1 / 20

Stage 2 Restrictions Under Part 161:

Pressure on Business Jets. Stage 2 Restrictions Under Part 161:. Peter J. Kirsch February 26, 2001. Today’s Presentation. Basic Part 161 principles Treatment of small stage 2 jets Case study: Naples, Florida. Part 161.

efia
Download Presentation

Stage 2 Restrictions Under Part 161:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pressure onBusiness Jets Stage 2 Restrictions Under Part 161: Peter J. KirschFebruary 26, 2001

  2. Today’s Presentation • Basic Part 161 principles • Treatment of small stage 2 jets • Case study: Naples, Florida

  3. Part 161 • Federally mandated procedures for consideration of local noise or access restrictions (Federal Aviation Regulations Part 161) • Congress: distinguish between stage 2 and stage 3 jet aircraft • Did not replace existing law

  4. Part 161 Principles • Large stage 2 jets have been phased out • Restrictions on remaining stage 2 jets subject to Part 161 review and comment procedures • All restrictions on stage 3 jets subject to FAA approval

  5. Practical Realities • Stage 2 jets drive DNL noise contour at most airports • Measurement of noise must use DNL • Remaining stage 2s are virtually all corporate/business aircraft • National spotlight has shifted from large hub airports to smaller commercial and general aviation airports • Few studies in 11 years

  6. Continuing Pressures • Congressional attention on small jet aircraft • Rothman legislation • Operators of stage 3 jets pay for noise costs of stage 2s • Economic policy tradeoffs less obvious than for larger (commercial) jets

  7. Who is considering Part 161 restrictions? • GA-only airports (Flying Cloud) • Small airports with little large jet traffic (Naples, Aspen) • Airports with little buffer land (Pease, Burbank)

  8. FAA views on noise effects of smaller jets (under 75,000) - I • Smaller jets should not receive any special protection under the law • “Unreasonable to impose identical analysis and documentation requirements on every airport, regardless of size or mission” • “Smaller airports often have smaller buffer zones around their takeoff and landing areas than do large airports”

  9. FAA views on noise effects of smaller jets (under 75,000) - II • “It is not unusual to find houses and other residential facilities much closer to the ends of general aviation airports than to the ends of runways at the major airports”

  10. FAA views on noise effects of smaller jets (under 75,000) - III • “Some communities tend to view both formal and informal operational access/noise restrictions as relatively easy ways to resolve community disputes or concerns with the [smaller] airport” • The 180-day notice period required under Part 161 “will provide adequate protection for the operators of both small and large aircraft as well as the general public”

  11. The FAA’s Limited Authority and Role • Comment on Part 161 study • No authority to review substantive decision • Review procedural compliance with notice and comment process • Evaluate preexisting rules for grandfathering

  12. Challenges of Small Airport Restrictions • Identifying operators • Measuring costs • Non-commercial users • Assessing noise benefits • Size of DNL contour • Other metrics • Liability

  13. Case Study: Naples Municipal Airport • Naples Airport Authority was the first airport to complete a Part 161 study and implement a restriction on stage 2 operations since enactment of the Noise Act in 1990 • Hard lessons from being first!

  14. History of Naples Airport Authority efforts • Part 150 Studies • Coordination with local zoning authorities • Local establishment of 60 dB DNL threshold • Aggressive pilot education • Outreach • Stage 1 ban • Aviation community support

  15. The Naples Noise Rule • Bans all stage 2 aircraft operations as of January 1, 2001 • Allows waivers in cases of hardship or good faith efforts to comply

  16. NAA’s Part 161 Study • Followed 15 years of efforts • Incorporated prior studies of non-restrictive approaches • Studied several different operational restrictions • Nighttime curfew • Phased-in approach • Exhaustive public outreach, notice • Extensive FAA coordination

  17. Issues Raised by Naples Study • Least restrictive alternative • Local coordination • Administrative efficiency • DNL metric and 65 dB contour • FAA role • Part 161 process review • Part 161 substantive review • Grant assurances

  18. Current Status of Naples Restriction • Rule in effect • Two dozen waivers granted • Good faith effort to comply • Replacement/ retrofit of aircraft • One-time operation • Enforcement deferred (thru 3/15/01)

  19. Challenges toNaples Restriction • FAA Enforcement Proceeding • Part 161 Subpart F • Part 16 (grant assurances) • Litigation • NBAA • Individual operator

  20. Conclusions:Lessons from Earliest Studies • Focus on smaller airports • Permissible extent of local tailoring • FAA role • Policy • Legal authority

More Related