Noise supporting documentation
Massachusetts Port Authority · from Massport · 139 pages · 5.6 MB
open the file ↗ · original at the source ↗
Noise Supporting Documentation I-1 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I. Noise Supporting Documentation This appendix provides detailed information, tables, and figures in support of Chapter 7, Noise . The contents of this appendix are summarized below. I.1 Fundamentals of Acoustics and Environmental Noise........................................................................................... I-2 I.1.1 Introduction to Acoustics and Noise Terminology ................................................................................. I-2 I.1.2 The Decibel (dB).................................................................................................................................................... I-2 I.1.3 The Effects of Aircraft Noise on People.................................................................................................... I-12 I.1.4 Regulatory Framework .................................................................................................................................... I-17 I.2 Logan Airport Noise Modeling..................................................................................................................................... I-22 I. 2. 1 AEDT Noise Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ I-24 I. 2. 2 2022 Radar Data ................................................................................................................................................ I-26 I. 2. 3 Fleet Mix................................................................................................................................................................ I-27 I. 2. 4 Runway Use ......................................................................................................................................................... I-49 I. 2. 5 Flight Tracks......................................................................................................................................................... I-63 I.3 Annual Noise Model Results ......................................................................................................................................... I-64 I.3.1 Noise Exposed Population............................................................................................................................. I-64 I.3.2 Cumulative Noise Index (CNI) ...................................................................................................................... I-73 I.3.3 Dwell and Persistence Reporting ................................................................................................................ I-81 I.3.4 Time Above (TA) and Time Above Night (TAN) .................................................................................... I-83 I.4 Status of Mitigation Programs ...................................................................................................................................... I-85 I.4.1 Residential Sound Insulation Program ..................................................................................................... I-85 I.4.2 Noise Complaints .............................................................................................................................................. I-88 I.4.3 Noise and Operations Monitoring System ............................................................................................. I-93 I.4.4 Airbus A320 Vortex Generators ................................................................................................................... I-95 I.4.5 FAA and Massport RNAV Pilot Project ..................................................................................................... I-95 I.5 Flight Track Monitoring Report .................................................................................................................................. I-103 I.5.1 FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) Procedures .............................................................................................. I-103 I.5.2 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 4R ............................................................................... I-106 I.5.3 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 9 ................................................................................. I-108 I.5.4 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 15R ............................................................................ I-111 I.5.5 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runways 22R and 22L ......................................................... I-113 I.5.6 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 27 ............................................................................... I-116 I.5.7 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 33L ............................................................................. I-119 I.6 2022 DNL Levels for Census Block Group Locations ......................................................................................... I-120 I.7 Airline Fleet Improvements .......................................................................................................................................... I-136 Noise Supporting Documentation I-2 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I.1 Fundamentals of Acoustics and Environmental Noise This section introduces the fundamentals of acoustics and noise terminology as well as the effects of noise on human activity and community annoyance. I.1.1 Introduction to Acoustics and Noise Terminology Chapter 7, Noise of this 2022 Environmental Status and Planning Report (ESPR) relies largely on a measure of cumulative noise exposure over an entire calendar year, in terms of a metric called the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL). However, DNL does not always provide a sufficient description of noise for many purposes. Other measures are available to address essentially any issue of concern. This section introduces the following acoustic metrics, which are all related to DNL, but provide bases for evaluating a broad range of noise situations. These metrics include: Decibel (dB) A-Weighted Decibel (dBA) Sound Exposure Level (SEL) Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) Time Above (TA) Time Above, Night (TAN) DNL I.1.2 The Decibel (dB) All sounds come from a sound source – a musical instrument, a voice speaking, or an airplane that passes overhead. It takes energy to produce sound. The sound energy produced by any sound source is transmitted through the air in the form of sound waves – tiny, quick oscillations of pressure just above and just below atmospheric pressure. These oscillations, or sound pressures, impinge on the ear, creating the sound we hear. Human ears are sensitive to a wide range of sound pressures. The loudest sounds that we hear without pain have about one million times more energy than the quietest sounds we hear. However, our ears are incapable of detecting small differences in these pressures. Thus, to match how we hear this sound energy, humans compress the total range of sound pressures to a more meaningful range by introducing the concept of sound pressure level (SPL). SPL is a measure of the sound pressure of a given noise source relative to a standard reference value (typically the quietest sound that a young person with good hearing can detect). SPLs are measured in decibels (abbreviated dB). Decibels are logarithmic quantities – logarithms of the squared ratio of two pressures, the numerator being the pressure of the sound source of interest, and the denominator being the reference pressure (the quietest sound we can hear). Noise Supporting Documentation I-3 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I The logarithmic conversion of sound pressure to SPL means that the quietest sound we can hear (the reference pressure) has a SPL of about zero dB, while the loudest sounds we hear without pain have SPLs of about 120 dB. Most sounds in our day-to-day environment have SPLs from 30 to 100 dB. Because decibels are logarithmic quantities, they do not behave like regular numbers with which we are more familiar. For example, if two sound sources each produce 100 dB and they are operated together, they produce only 103 dB – not 200 dB as we might expect. Four equal sources operating simultaneously result in a total SPL of 106 dB. In fact, for every doubling of the number of equal sources, the SPL goes up another three decibels. A tenfold increase in the number of sources makes the SPL go up 10 dB. A hundredfold increase makes the level go up 20 dB, and it takes a thousand equal sources to increase the level 30 dB. If one source is much louder than another source, the two sources together will produce the same SPL (and sound to our ears) as if the louder source were operating alone. For example, a 100-dB source plus an 80-dB source produces 100 dB when operating together. The louder source “masks” the quieter one, but if the quieter source gets louder, it will have an increasing effect on the total SPL. When the two sources are equal, as described above, they produce a level 3 dB above the sound of either one by itself. From these basic concepts, note that 100 80 dB sources will produce a combined level of 100 dB; if a single 100-dB source is added, the group will produce a total SPL of 103 dB. Clearly, the loudest source has the greatest effect on the total decibel level. I.1.2.1 A-Weighted Decibel (dBA) Another important characteristic of sound is its frequency, or “pitch.” This is the rate of repetition of the sound pressure oscillations as they reach our ear. Formerly expressed in cycles per second, frequency is now expressed in units known as Hertz (Hz). Most people hear from about 20 Hz to about 10,000 to 15,000 Hz. People respond to sound most readily when the predominant frequency is in the range of normal conversation, around 1,000 to 2,000 Hz. Acousticians have developed "filters" to match our ears' sensitivity and help us to judge the relative loudness of sounds made up of different frequencies. The so-called "A" filter does the best job of matching the sensitivity of our ears to most environmental noises. SPLs measured through this filter are referred to as A-weighted levels (dBA). A-weighting significantly de-emphasizes noise at low and very high frequencies (below about 500 Hz and above about 10,000 Hz) where we do not hear as well. Because this filter generally matches our ears' sensitivity, sounds having higher A-weighted sound levels are usually judged louder than those with lower A-weighted sound levels, a relationship which does not always hold true for unweighted levels. It is for these reasons that A-weighted sound levels are normally used to evaluate environmental noise. Other weighting networks include the B and C filters. They correspond to different level ranges of the ear. The rarely used B-weighting attenuates low frequencies (those less than 500 Hz), but to a lesser degree Noise Supporting Documentation I-4 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR than A-weighting. C weighting is nearly flat throughout the audible frequency range, hardly de-emphasizing low frequency noise. C-weighted levels can be preferable in evaluating sounds for which low-frequency components are responsible for secondary effects such as the shaking of a building, window rattle, or perceptible vibrations. Uses include the evaluation of blasting noise, artillery fire, and in some cases, aircraft noise inside buildings. Figure I-1 compares these various weighting networks. Figure I-1 Frequency-Response Characteristics of Various Weighting Networks Source: Harris, Cyril M., editor; Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, (Chapter 5, "Acoustical Measurement Instruments"; Johnson, Daniel L.; Marsh, Alan H.; and Harris, Cyril M.); New York; McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1991; p. 5.13. Because of the correlation with human hearing, the A-weighted level has been adopted as the basic measure of environmental noise by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and by nearly every other federal and state agency concerned with community noise. Figure I-2 presents typical A-weighted sound levels of several common environmental sources. Noise Supporting Documentation I-5 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-2 Common Environmental Sound Levels, in dBA Source: HMMH (Aircraft noise levels from FAA Advisory Circular 36-3H) Note: dBA – A-weighted decibel. Noise Supporting Documentation I-6 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR An additional dimension to environmental noise is that A-weighted levels vary with time. For example, the sound level increases as an aircraft approaches, then falls and blends into the background as the aircraft recedes into the distance (though even the background varies as birds chirp or the wind blows, or a vehicle passes by). Figure I-3 illustrates this concept. Figure I-3 Variations in the A-Weighted Sound Level Over Time Source: HMMH. I.1.2.2 Maximum A-Weighted Noise Level (Lmax) The variation in noise level over time often makes it convenient to describe a particular noise "event" by its maximum sound level, abbreviated as Lmax. In the figure above, it is approximately 85 dBA. The maximum level describes only one dimension of an event; it provides no information on the cumulative noise exposure. In fact, two events with identical maxima may produce very different total exposures. One may be of very short duration, while the other may continue for an extended period and be judged much more annoying. The next measure corrects for this deficiency. I.1.2.3 Sound Exposure Level (SEL) The most frequently used measure of noise exposure for an individual aircraft noise event (and the measure that Part 150 1 specifies for this purpose) is the SEL. SEL is a measure of the total noise energy produced during an event, from the time when the A-weighted sound level first exceeds a threshold level (normally just above the background or ambient noise) to the time that the sound level drops back down ____________________________________________ 1 “Part 150” refers to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 150, discussed in detail in the Regulatory Framework Section of this Appendix. Noise Supporting Documentation I-7 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I below the threshold. To allow comparison of noise events with very different durations, SEL “normalizes” the duration in every case to one second; that is, it is expressed as the steady noise level with just a one-second duration that includes the same amount of noise energy as the actual longer duration, time-varying noise. In lay terms, SEL “squeezes” the entire noise event into one second. Figure I-4 depicts this transformation. The shaded area represents the energy included in an SEL measurement for the noise event, where the threshold is set to 60 dBA. The dark shaded vertical bar, which is 90 dBA high and just one-second-long (wide), contains the same sound energy as the full event. Figure I-4 Sound Exposure Level (SEL) Source: HMMH. Because the SEL is normalized to one second, it will always be larger than the Lmax for an event longer than one second. In this case, the SEL is 90 dB; the Lmax is approximately 85 dBA. For most aircraft overflights, the SEL is normally on the order of 7 to 12 dB higher than Lmax. Because SEL considers duration, longer exposure to relatively slow, quiet aircraft, such as propeller models, can have the same or higher SEL than shorter exposure to faster, louder planes, such as corporate jets. I.1.2.4 Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) The Lmax and SEL quantify the noise associated with individual events. The remaining metrics in this section describe longer-term cumulative noise exposure that can include many events. The Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) is a measure of exposure resulting from the accumulation of A-weighted sound levels over a particular period of interest (e.g., an hour, an eight-hour school day, nighttime, or a full 24-hour day). Because the length of the period can differ, the applicable period should always be identified or clearly understood when discussing the metric. Such durations are often identified through a subscript, for example Leq(8) or Leq(24). Leq is equivalent to the constant sound level over the period of interest that contains as much sound energy as the actual time-varying level. This is illustrated in Figure I-5 . Both the solid and striped shaded Noise Supporting Documentation I-8 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR areas have a one-minute Leq value of 76 dB. It is important to recognize, however, that the two signals (the constant one and the time-varying one) would sound very different in real life. Also, be aware that the "average" sound level suggested by Leq is not an arithmetic value, but a logarithmic, or "energy-averaged" sound level. Thus, loud events dominate Leq measurements. Figure I-5 Example of a One-Minute Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) Source: HMMH. In airport noise studies, Leq is often presented for consecutive one-hour periods to illustrate how the exposure rises and falls throughout a 24-hour period, and how individual hours are affected by unusual activity, such as rush hour traffic or a few loud aircraft. I.1.2.5 Time Above (TA) TA is a metric that gives the duration, in minutes, for which aircraft-related noise exceeds a specified A--weighted sound level during a given period. The measure is referred to generally as TA. For this 2022 ESPR , three threshold sound levels are used in the analysis: 65, 75, and 85 dBA. These times are computed using the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT). I.1.2.6 Time Above Night (TAN) TAN is identical to TA, except it is computed for only the 9-hour period between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. The TAN is also developed using three threshold sound levels 65, 75, and 85 dBA. Noise Supporting Documentation I-9 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.1.2.7 Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) Virtually all studies of aircraft noise rely on a slightly more complicated measure of noise exposure that describes cumulative noise exposure during an average annual day: the DNL. (EPA identified DNL as the most appropriate means of evaluating airport noise based on the following considerations: 2 1. The measure should be applicable to the evaluation of pervasive long-term noise in various defined areas and under various conditions over long periods. 2. The measure should correlate well with known effects of the noise environment and on individuals and the public. 3. The measure should be simple, practical, and accurate. In principal, it should be useful for planning as well as for enforcement or monitoring purposes. 4. The required measurement equipment, with standard characteristics, should be commercially available. 5. The measure should be closely related to existing methods currently in use. 6. The single measure of noise at a given location should be predictable, within an acceptable tolerance, from knowledge of the physical events producing the noise. 7. The measure should lend itself to small, simple monitors, which can be left unattended in public areas for long periods. Most federal agencies dealing with noise have formally adopted DNL. The Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) reaffirmed the appropriateness of DNL in 1992 and DNL was reaffirmed again by the Federal Interagency Committee on Aircraft Noise (FICAN) in 2018. The FICON summary report stated; “There are no new descriptors or metrics of sufficient scientific standing to substitute for the present DNL cumulative noise exposure metric.” The DNL represents noise as it occurs over a 24-hour period, with one important exception: DNL treats nighttime noise differently from daytime noise. In determining DNL, it is assumed that the A-weighted levels occurring at night (defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) are 10 dB louder than they really are. This 10-dB penalty is applied to account for greater sensitivity to nighttime noise, and the fact that events at night are often perceived to be more intrusive because nighttime ambient noise is less than daytime ambient noise. Figure I-4 illustrated the A-weighted sound level due to an aircraft fly-over as it changed with time. The top frame of Figure I-6 repeats this figure. The shaded area reflects the noise dose that a listener receives during the one-minute period of the sample. The center frame of Figure I-6 includes this one-minute sample within a full hour. The shaded area represents the noise during that hour with 16 noise events, each producing an SEL. Similarly, the bottom frame includes the one-hour interval within a full 24 hours. Here the shaded area represents the listener’s noise dose over a complete day. Note that several overflights occur at a time when the background noise drops some 10 dB, to approximately 45 dBA. ____________________________________________ 2 Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety," U. S. EPA Report No. 550/9-74-004, March 1974. Noise Supporting Documentation I-10 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR DNL can be measured or estimated. Measurements are practical only for obtaining DNL values for relatively limited numbers of points, and, in the absence of a permanently installed monitoring system, only for relatively short time periods. Most airport noise studies are based on computer-generated DNL estimates, determined by accounting for all the SELs from individual events, which comprise the total noise dose at a given location. Computed DNL values are often depicted in terms of equal-exposure noise contours (much as topographic maps have contours of equal elevation). Figure I-7 depicts typical DNL values for a variety of noise environments. Figure I-6 Daily Noise Dose Source: HMMH. Noise Supporting Documentation I-11 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-7 Examples of Day-Night Average Sound Levels (DNL) Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, March 1974, p. 14. In 2015, the FAA began a multi-year effort to update the scientific evidence on the relationship between aircraft noise exposure and its effects on communities around airports. 3 This was the most comprehensive study using a single noise survey ever undertaken in the United States, polling communities surrounding 20 airports nationwide. For detailed information on the survey, please review the survey introduction and read the survey report 4 . Further information on FAA's aircraft noise research program, can also be found on a Federal Register ____________________________________________ 3 Federal Aviation Administration. Press Release – FAA To Re-Evaluate Method for Measuring Effects of Aircraft Noise. https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=18774 4 Federal Aviation Administration. Analysis of the Neighborhood Environmental Survey. https://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov/Products/Airport-Safety-Papers-Publications/Airport-Safety- Detail/ArtMID/3682/ArticleID/2845/Analysis-of-NES Noise Supporting Documentation I-12 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR notice published on January 13, 2021 5 . This notice invited comments on the FAA's aircraft noise research program, including the survey, through a 90-day total period which closed on April 14, 2021. The FAA is currently reviewing the over 4,000 comments received to this docket (FAA-2021-0037-001). The FAA will not make any determinations based on the findings of these research programs for the FAA's noise policies, including any potential revised use of the DNL noise metric, until it has carefully considered public and other stakeholder input along with any additional research needed to improve the understanding of the effects of aircraft noise exposure on communities. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 under Section 188 and 173, required FAA to complete the evaluation of alternative metrics to the DNL standard within one year. The Section 188 and 173 Report to Congress was delivered on April 14, 2020 6 and concluded that while no single noise metric can cover all situations, DNL provides the most comprehensive way to consider the range of factors influencing exposure to aircraft noise. In addition, use of supplemental metrics is both encouraged and supported to further disclose and aid in the public understanding of community noise impacts. I.1.3 The Effects of Aircraft Noise on People To residents around airports, aircraft noise can be an annoyance and a nuisance. It can interfere with conversation and listening to television, it can disrupt classroom activities in schools, and it can disrupt sleep. Relating these effects to specific noise metrics helps in the understanding of how and why people react to their environment. I.1.3.1 Speech Interference A primary effect of aircraft noise is its tendency to drown out or "mask" speech, making it difficult to carry on a normal conversation. The sound level of speech decreases as the distance between a talker and listener increases. As the background sound level increases, it becomes harder to hear speech. Figure I-8 presents typical distances between talker and listener for satisfactory outdoor conversations, in the presence of different steady A-weighted background noise levels for raised, normal, and relaxed voice effort. As the background level increases, the talker must raise their voice, or the individuals must get closer together to continue talking. ____________________________________________ 5 Federal Aviation Administration. Overview of FAA Aircraft Noise Policy and Research Efforts: Request for Input on Research Activities to Inform Aircraft Noise Policy. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/13/2021-00564/overview-of-faa- aircraft-noise-policy-and-research-efforts-request-for-input-on-research-activities 6 Federal Aviation Administration. Report to Congress on an evaluation of alternative noise metrics. https://www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/congress/media/Day-Night_Average_Sound_Levels_COMPLETED_report_w_letters.pdf Noise Supporting Documentation I-13 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-8 Outdoor Speech Intelligibility Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, March 1974, p. D-5. As indicated in the figure, "satisfactory conversation" does not always require hearing every word; 95 percent intelligibility is acceptable for many conversations. Listeners can infer a few unheard words when they occur in a familiar context. However, in relaxed conversation, we have higher expectations of hearing speech and generally require closer to 100 percent intelligibility. Any combination of talker-listener distances and background noise that falls below the bottom line in Figure I-8 (thus assuring 100 percent intelligibility) represents an ideal environment for outdoor speech communication and is considered necessary for acceptable indoor conversation as well. One implication of the relationships in Figure I-8 is that for typical communication at distances of 3 or 4 feet (1 to 1.5 meters), acceptable outdoor conversations can be carried on in a normal voice as long as the background noise outdoors is less than about 65 dBA. If the noise exceeds this level, as might occur when an aircraft passes overhead, intelligibility would be lost unless vocal effort were increased, or communication distance were decreased. Noise Supporting Documentation I-14 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Indoors, typical distances, voice levels, and intelligibility expectations generally require a background level less than 45 dBA. With windows partly open, housing generally provides about 12 dBA of interior-to-exterior noise level reduction. Thus, if the outdoor sound level is 60 dBA or less, there is a reasonable chance that the resulting indoor sound level will afford acceptable conversation inside. With windows closed, 24 dB of attenuation is typical. I.1.3.2 Sleep Interference Research on sleep disruption from noise has led to widely varying observations. In part, this is because (1) sleep can be disturbed without awakening, (2) the deeper the sleep the more noise it takes to cause arousal, and (3) the tendency to awaken increases with age, and other factors. Figure I-9 shows one such relationship from recent research conducted in the U.S. – the probability that a group of people will be awakened at least once when exposed to a given indoor SEL. Figure I-9 Probability of Awakening at Least Once from Indoor Noise Event Source: American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S12.9-2008/Part 6, Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Environmental Sound — Part 6: Methods for Estimation of Awakenings Associated with Outdoor Noise Events Heard in Homes; Equation 1. For example, an indoor SEL of 80 dB results in approximately 3.5 percent of the exposed population being awakened. If windows are open in the bedroom on a warm evening and a house provides a typical outside-to-inside noise level reduction of around 15 dB, which suggests it takes an SEL of about 95 dB outdoors to awaken 3.5 percent of the population. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) has extended this concept further and developed a standard (ANSI S12.9-2008/Part 6) for computing the percentage of the population that is likely to be awakened by multiple noise events occurring throughout the night. The FICAN subsequently endorsed the standard as the best available means of estimating behavioral awakenings from aircraft noise. Noise Supporting Documentation I-15 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.1.3.3 Community Annoyance Social survey data make it clear that individual reactions to noise vary widely for a given noise level. Nevertheless, as a group, people's aggregate response is predictable and relates well to measures of cumulative noise exposure such as DNL. Figure I-10 shows a widely recognized relationship between environmental noise and annoyance. Based on data from 18 surveys conducted worldwide, the curve indicates that at levels as low as DNL 55, approximately 5.0 percent of the people will still be highly annoyed, with the percentage increasing more rapidly as exposure increases above DNL 65 dB. Figure I-10 Percentage of People Highly Annoyed Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAN). "Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues." August 1992. (From data provided by USAF Armstrong Laboratory). pp. 3-6. Separate work by the U.S. EPA has shown that overall community reaction to a noise environment can also be related to DNL. This relationship is shown in Figure I-11 . Levels have been normalized to the same set of exposure conditions to permit valid comparisons between ambient noise environments. Data summarized in Figure I-11 suggest that little reaction would be expected for intrusive noise levels five decibels below the ambient, while widespread complaints can be expected as intruding noise exceeds background levels by about 5 dB. Vigorous action is likely when the background is exceeded by 20 dB. Noise Supporting Documentation I-16 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Figure I-11 Community Reaction as a Function of Outdoor DNL Source: Wyle Laboratories, “Community Noise,” prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Washington, D.C., December 1971, pg. 63. Note: DNL - Day-Night Average Sound Level. While the Schultz Curve remains the accepted standard for describing transportation noise exposure-annoyance relationships, its original supporting scientific evidence and social survey data were based on information that was available in the 1970s. The last in-depth review and revalidation of the Schultz Curve was conducted in 1992. More recent analyses have shown that aviation noise results in higher annoyance than other modes of transportation. Recent international social surveys have also generally shown higher annoyance than the Schultz Curve. These analyses and survey data indicate that the Schultz Curve may not reflect the current U.S. public perception of aviation noise. To ensure that FAA's continued efforts to reduce the effects of aircraft noise exposure on communities is based upon accurate information, FAA conducted a nationwide survey to measure the relationship between aircraft noise exposure and annoyance in communities near airports. This survey captured the community response to a modern fleet of aircraft as they are being flown today and used best practices in terms of noise analysis and data collection. The responses from the survey have been used to create a new National Curve, shown in Figure I-12 . The survey results show that there has been a substantial change in the public perception of aviation noise, relative to the Schultz Curve, which will ultimately Noise Supporting Documentation I-17 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I inform future FAA noise initiatives. Compared with the existing Schultz Curve, the new National Curve shows a substantial increase in the percentage of people who are highly annoyed by aircraft noise over the entire range of aircraft noise levels considered, including at lower noise levels. Figure I-12 National Curve: Percent Highly Annoyed as a Function of DNL I.1.4 Regulatory Framework I.1.4.1 Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36 Logan Airport operates within a framework of federal aviation regulations that limits an airport operator’s ability to control noise. For example, FAA’s FAR Part 36 7 sets noise limits for aircraft certification and the procedures by which aircraft noise emission levels must be measured to determine compliance. The regulation defines noise emission limits for turbojets, turboprops, and helicopters, classifying turbojets into categories referred to as stages based on noise levels at each of three locations: takeoff, landing, and to the side of the runway during takeoff (sideline). The categories are: Stage 1 aircraft are the oldest and usually have the loudest operations, having preceded the existence of any noise emission regulation. Rare examples include old, restored civil or military aircraft. There are no Stage 1 aircraft operating at Logan Airport. Stage 2 aircraft are less old and less noisy than Stage 1; they were the first aircraft types required to meet a noise limit. A subsequent regulation, FAR Part 91 (described below), prohibits the operation of a Stage 2 aircraft in the continental U.S. unless its takeoff weight is 75,000 pounds or less. The FAA ____________________________________________ 7 14 CFR Part 36, “Noise Standards: Aircraft Type and Air Worthiness Certification.” Noise Supporting Documentation I-18 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Reauthorization bill of 2012 also mandated the phase out of Stage 2 aircraft with a takeoff weight less than 75,000 pounds by the end of 2015. Thus, there are no longer any Stage 2 aircraft operating at Logan Airport. Stage 3 aircraft were certified for service before 2006 and have relatively quiet jets, although some are Stage 2 aircraft that have been re-engined, or have been fitted with hushkits, enabling them to meet Stage 3 noise limits. Stage 4 aircraft are required to operate with a cumulative noise level at least 10 dB quieter than Stage 3 aircraft at three prescribed measurement points. Jet aircraft certificated after January 1, 2006 must meet the Stage 4 limits. Although not required, the majority of aircraft in the 2022 Logan Airport fleets would also meet the Stage 4 noise limits if they were recertificated. Stage 5 aircraft are the newest and quietest aircraft. All aircraft certificated after January 1, 2018 must meet Stage 5 limits, which are a cumulative 7 dB below Stage 4 and 17 dB below Stage 3 aircraft. The Boeing 787, 747-8, and Airbus A350 and A380 are examples of aircraft that meet the new limits. About 29 percent of aircraft in the 2022 Logan Airport fleets would meet Stage 5 noise limits. I.1.4.2 Logan Airport Noise Abatement Rules and Regulations For decades, Massport’s primary mechanism for reducing noise impacts from Logan Airport’s operations was the Noise Rules. 8 The Noise Rules were designed to reduce noise impacts by encouraging use of quieter aircraft by requiring decreased use of noisier aircraft and by limiting nighttime activity by louder Stage 2 types. Many secondary goals aimed at limiting noise in specific areas also were stated. Specific provisions of the Noise Rules, which continue to serve these goals, include: Limiting cumulative noise exposure at Logan Airport (as measured by Massport’s cumulative noise index [CNI]) to a maximum of 156.5 Effective Perceived Noise Decibels (EPNdB) Maximizing use of Stage 3 aircraft Restricting nighttime operations by Stage 2 aircraft Placing limitations on times and locations of engine run-ups and use of auxiliary power units (APU) Restricting use of certain runways by noisier aircraft and time of day These restrictions and limitations are subject to FAA implementation and safe operation of the Airport and airspace. While the specific language applying to Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft is no longer applicable, due to aircraft fleet modernizations, CNI continues to be calculated and monitored annually. ____________________________________________ 8 The Logan International Airport Noise Abatement Rules and Regulations, effective July 1, 1986, are codified at 740 Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 24.01 et seq (also known as the Noise Rules). Noise Supporting Documentation I-19 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.1.4.3 FAR Part 150 First implemented in February 1981, FAR Part 150 9 defines procedures that an airport operator must follow if it chooses to conduct and implement an airport noise and land use compatibility plan. Part 150 Noise Compatibility studies require the use of DNL to evaluate the airport noise environment. FAR Part 150 identifies noise compatibility guidelines for different land uses depending on their sensitivity. Key values include a DNL of 75 dB, above which no residences, schools, hospitals, or churches are considered compatible, and a DNL of 65 dB, above which those land uses are considered compatible only if they are sound insulated. Noise abatement or mitigation measures that an airport operator must consider in a Part 150 study include acquisition of incompatible land, construction of noise barriers, sound insulation of buildings, implementation of a preferential runway program, use of noise abatement flight tracks, implementation of airport use restrictions, and any other actions that would have a beneficial effect on the public. While Massport has implemented variations of these and additional measures at Logan Airport, Massport has not filed an official Part 150 noise compatibility study with FAA because all of Logan Airport’s program elements, while regularly reviewed and updated, preceded the promulgation of Part 150 and are effectively grandfathered under the regulation. In 2021, Massport submitted a 2020 Noise Exposure Map prepared in accordance with Part 150 to FAA in order to update the Residential Sound Insulation Program. The Noise Exposure Map was accepted by the FAA in December 2021 and Massport was subsequently able to re-start the sound insulation program When the 2021 annual noise analysis was complete, Massport submitted a 2021 Noise Exposure Map to FAA in December, 2022; that contour set was accepted on April 11, 2023, and is being used in the next phase of the program. I.1.4.4 FAR Parts 91 and 161 The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) 10 directed the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to undertake three key noise-related actions: Establish a schedule for a phase out of Part 36 Stage 2 aircraft by the year 2000 Establish a program for FAA review of all new airport noise and access restrictions limiting operations of Stage 2 aircraft Establish a program for FAA review and approval of any restriction that limits operations of Stage 3 aircraft, including public notice requirements ____________________________________________ 9 14 CFR Part 150, “Airport Noise Compatibility Planning.” 10 Pub. L. No. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388, as recodified at 49 United States Code 47521- 47533. Noise Supporting Documentation I-20 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR FAA addressed these requirements through amendment of an existing federal regulation, “Part 91,” 11 and establishment of a new regulation, “Part 161.” 12 ANCA effectively ended Massport’s pursuit of any additional operational restrictions outside of this program. I.1.4.5 Amendment to Part 91 FAA establishes and regulates operating noise limits for civil aircraft operation in Subpart I, “Operating Noise Limits,” of 14 CFR Part 91, “General Operating and Flight Rules.” The noise limits are based on aircraft noise certification criteria set forth in 14 CFR Part 36, described above. In 1976, FAA ordered a phase out of all Stage 1 aircraft with a maximum gross takeoff weight (MGTOW) over 75,000 pounds, to be completed on January 1, 1985. After that date, Stage 1 civil aircraft over 75,000 pounds MGTOW were banned from operating in the U.S. (with limited exemptions related to commercial service at “small communities,” which has since expired in 1988). ANCA required a similar phase out of Stage 2 aircraft over 75,000 pounds by December 31, 1999. The 75,000-pound weight limit exempted most “business” (or “corporate”) jets and a very small number of the very smallest “air carrier” type jets until December 31, 2015, when a full ban took effect. 13 Aircraft operators responded to the Stage 1 and 2 phase-outs by retiring their non-compliant aircraft or modifying some of their aircraft to meet the more stringent standards. The modifications undertaken include installation of quieter engines, noise-reducing physical modifications to the airframe and/or existing engines, and limitation of operating weights and procedures to meet the applicable Part 36 limits. Some former Stage 2 aircraft that were “recertificated” as Stage 3 with these modifications may still operate at Logan Airport, but only on an occasional basis as general aviation aircraft. Aircraft with these modifications are no longer operating as part of the commercial fleet at Logan Airport. From 2006 to 2017, as airlines added new aircraft, Stage 4 aircraft were added to their fleets. The Stage 4 noise standard applies to any new jet aircraft type designs over 12,500 pounds requiring FAA approval after January 1, 2006. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has also adopted the same regulation for international operators, but neither FAA nor ICAO have indicated there will be restrictions on the remaining recertificated Stage 3 aircraft from carrier fleets. ICAO and FAA adopted a higher standard of noise classification called Stage 5 (Chapter 14 for ICAO) which was effective for new aircraft type certification after December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2020, depending on the weight of the aircraft. 14 Many aircraft currently operating at Logan Airport meet Stage 5 noise standards. ____________________________________________ 11 14 CFR Part 91, “General Operating and Flight Rules.” 12 14 CFR Part 161, “Notice and Approval of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions.” 13 FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 sets a January 1, 2016 ban of Stage 2 aircraft less than 75,000 lbs. 14 The Final Rule was published on October 4, 2017. Noise Supporting Documentation I-21 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.1.4.6 Part 161 FAA implemented the ANCA requirements related to notice, analysis, and approval of use restrictions affecting Stage 2 and 3 aircraft through the establishment of a new regulation, 14 CFR Part 161, “Notice and Approval of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions.” In simple terms, Part 161 requires an airport operator that proposes to implement a restriction on Stage 2 or 3 aircraft operations to undertake, document, and publicize certain benefit-cost analyses, comparing the noise benefits of the restriction to its economic costs. Operators must obtain specific FAA approvals of the analysis, documentation, and notice processes, and – for Stage 3 restrictions – approval of the restriction itself. Part 161 and ANCA define more demanding requirements and explicit guidance for Stage 3 restrictions. To implement a Stage 3 restriction, formal FAA approval is required. FAA's role for Stage 2 restrictions is limited to commenting on compliance with Part 161 notice and analysis procedural requirements. Part 161 provides guidance regarding appropriate information to provide in support of these findings. While Part 161 does not require this information for a Stage 2 restriction, Part 161 states that it would be “useful.” Moreover, FAA has required airports to provide this same information for Stage 2 restrictions (and even for Stage 1 restrictions pursued under FAR Part 150), on the grounds that they are required for airports to comply with grant assurance 22(a), “Economic Nondiscrimination,” which states that an airport operator “will make its airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public at the Airport.” 15 Although several (on the order of a dozen) airports have embarked on efforts to adopt both Stage 2 and 3 restrictions in the past two decades, FAA has found that only one, Naples Municipal Airport, a general aviation (GA) airport in Naples, Florida, has fully complied with Part 161 analysis, notice, and documentation requirements for a ban on Stage 2 jet operations. FAA found the airport was in violation of prior to FAA grant assurances. The airport operator successfully sued FAA to overturn that ruling and has implemented the restriction. ANCA and Part 161 specifically exempt Stage 3 use restrictions that were effective on or before October 1, 1990, and Stage 2 restrictions that were proposed before that date. The Logan Airport Noise Rules were promulgated in 1986; therefore, ANCA and Part 161 have no bearing on their continued implementation in their current form. Any future proposals to make the rules more stringent regarding Stage 2 operations or to restrict Stage 3 operations in any way would almost certainly trigger Part 161 notice, analysis, and approval processes for Stage 3 restrictions. In 2006, Massport requested an opinion from FAA regarding the pursuit of a Part 161 waiver or exemption to allow Massport to implement a ____________________________________________ 15 FAA Order 5190.6(b), “Airport Compliance Manual” Chapter 13, Section 14, paragraph (a). To be approved, restrictions must meet the following six statutory criteria: 1) The proposed restriction is reasonable, nonarbitrary, and nondiscriminatory. 2) The proposed restriction does not create an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce. 3) The proposed restriction maintains safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. 4) The proposed restriction does not conflict with any existing federal statute or regulation. 5) The applicant has provided adequate opportunity for public comment on the proposed restriction. 6) The proposed restriction does not create an undue burden on the national aviation system. Noise Supporting Documentation I-22 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR curfew of nighttime operations of hush-kitted Stage 3 aircraft. FAA informed Massport that a waiver or exemption from the requirements of Part 161 is not authorized under, or consistent with, federal statutory and regulatory requirements. A copy of FAA’s letter to Massport was provided in Appendix H, Noise Abatement in the 2005 ESPR. I.2 Logan Airport Noise Modeling To relate portions of the foregoing discussion to the specific noise environment around Logan Airport for this 2022 ESPR , Massport has developed DNL noise contours, TA noise metrics, and population counts for 2022 using the latest version of the FAA’s AEDT, version 3e, and a proprietary AEDT pre-processor. The pre-processor software takes radar data from individual flights occurring throughout the year, and structures it into a form usable as input to the AEDT. The AEDT serves as the computational “engine” for calculating noise. Prior to 2016, Massport used the FAA’s Integrated Noise Model (INM) with a pre- processor called RealContours TM which operated in a similar manner. Standard AEDT input methodology involves development of operational inputs and calculation of the DNL for a prototypical average annual day. 16 This approach requires manually collecting, refining, and entering the enormous amount of data averaged over a full year of activity at an airport. Typically, the model inputs may include an aircraft fleet mix with several dozen representative aircraft types, on the order of 100 to 300 representative flight tracks (common for a facility the size of Logan Airport), and runway use and flight track use percentages for three or four categories of aircraft types with similar performance characteristics. This normal approach to noise modeling meets accepted professional standards and reduces the effort and cost that would be associated with manually entering the parameters for every actual operation. However, it represents a significant simplification of the extraordinary diversity of actual aircraft operations over a year. Instead of relying on consolidated data summaries, Massport takes maximum possible advantage of both AEDT’s capabilities and the investment that Massport has made in its Noise and Operations Management System (NOMS). The AEDT pre-processor improves the precision of modeling by utilizing operations monitoring results in these key areas: Directly converts the flight track for every identified aircraft operation to an AEDT track, rather than assigning multiple operations to a limited number of prototypical tracks Models each operation on the specific runway that it actually used, rather than applying a generalized distribution to broad ranges of aircraft types Models each operation in the time period that it occurred, which realistically represent delays that occur during the year, rather than relying on scheduled flight times ____________________________________________ 16 Guidance on Using the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) to Conduct Environmental Modeling for FAA Actions Subject to NEPA, October 27, 2017, Section 3.2, p. 13 Noise Supporting Documentation I-23 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Selects the specific airframe and engine combination to model, on an operation-by-operation basis, based on the registration data for each flight wherever possible; otherwise, based on the published compositions of the fleets of the specific airlines operating at Logan Airport Figure I-13 provides a schematic representation of Massport’s annual noise modeling process compared to the standard AEDT process. The flow chart on the left depicts data from the NOMS system being used as noise model inputs, while the flow chart on the right illustrates the development of a simplified average annual day that would be otherwise necessary. Figure I-13 Schematic Noise Modeling Process (using NOMS data pre-processor vs. standard AEDT use) Source: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), HMMH. NOMS data preprocessor Noise Supporting Documentation I-24 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I.2. 