The URL can be used to link to this page

08-11-1999 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HElGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION AGENDA August 11, 1999 - Large Conference Room 1. Call to Order - 7 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Approvai of July 14, 1999 Minutes. 4. Unfinished and New Business: a. Consider Revised Airport Action Plan (Availabie Monday) b. Review Draft Airports and Aviation Chapter of Comprehensive Plan c. Comments on Technical Adviser's Repart 5. Updates a. Part 150 Update - Draft MSP Scoping �omments b. Proposed GIS Analysis of Corridor 6. Acknowledqe Recei�t of Various Reports/Correspondence: a. MASAC Agenda for July 27, 1999 and June 22, 1999 Minutes including MASAC Operations Committee Minutes of July 9, 1999 b. MASAC Technical Advisers Report for tk�e Month of June 1999 c. MASAC Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for Jurre 1999 d. MASAC Executive Summary for June1999 e. Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee Minutes June 23, 1999 7. Other Comments or Concerns. 8. Adjourn. Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notice. Please aontact City Administration at 452-1850 with requests. a ; � =� ; � r,. � �l ��` ! ;;t ._� �� ,�:; A biweekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developrnents Volume 11, Number 12 European Union DIFFICULT NEGOTIAT'IONS PREDICTED FOR US, EU ON TIGHTER ICAO NOISE RULE DifFcult ne�otiations ]ie ahead for the European Union and the United States on the details of a tighter international aircraft noise standazd, an o�cial of the European Union predicted July 19 at the annual conference of the National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled Environment (NOISE) held in San Francisco. Anders C. Jessen, first secretary for Transport-Environment-Energ}r with the Delegation of the European Commission, said there will be no progress on a rrrore strin�ent International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) aircraft noise certifica tion standard (loosely referred to as a Staae 4 standard) if the United States and the EU fail to a?ree on its parameters. Jessen said he was struck by the U.S. aviation industry's "apparent determination to prevent pro�ress towards more s�ingent noise standards" and by the "U.S. administ=ation's difficulty in handling the industry." \ The week of July 19 representatives of the European Commission in Brussels �. J met with high level officials of the Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, and U.S. aviation industry to try to determine whether the EC (the technical branch of the EIT) and the United States could issue a joint statement agreeing on some basis for proceeding with the development of a Sta�e 4 ICAO (Continued on p. 88) Flight Tracks THREE AIRPORTS, TEMPE EXPLORING USE OF NAV AIDS TO REFI��1E FLIGHT T3.2ACKS (By Charles F. Price) — Three U.S. airports — Chica�o O'Hare International, San Francisco International, and Louisville International — and the City of Tempe, AZ, are exploring the use of cuttin�-ed?e navi�ation technologies for noise miti?ation purposes. The new technologies allow aircraft to precisely follow noise abatement fliQht paths that are only meters wide and, say its sponsors, hold the promise of dramatically shrinkina noise contours on the a ound. The airports are pursuina aspects of the new technology in various ways — O'Hare to define fliaht �acks for its niahtrime "fly quiet" pro�ram; Louisville as one option in a Part 1�0 airport noise compatibility pro�ram planninQ process; and SFO as a component of iu onaoinQ noise miti�ation program. Additionally, a work plan to use the technolosy to better define a noise abatement departure route a�reed to in the settlement of a lawsuit challengin; a new runway at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport is pending before the Tempe Ci[y Council. The use of this ne�v technology for noise miti�acion purposes "is the most �� importan[ technical breakthrouQh in the noise field since the advent of hi�her (Continued or� p. 91) Copyright �O 1999 by Airport Noise Report, Ashbum, Va. 201-i7 � July 30, 1999 In �'his Issue... Stage 4 Standards ... Although they have not been defined yet, the issue of tighter aircraft noise certifica- tion standazds is in the news: ... An official of the Euro- pean Union predicts that the U.S. and Europe face di�cult negotiations over the shape of � a more stringent ICAO . - aircraft noise standard = p. 8� ... EC o�cials say they can amend their new rule barring hushkitted aircraft only if it does not degrade their envi- ronmental goals - p. 89 ... Le�slation is introduced in Congress that would require aircraft to rrieet Sta�e 4 standards by 2012 - p. 92 � Flight 7'ra�ks ... Three airports and the Ciry of Tempe are exploring the use of cuttinb edje navigation technology to refine noise abatement flight tracks - p. 87 San Francisco ... Airport plans to maintain its leader- ship role in naise miti�ation efforts, NOISE told - p. 90 ... Sierra Club opposes 31IFOfC f1111I1� Sar Francisco Bay for new runways -.p. 94 Grants ... FAA announces arants to 26 airports for noise miti�ation projects - p. 93 88 Airport Noise Report noise standard, Jessen told ANR. But neither Jessen nor U.S. sources felt that any progress had been made at the meetings. The U.S. airline industry said it will only support such a joint statement, according to Jessen, if the EU drops a regulation it approved in April that will freeze the number of hushkitted and reengined aircraft openting in Europe. The European's refusal to drop that regulation is the main stumbling block to movin� forward with a jointstatement, a U.S. source told ANR. The EU rejulation bars the addirion to the re�stry of European airlines of aircrafr "recertificated" to meet Stage 3 noise standards as of May 1, 2000. Beginning on April 1, 2002, the rule will bar the operation in Europe of hushkitted aircraft from non-European countries that did noc operate there between April 1, 199�, and May 4, 2000. The EU regulation was to have become effective this April, but under intense pressure from the United Siates, ihe EU delayed implementation of its regulation for one year. The EU is open to further gostponina the effective date of the regulation as long as pro�aress is being made with the United States on the shape of a StaDe 4 ICAO standard, 7essen told ANR. However, he stressed, the EU wilI not drop the regulation (See related story in this issue). 7essen said a report is due to the EU Commission at the . end of September documentinp pro�ess, if any, that has been made in working cooperatively with the United States on a tighter ICAO noise standard. There currently is no proposed ICAO "Stage 4 noise standard. A working � oup cf ICAO's Committe� on ' Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) is expected to complete its work on defining the technical parameters of a new standard by the end of September. If adopted, a tighter ICAO standard wiil not be called Chapter 4— thai chapter is aIready desijnated for helicopters. It is unclear at this point what ICAO will call it o�cially. Unilateral Action Defended At the NOISE conference, Jessen explained why the EU has taken unilateral action to bar hushkitted aircraft in Europe. Airports in Europe have come under increasina pressure to reduce aircraft noise, he said, and opposition by the public has continued to arow despite new technology and the imposition of operational measures by the airlines. In response to this arowine public pressure, Enropean airports have adopted operational and financial measures to restrict opera[ion of noisy aircraft. While the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 makes it very difficult for U.S. airports to impose restrictions of aircraft noise, European airports are under no such limitation. The proliferation of local restrictions at European airports has led to an unstable�operatina environment fot all aircraft operators. Jessen said. The ideal solution is a coordinated international response to deal with noise at its source, he said, but blamed the United States for deviating from the Sta�,e 2 phaseout timetable set by ICAO. In 199Q the United States decided unilaterally to acceler- ate the timetable for the phaseout of Stage 2 aircraft: it began the phaseout three months early; moved the final phaseout date up from April 1, 2002, to Dec. 31, 1999; and set three interim compliance dates for the phaseout (Dec. 31, 1994, 1996, and 1998). This accelerated timetable irnposed by the United States on carriers operatin� here pushed some carriers to use hushkitted aircraft to meet the Stage 3 requirements, the EU o�cial said, and led to a sisnificant increase in the number of aircraft that will be hushkitted to meet the standard. In 1996, ICAO estimated that only 6a0 airplanes would be hushkitted to meet Stage 2 phaseout requirernents; it now estimates that 1,500-1,600 aircraft will be hushkitted by 2040, Jessen said. `Threat to Environmental Gains' Hushkitted aircraft "generally have worse environmental performance than current pmduction aircraft; ' he said. Current production aircraft often exceed ICAO Chapter 3 (the international equivalent to U.S. Stage 3) noise standazds by substantial mazgins, Jessen said. But old production aircraft "are often only mar�nally compliant" and have to rely on iradeoff allowances to meet the standard or on recertification techniques that allow operational restrictions, such as wei�ht reductions and chanaes to flap settings, to be counted. � Older aircraft that are only maz�nally compliant with Sta�e 3 noise standards pose a"threat to environmental gains," the EU'officiai told conference participants. Noise levels at airports depend on the number of aircraft move- ments and the fleet mix servina the airport, he explained. Aircraft movements are expected to double in the next 20 years at many airports, he said, and [he fleei mix serving airports has "deteriorated" as a result of the U.S. decision to accelerate the StaDe 2 phaseout schedule. The Airport Council International - North America (ACI- NA), Jessen said, has pointed out that older aircraft origi- nally certified as Staae 2, such as older 727s, 737s, and DC- 9s, even if hushkitted "are dramatically noisier" than aircraft manufactured to meet Sta�e 3 noise standards. ACI-NA also has stressed that recertification techniques imposing operational restrictions on these older aircraft produce no reduction in noise emissions. Further, he said, ACI-NA has noted that the purpose of the Airpon Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 was to eliminate these older aircraft from the fleet. ICAO Failed to Consider Europeans ICAO is the body that develops international aircraft noise standards. The EU, Jessen said, looked to ICAO for many years to revisit noise cercification standards for jet and large propeller-driven airplanes. The current Chapter 3 ICAO noise standards are outdated, he said. • But ICAO's Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) — the technical committee that does mos� Airport Noise Report � � July 30, 1999 of ICAO's environmental work —"has up to now consis- tently failed to Qive due consideration to Europe's pressing �!, noise problems; ' Jessen said. In 1995, CAEP even removed the noise item from its work proa am. "CAEP in faci only revisited the issue after the European Commission presented irs proposed re?ulation barrin� recertificated aircraft. The EU General Assembly failed to sapport an EU proposal for a clear timetabie for a new noise standard, 7essen said, addin� that the EU and it member siates "have been very disappointed by the lack of support from the U.S., in some cases, even opposition to its efforts " Three concerns prompted the EU to propose its regulation on hushkitted aircraft, he said. Frst as the concern that substantial numbers of marginally Chapter 3 aircraft would be added to EU registers or operated into Es�rope. Second were concerns about proliferation of ad-hoc airport restric- tions in Europe. And fina3ly were concerns about ICAO's failure to adopt more stringent noise standards. �,�� ) EU Regulafion On April 29 the Council of the European Union approved the regulation barrin� hushkitted aircraft_ Jessen told the NOISE conference that the EU decided to postpone the efFective date of its new reaulation as an indication of its willin�ness to consider modifications to it to remove the perceived discriminatory impact. - There are several mispercep[ions, Jessen said, about the EU rule. The United States contends that the rewlation contravenes ICAO rules; that it underniines ICAO's role as a srandard-seitin� body; that there is no correlarion between en�ine bypass ratio and noise; that it imposes an arbitrary design standazd; and that it is discriminatory. But the EU o�cial rebutted all these contentions. ICAO standards aze not bindin� and they apply only to certifica- tion, not recertification of aircraft, he said. The EU is not underminin� ICAO's role, he contended. ICAO's failure to respond to European concerns farced the EU to react, he said, and the United States unilateral decision to accelerate the Sta?e 2 phaseout agQravated the problem. There is a correlation between enaine bypass ration and noise, he noted. As enQine bypass ration increases, jet exhaust noise decreases. And the EU's use of engine bypass ratio in noise standards is neither novei or unique, he said. 7essen also insisted that the EU regulation is not discrimi- natory. It imposes no particular solution, he said. European carriers with older aircraft will face the same limitation when attemptinQ to sell the aircraft. The EU re�ulation will have no impact on �vhich manufacturer EU airlines' choose in buyino new aircraft. The United States contends that the EU regulation discriminates asainst aircraft equipped with engines manufactured here, espzcially the Pratt & tiijhitney TTS-D enaine, a workhorse of the industry that is a prime candidate for hushkittina. The EU resulation is based on a design standard, (enQinz b}•pass ratio), not a performance stanc3ard (noise emission). It bars aircraft that have an en�ine bypas,s :• ratio of less than 3:1, regardless of whether the en�ine is hushkitted and its noise emission reduced_ The JT8-D has a bypass ration of less than 2: i.� European Ilnion EU ENV7[I20r�1VIENTAL GOALS IVIUST BE M[AINTAINED, IT.S. TOLD The European Union is willing to discuss amendments to its controversial regvlation barring hushkitted aircraft but only to the extent that they preserve the environmental objectives of the rule, two high-level o�ciats of ihe European Cornmission, the technical arm of the EU, told Secretary of State Madeline Albright, Secretary of Com- merce William M. Daley, Secretary of Transgortation Radney E. SIater, and U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Baishefsky, in a 7uly 201etter. The issue of hushkitted aircraft operating in Enrope has become enmeshed in ihe e owing traide tensions between the United States-and Europe. Hushkittina, once a topic relegated to technocrats, is now on the a�enda of cabinet -�. level officials in the United States and Europe. ConD ess has passed le�islation that will bar t}ie. Concorde from operation in the United States when the EU regulation takes effect, and Northwest Airlines is seeki� io have the government impose sanctions on Eurape for its action. EC Commissioner Neil Kinnock and EC Vice President Sir Leon Brittan noted in their letter that the "hushkits issue" was discussed at the recent EU-US Summit The EC officials said that "while we are ready to address the specific concerns raised by the United States [to the EU regulation], the environmental objectives of the regulation cannot be undermineti. We cannot accept a deterioration of the noise situation at European airports aenerated by these recertificated aircraft. Consequently, we are willing to discuss amendments to the regulation to meei your concerns to the extent that our environmentai objectives are pre- served." "We wish therefore [o continue to insist on the need for our cooperation to cover both o�r shorter and lonaer-term needs. It is important to pursue both an ICAO and a bilateral track." At the request of the United States, the EU postponed implementation of its rule by one year. But Kinnock and Brittan noted in their letter that this delav "was rendered possible by the new priority given by the United States to the ICAO work on a more strin�ent noise standard and by its willingness to work in close cooperation with Europe on rules for [ransiuon [ro a quieter aircraft flee�J." The European officials stressed that this decision to postpone the effective date of [he EU reQulation "is of an exceptional nature." They said "it was made bo[h to take due account of the concerns raised bv the United S[ates and to facilitate our cooperation for a ne�v noise standard which Airport Noi�e Report r� gp Airport Noise Report will meet our mutua] long-term environmental needs." Kinnock and Brittan said they are pleased that a coopera- tive process be[ween noise experts frorn the EC and the United States is well under way in the ICAO framework. "And we hope [hat we will mana�e at a political level to endorse the positive developments reached at a technical levei," they told U.S. officials. But they said they are also awaze of potential conflicting timetables since ICAO will not be able to deliver a more strinaent noise standard before the entry into force of the EU regulation. "However, if we can achieve toaether clear and substantial progress on the development of a new ICAO noise standard with appropriate transitional rules in the coming months, we believe that the European legislative bodies will'be in a position to draw the appropriate conse- quences reearding the future implementation of the regula- tion: ' Rule is `Safeguard' The EU regulation, they explained, "was desiLned to be a safeauard measure in order to prevent the addition of aircraft in the Community which should normally have been phased-out according to the ICAO principles. We would remind you that, in 1990, the U.S. Administration unilater- alIy decided, before an a�eement was reached in ICAO, to phase out noisy aircraft (Staae 2 aircraft) according to iu own timetabie, whilst imposina interim compliance require- ments, which were not included at all in the ICAO a�ee- ment " •� The result of this uniIateral action by the United States, they said, "is that techniques were used [in the United States] to prolong the life of old aircraft that should nor- mally have been retired accordin� to the ICAO require- ments. Furthermore, this application threatens the purpose of the ICAO standard in terms of overall noise reduction throuah best available technology. Europe expected that, on the basis of the ICAO rules, these old aircraft would no lon�er fly after 2002. It seems that U.S. airports were also taken by surprise." The EC officials noted that the Airport Council Interna- tional - North America aQrees with them. In a recent letter to Federal Aviation Administrator Jane Garvey, ACI-NA said that "in 1990, it was widely [hou�ht that there would be no feasible means of continuins the operation of certain noisy Scase 2 airplanes (particularly those powered by J'T8-D envines... The purpose of the 19901egislation was to eliminate these older aircraft from the operatin� fleeu and to reduce noise sienificantly." Hushkits and other recertifica- tion techniques, ACI-NA said, have allowed these aircraft "which are dramatically noisier" to continue to fly.� San Francisco InYI SFO PLANS TO MAINTA.IN LEADERSH]CP ROLE ON NOISE San Francisco International Airport, at the forefront of airport noise miti�ation efforts in the past, plans to maintain that role in the future, Wayne Bryant, acrin� noise abate- ment o�cer at SFO, told participants at the annual meeting of the National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled Bnvironment (NOISE} heId in San Francisco July 19-20. Leadership by the airport's current director, John Martin, and by past directors is the factor that has put the airport ahead in terms of noise abatement, Bryant said. "It takes dynamic leadership to challenge the industry and the federai government," he said, adding "the most effective airport managers take personal responsibility for beina assertive and proactive when it comes to addressing aircraft noise problems." The airport recendy upo aded its noise monitoring system to improve its analytical capabilities and to have data available within 24 honrs, he said. It also is installing new noise monitors in Southem San Mateo communities approximately 15 miles from the airport. These steps, Bryant said, were taken in response to concerns raised by the public. - .. Airport manaaement, he told the session, is trying to improve iis coordination and teamwork with the Federal Aviation Administration, the airlines, and the pilots to assist with the deveiopment of better ways to reduce aircraft noise. SFO aiso has hired a former chief pilot to assist with pilot issues and a former FAA air traffic control mana?er to assist with air traffic matters. And, he added, the airport recently appointed Ro?er Chinn, the former mayor of Foster City, CA, and founding father of the AirportlCommunity Roundtable, as'the new assistant deputy airport director for noise abatement. "He's from your side of the equation," Bryant told the city o�cials attending the conference. "Do you know of anyone," he asked, "who has vociferously represented an aircraft noise-impacted constituency as an elected public official and later been invited to take char�e of an airport noise abatement pro�ram?" SFO Setting Example Bryant said that earlier this year SFO Airpon Director John NSartin went to Phoenix for a conference of airport directors and federal aviation o�cials from around the country. During the course of the meetina he spoke about SF�'s expansion and runway reconfi�uration proQram and discussed his commitment to an aggressive environmental miti�aaon plan, Bryant said. "He told us chat it seemed.:like he was starting a revolution. Some of the airport officials called him a radical, sayinQ he was talkins about spendinQ too much money on the environment. They complained SFO miQht set examples other airports would not be able to Airport Noise Report � C July 30, 1999 follow." Of course, said Bryan[. "that wouldn't be the first time that has happened." -- He noted that San Francisco in not the only airport lookin� �'for new runways: Miami, Boston, Seattle, Chicago, and Los Anaeles also are strusjling to expand their ai�elds. "But there is no airport - indeed few developmenu of any sort - willinQ to consider the kind of miti�ation John Martin has been talking about," Bryant said. The initial figure being talked for environmental mitiga- tion for a runway reconfi�uration project that coutd add runways to San Francisco Bay is $200 miliion The airport wants to build new runways into the bay to reduce delay at the airport, reduce noise impacts, and to accommodate the larQer airplanes being planned. Restoring bay wetlands would offset the Ioss of bay azea that would occur from filling the bay in to add the runways. Lookin� to the future, Bryant said the "while most of the world is focused on the Y2K issue comina up on Jan. 1, 2000, we in the world of aircraft noise have what might be called `the other Y2K issue':' VJhile technically all aircraft will be Stage 3 after that date, he said, the differences between those aircraft oriD nally manufactured as 5tage 2 and those actually built as Staae 3"is quite substantial" in terms of noise emissaon. Also, the Airport Noise and Capacity Act severely limits the ability of airports to impose new noise restrictions. ' "This means that airports are facinj th�-new century with some bij challenges," Bryant told the conference. "To put it � 1Simpiy, most of the low-han�nD fivit has already been �picked." "A considerable amount of creativity and ingenuity will be required to find improvemenu in the future," he said. . "The end of the Staae 2 phaseout is also the be�nning of a national canversation about what to do next As an industry we need to work out a strate�y to deal with the life span of the previousiy Stage 2 aircraft, the older Sta?e 3 aircraft, the development of a StaQe 4 standard, aircraft under 75,000 pounds, and the restrictions on the regulatory authority of airpons." These issues are a hish priority at San Francisco, Bryant said, asserting that the airport "will go outside the box to maintain a leadership role in the world of aircraft noise abatement."