san francisco international...

FINAL

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program

Prepared for JULY 2018 City and County of San Francisco San Francisco Airport Commission

In association with: BridgeNet International

FINAL

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program

Prepared for JULY 2018 City and County of San Francisco San Francisco Airport Commission

550 Kearny Street Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94108 415.896.5900 www.esassoc.com

Los Angeles

Oakland

Orlando

Palm Springs

Petaluma

Portland

Sacramento

San Diego

Santa Cruz

Seattle

Tampa

Woodland Hills

120832.03

In association with: BridgeNet International 20201 SW Birch Street, Suite 250 Newport Beach, CA 92660

http:120832.03http:www.esassoc.com

OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector c lients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to re duce waste and energy within our operations. This document wa s produced using recycled paper.

PART 150 NCP CHECKLIST PART I

Issued In Washington, DC -- APP-600, March 1989 Updated 2007

Page 1.3-1 of 5

PROGRAM REQUIREMENT YES NO SUPPORTING PAGES/REVIEW COMMENTS I. Submitting And Identifying The NCP:

A. Submission is properly identified: 1. 14 C.F.R. Part 150 NCP? X Front Cover. Page 1-1. 2. NEM and NCP together? X Not applicable 3. Program revision? (To what extent has it been revised?) X Front cover, pages 1-1 and 1-11, and Chapter 4. Updated

eligibility boundary for residential sound insulation program. B. Airport and Airport sponsor's name are identified? X Front Cover. Section 1.1 on page 1-1. C. NCP is transmitted by airport sponsors cover letter? X Yes.

II. Consultation (including public participation): [150.23] A. Documentation includes narrative of public participation and

consultation process? X Section 1.7 and Appendices A-D.

B. Identification of consulted parties: 1. All parties in 150.23(c) consulted? X Section 1.7 and Appendices A-D. 2. Public and planning agencies identified? X Section 1.7 and Appendices A-D. 3. Agencies in 2, above, correspond to those affected by the NEM

noise contours? X

C. Satisfies 150.23(d) requirements by: 1. Documentation shows active and direct participation of parties in

B., above? X Section 1.7 and Appendices A-D

2. Active and direct participation of general public and opportunity to submit their views, data, and comments on the formulation and adequacy of the NCP?

X Section 1.7 and Appendices A-D

3. Participation was prior to and during development of NCP and prior to submittal to FAA?


4. Indicates adequate opportunity afforded to all consulted parties to submit views, data, etc.?


D. Evidence is included there was notice and opportunity for a public hearing on the final NCP?

X Section 1.7 and Appendices B-D

E. Documentation of comments: 1. Includes summary of public hearing comments, if hearing was

held? X Appendices C and D

2. Includes copy of all written material submitted to operator? X Appendix D 3. Includes operator's responses/disposition of written and verbal

comments? X Appendix D

F. Is there written evidence from the appropriate office within the FAA that the sponsor received informal agreement to carry out proposed flight procedures?

X Not applicable. Existing flight procedures will be maintained.


Issued In Washington, DC -- APP-600, March 1989 Updated 2/2008

Page 1.3-2 of 5

PROGRAM REQUIREMENT YES NO SUPPORTING PAGES/REVIEW COMMENTS III. NOISE EXPOSURE MAPS: [150.23, B150.3; 150.35(f)] (This section of the checklist is not a substitute for the Noise Exposure Map checklist. It deals with maps in the context of the Noise Compatibility Program submission.)

A. Inclusion of NEMs and supporting documentation: X Chapter 1. See Exhibits 1-2 and 1-3. III. NOISE EXPOSURE MAPS: [150.23, B150.3; 150.35(f)] [CONTINUED]

1. Map documentation either included or incorporated by reference? X Chapter 1. See Exhibits 1-2 and 1-3. 2. Maps previously found in compliance by FAA? X See Section 1.4 for status of NEMs. 3. FAAs compliance determination still valid?

(a) Existing condition NEM represents conditions at the airport at the time of submittal of the NCP for FAA approval? (b) Forecast condition NEM represents conditions at the airport at least 5 years into the future from the date of submittal of the NCP to the FAA for approval? (c) Sponsor letter confirming elements (a) and (b), above, if date of submission is either different than the year of submittal of the previously approved NEMs or over 12 months from the date shown on the face of the NEM? (d) If (a) through (c) cannot be validated, the NEMs must be redone and resubmitted as per 150.21.

X The January 29, 2016 letter from the FAA accepting the noise exposure maps for SFO is included in Appendix A.

4. Does 180-day period have to wait for map compliance finding? X The SFO NEMs were accepted on January 29, 2016. B. Revised NEMs submitted with program: (Review using NEM

checklist if map revisions included in NCP submittal. Report the applicable findings in the spaces below after a full review using the NEM checklist and narrative.)

X Not applicable. The NEMs included in the NCP wont change.

1. Revised NEMs included with program? X Not applicable. 2. Has airport sponsor requested in writing that FAA make a

determination on the NEM(s), showing NCP measures in place, when NCP approval is made?

X No new flight procedures or similar measures. NEMs accepted on January 29, 2016 are still valid.

C. If program analysis uses noise modeling: 1. INM, HNM, or FAA-approved equivalent? X INM used for NEM update. No modeling conducted for NCP. 2. Monitoring in accordance with A150.5? X Not applicable.

D. One existing condition and one forecast-year map clearly identified as the official NEMs?

X See Section 1.4 and Exhibits 1-2 and 1-3. FAA accepted the 2014 and 2019 NEMs on January 29, 2016.

IV. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES: [B150.7, 150.23(e)(2)] A. At a minimum, were the alternatives below considered, or if they were rejected was the reason for rejection reasonable and based on accurate technical information and local circumstances?

1. Land acquisition and interests therein, including air rights, easements, and development rights?

X See Section 3.3.



Page 1.3-3 of 5

PROGRAM REQUIREMENT YES NO SUPPORTING PAGES/REVIEW COMMENTS 2. Barriers, acoustical shielding, public building soundproofing X See Section 3.2.5. 3. Preferential runway system X See Section 3.2.3. 4. Voluntary flight procedures X See Section 3.2.2 and Section 3.2.4.

IV. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES: [B150.7, 150.23(e)(2)] 5. Restrictions described in B150.7 (taking into account Part 161

requirements) X See Section 3.2.4.

6. Other actions with beneficial impact not listed in the regulation X See Chapter 3. 7. Other FAA recommendations (see D, below) X Not applicable.

B. Responsible implementing authority identified for each considered alternative?

X See Chapter 3. Also see Chapter 2.

C. Analysis of alternative measures: 1. Measures clearly described? 2. Measures adequately analyzed? 3. Adequate reasoning for rejecting alternatives?

X See Chapter 3. Also see Chapter 2.

D. Other actions recommended by the FAA: As the FAA staff person familiar with the local airport circumstances, determine whether other actions should be added? (List separately, or on back, actions and describe discussions with airport sponsor to have them included prior to the start of the 180-day cycle. New measures recommended by the airport sponsor must meet applicable public participation and consultation with officials before they can be submitted to the FAA for action. See E., below.)

X Not applicable.

V. ALTERNATIVES RECOMMENDED FOR IMPLEMENTATION: [150.23(e), B150.7(c); 150.35(b), B150.5]

A. Document clearly indicates: 1. Alternatives that are recommended for implementation? X See Chapter 4 for information about recommended

measures. See Chapters 2 and 3 for approved and ongoing measures.

2. Final recommendations are airport sponsor's, not those of consultant or third party?

X See Chapter 4.

B. Do all program recommendations: 1. Relate directly or indirectly to reduction of noise and

noncompatible land uses? (Note: All program recommendations, regardless of whether previously approved by the FAA in an earlier Part 150 study, must demonstrate a noise benefit if the airport sponsor wants FAA to consider the measure for approval in a program update. See E., below.)

X As described in Chapters 2 and 4, the purpose of the RSIP is to reduce noncompatible land uses in the airport environs exposed to aircraft noise of CNEL 65 and higher.

2. Contain description of each measures relative contribution to overall effectiveness of program?

X See Chapters 2 and 4.



Page 1.3-4 of 5

PROGRAM REQUIREMENT YES NO SUPPORTING PAGES/REVIEW COMMENTS 3. Noise/land use benefits quantified to extent possible to be quantified? (Note: some program management measures cannot be readily quantified and should be described in other terms to show their implementation contributes to overall effectiveness of the program.)

X See Chapters 2 and 4 for quantitative data for SFOs RSIP.

V. ALTERNATIVES RECOMMENDED FOR IMPLEMENTATION:

[150.23(e), B150.7(c); 150.35(b), B150.5]

4. Does each alternative include actual/anticipated effect on reducing noise exposure within non-compatible area shown on NEM?

