Jennifer Landesmann, a member of Sky Posse Palo Alto and the Quiet- SkiesConference.org, a forum with advocacy groups from around the country, wrote: The FAA's current environmental practices are pushing communities to seek judicial review of FAA airspace changes and I can't see how the FAA will be inclusive regarding the ‘affected stakeholders’ group it is forming to review its aircraft noise policy when it is at the same time fighting citizens. An alternative way to move forward in light of FAA’s updated annoyance data should be considered, which is to have a moratorium on using the 65 DNL threshold as the standard for significant noise impact, thus suspending environmental declarations until there is some interim correction to avert the misrepresentations of impacts to communities, especially those outside the 65 contours. These corrections don't require new laws or new policies because adding more ways to consider noise is provided for in current rules - communities have made several proposals for best practices.
展开▼
机译：Jennifer Landesmann，Sky Posse Palo Alto和安静的SkiesConference.org，一个来自全国各地的倡导团体的论坛：FAA目前的环境惯例正在推动社区寻求对FAA空域的司法审查，我可以“ T了解FAA如何包容，就“受影响的利益攸关方”集团在形成其在同一时间争夺公民时审查其飞机噪声政策。应考虑借鉴FAA更新的烦恼数据的替代方法，这是暂停使用65个DNL阈值作为具有显着噪声影响的标准，从而暂停环境声明，直到存在一些临时校正来避免避免临时校正对社区的影响歪曲，特别是65个轮廓外的影响。这些更正不需要新的法律或新政策，因为在当前规则中增加了更多考虑噪声的方法 - 社区已经为最佳实践提出了几个提案。
展开▼