� Flight Tracks, from p. 87 bypass ratio jet enaines," William A. Albee, vice president for pro�rams with Aviation Navi�ation and Satellite Prosrams, Inc. (ANSP), told participants at a July 20 session of the annual meetinQ of che National OrQanization to Insure a Sound-controlled En��ironment (NOISE), held in San Francisco. Albee recentiv retired from the Federal Aviation Admini- stration where he worked in the Office of Environment and t ;�nersy and served as the aQency's noise ombudsman. � While no[ina that next-aeneration naviaauon technologies are "not a panacea for noise issues," Albee said they offered 91 a"huge potential for capaci[y, safety, and noise benefits." The new navigation tools with their more precise hish- resolution tracks wili enabie localities to better plan land uses and to devise more precise soundproofing programs for the smaller areas affected by the tiahter fliaht tracics, Albee �old ANR. All phases of the work associated with impiementins the system should be eligible for FAA fundine either throu�h planning or capital a ants or through the impositian of Passenger Facility Charges, he said Subhead here Development of fliDht tracks that will yield the selected b ound tracks requires "a highly sophisticated approach to positioninp waypoints," Albee said, adding that the process also calls for "careful validation and FAA certification [of the new flight tracks or flight procedures] with full partici- pation of air camers: ' Aircraft must be appropriately eyuipped to perform the hiah-resolution terminal azea navigation procedures the technology requires. As more planes are equipped with Flight Management Systems (FMS) uisina sensor pasition- ina reliant on Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites, ; _ said Albee, "the resolution of the fliaht tracks v�nil increase." Expected in the near future is an ability to apply"a I.ocal . Area Augmentation System (LAAS) to the raw GPS signaIs, �, which Albee said will "yield the highest possible resolution" � of flight tracks with repeatability "within a few meters of the ternunal area." . Asked by ANR how many FMS-eynipped planes were in service and compatible with the new technolo�es, Albee ` said no exaci estimate was available but used Phcenix Sky Harbor airport as an example, where he said 70 percent of . aircraft operating there are so equipped. "We expect 85 percent at Phoenix by the phaseout [of Sta?e 2 aircraft in 2d00], he said, implying that in time such equipment will. be standard. Albee told the NOISE conference that he stron�ly believes the emergina navi;ation technolo?ies "provide a genuine opportunity for communities to confront their noise con- cerns with tangible airspace design inputs_" Asked whether some airports are better suited for the new tools than others, Albee pointed to places where a consensus has emerged about flight tracks and noise, such as the Washington, DC, area; local governments there have agreed that aircraft routes and noise shouid be confined over the Potomac River. Best suited for the technolosies would be "places - even with a hi�h density of population - that have existino corridors of compatible uses where placement of fliQht tracks is logical and has a good chance for appro�ial," - Albee said. Any significant opposition by portions of the public to placement of che ground tracks or to the patterns of noise dispersion they yield, if it occurred, would of course impede or stall the process, he pointed out. Airport Noise Repor 92 Airport Noise Report LAAS Is Final Upgrade Airports wishin� to use the new tools will have to make outlays for the necessary infrasuvcture. Starting wich existin� �round-based naviQa[ion aids and graduating to FMS whose link to raw satelIite siDnals will yield a highe� dejree of accuracy, the system would then be finalized with installaaon of LAAS, which adds the capacity for highest- resolution tracks. The LA.AS is a transmitter/receiver computer which receives raw satellite data, corrects iu, and sends it out to aircraft. The LAAS equipment must be located in the line of site of runway ends to be effective. The hardware is not yet certified by the FAA. The a�ency is fasi-tracking the process, Albee said, but it may not be completed for a few years. Installation of the LAAS equipment is expected to cost less thari $1 million. In the meantime, however, airports can decide where they want their ground tracks and use e�cisting technologies, such as GPS, to enhance their accuracy. The installarion of LAAS, however, will take the flight iracks to their Iughest possible resolution, he said. Albee said FAA may eventually undertake — and pay the cost of — the up�ades as part of its move toward a compre- hensive navigation system based on GPS — a process that will doubdess take a very lono time. Some airports, he said, may wish to move more quickly on their own be drawing on other sources such as PFC's. Putting the technolojy to use, Albee said, is a stepwise process. Airpor[s are studied to detennine operational constraints, aircraft equipment, and standard operating procedures. These are then correlated with maps of sur- roundin� land uses givinj particvlar attention to noise- compatibte uses and features such as hiDhways, ra��lroads, bodies of water or industrial and undeveloped land. Aiterna- tive non-linear p ound tracks are then generated following noise-compatible areas as nearly as possibie. F1iQht tracks are then desi�ned that will both meet airport needs and deliver the chosen �round tracks_ The result, Albee report, is a set of "hi�h-resolution, predictable, repeatable fli?ht tracks over ... non-compatible land uses" that will "channel a hish volume of airplanes over publicly asree-upon �round tracks accurate to within a few meters: ' The system offers multiple optional fli�ht tracks from each runway, so traffic — and its noise — can be dispersed, if that is the wish of the community. ANSP, said Albee, is the oniy firm he knows of which is presently offerine an "intearated, comprehensive" system of hiah-resoIution traci:s chosen with the participation of operators, communities, and FAA. Some other attempts have been made to use the new naviQation technologies to alleviate noise, but these have not been successful, he said. The firm, based in I�Sinneapolis, was started in 1997 by John Fossia, former head of the noise and satellite programs oftice at Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. Legislnizon IC1 �i ! .'7- � 1� . .,- • 1 • • 1 • ' 1 Aircraft over 75,OOQ pounds operatina to or from the United States would be required to meet yet-to-be-defined Stage 4 noise standards by the year 2012 under legislation introduced in the House ]uly 13 by NY Reps. Anthony D. Weiner (D) and Joseph Crowley (D), who represent the New York City boroughs of Brook}yn, Qnezns, and the Bron� The bill has the bi-partisan supgort of 23 co-sQonsors represeniing districts around the counEry impacted by aircraft noise. The legislation, H.R 2499 — entided the Silent Skies Act of 1999 — would require the secretary of transportation, in consultaaon with the International C'ivil Aviation Organiza- tion (ICAO), to issue federal regulations setting Stage 4 noise standazds.no later than Dec. 3, 2001. The sponsors of the bill expect ICAO to approve internationaI Stage 4 noise standards by September 2001. The legislation also wonld impose an interim phaseout date of Dec. 31, 2006, by which time 50 percent of S tage 3 � aiicraft c�rently operating would have to be phased� out of the fleet, and it would repeal the exemption under which � supersonic aircraft currently operate in the United States. NotinD that the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 will resnit in the elimination of Stage 2 aircraft from the fleet by the end of this year; ttie sponsors of the legislation said "it is time for Congress to take the lead again." "In the past decade, uncler Stage 3 reqniremenis, aircraft engines have become 50 percent q�ueier," Rep. Crowley and Weiner said in a statement announcing their le�slation. With the Stage 3 goal achieved, they said they will now push for further restcictions on aircrafc noise. Their bill would reduce aircraf[ noise by an additiona140 percent, they� estimated. "Aircraft noise reduction efforts to date have been important steps in quietino aircraft over New York City," Weiner said, `But the residents of Queens and Brooklyn will tell you that the regalations in place do not go far enough. Living in the shadow of an airport should not be an ear-shattering experience. Quiet, livable nei�hborhoods around our airports are not a luxury — ihey're a necessity." "Now that implementation of Stage 3 technoloay is nearly complete, it's time to raise the bar," said Rep. Crowley. "Silent Skies will give LaGuazdia's nei�hbors another tooI to tackle excessive aircraft noise poilution in our neighbor- hoods, schools, and businesses. "Thanks to the hard work of the New York City dele�a- tion, real proa ess has already been made. �30 million in funding [to the National Aeronautics and Space Administra- tion] to research these quieter engines has already passed the House," he said, "and the High Density Rule [at Newark and 1FK airports] has been extended another 'seven years. "The next step is passin� the Silent Skies bill to phase in Airport Noise Report � l; July 30, 1999 these quieter en�ines. Stase 4 technology will dramatically improve the quality of life for residents of Queens and the -._Bronx, like myself, who live near LaGuazdia," the congress- nan said. ' Crowley said he reco�nizes the contributions the airlines indusuy has made in reducing the amount of noise coming from their aircraft, but said the number of flights keeps increasing at major airports. "Our constituents need relief," he said, "and they deserve it as soon as possible." Co-Sponsors As of July 30, the bill had 23 co-sponsors: Reps. Peter T. KinQ (D-NY), Nita M. Lowey (D-N�, Jose E. Sertano (D- Ni'), Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Edward J. Mazkey (D-MA), Michael E. Capano (D-MA), Wiliiam D. DeIahunt (D-MA), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OI�, Tony P. Hall (D-O�, Marge Roukema (R-N�, Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N�, John D. Din�ell (D-MI), Lynn N. Rivers (D-M�, Barbara Lee (D- CA), Fortney Pete Stark (D-CA), Christopher Sbays (R- CT), John B. Larson (D-C'1�, Bruce F. Vento (D-MN), Mark Udall (D-CO), Henry Hyde (R-IL.), and Constance A. MorelIa (R-Nff�). The bill was referred to the Aviation Subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.�1 AXP Grants � �FAA ANNOLTI�CES G�2.ANTS FOR NOISE MI7['IG�9,TION The Federal Aviation Administration recendy announced the following o ant awards under the federal Airport Improvement Pro�arn to conduct various airport noise mitigation projects and environmental assessments: • Fairbanks International Airport - a grant of $380,000 to acquire land for noise compatibility; • Tweed New Haven Airport, New Haven, Cf - a grant of $316,153 to conduct an airport master plan update environ- mental assessment; • TalIahassee Resional Airport - a grant of $2.4 million to acquire land for noise compatibility; • West Palm Beach International Airport - a grant of $2,262,260 to acquire land for noise compatibility within the 6�-69 dB DNL noise contour; • Dekalb-Peachtree Airport, Atlanta, GA - a grant of $2 million to acquire land for noise compatibility; • Boise Air Termina] - Gowan Fieid - a grant of $2 million to acquire land for noise compatibility and to provide relocation assistance; '• Chica�o O'Hare International Airport - a o ant of $3 million for noise mia�ation mzasures for public buildings w�ithin the 65-69 dB DNL, noise contour; ( � • Indianapolis International Airport - a grant of $2 million -' ro acquire land for noise compatibility; � • Louisville Internauonal Airport - Standiford Field - 93 separate grants of $70�,474 and $i,317,000 to acquire land for development and to provide relocation assistance; • Baton Rouae Metropolitan Airport - a �rant of $2 million for noise mitigation measnres for residences within the 6�-69 dB DNL noise contour, . • Lake CharIes Regional Airport, Lake Charles. LA - a �rant of �I8�,000 to conduct a Part 150 airport noise comgatibility pian study; • Baltimore-Washington International Airport - a grant of $900,000 to acquire land for noise compatibility within the 65-70 dB DNL noise contour (approacimately 26 acres); • Cambridge-Dorchester Airport, Cambrid�e, MD - a grant of $135,000 to acquire land for environmental miti�ation (approximately 58 acres) and to remove obstruc- tions; • Easton/Newman Feld, Easton, MD - a a ant of $135,000 to conduct and airport master plan update environ- mental assessment; • Frederick Municipal Airport, Frederick, MD - a grant of $3d3,750 to conduct an airport master plan update environ- mental assessment; = Salisbury-Ocean City Wicomico Re�onal Airport, Salisbwry, MD - a grant of $364,5(Xf to conduct an airport master plan update environmental asse.�,smenL -�� More Grants � � • Las Veaas McCarran International Airport - a�rant of � � $4 m�7lion to acquire land for noise compatibility; � • Adantic City International Airport - a�ant of $500,000 � to prepare an environniental�impact statement and to update a noise compatibility plan study; • 7ohn F. Kennedy International Airport - separate �ants of $300,000 and $1.5 million for noise miti?ation measures for schools; • La Guardia Airport - separate �ants of $1.4 million, $400,000, and $400,000 for noise mitigation measures for schoois; � • Syracuse Hancock International Airport - a grant of $1,839,d00 for residential sound insulation; • Westchester County Airport, White Plains, NY - a grant of �400,OOQ to conduct an airport noise compatibiliry study; • T.F. Green State Airport, Providence, RI - a grant of $50,000 to prepare an environmenta] impact statement; • New Austin Bergstrom International Airport - a grant of $2,330,OOQ to acquire land for naise compatibility; • Laredo International Airport - a �rant of $7�2,986 to acquire land for noise compatibiliry; and • Roanoke Re�iona) Airport - a grant of S 1 Z�,000 to update an airport noise compatibiliry plan.� Airport Noise Report 94 Airport Noise Report . � � � ' � � � . � • � `� � i � • � � Steven R. Alverson Manager, Sacramento Office Harris Miller Miiler & Hanson John J. Corbett, Esq. 5piegel & McDiarmid Washington. DC James D. Erickson Director, Office of Environment and Energy Federal Aviacion Administraaon John C. Freytag, P.E. Director, Charles M. Salter Associates San Francisco Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance Carlsbad, CA Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. Cuder & Stanfield Denver Suzanne C. McLean Chief Development Officer Tucson Airport Authoriry John M. Meenan Senior Vice President for Industry Policy Air Transport Associadon Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. President, Mestre Greve Associates Newport Beach, CA Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. McDermott, Will & Emery Chicago Karen L. Robertson Manager, Noise Compadbility Office Dallas/Fon Worth International Airpon Mary L. Via lante Presidenc, Synergy Consultanu , Seattie Lisa Lyle Waters Manager, Noise Abatement Pro�rarn Palm Beach County Department of Airports San Francisco Int'1 �, � � ` � ' �' � ' � ' � ; � � r ;. �. • . � On July 29, local chapters of the Sierra Club in the San Francisco area announced their opposition to San Francisco Intemational Airport's plans to study ptacing two square miles of fill into San Francisco Bay for new runways. Nearby Oakland Intemational Airport has similar plans on the drawina board, the environmental association said. The Sierra Club's "No Bay Fill" campaign aims to increase public awareness "of the perils of — and alternacives to — dumping up to 80 million cubic yazds of a sn�l unspecified fill material into the Bay: ' The Sierra Club said that "four million double-trailer dump trucks would be needed to carry the fill. End to end, the trucks would wrap three times around the globe or stretch 190 times between Palo Alto and Los Angeles." Airport Disappointed The airport responded to the Sierra Club's announcemeni, sayino it was "disappointed thaf'the local chapters o£the Sierra Clul� issued judgment before there is a preferred pro�anl altemative and before the airport's airfield developmeni program environmental studies have begun: '"We know this project cannot move forward unless we show a si;nificant net environmental gain for the Bay," said Airport Director John L. Marfin. The airport has completed a feasibility study of runways in the Bay but , is only in the early stages of the environmental review grocess, wiuch will involve five independent agencies including the Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the Regional R%ater Q�ality Control Boazd which must approve the project or it cannot go'forward. Sierra Club officials called the proposed fill project "a band aid solution for lono-term regional needs." The airport's own projections indicate that demand will exceetl capa,city — even with the proposed expansion —� around 2020. Whai is the airport going to do then, propose more fill, or adopt the reD onal and technical solutions it presenfly disdains?" The airport has proposed acquiring and restoring salt ponds in the Soutti Bay to offset the loss of Bay that will occur from the fill. But the Sierra Club said the airport•"shouldn't be able to buy the rights to destroy the environment by promising to improve it somewhere else." The Siecra Club said it wi]] advocate its "zero tolerance" of Bay fill at upcoming meetings in August where the public will have an opporluniry to voice its concerns about the airport's plans. The meetings are the first step in the environmental review process.0 AZRPORT NOXSE REPORT Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Charles F. Price, Con[riboting Editor; Maria T. Norton, Froduction Editor Published 2� times a vear a� 43978 Urbancrest C[., Ashburn, Va. 2014�; 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 aranted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of U5$1.03 per pa�e per copy is paid directiy to Copyright Clearance Center, 27 Con�-ress Street, Salem, MA 01970. USA. Copyright �O 1999 by Airport Noise Repott, Ashburn, V a. 20147 r; '�- �• CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, I��7NNESOTA Airport Relations Commission Minutes July 14, 1999 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on Wednesday, July 14, 1999, in the City Hall Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. The following members were present: Beaty, May, Rosza�, and Stein. Comtnissioners Fitzer and Leuman were absent. Also present was City Administrator Kevin Batchelder. ,.�.� . � � - May moved and Stein seconded a motion to approve the May 19, 1999 and June 9, 1999 Airport Commission meeting minutes as submitted. The motion was approved unanimously. REVIEW OF AIRPORT NOISE PLAN OF ACTION Administrator Batchelder requested that Commissioners review the City's Airport Noise Plan of Action for update revisions over the next month. At the ne� meeting revisions will be discussed � ) for a draft to be presented to the City Council. � _� Cornmissioner May suggested that Administrator Batchelder prepare a black line copy to work from, similar to the process used last year. Administrator Batchelder agreed to go through his notes and black line items for consideration. He noted that it has been a successful year, as a majority of items identified in the Action Plan were accomplished or addressed in some measure over the past year. A review of accomplishments will be submitted with the revised Plan to the City Council. Commissioners noted that the following priority items identified last year are included in the Part 150 Update Study: . Equity of current runway system Noise abatement departure profiles MSP long-term Comprehensive Plan issues: Expansion of existing airport Conridar definition/compliance 'issues Global positioning satellite technology Noise measurement issues High Priority High Priority High Priority High Priority Medium Priority Medium Priority The following priority revisions should be made: High Priority: Phase out of noisy Stage II aircraft Aircraft engine run-up noise and aircraft grou.nd noise during periods of departure over Minneapolis Medium Prioriiy: Prevention of third parallel runway- monitozing contract with MAC Monitoring Issue: Implementa.tion of MSP Mitigation Committee's Comprehensive Plan Commissioner Roszak asked if, a MAC contract was received for the City. Administrator Batchelder answered that the City has only a boilerplate contract. ' ��,� f ` d_.. .y � n r� n �--� "r-�..�s ,CO �e � •1 y� ��..r d+ J t Y t Comrnissioner Beaty added that rnonitoring the contract with MAC should be moved to a medium priority to make sure it gets done this year or in the year 2000. Also, run-up pads should be promoted to create a better noise environment. Ground noise is mainly caused by takeoffs � and landings while planes are moving tl�rough the cue. ' Administrator Batchelder stated that he �vill revise the priority list as suggested above. A black line working copy will be sent to each member prior to the next meeting for review and recommendations of aviation requirements in the City's updated Comprehensive Plan. T`he 60- day review process for the updated Comprehensive Plan is to begin in early September, which means that the Commission will be able to review these issues over the next couple of ineetings. MAC Ordinance A new MAC ordinance will take effect January l, 2000 to prohibit the operation of aircraft exceeding noise limits under federal law for Stage 3 aircraft. Commissioner Stein asked how the ordinance will be enforced. Administrator Batchelder responded that a violation would be considered a misdemeanor which carries a monetary fine. Cominissioner Beaty noted that hush kits qualify as Stage 3 aircraft. They are very noisy, and he would like to see them eliminated. Both hush kits and manufactured planes can qualify as Stage 3 aircraft with no distinction between the two types. (, � Administrator Batchelder reported that at the last MASAC meeting, Northwest Airlines made a motion that no disti.nction be made between manufactured and hush kit type airplanes on reports and simply be identified as stage 2 or stage 3 aircraft. However, he and other communiiy representatives opposed that motion, and were able to defeat it. Mendota Heights supports identifying the distinction. Cornmissioner Roszak stated that in Europe it is more expensive to land nosier aircraft, but it is difficult to impose penalties in the U.S. because of the FAA. He would be interested to have Northwest produce the legal authority or actual regulations for noise that requires hushkits to only be Stage 3 and Stage 2 aircraft. Commissioner Beaty sta.ted that ihe NWA hushkit aircraft are the loudest planes in the industry. There should be a way to measure the noise planes produce. Commissioner Stein agreed and sta.ted that a certain cut-off level should be used. Eagan Comprehensive Plan Administrator Batchelder reported that the City has received Eagan's updated Comprehensive Plan for comment. As part of the process, the City will have to submit the Mendota Heights udpated Comprehensive Plan to Eagan for their comment. Corrunissioner Beaty noted that the policies listed on page 2 of the Eagan Plan are quite generic. In order to avoid disputes, he would suggest that the City accept those policies. Aelministrator Batchelder noted that Eagan has requested that ANOMS be set up at the end of the north runway a year in advance of plane use. Eagan desires to have sound insulation fundi.ng provided on the basis of an increase in noise, and it is their contention that such a good job has been done with the corridor that aircraft should be kept in the corridor and not the new runway because land uses over the new runway are not designated. It is the City's position that the entire MSP Comprehensive Plan. is based on the new numbers. If the new runway is not used, a new Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would have to be done. Corrunissioner Roszak stated that if there is no harm in supparting the monitoring of ANOMS for a year in advance, it would be a gesture of good will. Administrator Batchelder stated that he is not opposed to monitoring ANOMS, but if it means a dilution of total dollars availabie for Part 150 sound insulation, those dollars will be spread thinner. Setting up a monitoring system for Eagan would be something that is not being done for other cornrnunities. The increase