Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Portland International Jetport – Noise Advisory Committee Meeting – 2/16/2012
Portland International Jetport Noise Advisory Committee 1001 Westbrook Street, Portland, Maine 04102
Date Start End Next Meeting Next Time Prepared By Company 02/16/2012 5:30pm 7:10pm 05/24/2012 5:30pm J. Dunfee PWM
Attended By Non-Attendees Jerry Angier – Greater Portland Chamber of Commerce Ed Suslovic – Portland City Council / NAC Chair Katherine Hughes – Air Carrier Station Manager Jerry Morton – Western Promenade Rep Mike Foley – Westbrook City Council Phil Gagnon – Gorham City Council Gary Lavimoniere – FAA ATC Maria Hannemann – Air Cargo Station Manager Alan Livingston – South Portland City Council Rep Maggie Shaw – South Portland Rep Non-Member Attendees Tom Ainsworth – Stroudwater Village Association Rep Bill Duffy – South Portland Cheryl Miner – Peaks Island Representative Paul Ouellette – Portland Andrea Andrus – South Portland PWM Representatives Alexander & Jean Beal – Portland Paul Bradbury – Airport Director Don Hawkes – Stroudwater Scott Carr – Deputy Airport Director Jen Dunfee – Airport Communications & Security Manager Jen Dorsey – United / Air Wisconsin
Opening Remarks – Mike Foley - Westbrook City Council Representative
• Meeting was called to order by Mike Foley. He stated that he would chair this evening’s meeting in Ed Suslovic’s absence. Foley apologized to the committee on behalf of the Chair for not having a meeting in November 2011 since the City’s committee appointee was in flux. Members of the committee requested that quarterly meetings be held regardless of who chairs the meeting.
• Cheryl Miner was welcomed as the newly appointed representative for Peaks Island. RNAV Procedures Presentation
• Jon Harris / FAA o Provided update to the committee on the FAA’s progress of the RNAV procedures. Harris
reported the FAA is on target with the roll out date of July 2012. o Boston Center has worked closely with both Manchester and Portland airspace managers to
ensure that there are no conflicts nor any push back from the FAA controller workforce. o FAA Flight Inspectors are the only possible delay in this process. The flight inspection check
rides are tentatively scheduled for March / April and Harris will inform the committee of the tentative dates once they’re determined.
o An overview of the RNAV procedures call for four published procedures: 2 Arrivals (Rwy 11 from the west and Rwy 29 from the east) 2 Departures (Rwy 11 to the west and Rwy 29 to the east)
o A future opportunity for a Radius-to-Fix (RF) Leg would allow an RNAV arrival to Rwy 29 that could follow the same path of the current Harbor Visual Approach.
An RF Leg approach could be available as early as June 2013. Committee Membership Update
• Cape Elizabeth Town Council has been notified regarding the vacant representative seat on the NAC. • Cheryl Miner has filled the seat for Peaks Island Representative.
Airline Schedule Update
• Information passed to the committee regarding proposed schedules for the next few months as part of a new data service subscription the Jetport has purchased. Information can be made available to the committee regarding scheduled service and possible schedule changes on a monthly basis.
Portland International Jetport – Noise Advisory Committee Meeting – 2/16/2012
• Discussion regarding the continuation of operations between 11:30 pm and 6:15 am led to a request for information reporting the percent of noncompliant flights. Tom Ainsworth requested that the minutes reflect an approximate “30% noncompliance” rate of flights.
The issue of schedule proposals and their review continues to be a topic of debate within the committee. In previous meetings, the Chair has restated the Committee’s position on this issue and its inability to prevent airlines from scheduling flights during the period of 11:30 pm to 6:15 am in accordance with the 1990 FAA Part 150 Study Record of Approval. This Record of Approval is attached to these minutes and this item is noted in Section II, B.7.
