APPENDIX Q COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON THE NOISE MITIGATION REPORT Introduction The New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia (NY/NJ/PHL) Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign Project (Redesign Project) presented the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for public review and comment in the winter of 2006. The comments that were received on the DEIS were used to inform the selection of the Preferred Alternative. Many of these comments proposed noise mitigation strategies, which were evaluated for operational feasibility and potential for reduction of noise exposure. A Mitigated Preferred Alternative was presented to the public in April 2007, along with the results of the operational and noise analyses, for additional review and comment. This document contains the responses to the public comments on the Preferred Alternative and its mitigation. 40 CFR Section 1503.4 (Response to comments) requires that an agency preparing a Final EIS assess and consider comments both individually and collectively, and respond accordingly. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has the option to provide separate responses to individual comments identified in commenter’s letters or, where the volume of letters is so large or the nature of comments are similar, responses may be provided in a topical format. This appendix to the Final EIS provides responses in topical format. Comment letters and petitions received on the Preferred Alternative and mitigation strategies totaled over 1,700. Each of the comment letters and petitions were reviewed, and many similar themes and issues were identified, resulting in 297 unique topical comments. To assist the reader in identifying specific letters or topics, the following are included: • A table of issues raised in the comment letters which directs the reviewer to the appropriate topic and subtopic for a response; • Topical responses to issues raised; • An index listing all the letters received sorted by the author; and • Copies of letters received from elected officials, federal and state agencies, and special interest groups (in numerical order by control number). The topical responses are ordered in 24 groupings. Those related to the Preferred Alternative and mitigation, applicable to the entire study area, appear first. General topic comments on process, modeling, quality of life and other issues are next. Airport-specific comments are found towards the end of the document. A section number has been assigned to each grouping. A representative comment for each topic and subtopic is displayed in italics, while the response appears directly below this statement. Further references to sections in the main body of the Final EIS are located within each response when appropriate. Table of Contents 1 Comments on the Preferred Alternative 1 1.1 Preferred Alternative 1 1.1.1 Opposition 1 1.1.2 Support 1 1.1.3 Mitigation Only 1 1.1.4 Increased Safety 2 1.1.5 Airport Capacity 2 1.1.6 Traffic Increases 2 1.1.7 Reduced Spacing 3 1.1.8 Severe Weather 3 1.1.9 Weather Impacts 4 1.2 Integrated Control Complex (ICC) 4 1.2.1 Feasibility 4 1.2.2 Delay Impact 5 1.2.3 Oceanic 5 1.3 New Mitigation Requests 6 1.3.1 Nighttime Flights 6 1.3.2 Quieter Jet Engines 6 1.3.3 New Runways 6 1.4 Stewart Airport 7 1.4.1 Expansion 7 2 Comments on General Mitigation 8 2.1 Mitigation 8 2.1.1 Not Enough 8 2.1.2 Volume Restrictions 8 2.1.3 Rotating Alternatives 8 2.1.4 Seasonal Routing 9 2.1.5 Orange County, CA 9 2.1.6 PHL Technology Upgrade 9 2.1.7 Advanced Technology 10 2.1.8 Noise Abatement 10 2.1.9 Call Hotline 10 2.1.10 Noise Monitoring 10 2.1.11 Geographical Restriction 11 2.1.12 NY/NJ Water Routing 11 3 Comments on Documentation 12 3.1 Documentation 12 3.1.1 Information Location 12 3.1.2 Mailing List 12 3.1.3 Lacking Detail 12 3.1.4 Incomplete 13 3.1.5 Compatible Land Use 13 3.1.6 Minimum Altitudes 13 3.1.7 Flight Track 13 3.1.8 Holding Patterns 14 3.1.9 Noise Impact Data 15 3.1.10 Population Data 15 3.1.11 Modeling Data 16 3.1.12 Comparison Information 16 3.1.13 2006 vs 2011 16 3.1.14 Historical Data 17 3.2 Long Term Analysis 17 3.2.1 25 Year Projection 17 4 Comments on Process 19 4.1 Process 19 4.1.1 ATC Participation 19 4.1.2 Dual Modena 19 4.1.3 Low Altitude Changes 19 4.1.4 Pre-Decision Changes 20 4.1.5 Implementation Timeframe 20 4.1.6 Homeland Security 20 4.1.7 Independent Review 20 4.1.8 NEPA Violation 21 4.1.9 Cost Benefit Analysis 21 4.1.10 Supplemental DEIS 21 4.1.11 Decision Criteria 22 4.1.12 ROD Signature Authority 22 4.1.13 Public Vote 22 4.1.14 Legal Review 22 4.1.15 Prejudged Outcome 23 4.1.16 Port Authority 23 4.2 Part 