[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66394-66397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29755]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Approval of Noise Compatibility Program for Van Nuys Airport, Van 
Nuys, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its 
findings on the noise compatibility program submitted by City of Los 
Angeles, Los Angeles World Airports under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 
47501 et seq. (formerly the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act, 
hereinafter referred to as ``the Act'') and 14 Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part 150 (hereinafter referred to as ``Part 150'').

[[Page 66395]]

On April 20, 2009, the FAA determined that the noise exposure maps 
submitted by Los Angeles World Airports under Part 150 were in 
compliance with applicable requirements. On October 16, 2009, the FAA 
approved the Van Nuys Airport noise compatibility program. Fifteen (15) 
of the thirty-five (35) total number of recommendations of the program 
were approved. No program elements relating to new or revised flight 
procedures for noise abatement were proposed by the airport operator.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the 
Noise Compatibility Program for Van Nuys Airport is October 16, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victor Globa, Environmental Protection 
Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration, Los Angeles Airports 
District Office, Mailing Address: P.O. Box 92007, Los Angeles, 
California 90009-2007. Street Address: 15000 Aviation Boulevard, 
Lawndale, California 90261. Telephone: 310/725-3637. Documents 
reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA has given 
its overall approval to the Noise Compatibility Program for Van Nuys 
Airport, effective October 16, 2009.
    Under section 47504 of the Act, an airport operator who has 
previously submitted a Noise Exposure Map may submit to the FAA a Noise 
Compatibility Program which sets forth the measures taken or proposed 
by the airport operator for the reduction of existing non-compatible 
land uses and prevention of additional non-compatible land uses within 
the area covered by the Noise Exposure Maps. The Act requires such 
programs to be developed in consultation with interested and affected 
parties including local communities, government agencies, airport 
users, and FAA personnel.
    Each airport noise compatibility program developed in accordance 
with Part 150 is a local program, not a Federal program. The FAA does 
not substitute its judgment for that of the airport proprietor with 
respect to which measures should be recommended for action. The FAA's 
approval or disapproval of Part 150 program recommendations is measured 
according to the standards expressed in Part 150 and the Act and is 
limited to the following determinations:
    a. The Noise Compatibility Program was developed in accordance with 
the provisions and procedures of Part 150;
    b. Program measures are reasonably consistent with achieving the 
goals of reducing existing non-compatible land uses around the airport 
and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses;
    c. Program measures would not create an undue burden on interstate 
or foreign commerce, unjustly discriminate against types or classes of 
aeronautical uses, violate the terms of airport grant agreements, or 
intrude into areas preempted by the Federal Government; and
    d. Program measures relating to the use of flight procedures can be 
implemented within the period covered by the program without derogating 
safety, adversely affecting the efficient use and management of the 
navigable airspace and air traffic control systems, or adversely 
affecting other powers and responsibilities of the Administrator 
prescribed by law.
    Specific limitations with respect to FAA's approval of an airport 
noise compatibility program are delineated in Part 150, Sec.  150.5. 
Approval is not a determination concerning the acceptability of land 
uses under Federal, state, or local law. Approval does not by itself 
constitute an FAA implementing action. A request for Federal action or 
approval to implement specific noise compatibility measures may be 
required. Prior to an FAA decision on a request to implement the 
action, an environmental review of the proposed action may be required. 
Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially 
assist in the implementation of the program nor a determination that 
all measures covered by the program are eligible for grant-in-aid 
funding from the FAA under applicable law contained in Title 49 U.S.C. 
Where federal funding is sought, requests for project grants must be 
submitted to the FAA Los Angeles Airports District Office in the 
Western-Pacific Region.
    The Van Nuys Airport study contains a proposed noise compatibility 
program comprised of actions designed for phased implementation by 
airport management and adjacent jurisdictions from July 16, 2008 to (or 
beyond) the year 2013. It was requested that the FAA evaluate and 
approve this material as a Noise Compatibility Program as described in 
section 47504 of the Act. The FAA began its review of the program on 
April 20, 2009, and was required by a provision of the Act to approve 
or disapprove the program within 180 days (other than the use of new or 
modified flight procedures for noise control). Failure to approve or 
disapprove such program within the 180-day period shall be deemed to be 
an approval of such program.
    The submitted program contained 35 proposed actions for noise 
abatement, noise mitigation, land use planning and program management 
on and off the airport. The FAA completed its review and determined 
that the procedural and substantive requirements of the Act and Part 
150 have been satisfied. The overall program was approved by the FAA, 
effective October 16, 2009.
    FAA approval was granted for fifteen (15) specific program 
measures. The approved measures included such items as: [Measure 
1] Airport Land Use Compatibility (ALUC) Plan; [Measure 
16] Noise Roundtable; [Measure 18] Automated Feedback 
System; and [Measure 23] Noise Abatement Officer. One (1) 
measure; [Measure 11] Improved Communications [Helicopter 
Operations] was approved for improving means of communication; but 
disapproved for any changes to existing flight procedures not approved 
in the NCP and flight tracks; [Measure 14] Signage was 
approved for procedures already in effect at the airport; [Measure 
3] Additional Development Within Impact Area is approved with 
respect to preventing the introduction of new housing but the portion 
of the measure that permits new noncompatible development within the 
DNL 65 dB, even with sound attenuation and/or easement is disapproved 
for purposes of Part 150 since it is inconsistent with the FAA's 
guidelines and 1998 policy; [Measure 17] Noise Management 
Monitoring System is approved for purposes of Part 150. Approval of 
this measure does not obligate the FAA to participate in funding the 
acquisition or installation of the permanent noise monitors and 
associated equipment. Note, for the purpose of aviation safety, this 
approval does not extend to the use of monitoring equipment for 
enforcement purposes by in-situ measurement of any pre-set noise 
thresholds; [Measure 5] Van Nuys Helicopter Policy is approved 
for study, however, the portion of the measure that recommends adoption 
of local plans and ordinances as necessary to regulate the 
establishment and operation of new helicopter landing facilities is 
disapproved; [Measure 12] Establish Noise Abatement and 
Departure Techniques for All Aircraft Departing Van Nuys was approved 
as a voluntary measure since the measure refers to the existing 
voluntary Fly Friendly program. Any changes to the voluntary nature of 
the Fly Friendly program or an adjustment to flight profiles is 
disapproved; [Measure 21] Marketing Policy has been approved 
as voluntary. Any mandatory enforcement of this

