall vote on a motion to report and on any 

amendment offered to the measure or matter, and the names of 

those members voting for and against. There were no recorded 

votes taken in connection with ordering H.R. 4481 reported. A motion by Mr. Mica to order H.R. 4481 favorably reported to the 

House with an amendment in the nature of a substitute was 

agreed to by voice vote, a quorum being present. 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of 

the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in this report. 

11

COST OF LEGISLATION

Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and comparison 

prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under 

section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the report and is included in the 

report. Such a cost estimate is included in this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII 

1. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and 308(a) of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee references the 

report of the Congressional Budget Office included below. 

2. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee has 

received no report of oversight findings and recommendations from 

the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight on the subject of H.R. 4481. 

3. With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 

Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the 

following cost estimate for H.R. 4481 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, May 17, 2002. 

Hon. DON YOUNG, Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4481, the Airport Streamlining Approval Process Act of 2002. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Hadley. 

Sincerely, 

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director). 

Enclosure. 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

H.R. 4481—Airport Streamlining Approval Process Act of 2002

Summary: H.R. 4481 would authorize the appropriation of $2.1 

million 2003 and $4.2 million in each subsequent year to facilitate 

environmental reviews for projects that would enhance the capacity 

to handle more flights at congested airports. In addition, the bill 

would require the Secretary of Transportation to coordinate federal 

agencies’ and airport sponsors’ efforts to review the environmental 

impact of such projects. H.R. 4481 would authorize the Secretary 

to allow airport sponsors to use local revenues generated at the airports to support such projects. Finally, the bill would authorize the 

Federal Aviation Administrative (FAA) to accept funds from airport 

12

sponsors to hire additional staff to facilitate the timely review or 

environmental reviews for capacity-enhancing projects. 

Based on historical spending patterns of the FAA, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4481 would cost $18 million over the 2003– 2007 period, assuming appropriation of the authorized funds. By 

allowing the FAA to accept funds from airport sponsors, H.R. 4481 

would affect direct spending. Therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures 

would apply, but CBO estimates that any net effect on direct 

spending would be negligible. 

H.R. 4481 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 4481 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 400 (transportation).

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending for Environmental Reviews of Airport 

Projects Under Current Law: 

Estimated Authorization Level 1 .................. 22 23 24 25 26 27

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 22 23 24 25 26 27

Proposed Changes: 

Authorization Level ...................................... 0 2 4 4 4 4

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 0 2 4 4 4 4

Spending Under H.R. 4481: 

Estimated Authorization Level ..................... 22 25 28 29 30 31

Estimated Outlays ....................................... 22 25 28 29 30 31

1 The 2002 level is the amount appropriated for that year for environmental reviews. The estimated authorization levels for the 2003–2007 

period reflect the 2002 level adjusted for anticipated inflation in the CBO baseline for this activity. 

Basis of estimate: H.R. 4481 would authorize the appropriation of $19 million to the FAA to facilitate environmental reviews for 

projects that would enhance the capacity of congested airports. 

Based on information from the FAA, CBO expects that nearly all 

of this amount would be used to hire additional staff to perform environmental reviews of such projects. Based on historical spending 

patterns for FAA expenses, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 

4481 would result in outlays of about $18 million over the 2003– 2007 period, subject to appropriation of the authorized amounts. 

H.R. 4481 would also allow the FAA to accept funds from airport 

sponsors to hire additional staff. Because such funds could be collected and spent without appropriation, H.R. 4481 would affect direct spending. Based on information from the FAA, CBO expects 

that only the largest airports would be willing to pay the FAA to 

facilitate the environmental review of their projects, and that any 

additional net direct spending would be insignificant each year. 

