APPRECIATION
Disaster makes planes welcome
Until the tragic events of last week, I had always been a bit annoyed with the sight and sound of commercial airliners passing overhead while I was enjoying our great outdoors. Today as I was hiking, I couldn't help but admire the sight and even take comfort in the sound of those aircraft as they returned to the skies.
Dan MurphyJefferson County Airport officials are working to clearing up some rumors. An e-mail recently was circulated to several government offices speculating on future projects at the airport here. According to a release from Jefferson County officials, here's the truth:
No new runways are planned.
The Airport has not approved, nor received since 1996, any application for scheduled commercial service.
Jeffco Airport has been a 24-hour, 7-day a week operation since 1964. Staff are researching operating the control tower 24-hours-a-day to reduce nighttime noise complaints and reports of low-flying aircraft near surrounding residential communities after 10 p.m. The tower now operates from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.
Planes violate Boulder airspace
Boulder Police are looking for information on three planes that violated Federal Aviation Authority airspace regulations about 7:30 p.m. Friday at Boulder Municipal Airport.
A representative from the FAA told police three planes took off from the airport and flew below acceptable levels.
The pilots landed at the airport and left before police officers arrived.
Anyone with information may call the Boulder Police Department at (303) 441-3333.
Members of Boeing's site evaluation team spent part of Monday afternoon touring the Jefferson County Airport in Broomfield, checking out its capabilities to house corporate jets and handle flights.
As that team visited with Jeff Price, Jeffco Airport's manager, the flight carrying the rest of Boeing's team of executives and consultants landed at the airport. The company's plane will be housed at Jeffco during the company's stay.
Gov. Bill Owens announced $2 million in aviation grants for 28 airport projects on Friday, saying it will help counties maintain airports and benefit the communities.
Counties receiving grants included Gunnison, Archuleta, Boulder, Arapahoe, Eagle, Fremont, Garfield, Weld, Jackson, Jefferson, Moffat, Montrose and Routt.
Communities receiving grants included Cortez, Fort Morgan, Glenwood Springs, Loveland, Fort Collins, Grand Junction, Limon, Steamboat Springs, and Wray.
The Colorado Aeronautical Board received 46 grant applications for runway repair, pavement maintenance and ramp upgrades. Funding comes from the aviation fuel tax.
NBAA understands your concern about airport noise and is an active participant in many noise reduction programs around the country. Many years ago NBAA developed aircraft noise abatement procedures for aircraft operators to use in order to reduce the noise levels around airports. It is not economically feasible for corporations to retire their noisier aircraft permanently. A Gulfstream II is worth around $12 Million and for a company to stop using a $12 Million asset it would cause an economic hardship that the company is not willing to bear. In 1990 the airlines were told they would have to retire their older noisier aircraft and replace them with quieter aircraft. The airlines had until 2000 to do this. This rule effected aircraft with a maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of 75,000 lbs or more (airline size aircraft). Business aircraft (under 75,000 lbs MTOW) were no effected by this rule and there is no rule to retire the noisy business aircraft. The airlines did not replace their noisy aircraft with new aircraft, they upgraded their fleets with new engines or hushkits (mufflers for jet engines). The FAA has not authorized, at this time, any such upgrade option for the Gulfstream aircraft which you are concerned with. There are currently two companies which are trying to develop a hushkit for the Gulfstream aircraft. Approval by the FAA is expected sometime this year. NBAA anticipated at least 75% of the aircraft will have the hushkit installed thereby making them quieter. If you have any questions, comments, or would like to discuss anything further feel free to contact me.
Joe HartAdministrator Garvey has asked me to respond to your March 7 e-mail concerning the status of the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) proposed Aviation Noise Abatement Policy.
We received approximately 600 comments to the proposed policy and are currently in the process of evaluating those comments, along with other inputs, in the development of a comprehensive Department of Transportation policy statement and FAA guidance document. The final document is expected to be completed by the end of the calendar year.
Thank you for your interest in this important matter.
Sincerely, Louise E. MaillettThank you for your November 22, 2000, electronic mail regarding National Partnership for Reinventing Government.
Great strides have been made by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to reduce aircraft noise. The conversion of Stage II aircraft to meet Stage III noise specifications has provided relief to communities across the country. The advent of advanced navigation and avionics provides better aircraft guidance and the development of airspace design and flight procedures consider impacts on noise sensitive areas. We fully expect that future technological advances will continue to reduce aircraft noise.
