Loading...
02-10-1999 ARC Packet/ � ���� � , CITY OF MEtUDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPQRT RELAT10fVS COMMISSION � � �" �_ � � AGEfVDA ,_ February 10, 1J99, 7 p.m. - Large Conference Room 1. Call to Order - 7 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3• Approval of January 13, 1999 Minutes. 4. Unfinished and IVew Business: �• Mr. Roy Fuhrmann, MAC - Guest Speaker b� Acknowledge Test Cell Update Discussion 5. Uadates : a• Election of Mayor Mertensotto as Chair of MASAC b• Third Parallel Runway Contracts �• MASAC Work Pian d• Ground Run Up Enclosures 1 6• Acknowled e Recei t of Various Re orts Corres ondence: a� MASAC Agenda for Jan. 26, 1999 and Minutes for Dec. 1, 1998 b• MASAC Operations Committee Minutes for Jan. 15, 1999 �• MASAC Technical Advisers Report for the Month of November d• MASAC Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for November 199g e• MASAC Technical Advisers Report for the Month of December � f� MASAC Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for December 1998 9• Airport Noise Report - January 22, 1999 edition h• NOISE - Legislative Update on Airport Fees �• Other Comments or Concerns. 8• Adiourn Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendo#a Heights wili make every attempt to provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at 452-1850 with requests. ( � CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, iV11N(VESOTA AIRPORT REi..ATIOtVS COIVIIUIISSION I�INUTES JANUARY 13, 1999 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relaiions Commission was held on Tuesday, January 13, 1999 in the City Hall Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Beaty, Roszak, Fitzer, Leuman, Stein and May. Commissioner Des Roches was excused. Also present were City Administrator Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. APPROVAL OF IViINUTES Commissioner Leuman moved approval of the December 9, 1998 minutes. Commissioner Fitzer seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 - • � . -: ■ -� -•-: ' , � _, Administrator Batchelder explained that in November, the MAC and the City of Minneapolis agreed to a contract on the Third Parallel Runway. He explained that the Commission briefly reviewed the contract at their December meeting and that the Commission requested a comparison, contract to contract, with the Mendota Heights contract. Administrator Batchelder explained that the Commission's goal should be to make a recommendation to the City Council suggesting changes to the contract between the MAC and the City of Mendota Heights. The Commission discussed the following comparisons between the Mendota Heights contract with MAC prohibiting a third parallel runway and the recently signed MAClCity of Minneapolis contract. (The comparisons are listed below along with specific discussion as generated by the Commission). CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS CITY OF IUIINNEAPOLIS , � Recitais Recitals Section 1 of the Minneapolis contract includes additional language as follows: "That provides the corporation (MAC) may not construct a third parallel runway wifihout the affected city's approval". Commissioner Roszak suggested that a copy of the 1994 State Statute referencing the above recital be included as a source of reference to the contract. Section 2 is identical in each contract. Section 3 is identical in each contract. Section 4 of the Minneapolis contract has an additional sentence that reads "The City and MAC have identified other mafiters of mutual interest that are also ( addressed in this contract. Administrator Batchelder questioned whether the additional sentence should be added because this item is addressed later within the contract under land purchases. Chair Beaty suggested that Runway Use Projections should be included. Administrator Batchelder reminded the Commission that the EIS was not completed at the time the Mendota Heights contract was signed. He stated that the MAC, at the time of the contract signing, agreed to give Mendota Heights the same provisions as the City of Minneapolis. Commissioner Roszak stated that the MAC may not agree to add new language. DEFINITIONS DEFINITIONS Section 1 of the Minneapolis contract has additional language defining "generally parallel". The Commission noted that the additional language "generally parallel" should be added to the Mendota Heights contract. The Commission noted that this definition encompasses all runways. The second sentence of Section 2 has the additional clause stating "so long as the acquisition of any property to the north of and generally paraliel to the existing parallel runways includes". The Commission discussed this clause and inquired if the definition included acquisition of land. Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that he is still waiting far a copy of the contract or some form of confirmation that the MAC will not be constructing a third parallel runway on the Bureau of Mines land. The Commission determined that additional review to determined what is preferred or not is necessary. Commissioner May arrived at 7:40 p.m. Section 2 of our City's contract ends with the restrict covenant running for the benefit of the affected property owners "and fihe City". Their contract has the addiiional language "as defined in paragraph 4 below". __. The Commission felt that Mendota Heights language "and the Gity" is the O preferred language. Batchelder stated that this is better language because it \` � gives the City same third party benefit rights as third party property owners. Section 3 is identical in both contracts. Section 4 has additional language in parenthesis stating (whether a legal owner or an equitable owner) The Commission felt that adding "whether a legal owner or an equitable owner should be added to the Mendata Heights contract. It should be noted that the diagram designating the area meeting the "affected property owner" criteria Has not been approved by the City. Sample maps were produced by MAC, but have not been approved by our City. It is not known if MAC and Mpls. have produced diagrams for an exhibit to their contract. Regarding the diagram, the Commission discussed Ldn 65 contours and how affected property owners should be identified. Commissioner Roszak pointed { ) out that the map should be built off of specific legal descriptions. Chair Beaty - stated that not all areas are referred to correctly. Commissioner May stated that all pictoria� documents should be drawn to scale and should be surveyed as well He stated that there is a need for an accurate representation of property. The Commission felt that the City of Mendota Heights should inquire if the City of Minneapolis agrees with the diagrams. Commissioner Roszak suggested that a letter be sent inquiring about the interpretation of the third parallel runway usage. Terms Our agreement runs through December 31, 2020 with provisions for three, automatic, additional ten year terms, unless we mutually agree to terminate the automatic renewal. This would go to January 1, 2051. Our contract has a provision that after January 1, 2021, the agreement may be terminated by the Legislature. This termination language is identical in each Contract, only the year is different. Section 2 is identical except the date, which in our contract is December 31, 2020. Their term runs to December 31, 2050. Their contract has a provision that after January 1,,2036, the agreement may be terminated by the Legislature. The promise date in the Mpls. contract Is December 31, 2035. The Commission felt that the above Minneapolis language should be added to Mendota Heights contract. Our Section 3 is identical to Mpls. Section 4, with the exception that they have added the following language "the Dual Track Airport Planning Process Final Environ. Impact Statement, May 1998 (``DTAPP/EIS") A document not available at the time of execution of our contract. Our Section 4 is similar to their Section 4. We have an additional clause that starts Section 4 as follows "It is intended by the Commission and the City that". Their Section 3 has additional language in the first sentence with the following clause inserted after Agreement. "related to the prohibition on construct. of a third parallel runway. Administrator Batchelder stated that there is no differences between the two contracts. Our Section 4 refers back to the language in ( Terms, 1St Paragraph, which is different dates than in Mpis. agreement. Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that Mendota Heights language is much narrower. Our Section 5 is identical to their Section 10. Our Section 6, allowing other affected cities to adopt our contract, or reach a separate agreement, is not contained in the Mpls contract. At Section 5 of the Mpls. contract, their contract diverges significantly from our contract with additional provisions that are not in the Mendota Heights/MAC contract. Their Section 5 discusses the use of Runway 17/35 in accordance with the conditions set forth in the Dual Track FEIS, Appendix A, page A.3-17. This is to prevent departures to the north off of Runway 17/35, except under limited safety and weather conditions. This section furfiher refers to a letter from the Mayor of Mpls. detailing percentages of arrivals from the north. Section 5 also discusses operating Runway 17/35 in a manner designed to maximize airfield capacity, reduce community noise and equitably distribute noise fihroughout the community. This section also commits MAC to not seek to permanently close down one or both parallel runways without the approval of the City, or request any changes to the runway use system, which would be inconsistent with pages A.3-17 of the FEIS. Regarding Secfiion 5 of the Minneapolis contract, the Commission discussed air noise distribution. Commissioner Roszak stated that the air noise should be distributed throughout the metropolitan area and not just throughout a specific community. In Section 6, MAC agrees not to acquire for use as air operations any land within Minneapolis north of TH 62 without the approval of the City, except for runway approach protection, Part 150 or to located navigational aids. Administrator Batchelder stated that Section 6 does not affect the City of Mendota Heights. The Commission discussed how the City of Mendota should have a guarantee that no land within Mendota Heights will be used for off site airport use (i.e., car rental agencies, car washes, etc). In Section 7, MAC agrees to immediately expand the Noise Monitoring System in the area affected by the existing parallel runways. It is not known whether the current ANOMS expansion satisfies this requirement of the contract. �' Regarding Section 7, the Commission discussed the possibility of adding more monitors and that the Mendota Heights contract should include this Section. In Section 8, MAC affirms its overall commitment to a fairer distribution of air traffic, specifically its commitment prior to completion of the North South Runway to use Runway 4/22 to distribute traffic to other parts of the Metropolitan area. Regarding Section 8, the Commission felt it important that the City of Mendota Heights include this section within its contract. In Section 9, the contract limits MAC's potential use of the Bureau of Mines property currently being considered for acquisition by MAC. Paragraph E describes the allawed land uses. Paragraph F addresses demolition of existing buildings on BOM land. (; Regarding Section 9, Administrator Batchelder stated that he does not see the potential of developing park land. Commissioner Roszak inquired if there are any goals that the City should inform MAC about. Administrator Batchelder stated that the MAC should be made aware of the 2005 Runway Usage Projection. He sfiated that the City has been concerned with the operations being inequitable and that the Mendota Heights contract should reflect more equitable distribution of air noise throughout the metropolitan area. Commissioner Roszak moved to recommend that the City Council direct the City Administrator to send a letter to the tVtetropolitan Airports Commission requesting the commencement of official negotiations to resolve the differences between the t�endota Heights and Minneapolis Contract (s) Prohibiting a Third Parallel Runway. Commissioner Leuman seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 RECORD OF DECISION FOR RUNVIIAY 17/35 EXECUTIVE SUIVIM�4RY Administrator Batchelder provided the Commission with a copy of the Record of Decision for Runway 17/35 - Executive Summary. Batchelder informed the Commission that Executive Summary discusses Low Frequency Noise Impacts (Pages 39 and 40). He informed the Commission that the Summary refers to the Mendota Heights Contract along with MSP expansion concepts. Commissioner Roszak inquired if the City of Eagan has shared their contract with the City of Mendota Heights. Administrator Batchelder stated that he has not heard from the City of Eagan. Roszak inquired if the City of Mendota Heights has a"me too" contract with the City of Eagan, and if so, is it in letter format. Roszak noted that if the City of Eagan weights in and cuts a deal, will the City of Mendota Heights be able to do the same. Batchelder stated that he would need to speak with Eagan's new assistant. UPDATE Runw� 4/22 Settlement � MAC/Richfield Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that Mr. Jeff Hamiel will fax any documents pertaining to this issue and that he will forward it to the Commission as soon as it is received. Airport Controlled Propertx Administrator Batchelder explained that the test cell site which Northwest Airlines runs its engine testing is an indoor facility and that it runs 24 hours a day. Richfield Settlement The Commission briefly reviewed an article within the Airport Noise Report, Vol. 10, No. 25) regarding the Richfield settlement. Guest Speaker in February Administrator Batchelder informed the Commission that Mr. Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, will be the Commission's guest speaker at their February 10 meeting. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VARIOUS REPORiS/CORRESPONDENCE The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC Operations Committee agenda for December 11. � , The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MAC Planning antl Environment Committee Agenda for January 5, 1999. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Airport Noise Reports - Volume 10, Numbers 22-25: - The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Reliever Airport Article - Met Council Newsletter. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the NOISE Policy Statement and Legislative Alert. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Eagan ARC Agenda for January 12, 1999. The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Eagan Letter on Temporary Noise Monitor Request. ADJOURNIVIENT There being no further business, the Airport Relations Commission moved to adjourn its meeting at 9:10 p.m. � Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary _Ka CI7CY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS February 8, 1999 To: Airport Relations Commission �--> From: Kevin Batchelder, City Ad ' r Subject: Unf'ulished and New Business for February Meeting DISCUSSI�N This memo will cover the agenda items for Unfinished and New Business and Updates. l. Mr Roy_Fuhrmann - is scheduled to be the guest speaker for our February 10, 1999 meeting. As requested, Mr. Fuhrmann will be prepared to discuss the development of specifications for investigafiing the use of Global Positioning Satellites (GPS), in particular, how the use of GPS may enhance the use of the Southeast Corridor for the benefit of our community. Other areas of interest include the review of the Non- Simultaneous Departure compliance and the evaluation of the Southeast Corridor. Attached you will find a document entitled Specifications for an Airport System DGPS - Requirements Assessment, that Mr. Fuhrmann distributed at the January 15, 1999 MASAC Operations Committee meeting: Please refer to the minutes of that meeting in the Acknowledgments section of your agenda packet. This topic is current and it is important because the FAA is currently writing specifications for how GPS will be used in the future. This allows the MSP cornmunities an opportunity to contribute to the implementation of this new technology. Mr. Fuhrmann is also working with the FAA Control Tower to provide Mendota Heights with a second, six month study of Non-Simultaneous Departure compliance. The Commission may wish to ask him about the first repozt and progress on the second study, due in March/April. The evaluation of the Southeast Corridor is scheduled as a MASAC priority later in 1999. The Commission may wish to make inquiries about this evaluation, and any other topic listed on MASAC's work plan for 1999. . , � � �, , 1 Meet with Mr. Fuhrmann and discuss the implementation of Global Positioning Satellite technology and other MASAC work plan goals for 1999. 2. Acknowled�e Test Cell U.�date Discussion - In October, MASAC was discussing the Ground Noise Study conducted by MAC staff, and it was suggested that Northwest � Airlines' test cell site was possibly contributing to the noise environment and might be the source of unidentified ground noise that residents were complaining about. This topic was addressed by Mr. Mark Salmen, of Northwest Airlines at the December 11, 1999 MASAC Operations Committee meeting and, then again, at the January 15, 1999 MASAC Operations Committee meeting. Please refer to the minutes of these two meetings, which are enclosed in the Acknowledgments section of your agenda packet. 3. Mayor Mertensotto's Election as 1VIASAC Chair - As you may know from the Friday News, Mayor Mertensotto was elected as Chair of MASAC, for a two year term beginning in February, 1999. As such, Mayor Mertensotto will chair all MASAC meetings, and appoint the members of the MASAC Operations Committee and the MASAC Executive Committee. This action came about primarily because there was a strong desire by the community representatives on MASAC to have a community representative as the Chair. It is also indicative of the respect for the Mayor's knowledge and expertise on the airport issues, as well as, his ability to lead a group. I will be prepared to update the Commission on all the details of the election. 4. Third Parallel Runway Contracts - City Council accepted the Commission's recommendation and directed the City Administrator to send a letter to Mr. Jeff Hamiel requesting that negotiations be�in so that our contract may be updated to have the same provisions as the Minneapolis contract. The Commission will be kept informed and will be relied upon to provide advice as this process of negotiation unfolds. 5. MASAC Work Plan - In the MASAC Agenda for Jan. 26, 1999, you will fmd the most recent draft of the work plan for the coming year. MASAC adopted this plan that evening. The development of the new 2005 Part 150 Contours will be a priority in the coming year. The Commission should review this work plan. 6. Ground Run Up Enclosures - At the Jan. 15, 1999 MASAC Operations Committee, Mr. Fuhrmann handed out the enclosed documents about types of ground run up enclosures. MASAC will address this issue this year. . , °, r y 4,5: �, j+ � ` i }'�y: i � -$ ;�'j { i �. This Section will highlight information relating to the manufacturers and benefits of ground run-up enclosures. Noise abating run-up enclosures have become more ;' � realistic with the advancements of newer technologies. Run-up enclosures can be -- designed to reflect and absorb sound as well as deflecting debris. Typically, these enclosures are consiructed with walls on three sides. Each wall has sound absorbing material and a steel supporting structure that will also provide transmission loss and blast protecrion. .. Aircraft ground run-ups are roudne aircraft engine maintenance tests which require the operation of the aircraft engine at thrust settings between engine idle and take-off thrust. These run-ups may be conducted for extended periods. of time and generate continuous elevated noise levels. During 1997, there were an average of 4.5 daily aircraft engine run-ups conducted at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP). S,1 Backgraund Although there are few daily maintenance test run-ups, the activity may generate noise complaints from adjacent neighborhoods. During 1997, 19 engine run-up noise complaints were recorder by the Metropolitan Airports Commission's Noise Hotline. In an effort to address some of the concerns raised by local communities, over the years, the MAC has installed earth berms at various locations around the airport in an attempt to limit the noise exposure to adjacent communities. In the mid 1980's the MAC installed a blast deflector fence to redirect the airflow of the engine eachaust.. Although the blast Nletropo&tan Airports Commission - Ground Nozse Nlonitoring Study 1998 Ground Run-Up Enclosures � l deflector was not designed as a noise absorption wall, some attenuation has been realized. The concept of quieting aircraft run-ups is not rare, but structures or enclosures at commercial airports throughout the world to contain run-up generated noise is a rare occurrence. -� Throughout the world, there are four basic categories of devices or measures used to quiet aircraft ground run-up noise. a. Earth Berm - A barrier made of earth to reduce the spreading effects of aircraft ground noise. (Already in use at NISP) b. Blast Fence or Noise Wall • A vertical or curved wall designed to redirect the aircraft jet blast upward. (Already in use at lYISP) c. Hush-House or Engine Test Cell - A facility that is fully enclosed, usually found at military bases, and oiten designed for one particular type of aircraft. f d. Ground Run-up Enclosure or Pen - A three or four sided structure designed to redi- . :��+ tiie �a: iJiS$� 3t�� $S1COI�U itQigP, . 2 Melropolitan Airports Com�nission - Ground Nozse Monitoring Study 1998 Survey 5.2 5urvey The following companies responded to MAC inquiries concerning commercially available products for the absorption of ground run-up noise. The following is a list of companies and the airports with their product: 5.2.1 Industrial Acoustics Company, Inc. Industrial Acoustics Company, Inc. has built both Ground Run-up Enclosures and Hush Houses. IAC has developed a multi-purpose, prefabricated facility for testing any fighter aircraft currently operated by the United States AirForce. There are over 70 IAC units installed world wide. These facilities are typically designed for a single type of aircraft or series of similar aircraft types. Figulre l. Au'craft Hush-House facility installed at a military USAF base. IAC also provides run-up pens for aircraft maintenance activity. The run-up pen is constructed of structural steel frames and steel panel components. The sound absorptive noise transmission loss characteristics are grea�er than a blast fence. IAC estimates noise level reduction capabilities of 20 dBA when using a noise pen. Nletropolitan Airports Commission - Ground Noise iblonitoring Study 1998 Survey BDI has also developed a Stabile-Flow technology which enhances the aerodynamic qualities of the enclosure and allows the facility to be used in a wide diversity of wind conditions, significantly reducing the risk of engine surges, and compressor stalls. Figure 7. Blast I7eflectors, Inc. Vented Sidewalls (Left) and Acoustical Panels (Right). lt�.fetropolitan Airports Commission - Ground Noise �1loraitoring Study 1998 � Grnund Run-Up Enclosures 5.3 Ground Run-Up Enclosures, Hush-Houses and Blast Fences ( Table 1: Partial Listing of Ground Run-Up Enclosures World wrde Airport � � Hamburg, Germany IAC 3- 52' walls, All Airbus Aircraft GRE movable rear door Amsterdam Airport, IAC 3- 50' walls Up to 747-400 GRE Schiphol, Netherlands S� Augustine, Florida BDI 3 walls E8A J-Stars, F14 GRE Palm Springs, Florida BDI 3 walls and roof Skywest Commuter Hush- . Aircraft House Chicago, Illinois BDI 3- 42' walls B777 GRE Manchester Aizport, Great Rheinhold 3 walls B747, DC10 Blast Britain & Mahl.a Fence Manilla Int., Philippines Rheinhold 3 walls B747, DC 10 Blast & Mahla Fence CKS Airport, China Rheinhold 3 walls B747, DC10 Blast & Mahla Fence FBA Erkelenz, NATO Rheinhold 3 walls B74� Blast Airbase, Germany & Mahla Fence Stansted Airport, London, Rheinhold 3 walls B747, DCIO Blast Great Britain & Mahla Ferice Hannover-Langenhagen, Rheinhold 3 walls .Airbus 340 Blast Germany & Mahla Fence Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Rheinhold 3 walls B�47, DC10 Blast & Mahla Fence There are other airports that also have blast fences installed such as MSP, but to varying degrees and provide limited benefits with respect to noise suppression capabilities. tYletropolitan Airporis Commission - Ground Noise Monitoring Study 1998 Wind �.4 Wind Wind speeds and directiuns also play an impurtant p•art in detcrnunino the direction of the �ircratt run-up he�din�. Based un tl�e Following iNi>rmstion IYoni thc mc�st recent weather Summary for MSP, the average wind spee�i ancl dircctiun probabililics arc as follows: Table 2: VVind Speed and Directrvn /nfvrmatiun Wind Less than 10 Knots 62.1 �/o Between 11 - 16 Knots & from 270 15.8�10 degrees clockwise through 090 degrees Between 17 - 21Knots & from 270 4.1''/0 degrees clockwise thr�ugh 090 degrees tl Between 22- 27Knots & from 270 t).6�I� degrees clockwise through 090 degrees Between 11- 27Knots & from 090 17.4'% de�rees clockwise through 270 de�rees T�t� I t���RIO Aircraft manutac:[urers specify that the aireraft must be wilhin 22 degrees of the direction oF wind t�ar hi�h-bypass engines with wind speeds above 15 knots. The alignment widens out to 180 de�rees as the wind speeds diminish. f igure 8. ALL WEATHER W1ND ROSE 1'or YISP. Sow�ce: Niinncapulis, tv1N. Wcather Sta[ion 1981-l990 National Climatc Data Centcr Nfetrop��lifan Airports Commissivn - G�uund N�ise iYlonitorinb Strtrly 1998 Ground Run-Up Enciosures 5.5 Conclusions l. There are four to five manufacturers world wide, that have designed b ound run-up enclosures or hush-houses for the suppression of aircraft noise. - 2. The installation of noise walls around the run-up pad may help reduce the noise impacts of engine run-up accivity in surrounding communides. Many of the companies estimate noise level reductions of 15 to 20 dBA for ground run-up enclosures. 3. Other technolo;ies such as "Hush Houses" and "Engine Silencers" are not practical due to the wide ran?e of aircraft confi�urations and en�ine types that exist within the MSP fleet. Mulaple structures or nwnerous en;ine silencers wouid need to be available to accommodate all possible engine/aircraft configurations. 4. The ground run-up enclosure at Chicago O'Hare International Airgort by Blast Deflectors, Inc. is currendy being used by their local maintenance personnel appraximately 85% of the time. The ase has increased since the initial openin;, due to excellent lighting, convenience and the apparent desi;n benefits for wind considerations from the vented sides, rolled tops and tapered wa11s. 5. Costs for �ound run-up enclosures will vary depending on the size; and site work required for the installation. IAC estimates approximately $50 per square foo� For a 400' by 400' three sided structure 50' high, approximate cost would be $3 million. Blast Deflectors, Inc., constructed the Chicago facility for $2.1 million with a total project cost of $3.1 million. Hush-house manufacturers declined to provide estimates, since the cost is directly related to the size and type of aircraft the facility is consaucted to accommodate. � 10 Metropolitan Airports Commission - Ground Noise Nionitoring Study 1998 C m F ;r� �. .r ,;� . .. � �r ; ,� - ��� '� `i ' ' `' ; ��- " -�; �� . .: ;, � ,, ', ' r' .