[Federal Register: November 9, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 217)]
[Notices]
[Page 65872-65876]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09no06-156]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Approval of Noise Compatibility Program, Columbia Metropolitan
Airport, Columbia, SC
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
findings on the Noise Compatibility Program submitted by the Richland-
Lexington Airport District under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. (the
Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act, hereinafter referred to as
``the Act)'' and 14 CFR part 150. These findings are made in
recognition of the description of Federal and nonfederal
responsibilities in Senate Report No. 96-52 (1980). On July 29, 2005,
the FAA determined that the noise exposure maps submitted by the
Richland-Lexington Airport District under Part 150 were in compliance
with applicable requirements. On September 18, 2006, the FAA approved
the Columbia Metropolitan Airport noise compatibility program. Most of
the recommendations of the program were approved.
DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the
Columbia Metropolitan Airport Noise Compatibility Program is September
18, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie Baskin, Federal Aviation
Administration, Atlanta Airports District Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
Campus Building, Suite 2-260, College Park, Georgia 30337, phone
number: 404-305-7152. 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 Columbia
Metropolitan Airport, effective September 18, 2006.
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 Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 150 is a local program,
not a Federal Program. The FAA does not substitute its judgment for
that of the airport operator with respect to which measure should be
recommended for action. The FAA's approval or disapproval of FAR Part
150 program recommendations is measures according to the standards
expressed in FAR 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 FAR 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 of 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 FAR 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, and an FAA decision on the request may require an
environmental assessment of the proposed action. 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. Where Federal funding is sought, requests for project grants must
be submitted to the FAA Airports District Office in Atlanta, Georgia.
The Richland-Lexington Airport District submitted to the FAA on
April 13, 2005, the Noise Exposure Maps, descriptions, and other
documentation produced during the noise compatibility planning study
conducted from September 17, 2001, through March 21, 2006. The Columbia
Metropolitan Airport Noise Exposure Maps determined by FAA to be in
compliance with applicable requirements on July 29, 2005. Notice of
this determination was published in the Federal Register on July 29,
2005.
The Columbia Metropolitan Airport study contains a proposed Noise
Compatibility Program comprised of actions designed for phased
implementation by airport management and adjacent jurisdictions from
March 21, 2006 to the year 2011. It was requested that FAA evaluate and
approved this material as a Noise Compatibility Program as described in
Section 47504 of the Act. The FAA began its review of the Program on
March 22, 2006, and was required by a provisions of the Act to approve
or disapprove the program with 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.
[[Page 65873]]
The submitted program contained nineteen (19) proposed actions for
noise mitigation on and off the airport. The FAA completed its review
and determined that the procedural and substantive requirements of the
Act and FAR Part 150 have been satisfied. The overall program,
therefore, was approved by the FAA effective September 18, 2006.
Outright approval was granted for twelve of the specific program
elements. One was approved in part. Several measures were disapproved
pending submission of additional information to make and informed
analysis. One measure was disapproved because it was not a noise
mitigation measure.
Operational Measures
OC-1. Flight Track Modifications--Arriving Turbojet and Heavy Turboprop
Aircraft
When air traffic, weather, and safety conditions permit, arriving
heavy turboprop and turbojet aircraft should be aligned with the runway
centerline approximately 3 to 4 miles from the runway end for Runways
11, 29, and 5. This measure is to adjust aircraft flight tracks to
reduce the areas that would be exposed to aircraft overflights,
especially those operations at low altitudes. The benefits from
implementation include a reduction in low altitude close-in approach
turns over noise sensitive uses, including Three Fountains, Cedar
Estates, and South Congaree. While there would be no change in the size
of the noise contour as a result of implementation of this measure,
this will help expose a smaller population to individual overflight
events that were consistently noted in public meetings as creating
significant adverse reaction by area residents. The procedure also
places arriving aircraft over airport property to the greatest extent
possible. These procedures could be formalized in the form of a
published approach procedure that standardizes the specific elements of
the procedures, such as in the form of a Standard Terminal Arrival
Route (STAR). (NCP, pages 4-8, and 68-69; Figures 5- (from Volume Two,
2-5, 7-2 and 7-3.))
