The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04 J.W. AIRPORT NOISE 02-07-00NO. 4 02-07-00 DATE: FEBRUARY 7, 2000 inter-Com TO: , WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMU~TY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTh~ENT SUBJECT: JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE ABATEMENT QUARTERLY REPORTS SUMMARY: This report transmits two John Wayne Airport Noise Abatem'ent"Quarterly Reports for the firSt and second quarters of 1999. The average noise level measured at monitoring station'M-7, located at Columbus Tustin-'Middle Schoo~ slightly decreased during the first quarter and slightly increased during the second quarter. Average noise levels during both quarters remained below the Cffy, Coutgy attd State criteria of 65 dB Commuttity Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) for residential uses. RECOMMENDATION Receive and file report. FISCAL IMPACT The City retains the acoustics consulting firm of J.J. Van Houten and Associates, Inc. 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 mm/ts 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 1 contains the quarterly reports for the first and second quarters of 1999. Attachment 2 contains the summary report prepared by the noise consultant. A brief overview of the information contained within these attachments follows. Measured Noise Levels During the first quarter of 1999, the average CNEL at Remote Monitoring Station (R/MS) #7, located at Columbus Tustin Middle School was 56.6 dB. This is .5 dB less than the four City Council Report JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports February 7, 2000 Page 2 previous quarters. However, for comparison, the CNEL was 1.0 dB higher (57.6) during the first'quarter of 1998. During the second quarter of 1999, the average CNEL was 57.3 dB. This is .5 dB more than the four previous quarters. FOr comparison, the CNEL was .2 dB lower ~57'1) during the second quarter of 1998. · All measured noise levels are below the City, County and State criteria of 65 dB CNEL for residential areas. . Noise Compla/nts During the first quarter of 1999, there were 28 TustirffOrange complaints compared with 37 for the same period during 1998. During the second quarter of 1999, there were 42 Tustin/Orange complaints compared with 64 for the same period during 1998. The number of Complaints decreased during the first and second quarters compared to the same period in 1998. The overall number of complaints during the first two quarters of 1999 appears to correlate with the average quarterly, aircrait CNEL and the number of quarterly jet operations at the airport. Type and Mix of Aircrai~ Related to Noise Levels · During the first quarter of 1999, the percentage of quieter Class E aircraf~ increased and the percentage of noisier Class A aircraft decreased compared with the samb period in 1998. The average CNEL for the first quarter of 1999 was slightly lower than the same period during 1998. During the second quarter of 1999 the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft increased and the percentage of noisier Class A aircraft'slightly decreased compared with the same period in 1998. The average CNEL for the second quarter was slightly hitcher than the second quarter of 1998. The percentage of quieter Class E aircraft using John Wayne Airport was slightly .l?4gher in 1999, compared to 1998. This percentage increase in Class E aircraft was offset by a decrease in the use of the noisier Class A aircraft and Class AA aircraft. Based on these data, there does not appear to be any correlation between the aircraft mix and the average quarterly CNEL. City coUncil Report JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports February 7, 2000 Page 3 Airport Noise Contours . A new noise contour was utilized by Van Houten and Associates, Inc. in preparing the attached rePort. This new noise contour is based on the 1998 contours developed by the noise consultant for the John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement office. Using this new contour, it is estimated that in' 1999 the aircraft-generated CNEL in Tustin will range bom about 60 dB to less than 55 dB. 'This is well below the City, County and state criteria for residential areas. The width of the new noise contour is also much narrower than in the previous 1990 noise contour. This resulted in the shifting of the 60db contour off of the MCAS-Tustin site and beyond the City's boundary .............. · 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 tmless otherwise dkected by the City Council. JA~s o~c~atWe i}ll~'°& I~lizabeth A. ~inJacl~ -- - Community Development' Director Attachments . . John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports for January 1, 1999 - March 31, 1999 and April 1, 1999- June 30, 1999. .Review' of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly RepOrts, 1s' and 2na Quarters 1999 (Van Houten and Associates, Inc.) \,~rX)MM_DEV~VOLi~SHARED,~CDD. RDA'~ZDDUUSTINAUWAWNA report to council 2-7-00.doe ATTACHMENT 1 John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports for January 1, 1999- March 31, 1999 and April 1, 1999 and June 30, 1999. NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT For the period: - January 1,1999 through March 31, 1999 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 ~ Loan Leblow Interim Ah-port Director John Wayne Airport, Orange County INTRODUCTION This is the 105th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of the California Airport Noise Standards (California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards). Effective January !, 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 Pro,am 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 noise monitoring stations (NMSs) located in Newport Beach, Santa Ana, Tustin and Irvine to measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS NMS-I: NMS-2: NMS-3: NMS-6: NMS-7: Golf Course, 3100 Irvine Ave., Newport Beach 20152 S.W. Birch St., Santa Ana ' 2139 Anniversary Lane, Newport Beach 1131 Back Bay Drive, Newport Beach 17952 Beneta Way, Tustin NMS-8: ·.. 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana NMs-9i 17372 Eastman Street, Irvine NMS-21:223 Nata~ Newport Beach . NMS-22:2338 Tustin Ave., Newport Beach NMS-24:1918 Santiago, Newport Beach -_ The map in Fi~m.tre 1 shows the general location of each permanent noise monitor station. Figure 2 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for the previous year (April 1, 1998 - March 31, 1999). 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- FIGURE I JOHN WAYNE STATi O N LO CAT! O N i I. AIRPORT MAP JOHN WAYNE M REMOTE MONITOF:IING STATION FIGURE 2 BRISTOL STRE=-T SOUTH RMS1 ,,. ,11 mmmmu~ LEGEND Single Family Residential Mulfi-Fam,qy Residential (Numb~ i~d~c-,,'~_ dwelling In¢ompap~le Land Use A_rea: 28.7 acres or 0.046 sqLm~ miles Nm'nber of Dwellings: 129 Numbe: of People: 323 (Based on 23 people pe~ D. U.) J O HN WAYNE AIRP O RT 6S dB CNEL IMPACT AREA APRIL 1995 - MARCH 1999 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT -3- :AIRCK~.FT TRAFFIC SUMMARY The Airport traffic summary for this quarter is shown in Table 1 and Figure 3 below: Air Carrier operational count histories and average_daily departure counts are illustrated in Tables 9 & 11. · . . .. TABLE 1 . -: ;,.-': :'-- ' '~- LANDIN6 AND T .AKEO~.OPERATIONs ': ..-- ' ~" ' "' January- March 1999 . Period.:: :-- · ' Air Carriers GA Jet (1) ~ Totai'. .Average Daily ~ ~-'-:':-' .' :~::- "~-'~ Jet- Prop "-':" ~ '" Operati~r~s (2) Jet 0pemtions .. ''- -.:r :.' ..' , ;:'i ~ :. January ": "'-: '.',':' "6,624 435 .... ~-v. 1,119 ' :'~::34,765 250 February-,- ..... - 6,106 '413 -"" 1,145 35,147 259 March 6,821 480 1,359: 36,172 264 First Quarter 19,551 1,328 3,6231 . 106,084 257 :l'welve Month~ ..... - 80,186 7,048 ..... 14,883 ' 422,617 260 04/01/98 - 03/31/99 QUARTERLY AIRPORT TRAFFIC SLr/viMARY (Landing and Takeoff Operations) · January- March 1999 Jet Carrier Uilita~ Prop Cartier GA Jet · GA Other ' -'-':T: -IFL':::::::. 19,551 32 .o 1,328 .. 81,228 -.,;_ 10,000 20,000 3(~,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 ., Number of Operations ,, · 90,000 -, NOTE: (I) Business Jet figures inchdc a 5% factor for operations not identified by thc JWA noise monitor stations. (2) Counts in this column aye based upon records provided by thc local FAA representatives. COMMUNITY NOISE EQLTIVALENT 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 Exposure Level (SENEL) values for Air Carrier and Business Jet aircraft are shown in Tables 6 through 8. For the twelve month period ending March 31, 1999, 129 dwelling units in Santa Ana Heights were in the "Noise Impacted Area" (within the 65 dB CNEL contour); this represents a decrease of five units in the number of dwelling units in the "Noise Impacted Area" from the previous twelve month period ending December 31, 1998. 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 the County, or rezoned for "other non-noise sensitive uses." As part of the County's Santa Ana Heights Land Use Compatibility Program, approximately 77 general agriculture (A-l) properties with residential land uses on Orchard, Acacia and Birch Streets were rezoned for Business Park Use in OctolSer, 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 Ana Heights. fl'he current AAIP has been renamed "Santa Aha Heights Acoustical Insulation Program" with the acronym "SAH AIP".) During the first quarter of 1999, no additional residences have been made compatible through the County's SAIl AIP. A total of 224 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 SAIl AIP. : TELEPHONE COMPLAINT CALLS (January i. 1999- March 31. 1999) 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, 1999 through March 31, 1999, the Office received 251 complaints from citizens. This is a 16.6% decrease from the 301 complaints received last quarter. It is a 25% decrease from the 332 complaints received during the same quarter last year. Figure 4 shows the distribution of the quarterly telephone calls and complaints from local communities. FIGLTRE 4 HISTOGRAM BY COMMUNITY 8O 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 19 18 10 11 10 9 12 5 '2 5 I 3 2 I One household is responsible for 66% of the 74 calls from Balboa Island. -5- TABLE 2 LONG TERM MEASURED LEVELS Aircraft CNEL from 4/98 through 3/99 Values in dB at Each Site Period NMS Site ........ 1 ...... 2--. 3 .... 21 -'?.2' 24 6 7 8 ' 9 APr.1.99.8,~.' ..... 67,! 66.0! ._ 65.7'' 61.4 . 62_.2 --59.9 57.1i' 56.7 45.8 66.3 # Days 1 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 28 19 May1998 66.5 65.6 65.3 61.1 62.5 60.2 ..... 56.8 _.57.3 45.5 - 69.3 ~# Days:i' :' ' r 31 .... "31..... -31....31 .' :' 22. '"" '~ 31 29.~ 31 30 30 i Jun 1998~ · -,~6.5 -- 65.8 '-' 64.5 '~ 59.6 .;." 63.8 60.8 .57.! 57.4 47.8 68.0 #DaYs:!:~ : .,i-"3'0 ' "30 :~--.;--.30..... 8 '-"' 29 "30 '-" 29 "30 " 29 30' Q-21998 66.5-65.8 ._.65.2' 61.1- 62.9-. 60.3- 57.0 57.1 46.5 68,2 #D~ys--~ "' i':'62 '"' 91 .91 ' ~ 69 81 91 88 90 : 87 79 Jul 1998-- 66.8 - 66.1!, 64.7 - 60.4 60.4 __60,1 .56.7 57.3'. 50.4 67.7 # Days .... "-~"31 .... "31-'~'31 --'31 ~-""3i 31 ' 31 31 31 31 Aug 1998 .... 67.1 65.8'- 64.6 '59.7 59.5 59.8 57.71 56.2 51.3: 67.2 #Days" . ._31 ,-. 24- ' '31 12 - -- 31 25 31 ' '31 27 31 Sep.!.998 66.7 ..... 65.4 ~ 64.0 ,. 60.6 .59.3 ' 59.4 -- 57.7 55.3 53.3 67.3 # Days .- 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Q-319981 66.9- 65.8 64.4 60.4 59.7 59.8 57.4 56.3 51.8 67.4 # Days '. 92 85 92 73 92 86 92 92 88 92 .0ct1998 66.4 65.4 64.1' 59.8 59.2'- 60.1 57.4 58.1 52.2 67.3 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 Nov 1998 66.5 65.6 64.6' . 60.2 61.8 60.6 57.7 56.8 52.5 66.9 # Day~'.- '; ! 30 . 30 30 22 16 ~ 30 27 30 30 30 Dec 1998 ' 66.0 64;7 64.7 59.3 - 58.7 61~. 56.0 56.6 52.1 66.1 #Days~ - 31 .... ; 31 - '" 31 -."" 31 ..... 15 31 31 31 31 31 Q-4.1998- , .... 66.3 - - 65.2 - 64.4 '-' 59.7 "59.9 60-7 57.11 57.2 52.2 66.8 #Days ~.' - 92 92 92 ~, 84~ -' 62 92 "89 '~' 92 92 92 'Jan 1999 66.0 65.0 63.7 ,, 59.0 59.1 58.8 56.6 56.0' 52.4 66.5 # Days 31 31 30 30 30 30 28 31 29 30 Feb 1999 66.2 65.3. 64.5' 59.8 59.1 59.7 56.4 56.7 _-_52.7 66.8 # Days 28 ,281 28 27 26 26 26 26 28 27 Mar 1999 66.3 65.7 - 63.9 60.4 59.3 58.9 57.0 57.1 55.5 67.7 #Days 31 ,.. 31 31 30 31 7 30 27 ' 29 31 Q-1 1999 66.2 .65.3 .. 64.1 59.7.. 59.2. 59.2 56.7 56.6: 53.8 67.0 # DaYs" ,90 90 89 87 87 63 84 84 86 88 ~-2 1998 thru. Q-1 1999 ' Total "1 66.51. 65.5 ' 64.6, 60.2 60.7 60.1 57.0 56.8 51.8 67.4 # DaysJ. 336! . 358 364 313 ' 322 332 353 358 353 351 Q-1 1998 thru Q-4 1998 (Previous 4 Quarters) - Total I 66.6J' 65.71. 64.7- 60.1 61.1 60.2 57.2 57.1 50.8 67.6 # Day~~ 320! 350! 362 310 285 358 341 359 348: 348 Change from Previous 4 Quartem ! I I -0. 1 -0.21 '-0.1 -0.4i -0.1-0.2, -0.2 1.0 -0.2 -6- TABI.E 3 ' -- DAII.Y CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION January 1999 Date · NMS Site ' ., 1 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 1 · 64.4' 63.6 63.1 57.5 57.2 59.2 60.8 53:7 50.3 65.¢ · - 2i 63.9 63.0 60.6 55.6 57.5 55.1 -.51.6.51.2 ·50.3 64.3 3 61.2 58.8 65.9 #N/A #N/A 61.6 #N/A '49.8 52.5 63.4 4 64.01. 62.8 61.7 55.2 56.5 56.3 #N/A 50.5 55.2" 65.7 5 65.5 64.3 62.9 57.3 58.2 58.3 50.9 55.6 55.0'66.4 '6-65.6'64.2 62'.6 57.0 58.4 57.6 53.01 54.9 45.3 64.8 7 66.6 64.9 63.8 59.3 59.9, 59.9 54.9· 58.3i 48.5 .'67.8 8 60.1 60.3 #N/A 58.7 56.4 #N/A 52.1 49.6 53.9 63.8 · 9 61.7. 60.7 59.6 53.9i' 57.0 54.5 #N/A '49.0 51.5i 62.2; 10 65.9 64.4 62.6 57.2 58.1 57.4 53.9 52.9 49.2 .66.0 11 65.1 64.3 62.7 58.4 58.6 57.2 56.1 55.81 49.8 66.8 12 66.5i: 65.8 63.8 59.7 59.9 59.7 59.8 57.4 51.0 67.0 13 67.3! 66.9i 64.2 60.4 60.4 60.3 58.2 57.2 48.1 66.9 14 67.01 65.9 64.0 58.5 58.2 58.8 59.6 53.8 55.1 66.2 · 15 6,7.7 66.3 64.7 59.8 59.6 60.3 56.8 55.6 56.5~ . 67.3 16 63.8 '62.9 61.4 57.61 57.6 57.4 58.7 55.3 50.2 65.1 ,, 17~ 67.6 66.3 64.9 60.0 59.0160.4 57.7 57.5 50.5 69.3 " 18 66.6 65.8 64.0 60.0 59.1 58.7 56.0 59.6 #N/A #N/A 19 . 67.066.2 64.4 60:4 62.6 '59.8; 56.3 59.0 48.5 67.7 20 66.3 65.6 63.7 60.4 60.2 59.7 56.6, 58.6 #N/A 68.6 21 66.9 '66.2 64.5 60.6 59.8 59.8 56.5 57.4 .49.1 63.1 '22 67.2 66.4 64.6 59.8 60.2 58.7 56.2 55.3-50.6~ 65.9 23 64.5 63.4 62.0 57.7 59.4 57.2 54.9 54.0 50.7 64.3' 241 67.2 66.8 64.9 60.9- 58.7 59.3 57.3 58.9 45.4 67.5 25 65.6 65.1 64.1 59.5 59.1 59.4 54.7 56.7 54.6 67.0 26 65.6 65.1 62.9 60.2 58.6 58.7 56.4 59.9 50.4 69.5 27 66.8 65.3 64.5 60.3 61.7 59.6 56.6 54.8 54.6 67.2 28 66.7 65.3 64.8; 58.3i 60.4 59.5 54.5. 53.2 51.1 66.0 29 67.7 65.6 64.8 59.2 58.6 57.3 55.5 54.1 56.4 67.2 30 65.8 64.7 64.1 57.0 57.8 55.1 52.3 52.4 55.1 64.4 31 67.7 67.1 64.4 60.8 58.5 58.9 57.7 55.9 52.1 67.0 Days 31 31 30 30 30 30 28 31 29 30 En.Avg 66.0 65.0 63.7; 59.0 59.1 58.8 56.6 56.0! 52.4 66.5 #N/A indicates insufficient data. _?_ - TABLE 4 DAIIJY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION February 1999 · , . Date .. NMS Site "' 1' 2 3' 21 ---.22- 24- 6 7 · 8 9 . "'~1. 67.8'"65.4 68.2.60.3 .~58.8 62.6 59.6-52.6 54.3 -64.2 , '-~. ~ 2~ 64.8.64.2- 64.6 58.3. 58.9 -57.2 -.58,1 54.2 53.4"65.8 , 3 67.1 -65.4' 63.8 .59.5-..59.7 57.8- 56.0 55.4 -54.3 67.4 ~ , .. -~'4 -66.9 65.8..64.0 60.1.58.9 60.1 -56.6 60.0 51.3 68.7 , : '5" 67.6' 66.5 '65.1 .60.6 59.6 -~ 61.2' 57.4 58.6 49.4 ' 67.9 6 65.2 ' 64.5 63.1 59.0 57.5 57.7 -56.5 54.8 50.4 64.8 7 67.4 66.4!_ 65.2 60.5 59.260.1 #N/Al 57.8 44.068.1 ~'-- 8 66.91 66.0- 64.5; 60.0 -59.8 60.4 56.8 57.7 43.4 68.2 9 66.3 65.9 64.0 62.1 58.6- 59.7 56.9 58.6 48.9 67.9 -- 10! 60.5 58.71 67.5 60.1 56.4 62.3 #N/A 51.9 49.6 62.7 11 59,8 56.4 65.8 #N/A #N/A 61.6 47.9 45.2 48.5 61.5 12 63.8 63.4 62.5 56.4 55.7 56.9 51.5 51.3 53.0 66.5 , 13 63.7 63.4 60.8 55.4 57.7 #N/A 50.0 49.5 46.3 63.8 · 14 65.5 _64.9. 63.3~59.6 - 58.8 58.1 56.2 58.21 52.6 67.2; ~:' i-15-' 66.7 65.8 ' 64.0 ~-' 60.2 60.0i 59.2 56.71- 56.2 '51.9 - 67.5 16' 66.6 65.6 64.5~' .~- 60.1 - 60.4 59..9 57.1 58.0 50.3 67.9 · " 17[~ 66.4' 65.7 63.9 .60.6 61.3~ 59.7 55.7 '58.7 46.3 68.1 -~ 18 67.2! 66.1 65.1 60.0 58.2 60.7 55.6 59.2 38.5 68.8 19 67.5 67.0i 64.5 60.3! 61.0 60.7 57.4 57.7 55.4 68.0 20 64.6 63.9 .62.2 57.6 58.0 57.3 53.4 53.3 47.3 64.4 21 66.8 66.4 65.1 60.2159.8 59.1 57.0 55.8 55.5 66.6 22 66.5 65.5 63.8 58.6 #N/A #N/Ai 54.9 51.5 57.1 66.0 23 66.5 65.6 63.8 58.0 58.7 57.3 54.6 56.7 52..9 65.6. 24 '66.9 66.6 64.1 59.9 59.0. 57:9 56.3 56.7 57.3 67.7 ' 25 66.9 66.5 .64'6 60.8 58.8 60.8 57.6 58.0 55.9 68.3 · 26 67.7. 66.9 65.7 61.1 61.3 -60.8 58.9 58.9 55.7 #N/A · 27 64.1 63.0 '61.9 57.8" 56.8 57.2 54.9 #N/A 48.01 64.1 28 67.1 66.4 64.0 60.1 58.5 58.0 56.8 #N/A 53.7 67.3 Days 28 28 28 27 26 26 26 26 28 27 En.Avg 66.2 65.3 64.5 '59.8 59.1 59.7 56.4 56.7 52.7 66.8 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -8- TABLE 5 DAII.Y CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION March 1999 Date NMS Site 1 2 3 ~' 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 -1 .66.3 65.7 64.1 59.6'"59.1 58.7 57.6 #N/A 52.2 67.1 , 2 66.7 - 66.3 64,1 "59.8 -59.9 58.7 55.7 #N/A 60.1 67.8 3 66.2 65.5 63.6 59.6 58.8-59.2 57.0 #N/A #N/A 68.9 .. 4 66.6 65.9'64.1 60.3'60.2' 59.7 #N/A #N/A 58.4 67.9 5 66.4 65.9 64.1 61.0 59.9 59.5 56.8 · 56.6 55.5 68.6 6 P65.0 64.4 62.8~ 58.5 ' 58.9' 57.5 55.6 55.6 53.1 65.6 7 65.8i 65.2 63.7 '60.4 58.0 58.8 57.9i'55.9 49.0 67:5 8 66.2 65.2 63.5 59.9 59.6 #N/A: 57.7 59.0 59.8 67.5 9 66.0 65.0 63.2 60.2:'58.5 #N/A 55.9 58.8 52.5 68.0 10l 66.2 65.4 63.7 60.7 59.0 #N/A 57.9 56.81 #N/A 68.8 11 67.5 66.7 65.3 61.7 59.4 #N/A 58.2 57~1 48.8 67.6 12 67.0 66.4 65.0 61.2 59.5 #N/A 56.7 57.7 58.3 68.2. 13 64.5 63.7 61.8 57.6 56.9 #N/A 53.4 52.3 57.8 64.5' 14. 66.9 66.0..64.4 60.6 58.7'#N/A 56.9 58.2 50.2 67.9 , :-15 66.2 65.9 63.3."60.5 ' 58.6 #N/A ' 56.3 56.9 49.0 67.4 16 65.5 65.0 63.2 60.3 60.21#N/A 56.1 58:1 55.7 67.6 ~ -17. 66.1 65.3 63.6 60.6 59.6 #N/A ' 57.5~56.2 57.2 67.5 18 67.1 66.0 64.8 60.7 '59.7 '#N/A 58.4 57.8 51.3 68.0 19. 67.0 66.3 64.1 60.7:60.6 #N/A - 56.8 59.3' 57.1 68.3 20i 64.31 64.1 62.0 58.4 58.4 #N/A 53.6 58.0 53.1 65.1 21 64.9 64.5 63.4 59.3 58.4 #N/A 55.5 55.1 -'54.9 67.8 22 ' 66.265.1 63.6 60.1 59.5 #N/A 56.5 57.0 53.3 68.1 23 65.9 65.6 63.8 60.4 -59.2 #N/A 56.7 56.1 59.9 67.3 24 66.3 65.5 63.7 60.6 59.3 #N/A 56.4 55.9 53.7 67.9 25 68.0 67.7 65.5 61.3 60.2 #N/A 58.2 57.2 55.9 68.1 26 68.0 66.5 64.9 61.0 60.4 #N/A 59.9 57.9 54.8 68.3 27 65.4 ~- 64.363.1 59.5 58,5' #N/A 56.0 55.4 51.9 65.5 28 67.1 66.5 64.1 61.0!'59.0 #N/A 57.4 55.5. 56.0: 67.9 29 66.9 66.0 64.6 #N/Al 60.2 #N/A 57.2 55.3i 50.8i 67,5 30 66.2 65.6 64.0 58.0 60.4 #N/A 56.8 58.6 50.9 68.4 31 65.6 65.4 63.1 63.1 58.8 #N/A 56.6 57.0 53.3 67.9 Days 31 31 31 30 31 7 30 27 29 31 En.Avg 66.3 65.7 63.9 60.4 59.3 58.9 57.01 57.1 55.5 67.7 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -9- TABLE 6 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGI.F EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE l ~FVELS · .~ .'~. Commercial Class A .............. ' ........... -,: January - March 1999 ; .' ,' .... '..~,~ , · . . ~ . Carrier- ~ - AC Type #Deps .., ...... - . - .......... NMSSite -,.~ - .... .: - ............... " "' ............. - '~ :": ~' ".', -:...- 1 2.. 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 Alaska Air. B7374 ..,~ 332 Average -, 95.3 94.4 . 92.2 88.8 86.7 87.4 85.2 82.2 82.0 93.5 ' · ..... ~ ..... .- ":' ": ...... : CoiJnt~'.: (299) (293) (297) (272) (264) (211) (301) (13) (15) (31)! America West A320 '~ .. 9 Average 93.6 . {t2.8.. 90.4 - 86.4 87.4 85.2 81.8 #N/A #N/A 88.9 '".... " : ............ !Count :: (8) ' (8) (8) (6) ' (6) (2) (6) · (0) (0) (1) ', : - B7373. -. 8A. vemge 94.1 93.3 90.9'86.5 85.7 86.1 82.4 #N/A #N/A 89.1 _..._ i~.' ' "."i"- - "'~' :c0unt-~ ~., (~) ' '(6)i'-' (6) -~..-(6) .-(5) (5). (6) (0) (o) (1) ; ~ B757 -- 72 Average --93.6 93.4 90.1 86.4. 85.7 84.2! 82.4 #N/A 81.1 88.4 ........... ::~' ~ Count : '-"(61) -(58). (62) (61) (55) (45)] (46) (0)i (3) (6) Amedcan B757 i'~ : 156:Average ' {)1.3 91.0 89.3 85.9 i~ 85.2 84.2 - 82.5 #N/Al 77.7 88~2 -': ' C.,°unt· (147) (140) i146) (12'0 (124); (102) (13:5) (0) (1) (8) MD80 1851Average 100.9 100.2 99.1 93.5 90.8 93.7 91.2 85.5 90.1 98.7 Count' (154), (152) (159) (149). (56) (114) (157) (10) (17) (26) Continental B7373 259 Average 96.0 95.1 .93.6 89.1 88.7 87,1 84.5 82.1 81.6 91.6 Count (222) (216) (228) (219)1 (195) (164) (225) (91 (13) (21) B7377 235 Average 96.2.. 95.0 93.5 88.2 87.9'86.6 83.5 81.2 82.6 92.6 , Count (187) (184) (192) (181) (151) (135) (186) (8) (16) (30t · .' B7378 1 Average . 97.9 96.8 95.3 #N/A #N/A 84.8 84.5 #N/A #N/A #N/A .' "'. ~ -. '~ .-, -" '*':~ Count. c. -., (1) (1) ' (1) - (0) (0) (1) (1) (0) (0)] (0) Delta .~.- B757:;:. -~ .... 173 Average -95.1 ._ 94.1 92.0 86.6 86.0 85.1 . 82.4 81.2 78.0 88.8 ..... ' ............... Count (149) (135) (149) (144) (13'0 (105) (142)! (4) (3) '(16) MDg0 87 Average. 92.21 91.1 89.6 83.9 82.8 84.0 82.1 82.8 #N/A 88.3 · iCount ' (66)! - (60) (75) (70) (72) (56) ' (65) -(1) (0) (7) FedEx A300 5 Average 94.7 93.8 91.6 87.6 87.9 84.6 83,5 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (5) (5) (5) (5) (4) (2) (5) (0) (0) (0) A310 58 Average 98.3 97.5 95.8 91.5 90.2 91.2. 88.3 80.0 83.0 92.5 Count. (54) (52) (54) (33) (13) (37)i (54)-(1). (4) (4) Northwest A320 :,.- 431 Average 95.6 94.4 922. 87.5 87.9 86.0 83.1 81.3 81.3 91.4 , Count' (373)] (357) (375) (343) (257)I (267) (369) (9) (13) (46) RenoAlr MD80 451 Average 98.2 97.8 96.6 92.3: 90.8 91.5 89.6 85.7 87.2 96.9 .... Count- (410) (398) (4i3) (359)l (243) (301) (412) (21) (26! (32) ~MD90 70 Average 89.7 88.6 86.9 81.6 82_.2 82.3 80.3 #N/A 82.8; 87.5 Count (63) (62) '(62)! (57) (60) (41) '(30) (0) (1)i (7) Southwest - B7373 192Average 94.3 93.5 89.9 86.7 85.9 85.7 83.2 81.4 81.8 89.5 Count ~ (175) (172) (177) (167) (166) (113) (173) (3) (7) (13) TWA B757., 128 Average 92.3 91.5 88.3 64.5 83.7 83.6 80.4; 79.4 80.7 88.3 _ ' ~'~ Count (10'0 (106) (111) (107) (108) (73) (95)! (2) (3) '(10)! MD80 125 ;Average 98.3 98;0 96.3 91.9 88.8 91.0 90.1 85.5 84.1 97.1 Count (109) (104): (107) (106) (93) (79) (113) (3) (lJ (3) United A320 51 Average 91.1 90.8 89.7 85.8 86.2 84.5 83.1 #N/A #N/A 84.4 Count (47), (45)] (46) (43) (45) (24) (46t (0) (0) (4) B7373 68 Average 95.1, 94.0 91.7 87.8 87.7 86.1~ 83.3 82.8 81.4 91.0 Count (eo)i (56) (59) (58) (48)i (so) (58) (3) (5) (8) rB757 68Average 92.4 91.4 88.3 84.4 83.8 842. 81.9 79.5 #N/A 89.9 ' Count (60) (61) (61) (56)I '(59) (23) (61) (1) (0) (3) UPS B757 62Average ~.2.[ 93.6 90.6 85.9 86.0 86.1 82.7 #N/A 79~1, 86.5 Count (58)I (57) (58) (48) (43) (39) (54) (0)~:1 (4) US Airways B7373 175JAveragei 97.71 96.31 96.6 91.5 90.3 90.7 88.4 83.2 83.8 93.8 !Count! (144)! (141)[ (146) (121) (108) (105) (144); (16) (16) (28) -]0- TABLE 7 MEASURJED AVERAGE SINGI~ EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class AA January - March 1999 ;Carrier AC Type i# Deps NMS Site ' 1 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 'Alaska Air B7374 153Average 92.0~ 91.6 89.0 86.9 85.4 84.4, 82.8.81.6 82.7 90.5- ' Count (139) (136) (140)..(129) (134) (80)j (137): (5) (7)1 (13)i AmedcaWest A320 ~ 85 Average 90.6 90.5 88.4 '85.3 85.6 82.7 82.2 #N/A #N/A 86.5 · Count. ;(76) (72)'{76) (73)!' (60) (50) (33) (0) (0) (6) B7373 - 798 Average 92_7 92.1 89.0 , 86.2 85.8 85.1 82.4 80.6 81.9 .88.7 - ' -* '-'.* Count (697) (669) (705)] (677) (684) (499) (670) (19)i (18) (52) :B757 I Average 91.5 91.3 88.91 85.7 . 85.2 85.1 80.7 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count ;' (1)i (1)i '" (1)! .... (1) (1) ' (1) ' (1) (0) (0) (0) Amedcan B757 I' 696!Average 91.9 91.5 89.81 86,2. 85.6 85.2 83.2 79.2 82.4: 88.4 - 'Count (623) (608) (629)! (560) (551) (437) (576) (7) (11)I (61) Delta MD90 346Average 91.8 91.0 89.0 83.5 82.7 83.9, 82.1 81.4 90.4 89,0 Count (302) (293) (311) (289) (298) (2:>5) (257)1 (12) (6) (21) l~enoAir MD90 I 87 Average 90.3 89.7 88.5 83.8. 82.9 83.0 81.3 #N/A #N/A 88.1 Count -(80) (78) (78) (77)1 (74) (56) (65) (0) (0) (5) Southwest IB7373 I 194Average 93.6 92.8 89.2 86.5 85.6 85.31 82.8 81.61 81.9 89.3 Count (179) (174) (180) (169) (169) (120)! (168) (3)l (4) (14) United A320 I 159Average 91.7 90.9 89.5 85.4 85.7 85.0 83.4 78.9 79.5 87.6 ,. Count (136) (133) (135) (134) (120) (111) (!34) (4) (5)i (18) B7373 2 Average 94.9 94.3 91.3 88.7 89.1 #N/A 85.0 #N/A #N/A 85.8 Count (1) (1) (1) (1). (1) (0)1 (1); (0) (0) (1)j B757 237 Average 91.9 91.1 88.3 84.2 83.8 83.9 82.3 82.1~ 81.3 88.0 . Count (215) (210) (213) (203)i (203) (146) '(206) (3) (5) (20) i MEASURED AVERAGE SING! JF EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE IJFVELS Commercial Class E January- March 1999 Carder AC Type # Deps NMS Site -- 1 . 2 3 21 ~)2 24 I 6 7 8 9 Alaska Air IB7374 508Average 90.2 90.0 87.5 85.9 84.4 83.6 81.8 81.8; 81.9 89~8 '' Count (438) (429), (443) (427) '(409)i (32_5) (421) (17) (32) (63) Amenca West B7373 567Average 91.3 90.9 88.0 85.6 85.2 84.0 81.3 79.5 80.9 87.3 !Count (516) (489) (512) (500) (509) (365) (475) (5) (7)i (34) Delta MD~0 90 Average 91.0 90.3 88.5 82.7 82.3 83.1: 82.4 80.5 79.9 88.3 Count ' (78) (70) (78) (76) (78) (58) (61)i (4) (1) (5)1 ~enoAir MD~0 710 Average 88.9 88.0 86.4 81.7 81.3 · 81.4 81.1 82.8 82.6 87.9 Count (644) (618) (642) (593) (598) (418) (262) (5) (6) (56) south.~est IB7373 80'0 Average 91.8 91.3 88.0 85.6 85.1~ 83.9 81.7 82.3 80.6 88'19 Count (726) (701)i (727) (692) (690)I (535) (644) (9) (24) (66) B7377 21Average 92.1 86.7 87.5 81.3 81.3 80.0 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ~Count (2) (1) (2) (2)'(2) (1) (0) (0) (0); (0) United A320 7 Average 89.6 88.7 88.2 84.1 83.6 82.7 81.8 #N/A #N/A 85.8 Count (5) (3) (5) (5): (3) (5) (4)J (0) (0) (2) B757 841 Average 91.1 90.5 87.8 84.0 83.6 83.0 81.7 80.1 80.4 87.5 . Count' (767) (746) (768)~ (724) (703). (530) (695) (5), (8) (60) TABIJF 8 . ... MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS - Commuter January - March 1999 Carder AC Type # Deps NMS Site : ..... 1 2 3 21 22. 24 6 7 8 9 SkyWest CL60 . 87 Average 85.9 83.9 86.3 79.3, 79.1 80.2 77.6 80.3 86.0 83.8 Count- (72) (72)' (74) (55) (57) .(48) (2) (1) (2) (9) E120 664 Average 81.8 82.6 82.7 79.5 77.4 78.1 81.01 85.3 80.8 83.3 · ~';" Count- (578) (532) (413) (536)i(245) (318) (10)! (2) (10) (39) MEASURED AVERAGE SINGI.~ EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS .... General Aviation · . ........ Jan,uary- Mamh 1999 Carder AC Type # Deps ~., .. NMS Site ' 1 2. 3 21 22. 24 I 6 I 7' 8 { 9 GenemiAviation Jet 1717 Average 90.9 89.6 90.8 85.1 83.5 85L31 85.5i 85.9 84.81 89.4 Count (1482),(1412) (1413) (1177) (1130) (85(~)t (583)! (9) (10)1 (122) -12- TAB~.~ 9 AIR CARRIER OPERATIONAL HISTORY Carrier .. AC Type I" Year. - 1995 1996 1997 1998 I 1999 Alaska Air AS B7374 8,684 8,798 7,718 7,795 1,985' 'MD80 270 290 4 ~AmericaWest AW A320 ' 1,184 780 6 '. 509 187 ~ B7373 13,162 15,284 14,152 11,9171 2,745 · ~ ' B757 318 858, 1,332 205 148 American AA B7373 2 -. . - -. IB75/' 9,490 8,542 8,970 8,329 1,710 · MD80 666 926 " 610 1,119 373 'Continental CO B7373 (1) 3,234 2,786 2,710 720 6 B7375 (1) 1,995 513 B737/ 868 469. ...... :B7378 ~ B7t~/ 588 659 724 298 - MD80 6 4 - ~Delta 'DL B7373 1,138 614 2 " B757'. 