Source: http://airportnoiselaw.org/statutes.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 03:57:21+00:00

Document:
History of U.S. Legislation Concerning Airport Noise; and History of Aircraft Noise Regulation in the U.S. to 1981.
Aircraft Noise Abatement Act (1968) (49 U.S.C. 44715). Requires the FAA to establish noise standards through consultation with the EPA, and to apply them in connection with issuance of civil aircraft certificates.
Airport and Airway Improvement Act (1982) (49 U.S.C. 47101 - 47131, which comprises subchapter I, chapter 471, in title 49, Transportation; subtitle VII, Aviation Programs; part B, Airport Development and Noise).
Airport Noise and Capacity Act (1990) (49 U.S.C. 47521 - 47533, which comprises subchapter II "National Aviation Noise Policy", chapter 475, in title 49, Transportation; subtitle VII, Aviation Programs; part B, Airport Development and Noise). ANCA mandates that the U.S. air fleet convert to "stage 3" aircraft by Jan. 1, 2000. It permits citizen suits against the FAA "where there is alleged a failure of [the FAA] to perform any act or duty under section 1431 of Title 49 which is not discretionary...." For an example of such a suit see Alvarado v. Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority. The FAA issued rules implementing ANCA in Part 161 of its regulations (see Regulations below).
Wendell Ford's Edsel -- Or How to Delight the Lobbyists and Enrage the Citizens, 1991 editorial on the passage of ANCA.
The Consequences of ANCA as Seen in 1990.
FAA Policy Statements on ANCA and Part 161, information on how the FAA understands ANCA.
Aviation Noise Policy and Regulation, a discussion of the consequences of ANCA for attempts to control airport noise, from a 1994 law review article.
Airport Noise, a discussion of ANCA and international legislative efforts to control aircraft noise (from the Trade and Environmental Data Base, May 2, 1996).
Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act (1979) (49 U.S.C. 47501 - 47510, which comprises subchapter I "Noise Abatement", chapter 475, in title 49, Transportation; subtitle VII, Aviation Programs; part B, Airport Development and Noise). Grants authority to the Federal Aviation Administration to issue regulations on "air noise compatibility planning". These regulations are published in 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 150. The Act is evaluated in detail in "The 1980 Airport Noise Act: Noise Abatement or Just More Noise?" by Kathryn Landreth, Univ. California Davis Law Review. 14:1049-1079 (1981), and in Rockett, Robert J. Comment, "Airport Noise: Did the Airport Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 Solve the Problem?" by Robert J. Rockett, Journal of Air Law and Commerce 52:499-527 (winter 1986).
National Environmental Policy Act (1969) (42 U.S.C 4321-4345). The first comprehensive federal legislation on environmental policy and programs; created the Environmental Protection Agency. It has been amended repeatedly since 1969 to refine policy and create new programs.
National Parks Air Tour Management Act (2000, Title VIII of Pub.L. 106-81). This Act was part of HR 2000, a complex bill covering a variety of aviation matters. It creates a plan for limiting and managing commercial air tours over national parks, but gives the FAA, rather than the National Park Service, decisive authority to deal with the problem of noise in national parks created by such aircraft (particularly helicopters). It was a follow-up to the National Parks Overflight Act of 1987.
"Each Federal agency shall consult with the Administrator in prescribing standards or regulations respecting noise. If at any time the Administrator has reason to believe that a standard or regulation, or any proposed standard or regulation, of any Federal agency respecting noise does not protect the public health and welfare to the extent he believes to be required and feasible, he may request such agency to review and report to him on the advisability of revising such standard or regulation to provide such protection."
Noise Pollution and Abatement Act of 1970. Established the Office of Noise Abatement and Control within the Environmental Protection Agency. This office was defunded in 1981 and has not been funded since then. See Loss of the U.S. EPA's Office of Noise Abatement and Control and "Dormant Noise Control Act and Options to Abate Noise Pollution", 1991, by Sidney Shapiro, Prof. of Law at the University of Kansas. The "Quiet Communities Act of 2003" (see Bills -- 108th Congress) would restore funding.
Tip Search and retrieve text of California codes at California Law.
Miscellaneous Noise Control (1995) (Health and Safety Code 118825 - 118830) prohibits take-off and landing of aircraft that produce noise in excess of limits for subsonic jet transport aircraft set in the Code of Federal Regulations, title 14, part 36.
Noise Control Act (1973) (Health and Safety Code 46000 - 46080).
