(7) Future Governors of Illinois could stop the 
O’Hare capacity enhancement project by refusing to 
issue a certificate required for such project under 
the Illinois Aeronautics Act, or by refusing to submit 
airport improvement grant requests for the project, 
or by improperly administering the State implemen-
tation plan process under the Clean Air Act (42 
U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) to prevent construction and op-
eration of the project. 
(8) The city of Chicago is unwilling to continue 
to go forward with the project without assurance 
that future Governors of Illinois will not be able to 
stop the project, thereby endangering the value of 
the investment of city and Federal resources in the 
project. 
(9) Because of the importance of O’Hare to the 
national air transportation system and the growing 
congestion at the airport and because of the expendi-
ture of Federal funds for a master-planning grant 
for expansion of capacity at O’Hare, it is important 
to the national air transportation system, interstate 
commerce, and the efficient expenditure of Federal 
funds, that the city of Chicago’s proposals to the
Federal Aviation Administration have an oppor-
tunity to be considered for Federal approval and
possible funding, that the city’s requests for changes 
to the State implementation plan to allow such 
projects not be denied arbitrarily, and that, if the 
Federal 
Aviation 
Administration 
approves 
the 
project and funding for a portion of its cost, the city 
can implement and use the project. 
(10) Any application submitted by the city of 
Chicago for expansion of O’Hare should be evalu-
ated by the Federal Aviation Administration and 
other Federal agencies under all applicable Federal 
laws and regulations and should be approved only if 
the application meets all requirements imposed by 
such laws and regulations. 
(11) As part of the agreement between the city 
and the State allowing the city to submit an applica-
tion for improvement of O’Hare, there has been an 
agreement for the continued operation of Merrill C. 
Meigs Field by the city, and it has also been agreed 
that, if the city does not follow the agreement on 
Meigs Field, Federal airport improvement program 
funds should be withheld from the city for O’Hare. 
(12) To facilitate implementation of the agree-
ment allowing the city to submit an application for 
O’Hare, it is desirable to require by law that Fed-
eral airport improvement program funds for O’Hare
be administered to require continued operation of 
Merrill C. Meigs Field by the city, as proposed in 
the agreement. 
(13) To facilitate implementation of the agree-
ment allowing the city to submit an application for 
O’Hare, it is desirable to enact into law provisions 
of the agreement relating to noise and public road-
way access. These provisions are not inconsistent 
with Federal law. 
(14) If the Federal Aviation Administration ap-
proves an airport layout plan for O’Hare directly re-
lated to the agreement reached on December 5, 
2001, such approvals will constitute an action of the 
United States under Federal law and will be an im-
portant first step in the process by which the Gov-
ernment could decide that these plans should receive 
Federal assistance under chapter 471 of title 49, 
United States Code, relating to airport development. 
(15) The agreement between the State of Illi-
nois and the city of Chicago includes agreement that 
the construction of an airport in Peotone, Illinois, 
would be proposed by the State to the Federal Avia-
tion Administration. Like the O’Hare expansion pro-
posal, the Peotone proposal should receive full con-
sideration by the Federal Aviation Administration
under standard procedures for approving and fund-
ing an airport improvement project, including all ap-
plicable safety, utility and efficiency, and environ-
mental review. 
(16) Gary/Chicago Airport in Gary, Indiana, 
and the Greater Rockford Airport, Illinois, may al-
leviate congestion and provide additional capacity in 
the greater Chicago metropolitan region. Like the 
O’Hare airport expansion proposal, expansion efforts 
by Gary/Chicago and Greater Rockford airports 
should receive full consideration by the Federal 
Aviation Administration under standard procedures 
for approving and funding an airport capacity im-
provement project, including all applicable safety, 
utility and efficiency, and environmental reviews. 
SEC. 3. STATE, CITY, AND FAA AUTHORITY. 
(a) PROHIBITION.—In furtherance of the purpose of 
this Act to achieve significant air transportation benefits 
for interstate and foreign commerce, if the Federal Avia-
tion Administration makes, or at any time after December 
5, 2001 has made, a grant to the city of Chicago, Illinois, 
with the approval of the State of Illinois for planning or 
construction of runway improvements at O’Hare Inter-
national Airport, the State of Illinois, and any instrumen-
tality or political subdivision of the State, are prohibited
from exercising authority under sections 38.01, 47, and 
48 of the Illinois Aeronautics Act (620 ILCS 5/) to pre-
vent, or have the effect of preventing—
(1) further consideration by the Federal Avia-
tion Administration of an O’Hare airport layout 
plan directly related to the agreement reached by the 
State and the city on December 5, 2001, with re-
spect to O’Hare; 
(2) construction of projects approved by the Ad-
ministration in such O’Hare airport layout plan; or 
(3) application by the city of Chicago for Fed-
eral airport improvement program funding for 
projects approved by the Administration and shown 
on such O’Hare airport layout plan. 
