Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline Through Federal Rockaway and Jamaica Bay Public Parks Draws Criticism

The route of the proposed Rockaway natural gas pipeline. The project would run from the Atlantic Ocean under the Rockaways and Jamaica Bay including Floyd Bennett Field into southeast Brooklyn. The proposel has drawn strong opposition from environmentalists and community groups.

This Sunday, September 2nd, the Coalition Against the Rockaway Pipeline (CARP) are holding a rally on the beach at Jacob Riis Park between 11am-3pm. (Image Courtesy of: Williams Companies via NY Times)

Brooklyn

“Having a pipeline and metering station going through a national park is absurd,” said Karen Mascolo. "If you let industry come in, you’re opening up the door to allow industry into any national park.”(Photo: Sheepsheadbites)

Updated, 5:01 p.m. | New York City needs cleaner, cheaper energy. That’s the only thing everyone following a proposed natural gas pipeline in the Rockaways agrees upon. But the project — running pipeline from the Atlantic Ocean under the Rockaways and Jamaica Bay into southeast Brooklyn — has drawn concern and outright opposition since it became public earlier this year, according to the New York Times.

Natural gas saves customers money, eases dependence on foreign oil and is cleaner than other fossil fuels (though extracting it by hydraulic fracturing raises other issues). But in light of recent pipeline leaks and explosions, environmental advocates and Brooklynites worry that the pipeline could damage fragile ecosystems, create safety hazards and compromise Brooklyn’s biggest piece of national parkland, Floyd Bennett Field. And the planning process itself has drawn criticism from community groups who say it has not been open enough to public review.

National Grid, the utility that delivers gas to Brooklyn, says that as the need for natural gas grows, the system must be expanded. “Brooklyn hasn’t seen a new delivery point in 50 years,” said John Stavarakas, National Grid’s director of long-term planning and project development. “We are at capacity.”

Until environmental impact studies are done, though — especially on the ocean, where the pipeline calls for more invasive digging than on the bay side — many environmentalists are withholding support.

“If we don’t reduce greenhouse gases, then the Jamaica Bay marshes will end up under water anyway,” said Glenn Phillips, executive director of New York City Audubon. “But the temporary disturbances could be very damaging to this place, which is critically important for birds, horseshoe crabs and fish.”

On Sunday, opponents of the pipeline, led by a group called Coalition Against the Rockaway Pipeline, plan to hold a rally on the beach at Jacob Riis Park in the Rockaways.

The $265 million pipeline project, which would take about a year to complete, consists of three pieces:

• a three-mile connector, built by the Williams Companies, from its existing Transco pipeline in the Atlantic Ocean to the Rockaways;
• a one-and-a-half-mile line from the Rockaways under Jamaica Bay and Gateway National Recreation Area land to Floyd Bennett Field, the decommissioned airport that is part of Gateway;
• and a metering station built in an unused hangar at Floyd Bennett Field.

Supporters say that the construction would generate 300 jobs and that the finished station would bring the city $8 million annually in property taxes.

Part of the pipeline proposal requires its developer, the Williams Companies, to restore abandoned aircraft hangars at Floyd Bennett Field in Brooklyn, like this one. (Photo:

Ozier Muhammad/The New York Times)

The plan was endorsed by the Bloomberg administration, which calls forexpanding the use of natural gas in its PlaNYC 2030 initiative. The city encouraged Representatives Gregory W. Meeks of Queens and Michael Grimm of Staten Island to co-sponsor the federal bill, passed in February, that authorizes the use of national parkland for the project.

The Regional Plan Association, a nonprofit group that studies and comments on local development issues, supports the pipeline. “The city needs natural gas to replace oil for heating, an important environmental goal,” said Robert Pirani, the association’s vice president for environmental programs.

But the Coalition Against the Rockaway Pipeline and other critics point toWilliams’s safety record and worry about an explosion in a national park or in a densely packed neighborhood. Since 2008, the company’s pipelines have had accidents — including leaks, ruptures and explosions – in at least seven states. The company and its subsidiaries have faced “corrective action orders” from the government in two cases, including a pipeline explosion in Alabama last year, and fines in two others. A company spokesman said that all the issues raised in the incidents have been addressed.

