Bay Area Regional Airport Study

Bay Area Regional Airport Study

Study BAR Technical Report

[Pick the date]

Florida Institute of Technology

Jazmond Gamble

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCODAy4S4mMkCFcVLJgodu10E4Q&url=http://www.airport-technology.com/projects/seattle-tacoma-international-airport/&psig=AFQjCNHCNKCVv-GpzML_EPwIjSeKoKdOmg&ust=1447882424925791

Jaz Gamble Bay Area Regional Airport Study

Table of Contents

Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………..2

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………...3

Noise Exposure Maps…………………………………………………………………………...4

Noise Compatibility Plan……………………………………………………………………….21

Summary………………………………………………………………………………………..25

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………26

Page 1


Executive Summary

This report is written to display and explain in detail the CFR Part 150 Study requested

by the Bay Area Regional Airport. In this report entails the recommendations and further actions

that should take place based off the results of the study. The report starts with an introduction

section which explains why this is being done and how it is required as a part of the Part 150

Noise study. In the noise exposure maps section you will find the process in which the study

began and how the usage of the new AEDT system played a part of this study.

After going through the process of building up the noise exposure maps for both the

CURRENTCASE operations which represent the current operations going on at BAR Airport,

and the FUTURECASE operations which represent the future operations that are supposed to

take place over the next 5 years. The maps displayed two different stories. The CURRENTCASE

showed no noise problem based off the noise exposure map and the population report that was

run in AEDT. However, after running the reports and analyzing the FUTURECASE maps and

reports, it is clear that there are some major noise problems and issues. It is believed to be

because of the new operations added on and the older model jets that are being used for these

operations.

To help resolve these noise problems it is recommended to apply noise suppressors or

Hush kits to the two older model jets that will be performing the cargo and mail operations. The

suppressors are believed to significantly reduce noise and out of all the possible options of

accommodations, proves to be the most economically feasible. The change in the engine noise

will greatly improve the noise problem and bring the BAR Airport within compliance of the CFR

Part 150 noise regulations.

Page 2


Introduction

This report entails a very detailed and descriptive analyzation of the Part 150 Noise study

that was performed on the Bay Area Regional Airport. The purpose of the noise study was to

locate and reduce existing non-compatible land uses that are around the Bay Area Regional

Airport. The goal is to not only reduce the existing non-compatible land uses but also prevent the

introduction of additional non-compatible land uses. With the usage of Noise Exposure Maps

and Noise Compatibility programs such as the AEDT software, and hundreds of noise contours,

the noise range and the 65 70 and 75 dBA ranges were determined. Although the part 150

program is voluntary, all airport operators are strongly encouraged to take part in it and apply to

their airports. FAR Part 150 is influenced by parts of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement

Act of 1979. FAR Part 150 provides uniformity in the aviation business when it comes to the

measurement of airport noise, establishing an airport noise compatibility planning program and

also strategies and techniques on determining the exposure of individuals to airport noise.

This study is necessary because it is part of the requirements of the planning program to

receive funding for the future development of the airport. The FAA requires submission of

detailed noise exposure maps and noise compatibility programs by airport operators. In this study

and report you will also find the required standard noise units and methods that were used at

Bay Area Regional Airport, and the identification of all the compatible land use around the

airport and if needed the location and identification of any noncompatible land use within the 65

70 and 75 dBA contour areas.

Page 3


Noise Exposure Maps

To first get started with the Noise Exposure Maps, the study had to first be set up and

organized using the AEDT 2b program. In this process, a new study was created. In this study,

the preferences for the study were developed and set, and the airport was named and went

through the process of identifying its location and weather that generally takes place in the area

that the Bay Area Regional Airport is located. Here lies in this process, the development of the

airport layout, and the design process of the airport runways.

After naming the airport, the next step that was performed was to identify the location of

the airport in the system. After going through the steps and process to find the location, the was

an airport reference point or ARP given. This points were given in latitudinal and longitudinal

points as well as the elevation in MSL. The latitudinal points of the airport were determined to be

at 37.619115º, and the longitudinal location of the airport is at 122.377960º. The elevation of the

airport is at 14.5 feet, MSL. The next step in these beginning stages of the process is where the

general weather of the area surrounding Bay Area Regional Airport is entered. The temperature

was set at about 57 degrees, the pressure in millibars was set at 1015.809998 while the sea level

pressure which also is measured millibars was set at 1016.789978. The relative humidity of the

airport was at 76.15% and the dew point was set at 49.240002 degrees, while the wind speed was

measured at 9.21 knots.