3,368 1,452~ 2,202 2,117 345 ~D90 , 2,944 3,0581 3,836 1,046~ FedEx FM ~A300 I 16 18 121 10 A310 384 484 486 496i 116 -Northwest 'NWA320 ! 3,484 3,502 3,408 3,219! 860 B757 2, Reno Air QQ MD80 4,272 4,0721 4,200 4,246! 906] ~MDg0 4,026 5,680 5,744! 1,735 Southwest WN B7373 (11 10,934 9,918 9,846 2,986t 152 B7375 (1) 6,6891 2,21¢ B737/ 2! 4 TWA TW B75/ 406 1,242 1,139! 250 MD80 1,697 1,440 848 986! 262 United UA A319 (21 749 230 A320 (2! 2,348 2,524 2,024 1,816, 202 B7373 (1) ! 950; 1,332 836 503 141 B7375 (1) 2 ~B757 ! 7,856 7,766 8,274 8,617 2,287 UPS 5X B757 I 504 504 47.6 · 500 124 US Airways US IB7373 I 880 842 1,444 1,456i 350 ,,, IB757 5~'0, 616 (]) Counts which separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts which separate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -]3- TABLE 10 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL HISTORY Aircraft · .~--Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 I A300 16 -.- 18; 12 10 A310 384 484 486 - - 496 - 116 A319 (1) '- 749 230 A320 (1). 7,016l. 6,806 5,4381 . 5,544 1,249 B7373 (2) 30,300 30,776 28,990 17,582 3,394 B7374 8,684_ 8,798 -'-7,7181 7,795 1,985 B7375 (2) ...- . ............. 8,686 2,730 B7377~'- ' ,. .... 870 473 B7378 .... .- .- . ' 2 B757 . 22,694 20,806 23,220 21,205 4,864: MD80 ' 6,911. 6,662 '"5,662 · 6,351 1,541 MDg0 6,970 .. 8,7389,580' 2,781 . (1) Counts which separate A319 and A320 aircraft OPerations began in 1998. ' (2) Counts which separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. :'~:-" ~RCRAFr OPERA~ONAL ~STORY ~ ;0,000 [] 1995 1 '5,OOO il 1996 ~0,000 i [] 1997 5,000 I [] 1998 0,000 1 · 1999 5,000 ' 0 . A300 A310 A319 A320 B7373 B7374 B7375 B7377 B7378 B757 MD80 MD90 . By Year TABlr.F. 11 AIR CARRIER AVERAGE DALLY DEPARTURE HISTORY !'Carder IAC Type Year Alaska Air AS B7374 11.896 12.019 10.573 10.678. 11.033 MDB0' 0.370~ 0.301 0.005 America West AW A320 1.622 "1.066 0.008 0.697 1.0447 B7373 18.030 20.880i 19.386 16.325 15.256i ' B757 - 0.436 · 1.172 .1.825 0,281 0.811 American . AA B7373 0.003 -.?~- ..... 'B757- 13.000 11.669 12.288'11.410 9.511 MD80 0.912 1.265 '0.836 .-1.533, 2.067 Continental CO B7373 (1) - 4.430 - 3.806 3.712 '- 0.986 0.033 ' - B7375 (1) ..... 2.733 2.844 - - - ' B73i1 - -' - ' 1.189 2.61i --- ' B7378 ..... , 0.011 1B757 0.805 0.900 0.992 0.408 MD80 0.008 0.005 -Delta ' DL B7373 1.559~ 0.839 '0.003 B7bz 4.614 1.984 3.016 2.900 1.922 MD90 4.022 4.189 5.255! 5.811 FedEx FM A300 i 0.0221 0.025 0.016 0.056 A310j 0.526 0.661 0.666 0.679 0.644 !Northwest NW A320 i4.773 4.784 4.668 4.410 4.789 B757 0.003 RenoAir QQ MD80 5.852 5.563 5.753 5.816 5.02:5 MD90 - - 5.500 7.781 7.868 9.644 Southwest WN B7373 (1) 14.978 13.549 13.4881 4.090 0,844 .B7375 (1) 9.163 12.344 ~B737/ 0.003 0.02P TWA TW B757 i 0.555 1.701 1.560. 1,444 MD80I 2.325 1.967 1.162 1.351 1.400 United UA A319(2) i 1.026 1.278 A320(2) j 3.216 3.448 2.773 2.488 1.133 B7373(1) 1.301 1.820 1.145 0.689 0.778 ';. B7375 (1) 0.003 B757 10.762 10.609 11.334 11.804 12.722 UPS 5X B757 0.690 0.689 0.652 0.685 0.689 US Airways US IB7373 1.205 1.150 1.978 1.995 1.944 IB757 0.781 0.842' (1) Counts which separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts which separate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -15- NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: March 17, 1999 TIME: 2:00 p.m. PLACE: John Wayne Airport, Eddie Martin Administration Building · . . .. . . AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS DISCUSSED .. e Airport Operation Statistics for 1999 , Bonnie Streeter gave an overvie~ of tile Januar~ 1999 statistics. There were no questions. ! Air Carrier Capacity AHocations for Plan year 1999-2000 Bonnie Streeter explained the capacity allocation process in accordance with th~ Settlement Agreement and the Phase 2 Access Plan that was approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors for the 1999-2000 Plan Year:. 39 Class "A" and 34 Class "AA" departures were approved; Class "E" departure seat capacity was approved for a two-year period to encourage increased passenger service; and 30 Remain Overnight (RON) positions were allocated for Air Carrier use. Q. ', Toni Callaway asked, "What are the quietest Class 'E' aircraft?" , · John Leyerle said. commuter aircraft are the quietest Class E' s; however, all of the passenger Air Cartier aircraft types now in use at JWA have qualified for Class E operations with the exception of the MD-80 aircraft which operates only in Class A. Class Edeparture flights tend to be the lightest of all operations and tend to be used for the shortest distances. Qe Gail Reavis asked,' "Are the allocations higher this year because the passenger numbers were low last year?". A John Leyerle said that the allocated seat capacity was increased, in part, to encourage increased passenger service within the 8.4 MAP (million annual passengers) cap. For the 1999-00 Plan Year, for the first time the Board 'allocated Class E seat capacity for more than one year to encourage greater passenger counts. We expect to serve approximately 8.1 million passengers this plan year. Q. ' Gall Reavis asked, "Isn't it the number of aircraft that make the noise and not the number of passengers? .... John Leyefle said, "Yes". He explained that the number of Class E aircraft departures are limited by the passenger cap of 8.4 MA.P. -16- e ' NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Continued _Replacement Monitorin~ System and Up-Comin~ Milest. oneq John Leyerle talked about the one-year side-by-side noise measurement comparison test between the current and new noise monitoring systems, and he explained the reason for the minor, technical differences between the two systems. The comparison data has been reviewed by JWA staff and ' consultants, Boeing, all of the 14 incumbent Air Carriers, and the thee parties to the Federal District Court Settlement Agreement: Newport Beach, the Airport Working Group and SPON. These stake- holders have unanimously agreed with the rni~or technical adjustments which will change the current maximum permitted noise limits by 0 dB to 1.1 dB at selected Noise'Monitor StatiOns. The new aircraft operations and noise monitoring system is scheduled for completion and acceptance this summer. Status. of the Santa Aha Heights Aconstieal lngn!a_tion Pro.gram ~ Carl Bmatz gave an update of the acoustical insulation progress: 52 dwellings have been completed within the last three and a half years; 22 dwellings are under construction; and 21 more have been approved by the Board of Supervisors for contract award. Soon a 182-unit apartment complex is planned for construction and 22 more dwelling are in planning for acoustical insulation. Remaining are approximately 140 homes to be insulated. Q. Gail Reavis asked, "What is the cost for acoustical insulation per home?" A. Carl Braatz explained that the average cost per home is $24,000 to $25,000. The Board has approved a maximum cost per unit of $38,500 for the acOustical insulation' consumcfion ~ improvements. .-.~ . ? - Additional COmments and Questions ' Comment: Toni Callaway states that North Tustin wants a noise monitor in their area (Lemon Heights). She believes there are many low and loud planes going over the hills and off-course. She is also unable to get return calls for requested data. Response: John Leyede apologized for any phone calls not returned. He explained the commitment of the Access and Noise Office to return every call that requests a return call and that provides a phone number. Red, ding her request for a new NMS installation, john explained that several years earlier in response to a request for a new NMS in another area around John Wayne Airport, the Airport expressed a wi .ll. ingness to operate and maintain a new NMS if the community would provide an NMS installation site and would fund the cost to purchase and install the equipment. The cost for .. equipment and installation is estimated to range from $25,000 to $50,000. Before a new NMS installation is seriously considered, John suggested that an interested community document and discuss its thoughts regarding why they want an NMS and how they would intend to use the noise measurement data from the site. -17- .o- - Qe Qe Ae A. NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Continued Ted Nichols asked, "Why are small propeller airplanes overhead all night, and will JWA be expanded?" ' John Leyefle 'said ~at the County's rules which govern aircraft operations allow General Aviation aircraft to operate 24 hours each day, subject to the requirement that each operation meet the General Aviation Noise Ordinance noise limits. All aircraft operations are monitored · by the JWA aircraft operations and noise monitoring system, and Notices of Violation are sent · . to the registered owners of aircraft which exceed the noise limits. For an answer to the question regarding potential future expansion of JWA, John suggested ~oiatacting the E1 Toro Master Development Program Office Who is preparing a Master Plan for the future aviation use of John Wayne Airport aiad potentially E1 Toro. · ~ . Priscilla Hall stated, "'I have lived in Crawford Canyon [north of JWA] since 1993 when it was quiet; since 1995 it has been very noisy. WhY does the quarterly report show NMS 7 (57.9 dB CNEL) and NMS 6 (56.9 dB CNEL) are about th~ same noise level?" John Leyefle explained that the average daily noise levels may have increased in some areas during the last several years as a result of the small increase in the number of aircraft operations which serve the increasing passenger demand within the IWA 8.4 MAP cap. He also explained the difference between departure and arrival noise levels for some aircraft (i.e., B757 are generally louder on arrival than on departure). Gail Reavis asked, "Are noise violations available to the public, and did the Board approve an - extension for cargo operations?" John Leyerle said that the statistics regarding the number of aircraft operation_.s and the noise limit exceedence count, including counts of the first, second and third violations of the General Aviation Noise Ordinance are available to share with the public. The allocation of capacity for Afl-Cargo operations during the 1999-00 Plan Year is expected to be approved by the Board of Supervisors in late March 1999 or early April 1999. 