NEIGHBORS OF DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT

April 14, 2014

Mr. Mark Duebner, DirectorDepartment of AviationDallas Love Field8008 Cedar Springs Road, L8 16Dallas, TX 75235-2852

Re: DEMAND TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS ATDALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT

Dear Mr. Duebner:

Thank you for your April 10, 2014 response to Councilmember Scott Griggs ("theDuebner Memo") relating to master planning activities, including airport taxiway andfacility upgrades, a major expansion of Runway 13-31, and a 480-acre mixed-usedevelopment at Dallas Executive Airport ("DEA"). We understand that the City of Dallas,Department of Aviation is DEA's "Airport Sponsor."

After careful review of your response (including attachments A-D), we have reluctantlycome to the conclusion that such activities have been carried out in apparent violation ofthe National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ("NEPA"), Presidential Executive Order12898 - Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations andLow-Income Populations, and 14 CFR Part 150 - Airport Noise Compatibility Planning.In addition, it appears that the Department of Aviation has also disregarded relatedportions of the following FAA orders and guidance: Advisory Circular AC 150/5070-68 -Airport Master Plans, Chapter 4; the FAA Desk Reference for Airport Actions, Chapter105; Order 5050.48 - National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) - ImplementingInstructions for Airport Projects; and Order 5100.38C - Airport Improvement Handbookas well as U.S. Department of Transportation Order 5610.2(a) - Actions to AddressEnvironmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations.

The basis for our finding is a belief that the City of Dallas provided false grantassurances to the Texas Department of Transportation, Aviation Division and the FAA inconnection with multiple applications for, and receipts of, Federal funds via the AirportImprovement Program ("AlP"). The assurances that we believe to be false are:

"(The airport sponsor) will comply with all applicable Federal laws, regulations,executive orders, poticies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to theapplication, acceptance and use of Federal funds for this project including but notlimited to the following: [...]

o National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 - 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq. [... ]o Executive Order 12898 - Environmental Justice [...]o 14 CFR 150 - Airport noise compatibility planning [...]

"The project is reasonably consistent with plans (existing at the time ofsubmission of this application) of public agencies that are authorized by the Statein which the project is located to plan for the development of the areasurrounding the airport."

Mr. MarkDuebner (April 14, 2014)Page 2 of 10

"It has given fair consideration to the interest of communities in or near where theproject may be located."

"In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a majorrunway extension, it has afforded the opportunity for public hearings for thepurpose of considering the economic, social, and environmental effects of theairport or runway location and its consistency with goals and objectives of suchplanning as has been carried out by the community and it shall, when requestedby the Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearings to theSecretary. Further, for such projects, it has on its management board eithervoting representation from the communities where the project is located or hasadvised the communities that they have the right to petition the Secretaryconcerning a proposed project."

Our belief that violations of Federal law may have occurred was reinforced after receiptof a copy of an e-mail from City Councilmember Vonciel Jones Hill 1 to CityCouncilmember Scott Griggs dated April 11, 2014. In her e-mail, Judge Hill stated:"(Judge Hill) felt certain that (Councilmember Griggs) had done what (Griggs) needed todo to inform (his) district." This indicates that Judge Hill is unfamiliar with therequirements of Federal law. It is the "airport sponsor" (in this case the City of Dallas,Department of Aviation), rather than an individual City Councilmember who isresponsible for assuring compliance with AlP grant assurances and it is concerning thatthe City of Dallas' most senior elected official with direct oversight over transportationpolicy appears to lack this knowledge.

