The Camarillo Airport Approach and Procedure Analysis (Study) will be led by Ventura County and its consultant team to explore ways to reduce aircraft noise through potential changes to how planes navigate the region. The Study will:

• explore modifications to how aircraft approach each end of the Camarillo Airport (CMA) runway to potentially reduce noise exposure;

• convene a Technical Advisory Committee composed of local pilots and aviation professionals to evaluate proposed changes and provide expert guidance;

• host a series of public meetings to inform, engage, and gather input from community members about proposed alternatives;

• coordinate with key partners, like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Point Mugu Naval Air Station, and air traffic controllers; and

• produce a final report that recommends procedural changes, which will be submitted to the FAA for review and potential implementation

Yes, the County is currently in the final stages of a Part 150 Noise Study. This new initiative is partly a continuation of that effort, which was prompted by findings from the Part 150 Study. These findings encouraged the County to evaluate flight procedures for alternatives that could reduce noise impacts and explore enhancements to airspace procedures. You can find more information about the Part 150 Study here.

As part of this effort, the County is intending to:

• Review existing procedures for possible changes and explore new routings based on public and Technical Advisory Committee feedback.

• Seek FAA approval to increase the current glide path angle so planes fly into the airport at a steeper angle from the ground.

• Propose a new charted visual procedure for FAA consideration that routes planes away from high density areas for FAA approval and publishing.

• Request changes to existing procedures and/or propose a new instrument approach procedure with adjusted flight track and/or glide path angle for FAA approval and publishing.

Existing Instrument Flight Procedures (IFPs) are standardized routes that help aircraft navigate to and from the airport environment. Optimizing the IFPs for CMA may require changes to longstanding, existing procedures in the surrounding airspace and those in place for other airports, which requires coordination. These procedures are used by pilots when flying under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR). These highly regulated procedures are administered by the FAA and/or authorized service providers. IFPs provide predictable and repeatable routes for aircraft to navigate to the runway safely during low visibility conditions.

Numerous techniques can optimize existing IFPs. These techniques include:

• raising the Glidepath Angle (a steeper approach to the runway to increase height of the aircraft above terrain);

• laterally offsetting the procedure path to avoid heavily populated areas;

• use of continuous descent approaches that reduce power changes during the procedure; and

• new extended visual procedure paths.

The County has retained a consultant with specialized expertise in airspace procedures to lead the effort. This consultant will oversee the planning of potential procedure changes and facilitate public meetings to gather community input. After the proposed procedures are reviewed by both the Technical Advisory Committee and the public, the consultant will submit viable alternatives to the FAA and other relevant agencies for consideration and potential future implementation.

The Technical Advisory Committee is composed of pilots, air traffic controllers and community members who bring valuable expertise to the Study. Their role is to advise the County and its consultant on potential airspace procedure changes. They contribute by sharing insights and suggestions for modifications and by reviewing the recommendations that will ultimately be presented to the FAA.

The County is funding this Study using general airport revenue sources. No taxes or special assessments have been used to support this effort.

While the results of the Study will not trigger immediate changes to airspace procedures, potential changes could be implemented within the next 24 to 36 months. Without this proactive effort, updates to the flight paths would likely require several more years.