X Not applicable. Implementation of the RSIP will lessen the effects of noise exposure.

5. Effects based on relevant and reasonable expressed assumptions? X Not applicable 6. Does the document have adequate supporting data that the

measure contributes to noise/land use compatibility? X See Chapters 2 and 4 for information regarding the RSIP.

C. Analysis appears to support program standards set forth in 150.35(b) and B150.5?

X See Chapter 4. The standards described in 150.35(b) primarily apply to noise abatement measures.

D. When use restrictions are recommended for approval by the FAA: 1. Does (or could) the restriction affect Stage 2 or Stage 3 aircraft

operations (regardless of whether they presently operate at the airport)? (If the restriction affects Stage 2 helicopters, Part 161 also applies.)

X Not applicable. The modified RSIP and the noise monitoring system hardware replacement project require FAA approval. No use restrictions are recommended.

2. If the answer to D.1 is yes, has the airport sponsor completed the Part 161 process and received FAA Part 161 approval for a restriction affecting Stage 3 aircraft? Is the FAAs approval documented? For restrictions affecting only Stage 2 aircraft, has the airport sponsor successfully completed the Stage 2 analysis and consultation process required by Part 161 and met the regulatory requirements, and is there evidenced by letter from FAA stating this fact?

X Not applicable. The modified RSIP and the noise monitoring system hardware replacement project require FAA approval. No use restrictions are recommended.

3. Are non-restrictive alternatives with potentially significant noise/compatible land use benefits thoroughly analyzed so that appropriate comparisons and conclusions among all alternatives can be made?

X Not applicable.

4. Did the FAA regional or ADO reviewer coordinate the use restriction with APP-400 prior to making determination on start of 180-days?

X Not applicable.

E. Do the following also meet Part 150 analytical standards? 1. Recommendations that continue existing practices and that are

submitted for FAA re-approval? (Note: An airport sponsor does not have to request FAA re-approval if noise compatibility measures are in place from previously approved Part 150 studies. If the airport has implemented the measures as approved in the previous NCP, the measures may be reported and modeled as baseline conditions at the airport.)

X Chapters 2 and 3 describe the measures that are in place at SFO and that are part of the baseline conditions.



Page 1.3-5 of 5

PROGRAM REQUIREMENT YES NO SUPPORTING PAGES/REVIEW COMMENTS 2. New recommendations or changes proposed at the end of the

Part 150 process? X See Chapter 4. The modified RSIP and the noise monitoring

system hardware replacement project require FAA approval. F. Documentation indicates how recommendations may change

previously adopted noise compatibility plans, programs, or measures? X See Chapter 4. The modified RSIP and the noise monitoring

system hardware replacement project require FAA approval. G. Documentation also:

1. Identifies agencies that are responsible for implementing each recommendation?

X See Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2.

V. ALTERNATIVES RECOMMENDED FOR IMPLEMENTATION: [150.23(e), B150.7(c); 150.35(b), B150.5] [CONTINUED]

2. Indicates whether those agencies have agreed to implement? X See Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2. 3. Indicates essential government actions necessary to implement

recommendations? X See Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2.

H. Timeframe: 1. Includes agreed-upon schedule to implement alternatives? X See Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2. 2. Indicates period covered by the program? X See Sections 4.2.2, 4.3.2 and 4.4.

I. Funding/Costs: 1. Includes costs to implement alternatives? X See Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2. 2. Includes anticipated funding sources? X See Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2.

VI. PROGRAM REVISION: [150.23(e)(9)] Supporting documentation includes provision for revision? (Note: Revision should occur when it is likely a change has taken place at the airport that will cause a significant increase or decrease in the DNL noise contour of 1.5 dB or greater over noncompatible land uses. See 150.21(d))

X See Section 4.4.

This page intentionally left blank

TABLE OF CONTENTS San Francisco International Airport 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program

1. Introduction 1-1 1.1 Airport Setting 1-1 1.2 Summary of Aviation Demand Forecasts 1-2 1.3 Airport Noise Compatibility Planning Overview 1-5 1.4 Updated Noise Exposure Maps 1-6 1.5 Purpose of the Current Noise Compatibility Program Update 1-6 1.6 Updated Noise Compatibility Program 1-11 1.7 Consultation and Public Involvement 1-12 1.8 Report Organization 1-18

2. Status of the 1983 Noise Compatibility Program 2-1 2.1 Introduction 2-1 2.2 Airport Noise Monitoring and Management 2-1 2.3 Flight Procedure Changes 2-7 2.4 Airport Noise Limits, Use Restrictions, and Economic Incentives 2-11 2.5 Noise Insulation / Avigation Easement Program 2-13 2.6 Neighborhood Improvement Program 2-17 2.7 Preventative Land Use Planning 2-18

3. Noise Abatement and Noise Mitigation Alternatives 3-1 3.1 Introduction 3-1 3.2 Evaluation of Noise Abatement Alternatives 3-2 3.3 Evaluation of Noise Mitigation Alternatives 3-14

4. Recommended Noise Compatibility Program Measures 4-1 4.1 Introduction 4-1 4.2 Recommended Noise Abatement Measure 4-1 4.3 Recommended Noise Mitigation Measure 4-3 4.4 Review and Revision of the Noise Compatibility Program 4-8

5. References 5-1

6. List of Abbreviations and Acronyms 6-1

San Francisco International Airport i ESA / 120832 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program July 2018

Table of Contents

Appendices A. Correspondence, Consultation, and Briefings B. Public Workshop Notices and Materials C. Public Hearing Notices and Transcript D. Public Comments and Responses

List of Exhibits 1-1 Airport Location Map 1-3 1-2 2014 Noise Exposure Map - San Francisco International Airport 1-7 1-3 2019 Noise Exposure Map - San Francisco International Airport 1-9 2-1 SFO Residential Sound Insulation Program Progress Since 1983 2-15 4-1 SFO Residential Sound Insulation Program Potentially Eligible Parcels (Future

Phases) 4-5

List of Tables 1-1 Historical Aircraft Operations at San Francisco International Airport 2007-2013 1-2 1-2 Aircraft Operations Forecast for San Francisco International Airport 2013-2033 1-5 1-3 Libraries That Received Printed Copies of the 14 CFR Part 150 Noise Compatibility

Program Report for San Francisco International Airport 1-13 1-4 SFO Airport/Community Roundtable Members (November 2015) 1-14 1-5 List of Attendees FAA ATCT Briefing (June 15, 2016) 1-15 1-6 List of Attendees FAA NORCAL TRACON Briefing (June 22, 2016) 1-15 1-7 List of Invitees Airline Briefing (August 16, 2016) 1-16 2-1 Summary of the Status of 1983 Noise Compatibility Program Measures 2-2 2-2 Noise Insulation Program Summary Through 2008 2-14 3-1 Summary of Noise Abatement Measures Considered for San Francisco International

Airport 3-13 3-2 Summary of Noise Mitigation Measures Considered for San Francisco International

Airport 3-21 4-1 Estimated Program Costs Aircraft Noise Monitoring System Hardware Replacement 4-2 4-2 Number of Homes Potentially Eligible to Participate in Future Phases of the RSIP 4-4

San Francisco International Airport ii ESA / 120832 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program July 2018

San Francisco International Airport 1-1 ESA / 120832 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program July 2018

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

This report documents the results of the second and final phase of the San Francisco International Airport Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150 Study Update: the Noise Compatibility Program (NCP). The Update was conducted in accordance with 14 CFR Part 150, Airport Noise Compatibility Planning [I-1]1. The first step in the update process was to develop maps depicting existing and anticipated future aircraft noise exposure (assuming that no changes to the existing Noise Compatibility Program were implemented) and to estimate the effects of that noise in terms of the number of people, households, and noise-sensitive land uses exposed to aircraft noise of Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) 65 decibels (dB) and higher. The noise exposure maps and the assumptions used in developing the maps are documented in the report 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150 Study Update, Noise Exposure Map Report, San Francisco International Airport, August 2015 [I-2]. The NEMs were accepted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on January 29, 2016 (See Appendix A for related correspondence).

1.1 Airport Setting San Francisco International Airport (SFO or the Airport) is located in unincorporated San Mateo County, California. The land and Airport is owned and operated by the City and County of San Francisco (CCSF) by and through the San Francisco Airport Commission (Airport Commission). SFO is located approximately 13 miles south of downtown San Francisco and occupies about 5,100 acres of which about 2,200 are land.2 As shown on Exhibit 1-1, the active operations area at SFO is bordered by the San Francisco Bay to the east and U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101) to the west and south, and Interstate 380 (I-380) to the north. The Airport is surrounded by the cities of Millbrae and Burlingame (to the south), San Bruno (to the west), and South San Francisco (to the north). San Bruno Mountain is located about two miles north of the Airport; Sweeney Ridge / San Andreas Lake is located about 1.5 miles west of the Airport. These two mountains funnel coastal winds southeast towards San Mateo County and the Airport. The surrounding terrain and direction of the winds are primary drivers for the direction of aircraft operations and associated noise contours.