Background

Our community was first made aware of the City's plans on February 3, 2014, followingcoverage by local media outlets CBS-OFW and The Dallas Morning News. According toCBS-OFW's Steve Pickett: u. now the city-owned airport ... is set to spread its wings,by extending and reconstructing its major runway. A longer landing strip, CityCouncilmember Tennell Atkins says, in order to land something much larger. l. ..]Atkinsand others claim larger, heavier corporate jets, the same seen flying into Love Field orAddison's airport, would bring more revenue to the City, more office and businessdevelopment around the Oak Cliff airport, with a longer, revamped runway, atExecutive." Confusingly, during the same news story, Atkins was also featured oncamera making the following statement: "The community gonna (sic) be involved, everystep of the way. '~,3

1 Judge Hill appears to be the Chairperson of the Dallas City Council Transportation &Trinity River Project Committee, which has jurisdiction over Dallas Executive Airport(conflicting information on the Dallas City Hall website indicates a no-lonqer-exlstentTransportation Committee chaired by Linda Koop, a former City Councilmember).2 http://dfv.l.cbslocal.comlvideo/9803948-controversial-change-at-dallas-executive-airport!3 As indicated in Attachment C to the Ouebner Memo, the "Master Plan Update FinalMeeting" was held at 10:00 a.m. on July 19,2012.

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 3 of 10

That same day, TheOal/as Morning News' Scott Goldstein reported, U(t)he project. ..includes the expansion of one of two runways to 7,000 feet. That will make it capable ofhandling the larger, heavier planes favored by many corporations, officials say.Currently, the longer runway measures 6,400 feet. [... J 'The length is very importantbecause we said 7,000 feet,' Atkins said. That's the magic number:"

Immediately upon hearing the news.we began attempting to contact various Dallas CityCouncilmembers and Department of Aviation staff in an effort to learn more about whatwas happening and to demand that we be consulted about the project. Of course, wealso reviewed the DEA Master Plan on the Dallas City Hall website." On April 1, 2014,representatives of our community held our first meeting with a Department of Aviationemployee. in which we registered our concerns about not being consulted about thisaction. This resulted in a community meeting with you and other Department of Aviationstaff members on April 3, 2014.

During the community meeting on April 3, you sated that DEA was "maintaining thestatus quo," "there are no plans to expand the airport," "no plans are being made forlarger aircraft" and that the City was merely repaving the runway and making safetyimprovements. At one point, in response to a question, you briefly pointed to a corner ofa Power Point slide that was visible on screen, and said: "You can go here for moreinformation." One of us quickly recorded the URL (www.dallasexec.airportstudy.com).before you removed the slide from the screen. A subsequent visit to that webpagerevealed it to be the homepage of a TOTALLY DIFFERENT master plan than the onelocated at www.dallascityhall.com .

No link to the DEA master plan website is available from either the Dallas ExecutiveAirport page at the official City of Dallas website or the "unusual" DEA homepage, andmembers of our community believe that only recently was a link to that URL placed atthe "Facility Overview" subdomain page of the DEA website. In addition, forensicanalysis revealed the DEA Master Plan website to contain a privacy cloaking deviceknown as a "robots.txt." script file that renders it undiscoverable by internet searchengines such as Google, Bing, and Yahoo". The DEA website also hosts a "robots.txt."privacy cloaking script. 7

Master Plan Update - Public Participation Requirements

As indicated in the Duebner Memo, authoritative guidance with respect to publicparticipation is provided by FAA Advisory Circular AC 150/5070-68 - Airport MasterPlans. According to this document:

4 http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2014/02ldallas-executive-airports-35-million-runway-reconstruction-and-extension-project;.could-start-this-summer.htmll5 http://www.dallascityhall.com/pdf/RedbirdAirportMasterPlan.pdf6 www.dallasexec.airportstudy.com/robots.txt7 http://www.dallasexecairport.com/robots.txt

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14. 2014)Page 4 of 10

"(t)he first task in a master plan study ... is the creation of a publicinvolvement program. 8 Over the course of the study, the publicinvolvement program will encourage information sharing and collaborationamong the airport sponsor... residents... and... the general public.Collectively, these various groups form the stakeholders who have aninterest in the outcome of the study. An effective public involvementprogram should provide these stakeholders with an early opportunity tocomment, before major decisions are made; provide adequate notice ofopportunities for their involvement; and should provide for regular forumsthroughout the study. ,I)

The FAA Environmental Desk Reference for Airport Actions also provides guidance atChapter 10:

"CEQ notes it is important to recognize that the cultural, historic, or socialconcerns of a low-income or minority population amplify that population'sperceptions of an action's effects. Consequently, reaching out to localcommunity leaders. .. or other suitable spokespeople early in theenvironmental process is a very important step in completing efficientlyand effectively an environmental justice analysis. ,,10

Timing of Public Outreach Program - Federal Guidance

The FAA repeatedly emphasizes the importance of early public outreach. to guardagainst situations in which an airport sponsor plans a project in secret, and thenpresents it to the public as a fait accompli:

"Public involvement has its greatest impact during the early stages of theplanning process, before irreversible decisions have been made andwhile many alternatives can be considered. When the stakeholdersbecome involved before major decisions or commitments are made, theplanners can better deal with issues of community concern and improvethe chances of reaching a consensus on controversial matters. Ifstakeholders become aware that the important decisions were madebefore they were invited to participate, they may distrust the planners. Inaddition, when public involvement opportunities are not provided until latein the planning process, there may not be enough time to make significantchanges. The tendency, instead, will be for planners to merely defendpreviously determined courses of action, rather than exploring any newalternatives. An effective public involvement program will usually avoidsuch an undesirable outcome. ,>11

8 http.llwww.faa.gov/documentUbrary/media/advisory circular/1S0-S070-6811S0 S070 6b chg1.pdf, p. 17.9 Ibid.10

http://www.faa.gov/documentUbrary/media/FAA Desk Reference for Airport ActionsChapter 10 EJ.pdf, p.3.11 AC 150/5070-6B. 401. p. 17.

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 5 of 10

Methods of Public Outreach - Federal Guidance

The FAA provides very specific guidance as to how airport sponsors are to reach out tothe public. Merely circulating "flyers and banners" to tenants located at an airport doesnot suffice.

"The study team may use a variety of forums, such as committees, publicinformation meetings, small group meetings, and public awarenesscampaigns in a public involvement program. [. ..] In addition, it may benecessary to consider the special needs and sensitivities of low incomeand minority populations, consistent with the provisions in ExecutiveOrder 12898 [. . .] Committees that facilitate the public involvementprogram often include a ... Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). [. ..] TheCAC serves as a sounding board and information exchange group forstakeholders, reviews the planning team's plans and proposals, interactswith the planning team, and finally gives its recommendations on thefinished plan to the airport sponsor. The membership of the CAC shouldbe representative of all stakeholders.

"In reviewing the master plan ... the CAC will weigh the recommendationsagainst community goals, values and needs. 12

''An 'open house' forum with interactive information stations staffed byknowledgeable staff or consultants is more informal, yet a very effectivemethod by which to engage the public and stakeholders in soliciting theiropinions on development options. A public information meeting using theopen house format will permit stakeholders to visit a meeting site at theirconvenience and visit with planners on an informal, one-on-one basis.[. .. J If a more formal meeting is desired, starting with an open house andmoving into a more formal forum can be effective. [. ..] Public informationmeetings are typically held in the evening to provide most people theopportunity to attend. ,,13

''An effective public awareness campaign is an essential part of the publicinvolvement program. It is instrumental in generating initial stakeholderinvolvement, in maintaining stakeholder interest throughout the program,and in keeping the general public informed of the progress of the study.

1) Informational and Educational Materials - Informational materialsdesigned to educate a broad audience about all aspects of the studymay be distributed to stakeholders. These materials might include factsheets, flyers, press releases, newspaper ads, and generalinformation packets. Planners should provide translations of thismaterial if the airport is located in an area where English is not thefirst language for a large percentage of the residents. A mechanism

12 Ibid. 402, p. 17.13 Ibid.

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 6 of 10

should be provided for individuals or organizations to add their namesto a mailing list to receive these materials.

2) Web Pages - Web pages, with interactive or self-guidedpresentations, as well as electronic copies of study documents, areincreasingly used as part of a public awareness campaign. Plannersoften link the master plan web page to the airport's web site. [. . .]

