10-13-1999 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
AIRPORT REl.AT10NS COMMISSiOiV AGEiVDA
October 13, 1999 - Large Conference Room
1. Call ta Urder - 7 p.m.
2. Roll Call -� �� �� � � ��u �
� � ����� �"
* Introduction of Ms. Elizabeth Petschel, New Member
,
3. Approval of September 3, 1999 Minutes.
4. Unfinished and IVew Business:
a. Consider Revised Airport Action Plan
b. Review Draft Airports and Aviation Chapter of Comprehensive Plan
5. U�dates
a. MSP Part 150 Study Update — Noise Abatement on Runway 17-35
b. MAC Capital Improvement Plan — 2000 — 2006
c. Third Parallel Runway Contract (Avaiiable Wednesday)
6. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Corres�ondenc�:
a. MASAC Agenda for Sept. 28, 1999 and August 24, 1999 Minutes
inciuding MASAC Operations Committee Minutes of Sept. 10 1999
b. MASAC Technical Advisers Report for the Month of August 1999
c. MASAC Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for August 1999
d. Airport Noisz Report — Sept. 10t'' and Sept. 24t'' editions
e. MASAC Operations Committee Agenda for Sept. 10, 1999
f. MASAC Operations Committee Agenda for October 8, 1999
g. City Staff/MAC Part 150 Meeting Minutes for Sept. 9, 1999
h. Eagan Airport Relations Commission Agenda for October 12, 1999
7. Other Camments or Concerns.
: �..
Auxiliary aids fior disabied persons are avaiiable upon reques# at least 'i 20 hours in advance. If a
notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights wi11 make every attempt to
provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notica. Please contact City
Administration at 452-1850 with requests.
CITY OF MENDOTA I�EIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, N�IQ�IlVESOTA
Airport Relations Commission Minutes
September �,1999
The regular meeting of the Mendota. Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on
Wednesday, September 8, 1999, in the City Hall Lazge Conference Room, 11Q1 Victoria Curve.
Chair Beaty called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. The following members were present: Beaty,
Fitzer, May, Roszak, and Stein. Also present were City Adm�nistrator Batchelder and
Administrative Assistant Hollister.
City Administrator Batchelder notified the Commission that the City Council has interviewed
candidates for the Commission vacancy and has appointed Elizabeth
Petschel.
. "'i • �' 11
Cornmissioner Fitzer moved approval of the August 11,1999 minutes as submi�ted.
Discussion:
Commissioner Roszak requested two corrections on page 3: 1) change the secdnd line of the third
paragraph to "...analysis of every..."; and 2) add the phrase, "at a11 points on the flight track" to the
end of the first sentence of the fourth paragraph.
Comrnissioner May moved approval of the August 11;1999 minutes as amended; Commissioner
Fitzer seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
1;'i; �►�1I:�►1
]Page 9: Commissioners continued with their review and update of the City's Ai�port Action Plan
for the year 2000. Cornmissioner May stated that he felt this issue and goal statec€ on page 9 is
redundant, as the Northern Dakota County Airports Relations Coalition (NDCAIZC) has been
working together on common issues. City Administrator Batchelder that NDCARC works on a hit
and miss basis. At the Council's direction the City has become less active in NDCARC, although
its initiation was generated by the previous City Administrator. Ciiy Acltninistrator Batchelder and
Mr. Hohenstein from Eagari coordinated agendas, minutes of ineetings and kept records. When Mr.
Hohenstein left, no one stepped forward to continue his efforts. The issues that are now a part of
the Part 150 Study are bringing more differences among cities to the surface than common ground.
; � Comrnissioner Beaty noted that when NDCARC started, there were many conflicts and little that
�` -' could be a�reed upon. Finally, the group came together and made a list of 25 issues that they
agreed on. T'hen many good things happened. He would like to see area cities be in a position to
see that they have more in common than differences. MAC has consistently had its way with �
policy and operation decisions by keeping cities in conflict. If NDCAR.0 could be stronger and
more united on big issues, it would have an impact on MAC decisions. Everyone lost when close-
in departures started. City Administrator Batchelder responded that close-in departures was fu11y
discussed by NDCARC, but Inver Grove Heights voted against the City's position. He agreed,
however, that it does make sense to have an open line of communication. Although the Council
would like to maintain a low profile, he would be willing to continue to work with the group. The
25 issues agreed upon was updated a couple of years after they were identified. It was at that time
the Council requested that the City not commit to any specific position on any issue and decrease
activity with this group.
Commissioner Beaty stated that in order to continue to be active, someone has to take the
organizational role of putking out agendas, keeping minutes and records. He does not like to see the
agenda rotated from city to city.
Commissioner May stated that he would volunteer to begin attending meetings because it is
important ta build bridges of communication and esta.blish relationships that could lead to
consensus.
Commissioner Beaty requested that a letter be sent to the Council explaining the accomplishments
of the group which the Comrnission feels justifies continued participation.
Page 10: Commissioner May stated that the stated issue and goal go hand in hand with Coalition
activities which couid enhance awareness of what is going on in other communities. It was the
consensus of the Commission to add regular participation in NDCARC as action step No. 5.
Page 11: Commissioner May asked if the Metropolitan Council has legislative powers.
Administrator Batchelder explained that the Iegislature gives the Metropolitan Council certain
powers. MAC is required to submit a comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council the same as
cities, and that is where the whole issue of land use compatibiliiy is being reviewed. The
Metropolitan Council has review power and it can stop anythuig inconsistent with the Metropolitan
System. However, it does not have statutory authority. For example, the Metropolitan Council
passed a resolution opposing Mounds View's attempt through legislation to get the runway length
of its airport limited in order not to serve as a reliever airport. The City Council of Mendota
Heights passed a resolution stating the need for reliever airports, and MAC was mandated by the
legislature to develop a general aviation reliever plan. That plan had to go to tlie Metropolitan
Council for approval because it is a metropolitan issue. The Metropolitan Council also distributes
ISTEA grants and allocates money for housing throu�h the Housing Redevelopment Authority
(HR.A). The biggest issues with cities for the Metropolitan Council is MLTSA, the boundary for
sewer ex�tension.
�
Commissioner May asked who the representative is for District 15. Administrator Batchelder
answered, Carolyn Rodriquez. He stated that she has been accommodating and will be supportive �" �;
of the City's Comprehensive Plan amendments. �
Commissioner Beaty asked the size of District 15. Administrator Batchelder stated that it includes
half of Dakota. County: Apple Vailey, Burnsville, Eagan, Lilydale and Mendota Heights.
Page 12: City Adrninistrator Batchelder noted the addition of No. 3, which states that most of the
mitigation goals are included in the Part 150 Study.
I'age 13: City Acirninistrator Batchelder noted No. 4, Re�egotiation with MAC on Terms in
Minneapolis/MAC contract. It was the consensus of the Commission for to review a clean draft
copy of the contract at the next meeting before submittal to the City Council as a recommendation.
After City Council review, a letter and contract will be sent to MAC for signature.
Commissioner Beaty asked for clarification of Action Step I`3o. 5, Direct MAC on Preparation of
E�ibit of Affected Properties. City Administrator Bat�l�elder explained that affected properties are
third-party beneficiaries who have legal standing for in3unctive or compensatory relief. This
process was set up by the legislature in order to provide sorne legal powers to affected parties who
are homeowners within the contour. That work has not yet been done because there is not
agreement on the methodology used to generate that contour.
Page 14: City Acirninistrator Batchelder noted that in Action Step No. 1, Runway 17-35 is the new
north/south runway. The following day MAC will be giving the City a preview of public
workshops to be held later in September. MAC will also show base contours that the Part 150
Study will work from to project contours �or the year 2000. There will be three public workshops
the week of September 26. Notices will be publicized.
Commissioner Roszak refened to the minutes of the July MASAC Operations Committee and
noted some rather brutal exchanges. It is clear that MAC is jamming as many operations as
possible into available air space. He asked if the goal to eliminate head-to-head operations is
realistic or whether it should be eliminated.
Comrnissioner Beaty agreed that the goal is difficult, but is n�eded because the system is
inequitable.
Commissioner Roszak suggested adding another action step that would advocate use of the 17-35
runway as a corridor for relieving head-to-head operations. City Administrator Batchelder noted
that recently Richfield was told they could not use PFCs for low frequency flights. Richfield sued
and settled with MAC, but the FAA would not approve spending for the settlement. The sta.tus of
that lawsuit is that the agreement was shot down by the F1�iA. Commissioner Roszak stated that
cities need a way to have more influence on the FAA.
It was the consensus of the Commission to change Action Step No. 3 to include ways to neQotiate
with FAA on head-to-head operations.
Page 15: There were no changes.
3
Page 16: City Administrator Batchelder stated that the gate is not at 90 degrees, so that every plane
passes through the gate. If the gate were at 90 degrees, it would miss the planes that turn north (
before they get to the gate. The gate is so designed to catch planes that lift off early and turn early.
The corridor ends at three miles. The premise of the corridor is for planes to stay within the first
three miles.
Commissioner Beaty stated that as the corridor becomes busier, it does not make sense to decide
that the corridor is defined at 90 degrees instead of 95 degrees. The FAA has stated that it will not
a11ow 95-degree boundary. If the City accepts this definition of the corridor, it will never be shrunk
and more planes will be squeezed in becoming an issue of FAA safety versus capacity. He is also
concerned about the irnpact of noise which will be phenomenal. He suggested adding an action
step that would state that as technology is irnproved, more planes not be added but an equita.ble
system of direction maintained.
Commissioner May stated that jamming the corridor with four or five planes defea.ts the legislation
to control noise for surrounding communities.
Page 17: 'There were no changes.
Page 18: There were no changes.
Page 19: It was the consensus of the Commission to modify the goal to state: Promote the
implementation of Global Positioning Satellite Technology to control arrival and departure (
headings in comdor �•�+ ,,,,+ .,,;+�,,,,,+ ,..,r.,,,;+�, Efforts shouid be concentrated on noise reduction,
not increased capacity. �-"�' � f' �'^� �-S c -�-� �a�� � .
Page 20: There was no change.
Page 21: 'There was no change.
Page 22: City Administrator Batchelder explained that this issue and goal relates �o the use of a
modei ordinance that is based on a model developed by the Metropolitan Council in 1985 and
1986. There have been discussions about the need to upda.te that model to current standards.
� ��. . �.��. � .. � . � • � � ��. �
It was the consensus of the Commission to review this chapter of the Comprehensive Plan with the
latest changes at the next meeting before making a recomrnendation to the City Council.
City Administrator Batchelder noted a number of changes the City Council had made on the
previous evening, September 7, 1999.
C
�
City Administrator Batchelder noted that zoning must now be consistent with land use designation
' ! in the Comprehensive Plan. Once the Comprehensive Plan is adopted, zoning and land use controls
need to be consistent. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the Comprehensive
Plan October 26, 1999, which gives the Com.mission another meeting to make final comments.
i'1•
095 Corridor Boundaay and I,ease Agree�ents
The Commission noted previous discnssion of the 095 corridor boundary.
Commissioner Roszak observed that all lease agreements are the same, except for Sun Country.
MAC has not imposed any ordinances on them.
� � 1 ' 1, � ,, ��. � �.. ►� �
City Administrator Batchelder stated that he will find a away to provide color copies of MAC
reports. MAC is unwilling to provide more than one color copy, and he will request a disc to work
from.
City Administrator Batchelder noted that in the MASAC packet there are minutes from the
August 13, 1999 MASAC Operations Commitie� and the August 10 meeting of the
( i Communications Advisory Board, where the dates are listed for the public workshops in
September. He will also include this informaiion in the Friday newsletter.
Commissioner Roszak asked for clarification af a letter dated August 8, 1999, from Neil Clark in
Minneapolis requesting that MASAC create a report on Relative Residential Noise for 68
properties. City Administrator Batchelder stated that those 68 properties are eligible for sound
insulation. There are a total of 6,700 homes in Minneapolis that qualify.
Commissioner Roszak noted the statement made by Mr. Roy Fuhrman in the July 2'1, 1999
MASAC minutes of the general meeting that MAC goes to the based airlines to fuld out what
type of engines they have on each aircraft to determine noise level.
Commissioner Stein commented on the excellent information provided in the Technical
Advisor's Report on page 5 with the breakdown percentages of Stage II, Stage III and Stage III
Manufactured aircraft.
Commissioner Beaty moved that the meeting adjourn. Comrnissioner Fitzer seconded the
motion. The meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Deanne Gueblaoui
Recording Secretary
5
C
�
� i 1 � • 1
�
October 11,1999
To: Airport Relations Cornmission
From: Kevin Batchelder, City A ' a o
Subject: Draft Aviation Chapter of Comprehensive Plan
DISCUSSION
Enclosed please find a copy of the Draft Aviation Chapter of Comprehensive Plan. This
draft is as revised by the City Council on September 7, 1999. Council authorized staff to begin
the 60-day reyiew process that includes sending this draft to the Metropolitan Council and to
neighboring governmental jurisdictions for their review and commen�
Each advisory Cornrnission is being asked to make their fmal review and comments to
the various sections of the clraft Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Co�ission will hold a
public hearing on October 26, 1999 and make a formal recommendation to Ciiy Council.
Council will then consider all cornments and make final revisions so th�t our Comprehensive
Plan may be submitted to the Metropolitan Council in November, or December.
� � • ' �
Review the draft Aviation Chapter of Comprehensive Plan. Consider any comments,
revisions, suggestions for the City Council's consideration.
�.
�
AI.RP�RT PLAN
Mendota Heights is a community directly affected by aircraft operations �t Minneapolis-
St. Paul International Airport (MSP). Aircraft noise is a�najor issue for Mendota Heights
because .of the detrimental impacts of increased operations on the e�uality of life in
existing neighbarhoods and the impact of land usz compatibility guide{ines and noisz
contours on development options. In recent years, the riumbers of airpa�t operations
and the percentage of departures/arrivals in the southeast corridor hawe increaseci to
the point of overwhelming the capacity of the originally c�efined flight corr`dors. _
The exclusive use of the parallel runways at MSP has ted to an inequitable distribution
of air traffic around MSP with those individual communities on the ends of the parallel
runways suffering tfie burden of air noise created by this regional facilii}r. All residentia!
areas in Mendota Heights were in conformance with the original aviatior� g.uidelines and
their �previous projections of air noise and air traffic. Mendota .Heights was the only city
that adopted the original Metropolitan Council noise zones and guidetines and is the
only city to adopt and enforce a Noise Attenuation Ordinance.
The Preferential Runway Use System at MSP relies he�vily on "land campatibility" as a
guiding principle fior departure determination, thereby increasing the volume of traffic
and the .percentage ofi exclusive use of the southe3st corridor, whicfi was zoned
commercial/industrial in cooperation with regional and local planning agencies. This
increased traffic has impacted exisiing compatible residential neighbarhoods and is
restricting the potential land uses available for remaining vacant I��td in �Mendota
Heights.
The City of Mendota Heights has worked strenuously to address airport r�oise issues. A
citizen Airports Relations Commission has been establrshed by Mendota Heights to
provide recommendations to the City Council on airport issues. �"his plan is a
compilation of the City's work and history regarding the airport, a szt af policies and
actions to guide future decisians on airport, a descripti.on af the confilicts with other
agencies responsible for airport impacts, and a discussion of the patential land use
impacts firom agency r�quirements. �
GOALS AND POLICIES
The overall goals in relation to airport related issues are as follows:
1. To reduce negative airport impacts in Mendota Heights.
2. To reduce aircraft noise through equitable distribution of flights among all
commuc�ities located adjacent to MSP.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
61
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
DEVELOPMENT FR,4MEWORK
� r
AIRPOP,T PLAN
3._ To work diligentiy with al( noise issues and agencies to decrease aircraft noise in
volume and to clecrease the area of noise impacts.
Aircraft Noise �Poiicies �
To addr�ss the issues described herein and to pursue the goals of the City_, the
following are the policies of the City of Mendota Heights
1. Increase public pa�ticipation and representation through MASAC and MAC.
2. Achieve noise reduction thraugh advocating modifiied takeoff procedures and
corridor compliance. � �
3. Advocate an equitable distribution of aircrafit traffic and a more equitable runway use
system.
4. Monitor the coniinued implementation of the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) airport
Comprehensive Plan.
5. Advocate for specifiic noise control measures thraugh operational changes and
advance technalagy. �
� ) 6. Establish. a physical capacity fior the Mendota Heights/Eagan corridor and transfer
" general aviation use to other reliever airports. . �
HlSTORY OF AiRPORT PLANNING
The fa(lowing table provides a shart history of airport and planning related actians that
� have occurred over�the past 30 years. Included are major airport decisions by the City
and other agencies that have impacted the community.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
� �
��
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
DEVELOPMENT� FRAMEWORK
A 1 R P O R T P L A N
HISTORY OF NO1SE 1SSUES
••• Preierentiai runwa s stem devised b MAC.
••• Metro olitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Councii MASAC? established.
• MAG and FAA estabiished a fiight corridor, whereby aircraft would stay on an
extended ninwa centeriine for a disiance of thre� 3) nautical mifes.
° Eagan resigns from MASAC. MAC, FAA, ATA and major airlines adopt a 5-
de ree left turn on take-off �ocedure. Ea an re'oins MASAC. - -
• Departure procedures further modifiied so aircraft were issued headings 10 to
11 de rees north of runwa centerline.
°• Metro olitan Land Plannin Act enacted.
• •: MAC deveioped Noise Abatement Operations Plan comparing 1977
a erations to 1981.
'� ••: NOISEMAP pcoject by Met Council and MAC to define tong term land use
compatibility standards for the Aviation Chapter of the Metropolitan
Devetopment Guide. Noise map policy contours largely define the characier
of develo ment. �
� •= Aviation Chapter adopted. Mendota Heights and Eagan modifiy their land use
` lans to be consistent wiih the defined fli ht corridor.
•:� Deregulation and subsequent growth in aircraft traffic changes operations,
resutting in parallel or successive departures and the need to maintain 15
degrees of separaiion between aircraft. Northem divergence resulted in a 90-
degree heading - increasing flighis directly over Mendota Heights
ncint�hnrhnnAe .
.
• •:� operations Committee implemented departure procedure to minimize us� of
9O-clenrPa haa�linnc
�
Reso(ution by Eagan and Mendota Heights that MAC, MASAC, FAA and ATA �,
be required to maintain all arriving and departing aircraft on Runway y 1 L and
11 R on compass h�eadings consistent with the ground tracts used to formulate
the noise lannin contours of the 1981 Aviation Cha ter.
Mendota Heighfs adopts Noise Attenuation Ordinance, based on Metropolitan
Council uidelines. -
Duai Tracic Planning legislation requires the Metropolitan Council and the
MAC to com are the o tion of e andin MSP to buildina a new ai ort site.
Braslau-Collette Study; request ta fan airplanes in the southeast corridor
denied.
Blue Ribbon Tas3c Force on Southeast Corridor
Ai ort Noise and O erations Monitorin S stem ANOMS) is initiated.
All non-Sta e 1( aircraft.are rohibited after December 31, 1999.
Parf 150 ro ram of insulation and ac uisition be ins:
Mendota Nei hts Air orts Relations Corrimission established.
MAC and airlines enter into voluntary nighttime agreements to limit non-Stage
11! a'srcraft. � � �
State le islature re eals dual track lannin for a ne�vair ort site.
Mendota Heights and the MAC enter into a contract prohibiting construction of
a third arallel runway until at least 2021.
Metropolitan Council adopts new Aviation Policy Plan wiih ne�,v Aircraft Noise
Polic Areas.
Implementation of non-simuitaneous departure procedures.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE i"
�
' DEVELOPMENT t=R,qMEWORK
63
A 1 P. P O R't' P L A N
The City of Mendota Heights has addressed aircraft noise issues in several ways,
including the following forma{ actions: � .
1. Membersh'ip in the Metropolitan Sound Abatement Councif (MASAC)
2. Modification of- the Land Use Plan � cansistent with the established -aircraft flight
corridor -
3. Adoption of the Aircraft Noise Attenuation Ordinapce
4. Establishment of the citizen Airports Relations Commission (ARC) to study airport
issues and make recommendations to the City Council
5. Agreement to a contract with MAC prohibiting construction of a third parallel runway
6. Par�icipation in the Northern Dakota County Airports Relations Commission
(N DCARC) � _ �
The City has worked through the various agencies on issues including: modification of
aircraft landings and departures, supporting the installation of ANOMS, supporting the
prohibition of Stage II aircraft, and educating homeowners about the Part 150 program.
The City of Mendota Heights planned its land used according to the flight corridor, as
originally established, and adopted land use guidelines into an ordinance format in
1987. Operations have strayed to existing resideniial areas autside of the planned
corridor however, signifiicantly impacting s2vera! neighborhoods.
IMPACTS ON FUTURE LAND USE PLANNING
Mendota Heights has planned its land uses in relation to the defined southeast aircraft �
carridor. Residential areas were develaped in compliance with the original aviation
guidelines and planned air traffic corridors. However in 1996, the Metropolitan Council
changed its noise zones_and guidelines, and it appears the sautheast corridor�has been
effectively changed. This change means that esfablished residential neighborhoods are
subject to air traffic thai was not intended to be in that area.
This potential change in operations in turn affects many more vacant and existing
properties than expected and predicted in past land use planning by the City. Land uses
were anticipated according to the previausly adopied noise zones. A changing
landscape of noisa contours is detrimental to the long range land use planning efforts by
the City, past and future, and undermines planning appropriately for neiqhborhoods.
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
� �I
_ ,
�d
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
.>>'
,,:;..<
;;�;
:�,
,�,, ; ,
:,
,1� ,..�:�
, �:�, � �;�.
� �z �
i{�: � .
���� ,. :��. lr�
r.
p;.; ru-
,,,,.
r'in ;
�, i
i '7 �:.
,�s;
1�"�t�'''F�� ' �♦'
il., ,�:
� }� 'r
'�`�L):'?' .f
�.�.��'�_ � ��'??�
�.x :' �
..��J �.j:-:
�r ,: j .,�'''
A,s ._ � � �
�..�;;k:,�y;r�
r ��''
�i�;:��;;:
���j;.,
r` ` F
�';.
; �' _
9.
::7 t .�r�.�
;t'�
;} Sf' ;
i;��i
I�.s
.� ��,�i
�j'11i
�:
;�::1:
,M�
��
;
�
�
` .
,�
�;
:�
�
�I
�'
������!�' e �U�No(ss,!
Y�
h `C` O
y �' �
J "' 4 � y.
p r' o
�y, a
—\' / —�f 4
y � w T'
t�,� � \�F�,
�'FrRopo�.
� � ;�i
;
� �•�� °��
,,; �•
`9
`� >��`k
� h n�4y
,�• 1. y ��t,';�.
t
� � � � � �
C�i '�1 � �o '�i �i�1 � �
o � �'
� � �� �. � C� t�n
� "� � (� � �
� �
� ,� � � [� .Z�
� � � � � �
� �- � � � o
� � � � o �
� o � � � �
�a �•� � �n
� � � � � �
� � � s�.'
� � � �.
Cp � � �7
�� � � �
� � � �
�' � � � —�1
c� o► � sv
o �-
� �
�.. �
� �
--� �
CD
� �.
�
�
. �
O
��\
\ Vp
rV �/
V,
r F.
,�_a:.
,���.
w.,{ ,
:�;.�.:
��.
� ��
,�..:
JI � V.1
1 � �; � �'�
\ � '� ��
Y . � .5. S ..
1
�.r=
�:� ,��
:M"
" �:;Y� -�.,
�, �,; r
, .a.
;:�. ��,.�; ��;
.��.. ,
,.,
��,; ..:,,..
� ,; ��:
,��:.
1.
� �:��
:::w.
:;,.:
!(QS��
I;�"
�4
C
�
i.,i �;
;��
,,,f .
•.: ;i:Ynrn:;<"
' lf '
i -i
�� �.
,♦.tr�t..
.�4 4 _':'!:
..,.� .r„
,:�:,.
s,,.,
�::i� .;
;, ;,..
�;r�::;:�
vt��j(,�.t:;
i
� '
��
,:
4' '
�10 I
�
� �
�'�'�', �
�
� ('� � �
'+.6P
� ��"1 �
�,,.r (��
� � �
!� � 4FA
� � Vt,/
da�
� � �
� � �
� ! ^
` �/ � �e��r
� � �
� � S 1A
� � �bnw
C� �n.a • �
� w.1I 1�
� W �
� t �
iw.�n �
����
��..�.'�
�
����
����
� � � �
����
.
� ���s�
.� � � �
� � `\� �j
�
�
�T
�
f""�"
C'MU
��
J+J:J
M`°�^
rT
�
`V
t�'
`:`i .
�%%%
�
��
�i'
i�.yr..
�-�w
ir , , :
�" ,.�:�,,:, i
V���
• r" �)
, ,��1:,;.
Y ". J7i
i� ..•a
� �<tF �
��;
�;� '�
4 _r.J��.
.s'1'.J
r'��
.�...:
1 � �1
' t � �,4
�'.
�...w
�
C
�
1.
li::`
,:
�`:
1 ..,,
4��; t�ii!.air:
� •.(/."
rl� y` � �' ��.
�-�r�
7F'..Fi"�
t� � t:
�"
i Iq I'
`,� e ►���vO�S.r `
��
yo
�,T—{-� ;. �
y �,, ��
� r
� -+ a
p O
4
� � —� �Y
�y ''`� C
'y/�y \ � •``��,t�
F1'ROP�
0
� � (�" �
°�y'� � f"'F �
��id ��y p�� r�
� �d `V Vr
r�,ir � � `�
� � �n �
. � � �.
� � �
�p '�A �
� � �
� � . t�
�.. � CD
CD �,
CD �. -�
�
� t� C�
� � o
�- � �
� �q� (/�\)
Y / � � r 1�
`�'aC � r -°'�
�ra, e V �/ �
� � �
� �
� /' /► V •
� �r
� �mw � �
� r ' � V
� �' ' .,��
� , ( � � �
� � �
� (U
��
�
C
::;r:,r;
:,,'!;'S,.
�.:��:
�Ls� ::o-
:';��'
�:.;-:� ,,,.
�;:
� ;:
,�N
; �;;
'f.,J:.t'�Y':'..;!�?,
•
,�� ,���'i'i
�i+i::':Sy
��i,
;��
�
�
�
0
•
�
a� Q r��NO�ss��
T� h°
h �
N � �'�
Y
J "+ �
� �
...y�y " a
d: \ �'f Q.^
"'y � T
L/��FTROPp����r
i ,���- �
;� � '�
x �
, :
;,:.,
� r�,ai
+�n ;�
i
��{t" ��
�'.i ''''' �{
'"�� , 4
C
, y
�v
;sw!I'
,:a.T
:�;;
'T,..'r
�`.�
!
�;
r�,,r,
�t
�,;
�;i"
,. r�.��;,:.
s.;;�: �:�:
;c,.
���„
C
N�� F::+.t:f`.
;:�: ,
, er�ri�>
s ��
4�
�{llVr:i�'
1�
�\-���•I.1�,
�frl'� F4
t�: � I
i
�.'
I.,.rAy A�t�;'•.
� ��:
i'!+,rc..a
;e
���'� y.
i,
�,ci:
�' j ';:
�F:n�";:�i
.hidr.f ��s�..
��. �.����.
�.
�..;
.., �,, :��:
Y �(
1
�a Pr.+u�
'��. ',k
�1?��Y�IVtt:
!''M:�1 4����!�
G
��.
�.�t 7r11
l
:Ht, ;a�v�r;;�.:.��
�
0
�
g � v�w i
y�� �
.f�4 :, n
�i s�� 3ii° �
€; , i:;
,�,,,,. � �
�i'
� .
,.. ,
�� ;
. ,,; ,��
i; .r ,�.�
,,;
:i-y.:- �:rr+
RUNWAY 17-35 FLIGHT TRACKS
--_- _--------------- ----- -- — — _ .; _.. — , .. __; ; —.
c . . j' �� � jil����i!`� � � ��^ ' ; ' , : ;
� . . 1 ,� � � ;�; , �,�-� , i, , t ,
� . , � , ��; ,!,'ii �:�, �. `, ..._` �
(. i. t' �. I j i � i � �� �1 (,
,'I ( -� '�,, � I�� �II � ��t�,� � ;
(� � I i . � � (�; r i'i � � � � � ��II� ). . � � � � � ( � A, ' ( '�...._.. ,. � �
� � � ,
'ij I it. ��, �. i. ill �III � � ��i � I' . I , ' ..§
�i I . � � ' � �I�I���I !�'�� ����' �� I .I II�I11. .I � . .�' .
� F I i ! . . � � +'l11 �.'� � � i I ' i . � � , . . . i ! i ! � � , �' � �� � �
' ( I � ��; t � � i ': �: I � � I J � ��'1 1 . .j _ ._.. .. . .
it��I�i �III� � '��. �. ``� � ' � � II� ;
, I���I'�I � � ��� 1. � I I)f 'I III) �� I I �11�,
I ii'� � !� / ��I�� �� �I ��I I�I i �III�I.II� t I�I,I. ,. - �
� I- . I, I� ' }�.�;��� 1 I I I I � �M .^. ....�.I.�I^....--- � � �i ,�
� I I I ' I . ' I .. �j � i_ ; I i' I' � . '• i.i, , , I''
( { � ' ( i`Y' , 1''. �^
� qq � ii� ,.t
! � I ' I��� lt i(�. � I ,i � I �'p� �; i ' i � I `�,�.if� � .. .
J�
�. '� ,� . _.. �!4'�.�.,!� � ���,!' �� ' �,1' i'
,, , ,_ , _ ; ,;.,.� ,�� , , ;,,
;� �►'�� �I��;Ii , � � r� a
� i��l��li i i i � il��, I'��
I� � � l ( , .
.; �II�� �
;�
�
, �,��I li �' ;I i1;� il� i��� Ii ii . ,......��.-,
: �il� j I, ��i. .., �,....�.i I il � I�I�� � � ' �1, • ,�,: �i'I �i
� � � � � I I ( j , � � � ' r,. �; , , ; �'
,i i � '' (�i �ll ��'!;� IIII �I� '� i I �,ji . ! � '��.
�����I� �i �i � I � � 1 . � I rI
�t; �r II I i �
i �jl��li��b.Z,. ! �i IiI{I� � I � I I `,� ;� i, �, I �n
' ' i:;�i� i!;' ;�lij�ii��j�' II�I ;� I I i� '�' � ,, - j � +�
i���� � I'�i�� ����! �`��I � �) r � � ��\ �,...
', � (jl ( �i �I' I�ii �I i � �
� i�, , � I ; ;
� '��� �� li;i�� �r ' i � ''� ;I�,i� ( ' � � ' � ��
.
, I i � � I I � ' � ' � � ( I �_ � _,..� .�- - 1 "" ;� ,, . .. . �.,.. . . _ ,! .. . . . � , . __ .. , _ ', r, , : ._
;1- ..,.__ �. . . �..:h�� ---� _ -;,_ ...�,-.r :; . ..� -� .�.i `�v�.._ I _ ;' .' ; ,
� ii � � ' I I � \ i �� �I � ,
Y ''' � �1 � n
, � i ��� ,i ;� � � I i I l I i i � I iil�� � �; _ � I I I� `, . �'
i'j• �� �i� � il!���'i i'i III���� 1 ? " ' � ,�
�. �; ��� :i��� t�� ('I ��'� �I ..... 1�'� , ( ',
� Ij � '��j!�I�i!ii��iili'�'�i ,, �, \\ / I
� � � . � � � , I � i , � ; I ,, ' ,�,: i 'I , i,. '� l , i ,
i �i ( iI' illilijllll ��!Ii� I� I (. yi�' i %! i I
i � �i� � I i � � I , � i , � I I 1 � � � ) 1!i�� � . � �
, � �. I i I � ( I I ��. � ' � 1. � I 1 i j � I� ; ��� � ���, !ili ' , � �'' / I
�����il���� I��� �� (I�� ��ii�� ���'1� ���`!}�i � �1:. i � (
i� \�il'%I i I � ` ���I) I; �i' '���� ,J�` ,lll� ���� . . �
, . I ��� i ��' � 1 � � i � I (; I i � � � � t I I � � � � � ,J� . t)I � � • � �' � ,i
�
�, ' `t.t����� � ' �I'I�'�� II�i� li ��1 ,��; '� .� � ; � � � I .
i
' � � � �� � (� .� � i � ��I �, r /
I �5, ' I � I �( I i 1 i I I � i� �� (�1� iP. \ � � , h �r. . ._'.._ '�' I
� ; . �� ( � ; � � � � � .(� � .\ . � _.I.. �
1 j ��'� �, � I� � � I � � /� '�' .� � �',� I
! f � !� ���;i� �(�j � , ' � . '' �, ; ' �) I
WEqp � DEP CO 4 9/. t � ; ` � ' '-. `�. , , � , I i
'� Zsa, G c�u+ A�4i �' i�;( j I( , � ,' ��`�� . j� DEP COM 5.66% �
; ,� � :� ,I i :: , ���1'i" ��iii� ��� � .DING_00'_ _...._ __ ; ;
� ' ,�f � HEA
i 1 1 CiA 5.15/
��i i i i I �.. yi ; y 4 -•- __ ..
i. � pi :, � �,. , , i �. �
� �DEP COM Q.33% i '. : � / �' `` ' . �� ! ' i ' I � i i
GA 3.95% . � . 4 �� , . ��j � � ! I , ; ' ,
I�—l__���..-, cv' . 'r I �� : , � , i
N�Q\aG Z5C4
! pEP COM 4.46%
GA 4.08%
� i.
i
�,
!
r.��.i�,��-i�.��-�, -r����;i<S ��� - - 6,000' -- L2,000'
Arrivnl Irc:icl<s -- --
SC�l�� I11 ['eet
I; I
, : ; i � '� '
' , !�, ';
' r j
�I ; .
AItf.1117'6C7'S BNClNBERS ('WNN6tbS
rn. uru�ru r.a,��pani..
__.__.____... __._______.----------_..___.. __��-�o��� `�--���,t--Z-��:�k-
�t1`�i±7.r�.t,
;i;��
' �i<,,.
,�,, :,,.�hi�;:
.�;
�:F��i��„sr,,
t J
n
J
�
U
�yy\�o'����� �i
�' � y�F
%c� �— t .
a �-}' �-c
O O
� t� r
-a .�
�'� �n
O `�� �
y�f�ss,oN��v a ya
::r"�.:y�.
,i
,}.sf��ix�;;s.
:�
��.
�,�
`'f;'�;.,
�
C
0
���:.i�
;�,,;�
}.,`
'
'�lt:ruGf�),
a� Q n� �N 0/ss�`Y
T� ' ,. �o
h J
�+y �n
� {`�� �
Q +L' �
G.
L � � � �Y
�y T
ErRo o�\,��,�
�.
'� � �
� �
� �
i"`�
6�.�.. �
� �
� �
� �
�
� �
� �
�
� �
� �
� • t/�
� �
.._ �
� �
�
�3 �
� �
O
� �
�
� �
� �
� �
`�' �Y
�
�
� � '���
� � ' ��
;,p,� \A,/ , e
� � �G�
� �
�
�..,l..,�.
;��
YS •�:
.i(' , �.�.�„ v
"h�i ::t �
�s4 �;�' �
:�t.,7.!!!�!!E!'r�
� � •
� �
��'^'`��" �
�m0 W /
�• �
�
dy��pdON13�, `�"
t� '} \ ���� �
� �"�"` ,*
�
v �"�— �-o
p '+ O
aa �,,, }i" •. r
--1 --
V� ! H
0 ��-'a``'
�3;i�iSSJON�nv a yr
� � �
�
•
�
\+
�.
r
� �
►
,�
w
•
�
� �.
►
•
i
4 •
,�
�
�
�
�
�
; :.-ti:,�fi.fe
�;�;^.. �.:
";`�.:;�
,;a;e:�,�.,
;'��
T%!'
v.:t�;��
c;
:
�
A�up suoi�e�adp Z�IIGua�� aGe�g sain�ai� �sann����u�� :a�oN
(S8�IU1 8f1�pjS) BJUL'�SIQ
9G bG ZG 0� 8 9 � z
�
U9
UL
v�
08 �
m
UG �
N
�
�
��G �
O
C
U�� Q
r
ro
OZG m
Q.
OE I- �
OVG
09 I-
asioN �.uan� a�6uog �����sny LZL�
(sa�iw an�e}s) aoue�siQ
OG 8 9
� _ � sa�i�oad ��oa�1�l �!�lusnl-I LZLB
��� p� I
��a��
�rn ��
o�'
0
OOOG
OOOZ
-- OOOE D
:,:
c
OOOi� ro
=„
ro
0005 `��°
— - 0009
OOOL
0008
s000
�000
6000
�, 5000
a�
.,-
� �1000
�
�
:w
¢ 3000
2000
1Q00
0
0
DC9 Huskit Takeoff Profiles
150
140
m 130
�
� 120
ti
J
� 110
�
0
� 100
�.
c
a>
W 9O
a�
c 80
�
70
60
0
2 � 6 8 10 12 14 16
Distance (statue miles)
DC9 Hushkit Single Event Noise
2 � 6 8 10 12 14 16
Distance (statue miles)
Nole: Norlhwesl Airlines Stac�e Lenc�th 2 Operaiions Only NNTB
� ".
81NI-I /��up suoi�eaadp Z u1Gua-� aGe�g s�ui��iy �sann�pau�� :a1oN
(sa�iva an��}s) a�u�asiQ
9t bG ZG OL 8 9 b Z
as�oN �uan3 a�fiu�g OZ£b
(sa�iw an���s) a�ue�sio
9G V1� Z4 0� 8 9 V Z
U
-- U9
- OL
�
- 08 �
m
- OG �
m
�
.-�
- 00 t� �
0
c
0 L G o-
r
m
Oz � m
a
- OEG y
OVG
09t
��_._ � � sa���oad }}oa��l OZEd
0
0
- 0001�
-- OOOZ
OOOE
- OOOb D
,-,.
c
0009 m
.;,
m
- OOU9 �
OOOL
0008
0006
OOOOG
10000
9000
8000
7000
N 6000
�
.� 5000
�
�
Q �4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0
B757 Takeoff Profiles
150
140
m 130
a
°�' 120
w
�
� 110
�
0
� 100
�
c
a�
W 90
v
c 80
�
70
�0
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Distance (statue miles)
B757 Single Event Noise
2 �1 6 8 10 12 14 16
Distance (stat�.ie miles)
No1e: Norihwesi Airlines St�ge t.en�th 2 Operaiions Qnly FINTB
C
: d�
j �` p.
i, } �+ .��
`4.
i�
(;
�,;5;�', ,r:r
, ., ''�� .
b �&
, �l�'f
�•�
r , ,m.
f 4•\Y
I.l..i: r{��. i
yc: � .q�G
?'k�'n '"l4;
�� Q �U�NOlSS h'
i
�� �
hr'� �
r
y w• ��n
O 'fi � O
L �j a
� � ' -4-` �
tiy � �
��y �, t ���,;
�'freoPo`��
�
�
�
�M
V '
�
"i
�
C.�
--�,
�
�
Y��1 O
r��Vy
Vr1Y
�
�`,�;.
��::
,��
,;,.�.
: ,,:;.::.
��1:...•h � i
C
�
�1'�k,;,
t'uY�
.t,�1�`
;;�.; 4>iiz�
i?y�z;r
1; ,�y�.
�;�„
: i�
t, .
n .�
'i'1'A:.re,�,
l� ' �1'
�
�� •,
L:
�
�
�
�
�
�.;
�
�
�
w�
• ���w+wr
d.a
...J
�
�
� �
� �-
�
�. S,""
. ..... �
^�."a �
.�.� (""
� qj
� �
� ^�
W �
�./ / �
� �
� �
� L MV
iYw �
�
'""' "'*�,�,,,' �..J J
� � �
� �, ._._:
� �.�
�
�.., � �
� � �+
� � ��11/�
�
� � �
�h..+m }� �
MN `�*" o
� �+d �4+..d� ���J
�
� � �
c.� :� Ca
�--
� � ,�
�
�
f�r'1Y�:�� ..''�
�I.
)�'rllot
�...;
��r
�
C_
.,w�
r: r,,
�i '
'�s�!'1�' �.
,.;�!7
«�. , �„
�',�,1
,� ,
.:��
;y.i:iy�����.
yi
7;' i
';� .�.
i;
iv;�t; va
(,
i�„r�
��'�''1'�I�tir
:�r.•r�;rE^.
� �;u•..:: a,ri
,,�,;�x
„r �.��
..,;�
>�:�,�,.,
�
:�:
L
E��7
':�'r:'�,we5'!�•
�f 'j t
.+r.'
1
y::F���"
,�i
�: 1n
�, J•rJ .f
{: 'r i
G .fl•�
.
':Iq
y':�
i:Aib -,?. .
�I�� ,
.<F.h,:r✓,u
-.Ihi:9.::,.
�'7' ,��i
•,�
i
t�. 5!'
�n:�. ..r
' tf:i ,1
� r
.i�
1
iJ�r q}'.
jeF A�,
I..
F
:ir'r
;, ta,
r a.,r
j ' d
�r.
'J< ;
R +•Y •
N4�:
C
�
�
�
4
�
�,�� rar,�s
,� e �.. ,r;
rT..i ly
� a�;•�.t?:•
h� i i ���P� J
i+� i�
�, , ,{�.::.�3"� �.� _(�
— �� `'��D d�:. r
' � ;� � '�y �n �, ��t' n:
C? ��(�,�j�' icr�,.'�',Jl': O
L -1 � �'��u', ^�. — -r �,F:
�l -�-( 'y�,��t�t � � •�
yy��, \ "Fa�l� i� �A �c+t`
�fTRU ������
Q�, � :E �. �� ;� ., ,�� tir `; � f � +� � � � f;
Pp�1S g,q��
�, P -j- T
2r t 9G
� �
� m � O
At � t N
o N
o �
f
�,� t Ga
9�'a1RPOaty
September 17, 1999
Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
6040 - 28th Avenue South • Nlinneapolis, MN 55450-2799
Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296
Keven Batchelder, Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
RE: Capitai Improvement Program
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Dear Mr. Batchelder:
The Commission on September 22, 1999 approved the preliminary 2000-2006 Capital
Improvement Program.
A copy of the spreadsheet listing the projects and project costs for the seven-year period and
�- j project narratives for year 2000 and 2001 is attached for your review. In my August 23, 1999
letter, I indicated that you will have 60 days to provide comments on the preliminary CIP to the
MAC. The last date to submit comments will therefore be November 22, 1999. All comments
regarding the CIP must come from the affect municipalities and not from individuals.
All comments should be addressed to my attention as follows:
Robert Vorpahl, Program Development Engineer
Metropolitan Airports Commission
2901 Metro Drive, Suite 525
Bloomington, MN 55425
Since ely, �
/ .�.� �
,
Robert J. Vorpahl, .E.
Attachment
sb
cc: Nigel Finney
Dennis Probst
i l
The ?vletropolitan Airportr Commission is an affirmative action employer.
www.mspairport.com
Relie�•er Airpurts: .-�IRL:�ICE � ANOK� COUNTY/BLAINE • CRYSTAL � FLYING CLOUD � LAKE ELMO > SAINT P�UL DO��"\-I'OWN
' �
Z
�
a
Z
W
�
>
0
Q_'
a
�
J
�
a
v
0
0
0
0
0
�
�
N
�
O
O
O
O
O
�
�
N
�
0
0
0
O
. o
�
i �
I �
O O
O `,O�
o rn
� � �
� N tfi
fR
O
O
d
O
V �
� �
] U7
V N
. �
O �
O O Q � �
0 0 0 0 �
� � � �
fR
y .��,}�. � �3 �
p p O O
O� � p � t�
N N � �
69
J
Z
�
�
� N
N
� J O
Ott1 Q =
C � N
m `° `� a
a m � �
� 3 � � �
I� o v .. o �
� m � � �
p ��+ m � a o
i � ..�., C C � (i3 fU
c � �!� � o- c v
y = m m c E E
= Q '_ � � E � �
V � C G �� O �
� C � � Q/
0. W C C � � C G
.: � � � o o Q � m
(n C � C UI VI N r@-. F-
� y w � � m m o m o
Vp. c -o � m a�i a a�i m
W c� o � o v,v_ o'a_ =
� � � C9 2�' �� ti u> >
a � W
�
� � o 0
o � o
0 0 .-
o �
Q o
a�
m � � m
rsi o-
�
FfY
� p O
O � �
O Q �
0 p O
0 p O
rd7 � �'
� �
tC7
N
6H
0 0 0
Q, o �
Q o 0
o � �
� p o
as ,� v
� �
[L3
N
�
0 � � .