PWM Noise Stats Year in Review 2011– Jen Dunfee
• Reviewed PWM Noise Statistics (see attached presentation) • There was a request for corridor / tolerance for flight track of Harbor Visual Approach
Per that request, the track threshold is outlined below in red:
Crosswind Runway Construction Update – Paul Bradbury • Construction of Runway 36 Safety Area will begin as weather improves. • The current schedule for the Runway 18/36 closure is May 1 – October 1, 2012. • There was a request from the committee to keep the community informed of the construction project
schedule via website updates, press releases, etc.
Community Outreach Sessions • Paul Bradbury reiterated that part of the Jetport’s Noise Compatibility Program includes continued
attendance at neighborhood meetings. The Jetport looks to the Noise Advisory Committee to inform the Jetport when those meetings are held.
• Tom Ainsworth spoke on behalf of Red Bank Village located south of the airport in that there was an interest in hosting a neighborhood meeting to discuss Jetport construction and noise. Alan Livingston volunteered to coordinate with Ainsworth to schedule a meeting.
Announcements
• Phase II of the terminal expansion is complete and all airlines are scheduled to be operating in the new terminal by mid March.
• Due to summer construction of Runway 18/36, there will be no Air Expo this year.
Next Meeting Scheduled: Thursday, May 24, 2012 @ 5:30pm
0
February 16, 20125:30 pm – 7:00 pm
Portland Jetport Main Conference Room
NOISE ADVISORY COMMITTEENOISE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1
AGENDAAGENDA
• Approval of Minutes
• RNAV Procedures Update • Noise Advisory Committee Q&A• Public Q&A
• Old Business• Noise Advisory Committee Membership Update• Airline Schedule Update • Year in Review – 2011 Flight Statistics• Crosswind Runway Project Update• Community Outreach Meetings
• Public Comment
• Next Meeting Tentative Date: May 24, 2012 @ 5:30pm
• Adjournment
2
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS -- COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP UPDATECOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP UPDATE
• The Chair shall be a Portland City Councilor – Ed Suslovic• A Resident of Peaks Island – Cheryl Miner• A Westbrook City Councilor – Michael Foley• A South Portland City Councilor – Alan Livingston• A Resident of South Portland – Margaret Shaw• A Cape Elizabeth Town Council member – VACANT• President of Stroudwater Village Association – Tom Ainsworth (designee)• President of Western Prom Neighborhood Association – Jerry Morton• President of Portland Chamber of Commerce – Jerry Angier (designee)• One Signatory Airline Station manager – Katherine Hughes• Federal Aviation Administration Tower Chief – Gary Lavimoniere• An Air Carrier Cargo Station Manager – Maria Hannemann
Advisory Members Pending Council Approval• A Gorham Town Council Member – Phil Gagnon• A Scarborough Town Council Member - TBD
3
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS -- AIRLINE SCHEDULE UPDATEAIRLINE SCHEDULE UPDATE
4
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS -- YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 PREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USAGE PREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USAGE -- COMMERCIAL OPERATIONSCOMMERCIAL OPERATIONS
5
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– YEAR IN REVIEW 2011YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 FLIGHT STATS FLIGHT STATS –– PREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USEPREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USE
Preferred Early Morning Departures 2011
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
1am
2am
3am
4am
5am
6am
7am
8am
9am
10am
11am noon
1pm
2pm
3pm
4pm
5pm
6pm
7pm
8pm
9pm
10pm
11pm
midnigh
t
Runway 29 (Preferred) Runway 11
NOTE: The FAA DNL sensitive time period is between 10pm and 7am
6
Preferred Late Night Arrivals 2011
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1am
2am
3am