1 AEDT Noise Analysis Logan Airport presents a set of unique challenges to modeling software, and over the course of many years, Massport addressed these challenges by developing a series of adjustments and customizations to better represent the operations, conditions, and terrain that affect noise at Logan Airport. The following adjustments were historically incorporated into INM analyses: Custom profiles . The analysis has developed custom climbing and descent profiles based on radar altitude data, rather than using default profiles built into INM. This results in more accurate aircraft thrust calculations, which in turn affects an aircraft’s noise emissions. Daily weather data . Noise calculations have used average weather conditions for each day to determine aircraft performance and sound propagation. Hill effect adjustment . Due to discrepancies between noise monitor data and INM calculations in the Orient Heights area close to the Airport, adjustments have been included to improve the accuracy of calculations in areas with direct line-of-sight exposure to the airfield. Over-water adjustment . The INM calculations assume that noise is absorbed as it propagates over ground. However, Logan Airport is mostly surrounded by water, which reflects rather than absorbs the sound. This results in higher noise levels in areas near the Airport. An adjustment has been used that allows the INM to assume higher aircraft noise emissions when they are close to the ground. In 2015, FAA released its next ‐ generation environmental analysis software, the AEDT version 2B. 17 AEDT incorporates the computational engines of the legacy tools INM and the Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) and provides a unified database back end and graphical user interface. With a common set of aircraft and airport data that are updated regularly, AEDT ensures that noise and emissions analyses can be performed with up ‐ to ‐ date information. Massport first explored the use of AEDT for the 2015 EDR and adopted AEDT as its ongoing noise model beginning with the 2016 EDR . In transitioning from INM to AEDT, Massport has investigated how to implement the historical adjustments in the new software. While the Massachusetts state EDR/Environmental Status and Planning Report (ESPR) process does not require FAA approval, Massport wishes to perform analysis to FAA standards. Massport has held numerous meetings with FAA since the release of AEDT to get approval for adjustments to AEDT. The following is a summary of the proposed measures to address the adjustments previously implemented in INM, and FAA’s response. Altitude control codes . This feature of AEDT performs a similar function to the custom profiles used previously, using altitude data to more accurately calculate aircraft thrust levels. Since this is a capability built into AEDT, FAA approval is implicit and was not requested. Aircraft weight adjustment . It has been determined that some aircraft takeoff weights, based on Department of Transportation T-100 data, do not always match the weight assumptions (stage length) made by AEDT. Consequently, an adjustment was developed to more accurately represent takeoff ____________________________________________ 17 AEDT 2A was released in 2013 and replaced the NIRS model for airspace analysis. AEDT 2B replaces, AEDT 2A, INM and EDMS. Noise Supporting Documentation I-25 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I weight, and therefore aircraft thrust during takeoff. FAA concurs with this approach but required that the analysis evaluate all aircraft departures. The weight analysis resulted in some aircraft increasing stage length and some aircraft decreasing in stage length. This resulted in essentially no modification to the noise contours; therefore, Massport decided to no longer include this adjustment in the modeling process. Annual weather . AEDT by default used 10-year average weather for the Airport. Massport has proposed using an annual average for the year under study to better capture year-to-year variations in weather. 18 FAA concurs with this approach . AEDT 3 allows for the use of annual average weather in the model so this approach no longer needs FAA approval. Hill effects . Massport has proposed including the adjustments previously used in INM. FAA does not concur with this approach . There are ongoing research studies to develop modifications to the AEDT model and FAA recommends waiting until those methods are available. Over water adjustment . Massport explored other options including the existing INM adjustment method. Massport proposed including the adjustments previously used in INM. FAA does not concur with this approach . There are ongoing research studies to develop modifications to the AEDT model and FAA recommends waiting until those methods are available. Massport will continue to work with FAA to address these issues and to incorporate enhancements to AEDT as they become available. In March 2017, the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) published an FAA-sponsored study entitled “Improving AEDT Noise Modeling of Ground Surfaces.” The study recommends a methodology and provides guidance for implementation in AEDT, however at the time of this study, FAA has not recommended the method for use with AEDT or incorporated the ACRP study information into the AEDT. In March 2018, ACRP published “Enhanced AEDT Modeling of Aircraft Arrival and Departure Profiles Volume 1: Guidance.” 19 It highlights new data with alternate default profiles for specific aircraft and new methodology available to model users to customize flight profiles in greater detail than was previously available. The study recommends a methodology and provides guidance for implementation in AEDT. Modified profiles have been added to the AEDT database, however, these profiles are not standard data and Massport would have to demonstrate the need to use the profiles and seek approval for each study. At this time, FAA has concurred with adjustments for annual average weather and the adjustment of aircraft stage length (both adjustments are no longer used), but disapproved adjustments for over-water effects and elevated terrain line-of-sight exposure. Massport has performed the AEDT analyses for 2022 using only FAA standard methods. ____________________________________________ 18 Daily weather is currently not an option in AEDT modeling inputs, however Massport will continue to request that FAA allow for such an option. 19 Airport Cooperative Research Program Web-Only Document 36: Enhanced AEDT Modeling of Aircraft Arrival and Departure Profiles, Volume 1: Guidance. http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/178074.aspx. Noise Supporting Documentation I-26 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR FAA guidance states that an airport noise modeling project should use the most current model version available at the time the project begins. FAA’s AEDT version 2c Service Pack 2 (AEDT 2c SP2) was released for general use on March 13, 2017; it was the version used to generate the 2016 DNL contours and accompanying noise analyses. AEDT version 2d was released on September 27, 2017. Massport used AEDT 2d for the 2017 DNL calculations. AEDT version 3b was released on September 24, 2019, followed by AEDT version 3c (originally released on March 6, 2020, and re-released with corrections on June 19, 2020). Massport used the re-released AEDT version 3c for the 2018 and 2019 analyses. AEDT version 3d was released on March 29, 2021. Massport used AEDT version 3d for the 2020 and 2021 analyses. Version 3e was released on May 9, 2022 and was used for the 2022 noise modeling contained in this ESPR. As with the previous upgrade from version 3c to 3d, the most significant changes in the model from AEDT 3d to AEDT 3e are improvements to emissions and dispersion modeling. The differences between AEDT 3d and AEDT 3e with regard to noise calculations are minimal. Two new aircraft types, the 747400RN and 7879, were added to the AEDT version 3e database; both are specific engine adjustments to the Boeing 747-400 and the 787-9 respectively. The BD-700-1A11 aircraft which was already in the AEDT database received nose/performance updates.. The following sections of this appendix provide several tables describing the AEDT input data for 2022. Where possible, the data for 2019 are included for comparison. I.2. 2 2022 Radar Data Logan Airport’s radar data are the basis for Massport’s annual noise calculations. The Passive Surveillance Radar System (PASSUR) radar dataset was used for the 2004 ESPR through the 2008 EDR . For the 2009 EDR through the 2014 EDR , Massport used the radar data from its Harris NOMS system. These radar data were obtained from a multilateration system of eight sensors deployed around the Airport. The positioning data from these sensors were correlated to provide better, more accurate coverage of aircraft (in areas where the traditional FAA radar has limitations) and provide a more complete set of points to define each track. Traditional radar provides points every four to five seconds where the multilateration system provides data every second. In 2015, the Massport system switched to FAA’s NextGen data feed, which integrates the Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS ‐ B) feed with multiple redundant real ‐ time FAA surveillance sources into a single fused data feed. The NextGen data is a “multisensory ‐ based” subscription data source that aggregates all available surveillance sources, including: FAA En Route Radars; FAA Terminal Radars; FAA Airport Surface Detection Equipment X Band (ASDE-X) Systems; FAA Aircraft Situational Display to Industry (ASDI) Oceanic and Canadian Tracks only; and Harris ADS-B Data Feed. Logan Airport is supported by an FAA ASDE-X system which provides highly accurate one-second data points for aircraft situational awareness on the Airport and within at least 5 miles of the Airport. These Noise Supporting Documentation I-27 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I data are fused with the other sources and provided to the Massport NOMS system in a geo-referenced data format. The geo-referenced radar data are imported into the AEDT model, which is built on a geo-referenced platform to retain accuracy of the data for modeling. For 2022, a total of 376,575 flight records from the NOMS contained suitable data for modeling, which is over 99.9 percent of the recorded flight records. These operations were scaled slightly by category and airline to match the 378,613 annual flights in Massport records. I.2. 3 Fleet Mix Table I-1 (2022), Table I-2 (2021), and Table I-3 (2019 for comparison) provide the scaled annual operations, listed by Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) aircraft type. Each ANP type listed in Table I-1 and Table I-2 is also mapped to a Runway use group based on its weight and performance characteristics described in the Runway Use section below. Regional jets (RJ) are defined as those aircraft with 90 or fewer seats, consistent with the categorization in Chapter 3, Activity Levels and Forecasting . 20 For years prior to 2010, the RJs in this report were classified as aircraft with less than 100 seats. When RJs first started gaining popularity, the aircraft types available were typically 50 seats or less, while the traditional air carrier jet has over 100 seats. As newer aircraft types have become available, the smaller 35- to 50-seat types have been replaced by 70- to 99-seat types, with the types having 90 or more seats flying many of the traditional air carrier routes. The majority of the newer types fall into two categories: the 70- to 75-seat category, which remain categorized as RJs, and the 91- to 99-seat category, which are categorized as air carrier jets. The Embraer 190 falls into this second category and is now classified in the Light Jet B group. ____________________________________________ 20 U.S. Code, 2006 Edition, Supplement 3, Title 49 – Transportation Subtitle VII – Aviation Programs Part A – Air Commerce and Safety, Subpart II, Economic Regulation, Chapter 417 - Operations or Carriers, Subchapter III - Regional Air Service Incentive Program, Sec. 41762 – Definitions – defines RJ air carrier service to be aircraft with a maximum of 75 seats. Therefore, this report categorizes aircraft with 70-75 seats and below as RJ and aircraft with 90 seats and higher aircraft as air carrier (Note: there are no types with 75 to 90 seats). Noise Supporting Documentation I-28 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-1 2022 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night Commercial Jet Operations 747400 Heavy Jet A 205 0 203 2 410 7478 Heavy Jet A 5 1 6 0 12 A340-211 Heavy Jet A 167 0 96 71 334 A340-642 Heavy Jet A 254 2 238 18 512 A380-841 Heavy Jet A 172 0 171 1 344 A380-861 Heavy Jet A 2 0 1 1 4 767300 Heavy Jet B 178 36 6 208 429 7673ER Heavy Jet B 3,307 984 2,290 2,000 8,581 767400 Heavy Jet B 264 3 193 74 534 767CF6 Heavy Jet B 28 11 8 31 78 767JT9 Heavy Jet B 24 5 2 27 58 777200 Heavy Jet B 503 31 413 121 1,069 7773ER Heavy Jet B 701 141 377 465 1,685 7878R Heavy Jet B 20 79 90 9 198 7879 Heavy Jet B 866 43 633 276 1,818 A300-622R Heavy Jet B 67 253 199 121 640 A330-301 Heavy Jet B 2,345 22 1,965 402 4,734 A330-343 Heavy Jet B 1,552 137 860 830 3,379 A350-941 Heavy Jet B 736 28 383 380 1,527 DC1030 Heavy Jet B 1 0 0 1 2 MD11GE Heavy Jet B 61 4 36 29 130 MD11PW Heavy Jet B 41 0 18 23 82 717200 Light Jet A 4 2 5 1 12 737400 Light Jet B 23 6 17 12 58 737700 Light Jet B 12,059 2,938 13,379 1,618 29,994 737800 Light Jet B 11,678 5,210 14,585 2,303 33,775 7378MAX Light Jet B 3,581 1,493 4,205 869 10,148 757300 Light Jet B 54 5 54 5 118 757PW Light Jet B 1,902 987 2,643 246 5,778 757RR Light Jet B 460 56 499 17 1,032 Noise Supporting Documentation I-29 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-1 2022 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night A319-131 Light Jet B 6,905 918 7,304 519 15,647 A320-211 Light Jet B 1,349 35 1,285 99 2,769 A320-232 Light Jet B 8,591 2,503 9,699 1,395 22,187 A320-271N Light Jet B 1,004 431 1,137 298 2,870 A321-232 Light Jet B 23,065 7,690 26,386 4,368 61,509 EMB190 Light Jet B 17,871 2,056 17,824 2,103 39,854 BD-700-1A10 RJ 0 0 0 0 1 CL600 RJ 13 2 13 1 29 Commercial Jet Operations CL601 RJ 1 0 1 0 3 CNA750 RJ 1 0 0 0 2 CRJ9-ER RJ 2,129 183 2,071 241 4,625 CRJ9-LR RJ 158 3 160 1 323 EMB145 RJ 1 1 1 1 4 EMB14L RJ 1,446 31 1,367 110 2,955 EMB170 RJ 1,100 126 1,128 99 2,453 EMB175 RJ 23,199 2,056 23,362 1,892 50,508 G650ER RJ 1 0 1 0 3 GIV RJ 11 2 11 2 26 GV RJ 4 0 4 1 9 Commercial Jets Subtotal 128,111 28,514 135,332 21,293 313,250 Commercial Non-Jet Operations BEC58P Non-jet 14,578 48 14,620 7 29,253 CNA208 Non-jet 859 6 858 7 1,729 DHC830 Non-jet 1 13 14 0 27 SF340 Non-jet 1,852 72 1,913 11 3,848 Commercial Non-Jet Operations Subtotal 17,290 139 17,403 25 34,857 Commercial Aircraft Total 145,401 28,653 152,736 21,318 348,107 General Aviation Operations A340-211 Heavy Jet A 2 0 1 1 4 A340-642 Heavy Jet A 1 0 1 0 2 Noise Supporting Documentation I-30 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-1 2022 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night 777300 Heavy Jet B 2 1 2 1 6 7878R Heavy Jet B 2 0 2 0 4 A330-343 Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 737700 Light Jet B 14 4 11 7 36 737800 Light Jet B 2 0 2 0 4 757PW Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 757RR Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 A319-131 Light Jet B 7 0 7 0 14 A320-211 Light Jet B 5 3 6 2 16 A320-232 Light Jet B 4 7 12 0 24 A320-271N Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 A321-232 Light Jet B 29 4 22 12 67 EMB190 Light Jet B 14 0 13 1 28 BD-700-1A10 RJ 466 52 466 52 1,037 BD-700-1A11 RJ 170 16 177 9 373 CIT3 RJ 18 1 17 2 38 CL600 RJ 1,600 147 1,650 97 3,495 CL601 RJ 511 34 510 36 1,091 CNA500 RJ 5 1 4 2 12 CNA510 RJ 17 0 15 2 34 CNA525C RJ 375 63 386 52 877 CNA55B RJ 1,290 85 1,299 76 2,751 CNA560E RJ 1 0 1 0 2 CNA560U RJ 118 13 118 13 262 CNA560XL RJ 799 52 812 38 1,702 CNA680 RJ 1,894 163 1,952 105 4,114 CNA750 RJ 972 65 971 65 2,073 CRJ9-ER RJ 2 0 2 0 4 ECLIPSE500 RJ 67 13 67 13 161 EMB145 RJ 44 4 45 4 97 EMB175 RJ 1 0 1 0 2 Noise Supporting Documentation I-31 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-1 2022 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night FAL20 RJ 5 0 3 2 10 FAL900EX RJ 221 14 216 19 470 G650ER RJ 296 33 301 28 659 GII RJ 1 0 1 0 2 GIIB RJ 1 0 1 0 2 GIV RJ 428 51 433 46 958 GV RJ 447 55 461 41 1,004 IA1125 RJ 76 4 70 10 161 LEAR35 RJ 883 131 897 117 2,029 MU3001 RJ 209 17 213 12 450 1900D Non-jet 1 0 1 0 2 BEC58P Non-jet 318 20 319 19 676 CNA172 Non-jet 10 0 10 0 20 CNA182 Non-jet 28 0 28 0 56 CNA206 Non-jet 4 0 4 0 8 CNA208 Non-jet 1,187 76 1,186 77 2,527 CNA441 Non-jet 38 5 37 6 85 COMSEP Non-jet 220 3 217 6 446 DHC6 Non-jet 499 50 488 60 1,097 DHC830 Non-jet 2 0 2 0 4 GASEPF Non-jet 13 1 13 1 28 GASEPV Non-jet 173 5 177 2 357 HS748A Non-jet 1 0 1 0 2 PA30 Non-jet 4 0 4 0 8 PA42 Non-jet 1 0 1 0 2 A109 Helo 8 0 8 0 16 B206L Helo 22 0 22 0 44 B407 Helo 9 2 9 2 22 B427 Helo 2 0 2 0 4 B429 Helo 22 57 19 60 157 EC130 Helo 15 10 17 8 50 Noise Supporting Documentation I-32 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-1 2022 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night R44 Helo 22 0 22 0 44 S76 Helo 143 10 144 9 305 SA330J Helo 193 4 192 5 395 SA350D Helo 23 1 25 0 50 SA355F Helo 12 0 12 0 24 General Aviation Total 13,975 1,278 14,131 1,122 30,506 Grand Total 159,376 29,931 166,867 22,440 378,613 Source: HMMH, 2023 Notes: ANP - Aircraft Noise and Performance. Table I-2 2021 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night Commercial Jet Operations 747400 Heavy Jet A 2 0 2 0 4 A340-211 Heavy Jet A 101 1 99 3 204 A380-861 Heavy Jet A 1 0 1 0 2 767300 Heavy Jet B 137 35 27 145 344 7673ER Heavy Jet B 2,097 827 1,636 1,288 5,848 767400 Heavy Jet B 34 0 5 29 68 777200 Heavy Jet B 572 128 599 101 1,400 767CF6 Heavy Jet B 79 32 11 100 223 767JT9 Heavy Jet B 6 9 9 6 30 7773ER Heavy Jet B 256 3 29 230 518 7878R Heavy Jet B 1,253 0 1,126 127 2,506 A300-622R Heavy Jet B 265 358 357 266 1,247 A330-301 Heavy Jet B 770 5 674 101 1,551 A330-343 Heavy Jet B 678 175 510 343 1,705 A350-941 Heavy Jet B 528 22 184 365 1,099 DC1010 Heavy Jet B 3 1 1 3 8 Noise Supporting Documentation I-33 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-2 2021 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night DC1030 Heavy Jet B 7 2 3 6 18 MD11GE Heavy Jet B 103 9 58 54 224 MD11PW Heavy Jet B 38 5 29 14 86 717200 Light Jet A 5 1 6 0 12 737800 Light Jet B 9,671 4,239 12,551 1,360 27,820 7378MAX Light Jet B 1,011 494 1,362 143 3,010 737300 Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 737400 Light Jet B 25 7 19 13 64 737500 Light Jet B 0 1 1 0 2 737700 Light Jet B 4,116 1,635 4,917 833 11,500 757300 Light Jet B 8 2 8 2 20 757PW Light Jet B 1,510 669 1,952 227 4,358 757RR Light Jet B 379 66 418 27 890 A319-131 Light Jet B 4,858 1,027 5,415 470 11,770 A320-211 Light Jet B 1,802 752 2,406 148 5,108 A320-232 Light Jet B 10,494 3,039 12,377 1,155 27,065 A320-271N Light Jet B 640 202 771 71 1,685 A321-232 Light Jet B 13,049 5,003 15,662 2,391 36,105 EMB190 Light Jet B 10,666 1,485 11,303 849 24,304 BD-700-1A10 RJ 4 0 4 0 9 CL600 RJ 13 1 14 0 28 CNA55B RJ 1 0 1 0 2 CRJ9-ER RJ 1,356 143 1,288 211 2,997 CRJ9-LR RJ 729 3 719 13 1,463 EMB14L RJ 707 14 664 57 1,441 EMB170 RJ 2,227 126 2,215 138 4,708 EMB175 RJ 12,496 1,001 12,563 934 26,994 GIV RJ 1 0 1 0 2 Commercial Jets Subtotal 82,698 21,524 91,997 12,224 208,443 Commercial Non-Jet Operations BEC58P Non-jet 15,525 28 15,536 18 31,107 Noise Supporting Documentation I-34 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-2 2021 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night CNA208 Non-jet 879 9 874 14 1,777 DHC6 Non-jet 7 8 15 0 30 DHC830 Non-jet 308 9 318 0 635 Commercial Non-Jet Operations Subtotal 16,720 55 16,742 32 33,549 Commercial Aircraft Total 99,417 21,579 108,740 12,256 241,992 General Aviation Operations A109 Helicopter 6 0 6 0 12 B206L Helicopter 40 0 40 0 79 B407 Helicopter 18 1 18 1 38 B429 Helicopter 10 30 8 32 79 EC130 Helicopter 30 5 31 5 72 R44 Helicopter 16 0 15 1 32 S76 Helicopter 99 8 88 19 215 SA330J Helicopter 100 3 101 2 207 SA350D Helicopter 55 7 55 7 123 SA355F Helicopter 12 0 12 0 24 SA365N Helicopter 2 0 2 0 4 74720B Heavy Jet A 1 0 1 0 2 747400 Heavy Jet A 2 0 1 1 4 7673ER Heavy Jet B 3 0 3 0 6 737700 Light Jet B 8 0 7 1 16 757PW Light Jet B 1 0 0 1 2 A319-131 Light Jet B 3 0 2 1 6 EMB190 Light Jet B 0 1 1 0 2 MD81 Light Jet B 2 1 0 3 6 BD-700-1A10 RJ 305 31 298 39 673 BD-700-1A11 RJ 123 12 121 14 270 CIT3 RJ 16 0 16 0 32 CL600 RJ 1,290 113 1,334 68 2,805 CL601 RJ 362 19 360 21 763 CNA500 RJ 45 2 45 2 93 Noise Supporting Documentation I-35 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-2 2021 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night CNA510 RJ 21 1 21 1 44 CNA525C RJ 233 45 234 44 556 CNA55B RJ 934 68 945 57 2,004 CNA560U RJ 140 10 135 15 300 CNA560XL RJ 630 43 640 32 1,345 CNA680 RJ 1,451 105 1,486 70 3,113 CNA750 RJ 637 67 658 46 1,408 ECLIPSE500 RJ 35 5 37 3 79 EMB145 RJ 45 4 44 5 97 FAL20 RJ 6 1 4 3 14 FAL900EX RJ 183 14 184 12 393 G650ER RJ 121 13 121 13 268 GIV RJ 424 39 418 45 926 GV RJ 261 22 252 31 566 IA1125 RJ 45 15 54 6 119 LEAR35 RJ 781 84 794 71 1,730 MU3001 RJ 229 11 226 14 481 BEC58P Non-jet 317 23 319 21 679 CNA172 Non-jet 20 0 20 0 40 CNA182 Non-jet 24 0 24 0 48 CNA206 Non-jet 4 0 4 0 8 CNA208 Non-jet 1,047 57 1,038 66 2,207 CNA441 Non-jet 32 4 31 5 73 COMSEP Non-jet 260 13 259 14 546 DHC6 Non-jet 461 34 460 35 989 GASEPV Non-jet 199 3 199 3 405 PA28 Non-jet 13 2 14 1 30 PA30 Non-jet 5 0 5 0 10 General Aviation Total 11,106 915 11,189 832 24,042 Grand Total 110,523 22,494 119,929 13,088 266,034 Source: HMMH, 2022. Notes: ANP - Aircraft Noise and Performance.BEC58P is the AEDT substitution for the Cessna 402. Some totals may not match due to rounding Noise Supporting Documentation I-36 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-3 2019 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night Commercial Jet Operations 7478 Heavy Jet A 210 0 209 1 419 747400 Heavy Jet A 277 3 274 6 559 A340-211 Heavy Jet A 358 4 146 216 725 A340-642 Heavy Jet A 308 4 295 16 623 A380-841 Heavy Jet A 201 0 201 0 402 A380-861 Heavy Jet A 160 0 3 157 320 767300 Heavy Jet B 14 1 11 4 30 767400 Heavy Jet B 50 1 49 2 102 777200 Heavy Jet B 1,058 295 1,003 350 2,707 777300 Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 767CF6 Heavy Jet B 87 40 6 121 254 767JT9 Heavy Jet B 120 17 3 134 273 7773ER Heavy Jet B 848 127 40 935 1,949 7878R Heavy Jet B 1,867 42 1,396 514 3,819 A300-622R Heavy Jet B 410 665 615 460 2,151 A330-301 Heavy Jet B 2,082 4 1,709 377 4,172 A330-343 Heavy Jet B 1,576 445 1,224 797 4,043 A350-941 Heavy Jet B 250 1 242 9 502 DC1010 Heavy Jet B 30 10 24 16 81 DC1030 Heavy Jet B 18 13 14 17 63 MD11GE Heavy Jet B 38 6 44 1 89 MD11PW Heavy Jet B 13 3 15 1 32 U_7673ER Heavy Jet B 2,455 841 2,147 1,148 6,590 717200 Light Jet A 1,656 390 1,482 564 4,093 737800 Light Jet A 15,886 6,442 18,296 4,033 44,658 MD9025 Light Jet A 3 0 3 0 6 MD9028 Light Jet A 1 1 1 1 4 737300 Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 737400 Light Jet B 24 12 24 12 71 737700 Light Jet B 5,763 1,973 6,263 1,474 15,473 757300 Light Jet B 289 20 278 31 618 Noise Supporting Documentation I-37 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-3 2019 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night 737MAX8 Light Jet B 192 191 228 154 765 737N17 Light Jet B 1 0 0 1 2 757PW Light Jet B 2,842 1,098 3,113 826 7,879 757RR Light Jet B 1,767 598 2,128 237 4,730 A319-131 Light Jet B 6,840 1,220 6,820 1,241 16,121 A320-211 Light Jet B 3,642 1,047 4,252 437 9,380 A320-232 Light Jet B 17,864 6,681 20,414 4,131 49,090 A320-271N Light Jet B 507 206 508 204 1,425 A321-232 Light Jet B 17,276 6,158 19,398 4,036 46,868 EMB190 Light