[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 190 (Monday, October 3, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24368]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 3, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. 27649]

 

Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Effects of 
Changes in Aircraft Flight Patterns Over the State of New Jersey

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Issuance of A Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) For Public Review and Comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA has decided to prepare a supplement to the draft 
environmental impact statement (DEIS) on the effects of changes in 
aircraft flight patterns over the State of New Jersey caused by 
implementation of the Expanded East Coast Plan (EECP). As a result of 
the analysis phase of the comment period associated with the DEIS, new 
information was developed by the FAA. Additionally, new information was 
received from the public during the comment period. Since this 
information is pertinent to the decision process leading to issuance of 
a final EIS (FEIS), the public should have an opportunity to examine 
the new material and comment on it prior to completion of the FEIS.
    The supplemental DEIS (SDEIS) was prepared in accordance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Copies have been mailed to 
individuals that participated in the EIS process as well as to 
libraries in select locations throughout New Jersey.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of key portions 
of the SDEIS and major areas of concern identified by the public. It is 
not intended to duplicate or cover every aspect of the SDEIS. 
Substantive comments submitted to the FAA should address the SDEIS, not 
this summary.

I. Summary of Key Portions of the SDEIS

A. Alternatives and Mitigation Under Consideration

    The following alternatives were evaluated and are being considered 
by the FAA:
    (1) Alternative A. Maintain the current (as defined in 1991) EECP 
structure. (Proposed action and no action)
    (2) Alternative B. Return to 1986 air traffic routes and procedures 
using 1991 traffic. (Rollback)
    (3) Alternative C2. Route Newark south flow departure traffic from 
over Raritan Bay to over the ocean (at night only) via a specific path 
defined by the Solberg and Colts Neck navigational aids. (Nighttime 
only oceanic/military routing)
    Alternative D3. Spread aircraft departing Newark runways 22L and 
22R to three different headings. (Spreading of fanning)
    These alternatives are described in detail in Chapter 3 of the 
SDEIS. Two mitigation measures were evaluated and are also being 
considered:
    (1) Routing some westbound departures from Newark to a new 
departure gate in the vicinity of the Solberg navigational aid.
    (2) Moving LaGuardia arrival traffic further south from its current 
routing.
    These mitigation measures are described in detail in Chapter 6 of 
the SDEIS. These measures, if selected by the decision-maker for 
implementation, would reduce noise by Day-Night Level (DNL) 5 dB or 
greater for approximately 18,500 residents of the Scotch Plains and 
Fanwood areas of Union County, New Jersey. These were two of the areas 
that experienced some of the greatest increases in noise as a result of 
implementation of the EECP.

B. Environmental Consequences

    None of the alternatives would cause significant noise, air quality 
or water quality impacts. (The one exception identified in the area of 
noise results from the assumptions used in reconstructing and modeling 
the return to 1986 routes and procedures.) Noise analysis indicates 
that 1.45 million individuals would be impacted by noise increases of 
DNL 5 dB or greater if the FAA returned to use of 1986 routes and 
procedures, while approximately 45,000 individuals would experience 
noise benefits of DNL 5 dB or greater. Fanning and nighttime use of 
ocean routing would have marginal noise benefits. In response to the 
volume of comments concerning noise impacts in particular communities, 
Appendix F of the SDEIS provides the increases in noise level predicted 
for each census block in New Jersey.

C. Public Participation

    In preparing the SDEIS the FAA has carefully summarized and 
addressed the comments received on the DEIS and made revisions to the 
text as appropriate. There have been extensive opportunities for public 
participation since the DEIS was made available on November 12, 1992. 
In January, 1993, the FAA held public hearings in New Jersey to obtain 
comments on the DEIS. In addition, two public meetings were held in 
Staten Island, New York to address the DEIS and the New York 
Metropolitan Area Aircraft Noise Mitigation Review, a study mandated by 
Congress, which specifically addressed noise issues in the New York 
metropolitan area, including parts of Connecticut and New Jersey, 
separate from the EIS action. The comment period on the DEIS extended 
from November 12, 1992 to November 23, 1993. This 369 day comment 
period was well in excess on NEPA requirements.

II. Areas of Controversy

    In addition to noise, air, and water quality impacts, the major 
areas of controversy concerning this EIS were alternate use of ocean 
routing, effects or aircraft noise on property values, and the scope of 
the EIS.