FAA Action: Disapproved for purposes of Part 150 pending submission
of additional Information to make an informed analysis. There is
insufficient information to determine the number of persons benefited
(either by changes to the DNL noise contour or appropriate supplemental
metric showing dB noise reduction), versus people that maybe newly
added due to changes in flight tracks.
OC-2. Flight Track Modifications--Departing Turbojet and Heavy
Turboprop Aircraft
When air traffic, weather and safety conditions permit, turbojet
and heavy turboprop aircraft, including military C-17 and C-130
aircraft, departing Runway 29 should maintain runway heading and not
initiate turns until after crossing Old Barnwell Road. Turbojet and
large turboprop aircraft departing Runway 11 should not initiate turns
until crossing Interstate 26. Departures on Runway 23 should maintain
runway heading one mile beyond the southern end of Runway 23. The
procedure has the aircraft gaining altitude over airport owned property
to the greatest extent possible prior to initiating turns. This results
in a reduction in low altitude close in departure turns over noise
sensitive uses including the residential concentrations of Three
Fountains, Cedar Estates, and South Congaree. This will help expose a
smaller population to individual overflight events that were
consistently noted in public meetings as creating significant adverse
reaction by area residents. (NCP, pages 8-11 and 69-70; and Figures 7-3
and 7-4.)
FAA Action: Disapproved for purposes of Part 150 pending submission
of additional information to make an informed analysis. There is
insufficient information to determine the number of persons benefited
(either by changes to the DNL noise contour or appropriate supplemental
metric showing dB noise reduction), versus people that may be newly
added due to changes in flight tracks.
OC-3. Noise Abatement Departure Profile (NADP)
Turbojet aircraft departing Runway 5 and 23 should utilize the
``Close-in'' NADP. Benefits relate to reduction in noise from aircraft
departures within the communities located in close proximity to the
ends of Runway 5-23, including Churchill Heights to the north and
residences situated in the vicinity of Pine Street to the south. (NCP,
pages 11-13, and 70).
FAA Action: Approved as an informal, voluntary measure when air
traffic and airspace safety and efficiency and weather conditions
permit. Appropriate use of NADPs have been shown to be noise
beneficial.
OC-4. Nightime Runway Use Modifications Subject to Airfield
Enhancements
To establish a nighttime noise abatement preferential runway use
program, it is recommended that a full-length parallel taxiway south of
runway 11-29 be approved as an eligible item by the FAA specifically to
reduce noise impacts on the sensitive communities located within the 06
DNL contour immediately north of Runway 5-23. Design and construction
costs will be determined subject to the approval of this item as part
of the NCP. (NEM, Figures 5-11 and 5-12; NCP, pages 13-14, 18, and 71;
Figures 7-5A, 7-5B, and 7-6.)
FAA Action: Disapproved for purposes of FAR Part 150. The NCP does
not provide noise benefit information on the nighttime preferential use
of Runway 11. The graphics referenced are not sufficient to demonstrate
a noise benefit. (Different land use base maps, scales, and graphics
were not used to compare information, making it difficult to determine
the required information.) Additional information on the location of
homes and the number of persons benefited, and whether there would be
newly impacted noise-sensitive airways, is required. The FAA notes that
construction of a full parallel taxiway was proposed in the Airport's
master plan for other purposes.
OC-5. Military Flight Training Noise Reduction
(a) It is recommended that the Airport request that military touch
and go operations be voluntarily reduced, eliminated, or limited to
daylight hours. (b) If the flight training cannot be eliminated
altogether, the Airport should provide to the operators of these
aircraft the location of noise sensitive uses surrounding the airport.
This should help the military operators to conduct training in such a
manner that noise sensitive areas are avoided to the extent that it is
technically feasible. (c) This procedure would reduce the number of
large military aircraft operating patterns over residential areas
during day and nighttime hours. (NCP, pages 18-19, and 72.)