� 0 O
0 0 0
O � �
g p O
tA � �'
� �
�
CV
�
O �
Q, O
O O 0
o� O
O
� . V
� � �
�
N
�
Q,
�, � ... p p -� O O
aj O O
� � o � �
t� � N N
N Fp Ef}
C�
�
0 0 0
p O O O Q O O
0 0 0
t+�f N t�0 � . CQ7 O �
vs � Ea � r,: v�
C7 �
ff3 �
N N
m
� � �
C (n
m
'O
G t�4 � � �
� �� �a � �
� � � r a s
r
� ro o c � 3 c �
N p. � � � m a y
C 'V � d X ,p
� � � C C ( j W p �
� o o n �
() ,� C � U U O � ` �
U Y � m i � a� N cq
� d F"' o= � c�i �' � V v
my. "' � � c � � � � � u_
�
c Q a� � � rn m c �, � -o
o: � @ tL [0 � o o U � c c
m
n o� a� a� � c c � n n� �
� � � � y � > > d = � �
I °� Q Q Q Q m m C� S � Q
LL
Z
�
a
f-
z
w
�
W
O
�
a
�
J
h
a
U
H
J W '��'
F j �
Uaa
T2
F-
Z �
W
F4- W W
U�a
�
I�
O
O
N
I�
0
0
N
0
0
N
c�
0
0
N
0
0
N
O I
0
N
o I
0
0
N
F
W
7
O
�
a
0
0
0
0
O
tC)
M
�
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
u�i o
� �
�
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
a o
0 0
0 0
,,,',.,. � N
vi
O O o
0 0 0
O N
� � n
vi
0 0
0
0
0
0
O
�
7
�
0
0
0
0
0
v
�
�
�
0
0 0
o m
tT �rj
� �
0
0
0
0
0
rn
�
N
vs
0
0
0
0
0
0
ti)
�
�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0. o 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O. O O
O O t� O O O O O � � � O
� � GO O N O lCJ O O N O �
� � v °D � � �
� � e� � � � �
r-
�
0 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
o � o � � �
o cQc� o � o c� m �n
M M tn tL] O � nj � � N
H! fH r �{ p �y � �
E9
69 fET �
m
m
N
N C
O) N
� � N
� �
'D
N
� _ �+- � �
� a � � .� � �
y .,�., O 4:S
C � � N (0 � T a N
0 3 3 p. � a tn � c
C �X O � C O C LL
a � m rn rn
c c. c o o �� o
<C � F- c
� � 'v o �� -o ° mi c � � `°
3 0 0 0 = ` c�i = o � � U Q � o '� i
w:° m:9 � in � �'N c � n c o - m-c
o s .t0c .mc 0 U J O W � � `t � � N a � g
� � � � N n n o N N N � � V U � �,i«�-.
a c c c •- •- ,- m v v v Q o � �0 U `- � �v
a� m a� �, >, >. T T �. >, a m o
� m m m m m m m�� 3 m m�� � i
� w m� 3 3 3 3 3 3 3� 3 E 3 3 c>. �(
'C > > > c c c c c c c � o � ' �
z a n a � � � � � � � in in in � � � _ � I
rn
0
N
N
m j
a ��
0
0
0
0
O
m
G'3
\
O
O
O
d
0
ta
E9
0 0
v v
� �
69
t0
0
0
N
�
O
O
N
Z
g
a
F-
z
w
�
w
> o
p o
� N
�
�
J
H
a
¢
v
�
0
0
N
O
O
O
O
O LL�
O N
N �
h
Z �,�,
W
i � � �
Q Q �
U��
a
�
H
Z �
W
F�- W W
� � �
�
I O
O
N
I�
�
f-'
U
W
�
O
�
a
O
O
O
O
O
O
Vi
O Q Qp O
O
O
� � 6�9
V3 aj
�
� O O O •O. O O O �
p O O O O �
O o 'r'�, , � � � � � �
� O �
fA f1? �
E!-T
0 0 0 0 0
0 o a o 0 0 0 0 � u� o 0 o c`nv
N �QQ' O U N � t0 � u�'J '�`'V" O O V;, V�
EF3 H3 N � n N � � � N t��- y3,
. KT � � � ff3 V�
rn
O
M
N
Q1
m
�
N N
'D C
f4 QI
m �
a � a�
� � m E
m a� a � �
m a�i � = cv �, rn
� U o � m a> td rn
� � � a � a� u. � >,
Q a Q � � � m m � d � �
a� � O a� 4 a�i °. ��'a. � c a�i � cn �
0 p i� m.� n. � � rn vUi c•1A fl, �` .c E m a�i
°� a� c[n c0 m o' o d = m V m � W g a� c' E a�"i
� � a� tn �•� ��, � � � � c ��, n- x � tn a? u)
N c.= C ' � � � N •� T N p N Q LLl C � tA
o U � 3 � � � � � � y ` c � m
Z m �o � � o a'=i � c � � n N v c, m m x � � t4 `° '�
� � E �Z E �> d � �'S � E = m ro c„) � w o o a. � > ti
o c a� � � � Q
C C � fA Q � i N � �- N O [O 'O � d N (O CJ C.) C.7 �' '�- G
J ` � N � m .�
� U � � � E E � m Q tll � ' � � � � .a a=i aci a�i � °' n.
o a� 'a ;� c E E c m in o � > � °� d � � cu a, E
> >'� � a� o 0 0 � ro m c� a> a> c .� o � �
Q [n [0 CC1 U U C� f.� � W W W W W W ii ii 'U C� U` 'U S Z Q
i �
0
O
� O
O �
O �
N �
0
0
0
� I o
o Q
o `f
N �
Zd
J
a
�
w o
0
j 'a' o
o �
� N �
a
�
�
h
a o
d �
U �
r� �
o �
o '�
N �
I--�
J W �
� j �
¢ Q �
va�
a
�
f-
Z �
W
14-W W
Q � �
�aa
�
0
O
N '
O (
O
N
O I
O
O
N
0
0
Q
O
O
O
vi
0
0
0
0
0
0
EfT
0
0
0
0
0
0
ff3
0
0
0
0
0
0
vi
0 0 0
� o 0
69 /fl
0 0 o O o 0 0
V O P O t!') O 'V
Ef? � ffi � � N E9
�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O i[') O O O O O O O O
O O O 1� 4C) tC) O O
O tf) V' N Q7 f� O O � tp (�p p
ttj N fF? tH fH EA 6g
�' 69 69 fA V3 (�
69 �
0
0
0
0
0
O
4�A
0
0
O
O
O
O
�
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
fA
0
0
0
0
0
O
V}
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
0
0
0
0
0
O
fA
0 0
� O
� O
� �
O O O O O O
O b O O O tt)
O O O tc� n pp
E9 tA
44 t�i EA EfT
N
�
� C G
Q � C N �
.N C .� � � � C �
C p V � _ � d N
� � O U •tUD O V � �
II.
L! Q o � 'ro a � tt_ � .D a �
� �2 p U � = O . C � N
o N N v 'm ° � � �c� � L j J c a�i rn
t0 �, N 0 QI
c0 N ?
m c � ¢ � Q� � m � m� � U N � � V a rn
aci x ° y > >, _,� o c � o � � rn m o m v c � �
i o W ` E Y c �� � t0 'a LL'a � � m�@ o c o � rn
� N � m � m m � Q � n. u. � � �� W � F- � .n
°� "v � � � ¢ � � a m � = ° E
�°� ii U � m E m °� o � o � o v=i ¢ Q � � o 0 o m °?
� m w ii � .� � Z [� 1- � m m � -� m m �rn n'
'� m � � m m m. m m m m m m m .,.., �_c � � Q. a a m in
S ` � � . (
� c c c c c c c c c c � 'a a m � W W W � �
� Q = � � E E E E E E � E E � > > � � rn � m � ,v_ \
Q, m m m cu a� a� m m m y a a0 t0 � � c c c �,
fn >. C CD O I- F F'_ Y_' I_ f- !- I'- I- I- O O O t� � Y ` Y u'
E" � � � � rn rn rn m rn rn rn rn o� m > rn rn m trJ m m m m _°
,v_ v m m � � a?
uVi La = N � � n .n .a � .n .n .n .n .o � U U a�i � a a a � c
� �� c`u c c v -o v a v v v v v v �- C� U c `'- •- •- •- d
O � � � � c c c c c c c c c c � Q Q'@ � � _ _ _ �
Li = _ J J J _I J J J _J _I _! J ._i J cG' � 2`- n. a a a. p, �p
a,
0
Z
g
a
Z
W
�
w
O
�
a
�
�
�
a
Q
U
N
Z �
W
�j�
n-p0
¢ � �
�an-
�
Z
W�
a�w
U�a
�
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
o � � �
O O O � ffl � �
O � �
N �
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 0
o � � � n � �
o v3 �t' r-
N �
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
o u� �n
o � � � � � �s � �
N � �
�
6f}
� � � o 0 0 �
o �
0 0 0 0 0 0 �
o �
0 o a � � o
O � o 0 0 � � �
O � � � T
N �
O �
o a
0 0 0 0 0 0 �
o �
o � � �
o � o o Q �r � i»
o �' "'
N � �
O �
O O O . O
O O O O O O O O . � .
0
.- o 0 0 0 0 0'r � �
0 o u� � �a � � � `fl
N � � � FF?
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O � O O O O O O O LL� �C1 � O O O
O � p O N tC) O O N � � N � � t� O C�7 N
p � � r- FA Fii ffi fA d3 � ff3 � � ffi Ef3 fii U.�
N Eq � �
Q.' U
N C
l4
jn L tA
fp C C
� W O
T �p �
C = U m
N � � �
U 'O
tD C � �t6 � �G C O IUO
� O V � @ m
N � � C m
f9 l9 (� C tA O (0 ..�.. � �
i�' ..�.. m 'L! Rf '�" p C O fp !� C .�-. 0I
� N � � 'C UI O U � C _ :
C C O � lp (0 c: O � C N ;a O
O T _..N.. m V m � U _ -p S� C N � y t6 CO
@ O � O O � � � f0 � N l4 d U � � N
c --� o'o � � � N o m N � o.
N V c � � x m � � � m � � � � � �
� l9 N @ .Su �2 Q � � � L U � � O C fp f0
� v Q S in m o Ti > x u N a c� � c c
� m` � m a� m a� �€ �E
N � U � Q m m U w w W�� m U > � o, d
V o .�' � c c c c c c c c � � •y � � E' �'
W V E E E E E E E E E m � rn a`�'i a`�i a"'i
._ _
� w aUi m m w `m m m m a`� a`� m
� t!� F- !- I- F- F- F- I- t- F- F- F- 1- H `s'� �S 'S
a
0
0
0
0
O
d'
�i
0
0
0
0
0
v
�
0
0
0
0
0
«i
�
0
0
0
0
0
�
�
�
O ,,
0
0
0
0
�
N
�
O
O
�
0
0
v_
�
O
�
0
0
0
O
�
f'i
O
rn
N
H3
N
a
N
'D
C
f0
J
m
0
�
�
�
�
0
u�
a�
m
(C
d
�
m
(3)
r
N
�
�
.�.
a
a�
�
T
tfl
a
ti
�
a�
c
d
°�,'
m
�
Z
�
a
E-
z
w
�
>
O
�
n.
�
�
H
n.
Q
V
E"
J W �
1-¢_-W�
�
U � d.
�
f"�
z
W �
a�w
Q � �
va�
�
O
O
O
O
� O
M �
M
�
0
0
0
m �
a o
o �
N �:
v►
0
0
0
0
o `�o
N �
�
0
0
0
0
o �
� o
cn
vs
0
0
0
0
o �
N �
M
6H
O
0
m
0
Q N.
O T-
N �
�"
o I
O
Q
n
O
O
0
N
(�7
7
tD
�
`o
a
¢
m
c
0
m
c
�
C
�
N
la
i �
�
�o
a
m
m
c
c
�
. �
N
� � �
U � E°-
W I N
7 =
O
� c
a i ¢
0 0 0
0 0 0
ao o co
0 0 0
v o v
v in rn
o v v
(A M N
V� 4f} �
(f3
N tp !O
N N (0
O O O
f- !-- f-
��
N N N
O N O
N N N
�
�
m
r
�
�
a
E
a�
o.
a�
�
/
m S�
'O
.` ,
Ll.
�
N
C
d
�
m
0
(D
O
O
N
�
O
O
N
Z
�
�..
H
Z
W
�
> o
O o
�. N
a
�
J
�
a
Q
V
t�1
O
O
N
N
0
0
N
Z '
J W �
�j� o
Uap� N
�
a n-
�
F-
Z �
W
Q�U o
�j-Wi o
N
vaa
�
0
0
0
O
O
C')
�3
O
O
O
O
O
O
t[)
�
0 0
o a,
0
o �"+
O N
�rj M
� �
O
O
O
O
O
O
11')
fiT
� p O
� p O
p � O
� �p O
C�
� � � !
O O O O
N O ch O
V3
� �i �s
O O
O O
O O
O O
t�D r�7 .
� �
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 � o 0 0
,a o o � a � � a�o
m Q � �
� � � � �` �, � �s
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
V3
O
O
O
O
O
tt)
6i
�
�,....,., O
O
O
O
O
rn
cD
�
0 0
0 0
� N
� �'
v3
m
�
Q a� c
v� � �m
c y (7�
y� � Q C O � �
?� LD O' � N C C �
C � � � �
� Z Qt L .... X O
y � � � � � o �' �j c (� �
� C C N � � (l:1; Z � T '� I Y y
E m �3 � o. � ' -0 3 E c -Q
�
o a`°i o.� aQi � m aci ��c � � � � ¢ =?
> � U E � m � o. o. � o ~ � � � °�
m .. � � � a o o iv 'v� a a� 'Q g cn
p �° � a? � 'co � m a� = c � m c t0 m 7;
T 3 o 7}C0 w �p �> >�.a.3 d m m � � � m
y C � �N ��.. a � p �� � � W �C �. N � � =p 'L7
� � � U N 'O C C� N N R N N N N � � �c` "O
¢ v � Q u) — ;° o � dC Q � rn rn rn � .� o °� a:
F�„ :Q � m �, �, m o V � m � � m c�'u m � [� .c� c� � ci
W � Y y � a�° � � � m v v � c c c'c a`�i � �, '� u>
� d �—�° a o � m o � c Q m m o�.. � � � u�� �"S 0 m
a U Z o. tn u� .t V o
a �
Z
�
a
�
z
w
w
O
�
a
�
J
1-a-
a
¢
V
F-
Z �
W
�j�
Q Q �
Ua�
a
�
H
Z
W �
I¢-W W
¢ � �
vaa�
�2
I�'
a o
0 0
0 0 0
N � �
o I
0
N
r� (
0
0
N
O I
O
N
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
N � �
0 0
0 0
o � �
O Eg 6�9
N
0 0
0 0
0 0
� �
O O
O O
O O
O O�
NT �
�3
0
0
0
0
rn
Ei9
o °'
0 0
0
�
o � ,
� a (
0
0
0
0
O
�
0 0 � �
0 0
o a
� � o 0
o � o 0
rn
69 � tD �
�
0
0
0 0 �
0
0
� � o
f- V3
ffl fif3
O
� � O
O O O O O
� � � � O
tD 1�. � � O
� � c� � ifl
v> ey
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
� �+ o
v � o � � o
� � � � � �
u�
�
o a o
0 0 0
0
0 0 0
n � N
N � N
� M
V)
x I
W
�
n
N
�
� �
� � O
V � � U
a7 o rn
I G
O C ?+
C X �
N W C
C �j •ro � d
0 0,
; � �� o E o n. c
jp C ` •V cU j O O
y Q � p O � ` tQ U1 . j C U C
c0 !6 m � N C � � fU � � O
E m =� a � � m � I �'� o �
d' LN V � � '= fD � � Of I Q .� U W
� � � � �y a� �,� 3 = � � N
tn o `c � a�i '� "� � co � � a c � M cNv
�
U v m o U LL1 m � � >, a �. m o � � c �+'
� y m � � m rn a a�i 3°' :9 .c = W m E � m
p .� � tn c � c � > c � c � � a� ;n > c c i
�
a o n- �'¢ _ � a�� rn in � w i� e I
0
0
0
0
O
EF?
O
�
W
�
J m
m
h
�
a
i 4 N
� a
m
� � m
O � T ,,
� �
�
c ._
3 �' ti
`O O .� u�i
o �
_ � m �
cn a Q �
� � m
�
Z
g
a
�
Z
W
�
W
>
�
�
a.
�
J
H
n.
¢
C)
H
JLLJ�
�j�
n' � �
U��
a n-
�
Z
w�
f�-W W
U�a
�
�
O
O
N
�
O
O
N
v
0
O
N
�
0
0
N
N
O
O
N
O
� O
N
0
0
N
O
O
0
0
�
�
GF3
0 0
0 0
v v
� �
N
N
�
t`
� m
I �
�
m �
� o
U �
N �
i W L
i � �,
o �
� c c
~ � E
W V N
� y >
� � a
a
0
0
0
0
O
�
0
0
0
0
0
�
o'
0
0
0
i»
O
0
0
o,
0
v�
O
O
O
O •
O
�-
�
O
O
0
0
N
�
0
0
0
0
�
rn
v3
c
3
0
C
3
0
�
�
N
a
�
m
0
�
�
�
0
0
0
0
N
M
t0
v�
0
0
0
0
0
N
tb
f!-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
ff3
O
0
0
0
u�
u�
m
EH
O ,
O ,
O......�,.
O
O
ti
GO
�
O
O
0
0
N
N
�
Io
Q
0
0
u�
�
u�
u
�
N
�
O
a.
¢
�
m
.�
�
. �
m
F�-
f0
�
C
C
Q
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
I � � v
P: �[i c�
fp V' r
� � �
�
U9 tn N
.«m.. ..m+ �
i E°- t°-
co co
0 0 0
N N N
O N O
N N N
0
0
0
0
N
�
O
V' I
v� �
0
0
0
0
0
N
M
�I
I
0
0
0
0
0
u�
N
r
�
O
0
0
0
�
u�
�
(S7
(E}
O
O
O
O
O
�
M
�
Vi
O
O
�
0
M
N
M
f+)
u9
0
0
0
0
�
rn
�
�
��
0 0 0
Q o 0
m o w
0 0 0
� N M
c�i m .-
N• W (D
� rr r�
� � �
�
tO N tn
CS tE l4
t6-F°-t
0 0 0
N N N
O CV O
0 0 0
(V N N
m
w
0
rn
m
m
t0
Q
rn
rn
rn
r:
N
�
E
�
o.
w
�
T
f9
�
�1..
�
�
c
a`
..�.
R
�
2000 CAPlT,I�L IMi'ROVE1Vi�NT PIROG�tA►IVI
Nlinneapolis-St. Paui International Airpori
Environmentai
Residential Sound Insulation (inside 6� DN�) $25,500,000
An ongoing program to insulate residential houses within the certified 1996 DNL 65 noise contour.
Schooi Noise Abatement Projects
$4,OOQ,000
This project will provide for noise insulation for Eiliot School in Richfield and a yet to be identified school in
Minneapolis. A pilot project at the House of Prayer pre-school wiil also be completed.
Su lemental Environmental Projects
$300,000
PP
The Baytown Township Groundwater Contamination Site extends from east of the city of Lake Elmo through
Baytown Township to the St. Croix River, and is approxima#ely bounded on the north by State Highway 5
and 40th Street and on the south by 30th Street. The site inciudes the Lake Elmo Airport.
Groundwater of the Prairie du Chien and Jordan aquifers is afFected by a release of the volatile organic
compound, trichloroethene (TCE) within the Saytown Towns�ip Groundwater Contamination site. The
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) believes that the release has occuRed at the Lake Elmo
Airport. The MAC has worked wiih the MPCA to conduct investigations and response actions at the Baytown
Township Groundwater Contamination Site, and in so doing has agreed to terms under a Consent Order
that requires the MAC to implement a Supplemental Environmental Project. (SEP).
The three projects proposed to satisfy the SEP provisions o� fhe Consent Order.are: .;- :��:
_
.., .
r 1. Enlargement of an mfiltration basin ai Fiying Cloud /�irpori. :�., �:
�..�:� 2. Participation in the planned Water Quality Improvernent project for Lake Nokomis in South
Minneapolis.
3. Contribution to the Metro Greenways Project in Washington Couniy.
Ventilation Testing/Remediation of Pasi Hornes $1,570,000
This is a continuation of the program to remediate problems associated with indoor air quality in houses
which were insulated in the period from June 1992 to April 1997.
Field & Runways
Air Operations Area CCTV Installation $200,000
This project will provide for the installation of six CCN carneras around the air operations area (AOA). This
system of cameras would allow Airside Operations staff to view operational activities around the airport and
would be effective in a variety of situations including snow cemoval, emergency response, cleanup
coordination and conformance verification activities.
Aircraft Fueling Truck Meter Proving St�nd $6Sa,000
This project will provide for the construction of an aircraft fueling truck meter proving stand on the snow
storage area to be constructed adjacent to Taxiway A1 on Runway 30L. The meter proving stand will be
used to testicalibrate the meters on the fuel trucks which service the aircraft at the gates.
Airside Bituminous Construction $500,000
An ongoing program to construct or reconstruct bituminous pavements within the Air Operations Area.
Inspectian of the overlays on Runway 12U30R will be made in the spring of 2000 to determine whether or
not a biturninous repair project is requirec3.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 1
Bituminous Reconstruction - Rwy.12R/30L Seg. 2 $1,300,000
This project will provide for the mill and overlay of the center section of the bitumious segment of Runway
12R/30L.
Gre�n Concourse Apron E�cpansion $17,000,000
The expansion of the Gresn Concourse wiil require the expansion of the apron and fueling hydrant system
which will be required to serve the new gates. This project is the second phase in the construction of the
apron and fueling system and wiil serve Phase 2 of the Gresn Concourse expansion.
Miscellaneous Construction
$400,000
An ongoing program to consolidate various incidental items beyond the capabilities of the maintenance
personnel, projects too small to be accomplished independently, or to handle airside problems requiring
repair which come up unexpectedly.
North Side Storm Sewer
$3,OOQ,000
The extension of Runway 4/22 by 1000 feet to the no�theast will require the construction of a new storm
water drainage system. The new storm sewer will be constructed from the Runway 12V30R and Runway
4/22 intersection to Snelling Lake. This project will provide for the construction of the segment from Golf
Taxiway east along the north side odf Runway 12V30R to Highway 5.
Pavement Rehabilitation - Aprons $3,500,000
An ongoing program to replace sections of concrete pavement in the aircraft operational areas that have
deteriorated to a point where maintenance is no longer a viable option. This year's project will include the
reconstruction of the apron adjacent to Gates 1 and 2 on the Gold Concourse and also a segment on the
Red Concourse adjacent to Gates 22, 26, 28 and 30.
Runway 12R Deic9ng/Holding Pad _ $15,000,000
This project will :construct the airport's deicing/holding pad on Runway 12R to allow for the efficient deicing of
aircraft and collection of glycol as well as for the holding of aircraft for operational reasons. This project will
also include the construction of Taxiway B between the deicing pad and Exit Taxiway B10.
Runway 17/35 Construction
$145,600,000
This is a continuation of the program to develop a new North/South Runway (Runway 17/35) at MSP.
Projects proposed for 2000 include the following: �
1. Construction of the west cargo apron for use by BAX Global, DHL, Emery and MAC Cargo
2. Construction of the Signature Taxiway
3. Taxiway W realignment
4. Construction of Taxiways WN and Y3 and Runways 4/22 and 17/35 tunnels
5. Reconstruction of Longfellow Road from 77th Street to 66th Street
6. Storm sewer installation
7. Airport Medical Clinic demolition
8. 34th Avenue sanitary sewer pumping s#ation
Runway 17/35 Land Acquisition
�100,000,000
During 2000, there will be a continuation of the acquisition of off-airport land as well as lease extinguishment
required to provide for the Runway 17/35 Protection Zone (RPZ).
Secured Area Acc�ss Cantrol System Field Gate Installation $300,OQ0
This project will provide for the installation three new security gates to be located at the Standard Air Cargo
site, at the new Navy facility and at the Public Safety Storage building.
Snow Storage/Melting Area
$2,830,OQ0
This project will provide for the construction of a snow storage/melting area including two 80-ton snow
melters adjacent to Taxiway A1 on Runway 30L.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 2
(
�
Stormwater CollectionlDetention Pands $1,50�,0�10
A new Nationai Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is expected to require additional
storm water storage in order to controi discharge of settleable solids to the Minnesota River. This project
will provide for the construction of a new storm water detention pond for the Minnesota River South drainage
basin.
Tunnel Structure Rehabilitation
$200,�1�0
The vehicfe tunnel under Runway 12RJ30L was constructed in 1970. Major rehabili�ation of the two
mechanical rooms located adjacent to the tunnel is now required. Replacement of m�hanical equipment
and lighting is required as well as replacement of the existing doors.
Utility Modifications
$600,13flo
This project provides for the lining/repair of the sanitary sewer line which runs adjac�rtit to Hwy. 5 and
between the Inbound/Outbound roadway and Hwy. 55.
Landside
72nd Street Upgrade $1,450,0¢10
This is the first project in a three year program to upgrade 72nd Street from 34th Avene�e to the west to
include two westbound fanes and three eastbound lanes and three traffic signals. Tpce upgraded roadway
will allow traffic from the new Humphrey Terminal and future Humphrey/Employee pa�ng ramp and future
LRT station to access 72nd street
Airport Mail Center $53,400,8DfD0
A new Air Mail Center for the US Postal Service is being constructed on a site adjac�a�t to Northwest
Building B as the existing facility must be removed to make room for Phase 2 of the Green Concourse
expansion. This facility will also provide concourse s.p.ace for Northwest Airlines adj��ent to the USPS .
concourse area for the purpose of interchange of mait:.� As the site.for the new Air Ma�6 Center displaces ;.. .
Nortwest Airlines employee parking, replacement,packing wilLbe provided on two leve[s on top of the,Aic Mail
Center. A project to provide the foundations arid structural steel will be bid in 1999. Tfiis project will proyide
for the building enclosure and finishes as well as all mechanization system equipmen�
Buildings Demolition
$259�,QOQ
This project will provide the demolition of the Navy offce and motor pool once they have moved to their
temporary facilities.
Business Service Center Development
$400,000
This project will provide for the development of a business/customer service on the Red Concourse plus
technical and space upgrades to the other three service centers that will enable thern to cross-rnarket with
the Grieve Conference Center.
Central Alarm Moniioring/Fiber Optic Cable Upgrade $S,DOOyti00
This project will provide for the installation of the fiber optic backbone required for the operation of the
�indberghlRegional Terminal P.A. system, the MUFIDS sytem, an ADA required visuat paging system, a
terminal complex fire annunciation system and a fully integrated central alarm monitoring system.
Commercial Vehicle Staging Area $�a0,aoo
Additional commercial vehicle staging area is required on Post Road as the increasing number of taxi cabs
are reducing the area designated for cornmercial vehicles. The staging area will be a paved, illuminated and
fenced area with AVI equipment fo� entry and exit control.
Concession Area Development/lmprovemenis
$7,2UU,flUO
This is a program to add new concessions and improve existing concession spaces throughout the
Lindbergh Terminal Complex. Approximately 20 new concessions and a new food cr�uri will be constructed
in Phase 1 of the Green Concourse extension. The addition of five new concessions within the existing
Green Concourse as well as continued upgrading of concession areas on the Blue Concourse will also be
�. ) included in this program.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 3
D Street Reconstruction $2,500,000
This project will provide for the realignment of D Street adjacent to the Green Concourse such that it wiil be
compatible with the installation of the Green Concourse people mover.
East Airport Water Main Loop $500,000 �.
This project is a continuation of the program to loop the water main on the east side of the airport to ensure
that water pressure and service demands can be met. This phase will provide for the installation of water
main fram the existing 18-inch stub under the 30R blast pad west along the north side of Runway 12V30R
to an existing 18-inch main at Taxiway Golf.
East Electrical Vault $1,350,000
This project will provide for the construction of a new East Electrical 13.8 kv Vault to provide power
distribution capabilifies for continuing facilities expansions. The need for the new Primary Distribution
System East Vault was determined during design for ongoing projects. This new vault will also allow
removal of some load from the existing North and South Vaults. Anticipated ultimate loads for the new East
Vault incfude:
Green Concourse Phase II
Future Ground Power System
Four parking ramps/Parking Management Building
Green Concourse APM
Additional expansion space � �
This project will also provide for the installation of equipment in the North and South as well as the East
electrical vaults which will allow the remote monitoring of high voltage switch positions and bus voltages to
allow safe high voltage switching. .
Electrical Substation Upgrades ' $500,000
The electrical distribution system components within the Lindbergh Terminal are approaching 35 yea�s old
and are at or nPar their lifetime operationa( expectancy. Major system protectian components are no longer
manufactured and a single failure of a component could cause an extended power outage in the Main (�
Terminal and older concourse facil�ties. Included within the scope of work is the replacement of obsolete
and problematic substation circuit breakers, installation of electronic protective controls and recalibration of
serviceable substation breakers. - .
Fiber Optic Cable Installation $475,000
This project will provide for the installation of fiber optic cable from the Lindbergh Terminal to the new
Humphrey Terminal. The fiber optic cable will be used for airport security, the MACNET, operations, and life
safety/fire alarm systems. The new cable would also serve the proposed Humphrey parking ramp and
ARFF station to be constructed on 34th Avenue north of the new Humphrey Terminal.
Green Concourse APM $12,000,000
This project will comp(ete the program to provide a people mover system on the Green Concourse similar to
that currently under construction with the parking project. The APM equipment was bid in 1999. This
project will provide for the construction of the guide way system and terminal modifications at the station
locations.
Green Concourse Expansion - Phase 2 $75,000,000
This project is the second phase in the program to add new gates to the Green Concourse. This project will
provide for the construction ofi eight new gates and a new Regional Terminal Facility wiih 29 aircraft parking
positions.
Gresn/Gold Parking Ramp Security System $'1,400,000
This project will provide far the installation of CC7V security cameras and call for assistance systems in the
existing G�een and Gold parking ramps to match the system in the new Red and Blue ramps. Completion of
the installation of the security systems will then allow the ramps to meet the security standards set by code
ordinance by both the cities of Minneapalis and St. Paul. �
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 4
$425,000
Humphrey AVI System
This project wiil provide for the instaliation of a permanent AVI system and taxi starter booth at the new
Humphrey Terminal to allow for taxis and commercial vehicles to be dispatched from the Post Road staging
; area. There will also be a patron waiting area attached to the taxi starter booth.
Humphrey Terminai Development
$15,000,000
This project is a continuation of the program to construct a new Humphrey Terminal and provides for tenant
and FIS finishes, sitework, concession build out and the construction of a ground services equipment
storage building. �
International Arrivals Facility Exp
ansion $2,500,000
The success of the Intemational Arrivals Facility (IAF) has prompted the Federal Government to add
additional staff to the IAF facility on the Gold Concourse. There is therefore a need for additional office
space and facility expansion to house the stafF. In addition, it is proposed to modifiy the secondary
inspections area by installing new Agriculturaaed'a � �e e! b Saddin naddit onal seat ng and signage. The
passenger pick up area located on the bagg g y g
success of the IAF faciliiy has also prompted a request for a study of how to expand the capacity of the
entire facility to handle additional 74? aircraft simultaneousfy.
Landside Bituminous Construction
$400,000
An ongoing program to reconstruct the airport's bituminous roadways and parking tots. This project will
provide for reestablishing a paved bike path through MAC property to connect to ather established bike
routes. The cfosing of Standish Avenue/66th Street which was a popular bike route was required to provide
for the temporary extension of Runway 12R/30L.
Landside Operations Department Office Exp
ansion , �2?5,000
This project will add office space for the Landside Operations Department including one �office for the
Assistant Airport Director7Landside and one small cash counting/deposit room.. ;- :
,:�, _ _ $950,000
" Lindbergh Terminal Emergency Power Modifications
( )
- This project will revise the existing Lindbergh TermOWe4s� tem. The Eme gency'GeneratorP oject i,n talled
of revisions to the Terminal Complex emergency p Y
and revised the 4160v emergency distribution system to theo course and B ueI Co cours �to a low for futu e
expand the sub-distribution within the Main Terminal, Red C
additional elevator loads and to further separate the generator loads to Life Safety and Equipment branches.
Lindbergh Terminaf Fire Alarm Upgrade
$750,OQ0
This project will upgrade the existing fire alarm system throughout the Lindbergh ierminal to meet current
NFPA and NEC local codes. The current fire alarm system does not include audio or visual annunciation of
fire. This project would add audio and visual annunciation in both the public and non-public areas of the
Lindbergh Terminal complex. This project could be done in phases over the next iwo years:
Phase I(2000) would include public occupied spaces;
Phase II (2001) would include nan-public occupied spaces.
Lindbergh Terminal Interio� Rehabiliiaiion
$4,000,000
An ongoing program to renovate the interior of the Lindbergh Terminal. This project will provide for the
remodeling of the Ticketing Area and will include refurbishing of the ticket counter shells and backwalls, new
signage to better identify the checkpoint locations as well as the airlines, and other amenities.
Lindbergh Terminal t�1l3FiDS and B1DS
��,aoo,000
This project will add Multi User Flight Information Display (MUFIDS) and Baggage Information Display
(BIDS) systems to the Lindbergh Terminal. This project will be completed in phases over three years.
Lindbergh Terminal Rubber F3ooring Replacement
$400,000
This project provides for the phased replacement of the rubber flooring on the sRy bridg�s, east mezzanine,
(`) in the parking ramp stair towers a a'nea ance and require eplacement wah n ew floor ng ma5e'r a1 materials
have deteriorated in condition an pp
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 5
Lindbergh Terminal Toilet Additions $1,500,000
There are no toilet facilities within the ticketing area of the Lindbergh Terminai which has been a source of
complaints from the traveling pubiic. There is also a need for additional toilet facitifies on the Red
Concourse. A project to add facilities to the ticketing area and renovate closeti restrooms on the Red I'
Concourse will be compieted. �.
Lindbergh Tertninal Visual Paging $�f,600,000
This project will add visual paging to the Lindbergh Terminal to comply with ADA guidelines. LED displays
will be added to the top of directory kiosks located throughout the Lindbergh Terminal. Consistent with the
ADA Guidelines, the LED signs wi)1 display visual messages providing the same or equi�alent information as
that now broadcasted through the public address system.
LRT Development $?0,000,000
This program will provide for the development of the LRT system including the constructiQn of the tunnel and
the stations.
Maintenance Facility Modifications $5,0OO,OQO
The existing office and crew facilities at the Equipment Maintenance Building are overcrowded due to the
growing staff required by increased airport area and facilities. This project will add offices for supervisors
and support staff and area for 70-80 additional crew members, including bunk rooms, an expanded crew
room, kitchen area and locker rooms. This project would also reconfigure the current parking area for
additional spaces, provide a separate delivery area and relocate the AOA security gate away from the
building entrance. A new boiler to service the new as well as the existing facilities will a�so be included with
this project
Parking Structure Rehabilitation , - . $1,000,00�0
An ongoing program to maintain the integrity of the multi-level Parking structures. Projects include concrete
repair, joint sealant replacement, expansion joint repairs, �and�concrete sealing. This year's project will .
provide for the painting of ceilings not currently painted .to improve the the light tevels, repa�ir of expansion ;
joints and required structural repairs in the Green and Gold ramps. . ,
Public Parking Expansion - EntrancelExit Roadways $3,000 000
This project provides for the construction of the short term and general parking entrance lanes to the new
parking facility, ticket dispenser islands and canopies and the realignment of the exit roadways near the
rental auto company exit ramp.
Public Parlcing Expansion - Roadway Landscaping $2,500,O�p
This project will provide the softscape improvements for the Inbound and Outbound Roadway including
landscape materials and an irrigation system.
Public Parking Expansion - Transit Center Plaza $700,OQ0
This project will provide for the construction of the Transit Center Plaza befinreen the new Parking
Management building and the Transit Center building including concrete paving of the ptaza, installation of a
storm drainage system and signage.
Public Safety Storage Building Improvements $850,Q00
The Airport Police and Fire Departments would like to expand the use of Public Safety Storage Building.
Currently the facility is used only for siorage and annual taxi inspections. Proposed changes would provide
a training facility for both departments. The building's usa as a storage facility would als� be improved.
Security Camera Installation - Terrninal $3U0,000
This is a continuation of the security program to provide for the installation of CCN cameras throughout the
terminal complex. This project will install cameras in various locations in the terminal and on the concourses
to enhance FAA security and public safety. These cameras will monitor and record events in areas that
currently do not have CCTV coverage.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 6
�'
Taxi Staging Area Canopy Installation $1,100,000
This project will provide for the installation of a canopy over the taxi staging area on Post Road. The canopy
will provide cover for the 40 vehicte staging a�ea to improve conditions for the drivers and their vehicles
waiting to be called to the terminal fo� passenger pick up.
Terminal Air Hanclling Units Replacement
$1,700,000
A 1997 study of the existing mechanical equipment in the Lindbergh recommended that mechanical units
that were installed in 1960 be replaced. Some ofi the units vvere replaced in conjunction ith the
development/revision of the concsssions area. This prograrr� wiil be continued with the replacement of air
handling units located in the center meuanine area.
Terminal Blast Il�itigation-Bomb Coniainenent Waste RecEptacfes $325,OQ0
The FAA has requested that the MAC review the replacement of existing waste receptacles with the
purchase and installation of new bomb containment waste receptacles. Explosive devices are the preferred
weapon used by terrorists and are most commonly placed in waste receptacles. This projeci will provide for
the installation of blast resistani trash containers for all public, non-sterile areas of the terminal building.
Terminal Blast Mi#igation-Curtainwalt Secucity Enhancement $550,000
The FAA has requested that the Il�AC review enhancing the safety of the curtainwall at the terminal. A
report prepared by the FAA recammends that all glass at the ierminal be treated to prevent scattering in the
event of an explosion_ This pracess was recently completed at Dallas-Fort Wo�th Airport �vhere interior and
exterior safety glass surfaces were covered with plastic treatments that adhere to glass to prevent scattering
under an explosive force. This project would provide this type of treatment to the glass surFaces in the .
Lindbergh Terminal adjacent to t[�e upper and lower.rQadways. Study is nended to determine whether this
would be effective; what areas are affected; should the area extend beyond the main terminal curkainwall.
� Application of this window treatment, if justified, wilt proceed in two phases. Phase I application includes the :
Lindbe�gh Terrninal glass surfaces adjacent to the upper an� lower roadway and the Green and Gold
Concourse glass surfaces adjacent to the roadway. Phase 11 wiil include the glass surF�aces of the two
skyways connecting the Green and Gold parking ramps to the Lindbergh Terminal.
Terrninal Complex Sprinkler System Madifications ,. .
$100,000
An ongoing program to address areas in the terminals which are not currently sprinklered. This item is
programmed to allow for further analysis of areas, which, if sprinkled, would allow for insurance premium
�eductions. It will also allow for extension of sprinkled areas should space utilization changes occur.
Terminal Electrical Modificatians $100,OOQ
An ongoing program to address electrical issues in the Terminal Facilities due to the age and deterioration of
the existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability. This year's project will include
increasing the switchboard capacity for additional fused switches in an electrical room on the Green
Concourse, miscellaneous fire afarm revisions on ihe Gresn Concourse, adding lights on emergency circuit
and battery pack in 15 electrical vaults, and providing misce8aneous minor revisions to electrical rooms
throughout the Main Terminal ar�d on the Concourses.
Terminal Elevat�r �Ilodifications $250,�00
This project will provide for the installation of an elevator to serve the Com/Ops Center as welf as modify
existing elevatorslescalators to meet the current codes as required by the State elevator inspector.
Terminal Exterior Rehabiliiation
$3,500,000
This is a continuation of the program to rehabilitate the exterior of the Lindbergh Terminal incfuding roofing
and curtain wall systems. This year's project will include replacing the roofing on the Red Concourse as well
as commencing a program to repair the curtainwall on the airside of the Red, Blue and Gre�n Concourses.
Printed 9/17l99 4:16:32 PM Page 7
Terminal Mechanical Modifications $150,000
An ongoing program to address mechanical issues in the Terminal Facilities requiring attention due to age
and deterioration of existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability. This year's project
will provide for upgrades primarily to a variety of plumbing systems. This year's projectwill include installing �
new water meters, pressure regulators, and flow sensors for all concourses, replacing domestic water
mains, waste and vent lines in the valet garage, and replacing pump controls and alarms in the valet garage
mechanical rooms.
Terminal Miscellaneous Modifications $250,000
An ongoing program to update and rernodel areas within the Terminal Facilities to keep abreast with
changing requirements. This may be a series of individual projects to meet the requirements of the various
tenants or may be consolidaied into a single project when possible. This work is typically done by purchase
order as the projects a�e small in scope and cost.
Trades Building Mezzanine Installation
$75,000
This project will provide for the installation of a mezzanine for the carpenters in the Trades Building to
provide for additional secured storage.
Transit Center Development
$4,925,000
This project will provide for a Transit Center at the east end of the new parking facilities including a waiting
area, restroom faciiities, vertical transportation and baggage check-in capabilities. In addition, this project
will also include the "cut and cover" excava6on and enclosure for the proposed Lindbergh Terminal LRT
station.
Tug Drive F1oor Replacement
$1,500,000
Water from melting snow brought. in by tugs has been leaking from the tug drive area into the valet parking
below. The concrete slab above the valet parking area has deteriorated to the point that pieces of concrete
have fallen on cars. To correct the deteriaration, a new concrete wear surFace wil{ ;be,.jnstalled with an under
floor drainage system. :� ..� .
West Mezzanine�Finishes -. . � � $1,000,000 ��
The new concession storefronts in the Lindbergh Terminal waiting area extend 15 feet beyond the line of the
existing West Mezzanine. A floor structure has been constructed over the extension:with the concessions
project completed in 1998. This project will expand the Wes# Mezzanine to provide.additional area for
expanded office space.
West Terminal Area Reha6ilitation $350,000
An ongoing program to modify or remodel areas within the West Terminal Complex to meet the needs of the
various tenantslgeneral public/MAC departmenfs utilizing the facilities. This year's project will include
window and flooring replacement throughout the West Terminal as well as some roof repairs. A first floor
canference room will also be constructed.
West Terminal Complex Boiler Replac�ment $200,000
Two of the four boilers currently serving the West Terminal Complex no longer function properly and must
be removed. These boilers used to also serve the air tra�c control tower which has been rebuilt and is
currently on its own heating system. Because of the reduced building load, three boilers will be sufficient;
the fourth boiler will not require replacement. It is proposed to salvage a boiler in the old Electrical Shop as
it is only three years old and reinstall it as the lead boiler for the West Terminal Complex. This boiler will
have to be salvaged at the time the Electrical Shop is demolished.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 8
2000 CAPITAL IIVIPROVEiV9ENT PROGRA�Ii
Reliever Airports
IAirlake
North Parallel Taxiway Realignment
$S50,t100
This project involves the removai of the existing parallel taxiway along the northwes#�s� end of Runway
12/30 and the construction of a new pa�ailel taxiway along a new alignment. This is �uired because the
existing taxiway does not meet FAA standards regarding runway/taxiway separation.
Sanitary Sewer/Watermain Install.-N. Building Area
�3,OOd}�0�
Airiake Airport is located on the south edge of the developed area of Lakeviile. A stu¢�y has been compieted
evaluating altematives for extending public utilities consisting of sanitary sewer and water main to the
Northeast and Southwest Building areas. This years project will extend these utilities to the Northeast
Building Area.
South Building Area Development
$a,�oo,�oo
This project is the second phase in the program to develop a new south building area and partial parallel
taxiway. This year's project will provide for the installation of the pavements and tax6way lighting system.
Anoka County - Blaine
Airfield Signage�ndcone Replacement
. . ; .. . $30�,i�00
This project provides for the installation of taxiway signage and a new windcone and segmented circle as
well as the rehabilitation of the beacon and the fumishing of a backup ganerator for airfield lighting and MAC
facilities. `
� . _. _..t _ .,_: , .::gi,000,�00
Pavement Rehabititation' •.
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircrafi� operational areas.(runways, taxiways, epcons) through
) bituminous overlays, sealcoats, or in sorrTe instances,.reconstruction, to restore the s�r€aces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will inctude the reconstructiori
of the South Building A�ea apron and access road. In addition, pavements in the so�th half of the East
Building Area will be crack filted and sealed.
Sanitary Sewer and 1Natermain Extensions
�3,600,aU0
The Anoka County - Blaine Airport is located adjacent to developed areas in Blaine an� Moundsview. There
has been a study completed which has evaluated alternatives for extending municipal c�tilities consisting of
sanitary sewer and water main to the airport. Negotiations have been completed with ff�e City of Blaine as to
the extent of the utility installation to be accomplished in 2000. It is proposed to extend utilities to the East,
West and South Builiding Areas in 2000.