Noise complaints regarding a specific airport are the responsibility of the airport owner. Jefferson County Airport (Jeffco) is owned and operated by Jefferson County, Colorado, and they have established noise abatement procedures to be used by all aircraft to avoid flight over residential areas. If you have concerns or questions about their noise abatement procedures we recommend that you contact the airport manager.
The City and County of Denver (CCD), is the owner and operator of Denver International Airport (DIA). Before the new airport was in operation, local officials received complaints about aircraft noise from the communities along the Front Range west of Denver. Studies that were done in the past, as well as the noise meters installed by the CCD, indicate that the actual noise levels experienced in areas west of the airport are well below the significant 65 Day-Night Sound Level (DNL). However, we understand that aircraft noise is considered an annoyance to some individuals at levels much lower than 65 DNL.
The CCD has made continuing efforts since the opening of DIA to minimize the impacts of overflight noise. The Noise Task Force, which was created in 1995, had Boulder County representation and worked with the FAA to consider flight track changes that would diminish overall noise impacts from DIA. As a result of their efforts, flight tracks in and out of the airport were altered to avoid many urban communities.
In response to continuing complaints, the DIA Noise Working Group has been established and will include participation by the FAA.
Additionally, the CCD established the Denver International Airport Noise Abatement Office to address noise complaints. Denver International Airport is in the process of an Airport Noise Compatibility Study and a comprehensive analysis on the impact of aircraft noise in the Denver area. Both of these studies encourage public participation and it is highly recommended that concerned citizens become involved in the process. As technical advisors to these studies, we continue to work with the CCD in an effort to make the airport as compatible as possible with the surrounding communities.
We understand that this does not resolve citizen concerns about aircraft overflight noise to their community. Aviation noise will not be eliminated and it is crucial that the public understand the technical and operational constraints to noise reduction. We urge Louisville and other regional communities to participate on local noise groups to gain a better understanding of the issues, and work to minimize noise impacts to the extent possible.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Lawrence B. AndriesenDear Commissioners:
On August 10th, I joined you in a public forum on aviation noise. As you will recall, at the forum we listened to the comments and questions of over one hundred citizens in attendance. The attendees were not only from Boulder County, but came from across the Second Congressional District. Their testimonials were wide ranging, but the two concerns most often voiced dealt with increased noise disturbances created by jumbo jets over mountainous Western Boulder County and the need for appropriate landing times at Jefferson County Airport. I would like to take this opportunity to bring you up to date on my actions since the forum.
In an attempt to address the first Concern, increased noise disturbances created by commercial jets over mountainous western Boulder County. Up until January 1, 2000, DIA re-routed the older, Stage 2 jets to the north, avoiding populated areas due to their much louder engines. Since being outfitted with "hush kits", the route have been changes back. The DIA Noise Abatement Office attributes the recent increase in noise complaints to this shift of "hushed" Stage 2 jets to the West over populated areas, notably Lafayette to Nederland. I understand the DIA Noise Abatement Office has undertaken negotiations with the airlines regarding altering these routes. I have met with representatives of the FAA and the commercial airline carriers serving DIA to express my support of this change in routing, and I am committed to helping all interested parties see the benefits of making this change in mutes a reality.
The second concern raised at the August forum dealt with noise created by late night and early morning departures and landings at Jefferson County airport. After consulting with the FAA, I have encouraged the commissioners to look at the experiences of airports in similar circumstances (24-hour airports without 24-hour control towers). I understand that many airports, in similar situations, have struck a successful balance by establishing a two-tiered landing/take-off fee system. The regular landing/taking- off fee is charged for hours when the tower is operational and a substantially increased fee during the hours when the tower is closed. This kind of two-tiered fee system would surely drive down the volume of "after-hours" flights, but would in no way infringe upon your valuable designation as a "24-hour airport". From a financial standpoint, under this sort of system, the volume of "after-hours" flights would decrease, but revenues might increase. I will continue my attempts to initiate a dialogue between the Jefferson County Commissioners and the concerned citizens on the timing of arrivals and departures at this airport.
Since coming to Congress, I have cosponsored two bills that address nationwide aviation needs not only the needs of today but the needs of tomorrow as well. Firstly, the "Silent Skies Act" which directs the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations defining Stage 4 aircraft (the next level of quieter airplane engines) no later than December 31, 2001. To give you a sense of the timeline, the International Civil Aviation Organization is scheduled to announce Stage 4 standards in September 2001. I believe this sort of aggressive implementation is important, particularly when viewed against the equally aggressive forecasts for airport and air traffic growth.
The second important aviation bill I have cosponsored is, H.R. 2702 the "Quiet Communities Act". H.R. 2702 would reestablish the Office of Noise Abatement and Control in the Environmental Protection Agency, moving it from its current location at the FAA. At the August forum, I continually heard constituents voice the belief that the FAA is so beholden to the major commercial airline carriers that they are unable to carry out their consumer responsibilities adequately. Passage of the "Quiet Communities Act" would go a long way towards relieving these fears.
On October 6th, the House of Representatives passed the FY 2001 Transportation Appropriations bill, including a provision directing the FAA to complete a long overdue study of aircraft noise in mountainous regions. My predecessor, David Skaggs, secured language in the FY99 Transportation Appropriations bill, directing the FA.A to complete a study of noise rates (and the gauging of noise rates) in mountain areas. To date, this study has yet to be completed. This bill simply directs the FAA to deliver this report to Congress by August of 2001.
This study is important because the allowable noise decibel standards nationwide do not take into account mountain terrain. For instance, noise spiking through a canyon, while technically within the acceptable noise decibel range, may in reality have a much louder impact. Clearly, this needs to be studied, and a new system needs to be developed to take into consideration mountain communities and terrain. While this is terribly important to my constituents in Western Boulder County, it is equally important in mountain communities across the country. I commend the committee for making this a priority, and I look forward to the FAA's findings.If I understand correctly, the Quiet Communities Act of 1999 is still alive but (stuck) in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Ground Transportation since 8/5/99. Regardless, I see that several members of the House - all Democrats - have added their support to this bill in the past several months:
Rep Engel, Eliot L. - 5/17/2000I see this as a positive sign.
Given your support for the Silent Skies Act HR 2499, I would like to know why you do not also support the Quiet Communities Act. Please co-sponsor this legislation and also try to generate support for it from your colleagues. Granted, the funding amount has decreased from $31 million in the 1997 version to $21 million in the latest version, but we need ONAC and, even with a third less funding, it would be better than what we have today - absolutely nothing.
Re: Comments on Rules Docket (AGC-200), Aviation Noise Abatement Policy 2000, Docket 30109
This memorandum represents officially approved comments from the Boulder County Board of County Commissioners to the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) request for comments on draft rules revising the 1976 National Aviation Noise Abatement Policy. Our major concerns are as follows:
NEED FOR MORE PUBLIC OUTREACH AND INPUT
We believe that publication of the draft rules in the Federal Register with a very limited time frame for public response, is inadequate to 1) reach residents of our County who are concerned about aviation noise and 2) elicit responses that reflect the importance of this issue to many of these residents. We recommend that the FAA publicize the draft rules changes more widely, extend the public comment period and hold public hearings in areas of the nation, such as ours, where aviation noise has been an obvious problem. We receive more complaints about aviation noise in Boulder County than all other nuisance noise complaints combined. Because of a wide variety of resident complaints received in our office concerning aircraft noise pollution, our board of county commissioners sponsored a public meeting last August, 2000, to better understand public concern about this issue. We invited representatives from our federal congressional delegation, FAA, Denver International Airport (DIA) and local and regional airports in/or adjacent to Boulder County. Approximately 115 Boulder County residents attended expressing many concerns about the impact of aircraft noise on their lives and communities. A summary of that meeting including the names of officials who were present is attached as an addendum to this document.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE 65 dBA DNL AS A NOISE IMPACT STANDARD IS SERIOUSLY IN DOUBT AND MUST BE CHANGED.
Based on complaints and actual measurement by our noise monitoring equipment in Boulder County, we know that there are significant aircraft noise impacts to our residents, primarily from Denver International Airport, but also from Jefferson County, City of Boulder and City of Longmont Airports. Residents of residential communities in the western foothills of Boulder County who live in low-noise background, high altitude terrain, surrounded by granite cliffs and canyons, appear to experience the most negative noise impacts.
In the FY 1999 Transportation Appropriations bill, then U. S. Rep. David Skaggs was successful in including language that called for the FAA to do a study which "shall address the specific noise problems related to single noise events, low background noise, and the higher altitude of Colorado communities." FAA has yet to implement this study. Please see attached copy of a letter from U. S. Rep. Mark Udall, now representing Colorado Congressional District 2, to U.S. Rep. Martin Olav Sabo, Ranking Member, House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee. We strongly urge that FAA's revision of aviation noise abatement policy rules not be implemented until this important study is completed.
FLIGHT PATTERN AND ALTITUDE ADJUSTMENTS TO ALLEVIATE NOISE IMPACTS MUST BE CONSIDERED AS AN FAA PRIORITY ALONG WITH SAFETY, AND ABOVE AIRLINE PROFIT MARGIN AND CONVENIENCE.
Our experience attempting to deal with aircraft noise impacts on behalf of our residents, illustrates to us that FAA does not give adequate priority to noise issues over airline convenience and profit margin. Representatives of FAA on many occasions have asserted that their defined mission does not provide for this approach. We believe FAA's mission should be revised to reflect citizen interests as a priority over corporate airline interests, or place rule-making authority in the hands of an agency which can appropriately represent that citizen interest, particularly as it relates to aircraft noise impacts, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
RULES ALLOWING "HUSH-KITTED" STAGE 2 AIRCRAFT TO PASS AS STAGE 3 AIRCRAFT MUST BE CHANGED.
We have strong evidence that the noise levels of "Hushkitted" Stage 2 aircraft have significantly higher noise impact than do Stage 3 aircraft using the same flight pattern and altitude. We believe that this single change could provide major noise impact relief to Boulder County residents.
SPECIFIC REGULATIONS MUST BE IN PLACE TO PROTECT WILDERNESS AREAS AND NATIONAL PARKS FROM AIRCRAFT OVERFLIGHT NOISE POLLUTION.
We know from complaints that noise pollution impacts from Denver International Airport departures and arrivals and other small aircraft occur on a regular basis in both Rocky Mountain National Park and Indian Peaks Wilderness Area, both of which are partially located in western Boulder County. We urge that the FAA work with both the U.S. Parks Service and the U.S. Forest Service to address these issues in the revised "Aviation Noise Abatement Policy."
FAA MUST WORK WITH LOCAL AND REGIONAL AIRPORTS TO PROVIDE FOR NOISE IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS AS A PRIORITY, ALONG WITH SAFETY, IN THEIR FLIGHT PATTERN AND "HOURS-OF-OPERATION" REGULATIONS.
In a recent public meeting sponsored by the Board of Boulder County Commissioners to hear from County residents regarding aircraft noise pollution, it was obvious that the local and regional airports serving this area needed more tools than currently provided by the FAA to solve noise pollution issues. Regulations should be developed by FAA which address cooperative efforts with local and regional airports in defining specific aircraft requirements, flight patterns and hours of operation which adequately address noise pollution to surrounding residential communities.
Thank you for consideration of our comments and concerns. We look forward to your response.Thank you for summarizing your presentation given at the Boulder County Aviation Noise Forum in August. We appreciate you voicing your concerns and giving ideas on how to alleviate some of the noise issues surrounding Boulder County and the Denver Metro area.
I have made Senator Allard aware of your concerns and can assure you that our office will be continually monitoring the issue and participating in finding solutions to the problems.
Again, thank you for contacting Senator Allard's office.
Sincerely,
Kristine PollardThank you for contacting me regarding the FAA. I appreciate hearing your concerns on this issue. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the Boulder County public meeting. At times, it is not always possible to have a staff member attend such meetings. I rely upon and appreciate letters and reports such as yours to communicate the public's thoughts and concerns.
I have heard from many Boulder County residents who share some of your concerns about this matter. As I am certain you are aware, noise from DIA has been studied, negotiated and litigated since the airport first opened. The Federal Aviation Administration requires noise abatement procedures in certain flight corridors and other noise reduction procedures, and ultimately, the administration has the authority to enforce and regulate the operations of DIA.
I will forward your letter to Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater for his consideration and review.
In the 1996 FAA Strategic Plan, among mostly pro-aviation business statements it also says, "FAA's major functions in the aviation system are to... Protect the public from aircraft noise...".
I would like to challenge you to tell me how you're doing that.
Daily, whining, groaning prop planes disturb the silence at my home, some from nearby Jeffco Airport and some not. Infamously loud Gulfstream and other Stage I jets regularly tear up the skies, sometimes waking me up at 5:30 and 6 AM. From DIA, jets - the "hush"-kitted kind, primarily - roar over city and county Open Space, Boulder Mountain Parks, Eldorado Canyon State Park, Rocky Mountain National Park and the precious Indian Peaks Wilderness. Really, there's no hush in these kits.
