The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE ABATEMENT QUARTERLY REPORTAGENDA EPORI y� z MEETING DATE: AUGUST 4, 2015 TO: JEFFREY C. PARKER, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agenda Item 4 Reviewed: City Manager Finance Director N/A SUBJECT: JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE ABATEMENT QUARTERLY REPORT SUMMARY: This agenda report transmits the John Wayne Airport (JWA) Noise Abatement Quarterly Report for the first quarter of 2015. The average noise level measured at Tustin's monitoring station (NMS 10N), located at Columbus Tustin Middle School on Beneta Way (Figure 1), remained consistent with prior quarters during this first quarter reporting period. There were no anomalies in the data recorded for this quarter. Average noise levels during the first quarter remained well below the City, County, and State criteria of 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) for residential uses. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file this report. FISCAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact. Figure 1 JVVA Noise ISP= �� ®til Augus% , 2015 Page 2 CC�CC I I Il_. `\��II CC S ►�!I T(0 T'l-1I 1F7, l L ° K Staff's analysis and ropori� of j(he quarterly John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Report falls ander G-�ioall ID of the Strategic Galan pertaining to strong community and regional relationships. -]Chile of Tustin strives to work coflaboratove�y with agencies both within and outside Tustin on issues of mutual interest and concern, and on this instance, on matters of airport traffic and House. DlSCUSSlOIN►l." Following the conclusion of each calendar quarter, John Wayne Airport staff prepares a Noise Abatement Program c uaini oirly Report and posts a copy of the report on their website. Attached is the quarterly report for the forst quarter of 20159 which includes the months of January through v arch. An overview of the information contained within the JW A Noise Deport includes measured noose levels, and an analysis of noose complaints. Measured Noise Levels Aircraft :eft noir IS most noticeable during airplane takeoffs , r1�ci�landings primarily due tto engine noise. Although eng111t''S produce iuc=-e a significant amount of aircraft noise,111;:1n other factors 111;1v influence the perception of 11oISe including.- proximity; weather 11n bad weather engine 11o15e is reflected off of the atmosphere making �ets appear louder than on clear ciiays;routes; non-scheduled operations w`-1Ic_,f-1 could include military or private aircraft; emergencies; a11d weight — a heavier Io`.ld 11av affect an aircraft's rate of ascent. During the first quarter of 20159 the average C EL at Tustin's monitoring station o :e11et l Way was 54.3 dB. This i .2 dB lower tf1a11 the average cif the previous quarter (Q=4-. October " tf1 o gf1 December 2014). Tf-1N average noise Ic'VeI for this quarter IS Vc"r"v similar ar to the average from 1111 th previous four quarters, VJf11cf-1 IS 55.1 d :. Figure -' provides a visualization of Tustin 9s CNEL levels for each 111o11tf1 during -1 c'' first quarter, of 20 1-5. Daily Commun'Ky Hdse EqwwaDeM Lewds QCHEQ in YusVon - January �hmu o h March 2US 7040 .._....... 60 January 50 a, February 30 20 March 10 ® Noise Impact Area Level 1 3 5 7 0 11 13 15 17 10 21 23 25 27 20 31 (65 dB) JJVVA Noise G `q)epoi�( August 4y 2015 Page 3 ll\llo1ise OorI(llpllalints I ll'he l=\J rporl's Access and Nose Office receoves and onvestogates noose caHs and comp�a�niZs from �oca1 c�t zens and other sources. Throughout aH ®f the Orange O®unty i'nnonlloriing area, noose compDaonts decreased by 34.7 percent durr ng the flrst quarter of O15 un cO�r paroson t® the fourth quarter ®f 2014. Thos ads® represents a 77 percent decrease [in c®mparoson t® the same quarter fast year. Jt shoU J be noted that several ®f she complla�nts were made by the same househo0d on the Cott' ®f J Mne. � I" I C 1 �! _ I� c� � l ;t I —t _ I c�► `"' (�)1 �, t 1 �' _ _ I �' t f I I" �' �'' (�_ I T � I� t I 1 •i I_� c=; c�� C 1 I !