of traffic on the parallel runways has not been monitored; and many homes would be eligible for monitoring. He would not want to change the rules for funding based on Eagan's theory. Commissioner Beaty added that if monitoring is used to keep more planes on the parallel runway and changing the planned configuration, he would be opposed to it. Administrator Batchelder stated that while relations between the two communities have been good, , the 150 Study Update has brought out many differences, as everyone argues for the most �.., advantageous position for their community. If the corridor were shifted to be over the most commercial and industriai areas, it would be further south. If it is argued that is for the greatest good for the greatest number, then the most appropriate location for the corridor must be examined. He suggested getting an overlay map to see the effects. The Ciiy is arguing for equity in the runway system, and Eagan is arguing not to move traffic to the new runway. Their Council is on record supporting the MSP 2010 Comprehensive Plan, but they are saying that land use should guide operations. They want to show that the change in Eagan qualifies them for home insulation funding.. MAC and the FAA are committed to the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the new runway, and the final EIS is based on new runway projections. The FAA does not want to deviate from that plan because the EIS will then become obsolete. MAC Operations Committee Meeting.' ,_�' Administrator Batchelder reported that the presenta.tion at the June 1 l, 1999 MASAC meeting was disappointing with no new information. The corridor gate penetration analysis looks at headings of 90 degrees, not 95 degrees. T'he City supports the established policy boundary set by MAC of 95 degrees. It is his hope that comments will be taken into account and adjustments made to the 150 Study Update. � � Chair Beaty stated that it appears that fihe corridor is being operated with planes sent in three different directions and not assigned headings but rather assigned ground tracks. Planes are taking � offmore often than every 58 seconds; it is closer to every 30 seconds. There are three tracks off each runway which causes more noise o`ver 1Vlendota Heights. Commissioner Roszak requested that the Commission go through a map overlay exercise regarding land uses for the City and for Eagan. The Cornmission could put together a comprehensive proposal that addresses all of the City's issues and further, state where the corridor should be if land . use is going to be the guiding principle. Administrator Batchelder agreed to ask the City's GIS staff to produce such an overlay map. The City will also provide MAC with the most updated information. It was the consensus of the Commission to review the overlay map at the next meeting. Destination A.nalysis Admiiustrator Batchelder reported that Inver Grove Heights requested a destination analysis report. Chair Beaty noted that the top five destinations represent only 35 percent of flights. City Administrator Batchelder stated that map operations shows these destinations are between 45 degrees and 165 degrees. Appointments to MAC 0 Mr. Bert McKasy, an attorney from Inver Grove Heights; and Nancy Spear from New Scandia have been appointed as new cornmissioners to MAC. The Govemor has stated that he wants an open- minded Commission that will focus on competitive factors. Metropolitan Council A.ir Noise Zones Administrator Batchelder reported receipt of a letter from Mr. Peter Coyle representi.ng Hoffinan Homes. In his letter, Mr. Coyle indicated receipt of a letter from Ted Mondale, Chairman of the Metropolitan Council sta.ting that the Metropolitan Council would not contest the finding that Hoffinan Homes is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan guidance. It is the City's decision, therefore, not to seek a Comprehensive Plan arnendment. Aclministrator Batchelder noted that this approval came on the heels of the controversy between the Metropolitan Council and Eagan. The Nletropolitan Council wants to reward communi"ties who are participating in the Livable Communities Act benchmarks. Before notice was received from Mr. Mondale, the City had been told that it cannot be approved because the Metropolitan Council has no authority to grant a variance to the Aviation Guide Plan. It was suggested that an extension be pursued until the Part 150 Siudy is completed, and the City applied for a six-month extension. It is hoped that a11 issues regarding the inequiiies in the corridor can be brought to the attention of the Metropolitan Council planners so they understand the Ciiy's issues. Corrunissioner Roszak stated that this is another reason to do an overlay map study. �'echnical Advisors Report • �; Administrator Batchelder reported tliat MASAC is considering how to revise the Technical Advisors Report. He requested Commissioners to take the draft home and for comparison with the previous one for comment on the proposed changes. Next month's agenda will include comments on this report. Gate Penetration Analysis The 95 degree MAC boundary policy resulted from the Blue Ribbon Task Force regarding non- simultaneous departures. The corridor gate penetration analysis does not recognize that policy boundary. The Commission requested a spreadsheet siunrnarizing month to month comparisons. Other Comments and Concerns Administrator Batchelder reported that an advertisement for new members was published a second time, as only one application was received. The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Deanne Gueblaoui Recording Secretary � � 1 1 � • 1 `� _1 � August 6, 1999 To: Airport Relations Commission From: Kevin Batchelder, City Adm' ' Subject: Unfinished and New Business for August Meeting �Y�.Y.�i �� This memo will cover the agenda items for Unfinished and New Business and Updates. l. Review Action Plan - At the June meeting, the 1998 Action Plan was reviewed for accomplishments that have occurred over the last year. Due to the lack of a quorum, their was no formal action taken by the members present to update the Action Plan, however, it was reviewed and discussed. In July, Commission members briefly � reviewed the Action Plan again and directed that the City Administrator prepare a revised plan in a black lined format for their consideration in August. This work is in progress and a black lined copy will be made available to the Commission members on Monday evening. 2. Review Draft Air�orts and Aviation Chapter of the Com�rehensive Plan - Mr. Steve Grittman, of Northwest Associated Consultants (NAC), met with City Council on June 16, 1999 in a workshop to examine the draft Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mendota Heights. Included in that draft is a chapter on Aviation. At the workshop, City Council made final revisions to the Comprehensive Plan and directed staff to begin the 60 day review process in early September. Prior to that date, each of the advisory Commissions is to review pertinent portions of the plan. Following this informal review, a formal review process with public hearings will begin through the Planning Commission to the City Council. At the July meeting, the wrong copy of the Aviation Chapter was provided to the Commission. Commission members received the correct draft Aviation Chapter in their Friday packet on July 16, 1999. Commission members should be prepared to comment on the draft Airports and Aviation chapter. If you have misplaced your copy, or need an additional copy for any reason, please contact Linda Shipton, or myself, and it can be delivered on Monday with the revised Action Plan. � 3. Comments on the Technical Adviser's Report - At the July meeting, colored copies of a draft Technical Adviser's Report was distributed to the Commission. This draft is �'. a Technical Adviser's Report that MASAC is considering to replace the old report. It is a new format and includes additional information. However, it also replaces some information and deletes information that was previously supplied, or provides it in a different format. Commission members should be prepared to discuss what they like about the draft report and what they would like to see carried over from the old report. ��. l. Part 150 - Draft MSP Sco�ing Documents - Enclosed for your review is the handout provided by MAC, at the July 27, 1999 meeting of MASAC. This document includes each of the comments made by the MSP communities on the scope of the work that the Part 150 Study Update should include. 2. Pro�osed GIS Analvsis of the Corridor - At the July meeting, the Commission . inquired about performing a GIS analysis that determines where the conidor would best fit given existing land uses and the location of existing comrnercial/industrial land uses. Mr. Curt Wimpee, Engineering Technician, has informed �me that he has the data to perform this analysis and that the GIS system can manipulate the locatio� of a "conidor", with one exception. We do not have the layer of information on zoning (� and demographics for the City of Eagan. We have discussed various methods of obtai.ning this data., including requesting it from the County or from MAC, who has recently requested this same data from each MSP community to perform the Part 150 Study Update. �' 1 1 � • � J' i August 10, 1999 To: Airport Relations Commission From: Kevin Batchelder, Ciiy Ad ''s a or Subject: Draft Airport Plan of Action I;ISCUSSI01� Enclosed please fmd a black lined copy of the Auport Plan of Action. This draft includes suggested revisions to the Plan of Action. These revisions are based o� our discussions at t�ie June and July meetings, as well as, revisions that I ar� suggesting to update the Plan of Action. The Commission directed that I make this attempt at updating the draft Plan of Action for the August meeting. I had hoped to get this draft to you on Monday evening and I apologize for its delay. My focus has been on getting the draft 2000 City Budget to Council on August 13, 1999 and it ( ) is an enormous task that we go through every summer. Please be prepared ta fully discuss t�ie draft Plan of Action on Wednesday evening for fival changes. Changes to the draft are shown in-s�eatrt for language proposed to be deleted and in redline for language proposed to be added. ACTION REQUIItED Review the draft Airport Plan of Action. Make any fmal c�ianges or revisiQ�s. Consider a recommendation to the City Council ta accept the Airpart Plan of Action as, a guide�ine for action in the coming year. � � ;:,r fc, i+ i,f �; r-, � �s li t � ' I� �� f�� i'. l �G., s , V:'. Ia �" ,5�, � �:' lf h; � � ,,��- `'6 (, ,�� t� (� �' 7 4� �; u � ° �.'� i•t 5�'r i/d� � ° ,� i� a' �1 :.1� �'T i.: � f; s,�� C •` • • x„ aa�aei r ;,:.}.r <�..:�. r..,�,.:�rc�. , ��'__ C Metropolitan Airports Commission 7150 Carri�� Je� I)e�a�°�e� ��nway� 12L ��d �2�2 Ila� I�ay 1��9 6�74 (96a1 %� �f th��e (J�e�at�� R��a�� C��°�d��° 7�.50 To#� �2I. � �21t ��u�er g9�ga�r��e O�aera�amns 6�74 (96e1%m) Totai 12� �i �.2� C�'$�e� I)ep��are C)�era�o�.s an �la� ��a�ra��r 6VI0�aoaeapoBis—St. �a�l . 6��ne�ra�6oro 2�a'te �8ot ��r Gate 9n_�orr6clor �5/��/� 99� ��e34:3� — �5/30/� 999 23:10:�5 , ' ��74� 1'e'��kS �9'�SS�� Gc°��: L��f = 277'l (4�0.4%), �$9gh$ = 4�09� Q59e�%) : : p: : : : : : : :O O:p t� . . . ; . . . . ' �y ' .C) .' ' . ; . . :� � �: �� . . . � ,. :�,r,.. ' •SSY • ' • _ . �� .... �aJ'or _ n ['�_ G1 � �� . . . . . : . . . . . : . . . . . :. . . . . .:ca �d: :-c . : �r: . . . . . : . . . �.A..... �-.� . . . . ... . . . . ... . . . . . � -� .'z -� .� -�.� -�.� -o.� -�.'z �.o o.'z o.�i �.�1 0.� � .� � .2 �evua�o�u� ��un Cea�ter of C�ate (�i�le�) , ,, '; • ��; �. ;. . ■ ��' ` - i ��, i•( � � �i Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 1 C Mekropolitan Airports Commission , 4� (Oo�%� ��.It�W�� Z� cA.�fll� �.Z� C�I�°�Il��° ,�� t��D��°1��.➢li'� ��9��°��fl��flS �'��°� �1��h �� ➢�� 090� C��°�°Il�� a�°y ��°Il�� 1�� 99 Page 2 9Viinne�polis—St. �au8 �E:PD�t6'3t60P1 �a$� �BO$ �CDP ��t� �OP$0'1_�09'PIt�QDP �5/031� J99 � 3:23:�1 — 05/30/19J9 �:�3.� 3 40 T��cBcs �s�ossed �ate: �eft = 7 ('�7.5%), �ig9at = 33 (82.5%) 6000 . . . 5000 ................: ............... : ................ : ................. ,.. • �.' • • ' O.. � 4000 ................ . ............... • ................. ... o ........ �-- O ; � 3000 .................................................... ..p... p.............. ,� : : o : o - � � � . � �o....--�--� � 2000 .................c�........a.......:--...�,...... �.�. 0 0: �000 ................ : . Q.. o .a. :o°............ : ................. (Runway End) —9 0 � (Corridor En�) �eviation �pos�a Cea��er of Ga�e �Mile�� + ��rival O Depar�tare ❑ Overfl6gh4 � Monttily Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis �� I: _ _ _ C C Metropolitan Airports Commission I 236 (3a3�1m) R�.nway �2L a�d �.�� Ca�°��e� �� e��°� ��rat��n� vv��°e S�uth �f the C�rrador (��h o� 30L L�ca��e�°� ��°fl�� l�ay 1999 �anneapolis—St. Paul Penet�atiora ��te 6�10� fo� (a�te South_CorrBdoe 05/Oi /19991 i:31:34 — 05/26/� 999 05:47:11 236 �'racks Cro�sed Gate: �.�ft = 90 (38.1%), �ight =146 �6'@.9%) 6000 5000� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;�� • �� • � • � • • � C1) � �r�►,i�� !� • � • • • �, �v � � � � � J j j��C�� ;y� � ��' �?� i 1�?�'„�^,.�*�,��''a''r��`� �� ,f+ • t "'� �1!� �t J �j rr.li ��. ! � • ' �, � �, (� � � .1 a �te�� w,` _ �� 9�,f� :� � r'v •*� • w+'�'." � I tfi� � � (Corridor End) —� 0 � (RWY Mid-Pomt)� Deviat�san ��otra Ceeate� asf Gate (�fii6es) + A�rival � Depae�ure ❑ Over�ligh� � Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 3 _ _ Metropolitan Airports Commission 54 (Oo�%� Ru��y 12L a�d 12R Ca�°�°��° ,�e� �e��.�°�� °�.�� w�r� 5° South �f the Co��°��° (5� So�� a�� 3��. �..�c��Il��°� ��°Il�� I��y 19�9 ; BUiaa�a�eapolis—St. Pa�ni Peneira�6on Gate 9�9ot for Gate Sou�h_Coe�ridoP_5cE�g 05/04/'9 999 i 5>05:52 — 05/26/� 99J 05:�7:� � �4� TO'aCkS CPOSS�CI GBfe: ��fi � 3� (57.4%�, 9�ight = �3 (42.6%➢ 5000 ................ : ............... : ................ : ................. ^ : : ' a.. . • • � 4000 ................ . ............... : ................ : ................. u. p . . - v O • � ; 3000 .�.�.........o .......� .......0 ........................................ = ' � ..(��;...� .............:.................. � 2000 OQ- . . . . . . � . . . . .� ��0� � • o � : o ��'o ° � � g � o �000 ................: .... ....... :.....d�..00�.o........... (Corridor End) —� o � (RWY �eviat6oet �'rom Ceaatee� of G�te (BV9i9es) + Arrival � �eparture ❑ Overff6igh� � Page 4 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis C Metropolitan Airparts Commission � P�`, 11 x �"� < < ;�P ' � t � 'I i J; ��` �11 . '�14.�� S ' i t'' it�� ` ; � � �� k f (�i I �' i t�P i ;�� r,�x �l; '1�. Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 5 � C C ��, ! .,: , 1. 1. 1, �. �'.�, �� +� � , , � , . , . � ., _ ' ; � . .: , �,�' . 1 ". \ .., 1' �..., ,� �-' �{�' ��x�x 7 � �ti� � x �Sf�j ` ta�'� rt�� S`. 2:. ??t 9 \� � � � ,,..� •, .� � ,�....�� ,_., _ � y_....��'� _.,+. ' Yy�.. ........ � . �, ... .�.r�..... i .. , . r*."......_.�............ . . �,..�..,�,� . . .. ...,. r�., s -----� , � � A Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council . �; � 1 . , 1 'i .. � � ,�' �, C ' Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Councii (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report �� ;��pi��s �y �;ity �� Namber ri� Nuanber oi '% of Total ; :..��t . ` -Corra ��irifis ��om laina�itst:. Coin launts; Anoica 1 1 0.1% Bloomington 37 29 2.9% Burnsville 3 3 0.2% Eag an 30 18 2.4% Eden Prairie 7 5 0.5% ��a 13 8 1.0% Golden Valley 1 1 0.1% Inver Grove Hei hts 258 14 20.3% I.alce Elmo 4 3 03% Lexin ton 2 2 0.2% Maple Grove 24 3 1.9% Mendota 1 1 0.1% Mendota Heights 70 40 5.5% Minneapolis 652 289 51.2% Minnetonka 3 2 0.2% New Hope 2 1 0.2% Pl mouth 10 7 0.8% Richfield 58 40 4.6% Rosemount 2 1 0.2% South St. Paul 1 1 0.1% St. Louis Park 12 8 0.9% St. Paul 73 50 5.7% Sunfish Lalce 5 1 0.4% W est St. Paul 4 3 03% W hite Bear Lake 1 1 O 1% ;::. ; , .� ' ��:� . >>:;� . . x':��°!n . ;: ;; '; .To4a1 . ��'�4 ;: Nature of 1VISP Complaints ��A.iH'@ O� ��p' �Oii1�91�1I1�S 0 �essive Noise m Early/I.ate I� I.ow Flying � Structural Dis turb ance 0 Helicopter ❑ Ga�ound Noise � Engine Run-up 0 Frequency A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program � C� 70� q 50� 0 .� � c� a 40� a. O w ° 30 a� .a Z20 � Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report M SP [�.11 Hoinr 12�aa�way �Tse All Anivals Jet Arriva]s All Departures Jet Departures Natnre of �pexations 0 RWY 4� RWY 12L � RWY 12R � RWY 22 �1 RWY 30L � RWY 30R A Prodact of the Metropolitan Aiiports Commission ANOM3 Progzam 4 , C Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report 1VIay 1999 M�P Car�ier Jet Fieet Composition . y E t��' '' �.�} 1 �. �^� i r. c 4'� �`' y� r la i'+ i I b f)7'� �r Y tl _; "y�" 'r � r � }�e ' l��,q rj. sf ^'� ,�ti .'te. at �f. td ��+��d�C'�6��d1{ii._� �C f.f � �! � x �. 4 � � a� ^�. '� � r � l r i1q .� 7. � 't „.� ��`� Q��S{.� q /. .f: ?tvsa..��5i`d�f�..,2�"L�01$�-��J�Y��-�.ifJ} is<.tr1��C^.��'�a(�1:�4,�iVR1f;„`r7v,�_,�4..i��N Vg..y:l��K.11�, �x�k.;;l�r4�l��.•::i B742 110.0 Boein 747-200 3 127 0.5% B741 109.4 Boein 747-100 3 21 0.1% B743 105.5 Boein 747-300 3 59 0.2% DC85 105.5 McDonnellDou las DC8-500 2 4 0.0% DC86 105.5 McDonnell Dou las DC8-600 2 95 0.3% DC10 103.0 McDonnellDougias DC10 3 997 3.6% B722 102.4 Boein 727-200 2 1351 4.8% B744 101.6 Boein 747-400 3 2 0.0% DC8Q 100.5 McDonnell Dou las DC8 Hush Kit 3 160 0.6% B721 98.5 Boein 727-100 2 55 0.2% DC9 98.1 McDonnell Dou las DC9 2 1783 6.4% B732 97.7 Boein 737-200 2 920 3.3% MDll 95.8 McDonnellDou las DCll 3 22 0.1% B72Q 94.5 Boeing 727 Hush Kit 3 17&4 6.4% DC87 94.5 McDonnellDou las DC8-700 3 42 0.2% B777 94.3 Boein 777 3 0 0.0% A306 94.0 Airbus Industries A300B4-600 3 29 0.1% A310 92.9 Airbus Industries A310 3 0 0.0% B73Q 92.1 Boein ?37 Hush Kit 3 171 0.6% MD8Q 91.5 McDonnellDou las DC9-80 3 1850 6.6% B752 91.4 Boein 757-200 3 2667 9.6% DC9Q 91.0 McDonnell Dou las DC9 Hush Kit 3 8139 29.2% B734 88.9 Boein 737-400 3 43 0.2% A320 87.8 Airbus Ittdustries A320 3 3727 13.4% B735 87.7 Boein 737-500 3 361 1.3% B738 87.7 Boein 727-800 3 2 0.0% A319 87.5 Airbus Industries A319 3 2 0.0% B733 87.5 Boein 737-300 3 831 3.0% B737 87.5 Boeing 737-700 3 7 0.0% BA46 84.9 British Aeros ace 146 3 1394 5.0% CARJ 81.8 Canadair 650 3 404 1.4% E145 81.8 Embraer 145 3 207 0.7% F100 81.8 Fokker 100 3 650 2.3% F70 80.1 Folcker 70 3 2 0 0% : � ,. �y q��y , - '�'oYals.� :....'...::�. ..... -_ '��c� ��; : , ,,..: � ...�t,�Y3,'Q..r. ...Y�.�� .': w.. .��' � _ ,�,. ` .t,.� ,, '` _ ,�.,CQg1.I1�,; �'CY'C�'.�1� �;: Stage II 2664 15.0% Sta e III 1196 36.8% Sta e III Manufactured 24048 48.3% TotalSta e III 25244 85.0% Note: Stage III hushkitted aircraft meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. e T'he Provided Noise levels from FAR Part 36 are the loudest levels documented per aircraft type during take-off measured in EPNL dBA (Effective Perceived Noise Level). �� 1 s EPNL is the levei of the time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone-corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover _ � measured in A-weighted decibals. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 5 � � _ Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top 15 Or�gin Ai�ao�s for 1VISP �`� 3� e,�t�� e��`,�t �~`�� tia�� '��,y '��'��,y c�'�,�, �`°�� 4��o b��e, o`��5 �G, �°�y�o O�'� � O �y� 'E'' F. q�` `� �� oS�,. �,00 c�ta �`' y �� y�,o � � �� Note: Origin Airport is the airport from which the aircraft last departed pnor to aznvmg a� m�r. Top 15 Destination t�i�orts for I�ISP +�$+m�' �o°�S �� L�°~� ��~`°� ti�� mS•S� 1`�{'`� �4�� c�'�� `tr� �'TM�'��`Q�y Cyo�~�o- 0 0 5�.. � �: `� P,��.a 4'� �� ' �;� ,� v� 4� Airpoa't Note: Destination Airport is the first airport that the aircraft is proceemng ro aner aeparung �v.or. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 6 � a 0 ... � c� c. a� a O w O ti a> � � � � Melropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report MSP l�tiglattime Ttemway Use 10:30 pm to 6:00 am All Arrivals Jet Arrivals All Departures Jet Departures leTature of Operations CI RWY 4� RWY 12L f�l RWY 12R � RWY 22 � RWY 30L � RWY 30R A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Prograrr► � �0�� l�lli�ll�@ O�BS �Dy IIOU.&' 699 525 143 35 12 14 74 209 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top 15 Actuai I�lighttime Operaiors by Type 10:30 pm to 6:00 am American American Airborne Airborne America West Continental Continental Continental Continental ComA ir Delta Delta Delta Delta FedEx FedF.�c FedEx Kitty Hawk Kitty Hawlc Northwes t Northwes t North wes t Northwes t Northwes t Northwes t North wes t Northwes t Northwes t North wes t Ry an Ryan Ryan Sun Country Sun Country Sun Country Trans World Trans World Trans World Trans World United United Un ited Un ited UPS Vanguard Van e u ard AAL AAL ABX ABX AWE COA COA COA COA COM DAL DAL DAL DAL FDX FDX FDX KHA KI-IA NW A NW A NW A NW A NW A NW A NW A NW A NW A NW A RYN RYN RYN SCX SCX SCX TW A TWA TWA TW A UAL UAL UAL UAL UPS VGD VGD F100 MD80 DC9 B733 B733 B735 B738 MD80 CARJ B733 MD80 B722 A 306 DC10 MDll B72Q B722 A320 B741 B742 B752 DC10 MD80 B722 DC9 B72Q B721 B722 DC10 B722 MD80 B722 DC9 B722 B732 B737 B732 53 13 16 14 38 2 25 2 1 54 1 31 18 2 12 46 3 3 21 274 48 4 5 192 3 253 56 46 28 43 37 4 61 22 26 5 2 1 24 25 6 7 15 41 2 53 Note: The top 15 Nighttime operators represent 95.'7%a of the total nighttime operations. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 8 1000 900 aoo �oo .r 600 0 500 U 400 300 200 100 0 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Nightt�me Flee� �ta�e l�i� for Top 15 r��rlines 10:30 pYn to 6:00 am �',�, F�',,{,,, ��.�, G�e,. G��i. ��y �.�,. ��,.��., `�',� �'G�•��,. �4,,v �4� �� Airline l��ghttime Fleet ��ge I�ix for T�p 15 Air�ines A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 9 l t Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report �� '� � � i i ' , E � t•i �t � 4 Y �'�' F :,: �,/ � :/I � I � � � � Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Le�end �i Remote Monitoring Tower A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 10 (� 1 ' Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report A;�e rage ':Total � :�aily 14�anthiy . ; 1�1VdT :I�oase ; , I�oase : < I�.) �r�entsl I+Fven�s;: : 1 249 7725 2 233 7208 3 270 8365 4 309 9570 5 384 11900 6 427 13225 7 88 2715 8 80 2483 9 12 367 10 15 453 11 7 213 12 8 233 13 122 3788 14 370 11455 15 177 5482 16 287 8891 17 62 1926 18 87 2708 19 72 2247 20 42 1316 21 48 1477 22 161 4995 23 288 8942 24 312 9668 16 287 8891 17 62 1926 18 87 2708 19 � 72 2247 20 42 1316 21 48 1477 22 161 4995 23 288 8942 24 312 9668 Average Danfly 1ZI�T �-i�rc��f� �v��ts i 2 3 4 s 6 � s 9 lo li A iz H � 13 14 rs 16 l� is 19 ao 21 aa 23 24 o so raa rso �oo �S� �oo `�So �'�o �.o s�o Number of Noise Events A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 11 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 A13 H �12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 RMT ID m AvQ Leq Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Councii (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report r�a��ge A.��c��t E��n� L�aax �nd I.,eq 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 �A Noise Levels Note: Leq is the constant sound level that, in a given dme period, would convey the same A-weighted sound energy as the actual time-varying sound level. Lmax is the greatest sound level measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time intervai or event. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 12 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report �! l�onth�y DI�L V�lues for .Aa�ca�ft, Comm�ni�y a�d Tot�fl 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 � 13 H � 12 � 11 � 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 HDNIL Noise Value RMT ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 It t2 l3 14 15 t6 t7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 � AircraR DNL 61.9 64.8 66.6 682 743 78.1 64.6 63S 56.9 63.6 583 S l.8 62.5 68.7 65.3 68 66.4 72.9 682 57.8 56.7 60 73.1 65 p Cortan. DNL 59.7 58.6 603 61 63.6 65.3 61.1 63S 575 6t 59.4 61.8 60.4 62 619 62 6L9 64.2 6L2 60.6 61.1 60.1 63.9 62,4 p Total DNL 63.9 65.7 67S 69 74.6 78.4 662 66S 603 65.5 61.4 623 64.6 69.6 66.8 69 67.7 73.4 69 62.4 62.4 63 73.6 66.9 Note: DNL is the cumulative measure of noise exposure during a twenty four hour day. (A 10 dB penalty is added to noise events occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.) A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 13 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top Ten Loudest A��craft 1�To�se Ev�nis for 1VISP (RMT Site#1) Xerses Ave. & 41S` St. Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departvxe ' 05/OS/9915:47:25 DAL1624 B722 D 30R 94.5 05/17/9914:43:02 NWA673 B722 D 30R 89.4 05/27/9912:35:05 NWA619 B722 D 30R 89.1 05/07/9910:03:03 NWA1515 B722 D 30R 88.8 05/31/9919:27:22 SCX715 B722 D 30R 88.6 05/19/9913:20:06 NWA1026 MD80 A 12R 88.5 05/27/99 21:00:24 NWA575 B722 D 30R 88.5 05/31/99 21:04:28 NWA575 B722 D 30R 88.4 05/23/99 22:43:55 DAL1683 B722 D 30R 88.2 05/12/9912:40:49 NWA619 S72Q D 30R 88.2 (RMT Site#2) Fremont Ave. & 43`d St. Minneapolis Date/Tune Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure � 05/31/99 21:30:54 NWA615 B722 D 30R 92.2 05y13/99 6:28:10 FBF710 DC85 A 12L 92.1 05/22/99 21:16:32 NWA615 B722 D 30R 92.1 05/21/9917:56:35 SCX791 S72Q D 30R 92.1 05/20/99 21:01:50 NWA575 B72Q D 30R 92.0 05/24/9912:02:57 NWA619 B722 D 30R 91.9 05/18/9911:51:22 NWA627 B722 D 30R 91.7 05/15/9918:47:18 DAL958 B722 A 12L 91.4 05/10/99 8:37:25 NWA1515 B72Q A 12L 91.0 05/27/9912:34:40 NWA619 B722 D 30R 90.8 (R1VIT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Deparhzre 05/12/9918:03:59 TWA117 DC9 D 30R 99.6 05/12/9916:05:03 DAL1624 B72Q D 30R 96.8 05/21/99 20:24:41 UAL1181 B72Q D 30R 95.9 05/18/9917:51:13 SCX785 $72Q D 30R 95.8 05/22/99 21:04:46 UAL1181 B722 D 30R 95.6 05/12/99 5:01:58 RYN610 DC87 D 30R 95.4 05/21/9917:50:38 SCX785 S72Q D 30R 95.0 05/05/9917:11:08 L,J25 A 12R 94.8 05/22/99 8:20:22 SCX227 B722 D 30R 94.8 05/08/9914:30:51 SCX715 5722 D 30L 94.7 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 14 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top Ten I.oudest �rcraft Noise Events f�r 19�SP (RMT Site#4) Oakland Ave. & 49�' St. Nlinneapolis Date/Time Flight Numbex Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure • 05/27/9919:51:26 DAL1683 B722 D 30R 99.6 05/24/9915:55:09 DAL1624 5722 D 30R 97.5 05/07/9911:00:41 SCX7443 5722 D 30L 97.2 05/31/9915:55:59 DAL1624 B72Q D 30R 97.1 05/26/99 7:12:34 SCX649 B722 D 30R 96.8 05/12/9919:01:02 UAL1897 B732 D 30R 96.5 05/08/9915:46:47 DAL1624 B722 D 30R 96.0 05/07/9915:48:39 SCX715 B72Q D 30R 96.0 05/27/9915:56:05 DAL1624 B72Q D 30R 95.7 05/18/99 9:47:53 NWA1515 5722 D 30R 95.5 (RMT Site#5) 12�' Ave. & S8�' St. Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arxival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/31/9917:49:02 SCX791 B722 D 30L 107.0 05/12/9917:11:14 SCX271 B722 D 30L 106.6 05/07/9911:00:15 SCX743 B722 D 30L 106.0 05/03/9911:46:57 NWA1296 B722 A 12R 104.5 05/08/9914:30:27 SCX715 B722 D 30L 104.1 05/31/99 7:12:25 SCX649 B722 D 30L 103.9 05/21/9911:35:21 NWA627 B722 D 30R 103.8 05/24/9917:49:40 SCX791 B722 D 30L 103.7 05/18/99 7:15:26 SCX649 B722 D 30L 103.7 05/07/9914:15:11 UAL1868 B732 D 30L 103.6 (RMT Site#6) 25�' Ave. & 57�' St.1Vlinneapolis Date/Tinne Flight Number Aircraft Axrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/22/99 8:19:47 SCX227 B722 D 30R 109.6 05/26/9915:05:23 NWA556 B722 D 30R 109.3 05/26/9919:25:03 NWA734 B722 D 30R 108.9 05/11/99 20:07:44 DAL1683 B722 D 30R 108.8 05/22/99 7:18:07 AMT8415 B722 D 30R 108.6 05/31/99 21:29:49 NWA615 B722 D 30R 108.4 05/21/9919:31:51 NWA734 B722 D 30R 108.4 05/27/9912:33:38 NWA619 B722 D 30R 108.2 05/20/99 21:20:56 NWA107 B722 D 30R 108.1 05/18/99 9:47:12 NWA1515 5722 D 30R 108.0 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 15 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top Ten I,oudest Aflrcrait l�oise Events f�r MSP (RMT Site#7) Wentworth Ave. &.64`� St. Richf'ield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/23/9917:34:10 5CX785 B722 D 30L 99.4 05/24/9910:01:37 UAL447 B722 D 30R 96.8 05/18/99 9:59:36 UAL447 B722 D 30L 96.7 05/17/99 9:06:00 DAL1015 B732 D 30L 95.2 05/24/99 6:31:22 UAL1195 B722 D 30R 94.8 05/08/99 7:07:29 NWA1�20 B722 D 30L 93.9 05/17/9912:55:34 LJ25 D 30L 93.7 05/17/9917:39:09 SCX785 S72Q D 30L 93.5 05/17/99 21:23:30 NWA107 B722 D 30R 93.5 05/23/99 9:59:07 UAL447 B722 D 30R 93.4 (RI�iIT Site#S) Longfellaw Ave. & 43rd St. Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Nwnber Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/21/9911:11:03 SCX743 B72Q D 30R 95.1 05/08/99 7:43:33 SCX749 B722 D 30R 97.2 05/23/9915:45:04 NWA556 B722 D 30R 96.9 05/17/9913:16:46 NWA1296 B722 D 30R 95.3 05/07/99 7:56:12 BTA4004 E145 D 30R 95.0 05/08/9911:31:42 NWA722 B722 D 30R 94.2 05/25/9911:37:02 SCX325 B72Q D 30R 94.0 05/07/99 6:09:19 SCX511 B722 D 30R 93.9 05/17/9913:33:50 NV1TA624N B722 D 30R 93.9 05/24/9913:27:21 NWA624N B722 D 30R 93.8 (R1VIT Site#9) Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. St. Paul Date/Time Fliglit Number .Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/22/99 21:40:42 NWA56 B742 D 04 96.4 05/31/99 21:27:23 NWA56 B742 D 04 95.9 05/09/9915:15:57 NWA19 B742 D 04 95.4 05/08/9915:43:52 KLM664 B743 D 04 95.1 05/23/99 21:47:11 NWA56 B742 D 04 94.2 05/14/9915:33:59 NWA19 B742 D 04 93.6 05/27/9917:18:28 NWA714 B722 A 30R 93.2 05/23/9919:34:27 NWA44 DC10 D 04 92.4 05/OS/9919:05:28 NWA44 DC10 D 04 92.1 05/17/9915:37:11 NWA19 B742 D 04 91.8 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 16 C Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report T'op Ten Loudest Ai�craft l�oise Ew�nts for li�SP (RMT Site#10) Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. St. Paul Date/Time Flight Number .Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departuxe � 05/17/9915:36:43 NWA19 B742 D 04 105.3 05/06/99 17:25:37 NWA19 B742 D 04 104.4 • 05/10/9915:15:52 NWA19 B742 D 04 104.3 05/09/9915:15:28 NWA19 B742 D 04 103.9 05/16/9916:02:52 NWA19 B742 D 04 102.5 05/24/9915:21:55 NWA19 B742 D 04 101.5 05/OS/9915:26:50 NWA19 B742 D 04 101.4 05/11/9915:07:46 NWA19 5742 D 04 101.2 05/06/9915:34:43 KLM664 B743 D 04 101.1 05/21/9915:21:09 NWA19 B742 D 04 101.1 (RMT Site#11) Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. St. Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dS) Type Departure �5/31/99 22:12:29 NWA107 B72Q D 04 102.7 05/04/99 22:04:54 NTNA56 B742 D 04 98.5 05/09/99 21:29:04 NWA56 B742 D 04 96.3 05/16/9915:59:06 KZM664 B743 D 04 95.8 05/17/99 21:36:32 NWA56 B742 D 04 95.7 05/13/9916:00:44 KLM664 B743 D 04 95.4 05/25/9912:11:11 NWA619 B72Q D 04 94.7 05/17/9915:42:31 ICLM664 B743 D 04 94.1 05/13/9915:12:41 NWA19 B742 D 04 93.8 05/05/9911:28:05 NWA1019 DC9Q D 04 93.6 (RMT Site#12) A1ton St. & Rockwood Ave. St. Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Axrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/05/99 8:03:58 NWA680 DC9 D 04 92.2 05/05/9911:51:56 NWA453 DC9 D 04 91.6 05/05/99 9:12:48 CCP480 B72Q D 04 90.2 05/11/9913:16:39 NWA581 B722 A 12L 89.5 05/20/9914:05:40 NWA1730 DC9Q A 12L 87.7 05/28/9919:45:02 NWA1299 B722 A 12L 87.0 05/08/99 7:17:10 BMJ48 SE80 D 04 86.7 05/16/9911:46:30 NWA1271 DC9 D 12L 86.4 05/04/99 7:38:12 MXP252 BE18 D 12R 85.2 05/14/99 7:08:36 EWW124 DC86 A 22 84.9 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program l7 C �' < Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top Ten Loudes� �rcr�t No�s� Events for I�ISP (RMT Site#13) Southeast End Of Mohican Court Mendota Heights Dafe/Time Flight Number .A.ircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Depaxture • 05/06/99 21:42:55 NWA615 B72Q D 12L •. 96.1 05/20/9911:07:19 SCX743 B72Q D 12� 94.6 05/30/99 21:42:14 NWA615 B722 D 12L 94.5 Q5/20/99 6:49:46 AMT8417 B722 D 12L 93.9 05/06/9910:12:27 NWA1515 B722 D 12L 93.6 05/20/9911:45:07 NWA627N B72Q D 12L 92.7 05/05/99 6:05:48 UAL694 B722 D 12L 92.7 05/13/99 9:57:55 NWA1515 B722 D 12L 92.7 05/19/99 9:50:40 NWA1515 B72Q D 12L 92.6 . 05/20/99 7:23:53 SCX649 B722 D 12L 92.6 (RMT Site#14) 1S` St. & Mckee St. Eagan Date/Time Flight Number A.ircraft Anri.val/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Deparhxre 05/13/99 6:43:17 AMT8417 B722 D 12L 103.5 05/09/99 6:12:55 AMTS417 B722 D 12L 99.9 05/16/9917:59:53 SCX785 B722 D 12L 99.4 05/U6/99 21:4,3:38 SCX607 B722 D 12L 99.0 05/06/99 21:22:21 NWA1299 B722 D 12L 98.9 05/13/9910:07:29 UAL447 B722 D 12L 98.6 05/06/99 6:13:4b SCX461 B722 D 12L 98.1 05/22/9913:47:24 NWA584 B722 D 12L 97.8 05/06/9913:29:27 NWA612 B72Q D 12L 97.4 05/09/99 21:23:02 NWA107 B722 D 12L 97.0 (RMT Site#15) Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. Mendota Heights Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/05/99 7:51:00 SCX749 B722 D 12L 100.6 05/05/99 20:48:36 NWA1299 B722 D 12L 97.7 05/14/99 21:11:59 NWA299W B722 D 12L 96.0 05/05/9912:23:57 NWA619 B722 D 12L 96.0 05/14/99 20:4t1:38 UAL1181 B722 D 12L 95.2 05/03/9912:16:41 UAL1650 B72Q D 12L 95.2 05/l.0/99 22:26:43 NWA615 B72Q D 12L 95.2 05/16/99 4:48:10 RYN610 B721 D 12L 94.7 05/05/99 22:29:15 NW.P;1531 DC9 D 12L 94.1 05/16/99 6:28:16 UAL1195 8722 D 12L 93.8 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 18 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top T�n I�oudest �rcr�i l�toise Ev�nts %r 1VISP (RMT Site#16) Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dS) Type Deparhtre ' 05/16/99 6:4,3:09 AMT8417 B722 D•• . 12L 103.3 05/06/9918:45:01 SCX791 B722 • D 12R 99.6 05/06/9918:41:44 NWA1076 B722 D 12R 99.1 05/16/9912:21:42 NWA619 B722 D 12L 98.2 05/28/9916:13:33 JCOM D 12R 96.9 05/22/9917:10:06 SCX271 B722 D 12R 96.9 05/11/9916:58:42 NWA1298 MD80 A 30L 96.7 05/15/9913:48:28 SCX785 B722 D 12R 96.6 05/07/9919:27:13 NWA460 DC9 A 30L 96.6 05/20/99 6:18:59 SCX461 B722 D 12R 96.5 (RMT Site#17) 84`� St. & 4`� Ave. Bloomington Dafie/Time Fliglit Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Deparh.�re 05/12/9910:14:58 NWA1515 B722 D 22 102.0 05/23/9915:19:23 NWA19 B742 D 22 101.4 05/06/99 6:02:02 AMT8417 $722 D 22 101.4 05/27/9914:21:09 UAL1965 B722 D 22 100.7 05/31/9916:33:31 N4VA19 B742 D 22 100.3 05/27/9916:23:44 NWA19N B742 D 22 100.3 05/15/9915:18:30 NWA19 B742 D 22 99.6 05/27/9915:21:43 NWA1502 B722 D 22 • 99.6 � 05/26/99 20:49:20 NWA575 B722 D 22 99.4 05/26/99 21:15:06 NWA107 B722 D 22 99.3 (RMT Site#18) 75`� St. & 17�' Ave Richfield Date/Time Flight Number A.ircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Deparlure 05/06/99 6:01:35 AMT8417 8722 D 22 106.9 05/27/99 21:27:19 UAL1181 B72Q D 22 105.9 05/05/9915:27:08 NWA19 B742 D 22 104.7 05/30/99 21:39:23 NWA107 B722 D 22 104.5 05/14/9919:43�:36 NWA411 DC9 D 22 104.1 05/15/9915:18:03 NWA19 B742 D 22 103.9 05/26/9916:27:24 NWA1502 B722 D 22 103.7 05/22/99 6:53:34 SCX743 B722 D 22 103.7 05/01/9915:08:11 NWA19 B742 D 22 103.6 05/16/9911:54:11 NWA627 5722 D 22 103.5 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 19 � �' 4 Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top Ten Loudest Agrcra€t �d�gse Eaents for 1VISP (RMT Site#19) 16�' Ave. & 84`�' �t. Sloomington Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure • 05/28/9914:59:00 NWA1174 B722. . D 22 102.5 05/28/9912:16:44 NWA673 • B722 D 22 101.9 05/31/9918:44:05 NWA1076 B722 D 22 101.4 05/29/9913:40:32 NWA584 B722 D 22. 101.0 05/17/99 7:14:29 NWA1066 B722 D 22 101.0 05/26/9916:07:09 NWA1174 B722 D 72 100.7 05/29/9911:20:21 NWA465 5722 D ZZ 100.4 05/30/9911:41:36 NWA592 5722 D ZZ 100.4 05/31/9914:58:54 NWA1174 5722 D 22 100.3 05/30/9912:39:29 UAL1289 B722 D 22 100.2 (RMT Site#20) 75"' St. & 3rd Ave. Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/26/9916:16:05 SCX715 B72Q D 22 97.7 05/08/99 5:13:56 RYN610 B72Q D 22 97.3 05/26/9911:27:01 NWA1271 DC9 D 22 97•1 05/26/9914:56:26 NWA131 B722 D 22 96.7 05/22/99 8:04:30 NWA962 DC9Q D 22 93.4 05/12/99 7:50:24 NWA680 DC9Q D 22 93.1 05/19/99 5:05:14 RYN610 B721 D 22 92.6 05/23/9915:14:01 NWA136 DC9 D 30L 91.9 05/31/9913:40:59 NWA743 DC9Q D 22 91.6 05/27/99 22:33:55 NWA1531 DC9 A 30L 91.5 (RMT Site#21) Barbara Ave. & 67�' St. Inver Grove Heights Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/19/9915:31:23 SCX791 B722 D 12L 85.9 05/16/99 20:12:03 ICE652 B752 D 12R 88.6 05/11/9912:08:13 NWA619 B722 D 12L 88.5 05/15/9915:29:21 NWA1470 B722 D 12L 86.6 05/09/9919:34:45 NWA628N B722 D 12L 86.5 05/09/9915:54:41 DAL1624 5722 D 12L 86.5 05/09/9911:29:01 NWA1019 DC9Q D 12L 86.2 05/14/9919:04:24 SCX791 B722 D 12L 86.1 05/05/9913:31:00 NWA624 B722 D 12L 86.0 05/11/99 8:09:34 SCX325 5722 D 12L 85.9 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 20 C ;- � C� Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report Top Ten I.oudesi Aire��t Noise Ev�nts for 1V�5P (IZMT Site#22) Anne Marie Trail Inver Grove Heights Date/Time Flight Number Aircra£t Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/10/99 9:00:49 NWA1066 B722 D 12R 90.2 05/07/9916:37:44 NWA119 DC9 A 30L 89.9 05/06/99 21:44:30 SCX607 • B722 D 12L 899 05/14/9913:19:34 � NWA624 B722 D 12R 88.6 05/05/99 7:1921 NWA1066 B722 D 12L 87.8 05/04/9918:19:36 NWA614 B722 D 12L 87.5 05/19/99 7:51:21 UAL1247 8722 D 12L 87.4 05/09/99 8:08:57 DAL376 B722 D 12L 87.1 05/05/9919:53:13 NWA734 B722 D 12L 87.1 05/07/9919:39:40 NWA625 8722 A 30L 87.0 (RMT Site#23) End of Kenndon Ave. Mendota Heights Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Arrival/ Runway L,max (dB) Type Departure 05/03/9917:30:10 NWA556 B722 D 12L 104.7 05/14/9919:03:07 SCX791 B722 D 12L 103.8 05/19/9915:30:10 SCX791 B722 D 12L, 103.6 05/11/9912:06:57 NWA619 B722 D 12L 102.7 05/06/9913:11:04 NWA1296 B722 D 12L 102.6 05/19/99 7:20:32 DAL376 B722 D 12L 102.4 05/06/9910:11:54 NWA1515 B722 D 12L 102.1 05/20/9917:54:07 NWA461 5722 D 12L 102.1 05/04/9915:06:50 NWA556 B722 D 12L 102.1 05/16/9914:23:41 NWA584 B722 D 12L 102.0 (I:tNIT Site#24) Chapel Ln. & V�Tren Ln. Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft A.rrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) Type Departure 05/06/99 21:44:00 SCX607 B7Z2 D 12L 94.4 05/13/99 6:4�:31 AMT8417 $722 D 12L 92.9 05/14/9915:56:07 UAL1965 S72Q D 12L 92.4 05/06/9917:33:07 NWA4b1 B722 D 12L 92.3 05/13/9912:39:06 UAL1289 B722 D 12L 91.5 05/01/9910:05:00 UAL1579 B722 D 12L 91.4 05/28/99 7:16:39 SCX649 B7Z2 D 12L 91.2 05/01/99 7:50:32 UAL1247 B722 D 12L 91.2 05/02/99 7:51:06 UAL1247 B722 D 12L 91.1 05/29/99 9:05:31 UAL688 B72Q D 12L 91.1 IVgav 1999 To� Ten Summarv: The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for May 1999 were comprised of 93.8% departure operations. 'The predominant aircraft type was the Boeing 727 with 72.5% of the total ops and with the exception of sites located in St. Paul with the predominant aircraft being the Boeing 747 with 70% of the ops due to the nature of operations over this area. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 2l C �. I: s� �- , ,y; � • • ., �j ;.: , •� �: :�r ,; �� - .. :� ��, .�. ` �` `1`� '�I: �1. '� .,� • • . :� �� C C Metropolitan Airports Commission 7150 Car�er Je� Departed 1Zunways 12L and 12R � l�ay 1999 6�i4 (96.1 %) of those C�pe�°at�ons Rema�ned. in the Corriclor 7150 Tota112I. & 121Z Cara�aer I)epartaare Oper�tioms 6�74 (96.1%) Totai 12I. � 12Td Cara�aer I)eparture Opera��o�s iaa the Coa�ridor �� , . . • • •• ;� � , , . ,, �, , ,� ,�, . , . �, , , . .,, ; � ; :. �' t � .�� t� • • • ��> � .s. � ` ! �r � ,: 1 1 1 • �1 A �� ) �S� � • � � ,G 1«-ytk{'r ril�.. �r, it�1o��.ilr�(� �'1`�*1 �y ,� , �1�� 1 fs�� r�-��' l r �' '� �."'` /�� i��:�� .�' ��ti`� t'� (►�j � " . � � v.� .,L�' ;�� r,� �� , i ►a� .7 „ ':�' ,"� '� �-� �r�� -�s ,�� *�, ,� rs ", � x : � � � ,fi� j` �, �� -. �� ,�. ^�.�n��• �. � '�`� �. � � .� �� R -�`� �'� � . � � .� �\ �u�.`��„ . .� ��' '�.h � � �,- '�„��'�`-"''�� `'t�`�'�r,E��`�''��5,:�'w�r��"`,r��,��;��,.x�'�.`��,ss�+�'��sz � ��,�� rv�.K�,�x, �' � {�sxe"'`��'`'�r�_ ' �� j �,�� !t � , �� ,.1�" .�, a��{ � ^+"� �� v'��.�i�� 7s�'��; 1� ,�. � r� ��,��'�,�Xnm� �'� � �x�rft��a� �� t�' r� � ��'� � � � � � �.r�y»' z.�;i �, ..''��p gkr �:a �t .€� t e � t�, J �y 4�%* ,, � Z �. � ,�- .��'^ �.��" ° �'�rj� , .1� 1 1�. �rx�r.�l�b � -'' ��3"��,"s.�i'��"�'��`s'J `� �``��.r"'r�3` . �€°�.,��,,.`v��+i,{��x.k �'."�r��.3,.�''*��„�.-,�� '� , l�tJY�i �� 'c�`.��'�'�`��°ia��,�...-r.��>: s , µ.3,,.;,..;�.�'�.u's'�,r"�ra�c'��3z�� v,..!'��`�.�.�,�'Y'�n�;iv��i�� +�1�►�� `-`��.�-e ��."- °" °�'-��`.:'r� �� kT ."`'`� £..z � )��; 3`-�u�+s .z'`� "°,''�y,,=E, � �� . �� Vv/ � ✓ „ '�\.`�. _ - �, �' � � : i , � ; � r � � i , � , r- . . . 0.8 1.0 1.2 + Arriva9 O Lieparture D Overflight Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Comdor Analysis Page 1 _ C �; � Metropolitan Airports Commission 4� ��o6�Im� R9.�Il�Il��y �.��.. �.�� R C�i.1t°�°Il��° ��£� ��°��.Il�°� ��t��°�tIlOIl�S ��°� �To�th �f t�e �9�� r�°��d�� a�� a��g �� 99 �eo�a�e��oV6s—S$. �aul 6��etrat6on Ga�� V�@o� �c�o� ��te �9znrth_�oe�P6¢�oa� 05/�3/� 99� 13:23:2� — OS/30/� 939 22:�3. � 3 �� P�COCS �'iPO°'sS�'� �'c'%$�: �.�$1t = % ��.�%�9 �$9��$ _ �:$ ��'�.�%� ��o� . . . , 5�0� ..................:•..._..............;..................:.................. �;� ,,.,� : : . � 400� ..................:...................:................o :......00 .......... ... : : .a 3000 ..................:.................. :.................p:.. p.............. � ; � O : . 00 : � O . O_ � 2000 .................d........a-...... :.....o...... o .�.� ......... " o o° :oo ° : 1 000 ................ : ... ....0 ..0 ..: ............... ................. � . . . (Runwa��y End) —� o � (Corridor En�) ��r6atBor� Fu�man �ea�t�a� o$ Gat� (6�aV�s� + Arr6val O Depaa�t�are ❑ �Dveu-�96gh� Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 2 C Metropolitan Airports Commission '23f ��a3%) �i��way �2�.. �� ZR C��° �� °��°� ��t�o�s �e�� 5�� f t�� C��°�d��° (5�� o� 3�� ,��°� ��°�� I�ay 19�9 Mae�nea�xolis—St. �aau� �e�etra$6o�s Ga�e P�oi for Gate S�a��h_�oro�u�9ou� �5/��/1999 31:3i :34� — �5/�6/� 999 0s:47:� � i 236 '9'rac9cs Cs�oss�c6 �a�ke: ��ft = Jm (3�.1 °/a), �8�@�� =146 Q�1.�%D 60f�0 5000 � � � 4000 � v � 30�0 � y+ � ��o� 0 �oi9 � (Corridor End) —� � � (RWY Mid-Point) �evBatBo�o �poen Ceuater of �aie (i�BVes➢ + Arrsva� o �epartua�� ❑ �v��fflog8�� Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Anulysis Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission 54 (�o� �I� � ��y �ZL �� .2R ��°e�� °�� °e ��t�o�s vve�°e 5� 5�� f �� °�°Il�� 5� �� .,��°� �a��°�� 1V�ay ��9 �6n�aea�ao�is—�t. Paul Pe�v�#��taoaa �ate �8a�t for Gate Soan�h_Corrad�u�_�deg 05/04✓'� 999 15:�5:52 —�5/2�/� 999� � x:47:1 � ' 54 TracVcs Ce�ossec9 G�$�: �eft = 3'� (57.4%➢, 9�ig9�� = 23 (Q��.G%) 6000 . . . 5�00{ ..................:...................:..................:.................. � . . . ... . . - � 4000 .....................................:..................................... � o : : : v o : . . � 3000 .o. a. .. . . .. ..o . .:.. . . .�. .. .. . . .o . .:. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . :. . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . � 4a . � ..............:.................. � �000 oQ- - . . . . . ° . . . . .:� a�°o. . . .a�,:. . .o � o : : : �000 .....°.....�......°...�?...°....:..... .�.�.�� o .° . ........... : : �-o �a � a � , , , , , � —1 � � 2 (Conidor End) (RWY Mid-Point)' �eviaf�on FPOP�t CeP9ter o$ Gatre (61�BIes) + Aca�6val � �D�pau�ture ❑ d��e�BugB�ot Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis �+� -�` Page 4 Metropolitan Airports Commission � tlk �1'i i ��` 6 E 1 . `t :�e � � :i� { � EI� � ��` �1� _'' '19 :�6 E � �. 9 E ' t', �1� t., , , � i C ! ;�� 2�t 4 'R ` � m�V C �'s � ;�€ � �1,4 �IP +if i Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Coreidor Analysis Page 5 . .. ' � . °, , . ,� • ,` ; � ' ,,• . ;�, ; � • � °� • ` ,, ` ; , �' , 111, 1 l 1 I•'_ '_►�- 11' TO: MASAC FROM: Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator SUBJECT: Follow-up Crossing in the Corridor Analysis DATE: July 19,1999 MASAC Since its conception, the crossing in the corridor procedure was anticipated to cansolidate as many operations as possible in the center of the Eagan - Mendota Heights Departure Corridor. In an effort to ensure the procedure was being utilized to the fullest potential, the MASAC Operations Committee underwent an operational_analysis to first assess the current state of the procedure usage and then assess any- changes which may occur following the first analysis. At the October 9, 1998 MA.SAC Operations Committee meeting the first Crossin; in the Corridor Analysis was presented and forwarded to MASAC. Subsequentiy that analysis was �'" � reviewed by MASAC at the October 27, 199$ meeting. The analysis data saznple period of \- the first analysis spanned October 1997 to Mazch 1998. In an effort to assess the operational results of the first analysis, a follow on analysis was prepared. The .second analysis data sample spans September 1998 to February 1999 and is identical to the first analysis in scope, resources used and applied analytical methods facilitating the direct comparison of the most recent analysis to the previous one for the purpose of procedural use assessment. At the April 9; 1999 MASAC Operations Committee meetina the second analysis was reviewed and forwarded to MASAC for review. y The second Crossina in the Corridor Analysis will be presented as part of the July 27, 1999 MASAC meetina aaenda. If you have anv questions or comments please contact me at 725-6328. TO: MASAC FROM: Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor SUBJECT: Part 150 Program Progress Review DATE: July 19, 1999 The Part 150 Study Update is continuing to move forwazd. Numerous important topics have already been discussed with HNTB, MAC's Part I50 Siudy Consultant, for evaluation and consideration. The public and MASAC member comments are bein; reviewed as part of tlie on-goin� work. During the month of July, HNTB and MA.0 staff will continue to process and analyze the information necessary for a thorough review of the Part 150 Study. The following list of major events with respect to the Part 150 Study Update process, identify the work completed to date and the significant topics under review: 1. January 26, 1999 - Announced at MASAC meeting that MAC will begin a Part 150 Study Update. � 2. February 23, 1999 - Mr. Evan Futterman and Ms. Kimberly Hughes from HNTB led ��: MASAC with a discussion of the following Part 150 related topics: �="��=- • Purpose and Description of Part 150 • Noise Measurement and .Analysis in the Part 1 �0 Process • History of the Part 150 Program at MSP (1987 and 1992) • Scope of Current Part 150 Update at MSP • Additional Issues/ Concerns to be Addressed in Part 150 Update (MASAC input) • Preliminary Time frame for Part 150 Study • Draft Scope of Part 150 Distributed to MASAC members 3. ivlarch - Draft Part 150 Study Update Scope available for review. 4. March 12, 1999 - MAC Staff presented a comprehensive review of MSP ni¢httime activitv. y �. I��Sarch and April 1999 - Comments conceming the Draft Scope of the Part 150 Study Update were received from seven communities in ei�ht letters. 6. April 8. 1999 - The MAC hosted a City and A�ency Meeting to discuss the Draft Scope of the Part 150 Study update. 7. Apri1 9, 1999 - Ms. Kim Huahes, HNTB, reviewed the contour generation process ��-ith the i�1ASAC Operations Committee members. The discussion included the follo�vina main topics: • FICON establishes the preferred metric as DNL • DNL characteristics • DNL niahttime penalties • Intearated Noise Model (INM) inputs contour development. The second method is in response to the requests from MASAC members to create an actual contour directly form ANOMS data. HNTB staff is in the process of developing INM scripting to accept flight tracking information directly from ANOMS that will utilize all available flight tracking data as the direct input for the INM contour development. MAC staff w-ill provide an update on any other issues related to the progress of the Part 150 Study Update at the July 27, 1999 regularly scheduled MASAC meeting. If you have any questions, please contact me at 72�-6326 �::�::�� =.: � `� � a � .. TO: MASAC FROM: Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator SUBJECT: Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Update DATE: July 19,1999 The RMT installation process is nearing the final stages. Cement slabs, anchoring bolts and all the needed utilities (phone and power) have been installed at the Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, Richfield and Anthony Middle School locations. The only remaining element at the mentioned sites are �lie RMT poles. The comple�ty of the Ericsson Elementary School site necessitates different installation procedures relative to the other sites. Although the Ericsson Elementary School site is a more complex installation, significant progress has been'made on the installation. On June 25, 1999 an access panel was installed at Ericsson Elementary school and the installation of anchoring bars, railings and a ladder was completed on July 9, 1999. The RMT poles have been delivered and pole installation for all the site is scheduled to be complete by July 30, 1999. Larson Davis representatives will be on site to install a11 of the monitoring hardware Aujust �& 6, 1999. Due to prior commitrnents and schedule conflicts Larson Davis representatives could not make it on site prior to the mentioned dates. As a resuit of the available Larson Davis installation. dates, the project completion date is anticipated to be August 6, 1999, although the acceptance testing will be completed as scheduled by Auaust 20, 1999. Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) staff will keep MASAC informed on any changes in the project completion dates. An update will be provided by MAC staff at the July 27, 1999 MASAC meeting. If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-72�-6328. PO Box 19209 Diamond �ake Station (5321 Harriet Ave) hiinneapolis, MN 55419 Phone 612 825 3q48 Fax 61Z 825 3048 e-maii Jbacich@woridnet.att.net June Z3, 1999 Ntetropolitan Airport Commission Sound Abatement Dear Sirs, We have been living in Scuthwest Minneapolis �since 1935. When wz first moved into our present residence noise from air traffic was quite light and one would never have anticipated the incredible increase in volume and noise of fiights. Over the years we have called you any number of times to compiain. We have had .members of your staff out here with equipment to measure noise as long as twenty years ago to no avail. It has become so bad that our light buibs shake loose in the sockets. We have a lovely three season porch which is quite unusabie when the pianes are taking off or landing directly overhead every thirty seconds. We have to interrupt telephone conversations while a plane � goes overhead. We hear jets taking off from sunrise to aft2r we go to bed at night. We have lost good neighbours who moved to other parts of the metro area so as to get relief from the � noise. We have heard endless solicitous promises from our politicians and from your pub;ic relations peopie about quieter engines and how hard you are working to remedy the noise paliution affecting residents in this area. You will forgive us if we are not convinced of your sincerity or integrity since the problem seems to be getting worse not better. (We know that there is no wayeur public officiais are going to ever stand up to Northwest Airiines, they are too afraid of loosing the tax base.) � Consequentiy, we would like to hear from you about having sound proofing work done at our home. I know it can be done because we have stayed at quiet hotels situated right in the airports. (Gatwick & Heathrow Hilton, Frankfort, Tampa, etc.) We pay very substantiai property taxes and think we deserve something back to help abate the dreadfui roar of jet engines. We fly frequently ourselves so we realise the importance of the airport however we do not feel it is fair that we have to suffer for a convenience that benefits persons in other parts of Minnesota as much if not more than it beneFits us. Since�ly yours, '�CC%�� . �� ,% U i r& Mrs 7ohn A. Bacich • , � � � , • • ; � �. . ; z�` � ■ �' ' �` � ; MINUTES METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING June 22,1999 7:30 p.m. 6040 28�' Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota Call to Order. Roll Call The meetinj was called to order by Chairman Mertensotto at 7:30 p.m. and the secretary was asked to call the roll. The following members were in attendance: Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Chairman John Nelson, Vice Chairman Petrona Lee Brian Bates Bob Johnson Nancy Stoudt Jennifer Sayre Dick Saunders Neil Clark Leo Kurtz Mike Cramer Gfenn Strand Dean LindberQ Joe Lee Cllarles Van Guilder Lance Staricha 1i11 Smit11 Marks Hinds Manm� Camilon Bob Andre�vs Brian Simonson Advisors Chad Leqve Shane VanderVoort Dick Keinz Cindv Greene Jan Del Cazo Visitors Mendota Heights �Bloominb on B(oominn on Airborne MBAA NWA NWA Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Minneapolis Burnsville Eagan Mendota HeiQhts Richfield v St. Louis Park St. Louis Park DHL Airways MAC MAC MA.0 FAA MAC Norma Jean i�Ivers Inver Grove HeiQhts 2. Approval of Minutes � A correction was made in the last paragraph of section 7 changing accommodations to accommendations and in section 13 to the spelling of Mark Hinds last name. The minutes of the May 25, 1999 MASAC Meeting were then approved as corrected. 3. Introduction of Invited Guests Receipt of Communications Norma Jean Myers introduced herself as an alternate for Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights. One correspondence was received by Chairman Mertensotto from Neil Clark, Minneapolis, asking to review the way data is compiled and presented to the MASAC body by the technical advisor each month. The commonication was referred to Chad Leqve and Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisors for review and comment. 4. June 11. 1999 Operations Committee Report — Mark Salmen Chairman Mertensotto briefed members on the Operations Committee Report in Mr. Salmen's absence. Items of importance were: D The MSP Run-up Pad and NWA Engine Test Cell Tour date was confirmed for Thursday, July 8, 1999 from 9:00 a.m. until noon. Busses will board at the West Terminal Building by the Noise Department entrance at $:45 a.m. � Wendy Burt, MAC Public Information O�cer, presented an outline for the MASAC Communications Proposal. After a brief discussion, a motion was made to present the proposal to the fulI MASAC body for review and recommendations. Melissa Scovronski was asked to attend the meetin� to field any questions. D Kim Huahes, HNTB conducted a presentation on the Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Departure Procedures. Additional topics need to be addressed and completed therefore, no information is brought back to the MASAC body. 5. MSP Run-Up & NWA Enaine Test Cell Tour Date Announcement Cl�ad Leqve, Technical Advisor asked for a sho�v of hands for a preliminary number of persons planning to attend the tour (date and time listed above). Those who were unsure �vere asked to call for availability of seatina. 6. RMT Site Location Update C11ad Leqve, Technical Advisor, update members on the proQress of the RiVIT Site additions. � Leases have been executed and approved by the commission. D Cement slabs have been put in the �round and utilities have been run to Richfield, Eagan, Inver Grove HeiQl�ts and the Anthony Elementary School sites. � A utility access has been installed at Ericsson Elementary Schoo(. 3 Tlle project completion date is still July 30, 1999 and acceptance testing to begin around AuQust 20. 1999; data will be available follo�ving that date. 7. MASAC Communications Proposal > Chad Leqve, Technical Advisor discussed the MASAC Comrnunicatons Proposal presented to and approved by the MASAC Operations Committee at the June 1 l, 1999 meetina. Wendy Burt, MAC Public Information O�cer, developed the proposal as a result of the May 9, 1999 MASAC Operations Meeting highlightina communication goals, key audiences, 1999 tactics, year 2000 tactics and an estimated cumulative budget of $99,290 as follows: 1999 ❑ MAC Website —consolidation and continued enhancement of existing Environment website information and functionality. $ 5,000 ❑ Ciiy Newsleiter —Regularly send MASAC information to community and organizations for inclusion in their own newsletters. $ 4,090 2000 ❑ Direct Mail—Pubtish a flyer or postcard that can be direct mailed to residents in MASAC member communities. $40,000 ❑ MASAC Community Newsletter —Publish a quarterly newsletter with new developments and updates on MASAC pro�ams and distribute it to key audiences including requests from the direct mailer. $21,000 ❑ Community NewspaperAdvertisemeni—Periodically produce and place ads ' ! about MASAC programs and meetin�s in comrnunity newspapers. $25,200 ❑.Publicity —Develop and place news stories about MASAC programs in communiiy newspapers. $ 9,000 Mr. Leqve eYplained the implementation considerations of establishing ultimate goals and the desired outcome of the communications efforts, solidify target recipients, c�mmunication media content and format, staffing and establishing a reasonable communication tiudaet. Chairman Mertensotto asked for 6-8 volunteers for a subcommittee to meet with Wendy Burt to establish priorities in the event the entire estimated commutative budget is not approved. The followina members volunteered forthis committee: Joe Lee, Minneapolis Lance Staricha, Eagan Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis Mark Hinds,. Richfield 1Vlike Cramer, Minneapolis Jil1 Smith, Mendota HeiQhts Neil Clark, Minneapolis Petrona Lee, Bioomin�on Dick Saunders; Minneapolis Jol�n Nelson. Bloominaton, suQ;ested volunteers for the subcommittee revie�v documentation from the Padillia Speer Beardsly Report which gave some direction �vith respect to ��vhat types of communications were viewed by the genera) broad membersl7ip as areas �vhich necessitated improvement, follo�v the MASAC Operations Committee template to come up �vith a business plan, give a lot of attention to the e;cisting infrastructure by plu��ing into existinQ city newsletters and think about the demands being placed on MAC Staff and hotiv to adjust for these demands by C considerinQ the recommendation that the MAC Commission add a staff person whose task would be to assist in this endeavor on either a full or part-time basis. Orientation Topic — Internet Technical Information Dissemination Capabilities Chad Leqve, Technical Advisor gave a presentation on the Aviation Noise Program Website and some of the new advances made on this Website in an effort to provide a more interactive and real-time information interface. He went on to state that all documents are available in a PDF format facilitating more e�cient downloading and printing capabilities as well as allowing staff to provide both current and historical (12 month) Technical Advisors Reports, Corridor Reports and special analyses. Mr. Leqve continued by explaining the new level of functionality that was added to allow users to actually interact with various databases containing operationaI information derived from ANOMS. This allows for an estremely high level of unrestricted fle:cibility when submitting a query to the ORACLE database tables. Mr. Leqve completed the presentation with a live demonstration via a laptop computer and a telephone line, showing the previously discussed capabilities of the Aviation Noise Pro�ram Website. Mark Hinds, Richfield, stated he felt it would be easier to look at certain types data if it was available in a spreadsheet format instead of a PDF format. ' Mr. Leqve explained that MAC Staff was hoping the presentation would produce that kind of feedback to enable tailoring applications around rvhatever type of information the general populous would tike to access from the system. He went on to state that data would be available for the previous 2-3 months and the most current information would be a one week period of time to allo�v information to mature in compliance with the agreement with the FAA not to provide real-time data. He also alleviated concerns about unrestricted information, unrestricted meaning that any information in the database is accessible in a read-only format. A firewall has been set �: �::':. up to prevent anyone from getting into the network thus preventing unauthorized changes or �=�:::;:, deletions from the database. " Chairman I�lertensotto inquired about documentation to show the number of times and how often the information is accessed and about ways to measure the use of the new Website to make sure it's use increases, justifyinQ the number of hours put into enhancin� it. He sugaested informing the various cities, via a mailing, indicating the availability of this Website. Mr. Leqve stated Communications Proposal (discnssed earlier) included a direct mailin� reflectin� the different resources available to the general public including the new Website. Glenn Strand, I��inneapolis eYpressed concerns about tl�e fact of makin� information more useful to t11e NIaSAC aroup and how to put information into a format that is ]ess complex thus increasing the internal information process, has not been formally discussed. He su�gested developing a smal] task force, no more than 6 members, to make recommendations to the committee on tl�is issue. Iv1r. Strand's main concern was being overwhelmed with the capabilities of nzore and navre information verses what information �vas necessary. Cl�ad Leqve, Technical Advisor stated MAC staff's intent is to provide a means for people, includin, ��IASAC tilembers and the aeneral public, to access information that is available in a �vay that best suits their needs. The demonstration �vas meant to inform the MASAC body of the capabilities tl�at, ��l�en used in the rijht manor, provides a lot of information interactively, to people botl� internally and externally. Chairman Mertensotto requested, and Mr. Strand accepted to canvas for three more persons to sit on the cornmittee he recommended and bring back a proposal for a committee to the fulI MASAC � body. Neil Clark, Minneapolis, asked if anyone knew where the data from the chart distributed at the last MASAC meeting showing average departure delays came from and where he could get more data. Cindy Greene, FAA su�gested it was the SIMMOD analysis presented by Kim Hughes, HNTB that Mr. Clark was remembering from the last meeting. John Nelson, Bloomington pointed out the Mendota Heights Corridor briefing document, submiited by HNTB and included in the mailing, contains a section called Limitations of the Corridor which discusses the SIMMOD analysis. Mark Hinds, Richfield, asked MAC Staff if they could eventually put up the GIS shape files so the City of Richfield could put them into their own GIS applications to enable using them in their analyses. 9. Closin� of Comment Period for the Minneapolis Straiaht-out Departure Procedure Chairman Mertensotto asked for any comments on the Minneapolis Straight-out Departure Procedure indicating written commen�s would be accepted for the next 72 hours providing they are dated June 22, 1999. Three written comments were accepted to be forwarded to the FAA; no verbaI comments were made. JOHN NELSON MA1)E A MOTTON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMtVIENT PERIOD OF THE MIIVNEAPOLIS STRAIGHT-OUT DEPARTURE PROCEDITRE WITH THE PROVISTO3V IlVDICATED BY CHA�ftMAlv MERTENSOTTO SECONDED BY MAIL'K l FIINDS. VVITH NO DISCUSSION, TAE MOTION TO CLOSE PASSED UNANIlVIOUSLY. I 0. Report of the Low Frequencv Noise Policv Committee Meetina Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, stated the meetin� is scheduled for tomorrow June 23, 1999, therefore he had nothing to report. 1 1. Report of the MAC Commission MeetinQ Chairman i�lertensotto briefed members on the N1AC Commission Meeting. Topics included: y Dennis Probst, Director of Landside Development reported on the plans that have been drawn up in reaards to the Hubert H. Humphrey Terminal: � S Qates �vill be available to be used by different types of aircraft. a- There will be 42 tichet counters. -r Anticipated openin� date is tl�e year 2001. -r Pro��isions for liaht rail transit at both terminals will be made. a- Tl�e anticipated completion date for the construction of the Lindberg terminal is the year 2003. -� Computer generated desi�n sketches of tivhat the terminaf will look like from the e,cterior «�ere available. � Tabled the NIAC and Nlall of America Exchan�e AQreement on the basis of neaotiations bein� incomplete. � � �- Discussed the purchase of wetlands mitigation and credits needing to be reestablished. � A motion was made to approve the transfer of gate 43 to United Airlines. n Minnesota Legislature authorized the MAC Commission to sell $30 million in bonds to cover the cost in regards to the mitigation procedures for the development of 17/35 runway. A request was made to the FAA to review the Revenue Diversion Policy making sure the selling of the Richfield bonds and repayment by Airport Commission would not be a violation of this policy. 12. Technical Advisor's Report Shane Vandervoort, Technical Advisor, briefed members on the executive summary report hi�hlightina: �- MSP May Fleet Mix percentages reflected an increase of 3.6% from April. �- The Hushkitted DC9, Airbus 320, Boeing 757 and MD80 represent the bulk of the aircraft operations at MSP in May. � The complaint summary indicated an increase in complaints from April to May of 312 which is consistent with last years numbers. D Minneapolis had the bulk of the complaints, the time of day for the complaints was evenly distributed and the highest concentration for the nature of the complaints was excessive noise. D All operations for the month of May remained consistent with April. There was a slight increase in cross wind runway usage due to the temperature increase from April to May which required longer distances for take-off. D- Overall Corridor operations decreased slightly due to the increased operations on Runway 22. � The overall percentages in May increased by 8% for departure operations and 6% more arrival operations over Minneapolis from April to May, 1999 which was a result of the chanae in winds. �;--: A Corridor operations were comprised of 47.0% of total arrivals and 53.6% of total departures �:i:_::: representing a decrease in arrivals by 1.9% and a decrease in departures by 11.4%. > Monthly DNL levels per RMT were consistent with the previous months levels. � Top Ten Noise events were very similar to April, 1999. Joe Lee, Minneapolis, asked why so fe�v departures go off from runway 4(0.8%) and why would Environmental Impact Statement be required to increase the use of runway 4/22 but operations off of runtivay 12/30 can be increased without this environmental documentation Cl�ad Leqve, Technical Advisor, explained some of the answers lie in the confi�uration of the airport at NtSP and prevailinQ nature of operations in and out of the terminal area. A recent departure analysis from MSP showing where aircraft are actually exiting the terminal area and lleading en route to their final destinations, revealed over 50% of the operations are to the South/ Soutl�east. Optimizing the operational efficiency of the airport, the use of runway 22 for departure operations plays into the nature of operations out of MSP and their final destinations. Cindy Greene, FAA stated Runway 4 is not optimal for departures due to the wind component. Wl�enever tl�e tivind alfows departures from Runway 4, it also allows departures over the corridor usin�, Run�vays l2R/12L, �vhich is ideal. When the wind favors Runway 22 or forces departures oi�to�Runway 22, it also a(lo�vs departures on Runways 30L/30R. Based on the way the wind flows. IntroducinQ Runway 22 is preferred when traffic allows. She went on to state, to safely reconfiQure the airport to allo�v for noise abatement, the 30-minute period of slotiv departure traffic ( l 0 airplanes or less) needed to allow the controllers to direct all airplanes ta�iina on the aroul�d to s�vitcl� from one end of the airport to the other, is rare durin� the day (approYimately two per day). Chairman Mertensotto pointed out Mr. Lee's question was the need for an Environmental Impact I Statement to increase the use of Runway 4, asking if there was criteria for the need of an Environmental Impact Staternent standard and published available for review. Ms. Greene explained an Environmental Impact Statement is needed whenever you change a current airtra�c procedure, however, there is no tool within the FAA that requires an Environmental Impact Statement due to increased operations of a current airtra�c procedure. Chairman Mertensotto reemphasized the minimal 30-minute periods to change the departure procedures inquiring what happens when the wind changes and there are more than 10 planes departing? Ms. Greene pointed out that if necessary, for safety reasons, the direction of departure needs to be changed with our without a 30 minute window. Chairman Mertensotto requested if additional information becomes available regarding this topic, that it be brought to the full MASAC body. Jolzn Nelson, Bloomington, asked when there is something exiraordinary going on at the airport that chan�es the way the FAA utilizes the airport because of thin�s such as temperature considerations, taxiway construction, etc., a very specific, brief statement in the Technical Advisors Report to describe what the nature of that construction is, would be all that is needed to inform the community and avoid increased complaints. Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis, asked what percentage of the fleet of DC9's are hushkitted and if they are really quieter. Jennifer Sayre, NWA, stated in the month of May there were 172 DC9's with 149 hushkitted. Shane Vandervoort, Technical Advisor, noted 75% of alI DC9 operations at �� i MSP in the month of May were hushkitted. 13. Persons WishinQ to Address the Council There were no persons wishina to address the council. 14. Items not on the AQenda John Nelson, BloominQton, stated Melissa Scovronski's presence at the meetina reminded him tl�at sl�e has served the MASAC Committee for several years, and althouah she is on a temporary assiQnment, she may not return if she accepts a position elsewhere, y Mr. Nelson su�gested commendina Mrs. Scovronski for her service to the orQanization, which he felt, was outstanding. C1�airmail �Iertensotto pointed out she is on(y on temporary leave and it is very possible she may return, �vhich he would also very much like to see since she has done such an excellent job. Otl�er MASAC members also e:cpressed to Dick Keinz, IY1AC of their desired to have Itilrs. Scovronski return. 1 �. Ad1oiirnment Chairman ��Iertensotto adjourned the meeting at 9:19 p.m. Respectfull�� submitted. Shelly Ludtvia, MASAC Secretary 1�1 ° • '1 ' ''' � � �' ' - • • 1 1 t: I '; MINUTES MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE July 9,1999 The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission MASAC Small Conference Trai]er, and called to order at 10:00 a.m. The follotivinQ members tivere in attendance: Members• Mark Salmen, Chairman Dick Saunders Bob Johnson Duane Hudson i�tayor Charles Mertensotto Jamie Verbru��e Kevin Batchelder Advisorv• Roy Fuhrmann "" �i Chad Leqve � _ Shane VanderVoort Jason Giesen Glen Orcutt Mark Ryan Visitors: Mark Hinds Glenn Strand NWA Minneapolis MBAA Bloomin�ton 1Glenciota Heiahts Ea�an Mendota Heights MAC MAC MAC MAC FA.A MAC Richfield Minneapolis Chairman Salmen briefed members on the Run-up Pad & NWA Engine Test Cell Tour that took place on July S, 1999 statina he felt it �vent very weli and �vas very informative. Mr. Salmen opened the meeting up for questions about thz tour askin� members to call the Aviation Noise Department tivith any questions that may arise throuQhout the month to ensure any response or presentation is added to the ne;ct agenda. Dick Saunders. Niinneapolis, asked how often do FAA representatives inspect the facility. Chairman Salmen e�plained tliat alon; �vith the reQularly scheduled inspections, they could show up anytime unannounced. He went on to state. not all inspections take place on-site, tivhen a plane lands at another airport, FAA representatives cou(d be l��aitinQ to do a spot maintenance inspection of the plane almost instantly. 