Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 J.W. AIRPORT NOISE 02-04-02AGENDA REPORT 690-10 NO. 12 02-04-02 MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY4, 2002 690-10 O TO: FROM: SUBJECT: WILLIAM HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE ABATEMENT QUARTERLY REPORTS SUMMARY: This report transmits two John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports for the first and second quarters of 2001. The average noise level measured at monitoring station NMS 10N, located at Columbus Tustin Middle School, slightly increased during first and second quarters. Average noise levels during both quarters remained below the City, County, and State criteria of 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) for residential uses. RECOMMENDATION Receive and file report. FISCAL IMPACT On December 18, 2001, the City Council authorized Wieland Associates to review JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports. The costs for such reviews are annually included in the Community Development Department budget. DISCUSSION Following the conclusion of each calendar quarter, John Wayne Airport prepares a Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report and transmits a copy of the report to the City of Tustin. Twice a year, the City's consultant prepares a report, which summarizes two quarterly reports. Attachment A contains the quarterly reports for the first and second quarters of 2001. Attachment B contains the summary report prepared by the noise consultant. A brief overview of the information contained within these attachments is as follows: JWA Noise Report February 4, 2002 Page 2 Measured Noise Levels During the first quarter of 2001, the average CNEL at Remote Monitoring Station (NMS) 10N, located at Columbus Tustin Middle School was 56.9 dB. This is .3 dB less than the four previous quarters. However, for comparison, the CNEL was .4 dB higher (57.3) during the first quarter of 2000. During the second quarter of 2001, the average CNEL was 57.5 dB. This is .4 dB higher than the four previous quarters. For comparison, the CNEL was .5 dB higher (58.0) during the second quarter of 2000. All measured noise levels are below the City, County, and State criteria of 65 dB CNEL for residential areas. Noise Complaints During the first quarter of 2001, there were 19 Tustin area complaints compared with 62 for the same period dudng 2000. During the second quarter of 2001, there were 17 Tustin area complaints compared with 34 for the same pedod during 2000. The number of complaints decreased during the first and second quarters compared to the same period in 2000. The overall number of complaints during the second two quarters of 2001 does not appear to correlate with the average quarterly aircraft CNEL nor with the number of quarterly jet operations at the airport. The average quarterly aircraft CNEL increased steadily from the fourth quarter of 2000 through the second quarter of 2001, while the number of complaints from residents of the Tustin area remained relatively steady. Type and Mix of Aircraft Related to Noise Levels During the first quarter of 2001, the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft decreased and the percentage of noisier Class A aircraft increased compared with the same period in 2000. The average CNEL for the first quarter of 2001 was slightly lower than the same period dudng 2000. During the second quarter of 2001, the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft increased and the percentage of noisier Class A aircraft decreased compared with the same period in 2000. The average CNEL for the second quarter was lower than the second quarter of 2000. JWA Noise Report February 4, 2002 Page 3 The percentage of quieter Class E aircraft using John Wayne Airport has gradually increased since the beginning of 2000. This percentage increase in Class E aircraft was offset by a decrease in the use of the noisier Class A. Based on data from the first quarter of 2000 through the second quarter of 2001, there does not appear to be any correlation between the aircraft mix and the average quarterly CNEL at NMS 10. Airport Noise Contours Wieland and Associates, Inc. utilized a noise contour in preparing the attached report. This noise contour is based on the 2001 contours developed by the noise consultant for the John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement office. Using this contour, it is estimated that in 2001 the aircraft-generated CNEL in Tustin ranged from about 59 dB to less than 55 dB. This is well below the City, County, and State criteria of 65 dB for residential areas. Since noise issues are of considerable importance to the City of Tustin, the Community Development Department will continue to monitor operations at John Wayne Airport unless otherwise directed by the City Council. ustina Willkom ssociate Planner El~abeth A.~Binsack - - " Community Development Director Attachments: Ao John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports for January 1, 2001 - March 31,2001, and April 1, 2001 - June 30, 2001. Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports, 1st and 2nd Quarters 2001 (Wieland and Associates). ~;COT PRIMARY~CDD-RDA',Cdo'~JUSTINA'JWA'~JWA report to council 02-04-02.doc Attachment A John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports January 1, 2001 -March 31, 2001 April 1,2001 - June 30, 2001 RECEIVED MAY 3 1 2(101 MENT PROGRAM QUARTERI,Y REPORT For the period: January 1, 2001 through March 31, 2001 Prepared in accordance with: AIRPORT NOISE STANDARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards Submitted by: /l Alan L. Murphy Airport Director John Wayne Airport, Orange County INTRODUCTION This is the 113th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of the California Airport Noise Standards (Califomia Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards). Effective January 1, 1986, the criteria for defining "Noise impact Area" was changed from 70 dB to 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Under this criteria, John Wayne Airport currently has a "Noise Impact Area." NOISE IMPACT SUMMARY Caltrans' Aeronautics Program has established guidelines in the California State Noise Standard to control residential area noise levels produced by aircraft operations using the State's airports. Under those guidelines, residential noise sensitive areas exposed to an average Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of more than 65 dB define the "Noise Impact Area." John Wayne Airport uses ten permanent remote noise monitoring stations (NMS) located in Newport Beach, Santa Aha, Tustin and Irvine to measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS NMS-IS: Golf Course, 3100 Irvine Ave., Newport Beach NMS-2S: 20152 S.W. Birch St., Santa Aha NMS-3S: 2139 Anniversary Lane, Newport Beach NMS-4S: 2338 Tustin Ave., Newport Beach NMS-SS: 324 '/2 Vista Madera, Newport Beach NMS-6S: 1912 Santiago, Newport Beach NMS-7S: 1131 Back Bay Drive, Newport Beach NMS-8N: 17372 Eastman Street, h'vine NMS-9N: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana NMS-10N: 17952 Beneta Way, Tustin The map in Figure 1 shows the general location of each permanent remote monitor station. Figure 2 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for thc previous year (April 1, 2000 - March 31,2001). The Figure 2 information was developed by Mestre-Greve Associates, Inc., in consultation with John Wayne Airport. CNEL values measured for the period and current digitized land use information were utilized to calculate the land area acreages, number of residences and estimated number of people within the "Noise Impact Area". -1- FTGURE i JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT STATION LOCATION MAP / I I ! I I JOHN WAYNE )RANGE JNTY NMS - NOISE MONITORING STATION -2- FIGURE 2 O Noise Monitors i'.-.-i Single Family Residential 65 dB CNEL Contour ~'.~ Multi-Family Residential STATISITICS: ~ Incompatible Land Uae Area: 17.4 Awes or .027 ~quare miles ~ Number of Dwelllng8:104 T Number of People: 260 (based on 2.5 people per dwelflng [mit) JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 65dB CNEL Impact Area April 2000- March 200'1 Me.~tre (;rede -3- AIRCRAFT TRAFFIC SUMMARY The Airport traffic summary for this quarter is shown in Table I and Figure 3 below. Air Carrier operational count histories and average daily departure counts are illustrated in Tables 9 & I 1. TABLE I LANDI'NG AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS January'- March 2001 Period Air Carriers GA Jet (1) Total Average Daily Jet Prop Operations (2) Jet OperationsI January 7,274 864 1,321 29,976 277 February. 