Brian O’Higgins, director of engineering for Williams, said much of the pipeline would be laid using a relatively noninvasive method involving a horizontal directional drill, which drills a small hole, bores underground, then gradually widens the hole. This would avoid digging up Rockaway beaches or Jamaica Bay. But 2.23 miles of pipeline in the ocean will be laid by traditional methods, requiring extensive digging, the company said. A Williams spokesman, Chris Stockton, said the planned route avoided “sensitive habitat.”

Two environmental advocates — Don Riepe, the American Littoral Society’s Jamaica Bay Guardian, and Dan Mundy Jr., co-founder of the Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers – said they were concerned about the ocean connector.

“It’s digging a huge hole in an extremely critical area,” Mr. Mundy said. “There’s a lot of life out there — fluke, flounder, lobster.”

Community Boards 14 in Queens and 18 in Brooklyn have also raised objections to the project. For the Brooklyn board, the deal-breaker was the proposal to build the meter and regulator station at Floyd Bennett Field.

At a meeting on Aug. 15 organized by the Coalition Against the Rockaway Pipeline, several speakers said that turning public park land over to private industry set a worrisome precedent.

Some environmental advocates want any revenue raised by the pipeline, which would run beneath Jamaica Bay, to go toward restoring marshland in the bay. (Photo:

Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times

The planning process itself has been a sticking point, too. In February, after Congress authorized the National Park Service to pursue the project, outrage and conspiracy theories ricocheted around local blogs, listservs and newspapers.

Mr. Stockton of Williams said that using national parkland required Congressional and presidential backing simply to start the process.

“This is an early, early, early step,” Mr. O’Higgins added, with many steps still required, including environmental impact studies, and approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the state Department of Environmental Conservation.

Activists and environmentalists complained that the plan seemed a fait accompli and that the park service had been secretive, never mentioning the proposal during public meetings discussing Floyd Bennett Field’s future. The revelation that Mr. Grimm received a total of $3,000 from National Grid and Williams for his re-election campaign after co-sponsoring the bill also fed the controversy. Mr. Grimm said there was no quid pro quo.

If the project goes forward, another fight looms, over money; everyone involved seemingly has a different idea about how much revenue may be generated and where it would go. Local advocates say that if they have to live with the pipeline, the money should go to Jamaica Bay, not disappear into the National Park Service’s general budget.

“This should at least provide some good money to the park,” Mr. Riepe said, adding that money was badly needed for marsh restoration. “That’s the lifeblood of Jamaica Bay.”

Read More:

Proposed Gas Pipeline, Endorsed by the City, Draws Criticism

New York Times - August 29, 2012 - By Stuart Miller

Activists: Jamaica Bay Pipeline Could Open Up Other National Parks To Industrial Use

Sheepshead Bites - August 7, 2012 - by Ned Berke

A Surfers’ Turf War (Hang 10, and Hold the Gas)

New York Times - June 19, 2009 - By Jim Rutenberg

USDA Bird-Strike Prevention Killing Plan Could Wipe-Out Half-Dozen Species In Jamaica Bay

Under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal, Wildlife Services staffers at the Kennedy Airport would be authorized to kill a half-dozen birds within a 5-mile radius. The intent is to reduce the number of bird strikes on planes. The plan has heavily criticized by environmentalists and animal rights groups who say the plan is mis-guided as the plan targets resident birds which are generally not involved in the aviation accidents here. Public comments on the plan will be accepted until June 13. (Photo: Christie M. Farriella for the New York Daily News)

Queens

The new plan to control bird strikes near Kennedy Airport flies in the face of a multimillion dollar federal effort to restore nearby wetland habitats for migratory birds, critics say.

Under the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s proposal, Wildlife Services staffers at the Queens airport would be authorized to kill a half-dozen birds within a five-mile radius of JFK, according to the New York Daily News.

The program, proposed to combat the growing number of potentially deadly bird strikes, has drawn the ire of conservationists and animal rights groups, who say it’s uncertain how culling the population will effect other species in the sensitive area.

“Would someone say we were going to kill every bear in Yellowstone?” asked Ida Sanoff, chair of the conservation group consortium Natural Resources Protective Association.

The plan would enable Wildlife Services at JFK to enter the Gateway National Recreation Area and kill all Canada geese, mute swans, double-crested cormorants, blackbirds, crows, rock pigeons and European starlings.

Proponents of the culling point to Federal Aviation Administration statistics that show 257 bird strikes at JFK last year compared with only 127 in 2005.