`'' / � t �, 'S � :, :, t �' '. ❑ Agenda for the January 26, 1999 NTASAC meeting ., ❑ Minutes of the December l, 199� 1VTASAC meeting with attachments ❑ Copies of MASAC correspondence not.included in the Operations Committee package � ❑ Blank Noise Monitoring and Information Request Form � . ❑ Minutes of the December 11, 1998 MASAC Operations meeting with attachments and cover memos CJ Monthly Part 150 Update ❑ November and December 1998 Technical Advisor's Reports �� v�--�5 �� ..1 �. f-- .�_ v� � �.-� /l%c i S-R-- _._.__---- -------r------ „ .�- --___—___., �.�e'`Q� � � �v c � � � l2 v`"o cx �r wG- � c C. s � .. �--c.o � 5-�- � c,- s � �. : �� _� ...__ . ____----- e��-�-�o� r��-«.�.-�� �-- Ci�-«. ��-, � , D �j 6�n, v�-S a v� /� o �,,,� i ,,–�-��-- e.` ��-� � �� �� cfb�f � _ ; C� ' 9. 2. 3. � 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. AGENDA METROPOLIiAN AIRCR�4FT' SOUtVD ABATE�IfEN?' COUNCIL General Meetinq January 26, 1999 7:30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. 6040 28T" Avenue Souih Minneapolis, Minnesota Call to Order, Roii Call -� Approval of Minutes of Meeting December 1, 1998 Introduction of Invited Guests Receipt of Communications Technical Advisor's Runway Systern Utilization Report and Complaint Summary Operations Committee Work Plan Presentation Orientation Topic - Sources of Jet Engine Noise Part 150 Update Plans Chairperson Voie December 11, 1998 and January 15, 1999 Operations Committee Report - Mark Salmen Repor� of the MAC Commission Nleeting - Bob Johnson Persons Wishing to Address ihe Council Items fVoi on the Agenda Adjournment Next Meeting: February 23, 'i 998 MINUTES METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING December 1, 199� 7:3U p.m. 6040 28`� Avenue South I�Yinneapolis, Aiinnesota Call to Order Roll Call The meeting was called to order by Chainnan Bob Johnson at 7:30 p.m, and the secretary was askerl to call the roll. The following members were in attendance. Bob Johnson Mark Salmen Jennifer Sayre Brian Simonson Dick Keinz Mike Geyer Brian Bates Dean Lindberg Dick Saunders Leo Kurtz Nathae Richardson Mike Cramer Neil Clark Kristal Stokes John Nelson Lance Staricha Jamie Verbrugge Charles Van Guilder George May Ellsworth Stein Macury Camilon Will Eginton Brari Digre John Ha.11a Advisors Roy Fuhrmann Cha.d Leqve Visitors David Haffermann Gene Franchett MBAA NWA NWA DHL Airways. MAC UPS Airborne Minnea.polis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis � Richfield Bloomington Eagan Eagan Burnsviille Mendota Heights Mendota Heights St. Louis Park Inver Grove Heights Sunfish Lake St. Paul MAC MAC St. Louis Park Dakota County October 27, 1998 " Approval of Minutes The minutes of the October 27, 1998 meeting were approved as distributed with the following changes: Page 2, item 3: The letter from Jce Little of Inver Grove Heights was forwarded to the Operations Committee rather than the staff for evaluation. Page 2, item 4: Jennifer Sayre reported that the actual number of days impacted by the NWA pilots' strike was 20. ' Page 8, item 6: Mark Salmen said the first sentence of the last paragraph of this item should read, "Cha.irperson Salmen said the issue was not a Richfield issue only and that the purpose of the study in question was to report on the sources of ground noise at the airport and was not intended to be a low frequency study." 3. Introduction of invited guests Recei�t of Communications A letter was received from Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, regarding his resignation as one of the city's MASAC representatives. He noted that Jamie Verbrugge had been hired as the city's new Assistant City Adrninistrator and would be representing the city at MASAC in his place. A letter was received from Kevin Batchelder; Mendota Heights, appointing two alternates to represent the �i city at the MASAC meeting. 1fie two identified aiternates were George May and Ellsworth Stein. � Chairman Johnson noted that the 1999 date for the November-December joint MASAC meeting had been moved back a week to November 30�' so that the Mendota Heights' representatives would be able to attend this meeting next year. 4. Technical Advisor's Runwa�vstem Utilization Report and Complaint Summary Shane VanderVoort, MAC Advisor, briefed the Technical Advisor's Report. Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis, asked about the high concentration of calls from one block on the map. He asked if there was a conelation with overflights or if it represents a serial caller. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said these types of anomaties usually represent one or two residences on a block. Mr. Lindberg asked if the stai� ever follow up with the individuals. Mr. Fuhrmann said they will if the individual requests it, but that since the complaint line doesn't ask for individual's phone numbers and people who call usually want to remain anonymous, staff doesn't follow up with each person. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, also displayed a graph of the run up activity for October 1998. He noterl that late night (between 10:30 and 12:00) run-ups are associated with early flights. (See attachments.) - 5. MASAC 1998 - A Year in Review 2 � October 27, 1998 Roy Fuhrmaru�, Technical Advisor, briefed the members on MASAC's major accomplishments and activities during 1998. (See "MASAC 1998 - A Year in Review") John Nelson, Bloomington, asked how this information should be communicated to the MAC Commissioners. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said he hoped to brief the P&E Comrnittee in January 1999. JOHN NELSON, BLOO�IINGTON, MOVED AND DICK KEINZ,1�1fAC, SECONDED, TO ACCEPT THE REPORT AND TO HAVE STAFF BRIEF THE P&E COMNYITTEE ON MASAC'S 1998 ACCOI�IPLISHMENTS, INCLUDING ITEMS NOT YET COMPLETED FROM THE MASAC AUDIT. 1�` Quarter 1999 Goals and Objectives The first quarter 1999 Operations Committee Goals and Objectives were presented to the council. Some members questioned the need to include Investigating GPS and Evaluating the Ground Run-up Enclosure in the first quarter. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, and Chairman Johnson said there were a couple of reasons, including: ➢ MAC's budget process begins in May. If funding is needed for either, evaluations need to be completed as soon as possible. _ ➢ Discussions regarding GPS specifications are,takix�g place at a national level and are moving quickly. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said if MASAC wants to be involved in developing specifications for GPS in regards to noise alleviatioq it will need to make decisions soon. Otherwise, the opportunity will pass without MASAC's input. ➢ Both ofthese issues were placed on the 1998 Goals and Objectives schedule but had to be pushed forward due to time constraints placed on the committee for the completion of other important goals. JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, MOVED AND DICK SAUNDERS, MINNEAPOLIS, SECONDED TO ADOPT THE OPERATIONS COIi�IMITTEE'S 1999 FIRST' QUARTER GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND TO INCLUDE THE DRAFT SCHEDULE IN THE PRESENTATIOlV TO THE MAC PLAN1VIlVG AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE FOR THEIR REVIEW. THE MOTION WAS PASSED WITH ONE PERSON OPPOSED. John Nelson, Bloomington, encouraged MASAC members to submit ideas or suggestions to the Operations Committee for their review and possible inclusion into the 1999 schedule. 7. Part 150 Program Pro�ress Review Steve Vecchi, MAC Part 150 Manager, briefed the program's completion status. He said by the end of 1998, 4,583 homes will have been insulated, with 910 of those homes being completeri this year. He said the cost of the program to date is $102.1 million. Mr. Vecchi then displayed a map of the 1996 contour, which showed the homes that have been completed, deferred or are still to be insulated. He said from this point on, the program will be entirely a south Minneapolis program. Mr. Vecchi then displayed a breakdown of the number of homes that have been completed by city, as well as a breakdown of the costs by each city. October 2�, 1998 < Mr. Vecchi then briefed the committee on the 1997 Homeowner Opinion Survey. He said the survey is � slightly delayed due to the need to collect the surveys ai�er the construction has been completed. He said 303 of the 650 (4'7%) distributed surveys were completed and reiumed. He also said the survey sample covered homes included in the January to August 1997 bid cycles. After reviewing the various portions of the survey and comparing them to previous years, Mr. Vecchi said the challenge for the program will be to maintain the high ratings while the prograrr� continues to change and become more complex with the increasing size of the housing stock. Some of the key discussion points of the survey were: . The percentage of homeowners reporting an improvennent in home activities has remained constant throughout the past 4 years. . Whole house improvements��re being reported. . Contractor performance is rated as�ither good or excellent 92% of the time. The remaining 8%, rated at either poor or fair, are from a few homeowners and are directed mainly at a few contractors. There are currently 7 contractors. . Homeowners feel the market value of their home has increased due to the improvements. . Consultant staff ratings remain consistently high. The question regarding the consultant's description of the Part 150 Package is particularly important because of the increasing complexity of the plans. Mr. Vecchi then briefed the committee on the past and projected future costs of the program. He said sta.f-� projects the average construction cost per home in 1999 to be $32,100. He said with 2795 homes remaining in the current program and with a budget of $25.5 million per yea.r, approximately 688 homes % will be able to be completed per year. This will bring the completion date for the current program out to �,. ea.rly 2003. Mr. Vecchi said the increase in the cost of construction is primarily due to the increase in the size of the homes being insulated. He said it is also due to the fact that more homes have hydronic heat, which means the cost of providing air conditioning increases. Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis, asked how the Part 150 program is funded. Steve Vecchi, MAC, said the lion's share of the fianding comes from Passenger Facility Charges (PFC's). He said although the MAC applies for federal funding ea.ch year, it ends up only covering a small portion of the program's costs. Someone also asked what happens once the current contour is completed in 2003. Steve Vecchi, MAC, said the Part 150 Update (which is in the beginning stages) will include a new 2005 contour. Mr. Vecchi said it is estimated that between 6,000 and �,000 more homes w�ill be included in the program at that time. EIS Procedure Process Glen Orcutt, FAA, reviewed the EIS Procedure process for the members: (See attachment.) Mr. Orcutt explained that there are three entities that play different roles in the process. He said the three roles are the sponsor, who in the case of MSP is MAC, the FAA, and the Public. Mr. Orcutt said a project starts with the sponsor, who proposes a project, develops alternatives and prepares an environmental assessment. He said the sponsor also needs to involve the public ea.rly in the planrung process and satisfy state requirements. The sponsor will also provide additional data and information to the FA.A as needed. 4 October 27, 1998 The FAA, under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is required to analyze the related environmental impacts and to provide interested parties with an oppornuvty to participate in the review process. The FAA can then either make a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or a Record of Decision (ROD). Mr. Orcutt noted that many factors go into either decision, including environmental impacts, airport system capacity needs, public input, costs, engineering feasibility and airspace. The public becomes involved by making comments at the appropriate stages in the decision making process through informational and public meetings. He saicl the public is involved early in the process by providing opportunities to review and comment on draft and final environmental dacuments. Mr. Orcutt said the FAA isn`t required to agree with the public comments, but that the FAA is required to consider them all. Mr. Orcutt said the decision to expand MSP at its current site represents a consensus or compromise. He said that since there were so many stakeholders, not everyone got exactly what they wanted. Mr. Orcutt said the FAA issued the ROD on September 23, 1998 and that the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) deternuneii it was adequate on November 18, 1998. Mr. Orcutt said the next step was to update the MSP Part 150 Program. The question was asked how the FAA forecasts the number of operations. Mr. Orcutt said the FAA has a forecasting office, which performs a long-term Terminal Area Forecast. He said this is done arumally and is driven by economic factors and projected economic conditions and trends. He said since MSP is located in an economy, the forecasted numbers of operations are higher than the national average. ! �) The question was also asked how the FAA responds to individual comments. Mr. Orcutt said the FAA tries to respond to each person but that similar comments are sometimes grouped together and given a general response. He said this part of the final document is sometimes very lengthy. Neil Clark, Minneapolis, asketi how the cost benefit of building a new runway at MSP compares with other airports. Mr. Orcutt said the cost benefit justification shows that the benefits are greater for Minneapolis than for other airports. Mark Ryan, MAC Planner, noted that it took the MAC, along with the FAA and the state, three years to accomplish the EIS. ,.. 9: November 13, 1998 Operations Committee Report Mark Salmen, NWA, briefed the members on the November 13, 1998 Operations Committee meeting. 10. Report of the MAC Commission Meeting Cha.irman Johnson reported the following: ➢ Commissioner Himle is continuing to meet with the City of Richfield. ➢ The Environmental Quality Board approved the Final EIS. A 1fie corrunission and Northwest Airlines are working together to increase the use of the left departure October 27, 1998 " lanes. ,- ➢ Ta.�ciway Whiskey has been completed, which will eliminate approximately 40,000 runway crossings � per year. 11. Persons Wishing to Address the Council There were no persons wishing to address the council. 12. Other Items Not on the A�;enda There were no additional items. 13. Adjournment Chairman Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted. Melissa Scovronski, MASAC Secretary tQ*J` N01(5�91I�' ;a = T 'f' � a O jf 4 O'T' �� �ti �r H�y 4ETN�P�`` � � • .-, � U N tl? � � N � � cci � � � � � � � �p � U � � � c�3 > � � � � � � ,.� '—, � � O � '� :� �'D �a.n � � � � � � :� � �=, � � U � � � � .;� C� ,�, � .,-, � � � �3 � � � � � � a� � U o � � � � o {..� �O CCj ,�, N 9 '�� • �i � �� � � � O � o � � °� <C � � � � � � �' O\ � � m � � � O .� N .� f +d I�1 0 � ����, -�Y��7� x � - f�i�sr�z '^ra�< CITY MANAGER JAMES D. PROSSER MAYOR MAATIN J. KIRSCH Cifiy (Vlanager's Office January 5, 1999 MASAC Secretary 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Subject: 1999 Representatives Dear MASAC Secretary: The City of Richfield's representatives to MASAC for the year 1999 will include: Kristal Stokes Representative 6733-17th Avenue (H) 861-2553 Richfield, MN 55423 Dawn Weitzel Representative 6700 Portland Avenue (V1n 861-9716 Richfield, MN 55423 Russ Susag Alternate 7305 First Avenue (H) 866-0373 Richfield, MN 55423 Mark Hinds Alternate 6700 Portland Avenue (1/� 861-9708 Richfteld, MN 55423 Sincer ly, � �._ � J es D. Prosser City Manager JDP:cak The U'��bu» Homervtiwr 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 612.861.9700 FAX: 612.861.9749 www.a ncn6eltl.mn us AN EOUAI OPPOfiTUNIN EMP�OYER . �' ; ; /' , ,/; . � : � R, . , . . ,, �: . . , ��� !/j'R;',�.� . � , dditional Space if Required: ,. % � Please indicate the 199� 1VIASAC objectives supported by this this request: ❑ To provide information to the MAC in their efforts to communicate changes in operations, due to construction to the surrounding communities. � Evaluate departure compliance through the Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor and make any necessary changes to the relevant procedures. � Review the ANOMS system and noise monitors, and evaluate the need and placement of additional remote monitoring towers Also, evaluate remote monitoring capabilrties. ❑ Reguest Air Tra�c Control personnel to make a presentation on how MSP operations are conducted. � Look at providing incerrtives to carriers in acquiring and operating factory-made Stage III arrcrafi. ❑ Irrvestigate how GPS and other NAVAids could help alleviate aircra� noise. ❑ Review the NADPs and compliance. ❑ Continue discussion of Part 1 SO contour generation. Please send your request via mail to: IVIASAC Secretauy, 6040 28th Avenue S., 1tlinneapolis, t1�11lT 55450 or fax it to :(612) 725-6310. For Staff Purposes Onlv: Request #: Staff Contact: Date Received: Is this a Phone Or Written Request? Approved By: Approval Date: Data Availability: Monitc3ring Start Date: Monitoring Stop Date: Analysis S[art Date: Analysis Stop Date: Completion Date: " � i. . :� . � a ... ` . � �.. .� e � . �� , � � � • • The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission No�th Star Conference Room, and called to order at 10:00 a.m. The following members were in attendance: Members• Mark Salmen, Chairman - NWA Jamie Verbrugge -�Eagan John Nelson - Bloomington Charies Mertensotto - Mendota Heights Dick Keinz - MAC Dick Saunders - Minneapolis Advisorv: Roy Fuhrmann - Technical Advisor Chad Leqve - MAC Advisory Shane VanderVoort - MAC Advisory � Visitors: Mark Hinds - Richfield Kevin Batchelder - Mendota Heights : � : IVV9/A ENGIlVE TEST CELL BRIEFING Chairman Salmen briefed the committee on NWA's Engine Test Cell. Mr. Salmen said he had just received the prints with the specification data from the manufacturer and hadn't had the time to review thern in great detait. He said the test cell meets the U.S. and European standards for noise attenuation and had just undergone a multi-million dollar upgrade, which improved the sound energy absorption capability of the test cell. He said he didn't know if the data he had reflected this upgrade. Mr. Salmen then described how the test cell was set up. (He said when they were available he would bring the plans for the test cell to a meeting or set up a time for the committee members to tour the facility.) The foliowing is a summary of Mr. Salmen's information: . The test cell is a room within a room where engines are mounted on a hard stand. . An augmenting tube is set up to capture the exhaust and send it out through the end of the test cell. . The test cell is a 15-inch concrete structure. Twelve inches is the standard. . The sound is vented through sound suppression panels. Any remaining sound is vented straight up and outside. . Noise levels have been checked at points on the perimeter of the airport while the test cell was being used in the evening and there was no detectable noise above ambient levels. . The test cell has been operational for at least 20 years. . The test cell is used on a 24-hour basis. . Noise levels inside the test cell building are much louder than in either the control booth or exterior to the test cell building. Chairman Salmen said he would attempt to locate more information about the test cell and visit the site before the next Operations Meeting. Ma�{c Hinds, Richfield, said he had done some research on this subject and asked if Chairman Salmen could obtain the Environmental Action Worksheet (EAV1� document for the NWA engine maintenance facility at the Chisholm/Hibbing airport dated September 4, 1991. He said there was information regarding a test cell at that facility in this document. C Chairman Salmen said he would like to do a thorough investigation of the test cell � operations before presenting it to the full MASAC body. CORRESPONDEtVCE Staff received a request from the City of Eagan for a temporary noise monitor to be placed in the Valley View Plateau neighborhood of Eagan just south of the existing 65 L.dn contour by the river. (See attachment.) Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said there were a couple of points to consider from the staff s perspective. He said at this point, the existing ANOMS version does not have the capability to correlate flight tracks with a mobile monitor. He said whatever the committee decided to do, it would be best to wait until the new version of ANOMS was installed sometime in February or March 1999. Mr. Fuhrmann also requested that the city of Eagan complete a Noise Monitoring and Information Request form so that the s#aff couki �bette� trac�C #i�e request. Mr. Fuhrmann said this type of monitoring may be helpful when staff begins the Part 150 Update process. Chairman Salmen said he felt that any monitoring completed for purposes of the Part 150 Update should be done with a systematic approach rather than trying to integrate 2 �' unplanned or piecemeal monitoring activities into a cohesive whole. Chairman Salmen also said he would like the city of Eagan to explain how their request would benefit the overall ! airport community. He said given next year's workload and priorities, it wasn't practical to support actions for a specific neighborhood, unless it was beneficial for the airport community at large. Chairman Salmen said he also agreed with Mr. Fuhrmann that if this monitoring takes place, it should be after the ANOMS 6.3 upgrade. Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he thought Eagan's request was more comprehensive and had more merit than an individual request for moniioring, such as was requested at the November meeiing from Inver Grove Heights. Mr. Batchelder also asked Jamie Veirbrugge, Eagan, if this request had grown out of a concem about southem excursions outside the corridor. Mr. Verbrugge said that was one of the reasons for the request but that it was also related to the "creeping" of the contour. Mr. Batchelder noted that excursions to the south of the corridor were at less than 1% over this past year and that most of the "violations" were to the north. Mr. Batchelder then asked Mr. Fuhrmann if he thought it would be a good idea to submit these "neighborhood" monitoring requests for the purposes of the Part 150 Update. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said each community has neighborhoods similar to the Valley View Plateau areas. He said whai would be important when considering a monito�ing request is whether or not conclusions could be drawn for other neighbofioods based on the findings. He said, although there may be benefits with monitoring many neighborhoods, he didn't think they would be able to perform monitoring at all the possible sites. Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan, suggested these types of monitoring projects be done over a couple of years. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said it would also be important to take into account wind/seasonal differences when performing monitoring activities. Mayor Mertensotto, Mendota Heights, said he felt thera was a problem with Part 150 insulation monies being tied up until 2003, which is when insulation within the current contour is estimated to be completed. He said the average citizen finds it difficult to understand why the program is prioritized out so far. He said he felt Part 150 priorities should be generated on a yearly basis based on current conditions. Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan, said it would make more sense to incorporate that type of change into the Part 150 Update rather than suddenly changing the process at this time. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said there would be more flexibility to make those types of changes for a Part 150 Update. He noted that most of the cities have been completed and Minneapolis is now receiving the bulk of the insulation. He said cities that have been completed out ta the Ldn 65 had the benefit of being finished early. He said he thought the city of Minneapolis would argue strongly that the 65 Ldn contour needed to be completed first before reprioritizing. N9ayor Mertensotto, Mendota Heights, said it was difficult to explain this type of prioritizing because it seemed to be based more on politics than on 3 current operational conditions. Dick Keinz, MAC, said it may need to be stated differently. He said although Mendota Heights and other cites have had all of their eligible residential sound proofing completed, we are still completing the south Minneapolis portion, which has a lot of residents still in the 65 Ldn contour and it is going to take us until 2003. After that point, we will take it out to the 60 Ldn and everyone will have some eligibility coming to them. Rather than saying the monies are committed to 2003, the benefit to Mendota Heights residents is that they had their eligible areas sound-proofed years before south Minneapolis. Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan, asked if the new Remote Monitoring Towers (RMTs) would be installed after the ANOMS 6.3 version was operational. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said that was correct. He said the RMT specifications will specify that they need to be compliant with ANOMS version 6.3. Mr. Fuhrmann said he thought the RMTs would be installed sometime in April or May. Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked whether or not an RMT location had been chosen in Inver Grove Heights. Chad Leqve, MAC Advisory, said he would be meeting with Inver Grove Heights representatives the following week to finalize the site. Mr. Batchelder said he was concemed about the final selection for the site being positioned outside the identified area. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, noted the three locations identified by Inver Grove Heights and said staff was working with the city on the Argenta Trail location. John Nelson, Bloomington, said the intention of his motion at the last meeting was to have staff look at the Argenta Trail location identified by Inver Grove Heights and was concemed that this part of his motion was not included in the minutes. Chairman Salmen asked if Mr. Nelson would like the minutes amended. Mr. Nelson said that was not necessary. Chairman Salmen said he would like to have it clarified and asked the secretary to review the tape of the meeting for verification. (The secretary reviewed the tape and found that Mr. Nelson did indeed specify Inver Grove Heights' number one site (6350 Argenta Trail) as the location for discussion.) Mr. Nelson said it was his intention that discussions regarding the Inver Grove Heights site be focused on the Argenta Trail location. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said staff would make that clear to the Inver Grove Heights representatives. Chairman Salmen wrapped up the discussion regarding Eagan's request. He asked Jamie Verbrugge to fill out the Information and Monitoring Request form for consideration at the next Operations Committee meeting. He said at that time, the members would decide whether or not the request should be fulfilled. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked that a letter to be sent to the City of Eagan acknowledging receipt of the request and explaining its status with the committee. 4 �. 9999 GOALS .4ND OBJECTIVES D/SCUSSION �'� Roy Fuhrmann, Technicai Advisor, displayed an ovefiead of the draft schedule. He noted that the first quarter schedule had been approved by MASAC and that 2"d through 4`n � quarters needed to be filled in. � � Mr. Fuhrmann noted that Minneapolis' list of recommendations were included on the front of the memo, as weil as the addition of the Part 150 Update process. Mr. Fuhrmann encouraged the members to leave some time open on the schedule so that staff and MASAC will have time to par�ticipate in the Part 150 Update process. Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked about the time frame for the Part 150 Update. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said there hadn't been an initial meeting yet and was unsure of the overall time frame. Mr. Fuhrmann recommended that a validation of the Integrated Noise Model (INM) using ANOMS be completed as part of the process. Mr. Batchelder noted that the Noise Mitigation Committee had recommended this action and that the communities would appreciate that effo�t, as well. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked if a formal decision had been made to proceed with a Part 150 Update. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said Nigel Finney, MAC Deputy Executive Director, briefed the P8�E Committee about beginning a Part 150 Update and recommended that MAC consultants, HNTB and HMMH, head up the study. KEVIN BATCHELDER, MEYVDOTA HEIGHTS, MO!/ED AND JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGiQIV, SECOIVDED TO HAVE STAFF GIVE MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS, BEGIfVNtNG IN JANUARY 1999, OPV THE PART 150 UPDATE (INCLUDIIVG i l CONTOUR GENERATIOf� AND THE LOW FREQUENCY NOISE STUDY), AS APPROPRIATE. AND THAT THE COMMITTEE DISCUS� HOW ANOMS DATA CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THE NEW COIVTOUR PRIOR TO IT BEING GENERATED. THE VOTE WAS UIVAIVINIOUS. MOTION APPROVED. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked if the commitfee would be able=to ce�rioritize o� add items to the work pla�- if'necessary throughout the year. Chairman Salmen said there would be no problem with adding or reprioritizing items, but items should not be deleted entirely from the 1999 work plan. John Nelson, Bloomington, said he felt that a low frequency noise study should be conducted, as part of the Part 150 Update study, and that mitigation should only be supported if the study supports it. Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan, asked if a low frequency noise study would be funded with Part 150 monies. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said because tfiere were very few federal dollars available for Part 150 mitigation, the majority of MSP's Pa�# 150 Program is funded by Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs). He said, because of this, funds for a low frequency noisE study would not come frarn federal monies, but that the FAA would most likely have to approve the use of PFCs and that the airport would set the level. � John Nelson, Bloomington, said since a Part 150 Update Study would have to be funded, the low frequency noise study, as part of this process, would also be funded. He said regardless of whether or not there is outside funding approval, the issue needs to be addressed. The committee then moved on to discuss the issue of health effects of aircraft generated noise. John Nelson, Bloomington, said, although the Operations Committee could not take up a health study, he feels strongly that MASAC needs to have an orientation presentation on the health effects of aircraft noise. Mr. Nelson suggested that this orientation be given at the June 22, 1999 MASAC meeting. -- The following is a summary of the ensuing discussion: . The purpose of the orientation is to give MASAC members a better understanding of the issue in an impartial manner. . The presentation is for informational purposes only. Any action taken by MASAC will be based on a discussion of the information provided. . The issue is a MASAC issue rather than an Operations Committee issue. . Staff, along with members of the committee, will research the literature and the possibility of retaining an expert speaker(s) for this type of presentation and report back to the Committee at the January 1999 Operations meeting. . Because MASAC is a sound abatement council, the presentation will focus on the health effects of aircraft noise rather than on a broad discussion of airport �elated health effects. John Nelson, Bloomington, asked if the additional RMTs would be installed by May 25, 1999. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said he did not know if it would be possible, but that it could be a goal. He said a more in depth time schedule needs to be developed first, but that staff hoped for an April or May installation. John Nelson, Bloomington, said he thought the Operations Committee should receive a briefing on the ANOMS 6.3 configuration once it is installed. . Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, suggested, due to the installation of ANOMS 6.3, that a review of the Technical Advisor's Report and other reporting procedures be included for the July 9, 1999 Operations Committee meeting. John Nelson, Bloomington, agreed and said he thought an investigation of this type should be undertaken every 3 to 5 years. The remainder of the work plan will be established at the January 1999 meeting. Staff will update the calendar for the next meeting, as well. The meeting was adjoumed at 11:50 a.m. 0 f � C Respectfully submitted: Melissa Scovronski, Committee Secretary � 30 November, 1998 Mr. Jeff Hamiel, Executive Director Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28`h Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Dear Jeff: � 1}10MAS EGAN Mayor PATRICiA AWADA BEA BIOMQUiST SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Councii Members THOMAS HEDGES Ciiy Adminishator E. J. VAN OVERBEKE cny cier� The Eagan City Councii, at the recommendation of the Airport Relations Commission, recently approved a request to have the Metropolitan Airports Commission place a temporary noise monitor in the Valley View Plateau neighborhood of Eagan. There are several factors that warrant the coliection of noise data in tnis area: The Vailey View Plateau's unique topography and its proximity to the airport may expose it to levels of noise that are not accurately modeled by standard noise modeling techniques. The area is among the most close-in neighborhoods to the airport that is not currently served by an ANOMS tower. The importance of the Eagan/Mendota Heights corridor to the future of the operation of the airport suggests that the residential areas adjacent to it be adequately served in terms of noise mitigation and noise measurement opportunities. These factors ail take on heightened significance in light of the November 12, 1998, letter from FAA Program Manager Gordon Nelson denying your request of May 22, 1998, to inciude Valley View Plateau as an eligible item forAlP/PFC funding. Placing a temporary noise monitor in this neighborhood shouid provide valuable information for an update to the Part 150 study. Understanding that the collection of reliable information requires an extended period of time, the City Council and Airport Relations Commission recommend the temporary noise monitor be located in the Valley View Plateau for a period of no fewer than 60 days. Thank you for your efforts to help the Eagan community address this significant issue. Sincerely, — ='' —>j , ' _ _::._.�._._- � "-�--�.--�-y.y-,�----- Jamie Verbrugge Assistant City Administrator CC: Roy Fuhrmann, Noise Programs Manager MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE: (612) 681-d600 FAX: (612) 681-4612 TDD: (612) 454-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STREN6TH AND GROWfH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opporfunity Employer MAINTENANCE FACILtTY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNE50TA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681-4300 FAX: (612) 681-4360 TDD: (612) 454-8535 MEETING NOTICE ii�ASAC OPERATIONS CO�/11U11TTEE The Operations Committee wiil meet Fridav, December 11, 1998 — 10:00 a.m. at the MAC West Terminal Building of the Metropolitan Airports Comrriission, North Star Room, 6301 34th Avenue South, Minneapolis. If you are unable to attend, please notify the committee sec�etary at 726-8141 with the name of your designated altemate. OLD BUSINESS 1999 Goals and Objectives Discussion NEW BUSINESS NWA Engine Test Cell Briefing MEMBER DISTRIBUTION Mark Salmen, Chairman, NWA Bob Johnson, MBAA Bob Kirmis, Eagan Ron Johnson, ALPA Brian Bates, Airbome John Nelson, Bloomington Dick Saunders, Minneapolis Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights Dick Keinz, MAC cc: Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights Charles Curry, ALPA Will Eginton, IGH Jennifer Sayre, NWA Mark Hinds, Richfield Advisorv: Keith Thompson, FAA Ron Glaub, FAA Cindy Greene, FAA Roy Fuhrmann, MAC Chad Leqve, MAC Shane VanderVoort, MAC C� 1��9.SA.0 OPE.1�'.ATIONS �Oli�I1VIITTEE To: I+'i2.OM: SUBJECT: DA.TE: MASAC Operations Committee Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor MASAC & Operations Committee Work Plan for 1999 December 4, 1998 � At the December 1, 1998 MASAC meeting the members approved the below completed partion of the MASAC Goals and Objectives Calendar for 1999 and forwarded a recommendation to the NIASAC Operations committee to move forth and complete the calendar for 1999. As a result, at the December 11, 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting, the prioritization process will continue. It is anticipated this prioritization effort will act as a catalyst for the finalization of the MASAC Goals and Objectives Calendar in January for approval at the January 26, 1999 MASAC meeting. As the prioritization process continues it is important to keep in mind topics previously brought to the Operations Committee, they are as follows: � '�. '�- � Begin ground leveUlow frequency noise studies for all communities. Begin the process of a PA.RT 150 update. Discuss how noise level data from ANOMS can be incorporated into PART 150 contour generation. Seek MASAC's support for a public health study to be conducted by the appropriate state agency to research the long-term health effects of noise on humans, especially on senior citizens and children. '�- Implement the Noise Reduction Plan outlined in the 1996 Noise Mitigation Recommendations. '�- Increase the credibility and value of the Noise Complaint and Information Line. '�- Review how information and how much information is distributed to MASAC members. `�- Produce a quarterly report for distribution to other bodies and to be made available to the public. The above information in conjunction with additional input from the Committee members will aid in the effective and suitable prioritization and completion of the MASAC Goals and Objectives Calendar for 1999. Proposed 1999 MA,SAC Goals and Objectives Calander - �p --:.�:� �. - - . _ _ .,�?,�.. . � ���:�.� .. . .--.;.., . �+�y�p� {.p� ._ �t�A��::.y ' '., ; .�.: .-�-z�:+.;, .,. .,_ :...��-�,. -;s,:,;:,... ..:.:.���� ; , ,,. ; =._..:z. . ? * �x +, V'aG���� ��1.4�t. „��y���Wi11471iil� "� S.Y2,.Y^"'�d�a�. —�"'l•-�(,L�������-::5t�`�r''�'aLl-F ""q.,.j.r . y r �'�.+� �^ (� . Y'�".� •..--aC�' r ,� �. "��� ��"�.��g � � '� .� .� �.�� ��.:��t= t .. �. ��-�.,.,..�I�equirements 1 � � a. �. f �.. ��� �"�,_.-�y�t�:.�: : :i "'*���"� -�i,. t';d''ry+ S. � y .� "� �� ..�'.w.?t�a`y;..� . .1, �'���f'�t �� d� , `-� .3ar-�,• �t+��s`x:r_ .9•± > � V. �..'�---„'"..�._. _:; = hi� "�x, � a.c+- ,�� _ r;! . � �.e,_ ..,- .. ' �T9� ..5.:.._ � � < '�'t' _..3.»'' ' Finalize Goals & Objectives for 1999 Develop Specifications for Investigating GPS January 15 Operations Committee Landing System Use for Noise Alleviation Determine Ground Run-up Enclosure (GRE) Evaluation/Benefit Criteria. January 26 MASAC Orientation Topic - Jet En;ine Noise Sources with Specwm data. (NASA Data) RMT Installation Update February 12 Operations Committee Review RFP results for RMT Installation . Update on ANOMS/RMT Integration February 23 MASAC FAA tour of the Faimington Air traffic Control Center Enhance Noise Inforrnation Dissemination options. (Community Communication of March 12 Operations Committee Construction, MAC Feedback, . and Operational Changes Review Nighttime Hours (Stage 2, 3; 9-11 P.M.) March 30 MASAC Receive MSP Construction Briefing(G. Warren) April 9 Operations Committee Non-simultaneous Corridor Departure Analysis April 27 MASAC Jeff Hamiel Update on MAC May 14 Operations Committee Evaluate Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Departure Procedures. May 25 MASAC RMT Site Location update June 1 I Operations Committee Construction Update Page 2 � � . � --t �:L� _ _ -- _� � � _ � - _ . ] � . �!1: � � _ Pro,ected Date ;, t�ccoanphshuu�g . �'_ _ ._�en�`.' -; - 5 �-- , � _ � , � quir�gnents s . _ ��- : �l�"•� .�:�-�~. :.�,r,�;- +r �'�y;l.._.,'"�w.�:�,i. �•.t... -i � ` ��,:,.. - �;� r a.� ' June 22 MASAC Orientation Topics luly 9 Operations Committee Construction Upda[e July 27 Y MASAC August 13 Operations Committee Construction Update August 24 MASAC September 10 Operations Committee Investigate incentives to carriers for Stage 3 A/C September 28 MASAC Sta�e III Compliance Review October 8 Operations Committee October 26 MASAC Orientation Topics I�tovember 12 Operations Committee Focus Activities for Upcoming Year November 30 MASAC Part 150 Progress Review December 10 Operations Committee Establish Calenda� for 2000 Page 3 MASAC OP�.�',..�TIONS CD��IMITTEE �o: F'+ �$OM: SITB,�CT: DATE: �� �' �� ��� . MASAC Operations Committee Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor Northwest Airlines Engine Test Cell Briefing December 4, 1998 : At the December 11, 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting Chairman Mark Salmen of Northwest Airlines will give a briefing about NWA's engine test cell. The briefin� will provide information on the facility specifications and composition as well as how the facility is used. � C� � css � � o -� � � O� � � � N V � w^ s�, o b �� o � o � c.° � ° o � � a� � b � .^�� � �s O .� � � U o `� � � � � � o o � '� � � •� L�. � Q � y .� � � O v � t�. � � � �V v� � L � � �'• �" `� U � � � . .� ss, � v � � � cC "' ; '' y � N y N � � C .� '� � cn "O E .�a � � N ? a s.. O � .a � ai .� � � � �� tsU c+� � • � w � � 3 O � V O � � � <C � c�t w° � h n �f' � O N � M �!' ., ` � O O � � '�' QO h .�a �y � N e� � M 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O p� �!l ^ M M ^ � 00 �!' l� i� Cr �,.� NN -- 6�9 69 69 69 b4 � ������ � �t;o;qv,c�� � � o v o o � c� �y �r c�s o 9 y� y y y y � � O O O O� O O w.i�=S� �" Q� M Q� M t� if') M �I fT �1' N �i' 00 ^-� N v'� c0 � oo � �: . . �%' � ra 4 N M �}' �n V� (� [� rn � rn � � � � � � � � rn rn � C� �� � f�� � . ... �f r�� *� �+;kk f i+� � rf t ��� b �; � �t � � � � r ax r � ,� , ; [, a,- �t . �a s_ .r " � � � �L� �'�°I C) � � � LL L.�C� °�° I� ! ' j . : � i i l �'� �a .' ! ', �� .'. . ; j fii 1 ; � F..'1 � 5. f � � �h `, i. :" '.� � i C 4 . f ' t `Y t '.t � yY�t'.. L 2 l 1•'j 't V � C� MINUTES NiASAC OPEl�7'IONS COt�iiVllTiEE JANU�4RY '� 5, �9 999 The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission North Star Conference Room, and calied to order at 10:00 a.m. The foliowing members were in attendance: Members: Mark Salmen, Chairman - NWA �� Bob Johnson - MBAA Jamie Verbn.igge - Eagan John Nelson - Bloomington C�arfes Me��nsouo - ME;�do.a Heic�r:� Dick Keinz - MAC Dick Saunders - Minneapolis Advisory: Roy Fuhrmann - Technical Advisor Chad Leqve - MAC Advisory ( ) Shane VanderVoort - MAC Advisory Visitors: Mark Hinds - Richfield Kevin Batchelder - Mendota Heights Will Eginton - Inver Grove Heights AGENDA Chairperson Salmen introduced Jim Kiewski, an intem for Northwest Airiines. Chairperson Salmen informed the committee members that the City of Richfield has sent a letter to Chairperson Johnson requesting membership on the MASAC Operations Committee. Chairperson Salmen said the request would be addressed after the chairperson elections in January. It was noted that the bylaws do not address the appointment of members to the Operations Committee, but that the chairperson has appointed the members in the past. It was also noted that although membership on the committee gives a community voting privileges, the Operations Committee meetings are open and anyone is allowed to speak. C 1999 GtJALS AND OBJECTIVES DISCUSSION Roy Fuhrrnann, Technicai Advisor, briefed the committee on the draft Operations Committee schedule for '1999. He noted that much of what is to be covered in the Part 150 Update Study mirrors what the Operations Committee is aiready woricing toward. He said those issues being covered in the Part 150 Update Study are underlined in the memo. He said he felt it was impo�tant that the Operations Committee act as an advisory body to the Part 150 consuitant team and that the Committee wiil have the chance to comment on the Part 150 Update Study items throughout the updating process. Mr. Fuhrmann then noted the change in the February MASAC meeting schedule. He said the trip to the FAA's Farmington Center has been postponed until later in the year and that a Part 150 Update Session has been added to the February meeting in order for MASAC to address the issues included in the Update. KEViN BATCHELDER, lV1ENDOTA HEIGHTS, �OV`D AND H�5 ,;��-1N�C�1, Illl� ;r+, SECONDED TO ACCEPT THE SCHEDULE CHANGE. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. A discussion regarding the agreement between the City of Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports Commission ensued. The foilowing points were made: ➢ Chairperson Salmen said he felt it was a great oversight that a MASAC representative had not been appointed to the �ow Frequency Noise Policy Committee. ➢ Dick Keinz, MAC, suggested that MASAC write a letter to the Commission in regards to having a MASAC member be part of the committee. � Bob Johnson, MBAA, said he had spoke to Jeff Hamiei, Executive Director of MAC, twice about representation on the committee but that it had not resulted in any action. � Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, noted that the Operatians Committee had deferred the City of Richfieid's request regarding low frequency noise untii the issue had been resolved at a higher level. He said now that an agreement had been reached, he felt MASAC should be involved and not passed over. � Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights, suggested that a letter be sent to MAC's Chairman requesting that, for continuity's sake, Bob Johnson, MASAC Chair be appointed to the committee and Mark Salmen, MASAC Operations Chair be appointed as an altemate to the Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee. ➢ Mark Hinds, Richfield, said he wasn't sure the agreement provided the opportunity to add representatives to the task force. He said it might be more appropriate to request to be an observer rather than a member. 2 ➢ Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan, had a copy or the agreement and read it aloud. The task force includes representatives from Minneapolis, Richfield, Bioomingtan, MAC, the Metropolitan Councii, and the FAA. Two consultants have already besn chosen, with a third consuitant to be chosen by the first two. Mr. Verbrugge said he was also unsure whether or not the membership of the task force could be overridden. He said at the very least, MASAC should know when the meetings are to be held and have the MASAC chairperson, Bob Johnson, attend. ➢ It was noted that the agreement did not prohibit adding representatives to the task force and that MASAC could be considered an extension of the MAC. ➢ Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said it might be more appropriate to send the letter to the committee rather than to the MAC Chairman, or possibly to Commissioner Himle. r John Nelson, Bloomington, said he felt MASAC deserved to be shown respect for their role in airpo�t noise mitigation and should be included on the committee. JOH�! t�ICLSCiV, BLOOMI�1GTt��1, i�OV�� A�1D CyA�L�S �i�;cT�iVSO i� O, �n�N�.� � � HEIGHTS, SECONDED, TO WR1TE A �ETTER TO THE CHAIRMAN OF MAC TO REQUEST THAT BOB JOHIVSON, MASAC CHAIR AND MARK SALMEN, MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE CHAIR, BE APPOINTED TO THE LOW FREQUENCY NOISE POLICY COMMITTEE AS METVI6ER AND ALTERNATE, RESPECTIVELY. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. Bob Johnson, MBAA, asked Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, if a schedule or a deadline had been set for the Part 150 Update Study. Mr. Fuhrmann said planning was still in the eariy stages, but that a more complete schedule would be available in Febn.tary. John Nelson, Bloomington, referring to the last item on the memo, said he thought it might be a good idea to form an ad hoc committee to study the possibility of producing a quarterly report. He said he didn't believe it belonged in the Operations Committee schedule. Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, suggested having the E�cecutive Committee form a separate committee to examine the possibility. He said it would also lessen the staffs workload. Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights,r said this type of report could be as sirnple as an activity repo�t and that it would keep MASAC accountable. Bob Johnson, MBAA, reminded the comrnittee that it was also inciuded as a recommendation in the Padilla, Speer, Beardsley report. DICK SAUNDERS, N1INNEAPOLIS, MOVED AND JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, SECOiVDED TO RECOM�IEND TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THAT AN AD HOC COMlUI1TTEE BE FORMED TO STUDY THE POSSIBILITY OF PRODUCING ,A MASAC C2UARTERLY REPORT. TNE V�TE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOT10N CARRfED. 3 C JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, MOVED AND CHARLES MERTENSOTTO, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, SECONDED TO APPROVE THE MASAC OPERATlONS COMMITTEE 1999 SCHEDULE. THE VOTE WAS UNANiMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. NWA ENGINE TEST CELL ADDlT10NAL 1NFORl�9,4TlON Mark Saimen, NWA, dispiayed additional information regarding NWA's engine test ceii, including blueprints of the maintenance hangar and the test ceil room itself. Mr. Salmen noted that the test cell's wails have 15" of concrete insulation, rather than the standard 12". He said it is noisiest near the doors of the test celi room. He said much of the noise is absorbed by the blast baskets above the test cell befween the outside and the test celL Mr. Saimen said very little noise can be heard from the test cell at 250 feet outside the perimeter of the buiiding. Kevin Batchelder; Mendota Heights, said if the noise peopie are hearing is not coming from the test ceil, MASAC should identify what is causing the noise. Mark Salmen, NWA, said he thought it was most likely the noise generated during breakaway thrust when aircraft power up and then down in a long queuing taxi line. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, reminded the members that the Ground Noise Monitoring Study found that much of the ground noise experienced at the airport is from aircraft operations rather than fixed source points. John Neison, Bloomington, suggested that future ground noise complaints might be correlated with the various ground noise sources, such as run ups, test celis, and airport operations, in order to find out what might be causing the noise. Ne said unless there are further requests for more information regarding the test cell, he felt this issue could be brought to closure. Charles Mertensotto, Mendata Heights, said he felt peopie wouldn't be satisfied unless monitoring has been done. Mark Salmen, NWA, said ,he was able to locate the Environmental Assessment Worksheet cornpleted for the Hibbing airport test cell, which had not been built. He said the worksheet references Minneapolis' test cell before it was upgraded. He noted that monitoring done at MSP showed, at a quarter of a mile, the sound generated from the test ce�l would be 49.6 d BA. Bob Johnson, MBAA, also noted that the test ceil heips eliminate run-ups on the fieid by providing a way for the airiine to test its engines inside. INVESTIG,4TlNG GPS SPECIFICATIONS F�R NOISE ALLEVIATION Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, briefed the Commitkee on the Background, Opportunities and Industry Trends for DGPS at MSP (see attachment for detaiis). Mr. Fuhrmann noted � that MSP participated in the Govemment and Industry Partnership (GIP) program, along with Honeywell and 13 other airpo�ts. He also noted that some airlines were integrating GPS technology quicker than others. Mr. Fuhrmann then reviewed in detail the six identified areas for a Requirements Assessment, including: . Define Noise Impacts . Evaluate Land Use Compatibilities . Define Airspace Challenges . Review Approach Procedures . Analyze Airport Infrastructure . Assess Airport User Requirements Mr. Fuhrmann also noted that: a An Inventory/Review of E�cisting Noise Abatement Policies is already being done through the Part 150 Update Study. a Integrating DGPS wit� tne Part 150 Noise Campatibility Plan will be �� eaking �ew ground. Mr. Fuhrmann estimated that an assessment will take at least 6 to 8 months. Committee members added these suggestions: . Continue to be mindful of the corridor and how departure headings are implemented. . Explore the possibility of steeper glide scopes. m F�cplore the possibilities of having departures follow geophysical features. a Explore how GPS could assist in NADP procedures. . E�cplore how GPS could assist with straight out departures. e Explore the possibifity of curved approaches. m Explore the possible impediments to universal use of GPS technology as the sole source of navigation. Mark Salmen, NWA, asked how the Letters of Agreement between the local FAA and the airiines will be affected. He noted that some of the agreements are very old. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said dealing with the FAA in this matter will be like exploring "uncharted waters." He said although some of the current procedures are very old, he felt GPS would eventually become the sole source for aircraft navigation. He said there will have to be broad, sweeping changes in order for this to happen, though. JOHN NEL.SON, BLOONIINGTON, 1kiOVED AND JAM1E VERBRUGGE, EAGAN, SECONDED TO ACCEPT THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR AN AIRPORT SYSTEM DGPS REQUIREMENTS ASSESSMENT AND TO FORWARD 1T TO THE FULL MASAC BODY. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED. E GROUND RUN UP ENCLOSURE EVALUATION/BENEFIT CRITERIA Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, recapped the Ground Run Up Enclosure information presented at a previous Operations Committee meeting. Mr. Fuhrmann aiso briefed the members about the GRE at Chicago/O'Hare airport. He said the GRE is three-sided, has a roiled top, and has sianted and vented walls. He said 70% of the run ups at this airport are performed there and that there is only one aircraft heading. Some other facts include: ➢ Over 700 run ups are performed per year at the airport. ➢ 2000 people are affected by run up noise. ➢ A majority of the run ups are performed at night. ➢ The GRE cost $3.1 million to instail. ➢ Aii commercial aircraft are able to use the GRE. ➢ The airport was able to obtain a 20-decibei reduction at 2 miles with ihe GRE. Mr. Fuhrmann reported that 96% of the run ups per�o�ed bctweEn January a��d July 1998 had taken place at the run up pad at MSP. Only 3.4% were performed at the runway 22 site. During this time, � 068 run ups were performed, including both propeller and jet engine aircraft. Mr. Fuhrmann then asked members to brainstorm possibie evaluation/benefit criteria. The foliowing suggestions were given: � A 20-decibel reduction at 2 miles shouid be realized. The installation company would be responsible for verifying this criteria. ➢ The number of people impacted by run up noise should be reduced (reduce contours). r The installation of a GRE must not deter airiines from using the enclosure. � The current fleet mix must be able to utilize the GRE. �- An evaluation of the best orientation of the enclosure shouid be- performed. ➢ Maintain existing blast fences if at all possible. ➢ Surveiliance capabilities should be continued. Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights, said it was important to establish what the existing .. conditions are before determining whether or not a GRE should be pursued or how the specifications shouid be written. Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, suggested examining Chicago's Request for Proposal (RFP) in more detail. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said he would obtain a copy. OTHER Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, reporked that at an 86% Stage III aircraft fleet mix, Stage li aircraft still account for 50% of the noise energy generated at an airport. He said once airiines meet and exceed the 86% Stage III fleet mix, the benefits of Stage lll aircraft will � C become more noticeable. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said that percentage should be reached at MSP sometime in the fali af 1999. The meeting was adjoumed at 12:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Melissa Scovronski, Committee Secretary 7 � r C C,_ —,� Id�finneapolis / St. 1'aul Iraternational lAir-port _ �=•��- — �� �'" 11�ONTHLY li�fEETING - 1t�fetropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Cauncil c�;»�: Einbert P.,1ohrt�n �« ��: T6m�as Hueg Techtim! Ad�isor: Roy Fahrmano Sccntan^ M��i� s�.� Airbarne Ezprrss: Brtan Balts Air Tiortspnrt Assariatinn: Paul MtGrvw ALPA: � �� Cin' af @laanin,qlon: � Petrnns I.ec v�r� wu�: Cin• ajBuma•illc: Ed Puner c;tv ojEaRmc ��� }oo Fiohensteln l�ace Smrichn Cin• oJlm�cr Grm�r Heightr. Dnk Hnmmo� City ojMudow Hcights: JW Smlth Kevin Satc6clder Cin ojMinneapdis: Dwn Lndberg Skre Minn x� c.� ca�oo s��a Sandre Calvin Rvy Mlke Cramer Cin• oJRichfield: Krtsml Sbkes n�o w�i�a Cin• ojSt �Lauis PorA: Rnbcr[ Adnws Cin• ojSt Paul: Ttrom�s H. Hu�g c;n• oJ'sursfish takr: Gicnda Spbtta 6elta Airlineslnc.: I.erry Goe6ring DHL Ainvm•s: Brian Slma�son Fedod Esrxess: Dan DeBord Federal Aviation Administmrim: Rnn Gleub Clndy Grscne MAC Sraff.• D{ck Keinz M&tA: Robert P. Johusoo Mrwlw Norlhw�c.rt Airlink: Phli Burke Mctrryir�liran Ai7ronr Cammisrinn: Cammtssbner Altoa G�sper MN Ai� Nminrvil Guuid.� Ma}or Ray J. S6etka Nanhwest Airlrnes Mnrk Salmen Jennifer Sayrc Steve Hdme N��y s�ai Sr. Paul C7mmher njCnmmerce: xatr Mwdi�wo Sun Conn�n• Airlinar co� c��� United Air(ines Inc.: Kevla Blaek unu�d Po,r�� s�na«: Mu�� c.�y« U.S. Air Fnrct Re��en•r: Capta{n DavM J. Gerken Metropotitan Airports Commission Declaration of Purposes l.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve pubtic interest, convenience, and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, international, national, state, and local, in and through this state; promote the efficient, safe, and economical handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international programs of air transportation; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that area; 2.) Asswe the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum environmental impact from air navigation and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement, control of airport area land use, and other protecave measures; and 3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental policies and minimize the public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around airports. Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council Statement of Purpose This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfare of the communities adjoining Minneapolis-St. Paul Intemational Airport - Woid-Chamberlain Fieid, a public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airgort; through study and evaluation on a condnuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviation of the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective procedures, control and regulations, consistent wiih the safe operation of the airport and of aircraft using the same; and through dissemination of information to the affected communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions initiated and taken to alleviate the problem. Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council Representation T'he membership shall include representatives appointed by agencies, corporations, associations and govemmental bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and responsibility or control over the airpori, or by reason of their status as airport users, have a direct interest in the operation of the airport. Such members wili be called User Representa[ives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and Public Representatives shall at all times be equal in number. The Aitport 24-hour Noise Hotline is 726-9411. Complainrs to the hot(ine do nnt result in changes in Airpon activity, but provide a public sounding board and airport information outlet. The hotline is staffed during business hours. Monday - Fridax This report is prepared and printed in house I Chad i.eqvc, ANOMS Coordinator Shane VanderVoort, ANOMS Technician Questions or comments may be directed to: MAC - Aviation Noise Programs Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapotis, MN 55450 TeL• (612) 725-6331, Fax: (612) 725-6310 ANSP Home Page: http://www.macavsat.or Ii1lletropoiitan Airpoa-ts Coar�ra�ssion Aviation Noise Programs �. i Oper-ations and C'o'np�aint Sumrnar°y 1 OperationsSummary - All Aircraft .....................................................................................1 1VISP November Fleet Mix Percentage ................................................................................1 Airport November Complaint Summary .............................................................................1 November Operations Summary - FAA Airport Tra�c Record ...............................�.........1 l�inneapolis -�t. l'aul Internaiional �4arp�rt C'omplaint Sum�nary 2 ComplaintSummary by City ...............................................................................................2 �vailable 7'ime, for Runway Ilse 3 TowerLog Reports - Ali Hours ...........................................................................................3 Tower Log Reparts - Nighttime Hours .......:........................................................................3 ', � / :' ' / / : !r Runway Use Report November 1998 ..................................................................................4 i_) C'arrae�° ,Jet Opet°�ziions 5 Runway Use Report November 1998 ..................................................................................5 1'�a�hit�me - .�.11 Op��°ations 6 Runway Use Report November 1998 ..................................................................................6 1Vi,�ht�°me �'ar�-ier° Jet C)pera�ions i Runway Use Report November 1998 ..................................................................................7 � /` � `' '' ��`' / �� / / / ` /` ' i 'i / / .. i � �' ,:�� . �: �, j � i '� � J,, r � ;,j /,' � `► ,� �: ;r �t '�` ./ � � t. ,' ,� . DaytimeHours ...................................................................................................................10 �'om�aunit,y Over°, f Zi�ht �4�al,y,szs 11 � � '�—=' Camer Jet Operations - All Hours ..................................................................................... l 1 Camer Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30 pm - 6 am) ......................................................11 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs IZemote .16�ortitori�zg ,Site Loccztion,� 12 �' C'ar-rzer Jet Arrival Related 1Voise Events 13 Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT .....................................................13 C'arrier Jei Depart�r� Related �loise �vent� 14 Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ................................................14 �'en Z,ouclesi �.ircraft .1Voise Events Identi ied' 7'en Loudesi .Aarcra, ft 1Voise Eve�ts Identi zed 7'en Loud'e�t Aircra, fi l�oise �vents �clenti�ecl 7'en Loudest Aa�°c�a,� 1Voise Ev�nts I�'�n�i° aed' 7'en L�ude�t A.ir�ra,� No�se Everats Idenii ied �'en Loudest Aircra,� 1Voise Events Identi aed �'li�h� �'rczck �ase Map 21 .. �, � - � , i � i '/� r � i: � �; � . . , � � . . Carrier Jet Operations - November 1998 ...........................................................................22 �4arpo�°i 1��$se and C�p�rataons l�loni�oran� S'yste�rt Fl��ht 7'rac&� 23 Carrier Jet Operations - November 1998 ...........................................................................23 A.a�°�ort .l�oase a�d Ope�°rztio�s l�lonit�rin� System �li�ht �'�°ezcks 24 Carrier Jet Operations - November 1998 .......................................................................... 24 Airport No�se and C)peration� 161onitor°in� Syste�a �light Tracks 25 Camer Jet Operations - November 1998 .......................................................................... 25 19.nalysis �,�'�.�r°c�°afi �V��se Events � 14i�crafi L�� d�(�4) A�alys�� o„�"A.arcrcz,�'t 1�loise �v�nis � Ai�°c�a, ft L�� tl.�(A) Aviation Noise & Satellite Proorams � �� Metropolitan Airports Commission �7 �1 �' .: 1 . ' il.` 1 1 ... ' .i � . �,. b; 1: � i �per�tions Summary - All Aircraft �tunway Arrival % Use �'leparture % Use 04 177 0.9% 66 0.3% 22 103 0.6% 542 ,,,, �.2.9% 12 7878 42.0% 8228 44.5% 30 10611 56.5% 9665 52.3% Ii�ISP November �leet lVlax I'e�entage Stage ��hhedule+d Schedulesi AIvO� AI�i0I0�S 1997 199� Count 1997 Count 1998 Stage 2 38.0% 28.6% 42.9% 31.2% Stage 3 62.0% 71.4% - 57.1% 68.8% Airport November Complaint Summary Airpor� 1997 199� MSP 416 1045 Airlake 0 0 Anoka 5 5 Crystal 0 1 Flying Cloud 3 2 Lake Elmo 0 0 St. Paul 4 0 Misc. 0 0 TOTAL 42� 1053 I+loverr�ber Operations Summary -�E1A Airport �'raffic Record Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission � �` � � � .' ' ' [� • . j � •. �•:' � , ,' .; , �. �� �� ,: ��'' ��� ,� ', ��t' � � . .��. ���. ... '� � ',. ,• �: '� �,� '�, Compiaint Summary by City City Arrival Departure To�al Percentage Bloomington 1 7 8 0.8% Eagan 30 7 37 3.7°Io Eden Prairie 5 7 12 1.2% Edina 0 7 7 0.7% Inver Grove Heights 36 200 236 23.6% Lakeville 0 1 1 0.1 % Maple Grove 12 I2 24 2.4% Maple Plain 1 0 1 0.1 % Mendota Heights 14 1� 31 3.1% Minneapolis 119 410 _ 529 52.9% Minnetonka 1 1 2 0.2% Richfield 15 41 56 5.6% St. Louis Park 1 1 � 2 0.2% St Paul 41 6 47 4.7%o Sunfish Lake 0 7 7 0.7% Tot�l 276 724 1(�Q 100.0% Time of Day 1�lature of Complaint � s��.�,. �ii i���� � . . ... �._ . .,,r.- . .,s. ._.�.a q ,,,n,�. _ ,n,. • � � : h�� / ��' 24� _ _ '.! _ _ �� �� � 1� � •� �u'� � � � "�� 1 • i�l 1 • �: '' • �:�^�..,z.� a t � �n � ' � ` iil�liii'iiiC.�.,'�, i i�jl�t/. � � ``; �` 1 �, ,��', 7 � .:L��� t ], F�, � 11 • � { �;¢;��,+; � � . - . - � „ i ' .I��� �� ����: ■�■ ''y �i „'? "■ w � • � • �� '4 �i'S 4 1?; , „ � � ' � �y$��. ;�; -:.��� 4 ' ♦ � �i � F^•l+f � � � ������ ��"n�1�55�■ I � , ���. � � r*S+ p 1�1 x�r� �. t ,,r, • �i �,� a„ b � ( L�N k 1 � ' '�`� � �,�,�' 1 � � _,„<w, . ,..,,,. ,.,�.�.�n.._ ._,.:, _�, . �.�,.. w,.....,.n,r�."1a� .�7�.L. ■ Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Available T'�rr�e %r Runway IJse �'ovver �.og Repo� - November 199� All Hours 0% 43% � 0% 35% 0 Metropotitan Airports Commission ��, �'� 64% 57% 1% Note: For 7% of the time available, simultaneous depanure operations occurred 7 ofo o,�'the parallels and rwy 22 resulting in an overal! use greater than 100%. `'°, - ..�.}, , �" ��5 � �, �;. .��?�4� v�: r`�J :h v 1�.F y � �tighitime �Iours 0% O %� �� �� �4% �3% 1% Note: For 7C/o of the time available, simultaneous departure operations occurred ']�'/o o,f�'the parallels and rwy 22 resulting in an overall use gmater thctn !00%. Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission ''' �'' 1 ,� � . 1 �� I�1ove�nber 0.3 °Io :... r�,, . .... _ ..� .w� _.�� . ...,_��. __w�.��. , .�_�. ., -.�.ti. ..., ��... .,_ .��r� _�..��, u,,,�..� ..,..... .._ _.,.., _:._�..: .. � � „ � ��• �� � 'i••�. � � �� 2 �' � , .� ;_ � � r,...,.w . .......... ... ... _.,.,.; _..:..._ v. ,,.:__ .. ,:�._,_. . .�_�,.� _ ...:._ �. � ; . .,.. ..__ ._ . .. ,. . . .,_�.,:. � � 1,�„�■� � � � i�,��_ �v;; , , ,. • � 1 1'. :: � i ", ' � : �"i i■ •�: I�'� , 1 � �'� ,i�, ,,� , . • •.., � ��e ..,� ,. . ,. . �� . .:. �.. w. _ �.w. . � . �.w r_ � .���._� ... � . , , ., ,�.,�� sf3 � �`� �.,,, �; : . ,�., _ : N.� r . , ���:. . ,X:� z.� r.: . .:-�....,. , � . . :: �' � � r� � x �' S'� , . � � i. ' ' r � 2. / ' i ,-, '�%r � �� � 3� "�' 1 i 1 (' � i „�-..�,,._ <.,..,... :. '� k., ..:. � . }s.. ��. . . ...�., >, . ....:.,�.., z s 4 �._.;�...r, ..., a.,-.,.,. .w.,�,,.,�. N�. .. . . .�.,�„ .��._:. �,.. ,�.. < ..:v�.�. ��.,:, .. , . �,.: ,.�. ...,.. ,...,,: a . ....,�.,..�>, ,��,� �..' t • ■■ ' ,, ,.� ,� � ■ � � • �/ r � � �� • , , , , I ��2�� ' ,� 1 � ��i ' � � •�� � � • i�• � ��i k �� � �� , � � � • � i � � i� • ' , I! �,:�:,.,. .n..�.a �, ..,: .... ., ..�..,,,w r:...w..� ��.:�,t �,,� . t.�:r. K��....� . , � � -���� � <��,s�� : � �, : '.. 1 . �.�' . 1 � �,����F �-�5� -. a-a � (. ��. '�..� � � i 1 .. 1� i � �"� � i {�..,,..,,.»�.. ._,... � ' .._,...,..,. .. �-�,,..y..`�sa��';���`;�.. ,..ac«� ...........................b,.;,.,,,. .-,.N4:._.���. u,,..,.,.e.M..-x....,,..�..,.....:.,..,,,�.:�, ..,F_.:.�_„ .....r�.:..,,�. Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs - Carr�er ,�et Operations Runway Use �2epo�t Noverr�ber 199� 01% . /o ; 42.5 .` `' 0.6% : Metropolitan Airports Commission 55.9% 45.4% s.-_.:_ . .w.....,�.... .�.. .._u ...�.r�:.... ur..�V�.o.., :,._....K:.:: ��. ,4���.._.. �n�.0 rw..,u ..-.:,� .. , _' _ � � �.�� ' �.�. . � . 'j � � • �. ����� S� �. .� - z � �, � � , 4 ; - n,w<.:K� .>�a�. �.,.. �-.� "�,,.�. L,,..... E, .�.� . ,. , _. . . .. . .. ... ....� . .. . .. ... .u. . ,.., .,. _ � . �. ., �. y. , . � ., ._,ar .. ..,,, _ ,� .,�. $., _,; �'���'���� ' "� �� � �� "- � - � •, � : -. ���'� ' �� , � -, � '� �� ° •, . : � . -. � � -, �'��l��� �' � ' � °� ' ' 1 • "� � ��' •� , t .., • . . , # . . , �.. ,,: ��,�, �., x��� x�, a�, 7 i i D � . , ��'��"�a�i ,�tb`!a� ��`*J�`��'r+�� : , � � � � � � � l�� �) � � i i � > .:.,,._. �.�...._.�.�A �.:,-x,..�.s..t��.`t.itf����.�. �r.t v f. � � �.e. + r_'t4 :�..�, � . , �. , ,.�.. »R..., , . � _... _. . � . �..-:... . ...., .. ,. ,..,. .�,, :�: w...,�.«r. -:. «.,.. „ Y� ... .. .. .:.. ....�i..,:.� 1� � � �I �� � � �/ ���� • �� � � ��I � • � � � � I�� � � ' � �I �� • � , �I ,. � '���� � ��'. �� : i �-, ! , , i , �I �� • �/ ���■ , • ��,'., �� • ' . •. •'/, . _ . X _._.,,- . . . -y �W ji�2��4 s�..�. I � � � . n - � � . . � � ,' f �5 �,h���'����y4}��t -. . 4 ' ' �� I '' ' � I � k � ( �� +rb�x:� M1 x�.....e:..,�.,�.,.-:,.....,�n: .�:.r,..:»Ti`n'�+t���. �C. a.�`.rc .'�tM1'1i�aF,.�-,. �. : ...un. R-.. �., .�.�, o..:....�z ..:........ ....�.,, .. _:.�,� .-. .�. ».... ...+....�.�...r *,..+,. ;:r.� ..:....., Aviation Noise & Sateilite Programs Page 5 Metropolitan Airports Commission Page 6 35.3% . � ; ; ,� • � . +� iJse I2eport Ivovernbe� 199� 1.1 °% � .� �. `; ' � '• ,� ,. � �• �� 1..�, �,�� � � � � .w,� ,... �...,.. , _.:..... ...._..: . . ..,,._ _.,.r..m . .. .... . ..... .....r ,. �,-., , m .� ., .,..,� ..... � � ■�� ' 1 ■� „� ,.� ,r ., , :.� . �I, ■. 1 1 ' , � • ' •� ; • . , � .,� �' . •, ;�, .� C i ��■ ' �., ' "' ; • • � , � � •,� �� . . . :�..-�. . . . � . ' �� �'�'�"`�i s�'r�'s'�3�`��" � ds�_ ........�:. �..�._�,- ,_.,....,.: ,�,�-;�_ '� _ / � ,,.,r,: . . .��.�..,�., :.,,N,..., . ._.,��-� � �Shx� Y �+ �,3�' k£�z r� ,�� � • � � � i ,'" - �. � .. , r t�t . x -1, 7 „w. ,.��-�.., ,,.,.,.._� �'�.!,�;�... , x °rl , i � , � � _ �,,�. . �.�. ..:��,. �1� ,.� ', :,M.::.:,,, � � � -. � . ■ ; II -, , ' � . � . -, ` � . . .,, � � . . •, .. � ., ������ "� ; � �� •. �' � '� � �'- �; .-. �`_ iii �r �-�� -�fi� ����-�� �,� �¢. � � r � ���±�;��h.=�,,7�k� ,i� i�-, ,` ', ��� �i b+��itxp./'i� �i E h� I�III.��, '' �' s�..�.....u„�n. ._....� ._a..wi .se.r,F'+.� 1..,. vso\N �u�l tw_ Flif.'�un.,n _ �.�..,w:v �v...+uu.�. �...=v.... ...rw:,�r u�w�,..�....�..... ...,x-.A�x..�:._ . :... r.. w�, o. ..w,e-.r..nre,.��..,.v....w,«:.r-.�... Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � . � . . >;,��. � �. �. , LTse �2epo� l�overribe�-199� 0.2% Metropolitan Airports Commission ..�.r_ ,ay ._:.,.�.. ._.�.�..,� , , ...m _ ..n._r ._ „ ,,a.:.. . .... .., � � .,. .. , .,.,w._:r .u, �.c .v,. -- - �<< a � . y. ' � � �. � � �i• �� � ' l'��. - Y �:� � ,. :.. �, ,.:.� �.���:,, �_ws. � ,�,.,. �..xr.� .�«�� �a� ..��:�b�.,� _ r_. ., . . �_ -,. ,� ��, .,-. ��,� �:� .,<. �4> � , .< .:,�.. �, .�.._. �,fi:.,�.: � � - e�■r�ii��� � • � �im� • -�� . : ,.., � ., � ��to��� - • - - ■����-. e�■� � •-- �� � -- ,�■�o�,� :... t .: .:� i ' ' ' . . . . � 1,■� Ra,7, �, ,.. � • 1 �• _� �,..,, _.� � , . ._.z�. � � , �. �.� �. ,,, ,s.a J� � , �'r�r,� +r,� - _ . . " t� � {'' "*'S - �r .�+'it'�,.�h - . . . . _�.. .. :� �, ., � . `�'� �jF S _ 4 � � ,�� �F � �a4'j,����',, �' " XYy' ' � f � �' , . <.,w,,..,-�. r«.: �. �..:�. ,. r .. . ^� ;� x:� 4k`� ti.. i�'?, .��5'�ti . :,..::,_ .«�, � K. ,. �. , ., x,...._,.,..,.y� �.,.,.,;:.. � . ,xa � . � . �....,,..... _. .. . _ - I ,��.-� ' ' / Y m.�,�n .� r ,._�,..,� . ■�III�. ' • . , � , � S,� I • • ' , � ,� � � / �� � � ,/ ���■,. , • � .ri a■� � : � i ���. • ,,I � • ,'� �,, . ���•' � Ir, ! . .' �'I�. . .,,,,..,r�, 4 �", �� �5+�[„1�'�jkjil�.�.rti,�'�C�,� ' '�'. a i �,� � �1 '� 1 `e�,e'�'"t �{'a�i t�,�s? l��tar,�T} i. � �� � / . � ." ' , .. M..��nT�`:Ta����}��'i�P�i'�I.x�„�;� ., - Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 7 Metropoli[an Airports Commission � • • < .�- � • , � :� ; .� � � • �`���. � . � ;�� . i; �1� �. Aircra#t Tv e Count Percenta e A306 35 0.1 % A310 33 0.1% A319 2 0.0% A320 2628 9.8% A340 2 0.0% B72Q 990 3.7% B733 598 2.3% B734 34 0.1 % B735 193 OJ% B736 0 0.0% B737 107 0.4% B738 2 0.0% B73Q 54 0.2% B741 35 0.1% B742 83 0.3% B743 50 0.2% B744 7 0.0% $75-213 2735 10.3% B76-2/3 2 0.0% B77-2/3 0 0.0% BA46 1209 4.5% CARJ 379 1.4% DC 10 828 3.1 % DC$Q 142 0.5% DC9Q 5774 21.6% E 145 204 0.8% F100 864 3.3% L101 0 0.0% MD 11 5 0.0°Io MD80 1402 5.3% B72-1/2 2626 9.8% B73-1/2 1295 4.9% BA 11 0 0.0% DC8-5/6/7 189 0.7% DC9 4232 1 S.8% Total 26739 100% Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�ams . .. '•. . . � r- /: �I .2 % �ta�e II Metropolitan Airports Commission .A�rcrafi Identifier and �escripiion'Table Identifier t�ircraft I2escription A306 AIRBUS INUUSTRIES A300B4-600 A310 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A310 A319 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A319 A320 AIRBUS INDUSTRTES A320 A340 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A340 B72-1/2 BOEING 727-100/200 SERIES B72Q BOEING 727 HUSH KIT B73-1/2 BOEING 737-100/200 SERIES B733 BOEING 737-300 B'734 BOEING 737-400 B735 BOEING 737-500 B736 BOEING ?37-b00 B737 BOEING 737-700 B738 BOEING 737-800 B73Q BOEING 737 HUSH KIT B741 BOEING 747-100 B742 BOEING 747-200 B743 BOEING 747-300 B744 BOEING 747-400 B75-2/3 BOEING 757-200/300 SERIES B76-2I3 BOEING 767-200/300 SERIES B77-2J3 BOEING 777-2�/300 SERIES ° BA11 BRITISH AEROSPACE $AC 111 BA4b BRITTSH AEROSPACE t46 (REGIONAL JE'l� CAR1 CANADAIR 650 DC 10 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 10 DCS-5/6/7 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8-500/600/700 SERIES DC8Q MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8-70 HUSH KIT DC9 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 DC9Q MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT E145 EMBRAER 145 F100 FOKKER 100 L 101 LOCKHEED TRISTAR L 101 I MD 11 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 11 MD80 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIFS SF3 SAAB-340 (PROP) Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9 Metropolitan Airports Commission � � , ,': � ; � , ;�. � . :, ,� � :. -,. i • ,. �, '.il �.. • . 1 ,;' • 11 � ;�. ii� Daytime �Iours Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Total Day Name Day Use Day Use 04 57 0.3% 137 0.8% 194 12L 3756 21.2% 3837 21.6% 7593 12R 40U7 22.7% 3790 21.3% 7797 22 497 2.8% 71 0.4% 568 30L 4757 26.9% 5139 28.9% 9896 30R 4625 26.1 % � 4813 27.0% 9438 T'oial 17699 100% 177�7 1(}0% 354�6 Nighttime Hours Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage �,�� �ight IVaane Night Use l�iight Use 04 9 l. l% 40 4.1 % 49 12L 220 27.4% 103 10.5% 323 12R 245 30.6% 148 15.1% 393 22 45 5.6% ` 32 3.2% 77 30L 139 17.3°l0 380 38.7% 519 � 30R 14-4 18.0% 279 28.4% 423 Total $02 1�% 982 100% 17d4 Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs r _ , - - � Metropolitan Airports Commission Cornrnunity Clverfli�ht Analys�s 1Vlinr�eapoiis - St. Paul Internatio��fl t�irpoa°t I�tovegnber 199� Car�-ier Jet Operations - All Hours Number l�iurxaber TO� I'ercent rdumber of Overflight A.rea ��V�S ���,�� Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations �Dpera�ions Operations per 24 I-€ours � � Over So. Minneapolis/ 56$1 6953 12634 47.3% 421.1 No. Richfield Over So. Richfield/ 137 326 463 1.7% 15.4 Bloomington Over St. Paul - 83 7 90 0.3% 3.0 , Highland Park Over Eagan/ 7493 6059 13552 50.7% 451.7 Mendota Heights Tot,�l 2b739 ]l0�% �91.2 Carrier Jet Operati�ns - IVighttime (10:30pm - 6 am) i�tumber Number Total Percent 1Vumber of Overflight Area ����5 ���,�� Carrier Jet Carrier Jet 4perations Operations Operations per 24 Hours Over So. Minneapolis/ 198 165 363 29.0°Io 12.1 No. Richfield Over So. Richfield/ 30 29 59 4.7% 2.0 Bioomington Over St. Paul - 28 1 29 2.3% 1.0 Highland Park Over Eagan/ 520 281 801 64.0% 26.7 Mendota Heights �'otal 1252 100%a 41.� Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 11 Metropolitan Airparts Commission I2emote IVio�ior�ng S�te I,ocat�ons . Airport Noise and C)perations 1Vlonitorin� System 5.. Page 12 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proo ams ( � Metropolitan Airports Commission , , �' . s' t 4 �t ,�.� .. _ . ; � � ��; �� �. :•. - aa .�, ' `�. . ,� `'., '. . . , .�,. ,s r ; ���j '�: .. Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for �ach R1VI'I' RMT Even�.s Events Events Events ID City Approximate Street Loca6on �5d� �OdB �9�d� >10�� 1 Minneapolis Xences Avenue & 41st Street 5427 177 1 0 2 Minneapotis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 4791 714 7 0 3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 5043 3286 291 0 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 4685 1196 6 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 5629 4337 668 3 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Sffeet 5512 3727 682 0 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 22 5 0 0 8. Minneapolis LongfeIlow Avenue & 43rd Street _ 12 0 0 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 137 82 3 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 130 111 25 0 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 26 1 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwoai Avenue 12 3 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 212 1 0 0 14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 9025 321 2 0 IS Mendota Heights Cuilen Street & Le�cington Avenue 564 31 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Vlas Lane 6385 3203 23 0 17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 258 132 3 0 18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 260 74 0 0 19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 41 6 0 0 20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 10 . 2 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 185 S 1 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 5453 43 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 3342 94 4 0 24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 8483 415 2 0 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13 Metropolitan Airports Commission Carri�r Jet Departure Related �loise Event� � IiTovernber 1995 Count of Departure Aireraft Noise Events for Each �IT (' �YT Events Events Events Events � City Approximate Street Locataon �$d� �OdB >90dB >100dB 1 Minneapolis - Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 882 292 4 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd S�treet 1225 617 46 0 3 Minneapotis W Elmwood Streef & Belmont Avenue 2059 1125 128 3 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 2413 1113 129 1 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 6489 3449 956 85 , 6 Mirmeapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 7371 4115 1748 292 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 4540 2008 1$8 2 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 2745 1086' 117 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 28 2 0 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 12 9 S� 3 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 22 8 3 0 12 St. Paui Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 4 0 0 0,�"' "� 13 Mendota Heights 5outheast end of Mohican Court . 4125 899 15 0 -� 14 Eagan- First Street & McKee Street SS74 2098 188 6 15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 4190 1133 74 0 16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane 5082 2623 447 15 17 Btoomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 246 92 14 2 18 Richfield 75th S[reet & 17th Avenue 432 277 105 17 19 Bioomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 409 187 58 2 20. Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 176 37 9 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 1849 483 14 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 2471 354 2 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 6271 2725 895 54 24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 4528 12� 30 0 ` Page 14 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commission z �.� � � ,. .: ; ; ' ,� � . . � ;� .. , �y • ,�i 1� 1. • RtVIT' #1: Xerxes Ave. �i 41st St. IVtinneapolis Date Time �� �� .�/D Level 98/11/0511:04:41 B722 93.0 D 98/11/0511:04:41 B722 93.0 D 98/11/23 20:01:41 B722 91.0 D 9$/I1/OS 09:29:17 B722 91.0 D 98/11/OS 09:29:17 B722 91.0 D 98/ i l/23 20: 01:41 B 722 91.0 D 98/il/2021:12:33 B722 90.6 D 98/11/20 21:12:33 B722 90.6 D 98/11/10 09:58:42 B722 90.1 A 98/11/10 Q9:58:42 B722 90.1 A RMT #3: W. Elmwaod St � Belmont Ave. li�Iinneapolis Date Ti� ;�� �� � I.evel 98/11/3012:15:30 B722 101.5 D 98/11l3012:15:30 B722 101.5 D 98/11/2916:31:22 B722 101.1 D 98/11/2916:31:22 B722 101.1 D 98/ 1 I/29 19:54:07 B 722 100.7 D 98/ 1 I/29 19:54:07 B 722 100.7 D 98/11/30 20:49:47 B722 100.0 D 98/1 I/30 20:49:47 B722 100.0 D 98/11/2218:22:32 B722 99.5 D 98/i l/22 18:22:32 B722 99.5 D Rll�T #2: Fremont Ave. 8� 43rd S� Miniieapalis l)ate Time A/C.... 1�Yax � Type Level 98/I1/0511:04:20 B722 96.7 D 98/11/0511:04:20 B722 96.7 D 98/11/3015:12:40 B722 96.5 D 98/11/3015:12:40 B722 96.5 D 98/ 1 U 16 11:29:40 B722 95.3 D 98/11/1611:29:40 B722 953 D 98%11/06 20:40:54 B722 94.8 D 98/1llOb 20:40:54 B722 94.8 D 98/11/19 21:13:03 B722 94.2 D 98/11/19 21:13:03 B722 94.2 D �IT #4: Oakland �.ve. �z 49th St. IViinneapolis Date �me �c �� A/D 'I�pe Level 98/11/1716:27:35 B722 101.0 D 98/I i/17 16:27:35 B722 101.0 D 98/11/3015:13:11 B72Q 99.0 D 98/11/3015:13:11 B72Q 99.0 D 98/11/30 06:54:02 B722 98.2 D 98/11/30 06:54:02 B722 98.2 D 98/11/2S 12:58:22 8742 98.1 D 98/I1/2512:58:22 B742 98.1 D 98111/0519:48:00 B727 98.0 D 98/11/0� 19:48:00 B727 98.0 D Aviation Noise & 5atellite Programs Page 15 Metropolitan Airports Commission 'Ten Loudesi Aircrafi Noise Even� Ideniifi�d RMT #�: 12th Ave. & SSth 5t. Minneapolis Date Time ,�� �� A1D Level 98/Il/ll 16:12:33 B722 106.5 D 98/11/i l 16:12:33 B722 106.5 D 98/11/1711:55:30 B722 105.3 D 98/11/1711:55:30 B722 105.3 D 98/i l/17 10:06:29 B722 105.0 D 98/11/0519:09:16 B722 105.0 D 98/11/1710:06:29 B722 105.0 D 9$/ I I/OS 19:09:16 B 722 105.0 D 98/11/2011:29:37 DC9Q 104.9 D 98/11/2011:29:37 DC9Q 104.9 D RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th S� Richfield Date Tirr� Ty� �� A/D Level 98/I 1/16 08:23:02 B722 102.2 D 98/11/16 0$:23:02 B722 102.2 D 98/I 1/19 08:17:42 B722 100.8 D 98/I l/19 08:17:42 B722 100.8 D 98/t 1/OS 07:09:08 B722 99.