After the location and weather process was finished, the details of the case were assigned.

The layout was named current case indicating that it includes the current layout and it was given

and expiration date of five years later. A new case will represent the operations 5 years later, it is

done this way to comply with the requirement for a Part 150 noise study.

Page 4


Next was the design process of applying the runways to the current case layout. This

process required switching to the design tab of AEDT and then the add runways section. Here is

where the runways were drawn and placed in the proper location as they are at Bay Area

Regional Airport. After the runways were drawn, it was time to edit the runway ends so that they

were in the exact location. Bay Area Regional Airport has four runways, runway 03 and 09, and

runway 21 and 27. The coordinates for runway 03 are 37.611462 and -122.384794 with an

elevation of 15.5 feet and a width of 150 feet wide. Runway 09 has coordinates of 37.624164

and -122.389857 with an elevation of 16.0 feet, and a width of 150 feet. Runway 21 has

coordinates of 37.623089 and -122.370116 with an elevation of 13.5 feet and is also 150 feet

wide. The 4th runway which is runway 27, has coordinates of 37.617746 and -122.367075 with

an elevation of 13.0 feet and a runway width of 150 feet just like the other three runways. The

coordinates are latitude and longitude respectively.

The below diagram was taken during the process of completing this first task of steps and

show what the layout of the airport looked like after the completion of the steps that have just

been explained and described above. It depicts the runway ends and the coordinates of each

runway end.

Page 5


Figure 1

Page 6


The next task of procedures requires defining the receptors and the receptor sets. To

understand the in totality what the importance and of these steps and what they do, knowing

what receptors are, is very important. An AEDT receptor represents a noise monitor with a

microphone and recorder at one location. This representation is for calculation purposes.

Although AEDT uses fairly accurate estimates of the noise at each receptor location, it is

important to note that they are only estimations because AEDT does not use actual noise

measurements.

Although there is no standard or required mandate for the locations and spacing by

regulation or Advisory Circular, past experience has shown that a 500 foot receptor spacing

provides a smooth noise contour with acceptable computation times. The grid area is required to

be large enough to capture at least the 65 dBA contour and slightly beyond. In this study the

defined receptor for the fixed grid was approximately 20x15 NM and centered on the ARP with

500 foot receptor spacing. The first step in doing this was to switch to the definitions tab in

AEDT then click on the receptor sets tab and click new to define and create the new receptor

sets. Here is where the details of the receptor set were entered. The name ReceptorFixedGrid was

given and the x count was rounded to 260 and the y count was rounded to 190. To get the X

count the equation 20 x6076 was used the 20 came from the 20x15NM dimensions of the

rectangular grid. The product of that which equals 121,520 feet was then divided by 500, the

number of receptors. The quotient came to 243 which was rounded up to 260 x count. To get the

y count a similar process was used. 15x6076 was used with the 15 coming from the 20x15 nm

rectangular grid dimensions also. The product of this came out to be 91,140 feet. That was then

Page 7


divided by 500 and the quotient came out to be 182 which was rounded up to 190 y count. This

brings the total receptor count to 49,400 (260x190).

As far as the spacing goes, 0.0001 is about 36.5 feet in AEDT. 0.00001 is 3.65 feet, for

this study the x and y spacing were bout set at 0.082. The latitude and longitude details for the

receptor set was set at 37.465239, and -122.611695 degrees respectively. The elevation which

was measured in MSL was set at 14.5 ft. Below depicts the receptor set details and receptor set

description as it is in AEDT.

Figure 2

Page 8


Figure 3

The next task involved adding the aircraft operations in that take place at Bay Area

Regional Airport. Although though it was a simple task, the process is very tedious. The

information for the average annual daily operations for the airport was found in tower logs and

FAA flight plans. To make things simple, all general aviation operations GA are on runway 3/21

and all commercial aviation operations COM are on runway 9/27. ADET has six aircraft types

with day and night operations, in AEDT each aircraft type has many different aircraft however,

with the same characteristics. Each of the 48 operations had to be entered manually. To start this

process, in AEDT the operations tab needs to be clicked on and then the process of adding and

selecting the aircraft operations and times begins. Separating the operations into arrivals and

departures then giving them a number count was a part of the process that was required for each

individual operation. After this first step, the process of looking up the right aircraft for that

particular operation took place. This could take some time considering that there are similar

aircraft that look alike but with different characteristics. Since the parameters of a gate and