"Experience shows that planners must gain the confidence of thestakeholders and overcome their initial concerns before any real progresscan be achieved. Extensive public involvement from start to finish in theplanning process enhances all plans and proposals and satisfies thegoals of long-range planning. ,,14

Appendix C includes both "(cjitlzens and others with a strong economic or social tie tothe airport" as well as "neighborhood associations" in its "List of Potentialstakehotders.';"

Documentation of the Public Outreach Program - Federal Guidance

To remove any doubt as to whether or not the public was actually involved, the FAArequires documentation of the public involvement program, with a record to be placed inan appendix of the Master Plan:

"Documentation of the public involvement program should appear in anappendix to the Master Plan. Copies of committee rosters, meetingminutes, advertisements, newsletters, and other elements of the PublicAwareness Campaign can be f/aced in an appendix as the official recordof the public involvement prog'fm. This documentation should be revisedregularly over the course of t e study rather than being prepared at theend of the process ."16

Department of Aviation's Failure to Comply with Public Involvement Requirements

The Department of Aviation app~rs to have ignored substantially all federalrequirements with respect to public e gagement in the DEA master plan process whichincluded the development of a new irport layout plan ("ALP"). As indicated in theDuebner Memo, a Planning Advisory (Committee was formed and met four times in 2011and 2012, yet no members of the commumty participated in the process. You havebeen unable to recall or provide any documentation that any efforts were made toengage the public at any point in the process." Indeed, the PAC appears to haveconsisted primarily of City staff and its consultants; meetings #3 and #4 of the PACappear to have been attended exclusively by City staff and its consultants. 18

14 Ibid.15 Ibid, Appendix c.16 Ibid. 40S.b.17 Duebner Memo, p.2.18 Ibid., Attachment D.

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 7 of 10

Although an "open house" was evidently held on July 19,2012, there is no evidence thatthe public was notified of this event."

Department of Aviation Misrepresentations to the Public, the FAA & ElectedOfficials

The DEA master plan listed at the official Dallas City Hall website is apparently differentfrom the master plan you appear to have submitted to TxDOT and the FAA. Moreover,the heretofore unknown DEA website contains the following statement, which appears tobe false: "A series of public workshops are included as part of the Master Plancoordination so that information can be presented to the public. These open-houseworkshops give the public an opportunity to view the working materials, ask questions,and provide feedback with the consultant and airport administration." Furthermore, a"Notice of Public Information Workshop regarding the ongoing Airport Master Plan,"scheduled for Thursday, July 19, 2012 references a meeting of which no documentedrecord of public notice or participation exists. 20, 21

The Master Plan hosted at the DEA master plan website states: 'To ensure the MasterPlan reflects the concerns of the public, the local communities, airport tenants, airportusers, and businesses throughout the region, the Master Plan process will include anactive public outreach program to solicit comments and suggestions which will then beincluded in the final Master Plan ... ,,22 No such public outreach program was everconducted. It further states: "The Master Plan Update will accomplish these goals andobjectives by carrying out the following:... Conduct active and productive publicinvolvement throughout the planning process. ,,23 This did not occur.

The Master Plan references "a graphical depiction of the elements and process involvedin the study" located at "Exhibit A. ,,24 An examination of that exhibit reveals it to describea process that never occurred. More specifically, there was no "Public InformationWorkshop" held prior to the development of "Airport Plans" and there was no interactionbetween the Planning Advisory Committee ("PAC") and the Public Information Workshop("PIW") at that time, since the failure to hold such PIW would have made such interactionimpossible. In addition there was no interaction between the PAC and PIW aftercompletion of the Financial Management and Development Program, since the final PACmeeting was held prior to the only PIW.2s An annotated version of that exhibit isattached to our letter, also as Exhibit A

Continuing, the Master Plan states: 'To assist in the development of the Master PlanUpdate, a cross-section of community members, stakeholders and interested persons

19 Ibid, p.2; Attachment C.20 http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/meetings/21 Duebner Memo, p.2.22 http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/files/2012112I1ntroduction-DF.pdf p. i23 Ibid. p. ii-iii.241b'd ...I . p. III.25 Duebner Memo, Attachment C (E-mail from Lana Furra, Assistant Director of Aviationdated July 16, 2012)

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 8 of 10

have been identified to act in an advisory role in the development of the Master Plan.Members of this Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) will review reports and providecomments throughout the study to help ensure that a realistic, viable plan isdeveloped. ,126 No community members participated in the PAC and the third and fourthPAC meetings consisted entirely of City staff and their advisors."