West Building Area Annex
$800,�ID0
This project will provide for the construction of the West Building Area including sanitary sewer and water
main and all required wetland mitigation.
Crystal
$250,a00
Drainage Modifications
The area to the east and west of the East Building Area have been subject to ponding as a result of poor
drainage. This project will provide for the cleaning of culverts and the regrading of dite�es to alleviate the
water ponding problems.
$500,000
Pavemeni Rehabilitation
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, sealcoats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
; j even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project includes the reconstruction of
the northside access road, the northwest building area access road, Taxilanes N-4 and N-5, and the
Runway 14U32R north parallel taxiway.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 9
Flying Cloud
Land Acquisition $27�700,OQ0
There has been and continues to be considerable residential development to tt�e east and north/northwest of
the F(ying Cioud airport. The degree of develoPment has raised cancerns about the ability to adequateely �
protect existing encroachment by non-compatible land uses. The most positive method of preventing non-
compatible land uses is to acquire the land and control its use. It is proposed to acquire approximatety 280
acres of property immediately south and west af the existing airport boundaries to provide approach and
transitional surface zone protection as approved by the Commissian in March 1999. Some �f this land will
be acquired in 1999. However, it will be assumed for purposes of this CIP that approximately 196 acres will
be purchased in 2000. In addition, there are easements to be acquired over approximately 16 acres.
Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Extensions $4,500,000
Flying Cloud Airport is on the finge of the develaped area ofi Eden Prairie. Studies have therefore evaluated
alternatives for extending municipal utilities consisting of sanitary sewer and watermain to the airport. Wth
the adoption of the Sewer and Water Instatlation Policy for the Reliver Airpo�ts, negotiations are continuing
so as to reach finai agreement on the altemative to be implemented. If agreement can be reached in 1999,
the project will commence in 2000.
St. Paul Downtown
MAC Building Modifications $100,000
An ongoing program to provide for facility modifications to ensure continued efficient aperation of buildings
or modifications necessary to meet the requirements of the various tenants. The FAA will be commissioning �._
a new air traffic control tower in 1999. The existing tower is attached to the MAC administration building. A
study will be made to determine what areas associated with the old FAA tower should be demolished,
modified and/or left as they exist _
Miscellaneous Eiectrical Upgrades . ... .. : $400,000 ..
The REIL systems for Runways 30 and 32 are powered from the runway circuits which is causing problems
for the regulators. This project will provide commercial power to the REIL systems as well as a new air ��
conditioner for the regulator room as the current system is not properly cooling the room. There are aiso
sign bases which have heaved due to frost or have settled and must be replaced. A backup generator will
also be provided for the airfield lighting system and for MAC facilites.
Pavement Rehabilitation
$45Q,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, sealcoats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surFaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the mill and overlay
of Taxiway P and a 600 foot section of Runway 14/32. There will also be pavement rehabilitation of the
alleyways in the West building area.
C
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 10
2001 CAPITAL II�fPROVEMENT PRfJGRAl1A
iwinneapotis-St. Paul Internaiionai Airport
Environmentai
Ground Run-up Enclosure $3,000,000
This project will provide for the installaiion of a ground run-up enclosure on the existing MSP run-up pad to
reduce the noise impact of engine run-ups on the communities adjacent to the airport.
Remote flAonitoring Unit lnstallation $�00,000
This project wiil provide for the instaliation of additional Remote Monitoring Towers (RMTs) to monitor the
noise environment associated with the new northlsouth runway 17/35.
Residentiai Sound Insulation (inside 65 DNL) $25,500,000
An ongoing program to insulate residentiai houses within the ce�tified 1996 DNL 65 noise contour.
School Noise Abatement Projects $2,000,000
This project will provide for noise insulation to a yet to be identified school in Minneapolis. There could also
be noise insulation projects fo� several pre-schools depending on the results of a pilot project to be
completed in 2000. .
Ventilation Testing/Remediation of Past Homes $1,570,000
This is a continuation of the program to remediate problems associated with indoor air quality in houses
. which were insulated in the period from June 1992 to April 1997.
Field & Runways
Airside Bituminous Construcfion . $500,000
���- � � An ongoing program to construct or re�onsfruct bituminous pavements within the Air Operations Area.
Inspection of the overtay on Runway 12U30R will be made in the spring of 2001 to determine whether or not
' a bituminous repair project is required."
Apron Lighting Upgrade $2,000,000
This project will provide for the upgrading of the light fixtures that serve the apron areas adjacent to the
Lindbergh Terminal complex.
Humphrey Remote Ramp Expansion $2,500,000
This project will provide for the expansion of the Humphrey remote ramp to the north to provide a parking
area for aircraft waiting for a gate at the new Humphrey facility. This area will also serve as a deicing area
and overnight aircraft parking area.
Miscellaneous Construction $400,000
An ongoing program to consolidate various incidental items beyond the capabilities of the maintenance
personnel, projects too small to be accomplished independently, or to handle airside problems requiring
repair which come up unexpectedly.
North Side Storm Sewer $500,000
The extension of Runway 4/22 by 1000 ieet to the northeast will require the construction of a new storrn
water drainage system. The new starm sewer will be constructed from the Runway 12U3QR and Runway
4/22 intersection to Snelling Lake. This project will provide for the construction of the segment from
Highway 5 to Snelling Lake..
Pavement Rehabilitation - Aprons $3,500,000
( j An ongoing program to replace sections of concrete pavement in the aircraft operational areas that have
- deteriorated to a point where maintenance is no longer a�iable option. This year's proje�t will include the
reconstruction of the apron adjacent to the Blue Concourse.
Printed 91'17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 11
Runway 17/35 Construction
$64,850,000
This is a continuation of the program to develop a new North/South Runway (Runway 17/35) at MSP.
Projects proposed for 2001 include the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Site preparation, grading, and utility installation for the center segment of the runway
Construction of the Runway 4/22 intersection
Taxiway M construction
Constn.rction of the public road from Longfellow to the infield area
Construction of the 68th Street interchange
Construction of the glycol treatment facilities
Demoiition of the freight forwarder buildings
Construction of the infield fueling facilities and pipeline
Storm sewer construction
MaintenancelMaterials Storage building
Runway 17/35 Land Acquisition
$40,0003000
During 2001, there will be a continuation of the acquisition of off-airport land as well as lease extinguishment
required to provide for the Runway 17/35 Protection Zone (RPZ). Costs for these items will be determined
based on negotiations with the impacted property owners.
Runway 30R DeicinglHolding Pad $18,200,000
This project will provide for the construction of the airport's deicing/holding pad on Runway 30R to allow for
the efficient deicing of aircraft and collection of glycol as well as for the holding of. aircraft for operational
reasons. This project will also include the construction of the apron pavement in the area of the demolished
Post Office as well as the installation of fuet lines and pits. ... . .
Runway 4/22 Extension - . $5,000,000
This project will provide for the construction of a 1,000 foot extension to the rio�theastend of Runway 4/22 to
accommodate nan-stop air serve to the Paciflc Rim countries. :�,� �• ;:. -
Runway 4/22 Reconstruction - Seg. 3 .. $8,500,000
Reconstruction of the northeast 2000 feet of Runway 4/22 is required as the pavements have reached their
useful life. . .
Runway 4/22 Road Relocation
$1,OQfl,000
The FAA is requiring that the Runway 22 service road be relocated. This requiremerrf to provide a Runway
Safety Area on the approach end of Runway 22 which meets the current design standards is staied in a
Special Condition in the Grant Agreement for the previous Runway 4l22 extension.
Stormwater Collection/Detention Ponds
$4,000,000
A new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is expected to require additional
storm water storage in order to control discharge of settleable solids to the Minnesata River. This project will
construct a new larger earthen dam and concrete spillway in the ravine near the Highway 5 embankment to
provide the required storage.
Taxiway B Construction
$1,20D,000
This project will provide for the construction of Taxiway B from Runway 4/22 to Taxiway M.
Utiiity Modifiications
$1,000,000
This project provides for the slip lining of the 24 inch sanitary sewer between the Inbound/Outbound
roadway and Highway 55.
Landside
72nd Stre�t Upgrade
$6a0,000
This project is a continuation of the upgrading af 72nd Street from 34th Avenue to the west ta include two
westbound and three eastbound lanes and and up to three traffic signals.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 12
�
,.
�.
Auto Rental Service Site Development $1,000,000
This project will provide fo� the relocation of the auto rentai service sites to a permaneni location.
Centrai Alarm Monitoring/Fiber Optic Cable Upgrade $5,000,000
� This project is a continuation of the program to provide for the installation of the fiber optic backbone
required for the operation of the LindberghiRegional Te�minai P.A. system, the MUFIDS sytem, an ADA
required visual paging system, a terminal complex fire annunciation system and a fully integrated central
alarm monitoring system.
Commercial Roadway Bag Belt $1,000,000
There are currently discussions taking place on how to better utilize the east upper leve4 roadway to alleviate
traffic congestion on the upper leve! roadway adjacent to the terminal. One issue which must be resolved is
the movement of baggage from the east roadway to the terminal bag make-up area. A project to pravide the
required bag belt and sortation faciiity is being considered.
East Airport 1Alater Main Loop' $100,Od0
This project is a continuation of the program to loop the water main on the east side of the airport to ensure
that water pressure and service demands can be met. This phase will provide for the final cannections to
the existing wate� main system and inctudes the installation of an 18-inch main under the Runway 30R
deicing pad to the existing 18-inch main at the south side of the 30R blast pad.
Econo�otfEmployee Paeking Structe�re $50,000,000
The construction of the southeast segment of Taxiway W wilt impact approximately 300 parking spaces in
the employee lot on Post Road. There is also a need to expand the .EconoLot to serve the proposed
Humphrey facility as well as provide additional public parking tor the Lindbergh Terminal. A new parking
structure to serve both needs located at the south end of the EconoLot site is being studied. The facility will
be sized to accommodate approximaiely 1800 empfoye.e spaces and 5500 - 6d00 public spaces. This
project will also provide for the demoli6on of the existing� Humphrey Terininal. .
: _. .
� • � $500,000
. Electrical Substation Upgrades �� `
-- �� The electrical distribution system components within the Lindbergh Terminal are approaehing 35 years old
and are at or near their lifetime operational �xpec#ancy. Major system protection companents are no longer
manufactured and a single failure ofi a component could cause an extended power outage in the Main
Te�minal and older concourse facilities. Included within the scope of work is the replacement of obsolete
and problematic substation circuit breakers, installation of electronic protective cantrols and recalibration of
serviceable substation breakers.
Elevated Roadway Landscaping - $600,000
This project provides for the landscaping of the planter areas beiween the upper level roadways to beautify
the approach to the Lindbergh Terminal. Included in this project are stone walls, trees, shrubs, annual
flowers and accent lighting.
Energy Management Center -- Boiler Replacements $4,500,000
The boilers in the Energy Management Center which serve the Lindbergh Terminal complex have reached
their useful life. Previous projects have rehabilitated the boilers to extend their life but now continuing
deterioration requires that the boilers be replaced. A new bolier was installed in 1995. The twa older boilers
will be replaced with this project.
Gold Ramp Express Entry $45�,000
This project will provide for the construction of an "Express Entry" from the east upper le��el roadway directly
into level 2 of the Gold Ramp. This will allow patrons into parking without the need to recirculate on the road
system.
Landside Bituminous Construction �400,000
An ongoing program to reconstruct the airpo�t's bituminous roadways and parking lots. Projects will be
� j evaluated in 2000 and presented for approval when the C1P is updated for the 2001 construction season.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:32 PM Page 13
Lindbergh Terminal Bag Make-up Area Addition $2,OOO,Q00
The bag make-up area in the Lindbergh Terminal is very congested. The addition of gates on the Green
Concourse wiil put additional pressure on these facilities. A study wili be compieted and a project to
increase the bag make-up space will commence in 2001.
Lindbergh Terminai Fire Alarm Upgrade $750,000
This project is a continuation of the program to upgrade the existing fire alarm sys#em throughout the
Lindbergh Terminal ta meet current NFPA and NEC local codes. The current fire alarm system does not
include audio or visual annunciation of fire. This project will add audio and visual annunciation in the non-
public occupied areas of the Lindbergh Terminal complex.
Lindbergh Terminal Interior Rehabilitation $1,000,000
An ongoing program to renovate the interior of the Lindbergh Terminal. This p�oject will include the
upgrading of the bag claim area comdor flooring, ceiiing and toilet facilities.
Lindbergh Terminal MUFiDS and BIDS
$2,500,000
This project is the second phase in the program to add Multi User Flight Information Display (MUFIDS) and
Baggage Information Display (BIDS) systems to the Lindbergh Terminal.
Lindbergh Terminal North Addition $12,000,000
This project will provide for a two story expansion of the north end of the Lindbergh Terminal. The first story
of the addition shall extend the existing retail mall space to the north while including new public restrooms,
public elevator and stair to mezzanine and an entry lobby to a second story airline preferred customers ..
lounge. The second story of the addifion shall consist of inezzanine office space as well as an airline �
preferred customers lounge.
Lindbergh Terminal Rubber Fiooring Replacement $400,000
This project is the second phase in the program to replace the rubber flooring on the skybridges, the east •
mezzanine and in the parking ramp stair towers. �
MAC Cargo Buildings-Airline Belly Cargo Facility � $4,700,500 (�
In conjunction with the construction of Runway17l35, new building areas will be developed. The MAC will
construct two cargo buildings which will be leased out to airport tenants. This project will provide for the
construction of a"belly" cargo building including all required aircraft apron and auto/truck parking areas. �
Presently, a majority of MSP's airline belly-cargo is accommodated within a 36,000 sf multi-tenant cargo
facility owned by Standard Air Cargo (Standard Cargo Facility). This faciiity is scheduled to be removed to
accommodate the construction of the Humphrey Terminal and its associated infrastructure. Additionally,
Delta Airlines has indicated a desire to move into the proposed MAC owned belly cargo facility. Currently
there are no other existing facilities at MSP that can accommodate the required airiine belly-cargo
operations. Therefore, a new facility must be constructed to replace the Standard Cargo Facility and house
airline belly-cargo operations.
Parking Structure Rehabilitation $1,000,000
An ongoing program to maintain the integrity of the multi-level parking structures. Projects include concrete
repair, joint sealant replacement, expansion joint repairs, and concrete sealing. This year's project will
provide for continued painting of ceilings to improve the light levels and concrete repairs as required.
Red Concourse Infill $3,OOO,U00
In order to maximize the capacity of the existing terminal complex, it will be necessary to expand the Blue,
Red and Gold Concourses. This project will add additional space by filling in the notch between gates 26 -
30 on the Red Concourse to provide far additional concession space, toilet facilities and phones and to
provide storage space for the MAC and the airlines.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:33 PM Page 14
Security Camera installation -Terminal $500,tf00
This is a continuation of the security program to provide for the instailation of CCTV cameras throughout the
terminal complex. This project will install cameras in various locations in the terminal and on the concourses .
to enhance FAA securiiy and public safety. These cameras will monitor and record events in areas that
� currently do not have CCN coverage.
Terminal Air Handling Units Replacement $1,700,O�fl
A 1997 study of the existing mechanical equipment in the Lindbergh recommended that mechanical units
that were installe�l in 1960 be replaced. Some of the units were replaced in conjunctcon ith the
developmenfilrevision of the concessions area. This program will 6e continued with the replacement of
additional units on the center mezzanine.
Terminal Complex Sprinkler System Mod�cations $100,OA0
An ongoing program to address areas in the terminals which are not currently sprinklered. Tiiis item is
programmed to allow for further analysis of areas, which, if sprinkled, would allow for insurance premium
reductions. It will also allow for extension of sprinkled areas should space utilization changes occur.
Terminal Electrical Modifications $100,000
An ongoing program to address electrical issues in the Terminal Facilities due to the age and deterioration of
the existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability. Projects will be evaluated in 2000
and presented for approval when the CIP is updated for the 2001 construction season.
Terminal Exterior Rehabilitation $1,000,�0�
This is a continuation of the program to rehabilitate the exterior of the Lindbergh Temninal including roofing
and curtain wall systems. This years project will include a continuaiion of the program to repair the
curtainwall system on the airside of the Red, Blue and Green Concourses. _
:: � . . :.. . $150,000� ;
Terminal Mechanical Modifcations ... �
An ongoing program to address mechanical issues in the Terrninal Facilities requiring attention due to age .
� and deterioration of existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliabil"ity. Projects will be
� evaluated in 2000 and will be presented for approval when the CIP is updated for the 2001 construction
season. - ,
Terminal Miscellaneous Modifications $250,000
An ongoing program to update and remodel areas within the Te�minal Facilities to keep abreast with
changing requirements. This may be a series of individual projects to mest the requirements of the various
tenants or may be consolidated into a single project when possible. This work is typicaEly done by purchase
order as the projects are small in scope and cost.
West Terminal Area Rehabilitation $100,000
An ongoing program to modify or remodel areas within the West Terminal Complex to meet the needs of the
various tenants/general publiGMAC departments utilizing the facilities.
Printed 9117/99 4:16:33 PM Page 15
2001 CAPITAL tiViPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Reliever Airports
Anoka County - Blaine
Building Area Development - Northwest $S,S00,000
This project provides for the construction of one-half of the Northwest Building Area including all wetland
mitigation for the entire building area.
Pavement Rehabilitation $1,300,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, sealcoats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surtaces to a smaoth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This years project will include the reconstruction
of Runway 18/36 and the pavement rehabilitation of the Runway 18/36 parallet taxiway and the south
crossover taxiway.
Crystal
Pavement Rehabilitation $450,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, sealcoats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surtaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project incfudes the pavement
reconditioning of the Runway 14R/32L parallel taxiway.
F►ying Cloud
Rwy 9R/27L Reconstruction/Extension � Rwy 9U27R Exiension . $8,450,000
This project provides for the reconstruction of Runway 9R/27L and. the extension of Runways 9R/27L and
9V27R. The project includes pavement construction.and �ecanstruction, VOR and MALSR light relocations,
and signage changes to reflect the renumbering of the runways to 10/28. A backup generator for airfield : (
lighting and for MAC facilities will also be provided. �
South Building Area,Development
� -� � -� $4,600,000
This project will provide for the first phase in the construction of the new South Buitding Area and will include
grading and utility installation.
Lake Elmo
Pavement Rehabilitation
$500,000
An ongoing project to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through bituminous
overlays, sealcoats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth, even
condition and improve overalt operating conditions. This year's project includes the milling and overlay,
including crack repair, of Runway 14/32.
St. Paul Downtown
MAC Building Modifications
$100 000
An ongoing program to provide for facility modifications to ensure continued efficient operation of buildings
or modifications necessary to meet the requirements of the various tenants. This project will include
modifications to the facility based on the study which will be completed during 2000.
Pavement Rehabilitation
$1,110,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiwa��, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, sealcoats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surtaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the mill and overlay
of Runway 13/31 and the southwestern portion of Taxiway D.
Printed 9/17/99 4:16:33 PM Page 16
r'')
, �
5
' i
� , ,�� �,.: � 1�. �t �:. ,�� �� , ti1
C� �:�, l, ! ��
.�� �`. �, , ..�
��� �
J - r` � ' � • / i /
. . ar �
❑ MASAC meeting age�da, cover memo(s) and correspondence for
September 28, 1999
❑ Minutes of the August 24, 1999 MASAC meeting
❑ Minutes of the September 10, 1999 MASAC Operations meeting with
attachments and cover memos
❑ Minutes of the August 31 and September 14, 1999 MASAC
Communication Advisory Board meetings
❑ Blank Noise Monitoring and Informa�ion Request Form
❑ Monthly Part 150 Residential Sound Insulation Program Update
❑ August 1999 Technical Advisor's and Corridor Reports
Q ��
. . , ,� 's
� ' / �
�
�' �;
� it �� .��� ;� •� �; - ,�,, — -
',�' ��
� � � ��, , ,� ��, ��<� .l�;
, �s� i'
� /�K
�;::
m
. ; � �
a , � • .. . � • 4'•., � � ' :i •
Generafl �'�iin�
Septemb� Zf�y 1999
8:00 p.m. ttr� �:45 p.m.
6040 28TH ��s.�ame South
Minneapol'�,, �riiainesota
1. Call to Order, Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of Meeting A��.�4,1999
3. Introduction of Invited Guests
Receipt of Communications
4. Stage 3 Compliance Review
5. I�iscussion of Draft Technical Advis�r���eport Revisions
6. September 10,1999 Operations Co��tee I2eport - Mark Salmen
7. Report of the Low Frequency N�ase Policy CommitteQ Meetings - Dick
Saunders
8. Report of the Communications �risory Committee Meetings - Roy
Fuhrmann
9. Report of the MAC Commission M�arsg
10. Technical Advisor's Runway Sys-� Utilization Report and Complaint
Summary
11. Persons Wisiung to Address the Co�e��
12. Items Not on the Agenda
13. r�,djournment
N� 1wles#ing:
��` � � � Octa3�er�26,1999
'TO: .
$+'R.C�1VI:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
� � -
,. � � ;1
MASr�C Members
Itoy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
Stage 3 Cou�pliance Review
�eptember 20,1999
�
In September 1998, MAC staff presented information concerning the compliance status of
Stage 3 conversions by airiines serving the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. As an
on-going process, MASAC requested an update on the airline's conversion progress to an all
Sta.ge 3 fleet by the end of 1999.
At the September 28, 1999 MASAC meeting, MAC staff will present a review of the current
status of the Stage 3 aircraft usage at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Intemational Airport (MSP).
Staff will also review the naiional Stage 3 implementation levels and the Airport Noise and
Capacity Act requirements.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-725-6326.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
MA,SAC
MASAC Members �
Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator
Comments on New Draft Technical Advisor's Report and Monthly
Corridor Analysis Formats
September 20,1999
At the August 24, 1999 MASAC meeting, the new DRAFT Technical Advisor's Report and
Monthly Corridor Analysis was presented for comment and review. The format has received
significant review by the MASAC C?perations Committee over the past several months.
As you will recall from previous meeting discussions, the draft report proposals were
submitted by Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) staff at the July 9, 1999 MASAC
Operations Committee meeting and the report review/revision topic was addressed at that
meeting, as well as, the meeting on August 13, 1999. The community perspective provided by
the membership at the July 9, 1999 and August 13, 1999 MASAC Operations Committee
meetings was critical to the success of the review/revision sessions. To ensure proper resource
utilization contributing to the optimal outcome of the proposed Technical Advisor's Report
and Monthly Corridor Analysis packages, all of the technological resources available were
considered, including but not limited to, ANOMS capabilities, internet capabilities and
reporting capabilities.
As a result of the review conducted by the MASAC Operations Committee, the new draft
Technical Advisers Report and Monthly Corridor Analysis was developed. The intent of the
review and revision of the documents was to ensure the highest c3egre� of communication
integrity and provide pertinent information dissemination with respect to aircraft impact
information for communities surrounding the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport.
At the September 28, 1999 MASAC meeting the new report formats and report distribution
methods will be reviewed and discussed. Any comments, written or otherwise will be
entertained by the �hair for consideration.
As a result, please come prepared with ideas and proposals for the new report formats and
effective/efficient distribution methods.
��
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-725-6328.
�:
�� i
��t1� V'�:. ��"P IC.� iJf i�1F.- . �. .-�.'.. . . ". .. .. -.�._._.. -..� _ ' _. - ' • -
���.-� S� C�'V OI.SE :3�:f O��T t��G .-�'yD 1�r'�t�t�il-� �''.�� �' R�'{� �,'.EST FDR��
�9.�8
I3a�e: �� ��' �`.,�- � . i�a wi�ose beaalf sre you r=s�uestiII„
�... — —
� riva�: -'T' b fct � S ��{.�: ( f�.� Y�a�e1f ,X �
• s
. � r�d�z•eas: �-<{- 2� u.�p�,+�' �r,-? . S- Cif� Cocmcl
�; . —�--
� ��� S3 4oG May�r
G�a
�� � -� � Or��ni: �ion 1�t��'� C c� ¢�r.,�.��':,-r+ ,.
., one. � � 2?_4 S " -
�
C�the�
Z� this a nne-tim� rnqu�i: �e �; =�a -' _
=e�s.._ �. _
Iinn, wha= is thc es.�e�tezi time fr�mz iar chis rE�uesr� cc
R'hich ai the fo]iowing best desrribrs the natur� of ymar� rr�uest: (�'irc?e alt rhat anplyj
Gtouna Ncise �:er�ia Rl:n-Ups Co�tet:rs Faf 150 l�t e• .
Sn re e�r�., t-� -tl.r. -�.�:, �•-t�rn.E�- 0.� 71 tr�-,1 s
�'-at�b T v�.ra�.c$ nn s,.�.a.iZ" --�n�+ � � A/'�
V
� �w �� i � �(i, � ��. "'f�.�� Yi.. �'C.t'�o � C}.
U �y-�
�'- � til. G.C.O+Yl �1`E1.s�. C,...+�"fy_t-C-�ti Q.f'ri C.4. _:.u'W'+n �4a
--`-- r. n . .
w t �1v1 \ Q.Z.x
�
� �^
t J 1 � �h_ ` �3.i"�1� �'I�.�
�
��--r'���'1
z 1 ��� �, �,�
, *�
r� � �r ti�-�.
0
+O�er Pt�crsz
_-n'. b•i .:��;'r.'"�•IE11T �)r �IN'.. .,.-_o--. .. ..r., .. .. -._._:_.."--._'_=,__,
C ti.. e+ 4. ' q L A 7� vr'
:�^�..�L' :tI IC�tG : L 1.�8� >fl.� +�,� �S�'J' 1Zi"'r �.IYLiJV� avJ v� �:ai L�t25 i 2.Z .
� i o prcvia,e ;ntormat2on ta use :LIriC tr. rhd�r sjfor�� to c�mazunic,:rr cir�at�� fn aGere:ions ch•r� ra ��r..r� 1c::cn
to lha s��rourr�in� �mrfaintrlti
��valu�tz de,.^mKtrrK r;,mclicnee throJgn tha �sgr.n�::tendnta ,^er�irts CorsdJvr ernc .ma1,. �sny necs,�ter,.�
rlrcn�eS !o tfte �.�e��trt �rocxttu�t-.
� A.�-view drarlNO�YISsvs:Pm and rrol�e tncrtimr.;, a7rd r�aiueile /Iid �ta� 31t:1 Dlae::.mtnt OJ Sa�ItiorrJl �em.ot� �
mnR;rorr,rg tuWA-. :�i1�. ev.11:tatc rtnsaf� morftcoring� canabtlttl�a: ._
� Reqv,rsr�ir 1'Ya,tJ;c � orrrra! personaet t� make a rare��ntartan on how,4l.,iP oprrarfwtis ara �nrit:r.���
❑ Lco& ar p,b,.��.�:.g l�rea�rtive�r tv ccr.-ier_ tn ac..^�uirinx �rd ane. �:trrg feuary�,r�radr Jt�ve ,�ll airr: cr3.
❑ Ir^•satigate nc�.� c;P� �rd nchar,bni`,�ids ein.l�lnle alJavtare airca�! nois:.
� Rzvtsw ths N.z21Ps arrs� c�mrplPa�zcz.
Q Cuntinuc cr�sc.:�i�trt aj Pair I30 w�nrou� yenerndon.
�lects� send;Yflr�r rer�Psf vi.a mail �: hL�i�AC Se�cr�tary, 604� 2$th Avenue S.,
l�tinneu�olis, �itN SS�SU dr1'"az ii to :(6L?) 735-b�IQ.
��
n� .�v���,��:
McrHtcnng ?r..rz D:�c:
�tanirar.�� Swo Date:
��ffi' Cc�nac:
D�te R��•�i: .�uaiysis Scut Dnte:
Ts thi: a��p,� Or W�,rip„ Rqucsr? . �.aity9s.cta{� Dace:
A�,c�roved Ey�
�pproval Date: Completioa IJaca:
E�
' �
� . ..
, �r .
Co�n.ments on Technical Advisor's Report
July 30, 1999
Ivir. Mark Salmen, Chairman
IvSASAC Operations Committe�
�ro Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 — ? 8`� Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota � �450-2799
Dear Mr. Salmen:
I wish to submit two comments re?ardina the new E.recutive Summan� of the Technical
Advisor's Report to the committee for its consideration. My comments are someti�vhat
narrow in scope: havina� mainlv to do with the narrative portions of the repon, and the
percentage fiaures reported there. Before makinQ those comments I�vould like to emphasis
mv apgreciation_ as an interested parn'. for the NLAC havinv had the �n.:mptier. :� institute
some unilateral chanaes in an attempt to mal:e these repons more meaninQful, and for the
�enerally superb nature of those chanaes.
First, in the new narrative portions — see for instance page 3 of the Summarti� for June, 1999
— the MAC staff uses words like "bullc," "concentrated," increase," "predominate," '`trend,"
"down," and "consistent." My somewhat modest observation as to alI these words is they
are all essentially undefined. That is, they really don't impart much hard information to the
reader. To both save staff rime each month (in thinl:in� up new editorializations), and to
reduce possible misinterpretations, I suaaest that a standazd set of statements be developed,
and that those same statements be made each month with regard to the data. For instance, if
the MAC wishes to comment about departure traffic throu�h the SE "corridor," they could
say it either stayed the same from last month (or last year), or inereased, or decreased; but,
they might not want to have to thinl: of somethina new to say about it each month.
Secondly, I think I detected, in the narrative portions, a misuse of the percenta�es reported
elsewhere. For instance, in the first narrative para�'a.ph on page 3 of the June, 1999
E:tecutive Summary, t he M A C s t a t e s t h a t, " T h e u se o f the crosswind rumvay increased by
26.�% more departures on Z2... ." I counted the increase in the number of deparnires on 22
as 21�% (i.e., 7,838 in June vs. 2,488 in May). Similarly, the percenta�e-of-all-departures
on 22 for the month increased b�� ?0�°io from May to June (i.e., from 12.9% of all departures
for all operations and camer jet operations in May to 39.4% of all departures in 3une). The
"Z6.�%" can be described as the increase in percentaae points for the departures on 22 as
compared to the total in each month. I suagestshat.a..standard set.of percenta.ge increases,
or percentaoe point increases, be adopted for reportina each month.
Th� you. ,��
,�+-�- .,�'� ``
�nce Staricha
MASAC Rep., Ciry of Eagan
August 26, 1999
Mr. Roy Fuhrmann
Technical Advisor
Metro Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28`" Ave. S.
Iviinneapolis, l�iN 55450
Dear Mr. Fuhrmann,
I was quite surprised by the July 1999 Technical Advisors Report. The draft report is quite good
looking and has some additional information. However, I could not find the Daily DNL numbers
for each of the remote sensors. Since I base my trend lines on these figures, I would appreciate
these numbers. They may be available on your web page, but the page is not all that reliable for up
time and dawn loading the whale thing is impractical for me.
I do not understand why the report was labeleri "draft". ApparentIy you are looking for some
feed-back which this is. Will you send the regular report out later? Although there is no
explanation, this "draft" report seems an attempt to answer all the informational issues floated at
recent meetings. I was led to beiieve that the "Communications Outreach Program" committee
would focus on this., but they certainly did not indicate this at the last meeting. What exactly are
your intentions and, how will you determine if the Technical Adyisors Report is satisfactory?
Take the ten loudest events for each site. What do we do with this �iformatian? I look at these
data as with the daily DNL. Can't see any use for these numbers now, but maybe someone will ��
invent a"disturb" factor and we can see how it's improved in past years. .
There has been added (page 12) "Average Aircraft Event Lmax and Leq" which seems useful, but
a line �raph would, in my opinion, be a better way to present these data. The terms used are
reasonably clear.
Also a page 13 has been added, "Monthly DNL Values for Aircraft, Community and Noise"
which, likewise, would be better shown as a line graph. The three different measures ne�d to be
defined more clearly. Just what is "Aircraft DNL", "Community DNL" and "Total DNL", and
how are they derived? •
Of course, I keep looking for you to adopt the measures I have suggested, namely: Daily DNL
Trends and Relative Residential Noise. Also, it sesms to me, that the expensive color printer
paper is not necessary for most of the data and graphs, but it looks geat.
Neil Clark
Minneapolis
c.c.: Charles Mertensotto
Dick Saunders
SEP- 5-59 SUN 21:12 LEAN LINDBERG o127�1489� F•.pi
DE�N LZNDEERG
Illnstration and Animatinn
5335 39th Ave. South
Minneapolis, MN 55417
(612} 72I-4993 fx (612) 721-6401
To: Roy Fuhrmann and staff
From: Dean Lindberg
5 paqes including cover
Comments on the revisians to the Technical Advisor's Report
JEP— J—�S SUN 21:13 DEAN LINDBERG o127214g9? � p_b�
To: Roy Fuhrmann et al
From: Dean Lindberg
Re: Technical Advisor's Repon (TAR) re-design
9-5-99
I hope my remarks, compliments, concerns and observations are useFul contributions in the effort to
overhaiil and impro�e the TAR.
Prirnarily, n►y thoughts nddress the overall systematic presentation of data in the various categories, or
analysis perspectives, used in the TAR. Additionally, graphic design principals and techniques that may be
helpfui as visuat aids to communicate TAR information are not employed in the repoct layout. Finally, as a
commercial artist with considerable experience in eornmunications, [ strongly suggest entisting the services
of a professional graphic designer to develop a Iayout for the TAR. In addidon to contributing to the
effectiveness of the TAR as an inforrnational document, a ptofessional layout coutd save significant
monthly production costs.
The staff has done a terrific job so far by taking initiative deveIoping the new TAR layout. Please
remember though, that a professionally designed report format will give the TAR readabiliry, credibilicy
and inteliigibiiity far exceeding the old TAR.
OVERALL INFORMATION PRESENTATION
Each scction of the TAR (phone complainu, tunway utilization, noise events, eic. and eic.) should have a
primary graphic in the form of a pie, bar, runway tayout, or other appropriate diagram. lf well designed,
the category diagram should allow presentation of baseline or target levels appropriate to the data, and
notable deviations fram basetine or targeted goals.
As bcst as I can, I'll attempt to orient my comments from a b�seline and deviation perspectivo.
NEW TAR, PAGE BY PAGE OBSERVAI'IONS
COVER It's workabie, but the discreet use of color adds to production expense wi[hout justifiable visual
in�pact. If a cotorful cover is desired, I suggest having a targe supply of th�m professionaliy printed and
adding appropriate monthly identifiers using a copy machine.
INSLDE COVER An MSP Ldn chart wouid be appropriate for inclusion sornewhere in the front of the
TAR. PerhaQs inside the cover, or on the backside of tJie "Table of Contents" or "De�lazation of Purpose"
pages. In addition to an inctuding an up-to-date Ldn chart, a celativo level decibel chart, an annoyance
level chart, arsd a typica] daily operations flow chart (similar to the chart in the 1993 MSP Capacity
Enhancement P►an) should be included in the TAR.
TABLE �F CONTH:VTS. If it hasn't been done yet, the contents and Table of Contents should be
organized in a logical sequence stream based on community information preferences. and logical flows
frorn one topic to the next. For example, the Runway Use information section (pagcs 4 and �) have jei fleet
composition and C}rigination and Destination (OD) analysis inserted betwe�n them for no readily apparent
reason.
OD infarmation moy be more suited for attachment to the ANOMS flight track graphies that htave
apparently been dropped from the TAR. A reason for incIuding Oi7 without 8ight vack data is not
apparent. A brief exptanation of the OD sigi�ificance might be appropriate in the TAR notes.
Grouping retated TAR reporting items into overall categories with primary and subordinate headings would
enhance the documenl's efftciency. %
�
SEP- 5-�9 SUN 21:14 DEaN LINDBERV 612T214897 P_03
� PAGE l. (Complaints by City) The information is 6ne. but rationai for inctuding the "Number of
Complainanu" is not apparent.-The "Number of Cornpiainants" data indicates an obvious seriai caller in
[nver Grove Heights (7 callers, 246 complaints). A Minneapolis or St. Paui seriaf callei s activity wouldn't
be detectabte because of the large overalt numbers oicomptaints and complainants. Is the intent of listing
the numbers of eomptainants to highlight serial caller activity in smallec communities?
'The page's layout is inefficien� from a�aphic design perspecUve. A well-designed graphic efluid include
all call categories for all cities and, at the sarne time, �ne�iight significant changes in ca11 complaint
activity. A pie chart is reasnnabty appropriate. but ihe pie chart )ayout and eolor use in the Dcaft TAR is
cumbersome and not space efficient, or production "fziend)y". if the staff is interested. I could provide
sketches to iilustratc the.se poinls.
COMPLAINT MAP is f►ne as it is.
MSP REFERENCE DIAGRAM. I suggest replacing ahe photograph with a line-art map inciuding and
identifying significant community laadmaaks such as mai� sueets, talces, parks and etc. Also, this page
offers a high cost/bertefit opportunity for color usage ttnat 1 couEd explain in more detait if staff is interested.
An explanation of MSP runway nomenciaturt logic r�ight be appropriate on this page. A graphic
consisting of a runway icon overlaying a compass icon would give a strong visuai reinforcement to a
runway identifier description.
PAGE 4. Color, as used an chis page, doesn't help understanding of the data's signiftcance. With careful
scrutiny, a strong visuai grasp of the MSP runway layout . and an understanding and memory of typical
MSP runway use percentages, a reader could surmise that departures from 22 wece extraordinarily high for
the month. The page unintentionatly (1 assume) obfuseates a significant runway use anomaly. The page
design is attractive, but inappropriate fot the type of information presented.
� � The page lacks a TA eamment; further de-emphasizing a significant ranway use pattetn ehange.
Additionally, there is no bascline informatiors to ca3l attention to the extrao�dinary crosswind runway use.
This page unintentionally highlights how page design can aelually obscwe vitai information. A runway
layout diagram with color caded arrows (if color is desFred on this page) woutd be a more efficieat graphic.
PAGE 5. The fleet composition with decibel tevol notaEions is s tetrific addition ta the TAR. Landing
decibellevels, if available, wouJd be a good addition as well.
It's rather curious that DC-9's have only one departure decibel level designation, whFle 727's, 737's, 747's .
etc. and ete. have decibel leve2 ratings for various aircraft series numbers. An explanalion for this singulaz
DC-9 eharacteristic would be apprapriate in the page's footnoies.
Footnotes intended to illuminate infocmation on the page should be accompanied with app�opriate
asterisks. Also, the EPNL expianation needs refinement for impraved intelligibility.
PAGE 6. The OD infarmation is interesting, but it appears to be unattacheai, subocdinate information and
out of piace in the TAR siream of logic.
PAGE 7. 1fie night-time runway use graphic has the same page iayout shortcornings as the "A11 Hours"
information on page 4.
PAGE $. A teniGc informational addition.
PAGE 9. A good exampte of matching data with a� apprapriate graphic. The cotor is nice, but I wonder
if it's worth the additional cost on this page.
SEP- 5-99 SUN 21:iS DEAN LINDBERG 6127�14897 P.04
PAGE !4. Line an created For page three could replace the photograph. This page could be easily re- �'
designed to graphically depict monthly and historic ANOMS decibef levels which could add to it's design ,
and inFormational efFciency.
PAGE I!. An inefficient page layout hinders correlation of information presented, a�d timits page capacity
for including any additiona! pertinent information. The iltustradve potential foc exhibiting historic, high-
event, or 1ow event days, is not incotporated into the graphic design.
PAGE 12. Slight layout modifications to this page wouid make it much more space and information
�fficient. Color �se contributes only a mazginal readahility enhancement. A page re-design would improve
informational impact rnore than the present use of colors adds to the page..
The def nition of I.eq is too academic. Bolh footnote definitions raise as many quesGons as they ptovide
answess. Explanaiion of average Lmax is not provided. Lmax is mentioned, but not represented on the bar
graph.
PAGE 13. Again, tayout and design rnodifications would enhance the inteIligibitity of the information
presented.
"Comrnunicy Noise L,evels" sre not defined. A more appropriate terms might be "RMT Ambient I,tvels".
My understanding is the RMT system is laid out to meas�re aircrafi noise, not commurtity noise_
The note on DNL should be re-written for addiponal clarity. The expianation of the 10 decibel penatty for
10:00 P.M. to ?:00 A.M. noise is incorrect.
PAGE 14. The addition of aircraft itight numbers end runway I.D.'s is terrife. )udicious use of eolor or
type faces coutd highIight any information desired for quick identification on these pages. A month2y
decibel levef avetage couid be included with each RMT n�ise event summaries.
C�MMENTS OPI THE OLD TAR
PAGE 1. Is this information included somewhore in the eew TAR?
PACE 2. Arrival and departure cnmplaints from individuat ciiies have been dropped from the new TAR.
Is lhere a reason for this? A weil designed page in the new TAR could accommodate retentioa of this
information.
PAGE 3. The runway Available Times graphic and infarmation should be retained in t6e new TAR.
PAGES 4-7. These pages are workably designed, but don't contain any baseline or hisioricat data..
PAGE 8. The term "Manufactured" implies "anificial" or "contrived". Is that the intent?
PAGE I 2. Make sure this information is retained in the new TAR.
PAGE 12. ?he RMT site map coutd be altered to accommodate additional noisc level informa�ion and
used in place of page l0 in the new TAR. 'I'�is page offers an excellent opportunity for an economic and
meaningful ux of calor. The new RMT sites should be added.
PAGE 13 and 24. Make sure this information is included in the new TAR.
PAGE 21-25, 26 AND 2'l. Redesign of these tiight track grapitics with consideration given to the origina!
intent fc,c their TAR inelttsion wonld enhance their effectiveness.
SFP- 5-99 5UN 21:16 DEAN LINDBERG 612T214697 P-��
'� I hope the extensiveness of my comments are not miscor�trased as a hazsh critique of tf�e stat�fs efForts on
the revised TAR. Actuatly. they've done an autstandi►�gBob getting tt�e batl rolling with their initiative on
this�project. Their efforts have facilitated meaningful, an�I hope consiructive, commentary.
Piease remember that carefui layont and graphic design w�rk enhances the TAR capacity to present
moaningful d�ta in an e�cient manner. Paor design hes the opposite effect. A we11 planned design also
considers production assets avaitable to stsff, and can ha,ve a signifieant pasitive impact on long terrn TAR
production costs.
If stat� is interesced, Td be happy to give a presentation �vi€h specific page and overall design and tayout
suggestions.
Sincerely,
Dean Lindberg
r �j
/
August �, 1999
Mr. Chasles Martensotto
Chairman, Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28`� Ave. S.
Miru�eapolis, MN
Dear Mr. Martensotto,
t propose herein �•et another noise metric for MASAC to publish. I call it RELATNB RESIDENTIAL
NOISE (RR11�.
RRN =(Avg. DNL for month) :c (No. of Residences)
The attached da.ta sheet "Calculation of Relative ResideIItial Na�ise by Community" shows exactly how the
calculation is proposed. The monthly average DNL of all ANOMS stations in each community is averaged
to �ive the community average. This DNL is multiplied
bv the number of residences in thc 65 DNL c,�ntour.
It's simple.
i The atta.ched data s�eet shows calculations for five
� cornmunities ar'ound the airport for which HNI'F3 has
estimated the number of residences within the 65DNL.
1' � The result is a baz chart, "Relatiae Residential
� -` Noise", which is atta.ched. This bar chart gTaphical1Y
' illustrates the relative comrnunity distress caused by
airport noise and suffered by residences.
� a�
s:.
I propose that MASAC publish the bar chart each
month with comparative data from past months os
vears to show progress on noise abatement. This simple grapiucal tool will provide MASAC with the
ability to explain the overall complex relationships of its work to the public. Noise abatement progress will
be immediately apparent to the pubtic and it will show the intenfi of MASAC to provide this information.
I will be pleased to explain and defend this metric, and, of course, to help with improvement in the
standardization and accuracy of input data.
Very sincerel v urs,
Neil Claric
5917 Grass ake Ter.
Minneapolis, MN 55419
•��
� � � � �
� � �
� ,� �
Avg. for May 1999
�
�r��✓�.J �-.���� ��om Cagan Men.Hts
C�
� Calculation o� Relat�ve Res'derati�6 oi�� �y Com�uni�
Remote MAC Noise Monitor Stations
Sta.# Address
Township
Minneapolis
1 Xerxes Ave. &� 41 st. St. M�nneapolis
2 Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
3 West Eimwood St. 8 Belmont Ave. ���neapol's
4 Oakiand Ave. 8 49th St. Minneapolis
5 12th Ave. &58th St. Minneapolis
6 25th Ave. & 57th St. M�nneapolis
8 Longfeliow Ave. & 43rcf St.
7 Wentwo�th Ave. & 64th St.
18 75th Dt. 8� 17th Ave.
