Summary

The need for a major new airport in the Chicago region has been much studied and debated in recent years. A site selection process narrowed possible candidates to five locations in Illinois and Indiana, which an independent consultant then evaluated on the basis of nine factors. In a controversial decision, a policy committee consisting of representatives from each state reviewed the consultant's analysis and settled on the Lake Calumet site in the city of Chicago. An analysis of the factors in the consultant's study, however, does not indicate a clear-cut choice for the location of a new Chicago-area airport. For two of the nine factors--airspace and air traffic control--particular sites had advantages over the others. The consultant estimated that the rural sites would have the fewest airspace and air traffic control delays and would incur significantly lower costs than the urban sites. For another factor--collateral development costs for utilities and highways and rail lines to access a new airport--the consultant did not provide cost data for comparing the sites. The remaining six factors identified advantages and disadvantages for each site but did not strongly favor any particular one. The policy committee's site selection was based on its interpretation of the consultant's study and other considerations. The committee votes indicate that Illinois members favored the Illinois sites, while Indiana members supported the Indiana site. Seven of the 11 committee members were from Illinois, and a majority-rule process was used to choose a site. Federal funds to help defray the costs of a new Chicago-area airport would have totaled about $3.1 billion for the Lake Calumet site. By comparison, the new Denver airport--the only major airport to be built since 1974--will receive $498 million in federal funds. FAA is concerned that funding a new airport at such levels would seriously affect the government's ability to fund other airport projects across the country.

GAO found that: (1) the study did not indicate a clear-cut choice for the location of a new Chicago-area airport; (2) rural sites would cause the least airspace congestion and the fewest air traffic delays, and would cost less than the urban sites; (3) the study did not include cost data for comparing collateral development costs; (4) the urban sites would result in the cleanup of most hazardous waste, but would substantially increase costs; (5) the policy committee used the study as one of several data sources for site selection; (6) the site selection process was strongly influenced by the predominance of policy committee members from Illinois; (7) the study assumed that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would fund 20 percent of the eligible cost regardless of which site was selected; and (8) AIP funding for any of the sites, especially the more expensive urban sites, would affect AIP funding for other projects.