Representative Joe Sestak | Representing the 7th District of Pennsylvania

AIRCRAFT NOISE COMPLAINTS

Each time disruptive sound (“noise”) is observed from aircraft approaching or leaving Philadelphia International Airport (“PHL”) over Delaware County, it should be reported to PHL, the FAA and Congress. Safety concerns should be reported as well. Substantial and relentless public comment is essential to corrective action.

Aircraft noise may or may not be the result of the FAA’s ill conceived NY/NJ/PHL airspace redesign plan. The reason why the aircraft noise is present is not relevant. The noise is the problem and its presence requires remedial action. It is probable that a significant portion of aircraft noise will be the result of aircraft flying the new airspace redesign headings. These headings were put into effect on December 19, 2007. They are part of Phase I of the Plan. The Plan has four phases continuing through 2011. The situation will get much worse unless corrected.

We have major air transportation delay and congestion problems. However, the FAA’s airspace redesign plan will not solve those problems. To the contrary, it will make these problems worse. Two types of action could stop continued implementation of the Plan. First - any one of the 12 pending court cases could terminate implementation, and second -- Congress could withhold funding to the FAA for the airspace redesign project until a competent examination of the problems, available solutions and applicable costs plus sources of funding is completed.

It is essential that area residents comment early and often about their observations. It is essential also that this information be communicated to Congress. If a report has been submitted and another event is observed, report it, and the 3rd and 4th and so on. If awakened at 3am by aircraft noise or life is disrupted at 3pm by aircraft noise, report it - every time. Note the day, date, time, location, etc. so the PHL tower can identify the aircraft and heading involved.

TELEPHONE

First -- call 215-937-6750. This is the PHL Noise Reporting Number. It is an unmanned line to record complaints. In times of heavy call volume, this telephone number may be inaccessible or the recording machine may not be able to accept further calls. Call and leave a message if you can. If this fails, call the PHL noise officer -- Jonathan Collette 215-937-6233.

Second -- call 215-492-4123. This is the FAA/PHL Tower Radar Supervisor. It is the number of the individual who is in charge of the controllers in the PHL tower. It is a recorded line and each complaint must be retained for future reference (including FOIA requests). The PHL tower radar supervisor can cause the controllers to put more aircraft back over the Delaware River path and may do so if he receives a flood of complaints. He will not be pleased to receive the complaint. Share your concern with him anyway!

EMAIL

Third – send an email to PHL at JONATHAN.COLLETTE@PHL.ORG and to the FAA at 9-AEA-NOISE@FAA.GOV. Send your email with the “Request Read Receipt” option activated. Keep the read receipt for future reference.

Fourth – send a confirming email to our U.S. Senators and U.S. Congressman. Congress does not publish individual email addresses. However, your email can be sent by going to the below Internet address for each official and typing the information.

• U.S. Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr. (PA): http://casey.senate.gov/contact/
• U.S. Senator Arlen Specter (PA): http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm
• U.S. Representative Robert Brady (PA-01): http://www.house.gov/formrobertbrady/issue.htm
• U.S. Representative Joe Sestak (PA-07): http://sestak.house.gov/IMA/issue_subscribe.shtml

GENERAL INFORMATION

• The FAA has adopted an airspace redesign plan involving the Philadelphia International Airport (APHL@). This was done pursuant to a Record of Decision (AROD@) dated Sept. 5th 2007. Phase I implementation of the Plan began Dec. 19th 2007. The Plan involves four phases continuing through 2011.
• The ROD at pp 25-6 (ANoise and Compatible Land Use@) states that Essington, Crum Lynne, Woodlyn, Wallingford, Swarthmore, Media, Rose Valley and Parkside will experience noise levels of 65 DNL dB or greater as a result of the new departure headings from PHL Runways 27L/R. http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/nas_redesign/regional_guidance/eastern_reg/nynjphl_redesign/media/Corrected_ROD_071005.pdf
• The FAA measures sound (in decibels i.e. dB) using flawed models lacking adequate calibrations and metrics that mask the existence of intermittent and annoying sound. It does not then take the next step of effectively determining the disruptive effects of that sound. It relies on the defective Schultz Curve. Even transportation experts in the U.S. DOT=s in-house Athink tank,@ the John A.Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, have faulted these metrics, models and processes. Extensive studies exist concerning noise, its measurement, its impact on public health and its impact on the ability of humans to carry out cognitive tasks. These studies need to be evaluated and used appropriately.
• Aircraft noise can have significant adverse educational development consequences e.g., see http://www.fican.org/pdf/FICAN_Findings_on_school_study.pdf. Many schools and educational institutions in Delaware County lie in the path of the new departure headings.
• Aircraft noise can have significant adverse health consequences e.g., see http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1253720 and http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20080214/hl_hsn/airplanenoiseboostsbloodpressureevenduringsleep
• Aircraft noise can have significant adverse property value consequences e.g., see http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/growch/v31y2000i3p408-419.html
• Aircraft traffic over densely populated areas has significant adverse ground safety consequences e.g., see http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/aviation/safety/thirdpartyrisknearairportsan2989
• From a Congressional viewpoint, the FAA is being intensely criticized for what amounts to serious mismanagement. Airspace redesign is only one aspect of this criticism. On Feb. 7th Senators Lautenberg and Menendez (NJ) blocked the nomination of Acting FAA Administrator Robert Sturgell to a five year term. See http://menendez.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=292402 Mr. Sturgell can remain in an acting role until the next President takes office. Part of their reasoning involves airspace redesign.
• The USDOT (of which the FAA is a part) does not appear to understand the gravity of the circumstance involving increased air traffic over densely populated areas. On Feb. 7th in response to the Robert Sturgell nomination hold, USDOT spokesman Brian Turmail said "…We hope they won't let a small thing like a slight change in noise levels for a small number of residents affect a confirmation that everyone would agree needs to be made swiftly to ensure the safety and continued efficiency of our aviation system." See http://www.btnmag.com/businesstravelnews/headlines/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003708748. This statement is not consistent with the ROD or the many scientific studies on the effects of aircraft noise.
• On Feb. 13th, the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation criticized the FAA for lack of leadership. See http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080213/oppose13.art.htm?loc=interstitialskip.