4am
5am
6am
7am
8am
9am
10am
11am noon
1pm
2pm
3pm
4pm
5pm
6pm
7pm
8pm
9pm
10pm
11pm
midnigh
t
Runway 11 (Preferred) Runway 29
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– YEAR IN REVIEW 2011YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 FLIGHT STATS FLIGHT STATS –– PREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USEPREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USE
NOTE: The FAA DNL sensitive time period is between 10pm and 7am
7
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– YEAR IN REVIEW 2011YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 FLIGHT STATS FLIGHT STATS -- FEDERAL EXPRESS / WIGGINS RUNWAY USAGEFEDERAL EXPRESS / WIGGINS RUNWAY USAGE
2008 2009 2010 2011
Operations Percent Operations Percent Operations Percent Operations Percent
Rwy 18/36 453 26% 688 35% 526 24% 562 20%
Rwy 11/29 1274 74% 1306 65% 1623 76% 2202 80%
8
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 HVA COMPLIANCE HVA COMPLIANCE
Average HVA Compliance 2007 - 2011
83%
89%
93%95%
94%
76%78%80%82%84%86%88%90%92%94%96%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
9
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 CALLS VS CALLERSCALLS VS CALLERS
Calls vs Callers Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008Calls 30 33 69 105 108 76 80 97 62 49 42 36
Callers 4 4 5 3 4 16 14 10 7 8 5 6
2009Calls 20 41 18 49 61 63 100 132 72 43 38 43
Callers 4 7 5 9 12 14 16 13 12 6 4 5
2010Calls 14 17 16 39 19 2 42 93 20 4 2 1
Callers 2 4 2 2 2 2 16 16 5 1 2 1
2011Calls 0 0 2 24 165 160 289 299 89 18 6 1
Callers 0 0 1 3 4 5 10 11 5 2 2 1
Avg Calls by Month 16 23 26 54 88 75 128 155 61 29 22 20
Avg Callers by
Month 3 4 3 4 6 9 14 13 7 4 3 3
10
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 YEAR IN REVIEW 2011 CALLS AND CALLERS PER NEIGHBORHOODCALLS AND CALLERS PER NEIGHBORHOOD
Calls Per Neighborhood
0%1% 2%
97%
Cape Elizabeth Falmouth Portland South Portland
Callers Per Neighborhood
15%
4%
15%
66%
Cape Elizabeth Falmouth Portland South Portland
11
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– RSA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UPDATERSA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UPDATE
Runway 18/36 Closure dates
• May 1st
– October 1st
• Weather Sensitive
•
Construction south side of
airfield for Runway Safety
Area (RSA) improvements
12
OLD BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS –– COMMUNITY OUTREACH SESSIONSCOMMUNITY OUTREACH SESSIONS
• Part of PWM’s
Noise Compatibility Plan
• Notify PWM of community meeting dates and times so we may attend
13
ANNOUNCEMENTSANNOUNCEMENTS
• Terminal Expansion Phase II is just about complete!
• Last of the Airlines moves to new terminal ticket area beginning of March.
• Next Meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, May 24, 2012.
• No Air Expo this year
• Camper’s weekend –
typically last weekend in June, July, August
14
THANK YOU
Next Meeting: Thursday, May 24, 2012 @ 5:30pm
NOISE ADVISORY COMMITTEENOISE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Portland International Jetport Noise Exposure Map March 2004 HMMH Report No. 298410 Page E - 1
APPENDIX E: CURRENT FAA-APPROVED NOISE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM MEASURES
HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC.
Portland International Jetport Noise Exposure Map March 2004 HMMH Report No. 298410 Page E - 2
HARRIS MILLER MILLER & HANSON INC.
Memorandumus,Dcpartrnontat T~s:porl(JlionFed4troI Avkrt100A.drrWotstrarion
SubjoCl: ACTIOtl: FAR Part 150 Noise Compat.ibil i ty Date:Program for Portland International Jetport,Portland r Baine
SEP 2 I 199C
Flam: Director, Office of Airport Planning" and Prograuuning, APP-l
Reply 10Altll, of:
To: AssistcHlt:. Administrator for Airports r ARP-l
Attached for your action is the Noise Compatibility Program(NCP) for Portland International J'etport (PWM) under FAR Part150. The New England Region, in conjunction with FAAheadquarters, has evaluated the program and recommends actionas set forth below.
