FAA Environmental Compatibility Program August 12, 1999

1
FAA Environmental Compatibility ProgramAugust
12, 1999

• Howard L. Wesoky
• Chief Scientific Technical Advisor for
  Environment
• Washington, DC

2
1998 FAA Strategic Plan

• It leads the aerospace community toward
  achieving the three goals at the heart of FAAs
  mission Safety, Security, and System
  Efficiency.
• FAA supports the Department of
  Transportations Human and Natural Environment
  goal using an Environmental Responsibility
  enabling goal with three focus areas.
• Understanding Aerospace Environmental Impacts
• Reducing Aerospace Environmental Impacts
• Quantify and Mitigate Environmental Impacts of
  FAA Activities
• . . . enabling goals . . . are not directly a
  part of the core FAA missions, but . . . are
  critical to accomplishing the mission.

3
DOT Performance Plan FY 2000

• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from
  transportation in the U.S. in conjunction with
  other DOT. No target is set for this goal.
• FAA will continue research on aircraft emissions
  reduction and control. Engine exhaust
  certification procedures will be harmonized with
  European Joint Aviation Authorities.
• Reduce the number of people in the U.S. exposed
  to significant aircraft noise by at least 64
  from the 1995 baseline of 1.7 million. The FY
  2000 target is at or below 600,000.
• The FAA will continue to engage in noise
  research and assessment technologies.

4
Future of Noise Reduction

• The Clinton Administration strongly believes the
  best way is to work through the International
  Civil Aviation Organization -- ICAO -- to
  establish a new standard -- Stage 4 -- and then
  to implement that standard.
• Secretary of Transportation Rodney E.
  SlaterAmerican Chamber of Commerce in
  BelgiumMarch 24, 1999
• This is a technology issue, and we need to use
  technology to deal with the noise issue.
• Deputy Secretary of Transportation Mortimer
  Downey"Civil Aviation Changing International
  Markets"AIAA Global Air Space 99
  ConferenceMay 3, 1999

5
Agency Roles

• NASA Maintain U.S. leadership in aeronautical
  science and technology.
• FAA Develop and implement programs to control
  aircraft noise and other environmental effects of
  civil aviation.

6
White House Commission on Aviation Safety and
SecurityFebruary 12, 1997

• Recommendation 1.10. The FAA should develop
  better quantitative models and analytic
  techniques to inform management decision-making.
• The Commission urges the FAA to strengthen its
  analytic and planning tools, especially through
  the development of models that give insight into
  the system-wide consequences of alternative
  courses of action. . .

System-wide simulation models are an important
FAA RD goal!
7
Environmental Issues

• Noise
• Local air quality
• Global change
• Climate
• Stratospheric ozone

• System-wide simulation
• Weigh
• Direct

8
FAA System-Wide Environmental Performance Models

• Noise
• Model for Assessing Global Exposure to the Noise
  of Transport Aircraft (MAGENTA) Estimates
  worldwide population exposure to aircraft noise.
• Integrated Noise Model (INM) Assesses the
  impacts of aircraft noise on airport communities.
• Noise Impact Routing System (NIRS) Assesses
  noise exposure effects of air traffic
  operations, including large scale multi-airport
  airspace redesigns.
• Emissions
• Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS)
  Required model for analyzing local air quality
  impacts of proposed FAA actions (e.g., new or
  expanded runways or terminals, op spec
  approvals).
• Global Emissions Model (GEM) In early planning
  stages to estimate and evaluate global aircraft
  emissions for all phases of flight (LTO cycle and
  cruise).

Each requires substantial development or
upgrading!
9
FAA Research, Engineering Development Advisory
Committee (REDAC)November 18, 1998

• Recommendation FAA should give priority to
  increasing environmental assessment capability in
  areas of engine emission certification as well as
  model development for mandated requirements.
• Response FAA plans to sustain environment and
  energy program with only modest growth.
  Currently, FAA is in process of increasing
  programs RD staffing with operations
  researchers for purpose of model development. To
  increase funding significantly would take away
  from higher priority areas of safety, NAS
  efficiency and/or security.

10
REDAC Subcommittee on Environment EnergyApril
21, 1999

• The RED Subcommittee on Environment Energy
  recognizes the importance of a balanced Federal
  budget and the related implications to the FAA
  and NASA.
• However, the federal budget for civil aeronautics
  RT should support a vision for an expanding air
  transportation system that is
• Free from community noise impacts,
• Contributing to improvements in local air
  quality, and
• Advancing understanding of and mitigating effects
  of global climate change.
• We, therefore, strongly support allocation of
  sufficient government funds to support this
  vision, and call on all stakeholders to join in
  partnerships to advance the related goals.

11
FAA Research, Engineering Development Advisory
Committee (REDAC) - June 11, 1999

• Dear Ms. Garvey
• The severe budget cuts proposed for NASA are
  truly alarming to the REDAC. The prevailing view
  in the industry is that NASA may need to be
  renamed NSA, dropping any reference to
  Aeronautics in their name if the present budget
  cuts are sustained. NASAs leaders have stated
  that they will eliminate efforts related to
  aeronautics in order to maintain their space
  program expenditures.
• The REDAC believes that progress on aircraft
  engine emissions and noise-related research will
  be severely impacted as NASA is forced to wind
  down current research efforts. The cessation of
  funding for noise and emission research is not in
  the public interest. The FAA will be hampered
  in its future efforts to effectively certify new
  systems and to produce effective regulation for
  the air transport system.
• Robert Doll
• Chairman, FAA Research, Engineering, and
  Development Advisory Committee

12
REDAC Subcommittee on Environment
EnergyMembership

• Dr. Wesley L. Harris, Professor of Aeronautics
  and Astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of
  Technology
• Chair
• Mr. John Begin Managing Director for Safety,
  Health Environment, Northwest Airlines
• Dr. M. J. (Mike) Benzakein General Manager, GE
  Aircraft Engines
• Mr. Gerald J. Chambers Specialist, Powerplant
  Engineering, American Airlines
• Mr. James C. DeLong General Manager, Regional
  Airport Authority, Louisville, KY
• Ms. Julie Ellis Managing Director for Industry
  Affairs, Federal Express Corp.
• Mr. M. E. Rhett Flater Executive Director, AHS
  International
• Mr. Billy M. Glover Director, Gov't. Industry
  Technical Interfaces, The Boeing Company
• Ms. Betty Ann Kane Executive Director, National
  Organization to Insure Sound Environment (NOISE)
• Mr. Paul F. Piscopo Staff Specialist for Aircraft
  Systems, Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of
  Defense
• Dr. Carol J. Russo Director of Aeronautics, NASA
  Glenn Research Center
• Mr. William H. Schultz Vice President Engineering
  Maintenance, General Aviation Manufacturers
  Association
• Mr. Steve Seidel Senior Advisor, Office of
  Atmospheric Programs, EPA
• Ms. Bonnie Wilson Senior Director of Airports,
  Facilities Service, Airports Council Int'l
  North America
• Mr. Howard L. Wesoky FAA, Designated Federal
  Official

13
FY 2000 Presidents FAA Budget Request Millions
14
FY 2000 Presidents FAA Budget Request -
Research, Engineering, and Development Thousands
15
Summary

• FAA has vision for air transportation system that
  is
• Free from noise constraints,
• Contributing to improvements in local air
  quality, and
• Mitigating effects of global climate change.
• FAA generally agrees with NASA goals.
• Further benefit assessment ongoing.
• System-wide simulation tools are an important RD
  goal.
• Current Federal RD budget may not support
  visionary plan.
• Congressional action re FY00 budget?
• Presidents FY01 budget plan?