05-13-1998 ARC Packet1.
2.
3.
4.
�
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS �'`�
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION 1
AGENDA
May 13, 1998 - 7 p.m. - Large Conference Room
Call to Order - 7 p.m.
Roll Call
Approval of April 8, 1998 Meeting Minutes.
Unfinished and New Business:
a. Discussion of Monitoring Non-Simultaneous Departures
b. Review Airport Plan of Action
5. Updates
a. MASAC Update
b. May 26, 1998 MASAC Briefing - FAA Airspace Usage and Control
c. NDCARC Update - Collaborative Issues and IGH Request for Runway
Separation
d. MAC Public Hearing - Bureau of Mines l.and Acquisition
6. AcknowlecJge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence•
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
e.
f.
9•
h.
I .
1•
Airport Noise Reports for April 24, 1998
MASAC Agenda for April 28, 1998 and March 31, 1998 Minutes
MASAC Technical Advisor's Report for March 1998
MASAC Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for March 1998
MASAC Operations Committee Agenda/ Minutes for April 17, 1998
MASAC Appointments to Executive and Operations Committee
MASAC Monthly Part 150 Status Report
MASAC Audit Summary
Minnesota Military Expo and 934th Airlift Wing Fact Sheet
Presentation Handouts to MASAC on DNL Contours
Eagan ARC Agenda for May 12, 1998
7. Other Comments or Concerns.
8. Adjourn.
Auxiliary aids for disabled persons are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a
notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to
' ; provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notice. Please contact City
Administration at 452-1850 with requests.
C .
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
�
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
AGENDA
METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATENIENT
COUNCII.
Generai Meeting
Aprii 28, 1998
7:30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m.
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Call to Order, Roll CaH
Approval of Minutes of Meeting March 31, 1998
Introduction of invited Guests
Receipt of Communications
Consent ltems
➢ MASAC Information Request Form
➢ MASAC Executive Committes Appointments
Technicai Advisor's Runway System Utilization Report and
Complaint Summary
Minneapolis Straight-out Analysis Request for Community Support
Operations Committee Appointments
Noise Contour Generation and DNL Development (HNTB)
Jeff Hamiel, MAC Executive Director
MASAC Audit - Discussion and Prioritization
Operations Committee Report
Report of the MAC Commission Mesting
Persons Wishing to Address the Councii
Other Items Not on the Agenda
Adjournment
Next Mesting:
May 26, 1998
MINUTES
METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL
GENERAL MEETING
March 31, 1993
�:30 p.m.
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Call to Order Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bob Johnson at 7:30 p.m. and the secreta.ry was asked to call
the roll. The following members were in attendance.
Bob Johnson
Mark Salmen
Dick Keinz
Brian Simonson
Brian Bates
Sun Country
St. Paul Chamber of Commerce
United Airlines
Steve Minn
Glenn Strand
Dean Lindberg
Neil Clark
Dick Saunders
Tom Hueg
Kristal Stokes
John Nelson
Petrona Lee
Steve Bianchi
Jon Hohenstein
Lance Staricha.
Ed Porter
Dale Hammons
Kevin Batchelder
Jill Smith
Manny Camilon
Sunfish Lake
Advisors
Roy Fuhrmami
Chad Leqve
Cindy Greene
Ron Glaub
1
MBAA
NWA
MAC
DHL Airways
Airborne
T.J. Horsager
Rolf Middleton
Tom Veeninga
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
St. Paul
Richfield
Bloomington
Bloomington
Bloomington
Eagan
Eagan
Burnsville
Inver Grove Heights
Mendota Heights
Mendota Heights
St. Louis Park
Dan Licht
MAC
MAC
FAA
FAA-NWA-CMO
Visitors
Jim Serrin
Approval of Minutes
Minnea�polis
The minutes of the March 2, 1997 meeting were approved as distributed.
Introduction of invited �uests
Receipt of Communications
There were no invited guests.
A letter was received from the City of Mendota Heights' city council requesting that MASAC produce a
monthly monitoring report on non-simultaneous departure procedures in the southeast corridor. Chairman
Johnson turned the request over to the MASAC Operations Committee for consideration.
4. ANOMS MOA Update
Chad Leqve, MAC, reported that there was no change in the status of the MOA. He said it was currently
being reviewed by the FAA in Wastungton, and that he wasn't sure esactly when the MOA would be
approved. Mr. Leqve also said that staff was working in-house with the new system to strea.mline
operations.
�..
JON HOHENSTEIN, EAGAN, IVIOVED AND KEVIN BATCHELDER, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, ��
SECONDED, THAT THE MASAC BODY ASK ITS MEMBERS TO CONTACT THE STATE'S �
CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION TO ASK FOR ASSISTANCE IN OBTAINING APPROVAL
OF THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH THE FAA. THE VOTE WAS
UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED.
Technical Advisor's Runwav Svstem Utilization Report and Complaint Sumrnarv
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, briefed the Abbreviated Technical Advisor's Report.
➢ Scheduled fleet miY percentages for Stage III aircraft is at 66.8%. Last year's count was 5'7%
scheduled and �4% actual.
➢ The February 1998 complaints were 60�, slightly lower than for 1997.
➢ Daily operations showed a slight increased from 1997.
➢ The tower logs showed heavy use of the corridor.
Dean Lindberg, Minneapolis, asked Mr. Fuhrmann to e;cplain how the tower log runway use percentages
compared to the actual use of the run�vays.
Kristal Stokes, R.ichfield, asked whether staff had any more information regarding nighttime run-up
operations affecting North Richfield. She said Da�vn Weitzel, Richfield, was still fielding a number of
nighttime noise complaints.
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, said he could incorporate agenda item number 8 at this point. Mr. Fuhrmann said
staff haci been investigating the nighttime run up activity. He e;cplained that the nighttime run-up field rule
",� restricts run-up operations between 12 a.m. to 5 a.m., which means run-ups can be performed between
10:30 p.m. and 12 a.m. and between 5 a.m. and 6 a.m. in emergency situations. He said documentation as
to the reason for the run-up is required if they are performed during these hours.
Mr. Fuhrmann said according to the run-up logs provided by the Operations Department, there has been a
decrease in the number of run-ups between the 12 a.m. and � a.m. timeframe and fewer operations between
5 a.m. and 6 a.m. He said sta:ff would be investigating it further and would produce a report once all the
monitoring information was complete.
Jim Serrin of Minneapolis asked why a live operator did not answer the complaint line between the hours of
5 p.m. and 12 a.m. He said he felt this time of the day would be one of the most busy.
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, said staff has not experienced an inordinate number of hang- ups during that time,
nor have they registered complaints about not being able to reach a live operator during that time period.
Mr. Fuhrnlann noted that a new phone system was now in place that would give callers the option to listen
to the A'I'IS line and to a construction update. He said the system tells people who want to speak with
someone that they can call during regular business hours. He also noted that staff had the ability to publish
additional information on its website.
Mr. Serrin said he still felt there should be more coverage of the complaint line during these hours.
Chairman Johnson and staff said they would monitor the new noise complaint system for a month to
determine how callers are reacting to the new system.
6. Rec{uest for Minne�olis Straight Out Procedure Support
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, said the initial analysis for the Minneapolis Straight Out Procedure had been
completed by HNTB and has been forwarded to the FAA. He said the FAA was now requesting
supporting documentation for the Environmental Assessment (EA). He said one piece of documentation
requested was writken documentation from the affected cities in support of the new procedure. Mr.
Fuhrmann said sta.ff was asking for written support of the procedure, noting that the more communities
who respond the better. He said the supporting documenta.tion would be forwarded to HNTB for final
inclusion in the EA package. Mr. Fuhrmann said the FAA also wanted to lrnow if there was any interest in
holding a public hearing and that if there was not, each city should indicate that in their written support.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if staff could provide a written summary of the Miiuieapolis
Straight-out Procedure for consideration by his city council. Mr. Fuhrmann said staf�could have
something available by the end of the meeting.
7im Serrin of Minneapolis asked how staff planned to solicit the supporting documentation. Chairman
Johnson said he felt the members who were present would be responsible for sharing the information with
their city councils/officials and that the request would be sta.ted in the minutes, as well. Jim Serrin said he
was concerned that cities that were not affected by the new procedure were being asked to provide written
documentation of their support for the procedure but had no incentive to do so.
STEVE MINN, MINNEAPOLIS, MOVED AND JON HOHENSTEIN, EAGAN, SECONDED TO
ESTABLISH A 30-DAY PERIOD FOR REPRESENTATIVES TO COMMENT, AND IF THERE
WERE NO OBJECTIONS, THAT STAFF SHOULD FORWARD THE REQUESTED
DOCUMENTATION TO THE FAA AT THE END OF THAT TIME PERIOD WITH A LETTER
FROM MASAC THAT THERE HAD BEEN NO OPPOSITION TO THE NEW PROCEDURE. �
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, urged the cities, especially Minneapolis, to provide the requested written
documentation, as well.
7. MASAC Assessment
Roy Fuhrmami, MAC, reviewed the MSP Noise Mitigation Cornmittee's recomnnendations and briefly
mentioned how the Operations Committee had been dealing with them at recent meetings.
There was discussion on standard instnunent departures for runway 04/22, GPS capabilities and whether
or not ANOMS could be used to monitor low-frequency noise.
Petrona. Lee, Bloomington, asked if the MSP Noise Mitigation Committee had prioritized their list of
recommendations and whether or not there had been any time limit placed on them. Jan DelCalzo of
Minneapolis said she did not recall that the members of the committee had prioritized any of the
recommendations or that they had implemented a timeline for any of them.
Chairman Johnson introduced Jean Bowman of Padilla, Speer, and Beardsley who was the facilitator for
the evening.
The MASAC members offered the following suggestions to improve the MASAC organization: �
COMNfUMTY CONIMUNICATION EFFORTS
1. Investigate the use of local cable television to (a) broadcast MASAC meetings and/or (b) broadcast a ('
video about MASAC and its noise abatement efforts.
2. Develop the Noise Complaint and Information Hotline to include monthly updates on what MASAC is
working on, as well as fax on demand capabilities.
3. Produce written informational ma.terials about various aircraft noise issues to be distributed to
interested parties and callers to the Information Hotline.
4. Each community representative should survey residents on which issues are most important to their
communities in regards to aircraft noise. MASAC should also take into account the findings of any
MAC Tra.veler and Community Survey.
MASAC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDUR.AL CHANGES
l. Include with the monthly mailing one week prior to the meeting, a checklist of the items included in the
mailing, the agenda for the ne:ct meeting, minutes of the last meeting, minutes of any committee
meetings, copies of any correspondence received, meeting handouts with cover memos, the Technical
Advisor's Report with attachments (when ANOMS is available �gain), a blank MASAC Information
and Monitoring Request form, and Part 1�0 updates.
4
2. Continue to develop the Noise Monitoring and Information Request form.
3. Hold annual "business plan" meetings in the fall in order to identify objectives for the following year.
4. Hold "study" meetings where one agenda item is discussed thoroughly.
5. Hold E.cecutive Committee meetings at least once per year.
6. Develop a report package from members to constituents and their appointing authorities.
MASAC MEMBERSHIP ORIENTATION AND EDUCATION
1. Develop a handbook for members, which would include, among other things, copies of the bylaws and
articles of incorporation, a directory of inembers with their biographies, committee rosters,
documentation of organizationat procedures and processes, information on the various noise programs
at MAC and a MASAC Organizational Chart.
2. Develop and hold procedurai and technical orientation sessions for members.
3. Schedule landside and Air Traffiic Control Tower tours.
4. Schedule neighborhood tours.
5. Educate members about MAC, its structure, procedures and priorities by (a) mailing the P&E
Committee agenda. to those members who wish to receive it, (b) distributing a MAC organizational
chart and (c) providing informational updates from the Full Commission meetings regarding noise-
related issues.
OPERATIONAL SUGGESTIONS
1. Investigate the effects of aircraft noise on physical and mental health.
2. Develop a departure procedure for Runway 22 to direct aircraft over areas of commercial development
and the Minnesota. River Valley when the ground-based instnunent landing equipment is available.
3. Evaluate departure compliance through the Eagan/Mendota. Heights Comdor and make any necessary
changes to the relevant procedures.
4. Review the NADPs and compliance.
5. Work within the aviation industry to encourage further reductions in aircraft noise levels.
6. Provide feedback to the MAC in their efforts to communicate changes in operations, due to
construction, to the surrounding communities. .
7. Request Air Traffic Control Personnel to make a presentation on how MSP operations are conducted.
8. Look at providing incentives to carriers in acquiring and operating factory-made Stage III aircraft.
9. Use GPS technology to map out the best noise abatement routes. Investigate how GPS and other NAV
Aids could help alleviate aircraft noise.
10. Continue to encourage reduction of Stage II aircraft operating out of MSP.
11. Investigate how real noise data can be used in Part 150 contour generation.
12. Change the nighttime hours to 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
13. Make every effort to keep the technological tools (ANOMS, etc) current and operational.
14. Review ANOMS system and noise monitors, and evaluate the need and placement of additional remote
monitoring towers. Also, evaluate remote monitoring capabilities.
(Note: This list is an attempt to consolidate the suggestions and discussions that occurred during the
meeting. The list ma.y not include each individual suggestion made.)
There was discussion regarding whether or not members should try to prioritize the suggestions for the
P&E Committee. It was decided tha.t each suggestion would be included in a memo to the P&E Committee
and that members wouid prioritize them at the ne:ct MASAC meeting.
Ni�httime Run-up Activitv
This item was discussed as part of Item 5.
9. MASAC Information Req,uest Form
Tbis item was carried over to the ne:ct meeting due to the lateness of the hour.
10. Operations Committee Report
This item was carried over to the ne:ct meeting due to the lateness of the hour.
11. Report of the MAC Commission Meetin�
This item was carried over to the ne;ct meeting due to the lateness of the hour.
12. Persons Wishing to Address the Council
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, introduced the newest mernber of the Aviation Noise Programs staff, Acoustical
Coordinator, Kay Hatlestad. He said Ms. Hatlestad would be working on monitoring projects and would
help coordinate the Part 150 house monitoring program.
13. Other Items Not on the A.e� nda
There were no other items on the agenda.
14. Ad1ournment
Chairman Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:3� p.m.
Respectfully submitted.
Melissa Scovronski, MASAC Secretary
0
� �s a .� a�
� o � o 0
� ,_ C
!A O�� �
.° 'ci3 c -o �
�. cts � � co
a�ia�i�mo
��cwa��i
�
C�� O � Q
.��o��
�o L � .,..
� �°-in cT
�'p � C
� � N � �
�
_ � � i �
� Q C � L
Q � � O �
� � V � t[S
�-. �
'y m C -C
o.��oo�
a���Q- �
��•� � � o
3 V.C� � N
L � ,�, � .«�.
.aj �
� ,�, O O �
C��cc�
�a v
��ocu
��ifvi�
.��.. � � Q � �
.,... m � O '� G
� ..�.. � fn �
c� � � � �
di '�
C
� � O � � �
� (LS � +� �
'� � > .0 � �
.� U N +-� i (Si
C � R3 � � =
. � � � � �
�� � m y �
� o o v, � o
o�.�.N'co
"'- C � � t0
�1 � � U � �
3 0 � c � �S
y-+ �ii O (� �
� C � � X. (�
J-+ �� � � �
� � W � � �
� �} Q �
•(� � � � (� �
o � c�a� m n
o���'..a'
V � O �
-�.��Ct�n
������
'� � Q' V (� .�
� r�... � � �
�Q.0 � � O Q
� � � p�j O C
.� � �
m��4o�
<nc��.�co
Q � � ? E c
�L:��mc�
cuca��.�
¢ � o � � �
�—vcu-ac
U�
m �
�
d �
.N.� —
3 �
��
c �
CO —
N �
� s
> `�
�ro �
c�
� �'
N�
� O
Q �
N p�
L C
LL �
V, �
= U
N, O
o °'
3 �
m
�
� °c
� � _
� � y�
'o � Q
co � �
.�C O �
� U •�
�a�c
v�°, = o
U
� X �
R! W �
� � �
U �
.� �
v �; �
Q �a
���
� � O
L �
� � V
� �' �
� Q �
. �
� L
U � �
�n -� �
� U �
�
v� `�
O
� �
> > ('"'Q
._ , �
Cll C �C
W � E
� � �
a
� � o
T
c N
0 0
�U �
O �
U �
� �
w N
a� �
� �
� �
U •�
O O
-a �
c� �
a� �
�
�O C�
� V
� �
=
•� a
�
� �
� �
tC �
o �
� c
'� •L
� O
Q N
�
� �
o �
� m
Q ''""
O �
� 5
o a�
•� L
� O
m N
� C
> �
a� �
a �
� o
at �
� �
C �
v �
�
� •�
� O
�U�
��.°c
a� �
� oj N
� � �
p�U
� � U)
Q
O � �
� � O
a u�i C
o �
O Q�
� � o.
N
a
1 a
�
I��'TRC�POL]['I'AN ..��.PC)RTS CC�NIl'i�IISSION
��°`'S'4,� Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
j 7'� 6040 - ZSth Avenue South • Minneapolis, IvfN 55450-2799
3� � Phone (612) 726-8100 � Fax (612) 726-5296
- * N
� N
!
C � �
t L�
/ 9ry 4iFapPYy
March 18,1998
Dear Neighbor:
The Metropolitan Airports Commission invites you to an open house to get information and
ask questions about this summer's reconstruction of runway 121Z. MAC staff will be available on
April l, from 4-S p.m., in the MASAC meeting room at the MAC General Offices located at
6040 28� Avenue South in Minneapolis. �
You may have heard or read in the news about the MSP 2010 plan to develop the airport to
meet current and tuture needs — this project is part of that plan. Specifically, the sbuth paraIlel
runway constructed nearly 50 years ago is in need of repair to keep it safe and efficient The
current runway consists of 8-11 inch thick concrete, overlaid with 10 inches of aspha.It These
runway materials have deteriorated due to age and were not designed for today's aircraft.
Reconstruction with 20-24 inch-thick concrete will safely accommodate the heavier aircraft
currentty using the airport
During reconstruction, there will be an increase in departures from the crosswind runway to
the southwest (runway �?), resulting in a temporary increase of air traffic over Bloomino on and
southern Richfield. Specifics include:
� Construction begins �pril 1 and will be completed by mid-August 1998.
� The south parallel runway will undergo reconstruction on the western 1/3 this year and the
eastern 1/3 in 1999.
� A portion of air traffic currently using the south parallel runway wili be temporarily shifted
to the crosswind runway, resulting in approxi.mately 100-150 more departures per day than
usual over Bloomington and Richfield.
� For progress reports about this runway reconstruction project, please check your
neighborhood newsletters, visit us on the Internet at www.mspairportcom or call the MA.0
Noise Hotline at 612-726-9411.
Because an upconvng runway reconstruction project affects air patterns—we want to keep
you informed. Again, please stop by the MAC on April 1.
The diagram below shows the area of increased flight activity. We apologize for any
disruption due to this project Thank you for your patience and cooperation while the
Minneapolis-St Paul International Airport enhances safety and efficiency.
Sincerely,
Jeff Hamiel
( �j Executive Director
The ;�fetropolitan :lirports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE • A�Oi�A COUNTY%BLAINE • CRTSTAL • FL1'I\G CLOUD • LAKE EL�tO • SAI;�fT' PAUL D04VNTOWN
ai
>
Q
m`
�
m
v
h
h
�
t0
3
s
m
_
Richfield
<
.�.
. 1 ��
��ril�8 �
Ganstruciion� ;
�
�
�
inter�ate 494
�
Mall of America, Bloomington
5
�'
Letter sent 3/18/98 to residents in Bloomington and
southern Richfield
_
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
May 8, 1998
To: Airport Relations Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder Ci Ad ''�tr� �
� t}' �--t°r
Subject: Unfinished and New Business for May Meeting
DISCUSSION
This memo will cover the two items on the agenda for Unfinished and New Business,
specifically, the Monitoring of the Non-Sinnultaneous Departure Procedures and the review of
our Airport Plan of Action.
Monitoring of the Non-Simultaneous Departure Procedures - The MASAC
Operations Committee has discussed the City of Mendota Heights' request to monitor
non-simultaneous deparlure procedures with the ANOMS. At today's meeting, MAC
staff presented A Scope of Analysis: Crossing in the Corridor as their proposed
methodology for fulfilling our request. (Please see attached document.)
Ms. Cindy Greene, FA.A, stated that the FAA would not provide MAC the information
necessary to detail controller time periods, as requested in Section 1.2 of the attached
document. Ms. Greene indicated that there are too many variable factors the controller
has to weigh in making a decision to release a departure. She was concerned that the
flight track data and ANOMS will show departure headings inconsistent with non-
simultaneous depariures without the explanation of why the controller made this
decision. The FAA. is not willing to devote a lot of time and resources to providing
these explanations on every flight during non-simultaneous periods and does not want
their controller's decisions to be micro managed.
MAC will move forward with the study on the basis that there is only one controller in
the Tower between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. I will be prepared to report in more detail at
Wednesday evening's meeting.
2. Air�ort Plan of Action - It is time for the Commission to begin review of the Airport
Plan of Action adopted last August. In past years, the Commission has reviewed and
updated this document during May, 7une and July and reported to the City Council in
August. (Please see attached Plan of Action.)
C
A Scope of Analysis: Crossing in the Comdor Procedure
1.2 FAA Feasibility
The implementation of operational procedures in the terminal area are dependent on the
ability of the local FA� to perform the procedure in a safe compliant manner with respect
ta the e;cisting environment and staff requirements. Due to the nature of the crossin�
procedure, it is imperative that there is only one local controller on duty in the tower. This
ensures that the same individual is monitorinQ the operations off both parallel runways,
thus eliminating the controller to controller communication function. When and only
when this scenario e.cists, the crossin� procedure is possible.
Due to the criticalness of one local controller to the crossing procedure, it is imperative to
have record of these time periods. Coordination will be made with Cindy Greene (local
FAA) in an effort to lo; [he one local controller time periods. This lo� will then be
incorporated into the analysis to help quantify available time for the use of the crossin;
procedure.
1.3 Operational Availability
The airspace environment is another factor when usin� the crossina procedure. Two
operational issues which effect the use of the crossing procedure are: y
'�- Non-simultaneous operations.
'i- Head-to-head operations.
It is necessary to establish when these operations exist to further analyze the possibility of
using the crossin� procedure. Non-simultaneous operations must exist in order to use the
crossin� procedure. An assump[ion will be made that any time one local controller is on
duty, non-simultaneous operations may be performed. Head-to-head operations can be an
operational impediment to performin� the crossinQ procedure, thus we will retrieve head-
to-head operational time periods from the tower logs as part of the base line for
establishinQ study criteria.
Incorpora[ing the assessment of these two operational issues will further quantify the
feasibility of using the crossin� procedure relative to operational availability.
Occurrence oithe Crossing Procedure
1.4 Occurrence of the Crossing Procedure
Va ANOMS it will be determined when the crossing procedure occurs. Using a �ate
structure in ANONIS, corridor compliant operations performin; the crossin� procedure
will be analyzed. Below is a diagram of the �ate structures which will be used:
Exclusion Gate:
Gate:
� Gate:
Using the above Qate structure will yield operations which crossed in the corridor allowinQ
track displays, counts and percentaje of operations to be generated. y
1.5 Summary
By assessing the time periods available to perform the crossing procedure from the FAA
side and operational side it will legitimize the possibility of performin� the procedure.
Being able to correlate when the procedure actually occurs with respect to the time
available will provide answers and possible reasons for the use and or non-use of the
procedure.
A report will be generated analyzing when the crossing in the corridor procedure is
performed and when the various variab(es allow for the procedure to be performed, thus
summarizing the correlation between the [wo.
tj
802. MENDOTA HEIGHTSIEAGAN
PROCEDURES.
a. Departures on Runways 12R ae�d 12L.
i (1) Whenever possible, under non-
simultaneous departure conditions:
(a) Aircraft departing Runway 12R wili
be assianed a heading to maintain an
approximate ground track of 105° magnetic,
and;
(b) Aircraft departing Runw�y 12L will
be assigned a heading to maintain a ground
track along the extended centerline,
approximately 118° magnetic.
(2) When diverging separGtion is in us�,
it shall be based upon the ioilowing criteria:
(a) Runway 12R - a headino betwe�n
090° and 105° or a track on or north or tF�e 30�
locali�er.
(b) Runway 12L - be�ween 090°
cnd/or a heaaing which wiii track ori or nor�h or
the 30� localizer.
t. ) (3) Proc��d on the assianed heading
_..
until at least 3 miles from the departure end of
the runway, then assigned on-cours� he�dinas
as soon as practical after the 3-mile point.
(4) Vl�hen rquest�d by thc pilot ox a
group IV or V turboprop, be issued headings
�nd turns which prohibit flight over these noise
�ensi�ive ar�a (i.e., river depar�ures).
r �
1 i
+'Y ,
` '� ` � ' . ! .�` � t
� � � � � t ��
; . .; ,.� �,
I�larch 1?, 1998
YIr. Robert Johnson, Chair
NSetropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28th Avenue South
I�"pls., MN 5���0
�e::r Mr. Johns�n:
T�!is letter is to make a formal request on behalf of the City Council of the City of Nlendota
'riei�hts for the AI�IOI�SS system to monitor, on a monthly basis, the Non-Simultaneo�ss
Depa.sture Procedures in the southeust comd�r. The purpose of the monitorina �Nonld be to
�n..lude dat� �r.l �':ze mortht� Technical �dvisor's Report revardinQ the F� Tower', :.c�npliance
t�l� �Touer c�r3er for N�n-Simultaneous Degrrt�ares.
