HomeMy WebLinkAboutAC Agenda 03-28-2016CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
AVIATION COMMITTEE AGENDA
REVISED AGENDA: Note new meeting room location:
City Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Monday, March 28, 2016 - 4:00 PM
Aviation Committee Members:
Council Member Tony Petros, Chair
Mayor Pro Tem Kevin Muldoon, Vice Chair
Tom Anderson
Jim Dunlap
Vicki Frank
Roger Ham
Tony Khoury
Tom Meng
Kay Mortenson
Tom Naughton
Bonnie O’Neil
Bud Rasner
Karen Rhyne
Walt Richardson
Gerald Scarboro
Melinda Seely
Tim Stoaks
Eleanor Todd
Staff Members:
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Aaron Harp, City Attorney
The Aviation Committee meeting is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other things, the Brown Act requires that the
Aviation Committee agenda be posted at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance of each regular meeting and that the public be
allowed to comment on agenda items before the Committee and items not on the agenda but are within the subject matter
jurisdiction of the Aviation Committee. The Chair may limit public comments to a reasonable amount of time, generally three (3)
minutes per person.
The City of Newport Beach’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee or a
participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, we will attempt to accommodate
you in every reasonable manner. Please contact Shirley Oborny, Executive Assistant to the City Manager, at least forty-eight (48)
hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible at (949) 644-3001 or
soborny@newportbeachca.gov.
NOTICE REGARDING PRESENTATIONS REQUIRING USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT
Any presentation requiring the use of the City of Newport Beach’s equipment must be submitted to the City Manager’s Office 24
hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2.SELF INTRODUCTIONS
3.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of minutes from the December 14, 2015 meeting
Minutes of the December 14, 2015 meeting
March 28, 2016
Page 2
Aviation Committee Meeting
4.UPDATES/CURRENT BUSINESS
(a) Review of Departure Altitudes (JWA staff)
(b) Update on Communications with FAA re: NextGen or MagVar (JWA staff,
Tom Edwards)
(c) Any other updates from John Wayne Airport staff and/or questions on
Tom Edwards’ report (see attached)
February 2016 Monthly Update
5.PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Public comments are invited on agenda and non-agenda items generally considered to be
within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Aviation Committee. Speakers must limit comments
to three (3) minutes. Before speaking, we invite, but do not require, you to state your name for
the record. The Aviation Committee has the discretion to extend or shorten the speakers’ time
limit on agenda or non-agenda items, provided the time limit adjustment is applied equally to all
speakers. As a courtesy, please turn cell phones off or set them in the silent mode.
6.ITEMS FOR THE NEXT/OTHER UPCOMING MEETING AGENDA
7.SET THE NEXT MEETING
Tentative: Monday, June 27, 2016 at 4 p.m.
8.ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES of the
COUNCIL/CITIZENS AVIATION COMMITTEE
(draft until approved by the Committee)
MEETING DATE & LOCATION: Monday, December 14, 2015, at the Newport Beach Civic Center (100 Civic
Center Drive, NB), Community Room.
ATTENDANCE:
Committee membership:
Tony Petros Council Representative present
Kevin Muldoon Council Representative not present
Duffy Duffield Council Representative not present
Kay Mortenson District #1 present
Vacant District #1 (alt)
Eleanor Todd District #2 present
Gerald Scarboro District #2 (alt) present
Tom Anderson District #3 not present
Bonnie O’Neil District #3 (alt) present
Tom Meng District #4 present
Vacant District #4 (alt)
Vicki Frank District #5 present
Walt Richardson District #5 (alt) not present
Shirley Conger District #6 not present
Bud Rasner District #6 (alt) present
Jim Dunlap District #7 present
Karen Rhyne District #7 (alt) present
Dave Kiff City Manager present
Aaron Harp City Attorney present
Melinda Seely SPON/Air Fair Rep. Rep present
Tony Khoury AWG Representative Rep present
Roger Ham Newport Coast Rep present
Vacant General Aviation Rep N/A
JWA Representatives present: Eric Freed, Barry Rondinella
City representatives present: Carol Jacobs, Tom Edwards, Shirley Oborny
Others present:
Gary Armstrong Jim Jordan Michael St. Clair
Brian Benoit Marion Jordan Liz Vazquez-Avila
Mary Bradbury Brynn Kelly Sherree Vaughan
David Cook Jim Mosher Wendy Walker
Bill Dambrackas Margo O’Connor Ayrton Ward
Joan Dambrackas Bob Pastore Candace Ward
Thomas Damiani Lee Pearl Ronnie Weinstein
Greg Goeser Nick Ralston
Tony Goodrum Dan Rudd
City of Newport Beach
AGENDA ITEMS:
1. Call Meeting to Order. The meeting was called to order by Council Member Petros at 4 p.m.
2. Self-Introductions.
3. Approval of the Minutes.
The minutes from the September 28, 2015, Aviation Committee meeting were approved. Mr. Mosher
mentioned a few minor typos.
4. Updates/Current Business
(a) Update on MagVar (JW)
Mr. Freed said some adjustments were made in the takeoff procedures in September 2015;
however, it’s not exactly how it used to be. The FAA has made all the adjustments it feels are
necessary at this point. We put together a synopsis of what we’ve seen and compared tracks. We
recently shared this information with the airlines and asked them to provide any insight or
recommended adjustments. According to the FAA there are no violations occurring. We’re now
waiting to see what the airlines come back with.
Chairman Petros provided a recap of the situation for attendees who are not familiar with the flight
path situation. Mr. Kiff feels that it’s the MUSSEL and CHANNEL procedures that still have a
problem. We sent the airlines a scattergram that shows a westerly shift and asked them to help
solve this problem with us. If we don’t receive a good response from the airlines, we may need to
increase our efforts. The FAA is saying the path is appropriate; however, a lot of us think it’s not
appropriate yet.
Mr. Edwards also gave a technical overview of what’s happening with the takeoffs. He said the
airlines are involved in the discussion because each of their flight management systems is different.
Discussion ensued.
Mr. Weinstein said he recently hosted a neighborhood meeting. The consensus from the attendees
is they feel the County controls the airport, not the FAA. The citizens in Newport Beach and Costa
Mesa feel the planes are disturbing the peace, polluting the air, possibly causing serious health
issues, interfering with their home values, etc., and they don’t think it’s okay. He suggested Mr.
Rondinella needs to sit down with the FAA and tell them they need to fix the problem. It’s not
acceptable to tell the residents that nothing can be done.
Mr. Pastore talked about the variations between the takeoffs of the MUSSEL and the STREL.
Mr. Mosher suggested that Galaxy Park seems to be an accurate place to visually determine which
direction the planes are veering towards. He also reviewed the Airport Access plan which states
that if an airline chooses to take a different departure other than the one for which they qualify,
they must notify the airport ten days prior to the departure. That indicates to him that the airport
has more knowledge about what the airlines are doing than they have previously stated.
(b) Approaching key JWA issues, forming recommendations for City Policy (Kiff, Edwards)
1. NextGen departure procedures – for HAYLO, FINNZ – GE/Naverus “two turns” in the Upper
Bay.
Mr. Kiff said currently half the flight patterns coming out of JWA go down the STREL path. He
wants to know if a recommendation should be made that all flights go down the STREL path.
Referring to the handout (attached), he said the blue line is the STREL flight pattern. The
yellow line shows a two-turn departure that the City studied with GE Naverus, an airport
departure and arrival technology firm. GE Naverus feels it can be done; however, the FAA said
the U.S. might not be ready for that yet. The question for the committee is whether to
recommend to Council that the City prefers a combination of half the flights using the STREL
pattern and half using the two-turn departure pattern. He thinks it’s a good idea because it
gives a break to Balboa Island and the Peninsula without affecting new communities.