With respect to additional public engagement, the Master Plan states: "To assist in thereview process, draft phase reports will be prepared at various milestones in theplanning process. The production of tirett phase reports allows for timely input andreview during each step within the Master Plan to ensure that al/ issues are fullyaddressed as the recommended program develops. Public workshops are also includedas part of the plan coordination so that information can be presented to the public. Theseopen-house workshops give the public an opportunity to view the working materials, askquestions, and provide feedback with the consultant and airport staff. Exhibit A depictsthe project work flow as it relates to PAC meetings and public workshops. ,,28 No publicworkshops were held; moreover, the information you presented at our April 3, 2014meeting appears to have been substantially misleading and incomplete, as it iscontradicted by the Master Plan.

The Master Plan document also alludes to a website: 'The material presented in theMaster Plan is made available to the public on the Internet via a website dedicated to thestudy at: ~dallasexec.airportstudy.com .,,29 As previously discussed, this websiteURL was ne er publicly disclosed, nor was the Master Plan document publiclycirculated. In addition, both the DEA website and DEA Master Plan website utilize theprivacy cloaking device known as "robots.txt," which inhibits their discovery by Internetsearch engines. Although a subdomain page of the DEA website now contains a link tothe Master Plan website, we believe that such link was added only recently, and theprivacy cloaking device at the DEA website prevents an audit of the history of changesto that subdomain page.

During our meeting with you at Dallas Executive Airport on April 3,2014, you stated thatyou were maintaining the "status quo" and merely making "runway and safetyimprovements." This is in direct contradiction to the statements made byCouncilmember Atkins on February 3, 2014 to CBS DFW and the Dallas Morning Newspreviously referenced, in which Atkins describes a program to lengthen Runway 13-31 toaccommodate jet aircraft similar to the ones presently utilizing Love Field. It alsocontradicts the plans depicted in the Master Plan concept. 30

We believe you sent the Master Plan to the Texas Department of Transportation,Aviation Division and/or the FAA in connection with your receipt of Federal funds underthe AlP grant program.

26 http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/files/2012112I1ntroduction-OF .pdt p. v27 Duebner Memo, Attachment 0 (Planning Advisory Committee Meeting AttendanceRecords dated June 15, 2011, August 25,2011, December 8, 2011, and July 19, 2012).28 http://dallasexec.airportstudy.comlfiles/20121121lntroduction-DF .pdf p. V29 Ibid.30 http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/files/20 121121Chapter-5-DF .pdt

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 9 of 10

On April 10, 2014, you sent the Duebner Memo to Councilmember Scott Griggs,previously referenced. In it, you stated, "In the Master Plan Development Guidelines,one public meeting is suggested for an airport of this size ... ,,31In fact, as alreadymentioned above, the Master Plan discusses holding multiple public meetings, includingfour PAC meetings and two PIW meetings.32 You also stated: "A public input meetingwas held during the development of the Master Plan on July 19, 2012." (emphasisadded)33 In fact, as indicated in that same document, the Master Plan PAC held its finalmeeting earlier that same day.34 You also stated "(c)ommunity members, stakeholdersand interested parties acted in an advisory role in a Planning Advisory Committee (PAC)that provided comments and reviewed plans. ,,35 The PAC "Meeting AttendanceRecords" indicate that no community members were involved in the PAC and that two ofthe meetings were attended exclusively by City staff and its consultants." Additionally, .you informed Councilmember Griggs: "(t)o be clear, we are currently an ARC 0-11airport.Dallas Executive Airport will remain an ARC 0-11airport.?" In fact, the Master Plan states: "theairport... will be planned to meet ARC D_lIl.n38Not only that, the Master Plan discusses the planto upgrade the airport to ARC 0-111extensively. ARC 0-11Idesign reguirements appear to bedriving the entire Runway 13-31 extension program.39 Finally, with respect to Runway 17-35, you stated: "The Department of Aviation has no intent... to extend Runway 17-35.,,40This in direct contradiction with the Master Plan you submitted, which reads: "Thedevelopment concept includes an extension to Runway 17-35 and parallel Taxiway D400 feet north and 300 feet south to provide a total runway length of 4,500 feet... thisadditional length will enable a larger portion of the general aviation fleet mix to utilize therunway when needed for wind conditions or for times when primary Runway 13-31 isclosed for maintenance or emergency purposes."? .