�� ; you are a��ar:., in 1�9 i• the Pn.�. � ower adogted a new Tower Grder ����oi�e �batement
prace�?.,t?'e to :be impler.zented as f�Ilows: ,
wneaever possible, under n�n-simultaneous conditi�ns:
Aircraft departing Runtivay 12R will be assiQned a headina to maintain an approximate
�round track of 10� ° ma�etic (ti�, and
Aircraft departing Runway 12L tivill be assigned a heading to maintain a�raund track
alon� the e:ctended centerline, approximately 118° iv1.
Specifically, NSendota Heights �vould like to monitor and collect data on fliaht� that comp�;� wit'ti
these prescribed proceciures and fliQhts that deviate from these prescribed proc<.dures. The:e are
many e;campies tivhen late evenina, or early morninQ, flights are not flyina runw��� centeriine
headinQs from Run�vay 12L durina periods of the day, or niQht, that are obviousiy r�on-
simultaneous conditions.
T?:e F�A imple:nented the procedure at the request ofthe tiletropolitan Airpors Comrr�i�sion
and the Ci�v cf T.fendota Heights to proYidz a relatively simple noise abatement procedure !o
beneiit resi��zts i� close protiimity..to �ISP International Airport. 'I`he data collect�d �vc+tl:� ��
relevani to cicterminina the compliance by� the traific controllers and the airline users, as wel! as.
the eFFectiveness of the r_e�v proce�jure. bVe ti�ould request that this data be collected for a per.ud
af at least si:c mantns, at a minim��m.
1101 Victoria Curve • Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 (612) 452-1850 • FAX 452-8940
Mr. Robert Johnso❑
ivla.rch 17, 1993
Paae t�vo
Th� City of Vlendota Hei�hts agpreciates your consideration of our request, and we are ready to
offer an;� assistance that we may. Should you have any questions, or conce:ns, please cont�ct rtie
at 4�2-18�0.
Sincerely,
�� i�',�;�. ���.,��,,,,.���._._
.� �, _ � . � >> ar_
. .:� _.._...:t•_ . _
City Admiristrator
cc: City Council
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
� ;_
1. Noise Reduction Throuah Modified Takeoff Procedures
A. Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Procedures
B. Adoption of "Close In" vs. "Distant° Departure Procedures
C. Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Takeoff Regulations
D. Implementation of Nanowed Air Tra�c Corridor
2. Hei�hten Awareness of Mendota HeiQhts Air Noise Concerns
A. Advertising the MAC Air Noise Complaint Line
B. Expand Distribution of .Air Noise Related Information
�-,,
C. Appointrnent of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
�-� D. Advocate for Equitable MASAC and MAC Representation
3. MSP Lon� Term Com�rehensive Plan
A. Monitor Contract with MAC on Third Parallel Runway
B. Implement MSP Mitigation Committee's Comprehensive Plan
4. Conversion to StaQe III Quieter Aircraft
5. Noise Reduction ThrouQh Liti�ation
6. Expand Eliaibility for Part 150 Sound Insulation Pro�ram in Affected Areas
� '
�e
Issue:
Goal:
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Takeoff Procedures Which
Minimize Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
Action Steps:
1. Request Copy of Tower Order that
Implements NSDP's
2. Monitor Compliance with Tower Order
3.
C�
NSDP's - Request Compliance
Pursue Magnetic Shift Affect on
105 Degree Heading on 1 1 L
Who When
Staff July
Staff/ Continous
ARC
Staff Sept.
ARC
Staff/ARC FAA is
implementing
-,
G,r,� � � at_ c1;� �- ��,r,
�
� F`:� L,: Qj�, � F 1J c,.�_ u� �" r�'� /�'�
i\ r
♦ • � � • � � �
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Adoption of "Close-In" vs. "Distant" Takeoff Procedures to Reduce
Noise Generation Over Mendota Heights.
Action Steps:
1. Seek Political Assistance from
legislative leaders - Send Correspondence
to MAC
2. MAC Planning and Environment reports
recommendation to MAC.
3. MAC recommends to FAA procedure
to be implemented.
4. FAA implements tower order.
5. FAA begins NADPs.
Who When
Staff/ARC August
Staff/ARC August
Staff/ARC
Staff/ARC
Staff/ARC
� �p q,t,,,..,�-f:�_ ri�..J'd". �le� �1 � �
�In /��t�'� f (�_
,^ f,,...�_:�A,;,��
` f� fi„�,,�'— "= G
� : � �e. � � , r<--
, �
f�';..� �� :�-
��� i ��� r�
Issue:
Goal:
AIR NOISE PLAN QF ACTION
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Ta�keoff Regulations to Reduce Noise
Generation Over Mendota Heights
Action Steps:
1. Inquire with FAA Control Tower about
current head-to-head operations
Who When
Staff August
2. Suggest Using crosswind runway more ARC
frequently during head-to-head operations.
3. Monitor MSP Mitigation Cnmprehensive Plan ARC/
designated Stage III only from10:30 p.m. Council
until 6:00 a.m. and assist MAC in lmplementing
Voluntary Agreements with Airlines
�. � 3
Fall 1997
riE'.�IrJ
Issue:
Goal:
Action Steps
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Implementation of Narrowed Air Traffic Corridor which Minimizes
Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
1. Advocate for Maintenance of 5 mile final
arrivals and 3 mile corridor for departures
2. Pursue the benefit of updating Tower
orders to original intent before shift
in magnetic headings
3. Presentation to Commission on GPS by
MAC or other expert (Mr. Harold Pierce)
t, ) 4
Who When
Staff/ARC Continuous
Staff/ARC Fall 1997
Staff Fa111997
i"
Issue:
Goal:
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information
Action Steps: Who When
1. Continue to inform the community on Staff/ARC Continuous
ARC projects and concerns using the
City's newsletter and separate single
page mailings.
2. Work with Northern Dakota County Airport Staff/ARC Continuous '
Relations Commission on possible Legislation
for MAC representation.
3. Mail letters and Heights Highlites to
State Senators and Representatives
regarding ARC issues
4. Invite guests to monthly ARC meetings
(i.e., Mr. Hamiel, Mr. Wagoner, State
elected officials)
5. Expand coverage of air noise issues
by pursuing informational meetings with
editorial staffs of major papers
6. Continue to send press releases to
newspapers, State Senators and
Reps.
7. Update and Promote air noise
mitigation document.
�� � 5
Staff Continuous
Staff Continuous
(Quarterly}
Staff 1997 �
Council
Staff Continuous
Staff/ARC Annually
� • � � � � � �
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
Actian Steps•
, r► .
1. Discuss concerns with State Senators ARC/ Dec. 97/Jan.9$
and Reps. regarding composition of Council
MAC. Pursue legisfation to amend
MAC Commissioner appointment process.
2. Discuss and Compare cities affected by ARC 1998
air noise to MAC representatives
3. Review MASAC representation and ARC/Staff 1997/1998
MAC representation with Northern
Dakota County Airport Relations `�.�:C„�� �
Commission. Propose new structure and
� _ � representation on MASAC.
u,.-�y �r; �--- �
�j � r� S �C� �� t � ��`� �
l� �'� � � � � � ��
r ,
� ,'
C
� � � ■ � � � •
Issue: MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
Goal: Prevent Construction of Third North Parallel Runway
Action Steps:
1. Monitor MAC Compliance with Contract
2. Research MAC Acquisition of Bureau of
Mines property and MAC interest in off
airport properties in 3rd runway area
3. Monitor EIS Process for N/S Runway
4. Monitor EIS for 12,000 foot Runway
Who When
Staff/ARC Continuous
Staff 1997
Staff/AFiC 1997/1998
Staff/ARC 1997
� ' • ' � i � •
Issue: MSP �ong Term Comprehensive Plan
Goal: Implement Noise Mitigation Requirements in MSP Mitigation
Committee's Comprehensive Plan
Action Steps Who When
1. Implement MAC's MSP Mitigation Plan Staff/ARC 1997/1998
a. MASAC Action Plan for Implementation
b. Joint Efforts with NDCARC
c. Dakota County Assistance
d. Legislative Assistance
:
Issue:
� � � � � � � �
Conversion to Stage III Quieter Aircraft
Goal: Assure Conversion by Federai Deadline of Year 2000
Action Steps: Who When
1. Work with MAC to assure 1996 Staff Completed
legislation to convert to all Stage Iil
aircraft by Year 2000 is implemented
��
K�
Consider Backsliding of Stage III
Conversion
MASAC Consideration of
Stage III compliance
� � 9
ARC
ARC/Co�ncil
Upon response of
NWA
Periodic
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Litigation
Goal: Determine Feasibility of a Legal Challenge to Current Air
(Voise Distribution
Action Steps:
1. Continue to be kept abreast of other
communities' issues and possible
litigation process
2. Consider Freedom of Information Request
for EIS or FONSI's on Increased
Operations
3. Consider Lega! Challenge Options if
North/South Runway is Delayed
( ) 10
Who When
Staff/ARC Continuous
Staff/ARC 1997
Staff/ARC 1997/1998
� a
� • � � � � � •
Issue: Expand Eligibility far Part 150 Sound Insuiation Program in Areas
Affected by Air Noise Exposure
Goal: Air Noise Mitigation Through Sound Insulation
Action Steps:
1. Continue to monitor changes in the Ldn
contours and monitor the Part 150
Sound Insulation program completion
process.
2. Examine the feasibility of purchase or
acquisition through Part 150 for severly
impacted areas
3
*
Who When
Staff/ARC On-going
ARC/Council
Ensure AN�MS data used for Noise Contour Staff/ARC
Generation for 2005 Part 150 DNL 60
Updated August 11, 1997
ACTION.PLN
� ••=
• w �
�p Airport Noise Report
Ce�ztennial, from p. 49
unilaterally beQun passen�er service at the end of 1994
despite the authority's opposition, and the airport quickly
sued. It arsued that Centennial has traditionally served as a
Qenernl aviation reliever facility; that citizens livinb nearby
are stronQly opposed to passenger service; and that the
airport possesses none of the infrastructure usually required
to support such service.
The airport authority first won a temporary restrainin�
order and then a permanent injunction against Centennial
Express in Arapahoe County District Court, prohibitinQ the
carrier from conductin� the passenger service. The carrier
appealed, however, and the court of appeals reversed the
rulintr of the district court, saying the authority's prohibition
was preempted by federal law.lfie current decision reverses
the appeals court and reinstates the order of the district
court.
The state high court rejected the Centennial Express
arsument that the airport authoriry's ban is preempted by
federal law, sayinD the Airline Deregulation Act (ADA)
"does not limit" a political subdivision ownin� and operat-
ing an airport "from carryina out its proprietary powers and
rijhts." Also, ruled the court, the authority "is not regulatin�
airline fares or routes (contrary to preemptive provision of
ADA) because the ban on schednles service does not
delineate what airlines can charge or where they can fly."
The court said that it believed "that an airport proprietor's
ban on scheduled passenger service falls squazely within the
proprietor's exemption" to the ADA preemptions. While
reQulations concernin� aircraft noise and b ound congestion
restrict the manner in which airport users conduct iheir
operations, a ban on scheduled service seeks to accomplish
a more fundamental goal in setting the boundaries of
permissibte operations ... The power to control an airport's
size exists at the core of the proprietor's function and is
especially strong where, as here, the prohibited use has
never been allowed or even contemplated."
Extent of Airport Control
Said Pflaum: "A lot of airports have been concerned about
the extent to which they can control the nature of their
facilities. I know of one former military base that has been
closed, and consideration has been given to some limited
aviation use. But there are serious concerns about whether
and how such use can be limited. So the Colorado decision
is imponant [in helpin� define such limits]. Fundamentally
it's a federal issue."
Pflaum pointed out that much depends on how the Federal
Aviation Administration interprets its non-discrimination
�ranc assurances. At the time of its original appeal, Centen-
nial Express also filed a complaint with the FAA. At issue
are assurances that authority agreed to when it accepted �30
million in federal grants to fund airpon construction and
operations. The authority pledQed to make che facility -
available as an airport "For public use on fair and reasonable
terms and without unjust discrimination, to all types, kinds,
and classes of aeronautical uses."
The State Supreme Court said it refused to construe the
assurances "so broadly that airport proprietors must accom-
modate every possible aeronautical use, saying they are
meant instead to keep airport owners from Qrantins access
to one carrier while denying it to another. In the case at
issue, the court held, "the authority is not discriminating
a�ainst a particular operator because [the action] applies to
all airport users equally."
The court also pointed to another assurance which it said
buttressed the authority's power to impose a ban; it provides
that an authority "may prohibit or limit any given type, kind,
or class of aeronautical use of the airport if such action is
necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary
to serve the civil aviation needs of the pubIic."
FA.A Response
FAA has yet to respond to the Centennial Express
complaint. Additionally, an opinion letter from the U.S
Department of Transportation, solicited by the Authority,
was 17 months in coming and, according to the court,
proved more ambiQuous than helpful.
"Apparently," Pflaum observed, "the ruling [of the
Colorado Supreme CourtJ was influenced by FAA not
having quickly responded to the issues. Ordinarily the courfs
tend to defer to the judgments of an interpreting authority"
like FAA. Shouid the agency respond by interpreting the
facts in favor of Centennial Express, this will carry great
weight. Federal courts will "review and consider" the
Colorado ruling, but "will be prone to defer to the opinion
of FAA," Pflaum reasoned, when and if the agency chooses
to go on record with its opinion.
ANR attempted to reach Centenniai Express attorney
Mark A. Pottin'er to learn whether the carrier intends to
seek U.S. Supreme Cour[ review of the rulin�; but by press
time Pottinger had not responded. He has told the Denver
press that he is uncerfain about an appeal but thinks FAA
will act, possibly by withholding federal funds from the
airport.
"The FAA controls the money," he said. "And at some
point it won't really matter what the State of Colorado
Supreme Court says if the FAA starts withholdina fundin'
from the airport, which they've already threatened to do.
...[This] airport is not going to be able to meet its financial
obligations. It has huse, hu?e debt obligations that are
floatin� out there. It appears it has no way to meet them,
especially without federal funding. And at some point, I
think they'll run out of money."
Recently FAA has given indications that when it officially
speaks, it wili assert that the �rant assurances prohibit the
kind of ban the court ruling has okayed. John Brackney,
Arapahoe County commissioner and airport authority
member, told The Denver Post that Centennial Airport "was
conceived as a�eneral aviation airport. For three decades
now elected officials have been promising that it would be a
AirpoR Noise Reporc
.: �,
C
f
� ��� _���
� �
Apri124, 1998
�eneral aviation airport. To change the character of the
airport by a federal decision is obscene. If the FAA is
orderin� us to change the character of our airport ... that's
just a travesty of public policy."�
Sound Insulation, from p. 49
rather than re�ulatory accion, he said. He offered no time
line on when the a�ency might make such a request of
airports.
The low number of airports responding to the C&S survey
might indicate the reluctance of airports to make any
statements about their sound insulation pr aarams for fear
that the community might demand that more be done or
refuse to accept airport statements that more federal funding
for sound insulation cannot be obtained, Burn said. She also
noted that airport noise proa am staffs are very busy and
may not have had time to participate in the survey or may
have been wary about what the survey results would be used
for. Michael D. Hotaling, manager of C&S's Pianning
Service Group, agreed with her statement.
FAA's Ohnsted told ANR: "There are lots of homes out
there [eligible for sound insulation) and our money doesn't
go as far as people think." FAA uses a formula, he said, to
distribute A1P money set aside for noise mitigation to
airports that seek it: $5 million is o ven per year, per airport,
for residential programs, and $3 miilion is p ven out per
airport that needs it, per yeaz, for schoois. Each airport can
then decide whether to use that funding for relocation or
sound insulation, he said.
Survey Results
C&S distributed its survey to 163 airports that have used
FAA AIP funds for noise compa6bility planning and
implementation programs. At the 41 airports that responded
to the survey, approximately 48,400 residential dwellinss
are eligible for inclusion in Part 150 Airport Noise Compati-
bility sound insulation prob ams, the survey found. SliQhtly
less than 3,800 of these dwellings have been modified to
date with sound insulation measures, the survey found. The
average construction costs to sound insulate these 3,800
homes was found to be approximately $25,000 per dwelling.
C&S said it was interesting to note that 72 percent of the
schools eli�ible for noise mitigation proa ams have been
completed at an avera�e consiruction cost of $1.6 million
per school. The responding airports indicated that 16
schools were eligible for the prob am, and 13 are finished.
C&S's 1998 Noise Compatibility Program Survey was
desiQned ta aather summary information related to the noise
compatibility plannin� and implementation efforts of
airports for the purposes of providing:
• A quick glance at the noise compatibility activities at
various airports;
• A look at the costs associated with planning and imple-
mentino noise abatement and mitigation measures;
• The status of mitiaation programs;
51
• The source of funds bein� used by the airports; and
• Sug�estions and comments from noise experts.
The airports that responded to the survey are Ann Arbor
Municipal, Baton Rouge Metropolitan, Boca Raton, Boise
Air Terminal, Capital City, Centennial Airport, Chica�o
Midway, Chica�o O'Hare International, Detroit City, �
Detroit Metro, Hulman Regional, John Wayne, Kalamazoo/
Battle Creek International, Kansas City International, Kent
County International, Lambert-St_ Louis International,
Laughlin/Bullhead International, LonQ Island NlacArthur,
Los Angeles International, Lovell Field, and Manassas
Regional.
Also respondin� to the survey were Mansfield Lahm,
Memphis International, Iviidland International, Nashua
Municipal, New Orleans International, Ocala Re?ional,
Ontario International, Page Field, Panama City-Bay County
International, Pittsburgh International, Portland Interna-
tional, Rickenbacker International, San Diego.International,
San Jose International, Southwest Florida International,
Spirit of St. Louis, Syracuse Hancock International, Univer-
sity of Illinois-Willard, Van Nuys, and Will Rogers World.
Formed in 1968, C&S Engineers, Inc., currendy is
assisting more than 40 airports with engineering, planning,
and environmental projects.0
Research
� • : • , ' �
. � � r ,� �. . .
A health questionnaire distributed by Staten Island, NY,
Community Hospital found that residents who lived in high
aircraft noise contours and who reported themselves more
bothered by noise also perceived themselves to be in poorer
health.
In contrast, a group of residents in a no�-flight azea who
also were bothered by various non-aircraft noises did not
similarly report poorer health.
"Although a causeleffect relationship cannot be estab-
lished between perception of poor health and being bothered
by noise from those livine in the fli�ht pattern area, this
disturbing finding indicates strongly the need for further
research and clarification," the principle author of the study
Arline L. Bronzaft, professor emerita a[ the City University
of New York, concluded in the study, "Aircraft Noise: A
Potential Health Hazard," published in the January 1998
issue of the journal Environmenr and Behavior .
The study was funded in part by a grant from Guy
Molinari, Staten Island Borou�h President.
The study demonstrates the need to conduct noise research
"that will yie]d a good database with which to influence
legislators and policy makers," Bronzaft said in the conclu-
sion of her research. "Scientific evidence would enable
those few House representatives who have already ex-
pressed an interest in formin� a special congressional
caucus on aviation noise, to enlist their fellow colleajues in
Airport Noise Report
52
their cause. Data finding a relationship between aircraft
noise and health would also be especially helpful in the
passaae of a bill known as the Quiet Communities Act of
1997 that calls for the re-establishment of the [Environ-
mental Protection Agency's] Office of Noise Abatement and
Control."
Bronzaft said she hopes the findings of her study "sug-
gestin� a relationship between noise and perceived adverse
health effects, serves to encouraQe che passage of federal
leaislation that will provide funds to deal with the rapidly
growin� aircraft noise problem and noise in �eneral."
Questionnaire
Officials of Staten Island Community Hospital decided to
include four questio�s on noise impact within a�eneral
wellness questionnaire that has been routinely distributed to
community residents over the years. The noise questions
would examine the relationship between perceived noise
disturbances and health perceptions and quality of life issues
amon� two b oups: one living within the 65 dB DNL noise
contour of a major, unidentified New York airport (most
likely Newark International) and a similar group in an area
with no aircraft overfli?hts.
The two communities were of comparable socioeconomic
status and size (35,000 residents). A computer randomly
selected 1,500 residents from each community for inclusion
in the study.
The two 0 oups living in and out of the flight pattern did
not differ significantly with respect to aje or gend�r.
However, 23 percent of the individuals located within the
fli�ht patterns identified themselves as either Black or
Hispanic whereas only 3 percent of the group in the non-
flight area listed themselves as belonging to these �oups.
Bronzaft, however, did not consider that race would
interfere as a confounding variable because the two Groups
lived in communities that were compazable
socioeconomically, and the education of the subjects in the
two groups was comparable (47 percent in the noise area
and 48 percent of the non-noise area has some colle�e
education).
The residents in the high noise contour were subjected to
an avera�e of 250 overflights per day and experienced
single noise levels e;cceeding 90 dBA approximately 40
percent of the time that these planes flew overhead. The
control sample did not live within the contour and was
considered a quiet community with respect to aircraft noise.
Of the 3,000 surveys mailed, only 521 (18 percent) were
completed. Of these subjects, 130 who lived within the
flisht pattern and 136who lived outside it were selected.
The Community Wellness and Health Promotion Survey
was a 20-item questionnaire developed by researchers at the
Sta[en Island University Hospital to elicit information on
residents' health and had been used prior to this study. For
the study, four noise questions were added to the survey.
They were designed to find out how annoyed individuals
were by noise, which types of noise disturbed them, how
Airport Noise Report
disruptive these noises were to daily activities, and whe[her
respondents had complained to the authorities about noise in
[heir neiQhborhood.
Results
Some 32 percent of the subjects in the overflight �roup
said they were bothered a great deal by neiQhborhood noise,
compared to 14 percent in the non-fli;ht area.
Of those bothered by noise, aircraft noise was ranked the
most bothersome source by 69.2 percent of those in the �
overflisht area, while noise from cazs, trucks, and loud
music were ranked the most bothersome sources by the non-
flight a oup.
Of the 130 subjects in the fli?ht pattern area, 80 reported
they were bothered a great deal or somewhat by noise,
whereas the remainder responded they were bothered rarely
or not at all by noise. Some 31 of the 80 subjects who
reported being bothered by noise stated that their health was
poor or fair. Only 8 of the 50 subjects in the flight pattern
azea who were not bothered by noise reported poor or fair
health.
In tertns of sleep disturbance, for the 130 subjects livin� in
the fli�h[ pattern, those reportina di�cnity in sleepin� were
more likely to be bothered by noise. For the I36 subjects
livin� in the non-flight azea, there was no significant
relationship between being bothered by noise and having
difficulty sleeping. ,
Bronzaft said "the results demonstrated that individuals
living in an air flight corridor are indeed bothered by aircraft
noise; this is clearly indicated by the fact that neazly 70
percent of the people are very much awaze of the noise. This
finding speaks against the notion that people ]ivina near
airports habimate to the noise. Furthermore the findings are
in keepin� with those of [earlier research showing] that
aircraft noise was more annoying than road or rail noise."
Bronzaft said that "it is well documented that a patient's
perception of health in general, as well as personal evalu-
ations of current health states, health outlooks and suscepti-
bility to illness, is a valid indicator that has proven useful in
detecting health outcomes."�
National Parks
AVIATION GROUPS URGE
MCCAIN TO LIMIT LEGISLATIOI�
Concerned that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), chairman of
the Senate Commerce Committee, is ready to attach
leQislation limitinQ air tour overflights of national parks to a
transportation reauthorization bili, several aviation �roups
urged him to limit his bil] and eive the Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee's National Parks Overfli�ht Workins
Group an opportuniry to complete its work developing 4
IeQislation to conuol park overfli�hts.
In a joint letter to McCain, the U.S. Air Tour Association
(USATA), the National Air Transportation Association
(NATA), and the Helicopter Association International
AirpoR Noise Repon
April 24, 1998
(HAI) asked McCain to limit any le�islation he may move
forward to three key provisions:
• Ensuring that the Federal Aviation Administration has
the statutory authority to implement the final worl:in� group
recommendations;
• EncouraQin$ the workinC �roup and the federal agencies
involved to complete this regulatory process as quickly as
feasible; and
• Creating a National Park Overflight Advisory Council
composed of air tour/aviation interests, environmentaU
conservation b oups, and "appropriate" federal agencies to
oversee implementation of the workina group's recammen-
dations.
"Consensus has been reached on many of the key issues"
of a plan to limit park overflights, the aviation groups toid
McCain in an Apri123 letter. "But, as you can appreciate,
this is a dynamic process. The work of the [National Parks
Overflight Working Group] is not yet finished. Some
important issues remain."
The aviation group said that high on the list of nnresolved
issues in the legislation beina developed by the working
group are:
• Clean guidance to the National Park Service regardin�
the a�ency's authority to determine "impact on pazk
resources" and "visitor experiences" and the specific criteria
by which impact will be deternuned in the development of
air tour management plans;
• Definitions of "natural quiet," "substantial restoration of
namral quiet," and "resource impairmenY';
• The Uriggering aititude which would require the develop-
ment of an air tout management plan for commercial air tour
operators to conduct an air tour at a specific park location;
and,
• Specific incentives such as preferred routes and altitudes
and other incentives for air tour operators utilizin� quiet
technology aircraft or which can demonstrate an ability to
fly existing aircraft in a manner which produces equivalent
quiet technolooy sound measurements.
Steve Bassett, president of USATA, which represents
more than 60 air tour operators, told ANR that the McCain
bill would give the Park Service "de facto control" of the air
space because it allows the Park Service to define impact on
the parks.