Chairman Petros said that in previous meetings the community has indicated its desire for
greater certainty about flights leaving the airfield. It wants to share the burden; fanning would
be better because it would array the sound. Mr. Petros likes the concept because it has a
professional basis by an organization that the City could advance.
The committee offered some comments:
It’s a good start because it affects the minimal number of homes
Residents on the peninsula would support the two-turn path
The two-turn path is desirable because it has less impact on residential zoning and more on
commercial zones
Safety is important to the FAA so the path needs to be safe
Mr. Kiff said if the recommendation is the two-turn path, the City would likely ask GE Naverus
to study it further. Mr. Edwards said the future Metroplex design will have some planes
veering off similar to the proposed two-turn path. If GE Naverus does more studies, it’s
important for them to know what the Metroplex will look like.
Mr. Pearl, President of the Balboa Island Improvement Association, said the presentation made
today is consistent with their recommendation on the Metroplex project. He believes they
would be supportive.
Mr. Khoury motioned to support a two-turn alternative for City Council consideration. Ms.
O’Neil seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
2. Studying a “higher, faster” departure procedure
a. Phase I – Evaluating current altitudes
b. Phase II – Determining if higher, faster carries with it significant noise reductions and is
feasible
Mr. Kiff explained that the 2007-2008 ARTS study looked at departures out of JWA. One
recommendation of that study was that some point in the future, the City should evaluate
whether or not the traditional noise abatement departure procedure was appropriate in light
of new technology. In rereading that section of the report, he thought it would be important to
talk to the committee about whether there is any merit in looking at another study. The study
could cost $50,000 to $80,000 and would take about six months.
Ms. Frank suggested there might be a study that already exists in light of the new,
recent takeoff procedures. Ms. Seely agreed.
Ms. Seely said her Board of Directors has talked about altitude for a long time. She
would be in favor of the study; although, she doesn’t think the airlines would like the
higher and faster because it would cost more money in fuel.
Mr. Khoury mentioned that the cost of fuel has gone down and he supports
recommending the study, if it doesn’t exist already.
Ms. O’Neil supports the study because the airlines should know they are causing health
problems with the noise and air pollution.
Mr. Scarboro suggested the study should include what the departures are like for the
other airports in the area, for safety reasons.
Mr. Radner and Mr. Ham are in favor of the study.
Mr. Edwards said in 2007 and 2010, this committee had the airport study the altitudes.
It might be good to look at those studies for comparison.
Mr. Pastor suggested finding out what each airline is doing, which can be done without
spending any money.
Mr. Pearl suggested checking with other cities to see if they are interested in sharing
the cost.
Discussion ensued about the airlines making the independent decision to take off at a lower
altitude.
Mr. Kiff reminded the group about the Settlement Agreement between the City, County, SPON
and AWG that says if the planes can take off without triggering the upper thresholds on the
noise monitors, they can take off any way they choose. With the study, we would be taking
something to them that would be voluntary. Mr. Harp agreed the airlines cannot be required
to be more restrictive than the Settlement Agreement.
Mr. Khoury motioned to advance a recommendation to the City Council to undertake a study, if
one does not already exist, that looks at the effects of higher, faster departures focusing on the
sound levels near the end of the runway and takes into consideration safety and air pollutants.
Mr. Rasner seconded the motion. The motion passed with one nay, Gerald Scarboro.
Mr. Edwards suggested somebody could look at EIR 546 from 1990 or 1991 as a starting point.
c. Phase III - Air quality, US EPA Rulemaking
Mr. Kiff explained that the US EPA this past summer is initiating a rulemaking on emissions
from air carriers. It includes investigation, potentially benchmarking and maybe leaning
towards setting additional regulations. He asked the committee whether they would like to
send correspondence to the EPA to lend support regarding emissions from air carriers.