On March 27, 1990, the FAA determined that the Noise ExposureNaps (HEMs) for PWM are in compliance with the requirements ofsection l03(a) of the Aviation safety and Noise Abatement Aotof 1979 (ASNA) and Title 14, CFR Part 150. At the same time,the fAA made notification in the 'Federal Register of the formallOO-day review period for PWM's proposed program under theprovisions of section 104 (a) of A$,.N~,:,anq.r;~""J(~.Et 150. ThelBO-day fO):.inal review period ends'September 23>, i9~O': If theprogram is not acted on by the FAA by that date, it will beautomatically approved by law, with the exception of flightprocedures.
The 1?HH prograludescribes the current and future noncompatibleland u~es within the 65 DNL. The NCP proposes measures toremedy existing identified incompatibilities and to preventfuture noncompatible land uses. chapter 2 of the Hepsummarizes the airport operator1s recommendations andquanti.fies the expected benefits derived from fullimplementation of the program. TIle table on page 2-11indicates that the number of people impacted would be reducedby about 5,172 with full implementation.
2
The Assistant Administrator for policy, Planning andInternational Aviation and the Chief Counsel have concurredwith the reoommendations of the New England Region. If youagree with the recollUIlended FAA determinations, you should signthe lJapprove" line on the attached signature page. I recommendyour approval.
u.s. Departmentof Transportation
Federal AviationAdministration
MemorandumRECCi\/I=f)..;' L.~Vi-~""'"
HARRIS iJ.lLLERMILLER HANSON i!·JC
Subject: ACTION: Recommendation far Approval of the Date JUL S7 1990Portland International Jetport, Portland, MaineNoise Compatibility Program
From Manager, Airports Division, ANE-600Reply toAttn. of
To: Assistant Administrator for Airports, ARP-l
On March 27, 1990, a notice was published in the Federal Registerannouncing our determination of compliance for the noise exposuremaps for Portland International Jetport, Portland, Maine, underSection 103(a) of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of1979. Coincident with that determination, we began the formal180-day review period for Portland's proposed noise compatibilityprogram, under the provisions of Section 104(a) of the Act. Theprogram must be approved or disapproved by FAA within 180 days orit shall be considered approved as provided for in Section 104(b)of the Act. The last date for such approval or disapproval isSeptember 23, 1990.
We have reviewed and evaluated the proposed noise compatibilityprogram and have concluded that it is consistent with the intentof the Act and that it meets the standards of Federal AviationRegulations Part 150.
The documentation submitted by the City of Portland was reviewedby the Airports, Air Traffic, Airway Facilities, and FlightStandards Divisions, and by the Assistant Chief Counsel. Thepublic comment period closed June 25, 1990. No substantivecomments have been received.
Each proposed action in Portland International's noisecompatibility program was also reviewed and evaluated on thebasis of effectiveness and potential conflict with federalpolicies and prerogatives. These include safe and efficient useof the nation's airspace and undue burden on interstate commerce.
2
Our approval or disapproval recommendations on each proposedaction are described in the attached Record of Approval. Eachproposed action is described in detail in Volume 2: NoiseC~~patibility Program.
U~~-L-iZC--------C>Vincent A. Scarano
Attachment
ConcurNonconcur
-~--"----f---'-rl-+-~--/~'~4 R'COAssistant Admini tor for Policy (Date)'
and International Aviation, API-l
ConcurNonconcur
ApprovedDisapproved
-----:~>...L-:...L=.~~:::...:-.--=-~~~I~~-_ JJ= 6-1, 19qDAssistant Administrator forA.1t'Ports, (Date)
ARP-l
SEP 14 '80 13:44
•FROM FAA AIRPORTS DIV TO TARIFF HQ PAGE.002
I. INIROOUCTION
N:>ISE et:MPATIBlL!'IY~
T'he City of J?artla.td, Maine, spmsored an Airport N:lise CC:mpatibilityPlanning Study lJl"lder a Federal Aviation Adtninistzation (FAA) grant, inCC%li'liance with Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR), Part 150. 'Ihe 1\k:>iseCo:r;;atibility ~am (N:P) am its associated Noise E:x:;p'Jsure Maps (NEM)were develOJ;:.'leQ con::urrently ani submitted to FAA for review and approval onDece:cber 'Z7, 1988 ani Nova:nber 8, 1989, respectively. The NEM wasdeterndned to be in CClX\Pliance on March 'Z7, 1989. The detennination wasanIlc::un.ca:l in the FedeI":u R!iister on May" 1, 1990.