$ D 98/11/OS 07:09:08 B722 99.8 D 98/ll/3013:07:50 B722 99.7 D 98/11/3013:07:50 $722 99.7 D 98/I 1/16 07:46:16 B722 98.8 D 98/11/16 07:46:16 B722 _ 98.8 D RIVIT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th S� Minneapolis Date Time �C . �� A/p Type Level 98/11/20 21:11:14 B722 109.2 D 98/i l/20 21:11:14 B722 109.2 • D 98/11/18 20:35:36 B722 108.8 D 98/I ll20 07:34:48 B722 108.8 D� 98/11/20 07:34:48 B722 108.8 D 98/11/18 20:35:36 B722 108.8 D 98/11/2917:36:48 B722 108.8 D 98/11/2917:36:48 B722 108.8 D 98/11/1819:56:13 B722 108.2 D 98/11/1$ 19:56:13 B722 108.2 D _ , :.. ` RMT #S: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd S� 1Vlinneapolis Date 'I�me A/C Max A/D Type Level 98/11/3013:14:27 B722 97.6 D 98/I1/3013:14:27 B722 97.6 D 98/11/0618:55:55 B722 97.4 D 98/I1/0618:55:55 B722 97.4 D 98/i i/16 13:47:24 B722 97.1 D 98J11I1613:47:24 B722 97.1 D 98/11/1917:07:45 B722 96.3 D 98/ii/1917:07:45 B722 963 D 98/ I 1/20 13:21:13 DC9Q 96.1 D 98/ I 1/20 13:21:13 DC9Q 96.1 - D Page 16 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proarams Metropolitan Airports Commission - �'en L,oudes� A�rcraf� No�se Even� Identified RMT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. R1VI'Y' #10: Itasca t-1ve. $� Bowdoin St. St Paul Date Tim� T� M� A/D Level 98/l l/28 21:54:15 B722 90.7 A 98/11/28 21:54:15 B722 90.7 A 98/11/28 22:38:44 B722 90.3 A 98/11/28 22:38:44 B722 90.3 A 98li1/2121:13:26 B722 90.2 A 98/11/21 21:13:26 B722 90.2 A 98/11/28 23:12:36 B722 89.9 A 98/il/28 23:12:36 B722 89.9 A 98/11/28 21:42:10 B727 89.4 A 98/11/28 21:42:10 B727 89.4 A RMT' #11: Finn S�. �i Scheffer Eive. St P'aul Date Ti� ,Ty� �� A/1) Leeel 98/11/1413:34:22 B742 99.5 D 98/11/1413:34:22 B742 99.5 D 98/ 11 /03 13:31:42 B 74A 93.6 D 98/11/0313:31:42 B74A 93.6 D 98/11/2813:00:48 B742 89.6 D 98/I1/2813:Q0:48 B742 89.6 D 98/11/0214:44:23 B74A 88.3 D 98/11/0214:44:23 B74A $8.3 D 98/11/1614:01:01 B742 87.6 D 98/11/1614:01:01 B742 87.6 D St, Paul Date Time �C �� A/D Tj�pe Level P 98/i l/28 13:00:33 B742 101.8 D 98/I1/2$ 13:00:33 B742 101.8 D 98I11/0214:44:08 B74A 100.2 D 98/11/0214:44:08 B74A 100.2 D 98/11/0313:31:27 B74A 99.8 D 98/11/0313:31:27 B74A 99.$ D 98/11/0513:07:58 B742 99.7 D 98/Il/0513:07:58 B742 99.7 D 98/ll/1614:00:45 B742 993 D 98/i l/16 14:00:45 B742 99.3 D It.1VI"I" #12: Alton S� & Rockwood r�ve. S� Pau1 Date Time �e �� � Level 98/11/2910:24:38 DC9Q 863 A 98/11/2910:24:38 DC9Q 86.3 A 98/11/18 07:20:46 BE18 85.5 D 98/11/18 07:20:46 BE18 85.5 D 98/I1/09 06:52:25 BE18 85.4 D 98/1I/0906:52:25 BE18 85.4 D 98/11/0916:53:50 B73Q 82.1 A 98/11/0916:53:50 B73Q 82.1 A 98/11/2811:36:Ob DC9Q 81.6 A 98/ 11 /28 1 I:36:06 DC9Q 81.6 A Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 17 - ... .. . • . � �: . .. .; �; . . �'; . . �; �T #13: Southeast End of IVlohican Court Mendota Heights Date Time Ty� �� A/D Level 98/ I 1/29 13:20:40 B 722 94.1 D 98/11/2913:20:40 B722 94.1 D 98/11/24I1:18:39 B722 93.7 D 98/11/2411:18:39 B722 93J D 98/11/2117:08:51 B722 93.5 D 98/11/2211:47:36 B722 93.5 D 98/11/2117:08:51 B722 93.5 D 98/11/2211:47:36 B722 93.5 D 98/il/13 21:18:28 DC9 92.5 D 98/11/13 21:18:28 DC9 92.5 D RM'T #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. I�endota �-Ieights Date Time ,�� �� A/D Level 98/11/29 09:34:34 B722 99.2 D 98/11/29 09`.34:34 B722 99.2 D 98/11/2417:3$:58 B722 97.2 D 98/11/2417:38:58 B722 97.2 D 98/11/03 20:41:50 B727 96.1 D 98/11/03 20:41:50 B727 96.1 D 98/11/0311:12:06 B727 95.2 D 98/11/0311:12:06 B727 95.2 D 98/11/1817:32:14 DC9 94.8 D 98/11/18 17:32: t4 DC9 94.8- D ItMT #14: lst St. & Mcl�ee St. Eagan Date Time �C Max � '1`ype Level 98/11/0116:20:36 B727 lO1A D 98/11/0116:2036 B727 101.0 D 98/11/28 20:38:43 B722 100.9 D 98/11/28 20:38:43 B722 100.9 D 98/I1/0112:56:37 B727 100.8 D 98/11/0112:56:37 $727 100.8 D 98/11/2211:04:48 B722 100.6 D 98/ l l/22 11:04:48 B 722 100.6 D 98/i l/09 12:57:45 B722 99.8 D 98/11/0912:57:45 B722 99.8 D ,. � R1YI'T #16: Avalon Ave. �i Vilas Lane Ea�an Date TSme �� ' -�� A/D 1�pe Level 98/ll/0411:46:18 B727 101.9 D 98/I1/0411:46:I8 B727 101.9 D 98/11/1012:18:55 B722 101.3 D 98/I1/1012:18:55 B722 101.3 D 98/11/2111:47:49 B722 101.1 D 98/I1/2111:47:49 B722 101.I D 98/I t/21 21:07:26 B722 1�.8 D 98/1I/2121:07:26 B722 100.8 D 98/11/22 09:20:17 B722 100.7 D 98/11/27 20:42:26 B722 IOOJ D � Page 18 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Aicports Commission � ' . ; ��; , li , ;� � ;�; , .,,,� ,� . � . J ' . .1� RMT #17: 84Yh St & 4th Ave. Bloomington Date Tirt� Ty� �� A/D Level 9S/ll/1013:34:03 B742 100.6 D 98/11/1013:34:03 B742 100.6 D 98/11/2614:08:06 B722 100.3 D 98/11/2614:08:06 B722 100.3 D 98/11/2313:11:14 B742 98.4 D 98/ll/2313:11:14 B742 98.4 D 98/11/2916:20:36 B722 96.9 D 98J11/2916:20:36 $722 96.9 D 98/11/0814:31:12 B742 96.3 D 98/11/0814:31:12 B742 96.3 D R1VIT #19: 16tt� Ave. � �4th St Bloomangtan Date Tima � �� A!D I.�evel 98/11/1317:38:50 DC9 1�.3 D 98/11/1317:38:50 I?C9 1003 D 98/11/26 06:28:50 B722 49.7 D 98/11/26 06:28:50 B722 99.7 D 98/11/14 20:09:34 B72Q 98.8 D 98/11/14 20:09:34 B72Q 98.8 D 98/l l/15 07:36:19 B722 98.6 D 98/11/IS 07:36:19 B722 98.6 D 98/l l/23 06:17:06 B722 97.4 D 98/I I/23 06:17:06 B722 97.4 D �1T #1�: 75th S� & 17th Ave. Richfield Date Time �C �� A/D 1�ype Level 98/11/1313:08:46 B742 106.5 D 98/11/1313:08:46 B742 106.5 D 98/11/2614:07:41 B722 104.1 D 98/I1/2614:07:41 B722 104.1 D 98/11/10 13:33:39 B742 103.9 D 98/11/1013:33:39 B742 103.9 D 98/11/15 09:23:32 B722 103.0 D 98/11/15 09:2332 B722 103.0 D 98/11J2611:09:32 B722 102.2 D 9�/11/2611:09:32 B722 102.2 D Rli�i'I' #20: 75th St. c� 3rd Ave. Richfield IDate Time �� �� A/D Type Level 98/11/14 21:16:28 DC9 95.1 D 98/11/14 21:16:28 DC9 95.1 D 98/11/1311:05:36 B722 95.0 D 98111/1311:05:36 B722 95.0 D 98/ll/1313:09:07 B742 94.8 D 98/11/1313:09:07 B742 94.8 D 98/11/0616:16:25 B722 94.0 D 98/11/0616:16:25 B722 94.0 D 98/1 I/22 05:06:47 B72Q 92.8 D 98/I 1/22 05:06:47 B72Q 92.8 D Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 19 Metropolitan Airports Commission T�n Loud�st t�ircraft Noise Events Ident�fied I2MT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St Inver Grove Heights Date Time � M� A/D Level 98/11/20 20:18:50 B722 92.5 A 98/11/20 20:18:50 B722 92.5 A 98/I1/03 09:51:13 B727 91J D 98/11/03 09:51:13 B727 91.7 D 48/1111811:09:05 B722 91.3 D 98/11/1811:09:05 B722 91.3 D 98/11/0116:55:41 B727 91.0 D 98/11/0819:17:15 B722. 91A D 98/11/1519:11:23 B722 91.0 D 98/11/0116:55:41 B727 91A D RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave. Mendota I�eights Date Ti� � Max � Level 98/11/1511:51:45 B722 106.0 D 98/11/1511:51:45 B722 106.0 D 98/11/1319:26:54 B722 105.1 D 98/1I/1319:26:54 B722 105.1 D 98/11/1816:53:15 B722 104.8 D 98/I1/1816:53:15 B722 104.8 D 98/I1/1011:44:39 B722 104.4 D 98/i l/10 I 1:44:39 B722 104.4 D 98/I1/24 11:18:08 ' B722 104.3 D 98/1:1/24 1 L• 18:08 B722 - 104.3 - D �2IVIT #22: Anne Marie 'IYail Inver Grove Heights Date Time �C �� � Type Level 98/I1/2118:41:23 B722 90J D 98/11/2118:41:23 B722 90.7 D 98/11/2108:42:43 B722 90.5 D 98/I1/2108:42:43 B722 90.5 D 98/11/22 06:15:08 � B722 89J D 98/11/22 06:15:08 B722 89.7 D 98/ 11 /04 I 1:01: 30 B 727 89.5 D 98/11/0411:0130 B727 89S D 98/l l/19 d0:20:34 GLII,F 89.1 A 98/11/19 00:20:34 GLILF 89.1 A ,, � R1VgT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. Eagan Date 'ISme •`�/� Ma�e �/D Type Level 98/I1/2912:59:06 B722 95.2 D 98/11/2912:59:06 B722 95.2 D 98/ 1 I/04 11:00:58 B 727 94.5 D 98/11/0411:00:58 B727 94.5 D 98/ I 1/01 12:56:58 B727 93.6 D 98/I1/0112:56:58 B727 93.6 D 98/I 1/22 06:14:41 B722 93.1 D 98/11/22 06:14:41 B722 93.1 D 98/11/0116:20:55 B727 92.6 D , 98/ 11 /29 12:59:06 B 722 - 95.2 ' D � Page 20 Aviation Noise & Sateliite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commission �� �, � ;), t � ., . ��� ., �� .� ... ^ :1 1 " `,, �, , , , , � ,i. ,� • , � : ` " � , � . . Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 21 Metropolitan Airports Commission . .. . . ; ,�, �' �, � 1' . i 1; � �, i � ' • ' ( ', . ;� . . ' d 'i: i Noise Monitor Locations Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #S #9 #10 #11 #12 1 59.5 63.4 64.9 64.7 69.7 70.5 61.0 57.0 41.6 49.6 42.8 43.2 2 61.8 64.9 67.0 65.7 71.5 72.2 60.9 54:1 55.2 61.9 55.9 56.0 3 62.4 63.1 66.8 63.4 71.5 69.5 62.0 48.8. 48.1 58.3 58.7 51.6 4 63.4 65.1 67.3 69.1 75.4 76.7 69.7 66.6 49.1 54.9 543 54J $ 62.7 64.5 67.5 703 78.1 79.2 71.5 71.3 47.6 58.3. 52.8 52.9 � 6 61.1 63.1 66.8 68.0 77.0 79.2 71.0 68.4 42.7 55.8 46.7 51.5 7 58.9 59.4 64.8 63.2 72.1 72.7 59.4 63.1 48.2. 54.5 45.5 48.2 $ 62.2 63.9. 67.7 643 71.2 70.6 48.6 58.9 48.6 56.4 47.4 49.3 9 67.1 69.4 7 L� 69.4 75.3 * 64.7 64.2 4$.5 58.3 49.0 56.8 10 65.3 67.0 70.3 69.3 76.3 79.5 68.2 66.1 49.3 57.9 55.5 58.2 1l 60.5 63.8 66.7 683 76.3 . 78.9 70.7 68.5 42.0 53.4 47.0 54.8 12 60.0 64.5 65.9 66.? 76.3 76.5 - 70.1 67.2 41.3 52.6 50.1 55.7 13 60.9 63.1 66.5 66.5 75.4 77.8 66.6 66.0 44.2 63.1 54.5 59.9 14 57.4 58.7 63.2 63.2 72.8 75.0 67.5 64.7 4b.5 60.7 - 58.0 52.3 15 59.9 62.2 66.4 65.3 71.1 72.2 56.8 60.6 41.3 57.5 53.1 53.6 16 61.5 64.6 67.1 70.0 76.8 80.3 71.6 70.9 45.0 57.3 48.6 49.8 17 59.4 59.1 67.8 65.6 75.7 77.6 67.0 65.1 40.9 51.6 50.2 53.0 18 64.4 66.7 70.8 68.2 74.6 77.1 65.8 65.7 49.2 58.6 52.7 55.4 19 62.4 64.� 66.5 70.1 75.7 78.9 71.5 67.8 51.9 52.5 45.3 56.5 20 59.4 62.1 65.6 67.5 76.9 78.5 71.3 67.0 55.4 51.6 54.6 67.1 21 59.2 60.4 66.3 64.3 71.0 71.5 47.4 60.6 62.1 6$.9 55.6 56.6 22 57.3 59.5 65.0 64.3 71.5 75.8 63.5 64.3 60.7 65.9 53.7 56.7 23 59.5 61.8 66.6 68.2 75.6 77.4 * 6b.2 50.9 63.7 56.1 59.0 24 * 63.2 68.3 65.0 72.2 73.� 58.0 61.8 45.7 63.4 56.4 56.0 25 * 63.0 65.8 67.7 75.1 79.6 70.6 69.1 46.3 55.4 51.9 57.2 26 54.7 58.2 59.6 63.3 68.9 73.2 63.7 63.0 45.7 58.3 53.3 58.8 27 50.1 57.8 62.3 62.8 70.6 70.8 58.0 57.4 46.3 60.7 54.1 52.4 2$ 50.5 58.6 63.0 60.7 67.9 70.9 54.3 563 67.8 70.9 57.9 55.7 29 56.7 64.0 67.5 67.7 74.2 77.1 66.4 64.7 53.6 61.0 50.2 52.0 30 S l.4 64.2 66.4 70.9 78.4 79.4 71.8 69.1 47.0 59.7 57.7 57.5 Mo. Ldn b�•9 63.5 66.9 66.9 743 76.4 67.5 65.6 55.4 61.6..._ . 53.6 56.9 Paoe 26 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs * Less thur: tx•enh•-inur hnurs n(dato avai(ahle ;� , �, --; .� Metropolitan Airports Commission Analysis of Airer�ft No��e Evenis - Aircraft I,dn d�(A) I�ovear�ber Ol to l�tovemb�r 30, 199� l�loise Monitor Locations Dat� #13 #14 #1S #16 #17 #1� #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 1 63.5 70.2 65.8 73.0 64.3 63.9 49.3 53.7 65.1 62.5 74.8 67.7 2 64.9 72.4 66.2 73.7 62.9 64.6 53.6 54.0 63.6 62.1 73.7 69.0 3 65.8 71.3 67.0 73.7 63.2 64.1 50.0 52.5 63.1 64.0 74.5 68.4 4 58.9 71.1 61.3 73.3 51.8 58.0 55.3 51.5 57.8 60.0 70.2 66.0 5 48.9 62.3 59.2 66.0 55.2 62.9 59.2 54.5 45.5 57.5 54.0 62.0 6 57.0 69.6 59.0 70.8 56.5 64.5 57.7 56.3 59.6 61.5 69.1 66.3 % 62.3 6$.2 63.3 72.0 59.4 61.5 55.6 47.4 61.8 62.0 72.2 65.7 $ 65.8 71.6 67.7 72.7 55.2 57.7 45.6 39.4 65.0 64.7 76.9 68.0 9 65.2 71.7 66.3 73.3 * 6�.3 58.7 57.5 62.1 62.3 75.1 68.4 10 61.6 68.8 63.9 72.4 65.4 66.7 55:5 61.4 59.1 63.5 70.9 67.7 11 49.9 64.3 56.7 68.3 56.9 65.7 58.3 59.8 48.8 60.0 61.9 63.7 12 56.5 66.7 59.0 69.5 55.4 * 56.3 52.2 57.9 61.1 65.6 64.5 13 64•8 68•7 66.5 71.9 54.3 * 61.8 57.8 63.7 61.6 74.3 b6.9 14 48•7 64.9 54.2 69.9 63.6 73.1 71.5 63.3 46.1 60.4 60.3 64.1 15 64.6 67.5 66.4 71.9 62.2 70.8 * 54.6 62.8 62.0 75.8 65.2 16 61.2 62.7 47.9 67.6 51.9 56.3 * 55.4 42.0 58.4 55.8 62.0 17 61.0 67.5 60.5 70.1 53.5 54.2 * 48.9 57.1 61.4 67.6 65.5 18 63.8 69.3- 66.8 71.9 49.3 * 50.6 48.4 60.4 61.2 72,8 66.8 19 38.5 65.2 54.5 69.8 60.0 70.3 63.1 57.7 54.6 62.9 61.4 65.6 � 20 50.0 67.0 54.4 70.2 58.0 56.5 67.1 52.8 49.8 61.5 61.5 65.3 21 63.8 68.9 65.7 71.7 50.0 63.0 48.5 - 57.7 62.5 . 64.2. 74.0 65.1 22 60.7 71.5 64.8 74.3 57.3 67.8 56.9 62.2 61.0 63.3 73.5 67.4 23 54.4 65.5 61.8 71.4 61.9 69.5 69.7 57.9 49.8 60.6 68.8 64.6 24 65.7 71.6 68.6 73.8 54.9 56.0 47.3 52.3 64.6 63.6 75.5 67.8 25 55.3 67.1 62.9 71.9 ° 52.8 61.7 54.5 58.9 52.7 60.8 66.8 65.5 26 50.8 65.2 57.6 68.5 68.0 74.9 72.2 57.6 49.1 57.3 63.3 62.3 27 59.8 68.7 62.4 70.5 58.7 61.8 543 41.0 60.1 60.1 71.4 63.5 2$ 61.3 71.8 64.2 71.8 63.6 69.8 65.6 53.1 59.0 61.4 72.9 65.9 29 61.0 66.9 64.4 70.7 58.9 60.3 52.9 45.3 56.9 59.3 71.4 63.5 30 � 65.6 ;6�k4� 70.5 51.5 56.8 50.3 54.6 47.1 60.0 66 2� 64.7 Mo. Ldn 61.5 � 68.9 � 63.8 ) 71.5 60.4 68.7 63.4 56.6 60.2 61.6 71.8 66.0 � Aviation Noise & Sateilite Programs Page 27 * Less than tx•enh• fnur hnucr njdutcr ovuilahle Metropolitan Airports Commission �_ . ��� ' �, , �; ;�, : . =� . . �. •, ; 1 t ! l! � / , � 1 ' : :1. �.; , .; ,, ; : ` ., '. i 1 r..i' • . �; ,! .. ;�;�, � 1 • � • i l � �- � � ♦ �' � . ' • �` ' 1 . . � �; ; � ,� � � . � .'; ;� . i,�, � � �/ i 1' 1. Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs • Metropolitan Airports Commission �nneap�lis - St. Paul International Aflrport I�ovember 199� : � � �; t� / ;.1, .. .` 1: �' , • . ;'�. ��, . . i, ;', . , . . '': ' 'i . • �' � i � i �i� ��� �� ' �� �� � �• .� �I�''� � • � , .�� _� n� i ��� �r.. ��� . 290 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE LEFT COUNT=6 (2.1%) RIGHT COUNT=284 (91.9�} �� `.J DEVIATION FROM CENTtR OF GATE (ffj � � _ Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs 1�/ Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission '' �, r� '• ' . , �;; ,' • �� . r�• �• . :(. 6059... Tot�l 12L, and 12IZ Carrier Jet Departures 0... Carrier Jet I)eparture - Early T%rnout (0.0% (1�lorih �id.e �efore 'I'hree 1��Iiles) Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams Metropolitan Airports Commission �: . ;i 1 /' ' ;i ,/ 1 . '�� . . �, ., . .: .; . .: ��� � • .� �;1 1 .: ` ' . �I�� .� ' >I; ��. : �I � . , �, :• ,, �, 1, ': i -, . • • .r•�. . , � � r! � �. ,, ,�: : �, , . Aviation Noise & Satellite Procrams Page 5 Metropolitan Airports Commission 1VIf nneapo�is � 5te Paul Intern�i�onai Airp�rt l�ovember 199� �/ ' � . : � � ; , , . 1,�, . �, . . � • 1 . • � � i / 1> 1 �, 1 ... � ; � (, ; ,�, , . 33 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE o L�� T CO�NT=33 (100.0�} RIGHT COUNT=O (0.0�) 0 0 � 0 � � � � a Q ;- ,., Q a o � Q � � � � � � 0 0 N O O O O O DcVIATION � �Oi�i CENTE� OF GATE (ff� � _ _ _ _ _ ( Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams Metropolitan Airports Commission I�inneapolis � Ste P�u� ���e�°n�tflon�� Airport I�tovemb�r 199� I � / 1 , , �,' � .; . . �; • :t . . >�: ,� , • ! • ,�' • 1 . ' � ,.? t � �! �; � � ' ., • i' / ..��.� � �• • �■ � t • DEViq � ION ��OM C� viER C� GAiE (f!) . Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � Pa;e 7 Metropolitan Airports Commission �� Southern �oundary Co�°rfldor �ate Pene�ration Analysis , IVlinneapol�s - Si. Paul Iniernational Afrpori I�ovea�ber 199� .� . � �, , ., . . xl•�. • • � � � �'�. �. .. � �; � � , • Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � �; Metropolitan Airports Commission �Iinneapol�s - Ste Paul I�iernat�onal .t��rport November 199� 6059 0.: 'Toi�l 12L ancl 12R �arr�er Jet Dep�rtures 6 oe. Carrier Jet Departures (0.1 % 5° South of Corridor (5° �outh of 30I, I.oealizer) 6 TR�CKS CROSSED P-GATE LEFT COUN1=6 (1u0.0�) RIGHT COUNT=O. (0.0%) �� DtViA�ION =�OM �� NTER OF GATE (f� r!� Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9 Metropolitan Airports Commission I�Iinneapolis - �te Paul Internat�onal �.irport I\lovember 1998 :�� ,/ � ,;, , � • , . . �;•�. . ,i , . . �.;�. . ,; ;� 1 `i'. � �. ;. �,,. .. . DEUTATION FROM CENTER OF GATE (ft) Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs ,, ; ; ; � x�r �• �� _� ��` ���'�� �� TO: FROIVI: SUBJECT: DATE: DEPARTNIENT OF ENVIRONhiE1�1T Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council Shane VanderVoort, Aviation Noise Programs Correction to the December 1998 Technical Advisor's Report January 26, 1998 In the December 1998 Technical Advisor's Report the Fleet Mis Percentages for Stage 2 and Stage 3 activity on pags one were transposed. Unfortunately, the packets had been mait_ed before the correction could be made. For your convenience please find page one of December 1998 tirith the corrected Stage 2 and Stage 3 percentages. We apologize for the inconvenience and will strive to maintain the hi;hest levels of accuracy. � Metropoli[an Airports Commission �perations and Complaint �ummary i�ecember 199� Operations Summary - All Aircraft Runway Arrival % Use Departure % Use 04 24 0.1% 49 0.3% 22 71 0.4%a 998 S.I�Io 12 4279 21.6% 4247 21.8% 30 15417 77.9% 14172 72.8% NISP December Fleet itilix Percentage Stage S��'�ed Scheduled ANOMS ANOMS 1997 1998 Count 199� Count 1998 Stage 2' 3$.3�0 26.4% 42.6% 26.2% Stage 3 61.7�'0 73.6% -57.��'0 73.8 r"o Airport December Complaint Summary Airport 1997 1998 M3P 479 1474 Airlake 0 2 Anoka 4 3 Crystal 0 1 Flying Cioud 4 4 Lafce Elmo 0 0 St. Paul 2 0 Misc. 1 0 TOTAL 490 1�84 December Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Recorrl ,., �i. �,.z,,,,i,�, � �� F i�...s-, ,r rt... . .. - — - -. � ,. � `s ��Zt�- L r. �.3i sl� r�.,'+a t��.a�; _ .:,.',, �,e , ._..� y�� �> k��.. yY.,.� y FY �, _ 4„��; 3 : .fd+_,,..-�?�s�:<.. r'a�{f:t'�.br:s`; ����•. �:....:,.�.,..s-�...-,M.<, - y i � � v � - i i� I���,�.� • .,,. ._......_,-�.M-.�.._=K ....��....,_.._.-...w.v...�..,. _.�.....-,.,,. •�.....a.:.,.......,.�:...,,.....�m,� �����l���l� ' Aviation Noise 8: Satellite ProQrams � C � ". Pa�e i ,r ... Nlinneapolis / St. �'aul International Airport w... .......... , MONTHLY MEETING - Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council c��;n,�: Rnbert P.Johnton u;�� c�,w.,,,��: Thanus Hueg Terhnic�d Ad�tisnc Aoy Fuhrmmn Sacrrlan•: Me1L�:a Smvronskl Airharne Erprcss: Erlan eaces Air Tiunspnn Assxiatinn: Paul McGraw � A[PA: Rnn Jnhnson Cin• r jBlnnmin,qlan: - PeVona Lee � Vern Wilmz Cin• njBumsl•i1/e: Ed Poner c,�• �>f�,��,: Jon Hohenslein LAaa Staricha Cin• r�f Im•erG�m•e Nrighrs: Dale }Iamrtnns Cin• njMendom Neigbts: Jill Smith Kevin Hakbelder Cin• njMinnrupolis: Dcaa Lindberg Steve hflnn Joe Lee Gieno Strand Sandra Colvin Roy Mlke Cramcr Cin� njRirhfield: Kristal Smkes Dawn Wdtze! Cin• njSr. Lnuis Park: Raber[ Adrews Cin• nf Sr. Paul: Thomas H. Hueg cr�• , fs��h.�, �,x�: Glenda Spiotta Delm Air Lines lna: Lnrry Goehring DNL Airx•ms: BrSan Simonson Frderd Erpress: Dan DeBord Frderal Ariu�inn .Ulministnnian: Rnn Glaub Cindy Grecne MAC Stqjj:• Dick Kelnz MB.tA: Rnbert P. Johnson Mrwha NonhN•rs1 AirlinA: Phil Burke Mrtrnprdi�un Airpnns Commisa'ion: GxnmLssbner Alt�n C,usper MN qir Nariniwl Guarth. �ts�jorRoyJ.Shetka . N�irdrH�rst Airlinrs: Jiark Salmen Jennifer Sayre Slere Hulme . Nancv Stovdt St Pauf Chmnhrr of'Crunmrn•r: Rolf MWdleton S�ai Cnuntn� Airlinra: (:urdon C,ravr; Unitrd Airlinrs /nc.: Kevin Black Unilyd Purrrl Srn�ire: 111ke Cever U.S. Air Fiurr Rrxrn•r: CaptaYn David J. Gerken Metmpolitan Airports Commission Declaration of Purposes l.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interest, convenience, and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, intemational, national, state, and local, in and through this state; promote the efficient, safe, and economical handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international programs of air transportation; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in tha[ area; 2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum environmental impact from air navigation and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement, control of airport area land use, and other protective measures; and 3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental policies and minimize the public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around airports. Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council Statement of Purpose This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfare of the communities adjoining Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport - Wold-Chamberlain Fieid, a public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airport; through study and evaluation on a continuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviation of the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effecdve procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and of aircraft using the same; and through dissemination of information to the afFected communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions initiated and taken to alleviate the problem. Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Councit Representation The membership shall include representatives appointed by agencies, corporations, associations and governmentai bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users, have a direct interest in the operation of the airport. Such members will be calied User Representatives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and Public Representatives shall at all times be eGual in number. 1fie Airport 24-hourNoise Hotline is 726-94/!. Canplainrs to the hotline do not resu[t in changes in Airport uctivit�•, but provide a public soundinQ board and airport information oude[. The hodine is staffed durin� husiness hours. Mvndnt• - Frida�: This report is prepared and printed in house b Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator Shane VanderVoort, ANOMS Technician _ Questions or comments may be directed to: MAC - Aviation Noise Programs Minneapolis / SL Paul Internationai Airport 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Tel: (612) 725-633I, Fax: (612) 7�-6310 ANSP Home Page: http://www.macavsat.org Nietropolitan Airports Commission Aviation IVoise Prograrns R _ -•� x �* t, �� � s y"�� c�r,-5 6 �..".: ti y Y ,¢'. ri. w� fG r "`i. t 'f. � � Operations and C'o�aplaint Su�amar�y 1 Operations Summary - All Aircraft ..................................................................................... l MSP December Fleet Mix Percentage .................................................................................1 Airport December Complaint Summary ..............................................................................1 December Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record .........................................1 Minneccpolis -�'t. I'aul International A�rport C'omplaant Su»ama�°y 2 ComplaintSummary by City ...............................................................................................2 �4vaalcable Z'ime, for° l�unwczy �Jse 3 Tower Log Reports - All Hours ....:............................................................................ Tower Log Reports - Nighttime Hours ...................................................................... � �' i � t � !' Runway Use Report Decernber 1998 ...................................................................................4 C'arrie� Jet Ope�-aiions s Runway Use Report December 1998 ...................................................................................5 1l�iglatia�rae - All �peraiions 6 Runway Use Report December 1998 ...................................................................................6 l�ightiime C'a�°�°�er Jet ()perations 7 Runway Use Report December 1998 ...................................................................................7 C'zz�-rier Jet Ope�°cztions b,� 7'J'p� � Ai�°cra,�'t Identi �er cznd l�esc�°ipii�n 7'able 9 Runwa,y �lse m l�ay/IVi�ht l�eriods - All Ope�°ations 10 DaytimeHours ...................................................................................................................10 , ? �'om�uni�y C�ve�°,�'lig�hi �nalysis 11 \� " Camer Jet Operations - All Hours .....................................................................................11 Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30 pm - 6 am) ......................................................1 1 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs C � , I�ernote 1Vlonito�-ing� Sa% Locations 12 ��' C'arrier Je� �4r�-ival Related' 1Voise Events 13 Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT .....................................................13 C`a�-�°aer Jet Depcc�-ture �elated 1Voise Ev�nts 14 Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ................................................14 7'en Loudest Ai�-cr°ccft l�oise Events Ic�'enii ied 1 S 7'en Lor�clest A�r°cra, ft 11�oise Evenis Iclent�° ied � 6 Z'en Loudesi Aircr°a, ft 1i%ase �vents Identi �ed' � 7 7'en Loudest A.irc�-a, ft 1Voise Events Iclenti aed 18 7'en Lou�est A.ircraft 1Voi�se Events Identi�ed 19 7'en L,o��d'est � irc�a, ft N�ise �venis Iclenii ted 20 Flighi T�°ack �ase 1V�a� 21 Ai�-po�°t l��is� and' Oper°ataons �Ionitor°ing Systern �li�hi Z'rac&s 22 Carrier Jet Operations - December 1998 ...........................................................................22 �lir°p��-t Noise anc� Operations Monrto�°in� �`ystem �'li�ht Trczcks 23 Carrier Jet Operations - December 1998 .........................................:.................................23 Ai�po�-t 1Voise �nd �pe�°cztions Mo�eitorin�g System �li�ht T�°acks Z� Camer Jet Operations - December 1998 .......................................................................... 24 �4ir,po�°i Noise ancl �pe�-a�zons lt�onito�°ing� System Flaght Tracks 25 Carrier Jet Operations - December 1998 .......................................................................... 25 Ancal,ys�s af'Ai�°crca,�'t l�oise Events - Aii'C�'�1,� �dn CI�(1�.� 26 �n�zlysi� �, f�4i�c�°a, ft 1V�ise Events -14i�°c�-af t Ld,� d�(A) 27 � Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs (�. Metropolitan Airports Commission r/' :1 ' . i .; ��' ,� � .. � .. �I: . � . �. � � C�perations Summary - All Aircraft Runway Arrival % �Ts� I)eparture % Use 04 24 0.1% 49 0.3% 22 71 0.4% 998 5.1 % 12 4279 21.6% 4247 21.8% 30 15417 77.9% 14172 72.8% M�1' I3ecember �leet 1l�ix Percentage Stage �cheduled Scheduled AIVOIIVIS ANCi�IS 1997 1998 Count 1997 Count 199$ Stage 2 38.3% 73.6% 42.6% 73.8% Stage 3 61.7% 26.4% - 57.4% 26.2% Airport December Complaint Summary r�irport 1997 199� MSP 479 1474 Airlake 0 2 Anoka 4 3 Crystal 0 1 Flying Cloud 4 4 Lake Elmo 0 0 St. Paul 2 0 Misc. 1 0 TO�'AL 490 1484 Iiecember Operations Summary -�'AA Airport T'raffic Record Aviation Noise & Satellite Proarams �`��b�-rc„G ��L4^-�Q 0 Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission l�inn-eapolas - Sto Paul International Airport Cornplaflnt Surnmary - Decembe� 199� Complaint Summary by City t City Arrival Iieparture Total Percentage A le Valle 0 3 3 0.2% Bloomin ton 0 11 11 0.8% Burnsville 0 3 3 0.2% 74 Inver Grove Hei�hts I 2 Ma le Plain _ 0 ...__.:., Mendota _____ .._.,.__ � � � Mendota Hei hts 8 Minnea olis 67 Richfield 1 St. Paul 26 e 'Total 206 Time of Day T'ime Total 00:00 - 05:59 36 06:00 - 06:59 47 07:00 - 11:59 619 12:00 - 15:59 286 � 16:00 - 19:59 135 20:00 - 21:59 169 22:00 = 22:59 122 3• - �• �'otal 1474 17 ..,..___ 91 ..._._.,_ ..._,__ 6.3% 5 8 0.6% 1 1 0.1 % 100 121 $.4% 17 23 1.6% 1 1 0.1% 1 1 0.1 % 14 22 1.5% ���� 1061 ....73.7°I< 55 3.8% 8 2.4% , ��,,`�~� 1233 1439 100.0% �� � �� � ._:.:�: Nature of Complar�- �, � � � ` Nature af Complaint Total Excessive Noise 1288 Earl /Late 128 Low Fl in 11 Structural Disturbance 10 Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs ne Run-up 0 n Total 1474 - �v��lable �'ime for Runway �Tse Tower I..o� �2eports - I�ecerriber 199� All �I�aurs 0% 60% � � %p Metropolitan Airports Commission � �� ��� �3% �% �% Note: For 1 D%a of the time available, simultaneous departure operations occurred lo% off the parallels and rwy 22 resulting in an overall use greater than 100%. Nighttime Hours 0% 0 °Io 5% v ��� �� 94% 78% 1% Note: For 6% of the time availabfe, simultaneous departure operurions occurred (% vfj'the parallels and ni.t• 22 resulting in an overul! use greater than 100°Io. Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission All Opera$�onS Runway Use Report Decerrr�ber 199� 0.3 % ,� . . � , r � �. �, '�' �' �,� 1•�. - �i � �. „ <�., _ _.. �.,n .i _ � . ,E.,,� � ,,.«�. . , ,. ��,,_ �, .. ..,z w �.., ,.�:. �.,..�..m, _ , .:.. .� __.. �� :�,.,.. � ��,_�.... . . �,,. .: ,_.:,.�..��� . ����� ����� � ��� �_���� �' • 1 . i '� ; 1�1 � :•�� . , � „� ; , , • � ,,, � 1 � ', �; : � �, � i � :1 �1 :'. ':, � �� �%� . .-a_..::..,- :, •::.:.,:.. � •_..,�'i� }.� (.. .. u -,...._.