150 23 4.2.1 Noise Abatement 23 4.3 Day Night Average Sound Level (DNL) 24 4.3.1 Averages 24 4.3.2 Flights per Hour 24 4.3.3 NIRS Accuracy 24 4.3.4 Thresholds 25 4.3.5 Significant Level 25 4.3.6 Inaccurate Reporting 26 4.3.7 Sensitivity Analysis 26 4.3.8 Worst Case Scenario 27 4.4 Multi-modal 27 4.4.1 Comprehensive Solution 27 4.4.2 Ignoring Option 27 4.5 Public Meetings 28 4.5.1 Additional Meetings 28 4.5.2 Meeting Requests 28 4.5.3 Notification 28 4.5.4 Panel Session Minutes 29 4.5.5 Internet Access 29 4.5.6 Tinicum Meeting 29 4.5.7 Public Input 30 4.5.8 Prejudged Outcome 30 4.6 Comment Period 30 4.6.1 Extension 30 4.6.2 Internet Submission 31 4.7 Next Steps 31 4.7.1 Compliance 31 4.7.2 Ensuring Mitigation 31 4.7.3 Implementation Plan 32 4.8 Other Comments 32 4.8.1 Air Service Demand 32 4.8.2 EPA Compliance 32 4.8.3 Compliance Monitoring 32 5 Comments on the Purpose and Need 34 5.1 Purpose and Need 34 5.1.1 Noise Reduction 34 5.1.2 Minimize Exposure 34 5.1.3 Ocean Routing 35 5.1.4 Redesign Unnecessary 35 5.1.5 Failure to Meet 36 5.1.6 Final Stages 36 5.1.7 Maintain Benefits 37 6 Comments on Property Values and Quality of Life 38 6.1 Property Value 38 6.1.1 Economic Analysis 38 6.1.2 Impacts of Noise 38 6.2 Quality of Life 40 6.2.1 Non-Noise Impacts 40 6.2.2 Contributing Elements 40 6.2.3 Education 40 6.2.4 Safety 41 6.2.5 Disaster Exercises 42 6.2.6 Structural Damage 42 7 Comments on Air Pollution 43 7.1 Air Pollution 43 7.1.1 Quantification 43 7.1.2 Reservoirs 43 7.1.3 Perceived Increases 44 7.1.4 Greenhouse Gas 44 7.1.5 Global Warming 45 7.1.6 Nighttime Ocean Routing 45 8 Comments on Health 46 8.1 Health 46 8.1.1 Impacts of Noise 46 8.1.2 Hearing Loss 46 8.1.3 Disabilities Act 46 8.1.4 Sleep Deprivation 47 9 Comments on Airlines 48 9.1 Airlines 48 9.1.1 Focus on Profits 48 9.1.2 Required Technology 48 9.1.3 Re-regulation 48 9.1.4 Restricting Access 49 9.1.5 Load Factors 49 9.1.6 Congestion Pricing 49 9.1.7 Demand-Side Management 50 10 Comments on Delay Reductions 51 10.1 Delay Metrics 51 10.1.1 Interpretation 51 10.2 Efficiency Gains 51 10.2.1 Optimal Conditions Only 51 10.2.2 Small Benefits 51 10.2.3 Status Quo 52 10.3 Delay 52 10.3.1 Landside Operations 52 10.3.2 Severe Weather 53 10.3.3 Result Verification 53 10.3.4 Flight Scheduling 54 10.3.5 New York/New Jersey vs. Philadelphia 54 11 Comments on Modeling 55 11.1 Modeling 55 11.1.1 EWR Operations 55 11.1.2 Forecasted Traffic 55 11.1.3 Terrain 55 11.1.4 NIRS Validation 56 11.1.5 Ambient Noise 56 11.1.6 Refinement 57 11.1.7 Mitigation Results 57 12 Comments on Traffic 58 12.1 Traffic 58 12.1.1 PHL Departures 58 12.1.2 Danbury/Oxford 58 12.1.3 Verification of Forecast 58 12.1.4 Assumptions 58 12.2 Traffic Levels 59 12.2.1 Capacity 59 12.2.2 Delay Sensitivity 59 12.2.3 Nighttime Penalty 60 12.2.4 Airline Behavior 60 12.2.5 Excluded Operations 61 12.2.6 Historical Data 61 12.3 VFR Traffic 61 12.3.1 Exclusion from Modeling 61 12.3.2 Safety 62 12.3.3 Post 9/11 Forecast 62 12.3.4 Additive Impacts 63 12.4 Modeling Traffic 63 12.4.1 En Route Separation 63 12.4.2 Terminal Volume 64 13 Comments on Environmental Justice 65 13.1 Environmental Justice 65 13.1.1 Post Mitigation 65 13.1.2 Elizabeth 65 14 Comments on Parks, Wildlife, and Historic Areas 67 14.1 DOT Section 4(f) 67 14.1.1 Orange County 67 14.1.2 Sandy Hook 67 14.1.3 John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge 67 14.1.4 Historic Sites 67 14.1.5 National Park Service 68 14.1.6 Rockefeller State Park Preserve 68 15 Comments on Continuous-Descent Approaches 69 15.1 CDAs 69 15.1.1 Support 69 15.1.2 Feasibility 69 15.1.3 Proof 69 15.1.4 Garden City 70 15.1.5 Detailed Analysis 70 15.1.6 Noise Screening 70 16 Comments on Aircraft Navigation 71 16.1 Area Navigation 71 16.1.1 Support 71 16.1.2 Pilot Navigation 71 16.1.3 Noise Concentration 71 16.1.4 Realistic Dispersion 72 16.1.5 Sensitivity Analysis 72 17 Comments on Connecticut Concerns 74 17.1 Impacts on Connecticut 74 17.1.1 Disproportionate Burden 74 17.1.2 LGA Traffic Shift 74 17.1.3 North Arrival Post 74 17.1.4 Traffic Growth 75 17.2 Altitudes over Connecticut 75 17.2.1 Fairfield County 75 17.2.2 Stamford 75 17.2.3 Descent Angles 76 17.3 LGA Routings Impacts 76 17.3.1 Danbury Airport 76 17.3.2 Fairfield County 77 17.4 Connecticut Noise Mitigation 77 17.4.1 Lack Of 77 17.4.2 Non-Residential Areas 77 17.5 Impacts on Connecticut 78 17.5.1 HPN Departures 78 18 Comments on Newark Airport 79 18.1 EWR 22 Departures 79 18.1.1 Noise Increases 79 18.1.2 Capacity 79 18.1.3 No Mitigation 79 18.2 EWR 22 Headings 80 18.2.1 Limited Mitigation 80 18.2.2 Headings East of 190 80 18.2.3 Altitude Shelf 81 18.2.4 Left Turns 81 18.2.5 Staten Island 81 18.2.6 New Jersey vs.