Comment from Brambleton Community Association

PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. Brambleton Community Association, a community of 6,500 homes (growing to more than 8,000) with more than 25,000 residents in Loudoun County, Virginia, situated in close proximity to the Dulles International Airport, thanks the Federal Aviation Administration for the opportunity to respond to the notice in the Federal Register entitled 'Overview of FAA Aircraft Noise Policy and Research Efforts: Request for Input on Research Activities to Inform Aircraft Noise Policy', which will provide input for the FAA's Noise Policy Review.
Brambleton has been involved in numerous discussions with several agencies for many years regarding operations at Dulles International, and we have noted that the FAA established compatible land use guidelines for a variety of land uses in 'Part 150, Appendix A, Table 1 Land Use Compatibility with Yearly Day-Night Average Sound Levels', and that the NPR will also consider the criteria for application of noise mitigation measures to address adverse noise exposure in areas that the FAA currently considers to be “normally compatible” with airport operations.
As noted by the authors of the NPR, the FAA’s current standards, implemented at Congress’ direction in 1981 by issuing the regulations at Part 150, were based on the Schultz Curve and were most recently updated in 1992. While the Schultz Curve remains the accepted standard for describing transportation noise exposure-annoyance relationships, its original supporting scientific evidence and social survey data were based on information that was available in the 1970s. More recent analyses have shown that aviation noise results in higher annoyance than other modes of transportation, and, as noted on the FAA's website, international social surveys have also generally shown higher annoyance than the Schultz Curve. These analyses and survey data indicate that the Schultz Curve may not reflect the current U.S. public perception of aviation noise.
We have also noted that the preponderance of the comments submitted to the FAA on the NPR have addressed specific noise issues at specific airports. While our comments are guided by our experience with Dulles International, we believe that we have identified six systemic issues that, if addressed, will assist the FAA NPR in making significant progress in reducing future noise impacts.
Considering this background, our Association makes the following recommendations for inclusion in the regulations that will come from the NPR and the eventual update of Part 150: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2486

Open/Download Filing

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from FedEx Express

See attached file(s): Comments - FAA-2023-1488 - AD-2023-00182-T

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-1488-0009

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Jump Aero Incorporated

See attached file(s)

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-1377-0447

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association

Please see attached AOPA Comments

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-1351-0020

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Anonymous

Airplane noise often wakes me up, disturbs me while working at home and while talking to friends. It used to be less noise when planes had to fly further over my property. Please do all you can to require planes that pass over cities (wow, a loud one is going over as I type with speed brakes making additional noise!) to fly as far above us as possible. I prefer 10,000 feet but 6,000 feet is an improvement over the lower altitudes such as 4903 Feet that the latest noisy planed just flew over my house. (Sep 18, 10:55:18 B62735 (LAX:SFO A320 244k, 4903ft))

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2473

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Nicole Palmer

Concord resident in the flight path for Hanscom Airfield

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2462

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Air Line Pilots Association, Int'l

See attached ALPA file(s) for Docket #FAA-2023-1652

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-1652-0004

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Donald Duerr

See attached file(s)

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-1377-0426

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Mohammed AL AZANI

See attached file(s)

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2022-1605-0003

Open/Download Filing

Open/Download Filing

Open/Download Filing

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Jim Alkire

We live on Vashon Island, a rural area near Seattle. As a rural area we are not permitted to have industry, 4 lane highways or other noise creating structures. We don't even have a stop light. The loudest noise we currently have are the more than 250 airplanes flying overhead every day of the year. Although we do not meet your DNL cutoff, the noise level in our rural area is just as damaging as the city noise over 65 DNL. According to your DBA scale, rural areas have ambient noise of 40DBA. This has been shown accurate by our rural noise monitor in 2020. However, when arriving planes fly over the island the noise jumps to 60 to 70 DBA depending upon the aircraft type. While this is still low in direct comparison to a noisy urban environment, the jump of up to 30 DB is damaging to our rural way of life. This issue is acerbated by the FAA policy of NextGen. As you can see by the attached daily flow map, NextGen runs right over the heart of Vashon Island. The lastest statistics from Sea-Tac airport show 17,000-19,000 landings per month. In the course of a year over 70% are in south flow. Most of which are over Vashon Island. That makes for an average of 250+ flights per day directly over our island. We understand the wisdom of having airplanes travel over water as much as possible. However, having planes flying over a rural island of 12,000 people at altitudes ranging from 3,000 to 9,000 feet depending upon flow (most are 5,500 to 6,500) is a "cookie cutter" approach which does not take into consideration individual circumstances. To this end we request the FAA consider ambient noise levels i their SEL calculations. In addition, we request that Next Gen be removed from the west side of Sea Tac and that the noise is spread out over a wider area as it is on the east side of Sea Tac. If Next Gen is so good, why isn't it used on the east side of the airport as well? There would be no rural areas affected on that side of the airport. I think the answer is obvious: the one million affected people on the east side would be up in arms, however, the 12,000 people on Vashon don't matter. Thank you for your time.