1 See Chapter 6 of this report for a full list of references. 2 Remaining 2,900 acres of SFO property is in San Francisco Bay waters.

1. Introduction


1.2 Summary of Aviation Demand Forecasts 14 CFR Part 150 requires that noise exposure maps (NEMs) be prepared for two scenariosexisting conditions and conditions 5 years into the future. Each map reflects the annual average number of daily aircraft operations for the specified year. Typically, data for the most recent full calendar year for which data are available at the time the maps are prepared are used to represent existing conditions. In this 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update, operations data for calendar year 2013 were used to represent the baseline (2014) condition (2014, which is the year of the submittal of the NEMs to the FAA) and forecast operations in 2019 were used to represent 5-year future conditions. The data used to develop the 2014 NEMs are representative of the existing conditions in 2015 and the data used to develop the 2019 NEMs are representative of the future five-year forecast condition in 2020.

The most recent FAA-approved aviation activity forecasts are documented in the report San Francisco International Airport Forecast Update (the 2014 Forecast) by Landrum & Brown [I-3], which was approved by the FAA on June 9, 2014. The 2014 Forecast provides baseline (2013) data and projections of annual passenger enplanements, air cargo volumes, aircraft operations, and commercial aircraft fleet mix that reflect market-driven demand for air service. The 2014 Forecast is unconstrained and as such does not take facility constraints or other outside limiting factors into consideration. The 2014 Forecast provides SFO and the FAA with an adaptive framework for long range planning.

Table 1-1 presents historical aircraft operations data for SFO. Total aircraft operations at SFO increased from 379,500 in 2007 to 421,400 in 2013, representing an average annual growth rate of 1.8 percent. During this time period, commercial passenger operations experienced the fastest growth, with an average annual growth rate of 2.7 percent. Military, cargo, air taxi and general aviation operations experienced decreases during the period.

TABLE 1-1 HISTORICAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS AT SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 2007-2013

Calendar Year

Commercial Passenger All - Cargo Air Taxi

Total Commercial

General Aviation Military Total

2007 330,114 7,140 20,463 357,717 19,150 2,633 379,500

2008 344,834 6,420 18,303 369,557 15,478 2,675 387,710

2009 342,658 7,084 14,938 364,860 12,293 2,778 379,751

2010 349,420 7,036 15,512 371,968 12,570 2,710 387,248

2011 365,372 6,782 16,059 388,213 12,711 2,640 403,564

2012 387,416 6,274 15,596 409,286 12,561 2,719 424,566

2013 386,416 5,920 14,475 406,811 12,213 2,376 421,400

Compound Annual Growth Rate 2007-2013 2.7% -3.1% -5.6% 2.2% -7.2% -1.7% 1.8%

SOURCES: Landrum & Brown, San Francisco International Airport Forecast Update, April 2014, as approved by the FAA on June 9, 2014; and SFO Year End Traffic Report, CY2013.

1. Introduction



1. Introduction


Table 1-2 presents projected aircraft operations data for SFO. Total operations at the airport are expected to grow at an average rate of 2.0 percent annually over the forecast period, increasing from an estimated 421,400 operations in 2013 to 625,620 operations in 2033. Commercial passenger and air taxi operations are anticipated to experience the fastest growth, with average growth rates of 2.0 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively. Military operations at SFO are not anticipated to grow during the forecast period while general aviation operations are expected to grow modestly at an average annual growth rate of 0.5 percent.

TABLE 1-2 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FORECAST FOR SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 2013-2033

Calendar Year

Commercial Passenger All - Cargo Air Taxi

Total Commercial

General Aviation Military Total

2013 386,416 5,920 14,475 406,811 12,213 2,376 421,400

Forecast 2014 389,800 5,800 15,000 410,600 12,300 2,400 425,300 2015 393,400 5,700 15,500 414,600 12,360 2,400 429,360 2016 397,600 5,900 16,000 419,500 12,420 2,400 434,320 2017 402,500 6,100 16,600 425,200 12,480 2,400 440,080 2018 407,800 6,200 17,200 431,200 12,540 2,400 446,140 2019 413,500 6,400 17,800 437,700 12,600 2,400 452,700 2020 423,800 6,600 18,400 448,800 12,660 2,400 463,860 2021 432,100 6,700 19,000 457,800 12,720 2,400 472,920 2022 441,900 6,900 19,700 468,500 12,780 2,400 483,680 2023 451,900 7,000 20,400 479,300 12,840 2,400 494,540 2028 508,300 7,700 22,100 538,100 13,140 2,400 553,640 2033 572,500 8,400 28,800 609,700 13,520 2,400 625,620

Compound Annual Growth Rate 2013-2033 2.0% 1.8% 3.5% 2.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2.0%

SOURCE: Landrum & Brown, San Francisco International Airport Forecast Update, April 2014, as approved by the FAA on June 9,

2014.

1.3 Airport Noise Compatibility Planning Overview The CCSF by and through the Airport Commission has a long history of implementing aircraft noise abatement and mitigation measures at SFO. The Airport Commission prepared a 14 CFR Part 150 Study for SFO in the early 1980s. The 14 CFR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) was adapted from the 1980 Joint Land Use Study Final Technical Report [I-4] which was approved by the Joint Powers Board in March 1980. The NEMs included in the 14 CFR Part 150 Study were accepted by the FAA on January 25, 1983 and the NCP was approved by the FAA on September 7, 1983.

At the FAAs request, the Airport Commission updated the 1983 NEM document in 1995 to reflect changes that had occurred at the Airport and in the Airport environs. The 1995 NEM update was accepted by the FAA as complying with 14 CFR Part 150 on May 17, 1996. The Airport Commission prepared a subsequent NEM Update in 2001; the 2001 NEM Update was

1. Introduction


accepted by the FAA on July 17, 2002. The existing conditions NEM in the 2002 NEM Update represents calendar year 2001 conditions and the future-year NEM represents projected conditions in calendar year 2006.

1.4 Updated Noise Exposure Maps In May 2014, the Airport Commission retained a team of consultants to assist in updating the SFO 14 CFR Part 150 NEMs and NCP in accordance with 14 CFR Part 150. Environmental Science Associates (ESA) was retained as the overall project manager for the process, and also to manage public outreach, FAA coordination efforts, and prepare all 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update documentation. BridgeNet International was retained as the acoustical consultant responsible for the development of aircraft noise exposure contours using the FAAs Integrated Noise Model (INM), Version 7.0d. Version 7.0d was the most current version of the INM at the time the noise contours for the SFO 14 CFR Part 150 NEMs were prepared. In May 2015, the FAA released the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) to replace the INM; however, the Final Draft NEMs had been completed and submitted for FAA Lines of Business review several months earlier (in January 2015), so use of AEDT was not adopted for the SFO 14 CFR Part 150 NEMs.

The updated noise exposure maps for SFO depict existing and future aircraft noise levels in the areas around the Airport. The NEM report describes the analysis, methodology, assumptions and findings associated with development of the NEMs. For SFO, the existing conditions NEM reflects aircraft noise levels associated with operational conditions at the Airport in calendar year 2014. The future conditions NEM represents 2019 conditions in conformance with 14 CFR Part 150, which requires preparation of an NEM representing forecast aircraft operations five years after the NEM date of submittal to the FAA (August 2015). The data used to develop the 2014 NEMs are representative of the existing conditions in 2015 and the data used to develop the 2019 NEMs are representative of the future five-year forecast condition in 2020. The FAA accepted the SFO NEMs on January 29, 2016.

Exhibit 1-2 presents noise exposure contours associated with aircraft operations at SFO in 2014 superimposed on a map of generalized existing (2014) land use in the Airport environs. Exhibit 1-3 presents projected noise exposure contours associated with aircraft operations at San Francisco International Airport in 2019, also superimposed on a map of generalized existing (2014) land use.