The ?art 150 Study was closely m:mitored by an Mvisory caomittee whichrepresented the City of Portlar.d (in:luding airport adninistration), theCity of South Portlar.d, aiI::Port users, lcx::al ~e.:r:nrents, an:i cam:n.mityresidents. A series of Advisory eaxtnittee neetings was held, with theconsultant presenting naterial ani finiings. P\blic iDfonnation meetingsWlere held on May 21, 19f!7, september 14, 19f57, Jant:.li3.ry 19, 1988, ar.rlSeptanber 29, 1988. '!he consultant addressed caments at all of theseIIEetings, am subsequent written C<::IJ:m;nts as well.
The study fCX::u.sed on def ining an optimum. set of noise ard lan:i usemitigation Iteasures to iJ:rrprove ccxrp.tibility l:etween ai.rport operations anicamumity lard use, presentl}' a.>Xi in the future.
'I1le resultant pzog;caltl is d.escribed in detail in Volume 2: NOiseCarpetibility P:I:"giaLam, sections 2, 3, 4, ani 5. section.2 Sl.JIm?lXizes 1'0>,section 3 ar.alyzes op;rational neasures, section -4 analyzes land userreasures, ar:d Section 5 describes ;UnplEmmtation ani llDnitoril"19. Tables 2.1ani 2 ..2, 00 pages 2-2, 2-3, a:ai 2-7, S'I..IIIfeIize the program.
The pL'OgLam e1erents belcw sunmarize as closely as possible the aiIJ;;JOrtope;cator' s ~mations in the wise o:::rnpatibility Pt"Clgram ar.rl are crossreferenced to the prograzn. T.l::l.e stataIEIlts ccntained within the sumarizedrec:Q!&lsniations ani before the i.Irlicated FAA approval, d.:i..sapproval, or otherdetez:minations do DOt represent the opinicns or decisi.cns of the FAA.
The approvals 'Whic:h follC7ti incltxie actions that the City of Portlarrlrecamen:1 be taken by FAA. It should :be noted that these approvals ir.rlicateonly that the actions would, if ~l~nted, be consistent with. the .PUrJ;X:lSQS
of. I;art 150. These approvals do mt constitute d.ecisicos to in'plen:ent theactions. Late- decisions con::erning possible irrplementation of theseactiCilS may l::e subject to applicable envirozmmtal or other procedures orrEx;IU.ira:rents.
•sE'P 14.'90 13:44 FROM FAA AIRPORTS DIU TO TARIFF HQ PAGE.003
2
A. Noise Ataten:ent Elerrents
1. N:lise Barrier at the Approach Eni of Rur.way 18. (sections 2.1.1,3.1.1, and 5.1.)
A lS-foot or :::lo-foot :barrier would be constructed, depen:'iing onfuture design considerations. Ma:ximu:n Lear Jet departure noiselevels are in the range of 80 to 90 dBA at three resider.ces. Nontu:d:xljet engine nmups are also a prcblem.
ApprOyed. A 12 to 16 dBA noise level re:Luction can be expected.
2. Hush Heuse on the East Erx1 of the Airport Property. (sections2.1.2, 3.1.2, and 5.1.)
Airline maintenar.v:e I.'U1'l.UPS are ~ted in the area of the BarHa%ixlr hangar.