State Aeronautics Act (1953) (Public Utilities Code 21001 et seq.) The purposes of the act are stated in Section 21002. And see section 21652, which grants cities, counties, and airport districts the authority to purchase "avigation" easements. Such easements give airports the right to impose on the burdened property "excessive noise, vibration, discomfort, inconvenience, ... and ... reduction in market value due to the operation of aircraft to and from the airport."
State Aviation Statutes -- a general guide.
Tip Search and retrieve text of Code of Federal Regulations at CFR. Regulations issued by the Federal Aviation Administration are contained in title 14 of the CFR. FAA regulations are available on the Web at FAR text or FAR archive. Like all federal agencies the Department of Transportation has established a program of periodic review of its regulations -- see Department of Transportation Unified Agenda and FAA Regulatory Review Program. FAA Advisory Circulars are advisory only; they are not binding on the public.
Federal Aviation Regulations, Overview (Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations).
Aircraft Altitudes, Minimum (Federal Aviation Regulation 91.119).
Airport Environmental Handbook (Federal Aviation Administration, April 2006, Order 5050.4B) Discusses how airports should prepare environmental impact statements.
Use of Part 150 Noise Exposure Maps to Limit Recovery of Damages for Airport Noise in Federal Court -- the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 imposed certain conditions on the rights of private individuals to sue for relief from noise in federal court.
FAA Policy on Part 150 Approval of Noise Mitigation Measures, 63 Federal Register 16409 (April 3, 1998) -- distinguishes between remedial noise mitigation measures, which the FAA will fund, and preventative measures, which will not be funded.
FAA Policy on Funding of Combined Parts 150 and Part 161 Studies and Analyses, 61 Federal Register 48727 (Sept. 16, 1996).
Part 150, Airport Noise Compatibility Planning -- this FAA website publishes detailed information on applications by airports for noise mitigation studies, funds awarded for mitigation, links to policies, etc.
Estimated Airplane Noise Levels in A-Weighted Decibels (FAA Advisory Circulars 36-3G, April 2, 1996; 36-1G, Aug. 27, 1997) -- Provides noise level data for aircraft certificated under 14 CFR Part 36.
Letters of Agreement (Sec. 3 of FAA Order 7210.3P) -- An airport can request air traffic control measures to reduce aircraft noise. If the FAA agrees, the FAA and the airport should sign an LOA to document the measures.
Proposed changes in noise certification regulations for helicopters, notice Oct. 5, 2000.
Notice and Approval of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions (14 CFR Part 161) -- Part 161 implements the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA). It applies to (1) restrictions on stage-2 aircraft operations proposed after October 1, 1990; (2) restrictions on stage-3 aircraft operations that became effective after October 1, 1990; and (3) amendments to airport noise and access restrictions in effect on October 1, 1990, but amended after that date, where the amendment reduces or limits aircraft operations or affects aircraft safety.
Aviation Noise Policy and Regulation -- a discussion of Part 161 and the statute behind it.
FAA�s Information and Guidance on Part 161.
FAA Policy Statements on ANCA and Part 161 -- information on how the FAA understands ANCA.
Requirements for Restrictions on Stage-2 Aircraft -- a plain-language summary of the requirements in Part 161 for imposing restrictions on stage-2 aircraft. Unlike restrictions on stage-3 aircraft, the FAA does not have authority under Part 161 to approve or disapprove restrictions on stage-2 aircraft.
Stage-2 Jets Weighing Less Than 75,000 Pounds -- The 1990 Airport Noise and Capacity Act provided a scheme for phasing out stage-2 aircraft by requiring that eventually all jet aircraft would comply with stage-3 noise standards, but notably the Act did not apply to jet aircraft less than 75,000 pounds. In 2012 that omission was addressed by requiring all such aircraft to comply with stage-3 standards. See U.S. Code �47534 .
East Hampton (NY) -- The Town of East Hampton adopted a number of restrictions on use of its airport in order to reduce noise impacts on local residents. The ordinances were challenged by several passenger service operators. The U.S. District Court ruled some of the restrictions lawful and others unlawful. The U.S. Court of Appeal for the 2nd Circuit rules that all of the restrictions were inconsistent with the intent and purpose of ANCA. (See Friends of East Hampton Airport v. Town of East Hampton) The Town of East Hampton filed a petition for review to the U.S. Supreme Court on March 6, 2017; a decision on the writ is pending.