6,517 774 1,525 26,195 287 March 7,284 884 1,562 35,209 285 First Quarter 21,075 2,522 4,408 91,380 283 Twelve Months 84,888 10,099 16,524 381,180 278 04/01/00 - 03/31/01 FIGURE 3 QUARTERLY AIRPORT TRAFFIC SUMMARY (Landing and Takeoff Operations) January - March 2001 NOTE: Jet Carder Military Prop Carder GA Jet GA Other 48 [] 2,522 1 4,408 21,075 . -, 63.327 0 10,000 20.000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 Numberof Operations (l) GA Jet ligures include a 5% factor for operations not identified by thc JWA noise monitor stations. (2) Counts in this column are bm;ed upon records provided by the local FAA representatives. COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVELS The monthly, quarterly and twelve month Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) average values for each monitor station are shown in Table 2, while daily CNEL values are shown in Tables 3 through 5. Insufficient data is indicated by "#N/A" entries in each table. Average Single Event Noise Exl:x)sure Level (SENEL) values for Air Carrier and GA Jet aircraft are shown in Tables 6 through 8. For the twelve month period ending March 31, 2001, 104 dwelling units in Santa Aha Heights were in -4- the "Noise Impacted Area" (within the 65 dB CNEL contour); there has been no change in the number of dwelling units in the "Noise Impacted Area" from the previous twelve month period ending December 31, 2000. The State has approved several remedies of aircraft noise levels for noise sensitive property in the "Noise Impact Area": homes can bc acoustically insulated, purchased by the County, or rczoned for "other non~noise sensitive uses." As part of the County's Santa Ana Heights Land Use Compatibility Program, approximately 77 general agriculture (A-1) properties with residential land uses on Orchard, Acacia and Birch Streets were rczoned for Business Park Use in October, 1986. Each property was individually sold and subsequently converted to compatible land use. Between 1986 and 1993, 124 residences have been purchased or otherwise made compatible through thc County's Purchase Assurance Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or Housing Relocation Program. In September 1993, the FAA approved a grant to fund a voluntary Accelerated Acoustical Insulation Program (AAIP) in Santa Aha tteights. (The current AAIP has been renamed "Santa Aha Heights Acoustical Insulation Program" with thc acronym "SAH ALP".) During the first quarter of 2001, no additional residences were made compatible through the County's SAIl AIP. A total of 267 residences in Santa Aha lteights have been purchased or otherwise made compatible through the County's Purchase Assurance Program, tlousing Relocation Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or SAH AlP. TELEPHONE COMPLAINT CALLS (January I, 2001 - March 31v 2001) The Airport's Access and Noise Office receives and investigates noise calls and complaints from local citizens and all other sources. During the period January 1, 2001 through March 31,2001, the Office received 561 complaints from citizens. This is a 79.2% increase from the 313 complaints received last quarter. It is a 28.7% decrease from the 787 complaints received during the same quarter last year. Figure 4 shows the distribution of the quarterly telephone calls and complaints from local communities. FIGURE 4 HISTOGRAM BY COMMUNITY 80 62 60 44 49 40 29 28 [] 27 24 20 4 1110410 16 12 13 ' 7 6 7 0 CommuniW One household was responsible for 79% of the 101 complaints from BalSa Peninsula, and one household was responsible for 72% of the 94 complaints from Laguna Beach. -5- TABLE 2 LONG TERM MEASURED LEVELS Aircraft CNEL from 4/00 through 3/01 Values in dB at Each Site Period NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON Apr 2000 66.7 66.8 65.0 60.5 59.1 #N/A 57.8 68.8 57.0 58.2 # Days 30 30 29 22 27 0 21 29 7 20 May 2000 66.9 67.1 65.3 60.5 59.0 #N/A 57.5 68.7 51.2 57.4 # Days 31 30 30 15 25 0 23 30 18 16 Jun 2000 66.8 67.0 65.1 60.7 59.1 #N/A 57.8 68.9 51.0 58.2 # Days 30 23 30 14 26 0 24 28 18 14 Q-2 2000 66.8 67.0 65.2 60.5 59.1 #N/A 57.7 68.8 52.8 58.0 # Days 91 83 89 51 78 0 68 87 43 50 Jul 2000 66.6 66.8 65.1 60.1 58.4 60.2 57.5 68.8 50.6 57.3 # Days 31 30 30 24 31 25 26 27 25 11 Aug 2000 66.9 67.1 65.1 59.3 58.6 59.7 58.3 68.6 48.9 57.9 # Days 31 31 31 30 31 30 14 31 24 8 Sep 2000 66.5 66.5 64.3 58.9 57.9 59.6 58.1 68.4 51.2 56.6 # Days 30 24 30 29 30 26 20 30 22 27 Q-3 2000 66.7 66.9 64.9 59.4 58.3 59.8 57.9 68.6 50.3 57.0 # Days 92 85 91 83 92 81 60 88 71 46 Oct 2000 67.0 67.1 64.9 59.2 58.6 60.0 58.2 68.6 51.1 57.5 # Days 31 31 31 31 30 26 23 29 25 22 Nov 2000 66.4 66.6 64.7 58.4 57.9 59.5 57.2 68.0 52.2 56.6 # Days 30 30 30 28 30 24 22 30 21 24 Dec 2000 66.3 65.9 64.7 58.2 57.4 59.6 58.0 67.5 51.0 56.2 # Days 31, 30 31 31 31 30 10 31 23 29 Q-4 2000 66.6 66.5 64.7 58.6 58.0 59.7 57.8 68.1 51.4 56.7 # Days 92 91 92 90 91, 80 55 90 69 75 Jan 2001 66.2 65.9 64.9 58.9 57.6 59.5 57.9 67.7 51.2 55.8 # Days 30 28 25 29 27 25 13 24 19 27 Feb 2001 66.8 66.8, 65.1 59.7 58.7 59.9 58.6 68.5 52.1 57.4 # Days 26 25 26 25 25 21 17 26 16 21 Mar 2001 67.1 67.5 65.2 60.3 59.3 60.8 58.4 68.7 52.1 57.4 # Days 31 28 31 29 31 16 6 30 13 26 Q-1 2001 66.7 66.8 65.1 59.7 58.6 60.0 58.3 68.3 51.8 56.9 # Days 87 81 82 83 83 62 36 80 48 74 Q-2 2000 thru Q-1 2001 Total I 66.7J 66.8 65.0 59.5 58.5 59.8 57.9 68.5 51.5 57.1 # DaysI 3621 340 354 307 344 223 219 345 231 245 Q-1 2000 thru Q-4 2000 (Previous 4 Quarters) Total I 66.71 66.71 65.0 59.5 58.5 59.9 57.7 68.5 51.6' 57.2 # DaysI 3651 3471 359 305 348 236 237 331 226 237 Change from Previous 4 Quarters -6- TABLE 3 DALLY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION January 2001 Date NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON 1 67.1 66.8 64.2 57.9 57.3 58.4 56.3 68.3 48.5 56.3 2 63.1 59.1 #N/A 59.2 53.2 #N/A #N/A 63.8 #N/A 50.4 3 63.5 #N/A 65.7 56.6 52.3 61.4 #N/A 63.2 #N/A 51.5 4 64.5 62.4 65.1 55.3 54.7 57.3 #N/A 66.7 54.4 53.1 5 66.1 65.0 63.4 58.0' 56.5 58.4 #N/A 67.6 51.1 54.5 6 63.9~ 63,9 61.8 56.8 55.2 55,9 57.7 66.1 49.4 52.8 7 66.5 66.5 63.9 58.2 57.4 57.7 56.2 68.4 50.2 56.0 8 67.3 63.2 64.8 60.8 59.6 60.6 57.9 68.1 #N/A 57.9 9 67.9 64.3 66.0 60.3 59.6 60.7 #N/A 68.5 #N/A 57.6 10 68.2 #N/A 66.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 70.3 #N/A #N/A 11 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 68.7 #N/,a #N/A 12 67.1 68.1 66.3 59.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A 69,1 #N/A #N/A 13 64.7 66.0 62.4 57.8 56.6, 57.1 59.5 66.1 47.8 56.0 14 66.6 66.3 64.5 59.4 58.5 59.1 #N/A 67,7 47.3 57.2 15 67.1 66.7 65.0 60.7 59.5 59.4 57.61 67.6 48,7 56.7 16 64.2 64.8 67.0 55.2 56.1 63.0 55.8' 65.5 #N/A 55.3 17 64.6 64.2' 63.9 55.9 55.2 60.0 53.9 66.6 52.4 55.3 18 65.8 65.8 64.3 58.1 57.1 59.2 55.0 67.7 54,3 55.1 19 67.4 67.4 64,9 59.2 57,8 59,4 #N/A 67.7 52.8 55.0 20 64.1 64.3 63.9 59.1 55.9 56.9 #N/A 65.8 #N/A 52.2 21 67.0 67.0 65.2 58.4 58.0 59.0 #N/A 67.6 50.7 54.4 22 67.2 67.1 #N/,~ 59.2 59.6 60.2 60.1 68.2 52.8 56.7 23 65.9 66.4 #N/A 59.4 59.2 59.2 #N/A 68.3 #N/A 57.0 24 66.7 67.3 66.0 59.9 59.9 59.6 59.6 69.3 50.6 58.6 25 67.3 67.7 #N/A 61.3 59.2 59,9 59.7 #N/A #N/A 58.7 26 67.3 67.4 65.8 60.6 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 27 64.4 64.9 62.7 58.2 56.9 57.7 #N/A #N/A 49.1 55.1 28 67.2 66.2 64.7 59.5 59.1 59.5 #N/A #N/A 49.2 57.1 29 66.7 66.5 64.7 60.3 59.2 60,1 #N/A #N/A 47.9 57.3 30 65.1 65.0 65.3 57.5 56,6 61.2 58.9 #N/A 52.1 53.5 31 63.6 64.1 #N/A 58.4 54.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A 53.3 51.9 Days 30 28 25 29 27 25 13 24 19 27 En.Avg 66,2 65.9 64.9 58,9 57.6 59,5 57.9 67.7 51.2 55.8 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -7- TABLE 4 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION February 2001 Date NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 10N 1 64.3 64.7 65.3 55.3 54.8 59.7 53.2 66.8 54.5 54.5 2 66.8 67.2 64.4 59.0 57.7 59.8 58.4 67.4 53.3 57.3 3 64.8 64.4 61.0 59.4 55.5 58.1 58.1 66.3 #N/A 50.4 4 66.8 66.2 64.5 58.1 57.7 59.0 61.6 66.9 48.5 55.9 5 65.8 66.4 63.5 59.8 57.3 59.4 #N/A 68.7 #N/A 55.2 6 65.9 65.0 64.0 59.7 57.6 59.7 #N/A 69.6 52.8 59.2 7 65.8 65.2 68.2 59.6 58.8 #N/A #N/A 65.1 51.3 55.5 8 67.1 66.6 65.1 60.1 58.8 59.4 59.7 68.4 53.0 58.1 9 67.8 67.3 65.7' 61.4 60.4 60.5 58.1 68.4 #N/A 58,3 10 64.0 64.3 63.4 56.9 57.3 59.0 58.9 66.2 49.6 57.9 11 66.3 67.7 64.2 59.4 58.7 59.6 #N/A 69,2 51.6 58.2 12 68.4 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 13 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 14 66.3 66.1 64.5 59.3 58.2 60.1 #N/A 68.8 #N/A 57.8 15 68.0 67.7 65.9 59,6 60.2 61.2 58.3 69.6 53.9 #N/A 16 68.2 68.1 65.6 60.3 59.2 60.4 60.6 69,4 #N/A 56.6 17 64.7 64.9 63.0 59.2 56.4 60.5 57.5 66.3 50.7 53.8 18 66.6 66.7 64,3 59.8 58.5 59.5 59.0 68.5 #N/A 56.8 19 67.4 68.3 65.2 60.4 59.1 60.1 58.4 69.9 50.9 #N/A 20 67.5 68.3 65.7 60.0 59.7 60.1 57.8 69.3 #N/A 57.9 21 67.1 67.4 65.4 59.9 59.8 #N/A 58.1 69.8 #N/A 57.6 22 67.3 68.3 65.1 59.7 59.9 #N/A 58.8 69.3 50.1 58.8 23 68.0 67.7 66.6 61.2 61.7 #N/A #N/A 69.0 #N/A #N/A 24 63.8 63.7 62.0 57.8 57.4 58.8 55.8 67.5 52.4 58.1 25 68.8 #N/A 66.5 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 69.6 #N/A #N/A 26 66.6 66.1 64.9 59.5 57.2 60.5 #N/A 69.2 54.7 59.1 27 #N/A 68.1' 66.7 61.1 59.8 60.7 58.1 68.9 50.8 59.0 28 68.0 68.0 65.6 60.7 59.5 60.7 #N/A 69.3 50.5 #N/A Days 26 25 26 25 25 21 17 26 16 21 En.Avg 66,8 66.8 65.1 59.7 58.7 59.9 58.6 68.5 52.1 57.4 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -8- TABLE 5 DALLY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION March 2001 Date NMS Site 1 S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON 1 67.7 67.7 65.7 59.3 59.7 60.4i 58.9 68.9 #N/A 57.0 2 67.7 68.0 65.7 60.6 60.6 60.6 #N/A 69.7 51.8 #N/A 3 65.2 65.5 63.3 58.8 57.6 58.6 #N/A 66.6 #N/A 55.5 4 67.7 67.0 65.0 61.0 59.0 60.0 #N/A 68.9 51.4 57.4 5 66.5 65.8 64.5 60.1 57.9 59.2 57.5 68.5 52.6 57.4' 6 67.0 67.2 65.0 #N/A 61.0 #N/A #N/A 69.6 #N/A #N/A 7 67.2 67.2 65.2 60.7 59.6 60.7 59.4 69.4 #N/A 58.5 8 67.5 66.8 65.8 60.8 60.3 61.7 58.3 69.5 53.2 #N/A 9 67.1 65.2 65.2 60.2 60.