� � �� 11 ��; ;i - _ I (�� — (_ I c _; c�� 1 �� I C 1 t `� c� � I " I 1—1 c� t f —I �' �!� I " �' I r�� 1 � d� I_ �•i I � � I - . T � 1 '� t I 1 � t ;i f f I t � c�� t I " �' ;� � � 1 �' � t c�� ,� c�� 111 - ' " fel —t —I c- I" c� �t•i l�� c�l� tf1�' C1�•itl_l l -t- cif tf—I� c._;c��111 ��,tlllt� 111,•ic _ kip " — Slc = 11tS. l �' !� C" _ �•i �� c�� I 1 �� t f 1 � t f 1 "�" � (;_ 1 c� c!► C1 � �� I ;� I C � � f "!�► C 11 t f —I �' f I " � t c� � I ; --i � _ I" d► f '> (I) 1 . � ;i. I � �" �� f c�� I I c!►1; I07P (1,0111 dII — 1 — — — — c�� i � �� I �"ft cisC ,�ct►f-1 1 :tUI1 ' AIC �!�c � Vc!�Ic`;�=I11; I t ' 11.. iI c j tf-1 c� c!► 11 �!� .t I C 1 �.t —I .� (i I c I 1 c�► t �=' c� � I �' ,� t f c�► � � c!� � — � 1 ��1 f I- c!� 111 ,� A � t ;•t f f I"�' ci� ;.t C"c�� 111 c _i _ tf��'I " c�c�► 11�� 11�tS. c�� !� "c�� j c� ' ;i C 1 � 1 � c� � I" � t •t C � �� I C S ci� c�► f t f —I ►" t- l—' I 11 cij 11 T � I '� t I C 1 i I� �' ;l �_� c�►111 �!► ;i 111 t'� t f 1 I- c�� I c� f 1 c�� I t t f —I �' �' ;i `� .; c =; —I ;•� —t c I � !� � ;t I 1 c� f —I �' C 1 � 1 111 k!► � I " c�► f I 1 c�► I �� (� c► C 11 �!► � ;� I C 1 t �� f ►� I " t f —I �' �► ;� `� t f I V �' v �' ;1 I " `_; I ``� cl I '� !� � �i � c i► c' � c!► , ( I i � 1 "�' ,�) . � �' C 1 �' _ �.t � � V t —1 �' �' I � ;t I —1 c�, t I c_; � ;i i► � c=' I f 1 c_, � �•i .� � I 1 C —I c�� I � � c_, c�� I11 � � �i I I � t �� 1 I" I � ci t i —1 � � � c_, �� I1 cid ;i �� tl-lil"�l ��I,t � "s. f-li��l-1 f�ll�f-1�'I- ��1�:��c�l�� tf-I� tfl�'��►I"v tf-i,it �.i11 il��l�,t�� i � c`;c►I��E•� ;iir�t�, til-�c t c�► c�► c J c � � I I" c�j I_ l l � I —I c� t f I �' ;•t I" C 11 �' I" 111 c�► 1 t f � c�► f � �� C� I C 1 c _� �:i 11 c�� 1.1 C 11 I11 �' I" . � � I" i t f I �' 11 � 111 k�� ' I" c!► f (�cl�C11�� I11t� f11� I�c��t I"�=;tc�f-1►=ci� 111��C"�" tf1;1f� t� J�''� ►' 1 1 ��) t=;cl►111��;ilC�t� ICS ;1 �IC1c��' c��I,t —t�'►" c��II"IC1c�� vC=12 C171 G 4 r -u 2 C� 0 - -. " _ Qu a rte ri,/C I' FogUrr' 3 JWA Noise Deport august 4, 2015 Page 4 GInce noIse Issues ; irof c oI_l dN a e Impoirlance to the CIty c�� _ S ICI, the CoCl1C11u111t eVf"�o pC11e t Department wiH c=,oC1 IC1I Ie to C1101I o " operaons at John Wayne SII pon u eS other4se 6rected by the I My v C cis I_ I f 1 c; H. The pubHc are ;I d 6 o n a H V =-- - - - �' c_, c!� C -11 �' t c�� !� � I � I c_, I �!� ;i t e In 1 John Wayne AIC laoIt'S Qu;•1 tel meetlngs -1e (i by the Accessand NoOffice. The next c I I ; rl meetl ci JIB be he " d on n p t e f 11 b er 9, 2015, ; i 2:00 p C 11. In t -I N John ;tel V C 1 AIrport AcitC11IC1Istr; itIVe Office �ci,ci ed at 1 ii(1) Airway AVe-L1e I1 Costa es; I. III ff�ld j�5iillll I Sen1or Management AssIstal1t ; I btf I A. &nsack Drector of oC11C11uC11t D v %pC11e 1t John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Report for January 19 2015, through March 31, 2015 n`1�QC� G=11 V E N T John wvf2yna Aorrpop� Hooas Abmf gmsnf Quarftrly Rsporf for JAnua y 19 2016 �hrouph March 319 2, 16 QHrs Quwftrr� MMSE ABA7IEI�Y[1EN7 PROGRAM Q lLJ AR7ER L Y RIEPOR7 For the peirn*od Sanu2i°y R9 200 thirough ICY airch 3R9 2®RS AMPOR7 NCDIISIE S7ANI[DA11D STATE OF CCALCFORMA CCS.gHTbi°nhq Admfl*nIlsttirafl ve Code PII'ntk M, Chapter 2059 SuhChapteir° 6.0 IIDHMMon ®f Aeiro nnufl s Suhmfttted hy-. Lawrence G. SeiraflM Aefi rng AI°pon°tt IDELrect®i° ll 7R(DD lU CYi(D This is the 169th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of the California Airport Noise Standards (California Administrative Code Title 219 Chapter 2.59 SarubChap$er 6e Division ®f Aeronautics Noise Standards). ]Effective January 19 1986, the criteria for defining "Noise fu-npact Area" was changed from 70 dB t® 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CN1E1L). Under this criteria, John Wayne Airport currently has a "Noise lu-npact Area." HC)ffsIE �MPACC'II' SUMMARY Caltrans` Aeronau.atics Program has established guidelines in the California State Noise Standard t® control