1.5 Purpose of the Current Noise Compatibility Program Update 14 CFR Part 150 prescribes the procedures, standards and methodology governing the development, submissions, and review of airport noise maps and airport noise compatibility programs, including the process for evaluating and approving or disapproving those programs. 14 CFR Part 150 is more comprehensive than previous federal noise programs, and since its

1. Introduction



1. Introduction



1. Introduction


enactment, FAA grants can be applied to implement noise programs in communities impacted by aircraft noise. While airport sponsors are not mandated to prepare 14 CFR Part 150 studies (participation in the program is voluntary), to receive Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funding for an airport noise program such as sound insulation, the airport sponsor must have federally accepted noise exposure maps (NEMs) and the program must be approved as a specific measure in the FAAs Record of Approval for the sponsors noise compatibility program (NCP). As described previously, the Airport Commission recently completed the 14 CFR Part 150 Study NEM Update for SFO to reflect changes in aircraft operations, fleet mix, and land uses in the Airport environs since the previous 14 CFR Part 150 NEM Update was accepted by the FAA in 2002. The 2014 and 2019 NEMs depict those portions of the SFO environs that are (or will be) exposed to aircraft noise levels of CNEL 65 dB and higher. The Airport Commissions goals for this NCP Update are to: (1) efficiently and cost effectively develop NCP documentation for SFO, (2) obtain FAAs approval of the updated NCP, and (3) ensure that ongoing 14 CFR Part 150 noise mitigation programs in the SFO environs (i.e., the residential sound insulation program) will be eligible to receive FAA funding in the future.

1.6 Updated Noise Compatibility Program Development of the noise compatibility program (NCP or the Program) update included the following steps:

Evaluating the status of noise abatement and mitigation measures included in the FAA-approved 1983 NCP;

Compiling information regarding voluntary noise abatement procedures at SFO that have been implemented outside of the 14 CFR Part 150 process;

Compiling information regarding noise mitigation programs that have been implemented at SFO outside of the 14 CFR Part 150 process;

Consultation/coordination with the FAA, the airlines, other Airport tenants and users, local and regional planning agencies, local elected officials, and the general public;

Development of a Draft and Final NCP and completion of the FAAs NCP Checklist; and

Conducting two public workshops and a public hearing for the updated NCP.

Chapter 2 provides a thorough discussion of FAA-approved noise abatement and noise mitigation measures that have been implemented at SFO since the preparation of the 1983 NCP and the current status of those measures. As described in Chapters 2 and 3, the Airport Commission is not seeking FAA re-approval of measures that have been implemented and/or that continue to be implemented by FAA air traffic control staff when weather and air traffic allow.

This 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update NCP for SFO includes an evaluation of noise abatement alternatives and noise mitigation alternatives; however, the Airport Commission is only recommending two modified measures for consideration by the FAA aircraft noise monitoring system hardware replacement and continuation of SFOs residential sound insulation program (RSIP).

1. Introduction


Chapter 4 of this document includes information regarding the aircraft noise monitoring system replacement project and residential properties that could be eligible for inclusion in future phase(s) of SFOs RSIP.

1.7 Consultation and Public Involvement 14 CFR Part 150 Section A150.105(a) requires that the NCP be developed and preparedin consultation with states, public agencies and planning agencies whose areaof jurisdiction is within the Ldn 65 dB contour depicted on the map, FAA regional officials, and other Federal officials having local responsibility for land uses depicted on the map. This consultation must include regular aeronautical users of the airport. The airlines serving the Airport, other Airport tenants and users, the FAA, state, local and regional planning agencies, local elected officials representing potentially affected residents within the airport environs, and the general public were involved in the development of the NCP for SFO. The elements of the consultation and public involvement process for the 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update included:

Three briefings with key stakeholders (See Section 1.7.1 and Appendix A for a list of attendees for each briefing meeting.);

Two public workshops soliciting input during the NCP update. (See Section 1.7.2 and Appendix B for more details.);

A public hearing soliciting input after publication of the Draft NCP. (See Section 1.7.3 and Appendix C for more details.);

Responses to comments received at the Public Workshops and Public Hearing, and during the 30-day public review of the Draft NCP are included in the Final NCP. (Comments received are published verbatim in Appendix D); and

A study website (http://www.flysfo.com/community/noise-abatement/sfo-part-150-study) was developed to provide key stakeholders, agencies, and the general public access to an electronic copy of the Draft 14 CFR Part 150 Study NCP Update and a direct method for submitting questions and comments regarding the Draft NCP. The website also included general information regarding 14 CFR Part 150, a list of key project contacts, and a project schedule. (See Section 1.7.4 for more details.)

Hard copies of the Draft NCP were made available for public review beginning on May 28, 2017 at the SFO Bureau of Planning and Environmental Affairs office at 710 N. McDonnell Road, 3rd Floor and at a number of local libraries (See Table 1-3). The public comment period for the Draft NCP ended on July 7, 2017.

1.7.1 Consultation Meetings and Briefings The public involvement program for the NCP update included an emailed e-News to members of the SFO Airport/Community Roundtable from the Roundtable Coordinator on November 10, 2015,

http://www.flysfo.com/community/noise-abatement/sfo-part-150-study

1. Introduction


a coordination meeting with FAA Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) staff on June 15, 2016, a coordination meeting with FAA Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (NORCAL TRACON) staff on June 22, 2016, and a briefing to SFO airlines representatives and the Airline Liaison Office on August 16, 2016. FAA San Francisco Airports District Office staff participated in all three briefings. The purpose of these outreach and briefing meetings was to provide information, answer questions, encourage participation, and consider stakeholder input for inclusion in the NCP update.

TABLE 1-3 LIBRARIES THAT RECEIVED PRINTED COPIES OF THE DRAFT 14 CFR PART 150 UPDATE NOISE

COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM FOR SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

South San Francisco Main Library 840 West Orange Ave South San Francisco, California 94080

Burlingame Public Library 480 Primrose, Road Burlingame, California 94010

Foster City Library (1) 1000 East Hillsdale Blvd. Foster City, California 94404

San Bruno Library 701 Angus Ave West San Bruno, California 94066

San Mateo Main Library 55 West 3rd Ave San Mateo, California 94402

San Francisco Main Library 100 Larkin Street San Francisco, California 94102

Millbrae Library (1) 1 Library Ave Millbrae, California 94030

Serramonte Main Library 40 Wembley Drive Daly City, California 94015

Pacifica Library (1) 104 Hilton Way Pacifica, CA 94044

Note: (1) Part of the San Mateo County Library, a Joint Power Authority, comprised of the cities of Atherton, Belmont,

Brisbane, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, Millbrae, Pacifica, Portola Valley, San Carlos, Woodside, and the unincorporated areas of the county.

Source: ESA, 2017.

Table 1-4 lists the City and County representatives that received the eNews regarding the NCP update through the Roundtable Coordinator. The eNews provided notification of the preparation of the NCP, alerted Roundtable members to the project status updates available on the website, and encouraged Roundtable member participation in the study process. The SFO Airport/Community Roundtable was established in 1981 as a voluntary committee to address community noise impacts from aircraft operations at SFO. The Roundtable membership consists of elected officials from the cities within San Mateo County, the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) and Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC), the County of San Mateo Board of Supervisors, CCSF representatives, and the San Francisco Airport Commission (Airport Director). The Roundtables advisory members include airline representatives, FAA ATCT staff located at SFO, and FAA NORCAL TRACON staff. The Roundtable monitors a performance-based noise mitigation program implemented by Airport staff, interprets community concerns and attempts to achieve noise mitigation through a cooperative sharing of authority among the aviation industry, the FAA, SFO management and local governments. All Roundtable meetings are also open to the general public and advertised on the Roundtables website (www.sforoundtable.org). Meeting agendas and packets with prior meeting minutes and technical reports are made available for review/download by the Roundtable Coordinator in advance of the scheduled meetings.

Table 1-5 lists the FAA ATCT staff located at SFO who participated in the June 15, 2016 briefing regarding the 14 CFR Part 150 NCP update. Table 1-6 lists the FAA ATO NORCAL

http://www.sforoundtable.org/

1. Introduction


TRACON staff who participated in the June 22, 2016 briefing regarding the 14 CFR Part 150 NCP update. Presentation slides from these briefing are provided in Appendix A.

TABLE 1-4 SFO AIRPORT/COMMUNITY ROUNDTABLE MEMBERS (NOVEMBER 2015)

Name Representing

David Takashima CCSF Mayors Office

Vacant CCSF Board of Supervisors

John L. Martin CCSF, San Francisco Airport Commission

David Pine San Mateo County Board of Supervisors

Ricardo Ortiz C/CAG Airport Land Use Committee

Elizabeth Lewis Town of Atherton

Douglas Kim City of Belmont

Cliff Lentz City of Brisbane

Richard Ortiz City of Burlingame

Raymond Buenaventura City of Daly City

Steve Okamoto City of Foster City

Alvin Royse Town of Hillsborough

Deborah Ruddock City of Half Moon Bay

Peter Ohtaki City of Menlo Park

Ann Schneider City of Millbrae

Sue Digre City of Pacifica

Janet Borgens City of Redwood City

Ken Ibarra City of San Bruno

Bob Grassilli City of San Carlos

David Lim City of San Mateo

Mark Addigeo City of South San Francisco

Deborah Gordon Town of Woodside

Ann Wengert Town of Portola Valley

NOTES: C/CAG = City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County; CCSF = City and County of San Francisco SOURCE: SFO Airport/Community Roundtable records, 2017.

