FAA May Close Oxford Airport Air Traffic Control Tower

As part of a goal to cut $600 million in costs during 2013 because of federal budget Sequestration, the FAA is making plans to close towers in Oxford, Danbury, Groton, New Haven, Bridgeport and Hartford.


Waterbury-Oxford Airport's air traffic control tower is scheduled to close in April along with five other airport towers in Connecticut because of the federal budget impasse. 

The Federal Secretary of Transportation sent letters on Feb. 22 to airports, trade associations and others saying the sequestration (partial government shutdown) will also lead to longer flight times because of fewer air traffic controllers.

"Flights to major cities like New York, Chicago and San Francisco could experience delays of up to 90 minutes during peak hours because we will have fewer controllers on staff," Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood wrote to the Department of Defense, Airlines for America, the National Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, among others. 

The Danbury Air Traffic Control Tower employs six people. In his letter, LaHood wrote the agency will have to cut $600 million because of the sequestration, and that may mean closing 100 air traffic control towers nationwide.

The smaller airports will lose their towers, those airports with fewer than 150,000 take-offs and landings a year. It will also lead to furloughs for 47,000 FAA employees of one day per pay period, but up to as many as two days per pay period between April and September.

"We also expect that as airlines estimate the potential impacts of these furloughs, they will change their schedules and cancel flights," LaHood wrote.

Danbury Airport Administrator Paul Estefan said Danbury has about 80,000 take-offs and landings a year, which means the Danbury tower is likely to close in April when the FAA sets a closure date.

LaHood's letter includes a list of all the airports likely to lose their air traffic control towers in April. In Connecticut, those are Waterbury-Oxford in Oxford, Igor I. Sikorsky Memorial Airport in Stratford, Danbury Municipal Airport, Groton-New London Airport in Groton (New London,) Hartford-Brainard in Hartford and Tweed New Haven in New Haven.

"If they can't resolve the budget, I guess that's the game plan," Estefan said. "The real question is after the sequestration, will they bring them back and how long will that take?"

Barbara Fairbanks February 24, 2013 at 12:30 PM
Next years spending is going up by 15 billion even with the cuts by sequestration. Why isn't the administration and Congress looking for ways of cutting waste, fraud, etc which runs into the billions and cutting non essential grants, i.e. mating habits of this or that and funding to non profits that do not impact the health of our citizens, etc. which runs into the billion. LaHood's letter is a continuation of scare tactics that this administration uses quite liberally to produce an outcry from its citizens to support its policies. The truth is often a victim with these scare tactics. Lets have meaningful cuts, tax and entitlement reform and then look at more taxes. With this CT administration and legislature, the citizens of CT have already had more than our share of tax increases with no benefit to the health of our CT economy. Lets not add more federal taxes before we look at cuts.
socrates February 24, 2013 at 01:15 PM
If towers are closed it is because Obama wants to cause you pain. Period. The budget for the FAA actually increases next fiscal year: "The Department of Transportation’s budget for 2013 is $74.2 billion. The automatic spending cuts would slice $1 billion out of its budget: that is a cut of less than 1.4 percent. And consider this: even if the cuts go into effect, the Department of Transportation will spend more money this year ($73.2 billion) than it spent last year ($72.6 billion)." http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/devastating-sequester-spending-cuts-give-me-a-break/ This is not a cut. It is a reduction in the proposed INCREASE in spending. Barack Obama depends very heavily on the stupidity of his supporters. Household income is down 8.2% under Obama. We've all had to make do with 8% less. It's ridiculous to think that government can't do with a little less of an increase in spending.
Tony Partsch February 24, 2013 at 01:24 PM
why don't we get rid of all the crooks and thiefs in the government and then maybe we would not have all these budget cut the government says we need jobs but who's the one cutting jobs the goverment
CTYankee February 24, 2013 at 02:39 PM
Damnable idiots in Washington! All the cuts they're putting out in the news are the ones designed to be the most visible, the most obnoxious, to raise the most ire in the public opinion.
Elena Bowen February 24, 2013 at 07:59 PM
This is sad and unacceptable. We keep paying more and more for what?? Congress & Senate need to change. How did they get raises?
Ray Sullivan February 25, 2013 at 03:33 PM
This is all part of a plan issued to all federal agencies by the present administration to put pressure on a Republican Congress to cow-tow to their every whim and desire to spend more and waste more on a populace which only wants more and more from the Government. In the 1920s they called it Marxism!
bob March 07, 2013 at 01:45 AM
President Obama seems to be literally holding America hostage by selecting the most pain-inflicting cuts. The $85 billion reduction represents a 2% cut in projected rates of growth and does not even touch existing line items. What he is doing is contrary to the interests of this country and worthy of his immediate removal from office.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something