08-12-1998 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
' AIRPORT RELATI�ONS COMMISSION
AGENDA
August 12, 1998 - 7 p.m. - Large Conference Room
1. Call to Order - 7 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approvai of July 8, 1998 Minutes.
4. Unfinished and New Business:
a. Review Airport Plan of Action
b. Discuss MASAC Request for Corridor Issues To Be Studied
5. Updates
a. MASAC Handbook
b. MAC and FAA Response on City Council Resolution on Corridor
Compliance
c. 1998 NOISE Conference
6. Acknowledge Receipt of Variaus Reports/Corres�ondence•
a. Airport Noise Reports for July 3 and July 17, 1998
b. MASAC Agenda for July 28, 1998 and June 23, 1998 Minutes
c. MASAC Technical Advisor's Report for June 1998
d. MASAC Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis for June 1998
e. MASAC Monthly Complaint Summary for June 1998
f. MASAC Operations Committee Agenda/ Minutes for July 10, 1998
g. MASAC Operations Committee Agenda for August 14, 1998
h. Eagan ARC Agenda for August 1 1, 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.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MIPfNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
JULY 8,1998 - MINUTES
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Comrnission was held on
Wednesday, July 8, 1998 in the City Hall Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The
meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. The following mern:bers were present: Beaty, Roszak,
Stein, Leuman and Des Roches. Commissioners Fitzer and May were excused. Also present
were City Administrator Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Roszak moved approva] of the June 10, 1998 minutes.
Commissioner Stein seconded the motion.
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
Commissioner Des Roches arrived at 7:06 p.m.
REVIEW AIRPORT PLAN OF ACTION
The Commission reviewed the Airport Plan of Action and made the following changes.
Regarding the Commission's Focus Issues, it was noted that several new Focus Issues
have been added to the list of issues.
1. Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
A. Monitor the Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Procedures
B. Pursue the Adoption of "Close In" vs. "Distant" Departure Procedures
C. Urge the Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Takeoff Regulations
D. Implementation of Narrowed Air Tr�c Corridor
E. Monitor Conformance with Three Mile Heading Procedure (NEW FOCUS
ISSUE)
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMNIISSION- JULY 8, 1998 MINUTES 1
�
2. Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns �
A. Pursue Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
B. Advertising the MAC Air Noise Complaint Line.
C. Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information and Information about the
Work and Effort of the City.
D. Continue to Collaborate with the Northern Dakota County Airports Relations
Coalition (NDCARC) (NEW FOCUS ISSUE)
E. Continue to Keep Abreast of Other Communities' Issues and Actions. (NEW
FOCUS ISSUE)
F. Work with Metropolitan Council Representatives. (NEW FOCUS ISSUE)
3. MSP Long Term Com�rehensive Plan
A. Monitor and Encourage Promulgation and Adoption of Air Noise Mitigation
Requirements in Mitigation Committee's's Plan (NEW FOCUS ISSUE)
4. Advocate a More Ec�uitable Runway Use System (NEW FOCUS TITLEI
A. Prevent Construction of a Third Parallel Runway
B. Work to Eliminate the Use of Head to Head Operations.
C. Monitor Progress of N/S Runway 17/35.
D. Monitor Runway Use System (RUS) for Conformance with MA.0 Policies. �,
(Administrator Batchelder reminded the Commission that this is a topic the
MASAC will be discussing as well)
5. S�ecific Noise Control Measures
A. Assure Conversion of Stage III Quieter Aircraft by Federal Deadline of Year
200Q.
B. Monitor MASAC's Plan to Reduce Aircraft Engine Run-Up Noise and Aircraft
Ground Noise during Periods of Departure.
C. Promote the Implementation of G1oba1 Positioning Satellite Technology to
Control Departure Headings in Corridor.
6. Noise Reduction Throu�h Litigation
A. Examine Feasibility of a Legal Challenge to Current Air Noise Distribution
7. Ex�and Eligibility of Part 1�0 Sound Insulation Program in Areas Affected
� Air Noise Ex�osure
A. Air Noise Mitigation through Sound Insulation
AIRPO.RT RELATIONS COM1ti11SSION - JULY 8, 1998 MINUTES 2
8.
�
Metropolitan Council Noise Zone Ma� and Related Land Use Controls
�NEW FOCUS TITLE�
Revise Metropolitan Council Land Use Zones and Controls to the Previous Land
Use Zones.
The following are the final changes to the Action Steps for the 1998/99 Air Noise Plan of
Action
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Takeoff Procedures which
Minimize Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
Action Stens Who When
1. Monitor Compliance with Tower Order StafF/AR.0 Study Requested
2. NSDP's - Request Compliance Staff/ARC Study Requested
3. Review first 6 month Study ARC Oct. 1998
4. Review second 6 monfih Study ARC Feb. 1999
5. Pursue Magnetic Shift Affect on
1 OS Degree Heading on 11 L
Staff/ARC/ 1999
MASAC
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Adoption of "Close-In" vs. "Distant" Takeoff Procedures to Reduce
Noise Generation Over Mendota Heights
Action Stens Who When
1. FAA. begins NADPs in Minneapolis Staff/ARC March 1998
2. Review NADP Procedures MASAC Ops August 1998
A.RC Sept 1998
AIRPORT RELATIONS CONINIISSION - JULY 8, 1998 NlINUTES 3
3. Continue to Pursue Adoption of A.RC/Staff Continuous �-
"C1ose-In" vs. "Distant" Departure Procedures
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Moc�i�fied Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Adoption of Mandatory Night�me Takeoff Regulations to Reduce
Noise Generation Over Mendo�a Heights
Action Stens Who When
l. DemandlAdvocate MSP Mandatory Rule CC/ARC Future MASAC
for Stage III Only between 10:30 p.m. Meeting
and 6:00 a.m. to Replace Voluntary Agreements.
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Mod�fied Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Implementation of Narrowed Air Traffic Corridor which Minimizes
Mendota Heights Air Noise Ezposure
Action Steps Who When
C
1. Advocate for Maintenance of 5 Mi1e Staff/ARC Continuous
Final Arrivals and 3 Mile Corridor
for Departures
2. Pursue the Benefit of Updating Tower Staff/AR.0 1999
orders to Original Intent before Shift MA.SAC
in Magnetic Headings
3. Presentation to Commission on GPS by Staff 1998
MAC or other Expert (Mr. Harold Pierc�}
4. Monitor Corridor Compliance and Depa.�t. Staff/ARC Continuous
Excursions
5. Pursue Removal of "Hinged Corridor" and ARC Long Term
the Repeal of Tower Order on South
Parallel Runway
�
AIRPORT RELATIONS CONIiY11SSION- JULY8,1998 NIINUTES 4
Issue: Noise Reduction Through 1Vlodified Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Monitor Conformance with Three Mile Heading Procedure
Action Stens Who When
1. Review Corridor Gate Penetration Analy. StafF/ARC Monthly
2. Alert MASAG and MAC about Compliance Staff/AR.0 As necessary
3. Work with FAA to Achieve Corridor Staff/ARC As necessary
Compliance
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports
Commission
Action Stens
l. Discuss concerns with State Senators
and Reps. regarding Composition of
MAC. Pursue legislation to amend
MAC Cornmissioner Appointment Process.
2. Develop long term strategic approach to
relations with legislature. Work with the
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
to Educate Legislators.
3. Discuss and Compare Cities affected by
Air Noise to MAC Representatives
4. Review MAC Representations with
NDCARC
Who
ARGCC
When
Nov/Dec 1998
ARC/CC 1998/1999
A.RC Continuous
ARC/Staff Completed by
MASAC
AIRPORT RELATIONS CONI�YIISSION- JULY 8, 1998 NIINUTES $
�
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Advertising the MAC Air Noise Complaint Line
Action Stens Who When
1. Advertise in Each Quarterly Newsletter StafF Each Edition
2. Continue to Handout Magnets on Request Staff As Requested
Basis
3. Produce Brochure for Public Information Staff/ARC Fall 1998
and have available at City Ha11 Front
Entryway
4. Mention During Public Meetings Ciiy Council
and Telecasts
5. Produce Insight 7 Segment ARC ��
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information and
Information about the Work and Effort of the City
Action Stens Who When
l. Continue to inform the community Staff/ARC Continuous
on AR.0 projects and concerns using the
City's newsletter and separate single page
mailings.
2. Work with NDCARC on possible legislation staff/ARC Continuous
for MAC representation
AIRPORT RELATIONS CO�YIMISSION - JULY 8, 1993 NIINUTES 6 ,
3
�
5.
:�
Mail letters and Heights Highlites to Staff
State Senators and Representatives
regarding ARC Issues
Invite guest to monthly ARC Meetings Staff
(i.e., Mr. Hamiel, Mr. Wagoner, State
Elected Officials)
Expand coverage of air noise issues Staff/CC 1998
by pursuing informational meetings with editorial
staffs of maj or papers
Continue to send press releases to Staff
newspapers, State Senators and Reps.
Continuous
Continuous
(Quarterly)
Continuous
7. Update and Promote Air Noise Staff/ARC Annually
Mitigation Document.
8. Host an Annual Open House for Staff/ARC Annually
Community Begin 1999
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Continue to Collaborate with the Northern Dakota County Airports
Relations Coalition (NDCARC)
Action Stens
1. Define Accomplishments of NDCARC
2. Provide Information to City Council
about the Benefits of Collaboration
3. Participate in Annual Joint Meeting
of ARC's
4. Work to Build Trust Amongst Members
and Councils
Who When
ARC Fa111998
ARC Fa111998
ARC August 1998
.•
Continuous
�--- ) AIRPORT RELATIONS COrY1NlISSION- JULY 8, 1998 MINUTES %
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Continue to Keep Abreast of Issues and Actions of Other Airport
Communities
Action Steps Who
1. Review Media Outlets for News Articles Staff
and Publish in Friday News
2. Participate in Annual Joint Meeting of ARC
NDCARC
3. Inform other Communities of Our Issues Staff
and Actions
When
Continuous
Annually
Continuous
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota �3eights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Work with Metropolitan Council Representatives
Action Steos Who When
1. Mail letters and Heights Highlites Staff Quarterly and
to District 15 Representatives As Needed
2. Meet with District 15 Representatives Mayor/Staff Annually
to Educate and Lobby on Mendota Hts
Air Noise Issues
3. Resolve Land Use/Air Noise Zones Issues CC/Staff
4. Meet with and Educate Met Council Staff Staff
Current
As Needed
Issue: MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
Goal: Monitor and Encourage Promulgation and Adoption of Air Noise
Mitigation Requirements in Mitigation Committee's's Plan
Action Stens Who When
1. Participate in MASAC Action Plan ARC/Staff Monthly
�
AIRPORT RELATIDNS CONIMISSION- JULYB, 1998 NIINUTES $ �• '
to Implement MSP Mitigation Plan
2. Review MSP Mitigation Plan
ARC Annually
Issue: Advocate a More Equitable Runway Use System
Goal: Prevent Construction of Third Iitorth Parallel Runway
Action Stens Who When
1. Monitor MAC Compliance with Contract StafflARC Continuous
2. Research MAC Acquisition of Bureau of Staff Current
Mines Property and MAC Interest in off
airport properties in third runway area.
3. Monitor EIS Process for N/S Runway Staff/A1ZC July/Aug 199,8
4. Renegotiate with MAC on Terms in CC/Staff Current
Minneapolis/MAC Contract
5. Direct MAC on Preparation of Exhibit CC/Staff Upon Comple.
of Affect Properties of MAClMpls
Contract
Issue: Advocate a More Equitable Runway Use System
Goal: Work to Eliminate Use of Head to Head Operations
Action Stens Who When
1. Advocate Use of Crosswind Runway ARC Oct 1998
to Eliminate Head-to-Head Operations (MASAC is
2. Review first six month Study
Scheduled to
Discuss)
ARC 1998
���� �� AIRPORT RELATIONS CONLb1ISS10N - JULY 8, 1998 NlINUTES 9
Issue: Advocate a More Equitable Runway Use System
Goal: Monitor Progress of N/S Runway 17/35
Action Stens Who When
1. Monitor EIS Process for 17/35 ARC August 1998
2. Advocate for Timely Construction of ARC Continuous
New Runway 17/35
Issue: Advocate a More Equitable Runway Use System
Goal: Monitor Runway Use System (RUS) for Conformance with MAC
Policies
Action Stens Who
1. Review Preferential Runway Use System A.R.C/CC
2. Request MAC to Reconfigure ARC/CC
Preferential Runway Use System to
Incorporate Changes in Airport with
New 17/35 Runway
3. Monitor Gate Penetration Analysis ARC
for Compliance with Estabiished
Conidor Procedures
When
Fall 1998
1999
Monthly
Issue: Specific Noise Control Measures
Goal: Assure Conversation by Federal Deadline of Year 2000
Action Ste�s Who When
1. Monitor Backsliding of Stage III Conver. ARC
2. MASAC Consideration of Stage III Comp. ARC/CC Periodic
AIRPORT RELATIONS CONI�YIISSION - JULY 8, 1998 MINUTES 1 �
�
3. Pursue the Adoption of an Incentives
Program for Stage III Compliance by
Airlines
1998
Issue: Specific Noise Control Measures
Goal: 1VIonitor MASAC's Pian to Reduce Aircraft Run �Ip Noise and
Aircraft Ground Noise During Periods of Departures
Action Steps Who When
1. Review MASAC Plan on Ground Noise Staff/ARC Fall 1998
2. Review Bluff Noise Issue ARC 1999
3. Make Recommendations to MASAC ARGCC 1999
Issue: Specific Noise Control Measures
Goal: Promote the Implementation of Global Positioning Satellite
Technology to Control Departure Headings in Corridor
Action Stens Who When
1. Schedule GPS Expert on AR.0 Agenda Staff 1999
2. Monitor MA.SAC Corridor Study to ARC Fa11 1998
Preserve Three and Five Mile Finals
on Arrival if MSP goes to GPS System
3. Include in any Discussion on Preferential ARC/Staff Continuous
Runway Use System Revisions
AIRPORT RELATIONS COM�i�IISSION - JULY 8, I998 MINUTES 1 1
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Litigation
Goal: Examine Feasibility of a Legal Challenge to Current Air Noise
Distribution
Action Stens Who
1. Continue to be kept abreast of other Staff/ARC
communities' issues and possible
litigation process.
2. Consider Freedom of Information Request StafF/ARC
for EIS or FONSI's on Increased Ops.
3. Consider Legal Challenge Options if Staff/ARC
N/S Runway is Delayed
When
Continuous
1998
1998/1999
Issue: Expand Eligibility for Part 150 Sound Insulation Program in Areas
Affected by Air Noise Exposure
Goal: Air Noise Mitigation Through Sound Insulation
Action Stens Who When
1. Continue to Monitor Changes in the Ldn Staff/ARC On-going
contours and monitor the Part 150 Sound
Insulation Program Completion Process.
2. Examine the feasibility of purchase or ARC/CC 1999
acquisition through Part 154 for severely
impacted areas.
3. Ensure ANOMS data used for Noise Staff/ARC Dec. 1998
Contour Generation for 2005 Part 150 MASAC
DNL 60.
AIRPORT RELATIONS COM�LIISSION- JULY 8, 1998 MINUTES I Z
Issue:
Goal:
Action Steps:
1.
2.
3.
Metropolitan Council Noise Zone Map and Related Land use
Controls
Revise Met Council Land Use Zones and Controls to the Previous
Land Use Zones
Work with CC and Planning Commission
on Comp. Plan Submission.
Review MA.0 2005 Ldn Contours for
Application to Land Use Zones
Consider Repeal of Sound Attenuation
Ordinance.