1 AGENDA Chairman Salmen asked for additions or corrections to the June 1 1,1999 MASAC Operations Meetina Ivlinutes. Kevin Batchelder, l�lendota Heiahts, indicated on pa�e 4, in the first sentence of the second paraaraph, the "corridors ability" should read the "corridors inability". Mr. Batche3der also indicated in the third line from the bottom of the same paragraph, where it reads "they are still using FAA operations", it should read "they are still using head-to-head operations". Jamie Verbru��e, Eaaan, noted in his comment on paae 7, he wanted to add that he discussed his viewpoint for the need to develop a philosophy among all the airport users about dispersion versus concentration and �vhat the best overall approach would be for noise abatement procedures. The minutes of the June 11, 1999 MASAC Operations meetina were then approved as corrected. AZRPO�YT CONSTRUCTIDN UPDATE Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, informed members that the airport reconstruction project is proceeding on course with a total of 15 days ]ost due to weather. Construction of the first 8 concrete. lanes has begun. When the lanes are completed, they will fill in between anticipating it will take a tota] of approximately 6 weeks for the 8 lanes to be completed. The underb ound utility lines are being finished up at this time and there is some construction adjacent to Runway 4/22 for underground utilities. Mark Hinds, Richfield, asked if they were still on schedule with the days lost to weather. Mr. Fuhrmann e:cplained they were able to adjust some of the work schedules to catch up. I�evin Batchelder, Mendota Heiahts asked if there is construction activity ongoing with the North/South =.. Runway at this time. Mr. Fuhrmann stated current activity includes continued clearing of trees and shrubbery as �vell as some additional gradina. The majority the trees have been taken out in the last 3-4 �veeks near tl�e Nfi�1DOT Maintenance Facility. There are still a fe�v trees left to be removed in those areas and there is sorne initial arade work that will be completed yet this year. Mr. Batchelder asked if the ivfNDOT building is under construction. Mr. Fuhrmann informed him that the 1v1NDOT buildin� is complete and an open house should be cominc up soon. Jamie VerbruQae, Eaaan, referred to the construction of the North/South Runway inquiring if this year ��as indeed the last year to use Rich Acres Golf Course. Mark Hinds, Richfield, stated the City of Richfield has been notified and parts of Rich Acres have been blocked off and will be under construction ne�t year. Tl�e par 3 and tl�e driving range may be of use for one more year. R��IT SITE UPD�TE Chad Leqve, MAC, briefed members on the RMT construction update including an actual picture of an RNIT site, throu�h a PowerPoint presentation. �- Leases �vith �•linneapolis Public Schools have been executed and approved. -r Cement slabs and utility runs have been completed for the Richfield, EaQan, inver Grove Hei�zhts and Anthonv Elementarv School sites. y 0 �- Utility access l�as been installed at Ericsson Elementary School and installation of mountinj brachets will beQin today, July 9, 1999. �- RMT poles were de(ivered July 7, 1999, installation will beQin the week of July 12, 1999 on a site by site basis. � �- Project completion date should be around July 30, 1999. a- Acceptance testina around August 20, 1999. PART 1 SO UPDATE PROGRESS �ZEVIEW Roy Fuhrmanr% 1N1AC, explained a fairly leno-thy chronology for some of the events that have taken place concerning the Part 150 Study Update that was included in the MASAE Operations packet. Other developments include: � Originally it was anticipated MAC Staff would be able to present the base case contours and have a public meeting in the month of July, 1999 in which the ne�v 1999 base case contour would be rolled out. But, as a result of the comments, questions and concerns about the accuracy of the contours and how appropriate information is accumulated and entered, that date had to be pushed back to enable reprogramming�of the input process for TNM to accommodate flight tracks as they come from ANOMS. Many community members question the ability of the historical �vay of Qeneratin� INM flight tracks, to produce a representative contour. In an attempt to provide an e:ctremely accurate contour, by addressing all the flight tracks, a standardized method is bein� implemented to obtain and feed direct input from an ANOMS database table that has all the coordinates for each given fli�ht track as input for the INM version 6.0 proQram and contour development. �- Staff anticipated the middle of August, 1999 as..the time frame for a public meeting and a notice �vill be sent out to the surroundin� communities to notify them of the exact date and time. � Ivlost communities should have received a letter requesting a land use contact person and the most recent di�ital data that the city has available to be provided to MAC on or before of July 30th, � 999. �- Communities should espect a call from Pete Rofuss, HNTB GIS representative workinQ closely �vitl� Nathan Reis, MAC to input the noise sensitive areas such as schools, daycare facilities, etc., as �vell as askinQ for some population data information. -� From the June 1999 MASAC Operations meetinQ came a lot of questions concerning the corridor. Tl�e need is to determine tivhere, throuQhout the elements of the Part 150 Study Update Scope, tl�ese items are identified and to deve[op an outline for notification of �vhen these anstivers will be �iven. �I'he question of the location for the Public meetin� and if the meetinQ provides an opportunity for public comment on tl�e information gathered to date does not preclude future public comment arose. Mr. Ful�rmann speculated it �vould be off-site but �vas unsure exactly ��here the location would be and that there �vould be multiple rneetinas and /or opportunity for community involvement. The content �vould be the base case contour informing the public of the contour starting point. TECHNIC.AL .AD t�ISORS REPORT & CORRIDOR RE vISIONS Chad Leqve, i�IAC_ presented the proposed revisions of the new ?echnica) Advisors Report and 3 C" � � � Corridor Report. After an in-depth page by page briefing, comments �vere requested. QUESTIONS ��1D ANSWERS Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heiahts: Q. Explain the deviations from centerline on the gate charts in the Corridor Report_ A. Mr. Leqve and Mr. Fuhrmann e;cplained to members how to read and understand the charts. Q. What about the readability of the color graphics (charts, graphs, etc.) after making black and white copies for constituents. A. MAC StafF suQaested that email or disk files could be sent to both members and their constituents (if so desired) for color reproduction or to be saved on the computer, which was vie��ved as a Qreat idea. Q. What is the procedure for the revision process from this point? A. Chairman Salmen responded that this is a first look at the revisions requiring sug�estions to be incorporated and brou�ht back to the MASAC Operations Committee for further review and discussion. Ron Glaub, FA.A: Q. Does soutl� of the Runway 30L mean south of the centerline of the localizer or south of the beam? A. Ivlr. Leqve stated it means the southern boundary of the localizer beam width. Q. How much of the Technical Advisor Report and Corridor Report information will be available on the Internet? A. Ivlr. Leqve etplained tI�e intent is to make all the information from botll reports available on the Internet. Jamie Verbru,Qe, Eaaan: Q. Ho�� are the comments goina to be considered? Are they goinQ to be addressed with the aroup on a yea or na�� basis? � A. b-Ir. Leqve suaQested to take the comments from this meetina and incorporate them into the report, brin;in� the revised draft back to the body for review and take that draft format copy to �I,-�S�C for comments. Chairman Salmen asked to hiQhlight the chanaes ��•ithin the Reports as «ell as incorporate an additional paQe to list the chan�es made so even•one viewinQ the draft will be able to easily find the chanQes. SUGGESTIONS Glenn Strand, 1�Iinneapolis: �1 Add a visual Qate for the specific corridor side beinQ analyzed. Mark Hinds, Richfield: �1 Requested a map or summary pa�e to show the locations, within the Metro area, of where the complaint calls are coming from to help track specific aircraft causin� the most noise problems. �-� Page 7; add a reason code for delays to let people know why there are so many nighttime flights includinQ a previous month for comparison. He felt it was very important to the communiiy to have it explained to them exactly why an aircraft flew overhead at 2:00 a.m. waking them up. �-- Mr. Fuhrmann e:cplained MAC does not have the information indicating why aircraft were delayed, especially on Staae III aircraft, and there are no a?reements with airlines requiring them to provide a reason why they flew a Sta�e II aircraft during the nighttime hours. Cliairman Salmen indicated it is costly to operate off schedule which would ne�-ate the t#eory that airlines don't care about the individuals affected by ni�httime operations and the administrative burden that would be placed on MAC Staff and the air carriers for reporting specifics and compiling it into a report would be monstrous. He went on to state l�IAC � � Staff, throuQh lease aQreements, is taking a very proactive role in reducin� the number of niQhttime operations indicating man-hours spent in that capacity should be the hiaher priority. Jamie Verbru��e, Eaaan: r-c- Incorporate links to an explanation page providina specific detailed definitions of the information provided within. Chairman Salmen: �-� On paae 4 of the Technical Advisors Report, the breakdo�vn at the bottom of the paQe should reflect StaQe II and Staae III aircraft versus Stage II, Stage III, StaQe lII Manufactured and a total StaQe III aircraft.y Tl�ere is no legal definition to differentiate between those aircraft manufactured as Staae II1 and those that are husl�ed, aerodynamically adjusted, etc. •� Kevin $atchelder, Mendota HeiQhts and Jamie Verbru�ae, EaQan stated the community prefers to l�ave this jnformation noted as is and would prefer to k-eep that way. �-- Nlarl: Hinds, Ricf�field, su�aested a disclaimer to clarify the data. 5 4� �-- Bob Johnson, MBAA, reminded members the revisions are only a draft that other individuals, not present, need to review and provide sug�estions before any final decision should be made. � Glenn Strand, Minneapolis, also stated the revision process needs time to evolve, a�reeinQ that there are some misleading perceptions about the difference between the staQes of aircraft within the general public. He suggested listing the aircraft in the report in an order reflectina some measure of noise output to evaluate this perception for the general public. �-- Mr. Fuhrmann sujjested as a compromise, presentin� comparisons between the staQes of aircraft to obtain a better understanding of exactIy what the impacts are and to give an actual "sort by aircraft levels" in the Technical Advisors Report. The values of Part 36 could be used as a link to this information to show these comparisons. KEVIN BATCHELDER MA.DE THE MOTION SECOYDED BY JAM� VERBRUGGE TO KEEP REPORTING TI3E INFORMATION ON T'�3E BOTTOM OF PAGE 4, MSP AIl2.CRAFT FLEET COMPOSITION, IN T'HE SAME FORMAT. AFTER A LENGTHY DISCUSSION, NO DECISION WAS M�E. THE MOTION WAS NOT RECOGI�tIZED AND TIiEREFORE, NO VOTE TAKEN. � In this same report, the chart does not reflect the number of aircraft that were originally manufactured as Staae II aircraft that have been re-enained. �' Chairman Salmen noted the following written comments from Neil Clark, Minneapolis and the Air � � Traffic Control ?ower Mana�er: (Enclosed) =_ Neil Clark, Minneapolis, per a �vritten comment: r� A trend analysis or a 180-day regression analysis to be added to the Technical Advisors Report for tl�e I2i�IT's reflecting a trend for a particular RMT over a period of time. (A sample chart �vas included with the last MASAC Ivleeting Packet.) .4ir Traffic Control: G� "Avai]able time for run�vav use" page. (This pa�e has been eliminated) c3= Run��a�� closures. (Tl�ese pa�es have been eliminated) c-�== Corric3or gate penetration analysis document. Could a method of indicatinQ distance from the airport be included in the diaaram of fliaht tracks? It is hard to determine how far the airport turns are bein<z made. �-- i�lr. Leqve nuted the scale already provided in the diagram measures the distance from ihe airport. It ��as mentioned that the addition of the previously discussed gates �i�ould help clarif�� this information and it was decided the addition of rinas to show distance �voufd onlv. 0 r' 1 clutter the diaaram therefore, causina confusion. c=�' Corridor gate penetration analysis document. The paQe that addresses jet departures north of the PROPOSED 9�-degree corridor is misleadinQ to the public and a source of unfair criticism for MSP Air Tra�c. This topic has been address previously and the Corridor Report reflects the actual 090 degree northern conidor boundary. �' Corridor gate penetration analysis document. Is the portion of this document that addresses early turnouts at cross-purposes with the current community emphasis of turning as soon as practical after three miles? �•- Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights explained there was a change in the wordin� of the Tower Order several years a�o making it very clear to Inver Grove Heights, at that time, that it was not Qoing to mean changing the operations of the aircraft, simply a sementies chanQe to the Tower Order. He felt that should be su�cient guidance for the FAA. Durin� the discussion about the revisions of the Technical Advisor and Corridor Reports, the followin� comments and questions were raised: Kevin Batchelder, i�fendota Heights stated it was his understandin� that there are no penalties for Stage II fliQhts durina the niahttime hours asking to have an e:cplanation of the voluntary provisions and IvIAC's ne�v ordinance beainning January ], 2000. ( � Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, explained MAC discourages the schedulin� of Stage II operations during the niahttime hours and has sent letters reflecting this for operations that have occurred during the nighttime hours. Certain airlines such as NW?. have agreements not to sclzedule StaQe II operations during the niahttime hours, however, exceptions such as weather delays, ATC delays, mechanical delays, etc. are taken into consideration. He also stated Sun Country has a penalty for operations of StaQe II aircraft durina the niahttime hours in their lease, esplaining a report is submitted to MAC on a quarterly basis witl� any e�cep#ions that take place. After goin� throuQh the audit process, fines are assessed for noncompliant operations. Other airlines, such as 7WA, United, etc., are on a voluntary aQreement and tlZe airlines reco�nize the fact that there are operations that take place durinQ the niahttime hours and it is a noise intrusive problem, ho�vever, the agreement is voluntary. He went on to state, beginnin� January l, 2000, all airlines �vill be required to be in compliance ��vith Staae III operations accordina to ivSAC's new ordinance and Federal Law. Chairman Salmen reminded members the topic of discussion was the 7echnical Advisors Report not the niahttime noise rule and data contained within. He also noted the fact that the data contained in the Technical Advisors Report is actual information not scheduled information. Jamie Verbruave, Eaaan, asked if there is a way to report scheduled fliQhts versus actual fli�hts in a timelv fasl�ion. l��tr. Ful�rmann eYp(ained MAC doesn't receive quarterly reports from all airlines and it �vould take numerous man hours to manuaUy go through 1.638 scheduled fliQhts versus actual fli�hts on a monthlv basis. y � 0 � Bob Johnson. MBA.A stated he thought the purpose of the revisions to the reports were supposed to try to reduce and c(arify the amount of information contained within. He felt the layman viewinQ this technical information would be more confused due to not bein� able to understand its meanina. � Glenn Strand, Minneapolis, supported 1ti1r. Johnson's concerns addin� the need to determine what is critical information, internal information and e:cternal information e:cplaining the revisions are a work in progress needin� both additions and subtractions. Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, suagested members think back to why the these reports were oriainally developed and to take into consideration the wide variety of people who will be viewina this information and their individual levels of understanding. � Ron Glaub, FA.A, stated the original document developed 20 years ago was a 3-page document with an original purpose to summarize tlle complaint information that was available at the time. He went on to state in reQard to the concerns about the niQhttime Stage II operations, the percentaQe of Stage II operations will continue to drop a little bit every month until the end of the year when the number will ao to "0". He also commented that the summary of why each aircraft operates at night, requested for eYplanation to the communities, would be a 30 pa�e document and would be more Y�ours than any one or two people could do in a month. Glenn Strand, Ivfinneapolis, stated the priority of the group is to determine what the noise is on the Qround suaaestinQ to look back at the real RMT numbers to determine which aircraft reflect the hiQhest noise problems. � _ , _.. ( The neYt MASAC Operations Meeting is scheduled for Friday, Au�ust 13, 1999 in the Lar�e = Doublewide MAC Conference Trailer. ' CIZad Leqve, AN01�iS Coordinator asked if inembers would prefer to have the updated draft of revisions in tl�e Technical Advisors Report and Corridor Report mailed to them or simply brought back to the next meetin;. It �vas aQreed to have this information mailed to members prior to the next meeting. ?he meetin� �vas adjourned at 12:00 noon. Respectfully submitted: Shelly Ludwi�. Committee Secretary : i � U.S. Department of Transpertciicn Federal Aviation Administration June ??, 1999 Minneapo(is Air Traffic Control Tower 6311 34th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 3�Ir. �Iark SaLmen. Chairman ��L-�S�.0 Operations Committee THRL�: �Iecropolizan �.irports Commisaion 60-�0-?8zh avenue South �Iinneapolis. 1��I�; 5a-��0-? ; 99 Uca� ;1r.:�airsc::: It is my understandin; that on the a;enda for the ne:�t l�L-�Sa.0 Operations Commit�ee meeting, scheduled for Jul� 9, is a revie��r oi the "Technical �dvisor's Report". linforzunately, Gindy Greene. the I�ISP �.ir Trafnc Control technical advisor to this a oup, is unable to atzend this mestin�. Because the information provided to yL�SAC in the Technical �ldvisor's Reporz each month is mainly derived �rom 3RTS data. tower runwac use logs, and a review af �ir Traffic Procedures and noise abatement compliance, tve would lik.e to offer the follo�ving comments for discussion at the July 9 meeting: l. '` �V�IL_�.BLE TI�4IE FOR Rt;�+`i�ir:�Y USE" P�GE. The title of this page ofien causes confusion and misunderstandin� as to �r•hat these staciscics are. These f gures are derived �om the co�ver run�vay use log. The run«•acs liszed are also the ones. adtierzised on the :�TIS. � au?�esiion �vould be �o label this page: a) �TIS ad�erzised runwati in use. or b) :�ir Trafiic selected runway in use. 2. RU�`�i%�.Y CLOSURES. On the pages that address runwa� availability and run�vay use, could there be reierence made to run�va� closures that make the runway unavailable? This is especially imoortanc iniormacion �vhen a runwac closure prevents the use of a noise abatement confi�uraiion. as you are a��are, run�vay closures ofzen occur ai night and for up to sis hours at a time. 3. CORRIDOR G_-�TE PENETR�TION :�i`iAI.�YSIS DOCUiYIENT. Could a method oi indicacing clistance irom the airport be included in the diagram of flight tracks'. It is hard co decermine ho«• rar the airport turns are being made. s. CORRIDOR G�TE PEiYETR:�TION ��1ALYSIS DOCU:�IENT. The paCe ihat addresses �et deoarture� r.ortn of the PROPOSED 9� degree corridor is misleading co the public and a sot:xce oi unfair crit�c��m ior �ISP �ir Traf�ic. Tne 9� degree norzhern boundary �vas proposed in tne earl�- 1990s and determined un*easiole o�• che F_�.-�. It ha� never been implemented. yet iniormacion on compliance ��tzh tnis non-e:�is�ent ooundary is pravided to the communitti� each monzh. The documenc �:.ould. ac mo�t. pro��ide tniormation on jets north of the actual north bounda::� oi 90 iil;T2�S. o. CORRIDOR G�TE PEiYETR�,TION �v4L,YSIS DOCIT'iYLENT. Is the portion oi this - document that addresses early turnouts at cross-pusposes with the current community emnhasis of curn.ing as soon as praczicat after three miles? �.ltnough "the main use of all of this iniormacion is public a�vareness, it is the oniy document and fact gaihering tool that allows feedback io the �ISP �ir Traftic Control Tower on how �vell we are doing in the noise abatement arena. � high emphasis is placed on noise abatement, with supporting documentation provided by the I�L�SAC document:.. This information is used for controIler and supervisor briefings. Controllers are provided information on how oiten aircrafi �vere turned ioo early, and are then instrucied to turn them as close to three miles as practical. tiVith the two goals almost in conf7ict, it is an almost imnossible task to place an adequate emphasis on both actions to allow for a great level of success at eicher. It appea.rs the recent emphasis is to comply with turning airerafi as soon as practical after three miles. It may be time to move the focus from analyzing ihe earl� turnoui compliance, to iocusing on turnin� aircrafi a� soon as practical. tiISP �TCT appreciates any consicierazion thai the iVL�S�C Operations Committee ma�- ;-i�e io these commer_ts. u%e look ionvard to conti.nui�g our work with I�L�C and the surroundin� COLT1''..I7llP�.L1�5 LO 2SS1SL lII IT1IL15flL1P_a iDl�c'. C1T1Car�1"y'� . � 1 � ��/1��r�� '� � `�I�.eith a. Thomnson ( � tilanager, tilinneapoLs �ir Traf�c Gontrol Tower MASA C NO.�SE MONITORING AND INFORII�A TION REO UEST FORM 1999 � Date: Name: Address: Phone: this a one-time request: Yes or No v� On whose behalf are you reyuesting: Yourself City Council Mayor Citizen Organization Other Beginning Ending no, what is the egpected time frame for this request? to Which of the following best describes the nature of your reques#: (Circle all that apply) Tround Noise Overfli�hts Run-Ups Contours Part 150 Other PLEASE WR1"TE O UT YO UR REO UEST HE.RE AND/OR A TTA CH ANY LET7'ERS OR �'ORMAL RESOL UTIONS. Over Please 0 Please send your request via mail to: MASAC Secretary, 6040 28th Avenue S., Minneapolis, MN 55450 or fax it to :(612) 725-6310. For Staff Purposes Onl�: Request #: � - Staff Contact: Received: Is this a Phone Or Written Request? Approved B}•: Approval Date: Availability: Start Date: Monitoring Stop Date: Analysis Start Date: Analysis Stop Date: Completion Date: 0 a"__._� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � w J C� �.n .[a w N tz �- i" � �, _ � O � co 0 Oo cn N-- p N � N .A. � .t� w � W N J w� w�,.... .,, . -r �-- • " „ ... ..r p O O Q O O O O � .r � � � � � � � � � � ny t�/'J tfl y !n ffl (n V�1 n~w `�' 6/9 �� 1�� ' L"��'j 'C.� '�' 'C�} Cli N N N — — �r? {�g ' �,,, ch 0 c'� � O tn �. �,._ � i.n �y.l •.a i.n � �O .a. "" � a � � � � � � � � r- � � l,�„t ��j' "v'� b'9 i-F, o`? ot — N N �"� - 4i � J v � � J v C° - t,.� i.� = i,n � �� c o c c o.• p ^ o 0 o cj� 1''� a � r c � 0 s� � � E �' ;� w w 0o J �� W� '�+a C� N O O 1/��.. V l GO N w � �= a =� O' ��-s O y c� O c'� J O � � O �`' �� '�'� �.r aa � � = � c� � � ?a � � � cn O' .. � ' C �j � �D Kn �,�,^'� � � �' � �� ` �- N��a � �^ � :� �-.' _ � � � C� `�:S Cn ` O � � �� u � "s � '� :r n � c„ Co =� O � C�„ n .. (1C �- tv tn �. � o ..t r ... � � �• � � � ,,.,, G O � � �. z "' �' = � � .^.`. � � � �--s � � O n � � � � G -' (D � c ` � � J � '� O' 'J :> _+ � �� O• � � � � � � J �.,. � "Y7 � c� r 111inneapolis / St. �"aul International Airport . '—`�� MONTHLY MEETING - Meiropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council ��: caari�s Merumonu v« ct��: ]ohn xeknon Technicnt Advisor. Rq Fahrmaan ��ry: Mett�sa Scmrortsicl Ai�arne F�press: H� s�� Air Transport Associmiart: �m M�c�w ALi'A xoa.��a rry afsro��o,�: Pea+oaa tn v�ra wama Grv of ayrnrviur Charl�s Gntfder Gry of F�gan; Jamle Verbrugge �« s��n� C+ry ojlnver Grove Heightr: � Chartes FglnmA Cary ojMendom Keighu: 7W Smith xerm aauheaer Gry ojMinneapo[ir. � �� S4ve Mlaa a« � c��m s�a s�a,� ca.m x� Mlk� cram�r Grv ojRichfield• KrEsial Stdccs nawo wd�� ry oj5t. Gouis PanF.• Rnberi Adrews Gry ojSt PauL John Halln Cin ojSunfish lnke: Glenda Spfotia Detta rI irlinet Inc.: Larry GoehrWg DHL Ainvavr. Brtan Simoason Federal Ezprc.v: John Sehussler Federa! Aviarion Adminisrradon: Roo Glaub C(ady Grcme MAC Srag.• Dlck 1Cetnz MB.Ut: Rnbert P. Jo6nsun Mtsaba Nn�7hwest i5irlink: . Phii Burke Merropnlitm� Aifportt Canmisaian: Commkssbner Altoo Gasper MN Air Nariwml Guaid: Ne�a� Rny J. Shetks Northwe.rr Airliner. Mark Selmen Jennller Sam Sleve Holmc tisncy Stoudt St Pcwl Chambrr af Gommert�e: ttou �taai�wo Sw Cavntrv Ai(lines: Gortloo crsves Unitcd Airlines lnc.: Kevin Black Unitcd Pareel5enicc: :11Ike Gerer U.S Air Fnree Rutnxr Cnptaln Davk! J. Gerken Metropolitan Airports Commission Declaration of Purposes 1.