20 75th St. S� 3rd Ave.
DNL Absolut� DNL
�w.amyw '
61.9 0.154$8�2
64.8 0.301995
66.6 0.4570�$
68.2 0.660693
74.3 2.691 a35
78.1 6.456542
63.5 0.223872
Avg. = 0.304655 64.83808
Richfieid 64.6 0.2884a�3
Richfield 72.9 1.949845
Richfield 57•8 0.06a2'6
Avg. = 0.768168 68.84324
9 Saratoga St. 8� Hartford Ave. St. Paul
10 itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. St. Paui
� 11 Finn St. 8� Scheffer Ave. St. Paul
12 Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. St. Paui
Residents RRN
� �
56.9 0.048978
63.6 0.22808?
58.3 0.067608
51.8 0.01513Fi
Avg. = 0.0902t�2 59.55217
62.5 0.177828
;, ( ) 13 Southeast end of Mohican Court Mendota Heights s�,3 0.338844
Mendota Heights �3.1 2.041738
15 Cuilon St. � Lexington Ave. ��ndota Heights
23 End of Kenndon Ave. q�g, = 0.8528G�3 69.30849
17 84th St. 8� 4th Ave.
19 16th Ave. 8� 84th St.
21 Barbara Ave. & 67th St
22 Anne Marie Trail
Bloomington 66.4 0.436516
Bloomington 68.2 0.660693�
Avg. = 0.548605 67.39259
inver Grove Heights 56.7 0.046 0.1
Inver Grove Heights 60
Avg. = 0_07338? 5$.65618
Eagan 68.7 0.74131
14 1st. St. & McKee St. Ea an 68 0.630957
16 Avalon Ave. & Vilan Lane Eagan 65 0.316228
24 Chapel Lane & Wren Lane A�9 _ p.562832 67.50379
* = microwatts/ sq. meter
*" = HNTS residenca codn#��inside 6�Di`,dL. Multiple = 3 singles.
�_"Relative Residential Noise" _(Avg. DNL) x(residence count)
' I
5750 372.8
1599 110.1
68 4.7
1631 109.9
148 10.0
, ' •, , � 1 I 1 . •. ;
METROPOLITAN AIRCRA.FT SODUfi�D ABATEMENT COUNCIL
GENERAL IVI��'`ING
Asugust 24, �999
7:30 p.�..
6040 28"' Aven� �outh
Minneapolis, NI'�ssota
Call to Order. Roll Call
The meetin� was called to order by Chairman lti4�ensotto at 7:30 p.m. on the bus enroute to the
Air Traffic Center in Fannington. The followin� a��rribers were in attendance:
Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Chairman
Brian Bates
John Nelson
Lance Staricha
Jamie Verbrugge
Solvei Wilmot
Will Eginton
Bob Johnson
Jill Smith
Kevin Batchelder
Dick Saunders
Mike Cramer
Leo Kurtz
Sandra Colvin Roy
Barret Lane
Kristal Stokes
Marks Hinds
John Halla
Advisors
Roy Fuhrmann
Chad Leqve
Mike Pedro
Shane VanderVoort
Cindy Greene
Visitors
Jon Larsen
�� j
�a'�en.dota Heights
�orne
��oomington
�,gan
l�Qan
�'�a
�ces Grove Heights
��AA
l���dota Heights
��ndota Heights
�neapolis
�eapolis
�a�eapolis
, � � eapolis
�s�rn.eapolis
�3iehfield
��hfield
�t_ Paul
� s:
Approval of Minutes
Corrections were made to the July 27, 1999 MASAC meeting minutes. The Mall of America was
incorrectly noted as the Mall of American, all of the Stage 2 and 3 aircraft were incorrectly noted
as Staoe II and Sta�e III. The minutes were then accepted as conected.
3. In[roduction of Invited Guests
There were no invited guests.
- Receiot of Communications
There were several communications received and copies provided.
-� Comments on the Draft Technical Advisors Report & Monthly Corridor Report was received from
Lance Staricha, Eagan and forwarded to Roy Fuhrmann and Chad Leqve for consideration.
� A letter from Jim Semn asking for infornlation on the straight-out departure procedure to be
forwarded to the MASAC Operations Commietee.
�- Two favorable responses were received by Shelly Ludwig regarding the receipt of the MASAC
packet via email.
-r Neil Clark sent a letter proposing the impiementation of a publication called Relative Residential
Noise (RRN), which is the average DNL for the month multiplied by the number of residences. The
letter was forwarded to the MASAC Operations Cominittee.
4. Auwst 10, 1999 Communications Advisorv Board Report
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, briefed members on the first MASAC Communications
Advisory Board meeting that was held on August 10, 1999. The following items were discussed: '
,\
� The responsibility of MAC Staff and goals were defined.
� Chad Leqve, MAC advisor, reviewed the updates to the MAC Web site.
-r Wendy Burt, PIO, asked members to do some of the legwork needed to obtain necessary information
for the submittal of publications to local newsletters and to provide research regarding other
dissemination options that MAC staff may not be aware of.
-r Discussed the cost and available budget for 1999.
a� Generated a preliminary list of topics that ca�nmunity representatives felt were a priority asking for a
top lO list to be submitted to MAC staff in order to generate a top three list to work from.
It was decided to meet every 2-3 weelcs for the first few months and then on an as needed basis.
The next two meetings are scheduled for August 31, 1999 and September 14, 1999 at 3:30 p.m. in
the MASAC small conference trailer.
Chairman Mertensotto stated the MASAC Communications Advisory Board meetinas are open to
anyone who would like to attend. Information on the dates, times and locations of these meetinQs
can be obtained from Melissa Scovronski at 612-726-8141, y
Auaust 13. 1999 Operations Committee Reoort
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, gave members a brief report on the August 13, 1999
Operations Committee meeting.
.� After a len�thy discussion on the Draft Technical Advisors Report and Monthly Corridor
Repor[, a motion to forward the draft to the full MASAC body for review and approval was
made and passed.
-� Reviewed the Ground Run-up Enclosure process approving the study to evaluate what could
be done with the existing site and options for relocatinQ the site to include modifications, cost
and available space.
a- Mr. Fuhrmann gave a presentation on a DNL trend analysis based on the period of time from
January 1998 through December 1998. The trend revealed an overall decrease in daily DNL
at MSP. It was noted that the results of this study are affected by the start date and the
amount of time included in the study. This also indicated the need to perform an analysis
spanning a longer timeframe than one year to accurately evaluate daily DNL levels. (See
enclosed copy of presentation.)
Part 1�0 Update ProQress
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, stated that throu�hout the month of July and the first part of
August the focus has been on the evaluation of the cunent and proposed land use from the
surrounding communities. The following meetin�s and workshops are scheduled in September to
provide information on the validation contour and land �se to interested parties:
�r September 28, 1999—Public workshop beginning at 5 p.m. at the Comfort Inn in
Bloominb on with the reb lar MASAC meeting to begin at 8 p.m.
a- September 29, 1999—Public workshop beainnin� at 5 p.m. at the Royal Cliff in Eagan.
�- September 30, 1999—Public workshop beginning at 5 p.m. at the Holiday Inn in EaQan.
Mark Hinds, Richfield, asked which version of INM is beinc used to generate the base case
contour. Mr. Fuhrmann explained version 5.2 is bein� used due to problems with version 6.0. If
(, 1
the problems are resolved, the base case validation contours will be generated in version 6.0.
� 7. RMT Site Location Uodate
Chad Leqve, Technical Advisor, gave a very brief update on the RMT site ]ocation. All five new
RMTs are up and running and are in the process of being integrated into the ANOMS system.
Data regarding these RMTs will be provided in the next Technical Advisors Report
Report of the Low Frequency Noise Policv Committee MeetinQs – Dick Saunders
Dick Sauders, Minneapolis, noted that there hadn't been a meeting of the Low Frequency Noise
Policy Corrunittee within the past 30 days.
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, informed members that BBN and HMMH have had
representatives on-site since Monday, AuQi.ist 23, 1999, monitoring on the field, in the
communities and at the tower on a daily basis.
9. Re�ort of the MAC Commission Meetin�
Chairman Mertensotto briefed mernbers on the MAC Commission meeting. Cominissioner Hale
was sworn in and Commission Cramer was reco�nized for his six years of work on the
comprehensive planning process. There was a change in the CIP for the Hubert H Humphrey
Terminal construction. 'There was an increase of 10 million dollars due to addina gates 7 and S,
adding curbside check-in for Sun Country Airlines and a ramp on the outside for easy access to
the lower level where the ticket counters are located. The September meetin� date was chanaed
to September 21, 1999 due to Yom Kippur, a Jewish holiday. y
10. Technical Advisor's Repon �
�
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, asked members to review the Draft Technical Advisors
Report and Monthly Corridor Report and be prepared to discuss comments and su�gestions ac the
next MASAC meeting of September 28, 1999.
11. Persons Wishing to Address the Council
There were no persons wishing to address the council.
12. Items Not on the Aaenda
The 30 million dollars in bonds from Richfield requested to help with the impact of Runway
17/35 is on hold due to a conflict with federal regulations.
13. Adjournment
The next full MASAC meeting will be September 28, 1999 following the public workshop at the
Comfort Inn in Bloomington. Chauman Mertensotto adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted.
Shelly Ludwig, MASAC Secretazy
, x�, , . . �. � � � . .
...
� . . . � ;�
MINUTES
MASAC OPERA.TION� CONIlV�ITTEE
September 10,1999
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission MASAC Large Conference Trailer and
called to order at 10:00 a.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Members•
Mark Salmen, Chairn�u�
Dick Saunders
Bob Johnson
John Nelson
Kevin Batchelder
Jamie Verbrugge
Dick Keinz
Ad_
Roy Fuhnnann
Chad Leqve
Shane VanderVoort
� � � Nate Reis
_ Mark Ryan
Mark Kill
Cindy Green
Glen Orcutt
Visitors•
Mark Hinds
Jan DelCalzo
Will Eginton
Glenn Strand
NWA
Minneapolis
MBAA
Bioominb on
Mendota Heights
Eagan
MAC
MAC
M�C
MAC
MA�C
MAC
MAC
FAA
FAA
Richfield
Minneapolis
Inver Grove Heights
Minneapolis
� � �
Chairman Salmen introduced Michelle Jensen, an NWA intern.
Correspondence
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, updated the corrunittee on several letters staff had received.
� �)
_: 1
• A letter was received from Neil Clark, Minneapolis, concerning Relative Residential Noise and was
forwazded to the Operations Committee from MASAC. �
• Another letter from Mr. Clark regarding the Technical Advisor's Report was received.
s A letter was received from Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis, regazding the Technical Advisor's Report.
• A letter was received from Lance Staricha, Eagan, regarding the Technical Advisor's Report.
Each of these correspondence will be addressed at the October 8, 1999 Operations Cominittee meeting.
Construction Update
Mr. Fuhrmann updated the Corrunittee on the south parallel runway reconstruction project. He said the
project would be completed no later than Tuesday, September 14, 1999.
Part 150 Study Update
Mr. Fuhrmann noted that the public workshop presentations at the end of September would be different
than the presentation for that day. He also noted that the reason for conducting the workshops at this
stage in the study was to give community members a chance to learn more about the Part 150 process
and be involved early on. He said there is some concern about bringing a validation contour to the
public without the iinal mitigation contour being available, but staff feels it is important to educate and
inform the public about what has talcen place thus faz.
A second reason for the workshops, according to Mr. Fuhrmann, is to validate the Integrated Noise
Model contour generation process. He said it is important to explain how the INM works and what
inputs have been used.
Finally, the community and individual comments received during the Part 150 scoping process request as ( 9'. T.'
much public input as possible.
Mr. Fuhmiann noted that besides the 1999 validation contour, which will be presented at the September
meetings, a base case contour for the yeaz 2000 and a forecasted contour for the year 20Q5 will be
presented at future public meetings. The 2005 contour will be significantly different from the base case
because it will include the north/south runway and the 2000 contour wili not. He said because a number
of operations will shift to the north/south runway, the contours off the end of the parallel runways will
get smaller while the azeas to the south of the new runway will get larger. The 1999 validation and 2000
base case contours will not be mitigated according to the Part 150 guidelines. They are a tool to make
evaluations and to study the analysis of the impacts associated with the noise. The 2005 contour will
take into account the high forecast for operations noted in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and
will have a different fleet mix than that being used today.
Because the Part 150 process is complicated and has changed sib ificantly from past studies, the
education process will be intense. Staff has made plans to help ensure that the public clearly understands
the process, includinQ developing a brochure that will be given out at the workshops and which will be
available to the public throu�h MACs Environment department.
Mr. Fuhrmann noted that the purpose of the meeting was to show how well the INM predicts noise levels
when the appropriate inputs are used.
2
Kim Hughes, HNTB, then reviewed the agenda.
Review of FAR Part 150
The focus of a Part 150 Study is to develop a comprehensive set of noise compatibility measures that
provide a balanced and coordinated program to effectively respond to noise impact problems. The
program being developed for MSP requires a thorough evaluation of options that are safe, practical and
official and are not unduly burdensome to any party and are Iegally defensible.
Noise Exposure Maps (NEM) and a Noise Compatibility Prob am (NCP) are the two documents to be
submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
Two maps will be submitted as part of the NEM, a base year and a 5-year forecast. The base year will be
2000 and the forecast year will be 2005. The 1999 validation contour is only mear►t to validate the
contour generation process. Because there will be an all Stage 3 fleet in 2000, the base case map may
look different than the 1999 validation contour. The 2005 forecasted map will also have a different
shape than the base case contour due to the new north/south runway being added. �
NCPs must consider a wide range of potential noise compatibility actions based on two cateQories: Noise
Abatement Actions and Land Use Actions. Noise abatement actions reduce non-compatible land use by
decreasing aircraft noise through aircraft procedural changes. Land use actions reduce non-compatible
land uses by preventing future non-compatible uses by either changing land uses or through corrective
measures, such as the sound insulation program.
Part 150 is a voluntary prob am. MSP has completed two Part 150 studies. Over 200 airports in the U.S.
�' j`� ) have participated in Part 150.
i" )
Review of DNL
The day/night level (DNL) is the single metric used for determining the exposure of individuals to
aviation noise.
DNL is the average noise level over a 24-hour period, except noise occurring at night (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.)
is artificially increased by 10 decibels to reflect the added intrusiveness of nighttime noise. (Community
background noise levels are typically decreased by 10 decibels at night.)
The Integrated Noise Model (INM) is the FAA approved computer software used eo generate noise
exposure maps. A variety of data is fed into the INM program to generate a contour. The more accurate
the information, the closer the contour will come to actual conditions. INM version 5.2 is beina used at
this time. Althouah version 6.0 is available in a beta or test version, there are problems that need to be
worked out. If the problems are resolved in time, version 6.0 will be used.
MSP INM Data Input
The inputs needed for INM are:
• Aviation activity (number of operations, fleet mix, day/night split, etc.)
0 Aircraft perforn�ance (weight of aircraft, temperature, departure stage lenb hs, etc.)
3
• Airport factors (wind and weather, layou[, demand/capacity, etc.)
• Aircraft operations (departure profiles, flight tracks, run up activity, runway use, etc.) �
Fleet Mix
The fleet mix information is separated into the followinQ operational categories:
• Northwest Airlines
• Other passenger airlines
• Re�,ional airlines
• Cargo (operate differently than passenger airlines and have a different day/night split)
s Generai aviation (most difficult to get information for)
• Military
Because Northwest Airlines operates a majority of flights at MSP, and how it operates is well
understood, they were placed in a separate category from the other passenger airlines.
The Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS) allows MSP to categorize operations
in this way. Separating aircraft operations into categories further refines and enhances the INM process.
The fleet mix was developed using ANOMS data, FAA tower records and the Offcial Airline Guide
(OAG) schedule information to extend to the end of 1999. Extensive coordination with Northwest
Airlines to confirm that its 1999 fleet mix was conect also took place. Allowances for possible flight
cancellations were made, as well.
Operations are assigned by operational category (as noted above) and then by aircraft type, the day/night
split and the departure sta.ge length. The departure stage length represents a range in distance that an �, �.
aircraft departinQ from MSP flies with Stage 1 being shortest and Stage 7 being the longest. Departure
staae lenb hs are important because they give an indication of how heavy an airplane is upon departure.
ANOMS data was used to determine sta�e len�hs and was then compared to OAG information.
Runway Use
Operations during the months of January, February and March 1999 were used to develop runway use
data because they represent months of non-construction. Runway use data is further detailed by the
operational category, arrival and departures and the day/night split.
John Nelson, Bloomin�ton, asked whether seasonal affects were taken into consideration. Kim Hughes,
HN'I'B, noted that for the base case contour (2000) a complete year's worth of data will be used. The
averaae temperature of 51 ° F at MSP was used in the model, which is closer to the temperature during
those three months.
Track Use
Track use was analyzed off of each runway end for the three months of January, February and March
1999 throuah an ANOMS gate analysis. Several tracks are new to this Part 150 study. Track use also
reflects the day/niQht usage.
Temperature
4
:l; � )
,
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data from the past twelve months was used to
deternzine the average temperature for MSP. This was calculated by taking the average hourly
temperature weighted by the average hourly operational count. 'This allows for a more accurate average
temperature related to when aircraft are normally operatin�. The average temperature input used in INM
atMSPis51°F.
Departure Profcles
The standard INM departure profiles were modified to reflect the Noise Abatement Departure Profiles
(NADP) being used off each runway end at MSP. Since Northwest Airlines accounts for approximately
80�Io of the operations at MSP, NWA's specific depariure profiles were used for NWA departures rather
than the standard INM profile. Because close-in NADPs are not standard for INM, a close-in departure
profile was developed. Aircraft tyge and stage-length were used to develop the profiles for input into the
model. Heavier (longer stage-len�) aircraft have different departure profiles than shorter staQe len�th
flights.
Eaasting Land Use
Existina land use data has been and continues to be collected and reviewed in order to better understand
the current non-compatible land use conditions in the area and to see how land use has changed since the
previous Part 150 study.
Data relating to development trends and activities include:
• Cunent land use mapping and classifications
• Population and housing esrimates and demographic indicators
• Municipalland development regulations
• Comprehensive planning and fuhu'e land use mapping
o New developmendre-development activities
• Zoning ordinances and other land use controls
A comprehensive Geo�raphic Information System (GIS) database is being constructed for the Part 150
Study Update. This database will provide a method for storing, retrievinD and mapping municipal
development data and will aid in making decisions for the future.
In June 1999, sixteen cities were contacted in order to obtain land use data. If a city could not provide
digital data, the city was provided with a hazdcopy of the city's parcel base maps. These were then
updated arid did tized by MAC and HNTB staff for inclusion into GIS format.
Interviews were held with most cities as a means of estabIishing a relationship with each city and to
verify the land use data used in the study.
Five cities are still in the process of verifying their land use information. These communities'
information will be updated, as the data becomes available. The remaining 11 cities have si� ed off on
hard copy maps of their cities' land use.
Once the existinQ land use has been approved, demographic estimates from the Metropolitan Council
will be used to derive population and dwelling statistics.
0
Each city's classification system has been normalized into a generalized land use legend
�
1999 E�cisting Conditions Validation Contour
Ms. Hughes then presented the 1999 validation contour. This is not the base case or mitigation
contour.
Ms. Hughes explained how staff performed the model validation. The first analysis involved annualizin�
the RMT monitored data. for one year at each site and then comparing the results to the same locations on
the model. The monitored and modeled data are within 2.4 DNL dBA.
For a better comparison, RMT monitored data for the months of January, February and March 1999 was
averaged and then compared to the modeled contour. Because the contour was produced using runway
use data for these three months only, this offered a better comparison. The monitored and modeled data
for these three months are within .5 DNL dBA.
Ms. Hughes said this last analysis shows that the modeled contour closely reflects what is being
monitored at the RMTs. She said a deviation of 3.0 DNL dBA or less is considered to be extremely
accurate. Ms. Hughes said the availability of ANOMS data for this study is the reason the model is so
close to monitored values.
Next Steps
o Public Meetings on September 28, 29, and 30. Three meetings will be held from 5:00 to 8:40 p.m.
The purpose of the meetings is to get the public involved early in the process and to educate them on
the methods being used to generate the noise contours. _
• Finalize the existing and future land use conditions. ( �
• Evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of previous FAA approved land use measures. `�
• Develop potential land use noise abatement measures for consideration. Community input will be
sought through public meetings in late November or early December 1999. The 2005 non-miti�ated
contour will be available at those meetings.
+ Finalize the 2040 base case contour.
• Plans are to have a final 2005 mitigated contour sometime in late spring or early summer.
Discussion
Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights, asked whether or not procedural noise abatement measures will be
evaluated. Ms. Hughes said along with land use measures, aircraft procedural measures would be
evaluated.
Cindy Greene, FAA, asked if staff and HNTB had a plan to educate the public as to why the 1996
contour and the 1999 validation contour were so different. Ms. Hughes said an explanation of why these
two contours are different could be included in the materials that are handed out at the public meetinas.
Jan DelCalzo, Minneapolis, asked Ms. Hughes how the 1999 valiclation contour would compare to the
2000 base case map. Ms. Hughes said she didn't expect a sib ificant change from the 1999 validation
contour to .the 2000 base case contour. Ms. DelCalzo expressed some concern over presenting a
validation contour to the public when it hasn't been done before. Ms. Hughes said it is important to
C
0
involve the public early in the process, before a fmal contour has been generated.
Glenn Strand. Minneapolis, asked why a 60 DNL contour wa�s not included in the validation contour.
Ms. Hughes said the 60 DNL contour wil] be included on €etture contours, but since the 6� DNL was
used for validation, the 60 DNL was left off to avoid confusi�u�.
Mr. Strand also voiced a concern about the public wanting more information than what will be presented
to them at the public meetings. He said he was concerned �at people will be frustrated that they can't
get their questions answered in one meeting and will not co� co any subsequent meetings.
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked if Minneapolis was the �'irst airport to perform a validation of a
contour using actual monitored data. Kim Hughes, �B, said, although it is the best comparison she
has ever seen, other airports have performed similar comparisons.
Jan DelCalzo, Minneapolis, asked if the high forecast for the t�u�nber of annual aircraft operations would
be used for the 2005 contour. Ms. Hughes said the high farecast from the Dual Track EIS would be
used. The high forecast for operations in 2005 is 625,000 opea�ations.
RMT Installation Update
Chad Leqve; MAC Advisor, gave a brief presentation on che status of the RMT installations. All five
sites have been installed and are functional. System ince�'ation and acceptance testing has been
completed. Data collection for the purpose of reporting began on August 20, 1999. The Auwst 1999
Technical Advisor's report will include data from each of �e five RMTs from that date forward. A
picture of the newly installed RMT in Richfield was shown.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m. The next MASA� Operations Committee meetin� will be
held on October 8, 1999 at 10:00 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Melissa Scovronski, Committee Secretary
f,
C
' ,;'' � � ,; � � ;,, '�; ,� � ,
DATE: September l, 1999
TO: MASAC Operations Committee Members
FROM: Fuhrmann> Technical Advisor
SUBJECT: Part 150 Update - F�cisring Conditions
As part of the ongoing Part 150 Update process, at the September 10, 1999 MASAC Operations
Comrnittee meeting MAC staff will provide informarion on the existing noise conditions around MSP.
This information will provide insight into the existing noise environment around the airport, which is a
critical part of the Part 150 Update process.
MAC's consultant HNTB in close coordination with MAC staff has been preparing the existing
conditions analysis as part of the Part 150 update process. Two existing conditions analyses have been
conducted in parallel. One analysis (Ana2ysis A) was conducted using actual ANOMS flight track and
noise data as INM inputs to generate the contours. A second analysis (Analysis B) was conducted
utilizing standard INM contour generation procedure including all of the standard/traditional procedures
: and inputs to generate the contours. The results of the two existing conditions contour analyses should
� � provide insight into the effects of using actual data compared to modeled information.
Information on land use and population counts relative to the existing condition contours will be
provided based on the existing land use and population counts received from the respective communities.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-725-6326.
�' � ` � '� � / �` � � �
DATE: September 1, 1999
TO: MASAC Operations Corrunittee Members
FROM: Chad Leqve - ANOMS Coordinator
SUBJECT: RMT Installation Update
The installation, integration and acceptance testing has been completed for all of the five new RMTs.
The new sites are performing well, as a result the %rst reported data from the new site will be provided in
the August 1999 Technical Advisor's Report with data beginning on August 20, 1999.
MAC staff will provide a project completion summary at the September 10, 1999 MASAC Operations
Committee meeting.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-725-6328.
0
� "�' • ' ,,
�, �� :�� �.- J,� 14 1� a; i
�
, .,� , _ j ;,1; � T. ,.... ,, ��� � `;; �,; C._ � ,:;.
/' •
�, ' �i
� , ,-
F::� -...,�
C -.
MINUTES
IYIASAC COMNiLTNICA'TI�?vS ADVISORY ]B(JARD
August 31,1999
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airposts Commission Metropolitan Room, and called
to order at 3:30 p.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Members•
Lance Staricha
Mike Cramer
Dick Saunders
Dean Lindberg
Advisorv-
Chad Leqve
Shane VanderVoort
Wendy Burt
Amy vonWalter
Eagan
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
h�1AC
MAC
MAC
1VIAC
AGENDA
REVIEW CON�lE�IUNICATlON TOPICS
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, suggested grouping the topics from the last meeting into four
categories, as follows:
I. Achievements
Ground Noise Study
NADPs
Straight Out Departure Procedure
Crossing in the Corridor
RMT Sites
II. Current Events
Part 150 Update
Stage 3 Compliance
Low Frequency Noise Issues
III. Long Term - Yeaa- 2000
Global Positioning System
North/South Runway
�-��� �� IV. As Ne�rler� or Ong4ing
__ Noise Complaint Line .
MeetinQ Notices and Agendas
The group discussed what topics would be most per�i�ent and settled on the Part 1 �0 Update as
the first topic to write about.
BEGIN DEVELOPMENT OF INFORMATION P1�CE
After much discussion, the group agreed to the follawing points:
• The content of the information piece (article) w�I be factuai and objective to avoid
editorializin�.
• The MAC Environment and Public Affairs Dep�tments will draft the a.rticle.
• The article should be no more than 750 words.
o The article will be written for an audience with �t�Ie or no knowledge of aircraft noise issues.
• Information included in the article will include: aEn explanation of DNL, a listinQ and simple
explanation of the data inputs and the target date� far completion. The article should also note
any public comment and educational opportunit�es, such as the public meetings already being
pianned.
s The MASAC Communications Advisory Board will review and make comments on the
article before distribution.
• A draft copy of the article will be ready for revi�w. by the September 14, 1999 meeting for
distribution as soon as possible thereafter.
• The article should include information about wl�re to find out more about the Part 1�0
proQram, including the appropriate MASAC m��ber and the noise and information line.
DETERMINE TARGET PUBLICA?70NS
s Cit_y Newsleners: The committee secretary will ��t�tact each city represented on MASAC to ��`
determine whether or not they publish a city newsTetter, who the contact is, how they prefer --
to receive copy, how often they publish and what their deadlines are.
• Community Newspapers: These weekly public�ans will be contacted through the MAC
Public Affairs Office.
• Community Newsletters: Members of the Corn�unications Advisory Committee will attempt
to identify community newsletters that may be amterested in aircraft noise issues.
• Airport Noise Report
• The Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRF') has a listing of community newsletters, as
well. The committee secretary will contact the NRP for this listing.
• The committee and staff will attempt to establish an�.ongoing relationship with each
publication contact in order to have access to publication of information on an ongoing basis.
DISCZISS HOW TO ENHANCE ACCESS TO T�� MAC NOISE DEPARTM�NT
WEBSITE
Committee members discussed possible additional ��.ks to the www.macavsat.orQ Website.
Some suggestions included:
• The Airport Noise Report
• Boeing
• NASA
• Landin�s.com
• FAA Documents (i.e. Part 150, Part 36, Part 16�, etc.)
C�
Committee members also discussed some more technical information they were interested in
seeinD on the Website, includi�� information on glide scopes, the PRM, freeflight, hushkittin`
packages and a�raphic depict�na the differences between the close-in and distant departure
profiles.
The next meeting is scheduled for September 14, 1999 at 3:30 p.m.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.r�•
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski, Committee Secretary
MINUTES
MASAC COMi��i[JNICATIONS ADVISORY �OARD
September 14,1999
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Cammission Small Conference Trailer and
called to order at 3:30 p.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Members•
-
Mazk Hinds
Mike Cramer
Dick Saunders
Dean Lindberg
Neil Clark
Advisorv•
Chad Leqve
Shane VanderVoort
Wendy Burt
Amy vonWalter
Richfield
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
AGENDt�
REVIEW PART I50 ARTICLE
Board members reviewed the article written by staff. The following comments were given:
• The article needs to be sliorter due to space limitations in most city newsletters.
• Para�raphs one through three and six should be left in. Parab aphs four and five can be taken
out.
• The article should focus on the big picture. A more detailed article can be written at a later
time.
• Since Part 150 is generally associated with the insulation program, the article should be clear
about how a Part 150 process works and how the insulation program fits into the bigger
picture.
• It is important that the article explain that this is the first time at MSP that a Part 150 Study
Update will employ ANOMS data and that this data will enhance the accuracy of the noise
contours.
o Mention of the new north/south runway and how it will impact operations at the airport may
be helpful.
• The article shouldn't mention past meetings, but should include specific information about
future meetin�s if available.
• Reference to the www.mspairport.com Web site should point directly to information about
the Part 150 Study Update at www.macavsat.orQ.
• Staff will revise the article to reflect the members' sugcestions and comments.
• Mark Hinds, Richfield, and Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, will review and approve a revised
version of the article via fax.
REVIEW PUBLICATIONS LIST (
Board members reviewed the publications list, which included city and neighborhood \
newsletters. The following suggestions were made:
• Additional cities need to be contacted for information on their newsletters.
• City newsletters normally publish every other month. Timely submission wili be important.
• MAC Public Affairs will coordinate contacting the community newspapers.
• The Board should consider the possibility of sending the article to groups other than the
media, includin� possibly city council members.
DETERMINE NEXT STEPS
At the October 7, 1999 meeting members will prioritiz� action items from the Community
Outreach Program, first presented to the Operations Committee in June, and set goals for 2000.
OTHER
Chad Leqve, MAC, said the following information has been added to the www.macavsat.ora
Web site:
• Information from the Federal Aviation Administra�ion's (FAA) Part 361isting that shows
decibel level comparisons between huskitted and manufactured Stage 3 aircraft.
+ The Runway Use System (RUS) map, also included in the Noise Programs Handbook.
s The Eaean/Mendota Heights conidor map, also included in the Noise Programs Handbook.
• A link to NASA's Langley reseazch facility, including technical documents from NASA �
regarding jet engine noise reduction research.
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, asked the Minneapolis members for suggestions on where to
hold the next Part 150 workshops in Minneapoiis.
The next meeting is scheduled for October 7 at 3:30 p.m.
The meetinQ was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski, Secretary
TO: City newsletter editors
FROM: Metropolitan Airports Sound Abatement Council (MASAC)
Communications Advisory Committee
Wendy Burt, Public Information Officer, MAC
Roy Fuhrmann, Manager, Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs, MAC
SUBJECT: Part 150 Study Update Informational Article
DATE: September 14, 1999
For your consideration is an 750-word informational piece that the MASAC and MAC will be
providing from time to time to neighboring communities around Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport. We would like to update communities about noise issues that impact them
and we hope you will consider including this information in your city or community newsletter.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is in the process of updating the Federal
Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 150 program at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport (MSP). The Part 150 program update allows the MAC to develop �nd refine
effective, comprehensive noise compatibility measures that are safe, practical and beneficial.
There are a number of ineasures currently in effect at MSP that will most likely continue,
however, advancements in technology and requirements of the 1996 Minnesota State
Legislature require and warrant an update.
Existing Part 150 noise compatibility measures include the operational use of the Eagan-
Mendota Heights Corridor and the Runway Use Systems. These measures help to distribute,
as much as possible, noise throughout the communities. Another measure includes land use
treatments that help make the land surrounding the airport more compatible with aircraft
operations. These incIude land use zoning usually adopted by local municipalities as well as
noise mitiQation treatment efforts such as the MAC's residential and school sound insulation
program.
The insulation of homes surrounding the airport is recognized and approved by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and allows airports to invest in noise mitigation measures.
Homes eligible for sound insulaiton are identified by the development of an airport noise
exposure map. At MSP, the Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS) is _
being used to ensure that the contour developed for noise mitigation purposes reflects the �
actual noise environment experienced in the community. �
The ANOMS system records and stores aircraft operations that occur at MSP on a daily basis
and correlates these operations with actual monitored noise measurements that occur at one
of 29 remote monitoring towers located within each community that is adjacent to MSP. The
ANOMS system has the ability to extract and report the actual aircraft flight path, altitude
and noise levels that were recorded at the remote monitoring towers affected by each specific
aircraft overfliQht. Other information such as MSP aircraft fleet mix, ni�way use, time of
day operations, departure destination information and atmospheric data are all used to
recreate and forecast the existing noise levels and to project future noise levels for mitigation
purposes.
DNL -- or Day Ni�ht average sound Level -- is a universal FAA. noise metric used
throughout the nation to determine the individual exposure level for aviation noise. By
definition, DNL is the avera�e noise level over a 24-hour period except that noises occumng
at night are artificially increased by ten decibels. This ni�httime weighting attempts to reflect
the added intrusiveness of nighttime noise events.
All of the ANOMS information is used along with forecasts of future aviation activity
includin� total number of aircraft operations, aircraft fleet mix composition, time of day,
aircraft weiQht, destination, wind and weather impacts, runway use, altitude and departure
techniques are used to create a noise exposure conto�ar. This contour defines the areas which
the FAA may approve for noise mitigation efforts by the MAC.
To encourage public participation, the MAC held the first of a sesies of public meetings to
disseminate the contour generation/validation process and base case land use to the public on
September 28, 29 and 30, 1999. At these meetings, MAC staff and others were available to
answer questions about the Part 150 Study Update process, the contour generation validation
process and the updating of the municipal land use.
Additional public meetings are tentatively planned for: November 30, December 1 and 2,
1999 - Noise Abatement and Land Use measures to be Considered including Past
Recommendations and Recomme:�dations to be Considered; February S, 9, and 10, 2000 -
Recommendations for Noise �Abatement and Land Use Measurements including MAC
recommendations for Part 150 Update. The MAC recommendations include community
comments submitted throughout the process.
The draft Part 150 study update is expected to be published in Apri12000 followed by a
public hearing and a 30-day comment period. Finally, the MAC will submit the Part 150
study update to the FAA in June 2000.
Throughout the Part 150 update, the MAC encourages public participation and comments by
.:
all community members. The MAC is working closely with the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound
Abatement Council (MASAC) which is comprised of 3S community and asrport user
� ) representatives. Through this organization, the MA� has already received numerous
comments to improve the Part 150 update and the public involvement process.
MASAC and the MAC suggest area residents contact �heir MASAC representatives. For
more information, contact the MAC noise information and complaint line at 612-�26-9411 or
the mspairport.com web site.
�
( F)
i
� ._
, , � � �. . � �- . � - � •�
f i /
Over Please
Please send your request via mail to: MASAC Sec�etary, 6040 28th Avenue S.,
Mi�aneapolis, MN �5450 or fax it to :(612) 725-6310.
#:
Staff Contact:
Date Received:
Is this a Phone Or Written Request?
Approved By:
Approvai Date:
Data ?r�vailability;
S tart Date:
S top Date:
Analysis S tart Date:
Ana�ysis Stop Date:
2
Date:
�
r
v
N
� .a
. = � C: q�"'�..' c� c�
c � E� e � ,-'
� r. O �, M N
� 3 F"
�
C�i y�
� �
.�
C. �" E"�
�' ; x � ,-+ c
a� i "� CO
^ � �
�� �
a °
'�
,�° r�.
r.+ Z
M
�.�, p � � N N
�. U e� ^`
0o W
a
� c
O .:+
�' G
C.'. .�r
� � �
� O
oL,°� p � o 0
� � p
� �
�� �
o^ :�
!-" L
� �
' �y
a� ai '� � � N
r. c E � �c
�b� �
^� � L`v.1
� Q O
0 �^ �
�
�, �
� �� v� � � �
� o . a �* r. ,-,
G" `" � � � M N
OV p M
U
� � �
� � w
U � -o 0
o�
� � � y � �
� �
� � y G� o D
� in a� ,� � :� �
� � c�n�" C!� o = C
c.° y o � y U
N ^ �C) '� � je; '
� � �� CC L'a O L
""' � U C�
� � � �
� c N G � ,� .�
.�
.e� `� � "" �" � a�i
° � � � � o 0
¢ � � v� U � �
� o 0 0 0 0 0 0
� o o O O� O o
r��MM o000
p � [�. � CT M �— N
.-�
�h- -N{f}- 69 b�-} b4 -N{f}- bMF}- �}
�
y I
�
U��������
� d: U; o d- o o��
� ��� 4.����
� 6�
�
rO�r tO�.� rO�.� O rO� MO MO rO�
►+� t+� �r r�, r+-� W W r+-�
cT M O� c�'1 N C'� N C'�
� N � � O o�O G� �
�
c�
�
�
�
�
C�
C
w
N
►17
�
L ♦
� � c�
�
F"' N M ct' V'1 � t� 00 .n, Ei
� Q� G� GT G� O� O� O� O� o
a� Q� O� p� Q� O� cT cS C� �
^�.i ..� .-. .-. .-. .�
MASAC Members
Chnirman:
Charles Mertensotto
(Mendota Heights�
First Vire Chairman:
John NeLson (Bioomingtonl
MASAC Operatians Cammirtee Chairman
and Secnnd Vire Chairman:
Mnrk Salmen (NWA)
Airbnrne Espress:
s� sac�
ALPA:
Ron Johnson
Citv njBlnomingmn:
Petrona Lce
ve� wu�oX
Citv vf Bumsville:
Checles Van Guilder
Citv ojEagan:
Jamie Verbrugge
t,��e sr�;�t,a
Cirv oJlnver Grove Heighrs:
Charles Eginton
City of Mendota Heights
J�i Sm;t6
Kevin Batchelder
Cirv njMinneapolis:
sarrec I.anc
Dean Lindberg
Joe Lee
Glenn Straud
sena� con� Roy
Mikc Cramer
Citv of Richfreld
Kristal Stokes
Dawn Weitzel
Citv of SG Louis Park
Robert Andrews
Citv nf St. Pnul:
John Aalla
Ciry ofSursfuh Lake:
Glenda Spiotta
Delta Airlines Inc.:
Latry Goehring
DHL Ainvays:
Brfsn Simoason
Federa! Express:
Jo6n Schussler
MAC Sraff
Dick Keinz
MBAA:
Robert P. Johnwn
Mesaba Northwest AirlirJc:
Ph7 B�ake
Nnrthwest Air(ines:
Jennifer Sayre
Steve Aolme
rr�,�y scouac
St. Paul Chamber of Cnmmerce:
Rolt M3ddleton
Sun CountrvAirliner
Gordon Graves
United Airlines lnc.:
Kevin Blsck
United Parce! Servrce:
Michael Geyer
U.S. Airx•avs lnc.:
Larry Yandle
MASAC Advisors
Metropnlitan Airports Cmm�dssion:
Roy Fuhrmnnn
Metropn(iran Airporrs Com»vssinn:
CommissionerAlton Gasper
Federal Aviarion Adminislranon:
Ron Gtaub
Cindv Greene
Ai� Tran,rponaqnn Assnciarinn:
Paul htcGraw
MNAir Narional Guard:
Major Roy J. Shetka
U.S. Air Fnrce Reseme:
Captain David J. Gerken
Secrerarc:
Melissa Scovronsld
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Deciaration of Purpose
1.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interest,
convenience, and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation,
international, national, state, and tocal, in and through this state; promote the
efficient, safe, and economical handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion
of this state in national and intemational programs of air transportation; and to
those ends to develop the fuli potentialities of the metropotitan area in this
state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all aviation facilities
in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and effective use of
aeronautic facilities and services in that area;
2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum
environmental impact from air navigation and transportation, and to that end
provide for noise abatement, control of airport area land use, and other
protective measures; and
3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental policies and
minimize the public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around airports.
Metrogolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Statcynent of Purpose
This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfare of the
communities adjoining Minneapolis-S� Paul International Airport - Wotd-
Chamberlain Field, a public ai�port in the County of Hennepin, State of
Minnesota, through the alleviation of the problems created by the sound of
aircraft using the airport; through study and evaluation on a continuing basis
of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviation of the same; through
initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective procedures,
conuol and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and of
aircraft using the same; and tteraugh dissemination of information to the
affected communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport
respecting the problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions
made and actions initiated and taken to alleviate the problem.
Metropolitan Aircrait Sound Abatement Council
l�epresentation .
The membership shall include representatives appointed by agencies,
corporations, associations and governmental bodies which by reason of their
statutory authority and responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason
of their status as airport users, have a direct interest in the operation of the
airport. Such members will be called User Representatives and Public
Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and Public
Representatives shall at all times be equal in number.
This report is prepared and printed in house by Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator and Shane
VanderVoort, ANOMS Technician questions or comments may be directed to:
MAC Aviation Noise and Satellite Progams
Minneapolis/St. Paul In[emational Airport
6040 28�' Avenue South
Minneapolis MN, 55450
TeL• (6t2) 725-6328. Fax: (612) 725-6310
MAC Environment Department Home Page: www.macavsat.org
The Airport 24-hour Noise Hodine is 726-941 I. Compiaints to the hodine do not result in
changes in airport activity, but provide a public sounding board and airport infonnation ouUet.
The hodine is staffed durine business hours, Mnnda�� — Friduti•.
Table of Contents
August 1999 Complaint Summary
August 1999 Complaint Map,
1
MSP Airport Reference Diagram 3
August 1999 All Hour Runway Use
C�
August 1999 MSP Carrier .Iet Fleet Composition 5
August 1999 MSP Top 1 S Airport Origin/Destination Analysis 6
August 1999 Nighttime Runway Use,
7
August 1999 Top IS Nighttime Operators by Type g
August 1999 Top I S Nighttime Operator's Stage Mix 9
MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoring Tower Site Locations Map 10 �,
August 1999 Total and Average Daily Aircraft Noise Events per RMT 11
August 1999 Average Aircraft Event Lmax and Leq per RMT 12
August 1999 Monthly DNL Values forAircraft, Community and Total Events
per RMT 13
August 1999 Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per R�LIT __ 14-21
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (NiASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
1VISP Complaints by City
� August 1999
Nature of 1VI5P Complaints
��til�'� O� ��� �OII3�DI�iIfl�S � E�essive Noise
EI Farly/Late
a Low �y�g
� Structural
Disturbance
[� Helicopter
❑ Ground Noise
� Fn�ine Run-up
❑ Frequency
A Product of the Nfetropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program
1
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MAS�1C) T�chnical Advisor's Rep�rl
��, f�� . . . •� ;�: , , � �..
� t 1 ..
(� 1
__ ,�
A I'rcxiuct c�f the Mcuopoli4m Airports Commission Al'dONIS 1'rc��r.un
�
�
�
0
'�
c�
�
a�
a
O
w
0
�
�
.G
�
O
Z
Mctrc�polit�m Aircralt Sound Abalcmcnt Council (MASAC) Technical Aeivisc�r's Report
August 1999 Total MSP All Hour Runway Use
All ArrivaLs Jet Amvals All Departures Jet Departures
Nature of Operations
O Rwy 4■ Rwy 12L Rwy 12R Rwy 22 ❑ Rwy 30L � Rwy 30R
ArrivaU
R�VY �epartiuv
4 Arr
12L Arr
12R An
22 Arr
30L Arr
30R Arr
tJve rtli�l�t,
So. RichfiekUB�
So. Minneapolis/r
So. Minneapolis/1�
St. PauUHi�hl�
rea � " I t
o. Richtieki
o. Richfieki
nd Park
Total r�rrivals
; 4 ; Dep St. PauUHighland Park
; 12L � Dep EaQan/Mendota HeiQhts
_. _-- _.. _ ` _ _
, _. ___ __.___.. __ .._.__ _.
; 12I2 Dep Faaan/Niendota Heights
i_ 22 _� Dep _ So. Richfie�/Bk�omington
; 30L � Dep , So. Nlinneapolis/No. Richtieki
� 30R ; Dep Su. Minnea�/No. R.ichtie�i
'i'�ital Departuns
Tat�tl i3�et�tiat�s
'aunt All - - G�iunt Jet : : ;
�eratiiius PercenE - :O x�ratio�Ls Percent`
36 0.2% 30 0.2% .