Who When
ARC Current
ARC/CC Aug 1998
AR.GCC Aug 1998
Chair Beaty moved to recommend that the Commission review the final draft of the
Airport Plan of Action on August 12, 1998 with the intent to present the plan to the
Ciiy Council on August 21,1998.
Commissioner Leuman seconded the motion.
AYES: 5
NAYS: 0
DISCUSS MA.SAC REQUEST FOR
CORRIDOR ISSUES TO BE STUDIED
City Administrator Batchelder explained that the City has received a formal request from
MASAC to consider and submit a list of Corridor Issues to MASAC by August 17, 1998
for their consideration. Batchelder stated that the MSP Noise Mitigation Program
includes an airport operations directive to Evaluate Departure Procedures in the Eagan-
Mendota Heights Corridor and as a result, this topic was added to the MASAC Work
Plan for 1998. He explained that the MASAC is asking Mendota Heights, and other
corridor communities, for a list of suggested corridor topics. He stated that the City of
Eagan prompted this request by submitting their own list of Corridor issues prior to Mr.
Hohenstein's departure.
The Commission reviewed the May 20, 19981etter from Mr. Jon Hohenstein (City of
Eagan) to Mr. Bob Johnson, (MASAC). The Commission discussed corridor compliance
and how the changes in magnetic headings directly impact conridor compliance.
Chair Beaty stated that he would like to see the City pursue requesting a formal test of
, }
" AIRPORT RELATIONS CONItYIISSION - JULY 8, 1998 MINUTES 1 �
departure procedures (close-in vs. distant). He stated that the City of Eagan has requested
the MASAC to reconsider alternative departure profiles for corridor operations and the (
City of Mendota Heights should support this suggestion as well. He stated that head-to-
head operations should also be included in this topic suggestion.
Chair Beaty directed stafFto draft a letter to MASAC and bring it to the next Airport
Commission meeting for review. Beaty suggested that this letter be sent to the Cities of
Sunfish Lake and Inver Grove Heights as well. Administrator Batchelder stated that the
NDCAR.0 will be meeting on July 16 and that they will discuss this issue as well. He
stated that he will present these topics to the City Council and will bring back the
Council's suggestion to the Comrnission in August.
REMOTE MOlYITORING TOWER ANALYSIS
Administrator Batchelder reviewed the following information as discussed by Mr. Roy
Fuhrman at a recent MASAC meeting.
Batchelder reviewed original criteria in placing remote monitoring systems. He reviewed
existing RMT sites as well as new sites. He reviewed charts which indicates the
distributian of EMTs in relation to flight penetration and the number of tracks through
each EMT. He reviewed a chart which indicates flight tracks which the RMT's do not
monitor. Batchelder explained that there will be five new sites.
UPDATES
Administrator Batchelder reviewed the June 1998 MASAC meeting regarding the
orientation of the ANOMS system. He reviewed the five functions of the system:
1. Operational Analysis
2. Airspace Utilization
3. Assess Operational Feasibility
4. SpacialImpact
5. Support other Applications such as input on the INM and other Land Use Issues
(GIS)
Batchelder informed the Commission that the MAC has a Web Site.
(www.macavsat.org). Batchelder stated that this site will allow an individual to access
informatio:� on how many planes fly over a specific area.
The Commission reviewed the June 19, 1998 letter from City Administrator Batchelder to
Mr. Doug Powers, FAA. This letter was sent to Mr. Powers informing him of a
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSIDN - JULY 8, i998 MINUTES 14 �
resolution adopted by the City Council give the FAA official notice of prolonged heading
violations contrary to the adopted rules and regulations for noise mitigation at MSP
airport.
The Commission reviewed a May 28, 1998 letter from Mr. Douglas Powers to Mr+ m k
Salmen, MASAC Ops Committee Chairman, regarding non-simultaneous departures and
how specific conditions dictate departuxe procedures.
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VA.RIOUS REPORTS/
CORRESPONDENCE
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Airport Noise Reports for June 5, 1998.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC Agenda for June 23, 1998 and
May 26, 1998 Minutes.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the MASAC Technical Advisor's Report for
May 1998. The Commission noted that 30 percent of the departuxes in May used
Runway 4-22. They noted that this is a result of current runway reconstruction and proof
that this runway should be utilized more often.
The Commission acknowledged receipt ofthe MASAC Operations Committee
Agenda/Minutes for June 12, 1998.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of nighttime noise summaries. It was noted that
Councilmember Jill Smith requested information on the top ten aircraft noise events
during nighttime hours.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Commission moved to adjourn its meeting at 9:15
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kimberlee K. Blaeser
Senior Secretary
i )
'-- -' AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMlSSION - JULY 8, 1998 rYlINUTES 1 S
� • { p
.���� 4.n::
� f:
MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL Ift1TERNATiOtVAL AIRPORT
TOPICS OF INTEREST
HIGH PRIORiTY ISSUES
1. Equity of Current Runway Use System ; LL...__ ._.___.__ __._.. __.____..:.::..�•
2. Noise Abatement Departure Profiles
3. MAC -��' "" ^ `'"� Representatian.
4. MSP Long-Term Comprehensive Plan Issues - Expansion of Existing Airport.
5. Corridor Definition/Compliance Issues.
6. Metropolitan Council "Noise Zone Map" Update and Related Land Use
Controis. � -
7. N'ighfi�rrne_Resfirictrons on A�rcraft�`Qperations..
_,:_... ,.._.. _r_..,.. , .,,_ .__ _n...,� ..�_�._ �. r _.
MEDIUIUI PRIORITY ISSUES
. . _..
�_. ' 7. Global Positioning Sateilite Technology.
8. •
9. Noise Measurement Issues - a. Usefulness of Ldn 65 Contour
b. Expansion of MAC Aircraft Noise .
Operations Monitoring {ANOMS).
10. Implementation of MSP Mitigation Committee's Comprehensive Plan.
ISSUES TO BE MONITORED
1 1. Prevention of Third Parallel Runway - Monitoring Contract with MAC.
12. Non-Simultaneous Departure Procedures.
13. Phase Out of Noisy Stage II Aircraft.
14. Aircraft Engine Run-Up Noise and Aircraft Ground Noise During Periods ofi
Departure Over Minneapolis.
1� � TOPICS98.INT
\
�.
C
l.
� � � � � � � �
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
A.
B.
C.
D.
E`
�s-:� :��..:
1Vlomtor the Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Procedures
Pursue the Adoption of "Close In" vs. "Distant" Departure Procedures
Urge=�_tlie Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Takeoff Regulations
Implementation of Narrowed Air Tra�c Corridor
M`_ omfar Conformance with tl�ree_m�le heading�p�ocedu�e
��.C_S__.,.__L_u_._�.._L._uA�
2. Hei�hten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
A. Pursu� Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
. �- -
� � i• 3 "t i r r• i '��� i�i i •��� i � i r. i �"e w�i • "v i�
" e " i � � v i vi � � � s i i ri�i � ae ' � � �a'e "v i : ' "ei � i v • "
D.
E.
F.
G':
H::.:
° i " i ■i ' :� ' e - i vi ' � � ie�ie .�i� � : "s i • : ■ i "s e: ' ' e i " - iM1 :�" : ■a ' :• 's -
e •i ' '
Advertising t11e MAC .Air Noise Complaint Line
Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information and`;Infarmation.about the
___..__....�__. .............. _.._.....,....
work and effort of the City:
Gontinue to collaborate with the Norihern Dakota. County Auports Relat�ons
. _ ::.,. .. . .:., . � . ... . _ .
Coalition (NDCAR.C)
Contm�e to keep abreast of other commumties' lssues and:act�ons;:
Work with 1V.tetropolitan Counc�l; representatt�es:
C
:� ��� i`'�.; �'": .w':
� , ` y4 �:,,. �,
3. MSP Long Terni Comprehensive Plan
A; Momtor and encourage-promulgahon ,and adoption of a�r .noise mztigat�ou
, . ... , :: , -,.. :.. ...�
req��rements m Mit�gatton_Comm�ttee's plan,
_: _.�.___. _.��._
4; Ad�ocate a Mbre Ec�utable Runwav Use S sy tem
A. • ' ' Prevent coustcuct�on qf
a;fihird parallel runway.
�
B;:: Work�ta Ehminate the Use of Head to Head ,QperaCrons;
__:.,: :�<__,.:--__:..:.u..�.,,,_.�._�_.,-_-_�_.r._,_�___�..�_.. ._ �,._�.�.__�
C Momtor ''T"� �l Progress of N/_S Runway 17/35;
�:: : .i._':..�.ui_._!��a.!'.:__!.i..ui_v�_..�__u.i_.,'�- �v._�v.=u:v_r — �._.�_� _v �� ...iu, � u v.
aea
' o-� s ° :-- ; • ..v es ". i �
D 1Vlamtor Runway LTse System (RUS) for conformance wrth MAC Policies.
.�_._� J:vL_�....�.L'�v'.'��..1.��_.v�._v�._.v_ � �v .�_._��_1>u_.:ic �.._u..�r .- � ...v__..._. w. v.� u.. .v.u... �
�5 ���.��-,�-� � ^ �+�-- "; ��-�:Specific Noise�Contro171Vleasures
A. Assure conversion of Stage III quieter aircraft by federal deadline of year 2000. .-�
�aise-e�estr�e:
C. �e�e��as 1VTon�tor MASAG's:-plan to reduce ariraft engine run-up noise and
:.: _,,.� :.... .:......�r._.....,._:. ... ....
aircraft ground noise during periods of departure. �=��e�is:
D. Promote the implementation of Global Positioning Satellite Technology to
control departure headings in corridor. .
�6. Noise Reduction Through Liti�ation
A; Examirie Feasib�lity�,of Legal Challenge
a r a r. i • •r. •y •�... .�,.,. t� � sn c� � r � +• r� � �; � n .r-.F � + a T ��
7: A;� Expand ellgibi�liGy of Part 150 Sound Insulahon Program in areas affected by a�r
_.
v
noise exposure �
b$ ; Metropolrtan Council No1se Zone;Map and Related I:and LJse ,Controls
A; Re�ise Metropohtan Couuc�l land use zones and controls to the pre�ious land
use zoiies:
_ . . ....
�Y S�� !�~ -��
�t ktb V�4 �,� . �.,.
� � � � 1 � 1 �
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Goal: Implementation of Non-Simultaneous Takeoff Procedures Which
Minimize Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
Action Steps: Who When
1.
2. Monitor Compliance with Tower Order Stafif/ Study._Re;_qu:e"�
3. NSDP's - Request Compliance
;4; Reuiew� 7 st 6 month study
._. ...,... _ � r ..!�.,i , .:_., , �_ �. , ,
�� �
- �k5:. Pursue Magnetic Shift Affect on
105 Degree Heading on 12R
6: Reuiew 2nd 6 month study:
0
ARC
Staff Study.�Reque��
__�_�--- -
ARC �
ARC .Oct.r98
Staff/ARC f-��-i�-
1171ASAG �te�►�i�rg
1999
AR'C� Feb 9_9'
� �{���/. C � �
, ,�,ti�.� p .��� � 1 .
L �
� � � � � . � � �
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: Who When
� -- ' - - ---- -- - •. . ��r�
-- : - : -
-: - - -;:- - --; : --::-:----
�,.
. -
_ .. . �:.-
„. � --- -: -: - :----- -::- -
,,.
--:--- --:: :- : -
� _ _ ..
,� . --:------:- : - - : : :. '
: :- --: ---- -:
- - _ . :r
. . . __ ; -- --=-----=- - -= - -
5.
FAA begins NADPs �n_:IVIPLS;.
R_ev�ew� NAD:P Procedures
-. ..��.,...__..,._....,_r<« �L___ �..__._...�- --�
Staff/ARC
IVIASAG Ops August 1998
ARC Sept, ,'19,9;8
7 Confiinue to .pursue adopfion of ARC/Staffi Contrnous
,.,:,, -
. � . . � ,.
,.:
elose in" �s , "distant" departurerprocedures
Issue:
Goal:
r►� ����� �,r a
. - � - • • � •
Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Adoption of Mandatory Nighttime Takeoff Regulations to Reduce Noise
Generation Over Mendota Heights
Acfiion Steps:
��
Inquire with FAA Control Tower about
current head-to-head operations
Who When
Staff �ra�gtrs�
Com;pl,eted
._....__.._ .::,....._.
,. _ ..
.::-- .- -: - :-- -: .- --: - -
._ ...
-;.-- :. -: --:: : --== =:- - :-- v .
. -m : .a . ..
,,o
2, Demand/Advocate MSP Mandatory, Rule CC/AR;C Futu;re t�
...,.. , � � d :�
fo� Stage I11'Only}between 1 Q 30�p m: 11'lieet�ng
„��,_.�.u.cct�...!..��.:_i.i.:.�_�..=,_..r _�..� �__��..,�.�...�......�,.._.._...,..—.�...'�d _...__ _.:. � .""�_ ..
and 6�`a, m,fio, rep;iace,rvqluntary; agreernents;
�,__ _ „ . ,,, � - ---- ----- - ' -- •. ..�.
. . ' : • • "
. . -- - -
;-- :-- -: ::- :' :' . . : "- :.-- ; o a
•�� - -- -- --- - „. - --; ----- -: :. „, .
■" : .. : _ - -
. - - • ---
: .- - -: ---- - -
( ) 3
�; '�!s°' ;1:� ��:
�: �.
1 � � � � � � �
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Goai: Implementation of Narrowed Air Traffic Corridor which Minimizes
Mendota Heights Air Noise Exposure
Action Steps vvno vvnen
1. Advocate fior Maintenance of 5 mile final Staff/ARC Continuous
arrivals and 3 mile corridor for departures
2. Pursue the benefit of updating Tower Staff/ARC ''�"� ��T
orders to original intent before shift NIASAC 1999;
,_ .. ., .. �� _..
in magnefiic headings � _
3. Presentation to Commission on GPS by Staff ��"�T
MAC or other expert (Mr. Harold Pierce) 1F9;9_8
-- :;�_�_..�,.
4; M':orntor Corridor CornpJiance and41Departure Staff/ARC Contrnuous
,..,.�. ,�..�,.:__...... . .__. ,_ ... .... : .... . . . . �._� ...� .. . . ......... , _._.._„_� ._.�._ ., : ;.
5__ Purs,ue. Rema�al of "H�ng'ed Corriclor" and ARG Long Term.
the repeal,of Tower �rder on South Rarallel
,.... �:. ,_ ._., � :_ . ...�. --. .. .T .,. , .,,... . ..: .
R'unway
____. _.,.._.:.,.._._.
0
r"
,� z�;. � r ;",w ..:F,.,•
2�� �'�3 r�_�• ;
i
1 � ` � ' � � � �
Issue: Noise Reduction Through Modified Takeoff Procedures
Goal: IVlon�tor Conforrnance Vi/�th Three IVide Heading ,Proeedure
.... _:. � ... ._., __n ._._ .... . ... .... .. �.. _ .. , � . r.... � ,... _..... ..
Acfion Steps Who When
1. Review Garndor Gate Fenetration,Analysis S�aff/ARC Monthly
,,._:,. _�,.. .E,._.�,...__,.,�. _„. _.�. ...: .:_�,.,_...., _.._.
2', Alert MASAC and�'MAC About Compfrance Staff/ARC As necessary
v-.�,.:. L�....v:v,n_• .-��_...� .i I �.:. .t.r_. . ._v.i�.v.ix. 1 �': ..�n i �r��� ....�.�Y �...1� �...::. a.rii. _...._ v ._i..v..� 1 . __.... :
_.___�..... a.c:v _i..�....�_ . •
3�; UUork wrth FAAT to Ach�e�e Corr�dar a. Staff/ARC As necessary
.