Page 9


GSU/APU are only required for emissions studies, the aircraft operation entry continued without

them. Time entries for the operations were entered in next. In this study the only Day and night

operations were in consideration so the day operations were logged in as taking place at 7:00 am

and the night operations were logged in as taking place at 10:00 pm. The next entry included

assigning the proper stage length to the operations. All arrival operations are assigned stage

length one with the exception of GA aircraft arriving VFR on a 5 degree glide slope as opposed

to the normal IFR flight 3 degree glide slope. The table below was used to determine how and

which stage length to assign to each operation.

Figure 4

The final step before creating the operation is to select the track for the operation. There

are 4 tracks to choose from, which are the four different runways and runway ends. This process

was completed for all 48 operations. The total operation count at this point came to 247 and the

stage length count is at 84. Below is the excel spread sheet of all the operations and their

properties that were entered into the AEDT system.

Page 10


User ID Airframe Engine Engine Mod Equipment Group Departure Airport Departure Layout Arrival Airport Arrival Layout Operation Type First Day Operation Count Stage Length Aircraft Type Track Arrival Runway End Departure Runway End1 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 3.86 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 32 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 15.44 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 213 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 34 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 215 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 3.84 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 36 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 15.36 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 217 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.12 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 38 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.48 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 219 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 25 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 3

10 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 100 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2111 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 312 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2113 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 3.84 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 314 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 15.36 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2115 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.06 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 316 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.24 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2117 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 3.1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 318 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 12.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2119 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.14 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 320 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.56 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2121 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 3.02 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 322 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 12.08 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2123 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.22 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 324 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.88 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2125 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 0.6 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 926 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 2.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2727 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 928 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2729 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 0.8 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 930 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 3.2 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2731 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 932 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2733 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 1.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 934 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 5.6 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2735 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 936 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2737 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 0.6 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 938 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 2.4 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2739 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 940 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2741 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 942 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2743 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 944 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2745 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 0.4 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 946 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 1.6 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2747 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 948 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 27

247 84

Figure 5

After imputing all the operations for the current case, it was time to move on to the next

task of creating an annualization, defining the metrics and then running them in the AEDT

system. An annualization in AEDT is a group of operations that is associated with the time

period to be analyzed, operations included in the time period, weighted groupings of the included

operations, and subset of processing options for the included operations. Annnualization can be

defined as being a convenient way to evaluate environmental consequences that represent noise

and emissions over the time period of interest with potentially different weighting of individual

operations or operation groups. In order to get the Annualization process started the operations

that were created in the steps before were put together in a one group. The new aircraft operation

group is named AircraftOpGroupCURRENTCASE, recognizing that these are the current case

op Group. To start the building of the annualization the OpGroupCURRENTCASE was added to

the root which was given the name CurrentCaseFixedGrid. The final step before creating the

Page 11


annualization is to set the processing options. The noise altitude cutoff AFE was set at 10000

feet. The mixing height AFE at 3,000 feet, the PM Model was FOA 3.0, and the fuel sulfur

content and sulfur to sulfate conversion rate at 0.0006 and 0.024 respectively. Once these

settings are applied, the annualization was created.

After building the annualization it was time to define the metric results. The metric that

was selected was DNL, DNL is an acronym for day- night average sound level. The metric type

was noise and the receptor set that was chosen is the receptor set fixed grid. After defining the

metrics and viewing the tracks, it is time to run the metrics. Below is how the receptors look after

the metrics have been run in AEDT.

Figure 6

The next set of task is how the study of the current case is wrapped up. Although this

stage was very lengthy, this is where the metric results are viewed along with the runways and

Page 12


flight tracks. This is also where the noise contours, noise contours area table and the population

exposure report is studied and analyzed. The table below displays the metric results.

Figure 7

The metric results above show the size and area of each of the three contours which are

65,70,and 75 dBA. The 65 dBA contour expands the furthest and has the largest shape length

with the 75 dBA contour length area being the smallest. In order to view the contours on the

actual layout, it had to be made user friendly as far as making the contours and their lines and

boundaries visible. The contour settings were changed to the minimum dB setting being 65 and

the maximum dB setting being 75. In order to make the contours easier to see, anything below

the 65 threshold color was made green and the thickness of the line is increased to two so that it

stands out amongst everything else. The 65 to 70 threshold was made orange and the color

thickness was at one. The 70 to 75 threshold color thickness was put at 1 while the color was

made red. Anything above the 75 dB threshold was made what AEDT calls a super red color.