residential area noise levels produced by aircraft operations using the State's airports. Under those guidelines, residential noise sensitive areas exposed t® an average Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNlE1L) ®f more than 65 dB define the "Noise Impact Area." John Wayne Airport uses tern permanent remote noise monitoring stations (NMS) located in Newport Beach, Santa Ana, Tustin and Irvine t® measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS NMS- ISe Golf Course, 31®® Irvine Ave., Newport leach NMS -6S: 1912 Santiag®9 Newport Beach NMS -2S: 20162 S.W. Birch St., Newport leach NMS -7S: 1131 Back lay Drive, Newport leach NMS -3S: 2139 Anniversary ]Lane, Newport leach NMS -8N: 17372 Eastman Street, Ervine NMS -4S: 2338 Tustin Ave., Newport leach NMS -9N: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana NMS -5S: 324 1/2 Vista Madera, Newport leach NMS- I ®N o 17952 leneta way, Tustin `The map in Figure I dhows the general location ®f each permanent remote monitor station. Figure 2 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for the previous year (April 19 2014 e March 319 2015). The Figure 2 information was developed by Mestre-Greve Associates, Inc., in consultation with John Wayne Airport. CN]ElL values measured for the period and current digitized) land) use information were utilized t® calculate the land area acreages, number ®f residences and estimated) number ®f people within the "Noise Impact Area". ego Figure 1 le ` • N x 'w1► IN � • �, Ob 14 • „ 9 •,� 1 M� � �+ t � , � t } ` �I�I � ' �� is "JP i � �: + �' ` � �` �' � • • w AF 10, tA IW k E ^ 6 40, ' y A l� / •, L EL a , {�, i l+0., ,• .. �` • J.' ` • r R'R - 'w'` Aft ' � - • 'N y • � '•r.. gyp. � 9 , s Ae ` 'r . » . -; •rte ,r (: :. as IL iy.as 7r. `• '•M %kin low y 'ML .. ,.w� '�• R. i n e Y 1_ Ale* ell of Lhk -b r , Art - OL ar a n low 19 Im 10 46 . � � rf ' � fir; � '* •' � W w �y a a. '�"' •a d fir• � � � �,.,� .. � � '\ � +. , �� "�.�, �� .E f .� ��1< � 4- 46 jp Oe IN, e f , � ` - 1 ,.,L,. '� r iix! %P � ,� •Mfr-" � � x � � ` s Yh '..► The Airport tral'ifiC Summary for this quarter is shown in Table I below. Air Carrier operational Count histories and average daily depaftUre Counts are illustrated in Tables 9 & 11. LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS January - March 2015 Period �i¢- farriers __] Jl �rop� January _ C,575 � 2,ll53 20,679 February 6,024� � ➢,�� 19 9628 Yi-larch 6,9�2, O 2,346 22926 First Qlaao-teo� �� ➢ x.571 �� _ 0�� 6.479� 62.593 �A Jet (1) Total �� .Uel �'®�� Average Daily Operations (�) �Ipe�°��®ups �2� Jet Operations 281 285 3®® 299 Twelve l�/�ou�t@�s X1,257 0 26,300 270,634� 294 NOTE: (1) GA Jet figures 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. CC(DI�VIII� U N]I'II"�Y I143I[SE IEOffVALIEI�7 LEVELS The monthly, quarterly and twelve month Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNIEL) average values for each monitor station are shown in Table 29 while daily CNIEIL values are shown in Tables 3 through 5. Insufficient data is indicated by "#N/A9 entries in each table. Average Single Event Noise Exposure Level (S EN1E]L) values for Air Carrier and General Aviation ,het aircraft are shown aur Tables 6 through 8. ACCCDUS RCA L IIINSU LA7ff(DN PR(DGRAV1I Four hundred eighteen residences in the Santa Aura Heights area have been sound attenuated and an avigation easement reserved throuugh the County's Acoustical Insulation Program, which closed in December 2009. The County has also acquired 46 residences as part of the Purchase Assurance Program, many of which were acoustically insulated, an avigation easement reserved and then resold. Among these County acquired homes, those located within areas designated for Business ]dark uses were razed, avigation easements were reserved, and the land resold for compatible Business ]dark uses, A� total ®f' x-64 residences in the Santa Ani. Heights area have been purchased or otherwise made compatible through the County's Purchase A..ssu.urance and Acoustical Insulation Programs. Seventy-four dwelling units in Santa Aura Heights remain in the "Noise Impacted Area" (within 65 dB CNEIL contour). 