Demand

Due to the numerous violations of Federal laws, regulations & FAA orders that appear tohave occurred and appear to be ongoing at DEA, and the false and misleading mannerin which you are describing your plans to the public and elected officials, we herebydemand that you IMMEDIATELY CEASE AND DESIST from violating Federal laws,including all applicable Federal environmental and aviation regulations, at DallasExecutive Airport.

If we do not receive an affirmative response from the City of Dallas by Friday, April 18 at5 p.m., we intend to seek relief from the Federal government by petitioning the FAA toinitiate an investigation of the City of Dallas, Department of Aviation in connection with

31Duebner Memo, p.232http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/files/20 12112/Introduction-DF .pdt33 Duebner Memo, p.234Ibid, Attachment C.35Ibid, p. 236Ibid, Attachment D37Ibid, p. 338http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/files/20 12112/Chapter-3-DF .pdt, p. 3-539http://daliasexec.airportstudy.comlfiles/20121121Chapter -5-0F .pdt40Ouebner Memo, p. 5.41 http://dallasexec.airportstudy.com/files/20 12112/Chapter-5-0F .pdf . p. 5-5

14 CFR Part 13 Enforcement Complaint - Exhibit A (Annotated Draft Final Master Plan, p. iv)

Public input process; Federal violations - National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; 14 CFRPart 150;Executive Order 12898; FAAAdvisory Circular 150/5070-6B; FAADesk Reference for Airport Actions, Ch. 10 5; FAAOrder 5050.4; FAAOrder 5100.38C; DOTOrder 561O.2(a)

DALLAS EXBCUTIVE AIRPORT

Airport Master Plan Draft Final

Exhibit A: MASTER PLAN PROCESS

I~ Airport FadlitlM Alnp"", nd AI, T,.l'I\e AclMty A. SodoeconomlcDau Loul Pl4lnnlng and \.&nd u..

ALPgeneratedduring this

phase included a"major runwayextension" -upgrade fromARC0-11to ARC

0-1111

~':~)~~~_::i;,')'~.' cc '" '; '. EYJlIIlIt.CIII?eI>tcondlt!onJ ,"r"'t ".",'".:! ;".:'~'.'" .nd IdcnllfydeY.loJ)l!*rt that , " ,> 'Z~;'.>::....;~::':~ai~furtl_.smctr ' ... ,' ", ="

iv I Introduction

June 15, 2011

Community not askedto participate;

3 airport tenants inattendance

Decision to upgradeOEAfrom ARC- 011toARC- 011Imade here

August 25, 2011

No publicannouncement;1 airport tenant in

attendance

December 8 2011

No publicannouncement;

no public participation

Meeting neverscheduled or held

July 19, 2012

No publicannouncement;

no public participation

No linkage betweenPAC& public

information workshop

Scheduled after finalPACmeeting;

announced only totenants;

no meetingdocumentation

Mr. Mark Duebner (April 14, 2014)Page 10 of 10

possible false assurances provided to TxDOT and/or the FAA in connection with the AlPgrant program. Given our standing as individuals and stakeholders "directly affected" byDepartment of Aviation activities at DEA we will be seeking relief under 14 CFR Part 13or 14 CFR Part 16 at our option.

NEIGHBORS OF DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT

Cc: Tennell Atkins, Mayor Pro Tem, District 6Scott Griggs, Councilmember, District 1Vonciel Jones Hill, Council member, District 3A.C. Gonzalez, City ManagerTheresa O'Donnell, Interim Assistant City Manager

Attachment