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A 50.8 #N/A 10 65.1 66.5 63.4 58.9 58.2 #N/A #N/A 68.0 #N/A 54.6 11 67.9 67.2 65.9 61.3 59.8 61.9 #N/A 68.7 50.7 57.6 12 67.3 67.8 65.1 59.8 59.1 #N/A #N/A 68.9 53.2 56.4 13 66.4 66.7 64.9 59.3 58.8 #N/A #N/A 68.4 #N/A 57.8 14 66.8 67.1 65.6 61.3 59.2 #N/A #N/A 69.5 #N/A 57.7 15 66.2 67.1 65.1 59.4 59.2 #N/A #N/A 69.4 #N/A 58.8 16 68.1 #N/A 66.1 60.9 60.1 #N/A #N/A 69.2 #N/A 58.8 17 65.7 67.9 63.9 58.5 57.8 #N/A #N/A 66.0 #N/A 54.3 18 68.1 68.7 65.8 59.2 59.8 #N/A #N/A 67.8 #N/A 55.2 19 67.4 68.0 65.1 58.6 58.7 #N/A #N/A 67.8 #N/A 55.3 20 67.0 67.8 65.9 #N/A 58.2 61.4 #N/A 68.9 #N/A 58.3 21 68.0 #N/A 65.6 60.7 58.7 61.4 #N/A 69.3 52.1 58.0 22 67.9 68.6 66.5 61.8 60.5 #N/A #N/A 68.7 #N/A #N/A 23 67.9 #N/A 66.0 62.2 60.7 61.7 #N/A 68.7 #N/A 58.6 24 65.6 67.2 63.7 58.0 57.7 60.9 #N/A 66.5 48.2 56.0 25 67.6 68.0 65.6 60.4 59.5 61.9 #N/A 68.8 #N/A 58.7 26 67.1 67.8 64.8 59.9 59.0 61.9 #N/A 68.0 53.1 56.8 27 66.8 68.4 65.8 61.3 58.7 59.6 #N/A 68.9 #N/A 58.0 28 67.1 68.1 64.8 60.6 58.4 59.4 #N/A 68.7 52.3 58.6 29 67.7 68.2 65.1 60.9' 59.1 #N/A #N/A 69.0 #N/A 58.6 30 67.6 67.6 65.5 60.6 59.5 #N/A 59.1 69.4 54.7 58.3 31 66.1 67.9 64.1 59.5 57.9 #N/A 56.1 67.1 49.5 55.3 Days 31 28 31 29 31 16 6 30 13 26 En.Avg 67.1 67.5 65.2 60.3 59.3 60.8 58.4 68.7 52.1 57.4 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -9- TABLE 6 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Glass A January - March 2001 Carrier AC Type ;# Deps NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 10N Alaska Air B7374 491 Average 95.6 95.2 92.1 85.7 87.1 86.3 85.6 92.8 82.4 82.0 Count (4361 (413) (438) (442 (4451 (442) (430) (39) (36) (39) B7377 13Average 92.5 92.5 88.1 82.5 84.2 83.7 82.4 93.3 #N/A 81.6 Count (12) (11) (12 (12) (12) (12) (12) (1) (0) (1) America West A320 60 Average 93.0 93.3 90.3 86.3 84.4 84.9 82.7 88.8 78.6 80.4 Count (52) (41 (52 (52) (52) (50) (46) (7) (1 (5) .B7373 13 Average 93.7 93.7 90.5 86.3 85.6 85.8 84.4 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (121 (11 (12) (12) (121 (10) (12) (0) (0) (0) B757 22 Average 93.4 94.2 90.4 85.8 84.7 85.4 85.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (22) (19) (22) (21) (22) (21) (21) (0) (0) (0) American B7378 257 Average 96.3 95.3 92.2 87.0 85.9 87.4 86.5 92.8 82.1 82.2 Count (219) (198) (229) (229) (2301 (226) (224) (22) (15) (21) B757 104 Average 91.8 92.0 90.1 85.1 84.9 85.6 86.2 87.6 80.0 75.8 Count (98) (89) (971 (95) (97) (97) (96) (5) (2) (3) MD80 574 Average 99.6 99.4 98.0 92.1 91.9 92.8 90.5 98.7 87.1 87.0 Count (500 (430) (507) (505) (507) (502 (486) (39 (50) (42) Continental B7373 251 Average 95.9 95.0 93.7 87.8 87.5 88.2 85.9 93.9 82.2 83.2 'Count (189) (174) (196) (197) (200) (196) (195) (42) (38) (36) B7377 273 Average 94.9 94.5 91.8 85.7 84.9 85.9 84.2 93.8 81.9 81.0 Count (229) (203) (232) (230) (232 (230) (228) (36) (26) (24) Delta B757 256 Average 94.5 94.3 91.7 85.6 85.0 85.3 84.3 89.8 81.1 81.2 Count (232) (214) (232) (229) (231 (230) (227 (15) (5) (10) FedEx A300 1 Average 99.6 #N/A 97.6 92.1, 92.8 93.5 91.3 #N/A #N/A #N/,Z Count (1) (0) (1) (1 (1 (1) (1 ) (0) (0) (0) A310 62 Average 99.1 98.3 97.2 92.2 91.3 92.3 89.6 95.2 83.0 81.4 Count (58) (53) (54) (57) (57) (57) (55) (3) (5) (2) Northwest A320 339 Average 95.6 95.1 93.1 87.9 86.0 86.7 85.4 92.7 83.5 81.8 Count (284) (257) (289 (289) (291) (290) (283) (41) (19)! (22) Southwest B7373 185 Average 94.4 94.2 90.9 85.7 85.9 86.1 84.7 92.3 81.9 81.4 Count (166) (142) (165) (1661 (169) (169) (168) (11) (13) (11) B7377 3 Average 91.0 90.3 86.6 86.4 81.8 82.2 83.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (3), (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (0) (0) (0) TWA B757 233 Average 92.5 92.5 89.5 84.1 83.6 84.1 84.3 89.2 79.7 80.3 Count (196 (1761 (202) (204) (203) (204) (201) (25) (13) (17) MD80 2 Average 99.4 98.9 98.6 91.9 91.2 93.5 91.0 #N/A #N//~ #N/A Count (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (0) (0) (0) United A320 37 Average 91.6 91.0 90.6 85.6 84.6 85.5 84.9 87.6 76.2 78.8 Count (301 (261 (31) (301 (31) (30) (31) (4) (1) (4) B7373 94 Average 95.2 94.7 92.6 87.1 86.5 86.7 87.7 91.2 82.4 80.6 Count (861 (72) (861 (851 (86) (86) (85) (7) (5) (5) B757 41 Average 94.2 93.9 92.1 85.5 84.6 86.0 85.0 92.9 80.1 81.0 Count (35) (36) (37) (36) (37 (36) (36) (4) (2) (4) UPS B757 62, Average 94.1 94.1 91.8 85.§ 85.4 86.4 86.5 88.2 80.5 77.2 Count (56) (56) (51) (56 (56) (56) (54) (6) (2) (2)' USAirways A319 177Average 94.9 93.8 93.6~ 87.0 85.4 87.0 85.7 91.4 82.7 82.6 Count (151) (131 (151 (149) (152) (148) (150) (19) (111 (15) A321 1 Average 99.8 98.8 98.5 86.1 85.0 85.3 82.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (0) (0) (0) -10- TABLE 7 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class AA January - March 2001 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site lS 25 35 4S 5S 6S 7SI 8N 9N 10N Alaska Air B7374 28Average 92.2 92.6 88.6 83.9 85.3 84.1 83.7 90.0 79.4 78.8 Count (22) (17) (22 (211 (22) (22) (22) (51 (3) (2~ R7377 174 Average 91.8 92.0 88.0 82.3 83.9 83.3 83.0 91.2 81.1 80.0 Count (149) (137) (154) (156) (156) (156) (153) (15) (8) (11) America West A320 356 Average 92.3 92.6 90.0 85.8 84.2 84.7 84.1 87.3 83.5 79.6 Count (331) (311) (326) (3271 (322) (321) (276 (231 (5) (8) B7373 437 Average 93.7 93.6 90.5 85.6 85.3 85.6 84.6 90.7 81.6 82.8 Count (396) (352) (391 (392) (3981 (394) (390 (29) (24) (20) B757 I Average 92.1 92.3 87.6 80.9 83.2 80.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (1) (1 (1) (1) (1) (0) (0) (0) (0) American B7378 44 Average 91.8 91.6 88.8 85.5 83.4 84.3 85.6 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (44) (42) (441 (43) B757 680Average 91.6 91.9 89.9 84.8 84.6 85.3 84.7 90.1 82.9 80.4 Count (594) (522) (605) (602) (602) (6021 (592 (511 (261 (32I MD90 112Average 87.1 87,6 86.1 80.7 79.8 80.0 80.3 86.4 77.7 77,9 Count (107) (102) (106) (101) (100) (107) (64) (4) (1) (1) Continental B7377 198Average 91.5 91,7 88.6 84.9 83.4 83.5 83.4 88.0 78,0 76.1 Count (183) (169) (181 (179) (179) (182) (168) (10) (2) (2) Delta MD90 343 Average 91.8 91.5 89.7 82.6 82.3 84.2 83.9 90.4 80.5 80.3 Count (305) (272) (309) (299) (283) (305) (291 (30) (10) (27) ~Southwest B7373 183 Average 93.6 93.6 90.4 85.2 85.6 85.8 85.2 91.3 81.0 81.4 Count (1651 (159) (164) (165) (165) (166) (1601 (16) (11) (8) 81.5 79.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A B7377 41Average 89.6 89.9 86.0 81,2 81.3 Count (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (3) (0) (0) (0) United A320 446, Average 91,2 91.3 90.1 85.6 84,2 85,4 85.1 88.5 81.3 82.1 Count (410) (364) (413) (411) (415) (413) (405) (26) (13) (15) MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class E January - March 2001 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4sIss ss 75 BEigE 10N Alaska Air B7374 4 Average 91.6 91.7 88.3 83.5 85.0 83.7 82.7 88.8 81.9 75.4 Count (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (2) (1 )1 (1 ) (1 ) B7377 555 Average 89.8 90.0 86.8 81.6 82.9 82,3 82.2 89.6 82.3 79,8 Count (505) (464) (500) (501 (511) (505) (485) (37) (13) (23) AmedcaWest ~,7373 839 Average 92.5 92.7 89.5 85.4 84.8 84.9 83.7 90.1 82.4 80.5 Count (746) (660) (740) (746) (751) (746) (728) (68) (47) (51) American B7378 97Average 90.6 91.3 87.7 84.1 82.7 82.8 84.7 90,8 77.0 77.2 Count (93) (881 (91) (92) (921 (881 (871 (3) (11 (2I MD90 511,Average 87.5 88.1 86.01 82.2 80.0 80.4 81.0 88.5 81.8 80.8 Count (437) (370) (433) (408) (368) (421) (315) (59) (16) (23) Delta MD90 172~Average 90.9 90.5 88.0 81.2 80.7 82.9 82.6 90.4 83.3 81.5 Count (160) (152) (161 (142) (137) (161) (146) (9) (1) (7) Southwest B7373 828 Average 92.41 92.51 89.6 84.9 85.2 85.2 83.9 90.9 81.9 81.9 Count (748) (676) (743) (749) (755) (751) (732) (59) (43) (41) B7377 20 Average 89.7 90.3 85.6 83.1 81.5 81.2 80.8 87.0 #N/A~ #N/.a Count (17) (16) (17) (18) (17) (18) (15) (2) (0)= (0) United B757 848 Average 91.7 91.8 88.7 83.2 83.0 84.3 83.1 89.1 81.1 79.8 Count (759) (676) (760) (743) (751) (755) (746) (62) (32) (44) -11- TABLE 8 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commuter January - March 2001 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1s 2S 3s 4S 5s 6s 7S 8N 9N 10N SkyWest CL60 89 Average 86.0 84.5 87.3 79.3 79.7 80.0 77.6 87.3 75.3 81.7 Count (72) {66) (75) (42) (231 (73) (14) (13) (1) (4) E120 1260 Average 80.9 83.6 82.2 80.9, 83.5 79.5 83.3 81.8 81.9 79.7 Count (1134) (1036) (1122) (162) (841) (1012) (261) (84) (25) (14) MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS General Aviation January - March 2001 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 10N General Aviation Jet 2099 Average 90.2 90.0 90.4 85.2 84.6 84.9 86.2 88.9 86.5 84.9 Count (1722) (1571) (1668) (1147) (946) (1500)i (911 (154) (36) (47) -12- TABLE 9 AIR CARRIER OPERATIONAL HISTORY Carrier AC Type Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Alaska Air AS B7374 7,718 7,795 7,237 4,242 1,046 B7377 1,090 5,658 1,484 MD80 4 America West AW A319 112 746i 76 !A320 6 509 1,060 1,575 760 B7373 14.152 11,917 11,985 10,892. 2,585 B757 1.332 205 464 471 46I American AA B7378 2 655~ 798 B757 8,970 8,329 8,145 8,621 1,576 MDB0 610 1,119 2,285 4,931 1.1511 'MD90 3,191 7,276. 1,253 Continental CO B7373 {11 2,710 720 24 2 B7375 (1) 1,995 2,061 2,030 502 B7377 868 2,491 3,189 944 B7378 16 B757 724 298. Delta DL B7373 2 4 B757 2,202 2,117i 1,585 2,086 512 MD90 3,058 3,836. 