The most recent bird strike forced an emergency landing in Westchester April 24th. Environmentalists and animal rights groups have repeatedly pointed out that these plans target resident birds and not migratory ones which are generally involved in area aviation accidents. (Image: NBC New York)

Environmentalists say while there’s a need for safety at the massive airport, they think the measures outlined need to be examined more carefully.

“I understand the need to manage some of these species, but I would like to see an equal amount of effort put into preservation,” said Don Riepe, director of the local chapter of American Littoral Society and a member of the airport’s bird taskforce.

U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has proposed legislation that would bypass the environmental impact review process for the plan and allow the USDA to kill all Canada geese within a 5-mile radius of the airport during their molting season this summer.

Gillibrand, the USDA and Gateway, which helped craft the plan, have all said such measures are needed to ensure safe airways.

“We can take steps necessary to protect millions of air passengers every day while preserving the natural beauty of this national park for future generations,” the senator said in a statement.

Public comments will be accepted until June 13.

CANADA GEESE: The largest of the native waterfowl in Jamaica Bay, Canada geese are considered one of the biggest threats to planes landing and embarking from nearby Kennedy Airport. They feed mostly on grass and can be seen grazing on lawns and golf courses. They are both large — male geese can weigh up to 10 pounds — and abundant.

MUTE SWANS: A nonnative species, mute swans were first introduced to the Northeast coast from Europe in the 1800s. They are beautiful but aggressive birds that can cause damage to local ecosystems. A male swan can weigh up to 25 pounds.

DOUBLE-CRESTED CORMORANTS: This black fish-eating bird nests on islands in the New York harbor. The population of the native species has remained relatively small and stable in New York. They can grow to almost three feet tall.

BLACKBIRDS: The red-winged blackbird is one of the most common small birds that nest in marshes. A single blackbird would likely not do much damage to an airplane, though they tend to congregate in flocks during the winter. The tiny bird can weigh just a few ounces.

EUROPEAN STARLING: This bird was first introduced to America in Central Park in the 1800s. They are urban birds that are found in just about every city habitat and are most abundant in city parks. Most grow to between 7.5 and 9 inches tall and weigh between 2 and 3.5 ounces.

CROWS: These native New York birds can flock in large numbers. Their numbers are recovering after the population declined due to West Nile virus in the 1990s.

ROCK PIGEONS: The familiar pigeon, rock pigeons pose a risk to planes because they can form large flocks. They tend to congregate in places where they are fed by people.

Read More:

USDA bird-strike prevention plan would cull half-dozen bird species in Jamaica Bay Plan could have a ripple effect in sensitive Gateway National Recreation Area

New York Daily News - May 26, 2012 - By Vera Chinese

Critics: Bird-Culling Plan Near JFK Goes Too Far Environmentalists say the plan to kill a half-dozen bird species near Kennedy Airport in order to reduce bird strikes on planes need to be examined more carefully

WNBC - May 27, 2012

Filling In Jamaica Bay For JFK Expansion Not Going To Fly - Environmentalists/Community

....nothing in this section shall authorize the expansion of airport runways into Jamaica Bay - 1972 H.R 1121 Section 3 (D)

The Jamaica Bay Task Force Group hosted its first meeting last week in response to the Regional Plan Association's (RPA) highly controversial report. More than 150 people turned out on Thursday, April 7, at the American Legion Hall in Broad Channel. Representatives from environmental and civic groups from around the bay as well as numerous fishing clubs and kayak groups came out and strongly opposed the plan. (Photos: © Geoffrey Croft/NYC Park Advocates) Click on images to enlarge.

Although the RPA report outlined several options to ease area airport congestion, the idea of filling in 400 acres of Jamaica Bay in Gateway National Park to create additional runways at JFK clearly received the most criticism. An act of Congress would be required to make this unprecedented change to a National Park. The report, Upgrading to World Class – The future of the New York Regions Airports, was funded by the Port Authority and developed by a consortium of major federal, state, city and county government stakeholders. No local environmental input was sought.

Such an expansion of JFK would have unacceptable adverse impacts on Jamaica Bay environmentalists and community activists assert, irreversibly harming what is not simply New York City’s ecological crown jewel but a wetlands and estuarine area of national importance.

