[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 190 (Monday, October 3, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24368]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 3, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
[Docket No. 27649]
Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Effects of
Changes in Aircraft Flight Patterns Over the State of New Jersey
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Issuance of A Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) For Public Review and Comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA has decided to prepare a supplement to the draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS) on the effects of changes in
aircraft flight patterns over the State of New Jersey caused by
implementation of the Expanded East Coast Plan (EECP). As a result of
the analysis phase of the comment period associated with the DEIS, new
information was developed by the FAA. Additionally, new information was
received from the public during the comment period. Since this
information is pertinent to the decision process leading to issuance of
a final EIS (FEIS), the public should have an opportunity to examine
the new material and comment on it prior to completion of the FEIS.
The supplemental DEIS (SDEIS) was prepared in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Copies have been mailed to
individuals that participated in the EIS process as well as to
libraries in select locations throughout New Jersey.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of key portions
of the SDEIS and major areas of concern identified by the public. It is
not intended to duplicate or cover every aspect of the SDEIS.
Substantive comments submitted to the FAA should address the SDEIS, not
this summary.
I. Summary of Key Portions of the SDEIS
A. Alternatives and Mitigation Under Consideration
The following alternatives were evaluated and are being considered
by the FAA:
(1) Alternative A. Maintain the current (as defined in 1991) EECP
structure. (Proposed action and no action)
(2) Alternative B. Return to 1986 air traffic routes and procedures
using 1991 traffic. (Rollback)
(3) Alternative C2. Route Newark south flow departure traffic from
over Raritan Bay to over the ocean (at night only) via a specific path
defined by the Solberg and Colts Neck navigational aids. (Nighttime
only oceanic/military routing)
Alternative D3. Spread aircraft departing Newark runways 22L and
22R to three different headings. (Spreading of fanning)
These alternatives are described in detail in Chapter 3 of the
SDEIS. Two mitigation measures were evaluated and are also being
considered:
(1) Routing some westbound departures from Newark to a new
departure gate in the vicinity of the Solberg navigational aid.
(2) Moving LaGuardia arrival traffic further south from its current
routing.
These mitigation measures are described in detail in Chapter 6 of
the SDEIS. These measures, if selected by the decision-maker for
implementation, would reduce noise by Day-Night Level (DNL) 5 dB or
greater for approximately 18,500 residents of the Scotch Plains and
Fanwood areas of Union County, New Jersey. These were two of the areas
that experienced some of the greatest increases in noise as a result of
implementation of the EECP.
B. Environmental Consequences
None of the alternatives would cause significant noise, air quality
or water quality impacts. (The one exception identified in the area of
noise results from the assumptions used in reconstructing and modeling
the return to 1986 routes and procedures.) Noise analysis indicates
that 1.45 million individuals would be impacted by noise increases of
DNL 5 dB or greater if the FAA returned to use of 1986 routes and
procedures, while approximately 45,000 individuals would experience
noise benefits of DNL 5 dB or greater. Fanning and nighttime use of
ocean routing would have marginal noise benefits. In response to the
volume of comments concerning noise impacts in particular communities,
Appendix F of the SDEIS provides the increases in noise level predicted
for each census block in New Jersey.
C. Public Participation
In preparing the SDEIS the FAA has carefully summarized and
addressed the comments received on the DEIS and made revisions to the
text as appropriate. There have been extensive opportunities for public
participation since the DEIS was made available on November 12, 1992.
In January, 1993, the FAA held public hearings in New Jersey to obtain
comments on the DEIS. In addition, two public meetings were held in
Staten Island, New York to address the DEIS and the New York
Metropolitan Area Aircraft Noise Mitigation Review, a study mandated by
Congress, which specifically addressed noise issues in the New York
metropolitan area, including parts of Connecticut and New Jersey,
separate from the EIS action. The comment period on the DEIS extended
from November 12, 1992 to November 23, 1993. This 369 day comment
period was well in excess on NEPA requirements.
II. Areas of Controversy
In addition to noise, air, and water quality impacts, the major
areas of controversy concerning this EIS were alternate use of ocean
routing, effects or aircraft noise on property values, and the scope of
the EIS.
A. Ocean Routing
Many commenters believed the alternative of using ocean routes 24
hours a day should be studied in detail as a reasonable alternative.