,.:.� ,.,�..�_ _��.a�:.,:.,:,:.t :,_..�.«_ _,��,. ..,...Y�� ,.�.� .:.,;�..�... ,, .. .. _ :--._ ...::. ... . _ .
Compliance _, .. _
— ---.�_.._,.���._�__
Issue:
Goal:
� . y..:.
:;;� ��; a i , ..
z x�, e
��� � ��� ��
� � � ' � . • � •
Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Appointment of City Resident to the Metropolitan Airports Commission
Action Steps:
Who When
1. Discuss concerns with State Senators ARC/ ^�. "� "�� "�
and Reps. regarding composition of Council No� /Dec ;;98
MAC. Pursue legislation to amend
MAC Commissioner appointment process.
2. Qe�elop long�fierm_sstrateg�c:approachr�to All
n.:._
r�latians with,legrsl�ature Workrw,ith the -
Associat�on,,+of Me,tropolitan_Murncipalities
r ��.,___.�,�� �
to.� educate legisiators 3
,�..�.:,:r,,:,.�.,..:,,-:,:,:w:.:r�,._.-...,....._,__. ...r._, �
3. Discuss and Compare cities affected by ARC
air noise to MAC representatives
4. Review
MAC representation with Northern
Dakota County Airport Relations
Commission.
Continuous
_ _... _ ... . .L i..u.�
...
ARC/Staff ^ �^� �� nno
by IVI,ASAC:
C
Issue ;
Goal ;
i�; 1 ���: . ;�M .tt::
•'` � '
AIR NQISE :,PLAN OF �ACT[tJN
Heighten' Awareness of'�Mendota''Heig,hts A�r ,Noise Concerns
, � _r� . ... ., ...., �. ..._,.
Aduertismg the MAC Air; Noise Complaint_ Une
StepS ` VSiho Wheri
Ad�ertrse;in E�ach Quarterly Newsletter Staff Each edrtion
.:,,, � ......:.. . ...... . . .., �::._� .� . .. .�,,.,.,.. .
......... ....
Contmue to Handout Magnets on' Request Staff As requesfied
,�.,.F.. .. . _.�.... , _,. .. ... ... ... .. _ � , ,.
B`asis
_....:_:::�:,:-:�::
IVI':ention Ducing Publ�c;iVieet�ngs_�
_r.._�...._,. _.
and Tel:ecasts.
,,.�: =,_:,_�:,.:._:_:�::�
�,-,��- Producett�g lns�ght 7r�Segcnent
,;.�;: ..., . ..� . ._..�.,. ,.....
7
Cifiy,Gounc�l
ARC
. ;�,.._n�
�
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
Issue: Heighten Awareness of Mendota Heights Air Noise Concerns
Goal: Expand Distribution of Air Noise Related Information and lnformafion
,_,
about the �work �an.d efifort of; the City
,. . . ._ .: ---.. _..:_� __,� ._,�� . �_"._ �
Action Steps: Who When
1. Continue to inform the community on Staff/ARC Continuous
�
AfiC projects and concerns using the
City's newsletter and separate single
page mailings.
Work wifih Northern Dakofia County Airport Staff/ARC Continuous
Relations Commission on possible Legislation _
far MAC representation. �
3. Mail letters and Heights Highlites to
State Senators and Representatives
regarding ARC issues
4. Invite guests ta 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.
:
.
Staff Continuous �
Staff Continuous
(Quarterly)
Staff 19'9,;8'.
Council -f,", +
Staff Continuous
Update and Promote air noise Staff/ARC Annually
mitigation document.
Nost an Ann:ual O;pen House. for Community Staff/ARG Annually ln Winter
De�elop Inforrnattonal Brochure for,;'; Staff/ARC
, . . _.
Display Case
( ) g
Issue:�
Goal:
` ��*i � f:r,. .-a ,.
�,��� F�'1; iw..� 9. h~ x
a
AIR..NOI'SE P,LAN (JF'ACTIUN
_ �. �..�. ... , _. ,,.. , :
.., ,, .. .
Heighten Awareness,of'Mend,ota Heights Air Noise Conce,rns:
C'ontinue to Collaborate,,with the �Northern Dakota C,ounty�� Airparts,
� „ .,
� :: 1 �, i . I .'. F
Relat�ons Coalition iNDCARC)�
____..,_._��_
1, Def�ne Accomp,l,ishrne_nts,of NDCARC.:
2' Prouide Information to Ctty, Council
t,_.� _ 3
Abaut the ,Benefits of'Collaboration
.� !� i ...n.. { n.v i. �_.. .v ,........ .t�.S�....n _ ..:... . .t . ��
3 ; Pa�ticipate �n_Annual 'Jomt Meet�ng;
�,.; , < <,..._.,,.�,r._� , � ..... .. . ... ...�� r„ ._� r ..
of-'�ARC'�s �
__. _......._.....,._,, _....
u—+.v..��.i__.1La:,�, :
4; Work,tv Build Trust�Amongsfi Members
✓.•. _I . ' '��.�.i.._ 'e�._.L3.u....Yv: ..._� _u.. a�
and Respectiue Councrls
_...�:.:._.,.__�,. �.,.,:.., __�_,,,
Wfi'o VUhen
ARC Fa11199'$
A_RC, Falla �1998
A'RC
ARC
�C7 '� �� ��9
AI.R ::NtJ'I:S.E. �P.LAN OF i4CTl(JN
,, _
, � ,...... _ ., r:.�. . ,.. _ . . , ,
issue HeightenyAwareness, of Mendyota Heights Air Noise' Concerns
_ ...:::. � ..:.
Goal:: G:ontinue to ICeep Abreast of ;issue's and Actions of Other Arrport
, .. .. : .. ,. . ...
,_ .
Commun_ities
..:,,..: ,. .._:�.
...�_._..--=._,. , ,_._ :..:::,.:_.,.__, _.
�dUho When
Action Steps ' �_ .:� _......
1` Reuiew Medra ,Outlets for News Articles Staff Continuous
,.�...
..__ ,_�_. _�_...:_, � __�: : ,_ .._ _� ., ,_._._... ,:
and Publ�sh,,rn, Friday �News
2� Farticipate in Annual Jamt Meet�ng of; �4RC Annually,
,.�, , : .:.:... ., . ,._ ... _._ ,_.� ..... ... ... .. .
: �� �_,. , .; .
'ND,CARC.
3', (nform';Ofiher Cornmunifires of our lssues Staff Conttnuous
:�_I:L� �..+...L_.la::.u�_____... .,e�L_� �..L.a�_L:�. _.u.���.��_ v__L_.�..�� t_.�_�..:_u:_��..__.�.:.u..:
_J._....r . ..�v.�. _�_�_�..w
arid' Acttons� �
���._. � 10
{"` �' s ai ',��'. .�:
.-��r r.% � �
� �> N
a
AIR NCJISE PLAN �OF �CTIO;�!
issue' Heighten, Awareness ofi Mendota Heights, Air Noise; Cancerns
,. .,.. . , , ,. ,. , , , .
�.. .: , ;. „ , „ . .,. .., ..
Goal � 1Nork' with Metropolitan Council Representatives�;
Action„Steps 1Nho When
Quarterly and
1'',; M'ail Letfiers and,He�ghts Highlites. Staffi ,, ,.;;.,
to� District,15 Represenfiat��e As' needed
_....: �. ,,. _.�.,.� ._ _�._ ,. � ...,..._ � .
2� Meet with District 15'Representatiue MayorlStaff Annuaily;
�,_:�:
� �..:�.�_._.... ___�.., . . __... .,_._.
to: Educate and.Lobby on IViendota 'He�ghts
,.. :.�.,�......_�:.,.. r�_.�.----.r:...,..,_, �, �,, ....,�� . .,. s , � ....
3� Resbl�e Land Use/Air No�se Zc�nes issues Council/Staff Current
,��w: �.,.,y��_,..._.�.�,-�---�,_�.�__,.,_�� �_�_.__� �..___._.__..� ��_...,�_ _,��_�.�. --,_ ,..__..__..«:
4; M'eet with and Educate-Met Caunc�t S�taffi Staff As needec
::.._�.. .�.�.�,... �..i�.� .l��v_�..._...r=.�.._Lu.WJ: .:_�:..v.�_ a.L�..u�.:i_��.v_�__x..:�.�..
f�
t"
I rh .
I�-�M1�� � � :
Ic�_, u.i�, �''',., �� k t
�,
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTI(JN
Issue: MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
Goal: Monitor and Encourage Promulgation and Adoption of Air Noise
Mitigation Requirements in Mitigation Committee's Plan
Action Steps: Who When
1.. Participate in MASAC Action Plan ARC/Staff Monthly
to Implement MSP Mitigation Plan
2. Review MSP Mitigation Plan ARC Annually
�� _ _ � � 12
issue:
�', s x K � �� 4� :
� • � ' � � � �
Advocate a More Equitable
Runway Use System
Goal: Prevent Construction of Third North Parallei Runway
Action Steps: Who When
1. Monitor MAC Compliance with Contract Staff/ARC Continuous
2. Research MAC Acquisition of Bureau of Staff �-9�
Mines property and MAC interest in off �Current
airport properties in 3rd runway area � _
3. Monitor EIS Process for N/S Runway. Staff/ARC � nn�t� nciQ
July/Aug_y,1:99$;
.
� J-9�
. , _
4`� Renegofi�afie with ;MAC yanrTerrns in ;
_:., : , �__��.:=
M�nneapol�s/NiA.0 contract ;
5: Direct N(AC on Preparatron of-Exhibrt
,:_,.., , .. __..,.. .
of; Affected Properties
��_� __-�
13
Gouncii/Staff
Curren.t
U.....,.,.�_.,._._ � �
Upon,i
Cornpletion ;
Of.
MAC/Mpls
, ..,. � �._ ....:.:....:.:.
C'o'ntract
_ .. ..
,�.�.. _ .:,:. � _.,.:;.:.:: . .
Iss,ue:; A' vocate a , ore::..,qut ,..:� :... . . .::... : _...,. .... . .. ..,�
.. ..�. .� . ., ... .. ,
Goal; W:ork to Elirninafie Use of._Head to Head Operations
Action Steps;; Who When
1' �: Advocate Use= ofi Grasswmd Runway ARC Oct 1998`;
�.�r�: ..,a � � � ., �,.k,.::_,...,.,_. .�..
r ..... ,., ,,;..:
r . " "T' '
� .:.. _.,..__...,.i .,.3 .�.r r �.�..__.._ ___:i:.._. ..�_ �u. _ _....,.L._��_
�2'= Eliminate Head to Head Operations
, _ �.:::�v.u.:.,.:_.�_::,..:.._, _.,,_ �..�.�........,.,.�.,..,_:.,.�... _�.�_ �u_ __,: � �.,._
3= Re��ew 1 st Six Month Study�of� NSDP,s.
. . . � ��.�_._ .:_.. u.�_. 1 ' _� L.i:_v�i ._� - 'v_.� �
�, � � 14
� 0 Y q
� °°o
�� ,� ;. � � ,.�_.
�' �' %; , � �
�:�-� �a+. c� ';. r
Issue
Go;al ',
AIR IV(JISE'!PLAN�OF �CT�10
: ,, , . ,..� . � ., . .... .... .. . .. . _ .
A'clvocate a More Eq'uitable, Runway Use System;
::. ,... .�,. t,. ,.._.
..,,�
Monitor Pragress�,of N/S Runway'17/35,
r .. . ... .. . ........ . , ,.._ ..: ., ...
1 : Monrtor EIS �Process�fior 17/35:
2; Ad�ocate for� Timely Construefion of,;
:;:L :.:.: , . ..,,�,. ,,�..,..., �.:..:_ ,,...��.:
Ne:w Runway'17/3_5';
� � � 15
wn�o
'ARC
ARC;
....ye ..,y .�
�. t �
Wtien
August„ 199$:
Continuous
Issue';:
Goal;,;
�_:.'
3 _:
.4' -^k '~�Y � `�� y��' � •
�IR N�C)ISE PLAN OFiACTION
..., �I.�:.rt_1� � .:-z�:�_.��. i � .i �...r. • ,� �. ..�. :.� .... .� � � �� ... .n.. -....:.:
Aduocate a More Equitable„Runway Use' System';
Monitor Runway Use System' (RUS) for, Confiormance with ,MAC
,;.,.;
P',olicies
Rev�ew Preferenttal Runway tlse System
�.� ...:...........__,--,_....��,�.___._,�.�u_���."._« .---. ._: �._�..---� _.__:
Requesfi MAG� to Reconfigure a
Preferentral Runway Use System to.
41 ' � 1 � �. L '... l �. .. ,.:
incorporate ch�ang�es in :A�rport withi
,....�_� w
New 17(35,nRunw'ay
M'onrtor Gate Penetration Analysts
>>
r � � ,,
fior Gornpliance with=Established
...: _�.:..a..�.� . _._.L_:_..._ =.J.::ni.�•a..a.n�—: �+-r. �u.>.1� v�—=.1..v�u:�LJJ �
Corridor Proeedures
� � 16
wno
ARC/,CC
ARC/CC
Wiien
Fall 1;9,9;8;
_1999
Monthly
m� j � L . �>�-
J '� �' = � � ► � = • = ., \
' " ' �i R�
' ' ' ' " � �.__'___ '_"�""��e�■
1 l.Tl � lrl �►' I�! � R�l � l�
� _ � � '' ' �' ""' ' ' � � � � i i i � -
- "� ""' .� i i•
� i .
v'�-'_."......___ -� - - - - - - � '=
�i�������t��q..i��'7L�1�����•_ --
� i ' ' � •
i i • _ � i � � � - ' � " - ♦ • • • • �T�
--� '--- - �• i
e e o e e e
0
_ �� � � . _ �_ � __ � --� ---- - i' v v "s G
� •
i i ' � � • � -
� _
' i i i i • ' ' ' ' ' ' '
� - i - ' - - - - - ' ' '
(See Page 1 1- Strikeout Items incorporafied there)
�� � 17
C
C��
i
Issue:
Goal:
AIR NOISE PLAN OF ACTION
• ' ' Spe,ctfic, Norse Control
IVIe'asiires
Assure Conversion by Federal Deadline of Year 2000
Action Steps:
1. Work with MAC to assure 1996
legislation to convert to all Stage III
aircraft by Year 2000 is implemented
2. �� Mo_nitar Backsliding of
Stage III Convers�ion �
3. MASAC Consideration of
Stage III compliance
4; Pursue the Adoption__of an Incent��es1
__... _...._.... o� r t '� F
.. '... . ' ..: ...
Penalties Prograrn far�Stage II(
�.s.0 �_ _..._._
Gornpliance ;by'Ai;r-lines
:
Who
Staffi
ARC
ARC/Council
A'RC
N;DCARC
��.�__--- --
�, �.,•; .:;r -
t �' 3
;'�.� 1 1 ��` � u 'i
When
Completed
_;�--::--- :
..
��«
Periodic
� � .�. ��=' .�-
. - � - • • � �
Issue: Specifi,c No�se ,Controf
, ,;
IVleasur.:es
Goal: IVlonifior MASAC's: Plan to Reduce Aircraft,�Runup_Noise and Atrcraft
,��_��.�.-------. � �a:.._.._._ --� �---.�:�_,.._.��� . , -- , .._ ...._.
Ground Noise Durtng Pe�iods of,,Departure.
,; ..:.:.:. . ..::. .... .„ :. . �.. __,., ,.
Action Steps: Who When
1. Review MASAC Plan on Ground Noise StafflARC Fall 1998
2. Review Bluff Noise Issue
3.
Make Recommendations To MASAC
� � 19
ARC 1999
ARC/CC 1999
',1�ii �� S'_ • r �.-
j � F � � �i i1� ' �a
'r�Y � � `
V'
♦ � � ' � • � ��
Issue: Specific, Norse Controi
IUleas'u:res
Goal: Pramote the lmplementation of 'Global Positioning Satefl_�te_Technology
.., . ._...�.._
to' Controi Arri�al and Departure Headings m Corridor
Wiio Wr°i`eri
1-:; Sehedule GPS Expert on .�ARC Agenda Staff: �T 999
.:: ,.,,:� :._ , ..,:..:, � .,...._ � , . _, .
<<,:,.:.�.. :.
2; Monitor MASAC� Corridor Study ARC: Fall 1998
.. . :: , , . ,:: ._,:... , .. .. ,
to presenie Three �and Fi�e Nlile'
Finals,,on Arrivat
�,,:, . _ r..�_:._�.. . _
3: Aduocate Durrng D�scussion on Preferenfi�al ARCIS,faff Continuous
:���n . _�. � ... , . , ,
Runway `l.Jse Szystern Re��sion_s
'4 : Promate iStandard� insfirurnent:tDepartures ARC/Staff.
,_..._� _-----_. �.. __....._
aiid F�nal Approaches through the'
..^ J Ly { .. 1 'r_
U'se o,f Glogai Pas�tioni,ng tSatellites
_,...__�,.�. 1__� _ �_,,._r___�� � � ��
� � 20
Issue:
Goal:
� � � ' � � � �,�
Noise Reduction Through Litigation
.Fr,� ...� � �},-,
�4��,^`�,. � � h. � � � v
^�z�=�-r�,i,-�� Examine Feasibility of a Legal Challenge ta Current Air
Noise Distribution
Action Steps:
1. Continue to be kept abreast of other
communities' issues and possible
lifiigation process
2. Consider Freedom of Information Request
for EIS or FONSI's on Increased
Operations
3.
Consider Legal Challenge Options if
North/South Runway is Delayed
( ) 21
Who When
Staff/ARC Continuous
Staff/ARC 1997
Staff/ARC � ""�" ��Q
199i8�/199_9;
._,...�;�:, ,,_,� . �:_;,.:..:. .. _��
1
� � i � � . 1 �
Issue: Expand Eligibility for Part 150 Sound lnsulation Program in Areas
Affected by Air Noise Exposure
Goal: Air Noise Mitigation Through Sound lnsulation
Action Steps: Who When
1. Continue to monitor changes in the Ldn Staff/ARC On-going
contours and monitor the Part �150
Sound Insulation program completion
process. .
2. Examine the fieasibility of purchase or ARC/Council
acquisition through Part 150 for severly
impacted areas
3. Ensure ANOMS data used for Noise Contour Staff/ARC
Generation for 2005 Part 150 DNL 60 MASAC
i � ) 22
�-9-9�8� � _
:1':'9."9'9;' . . �
_�.�-� . � .
a-9'��
Dec��T;9,98i .
C
Issue -
1__u.iw:.l.r.l�_.�
GoaI
� � ,�
:;��
a
��t��.. `
._._._ :1 �.� �,r �., i'� F.�.
� � � ' � � � • .
IVletropohtan Counc�l Natse Zone M!ap" ahd��Fietated Land� Use Controls
n__'=:_4_._... .a �...�t �.�.�__..... —e _..+LI_�u._i.�.u.�.l �.I......1 1 Y � .wu.1__u ! �..11. �i_i _�_L. -.z..,:. . � ._.... ..: " v�..��. —.� .v:.: x.,�.i..�A'._. �' 1
Re�ise Met` Couned L` and Use Zones ands Confirols LLto� the;;Pre�ious;Land
_u�..__.�u�.4�_"'�_u�.}.a..�.+1�u._...L.�..1_J�__L.....e.�._... ..1L..... �_.I��.uuif .4_ __�.... P _��.v...�
Work_ wrth Crty�,Councii. and�
P[anning Com�mission,,on�Comp�rehensiue:
2_�: Revrevrr MAC�2�05�LDNrC,onto;urs for�,K
App[rcafi�on :ta Lantl U}se �Zo�nes �
3� Cons�der� Repeal ofi�Soun� d A�tenuation__
� �
_� ,�_ -���,.���. _ �: r: ,��.�� �u,_�
(?;rd�nance
---..,:, __.:��.:-,_�a .:�
a
.�
ARC%CC:
a-r'__' u.i.. n._
ARC/C:C.
y,z�.�_�����_
Wh'en �
CUC��iI'i
••. -• ' .:.-
.. ,-- : °•: . � ••:� • ..�
ACTIONPL.98
�. ) � 23
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
II�1 i
August 11, 1998
To: Airport Relations Commission
From: Kevin Batchelder, City Adminis �t-oz�'''
Subject: Unfinished and New Business for August Meeting
DISCUSSION
This memo will cover the two items on the agenda for Unf'uiished and New Business,
specifically, the review of our Airport Plan of Action and the Discussion of MASAC's request
for Corridor Issues to Be Studied.
1. Air�ort Plan of Action - The Commission requested final revisions to the Mendota
Heights Air Noise Plan of Action at the July meeting. The Air Noise Plan of Action is
intended to serve as a guide and a goals statement to direct our actions, as it relates ta
airport operations and air noise in the community. The Commission stated their intent
would be to present an updated Air Noise Plan of Action to the City Council in August.
On Wednesday evening, the Commission should review the Topics of Interest list, the
Focus Issues and the Action Plan as it has been revised to date and suggest changes,
additions, corrections, etc. Changes are shown in- `-'�A�for deleted language and in.
redline:for new additions. (Please see attached Action Plan.)
ACTION RE(�UIRED
Consider the Air Noise Plan of Action and make a recommendation to City Council.
2. Discuss MASAC Rec�uest to Define Corridor Issues - We have received a formal
request from MASAC to consider and submit a list of Corridor Issues to MASAC by
August 17, 1998 for their consideration. The MSP Noise Mitigation Program includes
an airport operations directive to Evalacate De�arture Procedures in the Eagan-Mendota
Heights Corridor. As a result, this topic was added to the MASAC Work Plan for
1998.MASAC is asking Mendota Heights, and the other corridor communities, for a
list of suggested corridor topics. (Please see attached July 1, 1998 letter from Mr.
Robert Johnson.) The City of Eagan prompted this request by submitting their own list
of Corridor issues prior to Mr. Hohenstein's departure. (Please see attached.)
At our July meeting, the Commission reviewed Eagan's request of corridor issues to be
studied and provided direction to City staff on preparing our own list. Based on this (
discussion, and a knowledge of our history, goals and focus issues, the attached
letter was drafted for the Commission's consideration. (Please see attached letter
to Mr. Bob Johnson, Chair of MASAC.
ACTION REnUIRED
The Commission should review the draft letter on Corridor Departure issues and make
a recommendation to City Council.
C
August 18, 1998
Mr. Bob Johnson, Chair
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Mr. Johnson:
The City Council of Mendota Heights, at its August 18, 1998 meeting, officially adopted a list of
issues to be considered during MASAC's review of the Southeast Corridor. The list of issues is
as follows: � `� �
�
1. Corridor Com�liance - Aircraft operations should be maintained inside the designated
southeast corridor. �~� °„�.^-'°.'--'���C�e use of navigational aids, GPS and standard
„-,�„� -, . .
instrument de arture rocedures to narrow oper-ation�. ��. � � =T' `, ._� � ""-"-� `- ' `''-�
p p �ir-e ,�`rou^{"�--..�c ��- C�a�f- v- ��?<� r^
►�
3.
Corridor Configuration - The Blue Ribbon Task Force recommended iwo changes for -
implementation. The non-simultaneous departure procedures has been studied and
implemented. MA SAC must now consider the establishment of the 095 degrees polic�Q ry �����
bound recommendation. C� � �- � � `�'r � ��' �` �'�`� � `� �
�'Y � vS �� ,
��������.__
Vertical De�arhzre Analysis - Alternative departiue profiles should be reconsidered.
Altitude analysis should be performed to determine aircraft proximity to ground levels at
incremental distances from runway ends to be compared to aircraft capability. Deparhire
procedures testing is requested.
4. Head to Head Operations - Head-to-Head Operations require the divergence of departures
over residential areas of Mendota Heights, often during night time hours when traffic is
very light, reducing the efFectiveness of the non-simultaneous departure procedures.
Rerouting of in-bound traffic or modification of head-to-head procedures should be
��or� -rd��d: ��� ! �..�.��. d
5. Ma�netic Shift - With the shift in magnetic headings, the original intent of tower orders
that are based on heading designations should be reviewed.
Ci '
� , l_._ CC
n�
,..� 1 "�
�9�e�.��r �:-�v�-�..� -
_ � _
..� � � �� �''�_{ (,/../��f'
i
��ZZ
�'l�O"''�- �� (�.-; E'U c.�`
Mr. Bob Johnson
August 18, 1998
Page two
�j�� 1�`
;_ -
6. Ec�uitv of Runwa, Use S, stem - The existing RUS calls for the use of the crosswind
runway, up to 20% of the time, to relieve the burden on the para11e1 runways, which are
preferred based on land use compatibility theories. This has not occurred as prescribed
and should be considered. The recent reconstruction of runway 12R/30L has
demonstrated how RUS was intended to work and does work.
'Thank you for the opportunity to provide this list of corridor issues for review by MASAC. T'he
City of Mendota Heights respectfully awaits the opportunity to discuss these issues, and those
issues submitted by our neighbors in the corridor. We look forward to cooperating with MASAC
to address these issues.
Sincerely,
Kevin Batchelder
City Administrator
C:
C
(�)
Metropolifian Aircrafi Sound Abatemenfi Council (MASAC)
6040 28th Avenue Souih • �linnecoclis. Niinnescic 55-'SC •(e l2; %=c•��' �;
C�^cirmcn: i<cce�r P. Jcnnscn
r�sr Chcirs: Sc�rt 3unin. 1990-1995
+Nclter Rcc�censtein. Ii. 1482• 1990
Jcn Cei Ccizo. 1979-1982
Stcniey W. Olso�. 1989-1479
iechnicci
Advisor: Jcnn Fc95ia
luly 1, 1998
iviavor Charles i�iertensotto
City of ivlendota Hei�hts
2371 Rogers Avenue
tilendora. Hei�.hts, �1�I >j 12�
De�r �lavor �+fertensotto:
u�-'— „ --
Tne tiletropolitan Aircrafr Sound Abate:nza� Council (yLAS�C) is in its 29th ve�r of addressina airport
related noise issues and concerns_ yL�SAC represents a consortium of airport, air carrier and communiN
representatives. As one miQht expect, such a composivan provides an insi�ht�l platform for innovative
methods oi addressing various aircraft noise related issues_
In support of MASAC's charter the i�1t'�S�C Operations Cotnmitte� (�vhich reports to the full �S.ASAC
body) convenes monthly to address specific noise related issues. Tne 1998 «•or'.< plan objectives for the
VL�SAC Operations Committe� includes elements from the i41SP �Iois� yiiti�ation ProQram, ti�hich
resulted from the legislation endin� the Du�l-Trac':: Study. -
One oi the eioht airport operations directives contained in the proaram follows:
o F�enn_�1�/r�nrinrn T-��1ohr_ ('nYr?!�O!'
Fvnl��n.ln l�onnrttire PrOr��'=!r:-'c in rh_ -
As a result oF the above directivz the tit:�` �C Ooerations Commirz� has included this topic in .i�s 1993
ti=rork plan. �
Due to �our communin��s proximiR• to the cvmdor a;�a. su�azstions are «'zlcome rzl�te� [o this topic. It is
imoor�[ Co ke�p in mind this is :n e'.�iu�<<en ot depar�urz orecedures not a ecr-;dor redeEinition �niciat����.
.�.(l corr�rne.^.�s rec�ived ��ill be revie�.��zd �� �`�z �(.�S.�C Oez:�nor,s Cor,lmi�:ee in thz dztz,�nin��ion oF
cossible topics.
:�;thou2h suomittinJ suv�est;en� eecs r:c� r::c�ss�r�i�• mz`�': chz�. ��i(I oe ir,c':uded in [hc ��.�lu�uon.
c�2t7esticns c�n znhanc� thz croc�ss.
� ^c' �:C`� ut C`" �'•:l;l..^ .7(O�ICyJ ��:fi�c' �Lt3�r>�ilOt'i� t`Of �OUC
Pl��se nete che enclused le::�� r�c���.�� ��c�' [. � ;i:.__.. cu 5c:are .�.� �..' l�.� 149�
�o in,:(�r !z ��: _� ,;�> "�
r� �i- It �•our communit�� ti�ish�s =�o�:. - _ . �
�' � . .. .
� '� �___ --'_
Thank vou for vour tim� and consideration. It you have an� questions or commen�s p(e�se con[act Rov
Fuhrm�nn at 7��-6326.
S incere!y,
/ ,� /' i ;
% / � %i
.. �--c:' � .7'c.. �� � % L �.y.-�:�'�---,.-
� ben P. Johnsorr" "
✓
�tASAC Chairperson
Enclosure
cc: Kevin Batchelder
JiII Smith
:,
C �
C
�
ci�'� �� ���C3il
tilay ?0, 1998
Bob Johnson, Chair
tile�ropolitan Aircraft Sound _abatemen� Council
6040 28`h �,venue South
Vlin.neapolis, ti.1�i f >j��0
Dear Chair Johnson:
r�:�.rvi,as ���a.��i
���•,��
�ar�ic..a a�va.�a,
EE.� ����NI�I.�iSi
SrNC(�,4 r1. i�1ASiN
r�E��coa=_ waC�iTER
C�unc:l ��iemcerz
rr:cN�as �E�c-�s
cih/ .�cmin�strcrcr
E. J. VAN OvERBEKE
c:n, cz«
In oTficial action tak�n at its mzetinQ of ylay 19, 15�93, the Ea�an City Council formally
adopted a list of issues to be consider�e� in l•�:�5?,C's revieti� of the EaQanh�iendota
HeiQhts corridor. These include:
• Corridor Comnliance — the ne�a to main�ain opera�ions benvean rum��avi centerline
and 9� de�rees.
� Altitude Analysis — identiry the mesns and zxtremes of operations' aititudes at one
mile inczements frorn the run�vay end to the Inver Grove HeiQhts boundary on the
east, tiiendota Heiahts boundary on the nonh and EaQan boundary on the south and
west.
•�nalysis of operaCians' consequences from nunvay redesianation to 10/30.
a tilodification of head-to-head procedures to eliminate the ne�d For deparn2res to
diver�e.
• Feasibility of standard insli-ument departure procedure to naro�v ooerations.
• Non-simultaneous depar�ure nroc�durz analysis.
• Identification of desirable ilisit t�acks for QeoQraphic positioninQ svstems
implementation.
• Potential use of naviaational aids for improved comoliance with coridor procedures
prior to GPS.
� R.�C �i1S:G��: 3���^aCi�'? G�eY"�•*Tiu'e profiles for co�::C�r eperutlOP.S.
I �vill be happy to provide additional information with respect to these items at your
convenience or at the tiI_�SAC Operat:ons Commire� me��inv of June 12th. Thank you
for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
• ' b'Yc`�-�
Ju Hohenstein
�ssiscant to the Citv a.dminist:�:or
J�-:,' m s
tv1UNICIPAI Cc�'�lTER
?"c::C �'l�" �::Gc -�.=�
:-.. i•I. blli,?�i_�.. .- �� __ 24'7
--:.ME ;-• _ :�C
=-� i�;Z' _.. ; _
-..� .��=. ., ....,c
.-� :�:.•;E �=.{ ":�n=
( IcCi_ � - ���iC - :��r�i';� i•� .�UR', : i�.!P,II,P�Ii �
I�'� J \; I � �n�_''(��_-.'�
__..,. �cccr,�r:- _. ����v=
n,�,�,�r�TE����vct F,�c�u� r
..c... .,��C:-. ra -�i^,-
c-_ ,`t. y!�f�i�c�i,.i.` .... --
'-�"'i: ', ..�C
= - � _ . _.,,.:
4
............. ............... .. ..
C
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
July 30, 1998
To: Mayor and City Council �
�`,(, 1
From: Kevin Batchelder, City A''�'a
Subject: Acknowledge Response from MAC and FAA
DISCUSSION
At the June 16, 1998 City Council meeting, the Council adopted Resolution No. 98-35,
A RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE OFFICIAL NOTICE OF PROLONGED HEADING
VIOLATIONS CONTRARY TO ADOPTED RULES AND. REGULATIONS FOR NOISE
MITIGATION AT MSP INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. This resolution was in response to
corridor violations on the evening of June 14, 1998 and in response to the release of data by
the Metropolitan Airport Comm.ission's ANOMS system that showed repeated excursions north
of the corridor over the last year. (Please see attached Resolution No. 98-35.)
A response has been received from Mr. Roy Fuhrmann, MAC Technical Adviser, and
from Mr. Doug Powers, Interim Tower Chief - FAA. (Please see attached letters.)
According to both letters, on the evening of June 14, 1998, there were 16 operations
north of the proposed 095 degree policy boundary during the time referred to in our resolution.
These excursions were precipitated by thunderstorm activity and pilot requests to avoid poor
weather conditions.
Later this year, MASAC will review the corridor departure procedures as part of its
1998 action plan. The Airport Relations Commission will be making a recommendation to
City Council during their August 10, 1998 meeting regarding corridor issues that will need to
be studied in this review by MASAC. MASAC has requested that each city in the southeast
corridor provide a list of corridor issues to MASAC for consideration.
Acknowledge the correspondence from the FA.A and the MAC in response to our
resolution.
�
� � ` a �- �
,..
. ...
June I9, 1998
�Ir. Dou� Powers, Interim Tower Chief
Federal Aviation Administration
6311 34th Avenue South
�Iinneapolis, M�i 1554�0
Dea.r l�ir. Powers:
This letter is to fonvard an o�cial copy oi a City Council resolution adopted on Tuesday, June
l6, 1998 by the iblendota Heights City Council. Resolution No. 98 >>, RESOLUTION TO
PROVIDE OFFICTAI. NOTICE OF PROLONGED HE:�DNG VIOLATIO�tS CONTRARY
TO A.DOPTED RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR NOISE tiBTIGA2I0N AT MSP
I�iTERi�tATION.AL AIl�.PORT was adopted in response to repeated air traftic patterns north of
the established southeast corridor boundaries. .
Residentiai areas in Mendota HeiQ.hts that are outside the southeast comdor are e:�perienci.ng low
level overfli�hts on a repetitr`ve basis and it appears that the FAA Control Tower.is not concerned ��
about following the established corridor procedures. W6ile we realize that construction activity
this summer has chanaed air traffic patterns and that thunderstorm activity can result in ad;usted ��
air trafiic pattems, activity north of runway headin� 090° has become too frequent and regular �-
over the Iast year. �
As stated in the attached resolution, the conti.nuzd practice of southeast comdor violations on the
nonh is unacceptable and contrary to the established rules and procedures for noise mitiQation. If
the i�L4C and the FA.A are unable to follow the established corridor and noise miti�ation
procedurzs, it may be necessary that amended rules and reaulations be adopted with alI the
propzr environmental rules and reaulations, includin� public hea..rings.
Sinczrely;
�� ��,���
Kevin Batchelder
Citv Administrator
cc: Bruce Vento, Hous� of F'.epresent::::ves
James Oberstar, Hous:, of Represe��ati��es
Paul tiVellstone, U.S. Senate
Rod Grams, li.S. Seaate
_�.- ,���� - �- - - ��.-�..—,�
1101 Victoria Curve • i�lendota Heighis. �f� • ��1J.S (612) 4�2-1550 • Ft�. 452-8940
CITY OF 1�1E`�DOTA HEIGHTS
D.�KOT:� COU`�TY, i�1li`+i`aESOT�
RESOLUZI�`� `�O. 98-35
RESOLUTIO`i TO PROVIDE OFFICI:�L i�4TICE OF PROLO�vGED HEADI`iG
VIOL�TIO:�S CONTR�RY TO :�DOPTED RULES �'iD REGULATIONS FOR NOISE
l�1ITIG�TiON �T i�ISP I`iTER.i`(ATIO`iAL :�IRPOR'T
ti�HEREAS, residents of the City of yfendota Hei�hts located in residential areas north
of TH 110 between Delaware Avenue and Lexin�ton Avenue did experience repetitive, low level
overfliQhts on Sunday, June 14, 1993 bet�veen the hours of 6:1� p.m. and 7:'!� p.m.; and
i��ZEREA,S, these residential aress are approximately 1`/ miles north of the Southeast
Coridor: and
%�HEREAS, these residential ares are well nor[h of the 09� ° Comdor Poiicy Boundary
and the F� 090° Operational Corridor BoundarY for air traffic; and
Vv`�RE�,S, these repetitive overz`IiQhts werz eYpressly obtrusive because of their low
level takeoii profile; and
ti�'"HEREAS, the �ietropolit�.n airports Commission and the Ft� have �vell established
procedLr.:s for the operation of the Southeast Coric�or for noise mitiQation puruoses tivhich
require air�.rafr to be located betwe�n a 090° headinQ and�'or a headina ti�hic� tiv-i11 track on or
north oi the 30L localizzr, and
ti�'HER.E.�S, informational da�a f:om the :�in� or tioise �:-!C Operations �tonitorin�
S��stem�s (.=�.NOvIS) monthlv Comdor G�:� P�nz�r``i°n .-�n`lysis cle�l�� ce;�onstrates a
�ianii!ca.nt and ro�tine diver�enc� frorn c�:z establisi-!ed Froce�Lre� ior Ru:����:a�� l�L/30R, and
ti`�HERE.�S. CoriCor Gate P�ne,:�:!�,n ���l��sis �ata si!:c� June o� I99i clearl�.
�,�- ,; ��( Ca�er Je� Deparu:.� un P.�����a�� i?L�`3�R are
dzmuns�:���s a month(v ati�era�?e oi -.� -o �. 1t •
�:oiat;n�? thz required Cor�idor Proc���ur�� �,ti'ti� eXC�CStO�� i:Orih �i the c��:cor boundarizs.
\OtiV, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the vlinnesoolis-St. Paul �Iecropolitan
<�iruort Cummission and the Federai Aviation Administration at the titinneapolis-St. Pau(
International Airpo�t are hereby notified that the continued practic� oFsoutheas� corridor ( �
vioiations ro the nonh is unacceptable and contrary to the established rules and procedures kor \
noise mitiaation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED if the yletropolitan Airpon Commission and the
Federal Aviation Administration are unable to fo(low the �.stablished corridor and noise
mitiQation procedures, that amended rules and re�ulations be adopted after compIying w-ith
federal environmental rules and regulations, includina a public he�-inQ on any chanaes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Nlendota HeiQhts this 16th day of June, 1998.
CITY OF �iENDOTA HEIGHTS
$y Charl.es E. Mertensotto/s/
Charles E. i�lertensotto, �r�ayor
ATTEST:
`�� ____�_�,�:>>>�,�;� ,-���.c�.---�
K�thle�n ti1. Swanson, City Clerk
M RC�P�L� .c� �R'T� CC� IS�IC.�l'�
r�PP+,s sq,ryrQ Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
? •t 9� 6040 - 28th Avenue South � Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
� z Phone (612) 726-8��'����'���
_.. m O
, �t :i" y.
A ' l N
O
'0 <!`
O , y.
r t �o
9� 41RPORty
Mr. Kevin Batchelder
City Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 V'ictoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Dear Mr. Batchelder:
� �!� � �.) �. � �. ���� � � �.j
.0 � t �`� _ti.� :..r~ L.i ��
July 14, 1998
Thank you for your letter and notification of the recent Mendota Heights City Council resolution regarding
corridor operations. As you are aware, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) monitors the
corridor operations on a monthly basis. Last year, however, radar data for the Airport Noise and Operations
Monitoring System (ANOMS) was una�ailable from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), due to a
computer hardware change at the Air Traffic Control Tower (ATC'I') which affected our ability to monitor
comdor compliance with actual flight tracks.
Since the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the FAA has been restored, the monthly corridor
analysis reports have shown a slight increase of out of corridor operations on the north side of the proposed
095 degree boundary. Please keep in mind that the 095 degree boundary was a proposecl policy boundazy
and the operational heading is 090 degrees. Though these transgressions of the "northern boundary" of the
corridor are not a violation of any air rules, it does highlight an area for cooperation on an agreed-upon
procedure between the FAA and MA.C. Because there appears to be a shift in "out of corridor" activity
from the south side to the north side of the corridor, since the reacquisition of the radar data, MAC staff
will be conducting a review of the corridor tracking procedures. Althaugh the method MAC staff was
using prior to the change in FAA. equipment has not changed, a closer exanunation will be conducted
during the comdor review later this summer.
Although MAC and the FAA have a well established procedure for operations in the corridor area, it is
absolutely essential to point out that MAC can only request FAA to implement and follow various
operational procedures. FAA has sole jurisdiction over where aircraft may fly. This is not "buck passing"
between agencies, but rather, the reality that allows the complex National Airspace System to operate
safely and efficiently. Even when FAA agrees to implement an airport-requested procedure, it is a"best
efforts" arrangement, tempered by safety of flight, day-to-day operational constraints, and weather.
Concerning the activity on the evening of June 14, 1998, there were 16 operations north of the proposed
095 degree boundary during the time frame referenced in the resolution. After further review of the
associated time frame and research with the ATCT, it appears that localized building of cumulus nimbus
cloud formations in a direct line with the standard departure flight paths, caused the unusual flight patterns
for approximately 35 to 40 minutes. After these clouds passed through the area, operations again returned
to normal.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRI..AKE • ANOKA COtJNTY/BLAINE • CRYSTAL • FLYING CLOUD = LAKE EI1VI0 • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
As stated earlier, MAC staff is working closely with FAA tower personnel to insure aircraft maintain flight
operations within the agreed-upon corridor area, to the greatest extent possible. We will also work on the
"out of corridor" issue with the local ATCT to address many of your community's concerns during the
review of the corridor yet this summer by the MASAC Operations Committee. It continues to be MAC's
desire to establish a mutually beneficial basis, for all communities adjacent to the corridor, from which to
launch procedures to improve corridor boundary compliance.
Sincerely,
�
Roy �hrmann
Manager, Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
cc: Jeff Hamiel, Executive Director - MA,C
Cindy Greene, FAA
�
�
page 2
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
July 16, 1998
Minneapolis Air Traffic Control Tower
631 � 34th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450
Mr. Kevin Batchelder, City Admi_nistrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Deur 1V��. �u��uelan�:
JUL 2 2 �`���
��.,.� : �_w_. oer �----�
In response to your letter, dated June 19, 1998, the followi.ng information is offered. The
FA.A understands that aircraft noise is a cause of great discomfort for the communities
surrouncling the Minneapolis Airport. Minneapolis Air Traffic Control Tower has worked
closely with the communities through the Metropolitan Airports Commission to assist in
mitigating noise concerns. At the tower noise abatement procedures maintain a high
emphasis level and are consistantly monitored. Because of it's commitment to noise
abatement and noise mitigation, Minneapolis Tower provides technical advisors to both
the MASAC and MASAC Ops Committee. These advisors participate in these activities
to both provide information on air traf6c procedures to the communities, and also to
ensure that agreed upon noise abatement procedures are being complied with to the
greatest extent possible.
It appears in your letter and the attached Mendota Heights Resolution 98-35, that there
is a misunderstanding on the part of your community as to specific air traffic procedures
within the Eagan/ Mendota Heights Corridor. The Minneapolis Air Traffic Control
Tower does not operate under a"95 Degree Corridor Policy". As stated in the attached
page from the Minneapolis Tower Operational Order, and verified in your city's
resolution, air traffic controllers utilize a 90 degree heacling for dispersal of departures
from both runways 12 left and 12 right. The 95 degree policy has not been
environmeil��ly �tu��ie� �ay the FAA, nor have we been asked to pursue it. The data
provided to the communities each month through M�SAC tnat addressess tu�ns ncrth of
the 95 Degree Corridor Policy show results that are to be expected since the tower is
utilizing the allowable 90 degree heading quite often during depaxture rushes. I suggest
that if the data was pro��ided only on aircraft that are north of the actua190 degree
heading, the number of aircraft north of the corridor would be quite small. In studying
1998 corridor data provided through MASAC for the past five months, it appears that
aircraft north of a 90 degree heading would average less than 1°/a, or less than 40
aircraft in 4,000. Ali;hough air traffic control strives for 100% accuracy within the
corridor, a 1% north deviation figure can be easily associated with weather or pilot
heading variances.
� The concerns stated in your resolution pertaining to specific events on June 14, 1998
have been evahiated. My staff has reviewed all available data and has cletermined that
during the time period you referenced, 16 aircraft were given turns north of the 90
degree heading at pilot requests due to weather.
I hope this information clarifies the current air traffic procedures being utilized within
the Eagan/ Mendota Heights Corridor, and also reassures your community that noise (
abatement procedures are taken very seriously at the Minneapolis Airport Air Traffic
Control Tower
Sin erely,
`L� r,. -
/;
� . C � �,.., _ _
Douglas F. Powers�—
Acting A.ir Traffic Manager, Minneapolis ATCT
Attachment
cc: Bruce Vento, House of Representatives
James Oberstar, House of Representatives
Paul Wellstone, U. S. Senate
Rod Grams, U. S. Senate
v
�
0
N
� (� N
0 0 ��
m c'°c c tD
� � a�
o�v '2
�. O (D � �'
OtCn '��
g c
m �.Q��
3 �_� �
�fD��o
� !D � � N
y O n N �
d
proj N fl. � t�
�� = m a
' �'�co
;`��_
m � 4i N
!Q d f�ii �
> > �
0 o N v
'p < ID t11
� � m � a
0
m �, �.
oma.,�
�
N �s �'� @
� j d � �
w°��N�
�_� °' °�
,m m.o 0 0
�roTN
?
N � � (p
� c
� 3 m c
� w• o m
� o �
�
o��m
� o o �
_. � N
o-� a�
O 67 �. O
? � �
�
D�a
� N � (7
� _.
���
N� p� (p
< o�
, m
� o �
���
N m m
m � �
C
��'m
Q � �
��a
av �
ao�
� N �
d
Q N N
N �
�i» N
m
d o
m� a
�?
� � C
N
w � n
N = �
c ^ °�
w � �
o�<_•
av �
n .... N
� � �
`� w
m � =
O �
� �. ,A
m o.-
�, � o
v+ w �
� �' r
C �
� �
�D r
�
� y 'T� O]
y '27 61 N �'D tD � �TI N
� 'D C1 � CL V p� C N �.
w X N vNi, X N. 01 s ��
�v � �`�..� 3 `�.-. m" � O m
o. w rn m a' m�°: c `C` � C 0
� �p Ll. ""' N a r� O
�� �G � N D t0 N � d= C ��
Q. Q. -' ry� n C� n .a < N n
x
c m m T � m•m w� S
-o � m n,.,, a o. ,... a. a m
� 3 O, = Q- _ �' C � �!
� w��m wfO� mo � s
�� '� o. o w F o� c� m � -i
N'°m3a: a 3� �a' g m
° b n � w, � � �'. � °� 'D � D
� N
� w �, p^� �l 01 N �7 � � .� (ii
� w � •c = � �„ a D
(� p N� 4 3� S � � z
�.N' �� � � N � y
� � � �
�
�' � C N � N d
d C Q i _(1 � N
N � ` �
� = =
X n
� D
m �
� °
� w
.-�'. •-�
d
C �
v
� �
��
w �n
0
�
�
z
�
N
�
a
� T C,
0
� N
v O a^
cr o. ; -<
w m ? Q
N CO � .Cl
� O '�{ O
�. O = (^.
�a � �- m
� a n. �
G � C "
� � o
m m w �
�' � O
C N �p
i �
� �
d �
�
� 3, �
N ^' N
tD N ,r
� y �
v =
o. m v
m
� N � �
O � C �.
(D 02� v
c ^ u`� -+.
� f ��_D,
�
� � m c �
O Q: 3 �
� � N
�
N � G �''O
'�'= w m
m .�
o.�^ m m �
�
(D � �• y W
a�� "ro-'
= J =i �i
� O Gn cD =p.
Qoa
J p O �
�3
�
r�
O
b
N
(D
a
m
°
O
�
0
'D
m
�
N
�
�
Z
�
S
�
�
'O
m
�
O
Z
�
tv a C) m �'_'
0.'O = " n
.� m --c m
�o ^
o�y_'o.�
�D �"o� r
o N w � o
'_ a' -' w �: m
N �p N . �
� � m d � o
a m � c �
� � N C = O
m '� �
o a� �� �-
3�°'� W�
� C � p�j � _
N
� � �.o;T2
d � � �
N Qw �f. W
� (D n � C
W r- N � CJ'
O�-�p O,
rm w �
Q' �• 3
� � �
o �`< �
� d m
�
.�
O � � �
m � � w
�
�=ai m
� (p ?N
>� � L
> a �'
�� � �
O (,A �p Q
G �
O in
� a o �
O � n
^ 3 v
O �• p1
� �
� O �p
� � N
(D ^
^ � N
N p1
3, v II.
� � .
a �
o �
w � 'm�,'
f��ri m, o
i t1 �
� N 'O
To
� � n
(� � a
W � c
o �
� N
N N
� �
N �
W �
fl N
O
(9
N' N
�
d
m �
m �
�
m a
.p. <
� C
� N
.w
7�
n�
O
om
�
�
o, �
N C
N �
m �e
� O
� 3
v �
m
�
C p�
N.
v -
s. c
� �
O�
�• .A
� N
� N
m �
= N
ad
�
m
N
.O
m
�
`m
� o �
� -
�.ao��'
r; c
3 N o �
N � � ro
-la-•-,
N C
��a�
� m o m
�
tn 3. � �,
v�� tD
�aam
�
N� �G f�p �
�
nm �?
m
C�Ow m
nam
� ,,,, LS
_. N N
,: m
� a
y w � c
()
� N O �
'D.� � �
omd`�
� > > N
W Ct' � (D
� � �, n
��a
� -� _
O � N
� �
m 61
Q Q,
� � N
a
m' � m
p O �
m�
�Zo.
� d. '
� �
W
� �. C
nN _ (T �.
� � O
c N D �= ."il
m � _' m•,n
N � � � c
p � n d N
��v "'m
� o. � ° o
mmn' N
°'mro •n
SQ� _•�
N N �^ N �
��� ��
� O w �'O
��
.° �� m o
Q
� m � � �
.t. ? fD �%
� t�i� d `�
�
m
N� N N � O
m n
m < c, �. m
w w S o N�
� N � (D (D
m � a' `�
.ta�<_.owD
�-o c v <�
. �, � T
� O (p (O
' N 'p N 0 N
N p�j O� W C
�v � ��?
0�+�'3w°
�����1
axi�d� W�
3 a m d� m
�Dro'm��w
ao�mo
r
O � � �
3 N
F �
m
�am� �
� m w w c
�v� x �•
� a;� � (O
� � c� N.n
mco o � c
p � Q � �
� K ° c o
� m d � c
WN3o�
o-�c
:UNn �-O
r �- m w
pt N ?,� O
� N �'0
a ��
m o,
N N O �
.-D�:N �
(ll N = -
a.�� °�
? O
N �
� N �
a
� 3
� .
D
C
�m-1
S
�
C
�
�
`0
O
n
m
�
c
�
m
UY
f17 d
N
C � �
0
�3,�
w �• _'
� � m
d �
� w �
o � .
y O �
b � `.
w� �
p,'O C
�p O �
o��,
o� �
o-
f° a m
bvm
'n
� O
N �
��
• �.
w
0
r�
w
=a
a .,
o�
� N
w
�
Q.
�
w
�
c
lV
O
�
.Z1
�
�
w
N
C
Z
D
�
�
m
m
�
O
Z
���
K b � II'
� <.
��nn
o�mo
C � � �
� aw
� Q' O
o @ �
N. X f N
crogm
m �
O v' 7' N
� � � �
� � p C
o � c �
p N O Q
T �
< �
m . N o�
m�of0
a -,
v3?'o
'G = N C
. �
-, a
�
w ^
� o w �
'D C � � A1
0
¢m���
C � O �
� p, O G
m C � a
N � ,.y,. �
�- �
da'=��
m
�. d � � N
•� o
� N ,�,.. U1
N � �� � @
n d
? fp d = N
61 w ��p C
mc�i � o �
;, o a� m
n. m a, o
�- N
O � {U
O ?
(D
(D C (D � (D (D �
p ? tD � C C � :"
m �3•� o.ac o
mw�o.
°�u, u�D, o �.n� �
� N ..
?�G � N N O 3
�
�i � � v� -o
`° m m 2 � .
N d O � '� � C �
(D N
� �
O tD 3 2 Q�G �C (D
IU
n n � � � � O �
o{o.�`"m�°`"
o m m
N O � � N � �^. Q'
�o�
2a.� u+om
� Q.'O i�i �' lU � N
��Xt>>mw3
�G �
� 7 O, � .�+
W N �
W �p
�
N Ql fO
� a °c
N •D
.-: C
�� <v
N
w { o
v �; < ?
= � c �
iDvo'�
" O � -O
� C
� � o N
_ �
a=o-o.
m �o m
w �w`�
C � C �'
� �p m m
v av
. � � O
N �
� o, o
� � N
o, �,
N
oo�'�
O � � � =n
� d Q n
�o,moD
<
'� o_ w �- �
m
0 0 � �'
? y � �
� � L• (0
� O S �
�3��D
-c,
o;mm�
N
N �p 7 'C
v N n �
�
N' � � G
o - d �
� � N
� C L
� —
o�
ro
��a�z
d � ^•c o
�
�' 0.�.� N
c�D�°' -
�o�A�
`��G p� N (11 �
�
� � � a m
a �j O N Q-
-+ =• N
O `� N tll
v a�'�
m o � �
N,..,, y a. -�i,
O � p' �
� o @
f•� � �
a
0 N 7
� � '�. 01
� ry ? M
� -0 C
w °�
c:
z
A
�
�
m
�1
�
^'-.� C
Z
zA
� .�'
� �
orn
-o �
m�z
-�I p
am
zD
� W
'�
m
'S ,
rn
Z
-i �
D
Z �
v �,
'D
�
�
O
:A
�•
N � 7
N ._^--
O � � ^
w � � w
N � N �
a o
� �'wn
^ `° 3 `°
. Q
w ,�n � O
w N �
�� o
tD ?
a3'�
�
� � � N.
3 � � �
�N�a
� � C �
o � m m
� � ry Q
•- m � �
Q: a t�
� O
� �
a� ��?
mm.c m
W N. � O
� < ? N n �
�m m- o ro
w a.o?
� � O N
N � G -' n
� m .«
fU C O �' �
(D (�?_
m � m p� O
m��mw
' � � �
� 0 T C C
< w m m
.�D N N
C � ?
� N � 0+ -i
L � O , G
� O , �
ff
A N ' � O
N =
W N � ;:
D � n N
� °' o
�
00 �
�
N � ' 'D
� � �
^ a .,,,
3 � �
o" �
c; � o
O C 'A
� T
M �.
d
�
N y
� N
o �
�
o w
�
O N
� �;
� 5
O�
Q
��
N '�
��
'o < �
O @ fn
N � � a
Q� a
(D N 7' D
m �
a� �
�' � �
�
N ,�.. �
�
o w �
� O K1
2 0: �7
0
� O �
.�
m �. w
�G `G
N � p'
� N
� ? w
nN _,
? a,
N �
w
cn
O
��
m o
�"
Q
s�
� N
W N
o�
� �
a
o w
n �.
w �
m a
n �
o fD
G � '
in m
m m
lD
?
�
� �
` ; _
� . .
. , ;;
, �-`
!
+.� � ' • ` �
, �
: ��� �
A biweekly update on litigation, regularions, and technological developments
Volume 10, Number 11
Burbank
BUR.BANK ASSERTS ZONING AUTHORITY;
SUES AIRPORT TO BLOCK TERM7�tAL PROJECT
Asserting its zoning authority, the City of Burbank, CA, filed suit in Los Angeles
Superior Court on May 29 to block the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport
Authority from building an enlarged passenger terminal at Burbank Airport.
Peter Kirsch, special counsel to the city on airport matters, said Burbank was
forced to take legal action after the airport authority formally presented to the
Glendale, Pasadena, and Burbank City Councils plans that locate the new terminal
on land not zoned for airport use. The property was owned by Lockheed Martin
Corp. and significant portions have been zoned only for manufacturing or com-
mercial use since 19657 — a decade before the airport authority was created, he
said.
"At all three council sessions, the authority left no doubt that they intend to build
the proposed terminal on the land in question," Kirsch said. "Also, at no time did
the authority ever indicate the plan would or could be changed to comply with
Burbank's zoning laws," he added.
Kirsch said the legal action is required for the court to make clear that the airport
authority must comply with Burbank's zoninD Iaws and redevelopment plan.
(Continued on p. 82)
Noise Monitoring
NOISE CUMPLAINT DATA CAN SHE]D LIGHT
iON COMMUNI7CY RESP(�NSE, STUDY FINDS
It is feasible to analyze aircraft noise complain[ data being archived at many
airports by modern noise monitoring systems to understand what causes people to
register noise complaints and how.a�eise complaints are related to community
annoyance with aircraft noise, a study done for the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) concluded.
The study, "Use of Airport Noise Complaint Files to Improve Understanding of
Community Response to Aircraft Noise," was done by Sandford Fidell and
Richard Howe of BBN Technologies, Canoga Park, CA.
Analysis of noise complaint and flijht operations data can provide useful
information about several lona-standing concerns, the researchers concluded.
These include:
•"The extent to which complaint rates are driven by objectively measurable
aspects of aircraft operations;
•"The deb ee to which changes in complaint rates can be predicted prior to
implementation of noise mitigation measures; and
•"The deb ee to which aircraft complaint information can be used to simplify
and otherwise improve prediction of the prevalence of noise-induced annoyance in
July 3, 1998
In This Issue...
Burbank ... The City of
Burbank sues the Burbank
Airport Authority asserting
that plans for the new passen-
ger terminal do not meet city
zoning requirements - p. 81
Noise Complaints ... A
study done for NASA con-
cludes it is feasible to use
complaint data to better .
understand community
response to noise - p. 81
LA.X ... Airport awards
contract for portion of Phase
lI of residential sounproofing
program - p. 84
FAA ... Workshop to be
held in July on developing
future rAA. environmental
research agenda - p. 84
Stage 3 Com�littnce ...
American Airlines will
convert 727s with new
Raisbeck system - p. 85
Air Rautes . . . NJ, NY
congressional representatives
trying to require 10 percent
air noise reduction - p. 85
Reno ... Eminent domain
asserted in effort to obtain
property near airport - p. 86
Austin .. . $1.4 million AIP
grant aids acquisition of
school near airport - p. 87
Grants ... FAA awards
noise grants - p. 87 �
(Continued on p. 82) �- —'
Copyright �O 1998 by AirpoR Noise Report. Ashburn, Va. 20147 '
:_
Burbank, from p. 81
� "We're also seeking a court order prohibitin� any construc-
tion of a terminal unless the authority applies for and
receives required zoning changes by the city," he said.
Said Burbank Mayor Dave Golonski: "The airport
authority has told the news media their plan for a new
terminal is only conceptual, but they have said to commu-
nity �roups, chambers of commerce, and now the three City
Counci]s that the next step is preparing architectural plans,
somethin� you don't do if a plan is still in a conceptual
stase. This is just another example of the airport authority
tryin� to mislead people. Unfortunately, the authority has a
lon� history of acting as if i[ is above the law or immune to
state and local laws."
The mayor said he would instruct city attorneys not to
pursue che lawsuit if the airport authority provides enforce-
able assurances that it will redesign the proposed terminal to
comply with the city's zoning ]aws and redevelopment plan.
He said the city has written the airport authority asking it to
confirm that it would abide by all the ciry's zonin� and
redevelopment laws in construction of the airport ternunal,
but the airport has refused to make such a statement.
"'This issue goes to the heart of a city's right to control
land use," said Mayor Golonski. "As a City CounciI, one of
our most important jobs is to find the appropriate balance
between growth and maintaining the quality of life in our
community. If the airport gets its way, we will have lost the
.. power to do that.lfiat's why this suit is so important "
The mayor emphasized that the Burbank City Council
supports a new and relocated terminal and more than a year
ago put forth a plan for a 16-gate facility to replace the
current 14-gate ternunal. The airport authority's proposed
plan calls for terminal with 19 gates that can be expanded to
27 gates, the number sought by the authority when it filed
an Environmental Impact Statement with the Federal
Aviation Administration in 1992.
"We would be happy to work with the authority in
desi�ning a new terminal that is consistent with oor zoning
laws or work through the process for a zone chan�e," the
mayor said.
Lawsuit Called Premature
Victor Gill, spokesman for the airport authority, called the
lawsuit by Burbank "very premature," explaininQ that the
plans for the new airport terminal are still in the desi?n sta�e
and probably will not be ready for two years.
Gill speculated that Burbank's decision to file the IitiQa-
tion was mostiy for public relations, "to put the zonina issue
out there" for consideration. He said that the city has been
involved with the airport authority "intimately" in the
plannin� of the new terminal since 1990, but did not raise
the zonin� issue until recently, followinQ a change in the
City Councii in 1995. The issue of zoning was never held
out as a barrier to construction of the new terminal until
recently, he said. The airport authority would have dis-
Airport Noise R
cussed it earlier had that been the case.
The problem is not that the Burbank City Council has the
right to change its mind, Gill said, "but that the planning
process moves on and at some point the City Council has
time to object and then at some point there is a commitment
to move forward. The airport authority feels Burbank is
backtrackin� late in the game. They created a whole new
game involving curfews that was never part of the equation
... That is not fair to airport authority: '
The City of Burbank wants the airport authority to
conduct a Part 161 study on the feasibility of imposino a
nighttime curfew on operations at the all-Stage 3 airport.
Gill said the airport authority wants the city to state what its
position on the terminal will be if the curfew is not approved
by the FAA, but the city will not do so.