1. Introduction


TABLE 1-5 LIST OF ATTENDEES FAA ATCT BRIEFING (JUNE 15, 2016)

Name Representing

Peter Escobar FAA, Airport Traffic Control Tower at SFO

Mark Sherry FAA, Airport Traffic Control Tower at SFO

Camille Garibaldi Federal Aviation Administration, San Francisco Airports District Office

John Bergener SFO Planning Division

Bert Ganoung SFO Planning Division Aircraft Noise Abatement Office

Audrey Park SFO Planning Division Environmental Affairs

Adrian Jones Environmental Science Associates

SOURCE: SFO Bureau of Planning and Environmental Affairs, June 2016.

TABLE 1-6 LIST OF ATTENDEES FAA NORCAL TRACON BRIEFING (JUNE 22, 2016)

Name Representing

Thann McLeod FAA NORCAL TRACON

Camille Garibaldi Federal Aviation Administration, San Francisco Airports District Office

John Bergener SFO Planning Division

Bert Ganoung SFO Planning Division Aircraft Noise Abatement Office

Dave Ong SFO Planning Division Aircraft Noise Abatement Office

Audrey Park SFO Planning Division Environmental Affairs

SOURCE: SFO Bureau of Planning and Environmental Affairs, June 2016.

Table 1-7 presents a list of airline representatives that were invited to a briefing on August 16, 2016. The following airlines participated in the August 16, 2016 briefing: American Airlines, United Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Southwest Airlines, and Air Canada. Presentation slides from the August 16, 2016 airline briefing are presented in Appendix A. The presentation slides to the FAA staff and the airlines are almost identical with the exception of the meeting dates and preliminary analysis results of the noise abatement and mitigation measures based on feedback provided by the FAA. Airlines that were not able to attend the briefing were given the opportunity to submit comments regarding the presentation slides and the NCP documentation. Airlines and other regular aeronautical users of the Airport were also invited to the public workshops held on August 11, 2015 and June 28, 2017.

1. Introduction


TABLE 1-7 LIST OF INVITEES AIRLINE BRIEFING (AUGUST 16, 2016)

Name Representing Name Representing

Abbas Shaban Emirates Airline Kim Cheong Tae Asiana

Alan Nakai Japan Airlines Kirk McBride Hawaiian Air

Bader Al Marzouqi Emirates Airline Kristen Owens Airline Liason Office

Butch Generoso Phillippine Airlines Larry Karp Delta Air Lines

Christine Perkins British Airways Lynae Craig Alaska Airlines

Chu Ge Malaysia airlines Marco Artero TACA Airlines

Chuck Aquino Phillippine Airlines Marit Sormus British Airways

Colm Wynne Aer Lingus Mark Hoey Cathay Pacific Airways

Craig Peterson Frontier Airlines Mitch Dubner Continental Airlines

David Morgan Air New Zealand Myrka Manzo Airline Liason Office

Davina Pratt Aer Lingus Patrick Durgan United Airlines

Fidel Melara TACA Airlines Rinnell de Guzman American Airlines

Gary Valvo Delta Air Lines Rob Maas KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

Gopala Subramaniam Singapore Airlines Robert Lawson Air Canada

Hassan Alhammadi Emirates Airline Scott Mills American Airlines

Henry Meng EVA Air Sha Chi-Ping China Airlines

James Daulton jetBlue Airways Simon Scholey British Airways

Jean-Michel Bastard Air France Stephen Riley British Airways

Jeffery O. Morgan Delta Air Lines Sukhdeep Singh Singapore Airlines Jim Colburn Frontier Airlines Tom Bailey Virgin America

John Alsford Emirates Airline Wang Wei China Airlines

Jos Caballero Avianca Warren Lampitt Airline Liason Office

Keith Rimer United Airlines William Hawkins Lufthansa

Kevin Barry Virgin America Glenn Morse United Airlines

SOURCE: SFO Bureau of Planning and Environmental Affairs, August 2016.

1.7.2 Public Workshops

A Public Workshop was held on August 11, 2015 at the start of the Study where members of the public were able to interact directly with the Project Team, including Airport and consultant staff. The workshop was held in an open house format with guided displays/boards with information regarding the 14 CFR Part 150 Study NCP update process, the project schedule, official Noise Exposure Maps, and existing noise abatement and noise mitigation measures. No public comments were submitted during or following the August 11, 2015 workshop. A 2nd public was held on June 28, 2017 near the close of the comment period for the Draft NCP. No public comments were submitted during or following the June 28, 2017 workshop. Members of the public were afforded the opportunity to participate in discussions about the information, provide written and/or verbal comments, and have their questions answered. The public workshops took place at the Checuti Room at Millbrae City Hall, which is the regular meeting place of the SFO Airport/Community Roundtable. The public workshops were advertised in three (3) local

1. Introduction


newspapers, advertised on the Project website, and announced verbally and through written communication to the SFO Airport/Community Roundtable during regularly scheduled meetings. These materials and the local newspaper advertisements are provided in Appendix B.

1.7.3 Public Hearing

The Public Hearing was held on June 28, 2017 during the public review period for the Draft NCP. The Airport Commission provided a court recorder and afforded the opportunity for members of the public to provide comments on the Draft 14 CFR Part 150 Study NCP Update. The public hearing transcript is provided in Appendix C. The Airport Commissions responses to public comments submitted during the development of the Draft NCP are provided in Appendix D.

The Public Hearing was held at the Checuti Room at Millbrae City Hall, which is the regular meeting place of the SFO Airport/Community Roundtable. The Public Hearing was advertised in three (3) local newspapers and advertised on the Project website. These materials and the local newspaper advertisements are provided in Appendix B.

1.7.4 Project Website

A 14 CFR Part 150 Study update website was created to provide broad access to schedules, technical data, other pertinent information, and to engage stakeholders and solicit input. The website was continually updated during the Study, and includes the following information:

Overview of the 14 CFR Part 150 Study update, including descriptions of regulations, purpose of the study, and the process;

Project schedule;

Final Noise Exposure Map update, downloadable by chapter, including the two full-sized Noise Exposure Maps;

Draft Noise Compatibility Program update, downloadable by chapter;

Public Workshops and Public Hearing materials, which include:

o Handout summarizing the Study purpose, process, and ways to get involved with the Study;

o Glossary of terms;

o Informational boards presented at the workshop;

o Link for the public to provide comments; and

o Public workshop materials (handouts and boards) related to the draft NCP and final NEM.

1. Introduction


Contacts and links for the public to submit written comments and questions as well as to obtain additional information about the Study. Also included were links to external sources of information, including the FAAs Airport Nosie Compatibility Planning, SFO Aircraft Noise Abatement Office, and the SFO Airport/Community Roundtable websites.

The publicly-accessible website for the 14 CFR Part 150 Study NCP Update is compliant with the Americans with Disability Act and available for viewing and download at: http://www.flysfo.com/community-environment/noise-abatement/sfo-part-150-study) The Study website is hosted on the SFO Aircraft Noise Abatement Office section of the Airports main website.

Copies of correspondence letters between the SFO Bureau of Planning and Environmental Affairs (BPEA) and the FAA are provided in Appendix A. Public notices published in three local newspapers (including the San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury, and San Mateo County Times), sign-in sheets, and presented materials (boards) for the two public workshops and the public hearing are provided in Appendix B. Outreach letters were sent to the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) San Francisco Air Station and the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics (Caltrans Division of Aeronautics) to notify them of the availability of the public draft NCP update and to solicit input (See Appendix B). The transcript for the public hearing is provided in Appendix C. Comments received during the preparation of the updated NCP and responses to those comments are provided in Appendix D.

1.8 Report Organization This report provides the updated NEMs for SFO and the technical documentation required under 14 CFR Part 150 for a noise compatibility program. The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Chapter 2: Describes the status of FAA-approved noise abatement and noise mitigation measures included in the 14 CFR Part 150 Study Update Noise Compatibility Program prepared for SFO in 1983.

Chapter 3: Describes noise abatement and noise mitigation alternatives that were considered during the update of the Noise Compatibility Program for SFO.

Chapter 4: Presents the recommended Noise Compatibility Program Update for SFO.