4,218 4,121 1,031 FedEx FM A300 18 12 20 82 2 A310 486 496 487 404 124 Northwest NW A319 9 481 129 A320 3,408 3,219 3,486 2,554 549 Reno Air QQ MD80 4,200 4,246' 2,622 MD90 5,680 5,744 5,083 Southwest WN B7373 (1) 9,846 2,986 1,358 1,566 296 B7375 (1) 6,689 8,234 7,977 2,098 B7377 2 129 280 54 TWA TW B757 1,242 1,139 1,174 1,730 467 MDB0 848 986 894 314 4 United UA A319(2) 749 1,035 797 327 A320(2) 2,024 1,816 1,196 1,785 639 B7373 (11 836 503 791 882 182 B7375 (11 2 55 6 B757 8,274 8,617 8,290 7,522 1,774 UPS 5X B757 476 500 502 508 124 US Airways US A319 955 1,455 355 A320 11 2 A321 2 B7373 1,444 1,456 482 ( 1 ) Count_~ that ~parate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that separate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -13- TABLE 10 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL HISTORY Aircraft Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 A300 18 12 20 82 2 A310 486 496 487 404 124 A319 (11 749 2,111 3,479 887 A320 (1) 5,438 5,544 5,753 5,916 1,948 A321 2 'B7373 (2) 28,990 17,582 14,640 13,346 3,063 B7374 7,718 7,795 7,237 4,242 1,046 B7375 (2) 8,686 10,350 10,007 2,606 B7377 870 3,710 9,127 2,482 B7378 18 655 798 B757 23,220 21,205 20,160 20,938 4,499 ~MD80 5,662 6,351 5,801 5,245 1,155 IMD90 8,738 9,580 12,492 11,397 2,284 (I) Counls thai separate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that separale B7373 and B7375 aircraft opera6ons began in 1998. FIGURE 5 AIRCRAb--T OPERATIONAL HISTORY 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 B7373 B7374 B7375 B7377 B7378 B757 MD80 MDg0 By Year · 1997 · 1998 [] 1999 []2000 B2001 -14- TABLE ! i AIR CARRIER AVERAGE DALLY DEPARTURE HISTORY Carrier AC Type Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 AlaskaAir AS 87374 10.573 10.682' 9.921 5.806 5.811 87377 1.490 7.719 8.244 MD80 0.005 America West AW A319 0.151 1.019 0.422 A320 0.008 0.688 1.455 2.150 4.222 87373 19.386 16.351 16.422 14.874 14.367 8757 1.825 0.279 0.630 0.642 0.256 American AA 87378 0.003 0.893 4.433 8757 12.288 11.397 11.159 11.779 8.767 MD80 0.836 1.551 3.148 6.743 6.389 MD90 4.359 9.932 6.978 Continental CO 87373 (1) 3.712 0.964 0.033 0.005 87375(1) 2.742 2.844 2.776 2.789 87377 1.184 3.392 4.352 5.244 87378 0.022 8757 0.992 0.408 Delta DL 87373 0.003 0.005 8757 3.016 2.899 2.175 2.850 2.844 MD90 4.189 5.249 5.775 5.628 5.722 FedEx FM A300 0.025 0.016 0.027 0.112 0.011 A310 0.666 0.679 0.668 0.552 0.689 Northwest NW A319 0.014 0.656 0.733 A320 4.668 4.408 4.775 3.492 3.033 Reno Air QQ MD80 5.753 5.830 3.597 MD90 7.781 7.860 6.964 Southwest WN 87373 (1) 13.488 4.088 1.860 2.142 1.644 87375(1) 9.167 11.296 10.893 11.656 87377 0.003 0.178 0.383 0.300 TWA TW 8757 1.701 1.564 1.627 2.366 2.600 MD80 1.162 1.345 1.208 0.429 0.022 United UA A319(2) 1.030 1.411 1.082 1.822 'A320(2) 2.773 2.488 1.647 2.432 3.544 87373(11 1.145 0.688 1.082 1.202 1.011 87375 {11 0.003 0.016 0.033 8757 11.334 11.803 11.441 10.298 9.878 UPS 5X 8757 0.652 0.685 0.688 0.694 0.689 USAirways US A319 1.310 1.989 1.967 A320 0.014 0.003 A321 0.011 87373 1.978 1.995 0.660 (1) Counts that separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that ~parate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -15- Date: Time: Place: Noise Abatement Committee Meeting March 8, 2001 2:00 p.m. Eddie Martin Building AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS DISCUSSED: 1. Airport Statistics Bonnie Streeter gave an update on the Airport Statistics citing information published in the JWA Airport Statistics report for January 2001. She noted increases from January 2000 levels in the number of passengers, air cargo tonnage lifted, air taxi operations and military operations. General aviation and air carrier operational levels were both below last January's levels. 2. Capacity Allocations for the 2001-02 Plan Year John Leyerle explained that on February 6, 2001, the Board of Supervisors approved the allocation of commercial, commuter and cargo carrier capacity for operations in the 2001- 02 Plan Year which begins on April 1, 2001. Based on the approved capacity allocations, we anticipate approximately 130 commercial air carrier departures on average per day during the 2001-02 Plan Year. John further noted that the Board approved Class E capacity allocations for the next three Plan Years (through March 31, 2004) in order to stimulate additional passenger traffic. Capacity plans provided by the air carriers indicate the potential for some additional flights and service to new markets over the next three Plan Years. 3. New Entrant on April 1~ 2001 (Aloha Airlines) The Board of Supervisors approved capacity allocations for Aloha Airlines, effective April 1, 2001. Aloha has proposed service of two daily Class A departures to the Hawaiian islands of Oahu and Maui, as well as one daily Class E departure to Las Vegas. The airport must return to the Board of Supervisors to obtain approval for a lease agreement with Aloha Airlines. (At that time, leases for Federal Express and United Parcel Service will also be considered.) Aloha Airlines cannot initiate service at John Wayne Airport until they receive a signed lease agreement with the County. -16- Noise Abatement Committee Meeting (continued) 4. Status of the Santa Ana Heights Acoustical Insulation Program (SAHAIP) Carl Braatz provided an update on the status of the SAHAIP. A job walk for AlP Phase 8 was held recently. This phase will provide acoustical insulation for 24 single-family dwellings in Santa Ana Heights. The insulation of a 182-unit apartment building located at the corner of Mesa Drive and Irvine Avenue is 35% complete. After completion of the apartment complex and Alp Phase 8, there will be approximately 100 remaining eligible dwelling units in the Santa Ana Heights area. The SAHAIP will send an additional letter to these properties in the near future, to determine if the owners are interested in participating in the acoustical insulation program. Carl also noted that the Daily Pilot newspaper would feature an article on the SAHAIP in its March I 1, 2001, issue. Question: Pete Drummond asked what effect an increase in flights at John Wayne Airport would have on the SAHAIP eligibility area. Answer: John Leyerle explained that the SAHAIP eligibility area is defined by the projected 65 dB CNEL contour in the John Wayne Airport 1985 Master Plan. He noted that the actual measured 65 dB CNEL contour has been consistently quieter than the projected contour. 5. Any additional questions Question: In reference to the departure procedures in use by the air carriers, Pete Drummond asked if the air carriers were executing the left-hand turn from their initial runway heading to a heading that would position them over the Back Bay for their transit to the coastline. Answer: John Leyerle responded that generally the air carriers are adhering to the standard departure procedure (called the MUSEL 6 departure) out of John Wayne Airport. This departure procedure specifies that approximately one mile from the airport an aircraft initiate a left-hand turn from the 194 degree runway heading to a 175 degree heading. There is, however, some variability in aircraft flight tracks. If a carrier tums a few seconds early or late, their variation can be 1,0(}0 - 1,500 feet. Two to three miles from the airport the departure corridor is 4,000 - 5,000 feet wide. John explained that the airport has no control over aircraft flight paths. The Federal Aviation Administration has jurisdiction in this area, and they have stated that this level of dispersion is typical and fully acceptable for safe aircraft operation. John pointed out that 7%-8% of the aircraft ground tracks are well over the communities to the west and east of the Back Bay and that -17- Noise Abatement Committee Meeting (continued) complaints from these areas comprise a large percentage of the total complaint calls received by the John Wayne Airport Access and Noise Office. 6. Tentative date for the next Noise Abatement Committee meetin~ The date for the next quarterly Noise Abatement Committee meeting will be announced by letter approximately two weeks before the meeting. -18- NAC ROSTER March 8, 2001 NAME ORGANIZATION Pete Drummond Micki Harris Jay Hormuth Justina Williams Paul Bums Jeremy Irish David Post Carl Braatz Fred Pefia Rena Balleweg John Leyerle Bonnie Streeter Newport Beach resident/ Airport Working Group County of Orange John Wayne Airport City of Tustin America West Airlines America West Airlines TWA John Wayne Airport Alaska Airlines John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport -19- · ' ".ISTRA-I'ION DEC "5 .. RECEIVED NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT For the period: April 1, 2IX)I through June 30, 2001 Prepared in accordance with: AIRPORT NOISE STANDARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards Submitted by: Alan I,. Murphy Airport Director John Wayne Airport, Orange County INTRODUCTION This is the 114th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of thc California Airport Noise Standards (California Administrative C0dc Title 21. Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards). Effective January i, 1986, the criteria for defining "Noise Impact Area" was changed from 70 dB to 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Under this criteria, John Wayne Airport currently has a "Noise Impact Area." NOISE IMPACT SUMMARY Caltrans' Aeronautics Program has established guidelines in the California State Noise Standard to control residential area noise levels produced by aircraft operations using thc State's airports. Under those guidelines, residential noise sensitive areas exposed to an average Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of more than 65 dB define thc "Noise Impact Area." John Wayne Airport uses ten permanent remote noise monitoring stations (NMS) located in Newport Beach, Santa Ana, Tustin and lrvine to measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS NMS- 1 S: Golf Course, 31 (X) Irvine Ave.. Newport Beach NMS-2S: 20152 S.W. Birch St.. Santa Ana NMS-3S: 2139 Anniversary Lane, Newport Beach NMS--4S: 2338 Tustin Ave., Newport Beach NMS~5S: 324 V2 Vista Madera, Newport Beach NMS-6S: 1912 Santiago. Newport Beach NMS-7S: 1131 Back Bay Drive, Newport Beach NMS-SN: 17372 Eastman Street, lrvine NMS-9N: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana NMS-10N:I7952 Beneta Way, Tustin The map in Figure I shows the general location of each permanent remote monitor station. Figure 2 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for the previous year (July I, 2000 - June 30, 2001). The Figure 2 information was developed by Mestre-Greve Associates, Inc., in consultation with John Wayne Airport. CNEL values measured for the period and current digitized land usc information were utilized to calculate thc land area acreages, number of residences and estimated number of people within the "Noise Impact Area". -1- FIGURE I JOHN STATION I I m WAYNE AIRPORT LOCATION MAP \ JOHN ,.WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE ;OUNTY NMS - NOISE MONITORING STATION -2- FIGURE 2 O Noise Monitors ---'~ Single Family Residential 65 dB CNEL Contour r ..... Multi-Family ResiderYdal N STATISTICS: + Incompatible Land Use: 16.7 Acres or .026 square miles Number of Dwellings: 103 Number of People: 258 (based on 2.5 people per dwelling unit) -3- JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 65 dB CNEL Impact Area July 2000 - June 2001 AIRCRAI,~r TRAFFIC SUMMARY The Airport traffic summary for this quarter is shown in Table I and Figure 3 below. Air Carrier operational count histories and average daily departure counts are illustrated in Tables 9 & I I. TABLE I LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS April June 2001 Period Air Carriers GA Jet (1) Total Average Daily Jet Prop Operations (2) Jet Operations April 7,070 868 1,481 34,142 285 May 7,462 870 1,384 32,762 285 June 7,483 858 1,338 35,572 294 Second Quarter 22,015 2,596 4,203 102,476 288 Twelve Months 85,200 10,104 17,252 385,202 281 07/01/00 - 06/30/01 FIGURE 3 QUARTERLY AIRPORT TRAFFIC SUMMARY (Landing and Takeoff Operations) Apdl - June 2001 Jet Carrier Military Prop Carder GA Jet GA Other 1 31 2,596 1 4,203 22.015 NOTE: 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 Number of Operations (1) GA Jet figures include a 52, factor for operations not identified by thc JWA noise monitor stations. (2) Counts in this column are based upon records provided by the local FAA representalives. I I/8/01 -4- COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEI.S The monthly, quarterly and twelve month Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) average values for each monitor station are shown in Table 2, while daily CNEL values are shown in Tables 3 through 5. Insufficient data is indicated by "#N/A" entries in each table. Average Single Event Noise Exposure I,evel (SENEL) values for Air Carrier and GA Jet aircraft are shown in Tables 6 through 8. For thc twelve month period ending June 30, 2001, 103 dwelling units in Santa Ana Heights were in the "Noise impacted Area" (within thc 65 dB CNEL contour): this represents a decrease of one unit in the number of dwelling units in the "Noise impacted Area" from the previous twelve month period ending March 31, 2001. The State has approved several remedies of aircraft noise levels for noise sensitive property in the "Noise Impact Area": homes can be acoustically insulated, purchased by thc County, or rezoncd for "other non-noise sensitive uses." As part of the County's Santa Ana Heights Land Usc Compatibility Program, approximately 77 general agriculture (A-I) properties with residential land uses on Orchard, Acacia and Birch Streets were rezoned for Business Park Use in October. 1986. Each property was individually sold and subsequently converted to compatible land use. Between 1986 and 1993, 124 residences have been purchased or otherwise made compatible through the County's Purchase Assurance Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or Housing Relocation Program. in September 1993, the FAA approved a grant to fund a voluntary Accelerated Acoustical Insulation Program (AAIP) in Santa Aha Heights. (Thc current AAIP has been renamed "Santa Ana Heights Acoustical Insulation Program" with the acronym "SAH ALP".) During the second quarter of 2001, no additional residences have been made compatible through the County's SAH AlP. A total of 267 residences in Santa Ana Heights have been purchased or otherwise made compatible through the County's Purchase Assurance Program, Housing Relocation Program. Acoustical Insulation Program or SAH AlP. TELEPHONE COMPLAINT CALLS (April I, 2001 - June 30~ 2001) The Airport's Access and Noise Office receives and investigates noise calls and complaints from local citizens and all other sources. During the period April l, 2001 through June 30, 2001, the Office received 569 complaints from citizens. This is a !.4% increase from the 561 complaints received last quarter. It is a 21.0q4, decrease from thc 720 complaints received during the same quarter last year. Figure 4 shows thc distribution of the quarterly telephone calls and complaints from local communities. -5- FIGURE 4 HISTOGRAM BY COMMUNITY 200 183 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 2O 0 75 21 16 29 21 28 25 26 13 5 5 11 14 42 Community One household was responsible for 93% of thc 183 complaints from Balboa Peninsula. -6- TABLE 2 LONG TERM MEASURED LEVELS Aircraft CNEL from 7/00 through 6/01 Values in dB at Each Site Period NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N [iN 10N Jul 2000 66.6 66.8 65.1 60.1 58.4 60.2 57.5 68.8 50.6 57.3 # Days 31 30 30 24 31 25 26 27 25 11 Aug 2000 66.9 67.1 65.1 59.3 58.6 59.7 58.3 68.6 48.9 57.9 # Days 31 31 31 30 31 30 14 31 24 8 Sep 2000 66.5 66.5 64.3 58.9 57.9 59.6 58.1 68.4 51.2 56.6 # Days 30 24 30 29 30 26 20 30 22 27 Q-3 2000 66.7 66.9 64.9 59.4 58.3 59.8 57.9 68.6 50.3 57.0 # Days 92 85 91 83 92 81 60 88 71 46 Oct 2000 67.0 67.1 64.9 59.2 58.6 60.0 58.2 68.6 51.1 57.5 # Days 31 31 31 31 30 26 23 29 25 22 Nov 2000 66.4 66.6 64.7 58.4 57.9 59.5 57.2 68.0 52.2 56.6 # Days 30 30 30 28 30 24 22 30 21 24 Dec 2000 66.3 65.9 64.7 58.2 57.4 59.6 58.0 67.5 51.0 56.2, # Days 31 30 31 31 31 30 10 31 23 29 Q-4 2000 66.6 66.5 64.7 58.6 58.0 59.7 57.8 68.1 51.4 56.7 # Days 92 91 92 90 91 80 55 90 69 75 Jan 2001 66.2 65.9 64.9 58.9 57.6 59.5 57.9 67.7 51.2 55.8, # Days 30 28 25 29 27 25 13 24 19 27 Feb 2001 66.8 66.8 65.1 59.7 58.7 59.9 58.6 68.5 52.1 57.4 # Days 26 25 26 25 25 21 17 26 16 21 Mar 2001 67.1 67.5 65.2 60.3 59.3 60.8 58.4 68.7 52.1 57.4 # Days 31 28 31 29 31 16 6 30 13 261 Q-1 2001 66.7 66.8 65.1 59.71 58.6 60.0 58.3 68.3 51.8 56.9 # Days 87 81 82 83 83 62 36 80 48 74 Apr 2001 66.5 66.7 64.3 59.81 58.8 60.4 58.2 68.7 51.6 57.6 # Days 30 30 30 25; 27 6 10 30 8 27 May 2001 66.7 66.5 65.4 60.1; 59.2 #N/A 58.1 68.9 51.5 57.9 # Days 31 26 31 71 14 0 29 31 10 28 Jun 2001 66.7 66.7 65.0 60.1 58.6 59.2 57.8 68.9 51.6 56.9 # Days 30 29 29 13 24 I 27 20 2 27 Q-2 2001 66.6 66.6 64.9 59.9 58.8 60.2 58.0 68.8 51.5 57.5 # Days 91 85 90 45 65 7 66 81 20 82 Q-3 2000 thru Q-2 2001 Total I 66.7 66.7 64.9 59.4 58.4 59.9 58.0 68.5 51.2 57.1 # DaysI 362 342 355 301 331 230 217 339 208 277 Q-2 2000 thru Q-1 2001 (Previous 4 Quarters) # DaysI 13623401 354 307 344 223 219 345 231 245 Change from Previous 4 Quarters I -O.ll -O.ll -o.1 -o.1-o.1 o.o o.1 o.o -0.3o.o -7- TABLE 3 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION April 2001 Date NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON 1 67.8 67.9 65.7 59.9 59.2 #N/A 59.0 69.4 #N/A 59.3 2 67.0 67.3 64.8 60.3 58.9 60.1 #N/A 69.0 52.1 59.0 3 66.2 66.4 64.1 59.8 58.0 60.5 #N/A 69.3 #N/A #N/A 4 66.2 66.4 64.1 60.7 58.7 59.7 #N/A 68.5 #N/A 57.6 5 66.7 67.0 64.5 59.7 58.9 61.3 #N/A 68.5 #N/A 57.8 6 67.0 67.3 64.7 59.6 59.5 #N/A #N/A 69.8 #N/A #N/A 7 64.3 64.8 62.7 57.9 59.0 60.7 #N/A 67.7 49.9 56.9 8~ 66.1 65.8 63.6 58.6 58.4 #N//~ #N/A 68.2 #N/A 56.3 91 66.1 66.1 63.8 59.8 58.9 #N/A 59.8 68.8 53.2 57.5 10 65.6 65.5 63.7!59.9 58.9 #N/A #N/A 69.4 #N/A 58.2 11 66.9 67.0 65.1 59.4 59.2 #N/A #N/A 68.7 #N/A 58.2 12 66.8 66.8 64.8 60.7 59.3 #N/A #N/A 69.1 #N/A 59.0: 13 66.4 66.5 64.0 58.8 59.4 #N/A #N/A 68.5 #N/A 57.6 14 65.1 65.4 63.6 58.9 58.1 #N/A #N/A 66.1 #N/A 53.9 15 65.6 66.0 63.2 58.5 58.4 #N/,~ #N/A 67.6 #N/A 56.1 16 67.5 67.3 64.9 59.9 #N/A #N/A #N/A 68.3 #N/A 55.7 17 66.3 66.5 64.9 59.4 57.7 #N/A 58.1 68.3 #N/A 57.3 18 66.4 66.7 64.1 58.6 58.5 #N/A 58.9 69.2 #N/A 57.7 19 66.8 68.1 64.8 60.2 59.2 #N/A 57.8 69.9 #N/A 59.5 20 67.0 66.9 64.5 61.5 59.2 #N/A #N/A 69.2 #N/A 58.6 21 64.7 65.3 62.4 60.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A 67.4 #N/A #N/A 22 67.1 67.6 64.4 59.2 58.8 #N/A 58.3 69.4 #N/A 56.0 23 67.8 67.5 64.2 59.2 58.2 #N/A 58.6 67.8 #N/A 55.4 24 66.6 66.2 65.2 60.7 #N/A #N/A 55.2 66.8 #N/A 55.9 25 66.1 67.7 64.1 #N/A 57.6 #N/A #N/A 69.0 52.7 58.0 26 67.1 66.9 65.3 61.4 58.2 #N/A #N/A 69.4 #N/A 57.8 27 66.8 67.1 64.7 #N/A 58.3 59.7 57.4 69.6 51.2 59.1 28 65.3 64.9 62.5 #N/A 58.3 #N/A #N/A 66.7 50.5 56.6 29 67.1 66.7 65.7 #N/A 60.6 #N/A #N/A 68.6 52.0 57.2 30 66.4 66.5 64.4 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 57.3 69.1 49.7 58.8 Days 30 30 30 25 27 6 10 30 8 27 En.Avg 66.5 66.7 64.3 59.8 58.8 60.4 58.2 68.7 51.6 57.6 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -8- TABLE 4 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION May 2001 Date NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON 1 66.0 66.1 64.4 #N/A 57.6 #N/A 56.6 69.3 50.0 58.3 2 67.1 66.2 65.2 #N/A 58.9 #N/A 57.2 69.1 50.3 57.9 3 63.9 64.6 64.7 #N/A 56.0 #N/A 52.6 67.7 #N/A 53.7 4 67.0 66.3 65.9 #N/A 59.3 #N/A #N/A 69.3 50.9 56.4 5 64.7 65.1 63.5 #N/A 56.7 #N/A 56.3 66.5 #N/A 54.0 6 66.7 67.6 64.7 59.2 60.4 #N/A 56.9 68.8 #N/A 55.6 7 67.0 #N/A 64.