[[Page 66396]]

policy would constitute an airport noise and access restriction that 
may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and 
Capacity Act of 1990, 49 U.S.C. 47524(b), and 14 CFR part 161;[Measure 
13] Establish Noise Abatement and Departure Procedures was 
approved in part, as voluntary; disapproved in part pending compliance 
with 14 CFR part 161. The measure related to maintaining the existing 
flight procedure at the airport is approved as voluntary. Any changes 
to the voluntary nature of the Fly Friendly program or adjustments to 
flight profiles is disapproved; [Measure 19] Tenant 
Association has been approved in part. This approval does not extend to 
solutions or recommendations by the Tenant Association to existing 
operational procedures. These must be vetted through the FAA to 
determine their impacts on aviation safety and efficiency; [Measure 
2] Insulation and [Measure 22] Financial Assistance 
have been approved for homes or noncompatible development that was 
constructed or existed before October 1, 1998. Homes acoustically 
treated by the City of Los Angeles prior to approval of the Part 150 
study cannot be made eligible for federal AIP or PFC funding.
    FAA disapproved twenty (20) specific program measures. The 
disapproved measures included: [Measure 4] Construction and 
Capital Improvement was disapproved due to lack of quantifiable 
benefits identified and the FAA not being able to determine how the 
measure contributes to improving the noise environment around the 
airport; [Measure 6] West Side Operations was disapproved due 
to lack of quantitative analysis and the changes in altitudes would 
increase complexity for pilots and controllers; [Measure 7] 
Helicopter Training Facility was disapproved since the airport does not 
have authority to regulate numbers of operations; such action would be 
subject to analysis and approval under 14 CFR part 161. Also, the NCP 
does not provide sufficient information to determine that there would 
be a noise benefit; [Measure 8] Improve Use of Established 
[Helicopter] Routes was disapproved since the recommended Stagg Street 
arrival/departure procedure would create a safety hazard for FAA Air 
Traffic Control. It is also noted that the NCP states that an analysis 
of benefits was not conducted, and that it is not likely that benefits 
will occur within the CNEL noise contours of the official NEMs; 
[Measure 9] Bull Creek [Helicopter] Route to Balboa was 
disapproved since the 1991 Helicopter Study indicates a shift in 
helicopter traffic to Balboa Boulevard would require helicopters to fly 
over more residential areas and a school. Without current land use 
information, it is not possible to tell whether new noncompatible land 
uses would be impacted or benefitted should the route be shifted; 
[Measure 10] [Altitude of] Public Service [Helicopter] Fleets 
was disapproved since aircraft altitudes may not be established by 
local ordinance. Any study of possible changes to the airspace in the 
vicinity of Van Nuys Airport must be conducted in consultation with the 
FAA's Air Traffic Organization because of the potential impacts on 
airspace service and efficiency. Should a study recommend changes in 
altitude that are demonstrated to be safe, they may be submitted for 
approval in 14 CFR part 150; [Measure 15] Runway Policy--Full 
Length Departure was disapproved since there is no analysis to 
demonstrate the measure's noise benefits and the FAA cannot determine 
how the measure contributes to improving the noise environment around 
the Airport. This disapproval does not prohibit or discourage 
continuation of exiting practices to use the full runway length outside 
the Part 150 program; [Measure 20] Automatic Terminal 
Information Service (ATIS) Message was disapproved since FAA Order 
7110.65 Air Traffic Control, no longer provides for noise abatement 
advisories; [Measure 24] Noise Abatement Information was 
disapproved since noise abatement procedures are airport specific and 
must be evaluated for effectiveness at individual airports. Any new 
procedures proposed for noise mitigation at VNY may not be implemented 
prior to conducting a study to determine whether they can be 
implemented safely and efficiently, and whether they are noise 
beneficial; [Measure 25] Raising Burbank (Bob Hope Airport) 
Glideslope was disapproved since the FAA has concerns regarding the 
``ripple'' effect the change to the glideslope would cause within the 
Southern California Terminal Radar Control (TRACON) airspace around 
VNY. Traffic is already constrained by multiple regulated airspace 
areas and high terrain nearby. Raising the glideslope at Bob Hope 
Airport would require additional changes to vertical altitude for 