�:: ,,...:_�,::..:m � IIII ,/ �,� � ' ��5: � � t ^{S > .. - .. . .: � � y�. � lS� �', � � /, � '� / e �.«�.�.,.. .... �, .sr., . _.. c�L....��v� .� .:�i. ,l . xo1.FYx�.,v � .x..... . _, � , . <. _ .. ,: . :,,,..., ' �! m ,_:.,, <..4: ...,,. _�...,. _ ( I - i � � � �� • � � � � � . �,,�r. ���. , ��������� � � � �:� � • � � � � � � � � � ; � „� � • � � �r� � � � ��i 1 � 1 t • • '. ��� • ;,� 1' � 1• . '. ,:�..-:.�: �......,x. Y'S`'�r'r �4'L.'q�'1,2"y q.�'"'• vr»....u..-.r- ,.�i::a�.nr. �:�n�....z.......r...r� �. I����� i � � • � �� . � �;��. � � � i . � ' 1 ��'N'���,��"'`✓�S'yr�'��x,a�rv �y � � 1 { ( � � � , •.,,�. r� ,! ', r�� ���������:��:��, � Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs F , .` • � ,. ��J ;� • ,, �I' IZunway �.Jse Report Decear�ber 199� � � 0.0% 74.2% 21.7 0.3% Metropolitan Airports Commission � � � ,��`° �` ; r F� d �' � Ic�� £.. t . l�� t'� y� � - -,�r, ..,.-a_�.-.. . .......��,� ._« uex �vr,,..�,� � ..........�..< .. ,.. �.-u:: «.z. .........:�... :. � ..:.:... �;. .,....�..n..-..:..� ar i.n...v�, }': .,_.,,� �' i .,' • • � � � �. � 1. �� ��. f � �� � � :• ; � � � ; k , � i „n,.�.,,.-..�.R�,,.a.�:,w.,,,,,r.. .,.,.„.r .,� _;,,��.�.��, .:.... .........�.,_ ..�.,U,�,r u,..,.,,: .: ,� �U �� ��� � � �� �, �:�u. �.__��,u ����� � � �� � � ��� � � ��� � . � 'i � • 'i ������ 1 .,� ��� � � ��� � • ��• 'i ; �• 'i � � � � ����� .�. � � ���i,»�,, �� � � �� � � � � � ..=rv.<,n .w.....n. �.�L��t�.� wF A��.. n.na...r.�...r�w:, -...a n.nr,. n,..n=, _ w , n � �x �p .�� ; - 1 . . '' Ny�s... �i`�� � � �� ���t� � � . ( � � i f � � ' I �I � i ,� � �=. ..a..�'�ttrr.Ct. �'.'3��v �uar„ l. �3 :K',,.�-,.,v.- .�>..,,�x.,.. : .. ,- .�..�,:n.. ,...,.:... ,,;,,,,. „,�. �. �g . ,. -�, . ,,.,>�_.:.,..,,-r..-.,.,.,..}..,�,�z. ..�.,....�.-,y .:...,K.��.... .:.z. .. .� , .4.,.. .� �� �..,.:.,-:: , ,, -��� , ,,I � , �I , � • 1 , I p � � • �I ' �■� • � I� � II, �I�III , • � '' 1, , , , , � � , II� � IIIII � II� C i � : . ". ; � . • � : ". � � .�-� ��„� 4. ,/' �. III � ii�if�� � , ,�,�' x �..K. �..._ ������. _ s i �. , � �'+�"u `�„t nM�,�c.�k� `' 1 1 �� ( � _� �.:� � � �,,,,.,w-,�...._�.sN,,.a,..<.�,..,.,.. r .,.��,�ta'`�s�"�f�'..t:.�,.,.,..-..w...,, .�:,u�.....t.....-.�..,..,,.„.,.�,,.W.�..,.,m_,.... .,..,,�....,.a...�:,,�..>�.,,,..�._..w�.��-.-,,.�;.� Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs PaQe 5 Metcopolitan Airports Commission Ni�htiime - A.11 Opera�ions F�unway ITse �2eport Decernber 199� 0.9% 58.8% � 13.9 0.4% 10.9 0 �4.9% 29.4% �• �• �. . �. , �� � ')`•,. � ' ,� _ +� � i �. . ,,. : , .�.....w „ „�, ,._ ._ �.,.,.,_ , ,. .. .�.. :..... . .�. r_.,...... . � �. � ��,�,... _. � ,. . , , �, . ,..�n . .. .,.. ., a..e,,, _.. �...� ������.�:'�■� , I � �i � � 1�� �' �.'�� �' 1 � • � :.•�, `! ,� �•�, � ���� � � "'' ; '"� : �.� -, � • �: . .�, . .• :•. ,�.w.x.,,: . r� �� ��`�� .,,�� ' "L�� ��. � . ��' - � � �. . _ �r„ .,._r� ' � , �., �_ , ,.r, , � � ..,. .� _ � n' ; sir � �- � . = t x;.; S�[ y t9 i i �- �� � �(� �� �. '�'' � i � X �,.` `r 'Y • i i;t., x ,� �'� , v� �a•X�-....�. .b� .- ....,.., , r.a.� � ,�u.. ..v. y. �, M.r.>,; . _ i., ,..:;: .. � .:,.:.: ..__,�u ..��_.,.. ....._, . .. , , • / ._,,..:�. �.. ...... .. ........�. ., ...r .. ,..,- ,_a ._.,. ,..:.-... �� , �, , • I,, .,i�,■ ._.., , / .. � • I � � �/ �,�,��■� • 1, �'I.I • • � • ' I�' � �� �� i ,,'.�, � I �IIIII �I i � . :1 : , fi��■ ' �' , i• � 1 1 , i ■i '. F� ..' , � ',��C�y'Ii�,��';��,����. ._.. � I I � . :� I I � /. �;..w .'.,.:■: �' � � /■ �,., - „�"a3+�.+<+�,n,.i$e ,e: r K�?.� Pace 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams � . �, . ;.� ;���.-�, 1 Rundvay IJse IZepori December 1998 0.0 % Metropolitan Airports Commission �- :._.,,.,- _.�..X.�V.._ a� ,�.... � ....„. .�.z..,:..�,x, ,..� .... . .. ........... .�:,�.._.,n,.:, .,,.:� .,.,�...,..,. ,..,�,,.�.-... _ _`-s r 3 � � � � { �,.�� . .� . i ,.., ( � �.�� ' �1 . — � 1. .1. � .� �. � . i _ � k.., ..;�,._,.. �-,..-_.,.,. >...._r:.�,,.. . ._.,...,�. �e,-......:..,, ...o..._.�„��... , � _�.a „-.....:,:,... ��. xr.Fx �....,..a.,,:,..,._...;._.�..�, ..�,..,�.�.,re. ..:_,,...-,�-.�:a,.. �r...wn _:.....: ■ ', ,., �.�■■' �,.,,. �■ , •,' w. • � / '; �/ �'3���' �� :.,, ��� ..,, ����� � , : �, ��■��l� � • ��- � � , .,, � � • ��,,p�� • • , $ � : •, � _.:��.,, ...w..: �:- @Ty y,-�P.�FY ��`�C�j^e.Rk/'m . 1<..�..,..,.u. :,:�. ...�u,-.��.u, ,« �i.�,,...,.K ..n _ �„w,.-y�..�.. .. ,.,w, <. . . ...�.s .. u ,.. .. w. � , m .,.,., , _. ., ��...�c...: p , , �' ,. t� k�"A'�.(j{ii1� r� S�,i„q � . ' �� ." I � C � � '. :'. / ' � �rv�k �R k t����l�� ,a„s.,,,...-... � ...�:„-. . .., .,,,,. �s,�v Y?`: .,.'�, ..,4a . _ r'ws r:,..��,v.� o �. w..,, �.., ,.... �.: . , �_ , .. �.:. .: ..�. ,a,-....�.��.� t �.,. .. ..,,.> .._ ...: .,,.,m,.,« �. �..r .,+ . .. .... �. , ,- � .,,.� ...,._. « i'•1 � � � � ^�/ u���o♦� � � I ���1 ' : ,���� ..,, �,-� • I / C � • I I `III , ��/ � , � ,�/ .��.�� • ,.��� � /, . ' • .� • , IX I � � / ; / II � t��s.*-�°w—� �,r�'t� � II I i 1�� .� 1� t�'`�tsR>0'�''�`l�����`�ti�x,,��4�"�r�•��„ ', ��� I���I, ir�. ��. � I�. �.,..,,ws..K .�».,ar..........,.,.....n�''�.-.��F�'M'�7��t�� �.....,..K. , .�.,..�,�ur...w ,..,...,,,�-Am.�..,. ,.. ,w,:.,,.�a,w�.U,w. r-»�..,., .......-M�� ,. �.�,....�..,.a.,.>,�.......1_�.��....��..,... Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 7 Metropolitan Airports Commission .� - ' �' ;��' il ' � .� 1 1, �� ',1, . �;. . �., �;�� • �. . � . . . � � �1 . � . : : � : : . : . . . . � . ., . ., . . , . ; .. : :. �. :•.. .• .� � :• F100 L101 MD 11 ' ' lV1LOt7 � B72-1 /2 B73-1/2 BAl l DC8-5/6/7 894 44 10 �1503 2776 999 1 211 3353 28065 PaQe 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs f 0.3% 0.1 % 0.0% 10.8% 0.0% 3.4% 2.6% 0.3 % 1.4% 0.0% 0.2°Io � 0.0°Io 0.1 % 0.2% 0 3% � . o �a�o�% w�tQ.�� I.� 0.2% , 0.0% `....:.� 9.8% 0.2% 0.0% 4.6% 1.4% 3.4% 0.6% 24.4% 0.7 % 3.2 % 0.2 % 0.0% � 5.4% 9.9°Io 3.6 % 0.0% °��'P. `� � ��A.�E.' .�.� 0.8% _ __ � 11.9% 100 % Identifier A306 A310 A319 A320 A340 B72-1/2 B72Q B73-1/2 B 733 B 734 B 735 B736 ---------_____ -----_______ 37B Q -------._.__-- B 742 -----_._.__ B 744 B7-----_____ --------______ B 76-2/3 B 7------ B--_____ BA46 CAR1 -----__._._ DC 10 DC------_ D 8C Q DC9 DC9Q E145 FI 0 ----_ L101 MD11 MD 0 S F3 Metropolitan Airports Commission A�rcrai't Iden��fier and Descr°iptf on'Table Aircraft Description AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300B4-600 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A310 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A319 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A340 BOEWG 727-100/200 SERIES BOEING 727 HUSH KIT BOEING 737-100/200 SERIES BOEIlVG 737-300 BOEING 737-400 BOEING 737-500 BOEING 737-600 BOEING 737-700 BOEING 737-800 BOEING 737 HUSH KIT BOEING 747-100 BOEING 747-200 BOEING 747-300 BOEING 747-400 BOEING 757-200/300 SERIES BOEING 767-200/300 SERIES BOEING 777-200/300 SERIES BRITISH AEROSPACE BAC 111 BRITISH AEROSPACE 146 (REGIONAL 1ET) CANADAIR 650 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DClO MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8-500/600/700 SERIES MCDOi'�VELL DOUGLAS DCS-70 HUSH KIT �MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 MCDOMVELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT EMBRAER I45 FOKKER 100 LOCKHEED TRISTAR L 1011 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 11 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIES SAAB 340 (PR(�P) Aviation Noise & Satellite Proarams Pa�e 9 Metropolitan Airports Commission � , • ;� �, r '� • �; .� .. :, �, . � �, . � 1 1 ' ;r . ' . i . ' • ,'1 1 ;� • � • l '1 i Daytime Hours Runway I)epartures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Totai Day Name Day Use Day Use 04 40 0.2% 19 0.1% 59 12L 1910 10.3% 2013 10.9% 3923 12R 2045 11.1% 2100 11.3% 4145 22 889 4.8% 62 0.3% 951 30L 6786 36.8% 7329 39.4% 14115 30R 6801 36.8% 7070 38.0% 13871 Total 18471 100% 18593 100% 37064 I�tighttime Hours Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Name l�tight Use Night Use Totall�iight 04 9 0.9% 5 0.4% 14 12L 115 11.6% 63 5.3% 178 12R 177 17.8% 103 8.6% 280 22 109 10.9% 9 0.8% 118 30L 280 28.1% 748 62.4% 1028 30R 305 30.7% 270 22.5% 575 �'otal �95 100% 1198 100% 2193 Pa�e 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Prosrams �� Metropolitan Airports Commission C�rrflrntxn�ty Overfl�ght Analy�is ll�Iinneapolis - St. Paul Internaiional Airport T�ecember 199� Carrier Jet C3perations - All Hours 1Vumber Number Total Percent IVumber of Overflight Area �rrivals I3epartures Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations Operations Operations per 24 I-�ours Over So. Minneapolis/ 3055 10366 13421 47.8% 432.9 No. Richfield Over So. Richfield/ 13 555 568 2.0% 18.3 Bloomington Over St. Paul - 43 5 48 0.2% 1.6 Highland Park Over Eagan/ 10990 3039 14029 50.0% 452.6 Mendota Heights Total � 2$066 100% 905.4 Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30pm - 6 am) IVumber 1\iumber �O� Percent I`iumber of Overflight Area �,p�v�is I�epartures Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations Operations �perations per 24 Hours Over So. Minneapolis/ 130 338 468 30.5°Io 15.1 No. Richfield Over So. Richfield/ 2 77 79 5.1% 2.6 Bloomington Over St. Paul - 7 0 7 0.5% p.2 Highland Park Over Eagan/ 81 I 168 979 63.9% 31.6 Mendota Heights Tot�l 1533 A00% 49.5 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Paae 1 I Metropolitan Airports Commission Rernoie 1Vlonii�ring Site L.ocations Airport l\1o�se and Operaiions Nionitoring Systern Page 12 Aviation Noise & Sateilite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commission E ��€ j i a E ,� �, �% � � � .�� �, � • �i r�t �• • � , '�, :• � ,!: �1; �1 Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each i2MT RMT Events Events Events Events ID City Approximate Street Lacation �SdB �OdB >90dB >100dB 1 Minneapolis Xences Avenue & 41st Street 1338 38 1 0 �' Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd 3treet 1304 174 0 0 3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 1486 975 60 0 4 Minneapotis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 1257 350 3 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 1564 1222 165 2 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 1384 982 196 0 .7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 15 6 1 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 10 I 1 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 52 34 3 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 44 32 9 0 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 21 0 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 10 1 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 218 3 0 0 14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 6984 151 3 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Le3cington Avenue 597 24 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane 6325 3014 14 0 17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 23 7 0 0 18 Richfield 75ih Street & 17th Avenue 22 4 0 0 19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84[h Street 18 1 0 0 20 Richfield 75th Sireet & 3rd Avenue 7 0 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Bazbara Avenue & 67th Street 218 3 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 3593 " 20 0 0 23 Mendota Heigh[s End of Kenndon Avenue� 2754 138 0 0 24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 7287 203 2 0 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13 Metropolitan Airports Commission � , . . '' . ;�, � . �� . �, , � � , . �.. . � t�:� , Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT �.. RMT Events Events Events Events ID City Approarimate Street Location �SdB �OdB >90dB >100dB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 953 235 $ 0 2 . Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 1198 481 44 0 3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 1825 905 154 4 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 1399 529 67 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 5$th Street 4142 1893 534 63 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 4631 2256 970 203 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 4432 1518 196 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 2059 733 � 100 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 33 8 1 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 11 7 4 1 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 34 8 3 0 12 St. Paul Alton 5treet & Rockwaod Avenue 8 2 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 1186 235 14 0 14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 1590 548 63 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Le�cington Avenue 1211 311 25 0 16 ��agan Avalon Avenue &�las Lane 1479 714 137 6 17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 329 97 26 0 18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 533 326 124 14 19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 495 " 220 37 2 20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 268 44 4 1 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 618 156 1 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 658 115 3 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 18-i0 814 284 20 24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 1383 367 11 0 \ Page 14 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams ( ) Metropolitan Airports Commission � . .:� �',. .,i�� . � � .. .�, �; �, I2MT #1: Xen�es Ave. & 41st St. Minneapolis Date Titne � M� A/D Level 98/12/1911:53:08 B722 92.3 D 98/ 12/ 16 09: 27:26 B 722 91.5 D 98/12/1011:10:37 B722 90.8 D 98/12/27 09:34:13 B722 90.7 D 98/12/2517:34:27 B722 90.5 D 98/12/20 21:17:04 B722 90.4 D 98/12/2810:37:56 B722 90.4 A 98/12/1614:26:37 B722 90.4 D 98/12/3I10:07:43 B722 90.2 D 98/12/2314:29:16 B722 90.0 D RMT #3: W. Elznwood St ��elmont Ave. IVlinneapolis Iiate Time Ty� �� A/D Level 98/12/2314:28:43 B722 101.5 D 98/12/I107:57:10 B722 101.3 D 98/12/0915:04:08 B722 101.1 D 98/12/27 06:45:46 B722 100.2 D 98/12/0516:23:39 B722 99.8 D 98/12/2211:23:10 B722 99.�� D 98/12/2713:08:57 B742 98.8 D 98/12/27 09:33:25 B722 98.4 D 98/ 12/ 16 14:26:07 B 722 98.3 D 98/ 12/04 I 8:59:49 B 722 98.0 A. RMT #2: Fremont Ave. $z 43rd S� Minneapolis Date Time �C Max � Type Levet 98/12/2710:51:28 B722. 95.9 D 98/12/0916:21:15 B722 95.7 D 98/12/IS 20:58:14 B722 95.5 D 98/I2/I513:2137 DC9 953 D 98/12/2716:19:45 B722 95.3 D 98/12/0120:53:16 B722 95.3 D 98/12/03 20:36:57 B722 95.1 D 98/12/2311:54:21 B722 94.3 D 98/12/16I1:36:00 B722 94.0 D 98/12/25 21:11:21 B722 93.9 D RI�1T #4: Oakland t�ve. & 49th St. Nlinneapolis Date Time �C Max � 1�pe Level 98/12/2716:19:22 B722 982 D 98/12/24 09:5634 B722 98.0 D 98/12/30 20:03:47 B722 98.0 D 98/12/25 21:10:52 B722 97.6 D 98/12/1� 14:58:46 DCIO 97.3 D 98/12/03 20:36:30 B722 96.8 D 98/12/22 09:33:46 B722 96.5 D 98/12/2212:35:49 B722 95.6 D 98/12/2311:16:51 B722 95.4 D 98/12/31 10:06:53 B722 95.4 D Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page IS Metropolitan Airports Commission . . . . �;. �1� ' . 1 ` ''� .: � 1. �� • RMT #5: 12th Ave. �& 58th St. Minneapolis Date Time �C Max � Tj�pe Level 98/12/1716:47:33 B722 108.8 D 98/1210711:01:44 B722 106.8 D 98/12/0311:12:58 B722 104.9 D 98/12/0514:16:00 B722 104.7 D 98/12/0611:46:16 B722 104.4 D 98/1210311:54:27 B722 104.4 D 98/12/3107:28:10 B722 104.2 D 98/12/1615:09:21 DC9Q 104.1 D 98/12/17 06:28:06 B722 103.7 D 9$/12/27 06:45:21 B722 103.6 D R1YIT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th S� Nlinneapolis Date �me `vc Ma�c �p Type Level 98/12/0311:06:53 B722 108.9 D 98/12/25 21:10:16 B722 108.6 D 98/12/OS 21:53:48 B722 107.3 D 98/12/28 22:09:15 B72Q 107.3 D 98/12/2716:18:50 B722 107.2 D 98/12/1514:58:16 DC10 107.1 D 98/12/2212:37:46 B722 106.7 D 98/12/1211:17:20 DC9Q 106.7 D 98/12/0910:21:19 DC9Q 106.6 D 98/12/1411:18:15 C750 106.5 D � " RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th S� Richfield Date Time �C M� � Type Level 98/12/12 07:26:51 B722 99A D 98/12/17 09:53:52 B722 98.8 D 98/12/1616:19:51 B722 98.4 D 98/12/2514:43:04 B722 98.3 D 98/12/17 08:32:40 B722 97.8 D 98/12/3018:44:58 B722 97.1 D 98/12/23 09:51:33 B722 96.9 D 98/12/27 1I:53:30 B722 , 96.8 D 98/12/2711:40:39 B722 96.7 D 98/12/3113:57:49 B722 96.7 D RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd 5t. Minneapolis Date 'I�me �C Max � �'ype Level 98/12/I107:39:11 B722 100A D 98/12/1017:32:56 B722 98.2 D 98/12/O117:18:27 B722 973 D 98/12/1217:16:50 B722 97.2 D 98/12I06 22:03:34 B722 96.9 D �98/12f11�1�:14:20 � B722 96.5 D 98/12/2516:42:04 B722 96.1 D 98/12/26 08:33:07 B722 959 D 98/12/30 07:08:56 B722 95.7 D 98/12/2319:04:59 B722 95.6 D � Page 16 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commistiion Ten Loudest A.ircrait Noise Event� Identgfied ' RMT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. �� Paul Date Time � �� � Level 9$/12/0115:49:08 DC9 92.4 A 98/12/2812:44:08 DC9 92.4 A 98/12/1313:21:27 B742 91.5 D 9$/1210115:10:08 B722 91.3 A 98/12/0115:24:15 DC9 89.5 A 98/12/0115:33:35 DC9 88.8 A 98/12/0115:07:34 B722 88.2 A 98/12/2813:03:17 DC10 879 A 98/12/0115:31:57 DC9 87.6 A 98/12/07 23:22:04 B722 87.6 A RMT #11: Finn S� & Scheffer Ave. S� Paul Date Time ,� � M� � Level 98/12/0613:24:01 B742 98.7 D 98/1212913:I1:08 B742 95.8 D 98/12/0413:09:51 B742 94.7 D 98/12/28 05:23:29 SW4 88.2 D 9$/12/1007:10:39 BE18 86.6 D 98/12/25 19:12:37 B722 � 86.5 - -D 98/12/2518:55:50 B722 85.5 D 98/ 12/22 08:38:50 BE80 8�.2 D 98/ 12/25 19:06:54 DC9 83.3 D 98/ 12/02 07:08:05 BE80 8?.3 D RMT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. St. P'aul Date Time �C Max � 'I`ype Level 98/ 12/ 13 13:2 I:02 B742 101.4 D 98/12/0413:09:36 B742 98.8 D 98/12/0613:23:47 B742 952 D 98/12/2913:10:52 B742 95.1 D 98/12/2$ 12:44:47 DC9-� 94.2 A 98/12/O1 15:49:49 DC9- - 93.7 A 98/12/OS 08:45:50 B732 93.4 A 98/12/07 23:22:51 B722 92.1 A. 98/12/1214:35:50 DC10 91:7 A 98/12/0115:32:39 DC9 90.8 A RMT #12: Alton S� c�i �tockwood Ave. St. Paul Date 'lime �C �� A/D 'i`ype Level 98/12/(}4 09:38:39 DC9 84.7 D 98/12/0716:18:51 DC9 83.3 D 98/12/2518:56:12 B722 82.6 D 98/12/i l 17:12:11 MD80 823 A 98/12/0615:33:33 DC9 78.4 D -- 98/12/07 1��:45:05�- � BE80 77.9 D 98/12/04� 07:32:59 BE18 77.7 D 98/12/0615:23:49 DC9 77.3 D 98/12/28 07:3 ]:38 BE80 76.9 D 98/12l04 06:51:52 BE80 76.2 D Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 17 Metropolitan Airports Commission • � � • .� � , . i 1" ' • .�;. RMT #13: Southeast End of Mohican Court Mendota Heights Date Time �C Max � Type Level 98/12/26 21:04:07 B722 97.6 D 98/12/0110:05:57 B722 95.6 D 98/12/26 21:24:42 B722 93.4 D 98/12/0113:16:38 B722 92.8 D 98/12/0217:17:24 B722 92.5 D 98/12/OS 09:56:59 B722 92.1 D 98/1212611:52:50 B722 92.0 D 98/1212811:57:30 B722 92.0 D 98/ 12/OS 09:29:48 B 722 913 D r 98/12/O1 11:27:20 B722 _ 90.8 D RMT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. Mendota Heights Date Time �C Max � T�ype Level 98/12/26 21:24:24 B722 99S D 98/12/0717:1�5:10 B722 96.6 D 98/12/04 22:01:55 B722 96.0 D 98/12/0716:58:50 B722 95.0 D 98/12/02 22:05:38 DC9 94.4 D 98/I2/0219:26:53 B732 93.6 D 98/12/0113:23:28 B722 93.3 D 98/ 12/01 14:53:4 I DC9 92.8 D 98/ I 2/02 22:07:52 DC9 92.4 D 98/12126 21:03:49 B722 92.1 D RMT #14: lst St. & 1VIcKee St. Eagan - Date Time �C �� A/]p Type Level 98/12/2816:26:31 B722 99.8 D 98/12/0216:1839 B722 99.5 D 98/12/2814:14:59 B722 98.6 D 98/12/OS 08:44:50 B722 98.4 D 98/12/3016:25:35 B722 96.1 D 98/12/0212:59:09 B722 95.5 D 98/12/04 16:09;18 B72Q 95.5 D 98/12/0316:35:45 B72Q 95.0 D 98/12/1710:23:17 A320 95A A 98/I2/03 05:10:42 B72Q 94.9 D �.- � RMT #16: Avalon Ave. � Vilas Lane Eagan Date Time �C Maac � T`ype Level 98/12/0111:19:28 B722 105.3 D 98/12/Ol 11:48:39 B722 103.4 D 98/12/0=� 14:48:03 B722 101.7 D 98/12/0� 07:24:06 B727 101.1 D 98/12/13 20:43:55 B722 1009 D �9S/12/OS 07;37:16 B722 100.5 D 98/12/02 20:40:23 B722 99.5 D 98/12/1713:3037 B722 995 D 98/12/2817:30:58 B72Q 99.1 D 98/12/0=� 19;1$:00 B722 99.0 D C PaQe 18 AviationNoise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commission 'Ten Loude�t A��craft No�se Events Ident�fi�d RMT #17: �4th S� & 4th Ave. �loomington Date Time � M� A/D Level 98/12/13 08:22:22 B722 99.1 D 98/12/1215:52:48 B742 99.0 D 98/12/3012:23:26 B722 98.0 D 98/12/0513:04:42 B742 97.7 D 98/ 12/ 13 11:03:29 B 722 97.0 D 98/12/1214:14:38 B72Q 94.8 D 98/12/0713:47:02 B742 94.6 D 98/12/0910:41:30 B722 94.6 D 98J12/1013:44:16 B742 94.6 D 98/12/1513:14:54 B742 94.4 D I2Ii�T #19: 16th Ave. & �4th S�. Bloomington Date Time T � M� A/D Levei 98/12/06 08:14:43 B722 103.0 D 98/12/2606:30:15 B722 100.6 D 98/12/25 09:29:46 B722 99.5 D 98/12/25 08:25:55 B722 99.1 D 98/12/22 23:47:37 B722 97.7 D 98/12/07 06:09:09 B732 95.8 D 98/12/26 08:48:15 B722 95.8 D 98/12/24 06:27:33 B722 95.6 D 98/12/24 06:23:40 B722 95.4 D 98/12/0811:08:58 B722 94.9 D R1��IT #1�: 75th S� & 17th Ave. Richfield Date �me �C �� A/D Type Level 98/12/0910:50:14 B722 108.4 D 98/12/1114:14:02 B722 106.2 D 98/12/0610:56:34 B722 103.6 D 98/12/06 08:14:27 B722 103.3 D 98/12/07 07:0036 B722 102.9 D 98/12/O115:04:05 B722 102.4 D �-� 98/12/12 16:15:09 B722 102.4 D - 98/12/1413:35:46 B742 101.7 D 98/l2/25 07:49:46 B722 101.2 D 98/12/3012:23:00 B722 101.1 D I2.MT #20: 75th St. c& 3rd Ave. Richfield Date Time �C �� A/D Type Level 98/12/1114:14:22 B722 100.1 D 98/12/0610:56:55 B722 98.4 D 98/12/0910:50:27 B722 94.0 D 98/12/0611:12:02 DC9Q 91.8 D 98/12/25 07:50:09 B722 89.9 D • -98/12l19 07:08:45 B722 89.7 D 98/12/07 07:00:50 B722 89.4 D 98/12/24 08:48:43 B721 89.4 D 98J12/25 09:40:52 B722 89.1 D 98/12/24 06:15:46 B722 88.8 D Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 19 Metropolitan Airports Commission - �'en I.oudesi Ai�craft No�se Eve�ts Identified RMT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St, Inver Grove Heights Date Time Ty� M� A/D Level 98/12/1713:40:21 B722 93.5 D 98/ 12/07 18:57:09 B 722 89.8 D 98/12/Q413:34:43 B722 89.6 D 98/12/2619:33:32 B722 89.0 D 98/ I��02 13:31:29 B 722 88.7 D 98/12/3011:51:06 B722 88J D 98/12/0217:18:05 B722 88.4 D 98/ 12/28 13:44:04 DC9 88.3 D 98/12/2810:54:50 B722 87.8 D 98/12/0718:55:IS DC9 87.6 D RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave. 1Vgendota gieights Date Time �3'� Max � Level 98/12/07 20:52:51 B722 102.8 D 98/12/26 21:24:12 B722 102.4 D 98/12/02 22:32:37 B721 102.3 D 98/12/0113:25:55 B722 102A D 98/12/26 21:03:36 B722 102A D 98/12/01 13:16:08 B722 � 1019 -0 98/ I 2/0 I 09:27:14 DC9 101.8 � D 98/I2/0317:28:19 B722 101.7 D 98/ 12/07 20:30:27 DC9 101.5 D 98/ 12/28 20:45:39 - DC9 101.4 - D Page 20 RMT #22: Anne Marie Trail Inver Grove Heights Date Time T e Level � YP 98/12/28 06:16:56 B722 92.8 D 98/12/26 21:2$:45 B722 90.5 D 98/12/3016:3122 B722 903 D 98/12/2814:15:50 B722 90.0 D 98/12/1913:50:44 DC9 89.5 A 98/12/26 20:09:42 B722 89A D �8/12/1916:30:07 DC86 88A A' 98/12/1719:38:22 DC9Q 879 b 98/12/0216:19:32 B722 87:7 D 98/12/0109;54:22 B722 87.3 D RM7C #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren I.n. Eagan Date Time �C Max � Type Level 98/12/OS 08:45:10 B722 94.7 D 98/12/2015:54:29 DC9 94.6 A 98/12/0216:19:01 B722 92.7 D 98/12/2816:26:51 B722 92.4 D 98/l2/28 09:10:08 B727 92.1 D . -98/�?/�814:15:20 � B722 92.1 D 98/12J0109:53:52 B722 92.0 D 98/12/OS 07:37:53 _ : B722 _91.9 D 98/12/Oi 19:40:17 B722 91.5 A 98/12/0418:31:41 B72� 90.8 D ( \ Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams ;'--1 Metropolitan Airports Commission - Fl��ht �I�'ack �ase I�Iap Airport l�oise ar�d i)peratIlons IVionitoring System Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams Page 2I Metropolitan Airports Commission -Analysis of Aircraft No�se Events - Aircrai't I,dn d�(A) Deeernber O1 to December 31, 1998 Noise Monitor Locations Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 1 55.0 63.0 67.5 66.9 74.3 * 67.1 65.3 60.4 65.7 55.3 59.4 2 52.2 62.3 66J 67.4 73.3 76.0 64.9 62.9 41.7 59.9 58.3 54.0 3 50.6 63.4 66.6 69.1 76.6 78.4 71.3 68.3 463 55.2 55.$ 54.6 4 61.9 64.2 69.6 66J 74.1 71.6 66.2 65.4 47.6 62.6 55.4 52.1 5 55.9 62.4 66.6 65.3 72.7 75.4 65.2 61.5 49.4 58.4 50.8 46.9 6 51.7 64.1 67.8 68.2 75.9 78.7 71.1 70.2 59.4- 54.3 58.8 57.0 7 * * 65.0 63.8 72.4 * 63.2 63.9 60.0 65.3 56.6 57.8 $ 61.6 '� � * � * 67.9 66.6 48.8 59.1 57.5 59.6 9 61.8 * * 632 71.4 753 69.5 67.3 47.3 55.4 56.0 57.7 10 59A 62.1 62.1 63.6 70.9 77:5 71.6 67.8 41.5 58.6 53.8 59.8 11 59.1 62.0 65.0 61J 71.5 78.1 70A ` 69.2 41.7 57.8 56.7 59.1 12 58.2 61.6 60.8 583 68.2 75.6 65.7 65.0 43.7 55.0 59A 58.4 13 59.2 60.1 65.9 56.8 65.9 67.4 59.3 58:3 50.3 59.3 52.7 46.8 14 54.3 61.'7 64.6 61.5 70.0 74.9 * * � * * * 15 64.2 65.8 67.8 65.0 69.7 75.7 70.2 62.0 45.1 48.8 55.8 46.4 16 61.9 62.7 67.6 66.1 72.0 76.0 70.6 64.5 50.2 57.1 55.4 51.4 17 652 66.2 * 67.1 76.5 76.7 70.4 56.0 46.8 54.6 43.7 50.8 18 593 62.4 65.5 62.9 73.0 77.0 67.2 62.1 47.2 61.4 54.4 49.7 19 63.4 64.4 67.4 60.8 70.6 75.6 70.9 57.6 48.6 52.1 53.7 46.6 20 60•4 62.5 66.4 62.5 75.3 74.2 669 65.5 52.1 46.2 62J 52.5 21 60.6 62.1 63.5 * * * 70.8 * * * � * 22 58.0 62.4 63.6 66.6 75.0 79.4 69.5 65.4 53.2 62.4 54.4 56.3 23 62.1 63.4 67.1 66.4 75.3 78.7 68.1 66.7 49.4 57.0 65.0 57J 24 56.1 60.7 63.3 65.1 71.9 75.2 64.9 63.5 55.8 55.5 50.0 58.6 25 �•2 61.8 65.0 64.9 73.2 75.2 67.6 65.6 51.9 54.8 55.0 58.3 26 57.7 60.9 63.5 62.6 70.4 71.2 60.4 61.4 50.0 55.9 49.9 51.4 27 62.1 64.4 70.1 67.5 76.4 76.6 69.9 649 469 53.7 50.4 52.6 2$ 62.7 653 68.2 68.3 73.8 77.8 67J 64.6 54.4 63.1 56.5 58.6 29 61.5 62.0 67.5 67.9 76.0 78.9 68.6 68.1 53.0 53.4 56.4 46.6 30 59.7 62.5 66.3 67.0 74.8 77.2 * 66.0 47.8 54S 51.8 48.3 31 59.6 60.1 653 64.9 73.8 76.6 68.9 66.3 46.4 45.9 51.6 49.2 Mo. Ldn 60•2 62.8 65.9 65.3 73.2 763 68.3 6�.2 51.0 59.3 56.4 55.6 Page 26 Aviation Noise & Sateili[e Programs * L.ess Ihan t�rentc-(ourhnttrs njdcrtn arcdluhle C Metropo(itan Airports Commis�ion An�lysis of Aircrait I�o�se �ven�s - Aircrafi L,dn d�(A) December Ol io I)eeember 31, 199� I�loise Monitor Locations I)ate #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 I 63.1 69.8 66.8 73.3 55.8 65.0 5�.4 5�.7 60.4 62.7 73.8 67.2 2 65.1 69.9 68.8 72.7 59.9 65.5 59.5 51.0 62.8 62.7 76.5 66.0 3 56.3 67.4 60.3 70.7 67.8 61.5 57.8 52.6 54.6 * 673 64.5 4 63.2 70.9 672 73.5 56.5 63.0 55.4 59.4 62.3 61.1, 72.5 67.9 5 59.9 70.3 59.4 70.7 56.3 58.8 50.5 44.6 582 52.6 67.8 67.2 6 59.9 62.1 50.8 68.0 58.1 * 62.8 61.9 45.0 53.1 57.4 62.2 % 63.$ 67.7 66.0 70.1 66.4 73.4 69.8 58.1 62.5 * 72.7 65.9 $ 58.0 64.5 623 69.7 60.5 66.5 63.6 57.5 46.7 5$.7 69.3 63.4 9 53.0 66.9 61.6 70.2 63.6 72.5 69.0 61.8 48.3 60.3 66.6 65.2 10 55.4 66.7 62.7 * 58.1 61.8 58.2 .56.8 53.3 61.3 65.3 65.6 11 54.2 66.7 60.5 70.3 57.9 67.1 62.7 59.9 46.6 59.9 66.5 64.5 12 47.1 65.5 55.9 68.5 65.0 74.4 71.6 58.9 49.1 57.2 60.5 62.8 13 61.1 6b.7 62.2 69.7 64.0 68.1 65.7 53.9 62.4 62.1 71.2 64.7 14 57.7 64.8 * 68.7 61.6 69.2 66.1 56.9 52.1 58.0 67:0 63.6 15 48.1 65.6 * 70.4 60.1 65.3 59.2 57.7 45.2 58.9 6334,. }_ 63.7 .� 16 * * 56.4 70.5 55.3 62.5 563 57.0 49.7 59.0 62.9 63.4 17 60.0 64.6 64.4 70.9 55.7 61.8 52.3 51.3 60.0 62.8 70.7 65.3 18 55.7 66.4 58.9 69.7 58.6 65.9 58.1 56.7 52.9 60.4 65.1 64.2 19 47.5 58.4 50.1 67.6 57.2 54.0 48.3 54.5 57.1 59.9 56.0 62.7 20 52.3 57.0 47.7 66.8 48.5 52.4 * 54.0 47.9 58.6 56.3 61.1 21 * * 50.1 69.2 51.7 59.9 * 54.4 51.0 56.1 55.9 61.5 22 51.3 62.8 6�.6 69.3 57.8 682 67.5 56.9 48.9 58.2 63.0 62.2 23 49.2 63.3 * * * 71.3 65.9 * * 57.9 * * 24 47.5 62.7 58.9 68.2 64.3 72.8 70.9 61.9 47.3 57.0 64.1 62.0 25 53.0 62.2 56.5 67.6 61.9 70.7 67.0 59.0 47.9 57.4 60.6 60.8 26 62.8 65.7 64.2 70.5 64.0 72.9 71.0 49.5 59.5 61.1 71.1 63.1 27 54.3 63.6 56.2 68.7 56.7 55.0 52.8 5�.7 63.9 59.2 59.6 64.6 2$ 63.8 70.6 66.0 72.0 57.7 61.5 53.0 54.0 62.5 66.8 73.3 67.9 29 �•0 62.1 46.5 70.0 49.5 53.3 46.1 52.5 40.2 57.6 53.7 61.9 30 5�.3 65.3 55.1 70.0 59.1 67.8 64.0 54.3 56.0 59.7 66.6 62.5 31 5,6_4� 61.4 �6.� 68.0 55.5 63.9 63.6 50.5 44.6 57.3 53 2 61.7 Mn. j,dl1 58.0� 65.7 61.6 69.8 61.0 68.0 64.8 56.9 57.0 62.0 r 68.3 63.9 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs YZiC Sc.� c�� Pa�e 27 ' L.es.r lhcrn l�rerrtt•-rnur houcr u dcna «ruiluhle Metropolitan Airports Commission ;r � � 1. . �: �_, ./' ' 'i 1 1 .