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A 56.9 68.2 #N/A 56.7 8 67.2 #N/A 65.4 61.3 #N/A #N/A 55.9 69.2 #N/A 58.2 9 67.0 #N/A 64.8 #N/,a #N/A #N/A 56.6 68.9 51.9 58.8 10 67.0 #N/A 65.2 #N/A. #N/A #N/A 58.8 69.8 #N/A 58.3 11 67.5 68.2 65.9 #N/A 59.3 #N/A 58.2 69.4 #N/A 59.1 12 64.7 65.6 63.2 59.5 #N/A #N/A 60.3 67.2 49.5 55.5 13 66.3 67.3 65.0 #N/A 58.6 #N/A! 58.6 68.5 #N/A 56.7 14 67.2 66.9 66.3 60.9 #N/A #N/A 58.4 69.3 #N/A 58.4 15 67.0 67.1 65.8 #N/A 59.4 #N/Al 58.5 68.8 53.1 59.1 16 66.9 66.7 65.7 #N/A #N/A #N/A 60.4 69.2 #N/A 58.7 17 67.3 67.1 65.6 #N/A 60.7 #N/A 57.2 69.5 #N/A #N/A 18 68.6 #N/A 67.7 #N/,a 60.7 #N/A 57.2 69.9 52.2 #N/A 19 65.4 65.5 64.4 #N//~ #N/A #N/A 59.8 66.5 #N/A 57.8 20 66.9 66.9 65.5 #N/A #N/A #N/A 57.4 68.8 #N/A #N/A 21 66.9 66.7 66.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A 56.5 69.3 #N/A 59.6 22 66.4 66.5 66.9 #N/A 60.7 #N/A #N/A 68.7 49.4 58.3 23 66.7 66.1 65.8 #N/A 58.7 #N/A 57.3 69.5 #N/A 59.0 24 67.4 67.0 65.3 61.2 #N/A #N/A 55.5 69.8 #N/A 59.2 25 67.7 67.3 65.9 #N//~ #N/A #N/A 60.3 69.8 52.5 58.8 26 65.1 64.6 66.5 #N/A 58.1 #N/A 58.1 67.6 #N/A~ 55.5 27 63.8 63.8 61.7 #N/A #N/A #N/A 60.9 68.2 #N/A 57.1 28 66.5 66.2 64.9 59.9 #N/A #N/A 58.0 69.3 52.9 59.1 29 67.3 67.0 65.9 #N/A #N/A #N/A 59.2 69.2 #N/A 57.9 30 66.8 66.5 66.0 #N/,~ #N/A #N/A 57.7 68.9 #N/A 57.9 31 66.8! 68.0: 64.8 57.4 #N/A #N/A 58.1 69.4 #N/A 58.9 Days 31 26 31 7 14 29 31 10 28 En.Avg 66.7' 66.5 65.4 60.1 59.2 58.1 68.9 51.5 57.9 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -9- TABLE 5 DALLY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION June 2001 Date NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON 1 66.8 66.8 66.1 59.6 60.3 #N/A 55.8 69.9 52.1 #N/A 2 65.0 64.4 63.1 59.6 #N/A #N/A 59.0 67.6 51.0 57.0 3 65.8 66.3 63.7 59.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A 69.4 #N/A 59.0 4 66.8 66.4 64.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A 57.6 #N/A #N/A 58.0 5 66.5 66.7 64.6 #N/A #N/A #N/A 59.0 #N/A #N/A' 58.1 6 67.0 66.6 64.6 #N/A 58.6 #N/A 59.3 #N/A #N/A 58.4 7 66.9 66.8 64.9 59.3 58.1 #N/A 57.3 #N/A #N/A 59.2 8 66.8 67.1 65.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 9 65.0 64.9 63.1 #N/A 55.9 59.2 59.7 #N/A #N/A 55.6 10 66.2 65.8 63.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A 57.0 11 66.6 67.0 64.2 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 56.7 #N/A #N/A 58.0 12 66.3 66.9 64.6 #N/A 58.7 #N/A 59.2 69.5 #N/A #N/A 13 66.9 67.1 65.1 #N/A 59.6 #N/A 59.1 69.6 #N/A 57.8 14 67.7 67.4 65.5 #N/A 58.5 #N/A 57.1 69.1 #N/A 57.8 15 67.3 67.3 65.3 #N/A 58.4 #N/A 59.3 69.6 #N/A 58.4 16 65.3 64.9 63.1 #N/A 57.3 #N/A 58.8 #N/A #N/A 53.5 17 66.9 66.8 65.3 #N/A 57.6 #N/A 55.0 #N/A #N/A 54.6 18 67.0 67.0 65.3 #N/A 58.0 #N/A 58.3 68.4 #N/A 55.9 19 66.8 67.0 66.4 #N/A 57.9! #N/A 57.1 69.0! #N/A 57.3 20 66.9 66.7, 66.5 #N/A 57.6 #N/A 56.6 68.8; #N/A 55.0 21 67.4 67.4 66.0 61.9 58.7 #N/A 57.2 69.2 #N/A 57.1 22 67.4 67.2 65.3 58.7 59.3 #N/A 58.3 69.4 #N/A 55.9 23 65.9 66.7 63.8 58.6 57.7 #N/A 57.7! 66.9 #N/A 53.8i 24 66.7 66.6 64.6 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 56.1 69.4 #N/A 56.0: 25 67.4 67.5' 65.4 61.9 59.4 #N/A 57.1 68.6 #N/A 55.6~ 26 66.6 66.9 65.7 60.4 58.5 #N/A 56.81 69.3 #N/A 57.4 27 67.5 67.4 #N/A 59.8 59.6 #N/A 58.0' 68.5 #N/A 55.8 28 68.0 #N/A 66.8 61.2 59.9 #N/A 57.6 68.6 #N/A 56.4 29 67.4 67.8 65.8 59.7 59.1 #N/A 57.3 68.9 #N/A 55.9 30 65.7 65.8 63.8 58.6 57.1 #N/A 55.8 67.2 #N/A 54.9 Days 30 29 29 13 24 1 27 20 2 27 En.Avg 66.7 66.7 65.0 60.1 58.6 59.2 57.8 68.9 51.6 56.9 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -10- TABLE 6 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class A Apdl - June 2001 Carrier 'AC Type # Deps NMS Site lS 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 10N Alaska Air B7374 460 Average 94.5 94.1 91.8 85.5 87.1 87.1 85.3 90.0 #N/A 81.6 Count (452) (439) (452) (453)' (455) (440) (440) (3) (0) I1 B7377 9 Average 90.5 90.6 87.6 80.2 83.1 82.6 80.0 #N/Al #N/AI #N/A Count (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (0) (0)~ (0) Aloha B7377 90 Average 97.51 96.4 94.11 87.5 86.8 89.7 85.6 90.2 #N/A #N/A Count (88)! (83) (84) (84) (89) (85) (86) (1 ) (0) (0) America West A320 10 Average 93.8 93.9 91.6 88.5 84.5 86.2 83.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (10) (10) (10) (10), (9) (10) {10) (0) (0) {0) B7373 5 Average 94.4 94.6 90.31 84.6 85.8 86.3 85.6 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (5) (5) (5), {5) (5) (5) (4) {0) (0) {0) B757 64 Average 93.4 93.8 89.9 85.4 83.4 85.2 81.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (62) (60) (62 (61 (57) (62) (53) (0) (0) (0) American B7378 427 Average 95.5 94.5 91.8 86.7 85.11 87.3 84.3 93.4 81.9 77.2 Count (414) (405) (410) (411 (4121 (407) (403) (6) (3) (5) B757 126 Average 92.2 92.4 91.1 85.6 85.4 87.2 84.5 87.3 #N/A #N/A Count (125) (120) (124) (117) (122) (123) {120) (1 (0) (0) MD80 421 Average 99.8 99.8 98.2 91.6 91.7' 93.0 90.0 97.7 82.3 81.3 Count (412 (382) (412 (401) (405) (391) (389) (4) (3) (4) Continental B7373 183Average 95.7 94.9 93.8 87.4 87.0 88.7 85.5 94.7 86.2 82.6 Count (155 (151) 1157) (157) (156 {146) (153) (21 (13) (15) B7377 244 Average 95.3 94.6 92.3 85.8 85.4 86.6 83.9 95.8 80.4 81.1 Count {216) (213) (212) (215) (215) (215) /210) {22) (9) {8) B7378 1 Average 97.8 97.2 92.7 86.2 84.5 86.5 83.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (1) (1 (1 (1 (1) (1) (0) (0) (0) Delta B757 245 Average 94.9 94.6 92.5 85.8 85.0 86.2 83.6 91.4 82.1 81.3 Count (238) (233) (233) (229) (240) (234) (234) (4) (3) (4) FedEx A310 11 Average 98.4 98.2 96.6 91.3 91.0 92.1 88.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (63) (63) (61) (61) (61) (62) (59) (0) (0) (0) Northwest A320 359 Average 95.9 95.2 93.5 87.7 85.7 87.0 83.9 94.7 86.5 79.8 Count (332) (327) (332 (328) (330) (322) (323) (23) (6) (6) Southwest B7373 180Average 93.8 93.8 90.7 85.6 85.7 86.4 83.6 91.1 #N/A 74.9 Count (176) {173) (173) (177) (177) {176) (177) (2) (0) (1) B7377 1 Average 88.3 89.2 85.7 77.1 82.9 79.5!) 78.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (1 (1) (1) (1) (1 (1) (0) (0) (0) TWA B757 178 Average 92.8 92.7 90.1 84.4 83.9 84.7 82.2 87.4 79.0 #N/A Count (1741 (167) (173) 1174) 11701 (1731 (167)i I2) I1) (0) MD80 2 Average 101.1 100.0 97.4 88.2 90.5 92.3 90.1 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (0) (0) (0) Un~ted A320 1 Average 89.7 90.6 89.6 85.5 82.9 84.7 82.4 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (1) (1) (1) {1) (1) (1 (0) (0) (0) B7373 167Average 94.2 94.0 91.5 86.2 85.8 87.0 84.4 94.7 #N/A 82.6 Count (164) {160) {163) (163) (163) (163 (161 {1) (0) (1) B757 18 Average 94.2 94.2 92.1 84.8 85.4 86.6 83.2 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (18) (17) (18) (17) (18) (17) (18) (0) (0) (0) UPS B757 64 Average 93.4 93.7 91.8 85.6 85.0 86.9 83.6 85.0 #N/A #N/A Count (62) (62) (62) (62) (61) (60) (62) (1) (0) (0) US Airways .A319 124 Average 94.7 93.7 93.5 86.9 85.0 88.4 84.8 88.0 #N/A 72.9 Count (120) (118) (120) (1191 (1191 (1161 (117) {3) (0) (1) B757 56 Average 97.8 97.8 96.5 88.0 88.0 88.5 84.6 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (56) (56) (56) (56) (55) (51) (53) (0) (0) (0) -II- TABLE 7 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class AA April - June 2001 Carner AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 10N Alaska Air IB7377 148Average 90.9 91.0 87.9 82.0 83.6 84.5 81.7 87.4 90.8 75.4 Count (146 (139) (142) (142) (144) (140) (137) (2) (1) (1) America West A320 298 Average 92.0 92.1 89.5 85.6 83.3 84.1 81.4 85.6 #N/A #N/A Count (296) (292 (294) (293) (286) (290) (208) (1) (0) (0) B7373 388 Average 94.1 94.0 90.8 85.4 84.7 86.0 83.6 90.3 82.0 79.3 Count (377) (359) (380) (374) (380) (379) (375) (3) (2) (2) B757 4 Average 92.3 92.9 87.8 83.9 81.9 82.9 82.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (4) (4) (4) (3) (4) (4) (2) (0) (0) (0) American B7378 158 Average 90.3 90.3 87.2 85.1 81.8 84.2 81.2 88.1 77.4 77.5 Count (1551 (148)! (150) (153) (1501 (152) (140) (1) (1) (1) B757 703 Average 92.0 92.0 90.4 85.5 84.5 86.5 83.7 88.3 78.9 76.2 Count (677)' (666) (688) (675) (676) (676) (634) (7) (2) (4) Continental B7377 235 Average 92.8 92.8 89,8 84.9 83.7 84.5 82.5 93.6 81.4 79.1 Count (209) (200) (210) (209) (209) (206) (204) (20) (6) (9) Delta MD90 350 Average 91.5 91.1 89.9 83.0 82.4 84.8 82.9 91.8 94.9 74.8 Count (340) (329) (338)1 (326) (314) (329) (326) (5) (1 (3) Southwest B7373 180Average 92.9 92.9 89.9 85.4 85.2 86.3 83.4 88.9 78.0 76.3 Count (178) (172) (174) (176 (179) (175 (175) (11 {1 (1) B7377 2 Average 89,2 89.3 86.0 80.6 81.0 81.3 85.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (2) (2) (2) (2)i (2) (2) (1 ) (0) (0) (0) United A320 422 Average 91.4 91.5 90.7 85.81 84.2, 86.1 83.8 88.1 84.5 78.7 Count (414) (398) (409) (411) (412) (402) (405) (5) (1 (1) MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class E Apdl - June 2001 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 1 ON Alaska Air B7374 2 Average 88.7 89.7 86.2 82.1 83.0 81.9 79.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (0) (0) (0) B7377 664 Average 89.7 90.0 86.8 82.0 82.6 82.8 80.8 87.3 87.3 #N/A Count (655) (638) (650) (616) (652) (636) (590) (5) (2) (0) Aloha B7377 61 Average 90.3 90.3 87.0 82.2 81.1 82.5 80.