FAA Record ofMeeting

John Milligan, AWP-621, 310 725-3621 With: Bob Trimborn, SMO Airport Manager Jeff Mathieu, Aviation Director Marty Tachiki, Deputy CityAttorney Steve Benson, Planner, Coffman Associates Jim Harris, Principal, Coffman Associates Monroe Balton, AWP- 7 Terry Griffen, AWP-200 Roland McKee, AWP-200 Mark Tellier, Manager, SMO ATCT Ruben Cabalbag, AWP-621.5 Tony Garcia, AWP-620.1 John Milligan AWP-621 Date: October 1.2002, Time: 11: 30 am to 2:00 pm Subject: City of Santa Monica's Aircraft Conformance Program Digest: SMO Airport Manager requested that FAA reps attend abriefing bythe city's consultant on the city's proposed Aircraft Conformance Program (ACP). The briefing and discussion meeting was held atthe Santa Monica airport on October 1,2002 The ACP is designed 'to limit aircraft using the Airport to those compatible with the airport's design and physical limitations. Aircraft with characteristics exceeding Aircraft Design Group B-II would effectively not be allowed to operate atthe airport. Present traffic counts include approximately 6,000 annual operations of aircraft with approach Category C and Category D. Jet aircraft having approach speed Category B account for an additional 6,000 annual ops. FAA representatives included AirTraffic, Flight Standards, Regional Council and Airports Divisions, FAA comments cautioned the citythat itsproposal was not consistent with the city's federal obligations and federal law. The city expressed that itsproposed ACP was due to its concern for the level of safety at SMO. Presently. The airfield includes asingle Runway 3-21, 150'X 4987', Runway Safety Areas beyond runway ends extend only approximately 100' to the west and 50' to the east before the lend slopes suddenly approximately 40' down to public streets. The city's consultant studied alternatives inmeeting or improving compliance with FAA design standards. Land acquisition and grading ofembankment was considered unfeasibledue to cost. EMAS construction was considered unfeasible because there isinsufficient

room beyond runway ends. The consultant's report concluded that the citycould meet RSA standards for Aircraft Design Group B-II with the use ofdeclared distances and by displacing both landing thresholds by 300'. (itisnoted that asfarback as 1977, the Cityhad proposed displaced threshold as ameans to reduce noise, in that case, proposing a750-foot displaced threshold).' This would provide landing distance available (LDA) of4387' and acceleratestop distance (ASDA) of4687'. There was significant discussion regarding what other options might exist that hasn't yetbeen considered, without aconclusion reached. Due to underlying tension in this meeting, there was little discussion ofthe details ofthe aircraft restriction aspect ofthe ACP. FAA LOB's2 commented that safety determinations involving flight ofaircraft areunder FAA jurisdiction, not the airport sponsor. While meeting FAA design standards are encouraged inproviding for further and continued enhancement of amargin of safety, FAA. LOB's stressed that an inability ofan airport sponsor to correct asubstandard RSA does not inherently mean an operationally unsafe condition exists. Further, FAA does not consider itinherently unsafe for an aircraft oflarger design category to use an airport designed to accommodate alesser category aircraft. Air Traffic and Flight Standards reps reiterated that design standards limitations did not translate into operational limitations and that FAA develops instrument approaches to permit safe aircraft operations. FAA holds the expectation that the citycomply with Section 9ofthe Airport Agreement to maintain the 5000' x 150'runway. Any action taken bythe citythat conflict with its federal obligations, including economic non-discrimination (Assurance 22) would be of concern to the FAA. At the end ofthe meeting, AWP-621 provided the Airport Manager the text ofaFAA memo from AAS-1 to AWP-600 (attached). After the meeting, the Airport Manager escorted the Airports Division reps to each ofthe runway ends on the airfield to observe the condition ofthe RSAs. The Airport Manager was asked what time schedule could be anticipated for cityaction on the ACP. His response was that the city planned to give asimilar briefing to the various aviation trade organizations in October, finalize details of aproposed cityordinance to bring to the citycouncil in late November, and implement in February. 3

I http.vpqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes 2 Line of Business.

, Record of Meeting

.John Milligan AWP-6~ I. October I. ~OO~.