6. Date for the Next Meeting The next quarterly Noise Abatement Committee meeting will be announced by letter approximately two weeks before the meeting. -18- NAC ROSTER March 17, 1999 NAME ADDRESS PHONE NO. Ted Nichols Colleen Smoot : · Toni M. Callaway Jeff Thorstenson Carl Braatz Rita Jones Nghia Nguyen Mark Esslinger Jim Smathers Fred Pefia Gail Reavis Priscilla Hall, M.D. John Escobedo Bonnie Strecter John Leyerle Ramey Gonzalez 20322 Riverside Drive Santa Aha Heights, CA 92707 315 East Day Front Balboa Island, CA 92662- 1101 Castlegate Lane (Lemon Heights) Santa Ana, CA 92705 FAA Tower, SNA/ATCT JWA, Facilities PAC & Abcom JWA, GovemmentJCommunity Relations Orange County, Planning & Development Services US Airways Alaska Airlines 21281 Astoria Mission Viejo, CA 92692 19562 Country Haven Lane Santa Ana, CA 92705-1405 JWA, Access and Noise JWA, Access and Noise J'WA, Access and Noise JWA, Access and Noise -19- (714)-641-3192 (949) 673-0239 (714) 731-1803 (714) 668-0141 (949) 252-5125 (949) 756-9126 (949) 252-5176 (714) 834-5049 (949) 252-6300 (949) 252-6203 (949) 461-0020' (714) 573-1401 (949) 252-5185 (949) 252-5185 (949) 252-5043 (949) 252-5185 -. NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT RECEIVED JAN 1 1 20O0 COMM1JNI DEVELOPMENT _. For the period: April 1, 1999 through June 30, 1999 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: Loan Leblow Interim Airport Director John Wayne Airport, Orange County INTRODUCTION This is the 106th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of the California Airport Noise Standards (California Administrative Code Tide 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 monitoring stations (NMS) located in Newport Beach, Santa Aha, Tustin and Irvine to measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS NMS-I: NMS-2: NMS-3: NMS-6: NMS-7: Golf Course, 3100 Irvine Ave., NeWpOrt Beach 20152 S.W. Birch St., Santa Ana 2139 Anniversary Lane, Newport Beach 1131 Back Bay Drive, Newport'Beach 17952 Beneta Way, Tustin, NMS-8: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana NMS-9: 17372 Eastman Street, Irvine NMS-21:324 ~h Vista Madera, Newport Beach NMS-22:2338 Tustin Ave., Newport Beach NMS-24:1918 Santiago, Newport Beach _--z The map in Figxtre 1 shows the general location of each permanent remote monitor station. Figure 2 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for the previous year (July 1, 1998 - June 30, 1999). 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- ~ -'~ FIGURE x // I '~ -' '~ dOHN 'WAYNE AIRPORT STATION LOCATION MAP JOHN. WAYNE JNTY M,,,... REMOTE MONITORING STATION -2- LEGEND O Noise Monitors Multi-Family Residential 65 dB CNEL Contour ~ Single Family Residential STATISTICS: ~ Incompatible Land Use Area: 27.{; Acres or .044 square milesA Number of Dwellings: 107 Number of People: 268 ~E~ased on 2.5 people per D.U.) JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 65 dB CNEL Impact Area July 1.998 - June 1999 -3- AIRCRAFT TRAFFIC SUMMARY The Airport traffic summary for this quarter is shown in Table 1 and Figure 3 below. Air Carrier operational count histories and average daily departure counts are illustrated in Tables 9 & 11. TABLE 1 LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS April - June 1999 !Period Air Carriers GA Jet (1) Total Average Daily Jet Prop Operations (2) Jet Operations April 6,655 478 1,220 38,465 263 May 6,878 518 1,098 44,169 257 June 6,973 591 1,205 40,471 273 Second Quarter 20,506 1,587 3,523 123,1'05 264 Twelve Months 80,070 6,520 14,834 429,802 260 07/01/98 - 06/30/99 FIGURE 3 QUARTERLY AIRPORT TRAFFIC SUMMARY (Landing and Takeoff Operations) April - June 1999 I Jet Carrier ~ 20,506 Prop Carrier 1,587 GA Jet 1 3,523 ' GA Other ~ 96,75..! I 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 Number of Operations 120,000 NOTE: (1) Business Jet figmres include a 5% factor for operations not identified by the JWA noise monitor stations. (2) Counts in this column are based upon records provided by the local FAA representatives. COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVELS .. The monthly, quarterly.and tweNe 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 Level (SENEL) values for Air Carrier and Business Jet aircraft are shown in Tables 6 through 8. For the twelve month period ending June 30, 1999, 107 dwelling units in Santa Ana Heights were in the "Noise Impacted Area" (within the 65 dB CNEL contour); this represents a decrease of 22 units in the number of dwelling units in the "Noise Impacted Area" from the previous twelve month period ending March 31, 1999. 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 the County, or rezoned for "other non-noise sensitive uses." As part of the County's Santa Ana Heights Land Use Compatibility Program, approximately 77general agriculture (A-1) 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 Ana Heights. (The current AAIP has been renamed "Santa Ana Heights Acoustical Insulation Program" with the acronym "SAH An:"'.) During the second quarter of 1999, no additional residences have been made compatible through the County's SAH AIP. A total of 224 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 AIP. TELEPHONE COMPLAINT CALLS (April 1, 1999 - June 30, 1999) 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 1, 1999 through June 30, 1999, the Office received 345 complaints from citizens. This is a 37.5% increase from the 251 complaints received last quarter. It is a 61% decrease from the 566 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 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 7O 39 113 25 27 24 74 2 3 1 1 2 9 3 § 5 Community One household is responsible for 56% of the 70 calls from Balboa Island. -5- TABLE 2 LONG TERM M~EAS~D LEVELS Aircraft CNEL from 7/98 through 6/99 Values in dB at Each Site Period NMS Site I 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 Jul 1998 66.8 66.1 64.7~ 60.4 60.4 60.1 56.7 57.3 50.4 67.7 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 Aug 1998 67.1 65.8 64.6 59.7 59.5 59.8 57.7 56.2 51.3 67.2 # Days 31 24 31 12 31 25 31 31 27 31 Sep 1998 66.7 65.4 64.0 60.6 59.3 59.4 57.7 55.3 53.3 67.3 #' Days 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Q-3 1998 66.9 65.8 64.4 60.4 59.7 59.8 57.4 56.3 51.8 67.4 '# Days 92 85 92 73 92 86 92 92 88 92 Oct 1998 66.4 65.4 64.1 59.8 59.2 60.1 57.4 58.1 52.2 67.3 # Days 31 31 31 31 31i 31 31 · 31 31 31 Nov 1998 66.5 65.6 64.6 60.2 61.8' 60.6 57.7 56.8 52.5 66.9 # Days 30 ' 30 30 22 16 30 27 30 30 30 Dec 1998 66.0 64.7 64.7 59.3 58.7 61.2 56.0 56.6 52.1 66.1 # Days 31 31 31 31 15 31 31 31 31 31 Q-4 1998 66.3 65.2 64.4 59.7 59.9. 60.7 57.1 57.2 52.2 66.8 # Days 92 92 92 . · 84 62 92 89 92 92 921 i i Jan 1999 66.0 65.0 63.7 59.0 59.1 58.8 56.6 56.0 52.4 66.5 ;# Days 31 31 30 30 30 30 28 31 29 30 Feb 1999 66.2 65.3 64.5 59.8 59,1 59.7 56.4 56.7 52.7 66.8 # Days 28 28 28 '27 ~ 26 26 26 26 28 27 Mar 1999 66.3 65.7 63.9 60.4 59.3 58.9 57.0 57.1 55.5 67.7 # Days 31 31 31 30 31 7 30 27 29 31 Q-1 1999 66.2 65.3 64.1 59.7 59.2 59.2 56.7 56.6 53.8 67.0 # Day,s 90 90 89 '87 87 63 64 64 86 88 Apr 1999 66.2 66.0 64.1 #N/A 60.3 #N/A 56.6 57,0. 52.3 67.5 # Days , 30 30 30 0 30 0 29 30 __ 10 29 May 1999 66.2 66.0 63.9 #N/A 60.8 #N/A 56.5 57.5 49.6 68.01 # Days 31 31 31 0 31 0 31 31 31 31 !Jun 1999 66.8 66.6 64.8 #N/A 60.8 #N/A 56.2 57.3 49.3 68.2 ;# Days 30 30 30 . 0 30 o i 27 30 30 30 Q-2 1999 66.4 66.2. 64.3 #N/A 60.7 #N/A 56.4 57.3 50.0 67.9 # Da~,s 91 91 91 0 91 0 87 91 71 90 Q-3 1998 thru Q-2 1999 Total ! 66'51 65.7 64.3 59.9 59.9 60.0 56.9 56.9 52.2 67.3 # Days! 3651 358 3641 244 332 241 352 359 337 362 Q-2 1998 thru Q-1 1999 (Previous 4 Quarters) Total I 66'51 65'51 64.6 60.2 60.7 60.1 57.0 56.8 51.8 67..4 # Days! 336! 