7EL1 1?H(9 V 1E C�lDMPLAILN7 CALLS �J611n un y L 200 - Mpi ch 3l , 20o) The Airport's Access and Noise Office receives and investigates noise calls and complaints from local citizens and all other sources. During January 1, 2015 through March 31[ , 2015, the Office received 124 complaints f�®rn local citizens. This is a 34.7% decrease from the 190 complaints received last quarter. It is a 77.0% decrease from the 540 complaints received during the same qu.uauter last year. Figure.3 shows the distribution of`the quarterly telephone callus and complaints, from local communities. -4- f"F 11V I -ta Mesa Shoi-es E,-istbluff L intain y alle,y Hato i' CovH-- -itinaton Beach Laguna Beac-h Laguna [-,Jiguel Laguna Woods Lal, -.,e Fc, i, at Mission 'Vie-jc-I N, Tustin -ioi*t Beach lNofth Tustin Orange Santa Ana Santa Ana Heights Ti-abuco Canyon Tustin Unknown Westcliff Westminstet* Woodbridge Yoiba Linda FIGURE 3 H ISr rOGRAM BY COIVJIMUN 11r][iy 20, 0 1 � 3 4 5 6 10 1 1 1 1415161 1819202212'2238 2 42 152 6 2 72) 8 2) 9 B0 NUmber of Complaints Note: 71% of complaints from kvine were from one household. TABLE 2 LONG TERM MEASURED LEVELS Aircraft CNEL from 04/01/14 through 03/31/15 Values in db at Each Site Period NMS Site IS 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N ION Apr 2014 65.9 65.3 64.7 57.7 56.8 58.7 55.1 67.0 43.6 55.5 # Days 30 30 27 30 30 30 22 30 29 30 May 2014 65.7 65.0 64.3 57.6 56.8 58.4 #N/A 66.9 44.2 55.2 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 0 31 30 31 Jun 2014 67.0 65.9 65.3 58.6 57.8 59.0 56.2 67.8 43.6 56.3 4 Days 1 301 30 301 30 301 30 22 30 29 30 Q-2 2014 66.2 65.4 64.8 58.0 57.2 58.7 55.7 67.2 43.8 55.7 # Days 91 91 88 91 91 91 44 91 88 91 Jul 2014 66.8 66.1 65.4 58.4 57.5 59.1 54.9 67.4 43.0 55.2 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 26 31 31 30 31 Aug 2014 66.8 66.0 65.4 58.3 57.9 59.1 54.9 67.2 41.5 55.4 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 30 31 30 31 Sep 2014 66.6 65.8 65.3 58.1 57.5 58.8 55.0 66.7 43.3 54.2 # Days 28 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 Q-3 2014 66.8 66.0 65.4 58.3 57.6 59.0 54.9 67.1 42.7 55.0 # Days 90 92 92 92 92 87 91 92 89 92 Oct 2014 66.9 65.8 65.6 58.7 57.4 59.1 55.1 66.9 42.9 54.9 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 Nov 2014 65.7 64.3 64.8 57.7 56.4 58.9 54.4 66.3 42.9 54.1 # Days 30 20 30 30 30 30 30 30 23 30 Dec 2014 66.6 65.3 65.8 58.8 58.1 60.4 55.6 66.9 #N/A 54.7 4 Days 31 24 31 31 31 31 31 31 0 2 Q-4 2014 66.4 65.3 65.4 58.4 57.4 59.5 55.0 66.7 42.9 54.5 # Days 92 75 92 92 92 92 92 92 54 63 Jan 2015 66.1 64.9 65.1 58.3 57.2 59.3 54.9 66.0 42.7 53.8 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 26 30 Feb 2015 66.3 65.4 65.3 58.6 57.4 59.2 55.1 66.6 43.9 54.8 # Days 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 25 28 Mar 2015 66.5 65.4 65.6 58.7 57.2 59.1 55.2 66.8 42.2 54.4 # Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 29 31 Q-12015 66.3 65.2 65.3 58.5 57.3 59.2 55.1 66.5 43.0 54.3 Days 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 80 89 Q-2 2014 thru Q-1 2015 Total 66.4 1 65.5 65.2 58.3 57.4 59.1 55.1 66.9 43.1 55.0 # Days 363 348 362 365 365 360 317 365 311 335 Q-1 2014 thru Q-4 2014 (Previous 4 Quarters) Total 66.4 65.5 65.0 58.1 57.3 59.0 55.1 67.043.5 55.1 Days 363 346 362 365 365 360 316 365 314 335 Change from Previous 4 Quarters 0.0 0.01 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 1 0.0 -0.1 -0.4 -0.1 -6- TABLE 3 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION January 2015 Date NMS Site IS I 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N ION 1 65.4 64.3 64.0 57.7 57.0 58.3 55.2 65.0 #N/A #N/A 2 66.7 65.7 65.4 59.0 58.2 59.3 56.3 66.9 #N/A 56.0 3 65.3 64.7 64.4 58.1 57.2 58.4 56.2 66.4 29.7 54.5 4 66.7 65.9 65.9 58.6 58.0 59.4 55.6 67.2 4N/A 55.2 5 66.6 64.9 65.8 