Using Airport Design Standards To Justify Shrinking An Airport: Is It For Safety Or Noise? PRESENTED TO THE 2009 FAC ENVIRONMENTAL AND NOISE CONFERENCE JANUARY 16, 2009 Daniel S. Reimer Kaplan Kirsch and Rockwell
A Brief History of Noise Pre - 1990: Small number of noise restrictions causing big fears in the industry; left to courts to resolve 1990: Airport Noise and Capacity Act 1990-2000 Commercial service - Stage 2 phaseout Few local efforts under ANCA and Part 161 (all unsuccessful) Some grandfather efforts Post - 2000 Stage 4 rule Naples Stage 2 ban Burbank Part 161 Study (ongoing) A few grandfather efforts (VNY ongoing) 2
Noise Today Aircraft Likely national phase-out of remaining Stage 2 Stage 3 are protected under ANCA and FAA policy Slow transition to Stage 4 Local restrictions Consensus that ANCA and Part 161 are not a realistic means to impose local noise rules Instead, continued reliance on traditional tools (e.g., sound insulation, land acquisition, voluntary noise abatement) Note New requirements for land acquisition make this option harder to manage 3
Challenges Ahead All airports Few options for abatement (FLL, FXE, SUA) Some prospects for relief (CDA, NextGen) Difficult balance among noise, air quality, and GHG emissions No resolution on park issues Small airports Increased general aviation traffic and growth of fractionals Continued concern about so-called changes in the character of the airport VLJs may be noise-neutral, but their future remains uncertain No one knows when economy will turn around... but it will Noise problem solved? Probably not 4
Runway Safety Zones Runway Safety Area RSA Runway Runway Protection Zone - RPZ Runway 5
Runway Safety Reminder - FAA doesn t say, You must very often, but often says, You should and You may not. Sponsor s safety-related obligations Generalized grant assurance obligation to maintain airport FAA design standards for RSA and RPZ based on use (A/C 150/5300-13) Part 139 Basic standards for all RSAs; upgrade required when making certain improvements to older runways (former rule) FAA initiative to implement Part 139 (Order 5200.8 (1999), Order 5200.9 (2004)) Liability concerns Local safety-based restrictions -???? Non-Part 139 airports -???? 6
National Focus on Runway Safety High-profile accidents and overruns caused high-level concern Scrutiny of specific airports (MDW) Change in federal law P.L. 109-115 (2005); 49 U.S.C. Sec. 44706 (note) By 2015, Part 139 airports must improve runway safety areas to comply with FAA design standards (i.e., You must. ) The FAA must report annually to Congress on the agency's progress toward improving RSAs 7
FAA Implementation 2000: FAA identified 456 RSAs needing improvement FAA considers practicability in measuring compliance EMAS has altered practicability determination 2000 2007: Over 225 improvements Airports FY09 Business Plan (Nov. 2008) 225 RSAs need improvement 26 improvements scheduled for FY09 Status report in Summer 2009 Numbers vary by report 8
Recent Events Recent shift in attention to runway incursions; renewed emphasis on runway markings and other improvements June 2008 Runway Safety Report focused almost exclusively on incursions DOT OIG initiated audit in Oct. 2007 on FAA progress in improving RSAs; no final report S.2941 (Runway Safety Improvement Act of 2008) Next FAA report to Congress? 9
Airport Response Not as much of a problem for commercial service airports Requirements are clear Land often available (developed or vacant buffer) Physically-constrained airports may rely on EMAS (e.g., BUR) Some difficult projects Santa Barbara Airport (coastal zone) Tweed New Haven Airport (local zoning) 10
RSA at GA Airports Some GA airports face significant constraints Courtesy Martin County, FL 11
General Aviation Airports Regulatory structure remains unclear No move yet to require conforming RSAs at all federally-obligated airports But the pressure is mounting Grant assurances and conditions FAA pressure at individual airports Community pressure Liability exposure 12
Community Response New and improved arguments about runway safety Unrelated safety issues often blurred: runway incursions; accidents in flight; compatible land use; overruns, undershoots and veer-offs Same change in character argument Perception that conforming RSA will lead to growth, increased traffic Using safety as a surrogate for noise? 13
Small Airport Response Community, FAA, and airport sponsor may not have the same solution in mind Community may want to see: reduced operations, shorter runways, closed or relocated airport FAA wants to see: airfield improvements, land acquisition, EMAS But, FAA does not want to see reduced capacity Airport sponsor caught in the middle 14
Small Airport Responses Case Studies SMO HVN SUA Yet to be resolved Opportunity to change runway lengths (physical, effective) Role of local zoning Sponsor s authority to restrict aircraft in the interest of safety Further regulatory oversight (change from You should to You must ) 15
Coming Attractions Large airports Will the FAA and commercial service airports makes the 2015 deadline? How will Congress react to FAA s practicability test? What are the consequences of failure? Small airports Many legal questions unresolved Relationship to other safety issues (e.g., incursions) Community pressure not likely to abate All airports Many issues bound together in the eyes of the community Airports should try to keep issues distinct, even if the effort is not always successful 16
Questions Daniel S. Reimer Kaplan Kirsch & Rockwell Tel. (303) 825-7000 E-mail dreimer@kaplankirsch.com Web www.kaplankirsch.com Web www.airportattorneys.com 17