6209 28.9% 5067 32.8%
4879 22.7°l0 2961 19.290
170 0.8% 146 0.9�/0
4431 20.7�/0 2578 16.790
5733 26.��10 4664 30.2%
214;8 10ti:Qa/a 1��46 10i).(?%
104 0.5°Io 8� � 0.690
5767 27.3°Io 4266 27.7�'/0
5�2 2.6°l0 2?0 1.4�a
9102 43.1 °l0 7089 I 46.1 �/o
819 3.9°Io 237 � 1.5°Io
4782 ?2.6�0 349� ?2.7�Io
Z1126 100.0% 1�391 � 1t.10.U�'lo
�ZS�i� 31}837
=� A F'rcxiuct of thc Mctropc�litan Airports Commission ANOMS i'ro;ram
B7�2
I3741
I37=�3
DC��
DCBG
DC 10
13722
I37�
B721
DC9
B732
MD11
B763
DC87
8777
A3U6
A310
�
�
B734
A32U
B73�
B738
A319
t��3�
8���
13t�4b
CARJ
E14�
rloo
F7U
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
August 1999 le�ISP Carrier Jet Fleet Composiiion
...............x_.........�..�.��....�.--.-.--;-.�
110.0
IU9.�
10�.�
lU�.�
10�.�
103.0
102.�
101.6
IOOS
)8.�
98.1
97.7
9�.8
9�.7
9�.�
9=�.�
94.3
94.0
c�_�
92.1
91.5
91.�
91.0
88.9
s�.g
87.7
87.7
87.�
g�s
s�.s
8�4.9
si.s
si.�
si.s
f3U.1
.. - -
13c�cins 7�47-2(i0
L�ueit� 7=�7-IOU
Boein� 7=�7-3C0
NtcDonnell Dou�,las DC�-�(�U
NlcDonnell Douglas DCg-6(�
IvlcDonn�ll Duu<�las DC10
Boein� `727-20U
Boeing 7�4?-=�00
ilcDonnell Doublas DC8 (l�toditied Stg
Boeing 727-1�0
McDonnell Dou�las DC9
Boeing 737-200
McDonnell Dou��las DC11
Boeing 767-200/300
Boeing 727 (Moditied St;. 3)
Mc, nnDo ell Dougla� DC8-7U0
�Uv'lll� 7��
Airt�us Industrics A30UB�4-6UU
An'bus Industries 1131U
Boeing 737 (Modi.tied Slg. 3)
McDonnell Dou�las DC9-SU
Boein� 7�7-200
MeDonnell Douglas DC9 (Modified St
Boein 737=tC0
Airbus Industn�s A3?0 _^
B�o m 737-�UO ____
Bc�ein� 737-80t) _
� !1u'bus Industries A319 _
�]3Uv1Ra %J%-____- ��U -----
Ro��<� �:��-�cx�
Briliah Ele�x�,Ll�e 1�C
�____-------- .
Can adau 6�0
� linbraer l��
..____-_-----------
I�ol:kcr 1O0 __
-------P'oldter7U ---
Sta�e II _ ___
Sta,e II1 ��___.
Sta�Te III Ivtanul�aclurecl________ _
_. _._� Z• t 1 Sta��e iIi
3
3
3
2
�
3
�
3
3
2
�
�
3
3
3
�
�
3
3
�
�
3
3
3
3
3
3
_�
3
3
i
�
�
3
3
_�
3
! 329DG
: 11717
..__..--j 1��)1�
� 27�i31
IG�
90
6U
?
90
1021
1253
2
173
172
1050
639
15
?
3?a6
0
G6
�
IG2
2116
3178
5121
59
�tgi?
� ?.� z
0
112
1U13
i�
1=�s
3�g
267
� 773
-.._ � _
0. �°/n
U.��%
U.2%�
O.G"/n
03°/�
3. i%i
�4.1'%
0.('1%
0.�%
0.6%
3.�4%
Z.1°/u
0.0°/v
0.(7'/0
10.6'%
0.2%
0.(i°/�
U.2%
U.(�/o
0.�%
6.�/0
103%
26.3%
0.2%
1�.6%
0.7%
0.0%
0.4%�
3.3%
a�r�r�
�.s�i�
1.3%
0.��'/,
2.�%�
O.U'/o
lOS%
37.�)%
� 1.G°/,
89�i%
oa �
- _------- -----_.,__.�_-
Note: Stage III represent aircraft mod�ed to meet all stage III criteria as outiined in rederai Aviation Regulavon (rAR) Pari .3b. Tnis
Includes hushkit an�nes, angine retrofits or aircraft operational flight co�gurations. e durin take-off measured in EPNL dBA
•T1ie Provided Noise levels from FAR Part 36 aze the loudest levels documented per aircraft Typ g
(Effective Perceived Noise Level).
•EPNL is the ]evel of the time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone-corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft yover
measured in A-weighted decibels.
�
' A Product of the Nletropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program
Metropolitan Airciaft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
August 1999 Top 15 Ori� n Airports far MSP
1
a,sc'�l 4°�'� 1�'`A� .3S �6°�� a��1 ,a9s'°� ��a9�'%�m�'�� 'y�°�� �.,�� ,�S''4l ,�,�,�S��,d.��,4�
.�a�`���o� �� � �� �9�°��� � � g'��;� G~ ���'�� � 4
4
�ti ��o ���,�
��
��
Note: Origin Aitport is the airport from wiuch the aircraii last departed prior to azriving at MSP.
�
�,
�
i� v�
CC �,"
C, O
a� '� ;
A �
s,
�, a>
"� O
�
�
0
�
0
August 1999 Top 15 Desti.nation Airports for MSP
��1 �4,�¢�t �.�5��ti� ��oti �a.��l ��,4w`� �2y �,� Q�S 1y�o ��, ��,�,ti� °y,�p4 ���,5
�p � �,• � �} Q. '�- G�¢,� �e,9�. �,4,,, j� � � F�
G�~G��O � �OG��OL ��}'� ��1� 40`�
G ~ ���
�r►
Note: Destination Airport is the first airport that the aircraft is proceeding to aHer departing Iv1SP. �-
6 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOI�IS Program
� j
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatemeni Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
August 1999 MSP Nightti�ne R�nway Use
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 �.sn.
:��
AIl Arrivals
��
I
�yc�Se
%nt
a,;
���
G��t 1
C� nr
4a
t� '�
�fa
t
t �
x�
7 .,.'R` % t°-`.
�� I
1 �+i
r9%^�4 Y���Pi
�/� �}��
����� � t� .:
j' IS� A � �.x � k-
1�%� !t Y} f �, t f! 7,,
�i fi���' � ���` 4' �' � � � �` ��a
�r}����n��,� ��� ��x ,,
i ,�t �r . ,
({�I�k� h .t" .4i �`i j�� k �E}���
��@��� � � �%i5f �� ����`�f � t ��
�{4� � Si� . u»aS c-
�+�k�r f� �` 1'r fs�4ti� ���,t � �~3 s, .��
l���t��� �.���l��dJt.j 'i,�.tT j 5" � tb�
r ka
�� �ir �. 2 � li,. � r �' ,: r t
�r I;���:i � � .,:��;�� h _,F;f x .. .
Jet Arrivals t�Il DePa.rtures Jet Departi.ses
Nature of Ope�ions
� � � : .
� . �,: . ,� r. � �
�.� . �.� x..:
■ : .♦ � �;�. .
_ 7
A Product, of the Nietropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Pro�am
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC}Technical Advisor's Report
August 1999 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Oper�.tors by Type
Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 93.6% of the total nighttime operations..
,;
\
8 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOIvIS Program
i
�
�
0
'�
�
�
d
a
O
a.
0
s.
d
�
�
z
Metropalitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Coeancil (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
r�.ugust 1999 Nighttime Flesi Stage P�Iig for Top 15 Airlines
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 �.m�.
� v
T' �~4'�"' ��' G�� G�� q� ��9� .�' ,���- 5 �.� � 44 '��
ri� rline _____________
t� Stage 2 � Stage 3� Manufactamred Stage�
P�ugust 1999 Nightti�e �1eet 5tage M� fa�r Top 15 A�rlimes
xo:�a �.m. � 6:00 �.m. �.. ....�.,..,,.,..,.�...,.�.�.�,..-,
AAL I 0
AB� � 7 y
� t�,tiVE � 0
' COA `i �. �
; C^__OM_I �
{ Dt�L 10
_r-'-----
I FDX �._l _
.------ ,
i .. _ . ti1E5 _._ +_.._ --- � -
� N�VA _, i -- ��-
:
; RY�! ' �.
_ _- ��� i� - -1'�
�;
� T�U� ! 3
� __.�__ --
� U�L ; ?t)
�_._.-UP5 i 1
- -- --r-----.__
� V �D ; �=�
��r........... ...�....._.__,_ �� i 65
�� � -----���
y __ � __ }----� �,� --- -----�--- 39
�0 �� `fF' -- � =�C _
U -�---___.___ j� ---._-�_ 30
0 I }' --- - �3
_ _- J ��
21 � . � i ----- -- --�-------
_ _ ._._.-0 i 61 __, �?
------- --
_..._.� -----�------ 38
33 _
0 �-- -------- . ------�. __... _ _ _____ -
--....._ __----- -� t 1 iGt�
3U 1 � _ ____ _ �U3 _ _- - —
- ; ! {) ��
- � ----� 1------� � -- --- -� ----- _� � � �3
_j� l0i) ; 1 •. �,__. �
� i___._..._. �� 31
� I._.._____-_ _ :- ----- ^^ �� C� 1
g !� J� !
�.;_.____..._ --i .--
� -- "
, 5� i t) ..a- --
�
�_... _ _ .
---Iv t) � '. y _i_.{�..�..,�.,.,�....-,,,.—:..:-..:��...
� ) _ 9
" A Product of the Ivietropolitan Airports Commission ANOlY1S Progr�
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
I�emote Monitoring Tower �ite Locations
c
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
Leaend
1 Remote Monitoring Tower
�
A Product of the Nietropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 10 (
f a
\
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (Iv1ASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
August 1999 Averag� �aiiy
Aircraft Events by �ilV17C
29 5 � 1�6 J
?� j� � 1C�)1 I
�7 4 � 13U
?G 5� � 171� ,
25 11 ���
2�. ?80 8677
23 219 ` 6800
22 1�0 ����
21 3g 1170
2U 10G �?s$ ___._
�9 �48 7693
18 260 g0�0
17 18U ��8�
16 233 7230
15 � 12�k 1 3845
�
14 32p � 9916
13 79 � ?� 1
�� ; � 170
11 � 166
iQ 12 363
y 10 30O
' � 8 7C� j 2359
I —
� � � �9 i 89�
j 6 � 3C�8 j 11=�U7
I� _�r — �
; � ��:� ? s3o=�
� �. � ?�;�� f ��s�
--1----- � ,
�3 � ? 1=� � 6n�7
�
';� � � ? l y � b7�U
i_..____--;_.._ �
i � � � 7��9
� � -=�� _.. � _ _�
� �� � --��------_�-_._ 11
� � A Product of the l�Setropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program
2�
2E
27
2E
2�
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
�16
�15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abateffient Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
August 1999 Average Aircraft �vent Lmax and Leq
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
dBA Noise Ler��s
Note: L,eq is the constant sound level that, in a given time period woutd 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
interval or event.
Note: R2viTs 25,26;27,28 and 29 represent data from 8/20/99 through 8l31/99.
�
12 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program `
Mctropotitan Aircraft Sound Ab�otc►�Ent Council (NIASAC) Tcchnical Advisor's Rcport
Top Ten Loudest Aircr��€t 1`�aise �vents foP• 1�iSP
A��Ust i�rr�
�
(RN1T Site#1)
Xerxes Ave. & 4('` St., iVlinneapolis
Datc/ Timc Flighl Numbcr AircraCt Arriv�it/ Rumvay Lmaz (dB)
Tvpc Dcparlure
08/ 02/ 99 1-�:2�5:� 1 SCX71� B7?2 D 3UR 9O.?
U8/ U7/ 99 21:1 �:19 N W A 1267 B722 D 3OR 89.9
U2�/ l 3/ 99 10:19:1 � N W A I � 1� B722 D 3UR 892
U8/ U 1/ 99 11:3 �:U7 N W A�-�3 W B722 D 30R 88.7
U8/ 23/ 99 23:39:27 N W A 1273 B72Q D 3t)R 8�.6
O8/ U;/ 99 �):-� �:�3 N WAG11 B722 D 30R 8�.G
08/ 17/ 9�) 1!:-� �:11 N WA 1��3 B722 D 30R 88.�
0�/ 13/ 9�I 2 I:1 G:1 I N W AG 1� B722 D 3UR ��.�
08/ 19/ 99 11:� 122 N W A 12�9 B722 D 30R 83.3
U3/ 19/ 99 11:26:5C> N WA 1271 B722 D 30R 88.3
(�NIT Site#2)
Fremont Ave. & 43r`' St., IWtinneapolis
Dale/ Time Flight Numbcr Aircr<ift Arrival/ Rumvay Lma� (dB)
Tvpe Deparlure
08/ 26/ 99 I 1: : t:U-� U�( KO W N GLF� A I2R 98.0
t)8/ ?8/ 9�) !2: i-�:2� N WA IUC>� DC�) A 12L �)5.8
O�i/ t)Z/ �)�) 1-�:2Y:32 SCX71 � B72? D 3UR 9-�.(i
U�i/ tti/ �I�) I-�:2ti:l; SCX71� B722 D 30R 933 �, .
OY/ t�l/ 9�1 t L:� 1:0 ( N W A 12�9 B722 D 3t)R 9? 9
U�i/ c)5/ 99 9:-� �:-; ; N W At 11 B722 D 3UR �)2.3
O8/ O��l 9�1 �:t);:�-� N WA 1 l 1 B722 A 12L ��2.t)
�)�i/ 19/ 9�) 1 l:2G:3-� N W A 1271 B722 D 3UR 91.5
t)�/ t) V�1�) 11:�7:39 N WA 10-�7 B722 D 3UR 91.3
U�/ t1-�/ 9�l 2I:1C:lU N WA 1273 B722 D 3qR 91.3
(RMT Site#3}
West Eimwood St. c.�C Beimont A,ve., lVlinneapolis
Datc/ Timc Flighl Numbcr Aircraft Arriv<tl/ Run�v,iy LlTlat (dB)
Tvpc Dcp�.triure
t3S/ Ol/ 99 2�):0?:5-� ^DALlG�i3 ' B722 D �;OR 9S.S --
Uti/ I;i/ 9�) 12:? l:� t U AL I 177 B72? D ,t)R �I�.tl
(��i/ "2U �)�) 1O:1<>:?i TWA��)t DC�) A 12R 97.�i
�)�/ ?-�/ �)v I�:t);: l�) KH A-�3 L,R2� D ,c)L �l(,.C>
t)ti/ ?S/ �1�) IU:?t):t)2 CCP;-1-� B72Q D ;t)R �)G,2
U;t/ ;u/9�) ic,:-�(:SU NWAIt)2 B72Q A l2R �)5,t)
t)5/ 2-�/ ���1 7:-�7:SY SCX7-��1 B72Q D 3t)L 9-�.Y
U�/ O3/ �)v ?t):t);:19 DALlG�i3 B722 D 30R 9-�. �
0�;/ U.,/ �)�) IG:;;:-�6 UAL1 l;S B722 D 3�)R <)-�.0
t);�/ (�t/ �)v l2:-� l:-�2 N W A627 B722 D 3uR �) ;.5
t-� A Product of ll�c wlctropolitan Airports Coiuutission t�NONtS Program (�
Mclropolilan Aircralt Souud Ab�itcmcnt Couucii (MASAC) Tcchuic.il Advisor's Rcport
'I'op Ten Lo�ndest Aircrait Noese Events for 1ViSP
A���utir i�r���
(RIVIT Site#4)
Oa�land Ave. & �9`�' St., Minneapolis
Date/ Timc FliglU Numbcr Aircraft Arrivat/ Ru�c�vay Lm�ix (dB)
Type Departure
j?L lOt).S
U�/ 20/ 9�I 22:26:39 U N KO W N B7� � A 30R )`).S
0�/ 16/ 99 1�:2�:�6 SCX7t� B�„ D 3t}R 98.-k
08/ U=�/ 99 17:�-3:-4-� UNKOWN B7__
30L 97.8
0�/ 28/ 99 �:05:�9 SCY710 B��Q D 97.�
U�/ 19/ 99 11:�321 SCX7-�3 B��Q � 30R 96.6
08/ 02/ 99 2t):U�:36 DALTC�83 ���Q D 30R yC2
U�/ 2-4/ 9�) 11:02:0� SCY7=43 B7?Q � 30R )G.1
08/ 05/ 9�) 9:�3:U 1 N W A611 g72? D 30R 96.1
U8/ 2=�/ 99 16:11:�3 DALI624 B��Q D �U� y5.6
08/ 19/ 9�) 1 L�U:31 N W A 12�9 B7?? D
� " (RNtT Site#5)
1�`h Ave. & 58`�' St., Nlinneapolis
Dale/ Time Flighl Number Aircrafi Arrival/ Run�vay Lmax (dB)
Type Departure
B722 A 12L 105.�4
Og/ lU 99 1328:47 UNKOViiN ���L 103.9
08/ 2=�/ 99 7:17:12 SCX32� B7?Q � 3UL 102.4
08/ 2S/ 99 7:05:2� SC:{710 L�; D 3t}L lUU.8
(� � U8/ 2�/ 99 l�:q�:�3 KHA=43 30R 1QU.�
,.. _ 0�/ 13/ 99 6:3�:�4 SCY�7 t g72? D
30L yy•�
U8/ U�/ 99 7:09:;g SCX710 B722 D 31)R 99.3
08/ 13/ 99 3:3U:� 1 SCX227 B72Q 30L 9�.8
t)8/ 2-F/ �)9 7:�7:3-� SC�Y7=49 B��Q � 3()L 98.0
08/ 28/ �)9 7:S l:t)U SCX7�9 B��Q � 3UL 98.0
U8/ 13/ 9�) I�:U2:28 SCX�E t t B72Q �
(Ri'�tT Site#6)
25`�' Ave. & 57"' St., IVlinneapolis
Date/ Tin�e Fligl�l T�fumbcr Aircraft Arrival/ Rwi�vay Lma� (dB)
Typc Dcparturc
30R 1 It). �
08/ l;/ 99 16:=42:2� NWA68g B72Q � iUR 11Q.1
08/ 12/ �)9 21:17:5-� NWA57� B7?� D 30R lOS.7
08/ 12/ 99 20:�k7:59 N WA1j�0 B722 D 30R 1t)ti.�
t)8/ 13/ �)') 10:17:-�� NWAI�I; B722 D t,L 1O�.�
US/ Zt)/ 99 22;27;2y UNKOWN B7?? A 30R lU�i.l
�)8/ 2-�/ 9�I t`):-�7:�6 NbVAIt)2 B72? D 3t)R 1t)�.l
08/ 02/ 99 21:�42:06 N W A 1273 5722 D :>OR 10�.0
O�/ 12/ 99 22.;;:27 NbVA1267 B72' D It)7.9
30R
0�/ t7/ 99 21:t)t):�8 NWA�75 B7?? D ;OR l07.7
U�i/ OS/ �)�) 18:-F-4:0� _ N W A fU? B7�? D
� . � l;
- A Product oF thc Ntctropolit�tn Airports Conunission ANOMS Program
IVtctropotitan AircraCt �ound Abalcu�cul Council (MASAC) "I'cct►nic.�l Advisor�s Rcport
Top Ten L,oudest A��craft Noise �vents for I��SI'
�tu�n�sr t�����
(��
(RMT Site#7)
Wentworth �4ve. 8c 64'�' St., Richtield
Date/Timc Fligl�t Numbcr Aircralt Arrival/ Run�vay Lmas (dB)
Tvpe Departure
08/ 1:�/ 99 1(:O1):31 DAL1731 B7?Q D _�UR �)G.?
08/ l3/ 9�I 17:�cS:31 SCX78� B72Q D 30R 91.6
UY/ t)3/ 99 9:0129 UAL729 B72Q D 30R 9LO
US/ 13/ 9�1 13:23:3C N W A 127U B772 D 3UL 9U.9
08/ 18/ 99 12:�9:-�2 DAL93� B72Q D 30R 90.6
08/ 23/ 99 12:3t):; I U AL l 177 B72Q D 3UR 90.5
U8/ 02/ 99 12:�8:U3 N W A673 B722 D 30R 39.9
O�i/ t)7/ 9I 2U:32:-�9 SCX711 B722 D 3t)R 8�).9
U8/ (17/ 99 19:U5:32 N W A 12�2 B722 D 3t)L 89.6
U8/ 10/ 99 I�:OG:18 UALll7� B72Q D 30R �92
(F.N[T Site#3)
Lon� ellow Ave. & 43"' St_, Niinneapotis
Date/ Time Fliglri Ntunber Aircraft Arrival/ Runtivay Lmas (dB)
Tvpe D�p�irture
U�/ U8/ 99 7:11:UU SCX710 5�22 D 30R 98. �
U8/ 10/ 99 7:5�:�:� SC;C7�9 BZZQ D 30R 9�.�
08/ 23/ �)9 [l):�9:3� SCX7�3 B72Q D a0R 9�.��
0'3/ LC/ 99 7:1�:1> SC�`C.'�?� 8722 D _iUR 9�.0 (
08/ l7/ �)�) t l:l�:31 SCX7�; B72Q D ;t)R 9�.0 �..
Oh/ U=F/ 9�) 1�:2-�:�2 DAL l73 ( B722 D 3UR �)-�.-4
08/ 1319�) It):U6:lU DAL1702 B�2Q D 3UR 9-�.-F
0�/ 16/ 99 G:17:3 l SC;{� I t B722 D .it)L 9�.2
Ott/ 2�/ 99 22:13:�2 EW W 123 DC86 D 3OR 9-�.1
U8/ U 1/ 99 t3:�4S:07 N W A 1 l71 DC9 D 3t)R 9-�.1
�RI�IT Site#9)
Saratoya St_ & Hartford Ave., St. Paul
Datc/ Tinic Flight Numbcr Aircraft ArrivaU Rumv��_y Ltua� (dB)
Tvpe Dep�u-lure
08/ 2�)/ 99 1 S:10:5�) N W A I 9 B7-42 D 0-� 9�i. �
OK/ 2�/ �)�) !S: l5:-�C> N W A l9 B7�2 D U-� �)t>.H
t);t/ U8/ 9�) 7:-�(>:12 N W A�70 B722 D t)-� <)G.1
t)�+/ tY/ �)�) 1-�:13:t ; N WA23 B7-F2 D O-� 9�.7
t);i/ t'a/ 99 l-�:O;:5-F N WA57-� B72Q D U-� 9�.�
o�/ 2�/ �l�) 12:UU:3-� N WA23 B�-�2 D U-� ��5.2
t)S/ 2U')9 222-�:2; TWAG97 DC9 A 22 �I;.7
UK/ 2-�/ 9�) tci: l�)20 N W A 19 B7-�2 D t)� 93,j
t>K/ 13/ �)�) O:O�i:2-� N WA�6 B7-F2 D t)-4 y;.-�
t)Y/ 07/ 99 2O: �t): l�l N W A lU2 B722 D U-� �I �.3
lci A Praduct of the Metropotitan Airports Couuuission ANONIS Progra�ii (
Ivictro�olitan Aircrafl Sound Abatcment Couiicil (NIASAC) Tcct�nical Aci��isor's Rc�wrt
Top '�'en l.,oudest Air�r�f$ Noase Ev��ts for I�SP
Au<�dotit i�r���
(R.i'�iT Site#10)
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St., St. Paul
Dalc/ Timc Fligh� Numbcr AircraCt Arrival/ Run�vay �ma� (dB)
Typc Departurc
0�/ 04/ 9�I 7:-��:-�8 N�VA�70 B722 D U� 10-�.6
US/ 28/ 9�) 1�:1 �:1 � N W A 19 B7�42 D 0� l U-�.0
08/ 2=�1 99 12:16:12 N W A23 B7-L2 D 0� 103.;
O:t/ 2-�/ 99 IG:I�:�G N W A 19 B7�2 D O-4 1Q3.1
08/ l�/ 99 17:�9:2� N W A l�) B7-�2 D U�4 103.0
08/ U V 9�I 1�:O7.�� N W A 19 B7�? D 0� 1U2.7
�
U�/ 18/ 99 1-4:12:-�� N W A23 B7-�2 D t)� 1)1.6
0�/ 28/ 99 12:00:08 N WA23 B7-42 t)� 100.6
0�/ 29/ 99 1�:1U:32 N W A 19 B7�2 D 0� 10U.�
08/ 19/ 99 21:<422� N W A�6 B7� 1 �
(RMT Site#11)
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave., St. Paul
Date/ Time Flight Number Airerat't Arrival/ Run�vay Lmas (dB)
Type Departure
p:� IOi.S
08/ 29/ �)9 12:03:20 NWA23 B7�2 D U� 98.h
08/ 13/ 99 L:36:37 N W A2; B7-F2 D 0� g7.6
08/ q3/ 99 19:�3:?� N W A 1»0 B72Q � 0� y5.8
t)8/ 131 99 21:3 t:-�3 N WA 1�4� B7�Q D 0� 93.8
Og/ 18/ 9�) 19:06:-�3 N W A-�-4 DC 10 � 0� �)3.6
t)8/ 18/ 99 l�:.i-F:�7 KLl�it>G=� 87�i �
D 92.9
03/ 07/ 99 21:U6:�3 NWA10�4�) DC9Q t)� `�?-�
08/ 12/ �)9 2;:30:�0 N W A t��� B��Q � 0�- `�?-�
t)8/ 2-�/ �)N 19:�327 N W A-�=� DC Itl D U� 90.�
t)S/ !0/ 99 22:1-�:3�I NWASC> B7�? D
(R1V1T Site#12)
Alton St. & Rockwoud Ave., St. P�ul
Datc/ Tinic Flight Numbcr AircraCt Arriv�l/ Rumva�� Lniax (dB)
Tvnc Dcparturc _
Q8/ IS/ �)9 I-�:-�7:3t)
08/ 2C�/ 99 22:17:u-�
OR/ 18/ 9�) 16:28:36
t)S/ ;O/ �)`) 2?:-�t:3S
t)�/ 2�)/ �)�) 17:-4 t:it)
OR/ 22/ �)�) t 1:�2:���
t)�/ t2/ �)9 17:20:2C
02i/ 29/ 9�) 7:52:O-�
OR/ 13/ �)9 16:OQ:3 �
U�i/ l2/ �)�) 1-F:13:U�I
N W A>7-�
UALG�I
N W AGBS
CCP3-�2
NWAIT�
N W A 127(>
N W AG2<
N W AS7t)
DALI�IC,
NIES?7�)0
B72Q
B722
B72Q
87?2
�C`)Q
B722
DC�)Q
B7? Q
B72Q
SF �-�
D
A
D
A
D
A
A
D
A
D
(}:�.
t?L
0-�
12L
0-�
IZL
t2L
U�
3l)R
12L
�)j, i
9 ;.-�
92.3
BN.�)
8�). L
3�.�
8�.�
�-�.6
S-�.?
8;.9
� � l7
- A Producl oC thc Nlctropolitan Airports Conunission ANONIS Pro�.;raiu
Mctropotitan Aircralt Socu�d�Abatcu�cut Cou��ci! (MASAC) Tccl�nical Ad��isor's Rc�wrt
`I'op Ten Loudest Aia-c��ft Noise Events for l��S�
Ao�usE �»9
(RMT Site#l3)
Southeast End Of iVlohiean Court, N[endota Hei�hts
Dalc/ Timc Fligh( Number Aircraft Arriva!/ Run�v�ty Ltnaz (dB)
Tvpc Dcp�trturc
0�/ 11/ 9�) '7:13:08 SCX_'>2� B722 D 12L �)6. I
U8/ 18/ 99 9:��:03 N WA 1 i l� Bi2Q D 12L 9-�.1
U8/ 1 �/ �)9 11:33:=�-4 N W A� 1 ��43 B72Q D 12L )3.6
O8/ 22/ 99 1223:2� NWA6l9 B72Q D l2L 93.2
08/ 12/ 99 16:13:-�5 DALt62� B7?2 D l2L �2.9
t)8/ 1�/ 99 11:1726 NWA1271 B?2Q D 12L )2.�
08/ 21/ 9) i-�:�9:37 SCX71� B722 D 12L 92.-F
08/ 2OJ 9�I 22:UG:=�S N WA 1267 B722 D l2L 92.0
0�/ U9/ 99 12:43:5� N W A 12�9 B72Q D 12L 91.9
0�/ 12/ 99 15:2�:=47 NWAG7; S'�ZQ D 12L 91.9
(Rlb�i' Site# i 4)
ly` St. & Mckee St., Eagan
Date/ Time Fliglit Number Apscraft Arrival/ Runev<►y Lm�» (dB)
Tvpc Departure
08/ 08/ 9�) 17:5=�:OC DAL505 B722 D !2L IOU.�
U8/ 08/ 99 (=4:11:57 N W AG 19 B722 D 12L 100, !
U8/ l�/ 99 16:,G:38 Dt�Ll62-� B722 D 12� �)9.l
U�!/ 12/ �)9 1�):-�G:-�9 N W A 1272 B7?� D l2L 9��.O
t)�/ 28/ 99 17:02:3i NWA��3 B722 D l2L 93.3
O8/ l�/ 99 13:23: LO N W A t00 6�722 D 12L 9�.=4
U8/ 1-�/ 9�) �.2U:�47 SC�7�9 8722 D l2L 98.1
U8/ U7/ 99 7:1�:31 AMT8-�1� B'72Q D l2L 97.�
0�/ 22/ �)9 lt):03:Q( N WA 101 B722 D t2L 97. �
U�/ 11/ 9�I 11:18:3� NWAl271 B722 D i?L )7.3
(RI�iT Site#15)
Cuilon St. c� Lexingkon Ave., Ntendota Hei�hts
Date/ Tinic Fligh! Nun►bcr AircraCt Arrival/ Run�vav Liti��� (dB)
Type Dcparlurc
08/ U�)/ �I�) ?(:-�3:�7 N WA7;7 --- B7�� -._ D l2L lt)�).l
t)�/ 12/ �)�I t(i: i;:2-� DAL1G2-� B7?2 D l3L �)�.0
O�/ l)9/ 99 21:3�):t)7
O�/ U�)/ �)�) 21: �C�:� i
t)�i/ (1�)/ �)<1 7: t �:17
t)�i/ 1�/ �)�) 20:1O:12
0,;/ 2 U �)�) 21:-�.�:-�2
t)�/ 22/ 9�) 5:12:IG
t)�/ t V �)�l l;:l�t:O2
Uti/ 20/ �J�I ll:Oi:Ul
N W A 1 �-�5
NWAI�)2�
SCX3') i
DAL(G83
NWA12G7
RYN G 10
N W A 1( )-��
N WA t2�9
B7�Q
DC�)
B722
B722
872Q
B72Q
B722
B7?2
12L
12L
(2L
l2L
l2L
12L
l2L
I2L
�)7.-!�
97.�
96. �
9(i. �
�)j �I
<)5.7
yj.C�
y;.j
l�i A Prodiict of lhc Mctropolitai� Airports Couuuission ANONIS Program \
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abate�ent Council (MASAC} Technical Advisor's Report
'��p T'e� I.ou��s� Air�raf� N�� E�e��s ���r I�IS�
Augeest 1999
(]�.MT Site#lbj
Avalon A�e. & Vilas L�e, Eagan
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft ��ivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type �3ep,arture
08/ 18/ 99 14:33:00 UAL115� B7zQ D i2R g�'6
08/ 18/ 99 11:54:40 NWA706 DC9 A 30L 97.1
08/ 18/ 99 15:31:36 TWA117 B722 D 12R 96.3
08/ 29/ 99 20:34:10 SCX711 B722 D 12R 95.9
08/ 29/ 99 12:01:40 UAL1177 B72Q D 12R 94.5
08/ 29/ 99 18:59:40 NWA1046 B722 D 12R 94.4
08/ 29/ 99 9:52:00 UAL1133 B72Q D 12R 93.4
08/ 29/ 99 17:52:15 SCX785 B72Q D 12R 93.4
08/ 29/ 99 13:17:10 UAL734 B732 D 12R 93.3
08/ 29/ 99 12:09:02 NWA569 B72Q D 12R 93.2
� Site#1�
84�` St. & 4� Ave., Bl�mingtan
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft ��zivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type 1f3eparture
08/ 10/ 99 20:29:15 SCX711 8722 D 22 • 103.0
08/ 24/ 99 20:28:49 SCX711 B722 D' 22 100.9
08/ 09/ 99 11:14:14 N W A 101 B722 D 22 100.7
08/ 19/ 99 20:23:37 SCX785 B'122 D 22 100.�
08/ 19/ 99 17:28:53 NWA563 B'722 D 22 100.3
08/ 24/ 99 11:43:23 NWA627 B72Q D 22 100.1
08/ 29/ 99 7:19:03 CCP101 8722 D 22 100.0
08/ 02/ 99 12:57:04 DAL935 B722 D 22 99.9
08/ 18/ 99 21:49:37 NWA56 B741 D 22 99.7
08/ Ol/ 99 7:09:48 AMT8417 B722 D 22 99.7
(R1VIT Site�#� �)
75�' St. c�i 17�` Ave, �2.iehfield
Date! Time Flight Number Aircraft �rrivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type �Se�artnre
08/ 04/ 99 14:52:35 SCX71� B722 D 22 108.7
08/ 09/ 99 11:13 :�3 N W A 101 B722 D 22 107.2
08/ 21/ 99 18:58:20 N W A I028 B722 D 22 107.1
08/ 15/ 99 17:36:03 DAL505 B722 D 22 10�.�
08/ 09/ 99 10:53:13 NWA611N B722 D 22 10�.2
08/ 15/ 99 21:09:28 N W A 1273 B722 D 22 104. S
08/ 03/ 99 8:14:06 SCX227 B722 D 22 10�.7
08/ 08/ 99 13:49:33 NWA4�6 B722 D 22 104.6
08/ 09/ 99 12:33:39 NWA23 B742 D 22 104.4
08/ 15/ 99 7:34:35 NWA99 8722 D 22 104.2
( ) . I9
A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Pro�'am
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
Top Ten Loud�st �rcraft Naise Events for I�SP
August 1999 �,� �
(RMT Site#I9)
16`t` Ave. & 84�` St., Bloomington
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft ArrivaU Runway Lmas (dB)
TXpe Departure
08/ 07/ 99 8:00:�5 SCX749 8722 1� 22 103J
08/ 20/ 99 11:19:50 DAL1507 B72Q D 22 103.0
08/ 14/ 99 12:21:03 NWA619 B722 D 22 102.8
08/ 04/ 99 13:06:40 SCXS71 B722 D 22 102.7
OS/ 07/ 99 9:16:11 DAL1702 B722 D 22 102.�
08/ 20/ 99 8:18:36 SCX227 B722 D 22 102.2
08/ 25/ 99 �:18:02 SCX710 B'722 D 22 102.2
08/ 19/ 99 13:38:29 NWA612 B722 D 22 101.9
08/ 24/ 99 11:17:46 DALI507 B'722 D 22 101.7
08/ 17/ 99 14:42:23 NWA1470 B722 D 22 101.6
(]�M'T Site#20)
75�` St. & 3`d Ave., �tichfield
Date/ Time Flight Number �ircraft ArrivaU Runway Lmas (dB)
Type �eparture
08/ 04/ 99 14:53:00 SCX715 B722 D 22 103.5
08/ 16/ 99 11:16:13 SCX743 8722 D 22 99.9
08/ 10/ 99 16;19:51 DAL1624 B72Q D 22 g7.3 t,
08/ 09/ 99 10:24:46 NWA671 B72Q D 22 97.1
08/ 02/ 99 13:42:28 NWA1251 DC9 D 22 96.8
08/ 23/ 99 15:45:06 KLM664 �3'743 D 22 96.6
08/ 19/ 99 21:20:49 N WA 1267 B72Q D 22 96.6
08/ 13/ 99 21:13:29 NWA1267 B722 D 22 95.g
08/ 13/ 99 18:28:21 UNKOWN C414 D 30L 94.8
08/ 19/ 99 20:00:48 DAL1683 B72Q D 22 94.6
(Rl`vIT Site#21)
Barbara Ave. & 67`�` St., Inver Grove Heights
Date/ Time FLight Number Aircraft ArrivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type Departure
08/ 21/ 99 15:00:19 SCX715 B'722 D 12L 85.9
08/ 02/ 99 7:14:16 SCX325 B'722 D 12L 87.7
08/ 20/ 99 15:44:08 CCP343 B72Q D 12L 86.4
08/ 22/ 99 9:30:08 NWA707 B�2Q D 12L 36.0
08/ 25/ 99 21:06:4� NWA615 B722 D 12L 85,p
08/ 09/ 99 21:09:�7 UNKOWN GLF2 D 12L ��.7
08/ 21/ 99 12:15:23 NWA506 DC9 D I2L 8�,�
08/ 28/ 99 13:36:32 NWA1810 DC9 D I2L g4.=�
Q8/ 30/ 99 23:13:36 NWA144 B722 D 12L $�}.:}
08/ 20/ 99 1�:37:19 NWA24 B722 D 12L 8:�,3
20 A Product of the Nietropolita�a Airports Commission ANOMS Prob am
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abateiuent Conncil (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
Top Ten Loudest Aircrait N��.s� ���nts fo� 1l�ISP
August 1999
(]ZIVIT Site#2�)
Anne Marie Trail, Inver C�a'ove �ierghts
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft A�rrivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
T'ype �epaYEure
08/ 08/ 99 17:5�:06 DAL505 B'122 D 12L 88�4
12L 87.3
08/ 30/ 99 1524:38 DAL1731 B�22 D 12L $6•8
08/ 11/ 99 7:11:53 SCX�10 B722 D 12L 86•8
08/ 22/ 99 17:25.2� DAL505 B722 12L 85.3
08/ 12/ 99 19:47:39 N W A 1272 B�22 � 12L 85.3
08/ 12/ 99 17:54:56 DAL505 B722 D 12L $�•1
08/ 20/ 99 12:53:33 DAL935 B72Q D 12L 84 $
08/ 22/ 99 8:37:25 SCX227 B722 D 12L 84.6
08/ 20/ 99 15:40:27 DAL1731 B722 � �ZL 84.6
08/ 20/ 99 7:11:22 SCX710 B�22
� site#23)
End of Kenndon Avenue, M�do�a Heights
Datel Time Flight Number Aircraft E4rri`+aU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type Depart�re
08/ 29/ 99 13:4�:�4 NWA446 8�22 D`
12L 104.3
g� 12L 103.0
08/ 22/ 99 11:22:36 NWA1271 B�22 � 12L 102.6
08/ 09/ 99 21:43:46 N W A'737 8�22 � 12L 1a2.6
08/ 11/ 99 7:12:37 SCX325 B�22 D 12L 101.6
08/ 20/ 99 12:04:50 I�WA1259 �722 � 12L 101.6
08/ 21/ 99 14:59:04 SCX715 B�22 12L 101.2
08/ l�/ 99 20:09:58 DAL1683 B�22 D 12L 100.7
08/ 23/ 99 7:31:45 NWA680 DC9 � �2L 100.4
08/ 30/ 99 22:29:18 NWA1�45 B�2Q D 12L 100.1
OS/ 09/ 99 12:16:32 SCX743 B�2Q
(]�ZM.T Site#24)
Chapel Lane & Wren L�ne, �a�an
Date/ Time Flight Number TyPeft g�e� nre Runway Lmax (dB)
12L 96.6
08/ 12/ 99 19:47:07 N W A 1272 B722 D 12L 96.6
0$/ 26/ 99 19:46:3'7 N W A 102 B722 p 12L 95.4
08/ 22/ 99 7:16:30 AMT8417 B�2Q A 30R 92.0
08/19/9912:41:42 UNKOWN BE9L D 12L 91.8
08/ 09/ 99 22:33:29 KHA1772 B722 D 12L 91.�
03/ 07l 99 7:1�:44 AMT8415 B72Q D l2L 91.4
08/ 22/ 99 10:03 :18 N W A 101 8722 12L 90.5
08/ 20/ 99 '7:10:4� SCX710 B�22 D
08/ 22/ 99 '7:13:�0 CCP101 B72Q D 12L 90.3
08/ 1=�/ 99 13:2321 NWA100 B�22
j� 12L 89.8
�� � 21
A Product of the I�ietropolitan Airports Comznission ANOMS Prograrn
Metropolitan Aircra� Sound Abateuient Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
Top Ten Loudest �rca-a�t Noas� Even�s f�r IVISP
August 1999 � � �
(RMT Site�t25) Augzrs� 2'0-315;1999
Moonshine P�k, 1321 Tc�rdy Rd., Eagan
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft t�rrivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type Departure
OS/ 29/ 99 20:34:25 SCX711 B722 D 12R 84.6
08/ 29/ 99 17:52:24 SCX785 B72Q D 12R g2 3
08/ 29/ 99 7:50:09 TWA494 DC9 D 12R g2 1
08/ 29/ 99 9:�2:16 UAL1133 B72Q D 12R 81.9
08/ 2�/ 99 18:53:01 NWA728 DC10 D 12L gp 4
08/ 25/ 99 16:37:49 AJI333 LJ24 D 12R 80.3
08/ 21/ 99 1'7:46:16 AAL1121 MD80 D l2L gp 2
08/ 29/ 99 20:44:11 VGD432 B732 D 12R 79.4
08/ 24/ 99 10:04:41 NWA408 DC9 A 30L 7g.7
08/ 20/ 99 16:00:12 KLM664 B743 D 22 �g q,
(7ZMT Site��6) Augus� 20-315;1999
6796 Arkansas �,ve. W., I�ver Grove Heights
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft ArrivaU Runway Lmax (dB)
Type Departure
08/ 21/ 99 10:04.21 NWA9710 B'742 D 12L 91.1
08/ 23/ 99 7:12:34 SCX710 B722 D 12L 89.9
08/ 20/ 99 7:16:38 SCX.325 B72Q D 12L 8�,; �%
08/ 20/ 99 9:�7:46 N�WA 1515 B722 D 12L 8'7,1
08/ 25/ 99 10:04:13 NWA1515 B72Q D 12L 86.9
08/ 29/ 99 8:09:53 UAL690 B'72Q D 12L 86.4
08/ 26/ 99 4:59:51 RYN610 B721 D 12L g5 q.
08/ 2�f 99 16:06:20 DAL1624 B722 D 12L 86.2
08/ 22/ 99 8:13:07 UAL690 B72Q D 12L 85.9
08/ 21/ 99 7:17:12 SCX325 B,72Q D 12L 85.9
(RMT Site�27) Augus� 20-315;1999
Anthony Middle Scha��; 5757 :Irving Ave. S., Mirmeapolis
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft ArrivaU Runway Lma� (dB)
Type Departure
08/ 28/ 99 7:16:40 NWA738 DC9Q D 30R 85.5
08/ 2�/ 99 15:48:53 KLM664 B743 D 22 85.1
08/ 24/ 99 18:46:45 NWA960 DC9Q D 30R 8�.3
08/ 23/ 99 10:24:53 KHA6807 B727 D 30L g;,5
08/ 24l 99 23:14:45 AMT7231 B72Q D 30R 8;,�}
08l 23/ 99 10:13:40 NWA93� DC10 D 30R 83,3
08/ 23/ 99 13:2020 NWA1251 DC9Q D 30L 8;,i
08/ 23/ 99 8:4625 UNKOWN G2 D 22 83.0
08/ 23/ 99 9:29:11 NWA409 DC9Q D 30R 8;,p
0$/ 2�/ 99 13:20:03 NWA1251 DC9Q D 30L 82.g
C,
22 A Product of the �fetropolitan Airports Commission A.��tOMS Program
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Technical Advisor's Report
Toga Ten Loudest r�,i�craft Noase �ve�ts for 19�SP
�,�ga�st 1999
� Site#28) Aub st 2(1-315`,1999
6645 16�` A�enue S., l�ichfield
Date/ Time Flight Number Typ� � parture Runway Lmax (dB)
D 22 E9.�
OS/ 23/ 99 '7:50:57 MES3294 SF34 D 30R 88•�
08/ 23/ 99 22:57:40 KHA1772 B727 D 22 87.2
08/ 23/ 99 19:00:34 MES3191 SF3`� A 12R 86.5
08/ 30/ 99 9:58:27 NWA1243 DC9 D 22 86.�
08/ 30/ 99 7:43:43 UAL�29 B72Q D 30R 86.0
08/ 24/ 99 15:06:30 NWA1018 DC9Q D 12R g5•8
08/ 29/ 99 20:32:5� 5CX711 B722 A 12R 85.1
08/ 21/ 99 12:45:59 MES3164 SF34 A 12R $�•�
08/ 30/ 99 17:�5:07 NIES3118 � 0 D 30L 8�•�
08/ 24/ 99 17:52:06 UNKOWN
(]�MT Site#29) August 20-315`,1999
Ericsson Elementary School, 4315 sl�` Ave. S., l�Iinneapolis
Date/ Time Flight Number Aircraft ArrivaU Runway Lma.c (dB)
Type I3�parture
30R 84.8
08/ 28/ 99 9:�4:30 AAL1936 MD80 D 30R g���
08/ 28/ 99 9:31:14 NWA604 DC9Q D 30R 82•�
08/ 23/ 99 22:49:36 EWW123 DC$ D 30R $2•3
08/ 23/ 99 9:59:35 N'WA60� DC9Q D 30R 82•1
08/ 23/ 99 9:36:47 NWA456 DC9 D ;OR 82•0
08/ 28/ 99 9:08:09 UAL1810 B73Q D 30R $1•2
08/ 23/ 99 9:02:20 NWA739 DC9Q 30R 80•`�
08/ 24/ 99 16:54:0� COA692 MD80 D 30R 80.1
08/ 23/ 99 10:28:26 NWA314 DC9Q D 30R 80.0
08/ 24/ 99 11:59:10 NWA1286 DC9
Auwst 1999 Toq Ten Summarv: 'I`he top ten noise events �nd the event ranges at each RIvTT for August
1999 were comprised of 93.5% deparh�re operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the
Boeing 727 with 72•6% of the highest Lma.Y events. Due to the nature of operations on the crosswind
runway, (4/22) RMT's 9, 10, 11 and 12 in St. Paul are an exception. The predominant top ten aircraft type
over St. Paul was the Boeing 747 with 50.0% of the highest Lma.x events.