58.5 57.3 59.1 55.4 65.6 32.9 51.7 6 65.6 64.0 64.2 57.2 55.7 57.4 53.9 65.4 #N/A 51.6 7 65.91 64.7 64.8 58.0 56.6 58.5 54.1 66.1 #N/A 53.2 8 66.1 65.0 64.6 58.6 57.2 58.5 55.4 66.9 33.1 55.1 9 66.6 65.5 65.5 59.1 57.9 59.6 55.6 66.6 46.7 55.3 10 65.0 64.1 63.8 57.0 56.0 57.5 54.4 64.0 42.1 53.2 II 67.2 65.9 66.1 59.3 585 59.8 55.9 67.8 38.0 57.2 12 67.4 66.0 66.11 59.6 58.81 59.7 56.4 67.2 45.9 55.6 13 66.4 64.8 67.3 58.0 57.9 63.1 55.0 63.51 37.7 50.8 14 64.91 63.8 65.5 58.6 56.9 59.6 54.3 65.8 41.8 52.0 15 66.6 65.7 65.5 58.6 58.2 59.4 55.5 66.2 37.7 53.0 16 67.3 65.8 65.9 59.5 58.2 59.8 55.7 66.7 48.2 54.1 17 64.4 63.4 62.5 56.8 55.7 56.6 52.7 63.4 43.9 50.7 18 65.6 64.7 64.2 57.8 57.0 58.2 54.8 66.1 43.4 53.7 19 67.0 65.9 65.41 59.3 58.31 60.01 55.8 67.8 37.3 56.0 20 66.7 65.5 65.0 57.6 56.4 57.9 53.3 66.91 26.9 55.6 21 66.61 65.7 66.6 58.6 58.5 61.9 55.2 64.4 37.5 52.7 22 66.3 64.8 64.9 57.7 56.5 58.6 53.9 65.6 39.2 50.5 23 65.9 64.5 64.8 56.8 56.2 58.5 53.4 64.0 39.3 46.4 24 54.1 50.7 63.2 42.1 45.8 59.4 42.7 59.7 48.4 40.8 25 65.0 63.4 63.1 56.4 54.8 57.1 53.2 65.8 44.8 51.9 26 66.6 64.9 64.51 59.0 56.71 58.71 55.0 66.7 46.5 54.6 27 66.1 64.9 64.4 58.4 57.3 58.7 55.1 66.31 43.6 54.7 28 67.01 65.6 65.8 59.9 57.7 59.8 55.6 66.1 32.8 53.4 29 66.9 65.6 64.9 59.0 57.7 59.4 55.4 66.6 42.8 54.3 30 67.5 66.4 66.0 59.5 58.6 60.3 56.4 67.1 41.1 56.3 3164.9 64.1 63.1 57.0 55.9 57.5 53.6 63.4 37.3 50.9 Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 26 30 En. Avg 66.1 64.9 65.1 58.3 57.2 59.3 54.9 66.0 42.7 53.8 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -7- TABLE 4 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION February 2015 Date NMS Site 1S I 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N ION 1 65.6 64.6 64.3 57.4 56.9 58.1 54.1 66.2 34.6 52.6 2 66.7 65.6 65.1 58.6 57.6 59.2 54.9 67.4 44.6 55.4 3 66.0 65.2 64.6 57.8 57.2 58.5 54.6 66.6 9N/A 55.1 4 65.8 65.1 64.3 57.8 57.1 58.3 53.8 66.6 #N/A 55.6 5 66.7 65.6 65.4 58.7 57.8 59.1 54.6 66.9 43.4 55.0 6 66.9 66.0 65.5 59.0 57.8 59.4 55.6 67.1 9N/A 56.6 7 64.11 63.5 63.2 56.5 55.9 57.9 53.0 63.2 38.8 52.9 8 66.4 65.7 65.1 58.1 58.0 59.4 55.4 66.5 47.9 55.3 9 66.9 66.2 65.6 58.8 58.1 59.6 55.3 66.9 46.3 55.1 10 66.4 65.4 65.2 58.7 57.7 59.0 55.0 65.7 41.6 53.4 11 56.4 55.2 65.3 44.4 49.2 61.01 32.8 62.2 42.9 45.3 12 65.4 64.5 64.31 56.5 55.31 58.1 53.71 66.21 42.2 50.2 13 66.9 65.8 65.9 57.8 56.8 58.6 54.8 65.8 44.3 51.4 14 64.21 62.8 62.6 56.3 54.4 56.1 52.5 63.0 50.6 50.8 15 65.8 65.0 64.6 58.2 56.7 57.9 54.5 66.4 41.4 53.7 16 67.5 66.5 66.2 59.8 58.0 59.5 55.5 68.2 34.0 56.4 17 67.3 66.3 66.0 59.7 58.3 59.7 55.6 67.2 44.8 55.8 18 66.9 66.2 65.8 59.5 58.2 59.3 55.1 67.6 37.4 55.8 19 67.7 66.8 66.41 60.2 58.51 60.0 55.5 67.91 49.2 56.4 20 68.1 66.8 66.7 61.0 59.1 60.7 56.9 67.9 45.5 56.5 21 65.31 64.1 63.0 57.9 56.1 57.6 55.0 65.4 41.3 54.3 22 66.6 65.5 65.1 59.6 58.0 59.0 57.2 68.4 41.4 57.6 23 65.8 64.4 67.1 58.2 57.6 62.6 55.2 65.5 33.8 53.0 24 66.8 66.1 65.7 58.3 57.8 58.51 55.4 66.3 41.5 53.1 25 66.6 65.7 64.6 59.3 57.9 59.0 55.6 66.9 36.4 55.2 26 67.5 66.8 66.6 60.4 59.21 60.1 56.6 67.81 41.3 56.5 27 67.2 66.0 65.8 60.2 58.6 59.5 57.3 68.0 32.6 56.3 28 64.3 63.8 63.1 57.4 56.3 57.1 55.1 64.8 43.2 53.0 Days 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 25 28 En. Avg 66.3 65.4 65.3 58.6 57.4 59.2 55.1 66.6 43.9 54.8 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -8- TABLE 5 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION March 2015 Date NMS Site IS I 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N ION 1 67.3 65.6 65.8 60.1 58.0 59.4 56.7 67.5 44.8 55.6 2 67.8 66.3 66.2 60.6 58.8 59.9 57.6 68.0 44.5 56.0 3 66.7 65.7 65.3 59.2 58.3 58.7 56.7 67.2 38.6 55.3 4 66.2 65.6 65.2 59.0 57.8 58.9 56.4 67.0 38.2 53.9 5 66.1 64.8 64.9 57.6 56.6 57.7 54.2 65.6 45.4 51.8 6 61.5 58.9 66.9 53.5 52.1 62.2 48.8 62.4 37.2 39.0 7 64.71 63.6 63.3 55.9 54.2 56.2 52.5 64.2 35.1 51.1 8 66.8 65.4 65.3 59.1 57.1 58.6 55.4 67.8 29.8 55.6 9 67.4 66.3 