� ' �1 ���1; i�� , � ; � a� . � . _ ., ` i ` ' � . � . �, � ,� �' ,; � , 1 . • ;1 1 ; ''. . � . ,1 t � ,�, • • r,•�, . , � • ��� .� �;, . , . � r� �, +.� �. Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � Metropoliran Airports Commission . � - IViinneapolis - �t. Paul Internation�.� .Airpori � December 199� � � � . . � � .; • • �:r;.�, . , . . �� • ,� . • , ; �, , � .r ''� � � � • � 1 ' . � s� � ' � : .� � . � ��� i t�ai. KS ���SS�V �—Un �= 0 L` t I ��i;�'V!=1 J2 �' OQ.�%j �(�r � �t��N I=l1 ��.�%1 0 O I e . � � . I •; e e� � � � e ,• e ° a �s e e • � i o e : ; : ; , o , . . ' ; � �--------------- � ° ---�-------- °-��--=-------------=- , � � • ------------------------------------------ ' o----------. I �°'•�' e � • � I 4 I O, ed e • � • I � � °�°u Co 0• e ' • � i�°e� d ° ; g ee e • � �� � �ee I � � �esa0 • 8 . I �j---------'-----Y'�--------e ------^--'--'-----------�--'------"-----' ^-'-'---"---'--'-'----------'------' ""� 1 �o � o � ( o ' o; o ° B p • a . , . � , � Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission . �. • . i .:11' ., .. i .. � it 1 . �. � �;� �� � 3039... Total 12I, and 12R Carrier Jei I)epartures 0... Carrier Jet I�epariure - Early �rnout (0.0% (l�orih Side �e%re Three l��les) Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commis,ion �. . ;�, �_ �, �'� .: 1� ��i ��� . . ��� ., . ,. ,1 '�� . ' ..�, ,1 1 ,�' . ., �.� .. [ ' �i .� '1� �1�� ;�: �, . �; �; � ;�, ��� • �� .�; ., ; . . ; :�� . �; ,, � . �i �: �;;,,��: �,� , �;; �; ; :� , . Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pagz 5 Metropolitan Airports Commission 1Vlinneapolis m Ste Paul Iniernational 1�.irport Decerriber 1998 3039.e. 'T�tai 12L and 12�2 Carrier Jet I)epartur�s 19 me. Carrier Jei I)epartures (0.6% South of Corridor (�outh of 30L Local�zer) ! 19 �RACKS C�OSSE� P-GATE � Q '==T COUtii=18 (94.7�) R1;,HT COUNi=1 ;J.J%� L _ i � O I � � , � I , , , • O I o • � , � � ' � , . � O. �"_"""_'""'" _""' _ _'"""_""""_ _"""""""'"' ^"""""""""_"_""' _'"' _"""_ ^""'""""""""' 06 O Or � • • � . 0 � . . � . � ' ' � � '� O O'p ' ' r , "_"'"'""^'_"'-__" ' ' � . � O O 0 """""_""�"""' s """' ` � ""' 0 � � . O � Q � � � � � . . . """"""'___"r"""_'""""'_""""""'"""""__""""_"'""""_"""""""�"'_""'""""" G� �I � . ! i � � ' Page 6 Aviation Noise & Sateliite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commission ' •; '/ I `'�' .. i • . 1 . ;. 1 �. ,1; � � �; �; � :� / �, ,� � °�' • • � • � : . r .�_ .' ' � ,; ��' ., . ° • � �, . � � . �j � �� '�; � � 1 F ' �i. . � . . . � . � I _— �r_ I ; j Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams Page 7 Metropolitan Airports Commission 1 ' i1 i /: :. 1 ' 1. i . , � . . . �i •� . � ' • .; �1 1 =�� ,� �� • � , � � � • � �'1 1, ;�: . � �. �- , � ., � . ,. . �.,, . . , , ,, ,,�,. ._� � i; � . . � Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs ,� i ; Metropolitan Airports Commission °nneapoli� - ��. P�ul �nternational Airport ` �ecerrib�r 199� � . . ; '�; . � ,; .. � r . ,.. � . ' . r. .; � , . . ;'..�� . �; i� • /� i, i �i . ` � ��i` ` � � �� 1 _ 1��� ' � 1� � ,.: � _ . : ; 4 Iiti�K� �RO���D �-�Ai� ; �, L�r i COUN �=3 �75.G�j �IGH I �OUN i= i (25.Cij � o ( b ' �i � ( � . I j I I � ; : ': : � oi 1 : : ' ; � . , , o , . , � --------------------------------------------------------------------------- � �� ---------------=---------------- � � • ") � �I o � I i , , ( . I a ' . . , , • , � , , , � o � � �–, , ,� � , , -_ ' � , ------------------•------------------------------------------------ _.. ------ ' � i �'i ., ,------------------ ----------------- . — ,` , ,.,.� . , I �____ , . . . I� i� ` �— c� � : . ; ' _J � I . . � . ; , i C r-----------------*-----------------�----------------------- -----------------------------=----------------- I �' i i . � �; . 0 ----------------------------------------------------- -- --------------------- o : - - -------------=----------------- i � i ! I 1 � i ' � ' -0��0 -400C -2L°��� 0 2C�0 4000 6000 � ( DEV�A��uh =-t�U ��NiE�� OF ;,ATE (�l� Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9 Metropolitan Ai.rports Commission ' . / 1 :��:. ' . � , ., � � � ! : : � � � : L1�:3 / � ,�, . . � ' . . • 1•�,, • i ,. • • I•�. • . ;� 1 .I �, � : � ;,. . �, ; . . . . Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs (:-��� � � � � �,�,.v;. �. ��� * 7 l�� �,� � ��• � � �,Y� � �' `��y �' y�,4 ��. �� � � G' �: S ( '�a .+"�' 'h.-. .� ��:.. Y�. t4../ rf:,. + F. �_ fi,� A biweekly update on liti�ation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 11, Number 1 Stage 2 Phasout FXVE CARRIERS FILE REQUESTS WIT'H FA� FOJEZ WAIVERS FROM PHASEOUT DEADLINE Six airlines, including the third largest cargo camer, ABX Air, filed petitions �vith the Federal Aviation Administration at the end of December seeking permis- sion to operate Stage 2 aircraft beyond the end of 1999 final deadline for phasina out Staae 2 aircraft from the U.S. fleet. Several of these petitions were filed as precautionary measures by airlines that have firm orders for hush kits but fear unandcipated problems may cause delays in installing the kits. ` In addition, two Hawaiian cairiers, the Air Transport Association, and the CarQo Airline Association filed peticions askin� the FAA to clarify ats policy on allowina Sta�e 2 aircraft to fly back to the U.S. mainland for maintenance operations after the final phaseout deadline and to conduct non-revenue fli�hts to ferry Staae 2 planes to seII or relocate them. (5ee related story). The Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to grant waivers from the deadline for phasin� out StaQe 2 aircraft if it �vould be in the public Snterest to do so. The waivers can apply to up to 15 percent of a carrier's fleet and can extend through the end of 2d03. Conditions to the grant of a waiver are that the requests must be filed by Jan. 1, 1999, and that a carrier must acheive 8� percent 5tage 3 compliance by July 1, 1999. (Contirttted on p. 2) Legrslatiora 1VVa[cCA.II'�1 REIIe1'I'R�DUCE� BILL TO INC�A�E C)PERAT�OI�S A7C ][�IGH DE�SITY AI�PiJRTS Undaunted by the failure of controversial leaislation he introduced in the last session of ConQress that would have increased [he number of operations at the four so-called HiQh Density Airports (Chica�o 0'Hare International, ReaQan National, Newark International, and 7ohn F. Kennedy International), Sen. John ivicCain (R- AZ), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, reintroduced the bill Jan. 16. The new lesislation, the Air Transportation Improvement Act (S. 82), tivould reauthorize the Federa] Aviation Administration and tne federal airport srant pro�ram for a period oF ttivo years. It is almost identical to NScCain's earlier bill which passed the Senate 92-1 only ro die in the House at the hands of Rep. Henry J. H_yde (R-IL), who represents communities strongly opposed to the expansion of operations a[ O' Hare International Airpor. Comrnuni[ies near Reaaan National Airport also lobbied stronaly and effectively anainst the measure. Slot restrictions, or limits on the number o; opera�ons at 0'Hare, Rea�*an National, LaGuardia, and JFK> tivere put into place o�'er 20 years avo to address concerns about safety and noise. But tilcCain contends the slot rules h���e nothing (C.oritiri�ced ori p. ?) Cop,;rieh: 7 199� b:: .-'.ir}>on \'ois� Report. Ash6urn, V�. 20147 � � January 22, 1999 In This Iss�ce... Stage 2 Phaseout ... Five airlines, including cargo carrier Airborne, file applica- tions with the F.AA to operate a total of 18 Stage 2 aircraft beyond the Dec. 31, 1999, final phaseout deadline - p. 1 ... ATA, cargo carriers, and two Hawaiian carriers file petitions asking �FAA to clarify policy on waiveis to allow non-revenue Sta�e 2 aircraft flights after the the phaseout deadline - p. 7 . ... FA.A grants its first waiver from an interim compliance deadline to Servivensa - p. 7 � Legislntion ... Sen. McCain reintroduces bill that �3�ould add more fliahts at O'Hare, Reajan National, LaGuardia, JFK - p. 1 ?'echnolagy ... New virtual reality deszgn tool demon- strated to TRB - p. 4 ... FAA unveils updated version of ISIS - p. 5 San Diego ... Lindber�h Field became an all-Staje 3 on January lst - p. 6 Bz�rba�ak ... Airport an- nounces acceleration of residential sound insulation proQram for cities of Bur- bank, Los Angeles - p. 6 � The Federal Aviation Adminis[ration said that it �vill not act on the waiver requests i[ has received un:il July i' because only then will it know if the 8� perceni StaQe 3 fleet requirement is met. ABX Aiz-, Inc. , ABX Air, Inc., the airline subsidiary of Airborne Freigh[ Corp., �vhich collectively trade at Air6orne Express, asked the FAA for a waiver to operate up to five DC-8-61 aircraft throuQh the year 2000 or until the aireraft are replaced with StaQe 3 B-767 aircraft on a one-for-one basis, whichever comes first. ABX said it has placed a non-refundable deposit of �5 miliion with "a large aireraft lessor/owner," which it did not name, for the purchase of five B-767-200 aircraft. But these aircraft are in passen�er confijuration and must be modified • to an all-cargo confaguration before they can be used by .ABX. The modification procedure takes approximately 120 days to complete if no complications occur. "Based on the" scheduled dates of delivery and the time required to convert a B-767 aircraft, ABX projects that all five aircraft will ao online in the year 2000," the company said. It did not explain to the FAA why it had not planned to brinQ its fleet into compliance with ANCA prior to the end of 1999, as required by the law. The cargo carrier ar�ued that it would be in the public interest for the FAA to D ant it a waiver, notina ihat it worked "diligently" to help pass ANCA, has had an "unwavering" commitment to the�phaseout, has already expended over $200 million to convert its fleet, and that the Sta�e 2 operations beyond 1999 would be limited, The carrier contended that noise-sensitive airports that wished to protect themselves from�Staae 2 aircraft that arz granted waivers by the FAA. were free to adopt airport noise rules under ANCA barring such aircraft. However, it is hi�hly unlikely that any such rule would be adoptzd in time to bar ABX's Stage 2 aircraft. The airline also told the FAA that it should consider the issue of freiQhter aircraft capacity in decidin� whether to provide waivers for St�ge 2 aircraft. "ABX belieyes that . many al]-cargo aircraft will not be converted [so] [hat the capacity of the domestic freiahter fleet will decline after the final compliance deadline," the camer said. Such a shortage in aircraft, i[ ar�ued, would produce earoo rate increases that �vill have to be borne by the shipping public. The airline also argued that the loss of its five DGS-61s tivould have an impac[ on carQo rates. "Without the benefit of continued �rotvth in capacity, Airborne Express may not be capable of beinQ as aagressive as it has been in the past in offering corporate and other large shippers the benefit of its lower cost of doinQ business (e.�., lower freight rates). Likewise, FedEx and UPS �vill not be under the same de�ree oFcompetition pressure generaiJy exerted by r�irborne Express on the inclustry, if AB1 is deprived oF the use of the ' tive DG8-61 aircraft after Dec. 3l, 1999." ABX reminded the fiAA that "by statute, this competition related factor �irport Noise Report must be considered by the FAA in renderinR its judgment on [his waiver application." � Kitty Hatii�k Aircargo Kitty Hativk Aircar�o, Inc., an all-carao air carrier cur- rently operatin� 31 8-727, five DC-9, and seven Convair aircraft, filed tivhat it called a"precautionary" request to operate up to five Sta�e 2 aircraft "antii such time that the conditions preventinQ compliance are overcome, and the aircraft can be made compIiant." The carrier said it does not anticipate that such a period would extend beyond the middle of 2001. The airline stressed that it has entered into firm contracts with aircraft suppliers and hush I:it manufacturers to ensure compliance with the Dec. 31, 1999, deadline for retirin� Sta�e 2 aiccraft. "Hotivever, despite the best laid plans of Kitty Ha�vk Aircargo, one of its aircraft lessors or hush kit manufacturers under contract to the lessors or Kitty Hawk Aircargo could fail to meet their delivery obligations (throuDh no fault of Kitry Hawk Aircargo) and thus prevent the entire Kitty Hawk fleet from being compliant on the day of the final ANCA phaseout deadline," the company told the FAA. Therefore; "as a precautionary matter," the airline asked for a waiver to operate up to 15 percen[ of its fleet (five aircraft) beyond the end of the year. "Grant of this request will be in the public interest as it will ensure preservation of competition in the all-cargo indushy in the year�2000 when frei�hter capacity may be in short supply due to carrier compliance �vith the Sta?e 2 phaseout schedule," the company told the EA.A. il�idwest Express AirIines Midwest Express Airlines, Inc, also filed a"precautionary waiver" requestina permission to operate no more than four StaQe 2 DC-9 aircraft beyond the final phaseout date of Dec. 31, 1999. Midwest Express is a passenQer air cairier, classified as a national carrier, with a current fleet of 24 DG9 and three . NID-30 aircrait. From its principal hub in Milwaukee, i�VI, and its second�y base in Omaha, NE, the airline and its commuter aiiliate, Sky�vay Airlines, provides service to 41 citizs and 23 siates and Toronto, Canada. "Importantly," the airline told the FAA, it "offers the only non-stop service in 80 percent of the non-seasonal markets served by it 1�•iidwest Express links i1�lilwaukee and Omaha with the important population centers on both coasts and, in so doinQ, provides significant service opportunities that would not othertvise be provided." The airline told the Fr�1 that it has firm orders with ABS Partnership to hushl:Ct its six remaininQ Staae 2 DG9 aircraft and anticipatzs that this will be done by the end of 1999. However, the airline said that it must depend on the ability of o[her companies to achieve this result. "Therefore, solely as a precautionary measure, and �vith no intend to delay full compliance" �vith the phaseout requirement, ,�irpott yois� Rzport Januar�c� ?2, 1999 IvSidwest Express requested a waiver for up to four aircraft. "When Congress passed ANCA which manda[ed a uniform, national aircraft noise policy, it expressly provided for the possibility that carriers, for reasons both lvithin and beyond their control, may not tae able to meet the fina] StaQe 2 phaseout compliance deadline of Dec. 31, 1999," the v airline told the FAA. The company argued the loss of even one aircraft from service would hurt the company financially and iis ability to expand service and also would ne�atively impact the traveling public "which would have to rely to a�reater degree on either multi-stop or, more likely, connectinQ service via a major hub airport dominated by one or more of the major carriers." Midwest said it seeks to avoid this situation, adding "so should the FAA in the interest of ensurin� a fully competitive air transport system" Transco�atinental Airlines Transcontinental Airlines, Inc. submitted an application seekin� a limited waiver to pernnit operation of up to three Stage 2 aircraft (a DC-8-54, -55, and -61) until Dec. 31, 2003, or until the aircraft covered by the application have been brought into compliance with Sta�e 3 noise cer[ifica- tion levels, whichever occurs first. TransCon is certificated by the FAA to operate domestic scheduled and charter and foreign charter air transportation of property and mail. It is considered a new entrant for purposes of the Staje 2 phaseout requirements. At the end of 1998, TransCon's fleet consistezl of seven aircraft: four Sta�e 3 and three Stage 2 aircraft. � While the airline plans to retrofit its one remainin� Sta�e 2 DC-8-62 aircraft durin� 1999, it told the FAA "it is ]ikely that it will be impossible" for it to ret�ofit its DGS-54, -5�, and -bl by. the end of the year. "As the FAA is a�vare," TransCon said; "no hush kit or other noise suppression technolo�y for these models of aizcraft is commercially available at this time." The carrier said that Qoiet Technolo�y Venturz has received certification for a hush kit for such DC-3 aizcraft, but the first kits will be go to Fine Air, a partner in the hush kit venture. Quiet Technolo�y cannot provide assurances that its l:its wil] be available before the end of ]999. Also, Burbank Aeronautical Corp. currently is �vor};inQ on certification of hush l:its for these DC-8 models but the company estimates its certification will not be achieved before the sprina of 1999, "]eavinQ it doubtfi�l that ��ery many of these l:its can be instaIled prior to the end of [hat year," TransCon told the F_�A. "TransCon is follo�ving the projress of these t�vo pro- �rams, and expects to enter into a firm contract for hushkit- tine its S[aae 2 DG$-50 and -61 series aircraft b�� the rniddle oi [ 1999], when hopefully, it will be clearer which proaram presents the better option for [he c�mpunv. It �vould not be feasible or commercially wise for TransCon to comrnit itseli contractuaily at this point to either one of , these pro�rams, given the uncertainties a[tendant ro ttoth �f 3 [hem," the carrier told the FAt1. The airline contended it would be in the public interest for the F,�iA to grant the waiver. Casino Express Airlines TEM Enterprises, doinQ business as Casino Express Airlines, Inc., petitioned the FAA to operate one B-737-200 aicraft beyond the final phaseout deadline because the company does not know at this time whether it will be financially able to finance a hush kit for the plane. 1fie carrier said it may need to continue operating one Sta�e 2 aircraft "for a short time in 2000 until it can be replaced or retrofitted." Casino is a new entrant carrier with�a fleet at the end of 1993 consisting of two B-737-200 aircraft_ One has already been hushl:itted by Av Aero. However, the company told the FAA that it may acquire some additional B-737-200 aircraft in 1999, all of which would be eompliant with Sta�e 3 noise standards. "Because Casino Express is a small carrier, with a very small fleet, it must choose its fleet manajement options very carefully," the company said. However, the airline argued that it "fulfills an important role" in providin� service to small communities (it provides the only airline service to . Elko, NE, its home base) and in brin�in� approximately 110,000 people a year to Elko, primarily to gamble. The airline — with its fleet of two aircraft — told the FAA - that it is one of the niajor employers in the community of �0,000 and "thus fills a seriously needed role in the eco- nomic life of the community, which has been hard hit by closures and layoffs at many area gold mines, the main source of employment in the region." Casino Express asserted that to impair its ability to continue service to Elko "would cause si�nificant economic disruption to the community."d � LP;islalzon, from p. 1 to do with safery, callin� them "archaic, government- imposed fliQht limi[ation" in remarks made Jan. 2Q at a hearinQ on his bill. The disaoreement in the ]ast Con�-ress between the House and Senate on the FAA reauthorization bill resulted in only a six-month extension of the FAA's prog-rams, which runs out on l�iarch 31. And the House and Senate already appear to be on a collision co�rse this session. IYIcCain wants his bill passed by the end of Nlarch and has already heid a hearina on it. Ho�vever, the House Committee on Transpor- tation and Infrastructure, chaired by Rep. Bud Shuster (R- P,A), wants to slo�v thinQs down. The committee unani- mously aporoved legislation Jan. 7 that would extend the Airport improvement Prosram for the remainder of the fiscal ye�r (to Sept. 30). "If this is to be the year of aviation, we need sufticient time to craft solid leaislation that is �oina to provide the American peop]e �vith safe and reliable air service," Shuster said. "By extendina [the AIP pro�ram] throuQh the end oi the fiscal year, we will have ample time Airpor \oiie P.eport 4 to draft a Cood bill." The House bill would allow the full $1.95 biilion allowed by the obliQation ceilinQ to be spent on airport improve- ments through the end of fiscal 1999. l�IcCain's biIl would au[horize the federal airport orant program at $2.41 6illion for fiscal year 1999 and $2.475 billion for fiscal year 2000. At the hearinQ on McCain's bill, David Traynham, FA.A's assistant administrator for policy, plannin�, and interna- tional avia[ion, said the Clinton Adminis[ration currently is developing its own FAA reauthorization proposal and expects to issue it soon. Traynham said the FAA feels that McCain's bill "would make sijnificant improvements in the FAA." Aim Is to Enhance Competition In introducing his legislation, McCain said that his committee and the Senate "recognized the importance of removinQ barriers to competition in our nation's aviation industry last year with votes of overwhelmin'support for this leaislation. I expect the same to occur this year because it is impor[ant to our economy and to the future of the industry. One just needs to look at hotiv last year's North- tivest Airlines strike crippled an entire region of our country. We must give new carriers the opporiunity to c�mplete with the major airlines". McCain said his bill would enhance competition in the aviation industry in three ways • It would require the Secretary of Transportation to provide 30 slot exemptions (which means 30 more fli�hts) at O'Hare International Airport;� 18 slots would provide service to underserved communities and 12 slots would be available for general distribution; • It would create 12 new round-trip flights at Reaaan national, six of which would fly beyond the 1,2�0-mile perimeter rule at the airport. All of the new flights must be conducted with quieter Staee 3 aircraft; • It �vould provide slot exemptions for non-stop reQional jets to fly to and from underserved communities and 'O'Hare, LaGuardia, and JFK airports. These exemptions would have to be approved by the Secretary oiTransporta- tion for service between the three airports and airports ��'ith fewer than ttivo million passen�ers per year. Like his earlier bill, this one would require the Secretarv of Transportation to study and report on the environmental, safety, and noise impact of new flights prior to �rantina any slot exemptions at O' Hare. Prior to issuin� any slot exemp- tions, the Secretary would have to provide a 30-day public notice in the Federal Register and consult with local officials on noise and environmental issues: After thre� years, the Secretary must do another study on how safety, the environment, noise, access to undersen�ed marke��, and competition at O'Hare have been impacted by the increased number of operations. The bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to study and report on tne community noise levels in the aress surroundin� the four Hi�h Density airpores once the all- St�ne 3 fleet comes into effect in 2000. Airport Noise Report National Park Overflights McCain's bil] includes provisions reflectin� a compromise on air tour overflights of national parks that was reached between the air tour industry and environmental interests sitting on the National Parks Overfli�hts Worl:in� Group, set up by the FAA and the National Park Service. The lejislation tivould require air tour operators to conduct their tours in accordance with the air tour rnana�ement plans for each national park. If the plan is not already in place for a particular park, the FAA administrator and the director of the National Park System would develop one. The Grand Canyon National Park, which already has flight limits on tour operators, wouid be exempt from the legislation. Air tour operators would have to apply for authority to conduct operations over a park under MeCain's bill and the FAA administrator �vould prescribe operating conditions and limitations for each commercial air tour operator. Existing commercial air tour operators would have 90 days to apply to the FAA for operating authority. New entrant air tour operators would be required to apply for the authority before they could besin commercial air tour operations over a national park, The FAA would have to act on these applications within 24 months. A stand-alone park overIlights bill was also introduced by McCain 7an. 16. It is identical to the provisions in this bill. Aviation Development Program It also established the Small Community Aviation Deve:opment Procram under which the Secretary of Transportation would be required to set up a four-year pilot aviation development proaram and designate a proo am director. BeQinning in 1999, the program director would report annually to the Secretary and to Con�ress with analysis on the availability of air transportation services in small communities, identify factors that inhibit quality and affardable services in small communities, and make policy recommendations to address these faciors. McCain's bill also �vould require the Secretary of Trans- portation to review the marketin� practices of air camers that may inhibit the availability of affordable air transporta- tion service to small and medium-sized comm�nities. If the Secretary finds that these practices constitute an inhibition, the Secretary would be required to issue a rulemakinQ.b Technolo�y ��%! i1AL I2.EAL�'I'Y SY�T�1vI D�1�flNSTR�.'�'�i� 'I'tJ T� Part of the communiry outreach pro�ram for a ne�v fourth rumvay a[ �4iami International Airport was a virtual reality demonstration whicn zxactly depicted the noise contours predicted in the environmental impact statement on the•new runway and allowed ��iewers to take a visual tour af the contours from any perspective they chose. tifiami-based EnRine�rina & Computer Simulations, Inc. Airport �ais:: Fepor � 1 � January ?2, 1999 (ECS), has already given a demonstra[ion of its Interactive Transportation Desi?n Tool to the Secretary of Transporta- tion and on Jan. 12 provided a demonstration to members of the Aircraft Noise Subcommi[tee of the Transportation Research Board's Committee on Transportation-Related Noise and Vibration. The new tool "combines simulntion capability with sraphics to help expedite the design process," the company explained in promotional material passed out at the TRB committee meetin'. "This combination ailows for real-time manipulation of proposed transportation components (interior and exterior of facilities), runways, protected airspace jeometry, ports, roads, bridaes, tunneis, etc: to provide an optimized, visual approach for layout, facility and operational planning." The system is desi�ned to visually communicate complex desian alternatives to decision-makers early in the plannin� process, thus decreasin� the time needed for design approval and funding by months. Real-Time Interaction "Our approach to the actval' development o� the expansion plan differs from others in that our 3-D renderin� program is a`real-time' interactive software. This gives us the capabil- ity to manipulate the environment instantaneously providinQ planners, engineers, architects, local, state, federat agencies, etc. with the abiIity to modify the plans wiihout ]enQthy delays associated with revision of plans," the company said. For example, air tra�c controllers can "stand" in a virtual control [ower and instantIy move items tivithin the control '' tower or the entire tower itself to get greater si�ht lines. "In other words, modifications to the plans can be made in a few seconds, whereas other more traditional methods could tal:e days. This directly translated into large savings in both time and money," the company said. In terms of noise contour analysis, it said that its virtual reality system �ives viewers the capability to fly around the surroundins communities to see how the noise will afiect different areas. Using the Federal Aviation Administration's InteQrated Noise Model and aerial photo�raphy, the system can create three dimensional noise contovrs �vhich will exactly match those in environmental impact statements. The system also has the ability to modet landmark buildings to be used as reference points for the community; to add sound that �vill represent what would be heard at a particular location; to include specific flight paths and aircraft types in the analysis; to overlay multiple scenarios simuitaneously; to �enerate a terrain from input data; and to animate �ircraft alona specific flight paths. Scott Aviotti of ECS told ANR that Niiami International is the only airport where the company's virtual reality system has been used to depict noise contours. The system has bezn used to depict ne�v terminal buildin�s and other airpor[ facilities at Southwest Florida Internationa] Airport, Orlando International, Ne�vark International, Adanca Hartsfield International, and for UPS's netiv facility at Louisville 1n[ernational Airport.