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. By allowing the FAA 

to accept funds from airport sponsors in order to hire additional 

staff, H.R. 4481 would affect direct spending, but CBO estimates 

that any such effect would be negligible each year. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 4481 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

13

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Mark Hadley; impact on 

state, local, and tribal governments: Susan Sieg Tompkins; impact 

on the private sector: Cecil McPherson. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause (3)(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, committee reports on a bill or joint resolution 

of a public character shall include a statement citing the specific 

powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact the 

measure. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

finds that Congress has the authority to enact this measure pursuant to its powers granted under article I, section 8 of the Constitution. 

FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 

pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(Public Law 104–4). 

PREEMPTION CLARIFICATION

Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1994 requires the 

report of any Committee on a bill or joint resolution to include a 

statement on the extent to which the bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local or tribal law. The Committee states 

that H.R. 4481 does not preempt any state, local or tribal law. 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this legislation. 

APPLICABILITY TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to the 

terms and conditions of employment or access to public services or 

accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1).

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE 

* * * * * * *

SUBTITLE VII—AVIATION PROGRAMS 

* * * * * * *

14

PART A—AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY 

SUBPART I—GENERAL 

CHAPTER 401—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

* * * * * * *

§ 40104. Promotion of civil aeronautics and safety of air 

commerce 

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(c) AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS AT CONGESTED

AIRPORTS.—In carrying out subsection (a), the Administrator shall 

take action to encourage the construction of airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports as those terms are defined 

in section 47179.

* * * * * * *

PART B—AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AND NOISE 

CHAPTER 471—AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT

SUBCHAPTER I—AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT 

Sec. 

47101. Policies. 

* * * * * * *

SUBCHAPTER III—AIRPORT PROJECT STREAMLINING 

47171. DOT as lead agency. 

47172. Categorical exclusions. 

47173. Access restrictions to ease construction. 

47174. Airport revenue to pay for mitigation. 

47175. Airport funding of FAA staff. 

47176. Authorization of appropriations. 

47177. Judicial review. 

47178. Definitions.

* * * * * * *

SUBCHAPTER I—AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT 

§ 47106. Project grant application approval conditioned on 

satisfaction of project requirements 

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(c) ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS.—(1) The Secretary may approve an application under this subchapter for an airport development project involving the location of an airport or runway or a 

major runway extension—

(A) only if the sponsor certifies to the Secretary that—

(i) * * *

(ii) the airport management board has voting representation from the communities in which the project is located 

or has advised the communities that they have the right 

to petition the Secretary about a proposed project; and

15

ø(B) only if the chief executive officer of the State in which 

the project will be located certifies in writing to the Secretary 

that there is reasonable assurance that the project will be located, designed, constructed, and operated in compliance with 

applicable air and water quality standards, except that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency shall 

make the certification instead of the chief executive officer if—

ø(i) the State has not approved any applicable State or 

local standards; and 

ø(ii) the Administrator has prescribed applicable standards; and¿

ø(C)¿ (B) if the application is found to have a significant adverse effect on natural resources, including fish and wildlife, 

natural, scenic, and recreation assets, water and air quality, or 

another factor affecting the environment, only after finding 

that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists 

and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the 

adverse effect. 

(2) The Secretary may approve an application under this subchapter for an airport development project that does not involve 

the location of an airport or runway, or a major runway extension, 

at an existing airport without requiring an environmental impact 

statement related to noise for the project if—

(A) completing the project would allow operations at the airport involving aircraft complying with the noise standards prescribed for ‘‘østage 2¿ stage 3’’ aircraft in section 36.1 of title 

14, Code of Federal Regulations, to replace existing operations 

involving aircraft that do not comply with those standards; and 

* * * * * * *

ø(4)(A) Notice of certification or of refusal to certify under paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection shall be provided to the Secretary 

not later than 60 days after the Secretary receives the application. 

ø(B) The Secretary shall condition approval of the application on 

compliance with the applicable standards during construction and 

operation.¿

ø(5)¿ (4) The Secretary may make a finding under paragraph 

(1)(C) of this subsection only after completely reviewing the matter. 