Mr. Khoury motioned to recommend to the City Council to provide correspondence supporting
EPA’s efforts at rulemaking for air pollutants from air carriers. Mr. Meng seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Kiff wanted to note that it’s important for the City to work closely with its partners at the
airport. The City will not be successful without their participation.
(c) Any other updates from John Wayne Airport staff and or questions on Tom Edwards’ report
Mr. Rondinella said he’s happy to be part of this group. One reason he wanted to come to JWA is
because the City threads the needle between economic development, options for the traveling public
and job creation. He is committed to being a good neighbor.
Mr. Mosher pointed out that as JWA continues to experience growth, the unhealthier it will be for
Newport Beach.
5. Public Comments on Non-Agenda items
Mr. Mosher said that in 2002 in preparation for the General Plan Update and Coastal Land Use Update
the City contracted for a citywide hazards assessment for the natural and manmade hazards the City
faces. The EIR in connection with the extension of the airport mentioned in the hazards section the
fuel stored at the airport. With the 150 jets flying over Newport Beach each day, there is a possibility
of a plane crash in Newport Beach. The consultant recommended a study be done and Mr. Mosher
wonders if the public has seen that report.
6. Items for the next/other upcoming meeting agenda
N/A
7. Set the next meeting
The next meeting was tentatively set for March 14, 2016.
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 5:39 p.m.
# # #
February 2016 Update-All thingsAviation:
If you’d like additional information, please contact Newport Beach City Manager
Dave Kiff at dkiff@newportbeachca.gov.
City Council Supports Golf Course
Following upon the heels of purchasing the current lease of the Newport Beach
Golf Course, located on Irvine Avenue, south of the airport, the new owners in an
apparent attempt to make major improvements at the course have approached the county
about extending the lease past its current expiration date of December 31, 2020.
Accordingly the Newport City Council on February 23 further supported the efforts of
the new owners and authorized a letter from Mayor Dixon to the Orange County Board of
Supervisors in support of a potential lease extension. The Airport Working Group and
AirFair also sent correspondence in support of the idea.
Southwest Airlines-Long Beach
With room to grow, Long Beach Airport has offered Southwest Airlines an
opportunity to begin operations later this year, starting with four daily flights. Long
Beach also offered JetBlue Airways three daily slots and Delta Air Lines two slots,
according to city officials. JetBlue, Delta and American Airlines already fly out of Long
Beach but Southwest does not1.The flight slots became available when recent noise
studies2 confirmed that Long Beach Airport could add nine daily flights without violating
the city's strict noise ordinance.It remains to be seen if this will all pass but it is some
1 Southwest has approximately 45% of the JWA market.2 See discussion in January 2016 City Aviation update.
2
indication that Long Beach will see some growth in the coming year.
Long Beach Airport covers an area of 1,166 acres and has five asphalt-paved
runways, of varying lengths as follows: 10,003 by 200 feet; 6,191 by 150 feet; 5,421 by
150 feet; 3,330 by 75 feet; 4,470 by 75 feet. JWA, by comparison, sits on approximately
500 acres and has two commercial runways of 5701 by 150 feet and 2887 by 75 feet.
All Commercial Carriers at JWA Fly a Noise Abatement Departure Procedure
Recently there has been a great deal of communication, and questions generated
regarding departures at John Wayne Airport. Accordingly in a continuing effort to
remedy any misunderstandings, the issue of departures at the airport will again be
addressed.
Initially, all commercial carriers fly a noise abatement departure procedure at
JWA. The commercial carriers must only meet the noise thresholds of the respective
noise monitors. What has confused the matter is the discussion regarding the so called
“Close In and Distant Departure” Procedures. Prior to the historic 1985 JWA Settlement
Agreement, there was a Noise Ordinance/Curfew in effect at the airport. The Settlement
Agreement has successfully continued the same essential Noise Ordinance and Curfew.
