BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AJR 41|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AJR 41
Author: Lieu (D), et al
Amended: 6/30/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMM : 6-3, 8/10/10
AYES: Lowenthal, DeSaulnier, Kehoe, Pavley, Simitian, Wolk
NOES: Huff, Ashburn, Harman
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 46-27, 6/21/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Santa Monica Airport
SOURCE : Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution
DIGEST : This resolution requests that the federal
government review noise, air pollution emission levels, and
the safety of flight operations at Santa Monica Municipal
Airport.
ANALYSIS : Santa Monica Municipal Airport (SMO) is a
general aviation airport that the City of Santa Monica owns
and operates. Since airplane flights began operating at the
site that is now SMO in 1919, urban development has
encroached upon the facility. With the introduction of jet
aircraft operations in 1980's, tension has escalated
between the community and the airport over the
environmental impacts of airport operations.
Existing state law requires an Airport Land Use
CONTINUED
AJR 41
Page
2
Compatibility Plan for public use airports in California.
In addition, the Department of Transportation's Division of
Aeronautics is required to prepare a California Aviation
System Plan, which has several elements, including, but not
limited to, a policy element, a capital improvement plan,
an inventory element, and a system requirements element.
Existing law federal law confers primary jurisdiction over
all aspects of air travel in the United States to the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), including the
certification of aircraft, the certification of airports,
the administration of the national air traffic control
system, the administration of an ongoing aviation safety
program, the administration of capital grants for the
improvement of airports, and other related
responsibilities. In addition, federal law permits airport
operators to regulate certain aspects of airport
operations, such as the time of day that airplanes may use
a facility.
This resolution:
1.Makes findings relative to the deleterious impacts of
aircraft operations at SMO on the community surrounding
the facility, including the impact of FAA air traffic
management practices, aircraft noise, and exhaust
emissions from aircraft operating at the airport.
2.Memorializes the California congressional delegation the
FAA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),
the federal Department of Transportation (DOT) to:
A. Engage research by qualified scientists to study
the effects of emissions from SMO and, on the basis of
the study's findings, develop remediation plans for
the airport.
B. Establish minimum distance between aircraft
operations at SMO.
C. Restrict the use of Category C and D aircraft at
SMO. (Category C aircraft land at speeds between 121
and 140 knots and Category aircraft land at speeds of
greater than 141 knots.)
CONTINUED
AJR 41
Page
3
3.Orders the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies
of the resolution to members of the California
congressional delegation, the FAA, the USEPA, and DOT.
Background
SMO has approximately 400 aircraft based at the airport and
had 165,000 flight operations (landings and take-offs) in
2007. About 60 percent of the operations are non-resident
aircraft using the facility. The single runway at the
airport is 4,987 feet long and 150 feet wide. The disputes
associated with airport operations have focused on airport
approach category C aircraft which land at speeds between
121 and 140 knots, and airport approach category D aircraft
which land at speeds over 140 knots. These aircraft are
jet and turbo propeller aircraft. Aircraft representing
this category include Lear, Gulfstream, Citation, Cessna,
and other similar corporate aircraft.
There have been several disputes between the SMO and the
FAA for several years. In 1984, the City of Santa Monica
and the FAA entered into an agreement in which the city
committed to operating and maintaining the airport without
derogating its role as a general aviation reliever airport
or its capacity in terms of runway length and width,
taxiway system, and runway weight bearing strength until
2015. In return for making these commitments, the city is
entitled to prohibit the takeoff of aircraft between the
hours of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and from 11 p.m.
until 8 a.m. on weekends. "Single event" noise exposure
levels are capped at 95 dB.
The city has enacted ordinances banning category C and D
aircraft on the basis of safety, but it has lost in
administrative hearings before the FAA and in federal
district court. The city has appealed the most recent
administrative rulings in the federal circuit court in
Washington. Final briefs in this appeal are scheduled to be
filed at the end of this month.