The aviation group said it plans to work with environ-
mental interests to ` jointly test" the process negotiated in
the working group at a number of different national parks,
"particularly since it is very unclear to air tour operators
exactly what criteria the Park Service will use to determine
impact on park resources and visitor experience opportuni-
ties." The group said such tests "will tell us a lot about how
the process may work and what deficiencies still exist that
must be addressed, particularly with respect to `impact'
determinations."
53
Air Tours
SPECIAL FLIGHT RULE
SOUGHT FOR SEDONA AREA
Citizens for Aircraft Noise Abatement at Sedona (CANA)
issued a report April 20 recommending that the Federal
Aviation Administration issue a Special Federal Aviation
Resulation (SFAR) — as it did for the Grand Canyon
National Park — for the Sedona, AZ, area, a popular tourist
site with a b owing number of air tour operations over its
craQgy red rock scenery.
In a 280-page report, Quite Skies: Restoring and Main-
taining Natural Quiet in the Skies of Sedona, CANA asked
the FAA to ban air tours over Sedona and to require �eneral
aviation pilots to fly at least 7,500 feet Mean Sea Level or
2,000 feet above ground level, whichever is hiaher.
The report also calls for the Sedona Ranger District of the
Forest Service to request that all pilots immediately cease
overt7ying wilderness lands, which surround the City of
Sedona, to stop flying over popular tourist sites such as
Cathedral Rock, and Oak Creek Canyon, and to fly at least
2,OOd feet above b ound level over other forest lands.
A number of recommendations in the report aze directed at
stren�thening the Sedona Airport Administration's volun-
tary noise abatement procedures, such as requesting that
pilots not circle and hover at scenic attractions, and provid-
ing pilot information that geographically depicts residential
areas thar si:ould be avoided in ]anding and take-off
operations.
The final key recommendation is that the City of Sedona
and Yavapai County assess the impacts of Sedona Airport
operations on residential areas in order to determine if the
airport should remain in its current location central to the
community.
Sensitive Location
The City of Sedona is surrounded on three sides by
wilderness area, Ron Hutchinson, a spokesman for CANA,
said. CANA, which represents 200 Sedona residents but
currently is tryin� to expand its membership to 1,000, feels
that this entire area is very sensitive and aircraft noise has
become an intrusion, Hutchinson said. People come here to
commune with nature and the air tour operations interfere
with that, he said, contendina that some air tour operators
are flyin� as low as 200 feet over the ground and that the
number of air tour operations is growina.
Sedona's extraordinary landscape consists of jutting red
rocks, deep canyons, and sheared cliffs carved by natura]
forces. T'he area is home to about 15,000 year-round
residents and is the destination of about four million tourists
a year. The Sedona Ranger District land of the Coconino
National Forest experience 1.4 million visitors yearly,
according to CANA, with a]most 219,000 visitins the two
wilderness areas that abut Sedona, y
"Just as Sedona's majestic beauty draws Cround visitors,
Airport Noise Report
54 Airport Noise Report
so [oo does it act as a magnet for aerial visitors," said
Evelyn Martin, CANA's founder. "Many of the Sedona
area's aircraft overflights are si�htseeing in nature and
therein lines the heart of the problem. Air tours— most of
them by noisy helicopters and bi-planes — shatter the natural
quiet so valued by residents and hikers, and �eneral aviation
airplanes can drone endlessly above."
Hutchinson said the it is "especially problematic that air
tours must overfly residential areas in order to reach the
forest lands." He added that it is "even more inexplicable
that si�htseein� flishts are allowed to operate over the
wildernesses, when the 1964 Wilderness Act bans mechani-
cal transport and motorized equipment. Flightseeing
passenaers are visitors to the wilderness as surely as are
other visitors because the aerial passengers are overflyinQ
the area for the express purpose of enjoying the scenic
resources. Yet FAA rules provide no protection for eicher
communities or wildernesses from the noise impacts of
siahtseeina operations," he said.
The number of aircraft operations at Sedona Airport
already exceed the level forecast by the Sedona Airport
Administration for the year 2011, according to CANA,
which said that air tour operations are responsible for most
if not all of this unexpected increase. General aviation
operations (one takeoff and ]anding) number about 30,000 a
year and air tour operations about 14,000 per year, accord-
ing to CANA.
Basis for SFAR
CANA said that it is basing its proposal that FAA institute
an SFAR for the Sedona area on three factors. First, the area
does not have the "geographic expanse" of the Grand
Canyon so that quieter aircraft and no-fly zones cannot play
as meaningful a rule in restoring natural quiet Second,
Sedona's situation "presents even more reasons for banning
air tours than is the case with the only area to receive an
FAA air tour ban thus far, namely Rocky Mountain Na[ional
Park in Colorado. Finally, CANA said that the Forest
Service has o�cially indicated to FAA that "commercial
helicopter tours over wildernesses aze inconsistent with the
values for which these areas were established by Con-
gress."0
San Diego Int'l
16 AIRLINES GET AWAItDS
FOR MEETIl`�1G NOISE RUL�S
Sixteen of the 26 airlines servina San DieQo International
Airport - Lindber�h Field conducted their operations in
compliance with the Airport Use Regulations, time-of-day
restrictions, and fleet mix requirements in 199"1, the airport
announced April 14.
In reco�nition of this achievement, representatives of the
I6 airlines were presented with Airport Use Regulations
Compliance Awards by the Port District's Airport Noise
Advisory Committez.
In addition, all airlines serving San Dieso International
conducted 96 percent of their operations with quieter, Stage
3 aircraft operations throu�hout 1997, the airport said.
These current Stage 3 aircraft statistics reflect that air
carriers are on schedule to meet San Diego's Airpor[ Use
Reaulations, Lrandfathered under the Airport Noise and
Capacity Act of 1990, which require the phase out of all
noisier, Stage 2 aircrafr by Jan. l, 1999 — one year ahead of
the federai schedule.
"I am imQressed with the exceptional level of compliance
in 1997," said Thella Bowens, senior director of aviation for
the airport. "I am pleased to see the air carriers receive
recognition for their dedication and effort in meeting our
stringent Airport Use Regulations."
Air carriers in compliance with the Airport Use Regula-
tions throuahout 1997 were Aeromexico, American Air-
lines, British Airways, Frontier, Midwest Express, North-
west, and US Airways.
Commuter aircraft operators in compliance were Ameri-
can Eagle, Skywest, and Trans States. Caroo carriers in
compliance were Airborne Express, BAX Global, Emery
Worldwide, Evera een International, Ryan International,
and United Parcei Service.�
Westchester County Airport
26 CORPORA.TIONS HONORED = (
FO�t QUIET FL'YING IN 1995-1997 �� .�:
Westchester County Airport presented Spirit of Noise
Abatement Honors for 1995, 1996, and 1997 to 26 corpora-
tions based at the airport that "have gone above and beyond
their duty, to promote and adhere to noise abatement
procedures."
"This elite a oup has truly earned the title of `1fie Best of
the Best, '" airport ofFcials said in presentin� the awards
April 16.
To qualify for the award, aircraft had to be based at the
airport for the award year; have had 100 percent compliance
with the airport's Voluntary Restraint from Flying Proa am
which bars arrivals and departures between midniaht and
6:30 a.m.; and have had 100 percent compliance with the
airport's High Range Noise Event Prob am under which
aircraft cannot exceed a noise level of 96 dB at any of the
noise monitoring sites.
The airport said it was presentinQ awards for three
sepazate years because the staff has been busy with the
installation of new noise monitorin� system since 1995 and
had to postgone the awards ceremonies for 1995 and 1996.
Three corporations were honored for extraordinary efforts
to achieve the Lowest AveraQe Sound Level award: Texaco,
which won for the second time in 1995; Phillip Morris, the
1996 winner; and U.S. Tobacco, the 1997 winner.
"To achieve the Lowest Average Sound Levei [award]
takes an exceptional level of dedication and coordination,"
Airport Noise Report
April 24, 1998
the airport said. "Ongoing trainin� and education alonQ with
an enthusiastic team effort is the most important in�redient
to successfully achieve the [award]."
Spirit of Noise Abatement Awards were given to three
categories of aircraft: helicopters, turboprops, and corporate
jets.
Winners in the helicopter category were Bristol vlyers
Squibb (1995 and 1996), Se� am and Sons (1995 and 1996),
and Mark Palazzo (1996).
Winners in the turbopropeller cateaory were Bristol Myers
Squibb (1996), Champion International (199b), NFG Corp.
(1995, 1996, 1997), New York State Power Authority
(1996, 1997), Northeast Air Charter (1995, 1996, 1997),
Riversville Aircraft (1995), Safe Flight (1995, 1996, 1997),
and Richard Foreman Assoc. (1995).
Winners in the Corporate jet category were Bourke Shuttie
(1996), Bristol Myers Squibb (1995, 1997), Cable Holdings
(1995), Cappelli Development (1995, 1997), Champion
International (1996), Dun & Bradstreet (1995), Jet Aviation
for Ernst & Young (1997), Imperial Transport (1995 ,
1997), Ingersoll Rand (1996), International Paper (1996),
Jet Aviation for Chemical Bank (1995, 1996), Olin Corp.
(1995, 1996, 1997), Ogden Management Services (1997),
Philip Morris (1995, 1996, 1997), R.T. Vanderbilt (1995,
1996, 1997), Riversville Aircraft II(199�, Robert Wilner
(1996), Texaco (1995, 1997), Jet Aviation for U.S. Under-
writers (1997), U.S. Tobacco (1997), and Wlute Cloud
Company (1997).�
Palm Beach Int'l
SEVEN AIRLINES HONORED
FOR MEETING NOISE GOALS
Seven airlines met Palm Beach International Airport's
strinQent noise standards in 1997 and to-date in 1998 and
received the airport's 1997/8 Quiet Fleet Award, the Palm
Beach County Board of County Commissioners and airport
officials announced Apri123.
The award is given to those airtines operatin� Stage 3 jet
aircraft into Palm Beach International (PBn at least 90
percent of the time in 1997 and year-to-date 1998. The
award was created in 1997 by the Board of County Com-
missioners as part of a comprehensive program aimed at
reducing the number of noisier Stage 2 airplanes operated at
PBI.
Five carriers - American, America West, Midway, United
Airlines, and United Parcel Service (the only al1-ca�'ao
carrier operating at PBI) - were honored for flying 1Q0
percent of their operations with quieter Siage 3 aircrafr.
Also recognized for their commitment to noise reduction
were USAirways and Delta Air Lines, which flew 96 and 94
percent StaQe 3, respectively. Collectively, these seven
carriers represent 70 percent of the daily takeoffs and
landings by airlines at PBI.
The airport placed banners around the seven airlines'
55
bag�a�e claim areas announcina that they had won the noise
awards.
In a related element of the proQram, PBI offers cash
incentives for the early phaseout of noisier jets. Under this
program, airlines can receive a cash award of up to 85
percent of past noise fees paid to PBI by flyin� 95 percent
of their fli?hu with quieter aircraft. The percentaje drops to
75 percent for Stage 3 fleets of between 90 and 95 percent,
and �0 percent for Stage 3 fleets between 80 and 90 percent.
Those flying Sta�e 3 fleets of less than 80 percent are not
qualified.
In the first quarter of the 1998 fiscal year, the Quiet Fleet
Award winners received cash awards of more than $37,600,
the airport said. In total, approximately $42,860 has been
awarded under what the airport called its unique and
innovauve pro�am.
"The county has worked hard for many years to address
PBI's problems, said Bruce Pelly, director of the Palm
Beach County's Department of Airports. The award "is our
way of sayin� thank you to the carriers that have supported
our efforts and helged make PBI a good neighbor. I am
proud that our airport is one of the quietest in the country.
This program demonstrates the county's commitment to
noise reduction and to serving the entire county effectively
and responsibly:' „
Said County Commission Chairman Burt Aaronson,
"Creative and innovative prob ams like this will keep PBI a
national leader."�
Louisville Int't
STATE PROVIDES $20 MILLION
ADDiTIONAL RELOCATION Fi:TNDS
Louisville International Airport officials announced April
17 that the Voluntary Residential Relocation Proaram may
be able to more than double the number of relocation offers
to airport nei�hbors this next year because of a$20 million
state appropriation contained in Kentucky Gov. Paul
Patton's budjet approved earlier in the month.
T'he $20 million appropriation translates into as many as
22� additional households that can now be purchased in the
voluntary relocation areas, the airport said. The first 40
letters to homeowners were mailed April 15. These letters
asked the homeowners if they wished to be purchased
beQinning the approximately five-month process leading to
a purchase offer.
` I want to personally thank the 7efferson County delega-
tion for makin� this a priority in 1998," said Sam R.
Rechter, chairman of the Board of the Regional Airport
Authority of Louisville and Jefferson County. "We're
aaeressively addressing the two variables that have slowed
the relocation program - lack of funding and ]ack of
comparable housing. These funds and our efforts to develop
new housin� are a direct result of this strate;y."
State Rep�Larry Clark said the le�islators saw the need to
speed up the relocation pro�ram and tar�eted this measure
Airport Noise Report
56
ANR EDITOR.IA,L
ADVISORY BOARD
Mark Atwood, Esq.
Galland, Kharasch, Morse & Garfinkle
Washington, D.C.
Lee L. Blackman, Esq.
ivtcDermott, Wiil & Emery
Los Angeles, CaliF.
Dr. Clifford R. Bragdon, AICP
Dean, School of Aviadon & Transportation Dowiing
Cotlege
Eliot Cutler, Esq.
Cuder & Stanfield
Washington, D.C.
J. Spencer Dickerson
Senior Vice President
American Association of Airpon Executives
Edward J. DiPolvere
Administrator, National Association of Noise
Control Officials
Richard G. "Dick" Dyer
Airpoct Environmentai Specialist, Division of
Aeronauacs, Calif. Dept. of TranspoRacion
E. Tazewell Ellett, Esq.
Hogan & Hareson
Washington, D.C.
Julie H. Ellis, Fsq.
Managing Director
Federal Expcess Corpor.uion
Angel M. Garcia
Co-Chairman
Citizens Against Newark Noise
E.H. "Mce" Iiaupt
Manager, Airport and Environmental Services,
Na[ional Bnsiness Aircrah Association
Robert P. Silverberg, Esq.
Bagileo, Silverberg & Go(dman
Washington, D.C.
Joanne W. Young, Esq.
Baker & Hostetler LLP
Washino on, D.C.
Noise Report
as one of the top priorities. "I'm pleased that after several weeks of
reviewing the issues, the General Assembly pulled to�ether to help
provide the fundin� for this important effort," he said.
The $20 million state appropriation had been delayed for a while by
residents in the Cedar Creek, KY, area where the airport wants to build a
450-home subdivision of comparable replacement housing for homeown-
ers near the airport. Because the airport is havin� di�culty finding
comparable replacement homes in the $60,000 -$80,000 range, it decided
it would build its own new subdivision of replacement homes. Some $10
million of that $20 million project is being funded under the Federal
Aviation Administration's Innovative Financing Demonstration Program,
which is desi�ned to use small amounts of Airport Improvement Proa am
funds as leverage for debt issues and to reduce the time and costs associ-
ated with financin� airport infrastructure development.
Residents of the Cedar Creek area have discussed filing a lawsuit
against the airport authority over the new subdivision but have taken no
action so far, according to Doug Stern, a spokesman for the airport. He
said the other homes in the area are of compazable value and that the
airport plans to develop the land to less density than the zonin� allows
and also will convert the creek into a nature preserve.
Since 1989, the Louisville Airport Improvement Program has relocated
2,200 families throu�h the relocation program. With more than 1,600
households left in the area around the airport, the program remains the
largest airport voluntary residential relocation pro�am in the country, the
airport said.� .
IN BIZIE� ...
Curfew Sought for O'Hare
The Alliance of Residents Concerning O'Hare said it will soon write to
Illinois legislators seeking a ni�httime curfew on fli�hts at O'Hare
International Airport.
The or�anization noted that international airports in cities such as
Amsterdam, Paris, Frani�urt, Tokyo, Sin�apore, San Diego, San Jose,
Washin�ton, DC, and JFK International already limit night flights.�
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Charles F. Price, ContributinQ Editor; Maria T. Norton, Production Editor
Published 25 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-�867; FAX: (703) 729-4528.
Price $495.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients,
is �ranted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of US� 1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyrisht Clearance Center, 27 Congress Street, Salem, MA 01970. USA.
Copyright �O 1998 by Airport Noise Report. Ashburn, Va. 20147
C
�� , Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
,� ...... , _...�:::, -
MONTHLY �YIEETING - Nietropolitan Aircra.ft Sound Abatement Council
c,�,�,,,�,�:
Robcrt P.Johnsoa
V��r c���,n:
7'hatnas HueR
rC��h,��a� �w,�,sa�:
Ray Fuhrmauo
Srcrcmnc
.rc�ii� sm����
Airbarne Ecpmss:
Brian Batrs
Ar, rmnsport,irs«;ntion:
�i x��
ALPA:
Roo Jo6nsou
Ciry af 81oom�n,qtan:
Petrooa Lce
v�m wumx
crrv �fe�rnnan�:
Ed Porter
Ciry ojfagmc
Jon Finhcaaetn
�n« s��n�
Ciry of lnver Crrn•t Heigiva:
Daie Hammons
Ciry o/'.Nrndo�a Heiqhrr.
JW Smit6
Kevin Bate6ekier
Ciry of hlinneapdir:
n� uma�B
s��� x�
.t« �
Gienn Strsnd
Sandn Colvin Ray
cr� ota;�r��rd:
� swk�
Dawn welhel
crv ofs�. c�,r� a�t:
Robert Adrcwe
City afSt Paul:
rmm� [i. xo�
c;rv �s�,�.� r��:
Gienda Spbtia
Dtlw rlir liner (nc.:
Lyry Goehriag
DHLdirwms:
e,� si��
FGdllal ECpRSJ:
Dan DeHord
Fedtrd Aviatim .4lmitisnurion:
� arace wagpner
Clndy Grceoe
,�,�cs��:
Dkk Keiax
,uaa�:
Robert P. Joha�n
�Nesoba Northwest Airlink:
a�u a��
�Nettnpdit�m Airyorts Commissian:
Cammhcloeer Attm Gaaper .
MN AirNariona! Guard:
:ti+�mr xo, �. sb�u�
Narthweai Airliner
Starlc Salmen
Jenniter Sayre
sceve xotme
Vancy Stnudt
SL Puul G7utmber nf Commerre:
tmu .ris�ai��
Sun Caurun�Airlines:
cordofl cn.4
United.�t�rlints Inc.:
Kevin Bluck
United Parc'el Srn•irt:
�tOte C,eyer
U.S. A�� Frrrt�r Rrsrn�e:
Cnptain Devid J. Cerken
Metmpolitan Airports Commission
Declaration of Purposes
l.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interesi, convenience,
and necessity; promote air navijation and transportation, international, national, state,
and local, in and through this sta�e; gromote the efficien4 safe, and economical
handlin; of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international
programs oF air transportacion; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the
metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all
aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and
effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that area;
2.) Assure thz residents oF the metropolitan area of the minimum environmental impact
from air navi;ation 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.
I4letropoiitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Statement of Purpose
This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfaze of the communities
adjoining Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport - Wold-Chamberlain Field, a
public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviarion of
the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airport; throu?h 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, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and
of aircraft usin, the same; and through disseminadon of information to the affected
communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the
problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions
initiated and taken to alleviate the problem.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Representation
The membership shall include representatives appoin[ed by agencies, corpora[ions,
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
Representacives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and
Public Representatives shall at all times be equal in number.
The Airport 34-hour Noise Hor[ine is 726-9411.
Complainrs to rhe hotline do not result in chonges
in Airport acrivin�, but provide a public soundina
board and airpott information oudet. The h�dine
is staffed durin� business hours, Monday - Fridac.
i his report is prepazecl and pnntea m nouse o;
Chad i..�qve, r1i�tOMS Coorciinator
Shane VanderVoort, ,��lOMS Technician
Questions or comments may be directed to:
M�C - Aviation Noise Proerams
Minneapolis / St. Paul Incemational Airport
60�F0 ?8th Avenue Souch
ivtinneapolis, �IN 5�450
Tel: (612) 7?5-b331, Fax: (613) 73�-6310
�vSP Home Page: http://www.macavsat.ore
... . _... ..... .. .... ......... . _.. . ._. . . .. . ....... ...... ._.. .. �
1�Ietropolitan Airports Commission Auiation Noise Programs F
_ _ _
.
_
:
_
. /: °. :
. , ,
. .
Operations and Com�laint Summary 1
Operations Summary - All Aircraft .....................................................................................1
MSP March Fleet Mix Percenta�e .......................................................................................1
Airport March Complaint Summary ....................................................................................1
March Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office ......................................................1
Minneapolis - St. �aul Internatio�al Airport Complaint Summary 2
ComplaintSummary by City.......-• ...............................................................:......................2
�9.vailable Time for Runway Use 3
Tower Loa Reports - All Hours ..........................................:................................................3
Tower Lo� Reports - Niahttime Hours ................................................................................3
AllOperat�'ons 4 �
Runway Use Report March 1998 ......................................................:..................................4
Carrier Jet (�perata'ons 5
Runway Use Report March 1998 .........................................................................................5
Nighttime - All Opera�ions 6
Runway Use Report March 1998 .........................................................................................6
Nighttime C`arrier Jet O�erations 7
Runway Use Report March 1998 .........................................................................................7
Carrier Jet Operations by Type 8
Aircraft Id�ntifi�r an�d �escri�tifln Table 9
Runway Use -�ay/Nig�it Periods -�.11 O�perations 1�
DaytimeHours ...................................................................................................................10
Community ()ver�'light Analysis I1
Camer Jet Operations -,all Hours .....................................................................................1 1
Carrier Jet Operations - Niahttime (10:30 pm - 6 am) ......................................................1 i
Aviation tioise & Satellite Pr�aram,
Remote 1Y�onitoring Site Locations 12
Carrier Jet Arrzval Related Noise Events 13
�`.
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT .....................................................13
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Eve�ts 14
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ................................................14
Ten Loudest Aircra, ft Noise Events Identi, fied
Ten Loudest Aircra, ft 1Voise Events Identified
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identi, fied
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identi, fied
Ten Loudest Aarcra, ft Noise Events Identified
Ten Loudest Aarcraft Noise Events Identified
Flight �'rack Buse Map 21
IS
16
17
18
19
20
Airport Noise and Operations Nlonito�i�g System Flight Tracks
�.
22 �
Carrier Jet Operations - March 1998 .................................................................................22
Airport Noise and Operations 11�'onitoring System Flaght Tracks 23
Carrier Jet Operations - March 1998 .................................................................................23
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flzght Trac�is 24
Carrier Jet Operations - March 1998 ................................................................................ 24
Airport lVoise and Dperations Moniioring System �'lighi Trac�s 25
Camer Jet Operations - Ntarch 1998 ....................,........................................................... 25
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Ai�craft ��n dB(A)
Analysis of Aircra� ft Noise Events - Aircra, ft Ldn dB(A)
Aviation Noise & Satellite ProQrams
�
�
:�letropolitan Rirports Commission
Operations and �omplaint Summary
March 1998
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use Departure % Use
� 316 (.6% 14 ( OJ%
?? 38 0.2% 6� 3.3%
12 8597 43.8% 8902 45.8 %'o
30 I0679 54.4% 975Z �0.2%
Stage
1tiISP 1Ylarch Fleet I�Ii�t Percentage
Scheduled I Scheduled I ANOII�IS I ANOMS
1997 1998 Count 1397 Count 1998
Stage 2 40.5% 33.0%
� i
Stage 3 59.5% 67.0%
�./
Airport March Com�
46.2�0 �_�
53.8% � 5�.2%
Airport 1997 1998
MSP 916 930
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 0 3
Crystal I 2
Flying Cloud 3 5
Lake Elmo 0 0
SG Paul 0 p
Misc. 0 i�
TOTAL 920 941
March Average Daily Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Re�ord
Aviation Noise & Sate(lite Proo ams
Pave 1
�tetropolitan Airporrs Commission
IV�[inneapolis - St. ]Paul Iniernational A.irport Complaint Summary _
March 1995
Complaint Summary by City
City Arrival Departure Total Perc�ntage
A le Valle 0 1 1 0.1 %
Arden Hills 0 3 3 0.3%
Bloominaton 0 13 13 1.5%
Burnsville 0 10 10 1.1 °%
EaQan 67 35 102 11.4°Io
Eden Prairie 3 7 10 1.1 °Io
Edina 0 11 11 1.2%
Inver Grove Heiahts 7 24� 254 28.3%
Lake Elmo 1 1 2 0.2%
Ma le Grove 0 3 3 0.3%
Mendota HeiQhts l? 5g �� �'g%
Minnea olis 129 172 301 33.6%
Minnetonka 1 0 1 0.1 %
New BriQhton 0 1 1 0.1°Io
Richfield 5 38 43 4'8%
St, Anthon 0 1 1 0.1 %a
St. Louis Park 14 6 20 2.2%
St Paul 2l 14 35 4.0%
South St. Paul 0 1 1 0.1%
Shoreview 1 0 l 0.1 %
Sunfish Lake � 2 11 13 1.5%
West St. Paul 0 1 1 0.1 %
Total 263 = . 634 = -;- 897 1 t90°,�
Time of DaY Nature of Complaint
�� Total Nature of Complaint Total
OO:QO - 05:59 47 Excessive Noise 820
06:00 - 06:59 22 Early/Late b7
07:00 - 11:59 205 Low Flying 4
12:00 - 15:59 97 Structural Disturbance 3
16:00 - 19:59 21� Helicopter i
20:00 - 21:59 210 Ground Noise 31
En�ine Run-up ?
