Key issue: Will the proposed Runway Extension and airport improvements have a significant impact on

1
(No Transcript)
2
Draft ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Analysis

• Key issue Will the proposed Runway Extension and
  airport improvements have a significant impact on
  the environment?
• OSU draft conclusion The proposed improvements
  will have no significant impact (FONSI Finding
  Of No Significant Impact)
• What is a Significant Impact?
• In the case of noise, a greater than 1.5 dB
  increase in the Day Night Level (DNL).

3
Preliminary Conclusions EA is inadequate
The EA is inadequate because   1.  It fails in
several areas to reflect the full noise impact of
future operations.  These areas are      a)
predicting retirement of current serviceable and
noisy aircraft,      b) failing to show any use
of several noisy based aircraft, and      c)
exaggerating the actual climb profiles of
aircraft by failing to consider ATC restrictions. 
4
Preliminary Conclusions Fleet Mix prediction is
wrong
 Predicting retirement of current serviceable and
noisy aircraft There is an undocumented and
unsubstantiated assumption that the following
will be retired        a)  100 of the Citation
3 fleet.      b)  100 of the Canadair 600
fleet.      c)  100 of the Citation 500
fleet.      d)    98 of the Citation 55B
fleet.      e)   100 of the Gulfstream IV
fleet.       f)   100 of the Gulfstream V
fleet.      g)    83 of the Learjet 25
fleet. If the fleetmix remains unchanged, the
1.5 dB threshold would be exceeded.
5
Preliminary Conclusions Fleet Mix prediction is
wrong
 Based jet aircraft missing entirely from the
forecast operations include        a) Beechjet
400      b) 525 Cessna Jet      c) Citation
2      d) Falcon 50      e) Falcon 200      
f) Hawker Siddeley 800      e) Learjet 31   These
are noisy jet aircraft whose operation must be
included in the noise model.  Failure to include
these aircraft understates the noise impact.
6
Preliminary Conclusions Growth Rates are
understated
 2.  CAGR fails to adequately reflect future
operations. Three elements shown for growth in
Airport operations      a) A 2.2 compound annual
growth rate (CAGR)      b) An additional 22,000
operations from construction of the hangars     
c) 450 additional operations from lengthening of
the RW     Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR)
over the past seven years has varied from -17
percent to 19 percent.  2.2 percent is not the
worst-case required by the NEPA.   A 3.6 CAGR
with the same fleet mix and the forecast hanger
and RW extension 1.5 dB contour increase    
7
FLEET MIX
The sponsor claims the effect of lengthening RWY
9L/27R is to add only 450 new operations over
five years. This is curiously low, and if
founded, would not justify the expense to add
3,000 ft of runway. COST BENEFIT
8
CLIMB RATES
The INM (Integrated Noise Model) modeled climb
fails to reflect the shallower climbs which keep
aircraft lower to the ground. The result of this
oversight is an understatement of the noise
exposure contours from the model.
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
Conclusions

• The EAs noise analysis has critical flaws
• Unjustified retirement of noisy aircraft
• Inadequate Fleet mix
• Improper Departure profiles
• Low Compound Annual Growth Rate
• Any one of these flaws would push the noise
  impacts of the proposed improvements over the
  1.5 dB threshold

12
Updated Schedule

• Thursday October 14th Citizens Advisory
  Committee mtg
• Thursday October 14th Public Meeting
• November EA released to public for formal
  review
• November/December Public Hearing
• Submission to FAA for review -?-
• 6-12 months review
• Publication in Federal Register
• Comment by Public (up to 180 days)
• Action by FAA either
• FONSI
• or
• EIS
• Submission to OSU Board -?-