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2420

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Nan Bernstein Ratner

Noise levels in Bannockburn section of Bethesda Maryland

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2388

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from KASEY SHUE

Title: Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: International Role of the Federal Aviation Administration.1) the power of Federal agencies to impose civil monetary penalties for violations of Federal law and regulations plays an important role in deterring violations and furthering the policy goals embodied in such laws and regulations;

(2) the impact of many civil monetary penalties has been and is diminished due to the effect of inflation;

(3) by reducing the impact of civil monetary penalties, inflation has weakened the deterrent effect of such penalties . . .
OMB Control Number: 2120–XXXX.
further state that they intend
to continue existing operations of Royal
and as such, the transaction will not
materially impact employees or labor
conditions. (Id. at 8.) Applicants assert
that that neither competition nor the
public interest will be adversely affected
by the proposed transaction, as Royal’s
operations consist primarily of charter
bus transportation, as well as limited
employee commuter services, which are
markets that are very competitive in the
geographic areas served by Royal. (Id. at
9.) Applicants note that all charter
service providers, including Royal,
compete with other modes of passenger
transportation This action is categorically excluded
from environmental review under 49
CFR 1105.6(c). The statute
further requires the Administrator to
engage bilaterally and multilaterally on
an ongoing basis to bolster international
collaboration and to harmonize
international aviation safety
requirements, and to expand the
technical assistance provided by the
FAA in support of enhancing
international aviation safety.) Each Shall give an interested person
the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.
(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 383.)Raina White,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. 2023–17791 Filed 8–17–23; 8:45 am]and India Pinkney,
Executive Director, Office of International
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2023–17771 Filed 8–17–23; 8:45 am
Nicholas DeLotell by email at:
nicholas.delotell@faa.gov; phone: 202–
710–1163.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public now for me here the probelm i have with the action in question by what information set out on this docket
and names i have listed whether facts or in my case who knows what is true or not .And yes i am that of the person that may or may not have been lied to stolen from and hidden from withheld information for years .Now in the docket its state that it was not given the power to any person or agency to withold information or funds from any one . Which they have done 3 YEARS ,now where i come from that is called haressment and not to be cover up by those they have something to gain including aviation Administration and DHS ,Gov in itself is at question as they set there making important calls or puts as i like to say
as they do a good job and have a lot on there plat no doubt but at what cost do we go so far as to toture ,(train ) as it may be in my shoes to be honest
would not go about it in a way that was done .Not to be a party popper if i may speak to bold or lack of I think that what these high gifted folks are good people they are trying to trick and cover up what was done to resources and help that was placed on so called PI VOne 1107253 and others .I have worked hard and long unpaid is a long time to keep going at something and never truly knowing if it going to pan out will be a downer at times and is to say i not against the action in place its just that it needs to be done in a way thats is looked at with unbaised and without media upoar . FACTS THATS the burden is mild as to the figure dicussed seems fair and will not effect the people .I COME TO YOU TODAY begging for mercy and ask that you see to it thats those in charge are not doing the world harm and trying to pull a mask over your face with such evil and sick ways of getting information or making someone work for free and then turning it on that person as if it was there fault is just outrageous to me . I AM FOR TRYING to make it right and for everyone to live in a world that is the best we can make it rich and clean peaceful ,bright and god fearing world . SO I say the burden is justice and will not effect with such a way and agree with those incharge to carry out the action .Thanks and have a great day . 9MC-TX

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2022-1605-0004

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Air Line Pilots Association, Int'l

See attached ALPA file(s) for Docket #FAA-2023-1497

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-1497-0007

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Anonymous

As of May 30th 2023, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (“DCA”) averages 819 daily takeoffs and landings of commercial jets on its main runway, making it the busiest runway in the nation. According to the upcoming flight schedule, there will be 2,792 departures from DCA this week alone, almost all of which will depart from DCA’s only commercially viable long runway. In June 2023, there were 24,474 enplanements at DCA, 24,104 of which were commercial operations.

The neighborhood where I reside with my family is located about 7 miles northwest of Ronald Reagan National Airport (DCA) near the Potomac River. Given the proximity of the flight path to our home because of RNAV, the overwhelming majority of flights travel DIRECTLY over our neighborhood. Some flights travel on visual approach down the Potomac River, which is better but still creates material amounts of aircraft noise.

As for the time of day, ALMOST ANY daily flight schedule out of DCA typically begins well before 7 AM and ends around 1 AM. For example, on September 18, 2023, the first flight to depart DCA is at 6:41 AM, and the last departure is at 11:59 PM. Due to significant delays out of DCA due to heavy volume, flights typically depart or arrive AFTER midnight. Given the volume of enplanements at DCA, there are very few periods of the day where there is not air traffic out of or into DCA every minute or two.

