The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), (Pl 91-190) was signed into law on January 1, 1970. NEPA established a national environmental policy intentionally focused on the actions of Federal agencies and the desire to obtain a balance between a sustainable environment and the needs of present and future generations.

NEPA established a mandate for Federal agencies to consider the potential environmental consequences of their proposed actions, provide documentation of the analysis, and provide for disclosure of the study methodology and results to the public, other agencies, and interested organizations for comment prior to implementation of the proposed action.

While NEPA established the basic framework for integrating environmental considerations into Federal decision-making processes, it did not provide the details of how the process was to be accomplished. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), was established within the Executive Office of the President, to interpret NEPA and to develop regulations governing its implementation.

NEPA provides a process for incorporating public involvement and integrating the requirements of other applicable environmental laws and regulations into Federal decision-making and planning processes. NEPA also requires Federal agencies to use an interdisciplinary approach in planning and decision-making for any action that adversely impacts the environment.

What is an EIS?

An EIS is prepared by a Federal agency (i.e., the FAA) to disclose the anticipated environmental effects of a Federal action or development project that is likely to have significant impact(s). Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, (NEPA) requires that such statements provide full and fair discussion of significant environmental impacts in order to inform decision makers and the public of the reasonable alternatives which would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance the quality of the human environment. An EIS is used by Federal officials, in conjunction with other relevant materials, to plan major actions and to make decisions.

What is a Federal Action?

A Federal action can include: the issuance of Federal funding for construction of a project, the issuance of a Federal permit, license, or authorization allowing a project to proceed to construction, or a project that is undertaken by a Federal government agency.

When is an EIS required?

An EIS is required for major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. The preparation of an EIS is required when the impacts of a proposed action would meet or exceed a significance threshold for an affected resource, or when mitigation would not reduce the significant level of impact below the applicable threshold.

How long does it take to complete an EIS?

Typically, the preparation of an EIS can take 24-36 months, depending upon the complexity of the issues involved and the types and magnitude of improvements proposed. Some EIS processes have taken several years to complete due to the extent of the regulatory and public coordination required, public opposition, and legal challenges.

What is an EA?

An Environmental Assessment (EA) is prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, as amended, (NEPA) to document the analysis of potential environmental consequences so that the Federal agency (i.e., FAA) can determine whether an action or project is environmentally significant and whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) can be issued.

For what types of airport projects is an EA required?

Typically, and EA is required for actions involving: property acquisition, issuance of aircraft type certifications, construction or relocation of facilities (i.e., air traffic control towers), installation or relocation of an approach light system, construction or relocation of service or public roadways, issuance of new or revised air traffic control procedures, and approval of a new or updated airport layout plan.

How long does it take to complete an EA?

Typically, the preparation of an EA can take 12-24 months, depending upon the complexity of the issues involved and the types and magnitude of improvements proposed.

Must EA/FONSIs be made available to the public?

Yes, the document must be made available to the public. NEPA requires public involvement in the decision-making process. This can take the form of implementing a public involvement program throughout the study process and/or making the Draft EA/Final EA/FONSI available for public review and comment.

If permitting is conducted in tandem with the preparation of an EA or EIS, when is the permit issued?

Does Landrum & Brown manage all aspects of residential or institutional sound insulation programs?

Landrum & Brown staff provides acoustical services that support sound insulation programs nationwide. These services include acoustical design and testing services. Since Landrum & Brown has strong relationships with most of the nationwide sound insulation program managers and architects that manage full-scale programs, we would be pleased to put you in touch with the right firm for your needs.

Can I use Landrum & Brown’s Sound Insulation Support Services if my airport does not have a sound insulation program?

Landrum & Brown staff has worked with architects across the country in designing in acoustical treatments for new buildings located near airports. Since these projects exist only on paper as artist renderings, floor plans, and technical specifications, we use acoustical models that predicts future interior acoustical conditions to assist architects and developers during the design stage. Our services help ensure that new structures will meet interior acoustical specifications, meet accepted criteria for sleep disturbance and/or speech intelligibility, and many times reduce construction costs.

What can be done to make noise assessments more understandable for the general public - DNL or CNEL is just too complicated?

The Day-Night Sound Level (DNL) and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) are used in federal environmental evaluations because they have been shown to most correlate to public annoyance response curves. As these cumulative noise levels increase, the level or annoyance among those exposed correspondingly increases. However, neither cumulative metric adequate reflects the experience of the person exposed to noise events generated by aircraft.

The community experience to aircraft noise events is often dealt with through the application of supplemental metrics which are selected to assist in public understanding of what conditions are, and what they might be expected to be under alternative future scenarios. The single event Maximum Noise Level, the number of events within various noise level ranges, and the number of events within hearing range are metrics, which Landrum & Brown has applied in various studies. Other metrics may be tailored to specific uses or impacts, such as nighttime awakenings, environmental justice impacts, and seasonal variation to event frequency. Our staff of highly trained experts can work with you and your public to develop approaches to best portray the local experience and deliver the message of actual effect of expected changes to the affected communities.

Now that all the large Stage 2 aircraft have been removed from fleets, what is the best approach to continued noise abatement?

Several airports have attempted to navigate the Part 161 process to implement new restrictions on operations, but to date, none have been successful in obtaining FAA approval or concurrence in the action. We believe it is possible to obtain new restrictions, but the efforts required to do so may outweigh the benefits achieved by the attempt. An option to the Part 161 process is rigorously identify the specific operations of operational types that cause the problem you are attempting to address and then to seek voluntary agreements with the worst offenders. This action may result in betterment of the noise conditions, without triggering the rigorous requirements and costs associated with Part 161 planning.