However in approximately 1990 the FAA implemented a change to the departure
procedure at JWA. Prior to then there was allowed a so called “noise cutback” at 500
feet. This was however modified by the FAA pursuant to its Advisory Circular 91-53A.
Testing was conducted at JWA and resulted in development of the FAA Advisory
Circular 91-53A,Noise Abatement Departure Profiles. (NADP). The Circular describes
acceptable criteria for safe NADP and which can be utilized at JWA, given the noise
constraints as a result of the seven (7) noise monitors. However the procedures described
in the Circular are not the only means, of establishing acceptable departure profiles.
(Emphasis added)
Close in and Distant Departure procedures
The main difference between the two procedures is the point of power reduction
and flap retraction. The Close In procedure calls for thrust reduction followed by flap
retraction allowing for an initial faster climb in close proximity to the runway
3
environment. The Distant procedure calls for flap reduction followed by thrust reduction.
Aircraft are lower in the initial portion of the procedure, but are higher in the distant
portion of the procedure as compared to aircraft using the Close In procedure. Again it
must be noted that the FAA Circular provides general guidance for these two procedures.
Ultimately, airlines develop their own procedures according to their operations
specifications for each individual aircraft. Moreover all of the airlines use a procedure
tailored to their individual aircraft type. In addition, Aircraft performance is another
factor pertaining to noise. The climb rate and flight profile of departing aircraft will vary
considerably based on aircraft type. (Emphasis added)
All carriers implement a Noise Abatement Departure Procedure at the airport so
as to comply with the limitations of the departure noise monitors, whether close-in;
distant or other. The carriers are only required to comply with the maximum permitted
noise limits. How the carriers operate their aircraft to meet the limits is up to them and
the FAA.
Altitudes
Below is a breakdown by aircraft type only of altitudes at Balboa Island for a two
week period:
4
What follows is a breakdown of the average SENEL readings of various aircraft
types during the 3rd Quarter of 2015 at the departure noise monitors.
Average SENEL Readings of All 737s 3rd Qtr. 2015
NMS1 NMS2 NMS 3 NMS4 NMS5 NMS6 NMS7
AS3 92.5 91.7 89 84.2 81.8 84 80.4
WN 92.5 91.7 90.4 85 84.3 85.5 82.7
WN-E 90.8 90.4 89.1 84.8 83.1 84.6 81.8
UA 95.8 94.4 95.7 88.9 88.8 90 85.4
WS 94.9 93.5 94.3 89.5 86.1 88.4 82.4
B737 Readings at Noise Monitors
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
NMS1 NMS2 NMS 3 NMS4 NMS5 NMS6 NMS7
Noise MonitorsSENELReadings AS
WN
WN-E
UA
WS
3 Here is the abbreviations for each of the carriers as well:5x-UPS; AA-American; AS-Alaska; AW-US
Airways; DL-Delta; F9- Frontier; FM-FedEx; SC-Sky West Commercial; SK-Sky West Commuter; UA-
United; WN- Southwest; WS-West Jet
5
Average SENEL Readings 757s 3rd Qtr. 2015
NMS1 NMS2 NMS3 NMS4 NMS5 NMS6 NMS7
DL 95.9 94.8 94.3 87.6 86.5 87.3 83.9
5X 96 95.7 93.4 86.4 85.7 86.6 82.6
AW 94.7 94.9 91.3 83.5 82.6 82.6 80
B757 Readings at Noise Monitors
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
NMS1 NMS2 NMS3 NMS4 NMS5 NMS6 NMS7
Noise MonitorsSENELReadings DL
5X
AW
Average SENEL Readings A319 3rd Qtr. 2015
NMS1 NMS2 NMS3 NMS4 NMS5 NMS6 NMS7
DL 94.8 94 93.7 86.9 85.7 86.2 82.3
F9 93.7 93 92.1 86 85.1 85.7 82.3
A319 Readings at Noise Monitors
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
NMS1 NMS2 NMS3 NMS4 NMS5 NMS6 NMS7
Noise MonitorsSENELReadings DL
F9
6
Average SENEL Readings A320s 3rd Qtr. 2015
DL 94.8 93.8 93.1 86.7 84.5 85.9 82.3
UA 93.4 92.4 91.7 85.2 84.5 86.8 85
A320 Readings at Noise Monitors
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Noise MonitorsSENELReadings DL
UA
Below is a breakdown of the average altitude of the carriers only for a two week
period as they passed over Balboa Island4:
5x-UPS; AA-American; AS-Alaska; AW-US Airways; DL-Delta; F9- Frontier; FM-FedEx; SC-Sky West