Jet B 29,533 6,367 29,873 6,027 71,800 MD83 Light Jet B 5 0 4 1 10 CL600 RJ 783 19 745 58 1,605 CNA750 RJ 1 0 1 0 2 CRJ9-ER RJ 5,246 560 5,159 646 11,610 CRJ9-LR RJ 733 30 625 138 1,526 EMB145 RJ 18 0 17 1 36 EMB14L RJ 1,655 119 1,763 11 3,549 EMB170 RJ 5,264 375 5,204 436 11,279 EMB175 RJ 8,863 1,033 8,972 924 19,792 FAL20 RJ 1 1 2 0 3 G650ER RJ 1 0 1 0 2 GV RJ 2 0 2 0 3 LEAR35 RJ 7 5 8 3 24 Commercial Jets Subtotal 139,096 37,071 145,257 30,910 352,334 Commercial Non-Jet Operations BEC58P Non-jet 17,514 165 17,608 71 35,358 CNA208 Non-jet 1,126 12 1,118 20 2,276 DHC6 Non-jet 5 12 16 0 33 DHC830 Non-jet 3,764 152 3,727 189 7,833 GASEPV Non-jet 2 0 2 0 4 SF340 Non-jet 208 0 208 0 416 Commercial Non-Jet Operations Subtotal 22,619 341 22,681 279 45,920 Noise Supporting Documentation I-38 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-3 2019 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night Commercial Aircraft Total 161,715 37,412 167,938 31,189 398,254 General Aviation Operations A109 Helicopter 7 0 7 0 14 B206L Helicopter 11 0 11 0 21 B407 Helicopter 22 2 20 4 48 B427 Helicopter 1 0 1 0 2 B429 Helicopter 8 14 11 11 43 B430 Helicopter 3 1 4 0 8 EC130 Helicopter 34 2 30 6 72 H500D Helicopter 2 0 2 0 4 R44 Helicopter 20 1 19 2 43 S76 Helicopter 148 28 135 41 351 SA330J Helicopter 193 24 191 26 434 SA350D Helicopter 3 0 2 1 6 SA355F Helicopter 31 1 32 0 64 SA365N Helicopter 5 1 5 1 12 747400 Heavy Jet A 1 0 1 0 2 747SP Heavy Jet A 1 0 1 0 2 A340-211 Heavy Jet A 1 0 0 1 2 A340-642 Heavy Jet A 2 0 2 0 4 777300 Heavy Jet B 2 1 3 0 6 7773ER Heavy Jet B 0 1 0 1 2 7878R Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 A330-301 Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 A330-343 Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 C17 Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 U_7673ER Heavy Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 737800 Light Jet A 0 1 1 0 2 727EM1 Light Jet A 1 0 0 1 2 737400 Light Jet B 23 4 18 9 54 737700 Light Jet B 5 0 5 0 10 757PW Light Jet B 0 1 0 1 2 757RR Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 Noise Supporting Documentation I-39 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-3 2019 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night A319-131 Light Jet B 4 0 3 1 8 A321-232 Light Jet B 0 1 1 0 2 EMB190 Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 MD81 Light Jet B 1 0 1 0 2 BD-700-1A10 RJ 325 36 319 41 720 BD-700-1A11 RJ 140 17 143 14 314 CIT3 RJ 25 0 25 0 50 CL600 RJ 1,506 139 1,535 110 3,290 CL601 RJ 278 25 279 23 604 CNA500 RJ 46 3 43 6 97 CNA510 RJ 195 9 191 13 407 CNA525C RJ 388 60 383 65 897 CNA55B RJ 904 79 920 63 1,966 CNA560E RJ 2 1 3 0 6 CNA560U RJ 679 50 687 42 1,458 CNA560XL RJ 334 14 334 14 695 CNA680 RJ 1,104 72 1,126 51 2,353 CNA750 RJ 873 70 889 54 1,886 CRJ9-ER RJ 0 1 1 0 2 ECLIPSE500 RJ 11 1 11 1 23 EMB145 RJ 29 3 29 3 64 FAL20 RJ 4 0 3 1 8 FAL900EX RJ 283 21 278 26 608 G650ER RJ 174 28 190 12 405 GIIB RJ 6 1 7 0 14 GIV RJ 564 77 568 73 1,282 GV RJ 398 42 400 40 879 IA1125 RJ 180 21 185 15 401 LEAR25 RJ 1 0 1 0 2 LEAR35 RJ 837 135 861 110 1,942 MU3001 RJ 314 22 311 25 672 1900D Non-jet 1 0 1 0 2 BEC58P Non-jet 426 26 426 26 904 Noise Supporting Documentation I-40 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-3 2019 Annual Modeled Operations Aircraft Noise and Performance (ANP) Group Arrivals Departures Total Day Night Day Night C130 Non-jet 4 0 4 0 8 CNA172 Non-jet 24 2 26 0 52 CNA182 Non-jet 75 0 75 0 149 CNA206 Non-jet 5 0 5 0 10 CNA208 Non-jet 1,137 99 1,138 99 2,473 CNA441 Non-jet 17 3 16 4 41 COMSEP Non-jet 317 34 335 17 703 DHC6 Non-jet 780 81 749 112 1,722 DHC8 Non-jet 2 0 2 0 4 EMB120 Non-jet 0 1 0 1 2 GASEPF Non-jet 15 0 15 0 29 GASEPV Non-jet 204 12 209 8 434 HS748A Non-jet 2 0 2 0 4 PA28 Non-jet 23 2 25 0 50 PA30 Non-jet 1 0 1 0 2 PA31 Non-jet 26 0 25 1 52 PA42 Non-jet 2 1 2 1 6 General Aviation Total 13,191 1,270 13,286 1,175 28,922 Grand Total 174,907 38,681 181,224 32,364 427,176 Source: HMMH, 2020. Notes: ANP - Aircraft Noise and Performance. BEC58P is the AEDT substitution for the Cessna 402. The CRJ9-ER in the RJ category is the CRJ700 aircraft. Some totals may not match due to rounding In the calculation of DNL, annual operations data are scaled to represent an average annual day by dividing by the 365 days in a year (or, in the case of a leap year like 2020, by the 366 days). To compare operations between years, it is simpler to look at category totals. Table I-4, Table I-5, Table I-6, and Table I-7 summarize the numbers of average daily operations by categories of aircraft operating at Logan Airport from 1990 through 2022. Operations are summarized by operator category (commercial/GA), aircraft category, and day or night operation (night defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM, consistent with the definition of DNL). GA operations were not included in the noise modeling prior to 1998 and commercial jet operations were not separated until 1999. Noise Supporting Documentation I-41 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-4 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 1990 to 1997 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Commercial Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 312.40 N/A 228.89 203.34 189.40 156.90 132.40 108.46 Night 19.99 N/A 13.13 7.44 10.10 5.50 4.79 7.75 Total 332.39 N/A 242.02 210.78 199.50 162.40 137.19 116.21 Stage 3 Jets Day 288.89 N/A 384.49 418.99 425.70 429.40 439.81 505.08 Night 57.25 N/A 58.29 65.47 62.80 69.00 80.16 85.06 Total 346.14 N/A 442.78 484.46 488.50 498.40 519.97 590.14 Air Carrier Jets Day N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 Night N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 Total N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 Regional Jets 5 Day N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 Night N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 Total N/A 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 Non-jets Day 444.41 N/A 411.84 598.16 541.97 526.85 505.31 514.7 Night 11.72 N/A 69.32 46.84 13.59 11.14 13.73 27.27 Total 456.13 N/A 481.16 645.00 555.56 537.99 519.04 541.97 Total Commercial Operations Operations Day 1045.70 N/A 1,025.22 1,220.49 1,157.07 1,113.15 1,077.52 1,128.24 Night 88.96 N/A 140.74 119.75 86.49 85.64 98.68 120.08 Total 1,134.66 N/A 1,165.96 1,340.24 1,243.56 1,198.79 1,176.20 1,248.32 GA Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Night N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Total N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Stage 3 Jets Day N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Night N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Total N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Non-jets Day N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Night N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Total N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Noise Supporting Documentation I-42 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-4 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 1990 to 1997 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total GA Operations Operations Day N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Night N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Total N/A 4 N/A N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 N/A 4 Overall Totals Day 1,045.70 N/A 1,025.22 1,220.49 1,157.07 1,113.15 1,077.52 1,128.24 Night 88.96 N/A 140.74 119.75 86.49 85.64 98.68 120.08 Total 1,134.66 N/A 1,165.96 1,340.24 1,243.56 1,198.79 1,176.20 1,248.32 Table I-5 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 1998 to 2005 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Commercial Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 84.93 83.30 5.13 1.18 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.05 Night 5.92 6.66 0.26 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Total 90.85 89.96 5.39 1.23 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.06 Stage 3 Jets Day 541.43 597.28 727.09 756.24 740.75 717.85 772.39 765.76 Night 95.54 98.59 103.66 109.77 97.04 92.69 113.24 113.66 Total 636.97 695.87 830.75 866.01 837.79 810.54 885.63 879.42 Air Carrier Jets Day N/A 3 569.18 648.95 569.99 500.70 461.06 518.96 505.48 Night N/A 3 96.21 99.79 101.30 83.52 72.69 89.24 91.99 Total N/A 3 665.39 748.74 671.29 584.22 533.75 608.20 597.47 Regional Jets 5 Day N/A 3 28.10 78.14 186.25 240.05 256.80 253.43 260.34 Night N/A 3 2.38 3.87 8.47 13.52 19.99 24.00 21.68 Total N/A 3 30.48 82.01 194.72 253.57 276.79 277.43 282.01 Non-jets Day 552.56 448.82 409.62 317.62 165.45 135.18 133.24 148.77 Night 21.86 16.63 21.58 10.97 3.45 2.41 3.03 3.02 Total 574.42 465.45 431.20 328.58 168.89 137.59 136.28 151.79 Total Commercial Operations Operations Day 1,178.92 1,129.90 1,141.84 1,075.04 906.25 853.10 905.66 914.59 Night 123.32 121.88 125.51 120.79 100.49 95.10 116.29 116.68 Total 1,302.24 1,251.78 1,267.35 1,195.82 1,006.73 948.20 1,021.95 1,031.27 Noise Supporting Documentation I-43 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-5 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 1998 to 2005 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 GA Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 5.25 9.89 7.29 5.15 3.65 2.84 0.94 2.29 Night 0.40 0.74 0.64 0.50 0.41 0.26 0.14 0.25 Total 5.65 10.63 7.93 5.65 4.08 3.10 1.08 2.54 Stage 3 Jets Day 30.54 48.46 40.08 34.23 37.83 46.21 53.72 58.84 Night 4.21 6.55 3.21 3.28 6.42 6.98 8.37 9.33 Total 34.75 55.01 43.29 37.51 44.25 53.19 62.09 68.16 Non-jets Day 37.29 19.36 34.57 37.31 17.36 17.81 16.95 14.00 Night 16.28 18.89 1.83 1.92 4.45 4.40 5.20 4.75 Total 53.57 38.25 36.40 39.23 21.81 22.21 22.14 18.75 Total GA Operations Operations Day 73.08 77.71 81.94 76.68 58.84 66.88 71.60 75.12 Night 20.89 26.17 5.68 5.71 11.29 11.64 13.71 14.33 Total 93.97 103.88 87.62 82.39 70.13 78.52 85.31 89.46 Overall Totals Day 1,252.00 1,207.61 1,223.78 1,151.72 965.09 919.98 977.27 989.71 Night 144.21 148.05 131.19 126.50 111.78 106.74 130.00 131.02 Total 1,396.21 1,355.66 1,354.97 1,278.21 1,076.86 1,026.72 1,107.26 1,120.73 Table I-6 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 2006 to 2013 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Commercial Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 Night 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 Stage 3 Jets Day 767.55 748.13 699.39 667.45 674.25 684.19 649.22 667.65 670 Night 114.81 118.29 114.30 103.05 107.92 109.38 106.55 115.91 123.6 Total 882.36 866.42 813.69 770.50 782.17 793.57 755.77 783.56 793.61 Air Carrier Jets Day 490.63 472.39 443.15 422.92 521.64 571.03 530.76 546.27 556.59 Night 92.71 96.28 89.89 82.21 93.98 99.17 98.68 107.17 115.84 Total 583.34 568.66 533.04 505.14 615.62 670.2 629.44 653.44 672.43 Noise Supporting Documentation I-44 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-6 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 2006 to 2013 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Regional Jets 5 Day 276.95 275.77 256.24 244.53 152.61 113.16 118.46 121.38 113.41 Night 22.11 22.03 24.40 20.84 13.94 10.21 7.87 8.74 7.77 Total 299.06 297.80 280.64 265.37 166.55 123.37 126.33 130.12 121.18 Non-jets Day 140.81 145.27 132.52 136.43 138.53 135.18 133.92 132.33 128.45 Night 3.26 3.47 4.00 5.56 5.21 4.73 3.06 3.21 2.28 Total 144.07 148.73 136.52 141.99 143.74 139.91 136.98 135.54 130.73 Total Commercial Operations Operations Day 908.41 893.43 831.92 804.77 812.78 819.39 783.14 799.99 798.45 Night 118.09 121.77 118.31 108.65 113.13 114.11 109.62 119.12 125.88 Total 1,026.51 1,015.19 950.23 913.42 925.91 933.5 892.76 919.12 924.33 GA Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 1.90 1.24 0.36 0.09 0.27 0.08 0.25 0.31 0.00 Night 0.17 0.19 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 Total 2.07 1.43 0.38 0.10 0.30 0.08 0.29 0.33 0.00 Stage 3 Jets Day 61.08 54.82 43.98 22.31 27.80 52.51 52.93 51.21 52.64 Night 6.57 6.39 4.52 2.28 3.21 5.35 7.20 5.10 4.65 Total 67.65 61.21 48.49 23.59 31.01 57.87 60.13 56.31 57.29 Non-jets Day 15.05 11.98 15.13 8.19 8.19 18.18 15.16 13.06 13.95 Night 1.39 3.61 1.08 0.74 0.72 1.29 1.29 1.15 1.13 Total 16.44 15.58 16.20 8.93 8.92 19.48 16.45 14.22 15.08 Total GA Operations Operations Day 78.03 68.04 59.46 30.46 36.26 70.78 68.35 64.58 66.59 Night 8.13 10.19 5.62 3.08 3.97 6.65 8.52 6.28 5.78 Total 86.15 78.22 65.05 33.54 40.22 77.43 76.86 70.85 72.37 Overall Totals Day 986.43 961.46 891.39 834.33 849.03 890.16 851.49 864.57 865.05 Night 126.22 131.96 123.93 111.70 117.10 120.76 118.13 125.40 131.66 Total 1,112.66 1,093.4 2 1,015.31 946.03 966.13 1,010.92 969.61 989.97 996.70 Noise Supporting Documentation I-45 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-7 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 2014 to 2022 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Chang e 2019 to 2022 Commercial Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Night 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Stage 3 Jets Day 685.92 713.65 734.46 770.67 779.05 376.47 478.62 721.76 -57.29 Night 130.96 142.16 158.49 177.15 186.25 72.20 92.46 136.46 -49.79 Total 816.88 855.81 892.95 947.82 965.30 448.67 571.08 858.22 -107.08 Air Carrier Jets Day 585.55 620.45 636.04 657.25 655.57 319.04 382.72 567.82 -87.75 Night 126.36 134.93 148.75 164.09 174.30 68.41 85.22 123.44 -50.86 Total 711.92 755.38 784.79 821.34 829.87 387.45 467.94 691.26 -138.61 Regional Jets 5 Day 100.36 93.20 98.42 113.42 123.48 57.43 95.90 153.94 30.46 Night 4.6 7.23 9.74 13.06 11.95 3.79 7.24 13.02 1.07 Total 104.96 100.43 108.16 126.48 135.43 61.22 103.13 166.96 31.53 Non-jets Day 125.27 125.88 119.03 126.76 124.11 79.33 91.68 95.05 -29.06 Night 2.41 3.01 2.24 2.36 1.70 0.34 0.24 0.45 -1.25 Total 127.68 128.89 121.27 129.12 125.81 79.67 91.92 95.50 -30.31 Total Commercial Operations Operations Day 811.19 839.53 853.49 897.44 903.16 455.80 570.29 816.81 -86.35 Night 133.37 145.17 160.73 179.51 187.95 72.54 92.70 136.91 -51.04 Total 944.56 984.70 1,014.2 2 1,076.9 4 1,091.11 528.34 662.99 953.72 -137.39 GA Aircraft Stage 2 Jets 2 Day 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Night 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Stage 3 Jets Day 51.82 51.82 52.19 55.77 53.17 25.32 45.96 60.76 7.59 Night 4.28 4.59 4.56 5.08 4.79 2.38 3.69 5.21 0.41 Total 56.10 56.41 56.75 60.85 57.96 27.70 49.65 65.97 8.01 Non-jets Day 19.31 25.92 26.43 22.01 19.37 9.52 15.12 16.24 -3.13 Night 1.46 1.87 2.25 1.91 1.90 0.74 1.10 1.37 -0.54 Total 20.77 27.79 28.68 23.92 21.28 10.27 16.22 17.61 -3.67 Noise Supporting Documentation I-46 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I.2. 3.1 Commercial Jet Aircraft by Part 36 Stage Category As described in the Regulatory Framework section of this appendix, jet aircraft are classified into categories referred to as stages based on noise levels. The heavier the aircraft, the more noise it is permitted to make, within limits. Aircraft are allowed to be recertificated to the higher standard when modifications are made to the aircraft engine or design. Because of the substantial differences in noise between Stage 2, recertificated Stage 3, Stage 3, Stage 4, and Stage 5 aircraft, Massport tracks operations by these separate categories to follow their trends. Table I-3 shows the percentage of commercial jet operations by stage category from 1998 through 2021. One of the most significant changes occurring after the economic downturn in 2001 was the almost immediate retirement of the re-certificated Stage 3 aircraft from airlines’ fleets due to their high operating costs. This type of accelerated retirement was not as prevalent during the 2008 to 2009 economic downturn since the major airlines no longer operated these aircraft. Table I-8 Percentage of Commercial Jet Operations by Part 36 Stage Category – 1998 to 2022 Year Stage 5 Requirements 1 Stage 4 Requirements 2 Stage 3 3 Recertificated Stage 3 4 Stage 2 Greater than 75,000 lbs. Total 1998 N/A N/A 65.9% 21.7% 12.4% 100% 1999 N/A N/A 70.0% 21.0% 9.0% 100% 2000 N/A N/A 75.0% 24.0% 1.0% 100% 2001 N/A N/A 86.3% 13.6% 0.1% 100% 2002 N/A N/A 92.8% 7.2% 0.0% 100% Table I-7 Modeled Daily Operations 1 by Commercial and GA Aircraft – 2014 to 2022 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Chang e 2019 to 2022 Total GA Operations Operations Day 71.40 77.75 78.61 77.78 72.54 34.85 61.08 77.00 4.46 Night 5.77 6.46 6.81 6.99 6.70 3.12 4.79 6.57 -0.12 Total 77.17 84.21 85.43 84.77 79.24 37.97 65.87 83.58 4.34 Overall Totals Day 882.59 917.28 932.10 975.22 975.70 490.65 631.37 893.82 -81.89 Night 139.14 151.63 167.54 186.49 194.64 75.66 97.49 143.48 -51.16 Total 1,021.7 3 1,068.9 1 1,099.6 5 1,161.71 1,170.3 5 566.31 728.86 1037.30 -133.05 Noise Supporting Documentation I-47 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-8 Percentage of Commercial Jet Operations by Part 36 Stage Category – 1998 to 2022 Year Stage 5 Requirements 1 Stage 4 Requirements 2 Stage 3 3 Recertificated Stage 3 4 Stage 2 Greater than 75,000 lbs. Total 2003 N/A N/A 95.8% 4.1% 0.0% 100% 2004 N/A N/A 97.8% 2.2% 0.0% 100% 2005 N/A N/A 98.0% 2.0% 0.0% 100% 2006 N/A N/A 98.6% 1.4% 0.0% 100% 2007 N/A N/A 98.9% 1.1% 0.0% 100% 2008 N/A N/A 99.1% 0.9% 0.0% 100% 2009 N/A 87.8% 11.3% 0.9% 0.0% 100% 2010 N/A 93.2% 5.7% 1.1% 0.0% 100% 2011 N/A 95.5% 4.0% 0.5% 0.0% 100% 2012 N/A 95.8% 4.1% 0.1% 0.0% 100% 2013 N/A 97.4% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2014 N/A 97.4% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2015 N/A 96.7% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2016 17.8% 79.2% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2017 17.7% 79.8% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2018 15.5% 83.0% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2019 15.2% 82.9% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2020 28.5% 68.7% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2021 29.1% 69.2% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 2022 33.6% 65.3% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100% Source: Massport and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) radar data, HMMH 2022 Notes: N/A – not applicable. Values less than 0.05% appear as 0.0% due to rounding. 1 This column includes operations by aircraft that would qualify as Stage 5 if recertificated. Aircraft with maximum takeoff weight greater than 121,254 pounds that are certificated after January 1, 2018, must meet Stage 5 standards. The percent of Logan Airport operations in aircraft meeting Stage 5 requirements was not determined prior to 2016. 2 This column includes aircraft that are either certificated Stage 4 or would qualify as Stage 4 if recertificated. Certification as Stage 4 was not available until 2006 and the percent of Logan Airport operations in aircraft that meet Stage 4 requirements was not determined prior to 2009. 3 Certificated Stage 3 aircraft are originally manufactured meeting Stage 3 requirements under Federal Regulation Part 36. This column includes only operations by Certificated Stage 3 aircraft that do not meet higher certification standards. 4 Recertificated Stage 3 aircraft are aircraft that were originally manufactured and certified as Stage 1 or 2 under Federal Regulation Part 36, which either have been treated with hushkits or have been re-engineered to meet Stage 3 requirements. Noise Supporting Documentation I-48 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I.2. 3.2 Nighttime Operations Massport tracks flights that operate in the defined nighttime period between the hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM, when each flight is penalized 10 dB in calculations of DNL. Table I-9 shows this nighttime activity by different groups of aircraft. As in years past, the majority of nighttime operations (between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM) occurred either before midnight or after 5:00 AM. Table I-9 Modeled Nighttime Operations at Logan Airport – 1990 to 2022 Year Commercial Jets Commercial Non-Jets General Aviation Total 1990 77.24 11.72 N/A 88.96 1991 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 71.42 69.32 N/A 140.74 1993 72.91 46.84 N/A 119.75 1994 72.90 13.59 N/A 86.49 1995 74.50 11.14 N/A 85.64 1996 84.95 13.73 N/A 98.68 1997 92.81 27.27 N/A 120.08 1998 101.46 21.86 20.89 144.21 1999 105.25 16.63 26.17 148.05 2000 103.92 21.58 5.68 131.19 2001 109.82 10.97 5.71 126.50 2002 97.04 3.45 11.29 111.78 2003 92.69 2.41 11.64 106.74 2004 113.26 3.03 13.71 130.00 2005 113.67 3.02 14.33 131.02 2006 114.81 3.26 8.13 126.22 2007 118.30 3.47 10.19 131.96 2008 114.31 4.00 5.62 123.93 2009 103.05 5.56 3.08 111.70 2010 107.93 5.21 3.97 117.10 2011 109.38 4.73 6.65 120.76 2012 106.55 3.06 8.52 118.13 2013 115.91 3.21 6.28 125.40 2014 123.60 2.28 5.78 131.66 2015 130.96 2.41 5.77 139.14 2016 1 142.16 3.01 6.48 151.63 2017 158.49 2.24 6.81 167.55 2018 177.15 2.36 6.99 186.49 Noise Supporting Documentation I-49 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-9 Modeled Nighttime Operations at Logan Airport – 1990 to 2022 Year Commercial Jets Commercial Non-Jets General Aviation Total 2019 186.25 1.70 6.70 194.64 2020 72.00 0.34 3.11 75.45 2021 92.46 0.24 4.79 97.49 2022 136.46 0.45 6.57 143.48 Change (2019 to 2022) -49.79 -1.25 -0.12 -51.16 Percent Change -38% -52% -2% -26% Change (2021 to 2022) 2021) 44.00 0.21 1.79 46.00 Percent Change 48% 89% 37% 47% Source: Massport, HMMH, 2022 Notes: GA – general aviation; N/A - not available. Negative numbers shown in parentheses ( ). 1 Minor errors reported for 2016 data in 2016 EDR have been corrected in this table. I.2. 4 Runway Use Using radar data, the AEDT pre-processor determines which runway was used, the specific aircraft type, and time classification (daytime or nighttime) for each flight. Massport compares annual runway use to previous years using a variety of summary tables with different perspectives. The first summary of daytime and nighttime runway usages presented here is broken into six representative aircraft groups with similar runway requirements. The list below provides example aircraft types from each group: Heavy Jet A – B747s, A340s, A380s Heavy Jet B – B767s, B777s, B787s, A300s, A310s, A330s, A350s, MD-11s Light Jet A – B717s, MD-90s Light Jet B – B737s, B757s, A319s, A220s, A320s, MD-80s, E190 Regional Jet (RJ) – E135, E145, E170, E175, CRJ2, CRJ7, CRJ9, J328 and Corporate Jets Turboprops and Piston Aircraft (non-jets) Since Massport began categorizing aircraft this way, the proportions of aircraft in the Heavy Jet A and Light Jet A categories have diminished, due to changing fleets. The Heavy Jet A category represents only 6 percent of the heavy jets and the Light Jet A category represents less than 1 percent of the lighter large jets. Table I-10, Table I-11, and Table I-12 show the runway use summary for the modeled 2022 and 2021 noise conditions, respectively. Table I-12 shows the corresponding summary from the modeled 2019 noise conditions for comparison. The turbojet aircraft in the table were grouped into the different Noise Supporting Documentation I-50 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR categories for reporting purposes. Because the DNL contours developed using the radar data with the AEDT pre-processor reflect the actual use of the runways by each flight, they accurately represent Logan Airport’s noise environment. The modeled runway usage for a given particular aircraft type may be different from the overall group runway use presented in Table I-10, Table I-11, and Table I-12 . Table I-10 2022 Modeled Runway Use by Aircraft Group Heavy Jet A Heavy Jet B Light Jet A Light Jet B Regional Jets Non-Jets ARRIVALS Runway Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 04L 0.2% - 0.2% 0.1% - - 2.2% <0.1% 5.5% 0.2% 18.5% 0.4% 04R 40.0% - 34.6% 19.0% 25.0% - 30.8% 18.0% 28.0% 20.0% 14.0% 10.3% 09 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15R 0.1% - 0.4% 1.5% - - 0.6% 1.0% 0.6% 1.0% 4.9% 36.5% 22L 35.2% - 32.9% 30.2% 50.0% - 31.0% 40.5% 31.1% 41.8% 31.0% 26.9% 22R - - <0.1% - - - <0.1% <0.1% <0.1% - 3.4% 1.7% 27 5.3% - 17.4% 6.5% 25.0% 50.0% 27.2% 16.7% 21.2% 20.5% 9.5% 8.7% 32 - - - - - - 1.2% - 6.2% - 11.7% 0.2% 33L 19.1% 100.0% 14.6% 42.8% - 50.0% 7.0% 23.8% 7.4% 16.5% 4.7% 14.8% 33R - - - - - - - - - - 2.3% 0.4% Total 99.9 100.0 100.1 100.