After adjusting the contour size and layer properties, it is now possible to analyze and

view the population exposure report in AEDT. The snip below displays the AEDT population

exposure report and determines if there is anybody in areas that may require the airport to take

action because of populations being exposed to noise levels that are unsafe. The highest level of

noise exposure that the population is allowed to be exposed to without the airport facing penalty

is the 65 dB contour area.

Page 13


Figure 8

As shown in the population Exposure Report from AEDT, there is not any of the

population located within any of the contours. The population count is zero for the 65, 75 and the

70 contour levels, which is good for Bay Area Regional Airport. What does this mean for Bay

Area Regional? Well based off the population exposure report from AEDT, so far the contours

do not pose an issue. Considering that the AEDT map already contains the tracks and contours it

was time to make an even more in depth look and analyze the layers and reports. In order to do

this GIS base maps containing streets, population demographics, and landmarks were added.

After going through the process of adding the different layers of the streets and land marks, it is

now possible to view a complete noise exposure map of the Bay Area Regional Airport. Below is

a snip of the complete noise exposure map of Bay Area Regional Airport.

Page 14


Figure 9

After analyzing all the reports and outputs and the noise exposure map, there is no

incompatible land use within the 65 dBA contour. The current contours pose no threat or

problem so the airport doesn’t have to worry about accommodating any population or land uses

that find themselves inside the 65 dBA contour. This is the best-case scenario for BAR airport

because the airport will not have to worry about finding alternative plans to meet the

requirements concerning the noise exposure relative to business and the general public.

To move on to the Future case, a similar process had to start to begin the study. The

different operations had to be organized and entered correctly into the AEDT system. Before

hopping into the operations process, lets first go into a little background of what the future case

is. The FUTURECASE is the five year forecast operations noise analysis that is required as apart

of the CFR Part 150 noise study. As you may know, the BAR airport has been negotiating with a

cargo/mail-only airline to bring them aboard to the Bay Area Regional Airport over the next five

years. Because the airline business plan focuses on night operations and tends to use older jet

Page 15


aircraft that are louder than the modern aircraft, there has been a request to include the forecast

operations over the next 5 years into this noise study.

The process of adding the operations in is the same process that took place in the

CURRENTCASE. However, in this future case there are only 12 average annual day operations

that are to be added to the 48 existing operations. Of the 12 that are being added it there are only

two different airframes being used, the Bombardier Learjet 25 and the Boeing 727-100 Series.

Along with this information most of the operations take place during the night so they will be

categorized as night operations. At this stage an average annual day operations table for the

FUTURECASE is required. The userID is also very important for trouble shooting and

annualization so in the table you will see an F next to the userID of the operations for the

FUTURECASE. Below is the table for the average annual day operations with the

FUTURECASE operations included.

Page 16


User ID Airframe Engine Engine Mod Equipment Group Departure Airport Departure Layout Arrival Airport Arrival Layout Operation Type First Day Operation Count Stage Length Aircraft Type Track Arrival Runway End Departure Runway End1 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 3.86 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 32 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 15.44 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 213 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 34 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 215 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 3.84 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 36 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 15.36 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 217 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.12 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 38 Raytheon Beech Baron 58 TIO540 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.48 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 219 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 25 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 3

10 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 100 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2111 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 312 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2113 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 3.84 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 314 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 15.36 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2115 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.06 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 316 Piper PA-28 Cherokee Series O320 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.24 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2117 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 3.1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 318 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 7:00 12.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2119 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.14 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 320 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/5/2015 22:00 0.56 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2121 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 3.02 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 322 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 7:00 12.08 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2123 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.22 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 324 Bombardier Learjet 35 1AS001 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/5/2015 22:00 0.88 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2125 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 0.6 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 926 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 2.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2727 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 928 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2729 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 0.8 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 930 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 3.2 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2731 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 932 Embraer ERJ145 6AL009 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 3 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2733 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 1.4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 934 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 5.6 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2735 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 936 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2737 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 0.6 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 938 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 2.4 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2739 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 940 Airbus A320-200 Series 2CM018 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2741 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 942 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 7:00 4 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2743 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 944 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2745 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 0.4 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 946 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 7:00 1.6 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 2747 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.2 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 948 Boeing 737-800 Series 4CM039 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 11/6/2015 22:00 0.8 5 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 27

