Click for next page ( 6

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 5
6 CHAPTER TWO REGULATIONS, POLICIES, AND COURT CASES GOVERNING ISSUES OF NOISE OUTSIDE DNL 65 There are a number of existing and emerging reasons that air- impact. This block-rounding will double the number of port operators may need or desire to take action to address homes eligible for insulation or purchase assurance from noise outside the DNL 65 contour, including the following: just more than 1,000 to more than 2,000 ("ATA Says Block-Rounding at Bob Hope, Ft. Lauderdale Int'l Has Because of complaints from areas outside DNL 65, air- Gone Too Far" 2008). ports have identified reasonable and cost-effective pro- The existing noise compatibility program has matured grams to reduce noise impacts at lower noise levels; this and substantial complaints exist in areas outside the DNL is especially true for operational noise abatement flight 65 contour: A recent study conducted by the FAA's Cen- procedures, such as Continuous Descent Arrivals (CDA) ter of Excellence for aviation noise and emissions [The Continuous Descent Arrival, also referred to as the research, PARTNER (Partnership for AiR Transporta- Continuous Descent Approach, has proven to be highly tion Noise and Emission Reduction), concluded that sig- advantageous over conventional "dive-and-drive" arrival nificant complaints come from areas beyond DNL 65 (Li and approach procedures. The environmental and eco- 2007). The staff at airports that respond to aircraft noise nomic benefits of CDA were demonstrated in flight tests complaints finds that an increasing portion of their time at Louisville International Airport in 2002 and 2004; is spent addressing concerns from residents outside the there are significant reductions in noise (on the order of 6 DNL 65. to 8 dB for each event) owing to reductions in thrust and Federal policy is moving outside DNL 65: The Joint a higher average altitude (Clarke 2006)], and Noise Planning and Development Office has determined that Abatement Departure Profiles (NADPs) [FAA Advisory noise must be aggressively addressed to meet the capac- Circular (AC) 91-53A, Noise Abatement Departure Pro- ity requirements of the Next Generation Air Transporta- files (1993), identifies two departure profiles--the close- tion System (NextGen). Recently, the FAA has identified in departure profile and the distant departure profile--to targets for noise reduction, including a near-term target be used by air carrier operators. The AC outlines accept- to maintain its current 4% annual reduction in the num- able criteria for speed, thrust settings, and airplane con- ber of people exposed to DNL 65 or greater, and com- figurations used in connection with each NADP. These mensurate or greater reduction of the number of people NADPs can then be combined with preferential runway exposed to DNL 5565; as well as a long-term target, use selections and flight path techniques to minimize, to first bringing DNL 65 primarily within airport boundary, the greatest extent possible, the noise impacts], as well and later DNL 55 primarily within airport boundary as some advanced navigation procedures such as (FAA 2008). Required Navigation Procedures [Area Navigation Airports are required by court order: Two recent cases (RNAV) enables aircraft to fly on any desired flight path [Naples v. FAA (2005) and State of Minnesota et al. v. within the coverage of ground- or space-based naviga- MAC (2007)] have determined that airports must address tion aids, within the limits of the capability of the self- noise impacts beyond the current DNL 65 land use com- contained systems, or a combination of both capabilities. patibility guidelines. As such, RNAV aircraft have better access and flexi- bility for point-to-point operations. RNP is RNAV with Review of the actions leading to adoption of DNL 65 land the addition of an onboard performance monitoring and use compatibility guideline indicates that it was intended to be alerting capability (FAA 2008)]. adjusted as industry needs changed (in particular, as technol- Airports have adopted local land use compatibility ogy improvements resulted in quieter aircraft). Federal noise guidelines that apply to lower impact levels: Several policy has always recognized that land use compatibility deci- jurisdictions have used DNL 60 dB in defining planning sions should be made at the local level. In addition, adoption objectives or goals (Coffman Associates 2000). of the DNL 65 guideline in the 1970s reflected a compromise Airports have made commitments in support of airport between what was environmentally desirable and what was capacity projects; for example, at Ft. Lauderdale, the economically and technologically feasible at the time. FAA agreed in its Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on a runway extension to allow Broward County to This chapter addresses the existing and proposed applicable follow neighborhood boundaries to mitigate for noise laws, policies, and regulations, plus relevant court decisions