The review and finding must be a matter of public record. 

* * * * * * *

SUBCHAPTER III—AIRPORT PROJECT STREAMLINING 

§ 47171. DOT as lead agency 

(a) AIRPORT PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS.—The Secretary of Transportation shall develop and implement a coordinated review process 

for airport capacity enhancement projects at congested airports. 

(b) COORDINATED REVIEWS.—The coordinated review process 

under this section shall provide that all environmental reviews, 

analyses, opinions, permits, licenses, and approvals that must be 

issued or made by a Federal agency or airport sponsor for an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport will be 

conducted concurrently, to the maximum extent practicable, and 

completed within a time period established by the Secretary, in coVerDate May 23 2002 20:55 Jun 29, 2002 Jkt 99006 PO 00000 Frm 000015 Fmt 06659 Sfmt 06603 E:\HR\OC\HR531.XXX pfrm12 PsN: HR531
16

operation with the agencies identified under subsection (c) with respect to the project. 

(c) IDENTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES.—With respect 

to each airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport, 

the Secretary shall identify, as soon as practicable, all Federal and 

State agencies that may have jurisdiction over environmental-related matters that may be affected by the project or may be required 

by law to conduct an environmental-related review or analysis of 

the project or determine whether to issue an environmental-related 

permit, license, or approval for the project. 

(d) STATE AUTHORITY.—If a coordinated review process is being 

implemented under this section by the Secretary with respect to a 

project at an airport within the boundaries of a State, the State, 

consistent with State law, may choose to participate in such process 

and provide that all State agencies that have jurisdiction over environmental-related matters that may be affected by the project or 

may be required by law to conduct an environmental-related review 

or analysis of the project or determine whether to issue an environmental-related permit, license, or approval for the project, be subject 

to the process. 

(e) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The coordinated review 

process developed under this section may be incorporated into a 

memorandum of understanding for a project between the Secretary 

and the heads of other Federal and State agencies identified under 

subsection (c) with respect to the project and the airport sponsor. 

(f) EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MEET DEADLINE.—

(1) NOTIFICATION OF CONGRESS AND CEQ.—If the Secretary 

determines that a Federal agency, State agency, or airport sponsor that is participating in a coordinated review process under 

this section with respect to a project has not met a deadline established under subsection (b) for the project, the Secretary 

shall notify, within 30 days of the date of such determination, 

the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 

House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation of the Senate, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the agency or sponsor involved about the 

failure to meet the deadline. 

(2) AGENCY REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after date of receipt of a notice under paragraph (1), the agency or sponsor involved shall submit a report to the Secretary, the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

of the Senate, and the Council on Environmental Quality explaining why the agency or sponsor did not meet the deadline 

and what actions it intends to take to complete or issue the required review, analysis, opinion, license, or approval. 

(g) PURPOSE AND NEED.—For any environmental review, analysis, 

opinion, permit, license, or approval that must be issued or made 

by a Federal or State agency that is participating in a coordinated 

review process under this section with respect to an airport capacity 

enhancement project at a congested airport and that requires an 

analysis of purpose and need for the project, the agency, notwithstanding any other provision of law, shall be bound by the project 

purpose and need as defined by the Secretary. 

17

(h) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.—The Secretary shall determine the 

reasonable alternatives to an airport capacity enhancement project 

at a congested airport. Any other Federal or State agency that is 

participating in a coordinated review process under this section 

with respect to the project shall consider only those alternatives to 

the project that the Secretary has determined are reasonable. 

(i) SOLICITATION AND CONSIDERATION OF COMMENTS.—In applying subsections (g) and (h), the Secretary shall solicit and consider 

comments from interested persons and governmental entities. 

§ 47172. Categorical exclusions 

Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this section, 

the Secretary of Transportation shall develop and publish a list of 

categorical exclusions from the requirement that an environmental 

assessment or an environmental impact statement be prepared 

under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.) for projects at airports. 