DCA had 24,474 enplanements in June 2023 (the latest that DCA has made statistics available. Over a 30-day period, that equates to 815.8 enplanements/day. There is an approximately 60/40 split between north flow versus south flow operations and my family lives north of the airport (60% of the time, aircraft are taking off to the north). 815.8 x .6 = 490 events per day that either take a northbound approach or departure. Subtracting for a quiet period between 1 AM and 6 AM = 26 northbound enplanements per hour, with a higher number of those occurring during the non-penalized daytime hours before 10 PM (at least 30-35 per hour. That equates to a flight event over my home and neighborhood during peak times about every 1-2 minutes.

The average inbound airplane altitude over my home is between 1,400-1,700 feet, and outbound altitude is between 2,500-4,000 feet

As for the NOISE impact, at this proximity, noise events occur inside the home during all flight events. We experience noise events during my children’s bedtime and they occur at any time during which my family goes to bed, or wakes up in the morning.

Noise also impacts my family’s ability to leave the windows open, or use open air areas of our home.

Outdoor noise almost always results in pausing conversations with others while flights pass overhead. Given the frequency of those events (every 2 minutes), it is extremely disruptive.

Sleep disruption - flight noise is one of the last things my family hears as we go to bed, and the noise that frequently wakes us. It’s unavoidable. It is also inconsistent and uncertain. Due to frequent flight delays at DCA due to flight volume and weather, flights frequently arrive well after midnight and some departures happen on a scheduled basis before 6 AM. 5 hours of dependable quiet time is insufficient.

Health, Well-being, and Emotional impact - The flight noise is disruptive in all areas of our lives. Not only does it disrupt how we can enjoy our home and area, but it is also extremely disproportionate given that the flight pattern into and out of DCA always occurs over our home. It does not occur over the Potomac River other than visual landings, and it doesn’t occur in other areas of the region due to technology other than southbound departures and arrivals into DCA. The technology is so good that planes are always flying on the same general path with very little variance. Also, given the overwhelming scientific evidence of the negative effects of aircraft noise and the insufficiency of the DNL 65 metric, we have to live with the knowledge that the noise is affecting the quality of our sleep, our cardiovascular health, stress levels and the welfare of our children. It is a factual health hazard, and much more than a distraction or nuisance.

I have submitted noise complaints and contacted the DCA ombudsman. The house complaints seem to be aggregated as a metric, but no specific action has been taken. The DCA ombudsman has pointed to resources, but has appeared powerless to make any meaningful change to the issue.

We feel helpless and disrespected, and powerless against the seemingly insatiable need to fit as much air traffic into and out of DCA for commercial benefit, regardless of the negative impact on our health and welfare.

I hope and expect that the FAA will adopt a new noise policy and add new metrics that protect overflown communities and near-airport communities from harm based on my lived experience.

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2433

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from The Charlotte Airport Community Roundtable

See attached file(s)

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2447

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder

Comment from Robert Shatten

September 16, 2023
RE: Comments on Docket Number FAA–2023–0855

1.Vehicle Type: As privately-owned and chartered jet service has greatly expanded since 1976, this category of aircraft should be included in updated FAA noise policy. The revised standards must include a nighttime standard versus the current standard as this is when the most adverse impacts to communities occur as the deviation above ambient background is the greatest.
2.Operation of Air Vehicles: The FAA noise metric needs to include and model the change above background ambient noise levels during all forms of operations. See attached Massachusetts noise policy as an example. The 65 dBA standard is too high. See attached decibel metric and World Health Organization (WHO) Standard where noise should not exceed 45 dBLAeq and 60 dBLA max so that people can sleep with the windows open. These metrics would help address community concerns over noise and are well developed public health standards that prevent the propagation of noise pollution.
3.FAA’s DNL Standard: See above and attached documents. Day/night standard would also greatly benefit communities and airport operations.
3bAveraging of DNL – cumulative description of noise by averaging annually falsely depicts lower noise impacts as sound impacts from aviation are intermittent and considerably above background ambient noise levels. Five minute average noise measurement intervals (day/night) would be a better sound metric due to the intermittent nature of aviation noise so that these can be better identified and remedied.
3c. Epidemiologic evidence must be included in FAA decision-making. No need to reinvent the wheel in terms of researching public health impacts. Sound decision-making can lize existing state public health noise data, EPA, WHO data. Day/night standards and limits would greatly improve public health especially in terms of avoiding sleep disruption.
8. Yes, a new AA noise threshold should be established using a single event standard especially for nighttime operations. Consistent with MA noise policy, no increase above ambient of 10 dBA or more should be permitted as an operational metric.
10. Miscellaneous – where existing airports levy fines for nighttime operations, these fines should be given to the residences of the communities that are impacted by the sound disturbances from nighttime operations. Funding from the fees could be utilized for sound proofing of homes for example.

Comment Date:2023-09-18T04:00:00Z

Comment On Document ID:FAA-2023-0855-2393

Open regulations.gov Docket Folder