Nvte: Unknown fields are due to data unavailability in FAA flight track data.
( ) 23
~-' ' orts Commission ANOMS Program
A Product of the 1Vietropolitan Airp
C =.
�
.-�,.
, � rt: � -�t
� �
� � � �
, +f .
..
,� � ;�.
. � , , � :� �, ;, .� . , �� ., � � _�
� _ . . ,
. . . . . �
,, : _
s
-1= " - - :� �, �. � ' `'
� �iG�; � •
,,,,
,,: .:,.:; <<.,_:
C:
C
C.
Metropolitan Airports Commission
2� (0.6%) 12unway 12L and 12IZ Carri�r Jet Depa�iure Operat�ons vvere �
North of the 090° Corridor Boundary During A�gust 1999 .
Page 2
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Penetration Gate Piot for Gate North Corridor
08/01/1999 00:00:00 - 09/01/1999 00:00:00
28 Trac�Cs Crossed G�te: Left = 3(10.7%), Right = 25 (89.3%)
5a00................ . ............... . ................ . .................
400Q................ : ............... : ................ : .................
3000 .................: ..................:..............3 .. ...�;.�...........
. • � : O�
200Q................ ............... �0..�...��..�.G_T,O---��---.....
�. .CC;Z . � � : � � � ��O�O O
1 000 ................ : ............. ................ .................
0�
(Runway End)
-1 0
1
Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles)
(Corridor End)
+ Arrival `? Departure ❑ Overfiight �
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Comdor Analysis
C
11o�etsopolitan Airports Commission
64 (1.4%) I2unway 12I. and 121Z C�rrier Jet I�epariur� �peratio 1999 ��
South of the Corridor (�outh of 30I, Local�er) During �u�usi
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for Gate Souih_Carridor
08/01/1999 00:00:00 - 09i0'Ii1999 00:00:00
64 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 26 (40.6%j, Right = 38 (59.4�i'o}
5000 ................ : ................:................. : .................)
,-. . ... ................
� ............ •• .
� 4000 ................ . . : :
u. ; . .
�-- .................................
� 3000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `.:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:. . . . :
=' 2000 -� - . . � . . . . .� ; . .v . . . � .Y}. t,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . .
et p��i t� C J �_�";,A !:� � ,
���,,�, ; :������ ,..;` .............
���0 ................ : ................ . :�`�'�... �4��� ������ii�T,"�1�+1
� . p 1
-1 (RtiVY Mid-Point)
(Corrid r End} Deviation From Cer�ter o� Gate (FUliles)
+ Arrival O D�parture O Over�iight
- Page 3
Monthty Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
Metropolitan Airports Commission
11 (0.2%) Runway 12L and 12i2 Carrier Jet I)epa�ure Operations were �
5° South of the Corridor (5° South of 30L Localize�} �uring August 1999
IVlinneapolis-St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for Gate South_Corridor �t�eg
0$!09/199912:44:09 - 08/29/1999 22:38:43
11 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left =10 (90.9%), Right = t(9.1%)
6000 . _
5000 ................ : ............... : ................ : ................
.� � � =
� 4000 ................ : ............... : ................ : ................ ',
u. • • •
... • • .
a3000 � ....................................:................. ..................
� p p • • :
a2000 .�� ..............�p...��... �o..... :. .. .. .. .. .... .....:..................
1 000 ................ � ................ : .............�. _ ................
0 ' • ..
(Corridor End) —1 � � (RWY Mid-Point)
Deviation From Center of Gate (Milcs)
+ Arrivai O Departure ❑ Overtlight �
Page 4 �lonthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
�<
C
�vletropotitan H.lrpores �.omriiissiun
'�'op 15 Runw�ay 12L and 12IZ I�eparture Destinations for Augusi 1999
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
Page 5
: : �::. :.„ , �; � `�•� ,. ' �f �' � �! r * � ��� � S f � y ' `�'' ^
_ �'" ;: � :
�r ,� fi � � F ;
M
A biweekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 11, Number 1�
Europe
AIRLINES WANT STRONG ACTION TAKEN
TO FORCE EU TO RESCIND HUSHKIT RIJLE
The Republican-led House Aviation Subcommittee held a hearine Sept. 9 to
question Clinton Administration officials on how they are handling efforts to �et
the European Union to rescind a reQulation approved this spring that will freeze
the number of hushkitted aircraft that can be operated in Europe beginninb in
2002. �
The hearina — held the morning before U.S. and EU officials be�an ti�eir latest
round of neQotiations on the matter—provided an opportunity for many Subcom-
mittee members to voice their strona opposition to the EU regulation, which they
contend undermines the inteGriry of the noise and emission standards developed by
the Internationai Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and blatantly discriminates
against U.S.-manufactured aircraft.
A panel of representatives of the Aerospace Industries Association of Arnerica,
Inc., the Air Transport Association, and several hushkit manufacturers testified at
� � th� hearing, asserting that the EU resulation has �lready cost the U.S. aviation
�__- industry $1-2 billion and has put a halt to the sale of hushkits.
Contendin� that the Clinton Administration is not taking stron� enough action to
push the Europeans to rescind the rule, they told the committee they want the
(Continued on p. 112)
FfiA
FAA ENVIR(7i�IENTAL 0�2DER UPDA'�E�D
TO INCLUDE FICON RECONI�I�IENDATIaNS
Without fanfare, the Federal Aviation Administration recently updated its Order
I 0�O.1D on Policies and Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts to
include recommendations made in 1992 by the Federal Interasency Committee on
Noise (FTCON). y
FICON is the predecessor to the current committee called FICAN {Federal
InteraQency Committee on Aircraft Noise), which was estabtished in 1993. FICON
was established in 1990 as a result of the Environmental Protection Agency's
dissatisfaction tivith the ��•av the FAA was conductine noise analyses in airport
expansion projects. FICON was comprised of representatives of the Departments
of Transportation, Defense. 7ustice, Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Devel-
opment, EPA, and the Council on Environmental Quality.
The updated FAA order adopts the recommendations FTCON made in a report
entitled "Federal A�Yenc�• Re�•iew of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, dated
Auvust 1992 (4, A\TR, 1�9). Paramount among those recommendations was that
an assessment of thz noise impact below 6� dB DNL (the point at which federal
� ) noise nnalysis traditionall�• stops) should be made under certain circumstances.
�� The updated order states that. if a recommended screening analysis shows a I.�
(Cantinued on p. ! 14)
Copyri�h[ �O 1999 by Airpon Noise Report. Ashburn. Va. 20117
�
September 10, 1999
I� This Is�ue...
European Union ... U.S.
aviation industry wants
Clinton Administration to
take strong action to compel
EU to rescind its rule freez-
ing the number of hushkitted
aircraft that can operate in
Europe; says rule undermines
integrity of ICAO - p. 111
FAA ... AQency upciates its
order on policies and proce-
dures for considerina envi-
ronmental impacts to include
recommendations made in
1992 by FICON - p. 111
Repoa�t to Congress ... The
General Accounting Office is
asked to study the short- and
lon�-term environmental .
issues facina airports and
how well they are addressin�
them - p. 114
Airspace Redesign ...
FAA to hold public meetinQs
on airspace reconfiguration
undertivay in Baltimore-
Washington area - p. i 1�
Part 1�0 ... FAA approves
noise compatibility proaram
for Rickenbacker Interna-
tional Airport - p. 116
New ,Jersey ... NJCAAN
forms coalition to address
noise problems at Qeneral
aviation airports - p. 116
News Briefs ... - p. 117
112
administration to take the very rare step of filinQ an Article
84 action under the Chica�o Convention aovernina interna-
tional aviation to force the repeal of the EU reQulation.
Article 84 is the dispute resolution mechanism under the
convention. Only a few such actions have been filed in the
50 year history of ICAO and they have been between hostile
parties, such as India and Pakistan and the United States and
Cuba. If the ICAO Council were to rule under Articie 34
that the EU hushl:it rejulation violates the Chicaeo Conven-
tion, then the l� European countries that comprise the EU
would lose their voting rishts in ICAO.
Presentina the views of the Clinton Administration at the
hearin� were Ambassador David L. Aaron, undersecretary
for international trade at the Department of Commerce;
David Marchick, deputy assistant secretary for transporta-
tion affairs with the State Department; and David
Traynham, the Federal Aviation Administration's assistant
administrator for policy, plannin� & international aviation.
They were quickly dubbed "the three Davids" and presented
a unified voice for the administration.
They acknowled�ed that time is runnina out to bejin the
process of gettin� the European Parliament to reconsider its
hushkit reautation. LeQisiation to rescind the rule must be
introduced this fall in order for it to be acted on the by the
European Parliament befare the hushkit reQulation takes
effect next May. � �
Marchick said the administration is considerinQ an Article
S� action if ne�otiations with the EU fail and that the State
Department has been instructed to begin drafting the leoal
challenge. But the adminisiration officials warned a=ainst
what Aaron called "the train wreck" of an all-out trade war
with Europe over hushitted aircraft. And they contended that
retaliatory action by the United States could have the effect
of makina the Europeans less likely to rescind their resula-
tion and so alona with the ICAO process. y
Aaron assured the committee that the hushl:it resulation is
a priority with the administration_ "The issue is so important
that President Clinton raised it at the NATO summit," the
Commerce Department official told the committee.
A new EC Commission is beinQ seated in Brussels and it
is expected to take a fresh look at the hushkit re�ulation,
Aaron said, addinQ that h� plans to travel to Brusseis the
weeh of Sept. 20 discuss the matter with the new commis-
sioners.
Economic Issue
The EU hushkit re�ulation "is an economic issue masquer-
udin�� as a noise issue," said House Aviation Subcommittee
Chairman Rep. 7ohn Duncan (R-KY').
The EU rule would bnr aircraft with an enRine bypass ratio
�f less than 3. Bypass ratio expresses the amount of air that
bypasses the en��ine core as compared to the amount of air
bein�* forced throu��h the core. A bypass ratio of 3:1 means
that three times as much air is bypassin� the engine core as
soin�* throu�,h it.
� The choice of a bypass ratio oF � in the EU reQulation was
Air�ort tl'oise Re
very deliberately made to bar aircraft made in the United
States bnt not European-made aircraft, U.S. aviation
representatives told the committee. The Pratt &�Vhitney
IT8-D ensine, a prime candiate for hushkittina, has a bypass
ratio sli�htiv less than 3. �
At a press conference the foilowinQ day, an EU officiai
disputed the assertion that only U.S -made aireraft are
caueht by the EU rule. He said that the rule also would bar
the BAC 11 1, made by the British.
The EU contends that eneine bypass ratio is an appropri-
ate basis for a noise rule because there is a relationship
between engine bypass ratio and noise emission. But U.S.
aviation interests dispute this, contendina there is no such
relationship and notins that ICAO noise standards relate to
how an aircraft performs in terms of noise emission and not
to how it is desicned. _
BasinQ noise standards on aircraft desian is paniculartly
troublin� for the hushkit industry, all based in ihe United
States. While hushkits can reduce the noise emissions of an
aircraft, they typically do not chan�e the basic bypass ratio
of an enQine.
Developing ICAO Rule
While the text of the House hearins was about the EU's
hushkit reQulation, the subtext was about the current process
of developinQ a more strinQen[ "Sta�e 4" internationai noise
standard under the auspices of ICAO. The two issues are
inextricably related.
T`he U_S. airline industry wants the EU hushkit rule
rescinded as a precondition �to any aareement with the
Europeans on the process for developin� a more strinaent
ICAO noise standard. Two crucial issues yet to be decided
about a tighter ICAO noise standard are how strineent Stase
4 noise standards will be and whether the rule will include a
phaseout timetable for the noisiest of the Staoe 3 airplanes
(and what that timetabie wil] be). 4
The EU delayed implementation of its hushkit rule by one
year on the condition that the United States, which previ-
ously has opposed tighteninQ ICAO noise standards, begin
the process of workina seriously to tighten the international
standard. As an expression of this commitment, the Europe-
ans want the United States to sian a joint statement defining
a process for proceedinQ with the StaQe 4 ICAO standard.
Negotia[ions of this joint statement have be�n stalemated
over the issue of the rescission of the EU hushLit reRulation.
EU officials say they will consider further re�•isions to
their resulation to address U.S. concerns about it beinv
discriminatory but they stop short of sayinR the�� will y
rescind it. Havinn failed for the past 10 years to aet ICAO co
move on a more strinQent noise standard, the EL hushkit
rule Qives the Europeans leveraee in this latest ICAO
process that they lacked before.�
A tiQhter ICAO noise standard cannot be fin�llv appro��ed
until the ICAO Assembly votes on it in April ?00?. The EU
hushkit freeze will take eifect in 1blarch ?002.
An EU ofticia( speculated at a press conferer.�e held the
Airport Noise Report
�
C
C
tember 10, 1999
day after the House hearing that U.S. airlines are more
concerned about the impact of a tighter ICAO rule on their
_ hushkitted aircraft operatinQ in the United States than they
are about the impact of the EU r�le on their hushkitted
ry aircraft operatina in Europe.
VSichel Ayral, the European Commission's director for air
transport, disputed the U.S. airlines' contention that the EU
rule has cost them � 1-�2 billion. Only l� percent of the
anticipated 1,�00 - 1,600 U.S. hushkitted aireraft are
equipped [o operate the lona-haul routes to Europe, he said,
addinQ that many hushkitted aircraft are old and their value
already depreciated.
It is the impact of a new ICAO noise standard on the other
8� percent of U.S. hushkitted aircraft that will be operating
on short- and medium-haul routes in the United States that
concerns the airiines, he contended. "The ICAO standard
tivill bind them in the U.S."
Inclusion of a phaseout schedule for the noisiest Staae 3
aireraft in an ICAO Stase 4 noise standard would cancel
some of the protection that U.S. airiines and the air car�o
industry got for their Stase 3 fleet in the Airport Noise and
Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), which was carefully crafted
to make no distinction in the definition of Sta�e 3 aireraft
between newly-manufactured Stase 3 airplanes and those
hushkitted or re-enained to meet 5taae 3 noise standards.
With some observers contending it is almost impossible to
restrict the operation of Staje 3 aircraft under the FAA's
Part 161 rules implementina ANCA, the airlines and the air
carao industry have been lookin� forward to operatin� their
,^ �'"" � hushkitted aircraft for as ]ono as needed economically. But
,__ inclusion of a phaseout schedute for the noisiest Sta�e 3
aircraft in an ICAO Staae 4 noise standard would obviate
that. r
`Devastating Blow' to ICAO
7ohn W. DouQlass, president and CEO of the Aerospace
Industries Association of America, Inc., told the House
Aviation 5ubcommittee that his fundamental concern with
the EU rule is that if implemented "it will deal a devastatina
blow to international acceptance of and concurrence with
ICAO's role as the sole entiry to develop Qlobal aviation
environmental standards on a muitilatera] basis:'
"If this rule is enacte� it �vill stand clearly for the proposi-
tion that any countr}� or region can i�nore its international
obliQations and confer an advantase to its own industry by
passin�T an `environmentai reQulation' without a shred of
evidence of any environmental benefit," he said.
John Meenan, ATA's senior vice presiden� for industry
policy, aceused the EU of en�aQins "in an exercise of
appeasement' by "chopping off just part of the Stage 3 fleet
— the so-called hushkitted aircraft — and offerina them up."
Such action "undzrmines the core principle that a properly
certified aircraft should 'oe free to operate worldwide
without fear of discriminator�� treatment — and opens the
door [a complete nullitication of �vorldwide standard-
�� � s�[tin«." i�ieena� said.
-- 113
The EU contends that its rule is not inconsistent with
ICAO noise standards because they apply only to first time
certifications of new aircrait types and not to recertication of
aircraft already in operation. The U.S. aviation industry
strongly disputes that as does the ICAO Council President
Assad Kotaite who sent a letter to EU member states in
Nlarch statinQ that the EU re�ulation is inconsistent with
ICAO standards and that its impact irt terms of environ-
mental benefits and costs to carriers has not been fully
evaluated.
John Dugan, chairman of Du�anAir Technologies, Inc.,
spoke at the House hearin� on behalf of the Noise Reduc-
tion Technolo�}r Coalition, a Croup of three hushkit manu-
facturers: DuaanAir, Burbank Aeronautical Corp. II, and
ABS Partnership, which make hashkits for B-727s, B-707s,
and DC-9s, respectively.
About one-third of the U.S. airline fleet wi]] be hushitted
by the end of this year, he told the committee. "The benefits
we have come to expect from airline deregulation depend on
the availability of hushkits," he asserted. "Hushkits have
made possible the startup of new entrant and low-fare
airlines that keep our system competitive, as well as provide
service to small and medium-sized communities. Without
hushkits, the express packa�e and overniaht cargo industries
that have become so essential to U.S. businesses would not
exist, since they rely primarily on older, hushkitted aireraft.
The low airfares ava�}able today wonld not exist without the
lower capital costs made possible by hushkits."
The Europeans treat hushkits "as ef they are somehow
`cheatina' on the noise rules," Dugan said, but added that
. the continued development and avai3ability of hushkits will
be critical to the aviation industry's ability to meet StaQe 4
noise standards.
Attempt to Address �ieal Probelm
In testimony submitted to the hearin�, David Z. Plavin,
president of the Airports Council International - North
America (ACI-NA), said that U.S_ airports oppose the EU
reQulation because it as discriminatory and �vill encouraQe
the proliferation of local noise rules.
Nevertheless, he said, "however missuided, [the EU
hushkit reaulation] is attempting to address a rea] noise
problem. In intent, if not in practice, the EU has reco�nized
that despite the progress that has been made in reducina
aircraft noise with the phaseout of Staae 2 aircraft, there wi]1
contin�e to be problems in communities across Europe, the
United States, and the world associated with aircraft noise.
And while we will reach a point where all aircraft meet the
baseline criteria for the Staae 3 standard we must now
expect continued long-term operation of ]ar�e numbers of
certain relatively noisy Stage 3 aircrait, unless further
progress is made on noise miti�ation."
Plavin said ACI-NA supports an ICAO Staae 4 noise
standard for newty manufactured airplanes and the adoption
bv ICAO "of a reasonable and non-discriminatory retire-
ment timetable for current certified Stase 3 airplanes that
Airport Noise Report
114
cannot meet this standard, besinninQ with the noisiest
aircraft first." �
"VJe need a new, Stase 4 standard to serve as a reasonable
Qoal for communities adversely affected by aircraft noise.
As we formulate a new standard we must reco�nize the
tremendous strides that have been made in technoloQy.
There are aircraft beina manufactured today that are 23 dB
quieter than the baseline Staoe 3 standard. By contrast, most
if not ali hushl:itted or operationally modified Stage 2
aircraft have noise profiles at or very close to the Stase 3
baseline. If we consider that just 112 days from now, all
aircraft in this country are supposed to meet the StaQe 3
baseline standard, and that the technology exists to create
much quieter airplanes, why shouldn't we raise the bar to
ti�e hi�hest possible standard?"
Resardins the Article 84 action under the Chicaao
Convention, Plavin said that rather than discouragins the
development of regional noise standazds, "liti�ation of this
nature would assure that the effort to achieve a global
standard throuQh the established international process will
most certainiy fail." Plavin warned that without a widely
accepted and asreed international standard established by
ICAO members, "reaional noise restrictions wit] ensue and
the �lobai aviation system will be in chaos."d
FA.A Order, from p. III
dB DNL or sreater increase in noise impact within the 65�
dB DNL• or greater noise contour, then further noise analysi�
should be done in the 60-6� dB DNL noise contour where
noise increases of 3 dB DNL or more are expected.
The FAA said it will use this information durin� its
consideration of potential miti�ation for the projects under
consideration.
FICON said in its repor[ that three factors warrant analysis
beyond 6� dB DNL: the Schultz Curve, which related DNL
levels to [he percenta�e of the population hinhly annoyed by
noise, recoanizes that some people wi2l be hiahly annoyed
at relatively low levels of noise; it has been shown that lar�e
chanRes in levels of noise exposure (on the order of 3 dB or
more) belotiv 65 dB DNL can be perceived by people as a
de�Trada[ion of their noise environment, and computational
techniques no�v exist that allow for cost-effective calcula-
tion of noise exposure and impact data in the ranQe below
6� dB DNL. �
FICOi�1 cautioned in its report, however, that noise
predictions below 6� dB DtiZ are less reliable and that non-
aircrafc noise sources may play a role.
Other recommendations inciuded in the FICON report
were thar.
• FAA should continue usinQ the D_�TL, noise metric as the
principal means for describinR ]on�-term noise impacts at
airports; y
• Impro�•e� public understandinQ of DNL., supplemental
methodolo�ties, and aircraf� noise impacts is needed. The
FICON report reco�nized the value of usina noise metrics
Airport Noise Report
other than DNL but did not recornmend ma]:ing their use
binding on any federal a�ency; .
• Noise mitiQation options for areas in the 60-6� dB DNL
contour that will �et 3 dB DNL or more increase in noise
should be the same as those considered for hi�her noise
impact areas; althouQh FICON recoQnized that adjusting
aircraft flishE procedures would be probably the only
appropriate measure; and
• Once a Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility study has
been included in a National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) document, such as an environmental impact
statement, as one of the mitiQation commitments for an
airport expansion project, the FAA and the airpon operator
should accept the responsibility to see that it is carried out
and that the Part 1�0 study conforms to the NEPA scope of
noise analysis.
'The DOT Office of Inspector General currently is review-
in� 12 airports to determine how well they have carried out
their Part 150 proQrams.
The updated FAA environmental order is available on the
Web at: www.aee.faa.aov/1040/1_htm.0
Airports
ENVIRONMEN�'AL ISSUES FACING
AIRP�RTS UNDER STUDY BY GAO
Rep. Jarnes Oberstar (D-1�IN), the rankinQ member of the
House Aviation Subcommittee, has asked the General
Accountin� O�ce (GAO) to conduct a broad review of the
short- and lon� term environmentai issues facina airports
and the ways in which they are addressins them�
"Air travel is the fastest �rowine se�ment of the transpor-
tation industry, projected to continue growin� at a rate of
more than � percent per year," Oberstar told David Iv1.
Walker, comptroller �enerai of the United States, in a recent
letter. "As such, the nation's airports are expandin� to meet
this growing demand, with b0 of the nation's larQest airports
planning to add or extend runways. The environmental
impact of such development on nearby communities has •
become an inereasine concern, in part, because 70 percent
of the U.S. population lives within 20 miles of a major
airport."
The Federal Aviation Administration, Oberstar said, has
the responsibility for aidin; airports with development
projects to help meet the increasins demand for air traffic
services. In carrying out this mission, he said, the aaency
must "balance its goals of maintainins a safe and efficient
air transportation system with its responsibility to minimize
the impact on the environment."
"While the growth in air travel and airport operations has
raised enviranmental concerns, these concerns ha��e also
aFfected airport opera[ions and srowth," [he conRressman
told GAO. "On the one hand, the industrv's �ro�vth has
Airport Noise Repon
C
��
mber 10, 1999
created concerns about noise, air, and water pollution. On
the other hand, environmen[al concerns have increased the
time and cost of development and imposed restrictions on
fli�ht patterns, airporc use, and airport capacity."
� In response to these concerns, Oberstar wrote, several bills
� have been introduced in Consress "to foster a balance
between the demands for expanding airpor[ operations and
preservina the environment. These bi11s would determine
the feasibility of re�ulatinQ noise, air, water, and solid waste
poilution from all sources in and around airports."
Framework for Deliberations
"To provide a framework for future con�ressional
deliberations, I would like for GAO to condact a broad
review of the environmental issues associated with current
and future airpoc[ operations and development," Oberstar
wrote. "I would expect this initia] review to identify the
nature and scope of key environmental concems/challen;es
that the Consress and the Department of Transportation
would face in the short and lona term, focusing primarily on
issues related to noise pollution, air emissions, and water
quality."
In addition, Oberstar asked GAO to "evaluate what is
currently known about aviation's impact on global warmin�
and also to include the stams of FAA's and other federal
aQencies' efforts to address environmental concerns related
to airport operations."
Finally, he said, "the intial review should describe what
the nation's lar�est airpores are doins to balance airport
-f ..__, operations and growth with environmental concerns."
�� ;Dberstar told GAO that he anticipates that GAO will have to
� do follow-on work to its inidal study "to examine other
issues associated with the environmental impacts of airport
operations and �rowth identified durin� the inital review."
GAO is currently in the desiQn phase of the study. It plans
to survey the �0 busiest U.S. airports to find out how they
are addressins environmental issues and wil] talk to FAA,
the Departments of Defense and Transportation, Environ-
mental Protection AQency, and the National Aeronavtics
and Space Adminstration to discuss their roles in mitisating
environmenta] problems. GAO also wiil consider recent
reports done on airport environmentai issues.
DOT Study
The Office of the Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation is stud}•inQ «•he[her airports are adherinQ to
their Part 1 �0 Airport Noise Compatibility Programs and
whether those proQrams arz �cori:ina.
The office is studvin� about 1? airpons, a spokesman said
The study is exptected to be comoleted by the end of
November and ta be a��aila�le on the office's web site at
ww�,v.dot.Qov/IOG.�
115
Airspace Revision
PUBLIC MEETING �tAT�S
SET �47R POTOMAC PROJECT
The Federal Aviation Administration announced Sept. 3
that it wiil hold four public meetin�s in the Baltimore-
Washington, DC, area to solicit public input on the agency's
plan to revise the airspace around the araa's four major
airports: Dulles International, Reagan i�aaional, Baltimore-
Washinston International, and Andrews Air Force Base.
The a�ency said that it plans to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement to consider the potential impacts of
chanQes to air traffic control procedures and aircraft
routinQs in 75 mile radius area centered in the Georaetown
enc]ave of Washin�ton, DC. y
Chan�es to existing takeoff or landina noise abatement
procedures will not be considered in the EIS.
The present EIS follows an earlier one done as the basis
for approving the consolidation of four Terminal Radar
Approach Cantrol (TRACON) facitities, currently located at
the four airports, into one consolidated facility located at
Vint Hill Farms in Fauquier Coonty, VA, lacated west of
Washin�ton, DC.
The FA.A said that it will conduct an in-depth analysis of
aircraft routes and altitudes as well as Ais Tra�c Control
procedures. "The purpose is to determine what, if any, new
routes, altitudes, or procedures could be imptemented that
would take advanta�e of the TRACON consolidation,
improved aircraft pertormance, and new and emer�in� A lC
technologies," ihe aaency said in its Federal Register
�notice. "'The goal of the study is "to enhance safery, reduce
operatin� costs, and reduce environmentai impacts of
Potomac'ITtACON controlied aircraft in the environment
study area."
Aireraft routins has always been a very politically
sensitive topic in the metropolitan Washinaton area,
especially in the Potomac River comdor that aircraft follow
in and out of Reasan National Airport. In the early 1980s
the NSetropolitan Washinaton Council of Governments'
noise committee backed a"scatter plan" ta fan aircraft
operating at Reaoan National over a wider aeoQraphic area
to more equitable distribute the noise impact. The rerouted
aircraft so upset residents that got the new noise that it was
quickly abandoned.
The public scoping sessions on the air rouie revisions will
be held:
• Oct. 19 at the Dulles Airport Hilton;
• Oct. 26 at the Colony South in Clinton, I�4D, near
Andrews Air Force Base;
• Oct. 27 at the lblaritime Institute of Trainina and
Graduate Studies in Linthicum Heiahts, �SD, near BWI
Airport; and �
• Oct. 28 at the National Rural Electric Cooperative
association in ,�1rlinQton, VA, near Reagan National Airport.
A separate meetins will be held on Oct. 21 at the Holiday
Inn Capital in Washington, DC, for federaI, state, and lacal
Airport Noise Report
116 Airport Noise Report
a�ency staff that will be involved in the EIS.
Funher information on the meetin�s can be obtained from
Joseph Champley, project support specialist, FAA Air
Traftic Control Systems Command Center, Potomac
Pronram Office; tel: 800 762-9�31; e-mail:
joe.champley C�fa�.Qov.�
Part 1�0 Program
FAA APPROVES PROGR.AlV�
FOR RICKENBACKER INT'L
The airpon noise compatibility proQram for Rickenbacker
International Airport in Columbus, Ohio, has been approved
by the Federal Aviation Administration, the aaency an-
nounced Sept. 3. y
The pro�ram contains 26 measures, 20 of which were
approved by the FAA, one withdra�vn, and five did not
require FAA review.
Approved measures include:
• Several dealinQ with departure flisht tracks;
• AcquirinQ one periodic noise monitor;
• IvlaintaininQ the airport's noise abatement committee;
• ConductinQ an analysis of noise contours �nd updatin�
noise contour maps;
• Establishina a noise complaint o�ce;
• PreparinQ updated noise exposure maps;
• Developing a format public information pro�ram to
increase public ativareness of the airport's noise compatibil-
iry pro�ram;
� Purchasing homes within the 6� dB DNL noise contour;
• Purchasin� undeveloped land within the 70 dB DNL
contour;
• Encourasin� local jurisdictions to adopt compatible land
use zonin,, noise overlay policies, Quidelines for discretion-
ary project review, and land use controls; and
• Amendina the purpose in sections of the zonina,
subdivision, and buildinQ codes of the Colutnbus City
Codes to include the airpon.
The FAA said that five measures did not require its
approval: ( I) adoption of heiQht and hazard zonina, (2)
encoura�,ement of local jurisdictions to adopt flood plain
zonin�, (3) establishment of a local program ta purchase
a��i�;ation easements over property eliQible under the
airport's 1989 noise control proQram, (4) purchase of
selected homes in the forecasted 1992 70 dB DNL noise
con[our completed under the 1939 noise control proQram,
and (5) sound insulation of schools completed under the
( 9S9 pro�Tram.
�Vithdrawn by the airport «•as a proposed measure to
purchase development ri�hts on specitic parcels of undevel-
oped land �vithin the 199? 6i dB DNL noise contour.
Furthzr inPorma[ion on the pro��ram can be obtained from
tilary Ja�,iello, FAA. Detroit Air�orts District Office,
1�'illow Run Airport, East. SS20 Beck Rd., Beileville, IvII
-Fti I 1 ( : tel: (734) 457-7?96.J
New Jersey
NJCAAN FORMS ALLIAI�tCE
AROUND GA AIRPORT NOISE ( �
The New Jersey Coalition Asainst Aircraft Noise
(NJCA?.��1) announced recently that it has formed the
General Aviation Alliance. The coalition of community
groups "is fiQhtin� for home rufe to assure local control over
the development and expansion of local airpons" NJCAAN
explained in a press release_
Thus far eight citizen orsanization in the state have joined
the alliance and have endorsed a live six-month test of a
controversial plan NJCAAN has proposed to send airplanes
departina Newark International Airport over the Atlantic
Ocean to reduce noise impact.
"Since the Expanded East Coast PIan in 1987, much of
New Jersey has been a toxic zone of ear-shatterinQ noise
from Iow-flyin� pianes trying to neQotiate the world's most
coneested airspace," said Pamela Barsam-Brown, executive
director of NJCAAN. "Local airports have become a larae
part of the problem because traffic from lareer pianes have
forced �eneral aviation to use Iower aItitudes."
"CompoundinQ the situation further are efforts to expand
many local airports, often without any consideration for the
effects on the surroundins communities," she added. "This
country was formed around the ideals of self-determination.
In the spirit of what is in the best interests of our nation's
citizens, home rule should be a guidins principle in deter-
r.:ining the development of communities' airports," Barsam-
Brown asserted.
She noted that the U.S. House of Representatives in June
passed leaislation to reauthorize the Federal Aviation
Administration which provides fundins to svbstantially
expand airpons and increases fundins available to aeneral
aviation airports. � y
General aviation airports have grown sisnificantly in New
Jersey over the past six years, Barsam-Brown said, "fueled
by the state aovernment's laissez-faire attitude toward
citizen complaints about aireraft noise." She said that
"environmentaI desradation wil] be funher expanded by the
deep pockets of the federal �overnment."
Thz NJCANN Qeneral aviation alliance "will create a
network of expertise and information tha[ �vill be shared
amonQ the aircraft noise alliance members and will include
such issues as land use, health risks, pollution issues, and
political action," accordina to Barsam-Brown.�
Airpoa Noise Report
l
�� I
-=: � ' " )
September 10, 1999
IN .B.R�.E�' ...
Bti�I Traii
In an effort to reach out to the surroundina community,
the Baltimore-Washinston International Airport has become
the only airport in the country to buitd a dedicated hiker/
biker trail encirclins the airport property.
The 12.5 mile scenic trail connects hikers, bicyclists,
walkers, and joQQers to community resources, public
transportation, and area atuactions, includina historic sites.
Most of the trail is constructed of asphalt; ho�vever, wooden
boardwalks were used in environmentally sensitive areas to
protect natural features.
The trail has been built and maintained throuQh a public/
private cooperative effort that includes the Anne Arundel
County, MD, Department of Recreation and Parl:s, the
Maryland Aviation Adminisuation, the State HiQhway
Administration, the BWI Airport NeiQhbors Committee, the
Maryland Department of Natural Resources, and the Mass
Transit Administration.
Rangers from the counry Department of Recreation and
Parks routinely patrol the trail during dayliaht hours.
Anchorage Part 150
The FAA announced Sept. 10 that it has reopened the
public comment period on the proposed Airport Noise
Compatibility Program for Anchora�e International �,irport.
The program currently is under review by the a�ency.
Comments will be accepted until Oct b and should be sent
to Patricia A. Sullivan, FAA, Airports Division, AAL-600,
222 West 7th Ave., n14, AnchoraQe, Alaska 99513.
Albee 7oins Wyle Labs
William Albee announced that he has joined Wyle
Laboratories, based in Arlin�ton, VA, as director of special
projects. Wyle is an internationally recoQnized firm with
technical expertise in aviation noise. As special projects
director, Albee said he tivill be "building on Wyle's existinQ
capabilities and enhancins their ability to provide e;cpert
services to airports, FAA�local governments, aviation
manufacturers, and aircraft operators reoardin� aviation
noise and other environmental issues."
Albee retired from the FAA last April �vhere he spent nine
years as manaQer of the policy and regulatorv division of the
a�ency's Oftice of Enr•ironment and Energy. He also served
as thz FAA's Aviation Noise Ombudsman.
After IeavinQ the F.AA this sprin�. Albee initially worked
tivith Aviation, Na��i�ation, and Satellite Proararns, Inc.
(ANSP), a firm that is usina cutting-edae air naviQation
technoloay to develop high-resolution noise abatement
fliRht paths. Albee said he plans to continue this work at
t 1 �Vyle in close coordination with ANSP, using �Vyle's
_ expertise and software for fliaht track optimization.
117
Austin Draft Part 1�0
A hearing was held Sept. 9 in Austin, Texas, on a draft
update to the Part 1 �0 Airport Noise Compatibitity study for
the new Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. The draft
update recommends areas within the noise impact area for
avisation easements, acquisition, or sound insulation,
according to the airport. It said it has expanded its pro�ram
to include a voluntary home p�rchase program in several
areas.
At the old Robert Mueller Municipal Airport, which
closed for aviation purposes on NSay 22, more than 30,000
residents were affected by noise, the airpart said. The draft
Part 150 update indicates that approcimately 1,000 residents
are affected by airport noise within the 6� dB DNL contour
at Austin-Ber�strom International.
Before the new airport was built, zoninQ ordinances were
put into place to restrict incompatible development in the
noise impact areas near the new airport, which opened for
passenger service on May 23.
Planning Consultant Sought
Shutt Nioen Associates is seekina to fill a professional
position in its planning division_ This position can be filled
either at an associate (two years of experience) or project
mana�er level. Experience in airport planning andlor noise
and safety compatibility plannin� are essential. Stron�
analytical ability, and polished writins and speakina skills
are important.
The saiary is neQotiabie. A benefits packaae is available
that includes 401K plan, profit sharina, cafeteria plan, health
insurance, etc.
Shutt Moen Associates conducts noise and safety compati-
bility planning for airports with offices located in Northern
California about one hour north of San Francisco.
Resume and cover letters should be submitted to Shutt
Moen Associates, 707 Aviation Blvd., Santa Rosa, CA .
9�403; fax (707) 526-9721; e-mail sma@sonic.net. Ques-
tions should be directed to David Dietz at tel: (707) �26-
5010.
SFO Roundtable Request
The San Francisco Airport/Community Roundtable has
asked that the FAA give noise the same «•eisht as issues
such as San Francisco Bay fill in the preparation of a draft
environmentai impact report and statement on the proposed
reconfiauration of San Francisco International Airporc's
runtivay system.
The request was one par[ of the Roundtnble's response to
the proposed scope of environmental impact studies to be
prepared at the direction of the FAA and �he City and
County of San Francisco.
ReducinQ aircraft noise is one of four major environmental
objectives of SFO's proposal to reconfi�ure its intersectina
runways, the Roundtable explained in a r4cen[ press release.
Two years aQo, the Roundtable requested that the airport
Airport Noise Repor
120
ort Noise Report ,
REPORTED FLEET COi�IPOSITION
January 1, 1998 - December 31,1998 �
1998
OPERATOR CATEGORY BASE 1998 1998 TOTAL 1998 1993
LEVEL STAGE 2 STAGE 3� FLEET PHASEOUT' FLEET lYtIX3
DONIESTIC TOTAL (99 OPERATORS) 2,199 740 4,406 5,146 66.3% 85.6%
U.S. Nlajors* (10 operators) 1,5�0 �l l 3,163 3,674 67.0�10 86.1%
U.S. Nationals* (1� operators) 68 �9 297 356 13.2% 83.4%
U.S. cargo (25 operators) 552 131 850 981 76.3% 86.6%
Other U.S. (49 operators) � 29 39 96 135 -34.5% 71.1%
FOREIGN TOTAL (147 OPERATORS) 769 234 2,d58 2,292 69.6% 89.8%
Major Foreign* (59 operators) 591 189 1,764 1,953 68.0% 90.3%
Other Foreign (83 operators) 1�8 45 294 339 74.7% 86.7%
ACTIVE FLEET TOTAL (?46 OPERATORS) 2,968 974 6.4E4 7,438 67.2% 86.9%
Notes
*"U.S. Iviajors" refers to U.S. carriers with annual operating revenues of �l bilIion or greater, "U.S. Nationais" refers to ,-
_ f..
U.S. carriers with a�aual epe udag revenees between $100,000,d00 and Si billion. "MajorForei�i'refers to foreia operators with �.: :
10 or more subsonic turbojet airplanes over 75,000 lbs. chat are eligible for operation to the contiwous United States. �--`=%
1 The number of StaQe 3 airplanes listed in the active fleet may be somewhat understated. Once an operator notifies the F
that it has achieved 100 percent compliance, no further annual reports aze required. Therefore some fuliy compliant operators
have increased their Staee 3 fleet without reportin� the additional airplanes for noise compliance purposes.
'` Difference between base level and number of Stage 2 airplanes divided by base level, showing the percenta�e of Sta�e 2 airplanes
phased out. Individuat operators must have phased out 75 percent or more after 12/31/98 to comply under the phaseout option.
Calculations resultin� in fractions may be rounded to permit the continued operation of the next whole number of Sta�e 2 airplanes.
Therefore, some percentaQes are lower than the compliance percenta�es prescribed in the regulations.
3 Number of Stage 3 airplanes divided by total fleet, showing the percentage of StaQe 3 airplanes. Individual operators must have a fleet of
no less than 75 percent Sta�e 3 airplanes after i J31/98 to comply under fle�t mix option and as new entrants.
Calculations resuitins in fractions may be rounded to permit the continued operation of the next whole number of S[a�e 2 airplanes.
ThereFore, some percenta�es are lower than the compiiance percenta�es prescribed in the reQulations.
4 This category includes 19 new entrants that were added without base levei, contributins 24 Stage 2 airplanes to the total. Some of these
operators have a single airplane and under the roundina rule achieved compliance with�out adding Sta�e 3 airplanes to their fleets.
These factors result in the neQative phaseout percentage and the low fleet mix percenta�e.
Airport Noise Rzport
�`;-;-
��: �
�,- _..
� .��,( �
121
September 24,1999
OPERATOR
CATEGORY
DOMESTIC TOTAL
U.S. blajors
U.S. Nationals3
U.S. Cargo
Other U.S.3
FOREIGN TOTAL
Major Foreign
Other Foreign
ACTIVE FLEET
TOTAL
OPERATOR
CATEGORY
DOMESTIC TOTAL
U.S. Majors
U.S. Nationals
U.S. Cargo
Other U.S.
FOREIGN TOTAL
Major Foreign
Other Foreian
ACTIVE FLEET
TOTAL
BASE
�EVELI
2,199
1,550
68
552
29
769
591
178
1997 -1998 PROGRESS COlYIPARISON
STAGE 2 SUi�iMARY
1997
'AGE 2
1,136
7�3
78
241
64
1997
STAGE 3'
3,802
2,775
255
690
$2
1,917
1,653
264
,719
317
245
72
1998 STAGE 2
STAGE2 CHANGE
�40 -396
511 -242
59 -19
131 -110
39 . -?5
234 -83
� 89 -56
45 -?�
( 974 � -479
STAGE 3 SUMMARY
1998
AGE 3a
4,406
3> 163
297
850
96
2,058
1,�64
294
STAGE 3
CHANGE
604
388
42
160
14
141
111
30
7�5
1997
49.2%
51.4%
7.1 %
57.3%
-73.0%
57.3%a
58.5%
59.6%
199'7
;ET NIIX
77.0%
78.7%
76.6%
74.1%
56 �%
85.3%
87.1%
78.6%
79.8
%
1998 PHASEOUT
,SEOUT` CHANGE
66.3�10 17.1%
67.0�7'0 15.6%
13.Z�Io 6.1%
76.3°Io 19.0%
-34.5°Io 38.5%
69.6% 12.3%
68.0°l0 9.5%
74.7°Ic 15.1%
67,2% 15.6%
1998
;ET NI�
85.6�/0
86.1 �/�
83.4%
86.6"0
71.1°l0
89.8%
903�10
86.7c1c
86.9 �'o
.FLEET NIIX
CHANGE
8.6%
7.3 %
6.8%
12.5°Io
14.9%
4.5%
3.2�'/0
8.1 °Io
7.1 %
Notes
1 Some changes in base level have occurred since the 199� report due to the retum of U.S.-owned airplanes leased to foreign operators
and cessation of operacions by operators with base level.
2 1997 phaseout computed a�ainst base level of 3,OQ5 airplanes. 1998 phaseout computed against base level of 3.919 airplanes.
3 The na[ional cate�ory includes new entrants formerly reported as "Other U.S" that were added without base level, contributing
S[aQe 2 airplanes to the total. The "Other U.S:' category includes new entrants [hat were added without base level, contribucing
S[age 2 airplanes to the total. Many of these operators have a sinale airplane and under the rounding rule achieved compliance
without adding Sta�e 3 airplanes to their fleets. These factors result in the negative phaseout percentage and the low fleet mix
percen[age.