The Part 150 program and the NEPA process are more useful and fully acceptable approaches to implementing noise abatement actions that do not restrict access to the airport to users. Part 150 my provide runway use programs, develop noise abatement flight tracks and procedures, and implement on-the-ground mitigation that reduces the effective impact of aircraft overflights.

I know my airport is located in an EPA-designated nonattainment and/or maintenance area. But what does it mean if my airport is not properly reflected in the State Implementation Plan (SIP)?

Poor representation of emissions from aviation sources in the SIP could be a show-stopper during a future environmental approval process for a larger airport development project under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). An evaluation of conformance with the control programs listed in the SIP is required under the General Conformity Rule. Airports are at a disadvantage if the State air quality agency has not properly reflected their operational and construction activities in the SIP emission budgets. As Landrum & Brown has done with numerous airports nationally, we will discuss what your short and long term development goals are, prepare a comprehensive airport emissions inventory, and then negotiate with the State air quality agency to properly reflect airport activity in the SIP.

I need a consultant that understands airport development AND air quality issues.

What is the Master Planning process?

The FAA has defined a standard, sequential process for conducting a Master Plan. This process is suitable in many cases to update the Airport Layout Plan. In the more complex situations master planning is no longer a sequential process, bur rather, it is a comprehensive program of carefully coordinated planning activities that will facilitate federal and state approvals, airline and stakeholder acceptance, all often on an aggressive schedule. It requires not only a clear understanding of an airport’s role within the region and the national air transportation system, but also an understanding of each of the airport’s stakeholders, including the airlines and other tenants, neighboring communities, the FAA and other public agencies, and each of the functional areas within the Airport.

What defines a successful Master Plan?

There is much more focus on all aspects of the safety and security of passengers and baggage processing in terminal areas. The biggest single impact has probably been on baggage systems. Bags now receive a much more thorough screening than they used to. This has impacted the programming (sizing) and costing of terminals very drammatically, often at the expense of other elements of the terminal. There is a need to re-calibrate priorities and bring balance back into terminal planning. Of course security will remain at the top of the list of goals and objectives, but other areas of terminals which have been neglected for the past several years need now to catch up.

How is the decision to introduce movement assistance (moving walks, etc.) in terminal plans made? What factors are involved?

This depends upon the circumstances of each terminal. Most terminal planners agree that a walking distance of 1,000 ft. plus or minus is the maximum walking distance which should be imposed upon passengers. This distance takes the average passenger about five (5) minutes to traverse (based upon surveys taken several years ago by ATA,the average terminal user walks 187.5 ft/min.) But the perception of convenience, or inconvenience is equally important.For instance, it is not always necessary to introduce a moving walk or other conveyance after a passenger has walked 1,000 ft. Depending upon circumstances of the physical plan and other variables, a prudent plannermay provide for assistance before the prescribed maximum distance has been traveled. Bridges, connectors, and other static environments in the terminal complex provide excellent opportunities for improving the perception ofconvenience by providing assisted movement.

What is the single most important aspect of developing a successful terminal plan?

How can I attract air cargo to my airport?

The truth is you may not be able to. The fact that an airport has a long runway does not mean that it can become a cargo airport. There are many factors that should be examined before an airport begins to spend money on marketing efforts for a product that may never develop. We can provide in a short period of time, a “Due Diligence Report” that will answer many key questions and outline for an airport, how best to approach air cargo in the future.

Should I use a third party developer to build new cargo facilities?

Entering into a partnership with a private developer offers an airport the ability to avoid substantial risk and cost. On the other hand, the downside is a smaller revenue stream from the new cargo facility. The state of an airport’s balance sheet and the timing of the need for the new facility are critical considerations. We can help with a detailed cost analysis of both alternatives including translating project costs into probable costs to potential tenants, as well as return to the airport.

How can I accommodate future demand for air cargo at my airport?

We typically develop two types of 3D base models for airports – low detail and high detail. Low detail models are more for macro planning exercises where structures and other elements are represented in a “box” like manner. This helps planners and airport staff understand the relationship of elements within an airport envelope and generally how they fit together in context. High detail base models are more for persuasion and public visual communication. They have architectural detail and realistic environments. They typically become an element of a larger video production that includes a voice-over and background music.

Low detail model can be developed in less than a week. High detail models range from 2-5 weeks depending on how much area needs to be modeled. Including a video production, a typical project can take 3-6 weeks.

Who can benefit from a 3D visualization?

One of the benefits of 3D visualization is the ability to view an object from any angle in context with its surrounding environment. This technology could be used to develop hi-resolution renderings, animated fly-throughs, and video productions including voice-over and music. Some specific examples of how you could use 3D visualization in a project:

• For the public, you could illustrate potential visual impacts that a terminal, roadway, or new runway would have on the surrounding communities.
• For the local resident, you could place the 3D camera in a virtual surrounding community and see proposed new flight patterns and how they would visually affect the neighborhoods – simulated sound levels could be part of this as well.
• For the pilot, you could animate the view from a pilot landing on a new runway and demonstrate any changes from the existing conditions.
• For the traveler, you could do an animated drive-through of a proposed roadway and new terminal curb front to orient them to the new facility.
• For the elected official, you could develop a DVD computer presentation that presents the project through video, images, and talking points.
• For the media, you could provide broadcast quality animation and images to accompany news stories that would present a new scheme in a positive light – highlighting a new terminal and landscaping while minimizing any visual impacts to the surrounding communities.
• For the Air Traffic Controller, you could show views from the tower to the proposed runways and gate areas illustrating quality of sight-lines and shadows.
• For the FAA/NEPA team, you could prepare consistent and clear graphic materials for public meetings and workshops.