Congressional Quiet Skies Caucus Letter To FAA Administrator Steve Dickson re DNL65

Currently, FAA law has extremely complicated rules for establishing a noise boundary around airports. (A noise boundary is a geographic area inside which there is a certain acceptable noise level.) This is referred to as the DNL65. and it has several major flaws. The FAA Reauthorization Act Of 2018 attempted to address these flaws in several ways. This letter, from a caucus of Congressmen engaged on airport community issues complains to the Administrator that the spirit of the law is not being adhered to and demands that he make attempts to put his agency into compliance.

The language is fairly technical, however there are a couple of basic points they raise: First, that the noise boundary be determined by actual noise measurements (currently the noise boundaries are ‘modeled’ and those calculations often do not reflect in any way the lived experience for residents.) Second, that the ‘acceptable’ noise level of sixty five decibels (hence DNL65) has been determined to be far too high to conform with current understandings of healthy living.

NEPA Forty Most Asked Questions

1. Range of Alternatives. 2. Alternatives Outside the Capability of Applicant or Jurisdiction of Agency. 3. No-Action Alternative. 4. Agency’s Preferred Alternative. 5. Proposed Action v. Preferred Alternative. 6. Environmentally Preferable Alternative. 7. Difference Between Sections of EIS on Alternatives and Environmental Consequences. 8. Early Application of NEPA. 9. Applicant Who Needs Other Permits. 10.


Title 14: Aeronautics and Space PART 161—NOTICE AND APPROVAL OF AIRPORT NOISE AND ACCESS RESTRICTIONS Contents Subpart A—General Provisions §161.1   Purpose. §161.3   Applicability. §161.5   Definitions. §161.7   Limitations. §161.9   Designation of noise description methods. §161.11   Identification of land uses in airport noise study area. Subpart B—Agreements §161.101   Scope. §161.103   Notice of the proposed restriction. §161.105   Requirements for new entrants. §161.107   Implementation of the restriction. §161.109   Notice of

Missed opportunity or necessary avoidance? FAA Noise Metrics Report to Congress

TOPICS:16hr2020 Report to Congress (“Report”)April 14average day-night level standardBarbara LichmanCDNLCNELconcentrated noise impact pointsLAeqLdenLmaxNAnoise metricsPart 150SELTA Posted By: Cynthia Schultz June 16, 2020 Share this article: Missed opportunity or necessary avoidance? Cynthia Schultz, PE   While it would be easy to take the FAA to task for ignoring the congressional mandate, it is not so easy

Aviation Noise & Emissions Symposium 2020

The 2020 UC Davis Aviation Noise and Emissions Symposium will focus on defining the challenges that face the noise and emissions industry over the next few years and discussing real-world solutions. Symposium Presenters will share ground-breaking efforts being undertaken by elected officials, airports, consultants, communities, and the FAA to mitigate noise and environmental impacts of

HR 5874 – Decrease Noise Levels Act

116th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 5874   To require the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to amend regulations concerning the day-night average sound level, and for other purposes. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES February 12, 2020 Ms. Meng (for herself, Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Espaillat, Ms. Brownley of California, Mr. Beyer, Mr.