Date: 2 May 1996 10:19:48 -0800
From: "Suzanne Petroni" <Suzanne_Petroni@qmgate.arc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Moffett Web Page
To: "Walter Bays" <walterb@best.com> 
National Aeronautics	MOFFETT LIAISON OFFICE
Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, California...	MS 19-01...	8:57 AM
Subject:	Moffett Web Page	5/2/96

Mr. Bays:

I want to complement you on your Web page on "Moffett Field Cargo Airport." You have addressed many of the issues involved in the discussion of allowing cargo members of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet at Moffett Federal Airfield. While you have obviously spent a great deal of time researching these issues, there are some clarifications which need to be made. Please bear with me as this is a rather long note.

Allow me to begin by pointing out that NASA is not seeking to change the fact that Moffett Federal Airfield is a federal facility, open to Government and Government-sponsored entities only. Moffett's use has been, and will continue to be, for the benefit of the federal Government.

Your discussion of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) is buried in your Web Page. It should not be. The only reason NASA is even considering allowing these cargo carriers at Moffett is the fact that they are all members of the CRAF program, sponsored by the United States Department of Defense (DOD). DOD and the Air Force rely heavily on the CRAF fleet to support the nation's airlift capacity in times of regional crises or for national mobilization.

The CRAF program was validated during the Gulf War, when 5500 missions (20% of the total) were flown by civil carriers. In exchange for committing their aircraft to the CRAF program, DOD is now allowing these carriers to access government installations for commercial purposes. This is the biggest incentive for the cargo carriers to remain in the CRAF fleet, something the Department of Defense desires.

It turns out that Moffett Field is the installation the carriers most want access to. As you correctly point out, the main reason is to enhance their access to the Silicon Valley, whose computer and semiconductor products rely on air cargo. Most of the carriers currently fly into Oakland Airport early in the morning, offload their products onto trucks, and drive down to the Silicon Valley. This is not only bad business practice for them and their customers (they waste time and money by being on the road), but it also creates traffic and air quality impacts that could potentially be mitigated by being at Moffett Federal Airfield.

You are correct as well in saying that the carriers can not fly into San Jose Airport before 6:30 am because of its curfew. Let me clarify, however, that NEITHER San Jose's elected officials NOR the Airport Commission had ANY influence over NASA's decision to begin talking to the carriers. We began talking to the carriers ONLY because they DOD-CRAF link.

It is also extremely important to note that NASA agrees with Sunnyvale Mayor Robin Parker -- We do not intend to subject Sunnyvale and Mountain View residents to any noise that San Jose would not subject its residents to. That is why we have been working with the FAA on a Bay approach from the hours of 11:00 pm to 7:00 am. All aircraft arriving at Moffett during these hours would arrive over the Bay, NOT OVER SUNNYVALE. Any takeoffs which might occur during these hours would also take place over the Bay. This would of course be weather and safety permitting. In looking at our historical records, the Bay approach and takeoffs during these hours could take place about 98% of the time.

Therefore, for about 98% of the time, most area residents would neither see nor hear the cargo aircraft in the air.

Now let me discuss the "proposed flight schedule". The chart which depicts 9 round trips per day is indeed the information we received from the air freight industry. We do not anticipate more than this amount for the next few years. The Sunnyvale fact sheet that you refer to discusses a maximum number of flights per year that could be permitted at Moffett, and it is indeed an error. Let me address this.

In 1994, when NASA took over Moffett from the Navy, we did an Environmental Assessment for our Moffett Field Comprehensive Use Plan (CUP). The CUP stated that, out to the Year 2010, we would not exceed 60,000 operations (takeoffs and landings) per year at Moffett. This is significantly less than the Navy had during its peak years here. The EA was generally supported by the local communities.

Even with CRAF cargo flights at Moffett, WE WILL NOT EXCEED 60,000 OPERATIONS per year. To do so would violate national environmental policies. And just because we are permitted to do so does not mean that we will necessarily have 60,000 operations here.

Also, the difference between our current operations and the 60,000 (if we were to ever completely make up that difference) would not be made up solely by cargo aircraft. We are still looking forward to having other Government agencies and Government-sponsored entities bring their personnel and aircraft here. This helps to further enhance Moffett as a federal facility.

NASA is not seeking to convert Moffett into a commercial airport. NASA regulations prohibit the use of NASA airfields for anything but the benefit of the federal Government. General aviation does not benefit the federal Government, and therefore would never be allowed at Moffett under NASA control. Allowing CRAF cargo carriers at Moffett would, however, enhance our national security by further solidifying the carriers commitment to the CRAF fleet. It would also, as you note, help NASA pay for the costs of running the Airfield. We are not opening the floodgates to Moffett becoming a commercial airport. This is a program limited by federal law, Government sponsorship, and environmental constraints.

A few other points to clarify:

- The aircraft depicted in the picture is an ER-2, not a U2 or ER71. It is a research version of the U2, and while it is very noisy on takeoff, it almost glides in on landing.

- The NASA Administrator is Dan Goldin, not James Golden or Dan Golden.

- Your discussion of property values and quality of life is extremely misleading. Why would 15% of Sunnyvale's residents be forced to move if they would almost never see or hear the cargo aircraft (refer back to the Bay approach discussion). I bought a house in Sunnyvale last year, and have no concerns about my quality of life or my property value being impacted by limited cargo flights at Moffett.

- Finally, as you already have my name down on your list of contacts, please go ahead and link my email address to it. I'd be happy to answer questions or address concerns that people may have.

I hope this message clarifies some issues for you. Please feel free to use any or all of it in your Web Page, and please email me if you have any questions. Thank you.

Suzanne Petroni
Moffett Field Marketing Manager