There have been several disputes regarding ground safety at
the airport. Because of the urban encroachment at either
end of the runway, it is impossible to create runway
CONTINUED
AJR 41
Page
4
protection zones, either by clearing areas, which would
entail taking businesses and residences, or by reducing the
length of the runway for deploying material designed to
absorb the energy of out of control aircraft. Underlying
the limitations to making changes to the runway is the 1984
agreement which prohibits changes to runway at the airport.
According to the FAA, there have been seven runway
overruns and one undershoot between 1981 and 2008. None of
these have involved category C or D aircraft.
If the city has not accepted any airport development funds
from the FAA since it entered the 1984 agreement, it may,
after July 2015, be able to take actions, such as reducing
the length of the runway, which would likely reduce the
operation of high performance jet aircraft out of the
airport.
Comments
According to the author's office, the goal of this
resolution is to spur the federal government to take action
to reduce exposure to toxic jet fuel exhaust byproducts and
noise pollution and to prevent their deleterious health
effects. The author contends that "since the 1980s, a
number of changes have taken place with respect to aircraft
operations at SMO, including longer jet aircraft idling
times. In addition, more high-polluting jet aircraft use
SMO than ever before. In recent years the number of jet
aircraft operations at SMO has increased from an annual
total of 1,000 in 1984 to tens of thousands today."
The author indicates that "A February 2010 study by
pediatricians in their residency training at the UCLA
Medical Center evaluated the health impacts of SMO on the
surrounding community. The project was supervised by
faculty from the UCLA Department of Pediatrics. One of the
study's key findings was that airport operations,
particularly jet take-offs and landings, are contributing
to elevated levels of black carbon in the area surrounding
SMO. Elevated black carbon is associated with increased
rates of respiratory and cardiovascular disease, including
asthma, bronchitis, and increased risk for sudden death.
It is also associated with irreversible decrease in lung
function in children and increased carcinogenic risk.
CONTINUED
AJR 41
Page
5
Reduced lung function is a strong risk factor for medical
complications in adulthood as well. Given the number of
children exposed to jet fuel exhaust in homes and schools
around SMO, the health impact from increased black carbon
exposure is substantial. These "new UCLA findings" serve
as the basis for the resolution's memorialization to
establish and implement a reasonable minimum distance
between aircraft operations at SMO and the neighboring
communities.
Related Legislation
AJR 37 (Lieu), Resolution Chapter 127, Statutes of 2008,
memorializes the FAA to initiate a collaborative process to
review the safety of flight operations at SMO and to
examine the role of the airport in the regional aviation
transportation system.
AB 700 (Lieu) of 2007 required the City of Santa Monica to
establish a technical advisory committee to evaluate
relevant and appropriate studies and data regarding SMO and
submit a report to the Legislature and the FAA with
recommendations about potential actions that could be taken
to reduce the air quality impacts caused by air traffic
connected with SMO. This bill passed Senate Environmental
Quality Committee, but was held in Senate Appropriations.
AB 2501 (Lieu) of 2006 required SMO to record the engine
type and operation times of the landing and takeoff
operation cycles of all aircraft operating at SMO and the
data available to the public. This bill was defeated in
the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee.
FISCAL EFFECT : Fiscal Com.: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/10/10)
Concerned Residents Against Airport Pollution (source)
Friends of Sunset Park
Global Green USA
Mar Vista Community Council
Natural Resources Defense Council
Sierra Club California
Venice Neighborhood Council
CONTINUED
AJR 41
Page
6
Bill Rosendahl, Councilmember, City of Los Angeles
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, Eng, Evans, Feuer,
Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Gatto, Hall, Hayashi,
Hernandez, Hill, Huffman, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson,
Torres, Torrico, Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Conway,
Cook, DeVore, Fletcher, Fuller, Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore,
Hagman, Harkey, Huber, Jeffries, Knight, Logue, Miller,
Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, Silva, Smyth, Audra
Strickland, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Adams, Blakeslee, Caballero, De Leon,
Jones, Skinner, Vacancy
JA:nl 8/10/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED