Meeting Notes : Consultant Screening/Oversight Committee

Committee notes reflect the views and opinions of the committee members and not necessarily those of the Noise Compatibility Study Group, Coordinating Council, Regional Airport Authority of Louisville and Jefferson County, or the Consultant Team.

Pending Committee Approval

back to NOTES       Thursday, July 13, 2000

The meeting was held at 6:30 in the Regional Airport Authority Board Room.

Attendees: Tim Chilton, Don Conrad, Mike Clancey, Dorn Crawford, Mary Rose Evans, Steve Lambert, Pete Levermore, Marvin Pilkenton, Denny Rued, Bill Simpson.

Guests of the committee were RAA General Manager, Jim DeLong; RAA chief engineer, Bob Brown; and Old Louisville representative, John Sistarenik.

The agenda was adopted.

Notes from the March 13, 2000 meeting had been posted on the Web site, but copies were not available at the meeting. Approval of the notes was tabled until the next meeting.

Mary Rose said that this meeting had been called so that the committee members could catch up on several issues that had come up since our last meeting four months ago. The study is behind in the proposed timeline. Delays have occurred while the consultants, RAA officials, and Study Group leaders have tried to work out details of how to model the Study Group’s alternatives and common measures.

Bob Brown said that the consultants have proposed that the next Study Group meeting be scheduled in October. Tim, John and other neighborhood representatives expressed concern that the delays in the timing of the process are causing the public to lose confidence and trust in the noise study.

Bob reported that there are two issues that are delaying the modeling at this point. One issue is how to model the Study Group’s common measure, to "minimize exceptions to contraflow." He said that it was the consultants’ opinion that FAA would not approve this noise study, if it were modeled with no exceptions to contraflow, unless a FAR Part 161 study was successfully completed.

Dorn said that no exceptions to contraflow should be modeled because in a measure that says, "minimize exceptions," no exceptions would be the best place to start, and that’s what should be modeled. He also said that there already is an FAA approved noise abatement measure in place that does not include exceptions to contraflow, and that with FAA approval already in place, an FAR 161 study would not be required.

Jim expressed concern that modeling no exceptions could be used to force airlines not to fly exceptions to contraflow. He asked UPS representatives on the committee if they didn’t have concerns about this issue. Bill said that airport users would not agree to modeling that would restrict all exceptions.

There was discussion about what number of flights would be appropriate to model, if something other than zero was used.

There was a discussion about how many exceptions there are to contraflow. Dorn talked about the long-running struggle to get accurate data. Jim said he would have RAA staff find this information.

Bob said that he had talked to the FAA about what the consultants had told him. The representatives he had spoken with had said that the FAR part 161 study would have to take place before the FAA would approve the Noise Study, if no exceptions to contraflow were modeled. It was agreed that another conversation with the FAA would be beneficial. After several suggestions about how to contact them about this modeling procedure, the committee agreed that a phone call from Dorn, Bob, and Mary Rose to the FAA’s Memphis office would be sufficient. All three agreed to make the call and report the results to the committee.

Bob reported that the other issue keeping the consultant from running the models is the LDA (localizer directional aid). This is an instrument that can be used by pilots to safely make an offset approach to the West runway from the north. Several committee members emphasized that the LDA is critical to the runway use alternatives in the north. Jim expressed concern about whether pilots could fly the offset approach. Dorn, the chair of the Navigation Committee, and other members of that committee explained that UPS and Air National Guard pilots as well as Air Traffic Control Tower personnel had participated in the committee’s consensus and had agreed that that they could fly the approach. It was also pointed out that Bob had compiled a list of other airports that use a diverted approach. Jim agreed with the committee that the LDA should be modeled.

In a brief discussion about relocation of residents impacted by noise, Denny asked about the relocation schedule and Jim talked about a bond issue from the RAA that could, in conjunction with several other sources of funds, complete relocation in four years. This discussion will be continued in another forum.

Schedules for the N.O.I.S.E. Conference, to be held in Louisville on July 19-22, were made available.

Dorn had prepared and distributed a "Tally of Outstanding Study Elements". There was a brief discussion of some of the things that are overdue from the consultants or other sources. It was decided that members would look over these items for further consideration at the next meeting.

The next committee meeting was set for Thursday, August 10, at 6:30, in the RAA Board Room. Members requested that reminders be sent to confirm the date, time, and location.

The meeting adjourned at 9:15.


back to top