While the airport authority has resisted the idea of
conducting a Part 161 study on the grounds that a curfew
wouid never be approved by the FAA, Gill said the airport
authority is in the process of conducting an update of its Part
150 program, which could be used as the basis for beginning
a Part 161 study.
Gill accused Mayor Golonski of trying to do a"blatant
rewrite or history" by implyina that the cnrrent airport
development program "is far and away above and beyond
what citizens had contemplated in 1976" when they passed
an advisory referendum approving airport development.
Burbank contends there is "an unholy alliance to ram the
terminal project down throat of [the city] when in point of
fact the City of Burbank from 1990 forward was intimately
involved on advising and urging the airport to move on the
project," Gill said.
In related matters, a federal appeals court on May 19
affirmed the FAA's approval of the new ternunal building,
and a three-judge state appellate court on June 16 unani-
mously upheld the validity of a Burbank city law that
imposes a 10 percent tax on parking fees at the airport and
other locations in the city.0
Study, from p. 81
communities."
Bot�i the software tools and the information needed to
perForm snch analyses on compiaint data exported from
airport monitoring systems are readily available, accordinQ
to Fidell and Howe. "Fresh insishts in to the nature and 4
interpretation of complaint information," they said, "are
especially likely to stem from geoinformation system
processina of complaint and fliaht path information."
They said that it is widely believed among airport officials
that a sma11 number of complainers generate a dispropor-
tionate number of complaints and, therefore, raw complaint
counts do not provide a reliable indication of community
response to aircraft noise exposure.
Fideil and Howe dispute that contention based on their
review of the noise complaint data registered by people
living near the new Denver International Airport over a 25
Airport Noise Report
�
'� �
C,
`��� )
July 3, 1998
month period, from March 1, 1995, when the airport
opened, to March 31, 1997.
Some 160,593 complaints were filed by 3,681 people
during that period. Some 298 individuals reCistered more
than 60 complaints during that period and one individual
registered more than 20 complaints per day (about one-tenth
of all complaints received by the airport over this period).
But, the researchers stressed, this should not obscure the fact
that "the vast bulk" of all complainants called only two or
three times over the two-year period.
Comrnunity Response
The term "community response" to aircraft noise has
different meanings in different contexts, Fdell and Howe
explained: To those preparing environmental assessments
mandated by the National Environrnental Policy Act
(NEPA), or deternuning guidelines on land use compatibil-
ity around airports, or setting aviation regulatory policy, the
term generally implies an attitude — a deb ee of noise-
induced annoyance — in an airport communiry, they said.
But to airport noise abatement offices the term "rarely refers
to anything other than complaint behavior."
"Annoyance and complaints are fundamentally different
phenomena not only because of the obvious differences
between attitudes and behaviors, but also because of the
time scale and implicit causes of the two." Annoyance, the
researchers said, is a long-term, stable adverse attitude
toward noise, with rise and decay times of at least weeks or
months. Annoyance relates "at least in principle" to long-
term cumulative noise exposure, they said, thus the "the
case for using a 24-hour average noise exposure level as a
predictor of the prevalence of annoyance is self evident "
However, as any airport noise office will attest, they said,
"complaints are short-term responses to individual noise
events, and particularly to unusual ones:' "Complainants do
not wait until midnight to lodge retrospective complaints
about specific operations or cumulative noise exposure
during the preceding 24 hours. Many therefore fail to
understand why lonb term cumulative metrics are plausible
predictors of `community response,' i.e., complaints," the
researchers said.
A better understanding of the relationship between
complaints and annoyance can help clarify the circum- ��
stances in which alternative definitions of "community
response to aircraft noise" are most appropriate, and to
bridge the gap between them, Fidell and Howe explained.
Little Known About Complaints
Even though noise complaints are easier to measure than
annoyance, very little is known about them. "Even the most
basic phenomena of complaint behavior remain lar?ely
unexplored, primarily for lack of opportunities to study
complaint phenomena with adequate resolution," Fidell and
Howe said. For example, they said, no well established
answers are available to any of the follow questions about
noise complaints:
:
•"How much do population-weighted complaint rates
vary at airports with similar operations?
•"Why do particular aircraft operations attract complaints,
while others with similar objective characteristics (sound
exposure level, closest point of approach, time of occur-
rence, type of aircraft or operations, erc.) do not?
•"What are typical operational characteristics of flights
with low and high likelihood of complaints?
•"Can non-acoustic physical variables (e.g. number of
operations, closest point of approach, visuai angle subtended
at closest point of approach, time of day of operation,
temporal density, mean or variance of inter-operation
interval, aircraft attitude, etc.) account for a much variance
in complaint rates as sound exposure levei?
•"How much variance in complain[ rates cannot be
accounted for by physical (acoustic or other) variables?
�"Do complaints exhibit sequential dependencies; i.e.
how do likelihood of complaints vary on hourly or daily
rime scales with increasing number, rate, or duration of
flight operations?"
Origin of Complaints
One thing about noise complaints that is clear, Fidell and
Howe said, is that most come from areas of relatively low
noise exposure beyond the 65 dB DNL noise contour that
marks the boundary of compatible residential Iand use
around airports.
A 1994 review of the effectiveness of Part 150 A.irport
Noise Compatibility studies and military AICUZ (Airport
Installation Compatible Use Zone) studies at 15 civilian
airports and 12 Air Force bases fonnd that at seven of the
airports studied, nearly all of the complaints came from
areas outside the 65 dB DNL contour line. Another six
airporta reported that about one-half to two-thirds of their
noise complaints originated outside the 65 dB DNL cantour,
the researchers said.
The "intuitively appealing" explanation for this apparent
paradox — that rare high sin�le-event noise levels give rise
to a noise complaints — have yet to be tested formally or
even quantitatively documented, they said.
It is possible, they noted, "that individual noise events
inflaence annoyance in ways not fully reflected by their
contributions to annual DNL; or that complaint rates are
linked to shorter-term (hourly/daily/weekly) avera�e noise
levels; or that complaints are more closely associated with
max9mum levels or duration of exposure in excess of a
threshold value ("time-above"). It is also possible that
complaints are influenced by non-acoustic factors to a
b eater extent than are self-reports of annoyance. These non-
acoustic factors are not necessarily limited to unfavorabie
beliefs and attitudes about airlines and airports, but could
potentially include physical factors that may not correlate
hi�hly with cumulative noise exposure, such as aircraft type
and attitude, unpredictability, frequency of overfliaht, etc."
Airport Noise Report
S4 Airpori Noise Report
Undesirable Consequences
Regardless of the causes of annoyance and complaints and
the relationship between them, Fidell and Howe said, the
"disconnect" between airport and federal perspeciives on
complaints and annoyance as indices of community re-
sponse to aircraft noise has at least two undesirable conse-
quences:
• Federal guidance about "community response" to airport
noise based on the Federal Interagency Committee on
Noise's (FICON) 1992 dose-response curve relating noise
Ievels in DNL to the percent of the population hiQhly-
annoyed by aircraft noise "is of only limited practical value"
to those dealing most directly with airport/community
interactions; and
• For purposes related to NEPA, airgort complaint
experience "offers little-support for standard methods of
assessina aircraft noise impacts in airport communities."
"This disparity in definitions of community response to
aircraft�noise exposure can be especially troublesome in
land use compatibility controversies," they said, noting that
in California local airport land use planning comtnissions
created by state law are not bound by FICON's guidelines
and sometimes view local noise complaints "as more
persuasive than nationwide guidelines: '
Fidell and Howe said that a consistent me[hod for recon-
ciling attitudinal with behavioral manifestations of "commu-
nity response" to aircraft noise would be of considerable use
for environmental impact assessment, regulatory, and
airport management purposes. However, they said, efforts to
reconcile the attitudinal and behavioral perspectives on
community response have been limited by a lack of detailed
and reliable information about the circumstances of aircraft
noise prior to complaints being lodged.
But they noted that airport monitoring systems at many
civil airports now have years of noise exposure and com-
plaint data archived in a way that allows systematic analysis
of relationships between complaints and aircrafr noise
levels, on time scales ranging from individual events to
annual averages. "This new information, coupled with
information about spatial and demographic distributions of
residential populations relative to flight tracks, can be
exploited in case studies to clarify the relationship (if any)
between the probabilities of complaints and various meas-
ured or predicted noise metrics durin� time periods prior to
receipt of aircraft noise complaints," Fidell and Howe
reported.�
Los Angeles Int'l
. . . ' 1 � � .
�' • • 1�li'' � � 1
The Los An�eles Board of Airport Commissioners
announced that it has awarded a contract to Allied Ensineer-
in� & Construction of Anaheim, CA, for a portion of Phase
II of the Los Anseles International Airport residential
soundproofing program.
The $617,540 contract covers sound insvlation modifica-
tion of 31 residences in the communities of Westchester and
Playa del Rey which are located near the airport.
The award of this contract brings the total number of
homes completed or in the process of soundproofing
construction to 294, the airport said. The first phase of its
sound insulation program was recently completed with 126
units in multi-family buildings ou�tted with dual-panel
windows, solid-core doors, attic insulation, and "other
necessary soundproofing improvements," the airport said.
The noise midgation proa am at LAX includes nearly
9,000 residences in the Los Angles communities of Westch-
ester, Playa del Rey, and South Los Angeles with a recorded
Community Noise Equivalency Level (CNEL) of 65
decibels or higher.
T'he prob am is administered by the LAX Residential
Soundproofing Bureau.0
�
i' �,' f : 1 /
�' �' � � • ' _ � ' ��
The Federal Aviation Administration's Office of Environ-
ment and Energy has invited persons and oraanizations with
an interest in the environmental effects of aircraft to attend a
workshop July 28 and 29 in Washington, DC, to assist the
agency in developing proposals for future Research Engi-
neering and Development {R&D) funding.
"Because resources for reseazch aze, as always, scarce, it
is essential that [the O�ce of Environment and Energy]
identify avenues for future reseazch that are responsive to
public concerns about the environmental impacts of
aviation, and will provide real benefits to stakeholders in
aviation, with particulaz attention to public concerns," James
D. Erickson, director of the office, explained in his letter of
invitation regazding the workshop.
The workshop will initially address the findings from an
earlier public meeting, held last November, at which FAA.
explained the process it would use to develop an environ-
menta? research agenda and sought public comment on what
direction future research should take. Those comments are
contained in a"Findings Report," which will be distributed
at the workshop.
Erickson said that the workshop also will seek to:
•"Assess the public concerns presented in the Findin�s
Report from the Nov. 20, 1997, meeting for completeness
and accuracy;
� "Identify additional concerns;
• "Achieve consensus on aviation-related environmental
research activities that would provide benefits to stakehold-
ers in the aviation system; and
•" Provide [the O�ce of Environment and Energy] with
information that would assist in prioritizing these potential
research activities." -
"During the workshop, participants will meet in plenary
Airport Noise Report
�
�
C
J
C
�
..-,_
`<< �
� �
July 3,1998
session and in smaller working aroups devoted to areas of
distinct interest — aircraft and airport-related exhaust
emissions, aircraft noise, and airport-related chemical
handling and runoff," Erickson said. "By devoting much of
the workshop time to these smaller working groups, we
hope to take greatest advantage of the diversity of concerns
and expertise that will be broujht to the workshop by
participants."
Persons interested in attendina the workshop should
contact Jim Littleton in the FAA's Office of Environment
and Energy at tel: (202) 267-3579; fax: (202) 267-�594; or
complete the information form on the FAA's web page
(www.aee.faa.gov) under Environmental Research Beyond
2000.
The workshop will be held at the Governor's House Hotel,
1615 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.�
Stage 3 Compliance
AMERICAN TO COT�VERT
727 AIR.CRAFT'4�ITH RAIS�ECK
American Airlines recendy became the first major carrler
to purchase a new system designed by Raisbeck Commer- •
cial Air Group in Seattle that converts Stage 2 Boeing 727
aircraft to Stage 3 noise standards with no suppression of
engine noise or engine modifications.
The fact that the system includes no hnshkits worries
some observers who fear it will allow aircraft to technically
comply with Stage 3 noise standards at noise certification
points close to the runway but will make no difference in the
noise impact received in the community.
But Everett Murvine, director of engineering for Rais6eck,
said the system outperforms the FedEX hushkit on ap-
proach. The FedEX hushkit for 727s reduces noise levels to
only 1002 EPNdB, he said, while the Raisbeck system
results in noise levels on approach of 97.6 EPNdB (almost
identical to the 97.7 dB the Stage 3 Boeing 757 makes on
approach).
On takeoff, however, the Raisber�system results in noise
levels of 96.5 EPNdB, compared to the 94.1 EPNdB of the
FedEX kit, 100 EPNdB for an unmodified 727, and 84.7
EPNdB for the Stage 3 B-757.
The Raisbeck system is also significantly cheaper than the
FedEX hushkit: $695,000 per aircraft for the Raisbeck
versus $2-3 million for the FedEX hushkit.
American Airlines said that cost was a factor in its
decision pay $58 million to purchase the Raisbeck Sta?e 3
Increased Gross Weight System to make 52 of the airline's
Boeing 727-200 aircraft compliant with Staae 3 noise
standards. Deliveries will begin in September.
TWA also has an option with Raisbeck to convert 30 of its
727-200s with the Raisbeck system, according to Murvine.
In addition, several small Stage 2 operators, some from
Latin America, also have placed orders the conversion.
E�
How does the Raisbeck system work? Murvine said there
are three c�mponents ihat provide noise reduction:
• The gross weight of the aircraft is lowered (to 166,400
]b. for the low weight system and 178,000 lb. for the higher
gross weight system), which makes it quieter;
• Engine thrust is reduced to that of a Pratt & Whitney
TT8D-7 engine and thrust is kept reduced throu�h climb out.
This reduces noise impact but requires a 500-700 foot
lonaer takeoff roll; and
• Flaps are extended to only 25 degrees on approach,
rather than the standard 30-40 degrees, which reduces
aerodynamic noise and increases landing speed by about
four knots.
The engines are not altered in any way and the system can
be installed in only one day, Murvine said. Reducing the
weight of the aircraft does not require taking out seats, but
rather shortening the range of the aircraft he explained. This
is noi a problem with the 727, which is used on shorter
routes, he said.
Murvine said the market for the Raisbeck system is about
500 727-100 and -200 aircraft. The company has received
FAA certification for the 727-100 system, and expects to
receive certification for the 72Z-200 system in September.
7ames D. Raisbeck, chairman and C.E.O. of the company,
said in a press release: "When we began this pr aQram in
1991, it was obvious that the only then-available Stage 3
so]ution was exceedingly expensive, and compromised the
727s empty-weight and fuel-burn. Our goal was to leave the
Boeing 727 as it was when oria nally designed — except to
meet Stage 3. Since we don't touch the enaines or structure
of the Boeinb certified airplane, no compromises are
required from Pratt & Whitney, Boeing, or the end-user.
With our aerodynamic so]utions, we expect 727-200 Stage 3
gross weights to ultimately b ow to 197,000 lb. Maximum
Takeoff Weight, with equally generous savings for opera-
tors over other offerings:'�
EECP
NJ/NY REPS SEEK 10 PERCENT
�2EDUCTION IN NOISE IlVIPACT
Some 15 members of the New 7ersey and New 7ersey
con�ressional delegation are trying to add lan�uage to
legislation reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administra-
tion to require the agency to take steps to reduce aircraft
noise by at least 10 percent from current levels over their
states by the year 2000.
"In our opinion, the FAA has failed to do an adequate job
in alleviating aircraft noise over our states," the bi-partisan
�oup of congressional representatives from New York and
New Jersey asserted in a June 23 letter to Bud Shuster,
chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure and 7ames Oberstar (D-MN), ranking member
of the committee.