§ 47173. Access restrictions to ease construction 

At the request of an airport sponsor for a congested airport, the 

Secretary of Transportation may approve a restriction on use of a 

runway to be constructed at the airport to minimize potentially significant adverse noise impacts from the runway only if the Secretary 

determines that imposition of the restriction— (1) is necessary to mitigate significant noise impacts and expedite construction of the runway; 

(2) is the most appropriate and a cost-effective measure to 

mitigate the environmental impact of the runway, taking into 

consideration any environmental tradeoffs associated with the 

restriction; and 

(3) would not adversely affect service to small communities, 

adversely affect safety or efficiency of the national airspace system, unjustly discriminate against any class of user of the airport, or impose an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce. 

§ 47174. Airport revenue to pay for mitigation 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 47107(b), section 

47133, or any other provision of this title, the Secretary of Transportation may allow an airport sponsor carrying out an airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport to make payments, 

out of revenues generated at the airport (including local taxes on 

aviation fuel), for measures to mitigate the environmental impacts 

of the project if the Secretary finds that—

(1) the mitigation measures are included as part of, or are 

consistent with, the preferred alternative for the project in the 

documentation prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); 

(2) the use of such revenues will provide a significant incentive for, or remove an impediment to, approval of the project by 

a State or local government; and 

(3) the cost of the mitigation measures is reasonable in relation to the mitigation that will be achieved. 

(b) MITIGATION OF AIRCRAFT NOISE.—Mitigation measures described in subsection (a) may include the insulation of residential 

18

buildings and buildings used primarily for educational or medical 

purposes to mitigate the effects of aircraft noise and the improvement of such buildings as required for the insulation of the buildings under local building codes. 

§ 47175. Airport funding of FAA staff 

(a) ACCEPTANCE OF SPONSOR-PROVIDED FUNDS.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may accept funds from an airport 

sponsor, including funds provided to the sponsor under section 

47114(c), to hire additional staff or obtain the services of consultants in order to facilitate the timely processing, review, and completion of environmental activities associated with an airport development project. 

(b) ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION.—Instead of payment from an airport sponsor from funds apportioned to the sponsor under section 

47114, the Administrator, with agreement of the sponsor, may 

transfer funds that would otherwise be apportioned to the sponsor 

under section 47114 to the account used by the Administrator for 

activities described in subsection (a). 

(c) RECEIPTS CREDITED AS OFFSETTING COLLECTIONS.—Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, any funds accepted under this section, except funds transferred pursuant to subsection (b)— (1) shall be credited as offsetting collections to the account 

that finances the activities and services for which the funds are 

accepted; 

(2) shall be available for expenditure only to pay the costs of 

activities and services for which the funds are accepted; and 

(3) shall remain available until expended. 

(d) MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.—No funds may be accepted pursuant to subsection (a), or transferred pursuant to subsection (b), in 

any fiscal year in which the Federal Aviation Administration does 

not allocate at least the amount it expended in fiscal year 2002, excluding amounts accepted pursuant to section 337 of the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 

2002 (115 Stat. 862), for the activities described in subsection (a). 

§ 47176. Authorization of appropriations 

In addition to the amounts authorized to be appropriated under 

section 106(k), there is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation, out of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund 

established under section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 

(26 U.S.C. 9502), $2,100,000 for fiscal year 2003 and $4,200,000 for 

each fiscal year thereafter to facilitate the timely processing, review, 

and completion of environmental activities associated with airport 

capacity enhancement projects at congested airports. 

§ 47177. Judicial review 

(a) FILING AND VENUE.—A person disclosing a substantial interest 

in an order issued by the Secretary of Transportation or the head 

of any other Federal agency under this part or a person or agency 

relying on any determination made under this part may apply for 

review of the order by filing a petition for review in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or in 

the court of appeals of the United States for the circuit in which the 

19

person resides or has its principal place of business. The petition 

must be filed not later than 60 days after the order is issued. The 

court may allow the petition to be filed after the 60th day only if 

there are reasonable grounds for not filing by the 60th day. 