22:00 - 22:59 96
23:00 - 23:59 38 Frequency 2
Total 93a Total 930
PaQe 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Available Time for Runway �..Ts�
Tower Log Reports - IVlarch 1998
All Hours
1%
38%
35%
f��
12'�.\
16%
13
0%
Nighttime Hours
0%
0%'0
�
63%
5�%
Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams
Pa�e 3
�letropolitan Airports Commission
A.11 C)perations
Runway Use IZeport March 1 98
0.7%
r
lrl�
Runway A�v� Count Percentage M� 199'7
�P�� 1997 Count percentage
p¢ p 316 1.6% 225 1.5%
12L A 4162 21.2% 2948 19.9%
12R A 4435 22.6% 2942 19.8%
22 p 3g 0.2% 119 0. $%
30L A 5714 29.1% 4688 31.6%
30R A 4965 25.3% 3914 26.4%
Tatal Arr. 19630 I 104% I 14836 140%
� D 141 0.7% 18 0.1%
12L D 4153 21.4% 2606 20.0%
12R D 4749 24.4% 3104 23.9%
2� p 6� 3.3% 1030 7.9%
30L D 5039 25.9�1a 3536 27.2cIo
30R D 4713 2=�-3%a 2726 20.9°I'a
Total Dep. 19439 100% ( 13U20 100°Io
Note: ARTS data m�ss�ng Jor v.� czays.
Paae 4 Aviation Noise & Satel►i[e Programs
Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use 1Zeport March 1 9�
0.5 %
50.6% 0.1 %
43.5
� V�
1.6% '°°°
2.8%
�letCopoi�[an �lirpor[s l..ommission
54.8%
46.1 %a
Arrival/ ��
Runway �p�� Count Per�entage 1�� t 1997
Percen#age
Q4 A 225 1.6% 139 1.5%
12L A 2772 20.2% 1851 19.6%
12R A 3249 23.3% 1912 20.3%
22 A 19 0.1 % 84 0.9%
30L A 4233 30.8% 2903 30.8%
30R A 3301 24.090 2531 26.9%
Total Arr. 13759 1t?0% 94?A 100%
04 D 66 0.5% 4 0.1%
12L D 2775 20.3�Io 1664 19.0%
12R D 3�28 2.7.8�Io 2176 24.9%
2? D 387 2.8% 826 9.4%
30L D 4111 30.O�Io 2354 26.9%
30R p 2824 20.6CIo 1721 19.7%
Total Dep. 13691 100% 8745 1(i0%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 days.
Aviation �toise & Satellite Pro�?rams
Pa�e �
;�Ietropolitan :�irports Commission
Nighttime - t�.11 t�perations
Runway Use I�eport March l 98
2.6%
Marcii
Runway �p�� Count Percentage 1997 C unt 1�
Percentage
04 A 61 5.4% 86 11.3%
12L A 57 S.1 °Io 1$ 2.4%
12R A 184 16.4% � 56 7.4%
22 A 14 1.2% 78 10.3%
30L A 638 56.9% ' 410 54.2%
30R A 168 15.0% 109 14.4%
Total Arr. 1122 I 100% I '757 100%
04 D 18 2.6% 4 1:3%
12L D 164 23.7�10 5� 17.3%
12R D 2a9 37.4% 145 45.7%
22 D 4a 6.�4'0 43 13.6%
30L D 138 19.9% 45 14.2%
30R D 69 9.9% 25 7.9%
Total Dep. 693 100°Io 317 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 days.
Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite ProUrams
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations
Ilunway Use Report March 1 9�
0.4%
33.2%
1
A
22.6
0.8%
v�
�
1�letropolitan Airpor[s Commission
71S%
�9.4%
lYiarci�
Runway ���� Count Percentage 1� Co�t 199'7
Percentage
04 A 49 5.1 % 51 8. 7%
12L A 51 5.3% 14 2.4%
12R A 166 17.3�'0 40 6.8%
22 A 8 0.8% 66 11.3%
30L A 5�� 57.6% 318 54.4%
30R A 134 13.9% 96 16.4%
Total Arr. 9b3 1�% 585 10�0°l0
04 D 2 0.4% ( 1 0.5%
12L D 102 21.6% 36 19.5%
12R D 179 37.8% $7 47.0%
22 D 33 7.0°Io 31 16.8%
30L D 109 I 23.0% � 20 10.8%
30R D =1�$ 10.2°Io 10 5.4%
Total Dep. 473 11}0% 185 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for O.j days.
Aviation �toise & Satellite Programs
, ;
Paae 7
tifetropolitan Airports Cnmmission
�arrier Je� C)perations by �'ype
March 1998
Aircraft Type Count Perc�ntage
B 707 0 0_0°%
B727H 357 13%
B73B 755 2_8%
B74A 149 0.5%a
B74B 65 0.2%
B757 2618 9.5%
B767 84 03%
BA46 1060 3.9%
CpRJ 235 0.9%
FA 10 0 0.0°Io
DC10 1351 49%
DC8 1 0.0%
DC9H 2994 14.9%
A300 88 03%a
A310 39 0.1%
A320 2719 9.9%
F 100 1238 4.�%
L101 71 03%
MD11 13 0.1%
MD80 1246 4.5%
H25B 72 0.3%
H25C 9 0.0%
B A 11 1 0.0%
B727 3213 I1.7°/0
B73A 1�28 5.6%
DC8 174 0.6%
DC9 7370 26.9%
Total 2745a 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 davs.
Pa�e 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�ams
�J.,�% �tCiC�G' 1�
•' � � •, t � - [
�letropolitan Airports Commission
A.ircraft �dentifier and I)escription�'able
Identifier Aircraft Description
B707 ' BOEING 707
B727 BOEING 727
B�?7H BOEING 727 - HUSH KIT
B73g BOEING 737-300/400/500
B73A BOEING 737 100/200 SERIES
B74A BOEING 747
B74B BOEING 747 FREIGHTER
B7g7 BOEING 757
B767 BOEING 767
H25C BRITISH AEROSPACE 125 - 1000
H25B BRITISH AEROSPACE 1S - 700/800
BA11 BRTTISH AEROSPACE 111
Bp� BRITTSH AEROSPACE 146
Cq� CANADAIR 650
FA 10 FALCON 10
DC 10 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 10
DC8 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8, DC8 70 - SERIES RE (ALL SERIES)
DC9 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9
DC9H MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT
A300 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300
A310 AIRBUS IIVDUSTRIES A310
A320 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320
p i pp FOKKER 100
F2� FOKKER F27 (PROP)
F2S FOKKER F28
L101 LOCKHEED TRISTAR LlO11
MD 11 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC i 1
MD80 i�1CDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIES
SW3 SWEARINGEN METROLI�fER 3
SW4 SWEARINGEN 1�1ETROLI'VER 4
SF34 . SAAB 340
Aviation Noise & Satellite Prog-rams Page 9
�tetropol�tan ,�irports Commission
Runway Use - Day/Night 1'eriods - All Operations
Minneapolis - St. Paul Internationai Airport 1Vlarch 1998
Daytime Hours
Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Total Day
Name Day Use Day Use
04 123 0.7% 255 1.4% 378
12L 3989 21.3% 4105 22.2% 8094
12R 4490 23.9% 4251 23.0% 8741
22 599 3.2% 2� 0.1 % 623
30L 4901 26.1 % 5076 27.4% 9977
30R 4644 24.8% 4797 25.9% 94-41
Total 18746 100% 18508 100% 37254
Nighttime Hours
Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Total Night
Name Night Use Night Use
04 18 2.6% 61 5.4% 79
12L 164 23.7% 57 5.1 % 221
12R 259 37.4% 184 16.4% 443
22 45 6.5% 14 1.2% 59
30L 138 19.9% 638 56.9%a 776
30R 69 9.9% 168 15.0% 237
Total 693 100% 1122 100% 1815
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 days.
Pa�e 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Prpgrams
. _ �tetropolitan Airports Commission
�ommunity �verflight Analysis
Nlinneapolis - St. Paul Internationai Airport 1Vlarch 1998
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours
i
Number Number Total Percent Number of
Overflight Area A�v� �P�.�� Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations
Operations Operations per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/ 5981 6935 12916 47.1% 420.7
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/ 225 387 612 2.2% 19.9
Bloomington
Over St. Paul - 19 66 85 0.3% 2.8
Highland Park
Over Eagan/ 7534 6303 13837 50.4% 450.7
Mendota Heights
Total 2745a 100% 894.1
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30pm - 6 am)
Number Number Totai Percent Number of
�. Overflight Area A��� �p�� Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations
( Operations Operations per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/ 217 157 374 26.0°Io 12.1
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/ 49 33 82 5.7% 2.7
Bloomington
Over St. Paul - 8 2 10 0.7% 0.3
Highland Park
Over Eagan/ 689 281 970 67.6°Io 31.4
Mendota Heights
Total 1435 100% 46S
Note: ARTS' data missing for 0.3 days.
Aviation ti`oise & Satellite Programs PaQe l I
,til�tropolitan Airports Commission
Remote IVlonitoring Site Locations
Airport Noise and C)perations Monitoring System
.__
. � ; � �
� , I ; ( �
�' � � ' j
�.� '� � I �
, � ul r
, ; � '
; ;, � Minn�apolis ; �� � ��
I �C� i I i � �
• j = $r�8 ` ` F�j�o
• � ,\� !
. �/�%� � Z! ( i ;� � y �' � ° I � %�� \
I �.,�,/ � I F� 1i d ' U
I I � ° i 1
� ' e F., 70 �
� r���� �
' � O , � S�g .
l , i F5/} i
I / F'� i ��
� • -� . Mendota Heigh
—j�7 � g' ° FJ�,
�} F '�23 � �
Richfield � s�i� � � ��J • ���, s �,
. •� i
� � - ' d d o
� Fs�z,
.—_...
� � i F j/t6 • . F 4 •
o" J.� � � ° Ci� ' .
� F� � � + Inver Gr4ve Heights
i
�� ��
i � �
i i � • r ST n
� B�loom�'ngton � l�`` �� Eaaan
\ "
'� .
� � � � � ��
i i � c � O
� i ; 1
�
I �
� c�oo < <I
� f
� �.,�3
� �'v
�� �� �
i
PaQe 12 Aviation Noise & Satellite Prog-rams
C,
�ietropo(itan Airports Commission
�arrier Jet Arrival Related 1'�oise Events
March 1998
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each R1ti1T
RMT Events Events Events Events
ID City Approximate StreQt Location �� �B �90dB �100dB
i Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 4lst Street 4709 179 2 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Strest 3200 �68 � 0
3 Minneapolis W Eimwoad Street & Belmont Avenue 4050 1975 88 1
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 2960 919 2 0
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 3848 2995 565 3
6 Minneapolis ZSth Avenue & 57th Street 3432 2433 569 3
7 R.ichfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 30 l 1 2 0
8 Minneapolis Lon;fellow Avenue & 43rd Street 12 3 0 0
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 26 12 0 0
!0 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 26 21 7 0
1 I St. Paul Finn Str�t & Scheffer Avenue 16 0 0 0
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 11 1 0 0
13 Mendota Heighu Southeast end of Mohican Court 68 4 0 0
14 Eagan First Sireet & McKee Street 6114 152 2 0
IS Mendota Hei?hts Cullen Street & Lexin'ton Avenue 158 18 3 0
16 Ea?an Avalon Avenue & Vlas Lane 477 200 44 29
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 262 139 6 0
18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 24�1 86 I 0
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue &&�th Street 94 6 2 0
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 34 4 2 0
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 104 2 0 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne �tarie Trail 3082 30 t 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 13�6 17 1 0
24 Ea�an Chape! Lane & Wren Lane �497 l99 0 0
Nore: ARTS data missing for 0..� days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs PaQe !3
Metropo(itan Airports Commission
Cara-ier Jet I)eparture I�eiated l�oise Events
I�Iarch 1998
Count of Departure Aireraft Noise Events for Each Rl'�IT �
�T City Approximate Strest Location Events Events Events Events
ID >65dB >80dB >90dB >100dB
1 Minneapolis Xences Avenue & 41st Street 769 273 16 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street $32 379 26 0
3 Minneapolis W Elmwoad Street & Belmont Avenue 1401 515 85 1
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 1761 798 129 4
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th S�reet 4978 2770 991 141
6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 5058 3013 L480 346
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 3478 1569 247 3
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 1695 714 76 0
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 39 10 1 0
t0 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 5� 34 18 3
11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 47 26 9 2
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 33 13 2 0
13 Mendota Heighu Southeast end of Mohican Court 2524 760 39 0
14 Eagan First Street & McKee Streei 3784 1515 174 6
l� Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexin�ton Avenue 1665 648 85 5
(6 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Vlas Lane 382 187 63 14
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 212 87 18 0
18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 3�5 291 117 14
l9 Bioomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 345 196 63 1
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 103 31 5 0
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 1156 356 6 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 1649 303 4 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 3687 1839 663 74
2=� Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 3289 921 3 I 0
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 days.
Page 14 Aviacion i�Ioise & 5atellite Prorrams
�' )
�tetropoli[an AirpoRs Commission
�'en I.,oudest A,ircraft Noise Events Identified
R.i.�1T #1: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
vlinneapolis
Date Time T C Le� A/D
Y1�
98/03J1� 12:29:20 B727 93.9 D
98/03/1916:04:33 B727 93.9 D
98/03/0814:57:28 B727 93.5 D
98/03/0312:27:18 B727 92.7 D
98/03/1911:51:50 B727 92.3 D
9$/03/0416:10:�8 B727 91.9 D
98/03/2810:04:44 B72� 91.8 D
98/03/(1419:38:51 B727 91.6 D
98/03/t4 20:46:53 B727 91.6 D
98/03/2818:31:19 B727 91.1 D
RMT #3: W. Elmwood S� & Belmont Ave.
Nlinneapolis
Date T'� A✓C M�. A/D
'I�pe Levei
98/03/29 08:20:34 DC9 1042 A
98/03/2714:26:57 B727 100.3 D
98/03/28 20:27:33 B727 99.1 D
98/03%1919:10:02 B727 9$.9 D
98/03/0811:47:32 B727 98.9 D
98/03/? I 09:32:32 B727 98.8 D
98/03/44 09:46:42 B727 97.6 D
98/03/2216:18:�0 B7?7 97.4 D
98/03/3013:00:33 B727 97.3 D
98/03/?6I7:42:09 B7?7 97.2 D
RNIT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd S�
i�Iinneapotis
Date Time �e M� A/D
98/03/28 20:27:�3 B727 96.9 D
98/03/23 20:38:12 B727 96.7 D
98/03/27 20:30:43 B727 96.5 D
98/03/0610:05:44 B727 95.6 D
98/03/0219:33:49 B727 9�.3 D
98/03/2818:30:�6 B727 94.1 D
98/03/19 1 L•5 L•29 B727 94.0 D
98/03/22 20:42:32 B727 93.9 D
98/03/1912:12:54 B727 93.8 D
98/03/19 20:49:24 B727 93.5 D
RMT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th S�
Minneapolis
�� ,�� AIC Max �
Type Level
98/03/0211:49:37 B727 101.7 D
98/03/08 21:37:0� B727 100.7 D
98/03/0812:14:37 B727 100.6 D
98/03/27 21:02:35 B727 100.2 D
98/03J2816:08:58 B727 99.8 D
98/03/0610:05:?3 B7?7 99.6 D
98/03/06 09:3$:04 B727 99.1 D
98/03/0619:1�1:57 B727 98.9 D
98/0312816:1�:13 B727 98.6 D
93/03/06 (0:01:38 B727 98.1 D
�Vote: �RTS rlata missing for 0.3 cla�•s.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Proarams
Paoe 1 �
�le[ropolitan �irports Commission
'�'en I.�oudest Aircraft I�loise �Events Identified
R.NIT #5: 12th Ave. & 58th S�
Minneapolis
Date Time ,�� M� �
Levei
98/03/13 08:2�:10 B727 l07.5 D
98/03/2814:43:24 B727 107.2 D
98/03/0410:13:�0 B73A 106.9 D
98/03/20 08:33:51 B727 106.8 D
98/03/2310:28:17 B727 106.5 D
98/03/13 06:25:�7 B727 l06.4 D
98/03I28 17:23:13 B727 1063 D
98/03/2115:49:59 B727 106.1 D
98/03/2719:58:�2 B727 tQ6.0 D
98/03/2115:07:34 B727 105.7 D
RMT #'7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th S�
Richfield
Date Tiu'e ,Ty� � AiD
98/03/0212:�2:09 B727 101.6 D
98/03/04 08:54:�2 B727 IOOS D
98/03/27 t6:�6:50 B727 100.2 D
98/03/08 22:49:01 B727 99.8 D
98/03/I3 10:20: t4 B727 99.6 D
98/03/30 07:�0:37 B727 99.4 D
98/03/2810:03:08 B727 99.3 D
98/03/ 13 l0:?8: i l B727 98.9 D
98/03/081?:06:34 B727 98.9 D
98/03/06 20:39:0 t B727 98.7 D
RitiIT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th S�
vtinneapolis
Date Time A/C Ma4 A/D
Type Level
98/03/30 09:59:18 B727 109.$ D
98/03/3014:08:03 B727 109.8 D
98/03/ 19 20:57:29 BZ27 109.5 D
98/03/0610:01:06 B727 108.6 D
9$/03/2818:29:55 B727 108.6 D
98/03/22 15:3 i:27 B727 108.1 D
98/03/27 20:29:44 B727 108.0 D
98/03/2816:08:26 B727 108.0 D
98/03/23 20:37:11 B727 107.9 D
98/03/08 21:51:36 B727 107J D
RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd S�
1�Iinneapolis
Date Ti� AlC Maz �
Type Level
98/03/03 08:33:40 B727 98.5 D
98/03/14 13:26:18 B727 97.8 D
98/03/20 07:37:17 B727 97. I D
98/03/2818:22:03 B727 96.6 D
98/03/2$ 18:48:21 B727 95.9 D
98/03/09 08:13:46 B727 95.8 D
98/03/0319:I5:» B727 95.2 D
98/03/22 (�:31:45 B727 95.1 D
98/03/1916:21:?2 B727 9�.0 D
98/03/11 07:3�:� i B727 94.� D
C
Note: �1RTS data missing for 0.3 dacs.
PaQe 16 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proarams
�tetropoliran Airports Commission
'I'en Loudest A.ircraft l�oise lE�ents Identified
R.NIT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
S� Paul
Date Time ,�� M� �
Level
98/03/0713:59:24 B74B 91.5 D
98/03/29 15:05:27 B727 90.0 A
98/03/12 23:33:58 B727 89.1 A
98/03/12 23:28:54 B727 88.9 A
98/03/2006:59:01 BE18 88.5 D
98/03/29 08:31:4� DC9 8$.0 A
98/03/25 07:07:09 DC8 87.6 A
98/03/2915:11:00 DC9 87.5 A
98/03/29 15:13:52 DC 10 87.5 A
98/03/2915:15:58 DC9 86.8 A
RMT #11: Finn St & Scheffer Ave.
S� Paul
Date Ti� , �� � AJD
98/03/2913:48:53 B74A 101.7 D
98/03/3012:59;30 B74A 101.6 D
98/03/3114:55:52 B74A 99.1 D
98/03/12 06:� 1:59 BE 18 96.8 D
98/03/3114:23:19 B727 95.8 D
98/03/Q413:34:02 B74B 94.3 D
98/03/2013:=�b:4? B74A 92.8 D
98/03/1413:�10:03 B74A 91.8 D
98/03/3013:�1:?0 B7�A 9I.0 D
98/03/0213:21:38 B7�6 90.� D
RMT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
St. Paul
Date Time ,� �1� AJD
Level
98/03/1913:52:19 B74A 101.2 D
98/03/3013:41:05 B�4A l00.7 D
98/03/3013:01:07 B74B 100.5 D
98/03/3012:59:15 B74A 99.6 D
98/03/2913:48:39 B74A 99.0 D
98/03/31 t4:55:36 B74A 98.5 D
98/03/0713:58:57 B74B 983 D
98/03/2013:59:57 B74A 97.4 D
98/03/1913:30:29 B74B 96.6 D
98/03/02 08:21:39 DHCB 96.5 D
RN1T #12: Alton S� & ltockwood Ave.
S t. Panl
AJC Mag
Date T'�me � Levcl. A/D
98/03l29 17:13:11 B727 93.1 D
98/03l31 15:00:21 DC9 90.9 D
98/03/30 05:15: l9 B727 87.4 D
98/03/ 13 22:55:17 DC9 85.9 D
98/03/29 17:25:04 DC9 85.! D
98/03/ 13 00:10:47 S W3 84.0 A
98/03!?9 21:30:03 B727 83.9 D
98/03/29 06:?7:49 B73B 83.7 D
98l03/31 13:=�8:� DC9 83.7 D
98/03/31 1-�:�2:19 DC9 82.9 D
Nute: :�RTS clata missing for 0.3 cla�•s.
Aviation Noise & Satellite ProUrams
Pa�e l7
�1�letropolitan Airports Commi�sion
'Ten L�ude�t Aircraft I�toise Events �dentified
R11�IT #13: Southeast End of i�tohican Court
IVlendota Heights
Date Tirr� Tr� Max �
Leve1
98/03/Ol 11:56:18 B727 99.5 D
98/03/2616:14:43 B727 99.1 D
98/03/2614:�7:32 B727 97.6 D
98/03/0112:43:41 B727 95.3 D
98/03/26 07:59:21 B727 95.1 D
98/03/26 08:15:?8 B727 95.0 D
98/03/29 20:56:29 B727 95.0 D
98/03/24 20:40:01 B727 94.8 D
98/03/16 09:�5:35 B727 94.2 D
98/03/24 22:20:47 B727 94.1 D
RMT #1S: Cullon S� & Lexington Ave.
1Ylendota Heights
Date T'�e � I,evd �
98/03/31 10:04:01 B727 103.9 D
98/03/24 21:22:06 B727 t01.2 D
98/03/3118:45:54 DC9 100.7 D
98/03/29 21:39:42 B727 100.6 D
98/03/25 20:08:40 B727 100.4 D
98/03/25 06:37:01 B727 100.0 D
98/03/29 21:38:18 B727 99.8 D
98/03/24 21:16:17 B727 993 D
98/03/24 09:57:05 B7?7 99.3 b
98/03/31 12:33:? l B727 99.0 D
RIVIT #14: lst St. & McKee St.
Eagan
Date Time A/C Max A/D
Type Level
98/03/2516:33:03 B727 104.2 D
98/03/OS 10:02:02 8727 101.$ D
98/03/26 08:30:08 B727 101.6 D
98/03/20 20:02:54 B727 100.9 D
98/03/0116:18:33 B727 100.3 D
98/03/25I3:52:34 B727 100.1 D
98/03/20 09:22:38 B7?7 99.8 D
98/03/20 21:20:30 B727 99.6 D
98/03/1610:44:01 B727 99.6 D
98/03/2514:02:00 B727 993 D
RMT #16: Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane
Eagan
Date Time � Mag �
Level
98/03J2110:3I:27 BA4b 109.9 A
98/03/2110:50:05 DClO 109.9 A
98/03/2110:4b:08 DC9 109.7 A
98/03/2107:53:50 DC9 109.5 A
98/03/07 21:32:09 B727 109.3 A
98/03/2110:03:59 SF34 109.3 A
98/03/21 12:1$:32 A320 1093 A
98/03/ 19 1�:36:07 B757 109.2 A
98/03/0� 17:23:10 HS`?5 109A' D
98/03/0� 1�:33:02 DC9 108.8 D
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 davs.
Paae 18 Aviation tioise & Satellite Pro;rams
(
�
.<
�tetropolitan Airports Commission
'Ten Loudest Aircraft 1'�oise Events Identified
R1�IT #17: 84th St & 4th Ave.
Bloomington
Date Time ,Ty� M� A/D
Level
98/03/2812:45:�� B74A 99.5 D
98/03/?213:45:17 B74A 98.4 D
98/03/22 09:21:12 B727 97.2 D
98/03/2513:23:00 B74A 96.2 D
98/03/2712:09:48 B74A 96.1 D
98/03/2113:11:09 $74A 95.1 D
48I03/21 13:38:40 B74A 94.? D
98/03/1613:42:51 B74B 94.1 D
98/03/3114:15:39 B727 94.1 A
98/03/07 23:28:01 B727 93.6 A
RIVIT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th S�
Bloomington
Date Ti� Ty� Max �
Level
98/03/22 07:23:03 B727 101.5 D
98/03/22 07:36:�2 DC9 99.9 D
98/03/04 07:07:40 B727 99.4 D
98/03/14 06:�9: l� B727 99.3 D
98/03/2106:09:31 B727 99.1 D
98/03/2109:OO:19 B727 98.0 D
98/03/I? 13:32:�1 B74A 97.8 D
98/03/14 08:3�:30 B727 97.8 D
98/03/06 1-�:?9:? i B737 97.4 D
98/03/28 ?3:?7:� 1 B727 96.9 D
RMT #18: 75th St, & 17th Ave.
Richfield
Date Time ,� M� AJD
Level
98/0`3/2613:35:01 B74A 104.0 D
98/03/2513:22:36 B74A 103.5 D
98/03/2106:52:07 B727 102.9 D
98/03/28 21:10:05 B727 102.4 D
98/03/2812:45:31 B74A 101.7 D
98/03/07 06:30:08 B727 101.2 D
98l03/2107:00:21 B727 101.2 D
98/03/22 09:34:57 DC9 101.2 D
98/03/22 09:20:47 B727 101.0 D
98/03/07 07:20:43 B727 100.9 D
RMT #20: 75th S#. & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
� nate'Iy�e-- . . � � A/D
Leve3
98/03/22 09:35:15 DC9 95.0 D
98/03/14 19:05:25 B727 93.4 A
98/03/0613:13:09 B727 933 D
98/03/22 09:41:32 DC9 91.8 D
98/03/22 09:27:01 DC9 91.2 D
98/03l14 05:35:48 B727 90.6 D
98/03/1916:31:20 B727 90.2 A
98/03/1409:01:44 B727 89.6 D
98/03/?2 09:�:33 DC9 89.1 D
98/03/10 l l:19:51 DC9 88.� d
Note: ARTS dcita missing for 0.3 clays.
