Part 150 Advisory Circular Update

Transcription

1 Part 150 Advisory Circular Update Comments Received During Industry Outreach Presented to: ACI-NA By: Victoria Catlett, FAA Date: April 7, 2009 Industry Pre-Draft Comments Outreach to Industry in September 2007 NOISE public review, citizen participation opportunities, media kit, extending comment periods, local government participation AAAE more specific eligibility criteria, sample and/or model documentation, FAA eligibility and approval policy, land use guidelines, unique mitigation situations 2 2 1

2 Industry Pre-Draft Comments Outreach to Industry in September 2007 ACC samples and case studies, FAA approval criteria, guidance on noise analysis and supplemental metrics, more guidance on presenting individual NCP measures ACI-NA direction for using supplemental metrics, reference or guidance on the noise land audit and new mapping and re-use plan requirements. 3 3 Original Schedule vs. Revised Original outreach late 2007; drafting 2008; final issued by end of FY or CY 2008 Revised outreach completed early CY 2009; editing, disposition in consultation with commenters and AC team spring early summer Final AC FY or CY

3 Supplemental Metrics Limit system to DNL, supplement on case-by-case to improve understanding DNL maintains consistency, minimizes confusion DNL consistent with law to establish single system Supplemental Metrics SOW should indicate need to perform specific metrics to ensure costs budgeted 5 5 Supplemental Metrics Specify examples of appropriate metrics for given situations/outcomes Allow to use for noise abatement procedures to show effectiveness outside contour if little/no change within contour Comments offer scenarios where this should be allowed Establish policy and guidelines on how to balance benefits vs. constraints (with suggested criteria offered) Allowing use for flight procedures avoids requiring local thresholds when there is no serious local land use issue 6 6 3

4 Supplemental Metrics Not likely to lead to additional access restrictions due to existing onerous requirements Supplemental Metrics Improve explanations and discussion in Appendix A 7 7 Consultation and Public Involvement Call out reasons/how to s for various parties required to be consulted Provide more detail and instruction to FAA on its own involvement Improve guidance on local government participation How to contact, who should be involved Reference appended materials that could describe various techniques Include an update to FAA s Community Involvement Manual 8 8 4

5 Consultation and Public Involvement Provide separate guidance on NEM only vs. full NEM/NCP process Provide timelines for public involvement & consultation, and comment period extensions 9 9 Modeling Explain the FAA approval process for changes to modeling input, including time it takes Other technical comments and suggestions on modeling issues which are under review in the Office of Environment and Energy to determine how to address them in the final AC Input files FAA agreed to require submission of input files as part of PARTNER. Should include this requirement

6 Modeling Input files Should explain whether sponsor required to provide on request to general public Ground noise Modeling requirements Noise improvements (with specific examples provided) Format of AC Shorten Chapters on NEM and NCP and put technical information in separate appendices Cover page caused some confusion Definitions and references ensure accuracy Flow charts Add references in various blocks to where details can be found Ensure/improve their accuracy Add more regarding public involvement process

7 Land Use and Land Disposal Include guidance and requirements of FAA s land inventory/reuse/disposal Ensure classification standards appendices don t imply they are Federal requirements or that certain land uses are noise sensitive Explain highlighting; provide web references for public access Non-aircraft noise impacts and land use compatibility designations Various Measures of an NCP Value of, and inclusion of, easements in 150 study Flight procedures Temporary and change when circumstances change at the airport Land use jurisdictions should not make commitments to make permanent Should be re-evaluated when NCP updated Explain mandatory vs. voluntary Tradeoffs with efficiency/costs should be part of approvability factors How to treat measures proposed by other parties

8 Study updates Better emphasize decreases as well as increases in noise as reason to update Confusion in AC about timing of submission of NEMs and NCPs When to use AEM to determine whether update required Add other reasons an NCP update would be required FAA should require re-approval of previously approved measures* Eligibility Better explain and clarify 1998 noise mitigation policy Explain neighborhood equity and logical boundaries better Explain why monitoring equipment outside noise contour not eligible. Should be

9 Various editorial comments that improve comprehension and intent of various chapters and sections of the AC Land use classifications Introduction Be sure to include provide overview of the benefits of noise compatibility planning FAA Next Steps In some instances, FAA intends to informally consult with commenting parties where reason for comment is not clear We have preliminary designations of lead FAA offices to research and provide guidance to the Team We will begin editing where the response to comments is clear, and determine how to best address the more complex issues

10 FAA Next Steps Some issues will require additional evaluation internally. Supplemental metrics (no big surprise) Whether NCP measures previously approved should be re-evaluated and re-approved to determine their continued applicability and usefulness at the airport Tradeoffs of flight procedures noise benefits vs. fuel and air quality negative impacts (and vice versa) (where the agency is heading in the Next Gen arena) FAA Next Steps Some issues will require additional evaluation internally. How much re-formatting we should do How much material should be supplemented vs. referenced

11 Open Discussion Comments or questions on FAA next steps? END