HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-03-21-HFAC-min.pdf APR-11-1988 12 15 FROM HANSCOM TO 9735611 P 02
_ .�
SE'd_ECIMEN
4.
4- 15o9
MINUTES �Et.-`°v�,.
March 21 , 1989 O 8 meA,
HANSCOM FIELD ADVISORY COMMISSION R � 7989
ATTENDANCE 1
Michael Dye Jet Aviation
Robert Domnitz Merriam Hill Assoc, - Lexington
Paul V Roberts Concord
M Henry Wifholm Digital
Liz Banks Lexington Minuteman
Francesca de Van Massport
Sara Arnold Massport
Dick Marchi Massport
R D Sanford NBAA & Cobey Corp
Norm Fredkin Raytheon
Julie McCay Turner League of Women Voters
Patrice Hurley Bedford
Jack Taylor Lexington
S Jan David Beeqhcraft East
Paul J Collins Beechoraft East
Liz Corcoran Lincoln Planning Board
Col Vincent J MacDonald Hanscom Air Force Base
Michael J Harrington Bedford resident
Frank J McGovern Bedford resident
Kenneth H Ringle Bedford resident
Joyce Hale Massport
Barbara Patzner Massport
Charles R Lezama Bedford resident
RPR-11-1988 12'26 FROM HANSCOM TO 9735611 P 01
MINUTES
Paul Roberts called the meeting to order at 7 40 p m All present
introduced themselves
1 jlj nates. There were no corrections or additions to the minutes
2 Prise Subcommittee Report. Robert Domnitz distributed draft
minutes for the March 7th noise subcommittee meeting (see
attached) He reviewed the results of the meeting, first discussing
the issues involved in changing to new EXP (the method of estimating
noise at Hanscom based on the newest FAA noise data) He then
reported on the discussion that ensued regarding the nighttime
surcharge, presenting the latest proposal developed by the four
members present at the March 7th noise subcommittee meeting He
stressed that the members present were able to reach an agreement
He reported that Michael Dye, who represented the aviation based
users, was not able to attend Domnitz said he understood that a
minority of the subcommittee would object to the agreement reached
March 7th and encouraged the minority to present an alternative
position
Dye read a statement (see attached) explaining his objections to
both the original subcommittee proposal and the one submitted at the
meeting He voiced concerns about the process by which the
proposals had been developed and about the ratio of users versus
community representatives on the subcommittee Dye stated that
users are willing to test the validity of the proposal and even the
existing surcharge
Sandy Sanford also read a statement (see attached) that objected to
the noise committee proposal and supported Dye s exception to the
process This prompted discussion in which the users who are
nonmembers of the subcommittee expressed their discontent with not
being allowed to speak at two meetings when the night surcharge
proposals were developed
Domnitz said he did not ask the nonmembers at the March 7th meeting
to refrain from making comments, and he apologized that as chairman
he had not made it clear that they were welcome to do so However,
he believed that the process had been proper, with dialogue
extending over more than six months The other two community
representatives who are members of the noise subcommittee
concurred Domnitz also commented that the users had not developed
alternative proposals and that the tilt towards community membership
on the noise subcommittee is proper since it reflects the HFAC ratio
Users felt that the length of the discussions did not necessarily
mean that the solution was proper They discussed the economic
viability of the airport as it relates to the communities Jan
David read a statement prepared by Beechcraft (see attached)
expressing its dissention
APR-11-1988 12'26 FROM HANSCOM TO 9735611 P 02
Dick Marchi from Maseport told HFAC he was not surprised that the
two sides had been unable to resolve the situation, and in his
experience, concensus of this type is very difficult to reach
Sanford moved that the surcharge question go back to the
subcommittee and be discussed in a session open to all those
present Barbara Patzner thanked the noise subcommittee for all its
work and presented Massport s staff recommendations (see attached)
for addressing the issue since there is no consensus Henry Wifholm
suggested leaving the current surcharge in place until a Part 150
study is completed After further discussion, Sanford withdrew his
motion
Liz Corcoran asked that the noise subcommittee report be accepted by
the Commission There was a tie vote, 5 to 5, with one abstention
3 Tree Cuttint_in Radford Joyce Hale reported that in October
1988, Rick Bessom, a Massport engineer, informed HFAC of a tree
clearing project scheduled for 1989 to meet FAA requirements This
cutting was to be done on Massport property in Concord and Bedford
Because some of the area was in wetlands, Massport went to the
Conservation Commissions in both towns Unfortunately, the abutters
in Bedford were not individually informed and became extremely
concerned when they saw the trees being cut Hale explained that
the situation was complicated in part by the Corps of Engineers
work on Phase 2 of the Hazardous Waste Removal Program which
required some recent tree cutting in the same general area The
Massport work was completed three weeks ago
Bedford abutters who attended the meeting vocalized their concern
that they were not notified ahead, citing that Maseport had shown no
concern for its neighbors One abutter reported being told by the
FAA that the cutting as done by Massport was not really necessary
There were also reports of increased noise without the trees
According to HFAC member Patrice Hurley, the last time tree clearing
was undertaken, Massport had not notified the neighbors and had
promised to do so for future cuttings She asked that Massport look
into the matter of lost property values One resident suggested
Massport look at the possibility of planting trees on Bedford
conservation land near the Bedford gardens
Hale explained that Massport is exploring options for plantings that
will act as a visual buffer but will not interfere with FAA
regulations However, this will not help mitigate the noise issue
Further, Massport hopes to institute a management program that will
help avoid the necessity of cutting mature trees in the future
APR-11-1986 12'27 FROM HANSCOM TO 9735611 P 03
4 $twtistics. Sara Arnold reported on the February 1989
operations and noise statistics by comparing them to February 1988