(b) APPLICATIONS FOR FEDERAL FUNDING.—Not-
withstanding any other provision of law, the city of Chi-
cago is authorized to submit directly to the Federal Avia-
tion Administration without the approval of the State of 
Illinois, applications for Federal airport improvement pro-
gram funding for planning and construction of a project 
shown on an O’Hare airport layout plan directly related 
to the agreement reached on December 5, 2001, and to
accept, receive, and disburse such funds without the ap-
proval of the State of Illinois.
(c) LIMITATION.—If the Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration determines that an O’Hare airport layout plan di-
rectly related to the agreement reached on December 5, 
2001, will not be approved by the Administration, sub-
sections (a) and (b) of this section shall expire and be of 
no further effect on the date of such determination. 
(d) WESTERN PUBLIC ROADWAY ACCESS.—As pro-
vided in the December 5, 2001, agreement referred to in 
subsection (a), the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
Administration shall not consider an airport layout plan 
submitted by the city of Chicago that includes the runway 
redesign plan, unless the airport layout plan includes pub-
lic roadway access through the existing western boundary 
of O’Hare to passenger terminal and parking facilities lo-
cated inside the boundary of O’Hare and reasonably acces-
sible to such western access. Approval of western public 
roadway access shall be subject to the condition that the 
cost of construction be paid for from airport revenues con-
sistent with Administration revenue use requirements. 
(e) NOISE MITIGATION.—As provided in the Decem-
ber 5, 2001, agreement referred to in subsection (a), the 
following apply: 
(1) Approval by the Administrator of an airport 
layout plan that includes the runway redesign plan 
shall require the city of Chicago to offer acoustical
treatment of all single-family houses and schools lo-
cated within the 65 DNL noise contour for each 
construction phase of the runway redesign plan, sub-
ject to Administration guidelines and specifications 
of general applicability. The Administrator may not 
approve the runway redesign plan unless the city 
provides the Administrator with information suffi-
cient to demonstrate that the acoustical treatment 
required by this paragraph is feasible. 
(2)(A) Approval by the Administrator of an air-
port layout plan that includes the runway redesign 
plan shall be subject to the condition that noise im-
pact of aircraft operations at O’Hare in the calendar 
year immediately following the year in which the 
first new runway is first used and in each calendar 
year thereafter will be less than the noise impact in 
calendar year 2000. 
(B) The Administrator shall make the deter-
mination described in subparagraph (A)—
(i) using, to the extent practicable, the pro-
cedures specified in part 150 of title 14, Code 
of Federal Regulations; 
(ii) using the same method for calendar 
year 2000 and for each forecast year; and
(iii) by determining noise impact solely in 
terms of the aggregate number of square miles 
and the aggregate number of single-family 
houses and schools exposed to 65 or greater 
decibels using the DNL metric, including only 
single-family houses and schools in existence on 
the last day of calendar year 2000. The Admin-
istrator shall make such determination based on 
information provided by the city of Chicago, 
which shall be independently verified by the Ad-
ministrator. 
(C) The conditions described in this subsection 
shall be enforceable exclusively through the submis-
sion and approval of a noise compatibility plan 
under part 150 of title 14, Code of Federal Regula-
tions. The noise compatibility plan submitted by the 
city of Chicago shall provide for compliance with this 
subsection. The Administrator shall approve meas-
ures sufficient for compliance with this subsection in 
accordance with procedures under such part 150. 
The United States shall have no financial responsi-
bility or liability if operations at O’Hare in any year 
do not satisfy the conditions in this subsection. 
(f) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—If the runway redesign 
plan described in this section has not received all Federal,
State, and local permits and approvals necessary to begin 
construction by December 31, 2004, the Administrator 
shall submit a status report to the Committee on Com-
merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
House of Representatives within 120 days of such date 
identifying each permit and approval necessary for the 
project and the status of each such action. 
(g) JUDICIAL REVIEW.— An order issued by the Ad-
ministrator, in whole or in part, under this section shall 
be deemed to be an order issued under part A of subtitle 
VII of title 49, United States Code, and shall be reviewed 
in accordance with the procedure in section 46110 of such 
title. 