66.1 59.8 58.4 59.7 56.5 67.1 41.5 54.3 10 66.6 65.4 65.5 58.3 56.7 58.0 54.4 66.3 34.4 54.0 II 67.0 66.3 66.0 58.9 58.0 59.3 55.4 67.0 4N/A 54.3 12 65.6 64.3 68.41 57.3 56.21 63.41 53.9 63.31 39.8 47.0 13 62.9 62.0 64.2 54.9 53.8 59.1 51.7 66.1 48.6 49.6 14 64.01 63.2 62.7 55.5 54.3 55.2 52.9 63.9 9N/A 51.2 15 65.9 64.9 64.6 57.2 55.3 57.1 54.2 65.9 45.3 53.4 16 66.5 65.0 65.0 58.5 56.1 58.0 54.1 65.9 45.2 53.6 17 66.2 64.9 64.7 59.5 56.6 58.5 54.8 66.9 43.4 54.7 18 67.2 65.6 65.2 60.4 57.7 59.4 55.7 67.4 39.8 55.8 19 67.4 66.2 66.21 59.9 58.21 59.61 55.9 67.41 39.3 55.1 20 67.8 66.7 66.5 60.0 58.6 59.6 55.9 67.6 32.8 55.5 21 65.81 64.8 64.3 58.4 56.4 57.7 53.7 66.6 44.5 55.0 22 66.8 65.7 65.4 59.2 57.5 59.2 56.6 67.7 39.7 55.9 23 67.0 65.8 65.7 59.6 58.4 59.4 56.4 67.7 42.2 55.7 24 67.0 66.0 65.4 59.4 58.1 59.0 56.6 68.6 43.4 56.8 25 67.3 66.4 65.6 59.1 58.3 59.3 56.4 67.1 42.8 54.2 26 66.8 66.4 66.01 58.4 57.31 58.41 55.2 66.31 31.9 53.3 27 67.5 66.2 65.7 58.7 57.5 59.0 55.5 67.3 31.3 55.2 28 66.01 64.9 65.2 57.8 56.2 57.3 53.1 65.9 44.9 53.1 29 66.6 65.5 65.4 58.9 57.0 58.7 54.9 67.7 41.6 55.0 30 67.2 66.1 66.1 58.8 57.9 59.2 55.5 67.5 39.9 55.2 31 67.1 66.0 65.7 59.4 57.7 59.2 55.3 67.6 38.0 55.9 Days 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 29 31 En. Avg 66.5 65.41 65.61 58.71 57.21 59.11 55.21 66.81 42.2 54.4 #N/A indicates insufficient data. -9- TABLE 6 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class A January - March 2015 Carrier AC Type # Dcps NMS Site IS 2S 3S 4S 5S 6S 7S 8N 9N ION Alaska Air 13734 14 Average 97.0 95.4 96.4 913 88.0 91.0 85.4 97.3 81.2 84.7 Count (12) (11) (12) (12) (12) (11) (12) (1) (2) (2) B737 383 Average 92.8 92.0 89.1 84.4 82.0 84.2 80.7 90.2 82.0 79.1 Count (353) (35 1) (355) (356) (357) (342) (329) (21) (5) (3) B738 423 Average 98.4 96.7 97.1 903 87.5 89.5 84.4 92.8 81.5 80.7 Count (401) (392) (396) (403) (398) (385) (382) (19) (8) (9) American B738 1138 Average 98.4 96.8 96.9 88.8 88.2 89.2 85.8 92.1 80.9 80.8 Count (1054) (1036) (1052) (1067) (1066) (1016) (1013) (56) (14) (29) Delta A319 422 Average 94.8 93.8 93.6 87.1 85.7 86.4 82.6 90.2 79.4 81.5 Count (378) (371) (379) (378) (383) (369) (357) (29) (9) (3) A320 I Average 94.2 #N/A 92.6 86.6 84.0 85.0 80.8 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (1) (0) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (0) (0) (0) B752 254 Average 95.8 94.6 94.2 87.6 86.6 87.5 84.5 91.0 80.1 78.6 Count (220) (219) (224) (225) (225) (218) (209) (24) (4) (6) FedEx A306 62 Average 97.3 96.4 94.5 89.0 87.7 89.3 85.9 95.0 79.7 81.8 Count (56) (55) (55) (56) (56) (56) (56) (6) (3) (3) Frontier Airlines A319 255 Average 93.7 92.8 92.3 86.4 853 85.9 82.2 88.4 80.3 79.0 Count (236) (233) (238) (238) (240) (229) (225) (13) (1) (2) Southwest B737 2209 Average 91.8 91.2 89.7 85.0 83.7 85.1 82.7 90.0 80.7 79.0 Count (2056) (2040) (2058) (2071) (2068) (2010) (1987) (120) (22) (11) 8738 301 Average 92.8 92.2 89.6 84.2 83.3 84.8 82.7 90.0 81.6 78.6 Count (279) (278) (279) (281) (283) (279) (270) (15) (5) (2) United A320 510 Average 93.4 92.4 91.6 85.4 84.7 87.1 85.0 92.4 80.7 81.6 Count (452) (448) (451) (451) (451) (434) (436) (49) (4) (13) B737 502 Average 96.0 94.4 95.8 89.2 89.1 90.2 85.9 92.5 80.3 78.9 Count (463) (455) (461) (466) (467) (451) (445) (28) (9) (II) B738 242 Average 97.6 96.0 96.2 89.2 883 90.2 85.9 93.3 80.3 81.0 Count (195) (188) (200) (201) (200) (191) (186) (33) (9) (16) B752 18 Average 94.2 935 92.9 87.3 86.5 88.0 84.4 87.4 #N/A #N/A Count (17) (17) (16) (17) (17) (17) (17) (1) (0) (0) UPS B752 51 Average 95.4 95.0 93.2 86.4 85.4 86.3 82.0 88.0 #N/A #N/A Count (47) (47) (46) (47) (47) (47) (47) (4) (0) (0) US Airways A320 242 Average 94.0 93.3 91.6 85.0 84.2 84.7 81.5 87.7 78.5 80.1 Count (226) (223) (224) (219) (223) (223) (210) (16) (1) (3) A321 104 Average 98.1 97.2 95.7 87.6 86.6 87.2 84.6 90.6 80.6 80.0 Count 1 (89) (87) (94) (95) (96) (92) (85) (5) (2) (2) B752 4 Average 95.5 95.5 92.1 83.7 83.8 84.0 80.9 #N/A #N/A #N/A Count (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (4) (0) (0) (0) Wes jet B737 90 Average 95.0 93.6 94.5 89.9 86.2 88.8 82.6 91.0 76.7 7T7 Count (83) (82) (81) (82) (82) (81) (80) (7) (1) (2) -10- TABLE MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commercial Class E January - March 2015 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site IS I 2S 3S I 45 I 5S I 6S 7S 8N 9N ION SkyWest Coml. CRJ9 244 Average Count 90.6 (229) 89.0 (226)(230 88.9 82.2 (382) A4S5S6S 80.5 (203) 79.3 (151) 89.9 (12) #N/A (0) 76.9 (1) Southwest B737 1891 Average Count 90.7 (1765) 90.4 (1747) 88.9 (1761) 84.5 (1690) 82.1 (1692) 89.7 (94) 78.9 (6) 77.8 (7) TABLE8 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Commuter January - March 2015 Cartier AC Type # Deps I NMS Site IS I 2S I 3S I 45 I 5S I 6S I 7S I 8N9N I 8N ION Sky West CRJ7 422Average Count 87.8 (394) 87.4 (387) 86.6 (396) 79.7 (71) 82.2 (382) 79.7 (282) 79.0 88.5 (137) (21) #N/A (0) #N/A (0) MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS General Aviation January - March 2015 Carrier AC Type # Deps NMS Site IS I 2S I 3S I 4S I 5S I 65 I 7S I 8N I 9N ION General Aviation Jet 3085 Average Count 88.11 (2778) 87.0 (2721) 89.1 (2680) 82.9 (1610) 82.3 (1151) 82.6 (2195) 82.2 (631) 84.4 (159) 80.2 (5) 79.5 (3) TABLE 9 AIR CARRIER OPERATIONAL HISTORY Carrier AC Type Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Air Canada AC A319 4 Alaska Air AS 8734 110 84 73 89 28 B737 7,435 6,238 5,673 4,381 765 B738 761 942 1,162 2,486 847 American AA B738 7,208 7,667 8,658 9,339 2.275 B752 L519 911 4 MD82 4 Compass CP E170 1 1,352 Continental CO B737 4,124 B738 1,163 Delta DL A319 5,348 3,436 3,354 3,290 844 A320 36 31 21 142 2 B737 3,373 1,860 11 B738 87 55 14 4 8752 45 1,073 2,214 2,196 508 FedEx FM A306 506 508 506 508 124 A310 21 21 2 2 Frontier Airlines F9 A318 88 369 17 A319 2,751 2,368 2,278 2,381 510 A320 6 2 Interjet 40 A320 346 1,490 428 Mesa Airlines YV CRJ9 720 626 418 SkyWest Coml. SC CRJ9 584 2,0341 2,007 488 Southwest WN B733 4 2 2 B737 31,187 33,490 35,234 33,490 874 B738 1321 391 1,385 606 United UA A319 1,931 2,133 2,453 1,926 308 A320 4,419 4,554 4,229 2,774 710 8735 l B737 447 3,786 3,836 4,436 1,004 B738 77 1,407 1,305 1,748 486 B739 2 B752 916 1,039 1,557 237 36 UPS 5X B752 420 414 412 414 102 USAirways AW A319 1,1521 2,4421 1,997 808 26 A320 1,086 1,485 888 1,426 458 A321 586 247 860 934 208 B733 1,349 B752 32 8 22 46 8 Westlet WS B736 4 B737 766 1,093 730 728 180 Total 79,658 80,691 81,841 77,615 18,727 _12_ TABLE 10 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL. I-IISTORY Aircraft Year 2011 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 A306 506 508 506 508 124 A310 2 2 2 2 A318 88 369 17 A319 1L186 10.379 10.082 8.405 1,688 A320 5,547 6.418 6.628 4,770 1,170 A321 586 247 860 934 208 B733 1353 21 2 B734 1101 84 73 89 28 8735 I 8736 4 B737 47.332 46.467 45.484 43.035 10,153 8738 9.296 10.203 11.530 14.962 4.214 B739 2 13752 2.932 3.445 4.205 2.897 654 CR19 720 1.2101 2.4521 2.007 488 E170 1.3521 1 MO82 4 Total 79.658 1 80,691 81.841 1 77.615 18.727 13- TABLE II AIR CARRIER AVERAGE DAILY DEPARTURE HISTORY Carrier AC Type Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Air Canada AC A319 .005 Alaska Air AS B734 .151 .115 .101 .121 .038 B737 10.178 8.527 7.775 6.000 1.049 B738 L049 1.284 1.586 3.408 1.159 American AA B738 9.877 10.484 11.860 12.792 3.118 8752 2.082 1.235 .005 MD82 .005 Compass CP E170 1 1.847 Continental CO B737 5.649 8738 1.597 Delta DL A319 7.321 4.699 4.597 4.507 1.156 A320 .055 .041 .027 .195 .003 B737 4.627 2.538 .016 B738 .115 .079 .019 .005 B752 .063 1.462 3.033 3.008 .696 FedEx FM A306 .693 .694 .693 .696 .170 A310 .003 .003 .003 .003 Frontier Airlines F9 A318 .121 .503 .025 A319 3.770 3.235 3.121 3.260 .699 A320 .008 .003 Interlet 40 A320 .473 2.041 .586 Mesa Airlines YV CRJ9 .986 .855 .573 SkvWest Coml. SC CRJ9 .801 2.786 2.748 .668 Southwest WN B733 .005 .003 .003 B737 42.737 45.770 