On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 00:14:21 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
It would seem that this opens an avenue to legally
challenge that rational in an effort to modify/strike-down the
rule(s).

If that were true, why has no one contested any of the prior rule-making
changes that have similar lack of justification?

Perhaps, because it would require exposing the fallacy in FAA's
reasoning used to justify their rule making?

Can you provide your source, that supports your assertion of there
never having been a contest?

I doubt that there's any genuinely feasible way to engage a legal challenge
to the FAA's analysis. If there is, I'm all ears. We've got a ridiculous
*prohibited* area here in the Puget Sound that is just begging to be
overturned.


Have you studied the FAA's rationale in issuing that Prohibited Area?
If you are able to show how their logic is flawed, I would think you
would have grounds to petition your representatives for redress.