49F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 1/1/2016 7:00 3.2 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 350F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 1/1/2016 7:00 12.5 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2151F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 1/1/2016 22:00 0.19 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_A 352F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 1/1/2016 22:00 0.75 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_A 2153F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 1/1/2016 7:00 3.6 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 354F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 1/1/2016 7:00 13.8 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2155F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 1/1/2016 22:00 0.3 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_3_D 356F Bombardier Learjet 25 CJ6106 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 1/1/2016 22:00 1 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_21_D 2157F Boeing 727-100 Series 1RR021 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 1/1/2016 22:00 4.5 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_A 958F Boeing 727-100 Series 1RR021 NONE CURRENTCASE Arrival 1/1/2016 22:00 3.5 1 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_A 2759F Boeing 727-100 Series 1RR021 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 1/1/2016 22:00 4.5 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_9_D 960F Boeing 727-100 Series 1RR021 NONE CURRENTCASE Departure 1/1/2016 22:00 3.5 4 Fixed Wing DEFAULT_27_D 27

298.34 102

Figure 10

As seen in the table, with the addition of the FUTURECASE operations the operation

count has went up to 295. The stage length count has also went up to 102 with the additions of

the FUTURECASE operations. Since the FUTURECASE operations have been added it is now

time to go through the process of building another annualization. For this annualization both the

existing operations group and the new aircraft operations group will be assigned. Once the

existing aircraft have been added the new aircraft were added and named

FutureCaseAircraftOpGroup. Both this op group and the existing op group was placed into the

root which was named FutureCaseFixedGrid, once this was complete the annualization was then

created.

Page 17


The process of defining the metric results took place next. Once again DNL was used for

the metrics again since we are measuring the day/night average sound level. The receptor set

fixed grid was selected again and the AnnAveDayOpGroupFUTURECASE was the annulization

chosen. Once this process was finished it was time to run the metrics, and view the receptor set.

The snip below is of the receptor set in AEDT after the Metrics have been run.

Figure 11

The above snip is the Receptor set in AEDT. On the right is the layers pane which shows

the different layers for the receptor set and works as a legend to help describe what is going on

with the different colors and layers. The grey area is the noise that is below 40dB. The purple

represents the noise that is between 40 and 45 dB, while the lighter blue represents the 45 to 50

dB range and the darker blue represents the 50 to 55 dB area. The green is the 55 to 60, the

yellow is the 60 to 65 and the 65 to 70 is the lighter red area. What is referred to as the color

super red in AEDT is the above 70 dB area.

Page 18


Finally, it is time to view the metric results and finalize the noise exposure map for the

FUTURECASE. The contour settings were set the same as they were for the CURRENTCASE

noise exposure map. The contours were set at minimum and maximum dB was set at 65 and 70

respectively. Once again the layers of the map had to be adjusted, primarily the colors and

thickness of the color lines for the contours. The 65 Db contour line was made green and the

thickness was made to be at two. While the 65 to 70 contour line was made orange and the line

thickness was kept at one. The 70 to 75 contour line was made red and the line thickness was one

while the above 75 contour line was made super red and the line thickness stayed at one. After

this process was finished, it was time to produce the population exposure report for the

FUTURECASE, which is what is shown below.

Figure 12

When analyzing the exposure report it is clear to see that there are some issues with the

future case. There are people well within the 65dB contours. In the 65 dB contour level there is a

population count of about 13,882. Within the 70 dB contour level there is a count of about 4,839

and about 428 within the 75 dB contour level.

Page 19


Figure 13

Above is the finished noise exposure map for the FUTURECASE. The contours cover a

larger area and expands over a greater area of land which is what causes the issues with the

populations falling within the 65 dB contour areas. There will have to be accommodations made

by the Bay Area Regional Airport in order to meet the requirements of the CFR Part 150 Noise

study. In the Noise Compatibility section of this report it will go into greater detail about the

significant noise problem that the BAR airport faces and the recommendations to help reduce or

eliminate the noise issue to satisfy complaints and be compliant with CFR Part 150.