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 DEPARTURES Runway Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 04L 0.2% - 0.2% 0.1% - - 2.2% <0.1% 5.5% 0.2% 18.5% 0.4% 04R 40.0% - 34.6% 19.0% 25.0% - 30.8% 18.0% 28.0% 20.0% 14.0% 10.3% 09 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15R 0.1% - 0.4% 1.5% - - 0.6% 1.0% 0.6% 1.0% 4.9% 36.5% 22L 35.2% - 32.9% 30.2% 50.0% - 31.0% 40.5% 31.1% 41.8% 31.0% 26.9% 22R - - <0.1% - - - <0.1% <0.1% <0.1% - 3.4% 1.7% 27 5.3% - 17.4% 6.5% 25.0% 50.0% 27.2% 16.7% 21.2% 20.5% 9.5% 8.7% 32 - - - - - - 1.2% - 6.2% - 11.7% 0.2% 33L 19.1% 100.0% 14.6% 42.8% - 50.0% 7.0% 23.8% 7.4% 16.5% 4.7% 14.8% Noise Supporting Documentation I-51 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-10 2022 Modeled Runway Use by Aircraft Group Heavy Jet A Heavy Jet B Light Jet A Light Jet B Regional Jets Non-Jets 33R - - - - - - - - - - 2.3% 0.4% Total 99.9% 100.0% 100.1% 100.1% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.9% Source: Massport, HMMH, 2023 Notes: Nighttime for noise modeling is defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Values may not add exactly to 100 percent due to rounding. Table I-11 2021 Modeled Runway Use by Aircraft Group Heavy Jet A Heavy Jet B Light Jet A Light Jet B Regional Jets Non-Jets ARRIVALS Runway Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 04L - - <0.1% - - - 0.6% <0.1% 1.8% <0.1% 6.1% 0.8% 04R 31.1% 100.0% 27.7% 16.9% 57.1% 100.0% 27.0% 19.1% 26.4% 19.9% 20.7% 13.2% 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15L - - - - - - - - - - 0.5% - 15R 0.9% - 3.8% 1.9% - - 4.1% 1.4% 3.7% 1.6% 5.6% 2.0% 22L 28.3% - 33.1% 26.0% 21.4% - 31.4% 33.3% 32.2% 36.9% 30.0% 45.1% 22R - - - - - - <0.1% - <0.1% <0.1% 3.6% 2.4% 27 17.0% - 13.3% 3.4% 21.4% - 19.6% 14.3% 15.9% 16.7% 9.3% 7.5% 32 - - - - - - 0.4% - 2.4% - 3.6% - 33L 22.6% - 22.1% 51.7% - - 16.9% 31.9% 17.6% 24.8% 17.6% 29.0% 33R - - - - - - - - - - 3.1% - Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DEPARTURES Runway Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 04L - - - - - - - - - - 12.6% 3.5% 04R 26.9% 25.0% 10.1% 4.9% - - 5.0% 4.2% 0.8% 0.6% 6.4% 5.5% 9 3.8% - 17.4% 11.3% 33.3% - 23.8% 14.5% 30.5% 19.2% 17.7% 8.0% 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15L - - - - - - - - - - - - 15R 8.7% 50.1% 7.3% 27.6% - - 3.9% 22.9% 1.6% 19.9% 3.1% 44.4% 22L 17.3% - 6.8% 2.2% - - 2.8% 2.2% 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.8% Noise Supporting Documentation I-52 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-11 2021 Modeled Runway Use by Aircraft Group Heavy Jet A Heavy Jet B Light Jet A Light Jet B Regional Jets Non-Jets 22R 7.7% 24.9% 26.0% 15.8% 50.0% - 29.5% 18.0% 34.6% 25.1% 35.3% 14.3% 27 - - 10.2% 3.9% 16.7% - 13.9% 13.9% 15.4% 11.8% 7.0% 6.4% 32 - - - - - - - - - - - - 33L 35.6% - 22.1% 34.3% - - 21.1% 24.4% 17.1% 23.0% 17.8% 17.0% 33R - - - - - - - - - - - - Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: Massport, HMMH, 2022 Notes: Nighttime for noise modeling is defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Values may not add exactly to 100 percent due to rounding. Table I-12 2019 Modeled Runway Use by Aircraft Group Heavy Jet A Heavy Jet B Light Jet A Light Jet B Regional Jets Non-Jets ARRIVALS Runway Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 04L 0.1% - 0.3% 0.2% 2.5% 0.2% 4.1% 0.4% 8.3% 0.8% 25.5% 3.2% 04R 43.4% 18.3% 41.1% 23.4% 33.7% 21.2% 28.0% 18.3% 28.4% 23.2% 12.6% 19.2% 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15L - - - - - - - - - - 0.1% - 15R 0.4% - 0.5% 0.2% 0.5% 0.2% 0.6% 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 2.2% 11.3% 22L 29.5% 54.5% 27.0% 35.6% 22.8% 39.3% 28.8% 38.7% 24.8% 40.3% 25.9% 30.1% 22R - - - - <0.1% <0.1% <0.1% - <0.1% 0.1% 3.0% 4.0% 27 4.4% 9.3% 15.2% 3.6% 31.4% 17.7% 24.2% 16.5% 19.9% 22.1% 4.0% 11.4% 32 - - - - - - 1.8% - 5.7% - 12.9% - 33L 22.2% 18.0% 16.0% 37.0% 9.1% 21.5% 12.4% 25.9% 12.5% 13.4% 7.6% 16.1% 33R - - - - - - - - - - 6.0% 4.7% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DEPARTURES Runway Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 04L - - - - - - - - - - 20.5% 12.3% 04R 16.3% 10.1% 11.9% 4.0% 8.8% 5.8% 3.3% 2.2% 0.2% 0.4% 2.9% 2.3% Noise Supporting Documentation I-53 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-12 2019 Modeled Runway Use by Aircraft Group Heavy Jet A Heavy Jet B Light Jet A Light Jet B Regional Jets Non-Jets 9 5.7% 0.8% 18.9% 15.1% 26.5% 16.3% 33.0% 20.5% 38.5% 26.3% 18.7% 8.0% 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - 15L - - - - - - - - - - 0.0% - 15R 30.9% 44.3% 10.4% 18.8% 3.5% 14.3% 2.1% 10.6% 0.5% 6.3% 2.2% 23.7% 22L 6.5% 3.9% 4.7% 2.0% 3.5% 3.5% 1.5% 1.3% 0.1% 0.6% 0.1% 0.2% 22R 14.3% 11.4% 24.6% 32.6% 25.8% 20.5% 28.8% 29.4% 30.4% 33.0% 29.6% 29.6% 27 0.1% - 6.8% 1.9% 10.6% 23.1% 11.6% 20.3% 11.3% 20.6% 5.2% 3.6% 32 - - - - - - - - - - - - 33L 26.2% 29.6% 22.6% 25.6% 21.3% 16.5% 19.8% 15.6% 19.1% 12.7% 20.7% 20.5% 33R - - - - - - - - - - - - Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Source: Massport, HMMH, 2020. Notes: Nighttime for noise modeling is defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Values may not add exactly to 100 percent due to rounding. While previous tables present runway use by aircraft groups, Table I-13, Table I-14, and Table I-15 present the total runway use (jets and non-jets) by runway and time of day. The first section of each table displays the number of operations on each runway by time period for an average day. The second section displays the same information for the entire year and the last section displays the percent that each runway is used for a given operation type and time of day. Table I-13 shows that on an average day in 2022, Runway 22R had the most departures (about 174, per day and night combined) and Runway 22L had the most arrivals (about 169 per day and night combined). This usage pattern was also seen in 2021 and in 2019, although in 2019, Runway 9 handled as many departures in 2019 as Runway 22R did. Noise Supporting Documentation I-54 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-13 Summary of Jet and Non-Jet Aircraft Runway Use: 2022 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 15L 15R 22L 22R 27 32 33L 33R Total 2022 Daily Operations Counts Dep Day 9.8 18.7 122.0 0 0 9.7 8.4 160.4 26.0 0.0 102.3 0.0 457.2 Dep Night 0.0 2.2 11.9 0 0 13.7 0.9 13.9 4.4 0.0 14.5 0.0 61.5 Arr Day 21.9 123.5 0.0 0 0 3.7 136.6 1.9 99.4 16.2 32.1 1.3 436.6 Arr Night 0.1 14.9 0.0 0 0 1.0 32.7 0.0 13.5 0.0 19.7 0.0 82.0 Total Daily Operations 31.7 159.4 133.9 0 0 28.1 178.6 176.2 143.2 16.2 168.6 1.3 1037.3 2022 Annual Operations Counts Dep Day 3,564 6,827 44,525 0 0 3,545 3,060 58,541 9,478 0 37,327 0 166,867 Dep Night 10 813 4,342 0 0 4,996 321 5,060 1,604 0 5,292 0 22,440 Arr Day 7,977 45,083 0 0 0 1,337 49,871 710 36,283 5,912 11,729 473 159,376 Arr Night 21 5,444 0 0 0 382 11,952 9 4,920 1 7,200 2 29,931 Total Annual Operations 11,573 58,166 48,867 0 0 10,261 65,204 64,321 52,285 5,913 61,548 475 378,613 2022 Percentage Operations Dep Day 2% 4% 27% 0% 0% 2% 2% 35% 6% 0% 22% 0% 100% Dep Night <1% 4% 19% 0% 0% 22% 1% 23% 7% 0% 24% 0% 100% Arr Day 5% 28% 0% 0% 0% 1% 31% <1% 23% 4% 7% <1% 100% Arr Night <1% 18% 0% 0% 0% 1% 40% <1% 16% <1% 24% <1% 100% Source: Massport radar data and HMMH 2022 Notes: Arr – Arrivals, Dep - Departures These data reflect actual counts or percentages of aircraft operations on each runway end. They should not be confused with effective runway use, which is used by the Preferential Runway Advisory System (PRAS) to derive recommendations for use of a particular runway. Runway 14-32 is unidirectional: there are no arrivals to Runway 14 and no departures from Runway 32. Values may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. Noise Supporting Documentation I-55 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-14 Summary of Jet and Non-Jet Aircraft Runway Use: 2021 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 15L 15R 22L 22R 27 32 33L 33R Total 2021 Daily Operations Counts Dep Day 6.7 14.9 78.8 0.0 0.0 11.3 6.4 103.1 42.4 0.0 65.0 0.0 328.6 Dep Night 0.0 1.4 5.1 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.7 6.6 3.9 0.0 9.5 0.0 35.9 Arr Day 5.5 78.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 12.8 95.2 2.0 50.0 4.3 52.9 1.6 302.8 Arr Night 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 20.3 0.0 8.4 0.0 20.1 0.0 61.6 Total Daily Operations 12.2 106.2 83.9 0.0 0.2 33.8 122.6 111.7 104.8 4.3 147.5 1.6 728.9 2021 Annual Operations Counts Dep Day 2,455 5,447 28,763 0 0 4,129 2,327 37,630 15,466 0 23,713 0 119,929 Dep Night 8 509 1,871 0 0 3,137 243 2,417 1,440 0 3,463 0 13,088 Arr Day 2,002 28,534 0 0 89 4,683 34,746 715 18,252 1,584 19,318 601 110,523 Arr Night 5 4,261 0 0 0 380 7,420 7 3,080 0 7,341 0 22,494 Total Annual Operations 4,470 38,751 30,634 0 89 12,329 44,735 40,769 38,238 1,584 53,835 601 266,034 2021 Percentage Operations Dep Day 2% 5% 24% 0% 0% 3% 2% 31% 13% 0% 20% 0% 100% Dep Night <1% 4% 14% 0% 0% 24% 2% 18% 11% 0% 26% 0% 100% Arr Day 2% 26% 0% 0% <1% 4% 31% 1% 17% 1% 17% 1% 100% Arr Night <1% 19% 0% 0% 0% 2% 33% <1% 14% 0% 33% 0% 100% Source: Massport radar data and HMMH 2022 Notes: Arr – Arrivals, Dep – Departures These data reflect actual counts or percentages of aircraft operations on each runway end. They should not be confused with effective runway use, which is used by the Preferential Runway Advisory System (PRAS) to derive recommendations for use of a particular runway. Runway 14-32 is unidirectional: there are no arrivals to Runway 14 and no departures from Runway 32. Values may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. Table I-15 Summary of Jet and Non-Jet Aircraft Runway Use: 2019 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 15L 15R 22L 22R 27 32 33L 33R Total 2019 Daily Operations Counts Dep Day 14.8 18.9 150.7 0.0 0.0 12.6 7.1 141.9 50.6 0.0 100.0 0.0 496.5 Dep Night 0.2 2.6 17.0 0.0 0.0 11.2 1.5 25.5 15.4 0.0 15.3 0.0 88.6 Noise Supporting Documentation I-56 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-15 Summary of Jet and Non-Jet Aircraft Runway Use: 2019 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 15L 15R 22L 22R 27 32 33L 33R Total Arr Day 36.8 131.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.8 129.4 2.2 98.1 18.7 56.2 4.3 480.6 Arr Night 0.5 20.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 40.4 0.1 16.9 0.0 25.8 0.1 104.5 Total Daily Operations 52.2 173.1 167.7 0.0 0.1 27.9 178.3 169.7 181.0 18.7 197.3 4.4 1,170.3 2019 Annual Operations Counts Dep Day 5,384 6,882 55,019 0 1 4,593 2,586 51,805 18,452 0 36,511 0 181,234 Dep Night 79 953 6,197 0 0 4,087 530 9,303 5,624 0 5,581 0 32,354 Arr Day 13,417 47,882 0 0 23 1,375 47,237 791 35,794 6,822 20,506 1,581 175,429 Arr Night 172 7,450 0 0 0 138 14,733 31 6,180 0 9,422 32 38,159 Total Annual Operations 19,052 63,167 61,216 0 24 10,193 65,087 61,930 66,050 6,822 72,020 1,614 427,176 2019 Percentage Operations Dep Day 3% 4% 30% 0% <1% 3% 1% 29% 10% 0% 20% 0% 100% Dep Night <1% 3% 19% 0% 0% 13% 2% 29% 17% 0% 17% 0% 100% Arr Day 8% 27% 0% 0% <1% 1% 27% <1% 20% 4% 12% 1% 100% Arr Night <1% 20% 0% 0% 0% <1% 39% <1% 16% 0% 25% <1% 100% Source: Massport radar data and HMMH 2020. Notes: Arr – Arrivals, Dep - Departures These data reflect actual counts or percentages of aircraft operations on each runway end. They should not be confused with effective runway use, which is used by the Preferential Runway Advisory System (PRAS) to derive recommendations for use of a particular runway. Runway 14-32 is unidirectional: there are no arrivals to Runway 14 and no departures from Runway 32. Values may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. Runway use can also be presented in terms of percent of total operations. Table I-6 presents the 2022, 2021 and 2019 runway use for all operations which use Logan Airport, supplementing the information in Table I-10, Table I-11, and Table I-12 that separate runway use by aircraft group and time of day, and the data in Table I-13, Table I-14, and Table I-15 which total the runway use by operation type and time of day. For 2022, Runways 22L and 22R were the most active, with 22R handling the most Departures and 22L handling the most arrivals. Overall, the usage rates were similar to those seen in 2019 than in 2020 or 2021. For 2019 through 2021, Runway 33L was the most active, with primarily jet departures. Runways 4R, 9, 22L, 22R and 27 handled the majority of the rest of the traffic. Some year-to-year shifts can be seen in the data in Table I-6 . Noise Supporting Documentation I-57 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-16 Total 2022, 2021, and 2019 Modeled Runway Use by All Operations Runway Jet Arrivals Non-Jet Arrivals Jet Departures Non-Jet Departures All Operations Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 2022 Operations 4L 1.1% <0.1% 1.0% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% <0.1% 3.1% 4R 11.1% 1.4% 0.8% <0.1% 1.4% 0.2% 0.4% <0.1% 15.4% 9 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.9% 1.1% 0.9% <0.1% 12.9% 14 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15L 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15R 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% <0.1% 0.8% 1.3% 0.1% <0.1% 2.7% 22L 11.5% 3.1% 1.7% <0.1% 0.8% 0.1% <0.1% <0.1% 17.2% 22R <0.1% <0.1% 0.2% <0.1% 13.5% 1.3% 2.0% <0.1% 17.0% 27 9.1% 1.3% 0.5% <0.1% 2.3% 0.4% 0.2% <0.1% 13.8% 32 0.9% 0.0% 0.6% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 33L 2.8% 1.9% 0.3% <0.1% 9.0% 1.4% 0.9% <0.1% 16.3% 33R 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% Total 36.7% 7.8% 5.4% 0.1% 38.7% 5.9% 5.4% 0.1% 100.0% 2021 Operations 4L 0.3% <0.1% 0.4% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% <0.1% 1.7% 4R 9.2% 1.6% 1.5% <0.1% 1.6% 0.2% 0.5% <0.1% 14.6% 9 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.5% 0.7% 1.3% <0.1% 11.5% 14 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15L 0.0% 0.0% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% <0.1% 15R 1.4% 0.1% 0.4% <0.1% 1.3% 1.1% 0.2% <0.1% 4.6% 22L 10.9% 2.8% 2.2% <0.1% 0.9% 0.1% <0.1% <0.1% 16.8% 22R <0.1% <0.1% 0.3% <0.1% 11.6% 0.9% 2.6% <0.1% 15.3% 27 6.2% 1.2% 0.7% <0.1% 5.3% 0.5% 0.5% <0.1% 14.4% 32 0.3% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 33L 6.0% 2.7% 1.3% <0.1% 7.6% 1.3% 1.3% <0.1% 20.2% 33R 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% Total 34.2% 8.4% 7.3% 0.1% 37.8% 4.8% 7.3% 0.1% 100.0% 2019 Operations 4L 1.6% <0.1% 1.6% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% <0.1% 4.5% 4R 10.4% 1.7% 0.8% <0.1% 1.4% 0.2% 0.2% <0.1% 14.8% Noise Supporting Documentation I-58 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-16 Total 2022, 2021, and 2019 Modeled Runway Use by All Operations Runway Jet Arrivals Non-Jet Arrivals Jet Departures Non-Jet Departures All Operations Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night 9 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.7% 1.4% 1.1% <0.1% 14.3% 14 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15L 0.0% 0.0% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% <0.1% 0.0% <0.1% 15R 0.2% <0.1% 0.1% <0.1% 0.9% 0.9% 0.1% <0.1% 2.4% 22L 9.5% 3.4% 1.6% <0.1% 0.6% 0.1% <0.1% <0.1% 15.2% 22R <0.1% <0.1% 0.2% <0.1% 10.3% 2.1% 1.8% <0.1% 14.5% 27 8.1% 1.4% 0.2% <0.1% 4.0% 1.3% 0.3% <0.1% 15.5% 32 0.8% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 33L 4.3% 2.2% 0.5% <0.1% 7.3% 1.3% 1.3% <0.1% 16.9% 33R 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% <0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% Total 34.9% 8.8% 6.1% 0.2% 36.3% 7.4% 6.1% 0.2% 100.0% Source: Massport radar data and HMMH, 2022 Notes: Night for noise modeling is defined as 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Nighttime runway restrictions are from 11:00 PM to 6:00 AM. Values may not add to exactly 100 percent due to rounding. Table I-17 presents a historical summary of runway use by jets. Since 2009, the radar data have been analyzed with Massport’s Harris NOMS. Data from 2001 through 2008 were compiled with Massport’s PreFlight TM software, an analysis package used to access fleet, day/night splits, and runway use information from radar data. Data prior to 2001 were derived from Massport’s original noise monitoring system, supplemented with field records. Note that Logan Airport Noise Rules prevent arrivals to Runway 22R and departures from Runway 4L by jet aircraft except for certain circumstances. Table I-17 Summary of Jet Aircraft Runway Use – 1990 to 2022 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 1 15R 22L 22R 27 32 1 33L 1990 Departures 0% 2 3% 21% N/A 10% 2% 36% 20% N/A 7% Arrivals 1% 25% 0% N/A 2% 14% 0% 28% N/A 29% 1992 2 Departures 0% 6% 31% N/A 7% 2% 38% 10% N/A 6% Arrivals 1% 37% 0% N/A 3% 12% 0% 30% N/A 17% Noise Supporting Documentation I-59 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-17 Summary of Jet Aircraft Runway Use – 1990 to 2022 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 1 15R 22L 22R 27 32 1 33L 1993 Departures 0% 9% 33% N/A 7% 3% 40% 4% N/A 4% Arrivals 2% 44% 0% N/A 1% 11% 0% 28% N/A 15% 1994 Departures 0% 9% 33% N/A 4% 3% 32% 12% N/A 5% Arrivals 3% 42% 0% N/A 1% 8% 0% 27% N/A 19% 1995 Departures 0% 8% 36% N/A 5% 5% 29% 11% N/A 5% Arrivals 3% 41% 0% N/A 2% 8% 0% 27% N/A 17% 1996 Departures 0% 8% 32% N/A 5% 6% 33% 12% N/A 5% Arrivals 2% 38% 0% N/A 2% 11% 0% 29% N/A 18% 1997 Departures 0% 8% 30% N/A 5% 6% 31% 15% N/A 5% Arrivals 2% 36% 0% N/A 2% 9% 0% 30% N/A 20% 1998 Departures 0% 8% 35% N/A 6% 5% 28% 14% N/A 5% Arrivals 2% 41% 0% N/A 2% 7% 0% 28% N/A 19% 1999 Departures 0% 8% 31% N/A 5% 4% 30% 15% N/A 6% Arrivals 3% 37% 0% N/A 2% 10% 0% 28% N/A 21% 2000 Departures 0% 8% 35% N/A 4% 3% 30% 15% N/A 6% Arrivals 4% 40% 0% N/A 1% 7% 0% 28% N/A 20% 2001 Departures 0% 7% 34% N/A 4% 3% 35% 12% N/A 5% Arrivals 5% 36% 0% N/A 1% 8% 0% 32% N/A 18% 2002 Departures 0% 4% 31% N/A 6% 3% 35% 16% N/A 6% Arrivals 6% 31% 0% N/A 1% 12% 0% 30% N/A 21% Noise Supporting Documentation I-60 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-17 Summary of Jet Aircraft Runway Use – 1990 to 2022 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 1 15R 22L 22R 27 32 1 33L 2003 Departures 0% 4% 33% N/A 7% 2% 34% 14% N/A 6% Arrivals 7% 33% 0% N/A 1% 14% 0% 28% N/A 18% 2004 Departures 0% 5% 34% N/A 10% 4% 24% 18% N/A 6% Arrivals 6% 34% 0% N/A 1% 12% 0% 24% N/A 23% 2005 Departures 0% 5% 36% N/A 7% 1% 31% 13% N/A 7% Arrivals 8% 33% 0% N/A 1% 11% 0% 29% N/A 17% 2006 Departures 0% 4% 33% 0% 3% 1% 40% 13% 0% 6% Arrivals 7% 29% 0% 0% 1% 14% 0% 33% 0.2% 16% 2007 Departures 0% 5% 31% 0% 4% 1% 33% 7% 0% 19% Arrivals 5% 31% 0% 0% 1% 15% 0% 36% 2% 11% 2008 Departures 0% 6% 33% <1% 3% <1% 36% 6% 0% 16% Arrivals 6% 30% 0% 0% 2% 17% 0% 33% 2% 11% 2009 3 Departures 0% 7% 32% 0% 3% 2% 34% 6% 0% 16% Arrivals 7% 31% 0% 0% 3% 17% 0% 30% 1% 11% 2010 Departures 0% 4% 28% <1% 8% 2% 31% 10% 0% 17% Arrivals 5% 28% 0% 0% 1% 15% 0% 32% 1% 16% 2011 4 Departures 0% 6% 36% <1% 5% 2% 36% 7% 0% 7% Arrivals 7% 37% 0% 0% <1% 16% 0% 28% 1% 11% 2012 4 Departures 0% 6% 33% <1% 5% 3% 38% 6% 0% 9% Arrivals 6% 34% 0% 0% 1% 16% 0% 33% <1% 9% Noise Supporting Documentation I-61 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-17 Summary of Jet Aircraft Runway Use – 1990 to 2022 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 1 15R 22L 22R 27 32 1 33L 2013 Departures <1% 5% 30% <1% 5% 2% 35% 12% 0% 12% Arrivals 6% 29% 0% 0% 1% 16% <1% 32% 1% 15% 2014 Departures 0% 5% 31% <1% 5% 2% 28% 13% 0% 17% Arrivals 5% 30% 0% 0% 2% 25% <1% 21% 1% 16% 2015 Departures 0% 4% 29% <1% 5% 2% 32% 12% 0% 15% Arrivals 5% 29% 0% 0% 2% 25% <1% 23% 1% 16% 2016 5 Departures 0% 4% 30% 0% 6% 2% 27% 13% 0% 18% Arrivals 4% 31% 0% 0% 1% 24% <1% 23% 1% 16% 2017 6 Departures 0% 2% 25% 0% 5% 1% 28% 15% 0% 23% Arrivals 5% 21% 0% 0% 5% 23% <1% 27% 2% 18% 2018 Departures <1% 4% 30% 0% 5% 2% 34% 10% 0% 16% Arrivals 4% 30% 0% 0% <1% 32% <1% 21% 1% 12% 2019 Departures 0% 4% 30% 0% 4% 2% 28% 12% 0% 20% Arrivals 4% 28% 0% 0% <1% 29% <1% 22% 2% 15% 2020 7 Departures 0% 5% 19% 0% 7% 2% 33% 13% 0% 21% Arrivals 1% 23% 0% 0% 4% 36% <1% 16% 1% 19% 2021 Departures 0% 4% 24% 0% 6% 2% 29% 14% 0% 21% Arrivals 1% 25% 0% 0% 3% 32% <1% 17% 1% 20% Noise Supporting Documentation I-62 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-17 Summary of Jet Aircraft Runway Use – 1990 to 2022 Runway 4L 4R 9 14 1 15R 22L 22R 27 32 1 33L 2022 Departures 0% 4% 27% 0% 5% 2% 33% 6% 0% 23% Arrivals 2% 28% 0% 0% 1% 33% <1% 23% 2% 11% Source: Massport radar data and HMMH 2023 Notes: These data reflect actual percentages of jet aircraft operations on each runway end. They should not be confused with effective runway use, which is used by the Preferential Runway Advisory System (PRAS) to derive recommendations for use of a particular runway. Effective runway percentages include a factor of 10 applied to nighttime operations so that use of a runway at night more closely reflects its effect on total noise exposure. Jet aircraft are not able to use Runway 15L or 33R due to its length of only 2,557 feet. Values may not add to exactly 100 percent due to rounding. N/A - not available. 1 Runway 14-32 opened in late November 2006. (Runway 14-32 is unidirectional with no arrivals to Runway 14 and no departures from Runway 32.) 2 The 1990 Final Generic Environmental Impact Report was published and submitted to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs in July 1993. It included modeled operations and resulting noise contours for 1987, 1990, and a 1996 forecast year. The 1993 Annual Update published in July 1994 included operations and contours for 1992 and 1993. 1991 data are not available. 3 Runway 9-27 had extended weekend closings for resurfacing during 2009. 4 Runway 15R-33L was closed for 3 months in 2011 and in 2012. 5 Runway 4L-22R was closed for 31 days in 2016. 6 Runway 4R-22L was closed for 35 days in 2017, with limited availability for Runway 4R arrivals for about 80 additional days. 7 Runway 9-27 was closed for almost 3 months in the summer of 2020, during an unprecedented period of low levels of aircraft activity due to the pandemic. Since runway use plays such a key role in determining noise the aircraft noise distribution in the Airport’s environment, Massport also tracks the level of traffic off each runway end by combining counts of operations that overfly the same general area. The total operations and percentages shown for 2019, 2021, and 2022 in Table I-18 represent the amount of activity experienced off each runway end for a given year. Table I-18 Runway Usage by Runway End Runway End Operation(s) 1 2019 2021 2022 Total Flights % of Total 2 Total Flights % of Total 2 Total Flights % of Total 2 04L R4L A + R22R D 74,697 17.5% 42,054 15.8% 71,600 26.9% 04R R4R A + R22L D 58,449 13.7% 35,365 13.3% 53,908 20.3% 9 R9 A + R27 D 24,076 5.6% 16,906 6.4% 11,082 4.2% 14 N/A 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 15L R15L A + R33R D 23 0.0% 89 0.0% 0 0.0% 15R R15R A + R33L D 43,606 10.2% 32,240 12.1% 44,338 16.7% 22L R22L A + R4R D 69,805 16.3% 48,121 18.1% 69,463 26.1% 22R R22R A + R4L D 6,285 1.5% 3,185 1.2% 4,293 1.6% Noise Supporting Documentation I-63 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-18 Runway Usage by Runway End Runway End Operation(s) 1 2019 2021 2022 Total Flights % of Total 2 Total Flights % of Total 2 Total Flights % of Total 2 27 R27 A + R9 D 103,191 24.2% 51,966 19.5% 90,070 33.9% 32 R32 A + R14 D 6,822 1.6% 1,584 0.6% 5,913 2.2% 33L R33L A + R15R D 38,607 9.0% 33,924 12.8% 27,471 10.3% 33R R33R A + R15L D 1,615 0.4% 601 0.2% 475 0.2% All 427,176 100.0% 266,034 100.0% 378,613 142.3% Source: Massport radar data and HMMH 2023 Notes: N/A – not applicable. Runway 14-32 is unidirectional: there are no arrivals to Runway 14 and no departures from Runway 32. The 15 operations shown in this row for 2016 are non-jet departures which were most likely erroneously associated with Runway 32 by the computer algorithm. 1 A=Arrivals; D=Departures. 2 Percentages are rounded to the nearest tenth. I.2. 5 Flight Tracks The AEDT pre-processor converts each radar track to an AEDT model track and then models the scaled aircraft operation on that track. This method keeps the modeled lateral and vertical dispersion of the aircraft types consistent with the radar data and ensures that anomalies in the departure paths are captured in the pre-processor system. Table I-19 lists the number of flight tracks used in the modeling process for 2021 and 2022. A sample of flight tracks from 2021 and 2022 are displayed in Figure 7-5 through Figure 7-11 in Chapter 7, Noise. Noise Supporting Documentation I-64 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-19 Total Count of Flight Tracks Modeled with AEDT (2021 and 2022) Runway 4L 4R 9 14 15L 15R 22L 22R 27 32 33L 33R 2022 Departures 3,579 7,614 48,62 0 0 8,469 3,366 63,30 11,028 0 42,40 0 Arrivals 7,975 50,21 0 0 0 1,696 61,45 715 40,93 5,892 18,817 474 2021 Departures 2,369 5,886 30,35 0 0 7,225 2,560 39,61 16,76 0 26,92 0 Arrivals 1,989 32,63 0 0 88 4,959 41,94 713 21,23 1,574 26,51 596 2019 Departures 5,392 7,660 60,00 0 1 8,481 3,042 59,89 23,54 0 41,22 0 Arrivals 13,149 52,05 0 0 23 1,421 58,33 819 39,151 6,634 28,22 1,610 Source: Massport’s Harris Noise and Operational Monitoring System (NOMS) data and HMMH, 2023 I.3 Annual Noise Model Results I.3.1 Noise Exposed Population Table I-20 presents the noise-exposed population by community through 2022. This table includes population within the DNL 60 to 65 dB contour interval, although DNL 65 dB is the federally defined noise criterion used as a guideline to identify when residential land use is considered incompatible with aircraft noise. The population assessments for 2022 use 2020 U.S. Census data. As noted in the 2017 Environmental Status and Planning Report ( 2017 ESPR ), the method for calculating population impact was refined for the 2017 analysis. Historically, the population calculations were developed by the noise model (AEDT or INM) or by GIS software by adding the populations of U.S. Census blocks within each contour level. A block was considered to be within the contour if the center location (or centroid) was within the DNL contour. The weakness of that method arises from the fact that the population of a U.S. Census block is distributed throughout the block, not clustered at its centroid. Blocks on the edge of the contour were either entirely included or entirely excluded from the count, but in reality, some fraction of the block’s population resides within the contour. The updated method (adopted for the 2017 ESPR and continued since) determines the fraction of the area of the U.S. Census block that is within the contour and multiplies the block population by this fraction to determine the population exposed to DNL 65 dB or greater for that block. This more accurately represents the included population within U.S. Census blocks that are on the DNL contour boundary. This Noise Supporting Documentation I-65 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I proportional method, while still an approximation, also better addresses the more obscure problem of oddly shaped blocks whose centroid is outside the block boundary. When comparing population impact assessment across multiple years, it should be noted that the population estimation is affected by the noise model used to create the contours. As discussed in the 2016 EDR , AEDT-modeled contours are smaller than the INM-modeled contours, which included FAA-approved over-water effects, hill effects, and custom altitude profiles. Consequently, population calculations based on AEDT contours result in smaller exposed populations. Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL BOSTON 2 1990 1980 0 0 1,778 28,970 30,748 N/A 1992 1980 0 0 800 4,316 5,116 N/A 1993 1980 0 0 264 2,820 3,084 N/A 1994 1990 0 106 265 7,698 8,069 30,895 1995 1990 0 106 851 8,815 9,772 33,765 1996 1990 0 106 374 8,775 9,255 40,992 1997 1990 0 106 719 13,857 14,682 54,804 1998 1990 0 58 580 10,877 11,515 52,201 1999 3 1990 0 58 364 11,632 12,054 45,948 2000 2000 0 0 234 9,014 9,248 35,785 2001 2000 0 0 315 6,515 6,700 27,778 2002 2000 0 0 132 2,625 2,757 23,225 2003 2000 0 0 164 1,730 1,894 21,763 2004 4 2000 0 65 192 4,142 4,399 24,473 2005 4 2000 0 65 104 2,020 2,189 17,661 2006 4 2000 0 65 99 1,054 1,218 14,866 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 169 4,094 4,263 21,446 2008 4,5 2000 0 5 0 3,487 3,492 18,890 2009 4,5 2000 0 5 67 937 1,009 12,284 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 0 689 689 17,646 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 0 331 331 11,600 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 0 421 421 11,037 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 0 612 612 14,835 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 34 4,151 4,185 23,343 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 110 7,225 7,365 32,309 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 0 4,031 4,031 20,806 Noise Supporting Documentation I-66 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 14 4,720 4,734 24,595 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 11 2,228 2,239 23,445 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 7 4,029 4,036 25,163 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 60 60 7,946 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 885 885 9,473 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 0 3,862 3,862 17,804 CHELSEA 1990 1980 0 0 0 4,813 4,813 N/A 1992 1980 0 0 0 3,952 3,952 N/A 1993 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1994 1990 0 0 0 0 0 8,510 1995 1990 0 0 0 95 95 9,750 1996 1990 0 0 0 0 0 8,744 1997 1990 0 0 0 0 0 10,001 1998 1990 0 0 0 0 0 9,222 1999 1990 0 0 0 95 95 9,249 2000 2000 0 0 0 0 0 7,361 2001 2000 0 0 0 0 0 4,508 2002 2000 0 0 0 0 0 3,995 2003 2000 0 0 0 0 0 3,591 2004 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 7,756 2005 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 5,772 2006 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 2,477 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 9,774 2008 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 7,793 2009 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 5,462 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 4,897 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 3,485 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 9,236 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 12,110 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 0 65 65 13,900 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 10,526 Noise Supporting Documentation I-67 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 12,650 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 721 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 4,708 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 13,683 EVERETT 1990 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1992 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1993 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1994 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 924 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 Noise Supporting Documentation I-68 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEDFORD 1990 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1992 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1993 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1994 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2002 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2005 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2006 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 Noise Supporting Documentation I-69 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL QUINCY 1990 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1992 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1993 1980 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 1994 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1998 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 2000 0 0 0 0 0 636 2001 2000 0 0 0 0 0 610 2002 2000 0 0 0 0 0 610 2003 2000 0 0 0 0 0 610 2004 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 610 2005 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 610 2006 4 2000 0 0 0 0 0 610 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2009 4,5 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 0 0 0 0 Noise Supporting Documentation I-70 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL REVERE 1990 1980 0 0 0 4,274 4,274 N/A 1992 1980 0 0 0 3,848 3,848 N/A 1993 1980 0 0 0 4,617 4,617 N/A 1994 1990 0 0 0 3,569 3,569 2,099 1995 1990 0 0 0 3,364 3,364 2,304 1996 1990 0 0 172 3,292 3,464 2,505 1997 1990 0 0 0 3,293 3,293 2,047 1998 1990 0 0 0 3,168 3,168 2,132 1999 1990 0 0 128 3,165 3,293 2,047 2000 2000 0 0 0 2,496 2,496 3,100 2001 2000 0 0 0 2,496 2,496 3,100 2002 2000 0 0 0 2,822 2,822 2,399 2003 2000 0 0 0 2,994 2,994 2,227 2004 4 2000 0 0 82 2,969 3,051 2,678 2005 4 2000 0 0 82 2,540 2,622 2,731 2006 4 2000 0 0 82 2,540 2,622 2,698 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 0 2,450 2,450 2,853 2008 4,5 2000 0 0 0 2,434 2,434 1,802 2009 4,5 2000 0 0 0 2,512 2,512 1,452 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,413 2,413 2,473 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,547 2,547 3,123 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,762 2,762 3,191 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,505 2,505 2,791 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,832 2,832 3,829 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 0 3,789 3,789 3,385 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,376 2,376 3,508 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,362 2,362 2,899 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 0 2,362 2,362 2,899 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 0 3,484 3,484 3,733 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 641 641 3,983 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 1,260 1,260 3,669 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 0 3,416 3,416 3,904 Noise Supporting Documentation I-71 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL WINTHROP 1990 1980 0 676 1,211 2,420 4,307 N/A 1992 1980 0 626 1,146 2,488 4,262 N/A 1993 1980 0 648 1,211 1,773 3,632 N/A 1994 1990 0 417 1,343 5,154 6,914 7,512 1995 1990 0 482 1,611 5,757 7,850 7,077 1996 1990 0 417 1,376 5,930 7,723 7,333 1997 1990 0 417 1,659 6,386 8,462 6,839 1998 1990 0 519 1,522 6,572 8,613 6,507 1999 1990 0 353 1,408 5,946 7,707 7,135 2000 2000 0 247 1,070 4,684 6,001 7,776 2001 2000 0 244 683 4,123 5,050 8,104 2002 2000 0 2 481 2,247 2,730 7,921 2003 2000 0 0 339 1,956 2,295 7,386 2004 4 2000 0 2 337 1,649 1,988 6,508 2005 4 2000 0 39 347 1,280 1,666 6,353 2006 4 2000 0 39 416 1,288 1,743 6,845 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 247 1,139 1,386 6,749 2008 4,5 2000 0 0 244 1,409 1,653 6,547 2009 4,5 2000 0 0 171 643 814 4,221 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 130 598 728 3,720 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 130 939 1069 4,303 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 200 1,186 1,386 5,305 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 130 1,060 1,190 5,466 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 130 1,775 1,905 6,456 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 320 2,623 2,943 6,375 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 130 913 1,403 5,062 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 125 647 772 4,656 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 51 1,170 1,221 5,586 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 96 1,152 1,248 5,621 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 103 103 1,901 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 352 352 2,106 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 27 880 907 4,848 Noise Supporting Documentation I-72 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL All Communities 1990 1980 0 676 2,989 40,477 44,142 NA 1992 1980 0 628 2,352 14,604 17,584 NA 1993 1980 0 648 1,475 9,210 11,333 NA 1994 1990 0 523 1,608 16,421 18,552 49,016 1995 1990 0 588 2,462 18,031 21,081 52,896 1996 1990 0 523 1,922 17,997 20,442 59,574 1997 1990 0 523 2,378 23,536 26,437 73,691 1998 1990 0 577 2,102 20,617 23,296 70,062 1999 3 1990 0 411 1,900 20,838 23,149 64,379 2000 2000 0 247 1,304 16,194 17,745 54,190 2001 2000 0 244 998 13,004 14,246 43,616 2002 2000 0 2 613 7,694 8,309 38,150 2003 2000 0 0 503 6,680 7,183 35,577 2004 4 2000 0 67 611 8,760 9,438 41,975 2005 4 2000 0 104 533 5,840 6,477 33,127 2006 4 2000 0 104 597 4,882 5,583 27,496 2007 4,5 2000 0 0 416 7,683 8,099 40,822 2008 4,5 2000 0 5 244 7,330 7,579 35,122 2009 4,5 2000 0 5 238 4,092 4,335 23,419 2010 4,5 2010 0 0 130 3,700 3,830 28,736 2011 4,5 2010 0 0 130 3,817 3,947 19,026 2012 4,5 2010 0 0 200 4,369 4,569 19,533 2013 4,5 2010 0 0 130 4,177 4,307 26,577 2014 4,5 2010 0 0 164 8,758 8,922 42,864 2015 4,5 2010 0 0 430 13,667 14,097 52,748 2016 4,5 2010 0 0 130 7,320 7,450 41,486 2017 4,5 2010 0 0 139 7,794 7,933 46,974 2018 4,5 2010 0 0 62 6,972 7,034 43,270 2019 4,5 2010 0 0 103 8,665 8,768 47,167 Noise Supporting Documentation I-73 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-20 Noise-Exposed Population by Community Year Census Data 80+ dB DNL 75+ dB DNL 70-75 dB DNL 65-70 dB DNL 1 Total (65+) 60-65 dB DNL 2020 4,5 2020 0 0 0 804 804 14,551 2021 4,5 2020 0 0 0 2,497 2,497 19,956 2022 4,5 2020 0 0 27 8,158 8,185 40,239 Source: Data prepared for Massport by HMMH 2022 Notes: dB – decibel; DNL - Day-Night Average Sound Level; N/A – not available. 1 65 dB DNL is the federally defined noise criterion. 2 Boston includes portions of Dorchester, East Boston, Roxbury, South Boston, and the South End. 3 Boston population by community changed in 1999 due to employment of more accurate hill effects methodology and reporting change. 4 All results from 2004 to 2015 are from the RealContours TM modeling system with INM. All results from 2016 to 2022 are from AEDT using the proprietary pre-processor. 5 2022 noise analyses used AEDT version 3e, 2020 and 2021 used AEDT version 3d, 2018 and 2019 used AEDT version 3c, 2017 used AEDT version 2d, 2016 used AEDT version 2c SP2, 2015 through 2012 used INM version 7.0d, 2011 used INM version 7.0c, 2008 through 2010 used INM version 7.0b, 2007 used INM version 7.01, and 1990 and 2000 used earlier versions of INM. I.3.2 Cumulative Noise Index (CNI) Massport reports total annual fleet noise at Logan Airport, defined in the Logan Airport Noise Rules by a metric referred to as the CNI. The CNI is a single number representing the sum of the entire set of single-event noise levels experienced at the Airport over a full year of operation, weighted similarly to DNL so that activity occurring at night is weighted by adding an extra 10 dB to each event. This weighting is mathematically equivalent to multiplying the number of nighttime events by each aircraft by a factor of ten. The Logan Airport Noise Rules define CNI in terms of Effective Perceived Noise Level (EPNL) and require that the index be computed for the fleet of commercial aircraft operating at Logan Airport throughout the year. In addition, in EDRs and ESPRs, Massport reports partial CNI values of noise at Logan Airport, so that various subsets of the fleet (cargo, night operations, passenger jets, etc.) are identified (see Table I-21 ). The Noise Rules, adopted by Massport following public hearings held in February 1986, established a CNI limit of 156.5 EPNdB. The CNI generally has decreased since 1990, remaining below that cap, with changes from year to year on the order of a few tenths of a decibel. The 2022 total CNI remains well below the cap of 156.5 EPNL. Table I-22 shows the relative contribution of each airline to total CNI. The table provides the number of flight operations, the contribution to CNI by airline, and the partial CNI per operation for 2019, 2021 and 2022. The data reflect the contributions of individual aircraft noise levels and the frequency with which they occur. The table is sorted by the partial CNI per operation for 2022 and shows a mix of mostly international carriers and cargo operators at the top of this list. This is due to the higher proportion of nighttime operations among these carriers, as well as the operation of larger and/or older (nosier) aircraft. JetBlue Airways, with the largest number of operations, has the highest total CNI per airline at 148.1 EPNdB in 2019, 144.3 in 2020, and 146.8 in 2022, but its partial CNI per operation is below the other major Noise Supporting Documentation I-74 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR airlines, partly due to its use of newer, quieter aircraft. The cargo airline with the most operations at Logan Airport is Federal Express (FedEx). Regional carriers generally contribute the least to the partial CNI per operation whereas the international carriers, which typically operate larger aircraft and generally have more operations at night, are usually at the top of the list. The relative positions for the domestic carriers are due mainly to their fleet characteristics and number of night operations. Table I-21 Cumulative Noise Index (EPNL) – 1990 to 2022 (limit 156.5) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Full CNI (Entire Commercial Jet Fleet) 156.4 155.8 155.5 155.3 155.4 155.3 155.1 154.8 154.7 154.9 154.7 154.1 Total Passenger Jets 155.2 154.8 154.6 154.4 154.4 154.2 154.1 153.9 153.7 153.9 153.6 152.9 Total Cargo Jets 150.1 148.9 148.0 147.9 148.3 148.8 148.6 147.5 147.9 148.0 148.2 147.8 Total Daytime 152.5 152.1 152.4 152.1 152.1 151.6 151.2 150.8 150.4 150.4 149.5 149.0 Total Nighttime 154.4 153.4 152.6 152.4 152.6 152.9 152.9 152.5 152.7 153.1 153.1 152.4 Total Stage 2 Jets N/A N/A N/A N/A 151.0 150.2 149.4 149.2 147.7 147.1 124.7 121.5 Total Stage 3 Jets N/A N/A N/A N/A 153.4 153.8 153.8 153.4 153.8 154.2 154.7 154.1 Daytime Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 149.0 148.5 147.6 146.5 145.2 144.1 122.6 119.3 Nighttime Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 146.7 145.1 144.8 145.8 144.1 144.0 120.5 117.3 Daytime Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 149.1 148.8 148.7 148.8 148.9 149.2 149.5 149.0 Nighttime Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 151.4 152.1 152.2 151.5 152.1 152.5 153.1 152.4 Passenger Jet Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 150.5 149.9 149.2 148.9 147.5 146.8 124.2 116.3 Passenger Jet Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 152.2 152.3 152.3 152.2 152.6 153.0 153.6 152.9 Cargo Jet Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 141.5 137.4 136.8 137.4 139.0 134.5 114.8 119.9 Cargo Jet Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 147.3 148.5 148.3 147.0 147.3 147.9 148.2 147.8 Daytime Passenger N/A 152.0 152.2 152.0 152.0 151.5 151.1 150.6 150.1 150.1 149.3 148.7 Nighttime Passenger N/A 151.6 150.9 150.6 150.8 151.0 151.0 151.1 151.2 151.6 151.6 150.8 Daytime Cargo 137.1 137.1 137.6 135.2 136.1 138.0 136.7 136.2 138.0 138.2 137.5 137.1 Nighttime Cargo 149.9 148.6 147.6 147.6 148.0 148.4 148.3 147.1 147.5 147.6 147.8 147.4 Daytime Passenger Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 148.9 148.4 147.6 146.5 145.0 143.9 122.3 115.0 Noise Supporting Documentation I-75 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-21 Cumulative Noise Index (EPNL) – 1990 to 2022 (limit 156.5) Daytime Passenger Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 149.0 148.5 148.4 148.5 148.6 149.0 149.2 148.7 Nighttime Passenger Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 149.0 148.5 148.4 148.5 142.8 143.7 119.8 110.2 Nighttime Passenger Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 149.4 149.9 150.1 149.8 150.5 150.8 151.6 150.8 Daytime Cargo Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 128.3 126.7 124.6 126.4 131.6 131.5 111.1 117.3 Daytime Cargo Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 135.3 137.7 136.4 135.7 136.9 137.1 137.5 137.0 Nighttime Cargo Stage 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 141.3 137.0 136.5 137.0 138.2 131.5 112.3 116.4 Nighttime Cargo Stage 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 147.0 148.1 148.0 146.6 146.9 147.5 147.8 147.4 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Full CNI (Entire Commercial Jet Fleet) 153.2 152.7 153.4 153.2 152.6 152.7 152.9 152.3 151.9 152.1 152.2 Total Passenger Jets 151.8 151.3 152.2 152.1 151.4 151.5 151.9 151.1 150.9 150.6 151.3 Total Cargo Jets 147.4 147.1 147.0 146.6 146.5 146.4 146.1 145.9 145.1 146.7 144.9 Total Daytime 148.5 148.0 148.5 148.2 147.5 147.2 147.6 147.1 146.8 146.9 147.0 Total Nighttime 151.3 150.9 151.7 151.6 151.0 151.2 151.4 150.7 150.3 150.6 150.6 Total Stage 2 Jets 114.3 114.1 118.1 -- -- -- -- -- 113.6 110.8 104.9 Total Stage 3 Jets 153.2 152.7 153.4 153.2 152.0 152.7 152.9 152.3 151.9 152.1 152.2 Daytime Stage 2 111.2 113.7 109.4 -- -- -- -- -- 103.6 N/A 104.9 Nighttime Stage 2 111.4 103.2 117.5 -- -- -- -- -- 113.1 110.8 -- Daytime Stage 3 148.5 148.0 148.5 148.2 147.5 147.2 147.6 147.1 146.8 146.9 147.0 Nighttime Stage 3 151.3 150.9 151.7 151.6 151.0 151.2 151.4 150.7 150.3 150.6 150.6 Passenger Jet Stage 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 104.9 Passenger Jet Stage 3 151.8 151.3 152.2 152.1 151.4 151.5 151.9 151.1 150.9 150.6 151.3 Cargo Jet Stage 2 114.3 114.1 118.1 -- -- -- -- -- 113.6 110.8 -- Cargo Jet Stage 3 147.4 147.1 147.0 146.6 146.5 146.4 146.1 145.9 145.1 146.7 144.9 Noise Supporting Documentation I-76 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-21 Cumulative Noise Index (EPNL) – 1990 to 2022 (limit 156.5) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Daytime Passenger 148.2 147.7 148.2 147.9 147.2 146.9 147.3 146.8 146.6 146.5 146.8 Nighttime Passenger 149.4 148.8 150.0 150.1 149.3 149.7 150.0 149.1 149.0 148.5 149.4 Daytime Cargo 137.0 136.2 135.7 135.8 135.5 135.8 135.8 135.2 134.5 136.6 134.0 Nighttime Cargo 147.0 146.8 146.7 146.2 146.1 146.0 145.6 145.5 144.7 146.3 144.5 Daytime Passenger Stage 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 104.9 Daytime Passenger Stage 3 148.2 147.7 148.2 147.9 147.2 146.9 147.3 146.8 146.6 146.5 146.8 Nighttime Passenger Stage 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Nighttime Passenger Stage 3 149.4 148.8 150.0 150.1 149.3 149.7 150,.0 149.1 149.0 148.5 149.4 Daytime Cargo Stage 2 111.2 113.7 109.4 -- -- -- -- -- 103.6 -- -- Daytime Cargo Stage 3 137.0 136.1 135.7 135.8 135.5 135.8 135.8 135.2 134.4 136.6 134.0 Nighttime Cargo Stage 2 111.4 103.2 117.5 -- -- -- -- -- 113.1 110.8 -- Nighttime Cargo Stage 3 147.0 146.8 146.7 146.2 146.1 146.0 145.6 145.5 144.7 146.3 144.5 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Diff ’19- ‘22 Full CNI (Entire Commercial Jet Fleet) 152.3 152.9 152.7 152.6 153.1 153.4 153.5 150.3 151.5 152.8 -0.7 Total Passenger Jets 151.4 151.7 152.0 152.0 152.6 153.0 153.1 149.4 150.9 152.5 -0.6 Total Cargo Jets 145.1 144.5 144.2 143.8 143.4 142.9 143.0 143.1 142.7 142.2 -0.8 Total Daytime 147.0 147.1 147.2 147.0 147.5 147.6 147.7 144.9 145.8 147.6 -0.1 Total Nighttime 150.8 151.0 151.2 151.2 151.7 152.1 152.2 148.9 150.1 151.3 -0.9 Total Stage 2 Jets 111.3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- N/A N/A Total Stage 3 Jets 152.3 152.5 152.7 152.6 153.1 153.4 153.5 150.3 151.5 152.8 -0.7 Daytime Stage 2 101.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- #N/A N/A Noise Supporting Documentation I-77 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-21 Cumulative Noise Index (EPNL) – 1990 to 2022 (limit 156.5) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Diff ’19- ‘22 Nighttime Stage 2 110.8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- #N/A N/A Daytime Stage 3 147.0 147.1 147.2 147.0 147.5 147.6 147.7 144.9 145.8 147.6 -0.1 Nighttime Stage 3 150.8 151.0 151.2 151.2 151.7 152.1 152.2 148.9 150.1 151.3 -0.9 Passenger Jet Stage 2 101.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- N/A N/A Passenger Jet Stage 3 151.4 151.7 152.0 152.0 152.6 153.0 153.1 149.4 150.9 152.5 -0.6 Cargo Jet Stage 2 110.8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- N/A N/A Cargo Jet Stage 3 145.1 144.5 144.2 143.8 143.4 142.9 143.0 143.1 142.7 142.2 -0.8 Daytime Passenger 146.8 146.9 147.0 146.8 147.3 147.5 147.6 144.5 145.4 147.4 -0.2 Nighttime Passenger 149.6 150.0 150.3 150.4 151.1 151.6 151.7 147.7 149.4 150.8 -0.9 Daytime Cargo 133.6 134.9 134.4 133.8 133.9 133.6 133.4 133.8 134.9 134.3 0.9 Nighttime Cargo 144.8 144.0 143.7 143.4 142.8 142.3 142.5 142.6 142.0 141.4 -1.1 Daytime Passenger Stage 2 101.