Aviation Noise & Satzllite Programs PaQe 19
�titetropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified _
Rl'�IT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th S�
Inver Grove Heights
Date Time ,�� M� A/D
Level
98/03/2417:37:03 B727 92.1 D
98/03/Ol t4:07:22 B727 90.6 D
98/03/15 14:07:3 t B727 90.6 D
98/03/17 07:38:30 B727 90.2 D
98/03/0713:34:07 B727 90.1 D
98/03/1513:19:08 B727 90.1 D
98/03/OS 07:59:04 B727 89.1 D
98/03/16 09:56:32 B727 89.0 D
98/03/21 09:41:09 DC 10 89.0 A
98/03/07 20:31:57 B727 88.9 D
R�v1T #22: Anne Marie Trail
Inver Gmve Heights
Date Time ,� M� A/D
Level
98/03/021?:39:51 DC9 94.6 A
98/03/1617:30:10 B727 91.6 D
98/03/ 17 17:41:25 B727 9 t.6 D
98/03/26 08:3 I:04 B727 9I.1 D
98/03/27 0835:09 B727 90.4 D
98/03/1713:13:34 B727 90.0 D
98/03/12 22:30:15 B727 89.5 D
98/03/2010:34:06 B727 89.1 D
98/03/0513:18:01 B727 89.0 D
98/03/16 22:17:11 B727 8$.9 D
�
RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave.
Mendota Heights
Date �a� �� Lesel �
98/03/24 21:16:07 B727 106.5 D
98/03/2212:15:36 B727 105.8 D
98/03/2616:14:13 B727 105.8 D
98/03/OS 19:08:20 �B727 105.4 D
98/03/29 21:39:29 B727 105.0 D
98/03/2514:56:57 B727 104.9 D
98/03/25 09:29:11 DC9 104.8 D
98/03/31 18:45:44 DC9 104.6 D
98/03/31 I0:03:40 B7?7 104.2 D
98/03/0517:50:?4 B727 104.2 D
RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
Eagan
�� �� A/C Maz �
T�pe Level
98/03/2610:23:30 B727 95.6 D
98/03/2516:33:22 B727 95.2 D
98/03/2413:15:09 B74A 93.8 D
98/03/2510:04:07 B727 93.7 D
98/03/12 09:00:05 B727 93.7 D
98/03/1610:44:24 B727 93.4 D
98/03/2412:12:27 B727 93.3 D
98/03/27 08:34:37 B727 93.3 D
98/03/2016:16:04 B727 93.0 D
98/03J05 (4:24:06 B74A 93.0 D
Note: �1RTS data missing for 0.3 davs.
Page ?0 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
1�tetropolitan Airports Commission
Flight 'Track �ase 1V1ap
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
Aviation �oise & Satellite Prosrams Page 21
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
March O1 to March 31, 1998
Noise Nlonitor Locadons
Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #$ #9 #10 #11 #12
1 63.0 63.0 68.5 62.7 72.3 69.3 57.1 54.7 51.0 5�.8 57.4 5�.9
2 57.7 60.0 63.8 67.0 75.5 80.4 71.4 68.6 * * 53.7 50.3
3 61.0 60.2 66.5 67.0 76.4 79.6 69.2 65.3 533 45.1 45.6 49.0
4 60.1 59.9 66.1 67.1 76.8 79.4 69.1 67.8 * 54.5 5�.0 51.0
5 62.5 63.4 68.4 63.6 71.8 71.0 �0.4 65.6 4b.6 57.8 53.6 55.2
6 64.4 64.8 69.9 69.8 78.5 80.7 70.1 6�.9 52.0 563 55.2 56.8
7 56.4 59.1 63.7 61.3 73.4 71.5 69.2 59.0 52.2 56.4 46.8 46.8
8 59.9 61.8 64.5 67.9 76.2 79.2 * 65.0 48.8 46.8 54.0 50.8
9 55.8 59.7 60.3 66.2 74.0 75.4 68.5 66.9 44.1 51.2 41.6 51.2
10 60.6 603 63.7 64.8 72.4 76.2 68.4 65.3 57.6 57.4 5�.0 49.5
11 60.6 61.5 65.3 64.8 73.7 77.1 69.8 6�.3 5�.8 b0.4 51.8 51.0
12 57.2 59.1 64.3 61.8 70.7 71.5 59.0 55.5 62.4 66.6 64.7 58.9
13 59.7 60.3 65.2 66.8 * 78.3 72.6 68.5 54.7 58.8 58.5 61.9
14 61.1 61.1 65.1 64.7 74.9 74.8 69.6 64.2 41.5 53.8 51.7 43.0
15 61.5 62.7 68.6 63.2 72.2 71.0 * 60.6 45.7 57.1 49.0 49.9
16 62.0 63.0 68.0 64.2 72.6 71.7 52.2 593 40.8 57.2 53.8 *
17 62.1 63.6 69.0 64.3 73.1 71.1 60.0 63.6 45.5 53.7 54.0 51.3
18 63.8 64.1 69.3 63.3 71.9 69.4 6�.0 53.9 4$.1 59.9 57.4 51.9
19 62.5 63.4 66.8 69.1 77.6 80.0 73.2 68.7 51.5 60.1 56.6 54.5
20 55.7 60.3 65.0 62.6 733 733. 69.1 66.3 59.4 61.6 53.1 50.2
21 S9A 60.6 65.3 64.7 74.7 75.5 65.4 61.I 46.7 57.1 56S 55.0
22 62.9 63.0 68.8 69.0 77.2 78.7 7 L4 67.7 . 49.9 49.6 52.0 49.9
23 62.0 643 68.5 70.3 78.6 78.5 74.2 66.8 48.7 52.5 51.5 52.9
. 24 62.6 62.5 69.7 65.1 74.1 76.5 6�.5 649 46.6 61.6 58.3 60.4
25 63.8 63.4 70.9 6�.0 73.8 72.8 56.8 �9.$ 5�.0 63.1 58.3 58.0
26 61.9 63.9 69.3 69.9 76.6 80.6 66.3 639 48.1 5�.4 51.8 5�.3
27 63.9 64.1 71.5 70.2 79.8 78.8 70.0 66.� 50.8 59.7 5�.2 58.6
28 61.4 64.3 66.0 69.4 78.8 78.9 73.� 6�.7 38.6 49.4 47.6 53.�
29 63.1 6�.2 70.4 67.0 7�.1 7�.6 6�.5 6?.5 57.6 6(.l 59.7 �8.�
30 �9.7 61.8 67.0 67.0 7�.� 78.4 67.7 63.3 =16.4 63.1 59.9 57.7
3( 62.1 60.6 6�.$ 6�.1 7�.9 76. l 64.8 6�.0 �0.� 56.? 57.� �8.4
tifo. Lcin 6l .-� 62.4 67.5 66.6 7-1.0 77.0 69. ! 63.0 �3.0 59.� 56.1 ��.2
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 davs.
Page 26 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proarams + Less tAun �«�rnn• fourhnurs nf cicuu ucuiluh(e
1' :.
1�ietropolitan Airports Commission
A,nalysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn d�(A)
March Ol to March 31, 1998
Noise Monitor Locadons
Date #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24
1 66.2 72.6 65.1 61.8 45.9 61.3 50.2 50.5 63.1 64.b 76.1 69.0
2 59.4 68.0 * 69.7 62.0 69.3 69.? 60.6 51.6 63.3 59.2 66.0
3 49.2 66.6 * 71.0 �9.3 6t.8 52.5 48.7 49.1 63.8 57.8 6�.3
4 65.0 6�.2 * 6�i.7 60.2 62.8 60.1 49.8 45.4 59.8 59.9 64.5
5 68.0 72.1 68.9 Cx4.2 49.6 56.8 54.7 4�0.2 6�.1 64.8 77.2 69.1
6 62.2 7 t.8 63.2 62.8 52.7 58.5 57.8 54.1 61.2 62.2 68.3 67.9
7 62.7 69.3 63.6 63.6 67.0 73.7 66.9 57.8 63.9 633 73.2 66.5
8 59.9 68.8 60.8 61.6 64.3 64.5 54.3 * 58.7 61.7 67.5 66.2
9 66.3 61.9 * 723 5�.3 53.6 44.7 49.5 4�.7 5�.3 52.0 61.3
10 42.9 60.2 52.8 76.1 62.4 68.4 62.3 56.6 44.7 �3.5 52.7 59.4
11 56.9 61.1 54.5 66.0 �7.8 66.3 65.6 58.5 483 54.0 52.1 � 60.3
12 65.1 69.9 * 61.9 58.9 66.1 63.4 50.4 63.3 64.8 �4.2 66.9
13 60.0 66.1 * 65.5 57.4 65.4 65.7 59.8 51.7 62.3 64.5 65.2
14 49.0 64.5 * 77.3 65.5 72.3 72.4 61.7 49.8 61.7 60.4 62.9
15 66.8 72.4 * 6�.7 60.2 61.6 62.3 42.8 65.9 64.8 75.2 69.7
16 * 71.1 * 67.9 54.0 61.3 47.0 * 6�3.2 66.2 * 69.4
17 6a.1 70.4 * 68.6 61.3 63.9 48.7 48.6 63.0 62.8 73.9 67.7
18 65.0 70.7 * 62.3 6�.4 67.9 57.0 �9.5 63.9 63.0 74.7 68.1
19 55.2 6�.3 69.5 * 54.6 61.3 52.0 54.6 52.6 59.3 62.8 63.9
20 63.9 71.4 67.8 69.0 61.1 69.4 63.4 53.8 63.7 63.8 73.6 67.0
21 59.4 68.8 62.4 69.9 66.0 74.6 72.2 5�.2 60.0 60.2 703 64.0
22 58.8 67.3 60.1 69.2 Er�.4 73.� 71.6 62.0 5�.3 61.3 67.9 6�.3
23 47.4 67.3 67.3 67.9 53.4 63.4 58.1 56.9 53.6 59.9 66.7 64.0
24 68.8 69.2 76.2 69.9 �2.4 59.8 61.7 43.8 63.0 61.9 76.2 67.6
25 69.6 71.8 74.7 70.6 57.8 61.2 49.9 47.2 64.6 63.1 77.5 67.9
26 64.8 69.9 6�.6 67.4 53.8 6�.� �7.1 �8.8 57.3 63.3 72.8 68.4
27 66.0 70.4 66.4 679 �6.3 6 I.0 � I.� �9.0 6 f.2 62.9 74.2 67.0
28 45.0 6�.6 �3.2 68.� 64.� 70.6 67.� �7.8 43.9 61.6 �9.3 64.7
29 64.� 67.8 68.7 67.? ��.0 �9.8. -�8.� �9.2 60.7 �9.7 75.6 64.�
30 62.6 68.7 * 69.3 �8.8 �9.4 -�8.7 4�.6 60.2 62.3 72.� 6�.9
3 l 63. ( 68.� * 72.2 60.8 67.8 6?.3 52.7 60.0 6?.8 70.� 6�.0
Mo. Ldn 63.� 69.1 68.-� 68.� 61.0 67.-� 6�t.� ��.7 60J 62.3 72.2 66.-�
Aviation �ioise & Satellite Programs „�s.s �luu� nrenn - uur hnucr n cfutu u�uiluhlr Pa'� ��
Note: ARTS dutu missin; fvr 0.3 cluti•s. I I
�1Ct11�J4,1Vill:.��� .'�tt�r�,rit.l'-L111�111t11��.�1����
Proposed ��orth �oundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis '
Nlinneapolis - Sta Paul Internat�onal Airport
l�larch 199�
4.5 %(284) Carrier Jet Departures North of Proposed 095° (M)
Corridor Policy Boundary
Pa'e 2 Avia�ion Noise & Satellite Programs
�
�
�.
,.,...,.�,�„u..,, : , ,r,,,-.� u.,,,-,,,.,,� .,,
1�Iinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
March 1998
6303 ... Total 12L and 1�R Carrier Jet Departures
27� ... Carrier Jet Departures (4.3%
North of Proposed 09�° (NI) Corridor Policy Boundary
2� A �'• v� J V� J J J� J J V.'1 '
\ ,^ � !+ �'1 I i n
_�- ^��ii�J-=2r� ',,.'7. � �� ����T=3 ;,%., �,
� -- � ,
�
o,
�;
�
, i
' I
o. �
-� ' • : :-----------------'
_""""'"""'y"""' �"""""""""""""'""".'"-"""""""'_""'""""_"""". I
=�
�i e ,
� �
i • • � • '
i •• •
I • • • �
• ��.• ,• • .
i • �• ' I
o� l�� � �;��� : . ,
oI" -------------�—, �----''._------'r----'-----------`-------------•---------------------------------------
� .. . . I
c i p �.°f . . • .
?f j�'-s�� � •' f . �
•
� � • � • •
� ����' i �S • ' �� .
' •'; j. •. • • . �
,
; � � ,
�� • • • • : • a �
( � d �
`� ---'---.i �_.�_.__._;... --.�__._...:._---•--•---••---- ---------------�-=--------•--------j
--•- -
„........-•---- . . . • ,
Q! �• •��� � � . • . �, �
� � iy,.d� , � i
i e�, _• • . � � I
.
, ,:. �t . �
. . � �
. . . ;
I
�; ;
. i
�I-----------------=-----------�-----=-----------------=---------�--------=-----------------=---------------
�, I ' . . ,
i , I
i � '
i .
i
O � . �
OI ' """"""""""_"""""""""""""' _' _"""t
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""' ,
O �
� i
1
I I
� I
I
i . �
� � n � .'1 +! ''1 � n .� � l� n :
�� J J l,• � J J ✓ - � 'J �/ � 'J .� �J '� v � 'J � J V V J �.+
J _ �f i ' � ,�� � - � ,�7 " - 1i ' ' \ ' ' � � _ _ . � ��
Aviation tVoise & Satellite ProQrams Paae 3
1�iztropolitan .�trports C:ummission
i�Iinneapolis • St. Paul International Airport
IYlarch 1998
6303 ... 'I'otal 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departures �
10 ... �arrier Jet Departure - Early Turnout (0.2 °Io
(North Side Before Three Miles)
�
'� -.�i��� CR������ �-;,�'�
--- �:�: �,,� . ,
-� ���v-=? ;��.;;�1 �',,�- ����vT=1 ;i�.��;
� --
� .
�
� � .
e
.
� �' ------------------------ � --------------------'-- ------------------'----- ----------------------
� o�" ". . .
, ,,., , .
.
i
i �
� •
� . ,
� �
i
' o i :
,,,
�.—, ' -------------- ----
� �..---- •---------• ...............�- -•--
— --•- ----------------------------•-•��
� �I -- -----------
— �i '
— �
E .
�
I
i
�I
o� --------------'----'---- -'----'----------------•--•-'----------------------------�-----'------------
c� �- "
�
I .
i ,
; .
• �J V '.I �.I _ � V J �� ^ J J `J U
�
�-!1 a,-.;,V =='�'� �:V _� �' 1 �- ;�f,
, „
. . � _
J; , v, • . �
Paee 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
iJ 11 L �
C
�tetropolitan ,airport� Commission
Southern Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
Minneapolis - �t. Paui International Airport
Nlarch 199�
2.0 % (130) Carrier Jet Departur�s
So��th of Corridor (South of 30L Localizer)
Aviation Noise & Satellite Prosrams
PaQe 5
�.tztropoli[an .�irport; Commi»ion
Nlinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
�Iarch 1998
("
6303 ... Total 12L and 12Ft Carrier Je� Departures
90 ... Carrier Jet Departures (1.4%
South of Corridor (South of 30L Localizer)
at� ��.�v'�� v�V�JCJ , J��—
,,:�T ` � — n ;,'— i� ,7�
__� � v =� '��..�o) � v �� ru�., -C ��.+ o;
o -- " 1
0
o '
:� ,
' � i
� �
� ---------------•----------------------�-------------------------------------�----------- -, ----------------j
-� � � I
r��
, �
, �� . , i
•• � • '
� � , �
• o •
O +o • •
O ! • f • ' • � "'---"---- ;- �
�'----------��---°'-'�'----"---"---"---'---'--'---';�---- ""--'-'--------`-"--'----"-----
i- � � . .
♦ • •
�c i ��S s
r e� � • •
s:
e •�.j � �
s a e
I s � �:
J' �• ' • � � • '
� , . �
C= � • ' � • . � � _""""""
I
""'""""'""" '"._....'"""""'"..."""""""'�"""""""'"' ;"._.._....""__"'"" 'I
'". I • "" • • .
„'� ; � • i
♦ ' • � �
•• I
+-� i : � . . . i
�;�����������.���� ��.�������������� � ��������.��.��� ������������������ �����.����������� ����������������i
��� � '
. I
I
. I
�� ,`"""'"""""' " """"""" . "'"'"""""" �.' """"""" """""""" " "'"""""""' i
^ J , '� � �I '� J _ L �� '.J �J 'J � � U V �_-____-�_V V_--__- __ ______O_'v�J
l _ � .1 , `. ^ ,'i� .i _ V _ '� � �^ � ' � �
J _ � .^f � . V V �' v 'J V :1 . _ \ . ! /
Page 6 Aviation `loise & Satellite Proarams
�tz�ropui�r:�n �irpores �.,omm�ssion
i�Iinneapolis - St. Paul Internationai �.irport
� Vlarch 1998
6303 ... Total 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departures
4D ... Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turnout (0.6%)
(South Side Before Three l�Iiles)
20 -�,a��S CRaSSE� r-C.a;E
�___? ^OU��=iO �2�.��� �i�u� ����T=;� ;i�.��;�
� _ �., � � i
�
� ,
:.a �
, � �
o�
� , � .
�� ' --------------------------�--------------------------
�; ------------------------ ------------------------•---
�:
.
i
I �o s •
� •
�j : ; �
r_ """"'.�"'_"�"" ""'�""""'""""' """""""""'�""""""""�'"""'.�."""'�
C�1 �
c � � O
� O • �
� � � , • O • • �
I . 0 '•
� O •
o�------------------ `----- ----------------�------- -- -:- --;------------- ------.-----------.._.._
.,� I ° y • •
� �
' s �
I I
I I
i
Oi"""'-"'-""'--"'-"' """'-""'-"--""'-"' '-"""""-"""""' -""""""---"'-"'--'�
^v� I
�+�
I
"'-"----"-'-""""- --"-"--"-"-'-""-'-"..' """""'-"'-"""' --""'--""'-"-"'-"'.)
�
� ' � �
' I
- ���00 -a��00 �� �� � ��,J,,
�U�''J �JU �
' 1�i'ri i Iv� ' j,,, v� �_''! ;_� �" ^ 1 �` i.' I
:j :_ � -
Aviation �toise & Satellite Programs Page 7
�t�tropolitan .�irpoRs Commi�siun
Southern Boundary Corridor �ate Penetration Analysis
IYlinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
March 1995
�,
�
1.0% (6j) Carrier Jet Departures 5° South of Corridor
(5° South oi 30L Localizer)
Pa�e 8 Aviatit�n Noise & Satellite Programs
;
�,_. �)
titetropolitan .�irport; Commission
IYiinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
IYlarch 1998
6303 ... Total 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departures
40 ..o Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turnout (U.6%
(South Side Before Thr�e Miles)
�� -�.,��� C����E�, �-:;.�t--
' �"I '��� �VT=Zn ' i�.�7� .r - ,,,, �_ r - :�t� 1
� __ �VJ .,U � •�j ��v �v�V i �,; �LJ.U/o�
0
�I
;, � i
1
I
�I ' �
OI ""'""""""�"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""_"'
o �
�
.
� �
, .
i � e a�
•
� O I : � ,
O ' ' �
"""".a""""""""<""""'"""� """""""""""'"""""'"""'�'"""'""""""""""
O i
� ,--�, i � � '
i- � .; . : .
(�-- ` � �
. . . . .: .
e• s
i • • . •
I p � •
W � � ;
'� � '���'_""""_""""�"""'__`""""""_"""�."._"��""""_"""""_" ��""_.�"_"""...__..
' • �
�
�i •
i�_ ^r! � • • �
— � � • '
o I
O I
O I
--------------�------------------------------------�-------------------------�------.....---------------�--
" " " " " " " "" " " """ " " " " " " " " " " "'"" " " " " " " " " " " " """ " " " " "_" "" " " " " "
i ,
. I '
I
i�
i i
. _ ! c� !? /; /?
J L J V
-���0 - ;� ���'J�
'� � �� n U � � .. ,t� v _ ,`� _ � v '' '� � - � f �
Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite f'rograms •
! 1 ,� (� .�1
U � t, ��
�iz[ropoli�n .-�irpor[s Commission
I�Iinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
IVlarch 1998
6303 ... Total 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departures
25 ... Carrier Jet Departures {0.4%
S° South of Corridor (5° South of 30L Localizer)
L� I�:�'v!�� L��v �S! �� P'llA I L
__� �^^�N�— , _ , � ,
� ,
� -- �� -'9 ;?�.��; �iG�- CO�� -� , � .��;
�
�; �
�;
� .
.. . �
�e .:
� �, �
� � �O ! �� , •
Ot ' ' ' """"'-"'-
" """"""""""' e'"""'"'
"""""""""""""""""""""'�"""""""""" .�
�{
c i • � I
1 � •�
� � � � .
i ' e I
' •, s I
I
e • I
oi ; : � �
Q� ' " � . ; --------------
, � • ---------- �----------- 1
----•--�-------------------
------ ---------- -
------------------;---------- . .
�, o
�� s i
i , '
, ' • �
i
� I .
� , '"""'"'"""" "'"""""""' """"""'"""_ �"""""'"'"""""""""""'"""""'"""""
O' - " "
�i � . i
j C� I � � : : � i
I� """'_._...." """""""' '""""""'"' . """""'""' ' ""'"""""..' '�' """""""' �
I Q � ' '
I I .
� � . �
i
i
i
! i
j;�J� Q��J _2,�„ ., �nn� .��.�^ (�n^n
V �J 'J li V � '�% �J '.% �i J � 'J 'J lI t% �.I
�_� a- �v :;��,� �_�'�� ��= �� _`;�!;
Avia[ion Noise & Satellite Programs .
i
�
(.
Paje 9
� � �� '� '� �' � ' I ��/
A biweekly update on litigation, regulations, and technolog'scal developments
• � • . � �
AI'�1NUAL
It 1 • '
COVERING VOLUNIE 9, REPORT Nos.1-25
PAGES 1-204
JANUARY 27 thtough DECEMBER 31,1997
�
AIRPORT NOISE CONIl'ATI-
BILIT3.' PLANNING PRO-
( � GRAM (PART 150)
NOISE MA.PS APPROVED
- FAA approves pro�rams for three
airports, 20
- FAA issues policy change to dis-
courage new home construction near
airports, 66
- FAA approves prob ams forSprin�
field, Boise, 83
STATUS OF PROGRAM
- 191 airports have Part 150 prob ams
approved by FAA, a�ency report
shows, 180 V
- FAA has provided $43 million for
Part 150 studies, report shows, 18�
AIRCRAFT
- ACI-NA surveys cost of handlin�
large aircraft, 176
- Airports must strive to be good
neighbors, 96
ATLANTA HARTSFIELD
- Final buyouts be�in to clearpath for
runway, 173
AUSTIN-BERGSTROM
- State agrees to move facilities to
new airport, 46
- Runway foes ask CEQ to review
EIS contractor selection process, 77
: • n � ���i���
- County council approves commu-
nity roundtable, 88
BURBANK - GLENDALE -
PASADENA
- Airport authority files for summary
judgement, 4
- Ft1.�1 rejects Burbank call to sus-
pend grant offer, 12
�
- City of Burbank announces its plan
to expand airport, break stalemate,
17
- Court grants land for ternunal to
airport, 31
- Courtdismisses airport lawsuit chal-
lenging city review of terminal, 33
- FAA approval of PFC funds for
terminal challenged, 44
- City, airport in court again over
state law compliance, 51
- Airport gets land needed for ternli-
nal, 80
- Hearin� set on state law case, 99
- JudQe upholds tax imposed on park-
ing fees, 103
- City ofBurbankends mediation with
airport over expansion project, 113
- Consultantdefendsmakeupofcom-
mitee, 119
- Court rules Burbank has ri�ht to
approve airport expansion plan, 143
i CHARLOTTE/DOUGLAS
- City council approves addition of
Copyri�ht �O I998 by Airport Noise Report. Ashbum, Va. ?0147
i'.
2 Airport Noise Report
_
Fourth rumvav, 10� � KING COUNTY INT'L I FAA to reassess noise impact of
�- Part 1�0, 16I studies to beain at ; turn, ]09
CHICAGO O'HARE INT'L. ; BoeinR Field, 54 y �- NJ Qovernorarran;es meeting with
- New run-upenclosure reduces noise � FAA over new departure path, 171
level ?0 dB. 102 � LEXINGTON BLUE GRASS
-�l billion Face-lift se[ for O'Hare;
feds asked to bar any new runways,
140
- SOC says local support for new
airpon growina, 175
- Chica�o aQrees to soundproof com-
munities equally in settlement, 93
CLEVELAND HOPKINS INT'L
- BrookPark,Clevelandcompleteset-
tlement aQreement on erpansion, 9
- Parmaconsideringsuitoverincrease
in flights, 98
COLUMBiJS INT'L
- Ambitious expansion plans concern
airport neighbors, 160
DENVER INT'L
- Violations of aQreement sharply cut,
Coney says, 30 .