Daniel Mundy, Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers, Don Riepe, American Littoral Society, Brad Sewell, Senior Attorney of the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Captain Vinnie Calabro all gave powerful powerpoint presentations. The speakers, as well as audience members spoke passionately about the importance of preserving the area's vital ecosystem. The evening - which started off with Dan Mundy Sr - was chaired by his son Daniel and Mr. Riepe.

Another issue in the report that received major scorn was RPA's contention that Grassy Bay was a "Dead Zone." To refute this assertion, for twenty minutes boat captain and fishing columnist Vinnie Calabro showed image after image of enormous fish he said were caught in that area of the bay. Mr. Calabro, who said he's been fishing those waters for 40 years, was just one of dozens of attendees who represented the fishing community.

On March 17, leaders from 21 environmental, recreational, and civic groups signed and sent a letter to Port Authority Executive Director Christopher Ward voicing their opposition to the proposed plan.

Daniel Mundy, Jr. vice president Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers gave an impassioned and informative powerpoint presentation refuting many of RPA's findings. Among many other issues, Mr. Mundy took the report to task for RPA's many inaccurate air travel projections from prior reports beginning in 1947. “The nature of the proposal is outrageous," he said. — Geoffrey Croft

Brooklyn/Queens

A recent proposal to fill in about 400 acres of the Jamaica Bay wetlands for more runway space at the John F. Kennedy (JFK) International Airport is not flying well with environmental groups, local residents, and members of the local fishing and boating community, according to The Epoch Times.

The plan was one of six proposals made in the 2011 Regional Plan Association (RPA) report to manage increased demand in air travel and to remedy the current constrained airport capacity in the region.

Since the release of the RPA report, “Upgrading to World Class: The Future of the New York Region’s Airports” in January, controversy has been brewing and opposition to the proposal has been gaining momentum.

On March 17, leaders from 21 environmental, recreational, and civic groups signed and sent a letter to Port Authority Executive Director Christopher Ward voicing their opposition to the proposed plan.

The letter stated that the groups do not oppose efforts to increase the region’s aviation capacity, but urged the Port Authority to “consider other available alternatives for meeting the region’s airport capacity needs.”

It stated that permanently filling in a portion of the Jamaica Bay to accommodate JFK runway expansion would have an adverse impact on the bay. NYC Park Advocates, a parks advocacy group, describes the bay not only as the city’s ecological crown jewel but a wetland and estuary of national significance.

The letter highlighted the escalation of intrusive commercial jet noise, wildlife conflicts with aviation safety, and water pollution from the airport. It cited the likelihood for an increase in the runoff from the millions of gallons of toxic de-icing fluids used each winter that are currently being discharged directly into the bay.

On Thursday, April 7, the Jamaica Bay Task Force Group (JBTF) hosted its first town hall meeting in response to the RPA proposal.

The event, attended by nearly 150 individuals, provided city officials, scientists, and numerous community and advocacy group leaders with the opportunity to express their reasons for refuting the runway expansion into the bay.

“One of the major shortcomings of the report was that actual users, including environmentalists and civic organizations were not consulted,” said Geoffrey Croft, president, NYC Park Advocates.

“This would require an act of Congress and I am not going to let that happen,” Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-Queens and Brooklyn) said at Thursday’s meeting referring to filling in parts of Jamaica Bay. He stated that he had spoken with both the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Port Authority Executive Director Christopher Ward and expressed his opposition to that plan.

At Thursday’s meeting, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-Queens and Brooklyn) stated that he had spoken with both the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Port Authority Executive Director Christopher Ward.

Details of the conversation were unavailable, as Weiner’s media spokesperson did not respond as of press time.

However, Weiner was quoted as saying, “This would require an act of Congress and I am not going to let that happen.”

Likewise, Councilman Erik Ulrich opposes the plan. “There is no way we are going to let this happen in this community or in any other community. We cannot let this move forward,” said Ulrich.

The groups’ claim that the report overstated projections for future air travel demand, fails to address the airport land access issues, fails to seek the use of other airports such as MacArthur and Stewart, fails to recognize the impact on the surrounding environment, and fails to acknowledge previous studies, including the RPA 1973 report that rejected a proposal to fill in portions of Jamaica Bay.

Many were particularly upset that the report described a portion of the bay that borders JFK as a “‘dead’ section called Grassy Bay.”

Filling in the bay for runway expansion is not an option, said John Tanacredi, chairman of the Department of Earth & Marine Sciences at Dowling College, Kramer Science Center.