FAA Action: Disapproved pending submission of additional
information to make an informed analysis. (a) There is no evidence of
contact with the military to determine their willingness to carry out
this measure on a voluntary basis, as proposed. (Part 150.23(c)) (b)
There is no information on where noise sensitive uses would be located
in any printed handout information. The extended flight tracks at OC-1
and OC-2 are not approved in this Record of Approval due to
insufficient analysis. (c) There is no information on the number of
homes/noise-sensitive sites currently within, versus removed from, the
flight track corridors as a result of this measure or other noise
metric benefits.
[[Page 65874]]
OC-6. Construction of Ground Run-Up Enclosures to Reduce Engine
Maintenance Noise
Given the routine nighttime maintenance at Columbia Metropolitan
Airport, it is recommended that a pen type enclosure be approved as an
eligible item by the FAA and that the final decision on whether to
construct such an enclosure be made by the Airport following an
analysis of the associated costs and benefits, as 54 homes and 125
people will benefit from this measure if implemented. (NCP, pages 21-
26, and 72-73; Figures 7-7, 7-8, and 7-9.)
FAA Action: Approved for further study. The study should include
information on speech interference and sleep disturbance, and should
show benefits in terms of numbers of homes or other noise-sensitive
sites benefited versus newly disturbed by the relocation of ground run-
ups and aircraft taxiing to a proposed new location. If the study
demonstrates, from the cost/benefit analysis, that a pen type enclosure
would be beneficial to the surrounding airport community, the Airport
may recommend construction of the enclosure in a supplement or
amendment to this NCP.
OC-7. Public Relations Programs
This measure is designed to improve communication about the NCP
programs to the general public and to those pilots operating at
Columbia Metropolitan Airport: 1. The Airport should continue to update
the noise information on the Airport's Internet Site and to include
information about the current noise complaint procedures; 2. The FAA
should approve the purchase of three portable noise monitors. These
would be used to monitor aircraft noise at the request of citizens,
elected officials, airport tenants or other reasons. Some monitoring
may involve indoor-outdoor attenuation information where 2-3 monitors
may be needed simultaneously; and 3. The Airport should purchase and
install lighted noise abatement procedure reminder signs at each runway
end (a total of four signs). This is to inform airport users regarding
the recommendations of this study. Sample language may include ``please
follow noise abatement procedures.'' (NCP, pages 27-29, and 73.)
FAA Action: Approved. Eligibility for Federal funding of three
probable noise monitors will be determined at the time of application.
For purposes 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 and shall not be used for
mandatory enforcement of any voluntary measure. Noise abatement
procedure reminder signs must not be construed as mandatory air traffic
procedure. The content and location of airfield signs are subject to
specific approval by appropriate FAA officials outside of the FAR Part
150 process and are not approved in advance by this determination.
Land Use Measures
LU-1. Comprehensive Planning
Airport staff should strive to be an active participant in the
comprehensive planning process for nearby jurisdictions. It is
recommended that this Part 150 Study, including its implementation
recommendations, either be referenced in each jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan or specific elements of the FAR Part 150 be
incorporated into the plan to provide the basis for other land use
management approaches. During the comprehensive planning process, the
determination of future land uses should consider the 2007 noise
exposure map developed in this study (NCP, pages 34-36 and 77-78).
FAA Action: Approved. This is within the authority of the local
land use jurisdictions; the Federal government does not control local
land use.
LU-2. Discretionary Project Review
The use of discretionary project review of development, rezoning,
subdividing, special use, conditional use and variance requests is
recommended for implementation by nearby jurisdictions. The Airport
staff should work with local permitting, zoning, and planning bodies to
assist in the evaluation of noise impacts on projects under review. A
detailed checklist will be developed for project reviews, (NCP, pages
36-37, and 78-79).
FAA Action: Approved. This is within the authority of the local
land use jurisdictions; the Federal government does not control local
land use.