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- N/A N/A Daytime Passenger Stage 3 146.8 146.9 147.0 146.8 147.3 147.5 147.6 144.5 145.4 147.4 -0.2 Nighttime Passenger Stage 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 N/A Nighttime Passenger Stage 3 149.6 150.0 150.3 150.4 151.1 151.6 151.7 147.7 149.4 150.8 -0.9 Daytime Cargo Stage 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 N/A Daytime Cargo Stage 3 133.6 134.9 134.4 133.8 133.9 133.6 133.4 133.8 134.9 134.3 0.9 Nighttime Cargo Stage 2 110.8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.0 N/A Nighttime Cargo Stage 3 144.8 144.0 143.7 143.4 142.8 142.3 142.5 142.6 142.0 141.4 -1.1 Source: HMMH, 2022 Notes: CNI – cumulative noise index; EPNL - Effective Perceived Noise Level; N/A indicates information not available; dashes indicate no aircraft in that category General aviation (GA) aircraft and non-jet aircraft are not included in the calculations. Negative numbers are shown in parentheses ( ). Noise Supporting Documentation I-78 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-22 Annual Operations and Partial CNI by Airline and per Operation, 2019, 2021, and 2022 Airlines with more than 100 flights in 2022 Airline Group Operations Total Airline CNI (EPNdB) Partial CNI (EPNdB) per Operation 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022 El Al Israel Airlines Ltd. International 296 N/A 164 131.4 N/A 128.6 106.7 N/A 106.5 ABX Air, Inc. Cargo N/A 10 147 N/A 0.0 126.5 N/A 0.0 104.8 United Parcel Service, Inc. Cargo 2,096 2,183 2,114 138.9 138.2 137.7 105.7 104.8 104.5 Federal Express Corporation Cargo 3,775 4,892 4,722 140.3 140.2 139.9 104.5 103.3 103.1 British Airways, PLC International 2,650 991 1,703 135.0 128.0 134.6 100.8 98.1 102.3 Kalitta Air (Cargo) Cargo N/A 316 349 N/A 128.8 127.3 N/A 103.8 101.9 Hawaiian Airlines Domestic 426 380 422 132.2 129.5 128.1 105.9 103.7 101.8 Emirates International N/A 456 702 N/A 128.4 130.3 N/A 101.8 101.8 IBERIA, Líneas Aéreas de España, S.A. International 859 158 696 127.1 121.0 128.2 97.7 99.1 99.8 Lufthansa German Airlines International 1,703 867 1,446 131.3 124.3 131.3 99.0 94.9 99.7 KLM Royal Dutch Airlines International 263 304 364 123.1 123.8 125.0 98.9 98.9 99.4 Delta Air Lines, Inc. Domestic 42,218 28,826 46,893 144.6 144.2 145.9 98.3 99.6 99.1 Southwest Airlines Co. Domestic 19,907 8,916 10,535 141.7 138.1 139.1 98.7 98.6 98.9 Virgin Atlantic Airways, Ltd. International N/A 391 670 N/A 122.9 126.9 N/A 97.0 98.7 Turk Hava Yollari A.O. International N/A 500 742 N/A 126.3 127.4 N/A 99.3 98.7 Compañía Panameña de Aviación S.A. International 962 283 228 124.3 118.8 122.2 94.5 94.3 98.6 Noise Supporting Documentation I-79 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-22 Annual Operations and Partial CNI by Airline and per Operation, 2019, 2021, and 2022 Airlines with more than 100 flights in 2022 Airline Group Operations Total Airline CNI (EPNdB) Partial CNI (EPNdB) per Operation 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022 Alaska Airlines, Inc. Domestic 5,920 2,882 4,404 137.3 134.6 134.8 99.6 100.0 98.4 Swiss International Air Lines Ltd. International 978 328 804 130.1 123.3 127.4 100.2 98.1 98.3 Condor Flugdienst GmbH International N/A N/A 104 N/A N/A 118.5 N/A N/A 98.3 United Air Lines, Inc. Domestic N/A 14,393 22,123 N/A 139.6 141.7 N/A 98.0 98.2 American Airlines, Inc. Domestic 50,333 28,474 41,255 144.7 143.0 144.3 97.7 98.5 98.1 Spirit Airlines, Inc. Domestic 9,838 5,689 6,717 136.5 136.0 136.4 96.6 98.5 98.1 SATA Internacional International 809 409 648 125.3 123.3 126.1 96.2 97.2 97.9 Frontier Airlines, Inc. Domestic 1,211 1,036 1,489 128.1 126.2 129.6 97.3 96.1 97.8 Qatar Airways International 730 528 728 130.4 124.5 125.8 101.8 97.3 97.2 jetBlue Airways Corporation Domestic 114,09 1 61,898 91,803 148.1 145.5 146.8 97.6 97.6 97.2 Aer Lingus Limited International 1,860 655 1,910 129.5 124.2 130.0 96.8 96.0 97.2 Italia Trasporto Aereo S.p.A. International N/A N/A 484 N/A N/A 123.9 N/A N/A 97.0 Transportes Aereos Portugueses S.A. International N/A 526 965 N/A 125.4 126.7 N/A 98.1 96.8 Icelandair International 1,044 1,122 1,450 130.0 127.0 127.8 99.8 96.5 96.2 Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd. International 367 314 366 121.1 122.1 121.8 95.5 97.1 96.2 Noise Supporting Documentation I-80 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-22 Annual Operations and Partial CNI by Airline and per Operation, 2019, 2021, and 2022 Airlines with more than 100 flights in 2022 Airline Group Operations Total Airline CNI (EPNdB) Partial CNI (EPNdB) per Operation 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022 2019 2020 2022 Jazz Air Inc. International 2,922 2,274 4,166 126.2 125.3 131.7 91.6 91.7 95.5 Societe Air France International 856 616 961 126.5 124.5 125.0 97.2 96.6 95.2 Scandinavian Airlines of North America, Inc. International 369 N/A 389 123.2 N/A 120.8 97.5 N/A 94.9 Fly Play Corp International N/A N/A 453 N/A N/A 121.4 N/A N/A 94.8 Republic Airlines Domestic 21,832 29,990 46,247 137.7 139.3 141.4 94.4 94.6 94.8 Sun Country Inc Domestic 288 358 416 118.8 119.5 120.3 94.2 93.9 94.1 Air Canada (Signature) International 1,908 20 625 126.2 0.0 121.9 93.4 0.0 93.9 WestJet Airlines Ltd. International N/A N/A 144 N/A N/A 115.4 N/A N/A 93.8 SkyWest Airlines Domestic 4,880 250 782 132.9 118.2 122.6 96.0 94.2 93.7 Allegiant Air Domestic 7 1,063 1,154 0.0 123.6 123.9 0.0 93.3 93.3 Endeavor Air Domestic 10,520 2,973 4,621 133.9 128.3 129.8 93.7 93.6 93.2 Envoy Airlines Domestic 396 528 2,039 116.0 119.7 125.7 90.0 92.5 92.7 Japan Airlines Co., Ltd. International 728 644 730 123.1 125.0 120.8 94.5 97.0 92.2 Piedmont Airlines Domestic 3,087 1,439 2,955 126.8 122.1 125.2 91.9 90.5 90.5 Source: Massport and HMMH, 2023. Notes: CNI – Cumulative Noise Index N/A Not available; airline had no operations at Logan Airport in that year Operations for some carriers differ to those in Chapter 3, Activity Levels and Forecasting , and Chapter 8, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions , because this table only includes jet aircraft and not turboprops, and because it includes both scheduled and unscheduled air carriers. Noise Supporting Documentation I-81 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.3.3 Dwell and Persistence Reporting Dwell and persistence are measured by the number of hours that a given location or area is subject to jet aircraft overflights. The PRAS Advisory Committee designated eight runway end combinations for computing the effects of dwell and persistence on the communities, as shown in Table I-23 . As required by Massport’s commitments for the Logan Airside Improvements Planning Project, 21 this 2022 ESPR reports on noise dwell and persistence levels. Higher levels of dwell or persistence for over-water areas represent a benefit since this produces a corresponding decrease in total hours overpopulated areas. Figure I-14 and Figure I-15 illustrate the annual hours of dwell and persistence by runway end for 2018 through 2022, with 2010 and 2015 hours included for reference. The data accounts for the time the runway configuration was in use and does not necessarily represent operations on those runways. The graphics indicate that areas to the north of the Airport (Orient Heights and Revere; arrivals to Runways 22L or 22R or departures from Runways 4L or 4R) as well as the peninsula immediately to the east of the Airport (Winthrop; arrivals to Runway 27 or departures from Runway 9) experience prolonged periods of overflights more often than other areas. Evaluating the analysis results against the goal of reducing excessive dwell and persistence as much as possible, the results for 2022 in both graphs show a more equitable distribution than in other recent years. Table I-23 Representative Neighborhoods near Logan Airport Subject to Overflights Runway Representative Neighborhoods 4L and 4R Arrivals South Boston (Farragut St.), Dorchester, Quincy, Milton, Weymouth, and Braintree 32 and 33L Arrivals Boston Harbor, Hull, Cohasset, Hingham, Scituate, and other South Shore locations 14 and 15R Departures Boston Harbor, Hull, Cohasset, Hingham, Scituate, and other South Shore locations 22L and 22R Departures South Boston (Farragut Street), Boston Harbor, Hull, Cohasset, Hingham, Scituate, and other South Shore locations 27 Departures South Boston (Fan Pier), Roxbury, Jamaica Plain, South End, West Roxbury, Roslindale, Brookline, Hyde Park, and other points South and West 4L/4R Departures, 22L/22R Arrivals East Boston (Bayswater, Orient Heights), Winthrop (Court Road), Revere, and Nahant 9 Departures and 27 Arrivals Winthrop (Point Shirley), Boston Harbor, and other points North 33L Departures and 15R Arrivals East Boston (Eagle Hill), Chelsea, Everett, Medford, Somerville, Arlington, Cambridge, Belmont, and other points South and West Source: Massport. ____________________________________________ 21 U.S. DoT, FAA. 2002. Logan Airside Improvements Planning Project Final Environmental Impact Statement. Noise Supporting Documentation I-82 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Figure I-14 Comparison of Annual Hours of Dwell Exceedance by Runway End Source: HMMH, 2023. Figure I-15 Comparison of Annual Hours of Persistence Exceedance by Runway End Source: HMMH, 2023. 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 4L&4R Arrivals 32 and 33L Arrivals 14 and 15R Departures 22L&R Departures 27 Departures 4L&R Departures plus 22L&R Arrivals 9 Departures plus 27 Arrivals 33L Departures plus 15R Arrivals Annual Hours Runway End 2010 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4L&4R Arrivals 32 and 33L Arrivals 14 and 15R Departures 22L&R Departures 27 Departures 4L&R Departures plus 22L&R Arrivals 9 Departures plus 27 Arrivals 33L Departures plus 15R Arrivals Annual Hours Runway End 2010 2015 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Noise Supporting Documentation I-83 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.3.4 Time Above (TA) and Time Above Night (TAN) Massport annually reports the amount of time that aircraft noise is above each of three predefined threshold sound levels for each of the thirty community noise monitor locations. The measure is referred to as TA, and the threshold sound levels used in the analysis are 65, 75, and 85 dBA. Like DNL values. These times are computed using the AEDT model for an annual average 24-hour day as well as for the average nine-hour nighttime period (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The threshold sound levels of 65, 75, and 85 dBA correlate to levels that may cause speech interference, as discussed in The Effects of Aircraft Noise on People section of this appendix. Table I-24 and Table I-25 present a summary of the AEDT-calculated TA values for 2019, 2021, and 2022 at each of the monitor locations. Table I-24 Time Above (TA) dBA Thresholds in a 24-Hour Period for Average Day Site 1 Distance 2 (mi) Minutes above Threshold Modeled DNL (dB) 3 2019 2021 2022 2019 2021 2022 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 1 3.7 0.0 0.1 16.2 0.0 0.1 10.4 0.0 0.0 6.8 56.4 52.2 52.4 2 2.9 0.0 1.6 25.0 0.0 0.8 16.0 0.0 0.9 11.3 59.7 55.5 56.2 3 2.5 0.0 2.7 72.7 0.0 0.4 38.5 0.0 1.8 71.8 61.8 58.0 60.5 4 1.6 8.0 45.7 116.0 3.9 22.6 56.8 8.1 41.0 97.0 71.8 69.0 71.2 5 1.9 0.1 15.4 94.2 0.0 8.9 46.3 0.0 16.4 81.2 64.9 61.7 64.6 6 0.8 0.0 0.9 61.6 0.0 1.1 42.1 0.0 0.9 53.8 62.4 60.0 61.7 7 1.0 0.7 9.5 101.3 0.1 6.4 68.6 0.6 8.7 98.4 67.3 63.5 65.4 8 1.6 0.0 3.2 44.4 0.0 2.0 28.1 0.0 3.2 42.5 62.1 59.0 61.2 9 1.3 1.0 25.4 89.7 0.2 16.5 59.5 0.9 24.9 81.9 68.8 65.9 67.9 10 1.3 0.0 4.9 52.1 0.0 3.0 34.7 0.0 4.6 50.0 62.8 59.7 61.8 11 1.8 0.0 0.8 14.0 0.0 0.4 8.7 0.0 0.8 12.1 57.6 54.6 56.7 12 1.2 0.1 9.7 91.9 0.0 5.2 58.6 0.0 9.3 90.9 66.0 62.6 64.7 13 1.9 0.1 8.8 46.8 0.0 5.9 31.2 0.0 12.8 50.2 63.9 61.5 64.2 14 1.2 0.0 3.5 38.6 0.0 0.3 38.1 0.0 0.2 47.0 61.8 58.6 60.2 15 2.8 0.8 24.7 58.8 0.0 1.5 25.6 0.0 4.5 39.4 61.6 59.1 61.1 16 2.4 0.0 0.9 53.5 0.4 15.9 38.2 0.9 25.4 57.1 69.2 66.7 68.7 17 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 33.9 0.0 1.0 52.7 61.8 59.1 61.0 18 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 45.9 43.1 45.0 19 8.7 0.0 0.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 45.5 43.0 44.7 20 8.4 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 12.8 56.4 53.5 55.5 21 4.5 0.0 0.1 11.3 0.0 0.1 10.2 0.0 0.0 14.1 55.0 53.5 54.8 22 6 0.0 0.0 20.8 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.1 10.1 54.6 51.5 53.8 23 6.3 0.0 0.0 7.8 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 18.4 55.9 53.0 54.7 24 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 6.3 54.0 51.3 52.9 25 4.2 0.0 0.1 29.9 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 50.5 46.8 48.9 26 6 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0 21.0 0.0 0.0 22.7 59.7 57.9 58.3 27 5.3 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.1 7.8 0.0 0.0 5.8 54.8 50.7 50.9 Noise Supporting Documentation I-84 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-24 Time Above (TA) dBA Thresholds in a 24-Hour Period for Average Day Site 1 Distance 2 (mi) Minutes above Threshold Modeled DNL (dB) 3 2019 2021 2022 2019 2021 2022 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 28 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 51.6 47.4 47.9 29 7.3 0.0 0.2 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 48.6 44.5 45.4 30 1.5 0.0 3.5 38.6 0.0 0.1 10.5 0.0 0.1 10.4 59.0 55.7 57.3 Average TA Value 4 0.4 5.3 38.7 0.2 3.1 23.8 0.2 0.4 34.9 59.0 56.0 57.6 Source: HMMH, 2023 Notes: dBA - A-weighted decibel; dB – decibel; DNL - Day-Night Average Sound Level. 1 Site numbers correlate with the Figure 7-16 map and the addresses listed in Table 7-8 2 Distance from Logan Airport calculated from the Airport Reference Point. 3 2019 modeled with AEDT version 3c, 2020 with version 3d, and 2022 with version 3e. 4 Arithmetic average includes all noise monitoring sites. Table I-25 Time Above (TA) dBA Thresholds in a Nine Hour Night Period for Average Day 3 Site 1 Distance 2 (mi) Minutes above Threshold Modeled DNL (dB) 4 2019 2021 2022 2019 2021 2022 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 1 3.7 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 56.4 52.2 52.4 2 2.9 0.0 0.5 6.1 0.1 0.1 1.6 0.0 0.1 1.2 59.7 55.5 56.2 3 2.5 0.0 0.1 10.5 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.2 9.9 61.8 58.0 60.5 4 1.6 1.2 5.7 15.4 2.2 2.2 6.1 1.2 5.7 13.2 71.8 69.0 71.2 5 1.9 0.0 1.8 11.8 0.7 0.7 4.4 0.0 2.0 11.0 64.9 61.7 64.6 6 0.8 0.0 0.2 10.8 0.2 0.2 5.5 0.0 0.1 6.7 62.4 60.0 61.7 7 1 0.2 1.6 20.9 0.7 0.7 9.1 0.1 1.1 13.1 67.3 63.5 65.4 8 1.6 0.0 0.5 10.4 0.2 0.2 5.0 0.0 0.4 5.9 62.1 59.0 61.2 9 1.3 0.2 6.1 18.9 3.0 3.0 8.5 0.1 3.5 11.3 68.8 65.9 67.9 10 1.3 0.0 0.6 10.9 0.3 0.3 5.3 0.0 0.6 6.8 62.8 59.7 61.8 11 1.8 0.0 0.1 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 1.5 57.6 54.6 56.7 12 1.2 0.1 2.6 19.5 1.0 1.0 10.2 0.0 1.1 11.3 66.0 62.6 64.7 13 1.9 0.1 1.7 7.5 1.1 1.1 4.5 0.0 1.5 6.0 63.9 61.5 64.2 14 1.2 0.0 0.1 11.7 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 5.8 61.8 58.6 60.2 15 2.8 0.0 0.9 6.0 0.5 0.5 3.6 0.0 0.5 4.8 61.6 59.1 61.1 16 2.4 0.2 6.1 13.6 3.1 3.1 6.7 0.1 3.7 8.3 69.2 66.7 68.7 17 5.3 0.0 0.2 13.4 0.1 0.1 6.7 0.0 0.1 7.7 61.8 59.1 61.0 18 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.9 43.1 45.0 19 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.5 43.0 44.7 Noise Supporting Documentation I-85 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-25 Time Above (TA) dBA Thresholds in a Nine Hour Night Period for Average Day 3 Site 1 Distance 2 (mi) Minutes above Threshold Modeled DNL (dB) 4 2019 2021 2022 2019 2021 2022 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 85 dBA 75 dBA 65 dBA 20 8.4 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.9 56.4 53.5 55.5 21 4.5 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.7 55.0 53.5 54.8 22 6 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.2 54.6 51.5 53.8 23 6.3 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 2.7 55.9 53.0 54.7 24 8.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.9 54.0 51.3 52.9 25 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.5 46.8 48.9 26 6 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 3.2 59.7 57.9 58.3 27 5.3 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.6 54.8 50.7 50.9 28 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 51.6 47.4 47.9 29 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 48.6 44.5 45.4 30 1.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 59.0 55.7 57.3 Average TA l 5 0.1 1.0 7.5 0.4 0.4 3.4 0.1 0.7 4.6 59.0 56.0 57.6 Source: HMMH, 2023 Notes: dBA - A-weighted decibel; dB – decibel; DNL - Day-Night Average Sound Level. 1 Site numbers correlate with the Figure 7-16 map and the addresses listed in Table 7-8. 2 Distance from Logan Airport calculated from the Airport Reference Point. 3 Nine-hour nighttime period from 10:00 PM – 7:00 AM. 4 2019 modeled with AEDT version 3c, 2020 with version 3d, and 2022 with version 3e. 5 Arithmetic average includes all noise monitoring sites. I.4 Status of Mitigation Programs I.4.1 Residential Sound Insulation Program As discussed in Chapter 7, Noise , Massport has been working to restart its residential sound insulation program (RSIP). In 2022, no new dwelling units received sound insulation from Massport. A total of 5,467 residential buildings and 11,515 dwelling units have been sound insulated since 1986 when the program was first implemented. Table I-26 lists the yearly progress of this mitigation effort. Following FAA’s approval of model adjustments based on the effects of terrain (discussed in the 1999 ESPR ), Massport submitted, and the New England Region of FAA approved, a new sound insulation program. The revised contour, approved for a two-year period beginning in 1999, included dwelling units in East Boston, South Boston, and Winthrop that previously had not been eligible for insulation. Massport received notice of FAA funding for $5 million. Subsequently, Massport updated its program contour, first with the 2001 EDR contour and more recently with the Logan Airside Improvements Project approved Noise Supporting Documentation I-86 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR contour. These updates allowed Massport to continue the program with yearly additional funds through 2014. The Logan Airside Improvements Project incorporated runway use changes due to the new Runway 14-32 which opened in late November 2006. The Logan Airside Improvements Project update expanded the focus of the sound insulation program into Chelsea to satisfy the mitigation commitments made in the Airside Improvements Program Record of Decision (ROD). Massport also contacted property owners that were still eligible within the RSIP boundaries that had previously declined to participate; those owners were offered a second chance to participate in the program. As of 2015, the FAA requires airports to use the AEDT model to establish eligibility for sound insulation; therefore, Massport has been working with the FAA to develop a Noise Exposure Map (NEM) contour (including block rounding). The FAA accepted Massport’s 2020 Noise Exposure Map in December, 2021, allowing Massport to move forward with the RSIP. Table I-26 Residential Sound Insulation Program (RSIP) Status (1986-2022) Construction Year Residential Buildings 1 Dwelling Units 2 1986 4 8 1987 43 51 1988 102 159 1989 94 133 1990 121 200 1991 175 360 1992 197 354 1993 318 654 1994 310 542 1995 372 753 1996 323 577 1997 364 808 1998 328 806 1999 330 718 2000 195 601 2001 260 278 2002 205 354 2003 230 468 2004 320 791 2005 314 471 2006 286 827 2007 160 548 2008 94 388 2009 111 287 2010 56 83 2011 62 114 Noise Supporting Documentation I-87 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-26 Residential Sound Insulation Program (RSIP) Status (1986-2022) Construction Year Residential Buildings 1 Dwelling Units 2 20123 0 0 2013 45 76 2014 48 106 2015 0 0 2016 0 0 2017 0 0 2018 0 0 2019 0 0 2020 0 0 2021 0 0 2022 0 0 Total 5,467 11,515 Source: Massport, 2022 1 Includes multiple units. 2 Individual units. 3 Federal funding was delayed in 2012. Noise Supporting Documentation I-88 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-27 provides a list of all schools that have been treated under Massport’s sound insulation program. To date, Massport has provided sound insulation to 36 schools at a cost of over $8 million. Table I-27 Schools Treated Under Massport Sound Insulation Program Boston: 27 total Winthrop: 3 total East Boston: 13 total Winthrop Jr. High School East Boston High E. B. Newton St. Mary's Star of the Sea A. T. Cummings (Ctr.) School St. Dominic Savio High Revere: 1 total St. Lazarus Beachmont School James Otis Chelsea: 5 total Samuel Adams Shurtleff School Curtis Guild Williams School Dante Alighieri Chelsea High School P.J. Kennedy St. Rose Elementary Donald McKay St. Stanislaus Hugh Roe O'Donnell Total Schools: 36 E Boston Central Catholic Manassah Bradley South Boston: 6 total St. Augustine Cardinal Cushing Patrick Gavin St. Bridgid's Oliver Hazard Perry Condon School Roxbury and Dorchester: 8 total Samuel Mason Dearborn Middle Ralph Waldo Emerson Lewis Middle Nathan Hale Elem. Phillis Wheatley Elem. Davis Ellis Elem. Henry L. Higginson Source: Massport, 2015. I.4.2 Noise Complaints Table I-28 presents a detailed list by community of the total noise complaints made in 2019, 2021 and 2022, which can be filed either on Massport’s Noise Complaint Line, through a form on Massport’s website, or through the PublicVue flight track portal. The Noise Complaint Line provides individuals the ability to express their concerns about aviation noise (activities) or to ask questions regarding noise at Noise Supporting Documentation I-89 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Logan Airport. Callers 22 ask a range of questions such as “Why is this runway being used?”; “What time do the planes stop flying?”; and “Was that aircraft off-course?” The Noise Abatement Office (NAO) staff documents noise line complaints by obtaining information from the caller about the nature of the complaint, time of the occurrence, location of caller’s residence, and the activity that was disturbed. The NAO uses the collected information to determine the probable activity responsible for the complaint and writes a letter report to the complainant. The letter includes the original complaint, a response that identifies the activity responsible for the call (arrivals, departures, run-up, etc.), meteorological information at the time of the call (a major factor in aviation activities), runways in use at the time of the call, and a notice that FAA will receive a copy of the report. In 2022, Massport received 272,943 noise complaints from 80 communities, an increase from 269,867 noise complaints from 84 communities in 2021. The number of individual complainants increased from 1,204 callers in 2021 to 1,301 callers in 2022. The increase in complaints from 2021 to 2022 was about 1 percent, with an increase in the number of individual callers of roughly 8 percent. Recent technological advances in both Massport’s noise complaint phone system and online complaint tracking system, as well as the incorporation of third-party complaint applications, have made it easier for community members to file a complaint and to receive information about particular noise events. In late 2018, Massport added the option to submit complaints through the Airnoise button 23 which has dramatically increased complaints logged in the system. In 2019, the average number of complaints per individual caller (the ratio of calls to callers) was 100.8. This ratio increased to an average 232 complaints per caller for 2020 and was an average 224 complaints per caller in 2021. In 2022, there were, on average, 210 complaints per caller. Figure I-17 shows the call and callers data graphically. Massport’s website, http://www.massport.com/logan-airport/about-logan/noise-abatement/complaints/), provides for additional general questions and answers regarding the Noise Complaint Line. ____________________________________________ 22 For clarity, the people logging the complaints are referred to here as “callers” despite most complaints arriving electronically (as opposed to by telephone calls). 23 Airnoise is a subscription service that allows the user to file an online noise complaint by clicking a button. The system finds the aircraft closest to the complainer and then files a detailed noise complaint directly with Massport. https://www.airnoise.io/ Noise Supporting Documentation I-90 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-28 Noise Complaint Line Summary Town Name 2019 2021 2022 Change in number of calls, 2021 to 2022 Change in number of calls, 2019 to 2022 Calls Callers Calls Callers Calls Callers Abington 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Allston 0 0 77 2 6 2 -71 6 Arlington 7,021 77 10,017 30 11,276 58 1,259 4,255 Ayer 0 0 49 1 0 0 -49 0 Belmont 1,132 41 1,152 32 920 47 -232 -212 Beverly 13 6 38 5 36 5 -2 23 Billerica 2 2 2 1 0 0 -2 -2 Boston 162 27 70 28 430 29 360 268 Boxford 10 4 0 0 1 1 1 -9 Braintree 126 5 2 2 1,010 5 1,008 884 Brighton 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Brookline 2 2 3 2 2 2 -1 0 Burlington 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Cambridge 1,958 142 629 50 1,214 68 585 -744 Canton 5 2 1 1 4 3 3 -1 Carlisle 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Charlestown 65 14 20 10 51 19 31 -14 Chelmsford 1,931 2 1,201 3 1,093 1 -108 -838 Chelsea 1,605 47 232 15 103 35 -129 -1,502 Cohasset 975 9 732 5 571 4 -161 -404 Danvers 2 2 3 2 39 2 36 37 Dedham 2 2 2 1 0 0 -2 -2 Dorchester 28 15 37 15 19 11 -18 -9 Dover 8 1 1 1 2 2 1 -6 Duxbury 287 2 8 1 23 1 15 -264 East Boston 3,803 70 139 49 191 56 52 -3,612 East Bridgewater 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Easton 0 0 0 0 12 1 12 12 Essex 4 2 0 0 1 1 1 -3 Everett 58 23 8 5 18 12 10 -40 Framingham 8 1 13 2 28 2 15 20 Gloucester 2 2 0 0 30 1 30 28 Grafton 7 2 0 0 1 1 1 -6 Hamilton 187 11 1 1 3 3 2 -184 Hingham 15 6 66 3 6 4 -60 -9 Holbrook 1 1 4 1 1 1 -3 0 Noise Supporting Documentation I-91 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-28 Noise Complaint Line Summary Town Name 2019 2021 2022 Change in number of calls, 2021 to 2022 Change in number of calls, 2019 to 2022 Calls Callers Calls Callers Calls Callers Holliston 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Hopkinton 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Hull 1,047 97 796 31 650 33 -146 -397 Hyde Park 1,514 11 11 5 7 2 -4 -1,507 Ipswich 139 8 2 2 16 2 14 -123 Jamaica Plain 17,132 108 1,975 56 224 30 -1,751 -16,908 Lawrence 0 0 0 0 332 1 332 332 Littleton 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Lynn 60 21 64 16 72 18 8 12 Malden 15,414 34 6,324 24 3,265 9 -3,059 -12,149 Marblehead 1,291 14 2,742 16 2,807 6 65 1,516 Marlborough 0 0 11 1 3 1 -8 3 Marshfield 5 4 5 3 20 6 15 15 Medford 98,021 712 102,182 210 73,912 211 -28,270 -24,109 Melbourne 0 0 2 1 0 0 -2 0 Melrose 1,967 4 1,488 3 1,008 2 -480 -959 Middleton 5 2 0 0 7 2 7 2 Millis 12 1 8 1 1 1 -7 -11 Milton 41,575 219 17,454 77 17,420 110 -34 -24,155 Nahant 73 20 219 36 134 26 -85 61 Needham 9 3 49 2 1 1 -48 -8 Newington 5 1 38 1 153 2 115 148 Newton 208 18 124 6 38 11 -86 -170 North Andover 0 0 72 1 0 0 -72 0 North Easton 0 0 0 0 19 1 19 19 Norton 2 2 3 1 3 2 0 1 Norwell 2 1 3 2 7 2 4 5 Peabody 29 10 24 4 11 8 -13 -18 Pepperell 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Princeton 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Quincy 7 6 12 5 21 8 9 14 Randolph 3 3 0 0 6 1 6 3 Reading 1 1 47 1 2 2 -45 1 Revere 291 95 12,389 29 10,200 27 -2,189 9,909 Roslindale 2,975 78 4,157 40 350 16 -3,807 -2,625 Roxbury 5,151 24 3,548 21 1,586 6 -1,962 -3,565 Noise Supporting Documentation I-92 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-28 Noise Complaint Line Summary Town Name 2019 2021 2022 Change in number of calls, 2021 to 2022 Change in number of calls, 2019 to 2022 Calls Callers Calls Callers Calls Callers Salem 82 16 176 8 326 12 150 244 Saugus 1 1 2 2 0 0 -2 -1 Scituate 946 5 0 0 4 3 4 -942 Somerville 