° The number of Stage 3 airplanes listed in the active fleet may be somewhat understated. Once an operator notifies the FAA that it has
achieved 100 percent compliance, no further annual reports are required. Therefore some fully compliant operacors have increased
their StaQe 3 fleet without reportin� the addicional airplanes for noise compliance purposes.
Airport Noise Report
frj .
,_-,'�'��:��. :
:�I::'
'y� ..
�"'; ��;
� �...
122 Airport Noise Report
1998 PROGRESS REPORTS S�JiYfMARY - U.S. MA,,JORS
1998
OPERATOR BASE 1998 1998 TOTAL 1995 1998
LEVEL STAGE 2 STA�� 3 FLEET PHASEOUTI FLEET
MIX'"
Alaska Airlines 32 0 84 84 100.0% 100.0%
America West Airlines 33 13 98 1 i i 60.6% 88.3%
American Airlines 175 76 568 644 56.6% 88.2°l0
Continental Airlines l96 5� 309 364 7t.9% 84.9%
Delta Air Lines, Inc. 224 80 S01 581 643% 86.2%
Northwest Airlines 284 6� 3�2 419 76.4% 84.0%
Southwest Airlines 32 23 25? 280 28.1% 91.8%
T�VA 134� 50 ��0 200 62.7% 75.0%
United Airlines 237 100 5Q3 603 Si.8% 83.4%
US Airways 203 4'7 341 388 76.8% 8�.9%
U.S. NIAJORS TOTAL
(10 O erators) ' 15�� 511 3,163 3,674 67.0% 86.1%
Notes .
I Difference between bas� :�ve: and nc^:�e: of Stage ?. airplanes divi�ed by base level, showing the percentaee of StaQe 2 airplanes
phased out. Individual operators must have phased out 75 percent or more after 12/31%98 to comply under the phaseout option.
Calculations resuluns in fractions may be rounded to permit the continued operation of the next whole number of Sta�e 2
airplanes. Therefore, some percentages are lower than the compliatice percentages prescribed in the regulations. Some individual
operators have experienced rapid growth in both their Stage 2 and Stage 3#leets simultaneousiy. In certain cases, Sta�e 3 fleet
growth has exceeded base levei, resultin� in negative phaseout percentaees. These operators have chosen to comply throu�h the
tleet mix option.
Z Number of StaQe 3 airplanes divided by total fleet, showing the percentaQe of Stage 3 airplanes. Individual operators must have a
fleet of no less than 75 percenc Stage 3 airplanes after IZ/31/98 to compiy under fleet mix option and as new entrants.
Calculations resultine in fractions may be rounded to permit the continued operadon of the next whole number of 5taae 2 .
airpianes. Therefore, some percentaQes are lower than the compliance percentages prescribed in the rewiations. �
Airport Noise Report
� __ ,
�,f ,
��. }
:� �
September 24, 1999
1998 PROGRESS REPORTS SUl�ll�i IA.RY - U.S. NATIONALS
199$
OPERATOR BASE 1998 1998 TOTAL 1998 1998
LEVEL STAGE 2 STAGE 3 FLEET PHASEOUT' FLEET NIIY'"
*Air Tran Airlines, Inc. 0 8 37 45 O.O�Io 82.2%
Air Wisconsin 0 0 16 16 0.0% 100.0%
**Aloha Airlines l9 20 0 20 -5.3% 0.0%
American Trans Air 8 8 42 50 0.0%a 84.O�10
*Business Express 0 0 39 39 0.0% 100.0�10
Frontier Airlines 0 5 12 17 0.0% 70.6%
Hawaiian Airlines 6 0 11 11 i00.0% 100.0%
*Niidway Airlines Inc. 0 0 l� 17 0.0% 100.0%
l�lidwest Express ' 12 6 21 2� 50.0% 77.8%
Pan American Airways Corp. 9 3 14 17 66.790 82.4%
Reno Air 0 0 29 29 0.0% 100.0%
Sun Country Airlines 7 4 12 16 42.9°'0 75.0%
Tower Air 7 5 15 20 28.6% 75.0%
*Western Pacific Airlines 0 0 18 18 � 0.0% 100.0�10
World Airways 0 0 I4 14 O.a% 100.0%
U.S. NATIONALS TOTAL
(1j OPERATORS) 6$ 59 29i 356 13.2% 83.4%
123
Notes
* A new entrant that did not operate 5tage 2 airplanes during the time period used to establish base level. New entrants must have a
fleet of no less than 75 percent Sta�e 3 airplanes after 12/31/98 to comply.
**Aloha Airlines operates solely outside the contia ous United States in Hawaiian inter-island service.
� Difference between base ]evel and number of Sta�e 2 airplanes dividerl hy base level, showinQ the percentage of StaQe 2 airplanes
phased out. Individual operators must have phased out 75 percent or more after 1J31/98 to comply under the phaseout option.
Calculations resultinQ in fractions may be rounded to permit the continued operation of the next whole number of Stage 2
airplanes. Therefore, some percentages are lower than the compliance percentages prescribed in the rewlations. Some individual
operators have experienced rapid Qrowth in both their Stage 2 and Stage 3 fleets simultaneously. In certain cases, Stage 2 fleet
growth has exceeded base level, resulting in ne�ative phaseout percentages. These operators have chosen to comply through [he
fleet mix option.
'" Number of S[a�e 3 airplanes divided by total fleet, showing the percentage of Stase 3 airplanes. Individual operators must have a
flee[ of no less than 7� percent Stage 3 airplanes after 12/31/93 to comply under fleet mix option and as netiv entrants.
Calcula[ions resulting in fracvons may be rounded to permit the continued operation of the next whole number of Stnge 2
airplanes. Therefore, some percen[ages are lower than the compliance percentages prescribed in the regulations.
Airport Noise RepoR
124 Airport Noise Report
1998 PROGRESS REPORTS SUlYItVIARY - U.S. CARGO
1998
OPERATOR BASE 199$ 1998 TOTAL 1998 1998
LEVEL STAGE 2 STAGE 3 FLEET PHASEOUT' FLEET �IIX'
*Air Transport International Ltd. 6 3 22 25 SO.O�Jo 88.O�10
Airborne Express 82 19 93 112 76.890 83.O�Jo
Amerijet International IS 4 6 10 733�'0 60.O�Io
Arrow Air 23 5 7 12 78390 � 58.3�10
*Atlas Air, Inc. 0 1 22 23 0.0% 95.7%
Buriington Air Express, Inc. t6 1 3 4 93_8�/0 7�.0%
*Capital Cargo Intl Airlines, Inc. 0 2 4 6 0.0�7'0 66.7%
Challenge Air Cargo 3 0 5 5 100.0% 100.0%
*Contract Cargo Airlines, Inc. 0 1 0 1 0.090 0.0%
DHL Airways, Inc. 16 4 23 27 75.0�70 85.2%
Emery Worldwide Airiines 66 12 57 69 81.8aa 82.6%
Evergreen International 33 9 10 19 72.790 52.6%
Express One International, Inc. 29 5 20 2� 82.8po 80.O�10
Federal Express I57 33 289 322 79.090 89.8%
*Fine Air 0 3 9 12 U.090 75.00lc
Florida West Airlines ' ' 7 i 2'-- �-3 85.7po • 66.7%
*Gemini Air Cargo 0 0 7 7 Q0�/o 100.0%
*Kitty Hawk Aircargo, Inc. 0 8 27 35 0.09a �7.1 �/o
Kitty Hawk International, Inc. 49 13 23 36 73S�o 63.9�'0
*Nations Air Eacpress 0 0 1 1 0.090 100.0%
*Polar Air Cargo 0 3 10 13 0.0�'0 76.9%
Ryan International Airlines l 1 12 13 O.O�o 92.3%
*Trans Continental 0 2 4 6 0.0�'0 66.7�10
United Parcel Service 47 0 194 194 100.0�'c 100.0%
*Zantop International Airiines 2 1 0 1 �d.0�'c O.O�Ic
U.S. CARGO TOTAL
(25 OPERATORS) 552 131 850 981 76.3�'a 86.6%a
!`IVtCJ
* A new encran[ that did not operate Stage 2 airplanes during the time period used to estabiish base level. New en�ranu must have a fleet of no less
than 7i percent Stage 3 airplanes afrer lJ31/98 to comply.
� Diffe�ence benveen base level and number of Stage 2 ai lanes divided b base level, showin the ercencage of Stase 2
�P Y g p _ airplanes phased out.
Individual operarors must have phased out 75 percent or more aher IJ3 U93 to compiy under the phaseout option. Calculations resuitin� in
fractions may be rounded to pernut the condnued oper�rion of the next whole number of Sta�e Z airplanes. Therefore, some percentages are lower
than the compliance percentages prescribed in the rebulations. Some individual operarors have experienced rapid growth in both their 5taee 2 and
Sta�e 3 t7eect simuitaneously. In certain cases, Sta�e Z fleet �rowth has exceeded base level, resulrine in neoative phaseout percen[aees. These
operarors have chosen to comply through the fleet mix option. •
'" Number of Stage 3 airpianes divided by toral fleet, showing the percenta�e of Staee 3 airplanes. [ndividual operators must have a fleet of no less
than 7_5 percent Stase 3 airplanes after 1J31/98 to comply under tleet mix opdon and as new entrants. Calculations resultins in fracdons may be �
rounded to permit the condnued operation of the next whole number of Stage 2 airplanes. Therefore, some percentases are lower than the
compliance percentaees prescribed in the re�ulations. �
Airport Noise Repon
�;.> �
September 24, 1999 � 1��
1998 PROGRESS REPORTS STJl�IY1ARY - I�IAJOR FO�IGN
1998
OPERATOR BASE 1998 1998 TOTAL 1998 1993
LEVEL STAGE 2 STAGE 3 FLEET PHASEOi3�"' FLEET MIY"
Aeroflot 102 25 21 46 7���'0 45.7�Io
Aerolineas Argentinas IS 2 10 12 88"n.�t'�'a 833%
Aeromexico IS l5 46 61 0�:''d � 75.4%
Air 2000 0 0 10 10 U_�' 0 100.0%
*Air Atlanta-Icelandic 0 4 11 IS 0�& 733%
Air Canada 72 24 i 13 137 66.��, 82.5%
Air China 0 0 16 l6 1�..�''0 100.0%
Air France 23 4 69 73 8Z�fa 94.5%
Air India 4 4 13 I7 O�o 76.5%
Air Jamaica 4 0 13 13 l OQR.�S 100.0%
Air New Zealand 7 0 26 26 lOQ�"o 100.0%
Air Transat 0 0 20 20 t�� 100.0%
Alitalia 13 0 22 22 lOQ�.�i°'o 100.0%
All Nippon Airways 0 0 31 31 Q.fl� 100.0%
AOM-Minerve 0 0 I3 13 0� 1Q0.0%
Asiana Airlines 0 0 56 56 {D� 100.0%
Avianca 24 Q 12 12 10� � 100.0%
Britannia Airways 0 0 28 28 Q�� 100.0%
British Airways 19 9 128 137 52�'a 93.4%
- Canada 3000 Airiines Limited 0 0 11 11 ��i":'o 100.0%
Canadian Airlines International , 65 17 56 �3 7�_��la 76.7%
Cathay Pacific Airways 0 0 42 42 0�;''0 100.0%
China Airlines 11 2 22 24 81-�Qo 91.7%
China East Airlines 0 0 39 39 0_Qd'o 100.0%
Condor Flugdienst 0 0 29 29 0_0% I OO.O�Io
EI A1 Israel Airlines ] 1 7 1 S 25 3b_4�"o 72.0�7a
*Eva Airways Corporation 0 0 10 10 0.0°'a 100.0%
Iberia 1 6 21 27 -500_O�lo 77.8�70
Japan Air System Co., Ltd. 0 0 26 26 O.f��Io 100.0%
Japan Airlines 4� 12 121 133 7'�.i�'o 91.0°l0
*Japan Asia Airways 0 8 2�1 32 0-0"0 7�.O�Io
I�.LNI Roval Dutch Airlines 7 0 46 46 101➢_O�Io ] 00.0%
Korean Air Lines 21 3 5� �8 8�.7�'0 94.8%
Airpor[ Noise Report
126 Air�ort Noise Report
199$
OPERATOR BASE 1998 1998 TOTAL 1998 1998
LEVEL STAGE 2 STAGE 3 FLEET PHASEOUTI FLEET NIIX'"
Lacsa Airlines 6 2 9 1l 66.�°I'o 81.8%
*Lineas Aereos A1legro S.A. de 0 3 8 11 0.0% 72.7%
C.V.
LTU 0 0 20 20 0.0% 100.0%
LTU Sud ' 0 0 10 10 0.0% 100.0%
Lufthansa 0 4 68 72 0.0% 94.4%
11�Ialaysia Airlines 0 0 17 17 0.0% 100.0%
Martinair Holland 3 0 14 14 1Q0.0% 100.0%
Mexicana3 44 IS 31 46 6�.9% 67.4%
Monarch Airlines 0 0 19 19 0.0% 100.0%
Philippine Airlines 0 0 4$ 48 �.0% 100.0%
F'� 10 4 10 14 (�(?.0% 71.4%
Qantas . 11 0 5'7 57 1(10.0% 100.0%
Royal Jordanian Airiine 3 2 9 I 1. 333% 81.8%
Saudia Arabian Airlines 0 0 38 3& �.0% 100.0%
Scandinavian Airiines Systems 0 0 13 13 0.0°l0 100.0%
Singapore Airlines 4 7 43 50 -75.o% 86.0%
South African Airways 0 0 16 � 16 0.0% 100.0%
Swissair 6 0 31 31 iQ0.0�/0 100.0%
Taca 4 2 25 17 50.0% gg.2%
Taesa 10 2 1Q 12 8Q.0% 83.3�/0
TAP 0 0 12 l2 0.0% 100.0%
Thai Airways Internarional 0 0 12 12 0.�90 100.0%
Transbrasil Airlines 3 0 12 11 IOO.O�Io 100.0�/0
Varig 0 0 36 36 0_0% 100.0�/0
VASP 21 2 10 12 90.��7'0 83.3C/o
Virgin Atlantic 8 4 l9 23 �0.0�"0 82.6%
FOREIGN l�fAJOR- TOTAL
(�9 OPER?�TORSI 591 139 1,764 19�3I 53.0�''0 90.3%
Notes
* A new entrant that did not operate StaQe 2 airplanes durine the time period used to establish base level. New encrants must have a
flee[ ot no less than 7� percent Staee 3 airplanes after 12/3I/98 to comply.
�
C
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound A�iement Council (NIASAC)
b040 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, 1�c�esota 55d50 •(612) 726-8141
Chairman: Mayor Charles Mertensotto
Past Chairs: Robe�t P. Johnson, 1995-1999
Scott Bunin, 1990-1995
Walter Rockenstein, II, 1982-1990
Jan Del Calzo, 1979-1982
Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979
Technicai
Advisor: Roy Fuhrmann
IVIEETINCa �O'TICE
�AS�� C3�'�FZ4?'i��� C0�1iM1�'T%E
The Operations Committee will meet Fridav, S�tember 10, 1999 — 10:00 a.m. at the
General Offices of the Metropolitan Airports C�mmission, MASAC Large Trailer 6040
28tn Avenue South, Minneapolis.
If you are unable to attend, please notify the cor�¢�'s�e� secretary at 612-726-8141 with the
name of your designated alternate.
OLD BUS1���S
Part 150 Update Progress Rev���v - Existing Conditions
RMT Upd�e
MEMBER DISTRIBUTION
Mark Salmen, Chairman, NWA
Bob Johnson, MBAA
Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan
LL�rJ,n, IChr,cnr� A I D�(1�
Brian Bates, Airborne
John Nelson, Bloomington
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis
Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights
Dick Keinz, MAC
cc: Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights
Charles Curry, ALPA
Will Eginton, IGH
Jennifer Sayre, NWA
Mark Hinds, Richfield
John Alabach, NWA
Tom Worum, NWA
Advisorv:
Keith Thompson, FAA
Ron Glaub, FAA
Cindy Greene, FAA
p �'. �1....-....... � � A /'+
f-`�V�i I Cii il I I ICiI ll�� (VI!"11.i
Chad Leqve, MAC
Shane VanderVoort, MAC
Jason Giesen, MAC
MINUTES
.MASAC OPER.ATIONS C011�IMITTEE
August 1.3,1999
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission I�IASAC Lar�e Conference Trailer, and
called to order at 10:00 a.m. �
The following members were in attendance:
iVlembers•
Nlark Salmen, Chairman
Dick Saunders
Bob Johnsan
John Nelson
Kevin Batchelder
Jamie Verbrugge
Dick Keinz
Adti-isorv•
Roy Fuhrmann
Chad Leqve
Shane VanderVoort
Cindv Green
Glen Orcutt
V isitors •
IVlark Hinds
Glenn Strand
I�tWA
Minneapolis
MEA.A
Bloomin�-ton
Mendota Heights
Ea,an
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
FAA
FAA
Richfield
Minneapolis
r'�.�i��i.��..ty
Chairman Salmen asked for additions or corrections to the Ju(y 9,1999 MASAC Operations il�teetin�
Minutes t11at were distributed at the meeting for review. There were no corrections or additions. The
minutes of the July 9, 1999 MASAC Operations meetin� were then approved.
AIRPOR?' CONSTR UCTION UPDATE
Roy Fuhrmann, Technica( Advisor, updated members on the constniction at the airport highliQhting:
a- The concrete paving on the runway and adjoining taxiways has been completed.
1
�- The construction of the blast fence along Post Road is nearin� completion. EiVIAS, a substance that
looks like cement but crumbles under the weight of an aircraft, will be constructed to estend to the
east on Runway 12R which witl stop aircraft in the event an aircraft would be unable to stop on the
run�vay.
a- The reconstruction project remains on scheduled with the anticipated completion date of September
7, 1999.
RttiIT SITE UPDATE
Chad Leqve, MAC, briefed members on the RMT construction update including:
�- August 4-6, 1999 Larson Davis and iVIAC Staff installed all of the monitorin� equipment.
� August 6, 1999 representatives from Ivlorcon, Miller Dun�viddie, vfichaud Cooley Erickson and
MAC visited all the sites and prepared a final punch list.
a- RIYIT and system inte�ration is underway.
a- Acceptance testinQ 'rs scheduled for completion on Auaust 20, 1999.
PARTISD UPDATEPROGRESS`REVIEyV
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, discussed the Part 150 Update Progress Review. Currently iV1AC staff and
HNTB are concentratin� on comparin� the land use and zonin� information received from the
communities to the associated information from the counties for completeness. It is anticipated the
information will be available for review at the September 10, 1999 l�1ASAC Operations Committee
meetin�. Three workshop meetings have been scheduled for Septmeber 28, 29 and 30 to disseminate
this information to the general public. Details on the time and locations of these meetinQs will be
published in the area newspapers and at the nest Full MASAC l�Ieetin�.
TECHNICAL ADVISO.RS REPORT & CORRIDOIZ REVISIONS
Chad Leqve, NIAC, presented the changes to the proposed revisions of the new Technical Advisors
Report and Corridor Report. Changes and suggestions regardin� the Draft Technical Advisors Report
included:
a- Paje 2; added a map showin� the locations for Aviation Noise Complaints by month. It was
suQgested by Dick Keinz, MAC to add a title to the paQe.
r Pa�e 5; added a culum�� coniaining the rAn Far 3o take-ofi noise level in descending orcler and
added a footnote eYplaining Stage 2 Hushkitted aircraft meet all Sta�e 3 criteria as outlined in the
Federal Aviation Re�ulation (�AR) Part 36.
� It �vas suggested to change the word Hushkitted to include all modified aircraft not just
Hushkitted aircraft.
� A discussion re�arding the need to list aircraft as Stage ?, Sta�e 3 and Staae 3 i�tanufacti.ired
etlded �viti�out resolution. John Nelson, Bloomin�ton, suaaested removing the category of StaQe
3 Nfanufacriired and add an e;cplanation note defining the letter Q used in the aircraft type as tl�e
indicator of a modified Sia�e 2 aircraft. Chairman Salmen stated he would a�ree to that. Kevin
Batchelder, �Iendota Heiahts, reminded members that the reason the information �vas oriainally
presented that way is because the communities stronaly stated they �vanted to see tl�e (
information presented that way. Chairman Salmen stated there is no definition for the
difference in the Staae 3 and Stage 3 Manufactured aircraft arrd that it is a misrepresentation of
information. y
�- Page 5; added rivo bullet points for definition of EPNL and eYplainin� tivhat the numbers in the FAR
Part 36 Take-OfFNoise Levels represent.
� Paae 6; added notes below both graphs explainin; origin airport and destination airport. IYIr. Keinz
� asked about chan�ing O'hare to Chica?o to follow the format of the chart. Mr. Leqve esplained
there is more than one airport in Chica�o and the information only pertained to O'hare, tivliich is the
same for La Guardia
� Pa�es 7, 3 and 9; added the actual timeframe considered for niQhttime hours.
�- PaQe 8; chanaed the title to show the information is based on actua! operations.
�- PaQe 10; added a leQend of city names and added miniature R1�ITs to mark the locations of tlze sites
instead of using circles. The additional5 RMTs tivill appear on the map as soon as they are added to
the system.
T Pa�es 14-? l; added addresses to each Rl�IT site table.
° Bob Johnson, �IBAA, indicated the spellina of the street Xerses should be Xer.ces.
�- Pa,e 21; added a�I'op Ten Summary paragraph.
OTHER SUGGESTIONS AND COMIVIENTS WERE:
�- Updating information listed on the page directly behind the cover pa�e to reflect the most updated
MASAC i�Iembers. John Nelson, Bloomin�ton, stated he felt it would be appropriate to recognize
the Chairman of the lYIA.SAC Operations Committee as well. Dick Keinz, MAC, suggested addin�
a title to the page and Cindy Green, FAA, pointed out the last paragraph simply ended indicatin� (
there may be information missin�.
�- Jan Del Cazo suQ�ested adding a date to the title on paQe 1 for the MSP Complaints by City tab(e,
chanQinQ the wordinQ in the title on page 4 from il�fSP All Hour Runtivay Use to MSP Total
Operations, asked if the chronological order by RMT number in the charts on pages 11 and 12 could
be the same.
�- Kevin Batchelder, lYlendota Heights, made the point that his cornmunity did not want to see page 14
of the old Technical Advisors Report disappear. The page contained a table that sho�ved the canier
jet departure related noise events above 65dB, 80dB, 90dB and 100dB by RMT site. l�fr. Leqve
indicated similar information could be found on pa�e 11 af the Draft Techn�cal Advisors Report and
in addition the report is available interactively on the Noise Department Website. Bob Johnson,
ivlBt�y, siatcd the intent for the revisions was to reduce the size of the report and if the information
was available elsetivhere, did it really need to be included in the Technical Advisors Report. Vlark
Hinds, Richfield; asked if the chart to the right of the table on pa�e 11 could be reduced or
eliminated since it tivas duplicated information from the table neYt to it allowina room to add the
information �Ir. Batchelder indicated his constituents tivould like to have available. Ntr. Leqve
eYplained it �vould involve addin� a new page to a(low enough space for both the depar-tiire and
arrival infornlation. i�Ir. Batchelder stated he tivould simply dotivnload tl�e information from the
Website.
Changes and stiQQestions to tl�e Draft Corridor Report included:
C
3
�r Pages 1-4; added Qates to the departure operations maps.
OTHER SUGGESTIONS AND CONi1�NTS WER.E:
a- Kevin Batchelder, Nlendota Heiahts, stated his constituents did not want to see the Proposed North
Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis reflecting the 095-degree Corridor Policy Boundary
changed to a 090-degree boundar,�. He stated the City of Nlendota Heights and the Blue Ribbon
Task Force never received a written response in reaard to the status of the proposal, which is now
being eliminated from the Corridor Report. Cindy Green e;cplained the 095-degree was not
endorsed by the FA.A due to safety reasons. As a result, the to�ver order reflects that the 090-degree
headin� is to be used. She stated it would not be a problem to forward a written response statin�
why the 095-de�ree headina is not being used. lbfr. Batchelder e:cplained an inquiry as to why this
proposal was dismissed is reflected in the City of iYlendota HeiQhts Part 150 Scoping Comments
hopin� it �vill be addressed throuah that program with the potential of looking at movina the
corridor.
KEVIN BATCHELDER yIOVED, SECONDED BY JOH'Vi NELSON TO SEND THE REPORT
TO THE FULL YIASAC BODY FOR REV�tiV. TH� iV10TION �VAS PASSED
UNA�.'�]TIVIOUSLY.
After further discussion about additional chan�es in the Draft Technical f4dvisors Report (noted above):
- BOB JOF1'�Ti SON, iVIBAA MOVED, SECONDED BY DICK KEI'�ti Z, NIAC, TO SEND T�I:E
( � DRAFT TECfl�Ti ICAL ADVISORS REPORT TO �HE FULL NIASAC BODY FOR REVIEW.
THE MOTION PASSED UNANIIVIOUSLY.
GROUND R UN-UP ENCLOSURE
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor gave a presentation about the ne:ct possible steps with respect to a
Ground Run-up Enclosure or modifications to the eYisting MSP runup facility. Details included:
a- Reviewed NISP Ground Run-Up Activities:
� 1997 Run-Up Operations Analysis
� 1998 Ground Noise Monitorin� Technical Study
� Revised NISP Run-Up Field Rute
� Survey of Ground Run-Up Enctosures throu�hout the world
� Apri130th, 1999 Ground Run-Up Enclosure Presentation by Ted Woosley, Landrum and Bro�vn
� N1SP Tour ofNorthwest Airlines En�ine Test Cell Facility and the MSP Run-Up Pad
�- E:cisting Documents Associated with Run-Up Activity include:
� 1998 Ground Noise l�tonitorin� Technical Study
� 1997 and 1993 Field Run-Up Reports
� Run-Up Noise Complaints
� Compilation of other airport's eYisting run-up studies and GRE installation document if
availab(e. �`
° Revie�v Dual Track Plannins Documents, EIS and ROD
�- Inventory Data and Conduct Intervietivs �vith Airport Users, Airport Planners and Affected Parties
regarding:
° Inventory of available wind data.
° Inventory of various data soarces for Run-Up Procedures.
° Intervie�v Airlines and Maintenance Personnel.
° Meet with airport planners and review MSP 2010 Airport Nlaster Plan.
° Interview other affected parties.
�- Develop a Run-up Noise Measurement Program to:
° Monitor actual airport run-up activity including:
• Various Power/Thrust Setting
• Various Aircraft Types
° Off Airport Locations
• On Airport Locations
° Store the results in a database of field noise measurements from en�ine run-up events for use in
fiirther analvses.
�r Analyze the Collected Data
° Compile and analyze the collected data.
° Compare actual monitoring to predictions from the Integrated Noise N1ode1 (TNl�i) and
NOISENIAP. �
° Compare event Lm�,,� and single event Sound Exposure Levels (SEL).
° Evaluate back�round noise levels tivith respect to run-up noise levels. �
° Develop and compare final analysis of field measurements and computer generated noise
modelins.
�- Evaluate Alternatives for the existin� Run-Up Pad acoustical enhancements
° Document EYisting Run-Up Pad usage.
° Evaluate potential acoustical modifications.
° Evaluate wind coverage.
° Review Airport Operations Area Ciearance Requirements.
a- Develop Recommendations and a Summary Report containin�:
° Recommendations for the esisting Run-Up Pad.
° GenPral L�sign s�ecificatio;�s for enhancemertts.
° Determine if additional faciliiies are required.
° If required:
• Potentiallocations.
• Relationships to other e:cisting structures.
• Evaluate wind effects.
• Determine acoustical requirements.
• Deve(op Noise Reductian Performance Goals.
• Develop Specifications for facility/perFormance requirements.
�- Options
C
5
° Continue to use the e:cistin; Run-Up Pad Facilities.
° Search for altemative Run-Up Pad locations to use during unfavorable �vind conditions and with
respect to future airfield construction projects.
° Conduct an evaluation of the proposed benefits for modifyin; the esisting Run-Up Pad.
� Evaluate the potential benefits of an additional Ground Run-Up Enclosure Facility.
Jamie Verbruaoe, Eagan, asked about the deadline to include any potential allocations in the 2000
bud�et. Mr. Fuhrmann stated if the analysis was completed 6y 1�Iarch 2000 that would allow enou�h
time to present the results and recommendations to MASAC for approval to include the eYpense in the
CIP for 2001.
Bob Johnson, NIBAA, eYpressed concems about MAC Staff time constraints with the Part 150 Program
in prosress. Ivir. Fuhrmann e:cplained there would be a need to utilize consultants to complete the
process in a timely manor.
KEVIlV BATCHELDER, lY1ENDOTA HEIGHTS MOVED, �'vD JOHN NELSON,
BLOOIYLIl�tGTON SECONDED TO iYIOVE FORWARD WITH T�E WORK PROGRAIVI AS
PFtESEiV`TED. T� iVIflTION PASSED UNAN�'Vi IO�TS;.Y.
DAILYDNL T.REND ANALYSIS
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, presented a Daily DNL Trend analysis based on data taken from
January 1993 tl�rou�h December 1998 showing both the decreases in daily DNL and the increases in
(, ) daily DNL at each individual RMT location. A Daily DNL Values by I2NIT chart showing the changes
" in DNL throughout the period, which revealed the fact that the DNL levels vary relative to the time of
year the data is derived from. Overall, the IVISP airport noise trend is decreasing when considerin� the
daily DNL noise levels at all twenty-four RMTs. The general consensus from members �vas a longer
timeframe spannin� years versus months is more representative and provides a better picture of the DNL
trend. The mernbership found the analysis interesting and stated such analysis would be helpful on an as
needed basis.
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, informed members that a City Staff Workshop for the Part 150 Base
Case Analysis is scheduled for September 9, 1999 at 2 p.r;�. in the 11�IAC LarQe Conference Trailer.
The ne:ct MASAC Operations NSeetin� is Friday, September 10, 1999 in the MAC Large Conference
Trailer at 10:0 a.m.
The meetin� was adjourned at 12:00 noon.
Respectfiilly submitted:
Shelly Lud�vig, Committee Secretary
0
� �. � 1 ' � �` ' � t � � ,' `
DATE: September l, 1999
TO: MASAC Operations Committee Members
FROM: Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
SUBJECT: Part 150 Update - Existing Conditions
As part of the on�oin� Part 150 Update process, at the September 10, 1999 MASAC Operations
Committee meetin� 1�tAC stafFwill provide information on the eYistin� noise conditions around i�ISP.
This information will provide insight into tl:e e:cistin� noise environment around the airport, which is a
critical part of the Part 150 Update process.
I�IAC's consultant HNTB in close coordination with VI_�C st�ff has been preparin, the existin`
conditions analysis as part of the Part 1�0 update process. T�vo eYistin� conditions analyses have been
conducted in parallel. One analysis (Analysis A) was conducted usin� acival ANOMS fliaht track and
noise data as IN1UI inputs to generate the contours. A second analysis (Analysis B) was conducted
utilizing standard IN11�1 contour generation procedure includinQ all of the standard/traditional procedures
and inputs to generate the contours. The resuits of the ttivo eYistin� conditions contour analyses should
provide insight into the efFects of usin� actual data compared to modeled information. (
Information on land use and population counts relative to the esisting condition contours tivill be
provided based on the e:cisting land use and popuIation counts received from the respective
communities.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-725-6326.
�' � 'i � � i' t� i
DATE: September 1, 1g99
TO: l�IASAC Opera�ions Committee Members
FROM: Chad Leqve - ANONIS Coordinator
SiTBJECT: RMT Installation Update
The installation, integration and acceptance testing has been completed for all of the five new R1�ITs.
The netiv sites are performin� well;, as a result the first reported data from the new site will be provided in
the August 1999 Technical Advrsor's Report with data beQinning on August 20, 1999.
NIAC staff wiIl provide a project completion summary at the September 10, 1999 MASAC Operations
Committee meetin�.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 612-725-6328.
�
C
��.
�
_ �"
� -; �e�ro oli�an Air����' So��� ���}em�nt G�ou��ci� (�ASAC�
� 6040 28th Avenue South � Minneapoils, Minr�esafia 5aab0 �(612) 726-8141
Chairman: Mayor Charles Mertensotto
Past Chairs: Robert P. Johnson, 1995-1999
Scott Bunin, 1990-1995
Wa(ter Rockenstein, il, 1982-1990
Jan Del Calzo, 1979-1982
StanieyW.Olson, 1G69-1979
Technical
Advisor: Roy Fuhrmann
IViEETtNG NOTICE
Ni�SAC OPERATiOr�S CONIt'VviTi'EE
The Operations Committee will meet Frida October ��ASAC Large Tra e r6040
Genera i O ff i c e s o f t h e M e t r o p o l itan Air ports Commission,
28`n qvenue South, Minneapolis.
If you are unable to attend, piease notifij the commii�ee secretary at 612-726-8141 with the
name of your designated alternate.
i�EW BUSI�IESS
Part 150 Runway 17/35 Noise Abatement Departure Procedures
OLD BUSINESS
Review Communications
Technical Advisor's Repo�t Revisions
MEMBER DISTRIBUTI�N
Mark Saimen, Chairman, NWA
Bob Johnson, MBAA
Jamie Verbrugge, Eagan
Ron Johnson, ALPA
Brian Bates, Airborne
John Nelson, Bioomington
Dick SaundErs, �✓linneapolis
Mayor Charies Niertensottc, Mendota Heights
Dick Keinz, MAC
cc: Kevin Batchelder, (viendota
Heights
ChGrles Curry, ALPA
Wiii Eginton, IGN
Advisor�:
Keith Thompson, FAA
Ron G1aub, FAA
Cindy Greene, FAA
Roy Fuhrmann, (viAC
Chad Leqve, MAC
Shane VanderVoort, MAC
Jason Giesen, MAC
Jennif�r Sayre, NWA
(viark Hinds, P.ichfield
John Alabach, NWA
Tom Worum, NWA
C'
1��A.SA�C D�'EI.AT.�C)�S CD��.IVIITT�E
��. j � � � �� ��
7C�3:
F�2+OiYI:
SU�3JECT:
DAiE:
MASAC Operations Cornmittee
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
Part 150 Runway 17/35 I`doise Abatement Departure Procedures
September 30, 1999
r��sac
As part of the continuing efforts to receive community and airline representative input concernina the Part
150 process, the M.ASAC Operations eommittee wiIl be briefed on Noise Abatement Departure Options
for Runway 17/35. A brief discussion of the assumptior�s used in the Dual Track Planning Process EIS will
be provided as a base line for considering options for fli�ht track usaje and noise abatement procedures.
The outcome of this discussion will help to refine the alternatives that will be considered as part of the
future recommendations in the Part I50 Noise Compatibility Program (NCP). The followin� outline
identifies the topics and associated issues to be presented:
N�%�p abatement De�arture Procedurec (NriDPs? %r Runwav 17
1. Distant Frocedure
2. Close-In Procedure
Tra,ck De�'initinn and Usa�e
1. l� degree divergence requirements
2. Capacity requirements
3. Track usa�e
4. Environmental requirements
Preferred ni�ht time track use
l. Reduction of track dispersion for departures
2. Departure Procedure for river route
3. Arival procedures
4. Use of GPS auamented procedures will be considered to refine departure procedures and to
potentially define curved arrival procedu-es.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 7?5-6326.
C
C
<
I�ASA� DPEI�.�'I�D�T� C011/�I�IIT�'.��
,' :� �� � :�
'��; iYI�SAC Operations Committe�
�'��ll��: Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisar
��.T,$,j� �'�': MASAC Communications
��i'�E: September 30, 1999
��.s�c
?.t the September 28, 1999 MASAC meetinc, the members requested that the Technical Advisors Report
(TAR) revision process, as well as associated member comment letters, be returned to the MASAC
Operations Committee for further review.
By way of backQround, the impetus for revisina the T�R came from a request from one of the MASAC
rrembers during a MAS�C meetinc last fall, who indicated that the TAR provided an overburdenin�
amount of information which creates confusion. As an im�-nediate response, MAC staff oegan providin' an
executive summary to the TAR with the next report. �ldditiona?ly, the i�1ASAC Operations Committee
�egan a leagthy process of reviewing many aspects or the TAR as well as information dissemination
options. The committee specifically reviewed the Information Dissemination Options at the May 1999
meeting and the T� and Corridor report reviews were discussed at the July and August 19Q9 meetin�s.
After significant review and comments from this body at the above mentioned meetings, the Operations
Committee forwarded the revised TAR to the l�iASAC full body as a draft proposal. This [opic and draft is
now, once aQain, bein� referred to this body for comment ar.d review.
4Vith respect to the correspondence that has been submitt�d, I would like to offer the following comments
concerning the sug�estions from the various letters.
LBtter frorn Nir. Lance Staricha, Eagan .��ASAC Repres�entutive
l. Thank you for the opening compliments concernin� the overall revisions.
2. The comments concerning objective evaluation versus subjective evaluation of the chanaes
from month to month is an excellent idea. If the �oup believes an execLtive summary is
necessary in the future, we will incorporate these su�gestions.
3. �ny time summarizations about percenta�es are attempted, there is a oossibility for
misunderstandings. I a�ee that tive must establish a standard method for describina
Fercentaae chan�es that are clear and concise.
Letter from [tiir. Neil Clark, Minneapolis
1. The daily DNL levels are available on the Internet ag Ehe www.macavsat.org home pa�e.
Then �o to "Aviation Noise and Satellite Pro�rams", "�SAC", "Au�ust 1999 DNL
Levels".
2. The report is listed as draft because the full body of �ASAC has not approved the revised
changes.
3. The old report will not be sent in addition to the revised technical advisor report.
4. The communications outreach pro�am is part of tta� Communications Advisory Board's
major tasks for the upcoming year. Although they waIl be reviewing many items, the TAR
revision is not a part of their workscope.
5. The full body of MASAC, with recommendateons from the MASAC Operations
Committee, will determine when the TAR is satisfac�u :ry.
6. Over the years, MASAC members have requested di�e�ent information to answer specific
questions they have about the noise environment at 1�ISP. The ten loudest noise events at
each RMT pages were a direct result of a request foff tt�s-type of information.
7. Niany different options are available for displaying the: data in the TAR. Oftentimes a line
�aph or a bar graph are equally informational. EitheF will work.
8. Definitions for Aircraft, Community and Total DNL carnbe added, however, this document
was originally intended for MASAC members with a fairly siQnificant level of
understandino of these items.
9. The Relative Residential Noise metric appears to he highly correlated with residential �,
population within the Ldn contour. Althou�h any �etFic may be used by MASAC if it
helps to clarify noise impacts, the RRN metric may not change significantly each month
due to its reliance on population within the contou� and therefore may not adequately
represent the noise level distress within each commuLrity.
Leiter form Mr. Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis MAS�!� Representative.
1. Currently, the ability to hire a�raphic desi�ner or co�rnercial artist are not within the
department's bud�et.
2. Comments concerning the cover are well received.
3. The suj�estions for a Ldn, relative level decibel ch�rt and annoyance level chart will be
forwarded to the Operations Committee.
4. The location of a specific informational item withiu the TAR is a preference. Staff will
reoraanize the TAR to meet the collective preference if so desired.
5. It is assumed that ALL MASAC members are famliar with the nomenclature of MSP
runways.
6. Page 1- The inclusion of the number of complainant� is intended to provide members with
information regardin� repetitive compiaints. The tatal number of callers is oftentimes
more useful information than the total number of corrrplaints.It also provides another level
of evaluation for MASAC members.
7. Page 4-The TAR is desi�ned to provide objective in�ormation without biasinQ the reader.
Therefore, no addi[ional comments are included. �I
8. Pa�e 5- It may be impossible ta footnote all aspects of the report information. Again, the
� TAR was designed to be read by an edueated MAS�C member that is familiar with the
� report format, layout and iniormation �ein� provided.
9. Page 6- The Origination and Destination information can be moved anywhere within the
T�R that makes more sense, or r�moved in its entirety if so desired by the committee.
10. Paae 11 - Staff is open for suQoestions.
1 l. Page 12 - The definitions for these metrics are relatively simple. A design change could be
izcorporated.
12. PaQe 13 - Again, the avera�e M?�SAC member should be familiar with the three DNL
definitions.
13. PaQe 14 - Staff can include the Nlonthly DNL levels at each RMT if the committee so
desires.
Concernin� the comments with respect to the Old Technical Advisozs Report, the majority of Mr.
Lindber�'s comments support maintaining information previousiy supplied in the old TAR within the new
TAR. docurnent. The oria nal intent by most MASAC members was to REDUCE the amount of
information contained within the T.AR and only inciude the data that members find useful.
The comments from Mr. Staricha, Nir. Clark and 1�1r. Li�ac�ber; are helpful to staff, however, the fuIl body
of 11�IASAC and the MASAC Operations Committee members must determine whether the T_�R revision is
to accomplish data distribution reduction, inclusion of acdirional information and is the intent to provide
100Co satisfaction for ALL MASAC members.
At the October 3, 1999 Operations Committee mzetin�, staff will present this information as well as an
overview of a potential soludon to the TAR revision task.
(
i''
�
�,.
• w.
:a;:
August 8, 1999
�ir. Charles Martensotto
Chairman, NSetropotitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
60�0 23`�' Ave. S.
��Iinneapolis, i�f�
Dear Mr. l�tartensotto,
I pr000se herein r'et another noise metr.c for NIAS�C to publish. I call it RELATIVE RESIDEN'7iTAL
NOISE (RR1V}.
RFZtV =(.4vg. DNL for month) Y(No. cf Residences) �
Tne attached data sheet "Calculation o; Relative R�sidential Noise by Community" shows exa.ctly how the
calculation is proposed. The monthIy average DI*IL of all A,'�10MS stations in each community is avera�e3
to give the community average. This DivL is muitipIied
bv the nurnber of residenc�s in thc 6S L'NI, c�ntet:r.
It`s sunple.
The attached data. shert shows ca.tcuia�ons for five
ccmrr►unities around the airport for which Hl�t'I� has
estimated the number of residences within the 6�DNL.
The result is a bar chart, "Relative Resids�tial
1'�oise", which is attached. This bar ch.art graphically
illustrates the relative community distr�.ss caused by
airpert noise and suf"rered by residences.
i propose that NiASAC publish the bar chart ea.ch
mcnth w�ith cornpar�!tive data from past months or
��ears to show proQress on noise abatement. This s-:mple �aohic,31 tool will provide MASAC with the
ability to explain the overall complex relaticnships of its work to the pu.blic. Noise abatement proa ess w-i11
be immediately anparent to the public and ii will show the inteut of Mr�SAC to provide tnis informauon_
I titi•ill be pleased to explain and defend this metric, and, of course, to help with improverneat in the
standardization and accuracy of input data.
Very sincerei v,�urs, n
iVeii Clar�c �i�, ����
�/
5917 Grass �.aice Ter.
�ilir.neapoiis, ivL�`Z 5��19
N�
♦ ' ,.
���\
`�/
0
r 3�0
�
�
�
�
x Zao
U
v
U
�
� 100
.�
N
G�
.��
�� � . ` W �� .� � ;� r .... . �
� ' .� �,� ' '�
� . • � � �
I
�ipEs Rich Biom Eagan Men.Hts
R
�a������i�� �� ���a���r� ���i���#�a1 �Io��� ��r ��������
Remat�e N1AC �J�is� 141ar��tor Statzons
Sta.� Address Towrr�ship DN� Absolute DNL
,�.4. May 98 *
1 Xerxes Ave. & 41��. Si. �riinneapolis 61.9 0.�54882
2 Fremont Ave. & 43r�i St. Minneapolis 64.8 0.301995
3 West Eimwood St. & Belmont Ave. Nlinneapolis 66.6 0.�#57083
4 Oakland Ave. & 49th St. 141inneapolis 68.2 C1.6oC693
' S 12th Ave. &58th St. � i4iinneapolis 74.3 2.691535
6 25th Ave. & 57th St. �+4inrteapolis 78.1 6.d58542
8 Longfeflow A�ie. & 43rd St. tiiinneapolis 63.5 Q.223872
7 Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
18 75th Dt. & 17th Ave.
20 75th St. & 3rd Ave.
9 Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
10 Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
' 11 Finn St. & Scheffier Ave.
12 Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
`'" �� 13 Southeast end of Mohican Court
__ ' 15 Culion St. & Lexington Ave.
23 End of Kenndon Ave.
17 84th St. � 4th Ave.
19 '16th Ave. & 84th St.
21 Barbara Ave. & fi7th St
22 Anne Marie Trail
14 1 st. St. � i�icKee St.