A. Ocean Routing

    Many commenters believed the alternative of using ocean routes 24 
hours a day should be studied in detail as a reasonable alternative. 
Several different proposals were considered in the DEIS, but eliminated 
due to concerns about operational feasibility and potential 
environmental impacts. In June 1993, the New Jersey Citizens for 
Environmental Research (NJCER), on behalf of the New Jersey Coalition 
Against Aircraft Noise, submitted a proposal to route all Newark 
Airport departures south, down the Arthur Kill and over Raritan Bay to 
the ocean. This study was analyzed operationally and modeled to 
determine its noise impacts within the scope of this EIS.
    Operational examination indicates this proposal would cause about 5 
points of conflicting traffic within New Jersey, require tunneling of 
traffic from Newark under traffic from other airports, and cause 
substantial delays at Newark.
    Noise analysis indicates this proposal would have net benefits of 
DNL 5 dB or greater for approximately 228,000 New Jersey residents 
(690,000 residents would benefit while 462,000 residents would 
experience increased noise of DNL 5 dB or greater). In addition there 
appear to be potentially significant adverse noise impacts in areas 
south of Newark that would be overflown by aircraft at altitudes below 
3,000 above ground level (AGL) feet as well as in New York and 
Connecticut. Additional environmental review would be required to 
examine these impacts, which are beyond the scope of this EIS. This 
proposal is described in detail in Chapter 1 of the SDEIS.

B. Effect of Noise on Property Values

    Another area of concern was the effect of noise increases on real 
property values. There is insufficient scientific data to support a 
reasonable conclusion about whether the noise levels associated with 
implementation of the EECP have, or its alternatives would have, 
depressed property values in New Jersey. The economic studies of the 
effects of airport noise on house values to date, which have found a 
slight devaluation, have involved properties in or near urban areas 
surrounding major airports at noise exposure levels exceeding those in 
this EIS. This is discussed in detail in Section 5.2.1 of the SDEIS.

C. Scope of the EIS

    Another controversial issue was the scope of the EIS. The legal and 
policy reasons supporting the decision to limit the scope of the EIS to 
New Jersey and to air traffic changes above 3,000 AGL feet are fully 
explained in Chapter 2 of the SDEIS and Appendix A. Briefly, the FAA 
adhered strictly to the congressional mandate to study New Jersey 
because of the complexity of an expanded study, the difficulty of 
identifying objective criteria for excluding portions of the other 18 
States and the District of Columbia that were also potentially affected 
by the EECP, and the time constraints on the EIS process. The EIS 
examines changes above 3,000 AGL feet because that was the scope of the 
EECP. To assure compliance with NEPA, no alternative will be selected 
for implementation until all applicable environmental review 
requirements have been satisfied.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For further information contact Mr. William J. Marx, FAA Office of Air 
Traffic System Management, Environmental Issues Program Office, ATM-
700, Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-7900.
    Any person may obtain a copy of the SDEIS by submitting a request 
to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public Affairs, 
Attention: Public Inquiry Center, APA-230, 800 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling FAA's toll-free Consumer Hotline: 
1-800-FAA-SURE between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through 
Friday, excluding Federal holidays.

COMMENT PERIOD: The public will be afforded a 60-day period to comment 
upon release of the SDEIS. The opportunity to comment will extend from 
September 30, until November 30, 1994. Comments will be considered in 
preparing the FEIS. Late-filed comments will be considered to the 
extend practicable.
    Written comments on the SDEIS should be received at the following 
address, in triplicate, by November 30, 1994: Headquarters Federal 
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attn: Rules 
Docket (AGC-10), Docket No. 27649, 800 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20591. Comments may be delivered or inspected at Room 
915G in FAA headquarters between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
    Additionally, the FAA intends to conduct hearings and a meeting to 
gather comments on the SDEIS. The FAA will conduct public hearings in 
Cranford, Bernardsville and Tinton Falls, New Jersey to solicit both 
written and oral comments. A public meeting will also be held in Staten 
Island, New York. All persons wishing to make oral presentations at the 
public hearings and the public meeting are strongly urged to provide a 
written copy of their statements at the hearing/meeting or at the FAA 
address provided in the above paragraph. The exact dates, times and 
locations of the hearings in New Jersey and the meeting in Staten 
Island will be published in a subsequent Federal Register Notice and 
through the Press when arrangements are finalized.

    Issued in Washington, DC on September 28, 1994.
Bill F. Jeffers,
Acting Associate Administrator for Air Traffic.
[FR Doc. 94-24368 Filed 9-30-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M