DETROIT METRO
- Pobur named manaQer of airport
noise proaram, 177 ~
DULLES INT'L AIRPORT
- FAA to redesiQn airspace overBal-
timore-Washington, 13
- WolfasksFAAtodelaypublichear-
invs on D.C. airspace projects pend-
inQ study, ?�
- Faifax Countv moves no build line
for homes in plan but not in zoning,
41
•••
- Council opposes new parallel run- I�EW JERSEY
way, �� �- High level FAA officials a�ree to
� meet with citizens, 105
LOS AivGELES INT'L
- El SeQundo settles suit over ease-
ment, 8
- El Segundo asks FAA to condition
PFC approval to eliminate ease-
ments, 3�
- El Segundo concerned about ex-
pansion of LAX , 11?
- FAA disavows authority to bar L.A.
easements, 118
- El Segundo mayor asks Ft�A to site
basis for easements, 141 '
- Contract awarded for home sound-
proofin�, 175 I�
LOUISVILLE INT'L
- Innovative FAAfinancin� �rant will
support relocation project, 139
- Airport obtains option on land for
relocation, 174
IV�iVIPHIS INT' L
- Judge denies motion in class action
suit, 7
Iv1INNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL
I�itT'L
- Richfield offers to drop lawsuit
nQainst 1�1 �C, FAA runway EIS, 33
NIIRA�ti1�R
- Militarv retirees seek to block �
helicopter transfer, � ;
- FAA, citizens jroup a�ree to work
to�ether, 142
ORLA��1D0 INT' L
- Camers approve $1.2 billion ex-
pansion, 11�
OUTAGAMIE COUNTY AIR-
PORT
- Court strikes zoning ordinance
limitin� development beyond 6�
DNL, 147
'• : • 1
- County offers cash incentive for air-
lines to add Sta�e 3 aircraft, 117
' • .: � ••:
- Revenueissueresolvedwithoutneed
for liti�ation, 104
' • • • 1
- Airport board recognizes airlines
for noise reduction, 39
- Board approves contract for more
sound insulation, 44
- Airport sends disclosure notices to
over 9,000 property owners near
RDU, 41
- Airport explains choice of 5� DNL
contour for notice, 81
' � SAN DIEGO INT'L
- Reuse plan must benefitafl in countv, i�EWARK II�1T'L � �.
Turner says, l� � - 13 airlines awarded for meeting use
�- Coun denies city request to require ; rules, 47
January 27- December 31, 1997
- $1.7 million FAA �rant a�varded for
master plan, 52 y
SAN FRANCISCO INT'L
- FAA aQrees to test higher minimum
altitude, 103
- En�ine run-up'pen beinQ stud'aed for
SFO, 144
SEATTLE-TACOMA INT'L
- Some claims rejected, but suit
a�ainst third runway will go to trial,
1
- Increased traff'ic will delay construc-
tion of new runway, 29
- Study estimates high cost to miti-'
gate runway impacts, 36
- EPA questions validity of air analy_ I
sis for runway, 45
- FAA issues ROD approving SEA-
TAC expansion project, 89
_ - City can't block new runway, but
( ) can act to mitigate impact of can-
;
struction, 109
- Fli�htpath changes may violate civil
ri�hts, 111
- Flights not diverted over low-in-
come area, 145
TUCSON INT'L
- PFC's souQht for purchase of land
for noise miti�ation, 104
- Airport debuts video on soundproof-
ina program, 174
UNITED KINGDONS
- Runway opponents prepare to go ;
from trees to tunnels, 46 �
�
VAN NUYS
WASHINGTON NATIONAL
- FAA to redesign airspace over Bal-
timore-Washin�ton, 13
- WolfasksFAAtodelaypublichear-
in�s on D.C. airspace projects pend-
ing Siudy, 25
- GAO report on slot rules concerns
noise committee, 143
- Conanda will ask lawmakers to help
require GAO to do new slot rule
study, 1»
WESTCHESTER COUNTY AIR-
PORT
- Increasing commercial operations
linked to more complaints, NRDC
says, 25
AIRSPACE DESIGN
- DFW airspace chan�e causes no
mass outcry, 28
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
- NASA/FAAdeveIopin�technoloQy ,
to allow `free fliQht' of aircraft, 65
AIl2 QUALITY
- Tighter air standards would impact
airports, 53
APPROPRIATIONS
- House, senate pass AIP fundinQ bill
that includes �230-$239 million for '
noise, 101
C
caPac��
- Capacity enhancement strateQies,
noise must be considered toQether,
17 y
- Group criticizes Part l�Os for Bur- I
bank, Van Nuys, 113 ; COi�iFERENCES
- Grandfathered status of L.A. pro- i_ Florida to host airport noise semi-
posal accepted, 149 j nar, 106
3
- Final aaenda set for noise sympo-
sium, 176
CONSULTING
- Dunholter forms new consultin�
company, 1 1 � �
CONIlVIUNITY GROUPS
- Community groups tryinQ to form
new coalition, 91
- Conference call set on formation of
coalition, 114
- Grass-roots groups form `Citizens
Aviation Watch', 120
�
EMISSION5
- CAEP developin; proposal less
stringent on NOX, 160
0
FAA
- Appointment of FAA bureaucrat as
noise ombudsman provokes outcry,
1
- A lot to be proud of, but noise prob-
lem not solved, FAA says, 23
- PFC revenue should not be subject
to revised funding policy, ACI-NA
says, 8�
- Noise offce to hold forum on re-
search aQenda, 152
NOISE OMBUDSMAN
- No FAA decision yet on permanent
position, 9
- 6S inquiries received in first six
months, 90
FICAIV (Federal Interagency Com-
mittee on Aircraft Noise) (See
Research also)
4 Airport Noise Report
- FICAN to publish technical posi- j noise research pro�ram, 80 i show, 163
tions, 3S
- Citizen coalition urges limits on i LITIGATION(Seeindividualair- j h,
airport pollution, 82 i ports) �
, ; �sEaxcx
FLEET NIIX
- TWA, northwest struaglinQ to meet
StaQe 2 phaseout deadlinQ, data
show, 126
FORECAST
- U.S. airlines record third year of
growth, 21
0
HELICOPTERS
- New York City community groups
�le suit to close downtown heliport,
101
HUSH KITS
- Flight tests under way for Boeing
707 Sta�e 3 kit, 53
- Southwest exercises options for
hushkit, 14�
- NATO to study hushkit to quiet I
AWACS aircraft, 159 I
I
INTEGRATED NOISE
NIODEL (INM)
- FAA releases version 5.1 of
Integrated Noise Model, 7
0
LEGISLATION - FEDERA.L
- Biil would revive EPA noise office;
require EPA study of DNL noise
metric, 9
- Bill would put EPA in charge of
N
NATIONAL PARKS
- Tighter rules imposed for Grand
Canyon park, 4
- Fourlawsuitsfiledchallengin�FAA
rulemakin� on air tour operations,
49
- Workin� group developing criteria
forNPRM limiting park overflights,
77
- Air tour operators seek withdrawl
of new FAA rule limitin� over-
fli�hts, 93
- Park Service gives contract to
Papillon for quieter helicopter, 171
- ARAC approves outline of rule for
manajing air tours over parks, 192
NOISE NIODELING (See
Intearated Noise Model)
NOISE NIONiTORING
- DADE, Sacramento Counties pur-
chase HiYIMH system, 99
P
PASSENGER FACILITY
CHARGES
- 6.4 percent of total PFCs approved
devoted to airport noise projects, 53
-�2 airports imposing PFCs to sup-
port noise mitiQation projects, data
show,�3
- 6.8 percent of total PFCs approved �
devoted to airport noise projects, �
163 i
- 59 airports imposing PFCs to sup- !
port noise mitiQation projects, data !
- FICAN to hold forum May 13 in
Minneapolis, 39
- Status of research discussed at hear-
ing, 1 �0
- FAA be�ins process of developing
research aQenda for noise, emis-
sions, 156 y
HEALTH EFFECTS
- Cornell study finds aircraft noise
robs children of langua�e skills, 49
0
SOUND INSULATION
- Ventilation, air quality seen as
emerging issues, 122
- FA.A issues Final Policy on Part 150
Approval of Noise Mitigation
Measures: Effect on the Use of
Federal Grants forNoise Mitigation
Projects, 197
STAGE 2 PHASEOUT (See Fleet
Mix)
TECHNOLOGY
- GPS technology will cut cost of
noise mitiQation, 121
- Internet is new tool to present noise
data, 123
TEXT
�
- Memorandum of transmittal on ��
outline of recommended rule on
limiting fli�hts over national parks,
192
� ������ � ���� �� �����1'�
��ti5,S4��r Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport :':�� �.
? t' 6040 - 28th Avenue South
�
�r.'F�
�
i
V ?`
�
}� :����Ty.
r'� ��'� v,�`�
�2 ��` �'�
, .�
� Miruieapolis, MN 55450-2799 `'`-,'=�'�;'"y:•��
Phone (612) 726-8100 ° Fax (612) 726-5296 � ` �`,��;:;'��,,';.
. !=. '`' ' ,�
t.! � `+; ��� ':T.�: ='�j'��
, �,:; .. -' „�` . •„r.
:�.. `k �� i:� ''i., '.�Yl�.
i � ' _ ; �� i''.
��
, .r�' i ,
ti„ '�,�.�'� �>�r;�-'�;
fV O T 1 C E ,,n�a, ��
�b
MEETING
MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
The Operations Committee wiil meet Fridav. Aprii 17, �1998 — 10:00 a.m. at the West
Terminal Building of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, NORTH STAR ROOM 1N207,
6301 34th Avenue South, Minneapolis. .
If you are unable to attend, please notify the committee secretary (Melissa Scovronsfci 726-
8141) with the name of your designated altemate.
. �.
ANOMS Update
RMT Site Location Analysis
Discussion Items
Non-Simultaneous Corridor Departure Analysis
Correspor�dence
Next Meeting Agenda Items
MEMBER DISTRIBUTION
Mark Salmen, Chairman, NWA
Bob Johnson, MBAA
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan
Ron Johnson, ALPA
Brian Bates, Airborne
Tom Hueg, St. Paul
John Nelson, Bloomington
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis
Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights
Dick Keinz, MAC
cc: Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights
Charles Curry, ALPA
Advisory:
ATC Tower Chief, FAA
Ron Glaub, FAA
Cindy Greene, FAA
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC
Chad Leqve, MAC
Shane VanderVoort, MAC
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE � ANOKA COCTNTY/HLr1INE � CRY5TAL • FLYING CLOUD • LAKE EL.Iv10 • SAINT PAUL DOWNTQWN
tVIINUTES
MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
APR1L 17, 1998
The mesting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission West Terminal Building
North Star Conference F2oom, and cailed to order at 10:05 a.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Mark Salmen, Chairman - NWA
Bob Johnson - MBAA
John Nelson - Bloomington
Charies Mertensotto- Mendota Heights
Kevin Batchelder — Mendota Heights
Jon Hohenstein — Eagan
Dick Keinz - MAC
Advisorv:
Roy Fuhrmann - MAC
Shane VanderVoort - MAC
Chad Leqve - MAC
Ron Glaub - FAA NWA CMO
Cindy Greene - FAA
. � .
ANOMS UPDATE
Chad Leqve, MAC, updated members on the status of the MOA. He said there had been
no change, as far as he knew. Cindy Greene, FAA, said she had spoken with the
tempo�ary Air Traffic Control Tower Manager, Doug Powers, about the MOA. She said Mr.
Powers said that if the MOA was not signed by the end of the next week, he would sign it
himself.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, noted that the City of Eagan had sent letters to some of
Minnesota's congressmen regarding the MOA. John Nelson, Bloomington, said a letter was
also sent from the City of Bloomington to Senator Paul Wellstone.
Kevin Batchelde�, Mendota Heights, asked Cindy Greene, FAA, if Mr. Powers was planning
to become the permanent tower manager. Ms. Greene said this was definitely a temporary
situation and that they hoped to select a permanent tower manager within a month.
RMT SITE LOCAT/0N ANALYSIS
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC, briefly reviewed the previous month's analysis of the RMT site
locations.
Mr. Fuhrmann then dispfayed an overhead of the three original siting criteria used for the
current 24 sites. The three criteria were:
➢ Must be located on public land.
➢ Must be located within 100 feet of electrical power.
➢ Must be located to monitor the majority of operations at MSP.
Mr. Fuhrmann said the last criteria went through a number of iterations and analyses at the
time of the original siting.
Mr. Fuhrmann then expfained how staff had further refined the analysis, including how the
coverage area of the cuRent RMT sites were calculated and the assumptions that were
used.
Mr. Fuhrmann then displayed the current RMT buffer zones, based on the above
information, along with the land use wifhin a iwo mile zone araund the 2005 60 DN�
contour.
�
He reiterated that the RMTs' noise influence areas were actually quite a bit larger than the �'
calculated RMT buffer zones, and that even though some of the flight tracks did not cross
through a buffer zone, every flight track is monitored by an RMT.
He also noted that the grid size was reduced from 2,000 feet per grid to 1,000 feet, in order
to better represent land use.
The flight tracks were then laid over the RMT areas to show how many buffer zones each
flight track intersected. He then showed how many flight tracks went through either one or
zero buffer zones. He noted that only 16 flight tracks did not intersect a buffer zone.
Mr. Fuhrmann said staff then added 5 more RMT sites to increase the number of buffer
zones the flight tracks intersected, taking into account where the residential land use was.
Once these proposed RMT sites were placed, staff ran the flight tracks again to see how
many only intersected one RMT buffer zone. He said whereas with the 24 existing RMT
sites 1500 flight tracks had intersected one RMT buffer zone, with the additional 5 sites,
only 51 tracks intersected one buffer zone (out of approximately 22,000 flight tracks).
The committee then discussed the analysis and the possible locations of additional RMTs.
The following is a list of points that were made in this discussion:
� Individual flight tracks can be registered as a noise event within the current ANOMS
� -'
2
�
�
0
system at multiple RMT sites.
The analysis iilustrated that a rather modest number of additional RMT sites could
provide significant additional coverage.
The proposed locations are open for discussion.
New RMT sites for the North/South runway wiil be considered at a later time. A simiiar
analysis could be done for those sites at that tirne.
With the current RMT sites there is full coverage of all airport flight tracks. Adding
additional RMTs would simply expand the coverage area so that an increased number
of flight tracks would be picked up by more than one RMT.
➢ Although additional RMT sites would not reduce noise levels, they would provide staff
with more data and help community members fee! there was better coverage of the
noise in their areas.
➢ Staff is working on cost estimates for the additional RMTs.
➢ It was suggested that noise monitoring be performed for a one year period in areas
affected by the North/South runway prior to it becoming operational in order to
determine a baseline noise level to compare with noise levels after the runway is
operational.
➢ It was noted that since the cities to the southeast have zoned for non-residential land
use and that RMTs are only in residential areas, the RMTs to the southeast are farther
apart than in other areas around the airport.
➢ Staff noted that the analysis was performed without regards to city boundaries.
There was a lengthy discussion regarding the position of one of the proposed locations of
an RMT site in Mendota Heights.
Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights, asked staff to document how the analysis
was perFormed to preserve it for future information and/or use.
JOHN NELSON, BLOOMINGTON, MOVED AND JON HOHENSTEIN, EAGAN,
SECONDED TO ACCEPT THE REPORT FROM STAFF, FORWARD IT TO THE FULL
MASAC BODY FOR A BRIEFING WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT F1VE
ADDITIONAL RMT SITES BE ADDED TO THE MONITORING SYSTEM AND TO TAKE
THE NECESSARY STEPS TO INCORPORATE IT INTO THE 1999 MAC BUDGET. THE
VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRlED.
NON-S/MULTANEOUS CORRIDOR DEPARTURE ANALYS/S
Cindy Greene, FAA, explained there are few times during a normal day (6 a.m to 11 p.m.)
when the non-simultaneous departure procedure can be used. She said in order for the
tower to use the procedure there must be only one local controller on duty (non-busy times)
and aircraft must be departing off of only one runway.
She explained when there are two local controllers they operate independent of each other
(rather than having to coordinate every departure) and thus must use specific headings to
be sure aircraft are separated appropriately.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he was more concerned with the early morning
3
and late night hours rather than with #he daytime hours. He said he believe there was less ��
traffic during this time and that the procedure could and shouid be used more often.
Cindy Gresne, FAA, said head-to-head operations during these hours preempt non-
simultaneous departure procedures because the controllers have to maintain a 15-mile
separation between arriving and departing aircraft.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he was disappointed that the head-to-head
operations were preventing the non-simultaneous departure procedures from being used.
He said he felt this issue should be part of a larger discussion regarding the use of the
corridor. He reiterated that the city's initial request for MASAC to monitar compliance by the
tower in the use of the non-simultaneous departure procedure was still relevant but that the
nighttime hours were most important. He said he would also like to investigate how often
head-to-head operations prevented non-simultaneous departures.
Members discussed the prioritization and feasibility of an ongoing report versus a one-time
project, as well as the possible methodology for monitoring compliance.
It was suggested that it might be possible to divert some of the early moming flights to
runway 22 in order to be able to use the non-simultaneous departure procedures in the
corridor at that time, as long as it did not require a change in the RUS.
JON HOHENSTEIN, EAGAN, MOVED AND CHARLES MERTENSOTTO, MENDOTA
HEIGHTS, SECONDED TO ACCEPT RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST AND HAVE STAFF
PREPARE AN WFORMATION REQUEST FORM IN ORDER TO FURTHER DE�INEATE ��'
THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT AND BR1NG IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE AT THE
NEXT MEETING. THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. MOT10N CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE
➢ Zetter from Ms. Jan DelCalzo: Members discussed the letter and its suggestions.
CHARLES MERTENSOTTO, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MOVED AND JON HOHENSTEIN,
EAGAN, SECONDED TO HAVE STAFF RESPOND TO MS. DELCALZO'S LETTER
INDICATIiVG RECEIPT, AS WELL AS AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT MASAC HAS
ALREADY PUT IN PLACE MANY OF THE LETTER'S SUGGESTIONS. THE VOTE WAS
UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED.
OTHER ITEI►r1S NOT 4N THE AGENDA
Cindy Greene, FAA, said representatives of the Air Traffic Controllers union had just met
with the temporary tower manager regarding their concems with the safety of the Noise
Abatement Departure Profile (NADP) procedures recently implemented at MSP. Ron
G1aub, FAA, and Mark Salmen, No�thwest Airlines, said they would speak with the tower
manager about the union's concems and report back to the Operations Committee at the
May meeting.
C!
NEXT MEETING AGENDA ITEMS
The next meeting was scheduled for May 8, 1998 at 10:00 a.m. it was decided that the
meetings would be held the second Friday of each month rather than the third in order to
give the secretary more time to complete the minutes for the MASAC mailing.
The following items will be included on the May agenda:
➢ Further analysis and delineation of additional RMT locations
➢ Follow up on the air traffic controllers' NADP safety concerns
➢ Continuation of the non-simultaneous procedure monitoring discussion
➢ Formalize the Operations Committee's work plan for 1998
➢ Correspondence
The meeting was adjoumed at 12:35 a.m.
Respectfully submitted
Melissa Scovronski
Committee Secretary
5
t
�E O Al�l.�JU� DEPARTI�IENT OF ENVIRONMENT
To: MASAC Operations Committee
FROM: Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator
SUBJECT: ANOMS Status Update
DATE: April 9, 1997
As we are all well aware, ANOMS at Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport has been inoper-
able for an extended amount of time. In an effort to update the Operations Committee on the rea-
soning and staius of the current situation, the following memo lends chronolo�ical information
relative to our cunent status with the ANOMS program.
On September 26, 1997 a Request for Proposal (RFP) was submitted to Harris Mi11er Miller and
Hanson (HMMH) for the solution to a data acquisition problem which existed with ANOMS. In
the month of October 1997 meetings between the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC),
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and HMMH were held in an effort to reach an agreement �/
on the new system. A Contract was signed between HMMH and the MAC for the system in
November, the final architecture was solidified and the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the FAA and MAC was drafted and forwarded to local FAA.
In December 1997 the system was installed. Severai integrity tests were conducted by staff and
modifications were made. T'he only remainin� piece was an adopted MOA with the FAA. The
MOA was endorsed by the FAA Region in February 1998 and was sent to washington for
approval, were it still resides today.
Several calls have been, and are being made to try to expedite the process. We will continue to
pursue this issue until it is resolved. Once we receive the MOA production of reports and specific
analysis will be swift and accurate.
i-. .�=�� � :
`��:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE e
DEPARTNIENT OF ENVIROI�t1V1ENT
MASAC Operations Committee
Roy Fuhrmann, Manager, Aviation Noise and Satellite Program
Analysis of Potential RMT Locations
April 9, 1998
At the March 20, 1998, MASAC Operations Committee meeting, MAC staff provided data analyses of
possible methods to select the best locations for the placement of additional Remote Monitoring
Towers as identified in the Noise Mitigadon Prob am report of November 1996. Specifically, the report
lists item eight under recommendations as:
The MAC noise monitoring system monitors should be increased in number to provide more
coverage of actual impacts in the airport vicinity. In particular, areas affected by the north-south
runway and parallel runways should have additional microphone locations to monitor
continued and orowing volumes of air traffic as the airport expands. This system should be used
to corroborate the accuracy of the modeled contours for noise program eligibi]ity.
Requested analyses from the previous MASAC Operations Committee included a refinement of the
previous analyses procedures. Once again, we focused on the following methodology:
l. Use a two mile buffer around the Year 2005 DNL 60 contour, to incorporate the vast
majority of e}cisting RMT sites and focus on the areas most likely to be impacted by MSP
operations.
2. Analyze the landuse within each community to locate the site to provide coverage in areas
that are predominately residential use.
3. Overlay aircraft overflight data from one week out of each quarter to resolve seasonality
differences and attempt to locate the R1�iT in an area most beneficial to monitor existing and
future aircraft jet operations.
The original siting methodology used the following criteria:
4. Must be located within 100 feet of electrical power
5. Must be located on public property
6. Located to monitor the majority of operations at MSP. This process was refined multiple
times to account for both arrival and departure operations. The arrival paths as well as pro-
posed and existing departure paths were considered ciuring the siting of the ori�ina124 sites.
As of this mailing, we are awaiting updated landuse information from the various community sources.
We will include this information in the final analysis. MAC staff will a�ain provide an extensive series
of information analysis for further discussion and recommendations.
TC�: MASAC Operations Committee �-
FROM: Roy Fuhrmann, Manager, Aviation Noise and Satellite Pro�ram
SUBJECT: Correspondence
DATE: Apri19, 1998
Non-Simultaneous Departure Pmcerlures Discussion
The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council received a request from the City of
Mendota Heights requesting a monthly analysis of the Non-simultaneous Departure
Procedures in the corridor. A copy of the letter from Mendota Heights and the an excerpt from
the tower order is included with this mailing. Staff has requested the FAA to present a
discussion about the procedures and the activity in the corridor during the this summer's
construction
Correspondence from Janice DelCalzo
MAC staff received conespondence from Ms. DelCalzo regarding suggestions about
additional information for reporting and analysis. Her letter is included. Many of these items �
have been reported on in the past, and will be incorporated in the future MASAC handbook.
Other reports and information dissemination tools for ANOMS data will be considered as
MASAC completes the audit process. (,
�.,
/ home/ topgun/ frame/ YiA5AC/OpsCommittee/ rrnt_locations_apr98 Page ?
_ r
��� ,,_
�.,� .�. �', .,..� , ., :
Y � �
t,a� _�` ' �, �7
�. i
- <. , <
��
�� . �
. ,., ,� ��� . . ': �.
. '—. '� ��„ . . , . ,
,: µ r < ,. ° , ..
. . � � . . . .. . ,
.. y .�. _. .,.
. .� '.' �� ' .:
° '� "� .,.... __... . ___. . ... .... . . . ..._ , _....
— �__...,. , .. �.._. .
. •,>�. k e.E.,. ..l" � t-.r . ..... ..... , _
March 1?, 19�8
Nir. Robert Johnson, Chair
iVletropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28th Avenue South
]�"pls., MN 55�50
�e:�r Mr. Johnson:
Ti�ss letter is to make a forznal request on behalf of the City Council of the City of l�Sendota
�ieiahts for the ANOYIS system to monitor, on a monthly basis, the Non-Simultaneo�.�s
De��rture Procedures in tl�e southeust comd�r. The purpose of the rnonitoring •xould bP tu
i;�c:;t,.�e datu �r.� �'Ze morthly T�ch_nical ���,dvisor's Report re�arding the F�i. T�wer"� c.cmpliance
t��e 'a c�w�r C�r�er for N�n-S.imultaneous �ep:rt�.u'es.
<ti : yo�a are awar:., in 19Q7-the Fn.=�.l�ower adoFted a ne�v Tower Grder a.s 3•;oi�e ub�tenient
�ro�e��va-P to be implementzd as f��lows: .
wne:��r���r possible, undex non-simult�eous conditians:
Aircraft departing Runway 12R will �e assignec� a heading to maint�in an 3ppraximate
cround track of 10� ° magnetic (NI), and
Aircraft departing Runway 12L will be assigned a headin� to maintain a�round track
along the e,ctended eenterline, appro.cimately 118 ° M. V
5pecifically, l�lendota Hei�hts would like to monitor and collect data on flia�ts that compi;� witn
these prescribed procedures and flights that deviate from these prescribed proc�dures. T�1e:•e a.re
many exa.mples when lat� evezunQ, or early mozning, flights are not flyinQ run�-a�� c�r�terline
headinas from Runway 12L durina periods of the day, or night, that are obviousiy non-
simultaneous conditions. y
The FA.A implemen:ed *he procedure at the request of the i�Ietropolitan Airports t:omrr?i5�ion
a,-�d the Ciry �f ��fendota. Hei�hts to providz a relatively simple noise abater.ment proced�::e to
ber���it rrsi��nts iil close proxi.mity to i�1SP Interr.ational Airport. 'The data coll�cted �v,��il:! �e
c•elevanC io cielerrnininQ the comgliance by the �rarf:c controllers and the airline users, as 1�•el! as.
•. tl-�e eifectivenesG ���the r�tiv proce��ure, Lti'z would request that this ciata be c�l?ect�'�' :Or z'. perud
c�f �Lt least six mantns, at a minim�.::n.
.
1101 Victoria Curve • Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 (612) 452-1850 • FAX 452-8940
N:fr, Robert Johnson
I�Iarch 17, 1998
Paae t�Yvo
i l:e City of Mendota Hei�hts appreciates your consideration of our request, and we are ready to
offer an;� assistance that We may. ShoLld you have any questions, or conce:rs, please conta�t nie
at 45?-1850.
Sincerely,
(� C'�'9,v�. ���1�-'�G�
�; y,- � �. � -� �j-_
_ ..�c • _.._�s•: .. ._
City Admirisirator
cc: City Council
802. MENDOTA HEIGHTS/EAGAN
PROCEDURES.
a. Departures on Runways 12R and 12L.
; (1) Whenever possible, under non-
simultaneous departure conditions:
(a) Aircraft departing Runway 12R wiil
be assigned a heading to maintain an
approximate ground track of 105° magnetic,
and;
(b) Aircraft departing Runway 12L will
be assigned a heading to maintain a ground
track along the extended centeriine,
approximately 118° magnetic.
(2) When diverging separation is in use,
it shali be based upon the foilowing criteria:
(a) Runway 12R - a heading between
090° and 105° or a track on or north of the 30L
loca(izer.
(b) Runway 12L - between 090°
and/or a heading which wili track on or north of
the 30L. localizer.
� � (3) Proceed on the assigned heading
until at least 3 miles from the departure end of
the runway, then assigned on-course headings
as soon as practicai after the 3-mile paint.
(4) When request?d by the pilot of a
group (V or V turboprop, be issued headings
and turns which prohibit flight over these noise
sensitive area (i.e., river departures).
C
�
JANICE DEL CALZO
484� ALDRICH AVENUE SOUTH
NIINNEAPOLIS, IVIN 55409
827-4240
Apri13, 1998
Roy Fuhrman
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 - 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Roy,
I was extremely encouraged by the lively exchange among MASAC members last Tuesday
evening regarding possible changes in the MASAC processes as well as goal identification
for the future. I just wanted to add my two cents worth on a couple of items.
Kevin Batchhelder's recommendation that MASAC members receive more information
in a timely manner in order to have meaningful discussion at meetings was right on. The
packets of information mailed to MAC members prior to committee meetings are good
examples of this. Each agenda item should have some information about it in the packet.
That may be supplemented at the meeting, but at least members would have a clue as to
what the item is going to be about. I know it means more work for you prior to meetings,
but more productive meetings by members may ease your workload in the future:
I am convinced that many of the MASAC members simply are not aware of the many
noise related activities that have taken place in recent years. This is no fault of theirs,
simply that there have been many, many other venues where noise has been addressed. In
fact, one of my criticisms last fa11 was that MASAC had been weakened by ad hoc
committees usurping the noise issue. Some recap of those activities is needed in order to
go forward. For example, it would be nice to have MASAC representatives get a short
recap of the noise commitments that have been made through various means. They
include:
- the PART 150 program. I think members would be interested in maps showing
where the houses have been completed, the next priorities, how much has
been spent, etc. I know there is some overlap in membership in the
MASAC and Part 150 PAC, but there are lots of new MASAC members
who do not hav,e background in this issue.
- the total recommendations in the Mayors' Noise Mitigation Report. At the last
meeting you had an overhead showing some recommendations from the
Mayor's Noise Mitigation Committee on aircraft operations. However,
that Committee also made other noise related recommendations, such, as
'/
extending the insulation program to the DNL 60 contour, notse (
redistribution, etc. MASAC members should see all the recommendations,
expecially maps showing the 60 DNL area and cost projections.
the contract between Minneapolis and 1bIAC on the temporary extension of
12RJ30L, the permanent estension of 4/22 and the status of the third
parallel prohibition contract.
the Community Stabilization Committee (and before that the
Community Collaborative) that met and made recommendations regarding
noise. The results of their deliberations should be background information
for all MASAC members.
any noise restrictions embodied in various contracts, leases, etc. such as those
with Northwest in their loan covenants. I'm not sure where the Sun
Country lease negotiations ended up as far as noise goes.
MASAC members also need monthly progress reports on all past noise mitigation
measures in additian to the report on the Eagan/Mendota corridor. For eYample, it is nice
to point to a lengthening of the nighttime hours during which Stage 2 planes are
prohibited, but it would be nice to see a monthly report as to whether or not there
actually are no Stage 2 operations during those hours. Those reports are available and
should be in the regular MA.SAC packet. I hope there will be a report about the statues of
how airlines are implementing the new departure profiles as weil as compliance with the
nighttime runup regulation. If we ever get the straight out departure prohibition over
Minneapolis procedure, that is another initiative that would need monthly follow-up. �
Last but not least, the noise monitoring system must be put back into operation. It is a
tool that is absolutely inte�al to the work of MASAC. Why not use the collective
political power of the MASAC representatives to put pressure on the Congressional
delegation to force the FAA. to sign the Memorandum of Understanding? There are
MA.SAC representatives from at least three, if not four, different Congressional districts I
believe. Something needs to break this deadlock.
Thanks for taking the time to read this. I hope there are at least one or two suggestions
here that you will find helpful. Please let me know if you have questions about some of
the things I have mentioned.
Good luck in your assignment.
Sincerely,
Jan
cc: Bob Johnson, MASAC Chair
Minneapolis MASAC delegation
Dick Keinz, MAC
MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
.•� �. . ��; -
l. Provide feedback to the MA.0 in their efforts to communicate
changes in operations, due to construction schedules, to the
surrounding communities.
2. Evaluate departure compliance through the Eagar�IMendota
Heights Corridor and make any necessary changes to the relevant
procedures.
3. Review the ANOMS system and noise monitors. Evaluate the
need and placement of additional R.MTs. .A1so evaluate portable
monitoring capabilities.
4. Request air traffic control personnel to ma1�e a presentation on
how MSP operations are conducted.
Ongoing Discussion Items
� Providing incentives to carriers in acquiring and operating
factory made Stage III aircraft.
• Investigate how GPS and other navigational aids could help
alleviate aircraft noise.
• Review of NADP procedures and compliance.
• Continue Part 150 contour generation review.
C
�
MEMOR;.��:I��UL:��I
Date: Apri121, 1998
To: All MASAC members
From: Chairman Bob Johnson
I'• _ � • 1 1 ••••1 1
As per the MASAC bylaws, "The Chairman, subject to ratification by the membership,
shall appoint from the membership an executive committee which at all times shall consist
of two (2) USER representatives and two (2) PUBLIC representatives who will serve with
him as members of the committee for a terrn of one year, or until successors are appointed."
In accordance with the bylaws, the Chairman has appointed the following representatives to
the Executive Committee:
Bob Johnson
Dick Keinz
Jennifer Sayre
Steve Minn
Charles Mertensotto
ACTION REQUE5TED
Chairman
MAC
Northwest Airlines
Cify of Minneapolis
City of Mendota Heights
The MASAC Chairman requests ratification, by the full MASAC body, of the above
mentioned appointees to the MA.SAC Executive Committee.
Date: April 21, 1998
To: All MASAC members
From: Chairman Bob Johnson
Re: OPERATIONS COMMTTTEE APPOI��1'I`MIFNTS
The Chairman has appointed the following MASAC members to the Operations
Committee:
Mark Salmen
Bob Johnson
Dick Keinz
Ron 7ohnson
Brian Bates
Tom Hueg
Dick Saunders
Kevin Batchelder
John Nelson
Jon Hohenstein
Northwest Airlines, Chairman
MBAA., MASAC Chair
MAC
Air Line Pilots Association
Airborne Express
City of St. Paul
City of Minneapolis
City of Mendota Heights
City of Bloomington
City of Eagan
This is an informational item only. No MASAC action is requested.
W
(JI
C!� �
�
o'
� �
ce
�
-' c
�
E
�—. �. �. „C
� � � � � � �
� � � � � �
� O� tn .A W N.j
� �O �
� � -P 'V' -NP W �
� N w � W �
i° o 0 0 0�'
� � � � � � �
cfl
964{�9b9�� �
�o.r�ov,.��
� �.1 'vy, :t� �7D -P
� � a � a ��
0
�,
;�srflr�t�sc�s
� � � N N
h V r 1 �.1 �P oo a
� � W W ..r t.n
0 � � � �
� O d O O O "�
cfl
�
�
O
�
tfl
0
0
o � o �'
o � � o
� � � H'
F.t � �
� � �
� � � �
�..+
�-.. rr
N C p �`d
� O �
�Q. �, \!J
�, �. �
�
N� �, CD �
CD r"y-+- �y.
� � CD n
f7 � � �
�'� o �
n
,.� ro � o
� � � �
,....
nO � ,-�.�.
�
_ cD
�" ry+- � �
,.s �s �.. cn
Cp � � O
� "' �p t�.
p � �O
� N ��
� p � �
°, n � �
✓ � � O
c�n ^ti` ¢ �
CD � '=r:
�-a � p O
� "'�`" � �
� � � �
o � , � o .
� � �
0
,c�i� o
� �
� �
CD
-:
� �
.
�
_,.. •
► ,...
�
•
• �
� .. .
•
►
� -
►
_ ►
�
�r _ .
!
•,s __
�
�
.
. . I I I . .
� � � - __ � •
,; � �, , . .
7C0: MASAC
FROM: Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
SUB,jECT: MASAC AUDIT
DATE: April 20, 1998
At the March 31, 1998 MASAC meeting, council members discussed findin�s and recommendations
from the Padilla, Speer & Beardsley Audit, as well as additional comments. Due to the in-depth
discussion of the topics, members decided to prioritize the various ideas at a future meeting.
MASAC Chairman Bob Johnson and MAC staff grouped the ideas into four common areas and
presented the information to the MAC Planning and Environment Committee on April 7, 1998. The
memorandum from Mr. Johnson to the P&E Committee is included for further discussion and
prioritization at this month's meeting.
TO: Planning and Environment Committee
FROM: Bob Johnson, MASAC Chairman
RE: MASAC AUDIT RESPONSE
DATE: Aprii 6, 1998
The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Councii met on March 31, 1998 to discuss the
findings and recommendations obtained in the survey completed by Padilla, Speer & Beardsley.
An in-depth discussion spawned creative recommendations and a lengthy list of areas of
concentration.
Aithough the report was openiy criticai about the intricacies of MASAC, the members objectively
reviewed the findings and came to the meeting with well thought out suggestions for
improvement. The group divided the recommendations into four functional areas: Cammunity
Communication Efforts, MASAC Administrative & Procedural Changes, MASAC Membership
Orientation and Education, and Operational Objectives.
Many of these areas support PS8's findings and recommendations and are expanded in the
following list to delineate a broadef spectrum of potential improvement areas:
COMMUNITY COMMUNlCAT10N EF�ORTS
1. Develop the noise Complaint and Information Hotline to include month(y updates on
what MASAC is working on, as well as fax on demand capabilities.
2. Produce written informational materials about various aircraft noise issues to be
distributed to interested parfies and callers to the Information Hotline.
3. Investigate the use of local cable television to (a) broadcast MASAC meetings and/or (b)
broadcast a video about MASAC and its noise abatement efforts.
4. Each community representative should survey residents on which issues are most
important to their communities in regards to aircraft noise. MASAC should also take into
account the findings of any MAC, Traveler or Community Survey.
MASAC ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURAL CHANGES
5. Inciude with the monthly mailing one week prior to the meeting, a cfiecklist of the items
included in the mailing, the agenda for the next mesting, minutes of the last meeting,
minutes of any committe� meetings, copies of any correspondence received, meeting
handouts with cover memos, the Technical Advisor's Report with attachments (when
ANOMS is available again), a blank MASAC Information and Monitoring Request form,
and occasional Part 150 updates.
6. Continue to develop the Noise Monitoring and lnformation Request form.
7. Hold annual "business plan" meetings in tf�e fall to identify objectives for the following
year.
8. Hoid "study" meetings where one agenda item is discussed thoroughiy.
9. Hoid Executive Committee meetings at least once per year.
10. Develop a report pacScage from members to constituents and their appointing authorities.
MASAC MEMBERSHIP ORIENTATION AND EDUCATION
11. Develop a handbook for members, which would include, among other things, copies of
the bylaws and articles of incorporation, a directory of inembers with their biographies,
committee rosters, documentation of organizationai procedures and processes,
information on the various noise programs at MSP and a MASAC Organizational Chart.
12. Develop and hold procedural and technical orientation sessions for members.
13. Schedule landside and Air Traffic Control Tower tours.
14. Schedule neighborhood tours.
15. Educate members about MAC, its structure, procedures and priorities by (a) mailing the
P&E Committee agenda to those members who wish to receive it, (b) distributing an
organizational chart and (c) providing informational updates from the Full Commission
meetings regarding noise-related issues.
In additian to the MASAC Operations Committee Objectives, members suggested
MASAC:
16. Use GPS technology to map out the best noise abatement routes.
17. Continue to encourage reduction of Stage II aircraft operating out of MSP.
18. Investigate the effects of aircraft noise on physical and mental health.
19. Investigate how real noise data can be used in Part 150 contour generation.
20. Change the nighttime hours to 10:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M.
21. Make every effort to keep the technological tools (ANOMS, etc.) current and operational.
The above list of activities is not prioritized due to meeting time constraints. However, at the
April 28, 1998, meeting, MASAC members will identify areas listed above that will focus on
organizational efficiency and efFectiveness.
P&E's support and concem for the effectiveness of the MASAC organization has revitalized the
membership's awareness, organizational functionality and purpose. The group was pleased
with the overall outcome of the evenings discussions and appreciative of the audit process.
)
— �i
f c `; —
r, �
O
n�'�`
N � �.
=� O �
- ri O
y � T.
� � �`
r �
� T
<
n
o �
_ �
� C
D � '-'
�' � �
o c �'
. a`
(y y ^t
� y '�
.i r O
r ^ r
� N
(i �
C N
Q+ -�j
J� C
(:7
�:J
.'�-' 6�'� N
"" r-i V
� w �w ''''
V � p d r�
.'-ru. V � � iL-� tL
�`C?�33
•�• �vai m .N �
G N �,r a' i,
� v � � � 3
� v o � a
U Q � ° � o
�,;�aw�a
i.�i .� V sN. .�u �
CCi i'i
� fC1 .� � '' '.
� Z N > v �
v y �� � v m
v O '� � G
O O :� ,Q; pp ,�
� v � .� � �
¢ � V QJ � .�'u
� 'v ',� '� �t^vn K
F" � .� c6 ..� �v
N 'LS
G .i ¢S c�"C
� O d � �
.� � N U �
� � 3_��
� � G � �
� i � � � �
�° ��•�c
t�n,� .� � �
.� E" � 'cn v
vi �+-� .�.s o �
�
�� ��r'
41 � w � m ..`y^'.
�l TJ S.: � � �
� r � y � �
4: �o � ��
w O
� � � v � �
O p � �"' ^G �
�.' +-� �U-+ r L',
� � � r
.�����v
> '� �. �. �,
Qv�i 'G U �—vi .�
'r
R% �'' CCf r�
.� � � � w
� � �
bD � � '� � f�" � 0
•,�.�' �°�� ��'�,
� �
x;, c6 K,, . � N . 'r
� a � � � � �
�w�����•--���
G ^� ,-� ,.r, � � ,wy.., G
.� o � � i � ai .� p
r � .+.+ C+
�.' �' 'as � .� �' � �c
� y�,� � � � H � � � .�
�o°o°�°'C�o ;g�
Q1 � �� � Q � y � V
—� � C�.. 3 Q > p�
3"t3 � V,�r„ �?' u ic o
QJ R3 ?'� O'�"� QJ Cu ' ('`�
� w ai � v`�i �� � � v
� '
v v't�: � ��° i o
� � � � � � � � � �
a��� � �� � v y v
��•U H � cCi � O 7 ON
/"
�
'I
* *,� �.� �
..k . �..
**..***��
..,.... t
..*�,.��:.
* ,.-* : .
..***�_;
� t:.�-x.* � ��:
*.*,�.** ,
4
`.l s
�,_
- - - - - - � -�- - - �- `,-
Who: Military .�ctive, Guard and Reserve members and
veterans service organizations from the Twin Cities
and surrounding areas
When: 5aturday and Sunday July 18th and 19th,1998
0900 to 1700 each day
Where: Historic Fort Snelling, Fort Snelling Polo
Grounds, Army Reserve Center and the Air
Guard/Air �orce Reserve Base, all in the vicin.ity of the
Whipple Federal building at Higbway 55 and 62
(Crosstown). Aecess to the 934t6 Airlift Wing, �iir Force
Reserve base - take the 34t� Avenue ezit off of the
Crosstown 62 Highway and follow the frontage road signs
Wbat: The second annual Ezpo s�owcasing local ynilitary units,
personnel, aircraft and equipment displays,
military demonstration #eams; and his�oric displays at
Historic Fort Snelling from pre-l�evolutionary days
through Desert Storan
Why: 'I'o learn about the role of th� military services,
the part local forc�s play and the impact we bave
on our coffi�unities
Contact: Call the Army IZeserve I'ublic t�ffairs Office at
(612) 713-3011 or tbe A.►iir Force IZeserve Public
Afiairs Office at (612) 7i3-121i for aaaore in%rmation
��� �,: rHF
,�� , ` � �.
,�
<' ' * "
�+ �t� .�)
W yp�r-
C'+ a %�\� � a 'n
s ♦
�°io "ow.t `; .
•��ru a `"�
� ., . : . .. ,_ ,,. .. .,�, _-- �- .
. , , , . . � , ' :'- :
�:_ �.;'. ' � ' . . " . .
�,��;:�UN�TED���ST�[T���S.�����AIR` �OR�C�E.���; . �:�� ��
934th Airiift Wing, Air Foroe Reserve Command
Office of Public Affairs
760 Miiitary Highway, Minneapolis, MN 55450-2000
Phone: (612) 713-1217, DSN 783-1217
Fax: (612) 713-1210, DSN 783-1210
Iit i ��$ $ � 0 n The 934th Airlift Wing is a combat-ready Air Force Reserve Command flying unit located on
the north side of the Mumeapolis-St. Paul International Airport, Minn. The mission of the 934th is to fly C-130
cargo aircraft, both airdropping and airlanding cargo and people. Aeromedical evacuation of patients within the
theater of operations is another facet of the mission. The 934th supports the Air Force mission on a daily basis,
providing airlift both in the United States and around the world. Members of the 934th train according to Air
Force regulations and are inspected by active duty Air Force members. Upon mobilization orders, the 934th
would deploy to become part of the active duty Air Force's Air Mobility Command.
�J i�' !L$ To accomplish its mission, the 934th is made up of 13 units, including a headquarters section.
They are: 96th Airlift Squadron, 934th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, 27th Aerial Port Squadron, 934th Civil
Engineer Squadron, 934th Logistics Support Squadron, 934th Maintenance Squadron, 934th Aeromedical
Staging Squadron, 934th Services Squadron, 934th Security Forces Squadron, 934th Communications Flight,
934th Mission Support Fli�ht and 934th Operations Support Flight.
C O m m C� n d The 934th reports to 22nd Air Force, Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Ga. Headquarters Air
Force Reserve Command is located at Robins Air Force Base, Ga. The 934th's gaining active-d�ty force is Air
Mobility Command's 15th Air Force, Travis Air Force Base, Calif. The 934th serves as the Department of
Defense host command for all military operations at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Air Reserve
Station. It is responsible for more than 300 acres azound the airport, and it directly or indirectly supports
approximately 5,000 members of the Air Force, Air Force Reserve Command, Minnesota Air National Guard,
Naval Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve and Civil Air Patrol.
Pe� p' e To assist the wing commander in his responsibilities each day are approximately 150 air reserve
technicians and 200 federal civil service employees. More than 1,150 reservists from primarily a five-state area
are assianed to the 934th. They serve a minimum of one weekend a month and 15 active duty days a year.
'�i pC� �'.� The 934th obligated more than $8.5 million dollars in Air Force Reserve salaries in fiscal
year 1997, and $24 million dollars in construction, civilian salaries, travei costs and operating expenses.
A� rcra�t In January of 1970, the first C-130 Hercules cargo transport aircraft were delivered to the 934th
Airlift Group. Eight aircraft are assigned. The present aircraft, built by Lockheed Martin Corporation, aze
E-model C-] 30s flown by reservists of the 96th Airlift Squadron and maintained by reservisu of the 934th
Maintenance Squadron.
Hi��{� i�% The Air Force Reserve Command has had active units at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Interna-
tional Airport since 1948. In June 19�0, the 934th moved to its present location on the north side of the airport.
The 934th was activated on February 1 I, 1963, at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Before that time it
was called the 934th Troop Carrier Group, which had a materiel squadron, a combat support squadron and the
96th Troop Carrier Squadron. The group was under the 440th Troop Carrier Wing, headquartered at Milwaukee,
Wis. The 96th Airlift Squadron has served under the designations of troop carrier, fighter-bomber and airlift
squadron since it was constituted on May 25, 1943, at Baier Army Air Field, Ind.
On April l, 1978, the 934th was placed as a�oup under the command of the 442nd Tactical Airlift Wing,
i Richards-Gebaur Air Force Base, Mo. On Oct. I, 1981, the 934th was transferred to the 433rd Tactical Airlift
Wing, Kelly Air Force Base, Texas. On April l, 1985, the 934th was placed under the command of the 302nd
Tactical Airlift Wing, Peterson Air Force Base, Colo. On Dec. 31, 1987, the 934th was placed under the command
of the 403rd Tactical Airlift Wing, Keesier Air Force Base, Miss. The 934th was placed under the 302nd again on
June 1, 1992. Finally, the unit was designated a wing effective Oct. 1, 1994.
The 934th has been actively involved in support of the Air Force mission over the last two decades. The wing
took part in two three-week rotations in support of Operation Southern Watch in Saudi Arabia in 1996, during
the first period of exclusive manajement by the Reserve. The 934th participated for nearly five months in 1992 in
Operation Provide Promise, the United Nations humanitarian airlift into Bosnia-Herzegovina, and continued
rotations there in 1993 and 1994. Aircraft and people from the 934th deploy to Operation Coronet Oak in Panama
on a regulaz basis. In August 1994, the unit provided one of the first aircraft providing airlift for Cuban refugees
from Guanatanamo Bay, Cuba, to Howard Air Force Base, Panama, in support of Operation Safe Haven. Mem-
bers of the 934th were involved in Operation Joint Guard in 1996, Operation Restore Hope in Somalia in 1993 and
Operation Just Cause in Panama in 1989
The 934th had both people and aircraft mobilized and deployed for Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
Aircrew, aeromedical, aircraft maintenance, medical squadron, aerial port and support people deployed to the
Persian Gulf, England, Spain and other parts of the United States in 1990 and 1991.
Awa rds The 934th earned its third Air Force Outstanding Unit award for its support of the Air Force
mission from 1994-1996. Its earlier awards reco�ized accomplishments during service in 1988-1990 and
1981-1983.
The 934th has had numerous military units and base divisions win multiple awards and honors from the Air
Force, Air Mobility Command and Air Force Reserve Command. These units or divisions include the 934th
� � Communications Flight, base contracting o�ce, 934th Civil Engineer Squadron, Base Civil Engineering, base
_. -
pubIic affairs o�ce, 934th Aeromedical Evacuation Squadron, 27th Aerial Port Squadron, base aircrai� refuelers,
base military personnel office, base security police, 934th Security Forces Squadron and 934th Services Squad-
ron. •
Also, the unit captured its first-ever trophy in "Rodeo '94," U.S. Transportation Command's annual worldwide
showcase of airdrop, cargo delivery, transport and refuelin' operations. The 934th team won first place in the
airdrop competition.
January >99S
C�
C
MINNEAPOLIS, NIN
c ,
� .� r s
%�'�.
;1 '
The Federal Interagency
Committee on Aviation Noise
(FICAN) may look at the stress
effects of noise on children,
sparked in part by a 1997 federal
directive requiring federal agencies
�' '� identify disproportionate
.;nvironmental risks to children.
FICAN has been ur�ed by
conununity gsoups since 1993 to
move into such studies. Last fall.
two prominent researchers--Gary
Evans of Cornell University and
Dr. ?.rline Bronzafr of City
Universiry of New Y"ork (and a
member of US-Citizens Aviation
Watch)--briefed FICAN on their
research. The last research by a
U.S. federal a�ency on the effects
of noise on stress was done in the
1980s, funded by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Children's (and adult) health
issues arising from noise are one of
SMAAC's top issues for 1998-99.
If you can assist in helping us
formulate and carry out our plan.
please call 869-1501 or drop
Sib1AAC a note at 51 16 Columbus
�� ��'ve. S., i��linneapolis. i�IN 5�417.
- (.see rcicrte�c/ nrticle. pu�,Tc� 71
�, �.