Page 20


Noise Compatibility Plan

As discovered and discussed in the previous noise exposure section, concerning the

CURRENTCASE at the BAR Airport all is well as far as noise exposure and complying with

regulations. There is no significant noise that needs to be addressed by the BAR Airport for the

CURRENTCASE. The FUTURECASE however, is a different story. On the next page there are

two noise exposure maps. The first one is the noise exposure map when the FUTURECASE ,

and the Second is the Noise exposure map with the CURRENTCASE. When comparing the two

it is clearly visible that the noise contours expand out further and cover a greater area in the

FUTRURECASE noise exposure map. The reason for this is that In the CURRENTCASE there

are only 48 operations and most of them are using more modern aircraft that are more noise

friendly with build in noise suppressors or instruments that are accommodated on the aircraft to

reduce the level of noise produced by the aircrafts. In the FUTURE CASE BAR Airport is brings

on an cargo/mail airline that adds about 12 operations. The airline tends to use older Jet aircraft

which means they are not equipped with the same noise reducing technology as the modern

aircraft that are being used currently at Bay Area Regional Airport. These older model aircraft

are causing a spike in the noise level and are to blame for the rise and expansion of the noise

contours on the noise exposure maps and the source of BAR Airport’s problems.

Page 21


Figure 14

Figure 15

Page 22


The Impact sets which are located below also helps to compare the two cases and show

the different noise levels and populations involved in the area.

Figure 16

Figure 17

Page 23


The two aircraft that are being used by the mail airline are the Boeing 727-100 Series and

the Bombardier Learjet 25. After performing an Environmental impact report it is clear to see

that the noise level increased from the CURRENTCASE to the FUTURECASE. There are a

variety of changes that or accommodations that can be made to bring the noise level down.

Closing down the airport is unrealistic and not feasible at all. BAR Airport could choose to try to

buyout all the residents and land within the 65dB contours but with the size of the population

that is reported to be in these areas that would be a very costly feat to complete and wouldn’t be

worth the amount of money that it would take to make that plan happen. Since the noise problem

is primarily thought to be brought on because of the older model jets that the cargo/mail airline

uses, the most feasible and cost friendly solution found is to implement noise suppressors or

“Hush kits” on to the jets being used for these operations. An example of the noise suppressing

instruments can be found below.

Page 24


Summary

The purpose of this CFR Part 150 Noise Study was to assess the land compatibility and

noise level for Bay Area Regional Airport, for the CURRENTCASE and the FUTURECASE.

Though the process was a lengthy one in the end a full assessment and recommendations have

been found and given. The study started with setting up and building the case in AEDT. In the

Beginning stages the BAR Airport had to be located and the weather for that area had to be

entered into the AEDT system. The process continued into developing and drawing the runways

for the airport and fine-tuning the dimensions of the runway ends as well as their width. Once the

design process was finished the CURRENTCASE for the BAR Airport started to be developed.

All 48 of the airports operations were gathered and organized into the system each one being

assigned a time of day that it would take place and being placed on the proper tracks, or runway.

Once the operations were finished and put into the system, the annualization process took

place. All this led up to the purpose of the study and the reason of using the AEDT system,

which was to design the noise exposure maps. After viewing the completed noise exposure map

for the CURRENTCASE, along with the population exposure reports it was clear to see that

there were not any major noise problems and no recommendation for change or accommodation

was made. As far as for the FUTURECASE the same process was repeated to build the case and

the annualization along with 12 new future operations being added. The noise exposure map for

this case showed a vast rise in the noise levels and their contours. The noise problem was

attributed to the addition of the added on operations because of the use of the older jet aircraft

that tend to be louder than the modern aircraft. The recommendation of noise suppressors or hush

kits has been giving to help reduce the problem because of its feasibility and affectability.

Page 25


BibliographyNOISE CONTROL AND COMPATIBILITY PLANNING FOR AIRPORTS. (1983). Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/150-5020-1/150_5020_1.pdf

Avcon Noise Suppressor. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.avconindustries.com/images/uploaded/4520411370322108AvconNoiseSuppressor.pdf

Page 26

http://www.avconindustries.com/images/uploaded/4520411370322108AvconNoiseSuppressor.pdf

http://www.avconindustries.com/images/uploaded/4520411370322108AvconNoiseSuppressor.pdf

http://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/150-5020-1/150_5020_1.pdf

Documents

Bay Area Regional Airport Study