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interest, convenience, and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, internarional, 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 aviarion facilities in the entire state so as to pmvide for the most economical and effective use of aeronauric fac�7ities and services in that area; 2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan azea 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. Meiropolitan 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 - Woid-Chamberlain Fieid, a pubiic airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of the problems created by the sound of aireraft using the airport; through study and evaluarion on a continuing basis of the probiem and of suggestion for the alleviation of the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective " procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and of aircraft using the same; and ihrough dissemination of inforrnation to the affected communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to sug;estions made and actions initiated and taken to alieviate the problem. - _ Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council � Representation The membership shall include representarives appointed by agencies, corporations, associations and governmental bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and responsibility or contro] over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users, have a direcr interest in the operation of the airport Such members will be called User Representatives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and Public Representarives shall at all times be equal in number. The Airport 24hour Noise Hotline is 726-9411. Complaints to the hotline do not result in changes in Airpon activiry, but provide a public sounding board and airport information oudeG The hodine is staffed during business hours, Monday - Friday This report is prepazed and printed in house b: �73d L.CC]VC, fiN�$ COOi1j1718.tOi Shane VanderVoort, ANOMS Technician Questions or comments may be directed to: MAC - Aviation Noise Pro�rams Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airpon 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Tel: (612)]25-6331, Fax: (612) 7?5-6310 ANSP Home PaQe: ht[p://www.macavsaz.o 0 Metropolitan Airports Commission Avzation Noise Programs �, ; l Operations and Com,�laint Summa�y I Operations Summary - All Aiscraft ...................................••••------........................................1 MSP June Fleet Mix Percentage ..........................................................................................1 Airport June Complaint Summary .......................................................................................1 � June Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record ..................................................1 Illanneapolis - St. l'aul International Airport �'ompldzint Summary 2 Complaint Summary by City ....................................................... ........................................2 .� �ailabl� Time for Runway LTse 3 Tower Log Reports - All Hours ..............................................................................••-.•-••--•-•3 Tower Log Reports - Nighttime Hours .............:..................................................................3 1-�ll ��)67YltlO�ZS � Runway Use Report June 1999........... Carrier Jet Operations 5 ....................................................................:..4 Runway Use Report June 1999 .............................................••-..........................•---•--...........5 Nightiime - All Operations 6 Runway Use Report June 1999 ............................................................................................6 1�ighttime Carrier Jet ()pera�zons 7 Runway Use Report June 1999 ......................................................................................••-•-•7 Carrier ,Jet Operatio�,s by 7'ype 8 �. ircra, ft Identi,�er and I�esc�i,�tzon 7'abl� 9 Runway Use - Day/1Vight 1'eriods - All Operaiions IO Daytime Hours .................................................................................•--....:.......:...10 ............... C'ommunity Overflag�it Analys�s 11 �..__--� Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours .....................................................................................11 Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30 pm - 6 am) .......................................................11 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs I I�emote Moniioring Site I,ocatrons 12 Carrzer Jet Arr�►zval Related Norse .Events 13 Count of Arrival A.ircraft Noise Events for Each RM'T.... Carrier ,Jet Departure Related Noise �vents l4 �� ...............................13 Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ................................................14 7'en Loudest Aircraft Noise Events �dent�fied - 15 Ten Lvudest Aircraft Noase Events Identr, fzed l6 Ten Loudest Arrcra, ft Noise Events Identi, fied 17 Ten Loudest Aircra, ft Noase Events Ident�fied T'en Loudest Aircraft Noi,se Events Ident�fied Ten Loudest Aircraft 1Voise Events Identified f�' . � � Flight Track .�ase Map 2l (; Airport Noise and �peratio�s 11�onitoring System �'light Ti-acks 22 Carrier Jet Qperations - June 1999...--••--• ................••-................................................:.......22 Aarport Noise and Operations Monitorang System �light Tracks 23 Carrier Jet Operations - June 1999 .....................................................................................23 14irport Noise and Operations 1Vlonitorzng System Flaght Tracks 24 Carrier Jet Operations - June 1999 .................................................................................... 24 Airport Noise and Operations Nlonitoring ►System Flight Tracks 25 Carrier Jet Operations - June 1999 ...............................................••-•--............................... 25 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events� - Aircraft .�dn d�3(A) Analysis of Airc�-a, ft �oise Events - Aircraft .Z,dn dI�(A) Aviaiion Noise & Sateilite Programs � � Metropolitan Airports Comrnission Operations �nd Complaint Summary June 1999 Operations Summary - All Aircraft ;. Rnnway :� :�;�ni�ai-;;-__ .,. :_% Use ::�;�: -�.I�parture;; _�=�_�°�v IIse'.:. 04 119 0.6% 143 0.7g'a 22 130 0.6% 7837 39.4'1'0 12 11051 54.4% 6033 303% 30 8990 44.4% 5899 .. 29.6% MSP June Fleet Mig Percentage Note: Stage Ill Manufacrured Aiicraft encomparsed 50.39b of the tota187.1 % 5tage III Utilization Airport June Complaint Snmmary - �`":`��inport �199$ s -1999 MSP 1750 1593 Airlake 0 0 Anoka 9 7 Crystal 0 0 Flying Cloud 9 5 Lake Elmo 0 1 St. Paul 6 1 Misc. 1 1 TOTAL 1775 . 160$ .',:: � June Operations Summary - FAA t�irport Traffic Record Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 1 - ... .� • .. .�� .� '. 1;1 �. • L. 1 . • i 1 1 1. . , � . � t,� Pase 2 Complaint Summary by City A le Valle 0 2 2 0.1 % Bloomin ton 5 104 109 6.9% Burnsville 0 66 66 4.2°% Ea an 2 87 89 5.6% Eden Prairie 0 3 3 0.2% Edina 0 5 5 0.3% Falcon Hei hts 0 1 1 '`- 0.1% Inver Grove Hei hts 2 224 226 14.3% Lake Elmo 7 0 7 0.4% Ma le Grove 18 � 9 27 1.7% Ma lewood 0 1 1 0.1% Mendota 0 1 1 0.1% Mendota Hei hts 4 56 - 60 3.8% Minnea olis 282 533 815 51.7% Minnetonka 3 0 3 0.2% • Pl outh 8 0 8 0.5% Prior Lake 0 1 1 0.1% Richfield 6 58 64 4.1 % Robbinsdale 2 0 2 0.1% Rosemount 0 1 1 0.1 % Sava�e 0 5 5 0.3% South St. Paul 0 1 1 0.1% St. Louis Park 6 0 6 0.4°I'o St. Paul 43 25 68 4.3% Sunfish Lake 0 4 4 0.2% W Total 389 1187 � 1576 � 100%� Time of Day Nature of Complaint Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs ' Metropolitan Airports Commission Available 'Tixne %r Runway Use Tower Log �2eports - June 1999 All Hours 2% Note: For 55%a of the time available, simultuneous departure operations occurred o�'the parallels and rxry 22 resulting in an overall use greater than 100%. Nighttime Hours Nore: For 1 S%a of the time available, simultaneous depanure operations occurred o�'the parailels and rwy 2? resulting in an overall use greater rhan 100%. Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa?e 3 Metrapolitan Airports Commission . , � • , , � � I2unway Use Report June Note: Pe�cenrage of acsual arrival or'departure operations fmm ANOMS data. -Arriva]! - .-.: �:=. _ -� Jnne_199$ �7nne 1998 : Runway -� �� . �� Connt __ :Percentage :; Coant � .Percen e _.. -- P ..... . ._ _�. _.. .::_: :...... . ...... �. 04 A 119 0.6% 239 � 1.2% 12L A 6298` 31.0°Io 4759 24.8% 12R A 4753 23.4%a 3344 17.4% 22 A 130 0.6% 282 1.5% 30L A 3905 19.3% 4733 24.6% 30R A 5085 25.1% . 5848 30.5% '.�otal Arr. � 2A290 100% 192A5 � '. 100% '` 04 D 143 0.7% 163 0.9% 12L 'D � 5730 28:8% 4047 21.7% 12R D 303 1.5% 1014 5.4% 22 D 7837 39.4% 7962 42.7% 30L D 1152 5.8% 508 2.7�10 30R D 4747 23.8% 4949 26.6% Total Dep. 19912 10Q% 1$b43 lU0% Note: ARTS data missing for 0.4 days. Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs ; � ' Metropolitan Airports Commission Cai-�r1er Je$ i�per�.tiOns �.2unway �Tse 1Zeport June 19 Note: Pe�centage of achcal arrival or'departure operations finm ANOMS daia . . : . :..;..._.:_ _ - .. � �1�.rrivaU�- � �= - � - - Jnne-l.998 Jnne ].998 : Rnnway ' _� �p�_ `'Connt : I'erc;entage . ; : Con.nt ' . .. Percentage -. . - - �. 04 A 95 0.7% 166 1.3% 12L A 5017 34.8% 3902 303% 12R A 2907 20.2% 1540 12.0% 22 A 99 0.7% 197 1.5% 30L A 2185 15.1% 2435 18.9% 30R A 4109 28.5% 4641 36.0% Total A�: 14412 104% � 12881 � 100% `: ., 04 D - 100 0.7% 83 0.7°Io 12L "i� 4163 '29:2% � 2934 23.5% 12R D 80 0.6% 226 1.8% 22 D 5837 41.0% 5$96 47.2% 30L D 471 3.3% 167 1.3% 30R D 3595 25.2% 3179 25.5% Total Dep. 14246 1t�% 124$5 10�% Note: ARTS data missing for 0.4 days. Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 5 Metropolitan Airports Commission � • • � � � ,; � Runway t.Tse Report June 19 9 2.1 % � Note: Pe�entage of actual arrival or departure operations from ANOMS data. =�Ariival/ :: = � ''- - Jiiiie �1998 . Jiine_199� = Runway . � �� ._ �' Count = Fercentage Count: ' Percentage � 04 A 90 7.9% 168 13.7% 12L A 370 32.3% 279 22.7% 12R A 49 4.3% 75 6.1% 22 A 45 3.9% 141 11.5% 30L A 81 7.1% 169 13.7% 30R A 510 44.5% 398 32.3% Total Arr. 1145 140% :.1230 ' '...1�0%� .:: � 04 D 29 2.1 % 69 4.2% 12L D S 17 �36.4% 427 25.9% 12R D 20 : 1:4% - 94 5.7% 22 D 400 28.2% 618 37.4% 30L D 77 5.4% 14 0.8�10 30R -_ D 376 26.5% 429 26.0% Total ]Dep. 1419 100 %a 1651 lOQ % Note: ARTS data missing for 0.4 days. Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metrapolifan Airports Commission � , , „ . . . ,, ; � . � , � Runway Use Report June 1 �7.7% f+. � ]i" 'i A ' •..l �._ � . Rnnwa� � � �:AnzvaU :Count r Peroentage - �� J� �'� = .� :- ..__ - - . Departar� _ . . _ _ , � -�ount _ Peircxaifage; .. . - . ... �. ti•.. -. c�. _ �� . .. - -: K . 04- A 72 7.8% 119 13.0% 12L A 323 34:7% 246 26.8% 12R A 39 4.2% 33 3.b% 22 A 32 3.4% 98 10.7% 30L A 52 5.6% 98 10.7% 30R A 412 44.3% 323 3�.2% Total Arr. 930 � -100% :� ; - �: 917 :- _:: -:' 100%: � ��. 04 D 16 2.0% 34 1.6% 12L I D � 349 �32.1% 292 35.2% 12R D 13 1.6% 15 1.3% 22 D 292 26.6% 439 29.4°Io 30L D 53 6.6% 3 5.3% 30R D 270 31.1 % 276 27.2% Totall?aep. 993 :: l�% ' 3.059 100% Note: ARTS dara missing for 0.4 davs. Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 7 Metropolitan Airports Commission . Carrier Jet C)pera�� b� 7[`3'p€ June 1999 Airc�.aft -:�;: Count =�-" Percen e A306 50 0.2% A310 0 0.0% A319 12 0.1%a A320 4453 15.5%' A340 0 0.0% � B733 1050 - 3.7% B734 59 0.2% B735 232 0.8% B736 0 0.0% B'73'7 13 0.1% B738 0 0.0%a �" B741 29 �. 0_I% B742 183 0.6% B743 59 0.2% � 87. I% Stage III B�`� o o.o% B75-213 2968 10.4%�� B76-?J3 8 0.0% B77-213 6 0.0% BA46 1244 4.3% CART 376 1.3% DC10 990 35% E145 241 0.8% F 100 642 2.2% L101 1 �.0% MD 17 20 0.1% MD80 1768 6.2% B72Q 2640 9.2% B73Q 91 03% DCSQ 168 0.6% DC9 7664 26.7% B72-1/2 1565 5.5% B73-1/2 694 2.4% 12.9% Stage II BA 11 0 0.0% DC8-5/6/7 145 0.5% DC9 1287 4.5% • Total 28658- 100% Note: ARTS data missing, for 0.4 days. Paje 8 Avia[ion Noise & Satellite Prob ams 50.3% Manufactured Stage III � �� 36.8% Stage I�I 12.9% Stage II Metropolitan Airports Commission �rcraft Ideni�fier and I�e�c�ptiom'I'able Identifier:- `:� . : ° :;:: Airu-aft �}escription .: - . . - A306 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300B4-b00 A310 AIRBUS IlVDUSTRIF.S A310 A319 AIRBUS IlVDUSTRIES A319 A320 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320 A340 � AIRBUS II�TDUSTRIES A340 B?2-1/2 BOEING 727-100/200 SERIES B72Q BOEING 727 HUSH KIT B73-112 BOEING 737-100/200 SERIES B733 BOEING 737-300 B734 BOEING �31-400 B735 BOEIlVG 73�-500 B736 BOEING 737-600 B737 BOEING 737-700 B738 BOEING 737-800 B73Q BOEING 737 HUSH KIT B741 BOEING 747-100 B742 BOEING �47-2(}0 B743 BOEING 747-300 B744 BOEING �47-400 B75-2I3 BOEING 757-2001300 SERIES B76-2J3 BOEING 767-2001300 SERIES B77-2I3 BOEING 777-200/300 SE1tIES BA11 BRTTISH AEROSPACE BAC l l l BA46 BRITISH AEROSPACE 146 (REGIONAL JET) CARJ CANADAIK 650 DC 10 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 10 DC8-5/6/7 MCDONNF.I.L DOUGLAS DCS-500/600/700 SERIES DCBQ MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8-70 HUSH KIT DC9 . _ MCIX�NNELLDO[.�(aLAS DC9 DC9Q MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH HIT E145 EMBRAER 145 F100 FOKKER 100 L 101 LC3CKHEED TRISTAR L 1011 MD11 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC11 MD80 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIES SF3 SAAB 340 (PROP) Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9 Metropolitan Airports Commission � . ' �. � �' 11, • ,",/' . i, '. /1 �. . i .', . �,� , � . 1 i i Daytime Hours . Nighttime Hours . Runway Departures Percentage Ar�rivals Percentage '-=='='_� �;y====�;= Name Night Use Night U� =T'ota1=PT'ight -:._: --.- _:`=, N��;_ 04 29 2.1 % 90 7.9% -��= ��,1�19 ��=� z;_ �,:.� 12L 517 36.4% 370� 32.3%a =� =�� $$7_�- �:;z>;:� 12R 20 1.4% 49 4.3% ::��-��69 `�,�-`=';: ..�.:_ 22 4Q0 28.2% 45 3.9% ::;==4.45� =�-`=.`-':" 30L 77 5.4% 81 7.1% =;;158;:_��=�� 30R 376 26.5% 510 44.5% ., <-= ;�886.'~i=�;_�:"_ Total 1419 100% - 1195 .- 140% � . 2.5�4: ,. Nore: ARTS data missing for 0.4 days. Paje 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Air�orLs Commission Commua�ty i)ve�gPub Analys�s Minneapolis - S� Paul Inte�aaiional Aia-poa-t June 1999 ; Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30pm - 6 am) '. �;` ' , : _ ... ,.:.• } ` 4�-�c h`W ." "a,_ Y� `� . . . s..l+ .. .� 'K. � '.; y 'cL41 "yy-`'' �iY.L\+\.ili� � . ....1\��1•Qi,:•." � NIIIII�yCT .�II7n�i " Z'O (" I _ OverHight Area � -' - � • � -- _ �arrier Jet . Carrier 1et ,: ; �Dperations � . .: .._ �. - Arrivals ' �P�� iaons :O � � : tions : `24 Hours _ . . : _ _- . ... ... . . _ ._ , - -_ . =�� . . . _ .P� . . i�;.. _ - Over So. Minneapolis/ 362 323 685 35.6% 23.6 No. Richfield Over So. Richfield/ 72 292 364 18.9% 12.6 Bloomington Over St. Paul - 32 16 48 2.5% 1.7 Highland Park Over Eagan/ 464 362 826 43.0% 28.5 Mendota Heights Total � 1923 ` 100% `� - : - 66.4 � � Note: ARTS data missing for 0.4 days. Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Paae 1 I Metropolitan Airports Commission R .. � . , � � � _ . � �, � . ' � 1 1' ,. . / , l .' i i' i � Pa�e 12 �viation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams Metropolitan Airports Cammission � � . . .-. � �' ' � ' 1 � ; . , � : . .' June 1999 Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RM'T �r G`�ty � Appro�mate Str�eet Loca�aon Events �� Eoents Events Eoents :� -' - - h ��. 1. � �G5e1B � ::�80d� - � �B �>l� ...._ . : _ -. - , . f �-:. . . . -._ ._ ..... . . .. . .. . .. 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 6181 46 1 0 2 Minneapolis � Fremont Avenue & 43rd Streei 5075 796 3 0 3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 3741 1391 25 0 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th S�reet 5133 2071 7 1 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 4088 2902 376 0 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 55(X 5000 164�5 1 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Sireet 45 3 0 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street = 223 6 2 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 119 93 6 0�� 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 131 107 42 0 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 28 � 11 0 0 - 12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenae 20 5 0 0 � 13 Mendota,,,Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 30 4 0 0 14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 5427 73 3 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Le�cington Avenue 160 8 1 0 16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & V'ilas I.ane 2671 927 16 . 0 17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 95 63 0 0 18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 98 41 0 0 19 Bloomin�ton 16th Avenue & 84th Streei 31 0 0 0 20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 2 0 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 105 0 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 2734 ].8 1 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 2127 13 3 0 24 Ea�an Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 5Q80 65 2 0 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13 Metropolitan Airports Commission C�.r�er Jet I)epart�re Related. I`�oi�e Even#s June 1999 Count of Departure Aircraft Nois+e Events for Each RMT �. 'RMT . f ' �_ � - .Events Eve�s Eaents Events _ ,.ID s k C:1� .A��iOS1IilA� SiIE'Et I.00BilOII :S�—` _� _ �B ,>l� � : 1 F . . L � . � w-.�.t=i �4�e.�.++ .: ... ' �i�-..4 'r� . .. . . . _•-_•fi: :.a+� _ � 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 884 247 4 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue 8c 43rd Street 1047 378 22 0 3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 1685 459 32 1 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 2429 863 116 1 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th SEreet 3343 1269 305 29 6 Minneapolis ZSth Avenue & 57th Street 4011 3314 1710 402 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 1136 420 40 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street _1829 605 78 1 9 St. Paul Saratoga S�reet & Hartford Avenue 58 25 4 0�� 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Stzeet 120 78 51 '� 8 11 St. Faul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 103 �. 62 21 0 ` 12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 50 5 0 0�' (� 13 . Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 2605 367 30 0 �- 14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 2829 798 108 2 15 Mendota Heights Cullen Sireet & Lexington Avenue 3310 563 66 0 16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & V'ilas Lane 2142 279 20 1 1� Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 4168 1491 344 12 . 18 • Richfield 75th Street & 17tfi Avenue 5702 5220 3020 295 19 Bloomin�ton 16th Avenue & 84th Street 5673 3547 13Q5 51 20 Richfieid 75th Soreet & 3rd Avenue 2826 185 21 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 1158 117 1 0 22 Inver Grove Hei�hts Anne Marie Trail 1079 96 0 0 23 Mendota Heighu End of Kenndon Avenue 4021 2192 621 33 24 Ea�an Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 2044 � 403 10 0 i' 1 Paae 14 Aviation Noise & Satellite Frograms MetropolStan AirPorts Commission 'I'en I�oudesi �l.ircraft I�Toise Eveni� Ideni�fied RMT #1: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St NYinneapolis �' �Ste T'la� -t,.~" � t�/C - • ,1l�A7[ . �/D _. .- ... "°' =�� _. � �'Imc _ Level, _ , 06/21/9915:52:35 5722 92.7 A 06/27/9912:19:43 B722 91.9 D 06/13/9911:37:52 B722 91.1 D 06/27/9912:31:37 B722 90.5 D 06/17/9912:00:48 B722 90.0 D 06/11/99 20:24:17 B722 89.8 D 06/14/99 9:51:55 B722 89.6 D 06/16/9910:15:19 B722 89.4 D 06/16/9911:26:38 B722 89.3 D 06/28/99 21:45:37 B722 89.1 D RMT #3: W. Elmwood S� & Belmont Ave. Minneapolis Date Z"u�e 06/07/9914:27:17 06/Ol /9�.22:07:51 06/28/99 18:16:51 06/28/9914:51:05 06/04/9910:37:42 06/27/99 7:42:13 06/14/99 14:20:24 06/10/9917:38:01 06/ 15 /9911:44:52 06/28/99 22:23:57 �� . � ..,_.� ,..>.,.I. � �� : �:: : • • : � � : : • � ; •. : • •. . ; . . : 'i � D D D D A D D D D D RMT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd St Minneapolis .:..�r--� rt ." , ""'' V-._. . . ,�(T �q��. ' - _ . 3:.0 „^r►..6� rR`��_ J t . hlV.; +'r�a�::..- '�. ! /�1 '. - �Rasc iluPz � � 1L3J -�.'�-�_ ._ �.�-.__._._ � _ --�� _ -_-.--.. . 06/21/9915:52:53 B722 . 99.9 A 06/06/9916:05:26 DC9Q 98.9 A 06/17/9911:33:12 B722 95.3 D 06/14/99 12:21:09 B722 933 D. 06/16/9910:15:03 B722 92.6 D 06/17/9911:46:55 B722 926 . D 06/14�99 951:25 B722 923 D 06/17/99 950:13 B722 92.1 D 06/06/9916:04:10 B722 92.0 A` 06/12/99 22:40:55 B7ZQ 92.0 D RMT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St Minneapolis : Date Time." A/�. �Ma= k � � .--. �.- _ .,. _::: :� . T9pe-,:: - Level . : :.•- ,. .. :.: 06/11/99 8:37:12 B722 101.8 D 06/04/99 9:39:31 B722 101.7 A 06/21/9915:a3:23 B722 97.6 A 06/I7/9912:00:07 B722 97.2 D 06/27/99 7:08:45 B722 96.9 D 06/29/9910:59:53 B72Q 96.3 D 06/06/9916:06:04 DC9Q 96.0 A 06/27/9916:02:42 B72Q 95.8 D 06/15/9916:03:48 B72Q 95.7 D 06/28/9918:18:09 B72Q 95.7 D Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 15 Metropolitan Airports Commission . , � � , . . � , • . � . ; . � ` . RMT #5: 12ih Ave. & 58th S� Minneapolis 1�(� `^-s`� � ' . ��'.' � ... � a}8i:t �lIIBC �%�: � `�$Z ; 1�/� `• `r _ _ _ , .� - �?C ., . LCVC� 's . . - 06/07/9914:26:51 B722 107:4 D O6/14/9914:20:01 B722 107.3 D 06/13/99 20:27:12 B722 106.2 D 06/01/99 20:57:38 B722 105.4 D � 06/Ol/99 21:21:50 B722 104.8 D 06/27/99 7:0821 B722 104.1 D 06/16/9913:12:4Q B72Q 104.0 D 06/11/9911:22:19 B722 104.0 D 06/28/9915:52:49 B722 103.3 D 06/14/9916:12:3� B722 103.1 D RMT #7: Wentworth Ava-& 64th St Richfield Date T'ime AJC Max � �'Ippe Level . 06/14/9915:14:40 B722 97.3 D 06/27/9917:25:34 B722 97.3 D 06/11/99 20:58:23 B722 95.8 D 06/11/9919:40:59 B722 95.8 D 06/11/99 7:59:51 B72Q 94.7 D 06/13/99 20:27:31 B7Z � 93.8 -.D 06/10/99 7:31:08 B7� 93.7 D 06/11/99 7:29:27 B732' 92.9 D 06/13/9915:22:2� B72Q 92.8 D 06/14/9916:12:55 B722 92.4 D RM'I' #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St� Minneapolis _ DSt£ T'nIEC µ �� 1%i8Y " E�� - � --Z�pe: _I.evel , Q6/13/99 8:15:06 B722 1102 D 06/30/99 21:04:49 B722 109.7 D 06/21/9915:54:08 B722 109.1 D 06/30/9912:09:14 B722 1Q8.7 D 06/27/99 7:35:51 B722 108.6 D 06/13/9912:34:4ti3 B722 108.5 D 06/07/9911:47:32 B722 108.3 D . 06/28/9918:16:10 B727 108.3 D �� 06/11/99 7:16:25 B722 10$.3 D. 06/14/9919:28:29 B722 1(38.1 D � RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd S� Minneapolis . .. �.. . . - � Date Time .' A/C . � Maz : _ :A/D : .. .._T`Ype. Level :.. .::: :=.: ` . 06/10/9916:12:59 B722 100.3 D 06/24/99 7:35:15 B722 99.1 D 06/11/99 7:17:01 B722 95.2 D 06/07/99 6:13:19 . 8722 97.7 D 06/13/99 8:15:41 B722 97.7 D --06f14/-99 7:13:28 - •$722 � 97.5 D � Ob/28/9910:Q3:56 B722 97.4 D 06/29/99 7:19:50 B722 97.4 D 06/14/9919:29:09 B722 97.1 D 06/17/99 7:19:43 B722 96.7 D Page 16 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Metropolitan Airports Commission � . � �', . � : � . . �, � . . � '. .. RMT #9: Saratoga S� & Hartford Ave. St Paul ,_ . - Date T'urae � r � � �.�- , - . � ' _ :TYFe -Le�i ^�- G- 06/16/99 21:38:15 B742 92.9 D 06/20/9912:35:17 B742 91.9 A 06/16/9913:49:49 B72Q 91.5 D Q6/26/991$:09:43 B742 91.4 A 06/11/9919:16:52 DC10 91.4 D 06/13/9919:08:02 DC10 91.3 D 06/05/99 4:20:16 B721 91.3 A 06/23/99 4:32:37 B722 90.9 A 06/25/9911:47:15 B742 90.9 A 06/07/9912:24:16 B742 90.5 A RMT #11: Finn St & Scheffer Ave. St Paul Date Time � �.AIC _ � A�Yag - A/D Tppc ' ° Lcvel 06/13/9912:10:54 B742 99.8 D Q6/16/9912:18:29 B742 98.9 D 06/10/9916:30:11 B742 97.8 D 06/27/99 ].2:16:20 B742 97.8 D 06/27/9913:39:58 B72Q 96.7 D 06/28/99 20:26:32 B722 .96.6 D 06/28/9912:36:01 B742 96.4 D 06/10/99 22:33:38 B72Q 96.0 D 06/27/99 8:12:24 B742 95.2 D 06/20/99 6:57:47 B72Q 94.8 D RMT #10: Itasca Ave. � Bowdoin St St Paul w� � � , � � -- -.:�Date Z5� `Type: �:�.eed A/D JC 06/ll/9915:32:22 B742 103.7 D 06/04/9911:52:30 B742 102.3 D 06/28/9915:27:39 B742 102.2 D 06/27/9915:17:04 5742 102.1 D 06/27/9912:16:02 B742 100.7 D Q6/14/9915:25:15 B742 100.4 D 06/16/9915:53:26 B742 100.4 D 06/01/9911:54:56 B742 100.0 D . O6/16/991218:11 B742 99.7: D (16/16/9913:49:21 B72Q 99.6 D RM'T #12: Alton St & Rockwood Ave. _,�:. S� Paul : : .. - '�C`°�;.: ': � °:, :,.A:.:�__�-.-. � , . Date'I"ime - - . 'L+eve1 �A/D .. . _ T9Pc ��- " _.... -- . . Ob/27/99 6:56:17 B72Q : 88.8 D 06/04/99 9:16:07 SF34 84.3 D 06/02/9915:16:24 DC10 83.7 A 06I04/99 6:12:33 DC9Q 83.6 A 06/09/9912:02:02 SF34 83.5 D -06/05.�99 �3:4,'�:01. • -MD80 832 A 06/17/99 21:44:41 SF34 82.4 D 06/09/9917:44:07 A3Q0 82.5 A 06/10/99 22:38:33 B727 81.5 D 06/02/9917:07:10 DC9Q 81.5 A Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 17 Metropolitan Airports Commission , � �, � ;. . � � . . � . '� . .� R1VrT #13: Southeast End of Mohican Court Mendota Heights _ -- - � _.. � - Dafe Z"u�: A/C . Mas , � . � :� �- . _. ... , . � .. 