Chapter 5: References

Chapter 6: List of Acronyms

Appendix A: Correspondence, Consultation, and Briefings; and the FAA Letter of Agreement between FAA NORCAL TRACON and the FAA ATCT that outlines standard air traffic control procedures at SFO.

1. Introduction


Appendix B: Public Workshops, to be updated to include workshop materials presented during the public review period for the Draft NCP.

Appendix C: Public Hearing Notices and Transcript, to be updated to include presentation materials and formal comments received during the Public Hearing for the Draft NCP.

Appendix D: Public Comments and Responses, to be updated to include comments received during the public review period for the Draft NCP.

1. Introduction




CHAPTER 2 Status of the 1983 Noise Compatibility Program

2.1 Introduction The Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150 Study prepared by the Airport Commission for SFO was adapted from the 1980 Joint Land Use Study Final Technical Report. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reviewed the 14 CFR Part 150 Noise Exposure Maps (NEMs) and found them to be in compliance with 14 CFR Part 150 on January 25, 1983. The SFO Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) was approved by the FAA on September 7, 1983, making it the first airport noise compatibility program in the nation to be approved by the FAA.

The noise mitigation and abatement measures described in the following sections were recommended by the Joint Powers Board in the Joint Land Use Study published in 1980. The numbering and lettering of the NCP measures below were taken from the FAAs Record of Approval (ROA) dated September 7, 1983 (See Appendix A). The following sections provide information regarding the status of the FAA-approved and disapproved measures and associated recommendations regarding continuation of the measure in the future. The status of noise compatibility program measures listed in the 1983 ROA is summarized in Table 2-1.

2.2 Airport Noise Monitoring and Management A.1 Establish noise abatement as a priority function within the Directors Office including staff and resources to monitor mitigation plan and recommend corrective actions. Status: This measure was implemented locally in 1980 prior to the submission of SFOs 14 CFR Part 150 NCP to the FAA. Current responsibility for SFOs Aircraft Noise Abatement Program rests with the staff in the SFO Aircraft Noise Abatement Office (ANAO). The SFO ANAO serves as the link between the public and airline operators by ensuring that flights operate as quietly as possible and providing accurate and accessible information about SFOs noise abatement programs to community residents.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and the SFO ANAO continues to work with the public and airline operators to address aircraft noise issues at SFO. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

2. Status of the 1983 Noise Compatibility Program


TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF THE STATUS OF 1983 NOISE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM MEASURES

Count Action

Element Action Element Title 1983 ROA

FAA Decision Current Status and Recommendation

ON-AIRPORT ACTIONS: A. AIRPORT NOISE MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 1 A.1 Establish noise abatement as a priority function

within the Directors office including staff and resources to monitor mitigation plan and recommend corrective actions.

Approved Implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

2 A.2a Develop noise performance monitoring system. Approved Implemented. Airport Commission is seeking FAA re-approval of this updated measure. A.2b Install noise performance monitoring system and refine noise mitigation plan based on

results.

3 A.3a Expand Airports Rules and Regulations to include Actions contained in the Noise Mitigation Plan.

Partially Approved

Implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

4 A.4a Develop a Community Information Program including a communications link with citizens.


ON-AIRPORT ACTIONS: B. FLIGHT PROCEDURE CHANGES 5 B.1a Establish Runway 10 as the preferential Noise

Abatement Departure Runway from 1 a.m. to 6 a.m.

Approved Implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required. Modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs.

6 B.1b Study the use of an Instrument Landing System (ILS) for Runway 19 arrivals, in cooperation with East Bay communities.


7 B.1c Use microwave landing system (MLS) for Runway 19 arrivals, if feasible.

Neither approved nor disapproved

FAA never approved this measure and the Airport Commission did not pursue this measure. No further action is required.

8 B.2a Increase use of the Visual Shoreline Departure Procedure.


9 B.3a Study the feasibility of increasing the minimum crossing altitude over northern San Francisco Peninsula and Foster City.

Approved Implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required. Modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. B.3b Continue the increased minimum crossing altitude over northern San Francisco Peninsula

and Foster City, if feasible.

10 B.4a Continue to encourage use of the Quiet Bridge Approach (visual).




TABLE 2-1 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF THE STATUS OF 1983 NOISE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM MEASURES

Count Action



11 B.4c Use MLS curved precision approaches to avoid Foster City, if feasible.

Neither approved nor disapproved

FAA never approved this measure and the Airport Commission did not pursue this measure. No further action is required.

12 B.5a Continue improved procedures for avoiding overflights of Foster City.


13 B.6a Continue to use noise abatement climb power reduction following FAA procedures.

Approved Measure implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

ON-AIRPORT ACTIONS: C. AIRPORT NOISE LIMITS, USE RESTRICTIONS, AND ECONOMIC INCENTIVES 14 C.1a(1) Continue a maximum noise limit of 102 dBA for

aircraft using San Francisco International Airport.

Approved Measure implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

15 C.1a(2) Develop procedures for enforcing a lower maximum noise limit for night hours.

Disapproved Additional analysis under the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 necessary. Measure was never implemented. No action required.

C.1b Reduce maximum noise limit. Establish a lower maximum noise limit for nighttime hours.

C.1c Further reduce maximum noise limit. Reduce maximum noise limit for nighttime hours.

16 C.2a(1) Continue to prohibit unnecessary nighttime engine runups.

Disapproved Maintenance engine run ups limited to designated areas of the Airport. Fines not implemented. No action required.

17 C.2a(2) Investigate use of noise suppressors for engine runups.

Approved Measure was never implemented. No action required.

18 C.3a Develop a Noise Allocation System Consisting with the Noise Allocation Established for the Airport in the Regional Transportation Plan.

Disapproved Additional analysis under the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 necessary. Measure was never implemented. No action required. C.3b Implement a noise allocation and banking system.

19 C.4b Prohibit all aircraft operations over residential areas adjacent to the airport during night hours (between 2:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.)

Disapproved Measure was never implemented. No action required.

C.4c Prohibit all aircraft operations over residential areas adjacent to the airport during night hours (between midnight and 6:00 a.m.)

20 C.5a Develop economic incentives to encourage airlines to reduce noise.

Disapproved Additional analysis under the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 necessary. Measure was incorporated into the SFO Rules and Regulations but was never implemented or enforced. No action required.

C.5b Implement Economic Incentives, if feasible.

OFF-AIRPORT ACTIONS: D. NOISE INSULATION/AVIGATION EASEMENT PROGRAM 21 D.1a Develop and implement a voluntary noise

insulation/avigation easement demonstration program for existing homes and schools within the 70-75 CNEL.

Approved Program refined with updated FAA-approved NEMs. Airport Commission seeking FAA re-approval of this measure.

D.1b Expand program, if effective.



TABLE 2-1 (CONTINUED) SUMMARY OF THE STATUS OF 1983 NOISE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM MEASURES

Count Action



OFF-AIRPORT ACTIONS: E. NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM 22 E.1a Evaluate Airport/Community cooperation in

improving Airport impacted neighborhoods as an alternative or supplement to the noise insulation/avigation easement Program.


23 E.1b Implement a neighborhood planning and enhancement program, if needed.

Disapproved Measure was never implemented. No action required.

OFF-AIRPORT ACTIONS: F. PREVENTATIVE LAND USE PLANNING 24 F.1a Continue to prohibit new or redeveloped noise

sensitive land uses within the 70-75 CNEL. Approved Implemented. FAA re-approval of

this measure is not required.

25 F.2a Require adequate sound insulation and avigation easements for all new or redeveloped noise sensitive land uses within the 65-70 CNEL.


26 F.3a Continue to require acoustical studies for noise sensitive land uses in areas exposed to 60 CNEL and above.


27 F.4a Prepare a final airport land use plan to include Joint Land Use Study findings and recommendations.


28 F.5a Update noise element of cities and county plans to include Joint Land Use Study findings and recommendations.


29 F.6a Encourage coordinated land use planning between environs communities, ALUC and the Airport concerning noise, shielding, building height, access, air quality and the West of Bayshore lands.


NOTES: ALUC = Airport Land Use Commission or Airport Land Use Committee CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level FAA = Federal Aviation Administration MLS = Microwave Landing System NEMs = Noise Exposure Maps ROA = Record of Approval SOURCE: Federal Aviation Administration, Record of Approval, San Francisco International Airport Noise Compatibility Program. September 7, 1983.