Commercial; SK-Sky West Commuter; UA-United; WN- Southwest; WS-West Jet
4 More detailed analysis of altitudes is forthcoming.
7
New Airline Data-JWA Released
Anyone who has flown recently can appreciate the data reported by the FAA that
the domestic load factors for November 2015 were 84.18%. Load factor is a measure of
the use of aircraft capacity that compares the system use, measured in Revenue
Passenger-Miles (RPMs) as a proportion of system capacity, measured in Available Seat-
Miles (ASMs). At JWA, the Domestic load factors for November 2015 were 86.41%.
Traffic results for JWA for the period of 12-1/2014-11/30/2015 show:
Carrier Passengers5 Share
Southwest 4,198 44.94%
American 1,409 15.10%
United 1,299 13.64%
Alaska 922 9.70%
Delta 756 7.92%
Other 864 8.71%
Airports in the Region
LAX and ONT
LAX passenger figures for January 2016 showed an overall increase by +9.59%
for both domestic and international passengers, while ONT showed a very slight decline
of -.30% for January.
Airspace Management Committee
On February 25, Senators Flake and McCain of Arizona introduced a bill to establish an
airspace management advisory committee. The bill if passed would authorize the FAA
Administrator to establish an advisory committee to review and provide comments on
proposed changes before any such proposal is made available for public comment and
before any such proposal is implemented,in regulations, policies, or guidance of the
Federal Aviation Administration relating to airspace that affects airport operations,
5 Based on enplaned passengers(000) both arriving and departing.
8
airport capacity, the environment, or communities in the vicinity of airports. The
membership of the committee would include representatives of air carriers, airports of
various sizes and types, and State aviation officials.
C02 Emissions
An eagerly awaited aircraft CO2 emissions standard made further and important
headway recently at the United Nation’s International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO). The new environmental measure was unanimously recommended by the 170
international experts on ICAO’s Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection
(CAEP), paving the way for its ultimate adoption by the UN agency’s 36-State
Governing Council. “It is particularly encouraging that the CAEP’s recommendation
today responds so directly to the aircraft technology improvements which States have
forged consensus on at recent ICAO Assemblies,” highlighted Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu,
President of the ICAO Council. “Every step taken in support of ICAO’s full basket of
measures for environmental improvement is an important one, and I am sure the Council
will be deeply appreciative of the this latest CAEP achievement.” However, it remains to
be seen if the environmental measure will be successfully implemented.
Look at Airlines
The last time Congress convened a panel to look into competition and antitrust
issues in the airline industry, carriers TWA, Northwest Airlines and America West were
still operating but that was more than 20 years ago, and a coalition of travel organizations
thinks it's about time for another review, especially because mergers and bankruptcies
have put control of more than 70% of domestic travel in the U.S. in the hands of four
major carriers.” The time has come to reexamine the state of competition in the U.S.
domestic and international air travel marketplace,” says a letter to four key members of
Congress from a coalition that represents online travel agents, hotel operators and airport
managers, among others.
The group complains that fliers have fewer choices at some hub airports and
service has been cut to many smaller airports. Delta Air Lines, for example, carries about
9
74% of all passengers out of Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport and
Southwest Airlines flies 95% of passengers out of Chicago Midway International Airport,
federal data show.