1 o Avalon Ave. & Vilan Lane
24 Chanel �ane & Wren Lane
Avg. - 0.304650 6�#.83808
Rict�field 64.6 Q.288403
FZic:�field 72.9 1.94984�
Fticftfieid 57.8 0.060256
Avg_ = 0.760"168 68.84324
St. Paul 5c3.9 0.048918
Sti. Paui 63.6 0.229087
�i. Paui 58.3 0.0676�8
St. Psul 51.8 0.0`15130
Avg. = 0.0.90202 59.55217
Mendota Heights 62.5 a'.177828
Mendota Heights 65.3 0.338844
Mendota Neights 73.1 2.fl41738
Avg. = 0.852803 69.30849
B{oomington 66.4 0.438516
Bioomington 68.2 0.660693
Avg. = 0.548605 67.39259
}nvet Grove Heights 50.7 0.0�46774
Inver Grove Heights 60 0.1
Avg. = 0.073387 58.65618
E�gan 68.7 0.74�31
Eagan 68 0.630957
Eagan 6� 0.316228
qvg. = Q.562832 8 ; .50379
* = microw�tts/ sq. meter
�* = HNTB residence count inside �SDNL. Multiple = 3 sirgles.
**" _"P,el�tive Residentiai Nais2" _(Avg. DNL) x(residerca count)
Res;dents RRN
k. �.,r
5750 372.8
1599 110.1
68 4.7
1631 109.9
148 10.0
t
SEP- S-�9 '�UN ^<1 :1� TJcHry LIND$EP.I> 0l.^_7214�9; P_�il
DEAN LIP;DBE�iG
Illustration and �nimation
5335 39th Ave. South
�iinneapolis, MN 55417
(612} 721-4993 fx (6I2) 721-8�01
To: Roy Fu�rmann and staff
From: Dean Lindberg
5 pa�es including coyer
Comments on the revisions ta the Technical Advisor's F.eport
SEP- 5-ao SUN 21:i3 DEaN LINDBERu 6127?14¢97 p.��
To: Roy Fuhrmann et al
From: Dean Lindberg
Re: Technicat Advisor's Report (TAR) re-design
9-5-99
I hope my ccmarks, complimcncs, concerns and observatio�s are useful contributions in the effort to
overhaul and improve tha TAR.
Prirnarity, my [houghts address the overal[ syscematic presentation of data in the various categories, or
analysis perspeceives, used in the TAR. Additionatty, graphic design principais and techniques that rnay be .
helpful as visual aids to communicate TAR infQrmation are no[ empioyed in the regort layout. Finally, as a
commercial artist with considerable expezience i�r communications, I stcongly suggest enlisting the services
of a professional graphic designer to develop a layout for the TAR. In addition to contributing to the
effe�tiveness of the TA.R. as an informatianai document, a professionai layout couid save significant
rnonthly production costs.
The staff has done a temfic job so far by taking initiative devetoping the new ?AR layout: Please
remember though, that a professionally designed report format will give the TAR teadability, credibility
and intelligibility far exceeding the old TAR.
OVERALL INFORMATTON PRESEN'I'ATIOP�t
Each section of the TAR (phone comQtaints, iunway utilization, noise even[s, etc. and etc.) should have a
pr�mary graphic ia the form of a pie, bar, runway Iayout, o� other appropriate diagram. If well designed,
the category diagrarn shoutd ailow presentatian of baseline or tazget levels appropriate to the data, and
notable deviations from baseline or targeted goals. ��'
�
As bcst as I can, Pll actempt to orient my comrs►ents From a baseline and deviation perspective.
NEW TAR, PAGE BY PAGE OBSERVATIONS
COVER It's workable, but the discreet use of coior adds to production expense without justifiable visual
in�pact. If a colorful cover is desired, I suggest having a targe suppIy of them pcofessionaliy printed and
adding appropriate monthiy identifiers using a copy machine. �
INSIDE COYER An ItdSP Ldn chart woulcf be appcopriate for inclusion somewhere in the front of the
TAR. Perhaps inside the cover, or on the bac:cside of [he "Table of Contents" or "Declaration of Furpose"
pages. In addition to an including an up-to-date Ldn chart, a relative levei decibei chart, an annoyance
level chart, and a typica] daily operations flow chart (similar to the chdrt in the 1993 M5P Capacity
Enhancement Plan) should be included in the "FAR.
TABGE OF CONTENZ'S. If it h:�sn't been done yet, the contents and Table of Contents shouId be
organized in a logical sequence stream based on community information Qreferences, and togical flows
Crorn one topic to the next. For example, the �unway Use information section (pages 4 and 7) have jet fleet
composition and Originauoo and Destination (OD) analysis insened between chern for no readily aQparent
reason.
OD information m�y be more suited foc attachment to the Ai�iOMS flight trac4c graphies that have
apparently txen dr�pped from the TAR. A ceason for incfuding OD without tiight rsacic data is not
apparent. A bricf exptanation of che OD sigr.iticance might be appropriate in the TAR noees.
Grouping related TAR r�porting items into overalf categories with primary and subordinate headings would
enhance tbe documcn�'s efficiency. �
SEP- S-aa SUN 21:14 DEflN LINDBERG ol�i{14�9; P_03
PAGE l. (Complaints by City) The information is Gne, bu( rational for including the "Number of
Complainants" is not sppareai. The "Numo�r af CornQlainants" data indicaces an obvious serial caller in
Inver Grove Heights (7 callers, 246 complaints). A Minnaapolis or St. Paul seria! cailer's acUvity wouldn't
be detectable because oC the large overal! nur�bers of complaints and cocnptainants. Is the inte�t of listing
the numbers oFeomplainants ta highli�ht seriai catler activi[y in smaIler cammunities?
The page's layout is inefficient from a�aphi� design perspective. A welt-designed graQhic eould inelude
all calt categories for alt cicies and, at [he same time, highiight significant changes in call camptaint
activity. A pie chart is reasonabty appropriate, but the pie chart jayout aad color use in the Draft TA:t is
cumbersome and not space efFcient, or productiort "friendly". If the staff is ir.teresteci. I could provide
skctches to illustratc these gcin[s.
COMPLAINT 14fAP is Fine as it is.
MSP REFERENCE DIAGRA�+[. I suggest replaciog the photograph wiih a iine-ar� map including and
identifying significant community landmarks such as main streets, talces, par4s and ete. .41so, this page
offers a high cost/benefit opportunity for colar usage that 1 could �xQlain in more detail if staff is ineerested.
An exptanation of MSP n�nway nomenclature logic might be apptopriate on this page. A graphic
consisting of a runway ieon overIaying a cvrnpass icon wovid give a suong visuai reiniorcement to a
runway identifier description.
P.ACE 4. Coioc, as used on this page, daesn't help understanding oF the data's significance. With care:ul
scrutiny, a strong visual grasp oF thc hiSP rsnway ]ayout , and an understanding and memory of typical
h1SP runway usc percentages, a reader could surmise that departures frorn 2? were extraordinarily high for
the month. The page unintentionally (I assume) obfuscates a significant rvnway use anomaly. The paoe
design is attractive, but inappropriate for the type of inFarmation presented.
7fie page lacks a TA commrnt, furtfier de-t.mphasizin; a significant runway use pattern change.
Additionaily, there is no baseline information [o ca11 attention to the extrao�dinary crosswind runway use.
This page unintentionally highli�hts how page design can actually obscure vitai inPorrnation_ A runway
layout diagram with color coded arrows (if color is desired on this page) wculd be a more efficient graphic.
PAGE 5. Ths fleAt comgosition with deciY,el Ievel notations is a terrif:c additi��n to the TAR. L,anding
deciL�l levels, if available, would be a good addi[io� as weli.
It's rather cvrious that DC-9's have only ona departure decibe! Ievei designation, tivhile 727's, �37's, 7�7's ,
ete. and etc, have decibel ]evel ratings for var:ous airc:aft series numbers. An explanation for this sinoulac
DC-9 characteristic would bc appropriate in the page's footnotes.
Footnotes intended to illurninate information on the page should be accompanied with appropriate
astereslts. Also, the EPNL e:cQlanation needs refinernent for improved intetiigibility.
PACE 6. The OD inFc�rmation is interesrin„ but it apoears to be unattache;�, subordinate inFormation and
out of piace in the TAR strcam of logic.
PAGE 7. The night-time runway use graphic has the sarne page Iayoui shortcomings as the "A;3 Haurs"
inforrnation on paoe 4.
PAGE 8. A terrific informa[ional addition.
PAGE 9. A good exampie n� matching data wiih an agpropriate gtapnic. The coiot is nice, bue 1 wonde;
if it's worth the additional cost on this page.
SEP- 5-99 SUN 21:15 DEAN LINDBERG 61�?214$97 p_��
PACE 10. Line art created For page three could repIace the photograph. This page could be easiiy re-
designed [o graphicaily depict monthly and historic AN{�MS decibel leve(s which could add to it's design �
and informational effciency.
P.4GE i t. An ineFficient page layout hinders correlatiots of inFormation presenled, and limits page capaci[y
for inciuding any additional pertinent information. The itlust�ative potential for exhibiting historic, higti-
event. or low event days, is not incorporated into the graghic design.
PAGE 12. Slight Iayout rnodifcations to this page would Fnake it much more space and informalion
efFicient. Color use contributes only a marginal readahili�y enhancement. A page re-design woutd irnprove
informational impact more than the present use of colors adds tfl the page..
The definition of Leq is too academic. Both footnote dettnitions raise as rnany questions as they provide
answers. Explanation of average Lmax is not provided. F.max is mentioned, but nflt represented on the bar
graph.
PAGE 13. Again, layout and design modifications would enhance the inteitigibility of the information
presented.
"Cornrnunity Noise Levets" are not defined. A more appropriate terms might be "RMT Ambient Levels".
I�fy undersianding is the RMT systern is laid out to meascue aircrafi noise, noi cornmutrity noise.
'The note on DNL should be re-written for additional clacicy: The explanation of the 14 decibel penatty for
I0:00 P.NS. to '7:00 A.M. noise is incorrecL
PAGE 14. The addition of aircraft flight numbers and runway I.D.'s is terrific. Judicious use of color ot
type faces could hightight any inFormation desired for quick identification on these pages. A monthIy
decibel levei average coutd be included with each RMT noise event summaries.
CONiMENTS OI+t'THfi OLD TAR
PAGE 1. 1s this information included somewhere in thc new TAR?
PAGE Z. Arrival and departure complaints trom individual cities have been dropped from the new TAR.
Is lhere a reason for this? A well designed page in the newr TAR could accommodate retention of this
information.
PAGE 3. Tne runway Available Tirnes graphie and in%fmation should be rztained in the new TAR.
PAGES 4-7. These pages are workably designed, but don't contain any baseline or historica( data..
PAGE 8. The term "Manufactured" implies "artificiai" or "contrived". Is that the intent?
PAGE 1 t. Make sure this information is retained in the new TAR.
PAGE 12. The RNiT sile map could be altered to accommoddte additional noise level information and
used in piace of page 10 in the new TAR. This page offers an excellent opportunity for an econornic and
meaningful use of color. Tha new RMT sites shoulc3 be added.
PAGE 13 and 14. Ntake sure this information is included in the new TAR.
PACE 31-25, 26 AND 2'7. Redesign of these flight track graphics with cansideration given to the original
intent for t}teir TAR inclusion would enhance their effectiveness.
8EP- S-a� SUN �1:i6 DEAN LINDrERG 612721�89i•
f hope tl,e eztensiveness of my cQmments are nnt miscorstrue3 as a harsh critique of the stafFs ef#'orts on
'. ' the revised TAR. Ac.uaity, they've dane an autstandir�g juo getting tf�e ball roiliny wit" their iniciative an
this�pcojec:. Their efforts have faciiitated meanir.gful, and I hope cansirvetive, commentary.
Pieas� remember that cnrePul layout and graphic desigtt work enhances the TAR capacity .o present
rneaningfi:l data in an e�ficiznt manner. Paor de�ign has t,4e oaposite e�feci. A vve13 planned design also
considers production assets avaiiable to staFf, ar.d can havs a significant positive impact on fong terrn TAR
production cosis.
If staff is interested, Td be happy to give a pcesentation with sp�ific page and overail design and layout
suggestions.
Sincerely,
����.1
Dean Lindberg
0
P. k35
C
C'
August 26, I999
NIr. Roy Fuhrmann
Technic�.l Advisor
i�Ietro Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 23`" Ave. S.
I�Iinneapolis, 1�I�i r' S5450
Dear Mr. Fuhrmann,
I was quite surprised by the July 1999 Technical Advi��s Report. The draft report is quite good
lo�4ing and has some additianal information. Howeves, � could not find the Daily DNL numbers
for each of the remote sensors. Since I base my trend 1ffies on these figures, I would appreciate
these numbers. They may be available on your web pa;.*�, 6ut the pa�e is not all that reliable for up
time and down lo�ding the �vhole thing is impractical f��me.
I do not understand tivhy the report was labeled "draft". �pgarently you are looking for some
feed-back which this is. Will you send the regular repoa� a�ut later? Although there is no
explanation, this "drai�" report seems an attempt to a�r� all the informational issues floated at
recent meetings. I was led to believe that the "Commua��ions Gutreach Program" committee
would focus on this., but they certainiy did nat indicat� �s at the last me�ting. What exactly are
your intentions and, how will you deternune if the Tec'�.�al Advisors Report is satisfactory?
Take the ten loudest events for each site. What do we � v,�ith this information? I look at these
data as with the daily DNL. Can't se� any use for thes� �ambers now, but maybe someone will
( ! invent a"disturb" factor and we can se� how it's impr��r��in past years.
There has been added (page 12) "Average Aircra.ft Ev�.�:,�nax and Leq" which seems useful, but
a line jraph r.vould, in my opinion, be a better way to g��nt thes� data. The terms used are
reasonably c;ear.
A1so a paQe 13 has been added, "Monthly DNL Value� �o� .r�ircraft, Community and Noise"
which, likewise, would be be�ter shown as a line grapi�'�'�i� three di�erent measures need to be
de:ined more clearly. Just �vhat is "Aircraft DNZ", "C���nity Di''SL" and "Total DNL", and
how are they derived?
Of course, I keep looking for you to adopt the measur� I have suggested, namely: Daily DNZ
Treruls and Rzlative Resiuential Noise. Also, it se�ms �� me, thai the expensive color prinier
paper is not n�cessary for mast of the data and graphs, b�t it looks ¢reat.
Neil Clark �/ �
� �,
�tinneapolis �
,
c.c.: Charles �fer�ensotto
Dick Saunde: s
_ � It t t . . L � � i. I t . i T il � ��V H ;i . � i . — _ . — . . . . . : P :•� . . ' . _ . _ . _ . _ — . ! _ _ ° . . .
���.s S -� C �'�1I�5' �' _3�I � ��?�"0 ru�,�G .-#s''�17_�r'�'G�Rr�I�-� TI c� �r �.�'� %�'S�" �'G�..;��
�;
-- � 1998
33a�-: -� �.�-�-; � �' f 1 ;�'"� `l" . Oa ��oge ben:3.ii' are _-roa re�uestin�:
��� 'T' �+. f;1 � s C��. f�, t Il� Yo��1r" X .
.� � az�cs.� : .�- a.. � � � vsQ� -r��' 1����? , S - C it;t Council
=.,_._.._.__.�r_
� i�.r..,� � q S 3' �1' Q�1 �r3'ri7C
,
�lL�._'❑
'��iane: `� �� v Z ; :� �' Cr��=;on h3`��,,� �- c�^ �.,�..�.--n,�,.,,, ,:
Gtae�
'^•.
L- this � nne-tim� raqu�r. '� e5 �r :'�c
L..�.i
_�T.�.. _ �.. _
IFnn, w;zaz is iha ��e�t�� time fi-�ina r�r �is r��Le�r" ��
'�'hie�Z �f ihe fallowzng besY dz:rrib� the n�tnr� af yo�:r rr�,sest; (Circ'.e a?� rhs; anrlvj
_-----��-�
Crtouna Nci�e �;er3i�n�.>.3 �::n-�ps C�irtcc:� F�r: 1�� Ct; � ..
�R�f,-� L �SO.L L71'QNS
Zn re �3t`�. ra `�-2 'Y�3.�`. a'�`T Q.l �" � .� �I�
+�.�,�, � ur�.� n„rJ,:z •.�..i�T' .�hzrr•, "t�,.� � A, F
...,..�.�
� � �� i E Ci1 C� C�. �.�'�rv,:,,, c.. c� i'� arcr.�,��` ct
U
�- i LL (:.C;O�.,�'`s Ci,t`�G�+, (• ..,"..�y+�`� t Qf n C'? Wc.�, '�ja
�,/`� t� � t�.rQ i1�.;,, -
,�
� � `/LCL't1 �t c 7 ,d cv; tac.' 'v� \ � � � �. � ; i'.� ,�
�h � {�
' % ..� � "�1 � 1 l ^Y_,r't
V'
1 ,
'-� "� a' f1 j
t'
�- � r'�1-��f'�t�2..�t a
C%v'�r1�Uv, GL i i�G 1� r��i� .
'Y'ny*i r� �.,ES�� �
1
�171c'3" �IS.1.S2
_=�i1 b:i:i'=FHF.i1'IEfIT ut i'IH�:i ��i_-_o-.. .- :�'r��� .�.rf 7._._._._.--._�__.._�+ -•- - -
�r�cti77+771II� �iQcit.� I1'.�'.�ui: P.�:
1:::..�a ::� : 9a G r' ,.. �.»
P "rndic h� �,'31f1.� r�i.�., i3a71c"'�r..: iuii�vi� ..+ u;� t:ti: tulS i2�L°.:=„`i:
•, Cj i a prcviar, ;nFnrrnctton fo ctta A�:riC ?;. �ha!r �tj �r� :v ccmm-�a:c.:ta cncrt� tn p�tr:::uns, du�r tU cor..iN 14:.cn .
;a !he s�iroun�in3 �:.�mrrr.rrrrties .
a �vaf:rata �sr^�fTt: S C.�mClicn�a 11rro��Ir L5d E�g^�r- :Jan�tc ,"^: ergRts :.'on;rlor ��a .;�.�J,. ,Iny neca.tscry
el,cnge:x tv the r�l�ar.� rrcexdu�r�.
� R�vicw t}ia�vG'LiSsvs:2m �r�rrol,ie hicrcitar.;, and e+�aiu�ta 1hd ne�d an:1 plac::ment aj Jcditional remat� �
' moniro�irrg ruW��-.: �lso, au.rllate remc�e moniro�n� caDabU�tt�s ._
� F�qaa.;t /�ir Traaj c Carrrral Ferscnne! :� ��uxe a ore;.�htar:an o�r how,l.I.i? c�tircrfonl ar=_ �anauc::a'.
❑ L��ok at prov�r.-rt'+f� IHC$7rf1Y✓..Y IO ccr.du: in a;:Y.+ir}r.,� ord aner:lrr3 fac:ar1�-�rrade Si.:ga:ll aircrcrt.
❑ b^.'.sstl,3cta ncw GYS �Ttd C.t.i�tr ,b;�:`.�,ci; ecn.irl {rel� alleviare oir.^.-aJt nolca
C .Rrvtew the ,Y.iTPs arn� c�mF.7cnr�,
Q Cantine,c disc.rrs:an oj' Part I:0 �-anrw� gma,rolicn.
.t''t.�as2 s2;�d �rflctr r��c�sf via mail �: &L�SAC Se�r��t�.ry, 60�� ?8 th � veaus 5.,
l�tinneaaolis, .�j?Y 5.��� J or,�'�c i� ia :(61y) i'?�-b�IU.
�:
St� �:cnac::
L'ate ;�.e: =^r�i:
Ls thi: a� Or Wri � Rc1u�t? �
hppraved Cy.
1v�m�.1 Dacc:
r1�ta Av3ij;,biiir+_
�vicr�itcnng �t+rt l:�ce:
b:vnitar.:.g �too Data:
�it�fysis Sct:t Dzu:
'�alyss-Stna D�ce:
t:nmpiesioa Da�:
. • •�
NIIi'diiT�S
;' , iV�ASAC C3���.�'���5 Ci���!tiI�TTE�
Septe�ber �Q,1�99
The meeting was held at the i��letropolitan Airports Co�nission MASAC Large Conference Trailer and
called to order at 10:00 a.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Nlembers•
Mark Salmen, Chairman
Dick Saunders
Bob Johnson
John Nelson
Kevin Batchelder
Jamie Verbruage
Dick Keinz
Advisorv•
Roy Fuhrmann
Chad Leqve
('' � Shane VanderVoort
-- Nate Reis
I��iark Ryan
Mark Kill
Cindy Green
Glen Orcutt
Visitors•
1�Iark Hinds
Jan DelCalzo
Will Eginton
Glenn Strand
�IiR�'A
+_l�i�eapolis
tiffi�
�loamin�ton
iblendota Heishts
F�a� �
�C
1%1�C
1�1AC
NL�C
iY�AC
I4L4�
y���
F.4A
FA�i
Ric'rtiield
N1i�eapolis
Inver Grove Heights
til�eapolis
�i �x � i��}1-�
Chairman Salmen introduced I��licheile Jensen, an ti`W_� intern.
Correspondence
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, updated the comrnitte� on se�.�eral letters staff had received.
0
• A letter was received from Neil Clark, Nlinneapolis, concernin� Relative Residential Noise and was (�
forwarded to the Operations Committee from MASAC.
• Another letter from NIr. Clark re�arding the Technical Advisor's Report was received.
• A letter was reeeived from Dean Lindberg, IVlinneapolis, regardin� the Technical Advisor's Report.
� A letter was received from Lance Staricha, Eagan, regardin� the Technical Advisor's Report.
Each of these correspondence will be addressed at the October 8, 1999 Operations Committee meeting.
Construction Update
ivlr. Fuhrmann upda[ed the Committee on the south parallel runway reconstruction project. He said the
project would be completed no later than Tuesday, September 14, 1999.
Part 1�0 Study Update
1tilr. Fuhrmann noted that the public workshop presentations at the end of Szptember would be different
than the presentation for that day. He also noted that the reason for conductin� the workshops at this
stage in the study was to �ve community members a chance to learn more about the Part 150 process
and be involved earlv on. He said there is some concern about brin�ing a validation contour to the
public without the iinal miti�ation contour being avaiiable, but staff Feels it is important to educate and
inform the public about what has taken place thus far.
A second reason for the workshops, according to NIr. Fuhrmann, is to validate the Intz�rated Noise
Model contour generation process. He said it is important to explain how the INM works and what
inputs have been used.
Finally, the community and individual comments received durin� the Part 150 scoping process request as `
much public input as possible.
ivlr. Fuhrmann noted that besides the 1999 validation contour, which will be presenizd at the September
meetings, a base case contour for the year 2000 and a forecasted contour for the year 2005 will be
presenced at Future public meetings. The 200� contour will be signiiicantly different from the base case
because it will include the north/south runway and the 2000 contour will not. He said because a number
of operations will shift to the north/south runway, the contours off the end of the parallel runways will
get smaller while the areas to the south of the new runway will aet larger. The 1999 validation and 2000
base case contours wiIl not be mitigated accordin� to the Part 150 b idelines. They are a tool to make
evaluations and to study the analysis of the impacts associated with the noise. The 2005 contour will
t�ke into account the high forecast for operations noted in the Environmental Impact Statemen[ (EIS) and
will have a different fleet mix than that bein� used today.
Because the Part 150 process is complicated and has chanaed sig-nificantly from past studies, the
education process will be intense. Staff has made plans to help ensure that the public clearly understands
the process, includin; developin� a brochure that will be �iven out at the workshops and which will be
available to the public through NIAC's Environment department.
�-lr. Fuhrmann noted [hat the purpose of the meeting was to show ho�v well the INivI predicts noise levels
when the appropriate inputs are used.
C
0
Kim Hughes, Htii "TB, then reviewed the agenda.
l��view of FAR Dart 150
The focus of a Fart 1�0 Sii.idy is to develop a comprehensive set oE noise compatibility measures that
provide a balanced and coordinated �ro�ram to eifectively respond to noise impact problems. The
prog-ram bein� developed tor i1�1SP re�uires a thorough evaluation af aptions that are safe, praccical and
official and are nct undul�� burdensome to any party and are legallv defensible.
Noise Expo�ure Nlaps (Iv'Eb� and a�taise Compatibilitv Prog!-am (�ICP) are the two documents to be
submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (Ft�).
Two maps will be submitted as pan of the N�E�I, a base vear and a�-year forecast. The base year �vill be
2000 and the forecast year �vill be 200�. The 1999 validation contour is only meant to validate the
contour aeneratien process. Because there will be an all Stage 3 t7eet in 2000, the base case map may
look different than the 1999 validation contour. The 200� forecasied map will also have a diffzrent
shape than the base case contour duz to the ne�v north/souCh rsnwav being added.
NCPs must consider a wide ranae of pctzntial noise comgatibility actions based on ttivo cate�ories: Noise
Abatement Action5 and Land iJse Actions. Noise abatement actions reduce non-compatible land use by
decreasina aircraft noise throuQh aircraFt proce��ural chanQes. Land use actions reduce non-compatible
land uses by preventing futu�e non-compatible uses by eizher chan�ing land uses or throuah corrective
measures, such as the sound insulation program. y
Pan 1�0 is a voluntary proQram. l�ISP has completed two Part 150 studies. Over 200 airpons in the U.S.
have participated in Part 1�0.
Revietiv of DNL
The day/niQht level (Di�1L) is the sin�le metric used for determininQ the exposure of individuals to
avia[ion noise.
DNL is the averaQe noise level over a 24-hour period, except noise occurring at ni�ht (10 o.m. to 7 a.m.)
is artificiaily increased by 10 decibe?s to reflect the adde� intrusiveness of nijhttime noise. �Cor-�rnunity
bac�;jround noise levels are typical�y decreaszd by 10 decibels at ni�ht.)
The Inte�rated Itioise Nlodel (INNI) is the F�4 approved computer software used to Qenerare noise
e;cgosure maos. A varietv or data is fed into the T�i ttii I proaram to generate a contour. The mere accurate
the infarrnation, the closer the contour tivill come to actual conditior,s. 1�1 version �.2 is beina used at
this time. Althou�h version 6.0 is available in a beta or test version, there are problems that need to be
wor:czd out. If the problerns are reso(ved in time, version 6.0 �vill be used.
i�ISP IN4T Data Input
The inputs needed for I�i `i�i are:
� Aviation activity (numb�r of operations, fle�t mix, da�.r/niQht split, etc.)
• AircraFt perform�u;ce I;�.veight or aircraft, temperature, deparr�re sta�e lenQths, etc.)
3
• Airport factors (wind and weather, layout, demand/capacit}r, etc.) (
• Aircraft operations (departure pro�les, flight tracks, run up activity, runway use, etc.) �
Fleet Mi.z
The fleet mix information is separated into the following operational categories:
o Northwest Airlines
• Other passenger airlines
s Regional airlines
• Cargo (operate differently than passenger airlines and have a different day/night split)
• General aviation (most difiicult to get information for) �
• Military
Because Northwest Airiines operates a majority of flights at MSP, and how it operates is well
understood, they were placed in a separate cate;ory from the other passenger airlines.
The Airport Noise and Operations IvSonitoring System (ANOMS) allows MSP to categorize operations
in this way. Separating aircraft operations into categories further refines and enhances the INM process.
The fleet mix was developed using ANOMS data, FAA tawer records and the Of�cial Airline Guide
(OAG) schedule information to extend to the end of 1999. Estensive coordination with Nonhwest
Airlines to coniirm that its 1999 fleet mix was correct also cook place. Allowances for possible flijht
cancellations were made, as well. �
Operations are assigned by operational category (as noted ahove) and then by aircraft type, the day/niQht �.
split and the departure sta�e lenb h. The departure stage len� represents a range in distance that an
aircraft departing from MSP flies with Stage 1 being shortesc and Stage 7 being the ionsest. Departure
sta�e lenb hs are important because they give an indication of how heavy an airplane is upon departure.
ANOMS data was used to determine stage len�ths and was then compared to OAG information.
Racnway Use
Operations during the months of January, February and Nlarcfi 1999 were used to develop run�vay use
data because they represent months of non-construction. Runway use data is further detailed by the
operational cate�ory, arrival and departures and the day/night split.
7ohn Nelson, Bloomin�on, asked whether seasonal affects were taken into consideration. Kim Hu�hes,
HNTB, noted that for the base case contour (2000) a complete year's worth of data will be used. The
averaje temperature of 51° F at IVISP was used in the model, which is closer to the temperature during
those three months.
Track Use
Track use was analyzed off of each runway end for the three months of January, February and Nlarch
1999 throuah an r�'�iONIS Date analysis. Severai tracks are new to this Part 1�0 study. Track use also
reflects the day/niQh� usaae.
Temperatacre
National Oceanic �tmospheric Adminisuation (NO�-1) data from the past t�velve months was used to
detemune the averaQe temperature for NISP. This was calcuiated by tal:in; the average hourly
temperature wei�hted hy the averaje hourly operationnl count. This allows for a more accurate average
temperature related to when aircraft are normally operating. The avera�e temperature input used in tI'�IM
at I�ISP is 51° F.
Departure Proftles
The standard I�,'1�I departure profiles were modiiied to reflect the Noise Abatement Departure Profiles
��TaDP) being used off each rumvay end at NISP. Since Nonhwest Airlines accounts for approximately
80�70 of the operations at MSP, NWA's specitic departure profiles were used for l�'WA departures ra[her
than the standard IN1�I profile. Because close-in Nr1DPs are not standard for INl�I, a close-in departi.Ire
protile was developed. Aircraft type and stage-len�h tivere used to develop the proiiles for input into the
model. Heavier (lonQer sta�e-lenb h) aircraft have different departure profiles than shorter stage len�h
fliffhts. y
E:flstirzg Land Use
Existin� land use data has been and continues to be collected and reviewed in order to better understand
the current non-compatible land use conditions in the area and to see how land use has chan�ed since the
previous Part 150 study.
Data relatin� to development trends and activities include:
� Cunent land use mapping and classifications
� Population and housing estimates and demo�-raphic indicators �
• :�tunicipal land development rewlations
+ Comprehensive plannin� and future land use mappina
• Ne�v development/re-development activities
p Zoning ordinances and other land use controls
.�1 comprehensive Geographic Information System (GIS) database is beinQ constructed for the Part 1�0
Stud�� Update. This database will provide a method for storing, retrievin; and mappina m��nicipal
d�velopment data anu will aid in making decisions for tne future.
1n June 1999, sixteen cities were contacted in order to obtain land use data. If a city could not provide
digital data, the cir� was provided witl� a hardcopy oi the city's parcel base maps. These were then
updaced and digitized by MAC and HN'IB staff for inclusion into GIS format.
?nterviews were held tivith most cities as a means of establisnir.j a relationship with each city and to
verify the land use data used in the study.
Five cities are still in the process of verifyinQ their land usz information. T��ese comrnunities'
inton�nation will be updated, as the data becomes available. The rzmaining 11 cities iiave sioned off on
hard cepy maps of their cities' lan� use.
Once the e;cistinQ land use has been approved, uerno�rachic estimates from the �letropolitan Council
will be uszd to derive populaticn and dtiveliin� statistics.
Each city's classification system has been normalized into a Qeneralized land use legend {
1999 E:dsting Conditions Validation Contour
Ms. Hu�hes then presented the 1999 validation contour. This is not the base case or miti�ation
contour.
Ms. Hu�hes explained how staff performed the model validation. 'The first analysis involved annualizina
the RMT monitored data for one year at each site and then comparin� the results to the same locations on
the model. The monitored and modeled data are within 2.4 DNL dBA.
For a better comparison, RMT monitored data for the months of January, February and March 1999 was
averaged and then compared to the modeled contour. Because the contour was produced usinQ runway
use data for these three months only, this offered a better comparison. The monitored and modEled data
for these three months are within .5 DNL dBA.
Ms. Hu;hes said this last analysis shows that the modeled contour closely reflects what is bein�
monitored at the R1�ITs. She said a deviation of 3.0 DNL dBA or less is considered to be e;ctremely
accurate. NIs. Hughes said the availability of ANOMS data for this study is the reason the model is so
close to monitored values.
Nest Steps
• Public Meetings on September 23, ?9, and 30. Three meetings will be held from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m.
The purpose of the meetin�s is to get the public involved early in the process and to educate them on
the methods bein; used to cenerate the noise contours. ��
• Finalize the existing and future tand use conditions.
• Evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of previous FAA approved land use measures.
• Develop potential land use noise abatement measures for consideration. Community input will be
sou�ht through public meetings in late November or early December 1999. The 2005 non-mitigated
contour will be available at those meetings.
• Finalize the 2000 base case contour.
• Pians are to have a iina12005 mitigated contour sometime in late spring or early summer.
Discussion
Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights, asked whether or not procedural noise abatement measures will be
evaluated. Ivls. Hughes said along with land usz measures, aircraft procedural measures would be
evaluated.
Cindy Greene, Ff1A, asked if stafF and HN'IB had a plan to educate the public as to why the 1996
contour and the 1999 validation contour were so different. VIs. Hughes said an e;cplanation of why these
two contours are different could be included in the materials that are handed out at the public meetings.
Jan DelCalzo, Ivlinneapolis, askeci ti1s. Huahes how the 1999 validation contour would compare to the
2000 base case map. il�Is. HuQhes said she didn't expect a sianificant chan�e from the 1999 validation
contour to the ?000 base case contour. NIs. DelCalzo expressed some concern over preszntinQ a
validation contour to the public when it hasn't been done before. Ms. Huahes said it is important to
[�
involve the public early in the process, before a final co��aur has been generated.
Glenn Strand, Ivlinneapolis, asked why a 60 DNL contanr was not included in the validation contour.
Ms. Hughes said the 60 DNL contour will be include€� on future contours, but since the 65 DNL was
used for validation, the 60 DNL was left off to avoid co�flusion.
l�Ir. Strand also voiced a concern about the public wan�j rnore information than what will be presented
to them at the public meetings. He said he was conce:�ed that people will be frustrated that they can't
get their questions answered in one meeting and will no� carne to any subsequent meetings.
Dick Saunders, l�linneapolis, asked if Minneapolis w�s che first airport to perform a validation of a
contour using actual monitored data. Kim Fiughes, I-�"�'�'B, said, although it is the best comparison she
has ever seen, other airports have performed similar cou�arisons.
Jan DelCalzo, Minneapolis, asked if the high forecast frsr ehe number of annual aircraft operations would
be used for the 2005 contour. Ms. Hu�hes said the �mh forecast from the Dual Track EIS would be
used. The hijh forecast for operations in 2005 is 62�,t;QJU operations.
RNIT Installation Update
Chad Leqve, MAC Advisor, gave a brief presentation on the status of the RIvIT installations. All five
sites have been installed and are functional. Syste�a i�tegration and acceptance test'r.n� has been
completed. Data collection for the purpose of reportiai� be�an on August 20, 1999. The August 1999
Technical Advisor's report will include data from eac�a of the five RMTs from that date forward. A
picture oF the newly insialled RIVIT in Richfield was shown. �
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m. The next �r�SAC Operations Committee meetin� will be
held on October 8, 1999 at 10:00 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Nlelissa Scovronski, Corrunittee Secretary
7
C�
�
MINUTES
,; � CITY STAFF PAR.� 1S0 MEETING
September 9,1999
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Co�mission MASAC Large Conference Trailer, and
called to order at 2:00 p.m.
The followin� members were in attendance:
Citv Staff:
Edward Davis
Stev� Devich
Mark Hinds
Larry Lee
John Nelson
Kevin Batchelder
Jamie Verbrugge
Geoff Batzel
Glen Markegard
1bIAC and Consultant:
Roy Fuhrmann
Chad Leqve
Shane VanderVoort
Nate Reis
Mark Kill
Steve Vecchi
Mark Ryan
Kim HuQhes
Aaencv Representatives:
Cindy Green
Glen Orcutt
Chauncey Case
1
�ver Grove Heights
�ic�eld
Richfteld
�.loamin�on
�loomington
l�r�endota Heights
Eaaan
1Vlinneapolis
�3loominb on
�4bAC
MAC
1V�AC
11�t��
I1riAC
MAC
1V�AC
I�NTB
FAA
FAA
Metropolitan Council
C
C� �
AGENDA
Several information packages were distributed before the meeting and are included in these minutes.
Kim Hughes, HNTB, reviewed the meeting a�enda and provided a presentation of the followina
information. (See MASAC Operations Committee, MSP Existing Conditions packet.)
Review of FAR Part 150 (see packet)
The focus of a Part 150 Study is to develop a comprehensive set of noise compatibility measures that
provide a balanced and coordinated program to effectively respond to noise impact problems..
Noise Exposure Maps (NElVp and a Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) are the two documents to be
submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA.).
Two maps will be submitted as part of the NEM, a base year and a 5-year forecast. The base year �vill be
2000 and the forecast yeaz will be 2005. The 1999 preliminary or validation contour is only meant to
validate the contour generation process. Because there will be an all Stage 3 fleet in 2000, the base case
map may look different than the 1999 validation contour. The 2005 forecasted map will also have a
different shape than the base case contour due to the new north/south runway beina added.
Part 150 is a voluntary program and MSP has completed two Part 150 studies.
Review of DNL (see packet) .
The DaylNight Level is the single metric used for determining the exposure of individuals to aviation
noise.
(� �
The Integrated Noise Model (]NM) is the FAA approved computer software used to generate noise
exposure maps. A variety of data is fed into the INM pro�ram to generate a contour. The more accurate
the inforniation, the closer the contour will come to actual conditions.
MSP INNI Data Input (see MSP Part 150 INNI Data Inputs packet)
Fleet Mix
'The fleet mi:c information given in the MSP Part 150 Fxisting Conditions spreadsheet is separated into
the following operational categories:
• Northwest Airlines
• Other passenger airlines
• Regional airlines
• Cargo
• General aviation
• Military
The Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS) allows MSP to categorize operations
in this way. Separating aircraft operations into categories further reimes and enhances the INiY1 process.
The fleet mix was developed using ANOMS data, FAA tower records and the Official Airline Guide
(OAG) schedule information to extend to the end of 1999. Extensive coordination with Northwest
Airlines to confirm that its 1999 fleet mix was correct also took place.
Operations are assi;ned by operational category (as noted above), aircraft type, the day/night split and
the departure sta�e length. The departure stage length represents a range in distance that an aircraft
departing from MSP flies.
Runway Use
Operations during the months of January, February and March 1999 were used to develop runway use
data because they represent months of non-construction. Runway use data is further detailed by the
operational category, arrival and departures and the day/ni�ht split.
Track Use
Track use was analyzed off of each runway end for the three months of January, February and March
1999. The tracks shown in red in the p�cket �re the tracks that were use.d in t!?e �T_M gro�arn a.*?c� ase
indicated by letter. Actual tracks aze provided for one day in April 1999 to show how the INNI tracks
compare with actual tracks. Several of the INM tracks aze new Eo this Part 150 study.
Temperature
l�ational Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data from the past twelve months was used to
determine the average temperature for MSP. This was calculated by taking the average hourly
temperature wei�hted by the average hourly operational count. This allows for a more accurate average
temperature related to when aircraft are normally operating. The average temperature input used in INNI
at MSP is 51° F.
Departure Profiles `
The standard INM departure profiles were modified to reflect which Noise Abatement Departure Profile
(NADP) is being used off each runway end at MSP. Since Northwest Airlines accounts for such a large
portion of the operations at MSP, NWA's specific departure profiles were used for NWA departures
rather than the standard INM profile. Because close-in NADPs are not the standard for INM, a close-in
departure profile was developed for this input. Aircraft type and staje lenb h were used to develop the
profiles for input into the model.
Existing Land Use (see packet)
Existing land use data has been and continues to be coIlected and reviewed in order to better understand
the cunent non-compatible land use conditions in the area and to see how land use has changed since the
previous Part 150 study.
Data relating to development trends and activities include:
• Current land use mapping and classifications
• Population and housing estimates and demob aphic indicators
• Municipal land development reb lations
• Comprehensive planning and future land use mapping
• New developmendre-development activities
• Zoning ordinances and other land use controis
C
K�
f
A comprehensive Geographic Information System (GIS) database is being constructed for the Part 150
' Stud U date. This database will rovide a method for storinQ retrievinQ and ma ma munici al
y p p b, b PP b P
development data and will aid in making decisions for the future.
Sixteen cities were contacted to obtain land use data. If a city could not provide di�tal data, the city was
provided with a hardcopy of the city's parcel base maps, which were developed by their county. These
were then updated and digitized by MAC and HNTB staff for inclusion into GIS format.
Interviews were held with most cities as a means of establishing a relationsiup with each city staff and to
verify the land use data used in the study.
Five cities are in the process of verifying their land use information. These communities' inforniation
will be updated as the data becomes available. The remaining I1 cities have si�ed off on hard copy
maps of their cities.
Each city's class�cation system has been nornialized into a generalized land use legend
1999 Existing Conditions Validation Contour
Ms. Hughes then presented the 1999 validation contour.
l�Is. Hu�hes explained how staff performed the model validation. She said RMT monitored data was
annualized for each site and then compared to the same locations on the model: The results are depicted
with actual and modeled data. for each site. �
(" ) For a better comparison, monitored data for the months of January, February and March 1999 was
avera�ed and then compazed to the modeled contour. Because the contour was produced using runway
use data for these three months only, this offered a closer comparison. The model validation map for
January 1999 thzough March 1999 shows the average monitored values for each of the three months on
the left and the modeled values in bold on the right. The monitored and modeled data are within .5 DNL
dBA.
Ms. Hughes said this exercise shows that the modeled contour is extremely close to what is bein�
monitored at the RMTs.
Geoff Batzet_, Minneapolis, asked how the population counts v�ere calculated. Kim HuQhes, HNTB, said
the population was derived from multiplying the number af units by a multiplier. She said since the
Environment Department has up-to-date parcel data, the information is more accurate than what was
used in the first two Part 150 studies, which were based on census data.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he was concemed about public reaction to both the contour
and the unit numbers included in the contour for his city. He said residents may look at the contour and
see how many homes are included in it and might assume those are the numbers of hames that will be
'rncluded in the nert insulation program. He said staff would need to be careful ahout how they present
the information since many people may assume the validation contour is the final contour.
A len�thy discussion ensued regarding concerns about presenting the validation contour and
C!
population/unit counts before having the 2005 mitigation contour.
�` .
Roy Fuhrmann, l�Iana;er of Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs, e:cplained that the public meetings
bein� held at the end of September were scheduled to give community members the chance to be
invoived in the Part 150 process from the be� nning. He said if staff waited to present the information
until a final contour was available, there would be only four months for them to comment on the process
before the final submission to the FAA. He said everyone involved in the process has an obligation to
present the inforn�ation and to educate the public as to the validation contour's meaning. He said the
most important information to be presented at the meetings will be the input data for INM because those
inputs will deterniine the accuracy of the model for future maps. Information about what Part 150 is and
its process will also be discussed.
Ivlr. Fuhrmann noted, however, that he fully understands the concerns about � ving the wrong messa�e to
the community and that staff would take steps to present the information in the clearest way possible.
Cindy Greene, FA.A, said that educating the public is part of the Part 150 process and the public has the
right to know about how the Part 150 process is progressing.
Geoff Batzel, Minneapolis, noted that the base map for Hennepin County was not conect. MAC staff
said the base map was produced before all of the infomiation was obtained but that the �nai validation
contour would include the most updated information. MAC staff said the city representatives would
receive a copy of the final version before the public meetings take place.
Ne�ct Steps (see packet)
Public meetings will be held on September 28, 29 and 30 in three different locations. (See packet) (.
The next steps also include finalizing land use conditions, evaluating the effectiveness and
implementation of previous FAA-approved land use measures, developing potential land use and noise
abatement measures and finalizing the 2000 base case contour.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
l�Ielissa Scovronski
5
\'
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMIVIISSION
�AGAN,1VlINN]�SOTA
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
OCTOBER 12, 1999
7:00 P.M.
I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA
� , ��.� . � 11
�il�%�. Y�� : � CI : : 1
IV. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. North/South Runway Communications Plan
B. Runway Construction Diversion Impact
C. Contract
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Web Site Tour
B. Commission Staricha, Me�iia Darling
VI. STAFF REPORT
A. MASAC Update
B. Governor's Airport Funding Task Force
C. Number versus Percentages
D. Legislative and Regulatory Update
1 1 t'
Vffi. FUTURE MEETING AND AGENDA
A. Negt Commission Me�ting — 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, November 9
B. Negt MA,SAC Me�ting — 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, October 26
C. Governor's Airport Community Stabilization Funding Task Force —
5:00 a.m. Wednesday, October 27
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities wrll be provided upan advance notice of at least 96 hours.
If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. .
C