A.2a Develop a Noise Performance Monitoring System. A.2b Install a Noise Performance Monitoring System and Refine Noise Mitigation Plan based on results. Status: The noise monitoring system was developed and installed in 1981 with local funds, prior to the submission of SFOs 14 CFR Part 150 NCP to the FAA. In 1983, the Airport Commission expanded SFOs noise monitoring system from 13 Remote Monitoring Stations (RMS) to 24 stations. Five more RMS were added to the Noise Monitoring System in 1987. The system currently has 29 off-airport RMS located around the San Francisco Bay Area and five on-airport units that are used to measure noise from aircraft run-up activity. The ANAO also has four portable units, which are used for short-term noise monitoring at off-airport locations on an as-needed basis.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA, implemented and noise monitoring is ongoing. The current noise monitoring equipment was purchased and installed in 2004 and is reaching the end of its useful life. The Airport Commission intends to replace the 29 off-airport RMS, the five on-airport units, and the four portable units with state of the art equipment that fully comply with 14 CFR Part 150 and the Title 21 regulations. The Airport Commission will also purchase four new portable units to ensure that the ANAO is responsive to requests for short-term noise monitoring at off-airport locations. The Airport Commission is seeking FAA approval of this updated measure. Details regarding this updated measure are provided in Chapter 4 of this NCP Update.

A.3a Expand Airports Rules and Regulations to include Actions contained in the Noise Mitigation Plan. Status: On May 17, 1978, SFO promulgated its first comprehensive Noise Abatement regulation in the Airport Commission Resolution No. 78-0131. This measure was approved by the FAA and has been implemented. SFO has updated its Rules and Regulations several times since 1978 including updates issued on January 22, 1988 (Airport Commission Resolution No. 88-0016), July 16, 1991 (Airport Commission Resolution No. 91-0099), July 7, 1992 (Airport Commission Resolution No. 92-0202), December 7, 1993 (Airport Commission Resolution No. 93-0248), and January 17, 1995 (Airport Commission Resolution No. 95-0015). Rule 11 of SFOs Rules and Regulations [II-1], adopted on March 15, 2016, is a continuation of the 1978 noise abatement regulations.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and has been implemented. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

A.4a Develop a Community Information Program including a communications link with citizens. Status: This measure was implemented locally in 1981 with the establishment of the SFO Airport/Community Roundtable (Roundtable). Participants in the Roundtable include representatives from the SFO Airport Commission and local elected government officials from the City and County of San Francisco (CCSF) and San Mateo County. These local elected government officials include mayors, city council members and County Supervisors. Shortly



after its creation, the Roundtable focused its efforts to address the issues related to noise generated by aircraft operations at SFO. The Roundtable has become a forum for local residents to express their concerns related to SFO noise impacts.

Over the past thirty four years, the Roundtable has monitored the performance of SFO-implemented aircraft noise mitigation programs, voiced community concerns related to aircraft noise impacts, and identified additional feasible noise mitigation actions that further reduce aircraft noise impacts from SFO. Through the cooperation of SFO, local communities, the federal government, and the airlines operating at SFO, the Roundtable has facilitated numerous aircraft noise mitigation policies and programs to improve the quality of life for residents who are impacted by airport noise. The most notable policies and programs created by the Roundtable since its formation in 1981 include:

No Noise Shift policy (1993) the Roundtable will not knowingly take any action that will result in the shifting of aircraft noise from one community to another related to SFO operations. This policy was also included as one of the three Guiding Principles and Mission Statement of the Roundtables Strategic Plan (2010).

Produced a noise abatement training video for airline pilots (1997).

Established the Fly Quiet Program to grade the airlines operating at SFO on their ability to fly quietly and be good neighbors to the community.

Established the annual Jon C. Long Fly Quiet Program Awards to honor specific airlines for their efforts to help reduce aircraft noise.

Researched the feasibility of backblast noise (low frequency noise) mitigation.

Researched sound insulation options to mitigate aircraft noise in modular school classroom buildings.

Analyzed the feasibility of developing a Ground Run-Up Enclosure (GRE) at SFO to mitigate noise from aircraft maintenance activities.

Maintained an on-going evaluation of local area flight patterns, including advocating for a 1,000-foot increase in the altitude at the MENLO intersection (navigational fix) for aircraft arrivals to SFO and a 2,000-foot increase in the altitude at the Woodside VOR (navigational aid) for specific SFO arrivals.

Continued participation on the Advisory Board of the FAA Center of Excellence Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction (PARTNER), a national research effort to analyze feasible mitigation actions to address aviation noise and emissions impacts.

The Roundtable, which now consists of forty-five representatives, continues to meet on a regular basis to gather input from the general public directly impacted by aircraft noise from SFO. The Roundtable holds regular meetings on the first Wednesday of every other month beginning at 7:00 p.m. at the Dave Chetcuti Room at Millbrae City Hall. Roundtable members discuss aircraft noise levels in the vicinity of SFO and the status of ongoing noise mitigation programs and initiatives. The date and time of the Roundtable meetings are published on the Roundtable



website.1 Special meetings are held on an as-needed basis. The agendas for these meetings are available on their website 72 hours prior to a regular meeting. The Roundtable Coordinator also transmits an electronic copy of the meeting agenda, minutes of the prior meeting, and technical/special reports to the Roundtable members prior to the meeting. In addition, the SFO ANAO currently provides the general public with information related to the latest noise abatement measures on their internet homepage2, which also includes staff contact information so that the public may ask questions or voice their concerns.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA. The Roundtable continues to serve as a forum for discussions regarding aircraft noise levels in the vicinity of SFO. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

2.3 Flight Procedure Changes B.1a Establish Runway 10 as the voluntary preferential Noise Abatement Departure Runway from 1 a.m. to 6 a.m. Status: As of March 3, 1988, departures between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. are directed to Runways 10L and 10R or are directed to Runways 28L and 28R and assigned the NIITE THREE (RNAV) procedure when weather and traffic conditions allow. Aircraft using these runways are steered to the northeast shortly after takeoff in an attempt to keep aircraft noise away from the residential communities located to the northwest of SFO. By keeping aircraft east of U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101), the majority of the nighttime departures overfly industrial and business park land uses instead of residential areas.

SFOs preferential runway use program was implemented through Airport Operations Bulletin (AOB) 88-03 and is included in Rule 11 Noise Abatement Regulation of the SFO Rules and Regulations. The measure is voluntarily implemented by FAA staff at SFOs Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) when weather and traffic conditions allow.

SFO operates on two sets of parallel runways for both arrivals and departures. Based on this runway configuration, primary wind conditions, and physical terrain surrounding the Airport, there are three (3) preferred nighttime preferential runway procedures:

Nighttime Preferential Runway Use Priority 1: Use Runways 10L and 10R for takeoff because they offer departure routing over the San Francisco Bay, thereby reducing aircraft noise over communities surrounding SFO.

Nighttime Preferential Runway Use Priority 2: When departures from Runways 10L and 10R are not possible due to weather conditions, the second priority would be for aircraft to depart Runways 28L and 28R following the NIITE THREE (RNAV) Procedure3. The NIITE THREE (RNAV) is a predominately visual flight rules (VFR)

1 SFO Airport/Community Roundtable. Available online: http://sforoundtable.org/. Accessed February 18, 2015. 2 SFO Aircraft Noise Abatement Office. http://www.flysfo.com/community-environment/noise-abatement. Accessed

February 18, 2015. 3 The Shoreline Departure has been formally redesignated as TRUKN TWO (RNAV) when performed during the

daytime hours and NIITE THREE (RNAV) during nighttime hours per the Northern California (NorCal) Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex.



procedure that directs departing aircraft to the northeast shortly after takeoff in an attempt to keep aircraft noise away from the residential areas located to the northwest of SFO. This procedure keeps aircraft east of U.S. 101 where the land uses are zoned and developed for industrial and business parks instead of residential areas located west of U.S. 101. Both of these procedures incorporate an immediate right turn after departure to avoid residential communities northwest of SFO.

Nighttime Preferential Runway Use Priority 3: The third preference is to depart on Runways 1L and 1R. While this procedure directs aircraft over the San Francisco Bay, jet blast and low frequency noise from these departures may affect residential communities south of SFO.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA, has been implemented, and was modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. FAA ATCT staff and pilots continue to voluntarily implement this measure when weather and traffic conditions allow. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

B.1b Study the use of an Instrument Landing System (ILS) for Runway 19 arrivals, in cooperation with East Bay communities. Status: In 1982, the Airport Commission conducted a series of studies to determine the feasibility of providing precision instrument landing systems for Runway 19L and 19R arrivals to facilitate greater use of Runway 10L and 10R for departures. Runway 19L currently has a Category I ILS approach; Runway 19R has a RNAV (GPS) approach.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA, has been implemented, and was modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. Runway 19L currently has a Category I ILS approach; Runway 19R has a RNAV (GPS) approach. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

B.1c Use microwave landing system (MLS) for Runway 19 arrivals, if feasible. Status: Relatively few Microwave Landing System (MLS) approaches were implemented in the United States. MLS approaches to Runway 19L and 19R at SFO were never implemented.