Jamaica Bay has one of the most bio-diverse marine ecosystems, said Tanacredi, who was a research ecologist with the National Parks Service at Gateway national recreational area for 24 years.

Tanacredi expressed three concerns with the RPA’s proposal to fill in the bay for the runway expansion.

The first touched on what Tancredi described as RPA’s “poor planning” and their failure to investigate existing robust research that was conducted on Jamaica Bay.

The second concerned the filling of the large single borrow pit in Grassy Bay, as this will lead to other proposals to fill in the other borrow pits in the bay. Borrow pits are holes in the bottom of the bay when sand was removed many years ago to build JFK airport, said Tanacredi.

The third concern involved recreational and subsistence fishing. “The bay is not only a major economic stimulus for the community but the fishing community at the bay fish for their families,” said Tanacredi.

He also cited the issue of bird hazards and the dangers of the laughing gulls being sucked into the engine of airplanes.

“The nature of the proposal is outrageous,” said Daniel Mundy Jr., president of Broad Channel Civic Association.

Currently, the water in the bay is at its cleanest in recent years due to a number of restoration projects, such as the $16 million salt water marsh restoration and another ongoing project to reintroduce oysters into the bay, said Mundy.

The failure to include the RPA 1973 report and the other significant studies indicated a bias on the part of the RPA, stated Mundy.

Port Authority Representative Edward Knoesel, manager for environmental services, at the Aviation Department of JFK Airport, and Natural Resources Protective Assocaition's Ida Sanoff, and one of the Jamaica Bay Task Force's dogged advocates. (Photo: ©Vivian R. Carter)

“The Port Authority has no plans to fill Jamaica Bay,” Mr. Knoesel repeatedly said. “This is a study. We have not made the decision yet. We view this report as a start in the conversation."

Read More:

Proposed JFK Expansion Stirs Controversy with Environmentalists

The Epoch Times - April 13, 2011 - By Margaret Lau

Extending JFK runways meets opposition

The Queens Courier - April 12, 2011 - By Shiryn Ghermezian

Local residents fighting plan to extend JFK runways into Jamaica Bay

New York Daily News - April 7, 2011 - By Lisa L. Colangelo

A House of Cards Faces Into the Winds of Jamaica Bay

Rockviv - April 12, 2011 - By Vivian Carter

Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers

JFK Expansion Plan Unsettles Residents By Jamaica Bay

NY1 - March 23, 2011 - By Mari Fagel

Environmentalists Speak Out Against JFK Runway

Expansion

Into Gateway National Park

Who: Representatives from dozens of environmental, recreational, civic groups, agency and elected officials as well as members of the fishing and boating community.

What: Town Hall Meeting Speaking Out Against Port Authority Proposal

Where: American Legion Hall - 209 Crossbay Blvd. Broad Channel (718) 474 -5029

When: 6:30 p.m.

The Jamaica Bay Task Force Group is hosting its first meeting to respond to the highly controversial report by the Regional Plan Association (RPA) which calls for the destruction of up to four hundred acres of wetlands in Gateway National Park located in Jamaica Bay to accommodate runway expansion at JFK Airport. An act of Congress would be required to make this unprecedented change to a National Park.

Such an expansion of JFK would have unacceptable adverse impacts on Jamaica Bay, irreversibly harming what is not simply New York City’s ecological crown jewel but a wetlands and estuarine area of national importance. Hundreds of acres of the Bay would need to be permanently filled in something currently prohibited by federal law.

Jamaica Bay encompasses more than 25, 000 acres of water, marsh, meadowland, beaches, dunes and forests in Brooklyn and Queens, all accessible by subway. It contains a federal wildlife refuge the size of 10 Central Parks. It provides nursery and foraging, habitat for the region’s fisheries and other marine life. Bay waters adjacent to JFK are renowned for some of the region’s best fishing for bluefish and striped bass — and is a critical bird habitat area that is visited annually by what is estimated to be nearly 20 percent of North America's bird species. It is also home to various endangered and threatened species – from sea turtles to peregrine falcons. Intrusive commercial jet noise would potentially increase Wildlife conflicts with aviation safety. Water pollution from the airport - which currently discharges run-off from the millions of gallons of toxic de-icing fluids used each winter directly into the Bay - would likely increase.