48.268 45.874 11.238 B738 1 .180 .537 1.901 .830 United UA A319 2.627 2.910 3.364 2.636 .422 A320 6.077 6.240 5.797 3.803 .975 B735 B737 .608 5.178 5.249 6.077 1.375 B738 .110 1.921 1.792 2.395 .663 B739 .003 B752 1.252 1.418 2.132 .326 .049 UPS 5X B752 .575 .566 .564 .567 .140 US Airways AW A319 1.5751 3,3311 2.732 1.107 .036 A320 1.488 2.025 1.219 1.953 .627 A321 .805 .344 1.181 1.279 .285 B733 1.849 6752 .044 .011 .030 .063 .011 WestletWS 8736 .005 B 73 7 1.049 1.492 ..000 .997 .247 'Total 109.153 110,270 112.126 1 106.321 1 25.655 - 14- QUARTERLY NOISE MEETING Date: March 11, 2015 Time: 2:00 PM Place: Eddie Martin Building ITEMS DISCUSSED: Balboa Island residents Don Larsen and Lee Pearl voiced their concerns about the flight pattern of commercial aircraft, tightening of the flight path, noise levels and residue. They suggested possible solutions including moving the flight path to the Newport Harbor turning basin, and fanning the flight path by instituting additional waypoints to be rotated daily in order to distribute effects over a broader area. Eric Freed explained that while the Airport has regulations that include noise and operational limits, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) hasjurisdiction over flight paths. Mr. Freed noted that implementation of the FAA's NextGen program could result in narrowing of the departure corridor. Orange Hill resident Greg Monteleone was interested in the effects of the NextGen program on approach patterns. Eric Freed explained that it is too early in the process to know what the impact will be, although it is unlikely that the use of the extended runway centerline as the main arrival path would change. Mr. Freed stated that, in general, there is more dispersion on the approach path when visibility is clear, and conversely, a tightening of the pattern in poor visibility conditions. Ms. Reggie Mundekis, a representative of the OC Fairground Preservation Society, was interested in learning about the JWA noise monitoring program and how her organization might be able to use similar methods to institute a monitoring program for the Pacific Amphitheatre. Mr. Freed provided guidance on initial steps and considerations. -15- QUARTERLY NOISE MEETING ROSTER March 11, 2015 NAME ORGANIZATION Andrew Eisenberger Rep. Rohrabacher's office Donald Larsen Resident, Balboa Island Greg Monteleone Resident, Orange Hill Reggie Mundekis OC Fairground Preservation Society Lee Pearl Resident, Balboa Island Eric Freed John Wayne Airport Anthony Cangey John Wayne Airport Bonnie Frisch John Wayne Airport Nikolas Gaskins John Wayne Airport Louie Ilustrisimo John Wayne Airport I6- SNA/John Wayne Airport SUMMARY OF STATISTICAL INFORMATION FOR CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I. Size of Noise Impact Area as defined in the Noise Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 21, chapter 2.5, Subchapter 6): 5.91 acres (or 0.009 square miles) 2. Estimated Number of dwelling units included in the Noise Impact Area as defined in the Noise Standards: 74 dwelling units 3. Estimated number of people residing within the Noise Impact Area as defined in the Noise Standards: 185 (based on 2.5 people per dwelling) 4. Identification of aircraft of type having highest takeoff noise level operating at this airport together with estimated number of operations by this aircraft type during the calendar quarter reporting period: B737-800, 4,213 ops (arrivals+departures) 5. Total number of aircraft operations during the calendar quarter: 6. Number of Air Carrier operations during the calendar quarter: (Not mandatory) 62,593 19,571 7. Percentage of Air Carrier operations by aircraft certified under Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36, Stage III: (Not mandatory) 100% 8. Estimated number of operations by General Aviation aircraft during the calendar quarter: (Not mandatory) 42,739 9. Estimated number of operations by Military aircraft during the calendar quarter: (Not mandatory) 283