28,070 229 26,565 108 40,372 155 13,807 12,302 South Boston 448 48 53 27 25 18 -28 -423 South End 5,309 27 359 14 3,347 7 2,988 -1,962 Stoneham 3 3 2 1 -23 0 -2 -3 Stoughton 65 1 23 1 0 0 -23 -65 Sudbury 21 2 5 2 0 0 -5 -21 Swampscott 8 6 24 15 16 7 -8 8 Tewksbury 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Topsfield 33 2 6 1 0 0 -6 -33 Upton 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Wakefield 23 2 6 2 30 1 24 7 Waltham 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 -1 Watertown 3,709 28 2,710 18 3,661 28 951 -48 Wellesley 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 0 Wenham 537 5 39 2 479 5 440 -58 West Roxbury 5,239 27 1,097 11 50 8 -1,047 -5,189 Westford 0 0 9 1 0 0 -9 0 Weston 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 Westwood 192 2 0 0 1 1 1 -191 Weymouth 152 7 183 4 696 6 513 544 Whitman 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Winchester 9,143 15 15,329 19 8,466 9 -6,863 -677 Winthrop 8,121 201 54,166 85 84,748 103 30,582 76,627 Woburn 387 8 846 9 1,346 5 500 959 Total 268,929 2,669 269,867 1,204 272,943 1,301 Source: Massport, HMMH 2023. Note: Negative numbers are shown in parentheses ( ). Noise Supporting Documentation I-93 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-17 Noise Complaint Line Calls and Callers by Year Source: Massport and HMMH, 2023. I.4.3 Noise and Operations Monitoring System Massport installed its first automated monitoring system in 1973, which consisted of 12 fixed remote noise monitors (expanded to 18 in 1980), data acquisition and reporting software, a teletype-style printer, a public display panel consisting of lights on a map representing the locations of the noise monitors and analog displays indicating the real-time noise level at each noise monitor, and a separate system to monitor and record Automated Terminal Information Service (ATIS) transmissions and radio communications between the pilots and Air Traffic Control Tower staff with a time-search capability to research aircraft reported to cause community annoyance. In 1989, Massport awarded a contract to Larson Davis Laboratories (LD) to install a fully integrated Noise and Operations Monitoring System (NOMS), which included 36 fixed remote noise monitors (30 installed to measure noise from aircraft operating at BOS and 6 for BED), 20 wind speed and direction sensors installed select noise monitoring sites (18 for BOS and two for BED), three humidity and temperature sensors installed at select noise monitoring sites (two for BOS and one for BED), two portable noise monitoring kits, hourly airport weather data, runway operating configuration data, flight track and aircraft - 30,000 60,000 90,000 120,000 150,000 180,000 210,000 240,000 270,000 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 Calls Callers Noise Supporting Documentation I-94 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR identification data for aircraft operating at BOS, software running on servers at BOS and BED, and an independent public web portal providing 10-minute-delayed flight tracks. In 2004, Massport began to replace the NOMS with their current hosted system, which was completed in 2008. The system is being maintained and supported by the Harris Corporation (now Passur) and consists of the following principal components: Noise monitoring installations at 30 locations in the BOS environs and six locations in the BED environs. All 36 installations include a Brüel & Kjaer Model 3639 permanent noise monitor equipped with B&K Model 4952 microphones and other required permanent monitor elements (e.g., wind screen, cabling, batteries, power supplies, mounting pole elements, equipment enclosures, etc.). All 36 B&K permanent noise monitors capture 1/3 octave-band levels and audio recordings for the noise events. The system downloads these monitors via dial-up telephone connections, over analog telephone lines at 31 installations, and via cellular connections at the remaining installations. LD Model 2140 wind velocity (speed and direction) monitors at 20 of the monitoring sites (18 BOS and 2 BED). LD Model 2142 humidity and temperature sensors at three of the monitoring sites (two BOS and one BED). Two portable noise monitoring equipment sets, including a B&K Model 2250 analyzer equipped with B&K Model 4189 microphones and UA1404 preamplifiers. Hourly weather data (time, sky condition, wind direction, wind speed, and wind gust speed) collected by an automated weather observation station at BOS, imported from WSI Corporation each business day via a dial-up telephone connection, using an MS-DOS command line interface. Runway operating configuration data manually entered into the system from ATCT records. The Flight operations data is provided by Harris via a real-time connection to the NextGen data link. For BED the NextGen data link is augmented with information obtained from the Harris multi- lateration flight track sensors. A hosted web-based software application, Symphony EnvironmentalVue, provided by Harris for use at BOS and BED offices. During nighttime hours when the BOS and BED offices are not staffed, Plane Noise accepts and processes aircraft noise complaints. The Harris Symphony PublicVue web portal for the community to view near real-time flight operations, replay flight operations and submit aircraft noise complaints. Massport evaluated the current system in early 2018 and went out to bid for an upgraded NOMS in late 2018. The prior vendor (L3Harris) was selected and in 2019, L3Harris began upgrading the system, including additional reports and the option for Virtual Noise Monitors (VNM). Massport has replaced the equipment for all permanent noise monitors. The monitor at Site 1 was removed in May 2017; Massport (in collaboration with the South End community) relocated Site 1 to the Union Park Street Playground in April 2023. Noise Supporting Documentation I-95 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.4.4 Airbus A320 Vortex Generators Massport encourages operators to use idle or reduced reserve thrust during landing, and to retrofit the Airbus A319/320/321 family of aircraft with vortex generators, which reduce tonal noise on approach. A vortex generator is a small device that disrupts wind over ports on the wing. Without the device, the wind can produce a “whistling” tone during the aircraft’s approach into an airport. All Airbus A319/320/321 built after 2014 already come equipped with the Vortex Generator. United Airlines announced it was retrofitting its aircraft in 2017 as they went in for service. In a press release in October 2018, jetBlue Airways (the largest air carrier operator at Logan Airport) announced plans to retrofit its older Airbus fleet with Vortex Generators. The picture above shows an example of the device. American Airlines also completed the upgrade to their fleet. These changes reflect the partnership between Massport and the airlines to reduce aircraft noise to benefit surrounding communities. As airlines retrofit aircraft and transition to the newer models of the A320 family, the number of aircraft operating at Logan Airport without the vortex generators is expected to decrease. I.4.5 FAA and Massport RNAV Pilot Project Over the last several years, FAA implementation of Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) procedures – including RNAV – has resulted in a concentration of flights. On October 7, 2016, FAA signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Massport 24 to frame the process for analyzing opportunities to reduce noise through changes or amendments to PBN. Massport worked with FAA and others to develop test projects designed to help address the concentration of noise from PBN. Massport proposed several ideas for a test program with FAA to better define the implications of flight concentration on the community. This program, supported by the FAA, studied possible strategies to address neighborhood concerns. This was a first-in-the-nation project between FAA and an airport operator that includes analyzing the feasibility of changes to some RNAV approaches and departures from Logan Airport. FAA and Massport committed to: (1) analyze the feasibility; (2) measure and model the benefits and impacts of changing some RNAV approaches; and (3) test and develop an implementation plan, which will include environmental analysis and community/public outreach. ____________________________________________ 24 Massport. October 7, 2016. Massport and FAA Work to Reduce Overflight Noise. https://www.massport.com/news- room/news/massport-and-faa-work-to-reduce-overflight-noise/. Vortex Generator Device by Port on Wing Noise Supporting Documentation I-96 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR The project was structured in two phases, or “blocks”. Block 1 recommendations were those that would not result in shifting noise from one area to another, and that would not have significant operational/technical implications. A report on Block 1 recommendations was completed in December 2017. Block 2 recommendations were those that could result in noise increases in some areas or face technical barriers that would require further review. The RNAV technical team, led by MIT, released the Block 2 report released in December 2021. I.4.5.1 Block 1 Following the completion of Block 1, the Massport CAC voted to approve and recommend implementation of the four Block 1 procedures. On December 20, 2017, Massport sent a request for FAA review and implementation of the Block 1 recommendations. Massport provided a copy of the letter in the 2017 ESPR . Two of the recommendations have not moved forward (restricting climb speed to 220 knots due to flyability issues and modifications to Runway 22 RNAV SIDs due to airspace conflicts). The other two recommendations have progressed; the development of an RNAV visual approach to Runway 33L and the modification of the Runway 15R RNAV SID which would shift departures further away from Hull. The Runway 33L RNAV approach is similar to the jetBlue Airways RNAV visual Special to Runway 33L already in place but would be a published procedure for all airlines to use. A copy of the Massport request to FAA from April 2017 was also published in the 2017 ESPR . Since the Block 1 recommendations were sent, FAA and Massport have further refined the procedures and presented the FAA’s recommended options to the Massport CAC in January of 2020. On November 12, 2020, Massport submitted a request to the FAA for review and implementation of two procedures at Logan Airport. These include modifying the existing RNAV SID from Runway 15R to move tracks over water, and a new over-water Required Navigational Performance (RNP) 25 approach for users with the capability to utilize this more precise PBN procedure. A copy of the Block 1 letter is included as Figure I-18 . The FAA completed development of these procedures and published the procedures in December 2021. I.4.5.2 Block 2 The RNAV study team completed the evaluation of the Block 2 options in June 2021. Block 2 procedures were more complex due to potential operational/technical barriers or equity issues. Procedures considered as part of Block 2 were RNAV or RNP approaches to Runway 22L and Runway 4R, continuous descent RNAV profiles, heading-based departures from Runway 22L and Runway 22R, and dispersed headings from Runway 33L and 27. The Runway 33L, Runway 22L and Runway 22R departure concepts were presented to major airline representatives and FAA in May 2020. At the request of the Massport CAC, FAA agreed to take an initial look at the feasibility of these options by August 2020. FAA assembled a panel of stakeholders consisting of representatives from the airline industry, the FAA Air Traffic Organization (Mission Support Services, Air Traffic Services, System ____________________________________________ 25 Required Navigational Performance (RNP) procedures provide a precise flight path both laterally and vertically for aircraft on approach. Noise Supporting Documentation I-97 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Operations, and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association), the FAA Office of Environment and Energy, and FAA Flight Standards. FAA and industry stakeholders completed their initial review of the proposed procedures and determined that none of the procedures would be recommended for further evaluation. The RNAV study team and FAA worked to revise several of the procedures for possible implementation and developed several additional procedures. Massport presented these during a public meeting in September 2021 and to the Massport CAC for review. Massport and MIT completed the RNAV study at the end of 2021 and the Massport CAC considered each measure during its December 2021 meeting. In January 2022, the Massport CAC put forth two of the procedures for further study and implementation by FAA. The Block 2 report can is available on the MIT website. 26 On January 19, 2022, Massport submitted a request to the FAA for review and implementation of two Block 2 procedures at Logan Airport. These include modifying the existing RNAV SID from Runways 22R and 22L to enable an earlier turn to the east and adding a new over-water RNAV approach for Runway 22L. A copy of the Block 2 letter is included as Figure I-19 . Massport continues to coordinate with the Massport CAC, the FAA, and MIT on targeted, follow-on technical questions and reviews. In 2022, Massport completed the study. The FAA’s letter sunsetting the MOU is reproduced as Figure I-20 . ____________________________________________ 26 MIT Libraries. Block 2 Procedure Recommendations for Boston Logan Airport Community Noise Reduction. September 8, 2021. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/131242. Noise Supporting Documentation I-98 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Figure I-18 Massport Request to FAA for Block 1 Recommendations Noise Supporting Documentation I-99 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-19 Massport Request to FAA for Block 2 Recommendations Noise Supporting Documentation I-100 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Figure I-20 Massport Request to FAA for Block 2 Recommendations ( continued ) Noise Supporting Documentation I-101 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-21 FAA Letter to Massport, Sunsetting the MOU Noise Supporting Documentation I-102 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Figure I-20 FAA Letter to Massport, Sunsetting the MOU (continued) Noise Supporting Documentation I-103 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I I.5 Flight Track Monitoring Report As part of its ongoing commitment to mitigate noise at Logan Airport, Massport has undertaken evaluating the flight tracks of turbojet aircraft engaged in the implementation of established FAA noise abatement procedures. However, as is true for any airport operator, Massport has no authority to control where individual aircraft fly. That remains the responsibility of FAA, while the individual pilots are responsible for safely executing FAA’s instructions. The flight procedures, which are used by the Air Traffic Control (ATC) staff at Boston Tower to achieve desired noise abatement tracks, are contained in FAA’s Tower Order (BOS TWR 7040.1). Since 2002, Massport has prepared annual reports for flight track monitoring. Prior to 2002, Massport had issued semi-annual reports, an outgrowth of the Flight Track Monitoring Program study. That study was contained in the Generic Environmental Impact Report filed with Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) in July 1996 and was the subject of two Community Working Group workshops in September and October 1996. The information for 2020 and 2021 are repeated in this report for reference. The period covered by this 2022 ESPR is January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022. The purpose of the ongoing monitoring program is to identify any systematic changes in flight tracks that may occur and to reduce flight track dispersion, where appropriate. I.5.1 FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) Procedures FAA Tower Order BOS TWR 7040.1 entitled “Noise Abatement” describes the series of noise abatement policies, rules, regulations, and the procedures to be followed by FAA air traffic controllers in meeting their designated responsibilities to be “a good neighbor, while meeting our operational objectives/ responsibilities to the National Airspace System.” Section 7.a.3 of the Order, subtitled “Turbojet Departure Noise Abatement Procedures,” states that all turbojet departures shall be issued the Standard Instrument Departure (SID) procedure appropriate for the departure runway. Logan Airport has ten published SIDs; nine area navigation (RNAV) SIDs and one conventional SID. The conventional SID is for aircraft that are not equipped to fly RNAV procedures. The conventional SID uses terms such as “BOS 2 DME” to indicate where aircraft should turn. Here, BOS refers to an aid to navigation known as the BOSTON VORTAC, a radio beacon physically located on Logan Airport near the eastern shoreline between the ends of Runways 27 and 33L (see Figure I-21 ). DME refers to “Distance Measuring Equipment,” a co-located aid to navigation that provides pilots with a cockpit display of the number of nautical miles that the aircraft is from the designated radio beacon. Thus, BOS 2 DME means an aircraft should be two nautical miles away from the BOS. Pilots are then “vectored” or assigned to fly a magnetic heading given by and at the discretion of FAA air traffic controller to maintain the safe separation of aircraft. All altitudes in feet listed below (unless otherwise noted) are in mean sea level (MSL) and indicate the aircraft altitude used both by the pilot in the cockpit and the air traffic controller on the ground. Noise Supporting Documentation I-104 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR During 2010, several of the conventional-only (or radar vector) and RNAV procedures from the Boston Logan Airport Noise Study Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) 27 were implemented. There are eight RNAV procedures for departures from Logan Airport. These eight procedures are used by aircraft departing Runways 4R, 9, 15R, 22L, 22R, 27, and 33L (Runways 27 and 33L were added in 2014). These procedures primarily affected departures flying over the North and South shores and were designed to increase the amount of jet traffic crossing back over land above 6,000 feet to minimize noise impacts to communities. A ninth RNAV procedure, which is used by Runway 27, has been modified several times. Figure I-21 presents the gates used in the analysis for the Flight Track Monitoring Report. These gates are virtual vertical planes, which are used in the analysis to capture the aircraft flight paths. The gates are defined using a geographic coordinate for each end of the gate along with a floor and a ceiling altitude. The analysis captures the direction of the flights (in or out of the gate). The edges of each gate in Figure I-21 point in the direction that the aircraft is coming from. The gate analysis information is used to evaluate the performance of the flight procedures off each runway end. The RNAV procedures are still captured by the original flight track monitoring gates. Traffic crossing over the North Shore passes through the Revere, Swampscott and Marblehead Gates and traffic passing over the South Shore passes through the Hull 2, Hull 3, and Cohasset Gates. Turbojets departing Runway 27 on the RNAV pass through the Runway 27 gates and the Runway 33L RNAV flight tracks pass between (rather than through) the Somerville and Everett gates. The following pages present the jet aircraft gate crossing data by departure runway. ____________________________________________ 27 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Boston Logan Airport Noise Study Categorical Exclusion Record of Decision (CATEX ROD), Issued October 16, 2007. Noise Supporting Documentation I-105 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Figure I-21 Logan Airport Flight Track Monitor Gates Noise Supporting Documentation I-106 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I.5.2 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 4R Jet aircraft departures from Runway 4R remain on runway heading until 4 DME and then turn right, crossing the Nahant causeway. They gain altitude over the water, and then, as needed, turn to cross the shoreline and proceed to their destinations. The Nahant Gate (shown in Figure I-21 ) monitors aircraft after the first turn at 4 DME. The Swampscott and Marblehead Gates monitor northbound shoreline crossings, while the Hull 2, Hull 3, and Cohasset Gates monitor southbound shoreline crossings. Table I-29 through Table I-31 show that Runway 4R departures for 2022 were concentrated, with more than 99 percent “over the Causeway,” and the remainder split between the north and south ends of the gate. Table I-29 Runway 4R Nahant Gate Summary for 2020 Number of Tracks Through Gate Segment Percentage of Tracks Through Gate Segment North End of Gate 9 0.2% Over Causeway 4,505 99.5% South End of Gate 12 0.3% Total 4,526 100.0% Source: Massport, HMMH 2022 Table I-30 Runway 4R Nahant Gate Summary for 2021 Number of Tracks Through Gate Segment Percentage of Tracks Through Gate Segment North End of Gate 16 0.3% Over Causeway 4,566 99.3% South End of Gate 16 0.3% Total 4,598 100.0% Source: Massport, HMMH 2022 Table I-31 Runway 4R Nahant Gate Summary for 2022 Number of Tracks Through Gate Segment Percentage of Tracks Through Gate Segment North End of Gate 21 0.3% Over Causeway 6,081 99.4% South End of Gate 13 0.2% Total 6,115 100.0% Source: Massport, HMMH 2023 Noise Supporting Documentation I-107 Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR I Table I-32 through Table I-34 show how many of the shoreline crossings from Runway 4R were above 6,000 feet. For 2020, 97.8 percent of the flights were above 6,000 feet compared to almost 96.5 percent in 2021 and 95.5 percent in 2022. The Swampscott gate had the lowest percent of flights above 6,000 feet due to its proximity to the Nahant gate; aircraft crossing the Swampscott gate make an immediate left turn after crossing the Nahant causeway. Generally, less than 20 percent of Swampscott gate crossings are above 6,000 feet; in 2020, it was 38 percent. Crossings of the other four shoreline gates achieved altitudes over 6,000 feet over 98 percent of the time in 2022. Table I-32 Runway 4R Shoreline Crossings Above 6,000 Feet for 2020 Number of Tracks Through Gate Number Above 6,000 ft Percentage Above 6,000 ft Swampscott Gate 52 20 38.5% Marblehead Gate 1,438 1,410 98.1% Hull 2 Gate 260 259 99.6% Hull 3 Gate 1,029 1,025 99.6% Cohasset Gate 135 135 100.0% Total 2,914 2,849 97.8% Source: Massport, HMMH 2022 Table I-33 Runway 4R Shoreline Crossings Above 6,000 Feet for 2021 Number of Tracks Through Gate Number Above 6,000 ft Percentage Above 6,000 ft Swampscott Gate 102 15 14.7% Marblehead Gate 1,800 1,780 98.9% Hull 2 Gate 247 247 100.0% Hull 3 Gate 745 744 99.9% Cohasset Gate 189 188 99.5% Total 3,083 2,974 96.5% Source: Massport, HMMH 2022 Noise Supporting Documentation I-108 I Boston Logan International Airport 2022 ESPR Table I-34 Runway 4R Shoreline Crossings Above 6,000 Feet for 2022 Number of Tracks Through Gate Number Above 6,000 ft Percentage Above 6,000 ft Swampscott Gate 155 20 12.9% Marblehead Gate 2,333 2,291 98.2% Hull 2 Gate 333 333 100.0% Hull 3 Gate 814 814 100.0% Cohasset Gate 307 307 100.0% Total 3,942 3,765 95.5% Source: Massport, HMMH 2023 I.5.3 Statistical Analyses of Flight Tracks - Runway 9 Jets departing from Runway 9 maintain runway heading and gain altitude before turning back to cross the shoreline and proceed to their destinations. The Winthrop 1 and Winthrop 2 gates (shown in Figure I-21 ) monitor early turns for departures off Runway 9. The Revere, Swampscott, or Marblehead gates monitor northbound shoreline crossings, while the Hull 2, Hull 3, or Cohasset gates monitor southbound shoreline crossings. Table I-35 through Table I-37 show how many tracks turned prior to the BOS 2 DME. Northbound turns before BOS 2 DME pass through the Winthrop 1 Gate. Southbound traffic would pass through the Winthrop 2 Gate. In 2020 and 2021, 13 and 14 tracks crossed these gates respectively and in 2022, 25 tracks crossed these gates. The compliance rate for avoiding the early turns was 99.9 percent in 2020, 2021 and 2022. Table I-35 Runway 9 Gate Summary — Winthrop Gates 1 and 2 for 2020 Number of Tracks Through Gate Percent Turning Before BOS 2 DME Winthrop 1 Gate 8 <0.1% Winthrop 2 Gate 5 <0.1% Neither gate 16,543 99.9% Total 16,556 100.0% Source: Massport,
The text goes on. The rest is in the file.
related records
Records whose documents say similar things, nearest first.
- Air & noiseMassachusetts Port AuthorityLogan Airport Environmental Data Report, 2023 and 2024
- Air & noiseMassachusetts Port AuthorityLogan Airport Environmental Status and Planning Report, 2017
- Air & noiseMassachusetts Port AuthorityLogan Airport Environmental Data Report, 2018 and 2019
- Air & noiseMassachusetts Port AuthorityLogan Airport Environmental Data Report, 2016
- Air & noiseMassachusetts Port AuthorityLogan Airport Environmental Data Report, 2020 and 2021