358J 364 313 322 332 353 35B 353 351 Change from Previous 4 Quarters J 0.01 0.~1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.8 -0.1 -0.1 0.0 0.5 -0.1 -6- TABLE 3 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MON1TOR STATION April 1999 Date NMS Site I 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 1 65.7 63.9 67.2,#N/A 61.4 #N/A 54.6 52.5 #N/A 65.4 2 66.5 65.5 63.8 #N/A 60.4 #N/A 56.7 54.6 #N/A 67.5 3 64.6 63.7 61.8 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 57.7 54.2 #N/A 65.2 ,, 4 65.1 64.2 62.3 #N/A 62.3 #N/A 54.6 54.9 #N/A 67.1 5 66.6 66.4 64.4 #N/A 61.2 #N/A 57.8 56.6 56.2 67.9 6 66.2 66.0 63.5 #N/A 59.6 #N/A 56.7 59.1 #N/A 68.4 , 7 65.8 65.2 63:4 #N/A 58.7 #N/A 55.7 58.7 #N/A 68.5 8 66.6 66.4 63.9 #N/Ai 59.4 #N/A 58.2 '59.6 #N/A' 68.5 9 65.3 65.9 63.9 #N/A 59.41#N/A 58.1 54.6 53.9i 67.3 10 64.7 64.3 62.2 #N/A 59.3 #N/A 53.8 53.4 #N/A 65.3 11 67.6 68.2 65.2 #N/A 59.9 #N/A 58.1 59.8 #N/A 68.3~ 12 67.2 66.7 64.7 #N/A 59.6 #N/A 57.1 57.7 #N/A 67.9 13 65.8 65.6 63.7 #N/A 60.3 '#N/A 56.6 56.7 53.0 67.3 14 67.1 67.0 65.2 #N/A 60.0 #N/A 57.0 58.1 49.3 68.0 15 67.6 67.9 65.3 #N/A 59.3 #N/A 54.9 52.3 54.6 67.4 16 67.0 66.9 63.4 #N/A 60.7 #N/A 53.1 53.6 #N/A .67.7 17 64.3 63.7 61.3 #N/A 58.9 #N/A 52.7 50.1 50.4 64.0 18 66.3 ' 65.8:63.8 #N/A 59.5 #N/A 54.7 54.1 44.4 66.5 19 66.4 66.1 63.9 #N/A 60.1 #N/A 55.5 54.3;49.9 67.3 20 66.0 66.0 63.9 #N/A 59.9 #N/A 57.9 57.7 51.7 67.5 21 66.3 65.7 64.1 #N/A 60.9 #N/A 57.1 59.1 #N/A #N/A 22 66.3 66.5 64.5 #N/A 61.0,#N/A #N/A 58.2 #N/A 68.7 23 68.0 67.2 65.6 #N/A 62.9 #N/A 58.9 57.9 -#N/Ai 68.3 24 64.3 63.9 62.1 #N/A 59.6 #N/A 57.3 56.6 #N/A 65.2 · 25 66.4 66.4 64.2 #N/A 61.8 #N/A 57.2 57.1 #N/A 67.5 26 66.6 66.3 64.9 #N/A 60.5 #N/A 56.4 58.7 #N/A 67.8 27 65.9 66.1 63.8 #N/A 59.7 #N/A 55.8 59.8 #N/A 68.1 28 65.5 65.2 63.8 #N/A 59.0 #N/A 55.8 57.5 #N/A 68.2 29 66.4;66.1 64.9 #N/A 61.2 #N/A 57.9 58.0 #N/A 68.1 30 66.5i66.3 63.8 #N/A 60.8 #N/A 57.2 57.1 48.9 67.7 Days 30 30; 30 30 29 30 10 ;29 En.Avg 66.2 66.0 64.1 60.3 56.6; 57.0 52.3 67.5 #N/A indicates insufficient data. .?_ TABI .g. 4 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION May 1999 Date NMS Site 1 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 I 64.6 63.9i 61.8 #N/A 58.7 #N/A 59.0 55.8 47.5 66.1 2 66.9 66.4 64.9 #N/A 60.7 #N/A 57.5 59.2. 44.0 67.8 3 65.8 65.9 64.2 #N/A 59.3 #N/A 56.8 59.31 50.1 68.2 4 65.9 65.5 63.6 #N/A 63.6 #N/A 57.2 57.6 50.0 68.0 5 66.3 66.1 64.0 #N/A 61.3i #N/A 56.7~ 56.2 56.0 68.2 6 66.9 66.8 64.5 #N/A 61.8 #N/A . 56.2i55.8 50.6 68.1 ' 7 67.0 66.6 64.3.#NRA 60.6 #N/A '55.8 56.1 51.7 68.5 8 64,3 63.9 62.2 #N/A 61.8 #N/A 51.9 57.0 38.2 66.8~ 9 65.5 65.1 62.7 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 56.5 58.1 46.5 68.3 10 66.4 66.3 64.2 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 56.7 58.3 47.1 68.0 11 66.4 65.9 63.4:#N/A 60.6 #N/A 57.2 57.9 55.5 68.4 12i 66.7 66.5 63.8 #N/A~ 60.7 #N/A 53.6 57.8 49.9 69.6 13 66.2 66.0 63.9 #N/A 61.0 #N/A 56.4 59.2 35.3 68.6 , 14 66.9 66.6 64.3 #N/A 61.1 #N/A 56.8 58.9 49.9 68.7 15 64.3~ 64.4 61.8 #N/A 59.0 #N/A 54.6 55.3 44.0 66.0 16 66.3 66.2. 63.9 #N/A 60.9 #N/A 57.9 55.3 47.1 67.9 17 66.8 67.0~ 64.6 #N/A 61.4 #N/A 56.6 55.2 49.1 67.7 18 66.4 66.6 64.3 #N/A 60.1 #N/A 56.1 57.0 49.8 68.2 19 66.5 66.5 64.3 #N/A 62.1 #N/A 55.7 58.9 54.5 69.3 '20 66.7 66.6 64.4 #N/A 60.5 #N/A: 56.9 58.9 46.6 68.3 21 66.9 66.6 64.7 #N/A 61.8 #N/A 59.6 58.9 46.91 68.7 22 64.3 63.4 61.7 #N/A 60.8 #N/A 54.1 54.5i:'42.5 65.1 23 66.3 66.1 64.0 #N/A 59.91#N/A 57.4: 57.1 50.1 68.3 24 66.9 66.9 64.5 #N/A 60.4 #N/A 56.2i 56.2 52.2 67.6 25 66.2 66.4 63.8 #N/A 60.0 #N/A 54.7 57.0 46.7 68.2 26 66.7 66.6 64.1 #N/A 62.4 #N/A 55.9 58.1 45.3 68.7. 27i 67.1 67.4 65.3 #N/A 60.4 #N/A 56.1 58.2 45.1 69.01 28 '68.0 66.7 65.9 #N/A 61.5 #N/A 54.2 59.4 39.4 69.0 29 63.9 63.8 61.9 #N/A 61.0 #N/A 55.1 56.3 32.2 65.4 30 64.1 64.2 62.3 #N/A 59.7 #N/A 55.4 55.0 47.5 66.0 31 66.3 66.4 64.0 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 57.7 55.7 50.8 67.5 !Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31. En.Avg 66.2 66.0 63.9 60.8 . 56.5 57.5 49.6 68.0 #N/A indicates insufficient data. o -8- TABI.]::. 5 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION June 1999 Date NMS Site 1 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 1 67.0 66.8 64.6 #N/A 58.4 #N/A 56.2 56.6 48.2 67.6 2 65.5 65~9 63.4 #N/A 58.3 -#N/A 55.8 58.5 49.9 67.5 3 66.1 66.5 64.5 #N/A 59.1 #N/A 58.4 58.1 49.2 67.9 4 67.1 67.0 64.5 #N/A 59.5 #N/A 57.0 58.6 50.2 68.6 5 65.0 65.1 62.6 #N/A 57.0 #N/A 54.8 54.1 44.4 64.9 6 66.1 66.1 63.6 #N/A 58.41#N/A 56.4 57.6 52.4 68.5 7 66.1 65.8 63.0 #N/Al 59.7 #N/Al 54.5 56.6 46.6: 67.7 8 66.1 65.9 63.4 #N/A 61.9 #N/A '55.8 59.6 46.8 67.8 9 66.4 65.9 63.8 #N/A 62.6 #N/A 56.6 57.2 52.3 67.6i 10 67.2 66.9 64.7 #N/A 61.9 #N/A 59.2 57.6 50.3 68.6 11 67.6 66.5 65.3 #N/A 61.9 #N/A 57.6 58.1 49.9 68.3 12 65.0 64.8 62.5 #N/A 58.7 #N/A 55.3 53.3 '50.3 65.9 13 66.7 66.3 64.4 #N/A 60.6 #N/A 56.8 56.0 45.3 68.5 141 67.0 65.2 64.5~#N/A 61.2 #N/A 54.9 55.8 52.4 67.8 15 66.3 66~2 63.9 #N/A 61.2 #N/A 54.1 58.5 40.8 68.7 16 67.2 66.9 64.8 #N/A 65.0 #N/A 55.2 58.0 42.8 68.3 17 67.4 66.9 65.4 #N/A 62.2 #N/A 55.7 58.7 43.0 69.1 18 67.4 67.2 64.6 #N/A 61.4 #N/A 55.0 58.0 45.7 69.5 19 65.6 65.1 63.3 #N/A 58.9 #N/A #N/A 55.3 43.4 66.4 20 66.4;65.8 63.6 #N/A 60.7 #N/A #N/A 56.4 47.1 68.5 21 67.4i66.7 64.6 #N/A 61.5 #N/A #N/A 59.2 44.7 68.5 22 69.4 69.5 70.7 #N/A 61.1 #N/A 55.5 57.9 50.3 68.6 23 67.2 67.4 65.0 #N/A! 60.5 #N/A; 55.3 56.2 --50.3 68.2 24 67.9 67.7 65.5 #N/A 61.2 #N/Al 55.t 57.4 50.7 69.0 25 67.6 66.9 65.2 #N/A 61.5 #N/A 58.5 56.0 47.9 69.2 26 65.7 65.2 63.4 #N/A 58.9 #N/A 54.3 55.0 40.0 66.9 27 66.8 66.3 64.2 #N/A 60.0 #N/A 56.2 56.3 51.9 68.9 28 67.0 66.8 65.01#N/A 61.1 #N/A 55.5 55.1 53.3 68.0 29 66.7 '66.5: 64.3 #N/A 60.6 #N/A 55.6 57.7 52.9 68.7 30 67.3 68.01 66.0 #N/A 60.1 #N/A 56.4 59.0 48.0 68.8 I Da~,s 30 30 30 30 27i 30 30 ~30 En.Avg 66.8 66.6 64.8 60.8 56.2 57.3 49.3 68.2 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -9- TABLE 6 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class A . April - June 1999 carrier lAC Type # Deps NMS Site I 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 Alaska Air B7374 338 Average 96.2 95.6 92.4 #N/A 87.3 #N/A 85.1 83.1 82.2 93.4 Count (330) (322) (331) (0) (271) (0) (31'9) (3) (5) (5): America West A320 15 Average 94.5 93.8 91.5 #N/A 87.6 #N/A 81.5 #N/A #N/A #N/A ,Count (15) (14) (14) (0) (127 (0) (11) (0) (0) (0) B7373 8 Average 93.8 93.6 90.3 #N/A 85.7 #N/A 83.1 #N/A #N/A #N/A · Count (8) ~(7) (8) (0) (8)1 (0) (8): (0) (07 (0) B757 65Average 93.2 93.5 89.6 #N/A 85.7 #N/A 81.5 #N/A #N/A 87.7 r' Count (63) (62) (62), (0) (52) (0)i (41) (0) (0)i (1) American B757 312 Average 91.9 91.9 "90.0 #N/A 86.1 #N/A 83.3 #N/A 82.1 91.0 Count (308) (297) (306) (0) (255) (0) (264) (0) (2) (3) MD80 153 Average 101.1 101.0 99.2 .#N/A 90.7 #N/A 90.9 87.8 84.9 98.8 Count (144)! (142)! (145) (0) (47) (0) (138) (3) (5) (6) Continental B7373 230 Average 96.1 95.4 93.7 #N/A 89.0 #N/A 84.5 83.4 81.2 92.6 Count (223) (220) (224) (0) (180) (0) (216) (3) (2) (4); B7377 225 Average 96.6 95.7 94.0 #N/A 88.2 #N/A 83.7 82.0 82.5 94.0~ =count (214) (212) (214) (0) (151) (0) (199) (4) (3) (8) B7378 -3 Average 98.6 97.8 95.6 #N/A 91.3 #N/A 85.1 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (3) (3) (3) (0) (1) (0) (3) (0) (0) (0) Delta B757 173 Average 95.4 94.7 92.5 #N/A 86.7' #N/A 82.7 80.6 79.4 93.4 Count (163) (158) (165) (0) (131) (0)~ (150) (4) (1): (7) MD90 86 Average 91.2 90.4 88.7 #N/A 82.6 #N/A 81.4 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (84) (83) (85) (0) (77) (0) (77) (0) (0) (0) FedEx A300 I Average 92.6 91.9 90.1 #N/A 88.4 #N/A 81.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1): (17l (1) -'(0) (1) (0) (1) (0) (0) (0) A310 63 Average 97.5 97.1 95.4 #N/A 90.4 #N/A 88.1 #N/A 78.3 93.6 Count (60) (60) (59) (0) (19) (0) (59) (0) (1) (1) Northwest A320 441 rAvemge- 95.5 94.7 92.3 #N/A 88.2 #N/A 82.6 81.0 #N/A 92.0 iCount (426) (422) (432) (0)i (290) (0) (399) (1) (0) ,Reno AJr MDB0 479Average 98.0 97.9 96.5 #N/A~ 91.1 #N/A 89.4 85.9 87.5 98.4 Count (472) (461) (470) (0) (253) (0) (447) (5) (5) (5) MDg0 27 Average 90.6 90.1 86.9 #N/A 82.4 #N/A 79;2 #N/A 82.6 89.4 Count (25) (26) (26) (0) (25)j (0) (14)i (0)l (1) (1) Southwest B7373 ' 180 Average 93.4 93.0 89.9 #N/A 86.2 #N/A 83.1 83.5 82.2' 92.6 Count (175) (173) (174) (0) (1617 (0) (168) (2) (2) (3) B7377 3 Average 88.8 88.6 85.1 #N/A 81.3 #N/A 79.5 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (3) (3) (3) (0) (3) (0) (1) (0) (0) (0) TWA :B757 152 Average 93.6 93.0 89.7 #N/A 84.0 #N/A 81.5 #N/A #N/A 88.2 . Count (149) (144) (150) (0) (138) (0) (129) (0) (0) (1) MD80 1091Average 99.4 99.1 96.7 #N/A 89.5 #N/A 89.9 85.7 88.2 101.5 ,Count (103) (100) (105) (0); (76) (0) (101) (2) (2) (2); United A320 1 Average #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A~ #N/A #N/A #N/A 82.0 #N/A 90.3' Count (0) (07 (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (1 ) (0) (1 ) B7373 109 Average 94.8 94.3 91.6 #N/A 87.4 #N/A 83.7: #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (109) (107) (106) (0~) (86)i (0) (103)i (0) (0) (0) B757 77 Average 93.4 92.9 90.2 #N/A 85.2 #N/A 83.1 #N/A #N/A 84.8 Count (73) (71), (72) (0) (68) (0) (68) (0) (0) (1) UPS IB757 64 Average 93.9 93.7 91.0 #N/A 86.6 #N/A 83.0 #N/A #N/A 90.0 Count (62)i (62) (62) (0) (34) (0) (60) (0) (0) (1) US Airways A319 116[Average 94.4 93.4 93.1 #N/A 87.2 #N/A 83.6 #N/A #N/A 91.5 Count (111) (1087 (111) (0): (98) (0) (105) (0) (0) (2); B7373 66 Average 97.8 96.4 96.5 #N/A 90.6 #N/A 87.9 85.3 92.5 95.2 Count (58) (58) (60) (0) (50) (0) (58) (4) (4) (5) -]0- TABT.