1`9Pe� -Level _ 06%19/9912:16:15 B722 97.2 D 06/22/9910:23:23 B722 969 D 06/25/99 21:35:04 B722 95.8 D 06/30%99 9:49:21 B722 94.9 D 06/06/9912:25:15 B72Q 94.3 D 06/19/99 21�729 B722 94.1��- D 06/05/9910:03:22 B722 94.0 D 06/22/99 7:15:26 B722 93.5 D 06/18/9915:48:29 B722 93.4 D 06/02/9913:23:51 B722 93.2 D RMT #1S: Culion St, & Lexington Ave. Mendota Heights Date Tia� ; _ ��. � A/D 06/19/9912:15:58 B722 97.7 D 06/21/99 7:12:59 B722 97.0 D 06/21/9915:30:29 B72Q 96.1 D 06/22/9917:16:39 B72Q 95.8 D 06/18/9915:48:07 B722 95.7 D 06/21/99 7:08:58 B722 95.7 •-D 06/08/99 22:03:17 B722 95.4 D 06/04/9911:56:�1 B722' 95.2 D 06/09/99 20:42:52 B722 949 D 06/23/99 7:17:25 B72Q 94.6 D RM'T #14: lst St & McKee St .� , :. _.., . . ' .Date �� ;�A/C Max - � � : -. _ .- .. ._ ,1�,pe _; :.,Level._. -.. 06/09/99 7�7:52 DC9Q 105.8 D 06/10/99 20:18:19 B722 � 101.6 D 06/11/99 6:17:22 B722 1Q0.6 D 06/17/9914:28:14 B722 99.4 D 06/Ol/9913:29:58 B72Q 99.2 D 06/30/99 7:15:56 B722 98.8 D 06/01/_99 7:20:57 B722 98.7 D 06/Ol/9914:01:26 B722 98.2 D : 06/17/99 21:11:25 B722 97.8 � D 06/01/99 8:Q8:08 B722 97.6 D= RMT #16: Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane Eagan :.. . . _. " ' Date Time AJC � ' Max .= � _ -' Z`ype : Level � 06/23/99 7:22:56 B722 � 101.3 D 06/18/99 7:12:47 B722 98.1 D 06/Q5J9918:24:43 B72Q 97.0 " D 06/03/99 7:14:35 . B722 g6.1 D 06/17/99 20:06:4b B72Q 94.9 D ; �6/16/�99 �.�:33:5� �G9 94.4 A 06/04/9910:37:49 B72Q 93.8 D 06/11/99 6:59:39 DC9 93.7 D 06/30/9915:36:36 B72Q 93.7 D 06/11/99 8:10:19 DC9Q 92.9 A Page 18 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � - Merropolitan Airports Commission Ten I,oud.est �a-craft Noi�e Events I+dentified RMT #1'7: 84th St & 4th Ave. Bloomington t � � - � Date Z�u� ='' :, �� Lev�e1 �/D �.� . . - . . , . . .. . . 06/28/99 7:33:26 � B722 103.3 D 06/05/99 9:55:35 B722 101.9 D 06/06/99 21:36:32 B722 101.9 D t}6/07/9914:48:02 B722 101.6 D 06/17/99 7:19:25 � B722 101.6 D 06/27/99 20:53:41 B722 100.9 D 06/27/9915:44:05 B72Q 100.7 D Q6/24/9915:56:21 B722 100.5 D d6/24/99 20:39:40 B722 1002 D 06/08/9916:06:01 B722 100.1 D RMT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th St Bloomington Ir_ _ ��,• 06/12/99 11:12:42 (?6/17/9919:10:37 06/12/99 9:22:45 06/07/99 13:34:20 06/21/99 19:11:01 06/22/99 8:42:52 06/02/99 18:13:30 06 / 17/9916:19:36 06 / 1�/99 17:36:53 06/19/99 7:09:30 RMT #18: 75th S� & 17th Ave. Richfield _ � � =�::= � _�� .:=:� - .-: �. . . �;�I?�fe Z"� :-'Z�pe � Y _.:Le�el . � : . � ...�,� _. _ - . .. . 06J10/99 7:30:29 B722 107.5 D 06/03/99 20:16:44 B722 1Q6.8 D 06/04/99 20:4b:11 B722 106.7 D 06/21/99 8:14:42 B722 � 106.6 D 06/06/9917:?3:58 B722 106.5 D 06/03/9919:25:00 B772 106.4 D 06/18/9919:17:24 B722 106.0 D 06/20/99 20:37:21 B722 105.8 D: 06/09/9912:19:23 B722 105.7 D 06/Q4/9918:52:54 B722 105.6 D R1VIT #20: 75th St & 3rd Ave. Richfield - AJC-_ .. .� Mag Date T'ime � - Ma ^A/D _ - 1�*ge : � Level . 06/10/99 7:17:51 B722 � 99.6 D 06/24/9916:17:29 B722 99.4 D 06/05/99 23:20:27 B722 98.7 D 06/05/99 23:28:28 B722 98.4 D 06/13/9915:40:45 DC9 98.0 D ••06f13/99-5:06:13 -$72Q 97.4 D 06/06/9917:24:21 B722 96.9 D 06/24/99 23:01:32 B72Q 95.0 D 06/23/99 22:28:25 B727 94.7 D 06/29/9913:36:08 B72 94.3 D Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 19 Metropolitan Airports Commission • ,� �. • . � � : . . � ., , .�. RMT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th S� Inver Grove Heights � -{ ,I)AtC'T'�1� V �A/C� �'MaZ -�-�D . ' ... � :�Jt� S'a�a.�ai+ .-.`v 'i.. 06/22/99 7:16:07 B722 90.2 D 06/21/9911:26:45 B722 88.7 D Q6/18/9917:02:25 B72Q 88.7 D 06/01 j9916:11:45 B722 88.6 D 06/30/99 7:14:03 B722 88.2 D 06/06/99 7:11:14 "� B72Q 86.6 D Q6/20/9910:03:40 B722 85.8 D 06/Ol/9915:35:23 I7C9 85.7 D 06/Q4/99 21:14:33 B722 85.3 D 06/10/99 20:33:11 B722 $5.2 D RMT #22: Anne Marie T�-ail Inver Grove Heights �. {� �54. ,Xr.�.t `;•�L'3I V : - .i7�8$ _ _ `,�-:.II,�..acte-T'� I�■��[]�� A/D C S.A� i{.�_'.:�� ..... . �:-dr- � 06/09/99 738:46 DC87 97.4 A Q6/09/99 7:44:19 A320 � 89.7 A 06/11/99 6:18:27 B722 88.7 D 06/01/99 7:21:53 B722 88.4 D 06/30/9919:35:22 MD80 881 A 06/08/99 732:25 B?22 88.0 D 06/OCi/9915:43:03 B722 87.4 D 06/18/99 21:41:29 B722 86.4 D.- 06/18/99 7:13:52 B722 861 �� D Q6/30/99 7:09:38 B722 85.9 D -=� - RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave. Mendota Heights Date T'� A✓C ... ...:Mag�.. �- M� � 1�pe � �:' Level - _ . 06/18/9915:47:58 B722 103.3 D 06/30/99 9:31:13 B722 103.0 D 06/05/9910:02:56 B722 102.9 D 06/08/99 22:03:07 B722 102.8 D 06/09/99 21:06:30 B722 102.8 D 06/21/9911:25:32 B722 • 102.8 D 06/20/9916:02:01 B722 102.6 D 06/19/9912:15:47 B722 102.6 D 06/19/9911:39:32 DC9 102.6 D 06/30/99 9:48:51 $722 102.4 D RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. Eagan ._ AIC.� :ltsaa . Date'Iime ' A/D ; . - ', �.:. . ` ::T`ylie_ ;'Level 06/03/99 7:19:55 B72Q � 95.7 D 06/27/99 21:07:29 BA46 94.3 A 06/30/99 7:16:12 B722 942 D 06/03/9915:42:27 B722 94.0 D 06/OS/99 7:31:50 B722 93.8 D �-06/Ol-/99 8:08:27 B7�2 93.2 D 06/17/9914:28:35 B722 92.0 D 06/02/9914:24:32 B722 91.1 D 06/11/99 6:1�:44 B722 90.6 D 06/29/99 5:14:46 B721 90.4 D PaQe 20 Aviation Noise & Satellite Prob ams Metropolitan Airports Commission An�lysis of �rcraft 1�loise Events - A.ircraii Ldn d.� (.A) June Ol to June 30,1999 Noise Monitor I.ocations �� .� . � iv i i� ' � ' � r�� , ' �r�� ' • i� :. ..:��t��-��, o : : . � �� .: . , . �� o� � . � .. . .. �� . � �� o��r�� t � : �� ... .: �� .:: ��e�t �e� o�� : �.,�� -��.:.�� o�� . . � .:. �� r� ., : �� ..: �� . . .. , � � � �� . . ., . .. : . � �� : : �� . : �� :: .. .. �� .,. ... .:,��.�. ...��.,. �� .: .. , �� im■i � � �� - � .: � .. . .� �� .: , . �� t��t� � � � � � �� : . �� .. , .: �o �� a �� o�� im�� .. . .., „ o �� . . � �. ., ., .. ..,� .: .:� .,�� im�� .. .: : � � � � �� . , : . . �� .. . . . . � � � � o�� ms ., . , . . ... � : : � .. . ,. . : ., � : ... ... . . .. �� - �� -� � �� . . . . �� . : . . : . � . , . �Q;�, ., ,� ., .., ... �, .� ... ,m�, � � ,�, . � , • . , . , .� .: �� .�i�� .� Page 26 Aviation Noise & Sateilite Pro�rams * L.es.ti dreut f�renh'-�ntrr hnttrc n(duicr accrilcrhle �:. Metropolitan Airp�rts Commission Analysis of A.arcraft I�loise Event� - A.ircrafi Lein d�(�,.) June Ol to June 30,1999 Noise Monitor Locations Date : ; #13 #14 #15 #16 " #17 #18 - � #19 . . #20 #21, #22 #23 #24 1 59.1 68.9 61.0 6a.1 64.1 74.1 71.2 54.2 58.0 57.8 71.3 63.2 2 57.9 63.5 59.0 62.6 66.4 76.3 73.5 57.7 58.1 56.3 69.6 60.8 3 58.7 64.4 61.8 61.8 66.7 77.7 72.9 56.4 54.0 57.3 69.0 61.6 4 61.1 63.1 63.8 59.8 65.1 76.6 71.6 54.8 56.1 55.2 72.0 59.4 5 60.3 62.5 62.3 61.1 65.3 74.7 70.7 61.8 53.6 51.5 71.5 56.3 6 60.7 59.5 64.3 57.0 66.6 76.1 71.8 58.5 53.8 51.0 : 71.(� 55.6 7 52.3 � 61.9 53.1 63.0 68.8 76.0 73.0 58.6 45.7 54.5 64.1 62.1 8 60.7 62.6 63.5 58.0 66.2 76.2 71.9 56.0 56.3 55.7 72.0 59.1 9 60.6 64.5 63.5 58.3 65.7 76.4 72.0 59.8 53.9 57.9 71.7 59.2 10 56.2 66.9 57.0 63.9 69.3 76.0 70.7 63.0 52.2 55.6 66.9 60.6 11 40.4 63.8 47.4 65.2 63.3 69.4 65.7 52.9 41.3 57.4 57.0 61.1 12 53.7 63.8 55.4 61.4 68.5 75.9 72.9 56.4 50.6 56.0 66.6 60.4 13 47.0 59.3 40.8 63.5 62.1 70.5 G5.3 61.4� 40.4 53.2 53.1 58.4 14 38.9 60.3 37.9 63.4 54.3 51.4 41.3 44.1 37.9 54.7 53.3 �, 59.1 15 49.3 62.1 54.2 63.1 68.4 75.4 71.1 60.6 47.4 57.1 62.2 60.9 16 3b-2 60.8 47.4 63,5 66.4 72.7 67:3 54.9 41.3 54.2 55.0 60.0 17 57.2 64.6 59.0 61.3 68.1 7b.1 72.8 57.5 55.7 55.3 68.1 60.4 18 61.1 63.6 63.3 61.1 63.2 76.5 73.2 53.7 57.0 56.1 72.2 59.9 19 63.1 61.7 64.5 56.7 64.1 76.9 72.8 55.3 54.3 54.0 72.1 58.8 20 60.0 62.5 62.1 57.7 65.4 77.0 72.8 55.2 54.5 54.8. 70.9 59.1 21 61.� 60.5 64.5 55.0 65.2 76.8 73.5 53.7 55.7 51.7 TL.2 56.7 22 60.8 58.3 62.7 52.0 64.0 74.5 71.1 53.4 52.2 49.4 70.2 54.5 23 54.5 62.9 58.1 64.2 68.6 75.5 72.2 59.8 45.5 57.8 6b.1 60.2 24 29.9 64.1 45.3 62.2 70.2 76.4 71.5 62.5 42.5 52.9 53.6 58.6 25 60.3 62.5 60.6 55.4 62.2 75.8 72.8 52.0 53.4 54.6 70.2 58.2 26 57.3 60.8 61.1 57.5 59.8 75.4 73.1 50.4 52.3 52.6 69.7 57.3 27 37.8 59.6 42.0 62.5 70.3 74.4 69.7 57.3 43.5 53.6 52.7 59.6 28 39.2 60.4 44.5 64.0 66.1 71.6 6b.7 55.0 38.0 55.7 53.0 60.0 29 55.6 62.8 59.8 62.7 66.1 75.7 72.7 59.6 55.6 57.7 69.0 ' 60.7 30 61.0 63.5 61.3 61.4 69.8 76.7 73.4 58.7 53.9 55.6 70.2 60.7 Mo. Ldn 60.5 66.5 63.5 64.6 68.6 77.7 73.8 61.8 55.7 58.9 71.8 63.4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa�e 27 * Le.r.r thun rrrent�•-(nur hnur.c n(dntn a��ailcrhle Metropolitan Airports Comrnission � �� .� r :i �. � �� ,,. •. . , � : , •. �t �, . , � . • �� "7.3 %(310) Carrier Jet Departures North of Proposed 095° (M) Cora°id.or Policy Boundaa~� Pa�e 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � , Metropolitan Airports Commission IVl:inneapolis - 5�. Pau1 Intea�at�onal A,irpori _ June 1999 4243..o Tota112L and 12I2 Car��r Jet Departures 2F5 ... Carrier Jet I;eparta�res (6.7% North of I'roposed 095° (I4�) Corridor Poli�y Bound�ry 285 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE �, LEFI COUNT=18 (6.3�) RIGNI COUNT=26� (93.7�) a 0 � � �� ';` Ai;OiV FRO� CENIER QF GAit (i() lG Aviation Noise & Sateilite Programs PaQe 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission li�nne�.polis - S� Paul Interna�ional Airport ' June 1999 � � � 4243 ... Total 12L, and 12R Carrier Jet Dep�r4ures 25 ... Carrier Jet Departure - Early Tu.rnout 0.6 % (I�Torth Side ��fore Three l��iles) 25 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE - LEFT GOUNT=23 (92.0�) RIGNT COUNT=2 (8.0�) �i -10 �-,IIn�T�IO�ti FROu CENTE° OF GATt (ft) Paae 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs G� Metropolitan Airports Commission 1 ' i 1 t . i 1 1 , . � . . � , � ,, � • , l 1 '� . • . � � ,; ., �, � �, �� 0.3 % (1�.) Carrier ,�et ]Departures South of Cor�dor (South of 30I, Localize�°) Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 5 Metropolitan Airports Commission IVlinneapolis - S� Pa� Internat�onal A,irpori June 1999 � 4243 ... Total 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departures 6 ..e Carrier Jet Departures (0.2 °I'o South of Corridor (South of 30L Localizer) 6 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE �EFT CQUNT=4 (66.7�) RIGHT COUNT=2 (33.37) �i DEUTATION FROM CENTER OF G�ITt (ff) Pa�e 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs J V � � Metropolitan Airports Commission 1Vlanneapolis - S� Pau1 �ternational .�irport Jur�e 1999 4243 ... 'I'otal 12L and 121a C��ier Jet Depariures 5..e Carrier Jet Departures - Early �'u�nout (0.1 % (South Sid.e �efore �ree 1Vlales) 5 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE �EFT CODUT=O (0.0�) RIGHT COUNT=5 (100.0�) � � ��UTA110�! FROiU CENTFr OF GaT't (�k) Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 7 Metrogolitan Airports Commission �ou�hern �oundary Corridor Gate �enetra�on Analysis 1VI1nne�.polis - St� P�uil International Airport June 1999 ( 0.2 %(S) Carrier Jet lDepartures 5° South of Corridor (5° South of 30L Loc�izer) Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs C� C� � .: � � � Metropolitan Airports Commission I�l[inneapolis - S� Paul Inte�.at�onal .,�.ir�ort June 1999 4243 ... Total 12L aafld lZit �arrier Jet De}�aa-tures 3 ... Carrier Jet l�epartures (0.1 % 5° Sozath of Corrid.or (5° Souti� of 30I1 Ilocalizer) 3 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE LEFT COUNT=2 (66.7�) RIGHT COUNT=1 (33.3�) � D�U1�1T10� FRO�� CEUTER OF GAT� (f() )u Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9 Metropolitan Airports Commission . IVlinn�apolis - S�. P�� terna�o�a1 A.i��rt June 1999 4243 ... Total 12i� and 1212 Carrier Jet Departures 5... Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turn�ut 0.1 % (South Side Before Three Miles) 5 TRACKS CROSS�D P-GAiE �, LE� I COUNT=S (100.0�) RIGNT COUNT=O (0.0�) 0 a c �=VIAT!0` F�ROU CEN1�R OF GATE (ff) pa?e 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs � ' � • .i � �` ' s � ° �. `� �' •' � � • i; 1 1 ' .;, '� �, ' �` '' 1 �. . ': .: Executive Summary x ,ja., . . �. M�P June �leet I�� Perc�nt�ge �vo�rs AxoMs sr.�Q co�t c�nt �P� J�� Stage 2 15.6% 12.9%a Stage 3 84.4% 8�.1%a Metropolitan Airports Commissi. � .� June I999 Stage Use Composition During the month of June 1999 manufactured sta.ge I� usage = 50.3%, stage III usage = 36.8% and stage II usage = 12.9%. � June I999 Aircr� Composition The hushkitted DC9 was the most predominately used aircraft with �664- operations consisting of 26.7°Io of the total carrier jet operations. Following the DC9 hushkitted the top three were the Airbus 320 with 4453 operations (15.5% of the total), Boeing 757 with 2968 (10.4% of the total) and the Boeing 727 hushkitted with 2640 (9.2% of the total). �'�� . �tt� . t c��. '. _ =Airpiirt _ . . . _ 1Viay 99 . . : june 99 . - MSP 1274 1593 Airlake 0 0 Anoka 28 7 Crystal 0 0 Flying Cloud 4 S Lake Elmo 0 1 St. Paul 2 1 Misc. 1 i TOTAL 1309 1608 June I999 Com�laint Origin Summary MSP complaints during the month of June 1999 were highly concentrated in four cities: Minneapolis = S 15, Inver Grove Heights = 226, Bloomington = 109 and Eagan = 89. June 1999 Complaint �me o,f Dav Summar,y . The majority of complaints were received in the following time periods: 07:00-11:59 = 316, 12:00-1�:59 = 259, 20:00-21:59 = 247 and 16:00-19:59 = 237. June 1999 Nature o Complaint Summarv The nature of the received complaints were concentrated around the following sources: excessive noise = 1127, early/late = 422, ground noise = T7 and low flying = 16. Technical Advisor's Report Executive Summary Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission Airpoa-t C�perations laeference Diagr�m aa v� � • ','' ' r .. • . �;� • �,r : . � �,• ;� c Runway �p�� _ Overflight Ama �ount �ill Perc�ntage Connt Jef Percentage 04 Arr So. Rich.Bloom. 119 � 0.6% 95 0.7% 12L Arr So. Mp1s.INo. R.ich. 6298 31.0% 5017, 34.8% �. ,12R Arr So. Mpls./No. Rich. 4753 23.4% 2907 20.2% 22 Arr Stp./Highld. prk. 130 0.6% 99 0.7% 30L Arr Egn.lMen. Hts. 3905 19.3% 2185 15.1 °�o 30R A.rr EgnJMen. Hts. 5085 25.1% � 4109 28.5% Total Arr. ?A290 100°10 14412 100% 04 Dep ��Stp:IHiglild. prk. 143 -U.7% 100 0.7%'0 12L Dep Egn.lMen. Hts. 5730 28.8% 4163 29.2% 12R Dep Egn.IMen. Hts. 303 1.5% 80 0.6% 22 Dep So. Rich.Bloom. 7837 39.4% 5837 41.0% ��_� 30L . Dep So. Mpls./No. Rich.: 1152 5.8% 471 3.3% 30R Dep So. Mpls./No. Rich. 4747 23.8% 3595 25.2% Total Dep. 14912 14a% 14245 i0�% Technical Advisor's Report Executive Summary Page 2 Metropolitan AirPorts Commissi� � June 1999 Naghttiar�e Runvvay �Js� All Operati�ns � Carraer �et �pea-atioa�s Runway �P�re Overflight Area Count All PercentagQ Cou�t Jet Percentage 04 Arr So. RichJBloom. 90 7.9% 72 7.8% 12L Arr So. Mpls./No. Rich. 370 323°% 323 34.7% 12R Arr So. Mpls./No. Rich. 49 4.3°% 39 4.2% 22 Arr _. Stp./Highld. prk. 45 3.9% 32 3.4% 30L Arr Egn./Men. Hts. . 81 7.1% 52 5.6% 30R Azi' Egn./Men. Hts. 510 44.5% 412 44.3% Total Arr. - :1145 ; , : = ,. .. -100% ` -:: : : .. 930 ": . 100% 04 Dep Stp./Highld, prk. 29 2.1% 16 2.0% 12L Dep Egn./Men. Hts. 517 36.4% 349 32.1% 12R Dep EgnJMen. Hts. 20 1.4% 13 1.6% 22 Dep So. Rich.Bloom. 4f)0 28.2% 292 26.6% 30L Dep Sa Mpls./No. Rich. 77 � 5.4% 53 6.6°Io : 30R Dep So. Mp1s.INo. Rich. � 376 26.5%a 270 31.1% Total Dep. 1419 . : '; .:100% �' :' :: . 993 � 100% ;. June I999 Runwav Use Summary All Operaiions and Carrier Tet Operatzons � �' During June 1999 runway use for all operarions showed an increase of departure traffic on 22 compared to May `- 1999 with the bulk of the a.rrival traffic remaining concentrated on the parallel runways. The use of the crosswind runway increased by 26.5% more departures on 22 while arrivals on the crosswind runway decreased frorn June 1999 to May 1999 on runway 04 by 0.�%. Operations over St Paul remained consistent unth May 1999. Parallel runway operations represented a predominate Southeast traffic flow with 10% more operations arriving 12L&R compared to 30L&R. Departure operations off the parallels were down because of increased use of 22 resulting from the summer construction. Carrier jet operations also followed the same trend with overall comdor usage decreased from May 1999 to June 1999 while the parallels still supported the bulk of the traffic. Use of the crosswind runway increased frorn May 1999 to 7une 1999 with a 28.3% increase of departures on runway 22. Arrivals on the crosswind runway decreased from May 1999 to June 1999 on runway 04 by 0.5%. Corridor operations dropped from May 1999 with 12L&R departure operations decreasing by 21.6% and 30L&R arrival operations increasing by 0.7°Io. Overall Parallel runway use favored Southeast traffic flows with 11.4% more arrivals on 12L&R compared to 30L&R and 1.3% more departures on 12L&R compared to 30L&R. June I999 Nighttime Runway Use Summary All D,�erations and Carrier Tet Operations The nighttime hours (2230 - 0600) during June 1999 showed a decrease in runway 04 arrivals and an overall decrease in corridor usa�e compared � �V1ay-i999: �'he all operations runway use assessment depicts 7.9% of the arrival operations occurring on runway 04 with 51.6% of the arrival operations occumng in the corridor and 37.8% of the departure operations occurring in the comdor. The overall percent of operations over Minneapolis in June.1999 remained consistent with May 19991evels.. There were 2.2% less departure operations over Minneapolis and 2.2% more arrivals over Minneapolis from May 1999 to June 1999. The use of the crosswind runway over South Richfield and Bloomington increased from May 1999 to June 1999 with departure operations on runway 22 increasinQ by 16.8% and arrivals on runway 04 decreasin; by 5.0%. � (- Technical Advisor's Report Executive Summary Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission Nighttime carrier jet operations were consistent with the all operations trends. Corridor operations were comprised of 49.9% of total arrivals and 37.7% of total depariures in June 1999 representing a increase in arrivals by 2.9°Io and a decrease in departures by 15.9% in the corridor from May 1999 to June 1999. There were �Q 9% of the total arival operations and 33.7% of the total departure operations over Minneapolis in June 1999 � resenting an increase in arrivals of S.0% and a decrease in departures of 0.3% over Minneapolis. The use of the crosswind runway increased with departure operations on runway 22 increasing by 15.9% from May 1999 to June 1999. June 1999 Catalvsts for the Runwav Use Confi�urations In addition to wind and weather conditions dictating the nature of the runway use at MSP, construction during the month of June 1999 also influenced runway use for the month. June 1999 Aircraft I�Toise (�enerated I�onthly I)I�tL I.�eveis Per RIO�IT gM.'T s� � �; .� �� Y � , - � _ Monthly . _ �y� ,, �` c.G'itp �- ` �ppro�mate Str�etl.o�afion 7��g "�1L1� " rc;r_ .�.".--c�'yx.. `7� . 2.d.; 4.�"� -_ =� �w. � .'{" :��1�.L� � = . "" ' __ ". . - - J . • _': ;R;�'r.,.-" . ' " ' ' _ ' .. 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 62.0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 65.0 3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 65.7 4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Sti-eet 683 5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 72.5 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57ih Street 78.4 7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 61.7 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 65.1 9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 58.3 10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin S�eet 635 11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 57.0 12 St. Paui Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 49.1 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 60S � 14 Eagan First 3tseet & McKee Street 66S 15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Leacington Avenue 63.5 16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & V'ilas Lane 64.6 17 Bloominb on 84th Street & 4th Avenue 68.6 18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 77.7 19 Bloornington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 73.8 20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 61.8 31 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 55.7 2? Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 58.9 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 71.8 2� Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 63.4 Technica] Advisor's Report Executive Summary Pa�e 4 Metropolitan Airports Commiss: � June 1999 RM'1' DNL Level Summarv The above monthly DNL assessment per RMT site is consistent with the actual runway use for the month of June 1999. The higher DNL levels are for the most part concentrated off the ends of the pazallel runways and the departure end of runway 22 due to this months runway usage. The St Paul RMT sites represent some of the � lowest DNL values in the report. �. June I999 Ton Ten Noiss Events Per RMT Summarv The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for June 1999 are very similar to the information collected in May 1999. The top noise events at each RMT were comprised of 89.6% departure operations and the predominate aircraft was the Boeing 727 with the exception of sites located in St Paul due to the number and = nature of operations over St Paul. f Technical Advisor's Report Executive Summary PaDe 5 Low Freyuency Noise Policy Committee , 1 Wednesday, June 23, 1999 Room 3040, Lindbergh Terminal Wold-Chamberiain Field MINUTES The Low. Frequency Noise Policy Committee meeting. was cailed to order at 3:10 p.m. The following were in attendance: Members: . Mike Sandahl, Richfield; Larry Lee, Bloomington; John Himle, MAC; Sandy Colvin-Roy, Minneapolis Technical Support: Glen Orcutt, Federal Aviation Adminisiratiot�; Brian Timersan, MPCA; Chauncey Case, Metropolitan Co��ncil; D. Saunders, MASAC Expert Panel: Andrew Harris, HMMH; Sanford Fidell, BBN Others: . N. Finney, J. Unruh, C. Leqve, J. Giesen, M. Killian, MAC; B. Johnson, MBAA; S. Dibble, J. Del Calzo, Ci�y of Minneapc�lis; M. Fiinds, D. Brauer, City of Richfield; J. Sayre, �Northwest Airiines; S. Williams, K. Burt, DTED; B. Duffee; A.� Duffee; D. Ziemer; D, Pemberton 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IT WAS MOVED BY SANDAHL, SECONDED BY LE�, TO APPROVE TH� MINUTES OF THE MAY 19, � 999 LOW FREQUENCY NOISE POLICY COMMIiTEE MEETING. THE MOT10N CARRIED. 2. NOISE REDUCTION MEASUREMENTS OF HOUSES WITH �ND WITHOUT SOUND INSULATION — DRAFT REPORT (TASKS 5& 6 OF WOFZK SG�JPE) Andrew Harris, HMMH, gav$- a presentation regarding measurements taken to determine the LFN reduction provided by typical residential construction and the LFN reduction provided by residences subsequent to treatment in �the MSP Sound Insulation Program. Mr. Harris reviewed the results of the measurements indicating there is very little difference between the performance at low fre,�uencies of treated and untreated houses, while there is a much improved performance for mid to high frequencies in treated houses. As a group, the untreated and treated houses are almost identical at low frequencies. A draft copy of Chapter 8(results of Tasks 5 and 6) of the Expert Panel Report was provided to the LFNPC for review. Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee June 23, 1999 Page 2 3'. EXISTING LEVELS OF LOW FREQUENCY NOISE IN COMMUNITY (TASK 3 OF WORK SCOPEI Mr. Harris reviewed the results of ineasurements of noise levels in the absence of aircraft noise both inside and outside to determine the range of outdoor�noise levels in Richfieid, Minneapolis and Bloomington. It was concluded that the ambient levels of LFN in cities around MSP are similar to ambient levels of LFN in other urban residential areas. A draft copy of Chapter "X" was provided to the LFNPC for review. . .�- . 4. STATUS REPORT — SOCIAL SURVEY (TASK 4 OF WORK SCOPE) Sandford Fidell, BBN, reviewed the preliminary results of the social survey recently conducted in areas close to the intersection of Runways 4/22 and 12V30R. 459 interviews were conducted with approximately 2/3rds of the interviewees living in homes that have been insulated through tF� MSP Sound Insuiation Program. f'relimiriary results indicate that approximately 43% of those living in insulated homes notice rattling several times during�the day with 47% of those in homes that have not been insulated noticing rattle. 66°�� of those living in insulated homes say they nofice windows rattling; 70% in the homes that have not been insulated noticed window rattle. Mr. Fidell will provide an update on the results of the social survey at the next meeting of ( the LFNPC. 5. OTHER BUSINESS The LF��PC agreed ts� change the July meeting to Thursday, July 22, 1999, at 4:00 p.m. . The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m.