Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Studying the systemic dispersal of flight patterns to try and alleviate noise levels
Conducting several noise initiatives and health surveys to better understand the effects of airplane and helicopter noise levels on residents
Creating a central FAA repository where all resident complaints will be stored and organized via the internet
Providing enhanced community outreach
and while this is a step (and a very small step) in the right direction, what is this going to take another 5 - 7 years to "study"???
I love "to better understand" phrase. What is there better to understand, the residents have been complaining of noise they never had to endure, never mind "studying", re route the freaking planes already, or better yet, put the dam plane routes back the way they were. Where everyone was able to live peacefully.
These 'studies" all should have of been done right from the beginning of the implementations across America, not 5 years later. Didnt anyone at the FAA even remotely think that planes at much lower altitudes spaced so closley togehter would cause more noise? seriously, did they ever think of that????
these articles, while I appreciate that Misf posts them here for us, are still dissapointing, for they are still really doing nothing.
how long are studies supposed to be for, another 10years?
also, arent all our complaints being stored already, or did they just deceide to start this now?
im finding a bunch of bull, and i dont think any progress is really being taken..
****sigh****
im finding a bunch of bull, and i dont think any progress is really being taken..
****sigh****
Probably because it still isn't a real issue. The fact that it's been the same few people circle jerking in this thread for years should tell you something.
RE:Studying the systemic dispersal of flight patterns to try and alleviate noise levels
Conducting several noise initiatives and health surveys to better understand the effects of airplane and helicopter noise levels on residents
Creating a central FAA repository where all resident complaints will be stored and organized via the internet
Providing enhanced community outreach
Unfortunately Tom Suozzi's starting from zero and has a very huge learning curb. Isreal held several press conferences & wrote some really good letters on Congressional stationary to Huerta that were never answered & went absolutely nowhere! Hopefully Suozzi kept some of Isreal's people to get him up to speed on the FAA ( and Port Authority) obstruction tactics. The FAA is a top federal bureaucracy that is masterful at delay, deception, denying, creating confusion, stonewalling, giving meaningless & never ending power point presentations etc etc. They're all well protected by federal civil service laws ( except Huerta whose days are numbered) and to be blunt the Managers at TRACON & JFK tower could care less about the issues that are driving most of us nuts!
Some news from Janet McEneaney from Queens Quiet Skies
There is a lot to talk about this month. I am focusing today on the emergent news. More will follow.[/SIZE]
My computer had a sad emergency yesterday. I am using a borrowed laptop right now without full access to all the data and information I use for the Newsletter. Some of you have recently asked to be added, to have your addresses changed, to include some friends and neighbors. Unfortunately, that will all have to wait until my computer is fixed. To those of you with requests, I will send out the Newsletter individually sometime this week. Thanks for your patience and understanding.
AIRR ACT - THE FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017
The Senate and House of Representatives have each produced a proposed version of the AIRR Act, the 2017 FAA Reauthorization Act. The legislation will give the FAA its directions from Congress. The last version was enacted in 2012 and extended in 2016 for one year. This version is proposed to last for 6 years.
Queens Quiet Skies says 6 years is too long to wait to revisit and assess what may or may not be working a few years down the road. There's no credible reason to extend this legislation so long.. There is little real direction to the FAA in the legislation as proposed thus far. We can see where the Quiet Skies Caucus and our NY representatives have tried to insert community-friendly language, but there are very few actual deliverables or deadlines to require FAA action on community asks.That means the bill must be amended.
The amendment process begins when the bill reaches the floor of the House or the Senate. Queens Quiet Skies has been actively communicating with all our Queens members of Congress, from Sen. Schumer on down, about the AIRR Act. We have submitted comments about the House version of the bill, which I have attached. I hope you will take some time to read them so you understand how we think the legislation should be sharpened and focused. Our comments were also published last week in an influential aviation trade newspaper, the Airport Noise Report.
Discussions about the AIRR Act are going on all over the country in affected cities in advance of debate in Congress. You may have seen a "call to action" about the Polis Amendment from an advocacy group in Colorado. This concerns control of small general aviation airports, not airports like JFK and LGA. The Polis Amendment would help our friends in the East End of Long Island regain control of their small non-commercial airport from the FAA. A result of cutting down helicopter traffic to the East End would be a reduction in helicopter noise in northern Queens. We're all for that. So we support that amendment, as we hope other groups support our concerns which are outlined in the attached QQS comments.
It's hard to say how quickly the legislation will be enacted. There was a rumor last week that the House bill is going to the Rules Committee tomorrow, but no one knows for sure. Once the bills reach the floor of the Senate and House, it will be our representatives' turn to advocate our proposals and try to get as much into the bill for us as possible.
We are in the loop with the staff of Sen. Chuck Schumer, Rep. Joe Crowley, Rep. Grace Meng and Rep. Tom Suozzi. All of them are listening. Making predictions about how this Congress will act is difficult. One thing that's true, though, is that our organization is being heard and our proposals are being actively considered. This is happening in an unprecedented way throughout Congress and the country because of your efforts over the past 5 years. You have made change happen.
REP. MENG'S NEW AVIATION NOISE BILL IS PASSED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
It's great to work with Rep. Meng's staff on our aviation issues. They are clever and always looking for new opportunities to score a win for us. On Friday, we got a press release about new legislation from Ms. Meng that is quite creative and has been passed by the House of Representatives.