LU-3. Noise Overlay Zoning
In the vicinity of Columbia Metropolitan Airport, it is recommended
that each jurisdiction without noise overlay zoning (Springdale,
Pineridge, South Congaree, West Columbia, and Cayce) implement a noise
overlay zone, like Lexington County's modified noise overlay zones at
pages 40-42. The Lexington County zones use the NEF metric. NEF 40 is
equivalent to DNL 65; NEF-30 is equivalent to DNL 55. Lexington County
should revise its current ``Noise Overlay Zone.'' (NCP, pages 38-42,
and 79-80; Figure 8-2.)
FAA Action: Approved. This approval is limited to potential
noncompatible land uses within the 2007 and 2022 DNL 65 dB and higher
noise contours depicted on the accepted NEMs. The Federal government
has no authority to control land use. The local governments have the
authority to implement this proposed land use measure. Note that while
FAA once used the NEF noise metric; FAA has adopted the DNL metric.
Therefore, the NEF metric is a local standard. Outside the DNL 65 dB
contour, FAA, as a matter of policy, encourages local efforts to
prevent new noncompatible development immediately abutting the DNL 65
dB contour and to provide a buffer for possible growth in noise
contours beyond the forecast period.
LU-4. Compatible Use Zoning
All jurisdictions should monitor zoning within the 65 DNL contour
and in areas off the ends of runways for roughly one mile which are
subject to significant arrival and departure overflight activity and
prevent any rezoning that allows development of incompatible uses,
mainly residential uses, schools, churches, hospitals, nursing homes,
auditoriums, and concert halls. A further recommendation included the
Airport entering into discussions with the Town of South Congaree to
request that they consider expanding the existing commercial node at
the intersection of Edmund Highway and Pine Street towards the north
along Pine Street and Edmund Highway. These proposed measures would
require Airport staff to monitor zoning in nearby areas and to continue
to work with officials from all six jurisdictions previously identified
in the Study. (NCP, pages 42-44, and 80-82; Figures 2-6 and 9-1; Table
8.2.)
FAA Action: Approved. The Federal government has no authority to
control land use. The local governments have the authority to implement
this measure. This Part 150 program is limited to potential
noncompatible land uses within the DNL 65 dB and higher noise contours.
Outside the DNL 65 dB contour, FAA, as a matter of policy, encourages
local efforts to prevent new noncompatible development immediately
abutting the DNL 65 dB contour and to provide a buffer for possible
growth in noise contours beyond the forecast period.
[[Page 65875]]
LU-5. Zoning Changes, Residential Density
It is recommended that residential densities be addressed by
adjusting individual residential densities in current zoning ordinances
if the noise overlay zoning is not enacted. Where vacant land is
partially within the DNL 65 dB, and the parcel extends beyond that
contour, it is recommended that compatible uses be developed within the
DNL 65 dB, and that residential, or public use, or other uses
incompatible with higher noise levels be built in the lesser noise
contour (Planned Unit Development). This could be extended to areas
located beneath and within one-half mile either side of the extended
runway centerline out to a distance of one to one and one-half miles
from the end of a runway. In combination with the noise overlay zoning
recommendation, areas within the NEF-3O/DNL 55 dB to DNL 65 dB, it is
recommended lower density noise-sensitive development occur within the
areas impacted by the 2007 noise contour (from 10 units per acre to 4
units per acre). Consideration should be given to the potential use of
cluster development techniques where appropriate in these same areas
and where community support exists. If noise overlay zoning is not
implemented, this should be incorporated into existing zoning near the
airport for areas inside the 2007 55 DNL contour. (NCP, pages 44-46,
and 82.)
FAA Action: Approved. This approval is limited to potential
noncompatible land uses within the 2007 and 2022 DNL 65 dB and higher
noise contours depicted on the accepted NEMs. The Federal government
has no authority to control land use. The local governments have the
authority to implement this proposed land use measure. This Part 150
program is limited to potential noncompatible land uses within the DNL
65 dB and higher noise contours. Note that while FAA once used the NEF
noise metric, FAA has adopted to DNL metric. Therefore, the NEF metric
is a local standard. Outside the DNL 65 dB contour, FAA, as a matter of
policy, encourages local efforts to prevent new noncompatible
development immediately abutting the DNL 65 dB contour and to provide a
buffer for possible growth in noise contours beyond the forecast
period.
