c/o PDK Watch
P. O. Box 49325
Atlanta, GA 30359

August 13, 2000

Senator Max Cleland
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510-1005

Dear Senator Cleland:

In May, 1988 the Federal Aviation Administration argued in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (No. 87-8784) that, among other things in the Ruling, that the "...terms of the project forbade introduction of new types of aircraft and heavier loads." It further stated "the proposal explicitly maintains the current loading requirement of 66,000 pounds dual wheel." It stated the "... proposal expressly maintains the current weight limitation of 66,000 pounds. The proposed runway extension is not designed to accommodate operations by aircraft larger than the ones currently using PDK. Therefore, the petitioners fear that the runway extension will cause a significant impact because of the introduction of larger types of aircraft and heavier loads is unjustified." The Ruling also stated that "...speculation as to the use of PDK by larger types of aircraft and heavier loads could never be a cumulative effect because the proposal itself forbids that effect."

Earlier this year the weight limit was raised to 75,000 pounds dual wheel and planes exceeding this weight are routinely using the airport. The FAA is fully aware of this and has tacitly, if not formally, approved the change.

Would you please address the following questions and let me know the results?

Since the petitioners, on behalf of the communities affected by the extension, were led to believe the weight limits could not exceed 66,000 pounds, what is the basis for changing the position the FAA argued in court and which formed a significant part of the Court's ruling? What authority did they use for accepting these changes to the Ruling? How can a Ruling apparently be overturned by an agency of the United States without consulting with the petitioners in this action?

Thank you very much for your support in this serious matter.

Sincerely,

Charles L. Feltus