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (61) (61) (59) (59) (61) (61 (54) (0) (0) (0) America West B7373 969 Average 91.7 91.9 89.0 84.8 84.0 84.8 82.6 88.7 80.3 77.4 Count (946) (933) (939) (931) (948) (930)~ (918) (9) (7) (4) American B7378 641 Average 89.4 89.4 86.5 83.4 81.4 82.9 80.4 87.2 87.0 75.5 Count (622) (613) (622) (620) (609) (617)i (570) (7) (4) (1) 90.2 90.1 88.0 82.5 80.8 82.81 81.1 #N/A #N/A #N/A Delta MD90 175 Average Count (173) (171) (170) (145) (144) (170)i (153) (0) (0) (0) Southwest B7373 972 Average 91.8 92.0 89.3 84.4 84.7 85.8 82.6 88.1 78.7 75.9 Count (955) (943) (953) (939) (958) {931 (931) (6) (4) B7377 59 Average 89.9 90.1 86.1 81.6 81.1 81.2 79.3 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (57) (58) (59) (55) (56) (59) (48) (0) (0) (0) United B757 981 Average 91.9 91.7 89.3 83.5; 82.8 84.3 82.6 89.7 82.6 76.6 Count (962) (939) (951); (916)! (904) (926) (909) (11) (2) (3) -12- TABLE 8 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVEl.S Commuter April - June 2001 Carrier .AC Type # Deps NM,?, Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N 10N SkyWest iCL60 90 Average 85.3 84.4 87.3 78.9 78.6 81.3 82.7 85.5 #N/A #N/A Count (84) (85) (85) (381 (10) (79) (6) (2) (0) (0) E120 1298 Average 80.7 83.3 82.3 84.5 83.4 82.0 81.7 80.0 88.6 #N/A Count (1264) (1228) (1238) (86) (887) (1128) (224) (10 (4) (0) MEASURE[) AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS General Aviation April - June 2001 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1S 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S I 7S 8N 9N 10N General Aviation Jet 2101 Average 89.8 89.1 90.1 84.81 84.6 85.8 84.6 85.9 85.2 83.1 Count (1774) (1735) (1731) (1090)! (851 (1507) (774) (30) (3) (5) -13- TABLE 9 AIR CARRIER OPERATIONAL HISTORY Carrier : AC Type Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Alaska Air AS B7374 7,718 7,795 7,237 4,242 1,969 B7377 1,090 5,658 3,125 MD80 4 Aloha AQ B7377 5 305 America West AW A319 112 746 190 A320 6 509 1,060 1,575 1,265 B7373 14,152 11,917 11,985 10,892 5,316 B757 1,3321 205 464 471 181 American AA B7378 2 655 3,256 B757 8,970 8.329 8,145 8,621 3,241 MD80 610 1,119 2,285 4,931 2,003 MD90 3,191 7,276 1,254 Continental CO B7373 (11 2,710 720 24 2 B7375 I1) 1,995 2,061 2,030 868 B7377 868 2,491 3,189 1,901 B7378 16 2 B757 724 298 Delta DL B7373 2 4 B757 2,202 2,117 1,585 2,086 1,003 MD90 3,058 3,836 4,218 4,121 2,083 FedEx FM A300 18 12 20 82 2 A310 486 496 487 404 250 Northwest NW A319 9 481 318 A320 3,408 3,219 3,486 2,554 1,078 Reno Air QQ MD80 4,200 4,246 2,622 MD90 5,680 5,744 5,083 Southwest WN B7373 (1) 9,846 2,986 1,358 1,566 779 B7375 (1) 6,689 8,234 7,977 4,280 B7377 2 129 280 177 TWA TW B757 1,242 1,139 1,174 1,730 823 MD80 648 986 894 314 8 United UA A319 (21 749 1,035 797 797 A320 121 2,024 1,816 1,196 1,785 1,014 B7373 Ill 836 503 791 882 502 B7375 (1) 2' 55 22 B757 8,274 8,617 8,290 7,522 3,772 UPS 5X B757 476 500 502 508 252 US Airways US A319 955 1,455 602 A320 11 2 A321 2 B7373 1,444 1,456 482 B757 113 ( I ) Counts that separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that .~parate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -14- TABLE ! 0 AIRCRAF-F OPERATIONAL HISTORY Aircraft Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 A300 18 12 20 82 2 A310 486 496 487 404 250 A319 (1) 749 2,111 3,479 1,907 A320 (1) 5,438 5,544 5,753 5,916 3,357 A321 2 B7373 (2) 28,990 17,582 14,640 13,346 6,597 B7374 7,718 7,795 7,237 4,242 1,969 B7375 (2) 8,686 10,350 10,007 5,170 B7377 870 3,710 9,132 5,508 B7378 18 655 3,258 B757 23,220 21,205 20,160 20,938 9,385 :MD80 5,662 6,351 5,801 5,245 2,011 :MD90 8,738 9,580 12,492 11,397 3,337 (I) Counts that separate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. FIGURE 5 AIRCRAF'I' OPERATIONAL HISTORY 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 (1) (1) B7373 B7374 B7375 B7377 B7378 B757 MD80 MD90 (2) (2) By Year · 19981 [] 1999i Q2000! 12001' -15- TABLE 11 AIR CARRIER AVERAGE DALLY DEPARTURE HISTORY Carrier AC Type Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Alaska Air AS B7374 10.573 10.682 9.921 5.806 5.442 B7377 1.490 7.719 8.635 MD80 0.005 Aloha AQ B7377 0.014 0.840 America West AW A319 0.151 1.019 0.525 A320 0.008 0.688 1.455 2.150 3.492 B7373 19.386 16.351 16.422 14.8741 14.680 B757 1.825 0.279 0.630 0.642 0.503 American AA B7378 0.003 0.893! 8.994 B757 12.288 11.397 11.159 11.779 8.961 MD80 0.836 1.551 3.148 6.743 5.525 MD90 4.359 9.932 3.475 Continental CO B7373 I1) 3.712 0.984 0.033 0.005 B7375 (1) 2.742 2.844 2.776 2.398 B7377 1.184 3.392 4.352 5.254 B7378 0.022 0.006 B757 0.992 0.408 Delta DL B7373 0.003 0.005 B757 3.016 2.899 2.175 2.850 2.768 MD90 4.189 5.249 5.775 5.628 5.746 FedEx FM A300 0.025 0.016 0.027 0.112 0.006 A310 0.666 0.679 0.668 0.552 0.691 Northwest NW A319 0.014 0.656 0.890 A320 4.668 4.408 4.775 3.492 2.967 Reno Air QQ MD80 5.753 5.830 3.597 MD90 7.781 7.860 6.964 Southwest WN B7373 (1) 13.488 4.088 1.860 2.142 2.149 B7375(1) 9.167 11.296 10.893 11.823 B7377 0.003 0.178 0.383 0.492 TWA TW B757 1.701 1.564 1.627 2.366 2.276 MD80 1.162 1.345 1.208 0.429 0.022 United UA A319 12) 1.030 1.411 1.082 2.215 A320 (2) 2.773 2.488 1.647 2.432 2.790 B7373111 1.145 0.688 1.082 1.202 1.387 B7375 I1) 0.003 0.016 0.061 B757 11.334 11.803 11.441 10.298 10.431 UPS 5X B757 0.652 0.685 0.688 0.694 0.696 US Airways US A319 1.310 1.989 1.663 A320 0.014 0.003 A321 0.006 B7373 1.978 1.995 0.660 B757 0.309 (i) Counts thai separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that ~parate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -16- NOISE ABATEMENT COMMYlq'EE MEETING Date: June 21,2001 Time: 2:¢X) p.m. Place: Eddie Martin Building AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS DISCUSSED: 1. Airport Statistics John Escobedo gave an update on the Airl~)rt Statistics citing information published in the JWA Airport Statistics report for May 2001. He noted decreases from May 2000 levels in the number of passengers, air cargo tonnage lifted, total operations, air taxi operations and military operations. General aviation and air carrier operational levels were both below last May's levels. 2. New service destinations by Aloha and Southwest Airlines Aloha Airlines began service on May !, 2(X)I to Oahu and Las Vegas and added another flight on June I, 2001 to Maui. Southwest Airlines began new service on June 10, 2001 to Las Vegas and Phoenix. 3. Status of the Santa Ana Heights Acoustical Insulation Program (SAHAIP) Bonnie Streeter provided an update on the status of the SAHAIP. She noted that Ibr AlP Phase VII, the 182-unit apartment building located at the comer of Mesa Drive and lrvine Avenue is 95% complete. For AlP Phase Vlll, a contract as awarded on May 8, 2001 for the insulation of 25 additional units. Carl Braatz is in the process of gathering names for the next group. 4. Demonstration of TAMIS Communicator real-time noise levels John Escobedo gave an explanation of the noise level measurement display. Question: Pat Paddison asked do people look at SENEL or Lmax. Answer: John Leyerle explained differences between CNEL and SENEL. Question: Roger Sanders asked where do executive jets fall into JWA regulations. Answer: John Leyerle explained GANO vs. Commercial regulations. -17- NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING (continued) Question: Roger Sanders stated he gets calls to the homeowners association about jets that depart every morning at 6:30 am. It is very quiet then. st) this is very noticeable. Answer: John Leyerle explained that there are 4(X),(XX) GA operations ever5, year. We monitor all these operatk)ns and compare noise levels with noise limits. Explained the denial penalty. Question: Joseph Edwards asked why are there st) many more noise monitors It) the south as compared to the north and also is it possible that other areas are getting overflown where there are no monitors and therefore nol being recorded. Answer: John Leyerle explained that in the early 1980's thc Board of Supervisors wanted to expand JWA. Communities to the north and south were concerned. Law suits lead to a Federal Court settlement agreement in 1985. Parties to the final settlement agreement were the City of Newport Beach, AWG and SPON. While some representatives from Tustin and Santa Ana where involved at some stage, the parties to the final agreement were from thc Newport Beach area. Thus the number and location of the noise monitors was influenced by the involvement, or non-involvement, of communities. Other reasons are that there is more noise generated on departures due to takeoff' thrust versus arrivals. The noise impacted area of the 65 dB CNEL contour is located in Santa Aha Heights which is south of the airport. Communities to the north are removed from the 65 contour by many miles. The question of why JWA doesn't site additional monitors comes up periodically. The airport has always been supportive. If a community is willing to t'und the placement of a new monitor, at a cost of $25,000 to $50,000, JWA would be happy to do that. However. due to the passage of ANCA in 1990, any new restrictions on noise that were not specifically grandfathered, are prohibited. So data from any new locations would have to be for informational purposes only. To the best of our knowledge, the contours in the quarterly relx)rt and the annual contours show that there are no communities other than the Santa Ana Heights area that are in the 65 dB CNEL impact area. Question: Robert Shepherd asked isn't the CNEL the average noise and doesn't it average in the quiet times. Answer: John Leyerle defined CNEL as "24 hour weighted noise average". He also explained that the CNEL has been the standard for federal, state and local authorities since the 1970's. Mark Esslinger additionally explained that the quarterly report contours show the measured 65 dB CNEL contour, but that the projected contour from the 1985 JWA Master Plan is the contour adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This projected contour was computer-calculated. John Leyerle added that the actual contour has been consistently smaller than the projected contour. -18- NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING (continued) Ouestion: Roger Sanders asked is monitor I at Iht MtJSEL intersection. Answer: Ramey Gonzalez explained that monitor 3 is closer to the MUSEI~ intersection and is where the commercial carriers execute their power cutbacks. 