LU-6. Environmental Zoning
IT is recommended that the Airport support local jurisdictions in
the continued use of environmental controls to limit development in
nearby environmentally sensitive areas; this primarily includes the
floodplain and wetland areas in Lexington County, and South Congaree
and Pine Ridge. (NCP, pages 47-48, and 83.)
FAA Action: Disapproved for purposes of FAR Part 150. The NCP
describes this as an environmental protection measure, not a noise
mitigation measure. Part 150 is strictly a noise compatibility program,
not a broader environmental program. Existing controls appear to
prohibit development in these areas for other reasons.
LU-7. Subdivision Regulation Changes
As a measure to ensure future land development compatibility,
subdivision regulations should require a statement be recorded on the
subdivision plat that identifies the potential for aircraft operational
activity and possible noise impacts for plats that fall within the 55
DNL or higher on the 2007 NEM or NEF 30 if noise overlay zoning is
implemented. It is recommended that the Airport encourage and work
through local jurisdictions to consider noise impacts when parcels are
being proposed for subdivision. (NCP, pages 48-49, and 83-84.)
FAA Action: Approved. This approval is limited to potential
noncompatible land uses within the 2007 and 2022 DNL 65 dB and higher
noise contours depicted on the accepted NEMs. The Federal Government
has no authority to control land use. The local governments have the
authority to implement this proposed land use measure. This Part 150
program is limited to potential noncompatible land uses within the DNL
65 dB and higher noise contours. Note that while FAA once used the NEF
noise metric, FAA has adopted the DNL metric. Therefore, the NEF metric
is a local standard. Outside the DNL 65 dB contour, FAA as a matter of
policy encourages local effects to prevent new noncompatible
development immediately abutting the DNL 65 dB contour and to provide a
buffer for possible growth in noise contours beyond the forecast
period.
LU-8. Dedicated Noise and Avigation Easements
Noise and avigation easements are recommended as a condition of
approval for re-zonings, subdivision plats and issuance of building
permits on existing zoned and platted property for incompatible
residential properties and other noise sensitive uses inside the 2007
65 DNL or within the proposed Airport Noise Overlay Zoning areas. An
executed easement is also recommended for any approval zoning variance
request that creates a noise incompatibility. (NCP, pages 49-50, and
84.)
FAA Action: Approved. This approval is limited to potential
noncompatible land uses within the 2007 and 2022 DNL 65 dB and higher
noise contours depicted on the accepted NEMs. FAA's policy is that new
noise sensitive land uses should be prevented from developing around
airports. In cases where prevention is not feasible because the airport
sponsor does not control land uses, they should be rendered compatible
with noise exposure levels through measures such as avigation easements
during construction. Additionally, the FAA published a policy (See 63
FR 16409-16414, dated April 3, 1998) stating it will fund only
preventive mitigation after October 1, 1998. No remedial mitigation
would be available for new noise-sensitive structures built after
October 1, 1998.
LU-9. Fair Disclosure Regulations
It is recommended that the Airport undertake an informal disclosure
program including mailing a realtor notification brochure, publishing
results of this Study in local media, and placing copies of this Study
at each jurisdiction's administrative office. This program should
include information related to the South Carolina Residential Property
Condition Disclosure Act. (NCP, pages 51-52, and 84-86; and, Figure 9-
2.)
FAA Action: Approved.
LU-10. Fee Simple Acquisition Program
This Study identified two parcels: Parcel A and B (south of Runway
5) as candidates for voluntary acquisition. Parcel A (4.9 acres) has
one residential structure. Parcel B is 55 acres and has no
noncompatible land use. (NCP pages 52-56, and 87; and, Figure 8-3.)