separation changes. This will create the loss of significant designated 
altitude when there is an aircraft executing the Instrument Landing 
System to Bob Hope Airport. Loss of any altitude will be detrimental to 
air traffic operations in the vicinity; [Measure 27] Air 
Traffic Control Tower (ATC) was disapproved since specific standards 
must be met prior to extending the hours of operation at any ATC 
facility. FAA does not enforce locally enacted noise rules. Keeping the 
tower open solely for the purpose of noise abatement does not meet 
these criteria; [Measure 26] Lease Policy which was 
disapproved for purposes of Part 150 since the NCP analysis includes 
very little information on the measure. The measure appears to apply 
only to jet aircraft, which could be unjustly discriminatory and it 
does not discuss potential impacts on owners of non-staged, Stage 1 and 
other non-Stage 2 aircraft; [Measure 28] Aircraft ``N'' 
Numbers were disapproved for purposes of Part 150 since there is 
insufficient information to demonstrate a measurable noise benefit; 
[Measure 29] Incentives and Disincentives in Rental Rates was 
disapproved since the proposed measure could constitute an airport 
noise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full 
compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, 49 U.S.C. 
47521 et seq., and 14 CFR part 161; [Measure 30] Incentives 
and Disincentives in Landing Fees was disapproved since the proposed 
measure could constitute an airport noise and access restriction that 
may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and 
Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161; [Measure 31] 
Expansion of Fines was disapproved since the measure proposes to expand 
fines to mandate compliance with a voluntary Fly Friendly program that 
constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that may only be 
adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act 
of 1990 (ANCA), 49 U.S.C. 47524(b), and 14 CFR part 161; [Measure 
32] Maximum Daytime Noise Limits was disapproved since the NCP 
does not quantify noise benefits derived from implementing this measure 
and this measure constitutes an airport noise and access restriction 
that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise 
and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The completed 
Part 161 analysis may be submitted for FAA reconsideration of this 
measure under Part 150 if an FAA determination under Part 150 is being 
sought; [Measure 33] Limit on Stage 3 Jets was disapproved 
since the NCP does not quantify the noise benefits and this measure 
constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that may only be 
adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act 
of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The completed Part 161 analysis 
may be

[[Page 66397]]

submitted for FAA reconsideration of this measure under Part 150 if an 
FAA determination under Part 150 is being sought; [Measure 34] 
Expansion of Curfew was disapproved since the NCP does not quantify the 
noise benefits and this measure constitutes an airport noise and access 
restriction that may only be adopted after full compliance with the 
Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The 
completed Part 161 analysis may be submitted for FAA reconsideration of 
this measure under Part 150 if an FAA determination under Part 150 is 
being sought; and [Measure 35] Cap/Phase-Out of Helicopters 
was disapproved since the NCP does not quantify the noise benefits and 
this measure constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that 
may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and 
Capacity Act of 1990, and 14 CFR part 161. The completed Part 161 
analysis may be submitted for FAA reconsideration of this measure under 
Part 150 if an FAA determination under Part 150 is being sought. These 
determinations are set forth in detail in a Record of Approval signed 
by the Associate Administrator for Airports (ARP-1) on October 16, 
2009. The Record of Approval, as well as other evaluation materials and 
the documents comprising the submittal, are available for review at the 
FAA office listed above and at the administrative offices of the City 
of Los Angeles, Los Angeles World Airports.
    The Record of Approval also will be available on-line at: http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/airports/environmental/airport_noise/part_150/states/.

    Issued in Hawthorne on December 4, 2009.
Mark A. McClardy
Manager, Airports Division, Western-Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. E9-29755 Filed 12-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P