Bucks Residents For Responsible Airport Management
90 West Afton Avenue, PMB 171, Yardley, PA 19067
Tele: 215-493-6867 Info@brram.org
History
Since 1969, the Trenton-Mercer Airport has been incrementally expanding its physical size and capacity through federal airport improvement grants and entitlements. These changes have cumulatively altered TTN's operational environment. Residents from Bucks and Mercer are now experiencing the cumulative impact from the combination of these changes. Several significant changes are noted as follows:
 |
Instrument Landing System (ILS) Installed on Runway 6/24 (Bucks County) |
|
High Intensity Lighting Installed Runway 6/24 |
|
Scotch Road Relocation, Houses Purchased & Demolished |
|
Runway 6/24 Extended from 5,200 FT to 6,000 FT (No EA) |
|
Construction of 20,000 Sq Ft Terminal (No EA) |
|
Aircraft & Helicopter Maintenance & Refueling Services |
|
Aircraft & Helicopter Chartering Services |
|
Corporate Aviation (New Pfizer Terminal, Corporate Aviation Hangars, LLC) |
|
Flight Training Schools (Touch & Go) |
|
Military, NJ Air National Guard |
|
Commercial Turboprop Service |
|
Commercial Jet Carrier Service (No EA, 10 Failures) |
|
Foreign Free Trade Zone Designation |
|
Proposed Terminal Enhancement Program & CIP (See Diagram) |
|
Solicitation of High-Frequency/Low-Cost Commercial Jet Service (Southwest....) |
TTN's present configurement and operations favor Bucks County airspace usage. Runway 6/24 has been deemed preferential. Other runways are available, but only runway 6 (Bucks County) has been equipped with an Instrument Landing System (ILS). Much of the air traffic arriving and departing from other TTN runways also uses Bucks County airspace. The airport's voluntary noise abatement program is ineffective since many pilots neglect to comply. Due to State boundaries, Bucks County has virtually no voice as to the level of air traffic being routed over its communities.
The airport introduced and reintroduced scheduled passenger commercial jet service without first preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA). The EA would have evaluated the impacts of commercial jet service to airport neighbors and suggested possible mitigation measures.
Even though scheduled passenger commercial jet service has a long history of failure at TTN, Mercer County is aggressively pursing a new terminal to attract high-frequency/low-cost commercial jet service (Southwest, Jet Blue, Midway....). After nearly seven years of evaluation through an Environmental Assessment, the FAA determined that any economic and/or socioeconomic impacts to airport neighbors resulting from a new terminal would be "insignificant." On February 23, 2006, the FAA issued a Finding of No Significant Impact/Record of Determination (FONSI/ROD).
Terminal Enhancement Program, Trenton-Mercer Airport., June 1998
Schematic overhead of the expanded terminal drawing.
This is the 44,000 square foot terminal plan with 4 jet-bridges.
Each gate servicing a Boeing 737-300 jet.
Bucks Residents for Responsible Airport Management, Inc. (BRRAM) adamantly disputes the FAA's FONSI/ROD and contends that the FAA is an advocate for TTN expansion and has conveniently overlooked thirty years of incremental changes which have cumulatively altered the airport's size and operational environment.
On April 29, 2006 the New York Times reported that for thirty years the FAA has been studying the possibility of adding a fourth regional airport to reduce the congestion at Newark Liberty International, JFK International, and La Guardia and that the Trenton Mercer Airport is under consideration. If the FAA has known for thirty years that they are going to need a fourth regional airport to remedy future capacity issues at Newark, JFK, and La Guardia, and TTN is being considered, then how can they overlook the cumulative impact (past, present & foreseeable future) from the last 30+ years of TTN build-ups? After almost seven years of evaluation, how could they even consider a FONSI/ROD knowing all along that TTN was under consideration as a possible fourth regional airport?
BRRAM also questions the actual need for the project due to the airport's last minute change in preferred alternatives from four jet-gates to two jet-gates, their sudden retraction from the pursuit of commercial passenger jet service, and their long history of commercial service failures. The change in preferred alternatives came shortly after the FAA advised that the four jet-gate alternative would trigger an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Would it be fiscally responsible to expect taxpayers to fund a new $25 million+ terminal if there is no commercial passenger jet service?
BRRAM believes that TTN's thirty year incremental build-up to possible regional airport status is an OBVIOUS foreseeable cumulative impact and that their ultimate goal is to attract and maintain high-frequency/low-cost commercial passenger jet service such as Southwest, JetBlue, Midway, etc. BRRAM also believes that the last minute change in preferred alternatives and the sudden withdrawal from the pursuit of commercial passenger jet service was designed to avoid further environmental review of the airport under an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
On June 6, 2006, Lower Makefield Township and BRRAM, through the legal office of Potter & Dickson, appealed the FAA's Finding of No Significant Impact / Record of Decision (FONSI/ROD) in the United States Courts of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia, PA. You can view a copy of the filed appeal by clicking on the following hyperlink:
In November 2006, Lower Makefield Township and BRRAM entered into mediation, under supervision of the United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, Philadelphia, PA, to try to negotiate a reasonable compromise with the FAA . Mediation formally ended almost a year later without settlement. The appeal is now headed back to the court.