FAA Action: Disapproved for purposes of FAR Part 150, pending
submission of additional Information to make an informed analysis.
There is insufficient evidence these parcels are likely to be developed
incompatibly. Other measures in the NCP are intended to reduce the
likelihood of incompatible development on vacant parcels. It is noted
Parcel A is not located within the current conditions DNL 65 contour,
and Parcel B is partially impacted by the DNL 65 dB noise contour but
its current use is compatible with the airport. The need for this
property as part of a future runway extension project may be evaluated
outside of the FAR Part 150 process.
[[Page 65876]]
LU-11. Voluntary Soundproofing Program
Soundproof residences and public uses buildings on a voluntary
basis (where it is cost effective and technically feasible) and it is
recommended that in exchange for the property owner executing a noise
and avigation easement. Soundproofing program would be based on 2002
NEM until activity meets 2007 N7EM forecasts (map dates represent years
2006 and 2011 respectively per sponsor letter dated 03/21/06). The
incompatible areas (including 18 private residences and a commercial
day care center) within the 2002 NEM 65 DNL contour should be
considered for participation in a federally funded, voluntary
soundproofing program. It is recommended that in exchange for
soundproofing that the property owner execute a noise and avigation
easement. This easement could also be signed in lieu of having
improvements made to the home or building on the property. Executing an
avigation easement would not be a mandatory requirement of the
soundproofing program. A homeowner eligible for the program (within the
DNL noise contour) would be permitted to sell a noise and avigation
easement to the Airport Sponsor instead of participating in sound
attenuation, should they choose not to participate or if their
residence does not qualify for participation in the program. (NCP,
pages 58-63, and 88-89; and, Figures 8-4, and 8-5.)
FAA Action: Approved. The voluntary sound insulation within the DNL
65 dB noise contour is approved. The specific identification of
structures recommended for inclusion in the program and specific
definition of the scope of the program will be required prior to
approval for Federal funding. This includes a determination of which
NEM applies at the time of grant application, and evidence the day care
manager holds good title to the building proposed for sound
attenuation. Provisions will be included in the scope of work to allow
eligible homeowners to sell an easement to the airport sponsor should
they not choose sound insulation program or if their residence does not
qualify. The FAA's policy is that no structures built after October 1,
1998, are eligible for Federal funding for remedial mitigation (see FAA
policy at 63 FR 16409).
LU-12 Noise and Avigation Easement Purchase
It is recommended that the Airport undertake the acquisition of
avigation easements in the 2007 noise impact area as a secondary
measure to provide those property owners who may not qualify or opt to
not participate in the soundproofing program with an option as well as
providing the airport with the protection afforded by the easement with
non-suit covenant. (NCP, pages 63-64, and 89.)
FAA Action: Approved. This approval is limited to potential
noncompatible land uses within the DNL 65 dB higher noise contours.
Disapproved for purposes of Part 150 with respect to Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) Funding outside the DN7L 65 dB noise contour.
Section 189 of Public Law 108-176, Vision 100-Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act, December 12, 2003, specifically prohibits FAA
approval of Part 150 program measures that require AIP funding to
mitigate aircraft noise outside DNL 65 dB--(through Fiscal Year 2007).
Section 189 does not preclude the use of airport revenue outside DNL 65
dB. Mitigation within the 2007 NEM 65 dB noise contour area is subject
to a showing the NEMs are applicable at the time of grant application.
Provisions will be included in the scope of work to allow any homeowner
eligible for the program to sell a noise and avigation easement to the
Airport Sponsor should they choose not to participate in the sound
insulation program or their residence does not qualify for
participation in the program. Also, the FAA's policy is that no
structures built after October 1, 1998 are eligible for Federal funding
for remedial mitigation (see FAA policy at 63 FR 16409).
These determinations are set forth in detail in a Record of
Approval signed by the FAA on September 18, 2006. 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 office of the Richland-Lexington
Airport District. 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 Atlanta, Georgia on October 25, 2006.
Scott Seritt,
Manager, Atlanta Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 06-9122 Filed 11-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M