!pproved. A 13 to 14 dBA noise level re:1uction can be expected to5-6 single a:r.d multi-family residential units to the east of theairport. Maintenance runups would be consolidated at a centrallocation.
3. Preferential Use of Runway 29. (sections 2.1.3, 3.2, and 5.1.)
RuDla;y 29 would be the preferential I'Un"laY for early rcorningdepartures ani Ru.nw~ 11 would ~ the preferential ru:riflay for latenight arrivals.
19?rOyed. !1:lpulation within ONL 65 would be reduced byapproxiIrately 4,800 in nore densely populata3. areas east of theai:rport.
4. Preferential Arrival Route. (sections 2.1.4, 3.3, and 5.1.)- .M'.:,)st tutbojet aircraft WOJld be controlled to approach R1Jrli.Jay 29fran the north, maki.n;J greater use of airs.I;lace OV'er Portlard:Ha.z:bcr•
Approyed. Approx.im;.te1y 200 less people wwld be exposed to 65ONL. Also, bebJ-een 1,100 anS 1,200 less people would be iIrpactEdby Sn.. 90 or greater. Workload am air traffic flOfi would be moreevenly distributed arxl use of the existing published R1.l.l'Jrlay 29HaJ::t>or Visual AppJ:Oach would be facilitated.
SEP'14 '90 13:45 FROM FAA AIRPORTS DIU TO TARIFF HQ PAGE.004
3
5. RurJ,.Jay 11 Preferential Defarture Routes. (Sections 2.1.5. 3.4.5.1. 2.1.6, 3.5, 2.1.7, and 3.6.)
ThrGle variations of the existing straight-cut prcx:edure areprop:>sed: right turns as SOOIl as feasible, left tum.s to a.:heading to orer.fly the Fare River, azxi stIaight-out departures to3. 000' or appratinately six nautical miles (whichever canes first).'It.le Autanatic Teminal Information service wa:a.d be used topd:>licize the proce:iures.
Approved. Taken tOgether. the three xreasures would satisfy accmrunity ci>jective of sha.r:iDg noise. 'l!:le first 'WCUld reduce};X:PU1atial ~sed to 65-70 OOL, ar:d greater tbm 70 DNL by 171people am 36 people, :relSpsctively. The secon:i eould reduce thepopulation extX>SEd to 65 DNI:.. by approxinately 3,900 people. Thethi.td prcduces no c:;ruantifiable change in ONL contcurs, but 'WCUldrEduce noise canplaints fran aircraft whidl double back overresidential areas at laver altitudss.
6. Use of 'EM Advisoz:z Circulars CAe) 91-53 I'i:>ise AbatSlElt I?§arturePrOfiles. (sections 2.1.9, '3.8, iiXi 5.1.)
Airlines currenUy use a. similar prcx;edure while opezating atFortlatd. '!be aixport would rEqUeSt that airlines fly the AC 91S3 noise abatanent departure trofile (reduced. pc:Mer takeoffs forRurlriay 11 departures). Fewer 't«:lUld be iccreased over water.
Approved. BEL noise would be reduced significantly over close-inresidential areas (Table 3.16.)
B. Monitoring and Review Elements
7. Monitor Proposals for New Scheduled Operations Between11:30 P.M. 6:15 A.M. (Sections 2.1.8 and 3.7.3)
Any airline proposing to schedule operations between the hoursof 11:30 P.M. and 6:15 A.M., is required to present theproposal to a continuing Noise Abatement committee. Uponreview, the committee submits a recommendation to the Citycouncil to accept or reject the proposal.
The City has stated by Letter dated september 19, 1990, fromthe Airport Manager that, prior to implementing any mandatoryuse restriction, it recognizes its responsibility to thoroughlyevaluate impact with regard to: 1) reasonableness consistentwith reducing non-compatible land uses around the airport, 2)undue burden on interstate commerce or foreign commerce, and 3)unjust discrimination with regard to airport users. The cityhas also agreed to submit the evaluation and any proposed use
4
restriction as a rev1s1on to this Noise Compatibility Program(NCP) for approval in accordance with Part 150 of the FederalAviation Regulations. In addition, the City states that itdoes not intend to take action implementing a mandatory userestriction until FAA review is complete.