I've contacted FAA offices in Denver, in Seattle, in Washington, DC and no one at the FAA is able to help me with my noise issues. The FAA noise ombudsman told me that airspace is public and that the business jet people are wiling to phase out Stage I craft by 2005; I'm not willing to wait until then to get a good night's sleep and I challenge you and your FAA business to start talking the talk and start turning down the noise - not in 2010, not in 2005, but in August 2000 - today. As for the noise ombudsman, I think it's amazing that, in a 6-month period, the position only fielded several dozen inquiries from the public. With all the citizens' groups protesting aviation noise, it seems impossible that those thousands and thousands of people wouldn't have contacted the noise ombudsman.
The FAA, in its incestuous relationship with the aviation and military industries, continues to cater to the arrogant, greedy giant corporations and ignores - at every level, as far as I can tell - the concerns and needs of the public, the taxpayers. I would call no one at the FAA a public servant.
This statement in your Strategic Plan about protecting the public form aircraft noise is a mockery, a lie. How can it be that, since at least 1986, companies have been working on hush kits, but here we are in the year 2000 and it's obvious that this bogus non-solution does not work? We just wasted set 10 or 15 years of potentially quieter skies, for the benefit of FedEx and other hush kit producers, and for the benefit of the airlines that didn't have to spend really big bucks for truly quieter and hopefully more efficient, less-polluting engines. Again, corporate greed and power rule; as always, the public loses.
Just a short comment on your representation at the Boulder County aviation noise meeting last night. I was disappointed that your representative didn't make any public statements, nor did she take advantage of the opportunity to publicly challenge the various DIA, FAA, or Jeffco Airport officials present about any number of noise issues that affect our health and well-being daily.
In contrast, Representative Mark Udall was there with two aides, was observed taking notes, spoke several times, challenged the FAA and DIA on several points, discussed his Silent Skies Act, and generally gave the impression that he truly cares about the aviation noise, not just in Boulder County, but throughout the nation; I don't think it's just election year marketing.
Also, Ron Forthofer, the Green Party candidate for Mark Udall's seat in the House, made the effort to attend the meeting and to hear citizens' concerns first-hand.
Senator Allard, you are not showing the people of Boulder County - the people of Colorado, really - that you truly and sincerely care about our aviation noise issues.
Since the discussion of the bogus Stage III "hush" kits at the Boulder County Aviation Noise Forum last night, I've been asking myself some important questions about this technology. Although I very much feel that we need to move forward aggressively to quiet the skies - we can't afford to wait another minute, really - we should devote at least some time, effort and thought to ask some questions about the inception, regulation and implementation of hush kits.
When were Stage III hush kits introduced? FedEx, the package delivery giant, is also a major player in the hush kit business for Boeing 727 aircraft and, from the marketing materials at their hush kit Web site, it would appear that FedEx and Pratt & Whitney were working on this in 1986, and started installations a decade ago, in 1990. This begs the very important question: how is it that, even though they've been working on this for fourteen years, here we are in the year 2000, stuck with all this bogus technology that doesn't really quiet the skies (although I'm sure it generated lots of really big commission checks for hush kit sales people). Why has it taken us this long to realise that, gee, this doesn't work? Creative or lax specification, bogus science, bad math, lies, deception, nepotism, the old boy network, bribes, payoffs - how did we get here? Millions of people are affected daily by the bogus hush-kitted aircraft and we must do all we can to undo this injustice to the public and to the commons. We must take real, concrete, meaningful steps to undo this mess - to protect the public and the environment from the misguided, low-budget solution to the noise problems manufactured by Pratt & Whitney even more decades ago, presumably with the blessing of the Congress in power at the time. Most importantly, we need to make sure that we do not travel down this path in the Stage IV process. We need to make sure that future legislation does not have the kinds of loopholes that allowed this hush kit debacle - we need to inspect our legislation with not just a fine tooth comb, but a microscope - to ensure that this type of public deception and abuse can't happen again. As is so clearly and dramatically demonstrated here, legislation has powerful long-term impacts. If the hush kits are known to be bogus, we should stop allowing their production, sale and installation until we quickly develop a better means of specifying what it is that we expect them to accomplish. No sense installing known-bad technology; let's ramp up for Stage IV and V.