:
., ,
NATIONAL LEADER
TO SPEAK AT SNI�AC
ANNUAL MEETING
I�I�Y' 7
Jack Saporito, co-founder and
president of US-Citizens Aviation
bVatctL a new national citizens
group fi�htina the environmental
effects of the aviarion industry, will
be the principal speaker at the 1998
spring meetin� of S�SAAC
Thursday, i�fay 7.
Saporito will speak on the rising
threats to public health foreseen
from the doublina of worldwide air
traffic in the neYt 20 vears.
S�IAAC was one of the founding
organizations of CAW last .�ugust.
Nlembers will also hear about
CAW's initiatives to develop
stron�er federal and state
monitorin� and control reQulations
on air, water and land pollurion
from airports.
Please plan to be a part of this
major ne�i� «,�ave of citizen
participation. The free event
be�ins at � P.�i. Thursday. �•fa;� 7
at �Iavflo���er Con�?re�zational
Church. E. Dia�nond Lake Road
and Hwv. �� W. For fiu-ther
information. call S\-I.�.�,C at
$22-8113 ur 869-1 �� 1.
I'1�IPR0'VEI) NOISE
METHODOLCDGY
NEEDS CITED
Numerous suggestions to
advance aircraft noise
measurement methodologies have
been made in Washington in recent
months.
At a FICAN hearing in March,
the Narional Organization to Insure
a Sound-contolled Environment
(NOISE) made a number of
important recommendations, e.g :
*The development of "more
sophisticated and realistic measures
of airport noise" other than DNL
{day-nieht level), the government's
preferred metric which averaaes
noise over a 2�-hour period and
includes a nighttime penalty;
*Reassessment of the FAA's
Intearated Noise lyfodel, a
computerized projection of noise
levels used in drawina noise
contours; y
*Broader research into the
health effects of noise pollurion;
*Studies of the economic
impacts of noise, such as
de�radation of property values (a
question recently addressed
incomplerely at 1�ISP);
*Creation of a model
buildin� code for use in noise-
impacted areas;
*��tore resea��ch to deterrnine
"state of the art, affordable sound
insulation materials and
technologies;°
*A survey of the relarive
effecriveness of current land use
planning measures to mitigate
airplane noise, leading to "a
compendium of best practices that
local governments could
voluntarily access."
NEW FAA POLICY SET
The FAA has issued a final
policy intended to discourage local
govetnments from allowing new
non-comparible residenrial
development within 65 LDN
contours around airports.
The intent is to get the FAA out
of the business of retroacrively
soundproofmg homes that local
jurisdictions allow to be built with
inadequate sound insulation in hig:h
noise contours. (Since most
neighborhoods in the Twin Cities
are fully developed, the policy isn't
expected to have an impact here.)
STAGE 4 ENGINE
RESEARCH
PROGRESSING
A NASA-F,�-1 research
program to define the necessary
technolo�y and flight operatina
procedures to reduce aircraft noise
by 10 decibels by 2000 is making
good proyress, accordina to
FICAN.
The u•ork, bein� conducted as
part of NAS.�'s Advanced
Subsonic Transport project, couid
lead to practical production of a
S;14��..�C N�Yl�SL�TT��R
II (I ��/ ,� 11 guOFEAu
vA �'. �,� � M'�
HOSP�TAL �
HQELRIS �i
PARK 7�
ES+PEnna,i. (V _ fi
AREA tOW�'j (H,Wbi Q
�l�l cg�ss � B
�1( I�� 's�v
ESII����rA` �r I(�I( �i II �� �
AREA _
� �NEw
R V N\+/AY
PROTEC710N �
��\
1,000 FT. RUNWAY
ANo 7q�ctwAY EXTENSioN
�Ex�srr�tv "�f' �"--__
{ZUNWAY / �
PRdTEcl'toN NoRrx �
ZO N E
AtRPORT SGALt
ROPER7Y�� �"��°oo FY;-�
SounroARY �
L/N E
Stage 4 jet engine, quieter
helicopters and quieter propeller
craft. A year ago laboratory tests
had produced a si:c-decibel
reduction.
NOISE, made up largely of
airport operators, has called for
further reducing the perceived
noise levels of future aircraft " by a
factor of two from today's subsonic
aircraft within 10 years, and a
factor of four within 20 years."
Further, several citizen aroups
have adtiocated recognirion of the
��-decibel level as the threshold
for future noise mitiaation
proasams for residences, and 45
decibels for schools.
(In �Iinneapolis, Washburn
Hi�h School and Ramsey Fine Arts
Schoo] are scheduled to receive
�10 million in air c:onditionin<� and
othersound-deadenin� measures
o��er the neYt two years. j
2 S��1.�.-•,C Ne���sletter.tilav 1998
PUBLIC I�EA�tiNG SET
C
The plan to extend the
crosswind runway by 1,000 feet to C<
the northeast will require the �
acquisition of approximately 27
acres of property owned by the
soon-to-be defunct U. S. Bureau of
Nfines near Hwys. 62 and 55. A
public hearing will be held at 2
p.m. Tuesday, May 5 in the MAC
Conference Room at the Lindberah
Terminal.
US-C�ti� TESTIFIES
At the FICAN hearing. rivo
representatives of US-Citizens
Aviation Watch (CAW), to which
SVSAAC belongs, also contended
that the FAA's current noise metric
is flawed and yields deceptive
results. Jack Saporito, president of
CAW, and Donald Y1acGlashan of
Washington, D.C., also arvued that
the 65 DNL threshold for�
compatible land use is too hi�h.
`_
Saporito further charged that
� AA's method of counting noise-
affected people is "grossly
misrepresentative." For example,
while the FAA claiins some 3.5
million people reside within 65
DNL noise zones around the
country, "the State of 111inois
conservatively estimates that 1.5
million people are affected at
O'Hare International alone."
LIGHT RAIL TO
AIRPORT?
The prospect of light rail
service between downtown
Minneapolis, the airport and the
ivlall of America now appears
likely as the result of initial
fiuidin� of �50 million from the
1998 Ivtinnesota legislature.
Another $200 million would
come from Congress as part of the
- �roposed $230-billion narional
( �ansportarion bill. But sources for
the remaining $100 million --
understood to be Hennepin County
and the �IAC -- are yet to be
idenrified clearly.
Twin C�ties 7ra�sitways
To
57. Cloud
To ` Nor�t't�-t-own
Ho�1"iceflo rLTronsit
�`�Hubr
L�
�J `�- 6 �%1
Oown�"o�.�n �"'
M�nneuPv�iS
F'//��- ii/ / �OWni-own
/N14V-�+til4 �GS� Pfi.v I � .-
��/ / ' Co�ricbr/
�j/�L � //
Mat,oY 1
America � r„�Sp
� �A�RPOR7I
.�--�
�.J J�J
�
ApQle
�lqlley
SR+���C N�i�SL�TT��Z �
For example, the airport has so
far corrunitted only a nominal � 1.5
million for a passenger ternunal
station. Remaining to be defined
are the costs of a two-mile tunnel,
which mi�ht approach $100
million.
Also not yet defined are the full
LRT system passenger estimates,
the incremental costs to the
proposed relocation of the present
Lindbers.h terminal after 2010, and
the impact on the LRT investment
from the eventual need for a new
airport.
RLJNtiVAY
EXTENSIONS
DELAYEI�
The planned extensions of the
south parallel (12R) and crosswind
(4/22} runways have been held up
temporarily by several questions,
several of them environmental.
After these are resolved the
MAC documentarion will be
submitted to the Federal Aviation
Agency (F.AA) for approval. The
The diagram at left
depicts a proposed lon�
range development plan
for bus and light-rail
transit service in the
Ttivin Cities.
The initial ligh[-rail
corridor �vould run
bet��•een do�vnto�r�n
Nfinneapolis and the
Mall of America, �vith a
tunnel and stop at the
airport for airline
passengers.
Neither the Nlall of
rimerica nor
To �' B(oominaton has
H�t'inys committed funds to help
finance the southern leg
of the rail line.
3 SMAAC Newsletter I�1ay 1998
runway is scheduled to be foot
extension of the south para11e1
runway after the 4/22 crosswind
runway job is complete.
completed this fall, the crosswind
in 1999 or 2000.
In March, the city of
�viinneapolis negotiated an
aaQrreement with the MAC to
preclude further usage of the 900-
SMAAC members Dean
Lindberg, Glenn Strand and Dick
Saunders testified against the
extensions at a public hearing Dec.
18.
The construction work on the
northernmost 3,000 feet of the
south para11e1 runway is expected
to reduce noise over south
Minneapolis during the sununer.
Some 135-205 flights a day are
being directed over Richfield.
4 � ,, � � t .:. .
� . ��
Icelandair introduced nonstop
service April 9 to Keflavik with
continuing fligllts to 20 European
cities. Five flights a week are
scheduled, using Boeing 757s.
The Twin Cities Airport Task
Force (TCATF), a committee of
travel-related businesses and
citizens promoting the MAC's
campaign for more international
service, assisted in the Icelandair
ca�npai an.
ICFLA1VDAlR �
HO��TE INSL�LATION
pacE sLoti�%s
The number of homes insulated
for aircraft noise around IvtSP
decreased to 847 in 1997 from
1,002 homes in 1996, according to
the MAC Part 150 program office.
The decrease was the result of
two factors:
*Delays caused by the
decision to pre-test homes for
carbon monoxide levels before
be�inning work;
*Delays caused by funding
recommitrnents, based on an
averase cost per home of �28,000
far 1998 vs. �19,500 in prior
years.
The 1998-2002 goal is 910
homes per year in a budget range
of �25 million, said Steve Vecchi,
program manager, to finish the
3,600-plus homes remaining to be
treated in the 65 LDN noise zone.
All homes are in Minneapolis.
�
�
�
�
�
�
O
T
S1��..�C N�k�SL�T'�'�R.
AIR CHINA NEXT?
TCATF members have aiso co-
operated with NfAC in developing
markering contacts with officials of
Air China and the Chinese
government over the past year.
TCATF is optimistic that Air
China will choose the Twin Ciries
over Detroit as a stopover point on
a Beijing-New York route later this
year, replacing Anchorage.
PRED �TORY PRICING
CHARGED
Ivieanwhile, the �owing battle
bet�veen large and small airlines
over the majors' alleged predatory
pricina tacrics has heated up in
Washington.
The Justice Deparnnent in
February sent out fresh civil
subpoenas to at least four small
airlines in a quest for evidence of
predatory price-cutting and other
anticompetitive practices at seven
Nois� lnsulaiion Progress
0
92 93 94 95 96 97 98
Year
30
25
20 �
r
X
15 �
�
10 �
5
�
� S�•5.�.�C tie���sletter �1av 1998
hub airports where the Bi� Four
airlines dominate 70 percent or �
more of the business.
Included is MSP.
The small carriers, such as Pro
Air, Vanguazd, Frontier, Reno Air,
Little Spirit and AirTran (formerly
Valujet), have accused the
dominant cariers of trying to drive
them out of markets by
undercutting fares. The majors,
including Northwest, United, Delta
and .4merican. contend thev are
merely protectin� hard-won turf,
and accuse the Clinton
Administration of effectively
trying to reregulate the airline
industry.
A 60-day period for public
comment on the Department of
Transportation's proposed
guidelines ends in late Iv1ay. The
guidelines would restrict the
majors from matchina a discount
rival's fares and sellin� large
numbers of low-fare seats to drive �
the newcomers out.
IYIIT PROFESSOR
COMMENTS
Nancy Rose, an MIT economics
professor, believes that airports
need to maintain adequate rzserve
�ate capacity to facilitate the entry
of competitors into hub markets,
and ultimately bring lower fares.
"It appears as though it is
difficult to enter (the Twin Cities
market) on a small scale and
succeed," she told a University of
ivfinnesota Center for
Transportation Studies audience
Feb. 24.
Northwest. which controls
about 80 percent of Twin Ciries
traffic, has spoken up for nine of
the neYt 12 gates planned at �1SP
in the ne�t 10 years. V an� uard has �
asked for two. Continental one.
Since those requests were
submitted last fall, Northwest and
Continenta.l have agreed to a code-
sharing alliance, ostensibly to feed
more traffic from their respective
domestic svstems to international
points. But observers are watching
to see if the Northwest-Continental
alliance reduces service and/or
raises prices here over tirne.
NORTHti'VEST HAS
WORST RECORD OF
STAGE 3
COMPLIANCE
The FAA's annual fleet mis
report to Congress shows that
North«�est Airlines had onlv a 63.4
percent mit of Stage 3 to Stage 2
aircraft at the end of 1996.
To even reach that level, NWA
had to use four carryFonvard
compliance credits provided under
Part 91 regulations to meet the
� � eadline.
A Si�LA.AC spokesperson at the
Dec. 18 public hearing on the
run��av estensions encouraaed
North�vest management "to e�hibit
the same zeal in conforming to
noise standards as it does to
dominate the airline market at this
hub."
The rankings for 1996 for major
U. S. carriers:
Alaska Airlines ...............89.2%
Acnerican Airlines..........87.9%
South«�est Airlines.........80.7%
U.S. Air .........................73.4%
�rr�erica West
Airlines ........... ............ 77.9°'0
United Airlines ..............72.0°'0
Delta Air Lines ..............69.�°%
Continental Airlines.......69.�%
��f� ..............................�J.�° o
North«�est Airlines.........63.4°%
( � U.S. Average (10).......7�.3°�
S�.��.0 N�1�SL�TT��
Smaller Carriers Trail
Other carriers, including lo�v-
fare and charter lines serving MSP:
Sun Country Airlines.......61..1 %
Frontier Airlines ..............�0.0°0
Vanguard Airlines...........�0.0%
Champion Air .................�0.0°%
Comair ........................... NR*
Great Lakes Air .............. NR*
*Not reported
Foreign Carriers Rank Higher
Among foreign camers serving
MSP, Stage 3 compliance rates
were higher, e. g.:
KLM Ro�al Dutch
Airlines ....................100.0%
Icelandair ....................100. 0%
Air China* ..................100.0%
Air Canada .................. 63.=�%
*Considering service to
MSP
Cargo Carriers Lag
The standings for the ei�ht
car�o camers here:
UPS ..............................100.0°/a
DHL Ainvavs ................ 70.�°/a
E�press One lntl............ 66.7%
Federal E�press ............. 6�1.9° o
R��an lnternational......... 6U.0%
�irborne E�press........... �8.1°a
Emer�� World�ti�ide..........�6.9%
Zantop International...... �0.0%
Cargo Average (24)....... 69.1 ° o
NOTE: All airlines must be at
7� percent Sta�e 3 fleet mis b�•
Dec. 31, 1993 and 100 percent b��
the end of 1999, b�� federal lau .
LAND BANKING URGED
The 63rd District DFL
conti�ention passzd a resolution
urging the State Legislature to
reconsider the question of banl:inv
land for a future ne«� T�z�in Cities
airport, a long-term SIv1A:-�C
objective.
� S`-1.�AC Ne���sletter ti�fav 199S
RICHFIELD LAWSUIT
STILL ALIVE
Richfield's lawsuit challenging
the adequacy of a 1994
environmental review for the
extension of the 4/22 crosswind
runwav has been ordered to
continue by the Eighth Circuit
federal appeals court.
The irony, observers noted, is
that the extended runway's
purpose—to rerlistribute eYcessive
noise over Minneapolis to
R.ichfieid--may never be fulfilled.
That's because a key taxiway is on
hold unti] 2001, and the new north-
south rum�av is scheduled to open
in 2003. Thye cost of the runwav
improvement and associated noise
insulation in Richfield is estirnated
at ��6 million.
Key Phone Numbers
NiSP Noise Hot Line .726-9411
Part 1�0 Program Office �2�-62� 1
MAC Headquarters 726-3100
i�tAC Commissioner
Steve Cramer 82�-66�2
i�IAC Commissioner
Joe Gasper 823-� 198
Ivtinneapolis Mayor
Savles Belton 673-2100
l lth Ward Council Nlember
Dore' Mead 673-2211
12th Ward Council Member
Sandra Colvin Rov 673-2212
13th tiVard Council I1%Iember
Steve Minn 673-2213
Glycol Deicing Pad Started
Construction has begun on a
�,9.2-million �l��col deicing pad to
ser��ice aircraft taking off on the
north parallef run���av (12L). The
facilit�� is etipected to be partiall�•
available for the 1998-99 «�inter
season.
Three other new pads are
planned in the next three years to
accommodate anricipated future
growth to 600,000 flights a year.
CIT�C" APPOINTS 8
i��iASAC DELEGATES
The City of Minneapolis has
named eight citizens to the newly
e.cpanded Metro Aircraf� Sound
Abatement Council (MASAC) for
varyin� terms.
Representing the Sth Ward are
Dean Lindberg and Nathae
Richardson; from the lith Ward
Glenn Strand and Dick Saunders;
from the 12th Ward, City Council
Member Sandra Colvin Roy, and
from the 13th Ward City Council
ivSember Steve Minu, Joseph Lee
and Neil Clark.
Lee and Minn are carryovers.
Four vacancies remain to be filled
in the 12-mernber Minneapolis
delegation. Clark, Lindberg,
Saunders and Strand are SMAAC
members.
HEAVIEST USED
PARALLEL
R��AYS?
While i�iinneapolis may receive
some respite this stnnmer, the fact
remains that the two MSP parallel
nuiways are the most heavily used
pair of runways in the country,
asserts Jim Semn. former
Niinneapolis i�1ASE1C member.
With daily flights averaging
1,350, each parallel is carrying
nearly 700 flights. Only O'Hare's
parallels rival this volume, Semn
believes.
S1N[��k.0 N�hYSL�ETT��Z
35
� 30
T
x 25
`
to
� 20
�
a,15
c
�10
ca
°- 5
NISt� Tra�ic Tr�nds
92 93 94 95 96 97
Year
TRAFFIC SETS
RECORD
Passen�er traffic at MSP
reached a record 30.2 million in
1997, an increase of 5 percent over
the 1996 record of 23.8 million.
The number of flights rose to a
record 491,273, up 1 percent from
the 1996 hiah of 485,000. The
slower rate of increase in fli�ts is
believed due to higher load factors
on commercial jet flights, which
le��eled off at 293,000.
i�lost domestic airlines are
projecrin� another banner year in
1993, provided the economy
remains healthy.
'1�'EB SITE UVDER STUDY
While S�fAAC does not have
an official Internet Web site: you
will find us listed on the Noise
6 Sti�1AAC Newsletter, �iay 1998
0
0
500 �
x
�
ta
400 �
c
0
:�.
300 a��i
�
O
200 -
Pollution Clearinghouse page
under www.nonoise.org (U888-
200-8332).
If you would like to affer Web
page design or operational skills to
SVIAAC, please call us at
869-1501.
Published intermittently by the South
Ivfetro Airport Action Council.
Board of Directors:
Dick Saunders: President
Neil Clark: Second V.P.
Meg Parsons: Secretary
Eiieen Scully: Treasurer
Chuck Mamer
Greg Bastien
Dean Lindberg
S �YIA�C
5116 Columbus Ave. S.
Minneapolis, MN 5�417
(6l2) 822-8118
(_
STATEN ISLAND
�TUDY RELEASED
Scientists tivho studied the
effects of airplane noise on two
groups of residents of Staten
Island, NY have published their
findings in "Environment and
Behavior," January 1998.
(The site was chosen as it is at
the confluence of three of the
nation's busiest airports --
Ken.nedy, LaGuardia and Newark.)
Dr. Arline Bronzhaft and others
found the follo�ving:
--Of those living within the
flight path, 32 percent were
bothered a great deal by airplanes,
whereas only 14 percent in the
nonflight path were bothered;
--In comparison of aircraft noise
�vith other noises sources such as
�'` arden equipment; trucks, and
�----�ogs; those living within the flight
path �vere most affected by airplane
noise;
--InterFerence of aircraft noise
�vith normal life eYperiences was
very high �vithin the flight path as
compared to the non-flight path
communitv:
--lYlotivation of residents to
complain about aircraft noise to
government officials �vas 29
percent for those in the flight path
vs. 16 percent for the other group
On several other indicators of
health -- general health, sleepin�
patterns, food collection, e�ercise
habits, smoking behavior and stress
levels, those ��ithin the flight path
fared ���orse than those outside.
i�tam� in noisz-affectcd
communities around thc U.S. hn��c
� �rged more fedcral atten[ion to
Shi�i�C N�i�'SL�TT�fZ.
health effects from aircraft noise,
including U.S. - CAW. Thzv are
pressing for passage of the ``Quiet
Communities Act," which calls for
the re-establishment of an Office of
Noise Abatement and Control
within the EPA.
ENVIRONMENTAL
GROUPS PLAN CLEAN
WATER LAWSUITS
Several environmental and
animal rights groups filed notices
of intent in January to sue the
Nlarvland Aviation Administration
over alleged discharges of aircraft
deicing fluids at
Baltimore/Washington
International Airport and the City
of Chicago over alleged violation of
laws requiring public disclosure of
large releases of ethvlene alvcol at
Chicago 0'Hare International.
The Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC), the Humane
Societ�� of the U.S. and U.S.
Citizens Aviation Watch are parties
in both suits. They ��vere joined b}•
the Airport Environmental
Coalition of Linthicum, N1d.;
against BWI and bv the Alliance of
Residents Concerning 0'Hare
(AReCO) at 0'Hare.
The groups charge that N1AA
violated the federal Clean Water
Act b�� discharaino into nearb��
Sa��mill Creek storn��vater that is
highh• contaminated �vith aircraft
deicing fluid. The�� also allege that
both MA.� and the Citv of Chicago
vio(ated federal Superfund and
communit�� rirrht-to-l:noti�� la�t s
rcquirinv the airport auth�ritics to
report major releases of �l� col and
other to�ic ch�micals to f�deral.
state and local em�r�enc� pla�lilin�=
z�Tenc�es.
7 SN1A:�C Ne�vsfetter ��Say 1995
"We aim to have the airports
expedite improved runoff collection
and management s_ystems and
s�vitch to less toxic deicing
chemicals," said Nancy Marks,
NRDC senior attornev. She
emphasized that "we are not
advocating reduced deicing or
anything else that could
compromise passenger safety."
EUROPEANS PUSH
TOUGHER EMISSION
STANDARDS
Environmental groups in
Brussels and London say a recent
European Commission proposal to
lo«�er nitrogen o:cide (NOY)
emission limits for aircraft by 16
percent is onlv a partial solution to
gro«-ing air pollution.
In order to be more effective;
the proposed restrictions need the
support of the European Union's
major trade partners. The EC
restrictions would apply to ne�v
commercial jets beginning in 2000
and to existing engines starting in
Zoos.
The European Environmental
Bureau and London's Aviation
Environment Federation �vant EU
nations to remove the air transport
sector's dutv-free privileges and
ta�-e�empt status for jet fuel, adopt
the EU�s standing draft directive
for cutting noise from ne«� aircraft
b�� at least three decibels, and etiert
'`real pressure" on the International
Citi�il Aviation Organization to
reduce N0� emissions from
aircraft �tiorld��ide.
Sy1AAC intends to stud�� air
�missions problcros u�ith US-CA��.
8 G G95 NW `s�y6iaH e�opuaW
anan� suo��i� LOG L
ao��a�s�uiwpy �(�i�
aap�ay���� uina�{
S bZOZ 'oN ��ad
�y� `stiod�auury�
P�d a��fld 'S'11
a�� �S
p�o2I a`Te'I puoureiQ p� MS£ �Csn�c�`diH
t{�mq,� �uoc�eoa.rriuo� ian�oj��Cey�
� ��y� �,��ps.�nq,L •m•d OO�G
au��aay� auiadS ��`4'ytIS
u���r� uot��cn�� suazz�t� �S-n
.�apuno�-o� `o�iiod�S ���1'
:�a:�Eads �san�
�.�.��� �'���. ''��
8TT8-ZZ8 iZI9)
LI�S� I�II�iI `siiod�auuiyV
q�nog anuan� snqcun�o� gljc
�b�I1IS
'II���if10� �IOI.L71� ,I.2IOd2�I�v 02[.L�L�I H.I.�ZOS
C.
SIVIAAC ENROLLMENT-RENEWAL FOR1�1
Send to : SNSAAC
5116 Columbus Ave. S.
�linneapolis, i�IN 55417
General ($15) _ Supporting (�2�)
Name:
Address:
City:
State
_ Contributing (�50)
�
Phone:
_P(ease check if you are ti�rillinv to serve on a Siv1AAC committee.
The number on the mailin�,� label indicates the last year of paid up membership. Please renew if not current.
SMAAC is a volunteer citizens' group and vour participation is vital. Your dues provides the funds to �; ;
inform elected leaders in govemment; the S�I.�C membership; and the general public on airport matters.
AGENDA
� REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN AII2PORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
EAGAN CIT�' COUNCIL CHAMBERS
May 12, 1998
7:00 P.M.
I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA
A. Oath of Office — David Pewowaruk
II. APPROVAL OF MIlVITTES
r �• � : :w • •�
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Review Issues
( j VII. STAFF REPORT
A. South Para11e1 Runway Construction — Flight Pattern Changes
B. MASAC Update
C. Northern Dakota County Airport Relations Coalition Update
11 1 � '
IX. FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS
o Next Commission Meeting — 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, June 9
• Next MA.SAC Meeting — 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 26
X. ADJOURNMENT
�
�- ; � : --:.. :. -��;�{:.,:.
�r �i�.F�j�i�` i '' ��, '� F
A 4� J�,.,J � � i t ��
y�,,1�„ ' �,, � t
_ {��,�c ,,.,;,, � � r . :.+ s- ;
^1...:_�� ,. . J ,
. . .'w S�.�y .�ky ' � �"'��L:.+'i+�.
. �._ ��.
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a
notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan wil! attempt ta provide such aid.