Los Angeles -- Los Angeles World Airports is undertaking studies at two airports to support Part 161 applications for restrictions on stage-3 aircraft to abate noise. See Part 161 Study at Los Angeles International Airport and Part 161 Study at Van Nuys Airport.
Policies and Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts -- FAA Order 1050.1E, June 2004. This order establishes policy and procedures and assigns responsibility for assuring agency compliance with the National Environmental Quality Act (NEPA).
Rules of Practice for Federally Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings (14 CFR Part 16) -- Part 16 sets out the rules governing proceedings instituted by the FAA or by a complaint concerning assurances contained in airport property deeds from the U.S. government to local agencies and in FAA grants in aid.
Tip The complete California Code of Regulations are available on the Web site of the California Office of Administrative Law.
Noise Standards (21 Cal. Code Reg. 5000 et seq.) "The purpose of these regulations is to provide a positive basis to accomplish resolution of existing noise problems in communities surrounding airports and to prevent the development of new noise problems." See Regulation of Noisy Airports in California for a summary of these regulations. The regulations are issued by the Department of Transportation's Aeronautics Program, Office of Technical Services (Bob Moore, chief). For an official statement on the limited utility of these regulations, see Role of the State of California in Airport Noise Abatement.
The Cincinnati-Blue Ash Airport lies within the city limits of Blue Ash but is owned by the City of Cincinnati. Out of concern for the noise of aircraft departing the airport, the City of Blue Ash enacted an ordinance requiring pilots departing the airport to make specified turns in order to reduce aircraft noise in residential areas. In United States v. City of Blue Ash (U.S. Ct. So. Dist. Ohio, 1978; 487 F.Supp. 135; aff'd, 6th Cir., April 15, 1980, 621 F.2d 227) the court declared the ordinance invalid because the federal government has preempted the field of regulating aircraft in flight.
Measure A (2001) -- Passed by voters in a special election in October 2001, this initiative requires that a nighttime curfew and cap on flights be imposed at the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport before any expansion of the airport is undertaken. The initiative was declared invalid by a court.
City attorney's memorandum on Measure A (April 16, 2001) -- Discusses implementation issues.
City of Burbank v. Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority -- The City of Burbank, which never opposed the purpose of Measure A, brought this lawsuit because it thought that implementation of the measure was legally problematic.
Superior Court opinion (Aug. 23, 2002) -- declares that Measure A impermissibly interferes with powers delegated to the city council by state law.
Court of Appeals opinion (Nov. 19, 2003) -- affirms lower court decision.
City Code Section 4.23 (amended Nov. 1, 2001) -- prohibits flying between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m.
In 2015 the Town of East Hampton adopted a number of flight restrictions at its airport to curb the noise impacts of traffic from New York City to this wealthy enclave in Long Island . The restrictions were challenged in U.S. District Court (see Court Upholds Curfew for Noisy Aircraft in East Hampton ), the case was appealed, and a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court was filed March 6,2017.
Ordinance Regulating Sites of Operation of Aircraft (2000) -- City adopted an ordinance regulating where helicopters were permitted to land and take off in the city. The ordinance was upheld by a state appellate court, which ruled that the ordinance was not constitutionally void for vagueness and was not preempted by federal regulation of airspace.
City Ordinance 91-16 (July 23, 1991) -- An example of noise regulation based on absolute noise limits (the "single event noise exposure level" or SENEL). (The Santa Monica, California, Airport has a similar regulation.) This ordinance is a revision of a 1975 ordinance, enacted before the federal Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 restricted the ability of airports to adopt noise abatement programs. A lawsuit challenging the 1975 ordinance resulted in the important "proprietor exception" to federal preemption of local regulation of aircraft noise; see National Aviation v. City of Hayward (1976).
Airport Zoning Ordinance (2009) -- City of Hillsboro adopted a new zoning district imposing restrictions on land use and requiring avigation easements for future development in an area near Hillsboro Airport, owned and operated by the Port of Portland. The ordinance was determined to be an unconstitutional taking of property without compensation by the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals, and the board's decision was upheld by a court of appeals.
Proposed city charter amendment (2005) -- Activists put this amendment to a vote by an initiative, which was defeated (56% against) in a special election for which about 20 percent of registered voters turned out. The amendment would have required "any expansion" of the local airport to be approved by voters. A similar measure in Burbank (Calif.), which voters approved, was declared invalid (see above).
