The San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) forked over more than $45,000 in legal fees in August to a Point Loma resident for an apparent violation of the California Public Records Act. Roger Britt, 77, claims the Airport Authority withheld vital e-mails that would demonstrate how the Airport Authority “has violated the law by falsely reporting to the public and the state the amount of noise generated by airport operations,” according to language in the lawsuit Britt brought against the Airport Authority in 2007. “It’s concealment,” Britt said. “[The Airport Authority] felt there was some disclosure that they didn’t want [the public] to see.” Although Airport Authority officials confirmed the court order to pay a portion of Britt’s legal fees, airport officials maintain the decision does not mean the Airport Authority violated the law. “Nothing was pulled as exempt from this [information] request,” said Lee Kaminetz, counsel for the SDCRAA. But, according to Kaminetz, other requests Britt have made in the past for such information about noise-measurement algorithms and such is considered proprietary and would have been exempt from disclosure under the California Public Records Act (CPRA). In 2006, Britt asked the Airport Authority for every interagency e-mail exchanged between the Airport Authority’s noise mitigation office, the Airport Authority’s Quieter Home Program and the California Department of Transportation between January 2003 and July 2006. The request involved the disclosure of e-mails between several individuals and supervisors in the various departments. These agencies measure and report noise in the airport’s surrounding communities and are responsible for retrofitting the affected Peninsula homes with special sound-dampening windows and equipment to reduce noise inside the homes. Britt asked for these e-mails — which can be made available under the CPRA — in their original electronic format so he could search through them electronically. According to a statement from the Airport Authority, airport officials initially offered Britt seven “bankers boxes” of printed e-mails. But they maintain they withheld no records. Divulging the e-mails in their original electronic format would require access to a central server and compromise security and information protected under federal law, said Steve Schultz, a spokesman for the Airport Authority. After about two years of correspondence and litigation, Britt received eight compact discs full of e-mails. Britt maintains, however, he hasn’t received much of the original information he sought. “They gave the e-mails to me in an alternative format so I never really got to see the unedited e-mails,” Britt said. “That leads me to believe that somebody’s hiding these things.” Britt said he wants to have access to the jet-noise measuring processes used by the Airport Authority. The formulas and algorithms, however, may be exempt from the California Public Records Act as proprietary software belonging to a private company, Lochard Corp., which developed the noise monitoring system, Schultz said. Britt said he believes there may be discrepancies between the average noise level in the Peninsula and the numbers actually reported on the Airport Authority’s website — and that careful analysis of the formulas may reveal this disparity. Differences could mean that noise from airport operations could affect more homes than previously thought, according to Britt. The Airport Authority reports the noise measurements to the California Department of Transportation and the public by way of the Airport Authority’s website www.san.org. Airport officials said Britt’s claim is speculative. “There’s no evidence that suggests the [noise measuring] is faulty,” Kaminetz said. Britt said he will continue to ferret out the noise-measurement formula that could change the number of homes eligible for the Quieter Home Program. In the interim, Point Loma residents may have to contend with the San Diego International Airport’s ongoing construction and near-term improvements that could result in a temporary shift in jet departure paths to the south. Such changes could impact the noise levels over a new group of homes and schools, according to airport watchdog groups and Peninsula planners.