Dozens of environmental, recreational, and civic groups are vehemently opposed to this plan. On March 17, a letter was sent to Port Authority Executive Director Christopher O. Ward to voice their strong opposition (see attached). The groups are asking that the Port Authority consider other available alternatives for meeting the region’s airport capacity needs. The letter was signed by 21 groups.

The report,"Upgrading to World Class – The future of the New York Regions Airports" http://www.rpa.org/pdf/RPA-Upgrading-to-World-Class.pdf (pages 150-154) was funded by the Port Authority and developed by a consortium of major federal, state, city and county government stakeholders. No local environmental input was sought.

Background:

The report proposes expanding JFK Airport further into the waters of Jamaica Bay as a means of accommodating anticipated growth in the number of passengers at the regions three airports. This radical plan calls for the filling in and paving over of four hundred acres of wetlands within the boundaries of Gateway National Park. The plan has been met with shock and outrage from leaders in the environmental and civic communities all of whom were not consulted during the two years of the report's creation. The destruction of protected lands within a National Park on such a scale are unprecedented and many feel the effects will ripple throughout the bay. Such critical ecological factors as: Tidal flow, salt marsh habitat, critical mud flat habitat, marine fisheries, and water quality will be impacted on a massive scale. In addition the report seems to have a number of inaccuracies and omissions that are in direct contrast to the facts regarding these impacted areas.

Thursday night's meeting will have four presenters who will respond to the report, speak to the impact these proposals will have and present documentation of the marine and bird life that is so abundant in this area. The meeting will have representatives of the various environmental groups working around the bay, agency representatives, and elected officials or their representatives as well as members of the fishing and boating community.

Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers - Statement

The Jamaica Bay Ecowatchers (JBEW’s) stand firmly opposed to the addition of new runways and/or the extension of new or existing runways into Jamaica Bay. This proposal would do irreperable harm to the fragile ecosytem of Jamaica Bay. As the only designated wildlife refuge in the National Parks System Jamaica Bay is host to over one third of all bird species in North America making it one of the most significant bird sanctuaries in the Northeastern United States. In addition over 60 reptiles and dozens of species of fish can be found in this Bay.

The proposal by the Port Authority to fill in and destroy up to 400 acres of wetlands and shoreline area is ill advised and without recent precedent. The report, which is the basis for these plans, appears to be seriously flawed as it refers to the impacted areas as “dead” zones when in fact they are some of the most productive areas on the Northeast coast. Home to spring and summer runs of striped bass and blue fish which number in the tens of thousands this area is rich in natural resources. At a time when tremendous improvements, including marshland and oyster restoration, osprey revival , and water quality upgrades, have been achieved this proposal would serve to deliver an impact that may be fatal to the bay . In addition to the huge loss of habitat and impact to bird and fish populations the expansion would curtail tidal flow and inhibit necessary flushing action leaving a large hypoxic lifeless area in the entire northern section of the bay.

"The JBEW's recognize that the airports today have too little capacity for growing demands and have congestion and delays but the expansion of JFK Airport at the expense of the environment is totally unacceptable," said Dan Mundy Sr. founder of the JBEW'S.

These startling proposals were unveiled at a recent conference titled “Upgrading to World Class – The future of the New York Regions Airports." The meeting was hosted by the Regional Plan Association and attended by hundreds of representatives from the airport industry on January 27, 2011 . The report, see link http://www.rpa.org/pdf/RPA-Upgrading-to-World-Class.pdf (pages 150-154) was developed by a consortium of major federal, state, city and county government stakeholders. No local environmental input was sought and at a Q & A period, during the conference, Dan Mundy Jr. pointed out had that involvement been included the document produced may not have been so flawed.

The JBEW’s suggest that the federal government should fully fund the FAA’s NexGen 1 & 2 programs that will transform air traffic control from the present ground-based technologies to satellite-based technology. This action will produce capacity increases for each airport and enable the adjustment of flight schedules dynamically and provide for saver airline travel. Also the expanded use of outlying airports with improved transportation and managing demand at the present airports will solve many of the problems.

NYC Park Advocates Inc. is a non-profit, non-partisan watchdog group dedicated to restoring public funding, improving public parks, increasing public recreation programs, expanding open space and accessibility, and achieving the equitable distribution of these vital services in New York City for all. We are the only non-profit park advocacy group dedicated to all City, State and Federal parkland in New York City. For more information please visit us at nycparkadvocates.org

###