City of Los Angeles Ordinance: Van Nuys Airport Noise Abatement (August 10, 1981) -- The ordinance establishes a "no flight curfew" for certain types of planes between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.; bans "touch and go" flying between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. from September through June and between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. the rest of the year; establishes a preferential runway for traffic between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.; and prohibits engine maintenance "run ups" between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m.
City of Naples Airport Authority Resolution #2000-8 (Nov. 16, 2000) -- Prohibits stage-2 jets. The ordinance was upheld in a lawsuit, but subsequently the FAA challenged the ordinance through its own administrative process (see Administrative Cases).
Measure A (1994) -- Passed by voters in November 1994, this initiative amended the county's general plan to require that the former El Toro Marine Corps Air Station "shall be used for a publicly or privately owned and operated airport."
Measure S (1996) -- Defeated by voters in December 1996, this initiative would have repealed Measure A.
Measure F (2000) -- Passed by voters in March 2000, this initiative requires a two-thirds vote of the electorate for approval of any airport projects. The measure was declared invalid by a court. However, because passage of the measure reflected widespread opposition to development of a civilian airport at the former El Toro Marine Corps field, the mere passage of the measure killed any prospect of a civilian airport at the El Toro field.
Citizens for Jobs and the Economy et al. v. County of Orange -- Proponents of a civilian airport at El Toro field challenged Measure F.
Superior Court opinion (Dec. 1, 2000) -- Superior court declares Measure F invalid in its entirety.
Measure W (2002) -- Passed by voters in March 2002 (58% county-wide, 87% in southern portion of the county), this initiative repeals Measure A (see above) and amends the county's general plan to designate the former Marine Corps Air Station for use as a park, educational and cultural facilities, and other nonaviation uses.
AOPA Complaint Against Ordinance (April 1, 2004) -- The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Assn. filed a formal complaint with the FAA, demanding a hearing under 14 C.F.R. Part 16. The complaint alleges that the ordinance does not comply with the conditions under which the airport land was deeded to the city by the U.S. government.
City Code Chapter 12.03: Airport Curfew (October 21, 2003) -- Prohibits takeoffs or landings within curfew hours by aircraft exceeding an average of 89 decibels. The ordinance was adopted after legal challenges to the city's previous curfew. Under a previous curfew, adopted in 1984 (see below), aircraft were categorized according to both noise level (stage 1 being the noisiest and stage 3 the quietest) and weight (heavier airplanes being defined as "transport aircraft" and lighter airplanes as "non-transport aircraft"), and aircraft operators were classified either as commercial "air carriers" or as non-commercial "general aviation" operators. Whether a particular aircraft was exempt from the curfew or eligible for a waiver of its provisions depended on the interplay of these factors. The 1984 curfew was not only attacked in court but was also the subject of an informal complaint to the FAA filed by the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. The 2003 ordinance was drafted in collaboration with the FAA.
Wing and a Prayer, Inc. v. City of San Jose (2001, U.S. District Ct., N.D. Cal., Case No. C 00-20018 JF, unpublished) -- Billionaire Larry Ellison challenged the city's curfew on aircraft weighing more than 75,000 pounds. The judge ruled that the city's curfew did not apply to Ellison's jet, but stopped short of declaring the curfew unlawful. The decision posted here is on motions for interlocutory relief (prior to final judgment). The case was subsequently dismissed per an agreement between the parties, Dec. 18, 2002 (see settlement agreement).
European Union Directive 92/14/EEC (March 2, 1992) -- Bans operation of "stage-2" jet aircraft in the European Community after April 1, 2002.
United Kingdom: Airport Noise Regulation -- See also Department of Transport: Aviation.
Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice Program in the Federal Government, issued by the President on February 11, 1994.
California Attorney General's Opinion, 69-216, 53 Op.Atty.Gen. 75 (1970). Opinion includes: (1) The federal government has occupied a portion of but has not preempted the entire field of regulating aircraft-produced community noise and state and local governments may legislate in the field if there is no conflict with federal statutes or regulations. (2) State and local governments which are airport proprietors may regulate aircraft-produced community noise in their capacity as proprietors despite federal statutes or regulations covering the field. (3) State and local governments may regulate aircraft-produced community noise by land use controls such as airport siting and zoning without restriction by the federal government.
California Attorney General's Opinion, 90-914 (1991). Opinion: The jurisdiction of a county airport land-use commission is limited by county boundaries.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.