(h) DEFINITION.—In this section, the terms ‘‘airport 
layout plan directly related to the agreement reached on 
December 5, 2001’’ and ‘‘such airport layout plan’’ mean 
a plan that shows—
(1) 6 parallel runways at O’Hare oriented in 
the east-west direction with the capability for 4 si-
multaneous independent visual aircraft arrivals in 
both directions, and all associated taxiways, naviga-
tional facilities, and other related facilities; and
(2) closure of existing runways 14L–32R, 14R–
32L and 18–36 at O’Hare.
SEC. 4. CLEAN AIR ACT. 
(a) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.—An implementation 
plan shall be prepared by the State of Illinois under the 
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) in accordance with 
the State’s customary practices for accounting for and 
regulating emissions associated with activity at commer-
cial service airports. The State shall not deviate from its 
customary practices under the Clean Air Act for the pur-
pose of interfering with the construction of a runway pur-
suant to the redesign plan or the south surburban airport. 
At the request of the Administrator of the Federal Avia-
tion Administration, the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency shall, in consultation with the 
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, de-
termine that the foregoing condition has been satisfied be-
fore approving an implementation plan. Nothing in this 
section shall be construed to affect the obligations of the 
State under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (42 
U.S.C. 7506(c)). 
(b) LIMITATION ON APPROVAL.—The Administrator 
of the Federal Aviation Administration shall not approve 
the runway redesign plan unless the Administrator of the 
Federal Aviation Administration determines that the con-
struction and operation will include, to the maximum ex-
tent feasible, the best management practices then reason-
ably available to and used by operators of commercial serv-
ice airports to mitigate emissions regulated under the im-
plementation plan. 
SEC. 5. MERRILL C. MEIGS FIELD. 
The State of Illinois and the city of Chicago, Illinois, 
have agreed to the following: 
(1) Until January 1, 2026, the Administrator 
of the Federal Aviation Administration shall with-
hold all Federal airport grant funds respecting 
O’Hare International Airport, other than grants in-
volving national security and safety, unless the Ad-
ministrator is reasonably satisfied that the following 
conditions have been met: 
(A) Merrill C. Meigs Field in Chicago ei-
ther is being operated by the city of Chicago as 
an airport or has been closed by the Adminis-
tration for reasons beyond the city’s control. 
(B) The city of Chicago is providing, at its 
own expense, all off-airport roads and other ac-
cess, services, equipment, and other personal 
property that the city provided in connection 
with the operation of Meigs Field on and prior 
to December 1, 2001. 
(C) The city of Chicago is operating Meigs 
Field, at its own expense, at all times as a pub-
lic airport in good condition and repair open to
all users capable of utilizing the airport and is 
maintaining the airport for such public oper-
ations at least from 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. 
7 days a week whenever weather conditions per-
mit. 
(D) The city of Chicago is providing or 
causing its agents or independent contractors to 
provide all services (including police and fire 
protection services) provided or offered at Meigs 
Field on or immediately prior to December 1, 
2001, including tie-down, terminal, refueling, 
and repair services, at rates that reflect actual 
costs of providing such goods and services. 
(2) If Meigs Field is closed by the Administra-
tion for reasons beyond the city of Chicago’s control, 
the conditions described in subparagraphs (B) 
through (D) of paragraph (1) shall not apply. 
(3) After January 1, 2006, the Administrator 
shall not withhold Federal airport grant funds to the 
extent the Administrator determines that with-
holding of such funds would create an unreasonable 
burden on interstate commerce. 
(4) The Administrator shall not enforce the 
conditions listed in paragraph (1) if the State of Illi-
nois enacts a law on or after January 1, 2006, au-
thorizing the closure of Meigs Field. 
(5) Net operating losses resulting from oper-
ation of Meigs Field, to the extent consistent with 
law, are expected to be paid by the 2 air carriers at 
O’Hare International Airport that paid the highest 
amount of airport fees and charges at O’Hare Inter-
national Airport for the preceding calendar year. 
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the city 
of Chicago may use airport revenues generated at 
O’Hare International Airport to fund the operation 
of Meigs Field. 
SEC. 6. APPLICATION WITH EXISTING LAW. 
Nothing in this Act shall give any priority to or affect 
availability or amounts of funds under chapter 471 of title 
49, United States Code, to pay the costs of O’Hare Inter-
national Airport, improvements shown on an airport lay-
out plan directly related to the agreement reached by the 
State of Illinois and the city of Chicago, Illinois, on De-
cember 5, 2001. 
SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON QUIET AIRCRAFT TECH-
NOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 
It is the sense of the Congress that the Office of En-
vironment and Energy of the Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration should be funded to carry out noise mitigation pro-