The U.S. Navy has a Jet Noise Reduction Program run by the Navy's Office of Naval Research. Ms. Meng's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act requires the Navy to share its jet noise research results with civilian air programs. Discoveries made through this program will contribute to the production of aircraft that produce less noise than current models, possibly resulting in future reductions of airplane noise over communities like Queens.
The Congresswoman said, “Many discoveries and advancements made by the military have been adopted for civilian use and there is no reason why the same can’t be done for mitigating aircraft noise. Noise mitigation discoveries made by the Navy could go a long way in helping to reduce the barrage of airplane noise that continues to negatively affect my constituents, and those in other parts of the country. I look forward to my measure now moving through the Senate. If we are going to do all we can to combat excessive aircraft noise, we must use every tool at our disposal and that includes out of the box ideas like this legislation.
The amendment was supported by Rep. Joe Crowley, Rep. Tom Suozzi, Rep. Kathleen Rice and the other members of the House Quiet Skies Caucus.
THE FAA UNVEILS ITS PROPOSED RUNWAY 13 REQUIRED NAVIGATION PROCEDURE
FAA personnel recently gave a Powerpoint presentation about their plan to make a new, permanent Required Navigation Procedure on runway 13 at LGA. It was a surprise to many of us.
The FAA sent a notice around last fall saying they were implementing a temporary new procedural requirement on Runway 13 (home of the TNNIS climb) to "deconflict airspace" with Teterboro and Newark during limited runway construction at JFK. Now they want to make it permanent. That's a serious discussion for northern Queens that hasn't taken place yet.
We were kind of confused during the presentation. The FAA told us last fall they were going to try this required procedure temporarily, during runway construction at JFK. The idea is that if planes take off on Runway 13 at JFK, they must also take off on RW 13 at LGA (the runway that is the home of the TNNIS Climb). We're not persuaded yet that it's necessary and that there is nothing else that will deconflict the airspace, if indeed the airspace really does need to be deconflicted. It's not acceptable to keep adding departures on RW 13.
During the presentation, FAA personnel mentioned a finding of no significant impact and a categorical exclusion. We don't remember either of these criteria being met. The idea of making the procedure permanent was news to everyone. To the best of our knowledge, the proposed permanent required navigation procedure was not included for consideration during the Part 150 TAC noise mitigation studies. The FAA told us no one had commented about the proposal in their public comment email box but we didn't know there was a public comment email box.
We need more information and more discussion about the proposed procedure. The agency should put the brakes on its planned timetable for this implementation, start over and do it right. If there's going to be a FONSI or CATEX, we need to know. The agency needs to solicit informed public input.
Because of our concerted community activity, Congress and the FAA are recognizing at last that affected communities are stakeholders in the aviation decision-making process. Organizational culture takes time to change, but the FAA is making a real effort to change how it engages with our communities. I have been very encouraged by my interactions with Julie Marks, who was appointed by Administrator Huerta to plant and water the seeds. Change is required on both sides after a long period of mistrust and misunderstanding. I look forward to working directly with the FAA in Region 2, exchanging information and viewpoints in a respectful discussion and collaboration on behalf of the members of Queens Quiet Skies.
TAC MEETING REPORT
There was a meeting of the LG Part 150 Study Technical Advisory Committee last month. The Committee posted the meeting presentation here:
We have a homework assignment: to review the preliminary report outlines and bring questions and comments to the next meeting. I am encouraging all of you to review the material as it is posted on the PA's website. If you have questions or comments, we will bring them to the meeting on Thursday October 19, 2017: 1 P.M. – 4 P.M.
SEN. AVELLA AND AM CURRAN INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO FUND AVIATION PUBLIC HEALTH STUDIES
At the end of the just-finished Albany legislative session, Sen. Tony Avella and AM Brian Curran introduced legislation to provide funding for additional noise mitigation studies. We are hoping to see this move forward in the coming year. QQS will have some news for you soon about aviation-related public health studies. We'd like to see them funded by the NYS Legislature, as well as by Congress. Here is a link to an article about the proposed legislation. In the next Newsletter, I will share some news about the MIT study at Logan Airport. That's the kind of research and studies we need for Queens and Nassau, funded by Congress and the State. Thanks to Sen. Avella and AM Curran for getting it started in Albany.
I told you recently that the Town of East Hampton had filed a request for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court after it lost its appeal in the Second Circuit. The lawsuit was essentially about control of the town-owned general aviation airport -- not a commercial airport like LGA or JFK. Aviation noise in the community has increased exponentially in recent years. The town wanted a curfew, the FAA said no. The Town asked the federal courts why the FAA can control a civic-owned general aviation airport. The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals said that the FAA has been given power by Congress (in the Airport Noise & Capacity Act of 1990) to control all aviation in the United States. This is, of course, an over-simplification of some very interesting legal issues. The U.S. Supreme Court denied a hearing to the Town of East Hampton without comment last month. Here's a recent article in the New York Times about it:
This is an issue that arose at the Santa Monica Airport, too. The Town of East Hampton has hired the law firm that assisted the City of Santa Monica in its fight to control its own airport. Here is the link to that story:
The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 is a last-century dinosaur that needs to be revisited and retired. I will have more to say about that in an upcoming Newsletter. I will keep you updated on the progress of the AIRR Act, what's happening with the FAA proposed flight procedure and share two pollution studies that were sent by QQS members. All coming soon!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