Recommendation: The FAA neither approved nor disapproved this measure and the Airport Commission did not pursue this measure. The Airport Commission is not seeking approval of this measure and no further action is required.

B.2a Increase use of the Visual Shoreline Departure Procedure Status: After considerable coordination with FAA Air Traffic and Flight Standards representatives, the visual shoreline departure procedure4 was implemented in 1980, prior to the approval of the NCP. Rule 11 Noise Abatement Regulation of the SFO Rules and Regulations encourages the use of the TRUKN TWO (RNAV) procedure during daytime hours when aircraft

4 The Shoreline departure procedure has been changed to TRUKN TWO (RNAV) and the Quiet departure procedure

has been changed to NIITE THREE (RNAV) per the Northern California (NorCal) Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex.



are departing on Runways 28L and 28R. FAA ATCT personnel at SFO regularly assign aircraft departing on Runways 28L and 28R to the TRUKN TWO (RNAV) departure procedure during the daytime hours and the similar NIITE THREE (RNAV) departure procedure for operations conducted after 10 p.m. at night, particularly if they are headed to destinations north or northeast of SFO.

As of March 3, 1988, the Airport Commission requests that aircraft departing from Runways 28L and 28R to use the TRUKN TWO (RNAV) procedure or the NIITE THREE (RNAV) procedure whenever possible. These departure procedures steer aircraft to the northeast shortly after takeoff in an attempt to keep aircraft and associated noise away from the residential communities located northwest of SFO near San Bruno Mountain. Aircraft following the TRUKN TWO (RNAV) procedure overfly the San Francisco Bay and industrial land uses in South San Francisco.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and was modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. Implementation of the TRUCKN TWO (RNAV) and NIITE THREE (RNAV) procedures is ongoing. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

B.3a Study the feasibility of increasing the minimum crossing altitude over northern San Francisco Peninsula and Foster City. B.3b Continue the increased minimum crossing altitude over northern San Francisco Peninsula and Foster City, if feasible. Status: Prior to the FAAs approval of the NCP, studies were conducted to determine the feasibility of modifying arrival routes and altitude profiles above the San Francisco Peninsula and residential areas in Foster City southeast of the Airport. These studies determined that minor adjustments to existing flight procedures could be made to provide overflight noise reduction. Rather than increase the crossing altitudes over Foster City and the Peninsula, the FAA opted to maintain the glideslope and instead offset the arrival course laterally from Foster City and the shoreline. The SFO ANAO, working with the FAA, has promoted greater use of the FMS Bridge approach to avoid overflight noise impacts in Foster City and other Peninsula communities. The Airport Commission and FAA have implemented a Precision Runway Monitoring (PRM) / Simultaneous Offset Instrument Approach (SOIA) for Runways 10R-28L and 10L-28R. The use of the PRM/SOIA at SFO has helped reduce the level of aircraft noise exposure in neighboring communities. When the PRM/SOIA is used, approaches to SFO take place over the San Francisco Bay waters instead of over San Mateo, Foster City and other cities south of SFO.

Recommendation: These measures were approved by the FAA and were modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. Voluntary implementation of these measures is ongoing. FAA re-approval of these measures is not required.

B.4a Continue to encourage use of the Quiet Bridge Approach (visual). Status: The use of the Quiet Bridge Approach (formerly called the FMS Bridge approach) for arrivals to Runways 28L and 28R has been encouraged, promoted and employed by air traffic controllers at SFO since 1980. The FMS Bridge approach procedure uses a visual landmark (the



San Mateo Bridge) to position aircraft east of residential areas in Foster City, thereby mitigating overflight noise. The measure is voluntarily implemented by FAA staff at SFOs ATCT.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and was modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. The measure is voluntarily implemented by FAA staff at SFOs ATCT when weather and traffic conditions allow. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

B.4c Use MLS curved precision approaches to avoid Foster City, if feasible. Status: Relatively few Microwave Landing System (MLS) approaches were implemented in the United States. A MLS approach to Runway 28R at SFO was never implemented.

Recommendation: The FAA did not approve this measure and the Airport Commission did not pursue this measure. The Airport Commission is not seeking approval of this measure and no further action is required.

B.5a Continue improved procedures for avoiding overflights of Foster City. Status: As part of the Fly Quiet Program, implemented by SFOs ANAO since 1988, Runway 28R is the preferred arrival runway at SFO via the FMS Bridge approach path, which is monitored daily. Aircraft with a final approach to Runway 28R fly to the east of Foster Citys shoreline which minimizes aircraft noise levels in Foster City. A list of operations that deviate from the FMS Bridge approach path is generated once per week and submitted to the FAA Northern California Terminal Radar Approach Control (NORCAL TRACON).5

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and was modeled as baseline conditions during the development of the 2014 and 2019 NEMs. Voluntary implementation of this measure is ongoing. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

B.6a Continue to use noise abatement climb power reduction following FAA procedures. Status: At the request of the Airport Commission, FAA ATCT personnel at SFO voluntarily began using the FAA recommended engine thrust and flap retraction procedures as defined in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 91-53, Noise Abatement Departure Profile [II-2] at SFO in 1979. Currently, aircraft departing from Runway 28L and 28R use the appropriate International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Noise Abatement Take-off Climb Procedure A or FAA Advisory Circular 91-53A6 [II-3] noise abatement climb procedure to minimize noise levels in communities close to SFO. SFO ANAO staff members track airline adherence to this noise abatement measure through the Fly Quiet Program.

5 SFO Aircraft Noise Abatement Office. Foster City Shortcut Incursions Report. Available online:

http://www.flysfo.com/community-environment/noise-abatement/reports-and-resources 6 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Advisory Circular 91-53A, Noise Abatement

Departure Profiles, July 22, 1993. Available online: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/ac91-53.pdf

http://www.flysfo.com/community-environment/noise-abatement/reports-and-resourceshttp://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/ac91-53.pdf



Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and voluntary implementation of this measure is ongoing. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

2.4 Airport Noise Limits, Use Restrictions, and Economic Incentives C.1a (1) Continue a maximum noise limit of 102 dBA for aircraft using San Francisco Airport. Status: In 1981, the Airport Commission established an acceptable noise level of 102 dBA for aircraft operations at SFO. As of January 1, 1993, the Airport Commission allows aircraft to depart SFO during the nighttime hours between 11:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. only if the aircrafts effective perceived noise level (EPNL) at takeoff does not exceed 103 EPNdB.

SFO ANAO staff members track airline adherence to this noise abatement measure through the Fly Quiet Program (Fleet Quality). The Fly Quiet Reports grade individual airlines based on a scale from zero to ten, where a zero represents poor performance and a ten represents outstanding performance in terms of adhering to SFOs noise abatement procedures, respectively. The Fly Quiet scores allow SFOs ANAO staff to easily compare individual airline performance on a quarterly basis.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA and implementation is ongoing. FAA re-approval of this measure is not required.

C.1a (2) Develop procedures for enforcing a lower maximum noise limit for night hours. C.1b Reduce maximum noise limit. Establish a lower maximum noise limit for nighttime hours. C.1c Further reduce maximum noise limit. Reduce maximum noise limit for nighttime hours. Status: This measure was disapproved by the FAA pending the receipt of further information. The Airport Commission never established nor enforced a lower maximum noise limit during nighttime hours. SFO ANAO staff members track airline adherence to the maximum noise limit of 103 EPNdB through the Fly Quiet Program (Fleet Quality).

Recommendation: The FAA disapproved of this measure and it was never implemented. The Airport Commission is not seeking approval of this measure and no further action is required.

C.2a(1) Continue to Prohibit Unnecessary Nighttime Engine Runups. Status: This measure was disapproved by the FAA pending the receipt of further information.

Recommendation: The FAA disapproved of this measure and it was never implemented. The Airport Commission is not seeking approval of this measure and no further action is required.



C.2a(2) Investigate use of noise suppressors for engine runups. Status: This measure was approved by the FAA but was never pursued by the Airport Commission. The Airport Commission conducted a study in 2009 to identify a potential location for a ground run-up enclosure (GRE) but determined that constructing a GRE at SFO was not feasible due to severe land constraints. Noise evaluations conducted by the SFO ANAO suggest that noise barriers could inadvertently push noise downwind towards Foster City and San Mateo residents.

Recommendation: This measure was approved by the FAA but was never implemented. The Airport Commission is not seeking approval of this measure and no action required.

C

san francisco international...

Documents