~ 7 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGI~ EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class AA April - 3une 1999 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site 1 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 Alaska Air' B7374 168 ;Average 93.2 92.9 89.5 #N/A 85.8 #N/A 82.9 #N/A 83.1 89.9 ~Count (167) (163) (167) (0) (148) (0) (155) (0) (1) (1) AmedcaWest A320 89 Average 90.9 91.4 88.7 #N/A 85.9 #N/A: 81.1 79.8 84.6 8915 Count (88) (84) (88t (0) (55) (0) (33) (1) (1) (.1) B7373 776Average 92.7 92.5 89.2 #N/A 85.9 #N/A 82.5 82.6 81.8 90.6 Count (751) (734) (753) (0) (686) (0) (660) (4) (4) (9) !American IB757 738Average 91.8 91.8 89.9 #N/A 85.8 #N/A 83.6 81.4 84.9 88.7 Count (718) (704) (725) (0) (627) (0) (614) (1) (3) (6) Continental B7373 --'60 Average 96.5 95.9 94.8 #N/A 88.1 #N/A 84.0 82.5 #N/A 93.9 Count (57) (53) (58) (0) (48) (0) (51) P (1)i (0) (1) Delta MD90 346 Average 91.5 91.0 88.9 #N/A; 82.4 #N/A 82.3 80.3 #N/A 91.0 Count (337) (3,33) (337) (0)1 (301) (0) (260) (1) (0)! (3) Reno Air MD90 82 Average 90.6 90.2 87.8 #N/A 82.4. #N/A 80.7 #N/A #N/Ai 92,7i count (81) (78) (81) (0) (76)i (0) (44) (0) (0) (1)1 Southwest B7373 180Average 92.2i 92.3 89.1 #N/A 85.7 #N/A 82.9 83.2 82.7 91.8 count (178) (175) (177). (0) (161) (0) (167) (1) (2) (2) B7377 I Average 90.4 89.8 85.2i #N/A 82.9 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (1) (!) (0) (1) (0). (0) (0) (0) (0) United A320 349 Average 91.6 91.6. 90.0 #N/A 86.3 #N/A 83.9 #N/A 77.4 86.7 Count (337) (334) (337) (0) (284) (0) (318) (0) (1) (3) B757 74 Average 92.6 92.2 89.8 #N/A 85.2 #N/A 82.71 #N/A #N/A #N/A count (72) (72) (72) (0) (65) (0) (72) (0) (0) (0) M]~ASUP~D AVER. AGE SINGI~ EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE l ~VELS commercial Class E April - June 1999 Carder AC Type # Deps NMS Site " I 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 Alaska Air~ B7374 446Average 90.2~ 90.5 87.4 #N/A 84.8 #N/A 81.7 81.9 79.9 90.5 count (426) (426) (430)i (0) (411) (0) (391) (7) (4) (12) America West B7373 7181Average 91.3 91.3 88.3 #N/A 85'.3 #N/A 81.6 81.8 87.8 90.3 Count (700) (692) (699) (0) (641) (0)i (628) (3) (2) (6) Delta MD90 86 Average 90.7 90.0 87.7 #N/A 82.2 #N/A 80.6 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (86) (84) (85) (0) (75) (0) (65)i (0) (0) (0) i Reno Air MD90 888 Average 88.6 88.4 86.2 #N/A 81.7 #N/A 79.5 78.2 80.6 87.7 Count (871) (859) (874) (0) (797) (0) (274) (1) (3) (8) iSouthwest B7373 846Average 91.2 91.2 88.5 #N/A 85.5 #N/A 82.0 81.3 91.0 90.1 Count (831) (812) (830) (0) (742) (0) (773) (5) (7) (9) B7377 9 Average 89.6 89.8 86.1 #N/A 81.5 #N/A 78.5 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (9) (9) (9) (0)i (7) (0) (2) (0) 1 '(0) (0) United B757 813 Average 91.6 91.4 88.2 #N/A 83.7 #N/A 81.7 80.0 81.5. 88.5 Count (786) (765) (785) (0) (714) (0) (690) (3) (3) (11) -11- TABLE 8 - MEASURED AVERAGE SINGI~F EVENT NOISE EXPOSUR~ LEVELS Commuter April - June 1999 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site I 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 SkyWest CL60 90~Average 85.8 84.8 86.7 #N/A 79.3 #N/A 80.9 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (83) (78) (84) (0) (67) (0! (2) (0) (0) (0) E120 795 Average 81.6 83.3 82.0 #N/A 78.4 #N/A 85.2 #N//~ 104.9 85.6 Count (688) (681)i (470) (0) (308) (0) (18) (0) (1) (3) MEASURED AVERAGE SINGI~F EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE I~EVELS General Aviation April - June 1999 ' Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site I 2 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 General Aviation Jet 1678 Average 89.8 89.3 90.2 #N/A 83.9 #N/A 86.0 93.7 87.4 89.~ Count (1547) (1506) (1469) (0) (1184) (0) (505) (5) (11) (29) .o -12- TABLE 9 AIR CARRIER OPERATIONAL HISTORY Carrier AC Type Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Alaska Air AS B7374 8,684i 8,798 7,718 7,795 3,887 MD80 270 220 4 America West AW A319 2 A320 1,184 780 6 509 394 B7373 13,162 15,284 14,152 11,917 5,750i B757 318 858 1,332 205 279 '~,merican AA B7373 2 B757 9,490 8,542 8,970 8,329i 3,821 MD80 6661 926 610 1,119 675 i Continental CO B7373 (1) 3,234 2,786 2,710 720 20 B7375 (1) 1,995 1,072 B7377 868 926 B7378 8 B757 588 659 724 298 IMD80 6 4 Delta DL B7373 1,138 614 2 B757 3,3681 1,452 2,202 2,117 690 MDg0 2,944 3,058 3,836 2,083 FedEx FM A300 16 18 12 12 A310 384 484 486 496 242 !Northwest NW A320 3,484 3,502 3,408i 3,219 1,742 '!~57 2 Reno Air Q'Q MDB0 4,272 4,072 4,200 4,246 1,860 MDg0 4,026 5,680 5,744 3,733 Southwest WN B7373 (1) 10,934 9,918 9,846 2,986 437 B7375 (1) 6,689 4,340 B7377 2 30 TWA TW B757 406 1,242 1,139 554 MDB0 1,697 1,440 848 986 481' United UA :A319 (2) 749 511 A320 (2) 2,348 2,524 2,024 1,816 620 B7373 (1) 950 1,332 836 503 357 B7375 (1) 2 2 B757 7,856 7,766 8,274 8,617 4,207 UPS 5X B757 504 504 476 500 252 US Airways US A319 230 ~A320 2 B7373 880 842 1,444 1,456 482 B757 570 616 (l) Counts that separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that separate A319 and A320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -13- TABLE 10 AIRC~ OPERATIONAL HISTORY Aircrait Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 A300 16 18! 12 1'~ A310 384 484 486 496 242 A319 (1) 749 743 A320 (1) 7,016 6,806 5,438 5,544 2,758 B7373 (2) 30,300 30,776 28,990 17,582 7,046 B7374 8,684 8,798 7,718 7,795 3,887, B7375 (2) 8,686 5,414 B7377 870 956 B7378 8 B757 22,694 20,806 23,220' 21,205 9,803 MD80 6,910 6,662 5,662: 6,351 3,016 MD90 6,970 8,738 :9,580 5,816 (1) 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 AIRCRAFF OPERATIONAL HISTORY ~5,000 ~0,000 ~5,000 !0,000 5,000 0,000 5,000 0 !El 1995" !I'11997 , ,ri 1998 A310 A319 A320 B7373 B7374. B7375 B7377 B7378 B757 MDB0 MD00 By Year -14- TABLE 11 AIR CARRIER AVERAGE DAII.Y DEPARTURE HISTORY Carder AC Type Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Alaska Air AS B7374 i 1.896 12.019 10.573 10.682 10.746 MD80 0.370 0.301 0.005 America West AW A319 0.006 A320 1.622 1.066 0.008 0.688 1.094 B7373 18.030 20.880 19.386 16.351 15.890 B757 0.436 1.172 1.825 0.279 0.762 Amedcan AA B7373 0.063 B757 13.000 11.669 12.288 11.397 10.547 MD80 0.912 1.265 0.836 1.551 1.878 i Continental CO B7373 (1) 4.430 3.806 3.712: 0.984 0.055 B7375 (1) 2.742 2.978 B7377 1.184 2.541 B7378 0.022 B757 0.805 0.900 0.992 0.408 I MDS0 0.008 0.005 Delta DL ~B7373 1.559i 0.839 0.003 B757 4.6141 1.984 3.016 2.899 1.912 MD90 4.022 4.189 5.249 5.751 FedEx FM A300 0.022 0.025 0.016 0.033 A310 0.526 0.661 0.666 0.679 0.669 Northwest NW A320 4.773 4.784 4.668 4.408 4.818 B757 0.003 RenoAir QQ MD80 5.852 5.563 5.753 5.830 5.144 MD90 5.500 7.781 7.860 10.315 Southwest WN B7373 (1) 14.978 13.549 13.488 4.088 1.210 B7375 (1) 9.167 12.017~ B7377 0.003 0.083 TWA TWB757 0.555 1.701 1.564 1.558 MDB0 2.325 1.967 1.162 1.345 1.298 United UA A319(2) 1.030 1.409 A320(2.) 3.216; 3.448 2.773 2.488 1.724 iB7373(1) 1.301 1.820 1.145 0.688 0.983 B7375 (1) 0.003 0.006 B757 10.762 10.609 11.334 11.803 11.657 UPS 5X B757 0.690 0.689 0.652 0.685 0.696 US Airways US A319 0.635 A320 0.006 B7373 1.205 1.150 1.978 1.995 1.331 B757 0.781 0.842 , (1) Counts that separate B7373 and B7375 aircraft operations began in 1998. (2) Counts that separate A319 and A.320 aircraft operations began in 1998. -15- NOISE ABATEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Date: May 26, 1999 Time: 2:00 p.m. Place: Eddie Martin Building AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS DISCUSSED: 1. Airport Operation Statistics for April 1999 Bonnie Streeter of JWA gave an update on the April statistics. Percentages show a downward trend overall. 2. Replacement Monitoring System Update John Leyerle gave a history of the noise monitoring system at JWA. A contract to upgrade the system was awarded to Tracor Applied Sciences of Austin, Texas in 1997. The upgrade is substantially complete. In February of this year, the Board of Supervisors approved a significant amendment to the original contract Acceptance of the new system is expected in Au~mast of 1999. An important recent milestone is the completion of a yearlong side-by-side comparison test of the old and new system with regard to noise measurements. This test 'and the subsequent analysis of the data resulted in a recent action by the Board of Supervisors and the parties to the Settlement Agreement approving a change to the maximum permitted noise limi_'ts effective July 1, 1999. 