Several different proposals were considered in the DEIS, but eliminated
due to concerns about operational feasibility and potential
environmental impacts. In June 1993, the New Jersey Citizens for
Environmental Research (NJCER), on behalf of the New Jersey Coalition
Against Aircraft Noise, submitted a proposal to route all Newark
Airport departures south, down the Arthur Kill and over Raritan Bay to
the ocean. This study was analyzed operationally and modeled to
determine its noise impacts within the scope of this EIS.
Operational examination indicates this proposal would cause about 5
points of conflicting traffic within New Jersey, require tunneling of
traffic from Newark under traffic from other airports, and cause
substantial delays at Newark.
Noise analysis indicates this proposal would have net benefits of
DNL 5 dB or greater for approximately 228,000 New Jersey residents
(690,000 residents would benefit while 462,000 residents would
experience increased noise of DNL 5 dB or greater). In addition there
appear to be potentially significant adverse noise impacts in areas
south of Newark that would be overflown by aircraft at altitudes below
3,000 above ground level (AGL) feet as well as in New York and
Connecticut. Additional environmental review would be required to
examine these impacts, which are beyond the scope of this EIS. This
proposal is described in detail in Chapter 1 of the SDEIS.
B. Effect of Noise on Property Values
Another area of concern was the effect of noise increases on real
property values. There is insufficient scientific data to support a
reasonable conclusion about whether the noise levels associated with
implementation of the EECP have, or its alternatives would have,
depressed property values in New Jersey. The economic studies of the
effects of airport noise on house values to date, which have found a
slight devaluation, have involved properties in or near urban areas
surrounding major airports at noise exposure levels exceeding those in
this EIS. This is discussed in detail in Section 5.2.1 of the SDEIS.
C. Scope of the EIS
Another controversial issue was the scope of the EIS. The legal and
policy reasons supporting the decision to limit the scope of the EIS to
New Jersey and to air traffic changes above 3,000 AGL feet are fully
explained in Chapter 2 of the SDEIS and Appendix A. Briefly, the FAA
adhered strictly to the congressional mandate to study New Jersey
because of the complexity of an expanded study, the difficulty of
identifying objective criteria for excluding portions of the other 18
States and the District of Columbia that were also potentially affected
by the EECP, and the time constraints on the EIS process. The EIS
examines changes above 3,000 AGL feet because that was the scope of the
EECP. To assure compliance with NEPA, no alternative will be selected
for implementation until all applicable environmental review
requirements have been satisfied.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For further information contact Mr. William J. Marx, FAA Office of Air
Traffic System Management, Environmental Issues Program Office, ATM-
700, Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-7900.
Any person may obtain a copy of the SDEIS by submitting a request
to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Public Affairs,
Attention: Public Inquiry Center, APA-230, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591, or by calling FAA's toll-free Consumer Hotline:
1-800-FAA-SURE between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
COMMENT PERIOD: The public will be afforded a 60-day period to comment
upon release of the SDEIS. The opportunity to comment will extend from
September 30, until November 30, 1994. Comments will be considered in
preparing the FEIS. Late-filed comments will be considered to the
extend practicable.
Written comments on the SDEIS should be received at the following
address, in triplicate, by November 30, 1994: Headquarters Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of the Chief Counsel, Attn: Rules
Docket (AGC-10), Docket No. 27649, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591. Comments may be delivered or inspected at Room
915G in FAA headquarters between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
Additionally, the FAA intends to conduct hearings and a meeting to
gather comments on the SDEIS. The FAA will conduct public hearings in
Cranford, Bernardsville and Tinton Falls, New Jersey to solicit both
written and oral comments. A public meeting will also be held in Staten
Island, New York. All persons wishing to make oral presentations at the
public hearings and the public meeting are strongly urged to provide a
written copy of their statements at the hearing/meeting or at the FAA
address provided in the above paragraph. The exact dates, times and
locations of the hearings in New Jersey and the meeting in Staten
Island will be published in a subsequent Federal Register Notice and
through the Press when arrangements are finalized.
Issued in Washington, DC on September 28, 1994.
Bill F. Jeffers,
Acting Associate Administrator for Air Traffic.
[FR Doc. 94-24368 Filed 9-30-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
