Article Summary:
The Department of Transportation is seeking public comment on ‘Advanced Air Mobility’ which is a set of rules involving new forms of air transport, including drones and vertical take-off aircraft. You can read the complete description here: Federal Register-2023-10448
Since these changes will profoundly affect all aviation-impacted communities, we can use this as another chance to weigh in on much needed changes to FAA regulations on both noise and pollution.
To save you time, Aviation Impacted Communities has prepared a comment template we think is very good. We recommend that you simply follow their instructions (carefully) and utilize their language, customizing as you see fit: AICA-FRN-AAM-2023-FINAL
a. airspace lease laws,
b. avigation easement laws,
c. laws that vest landowners with air rights,
d. nuisance, privacy, trespassing, licensing, insurance requirements, land use, zoning, police operations, and operating unmanned aircraft under the influence or other policing laws.
2. FAA must conduct rigorous, transparent, and independent research on the potential negative impacts of AAM including:
a. National Academies:
i. peer-reviewed report to determine a measurement system of the expected aviation noise impacts and annoyance on the environment
ii. study of the Public Health Impacts
iii. cost benefit analysis of AAM
b. Studies of the:
i. Environmental Impacts.
ii. Governance options and implications.
iii. Communities’ Security and Privacy Concerns.
iv. Noise exposure and multiple metrics contours (DNL, N-above Lmax, T-above L-max) using AAM early pilot implementation data.
4. The evaluation and decision making for AAM environmental impacts should represent the layperson’s lived experience by using the metric N-Above in Lmax bands, some reasonable threshold(s), ambient noise consideration, and total noise and visual impacts of ALL current aviation impacts from multiple:
a. airports/helipads/drone launching and landing pads
b. vehicle types,
c. flight paths – procedure or vector,
d. specialized vehicle operations (e.g., hovering).
5.Noise metrics and thresholds should penalize sensitive time of day occurrences using multiple time blocks and must reflect local ambient noise environments.
6. Changes to airspace design and/or new AAM routes must be published, must require an
environmental review, and cannot use a Categorical Exclusion.
7. Do not use the NextGen implementation as a best practice mdel for AAM. NextGen excluded the community as a key stakeholder and DNL did not reflect NextGen impacts.
8. Do not use the inadequate FAA’s 2016 Community Involvement Manual (CIM) for AAM Community Engagement. The CIM has not delivered on its assertion “commitment to inform and involve the public and to give meaningful consideration to community concerns and views as the FAA makes aviation decisions that affect them”.
8. Include Community as a key stakeholder in all high-level activities of the AAM Integrated Master Schedule versus Community only after Phase 5: “Post-implementation”.
10. Abandon the community engagement model of “Decide, announce, defend”(TR NEWS 2020) and instead practice “…meaningful dialogue to address negative impacts of past FAA actions and of future FAA actions before decisions are made.” “Formal research on airport public involvement, research on other transportation modes, and research on other institutions that deal with the public all confirm that the “we vs. they” or “decide, announce, defend” approach has failed and must transition to strengthened two-way communications to have a better chance for long-term success.
11. Innovate 28 (I28) should require that “collecting data” include environmental impacts, the type of AAM uses, and community engagement reports. For example, monitoring reports for counts of AAM events using Lmax bands in 5dB increments between 45dB and 80dB and T-Above data capturing the duration of AAM “hovering” events. Reports on community engagement activities should include the type of outreach, number and type of attendees, timing relative to the decision-making process, feedback on the laymen’s experience of noise and visual impacts. Information on the type of AAM uses
should include the number and percent of operations for transporting non-medical passengers, medical personnel and patients, goods, etc. Given that AAM is an emerging aviation ecosystem, detailed data is needed for I28 implementations to inform advanced regulations and to create a cost and benefits profile.
12. Require at least one Community member to serve as an Environmental representative on the FAA Advanced Aviation Advisory Committee. Such Community member, or direct relatives, must not be affiliated with, receive funds from, or provide services to the FAA or aviation industry or aviation industry consultants.
13. Set up a “Questions and Answers” task force in 2023, with adequate representation of potentiallyimpacted communities, to identify and answer the public’s AAM concerns.
14. Regulations should provide strict operational limits during sensitive hours for flyovers over residences and should be governed by local noise ordinances e.g., no package delivery permitted between 6pm and 8am.
Commentary from AICA
The ambitious plan to commercialize AAM by 2025, scaling up by 2028, lacks specific federal regulations and demands deceleration. Communities that would be subject to noise/health impacts OPPOSE AAM. The following is required:
STUDIES/RESEARCH: The rush to implement AAM must be slowed. Short-term focus should be on conducting thorough health/environmental studies, cost-benefit analysis, comprehensive/independent research, pilot programs, data analysis, community outreach to ensure responsible innovation, and addressing potential adverse impacts to people on the ground.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Environmental review must be thorough and not streamlined as indicated by FAA in its “Innovate 28” AAM Implementation Plan.
ASSESS CUMULATIVE IMPACTS: Stacking AAM below other aircraft (commercial, G.A., helicopters) at 400 AGL, and across multiple airports, has the potential to significantly impact noise levels, visual pollution, and the overall well-being of people, as well as having privacy and security implications. Adverse Cumulative Impacts on health, quality of life, sleep, and environment must be thoroughly studied as part of NEPA and closely monitored during early pilot programs. It is crucial to address health/environmental impacts through implementation of strict emission standards, exercise of local control over ground infrastructure, flight restrictions, and appropriate regulations. Zero-emission vehicles should be prioritized, and regs should ensure AAM operations adhere to land use rules, protect wildlife corridors/natural habitats, and avoid high fire zones.
SET BENCHMARKS FOR DEVELOPMENT: Key considerations include benchmarks for development, staged rollouts, pilot programs, community engagement, equitable access, reducing noise/environmental impacts, and prioritizing public welfare.
FEDERAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: The public rejects the “fly now, regulate later” approach. Studies/research must guide the establishment of a Regulatory Framework before AAM implementation to ensure responsible integration. Establish new rules specifically designed for new entrants like AAM, rather than modifying existing regs to include AAM. Do not include AAM in ANCA. Federal regs must address major concerns regarding safety, noise, health, privacy, economic damage, environmental, and quality of life impacts on the ground.
PUBLIC AS FULL STAKEHOLDER: The public is unaware of how this world-changing technology will alter the character of neighborhoods, impacting quality of life for all. Providing the public full stakeholder status, along with ensuring absolute transparency, are crucial, and DOT should prioritize input from the general public rather than solely industry perspectives.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT: Learn lessons from flawed programs like NextGen. Community engagement for AAM should involve representation of community stakeholders, early involvement in decision-making processes and at every stage of implementation, meaningful dialogue and collaboration, and elevation of environmental impacts as a co-equal priority. Community understanding/acceptance must not be the goal of community engagement.
LOCAL CONTROL: FAA must not dispute states’, cities’, and regions’ local control over land use, infrastructure, electricity, aircraft operations, and impacts that allows for tailored approaches prioritizing the well-being of communities. Rushed implementation without comprehensive regulation risks inadequate oversight.