While I find the information at the FedEx hush kit Web site quite interesting, I am especially drawn to this one sentence: "Through the use of advanced technology engine noise reduction components, approach noise is comparable to many new Stage 3 aircraft, while certified noise levels are reduced up to 2.5 decibels (EPNL-dB) lower than other Stage 3 systems -- where it counts most at noise-monitored airports -- on takeoff." It indicates to me that the real purpose of the hush kit is not to reduce aviation noise impacts on millions of helpless human beings and animals the world round, but simply to satisfy a noise requirement at those airports where such monitoring is in effect. No, it's not a big surprise, yet it underscores the theme of ruthless big businesses making a buck at anyone's expense. It would be very interesting to know if there were engineers and scientists at Pratt & Whitney, FedEx or government that saw through the smoke screen and opposed the bogus technology that was being developed. The FedEx marketing material quotes $130 billion as the cost of replacing 2000 JT8D engines. For me, this just raises another question: how much more would it have cost for them to voluntarily build dramatically quieter engines so their customers - and the public - wouldn't be in this situation in the first place? And what if we'd had the EPA ONAC to demand quieter aircraft engines?
In reading some of the pieces I've found on the Web, another very important question comes to mind, in part as a result of the Boulder County Aviation Noise Forum. We heard some discussion about the extra effort required to gain elevation at higher altitude; presumably, that means more noise. Do any of the current and proposed aviation noise standards take into account operation at higher altitude environments, such as here in Colorado?
Some excerpts from the FedEx hush kit marketing material:
Are You Stage 3 Ready? As of December 31, 1999, noisier Stage 2 aircraft are not eligible for operation in U.S. airspace. However, that doesn't mean you have to abandon your B727 "cash cow". Despite the FAA mandate, your B727 can still be an economical performer for many years to come with the FedEx Stage 3 Kit.
Hushkit FedEx & the Environment
People around the world are demanding a better environment, cleaner, safer and quieter. Starting on December 31, 1994, Stage 3 Noise Standards in the United States and Europe began requiring airlines to begin phasing out operations of their noisier Stage 2 fleets.
As of the year 2000, operation of Stage 2 aircraft in the continental United States is prohibited with few exceptions. In Europe and Canada, a similar phase-out schedule will eliminate Stage 2 operations by the year 2002.
In 1993, Pratt & Whitney estimated the cost of replacing the more than 2000 JT8D powered B727s, B737s, and DC-9s in service, at more than $130 Billion, a major financial hurdle for the Airline industry.
Anticipating the high cost of compliance, Federal Express, the world's largest operator of B727s, joined forces with Pratt & Whitney in 1986 to develop a cost-effective Stage 3 Noise solution for the B727s. After thousands of engineering man hours and hundreds of test flights, FedEx has proudly introduced the FedEx Stage 3 Kits for all B727 models at maximum takeoff weights up to 204,500 lbs.
In addition to installing FedEx Stage 3 Kits on its own B727 fleet, FedEx has offered this cost effective noise solution to other B727 owners and operators around the world since 1990. This has allowed these companies to operate as good corporate neighbors at local airports while preserving their investment in their B727 fleets.
Invest In The Sound Value
Since 1990, more than 60 Boeing B727 owners and operators have ordered FedEx Stage 3 Kits to extend the life of their fleets. They have chosen the leader in B727 noise reduction as an alternative to expensive new aircraft and re-engining programs...As you know, the noise problems of Denver International Airport (DIA) have resulted in a great deal of argument and finger-pointing, but very little real progress. While the city of Denver has taken some positive steps to address some of the problems, it simply doesn't have the ability to fix the noise problems caused by flight patterns. Only the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has the authority to change Which communities planes fly over when approaching or taking off from DIA. It is time to put an end to the blame assignment and bring the parties to the table who can actually fix the problems.
As a member of the Appropriations Committee, which oversees funding for the FAA, I have tried to focus on finding solutions and fixing the problems. This year, I worked with others in the Colorado House delegation to develop a strong provision to include in the FAA's funding bill. A copy is enclosed. It instructs the FAA to work directly with the people who are experiencing problems and find solutions. The report also requires the FAA to go beyond the studies that have been done so far and base its solutions on the specific problems that exist in Colorado.
The noise problems of DIA are different than those in Chicago or New York because of higher altitude and the rural nature of communities along the Front Range, and the legislation instructs FAA to treat these problems differently. In short, the FAA must treat DIA like it is in Colorado and not like it's anywhere else in the country.
Specifically, the FAA is directed to not only fix problems of sustained noise for nearby communities, but also problems due to low background noise (like in rural communities and the Colorado backcountry), or communities at higher altitudes (such as Nedefiand or Idaho Springs). The FAA is also instructed to work to reduce single noise events, where occasional planes shatter the quiet of nearly silent areas such as the Indian Peaks Wilderness.
Hopefully, this action will enable people in Colorado to be involved in decisions about how planes are routed over their communities. I believe this is an important change in the way we are addressing the problems of aircraft noise in Colorado and starts us down the path toward finding real, workable solutions.