The FAA is seeking comment on a draft document, “Noise Abatement Entries in the Chart Supplement,” proposing ways to standardize language for airport sponsors to describe local noise abatement measures in the FAA’s Chart Supplement, which includes the Airport/Facility Directory.  Because the Chart Supplement is the primary source of information to pilots on operational information about airports, the FAA hopes that standardized language for noise abatement measures will improve pilot compliance.

Airport operators with local noise abatement measures and procedures, including voluntary measures, may want to submit comments to assure that the FAA’s final guidance document includes standard language that would clearly and accurately describe their specific local noise abatement measures.

The FAA’s efforts to improve how the Chart Supplement describes noise abatement measures includes the following specific steps:

• Creating a new “Noise” entry in the Chart Supplement to describe local noise abatement measures.
• Consulting with pilot, operator, and airport stakeholders to develop preliminary recommendations for best practices to describe noise abatement measures.
• Publishing best practices for the Noise entry structure and nomenclature.
• Expanding the standard list of Chart Supplement abbreviations to include terms commonly used to describe noise abatement measures.
• Adding guidance on how to include noise abatement information in the Chart Supplement into draft advisory Circular 150/5020-1, “Noise Control and Compatibility Planning for Airports.”  

The FAA is seeking comments on all aspects of the proposal, including its proposals on structure and nomenclature, but has requested information on the following questions in particular:

• Is the term “Noise Abatement Information (NAI)” an effective term to cover operational noise abatement information, or should another term be used?
• Most noise abatement measures nationally are voluntary.  Accordingly, the FAA proposes not using the word “voluntary” for each measure but would identify which measures are mandatory.  Would that be readily understood by pilots and other stakeholders? 
• Quiet hours are defined as voluntary, and curfews are defined as mandatory.  Would those definitions be readily understood by pilots and other stakeholders?
• How should complex local noise abatement information, such as noise abatement flight paths or aircraft performance criteria, be included in the new “Noise” entry and/or point to the “Notices” entry in the Chart Supplement, where such measures are often described?
• What is the best way to describe preferential runway use programs that are tied to reported wind velocities?
• Is the proposed structure, nomenclature, and template for describing noise abatement information logical, complete, and clear? If not, how can it be improved?

ACI-NA and AAAE are preparing general comments on behalf of their membership, and Kaplan Kirsch attorneys are working with clients to assess whether airport-specific comments are appropriate.  For additional information contact Eric Pilsk, Peter Kirsch, or Steve Osit.