Approved in part. This measure, already implemented, isapproved insofar as it establishes an administrative procedurefor review of proposed airline service by the Noise Abatementcommittee. The continuation of an airline service monitoringprocess should promote a good relationship between the NoiseAbatement Committee and airlines.
The measure is disapproved insofar as it may appear to grantthe NAC authority, on behalf of the City, to delay accessthrough extended negotiations or to force airlines to agree tomeet unspecified noise standards. The measure is disapprovedinsofar as it may appear to grant the City blanket authority toapprove or disapprove nighttime operations based on unspecifiedstandards. FAA approval of monitoring and review by the NACdoes not extend to actions on the part of the City council toaccept or deny proposed service based on recommendations of theNAC. Until such time as the City adopts a reasonable,nondiscriminatory use restriction or obtains FAA approval of aproposed use restriction in a revision to the NCP, the Cityshould permit unrestricted access in accordance with theassurances set forth in its federal grant agreements.
A decision by the FAA to approve a proposed use restriction isnot legally binding on the airport sponsor. While the City hasagreed to submit proposals for approval under Part 150, FAAapproval or disapproval under Part 150 does not regulate thecity with respect to its airport access decisions. The FAAwill evaluate the proposal submitted under Part 150 relative tosafe and efficient use of the navigable airspace.
5
8. N::>ise AbatEment Q:mni.ttee :Re\Tiew of ~anenta.tion. (section 5.3am 5.3.5.)
'Ib! ItdvisOtY Carmittee 'WOUld fozm a R;)ise Abata.nent Ccmnittee(NAC) to review :to cc:mpliancel i:ncluding both op!Zational ar.r:ilan:t use eletrents. '!he NAC walld take an active %Ole. inoooz:d.inating with affected local gove:r:n:nmts to facilitatein'plarentation of the I'CP. nus cxxmiiDation~d beparticularly inportant for the rElIlEdial~ing progratIlr theair:pcrt zoning overlay district, w real estate disclosure. '!beNAC 'fl'ifJ::l also calSider future policies for noise CCIltrol, ird.udi:Dga noise based user fee.
Ag?royed. This neasure 'WCUld create a fa:un for diSClJSsion ofnoise abatenent issues. FAAIS approya1 CIoes not exterxi to futureactia1.s on the put of the NAC or City Ccw::I.cil, particularly withrespect to use restrictions or a noise based user fee.
9. Quantitative Review of Changes in Noise Exp?sure. (Section5.3.2.)
AiI:l;xxrt nanaga:aent 'W'OUld carpu.te an En> noise netric each year I asa IIeaIlS of detezmin:i..ng whether the H:P s1xn1.d be :reevaluated arXlnew noise contOJrB prepared.
Appl:OYed. N:P effectiveness can be tracked and, if appropriate,NI:N contcurs UJ;XBted.
10. !!£Cgqi?Utation of ContOJrs with Changes in Aizport Layout or9!tration.. (Section 5.3.3.)
'!be NEN wcw.d be rerised ar.d N:P reevaluated if a najor c:barJ.Qe inairfield layout or OI:enltion is proposed - em. that would affect%UD'IaY use or flight paths.
~. 'Ihi.e ~uri.'!! provides a criterion for keep1:ng the NEMand H:P current.
SEP 14 '90 13:46 FROM FAA AIRPORTS DIU TO TARIFF HQ PAGE.1ZI06
6
•
11. Minimun TinE Intexval Between Prepaxa.ticn of Nav Nc:lise Co'ltours.(section 5.3.4.)
NEw noise oontOJ.rs would be pr~ai a mi.ni.:rrum of erery fiveyears.