3. Sta_ms of the Santa Aaa Heights Acoustical Insulation Prom Carl Braatz of JWA gave an update. Twenty-two homes are currently under construction, due for completion in mid-June. Construction on twenty-one more homes will begin in July of 1999. The awarding of a contract for another group of twenty-two homes is expected at the end of July 1999. The insulation of an 182-unit apartment complex is ongoing. 4. Update on JWA Manaffement Changes John Leyefle described recent changes in the management of John Wayne Airport. O.B. Schooley left his position as Airport Director in September of 1998. At that time Loan Leblow was appointed as Interim Airport Director for a period that was anticipated to last ninety -16- ._. Noise Abatement Committee Meeting Continued days. Recently, County CEO Jan Mittermeier decided to postpone the appointment of a permanent full-time Airport Director until the completion of the Master Plan and EIR for the reuse of E1 Toro. Alan Murphy is now acting as Assistant Interim Director. .5. Access and Noise Office RedistributiOn of Duties John Leyerle explained the recent redistribution of duties in the Access and Noise Office. The staff of the Access and Noise Office is composed of four Noise Specialists: John Escobedo, Ramey Gonzalez, Doffs Mays and Bonnie Streeter. About a month ago, the responsibilities of the office were delineated into input team duties and output team duties. John Escobedo and Ramey Gonzalez are the input team and Doffs Mays and Bonnie Streeter are the output team. Input duties involve the gathering and entry of data into the noise monitoring system. The input team is also the f~rst point of contact for complaint calls from the community. The output team processes the input results and produces various reports. They also have the primary responsibility for ak carrier contacts. 6. Additional Questions - None. 7. Next Meetin~ Date - To be announced. -17- ATTACHMENT 2 Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports, Ist and 2nd Quarters 1999 (Van Houten and Associates, Inc.) Transmittal RECEIVED COM, I UNI tT Dt VEL u?¢..,.! :. ! To: Elizabeth Binsack From: John Van Houten Date: December 3, 1999 Subject: Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports No. of Pages: 9 (including this one) Message: Dear Ms. B insack: Attached is our review of the JWA quarterly reports for the 1 st and 2n'! quarters of 1999. Please note that there have been some significant changes to the report. These are: 1. The "Aircraft Noise Contours" section of the report has been completely rewritten since we are now relying on the 1998 JWA contour map and not our 1990 study to estimate the noise contour locations'in Tustin. 2. We used to provide the estimated 1990 noise contours in our report along with the existing year noise contours. The 1990 contours have been deleted from our report to avoid confusion with the new contour locations. 3. The new contour locations provided in Figure 3 are based on the 1998 contours developed by Mestre Greve for John Wayne Airport. You'll notice that the width of the contours is much narrower than in our previous reports. This gets the 60 dB contour off of the MCAS(H) Tusfin site. 4. To make the noise contour map of FigUre 3 easily readable, only the 55 dB and 60 dB contours have been shown. 3320 E. Chapman Ave. #323 Orange, CA 92869 Tel: 949/476-0932 Fax: 949/476-10"..3 J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. John J. Van Houten, P.E. Consulting Engineer in Acoustics December 3, 1999 Project File 2779-98 CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Attention: Ms. Elizabeth Binsack" Subject: Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports for the 1 st and 2na Quarters of 1999 References: 1. "Data Evaluation and Aircraft Noise Impact Study for the City of Tustin;" J. J. Van Houten & Associates, Inc.; January 8, 1990 2. '2qoise Abatement Program Quarterly Report for the Period: January 1, 1999 through March 31, 1999;" John Wayne Airport 3. "Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report for the Period: April 1, 1999 through June 30, 1999;" John Wahine Airport 3320 E. Chapman A ye. #323 Orange. CA 92869 949/476-0932 F.4&' 949/476-1023 Dear Ms. B insack, 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 Figures 1 and 2, the average annual CNEL at station M-7 will be 56.7 dB for 1999 based upon data for the first two quarters. This is 0.3 dB lower than the average annual CNEL of 57.0 dB for 1998. (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 of 56.7 dB in 1999 reflects the possible stabilizing of a modest upward trend in the aircraft noise exposure measured at station M-7. This trend is illustrated in the following table: CITY OF TUSTIN Project File 2779-98 Year Average Annual CNEL 1994 56.1 dB 1995 56.4 dB 1996 56.8 dB 1997 55.9 dB 1998 57.0 dB 1999 56.7 dB 3. Referring to Figure 2, the number of noise complaints received from the Tustin area in the first two quarters'of 1999 appears to correlate with the average quarterly aircraft CNEL measured at station M-7 and the number of quarterly jet operations at the airport. 4. As indicated in Item 1, above, the annual average CNEL measured at-station M-7 is 56.7 dB based on information through the Second quarter of 1999~ 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 P1an (Reference 1). AIRCRAFT NOISE CONTOURS Figure 3 provides the estimated location of the John Wayne Airport noise contours for 1999. These are based on the 1998 contours developed by the John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Office, and on data through the second quarter of 1999. Referring to Figure 3, it is estimated that in 1999 the aircraft-generated CNEL will range from about 60 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 JWA 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 are Stage I, Stage II; and Stage III aircraft. John Wayne Airport has only permitted Stage III 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 1998 and the second quarter of 1999. Also provided is the measured average quarterly CNEL at monitoring station M- 7. 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 increased slightly in 1999, compared with 1998. This increase in Class E aircraft was offset by a decrease in the use of the noisier Class A and Class AA aircraft. Based on data from the first quarter of 1998 through the second quarter of 1999, there does not appear to be any correlation between the aircraft mix and the average quarterly CNEL at monitoring station M'7. 2j. j. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. CITY OF TUSTIN Project File 2779-98 If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 949/476-0932. Very truly yours, J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. /,~ David L. Wieland Principal Consultant Wieland Associates - 3 j. j. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. · 0 ..... · :::i?ii~; :::::::::::::::::::::::: ....... ,................ ::~;:~:~: :::::::::::::::::::::::::: . ,...-...-..... ............ ,... ,........-...-.,. ..:.:.:.:.: ~:~,'::::::~:~:~ ........ .......... .;.:.:.:.:, ~. ........ ......... '.....:.:.:.:.:......... .... ................. .... :::::::::~? ~.f:f:~:~l .:.:.:.:-:-: ::::::::::::::::::::::::: -.'- .... ....... -...:.~.:.~ ,'' '.;.: ; :,:-:4 -..: ~:,:~ : :.'~:~ ~??::: ...:::. . .. ..... ..:.:...:.~:~.~. i::':;: :: :=. :.;:;::? r¥-:~:I I I I · T I'- ...... ....... I_ I I -1 I I ! I I __.,~ ..... I I I ........ I o I ! I I I I I I I I I ..... I-- 1 'T f I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I / ....... L_ I I I I I I 1' ! t L- .... J I I I~l I I I I I I ! I_ ! I ...... ..~-- , I I '1 I I I ..... __t- I I I I ! I 1 I I I I I I I ....... T I I I-- ...... I I I t-- ...... I I I ....... I ....... I I , (SP) 'F:IN3 m 70 o 50 -~ 40 m 30 (3 2O m 10 < 0 IAverage Quarterly Aircraft CNEL, M-71 'i:: -"::" · " :-:-":: :i ' ' ._ ._~. ..... ~. ...... ..-i~i- ...... i:.-i~i ..... ~!ii~ :--- ..-..:~ :i:!~ i:i: -- ~':' :':' ~ ~:'-'~ ..... iii'.:' ...... ~-:.: -: ..... ii" .' ' :'ii .:.- ":: ':': . --~-~ ............... ! :.?: - ,,....-'-:~ ':':.... ~ . j:~' · -... ..:. .:,:' ':,!: , ":' : !,: , · .,:. , ..... -,.. , ] , 1Qtr98 2Qtr98 3Qtr98 4Qtr98 1Qtr99 · 2Qtr99 3Qtr99 4Qtr99 Quarter/Year 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 ITotal Quarterly Jet Operations, M-71 ' __ 1Qtr98 2Qtr98 3Qtr98 4Qtr98 1Qtr99 2Qtr99 3Qtr99 -- 4Qtr99 Quarter/Year 90 (~ 80 o 70 Z --~ 60 ~ '~ 50 = 40 ~ 30 · ~ 2O <r 10 0 IAverage Quarterly Noise ComplaintsI 1Qtr98 2Qtr98 3Qtr98 4Qtr98 1Qtr99 2Qtr99 3Qtr99 4Qtr99 Quarter/Year Figure 2. Average Quarterly CNEL at Station M-7, Quarterly Jet Operations at JWA, and Quarterly Noise Complaints 6 ~-. ., !~ - ~-- . 'i ~ ~~ .,__-_- , ~. ,= I:-~- '"' ~'x .:---.- . ~ ;,.-!~ ~,:~ ~ J. .I. VAN ttOUTEN & Estimated Location of 3 ASSOCIATE$, ZNC. John Wayne Airport Noise Contours, 1999 0 0 0 I I I ! o I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 suo!leJ9d0 ~e.~oJ!b' Jo J,gquJnN - 0 0 0 0