� 5 FAA FAA UiVVEILS NEW SYSTEM FOR REPLICATING NOISE In the very near future, aircraft overfli¢ht noise �vill be easier to replicate and will more accurately reflect local conditions thanks to a new computer-based demonstration tool developed by the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Defense. The Aviation Noise Demonstration System (f1NDS) is an ❑pgzade of the Interactive Sound Information System (ISIS) developed by Dubbink Systems of San Luis Obispo, CA. In recent years, ISIS has established itself as the standard system for presentin� flyover noise demonstrations to communities, �overnmental a�encies, and others making decision about airport expansion and noise miti�ation projects. But, unlike ISIS, "real time" inputs from an airport's noise monitoring system can be fed into the new ANDS system, Robert Hixson, an environmental specialist and community planner in the.FAA's O�ce of Environment and Energy, explained at a Jan. 12 meetinQ of the Transportation Research Board's Committee on Transportation-Related �, Noise and Vibration. He said that ANDS can be customized to replicate individual airports, including the3r own existin� and future noise contours. "ANDS is a fully interactive, simplified version of ISIS that offers users the ability to chanae content or have � chanaes made for them by Dubbink System," Hixson said. ANDS has the ability to predict noise events "based on `real-noise' e,camples that can be localized to a specific set of variables and conditions. Users who complete special trainina also will be able to customize program content themselves." Content that can be chanJed to accommodate local situations includes rumvay configurations, fleet mix, Intejrated Noise Model (INNi) contour maps, photojraphs of noise-sensitive uses, lansuage, land use maps, and video segments. The new system uses graphics plus audio to demonstrate Sta�e 2 versus StaQe 3 aircraft, Day-NiCht AveraQe Sound Lev�l (DivL.), Sound Exposure Leve] {SEL), and sound insulation benefits, Hixson said. ANDS also can be used to demonstrate noise propagation, hotiv multiple sounds interact, the effe�ts of noise barriers, and the effects of residencial environmental noise on one's perceptions of aviation noise. AN`DS is hiQhly portable, Hixson said. It uses a potiverfu] laptop computer �t�ith built-in CD-ROM, compact but power;ul speakers and amplifier, and a]iQht-weiaht, compact multi-media projector for large-screen presenta- tions. The sys[em will operate in three modes: basic, custom, and exper. There will be a l:iosk version for exhibit use. The major uses of ANDS are e;cpected to be in support of Part 1�0 Airport i\Toise Compa[ibility Programs, to support the noise elemencs of airport environmental studies, and for Airport �;uis� Rcpor, 6 Airport Noise Report trainine of planners, controllers, pilots, and local officials. The sys[em is a joint project between the FA.A and the US Air Force's Armstrona Research Laboratory. Both FAA and DOD versions of ANDS will be available. TheANDS sound track will include up to 30 civil and/or military aircraft. The FA.A's plans to have one ANDS system in each of its regional offices and will make ANDS master work stations available to consnitants and others. The fiA.A and DOD plan to refine and add more aircraft to the system in the future and may develop an Internet version. Hixson said that the FAA pians to make the A.tYDS software broadly available within the next few months. The ANDS system will be demonstrated at the upcoming International Airport Noise Symposium to be held in San Diego Feb. 22-24. For further information on t1NDS, contact Robert Hi�son at te1:= (202) 267-3�65; fax (202) 267-5594; or e-mail: www.aee.faa.cov; or eontact Dr-: ��vid Dubbinl:, David Dubbink Associates, 864 Osos St., Suite D, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401; tel: (805) 541-5325; fax (80�) 541- 5326; e-mail: dubbink@noisemanagementcom.� San Diego Int'Z ALL-STAGE 3 FLEET �ZEAC:I�TED ON JAI�CTARY 1 San Diejo International Airport became an all-Sta?e 3 facility on Jan. 1 as a new noise rule went into effect that allows only quieter Stage 3 aircraft to opera±e at Lir.dbergh Field. . � The "100 percent Staae 3 rule," as the airport calls it, �vill be enforced by the Port of.San DieQo, the airport operacor, and will apply to all rejularly scheduled commercial airlines, commuter, and carao flijhts to and from the airport. Operators violating the rule will face possible fines. San Diego's rule, which makes the airport alI-StaQe 3 a year ahead of the federal schedule, was �andfathered under .the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. The act imposes a federal schedule for phasing out Stase 2 aircr'+,..it by the end of 1999. 4 The Port of San Die�o, ho�vever, is takin� that step a��ear early, followin� the Airport Use Regulations set by the Board of Por[ Commissioners with community input in 1989. The re�ulations subsequently initiated a schedule ior eliminating Staae 2 operations at San DieQo that was more aseressive thanythe federal schedule. San Dieao Internz- tional has been very close to an'all-Staae 3 flee[ for several }�ears. For instance, in 1997, some 97 percent oi the airc:afr operations at the airport were Staae 3 compared to an avera�e of 80 percen[ for the rest of the counry. "ti�'e are only one of four airports in the nation mand�l[lQ 100 percent StaRe 3 operations," said Thella Bowens, senior director of aviation for the Port of San Dieoo. "This as a proud achievement for San Diego International Airpor �+�hich has been accomplished tivith the close cooperatian of the 25 operators that use LindberQh Field." The other airports [ha[ are already all-Stage three are ali in California: John Wayne Airport in Orange County, Bur- bank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, and Lon� Beach Airport.d Burbank AIRPORT ACCELERATES SOUNDPROOFING PROGRAIYI The Burbank-Glendale-I'asadena Airport Authority announced Jan. 15 that it has accelerated its residential acoustic treatment pro�ram in the cities of Burbank and Los Anaeles, which have strongly opposed the construction of a replacement passen�er terminal at the airport: On 7an. 4, the airport authority voted unanimously to retain the services of Wyle Laboratories of EI Segundo, CA, for the design and construction manajement of future residential acoustic treatment projects for the next five years. The vote amended a previous agreement with Wyle and brought the total nnmber of homes covered by the contract to 150. In the past two years, Burbank Airport has entered into con�racts with 933 homeowners out of a total of 2,300 who are eliaible for its residential acoustic treatment pro�ram. "We view the proo am as having a fairly significant success rate in a short period of time," said Sidney Allen, mana�er of the pron am. "Many homeowners living in the cities of Burbank and Los Angeles have expressed a real interest in this program." He said that, of the �150 homes in the Wyle contract, 104 are located in the Ciry of Burbaz�k. `"I'his is a very heavily weighted prob am to try to address Burbank's noise concerns," Allen said. The City of Burbank currently is enaa�ed in a legal battle with the airport authority over the construction of the new temunal, which Bubank fears will result in increased noise impact. To date the Federal Aviation Administration and the ai�ort have committed �7.4 million in b ants and matching funds to acoustically t�eat homes, �vhich includes the installation of new doors, windows, attic insulation and, if necessary, central heatin� and air condifioning. Nine homes were acousticalIy insulated and completed in Phase I of the projram. The airport has entered Phase II by siQning up 7� homeowners, 50 of whom live in Burbank within the 7Q+ CNEL noise contour and 25 who reside in SUn Valley within the 6�+ CNEL contour. Acoustical treatrnent of 2� homes in Burbank will beQin in February. Another 7� homes will be treated under Phase III of the proaram (�0 homes in Burbank and 25 in Los An�eles), bringinQ the total number of homes receivina acoustical treatment to 1�9. y The airport authority also announced that on Jan. 4 the board approved an aareement and Avigation Easement with the Burbank linified School District for acoustical treatment of Iviin�ay Adult School. , The aareement provides for almost $4 million in funds from the airport authority and the FAA for improvements .�irport Noise Fepon r"'� C t � Januaz�v 22, 7.999 that will siQnificantly reduce noise at the school. The next step in the process wil] be the selec[ion of an architect and then production of plans. Once approved, construction is se[ [o besin next year and �vil] take approximately t�vo years to complete. Improvement will include ne�v windows and doors, acoustical ceilin�s, and air conditioning. Ivlin�ay Adult School is the fourth and last in a series of schools to be acoustically treated by the airport_ Upon completion of this project, the airport authority and the FAA wil] have•funded more than �12.5 million in schooi acousti- cal treatments.� Stage 2 Phaseout FAA ASKED TO CLARIFY POLICY ON NON-REVEI�IU]E OPERATIONS Fenrin� that the Federal Aviation Administration may be ready to tal�e the position that absolutely no Stage 2 opera- tions will be permitted after the Stase 2 aircraft phaseout deadline at the end of this year, even those for maintenance work and to move aircraft to be hushki[ted or sold, the Air Transport Association, the Cargo Airline Association, and two Hawaiian carriers asked the FAA to clarify its policy on waivers, asserting that the a?ency has lee�vay under the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) to �rant �vaivers for non-revenue operations beyond the end of 1999. The airlines are in no tivay back-peddling on the phaseout of Stage 2 aircraft, stressed John Meenan, senior vice president for industry policy at ATA. But, he told ANR, the inability to conducc a very limited n�mber of non-revenue operations to move Staae 2 aircraft to be hnshl:itted or sold would reduce the value of the aircraft to scrap. On Dec. 31, the ATA and Car�o Airline Association filed a joint petition with the PAA seeking clarification of the �aaiver provisions in the FAA.'s Pai-t 91 rules implementinQ the StaQe 2 aircraft phaseout requirements of Ai�TCA. In the alternative, they souQht a limited waiver to operate Staae 2 aircraft after Dec. 31, 1999 — the final phaseout deadline — and asked that their petition serve as a"placeholder" application to preserve the rishts of their member air)ines to file individual applications for specific exemptions aiter Decernber 31, 1995 — the deadline for submi[tin� applica- tions for waivers from the final phaseout deadlin�. "This application is being filed out of an abundance of caution due to the lack of clarity as to the permissible scope of limited Staje 2 operations after Dec. 31, 1999, " ATA and the carQo airlines told the FAA in their petition. "It has come to our attention that the [FAA� mav be on the veree of takin� certain positions �vith resoect to the opera- tion of Staae 2 equipment after Dec. 3l, 1999, �vhich �ve believe are inconsistent with the policy established by [.AI�TCA� and/or the FAA reaulations enacted therzunder." They said they �vere informed that the FAA may be takin�t the position that "absolutely" no S[age 2 operations «�ill be permitted in the United States even if these opera[ions are solely: � • To import the aircrafc for the purpose of con��enin, them to StaQe 3 standards or to move them to Alaska or Ha�vaii where they could opera[e ]egally bzcause Sta�e 2 aircraft in these states are exempt from the phaseou[ requirements; • To export a Staae 2 aircraft from the United States or to move one to a maintenance facility in connection with being exported; • To move a StaQe 2 aircraft from a storase facility in connecuon with its modification to StaQe 3 noise standards; and � • To perform maintenance on a SiaQe 2 aircraft which can continue to be le�a]ly operated in Hawaii or Alaska after the �phaseout deadline. "tiWith the upcomina Dec. 31, 1999, 100 percent compli- ance date, the industry is faced �vith some practical prob- lems perhaps not fully explored �vhen the [FAA] imple- mentinQ regulations were enacted in 5eptember 1991," the airlines told the aaency. "The indusiry is concerned with the significant dimin3shed value of Stage 2 aircraft if such non- revenue operations are not permitted. Moreover, U.S. maintenance facilities would not be able to provide hushkit- ting and other maintenance services if such ]imited Stage 2 operations are not allowed" Section 91.8�7 of the FAA's reQulations specifically permits carriers to apply for special flight authorizations to bring Stage 2 aircraft into the lower 43 states for mainte- nance purposes. However, the preamble to FAA's phaseout regnlations specifically states [hat "1�laintenance fli,�hts wiil not be allowed after the statutory prohibition of Dec. 31, 19S9." ATA and the carao carriers araed FAA to review and modify this policy, which, they argued, "appears to recognize that such operations were not prohibited by the underlyin� leaislation." Section 91.8�9 allo�vs persons to app]y for special flight authorizations to brina Stage 2 aircraft to the conti�uous United States for the purpose of obtaining madifications to meet Staee 3 noise levels. There is no indication that the ability to mal:e such requests expires on Dec. 3l, 1999, �the airlines said.4 � Sta�e 2 Phaseorct I+'r�A GRANTS FIRST WA�VJE�Z. ��OiV1I�1TE�.li�1 DEAIi��� On Dec. 30, 199S, the Federal Aviation Administration Rranted its first waiver to an interim compliance deadline in its Par °1 rules required the phase ovt of Stave 2 aircraf[ operatior,s in the United States. � The temporan� waiver u•as aranted to Servicios Avensa, S.A. (Servivensa), a nev; entrant Venezuelan carrier, to allotiv it to operate its fleet of two StaQe 3 and three Sta�e 2 $oeina 727-200 airpinnes between Venezuela and the y United States until Jan. J�, 1999. The carrier had souQht the �vaiver Lntil Jan. 1 S, but [ne FAA cut that request by three days. As a netiv entrant, Servi�:ensa is required under the FAA's AirpoR \oise Rcport 8 ANR EDITORIA.L ADVISOk2Y BOARD Steven R. Alverson Mana�er, Sacramento Office Hams htiller Miller & Hanson John J• Corbett, Esq. Spiege( & VlcDiarmid Washina on, DC James D. Erickson Director, O�ce of Environment and Ener�y Federal Aviation Adminis[radon John C. Freytag, P.E. Direcror, Charles bi. 3alter Associates San Francisco i4lichael Scott Gatzke, Esq. Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance Carlsbad, CA Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. Cutler & Stanfield Denver Suzanne C. lYlcLean Chief De�elopment OfFcer Tucson Airport Authority John Ni. Meenan Senior Vice President for Industry Policy Air Transport Association Vincent E. lblestre, P.E. President, Mes[re Greve Associa[es Newport Beach, CA Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. McDermott, Will & Emery Chicago Karen L. Robertson ManaQer, Noise Compatibiliry Office Dallas/Foa Worth Intemational Airport _llary L. Vi�lante President, 3ynero Consultants, Inc. Seattle Lisa Lyle Zi'aters Ivfanaeer, Noise Abatement Program Palm Beach County Department of Airpotts Airport Noise R Part 91 rules implementin� the Airport Noise and Capaciry Act of 1990 to have a[ least 7� percent of its fleet operatin� in the United States compli- ant with Stage 3 noise standards by Dec. 31, 1998. ' Servivensa operates only five B727-200 aircraft in the United States. Two of these aircraft already meet Stage 3 noise standards and, without the waiver, a third would have had to have been brought into compiiance by Dec. 31, 1993, or the airline would have had to remove two of the Sta�e 2 aircraft presently in use in [he United States. The waiver, which FAA said was in the public interest, permits Ser- vivensa to complete the on�oing re-enginin� of a B-727-200 airplane to Sta�e 3 status. Without the waiver, Servivensa would have had to . discontinue operation of two airplanes until compliance was achieved, affecting the holiday Christrnas holiday flights of approximately 9,000 passengers, according to the FA.A. In its stater�nent b anting the waiver, issued on Dec. 31, 1998, the FAA. said it finds "[hat good cause exists in this instance to o ant a waiver of the requirements of 91.867(b)(4) for a limited period. Although the materials presented by the petitioner indicate that much of the delay 9n acquiring the new aireraft engines was within the control of the petitioner, the FAA is satisfied that part of the delay was not. The pe6tioner appears to have had a reasonable plan for compliance and began to execute that plan in June 1998.'The conversion of the replacement airplane was delayed in part because of unforeseen events that occurred at the en�ine manufacture facility that were unknown to the petitioner and were beyond the petitioner's control. Under such circumstances, the FAA has deter- mined that a D ant of waiver may be appropriate." 'The a�ency anticipated that the waiver would result in a total of 30 operations each between Venezuela and the United States by two of Servivensa's Sta�e 2 airplanes durin� the period Jan. 1-15, 1999. The FAA said the intent of its Part 91 phaseout reguirements "is not to punish an operator for reasonable attempts at compliance that are delayed by circumstances beyond its control. In this case, compliance would result in the petitioner's inabiliiy to operate two of its �ive auplanes, wi[h a siQnificant adverse impact on passenger service." Last summer, Servivensa si�ned an a�reement with Pratt & 1Vhitney and BF Goodrich that would permit up to five of its B727-200s to be re- en�ined. That work has been delayed, the carrier told FA.A, because of extensive lejal and paperwork requirements associated with financing the project and because of unanticipated deIay in the shipment of the en�ines to Venezuela.� AIRPORT NOISE R�PORT Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Charles F. Price, ContributinQ Editor;ll�Iaria T. Norton, Production Editor Published 2� times a year a[ 4397S Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4�28. Price $549. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of USS1.03 per paae per copy is paid directly to Copyri�ht Cle<uance Center, 27 ConUress Street, Salern, MA 01970. USA. Copyright �O 1999 by Airport Noisc Report, Ashburn, Va. 201-17 oi/?o/99 {�'ED 12:=�o Fa� 202 6J9 3?38 OT�T TO INSURE A _ .. � s: r — --• � '. � f �' �. � .�',�'� l � � Y ", �y � � 75± r �� �fi.��'' ��� 1�: �fih� c�.. �- iC` }�'� ti.� �'':"� . `k; � i' :�m. :n: ��y ds� � {+� _ k�� i s�;; d,,....,, °��« .TIo� �o r�su� A st FACSIMILE TRANSIVIITTAL SHEET rr+c� �r�An,sGn�nTF nFl IVERY _ ATTENTION RECiP1ENT, Please forward the attached to the appropriate persan{s} in your fiirm. .' To• PiO��E :F��BER�3 From: DEi�dIB l�icGR.A:P�' • �COT'� SIiRU� � LEGISLATIVE & REGULATORY ' AFFAIRS Phone: (202} 434�8153 Fax: (202} 639-8238 Date: Janua�'y 15, 1999 To'�al Pages: 3 (Including this page) SP�ClAL iNSTRUCTIONS OR MESSAGE: $.�i �.L��A���E �IPC�AI" AiTACH�P ARE TUU(J SEP��ATE STORIES ASOUi Af� t�7CR�ASE 1� F'�Cs �.�17 SEt��TO� �cC�l�'S PASITI01� 0� �ESTIOi�S OR N ED ADD1T1��, AL /1 PLEAS� CCl�TACi US 1F YOU HA�IE APdY 4U I�Ft?RNiATfON ll THI�Fd{� Y�U. If you do not receiva a11 pages indicated, please call (202)434-8183 for assistance. �}_.f V V 1 O1/20/99 tYED 1?:10 F.�� 20: 639 8:�8 Admit��stra�ion C.rjnsidet's Platt to Boas� �aximum Airpoti Fee �o $5 Per Passe�ger ith more funds needed for tAe upkeep of ti2e na- tion's aviacion system, the Clinton administra- tion is said fo be eyeing a, plan to sharply in- crease the maximum fee Ehat airports can collect from passengers, according to sources. While cautioning that details of the fiscal year 2q00 budget plan still ara baing decided, sources said they expect the adminis[ratian now is likely to back a pro- posal to increase the maximum passenger facility charge (PFC} collected by airports fr4m �3 to $5. By itself, such a large increase in the maximum PFC is likely to meet with opposition from tne airline indus- try, which last year successfully opposed a S 1 PFC hike. But when coupied with an expecced deep cut in che Air- port Improvement Program, the administration's fi- nancing plan inay not fly an Capito! Hill, the sources said. Aiready, House Transponation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bud. SKuster (R-Pa.) has said he will not support a PFC increase whi3e revenues in the Aviation Trust Fund are not fully spent to upgrade avIa- tion facilities_ The adminiszration's financing proposals for airport construction pc-ograms will be part of a iarger package that President Clinton will sent to Capitol Hill early next month_ Also iikely to be included in the budget for Fed- eral Aviation Administration programs, sources said, will be a plan to finance the nation's air traffic control system v�ich new user fees. More details on the administration's plans are ex- pected to emerge Jan. 15, when�Transportation Secr�- tary Rodney Slater and .many other senior Transporta- tion .Departmen�-efficials are scheduled to meet with members of Congress ai�d top aviation industry o�cials to�discussxh�rfinancing of the�U:S. aviaRon•system. The all-dsy mee[ing will taka place ak the World Trade Cen- ter in New Yock City. S1.6 Billion A1P Under Discusslon. The C�nancing pro- posais alsa wilt be reflected in the FAA reauthoriiation bill that F�A Administrator Sane Garvey said should be sent to Congress soon after the budget submission. FAA programs, including the Airport Improyement Pro;ram, now are du� to expire March 31. While Shusrer led his committee Jan. '1 in passing another shor't-term exten- sion of the programs, neither the House nor the Senate ha�e y�t acted to ensure FAA funding con[inues this spring while Congress tackles the long•kecm FA� reau- thorization (5 DER A-3$, 118199}. White aviation safety and airline competicion are among the controversies that will.make it d�ificult for lawmakers to reach an early agreement on a bi11, future financing of the system appears to be the mos[ diF,�cult issue raised by the reauthorization. htany of zhe pro- ' posed solutions already are encountering strong sirline industry opposition, the sources said. . i The plan ta boosc the maximum P�'C �rnm 33 to �5 is ssid to•have been recommended by a DOT Norking group zhQt exarnined the issue of long-term financing of FAA programs,� Howevar, the administntion's plan 'ss no� expected to reflect di'scussion� DOT had about mak- , ing the fee more of a"consensus PFC" to address air- (ine induscry concerns abou� how airpons use the � funds. [7] 0 0 2 � ' Each $1 increase in the PFC is e'stimated to yield �400 miltion annually. Thus a$? increase wou(d b�i�g in $$00 mitlion. I But at the sar�e tirne that the administration pro- pases to raise rhe PFC cap, oFficials also wanc to again cut the Airport Improvement Progtam, sources said. The 1�udget now is expected to propose cutting AIP funding iv $i_6 billion, down from the $1.95 billion [ha� congressional appropriators agreed to for FY 1998, they said_ ` Not only is the $1.6 billion far less than the appropri- ated level, the figures is even below what the adminis- [ration p�oposed in its FY 1999 budget sent co Congress last winter, they said. Last year, the pres+dent's budget endorsed a AIP level of $1.7 billion. "i�he fund will ha�e an uncommitted balance af almost $7 billion az the end of this year. For his part, Shuster already has made it clear he will not entertain any PFC increase as long as revenues from existing aviation excise taxes sit unused in the Avjation Tcust Fund, which finances the AIP and other FA.A accounts. To "fcee up those funds, Shuster and Rep. James Obersiar (D-Minn.) said they will back leg- islation to ei[her take the trust fund aff budget or other- wise "wall off" aviation within the federal budget pro- cess. Neva User Fec�Based ATC Plan. Also said likely to be•in- cluded in the president's budget request is a plan to im- ( pose new fees on the users of the aviation system in or- \ der to support air traffic con[rol aperations, the sources said. The plan is said tfl be panicularly favored by the Ofnce of Management and Budgec. But the agency's original pian to use the fee ro raise millions more than cuzrently needed for ATC opera- tions immediately ran into- trouble with the airline in- dustry, sourcas said,-and now may have been scaled back somewhat. . That proposal also will stand in contrast to the Qlan Shuster recently backed to control ,ATC costs. In recent comments to reporters, Shuster said he is likely to push m3��g FA,A independent-o; the Transportation Depart- ment, or, at a minimum, making ATC operations sepa- race. Shuster said such steps would help to remnve po- �i�icat pressures on the agency, particularly from the y,rhite House. Specifi�s on the administra[ian's FAA financing plans are expec[ed to be formally announced Feb. 1, the da�e on �hich the budget is sent to Congress. BY NANCY OGNwNOV1CH 01/20/99 1FED 12:�1 Fal 202 sa9 3?3S .. ,� . . ... v.�vv� Page l of 1 I�. CC�� I�EBUFFS �HL7STER BID FOR. SII�I'LE �AA BILL By Karen Foerstel, CQ Staff Writer 7an. 15, 1999 - Senate Commerce Ch�rm�` T0� ����� �'��'' is pretty busy these days �with the �mpeachment trial and his expioratory 2��fl presidential bid. $ut he's not too busy to fight back when challenged by House Transportation Chauman Bud Shustet, R Pa McCa.in see,s airline competition problems as vne of t�he�t S�uan�P efforts to put off nsideration of should address tlus year. And he ss cleazly not pleas Y �t; movin Aviatian Trust Fund those issues and hold them hostage to the House chairm�'s p� Proj 8 revenues off budget. Shuster struck first this yeai', SPe�ding a simple Federal Aviation Adsninistration (FA�) reauthorization bill (HR99) through his comm�ttee 1an- n' cons dera� oln of competit n� ssues for�rt improvement grants flo�nng through Sept. 3Q, postpon► g now, "In my Svildest imaginatian, I could not imagine such a scenario," McCain said when asked if he would go along with that appraach. McCain �rants to pass a multiyear reauthorizatian bill with provisions an Nati nra]nChicaPotstO'Hare increasin� the number of daily fligh ts from four major airports -- Reag , � and New York's Ker�nedy and LaGuardia -� to underserved communities. The Senate passed his bill by 92-1 Iast September, but Shuster refiised to act on it. _- With time runrung out, the chairmen stuck a pravision in the o�b Ca n in e�nd s o use tha�t d�op dead PL 105-277) to kesp the airport gants flowing unt�.l Iv�arch � 1. date to force Shuster to negotiate over the competition provisions. But Shusier plans to mave his simple extender through the �io es�e�aearncluded his pr pasal o fe n e el might then address the competition issues in a separate measur off Aviation Tn.ist Fund revenues the way he prQtected Highway Trust Fund monies last year. 1�Jith the clock. now ticking down, both sides have dug in their heels. �1998 Congressional Quarterly Inc. A�1 Rights Reserved. .>y,.;. _..