~ed. 'Ibis .treasure would also ensure up-to-date .NEM ani N:P.
c. Land Use ElettElnts
12. La:r:d AffiUisition ar:d Relocation (sections 2.2.1, 4.1.1, ani5.2.1.)
A rrd:>ile lane park, consisting of 20 banes within the 70 DNL<::on.tour, would be the subj ect of acquisition ani relocation.
Appz:'OV'ed. Lar.d acquisition t:hrouqh voluntaIy fee-s:i.Irple purchasea:r.rl S1hsequent ralo:ation of residents 'WOUld provide effectiveremediation of an incat'i;atible use.
13. sound~ing. (sections 2.2.2, 4.1.2, and 5.2.2.)
A sam:1proofing prog,ran ~d be inplanented for larxi uses thatCOltain qualified carq;atible residential am noise sensitive lamuses within the 65 DNL ar.d 70 DNL contcurs, ani qualifiedca:cp3.tible non-residential lard uses within the 75 DNL cootour.
Approved. One buI:Cred-eighty sev-en residential ani four :n0n
residential lar.d uses would tx:>tentially :be affected, perilingstructural ani aCC\:1Stic surveys ar.d evaluation of noise :rronitor:ingdata.
14. E'asanent Acquisition. As part of SOl.I:rl attenua.tion assistance.(sections 2.2.3, 4.1.3, and 5.2.3.)
In areas with noise levels greater than 65 DNL, avigationea..satJimts would be negotiated as };:art of sa.u::d attenuationassistance.
~. In conjurx::tion with swn:iproofing, this rreasure wouldensure future ca:n;patibility 1::etween the aiz:port and existingqualified cc:np;ltible laDi uses•
•
·....,- '"I ..... J,rr Ml..:lI
15. Ai~ Zoning Overl<;y District. {sections 2.2.4, 4.2.1, am5.2.3.}
I"'f-H:iE . 007
7
,
Noise Slel"'.sitive lan::i uses would be restricted. a:r.d constructionstandards specified.
~. CtIripatible develc;ment would be erx::ouraged ar.dinxmpatible deie10prent proh.ibitea.
16. E:aserrent Acquisition - As Part of P:toposeO. New Devel~t.(Sections 2.2.5, 4.2.2, and 5.2.5.)
Through purchase or dedication. avigation easen:nts for pro;;osednEW dete10prent WClUld. be d:>tained•
.Approved. This :treasure \liOUld ree;trict lam uses to thosecanpatible with dafined ooise exposure, ensure the airport theright of e;,;erflight, the right to cause noise, ani the right toprohi.bit potential c:bstructions to airepace.
17. Real Estate Disclosure. (seetiau; 2.2.6. 4.2.3, ani 5.2.6)
Real estate disclosure policy would be in:luded in rerisions tozoni.ng ordinances.
ApprOved. The identification of airport noise inpacts en realestate would foster an awareness of aixport and carmunityrelationships, an:i serve as wtice of airport noise .iIli:act topotential buyers or lessors.
18. OndevelgPed Land Aogpisition. {sections 2.2.7, 4.2.4, and 5.2.7}
This rreasure would be institutEd by the ai.1.1;';ort to eliminate longterm carq;:;atibility prc:blens associated with developIElt :in areassUbject to 80 DNL noise contcw:s. Vol'Untary fee-siIrpIe purchase'WOUld be involved.
~ed. ur.develo~ land acquisition through fee-siIiple .purchase would ~ide the City ~ific deY'elo.r;:ment or Ian:! useCQ'ltrol over UIXieveloped land :bet'il'i"etID the western ai.z:port J:x:rmdazyani the limits of the 80 DNL contcur in the City of SCAlthPortlar.d. Approval is subj ect to, a s:t:ocing at the t:i.I.re of theairport o.t;::eX'ator' s~ action, that such purchase isnecessazy to prevent a non-carpatible use of the p1'O];:erty.