5. Any additional questions Question: Pat Paddison stated in looking at the monthly CNEL tables in the most recent quarterly report noticed that many monitors don't have a full months worth of data. Answer: John Leyerle explained that monitors were up and running during that period, but we experienced problems with the monitors from time to time. The noise staff works diligently to resolve these problems as soon as possible. Question: Robert Shepherd asked if the commercial carriers noise compliance period was reduced from a calendar quarter, would that be in violation of ANCA. Answer: John Leyerle explained that he could only speculate. The Board of Supervisors has agreed to proceed with an EIR for the renegotiation of the settlement agreement. Question: Pat Paddison stated he keeps hearing that "nothing has changed" (with regards to aircraft over his home) and maybe that's true as far as the FAA is concerned, but it has changed dramatically over the last several months. Who brings the planes onto the ILS. Answer: John Leyerle explained that the FAA has full control of airspace traffic, along with the pilot in command, by Federal law. There is more control in a controlled airspace, in Anaheim, as aircraft come from eastern airports to get on to the ILS, air traffic controllers at Coast TRACON in San Diego are continuously in communication with the aircraft pilots directing them through the airspace. The FAA's primary concerns are safety and efficiency. They need to maintain separation of three miles. In the presence of wingtip vortices, they need 5 miles of separation, e.g. the B757 aircraft which flies into JWA frequently. Two other things have changed. The number of aircraft in the airspace has increased and the bunching of aircraft operations in that airspace during peak-use times has also increased, thus increasing the chances of routing over the Anaheim Hills area. Question: Pat Paddison asked is there any way to change things. Answer: John Leyerle's reply was the closer you are to any airport, the more difficult it is to effect change. -19- NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING (continued) 6. Tentative date for the next Noise Abatement Committee meeting The date for the next quarterly Noise Abatement Committee meeting will be announced by letter approximately two weeks before the meeting. -20- NAC ROSTER June 21, 2001 NAME Robert Shepherd Mark Esslingcr David Post Pat Paddison Roger Sanders Maya DeRosa Joseph Edwards John Leyerle Bonnie Streeter John Escobedo Ramey Gonzalez Rena Balleweg ORGANIZATION Newport Beach Aviation Committee County of Orange TWA Anaheim Hills resident Bluffs Homeowners Association City of Santa Ana City of Santa Ana John Wayne Airporl John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport John Wayne Airport -21- Attachment B Revicw of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports January 25, 2002 Project Fi le 241-01 Ms. Justina Willkom City of Tustin Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 Subject: Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports for the I~t and 2"d Quarters of 2001 Deal' Ms. Willkom, As requested, we have reviewed the referenced quarterly reports for the noise abatement program at John Wayne Airport. The following provides our findings with regard to airport operations and their impact on the City of Tustin: 1. Referring to Figure 1, the average annual CNEL at NMS 10N was 57.2 dB for 2001 based upon data for the first two quarters. This is 0.1 dB lower than the average annual CNEL of 57.3 dB for 2000. (NOTE: The noise contours for John Wayne Airport are based on average annual CNEL values measured at each remote monitoring station.) 2. The average annual CNEL o1'57.2 dB in 2001 implies the leveling off ol'a modest upward trend in the aircrali noise exposure measured at NMS 10N. This trend is illustrated in the following table: 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 56. i dB 56.4 dB 56.8 dB 55.9 dB 57.0 dB 56.8 dB 57.3 dB 57.2 dB Refen'ing to Figure 2. thc number of noise complaints received from the Tustin area does not appear to correlate with the average quarterly aircraft CNEI, measured at NMS 10N, nor with the number of quarterly jet operations at thc airport. As indicated in the figure, the average quarterly CNEL increased steadily I'rom the fourth quarter of 2000 through the second quarter of 2001, while the number of complaints from residents of thc "l'ustin area remained relatively steady. g¥ielan(I Associates. Inc. .4('ou.qtical Con.~'ultant.~ 23276 South I)oinle I)ri~e Suite 114 I.aguna Ilills. CA 92653 'l~'l: 949/829-6722 Fax: 949/829-6670 Average Quarterly Aircraft CNEL, NMS 10N] ~ 58.5 ~.. ~ .~. ~.~ ....., ~?.~.. ,.~ [.'] . . ..... . .... :.....:;.,? .'."~,~','" ~ 58.0 .................... . ........... ' ...... ~"~ :;' :' ~.,,.'- ~ 57.0 ~56.5 c 56.0 < IQtr00 2Qtd)0 3Qtr00 4QtrO0 IQtr01 2Qtr01 3Qtr01 4QtrOl ITotal Quarterly Jet Operations, NMS 10NJ 2>,OOO ....  10,000 , = 5,000 ~ 0 t-- IQtrO0 2QtrO0 3Qtff)O 4QtrO0 IQtrOl 2QtrOl 3QtrOI 4QtrOl I Average Quarterly Noise ComplaintsI > 0 < IQtr00 2Qtr00 3QtrO0 4Qtr00 IQtit)l 2Qtr01 3QtrOl 4QtrOl WIELAND Average Quarterly CNEL, Quarterly Jet 2 ASSOCIATES, INC. Operations, and Quarterly Noise Complaints CITY OF TUSTIN Projccl Filc 241-01 As indicated in Item 1, above, the annual average CNEL measured at NMS 10N was 57.2 dB through the second quarter of 2001. This is slightly less than the 58 dB that was estimated for the station in the referenced aircraft noise impact study for the Phase 2 Access Plan. Aircraft Noise Contours Figure 3 provides the estimated location of the John Wayne Airport noise contours for 2001. These are based on the 2000 contours developed by the John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Office, and data through the second quarter of 2001. Referring to Figure 3, it is estimated that in 2001 the aircraft-generated CNEL ranged from about 59 dB to less than 55 dB. This is well below the City, County, and State criteria of 65 dB for residential areas. Use of Quieter Aircraft at John Wayne Airport The correlation between the increasing use of quieter aircraft at JWA and the change in CNEL within the City of Tustin has been assessed. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) classifies aircraft into three categories based on noise levels. In order of decreasing noise levels, there arc Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III aircraft. John Wayne Airport has only permitted Stage IIl aircraft since the early 1970's. The airport has its own classification scheme for passenger aircraft. In order of decreasing noise level, these are Class A, Class AA, and Class E aircraft. Table 1 provides the estimated number of each class of aircraft that used the airport between the first quarter of 2000 and the second quarter of 2001. Also provided is the measured average quarterly CNEL at NMS 10N. Table 2 provides the same information, but the values have been normalized to 17,000 aircraft operations (takeoffs and landings) per quarter. In this way, a correlation can be established between the quarterly CNEL and the mix of aircraft types. Referring to Table 2 and Figure 4, the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft using John Wayne Airport has gradually increased since the beginning of 2000. This increase in Class E aircraft was offset by a decrease in the use of the noisier Class A aircraft. However, during this same time period, the average quarterly CNEL has been relatively steady. Therefore, based on data from the first quarter of 2000 through the second quarter of 2001, there does not appear to be any correlation between the aircraft mix and the average quarterly CNEL at NMS 10N. 4 ._.~, ~ .,- , _~ ~~t-~ ' '.~" I * ~ "' " "'['~"'~'~' "~ ~' ',~' · .'~m~Y~.X/ ~~:~:~ ~~ ~ '-~ ':;:~:'".~,¢~ i .Z~ ~,'~ ,.~ ,~, ~~ ~'2~ . - ........... ~- ~, .~~ ~~,~ ¢ ~.: .......... ~ ~ :?, ~E~ND Estimated Location of ASSOCIATES, INC. John Wayne Ai~o~ Noise Conto~s crr¥ oF TUSTIN Project File 241-01 Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with this acoustical consulting service. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact us at 949/8:29-6722 Sincerely, WIELAND ASSOCIATES, INC. David L. Wieland Principal Consultant 7 References CITY OF TUS"I'IN Project File 241-01 1. "Data Evaluation and Aircraft Noise Impact Study for the City ofTustin;" J. J. Van Houten & Associates, Inc.; January 8, 1990. 2. "Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report for the Period: January l, 2001 through March 31, 2001 ;" John Wayne Airport. 3. "Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report for the Period: April 1, 2001 through June 30, 2001 ;" John Wayne Airport.