(b) JUDICIAL PROCEDURES.—When a petition is filed under subsection (a) of this section, the clerk of the court immediately shall 

send a copy of the petition to the Secretary or the head of any other 

Federal agency involved. The Secretary or the head of such other 

agency shall file with the court a record of any proceeding in which 

the order was issued. 

(c) AUTHORITY OF COURT.—When the petition is sent to the Secretary or the head of any other Federal agency involved, the court 

has exclusive jurisdiction to affirm, amend, modify, or set aside any 

part of the order and may order the Secretary or the head of such 

other agency to conduct further proceedings. After reasonable notice 

to the Secretary or the head of such other agency, the court may 

grant interim relief by staying the order or taking other appropriate 

action when good cause for its action exists. Findings of fact by the 

Secretary or the head of such other agency are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence. 

(d) REQUIREMENT FOR PRIOR OBJECTION.—In reviewing an order 

of the Secretary or the head of any other Federal agency under this 

section, the court may consider an objection to the action of the Secretary or the head of such other agency only if the objection was 

made in the proceeding conducted by the Secretary or the head of 

such other agency if there was a reasonable ground for not making 

the objection in the proceeding. 

(e) SUPREME COURT REVIEW.—A decision by a court under this 

section may be reviewed only by the Supreme Court under section 

1254 of title 28. 

(f) ORDER DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘order’’ includes a 

record of decision or a finding of no significant impact. 

§ 47178. Definitions 

In this subchapter, the following definitions apply: 

(1) AIRPORT SPONSOR.—The term ‘‘airport sponsor’’ has the 

meaning given the term ‘‘sponsor’’ under section 47102. 

(2) CONGESTED AIRPORT.—The term ‘‘congested airport’’

means an airport that accounted for at least 1 percent of all delayed aircraft operations in the United States in the most recent 

year for which such data is available and an airport listed in 

table 1 of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Airport Capacity Benchmark Report 2001. 

(3) AIRPORT CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT.—The term 

‘‘airport capacity enhancement project’’ means—

(A) a project for construction or extension of a runway, 

including any land acquisition, taxiway, or safety area associated with the runway or runway extension; and 

(B) such other airport development projects as the Secretary may designate as facilitating a reduction in air traffic congestion and delays.

* * * * * * *

20

CHAPTER 475—NOISE 

* * * * * * *

§ 47504. Noise compatibility programs 

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(c) GRANTS.—(1) * * *

(2) SOUNDPROOFING AND ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES.—The Secretary may incur obligations to make grants from amounts made available under 

section 48103 of this title—

(A) * * *

* * * * * * *

(C) to an airport operator and unit of local government 

referred to in paragraph (1)(A) or (1)(B) of this subsection 

to carry out any part of a program developed before February 18, 1980, or before implementing regulations were 

prescribed, if the Secretary decides the program is substantially consistent with reducing existing noncompatible 

uses and preventing the introduction of additional noncompatible uses and the purposes of this chapter will be 

furthered by promptly carrying out the program; øand¿

(D) to an airport operator and unit of local government 

referred to in paragraph (1)(A) or (1)(B) of this subsection 

to soundproof a building in the noise impact area surrounding the airport that is used primarily for educational 

or medical purposes and that the Secretary decides is adversely affected by airport noiseø.¿; and

(E) to an airport operator of a congested airport (as defined in section 47178) and a unit of local government referred to in paragraph (1)(A) or (1)(B) of this subsection to 

carry out a project to mitigate noise in the area surrounding the airport if the project is included as a commitment in a record of decision of the Federal Aviation Administration for an airport capacity enhancement project (as 

defined in section 47178) even if that airport has not met 

the requirements of part 150 of title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations.

* * * * * * *

Æ