Complaints increased, night operations decreased and- total
operations for the month were down When looking at the different
types of aircraft there were decreased operations for single, jet,
helicopter and military aircraft The only increase was in the
category of twins and turbos Using the old EXP calculations, there
was an increase in noise primarily due to an increase in operations
by the more noisy jet aircraft
Arnold explained that Massport a programmer had made some changes in
the EXP program so that it was possible to start maintaining
complete records on the types of twins and turbos using Hanscom
Traditionally, the noise consultant reviews the EXP results when
program changes are made, and this has not been done yet Thus,
there is some potential for error in the February report If there
are any changes, this will be reported at the next HFAC meeting
5 Other Hale reported that the Bedford Housing Authority is
interested in building twelve units of low income housing on
Massport property A land swap was suggested by Bedford Hale
explained that Massport is reluctant to swap due to the proximity of
the land to the airport Nonetheless, the proposal will be studied
by Massport
Hale and Patsner reported on plans originally referenced in the
business plan presented in January Funding has been approved to
repair the concrete on Runway 11/29, Taxiways Alpha, Charlie, Echo
and Golf, and the East Ramp There has been no decision on the
funding for the maintenance building extension
Domnits reported on Massport Board items He referenced a $30,000
financial study contract for Hanscom and the fact that approval of
the noise monitoring system had been postponed until April Marchi
explained that the Part 150 study will go forward, and Maseport
staff is recommending to the Board that Masaport finance the Hanscom
portion of the noise monitoring system
Roberts reported that Jack Taylor, Corcoran, and Sanford have agreed
to be on the nominating committee Taylor will be chairman
Col MacDonald reported that he will discuss the Base Comprehensive
Plan at a future meeting
TOTAL P 03
HFAC Noise Subcommittee
Minutes of Meeting - 3/21/89
Attendees
Barbara Patzner Massport
Joyce Hals Massport
Sara Arnold Massport
Larry Coleman Massport
Robert Miller HMMH Inc
Ralph Sanford Cobey Corp and NBAA
Henry Wifholm Digital
Patrice Hurley Bedford
Al Schmertzler AOPA
Paul Roberts Concord
Robert Domnitz Merriam Hill Assoc - Lexington
1 Recommendations for converting to new EXP and for revising
some EXP calculations in both old and new EXP
Noise Subcommittee members discussed HMMH s
recommendations for converting to new EXP and for making some
revisions to EXP calculations
a) Under the old method of calculating EXP, twin piston
aircraft and turbo aircraft had been grouped together
However, the noise from the two types of aircraft is not
the same, and new EXP calculates them separately Bob
Miller of HMMH, Massport s noise consultant, now
recommends using FAA data that provide individual noise
characteristics for several types of turbo and twin
aircraft, rather than grouping all twins and all turbos
together This was accepted for future calculations of
EXP
b) Miller explained that some turbos (the Beech 300 and
Jetstream 31) that are being classified as heavy turbos
because they weigh over 12, 500 pounds and therefore need
to be charged more for night operations, should not be
in that category for noise purposes He recommended
changing them retroactively in both old and new EXP to
the less noisy group of light turbos This was accepted
by the Noise Subcommittee
c) Miller recommended endorsing the GEIR recommendation
that single engine aircraft be included in EXP using an
estimate based on FAA tower counts, but that EXP without
singles be used as a secondary source of information
when evaluating changes in EXP Discussion ensued
regarding the inclusion of flybys in the FAA tower
counts and that actual activity at the airport may be
around 85% of the tower count It was determined that
the difference does not affect EXP comparisons between
years , as long as it is calculated consistently, but
since the tower counts misrepresent activity at the
airport, it could be an issue when considering airport
capacity HMMH will look into this and the issue will
be discussed further at the next noise subcommittee
meeting
d) Sandy Sanford raised questions about the new SEL
values for several of the aircraft, including the
BAC1-11 and the Hawker Siddeley, due to different
engines being used by those aircraft It was decided
that Miller would discuss this with Sandy at another
time and develop a recommendation based on his
particular concerns
e) HMMH recommended calculating new EXP for years prior
to 1988 by using new SEL values for most of the
aircraft, since the new SEL values are based on more
accurate data An exeption was to leave the BAC1-11 as
a noisier aircraft He also recommended separating
twins and turbos on a percentage basis using the best
available data for each year
Members expressed concern with trying to reconstruct new
EXP for prior years since complete detailed data was not
available Consensus leaned toward using old EXP for
measuring changes up until either 1987 or 1988, and then
using the change in EXP to adjust the 1 5 dB allowance
for increased noise Massport leaned toward wanting to
use 1987 because Ldn contours had been created then,. and
it would therefore be a good year to establish as the
new base Community representatives were concerned
about reconstructing the noise levels for 1987 and
whether so doing would indicate less noise increase than
previously thought It was concluded that the
consultant should develop the numbers for presentation
at the next noise subcommittee meeting at which time it
would be decided whether to use 1987 or 1988 as the year
to make the change from old EXP to new EXP
2 Night Surcharge System
After discussion, the Noise Subcommittee agreed on
revisions to the Night Surcharge System as described in the
attached letter to Paul Roberts from Robert Domnitz dated
3/13/89 The agreement differs from the compromise reached a
month earlier in that the decibel categories and dollar fees
have been spaced more evenly Domnitz urged parties that could
not support the agreement to submit alternative ideas to the
HFAC or Massport