"Bringing air noise relief to New Jersey and New York in
Airport Noise Report
86 Airport Noise Report
,not a new issue," said the representatives, who districts
include areas impacted by noise from the three major New
York City airpons. In fact, they said, "the Aviation Safety
and Capacity Expansion Act of 1990 directed the FAA to do
an Environmental Impact Statement on the Expanded East
Coast Plan [a major reroutinc of airspace over New Jersey]
for the purpose of addressing the issue of air noise. Five
years and $6 miliion later, the EIS was published with
sua�ested solutions to reduce air noise. Not only have
virtually none of the suggestions been successfully imple-
mented, but no alternative noise reducing plans have taken
its place. Instead, the noise over New Jersey and New York
continues to worsen."
The le�islators are seeking, by 2000, a 10 percent reduc-
tion in noise beyond what will occur frorn the phaseout of
Sta�e 2 aircraft.
In other action in New Jersey, the NJ Coalition Against
Aircraft Noise (NJCAAN) wants the Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey to use 10 percent of the Passenger
Facility Charges (PFCs) it collects for noise miti�ation. The
anti-noise activists also are criticizing the Port Authority for
not par[icipating in the FAA's Part 150 Airport Noise
Compatibiliry program. The criticism comes on the heels of
an FAA announcement that 11 airports azound the country
have been awarded $55 million in FAA.D ants for sound-
proofing prob ams.
The Port Authority said that, since 1983, it has spent about
$91 million to soundproof approximately 53 schools around
Newark, LaGuardia, and JFK International Airparts, which
it operates.
NY Delegation Split
In a related development, The New York Times regorted
July 3 that the New York congressional deleeation is split
over legislation movino through Conb ess that would loosen
slot rules at four airports, including LaGuardia and JFK
International, to make them more accessible to start-up and
regional airlines.
Representatives of cities in upstate New York, such as
Albany, Rochester, Syracuse, and Buffalo, support the
le�islation, the Airline Service Improvement Act, because it
is meant to make start-up and regional airlines more
competitive with the majors at mid-size cities. T'he Times
reported that the cost of a refundable, round-trip ticket from
Rochester to Chicago, which many business travelers must
purchase when travelin� on short notice, ranges from $900
to $1,05� — more than the cost of a restricted round-trip fare
from Rochester to Hong Kona.
Under the act, the Department of Transportation would be
able to grant additional landing slots at the four "Hish
Density" airports (JFK, LaGuardia, Reagan Nationai, and
Chica�o O'Hare) to airlines that fly to areas underserved by
air transportation. For the past 30 years, the number of
takeoffs and landings have been restricted at these four
_ _.__
ighly-con�ested airports.
Representatives of communities in the New York City
area impacted by aircraft noise fear the legislation, which
could increase the number of operations at LaGuardia and
JFK, will exacerbate an already bad noise probiem_0
Reno/Tahoe Int'Z
EMINENT DOMA,IN ASSERTED
IN EFFORT TO GET PROPERTY
In an effort to complete its acquisition of land near Reno/
Tahoe International Airport for noise mitigation purposes,
the Airport Authority of Washoe County, NE, filed June 5
for eminent domain on 13 parcels of Iand in an area called
Rewana Farms near the airport.
The 12 parcels represent 13 percent of the originai 90
parcels identified in the airport's 1991 Part 150 Airport
Noise Compatibility study as beina incompatible residential
land use.
At its March meeting, the airport's Board of Trustees
voted to use eminent domain procedures to acquire the land
after exhausting attempts at negotiations, the airport said.
Both the airport's Community Outreach Committee and the
Federal Aviation Administration advised the board to take
such action.
Of the totai 90 pazcels in the Sonthwest Land Acquisi[ion
Area, 64 pazcels (or 71 percent) have already been pur-
chased. Of the remaining 26 parcels, only nine owners,
representing 12 parcels, have eitherrefused to begin the
process by allowing an appraisal, or negatiations have
stalied. T'he airport has filed eminent domain procedures on
those parcels. It said it will continue to negotiate with the
other property owners.
To date, the airport has applied for and received grants
totaling neazly $12 million from the FAA for its Southwest
Land Acquisition Program. Under the Federal Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policy
Act, all property owners and tenants — even those against
whom eminent domain proceedings are filed — are entided
to their maximum-aliowable relocation benefits. Property
owners receive both a property purchase price based upon a
certified appraisal as well as relocation benefits, while
tenants receive relocation benefits only.
The airport also announced that, in accordance with its
Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program, the airport
Board approved a contract with Advance Installations, Inc.,
in the amount of $326,808 to sound insulate 17 additiona]
homes in the Huffaker Hills/Persimmon-Alder neighbor-
hood. To date, 86 residences have been insulated at a cost of ��
approximately $17,000 per home, the airport said. Fundina
for the sound insulation is provided by a �rant from the y
Federal Aviation Administration.�
Airport Noise Report
�
�)
� (,.-. )
(� )
July 3, 1998
Austin-Bergstrom Int'1
$1.4 MILLION AIP GRANT
AIDS SCHOOL ACQUISITION
The Federal Aviation Administration and Sen. Phil
Gramm (R-TX) announced the week of June 17 that the
City of Austin wili receive an additional $1.45 million
federal grant to reduce the city's share of acquirinQ three
elementary schools and a high school located near the new
Austin-Bergstrom International Airport.
This reimbursement of funds reduces the City of Austin
Department of Aviation's contribution from $12,748,000 to
$11,348,000, the airport said.
The entire real estate transaction, which closed in 1997,
was $45,748,000 for avigation easements and purchase and
relocation of four schools located in or near the flight path
of the new airport. Based on the final appraised value of the
high school, the city applaed last fall to the FAA to increase
its intent of funding.
The total federal contribution of acquiring the four Del
Valle schools is not $34.4 million.
The city purchased the four schools providing funding for
Del Vaile to construct new facilities. The school district will
have rent-free use of the three elementary schools until Sept.
1, 1999, and rent-free use of the high school until Dec. 15,
1999. After that rent will be set at fair market value based
on a agreed upon formula. Del Valle Independent Schooi
District official say plans for relocating the schools are well
underway.
The airport also announced that the county appraisal
district recently announced an increase in property apprais-
als around the new airport's perimeter, offsetting feazs that
the airport would adversely affect property nearby.
Cargo operations began at the airport on June 30, 1997.0
Grants
FAA AWARDS GRANTS
FOR NOISE MITIGATION
The Federal Aviation Administrati�n recently awarded
grants under its Airport Improvement ProD am to the
following airports for noise mitigation projects:
• Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport received $5
million to acquire land for noise mitijation and to sound-
proof residences;
� Fresno (CA) Yosemite International Airport received $2
million to acquire noise suppressing equipment;
• Ontario (CA) International Airport received $2.� million
to acquire land for noise compatibility and to provide
relocation assistance;
• Palm Spring (CA) Regional Airport received �2 million
to soundproof approximately 210 residences and to acquire
land for approaches and noise compatibility;
• San Diego International Airport received $1,3�,320 to
m
soundproof Point Loma Hiah School in the San Diego area;
• San Francisco International Airport received $2 million
to soundproof 200 residences in the community of San
Bruno; the airport received an additional grant of $2 million
to soundproof an unspecified number of residences;
• San Jose International Airport received $4,148,945 to
soundproof 310 residences in the City of San Jose;
• Reid-Hillview Airport in Santa Clara County, CA,
received $151,200 to conduct a Part I50 Airport Noise
Compatibiliry study;
• Indianapolis International Airport received $5 million to
acquire land for noise compatibility and to provide reloca-
tion assistance; the airport also received a �rant of $3
million to conduct a Part 150 Noise Compatibility Plan
update;
• Baton Rouae Metropolitan Airport, LA, received $2.5
million to acquire land for noise compatibility;
• Ocean City Municipal Airport, MD, received $1,135,000
to acquire land for approaches and to provide relocation
assistance;
• Las Vegas McCarran International Airport received $3
million to acquire land for noise compatibility including
relocation assistance;
• Reno/'Tahoe International Airport received $500,000 to
soundproof 21 residences in the communities of Huffaker
Hills and Persimmon/Alder; the airport also received a b ant
of $1.5 million to acquire land for noise compatibility and to
provide relocation assistance;
• Cleveland-Hopkins International Airport received $5
million to soundproof 162 residences in Cleveland, 30
residences in Brook Park, 18 residences in Olmsted Falls,
and 12 residences in Olmstead Township;
• Pittsburgh International Airport received $3 million to
soundproof residences in the City of Pittsburgh;
• New Austin International Airport at Bergstrom received
$1,403,062 to acquire land for noise compatibility;
• Brownsville/South Padre Isiand International Airport,
TX, received $146,938 to conduct a Part 150 Airport Noise
Compatibility study;
• Kin' County International Airport (Boeing Field) in
Seattle, WA, received �243,222 to condact a Part 150
Airport Noise Compatibility study; and
• Seattle-Tacoma International Airport received $3 million
to soundproof 200 residences in Kent, Seattle, Des Moines,
Bnrien, Tukwilla, and areas of unincorporated King County
and to provide relocation assistance.�
Airport Noise Report
88 Airport Noise Report
�-ANR EDITORIA.L
IADVISORY BOARD
Mark Atwood, Esq.
Gailand, Kharasch, Morse & G�nkle
Washing[on, D.C.
Lee L. Blackman, Esq.
McDermott, Will & Emery
Los Angeles, Calif.
Dr. Clifford R. Bragdon, AICP
Dean, School of Aviation & Transportation Dowling
College
Eliot Cutler, Esq.
Cuder & Stanfield
Washington, D.C.
J. Spencer Dickerson
Senior Vice President
American Association of Airport Execntives
Edward J. DiPolvere
Administrator, National Association of Noise
Control Officials
Richard G. "Dick" Dyer
Airport Environmental Specialist, Division of
Aeronautics, Calif. Dept. of Transportation
E. Tazewell Ellett, Esq.
Hogan & Hartson
Washington, D.C.
Julie H. Eilis, Esq.
Managing Director
Federal Express Corporation
Angel M. Garcia
Co-Chairman
Citizens Against Newark Noise
E.H. "Moe" Haupt
Manager, Airport and Environmental Services,
National Business Aircraft Association
Robert P. Silverberg, Fsq.
Bagileo, Silverberg & Goldman
Washington, D.C.
Joanne W. Young, Esq.
Baker & Hostetler LLP
Washine on, D.C.
ON THE AGENDA...
July 22-25 Annual meeting of the National Organization to Insure
a Sound-controlled Environment (NOISE), Thornton,
CO (near Denver); (contact Dennis McGrann,
Suite 900, 601 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington,
DC 20004; tel: (202) 434- 8163; fax (202) 639-8238).
Au j. 20-21 American Association of Airport Executives' Aircraft
Noise and Land Use Planning ManaQement Workshops,
Milwaukee, WI (contact AAAE; tei: (703) 824-0504 or
fax-on-demand: (1-800-470-ARPT).
Sept. 14-15 American Association of A.irport Executives' Fall
Legislative Issues Conference, Washington, DC
(contact AAAE; tel: (703) 824-0504 or fax-on-demand:
(1-800-470-A.RPT).
Oct. 4-7 Airports Council International - North America's 7th
Re�onal Conference & Exhibirion, Marriott's Orlando
World Center (contact ACI, 1775 K SG, I'�W, �
WashinD on, DC 20006; tel: (202) 293-8500; fax (202)
331-1362).
�
Nov. 8-10 American Association of Airport Executives/American
Bar Association Airport Law Workshop, West Palm ;,� •
Beach, FL (contact AAAE; tel: (703} 824-0504 or fax- -�..
on-demand: (1-800-470-ARPT�.
Nov. 16-18 IIVT'ER-NOISE 98, The 1998 Intemational Con�ress on
Noise Control Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand
(contact Conference Secretariat, INT'ER-NOISE 98
Secretary, NIDA, PO Box 1181, Aukland 1001,
Australia; tel: (+b4-9-379-7822; fax: +64-9-302-0098).
Nov. 20 The 1998 International Symposium on Recreational
Noise — The Effects of Man on the Environment,
Queenstown, New Zealand (contact Symposium
�cretary Grant Morgan, Electroacoustic Calibration
Services, PO Box 76-068, Manukau City, New
Zealand; tel: +64-9-279-8883; fa�c: +64-9-279-8833).
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: (�03) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528.
Price $495.
Au[horization 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 pa�e per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 27 Congress Street, Salem, MA 01970. USA.
Copyright �O 1998 by Airport Noise Report, Ashburn, Va. 20147
�
' ��
���J
• r� �.� , 4 ,j •` !' •� � I ..
A biweekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 10, Number 12
Land Use
STATES VIEW THEIR LAWS AS EFFECTIVE,
BUT WANT STRONG FEDERAL GUIDELINES
In response to the Federal Aviation Adrninistration's request for comments on
ways to improve land use plannina around airports, several states said that their
statutes have been effective and urged FAA to become more active in providino
land use planning guidance.
Mazlin Beckwith, prob am manager for the California Department of Transporta-
tion's Aeronautics Prob am, urged the agency to adopt a process used in CaIifornia
called "normalization," which, he said, had its origin in the 1950's and was �
recognized by the Environmental Protection Agency in the 1970's as a method for
predicting community response to airport operations.
"Normalization provides a method for taking into account the differences in
local conditions near airports," such as those in rural or suburban areas with lower
backb ound noise levels, Beckwith explained. Due to the lower background levels
in suburban and rural areas, the California Department of Transportadon (Caltrans)
has consistently recommended the use of lower limits for land use decisions, he
said, adding that the state has found the normalization procedure "to be reliable
and useful."
(Continued on p. 90)
Fleet Mix
ONLY 51.2 PEI2CENT ()F STAGE 2 AIRCRAFT
h2EPORTED C)UT OF FLEET AT END OF 1997
At the end of 199�, all operators of Stage 2 aircraft in the United States, as a
group, had phased out only 512 percent of their StaQe 2 aircraft, indicating that
they are waiting until the last minute to meet the end of 1998 statutory requirement
that 7� percent of the Stage 2 fleet be phased out.
With airline operations booming and revenue up, operators of Stage 2 aircraft
most likely do not want to pull their aircraft out of service to retrofit or retire them
until the last minute, one observer speculated.
Several FAA o�cials said they do not anticipate many airlines to file for
exemptions to opera[e beyond the end of 1999 deadline when all Stage 2 aircraft
must be removed from the fleet. The deadline for filing petitions seeking such
exemptions is coming quickly — 7an. l, 1999, and Wiliiam Albee, of the FAA's
Office of Environment and Energy, said no petitions will be accepted beyond that
date because it is a statutory deadline.
Albee provided ANR with some data that wil] be included in the FAA's annual
fleet mix report to Congress, a statisticai snapshot of how well U.S. and foreign
airlines are complying with FAA's Part 91 regulations, which require that all Staae
2 aircraft operated in the United States be retired by the end of 1999. y
That report currently has been approved by the FAA and is at the Office of the
(Continued an p. 92)
Copyright �O 1998 by Airport Noise Report, Ashbum, Va. 20147
�
July 17, 1998
In This Issue...
Land Use ... In comments
submitted in response to
FAA's request for assistance
in finding better ways to
achieve compatible land use
around airports, several states
tell the agency their laws
have been effective, but urge
the federal agency to become
more active in issuing federal
guidelines - p. 89
... Clark County, NE, and
other commenters tell the
FAA it should act as a na-
tional clearinghouse for
information on successful
land use planning efforts
around the nation - p. 92
... EPA and others tell the
FAA they want to see airport
noise contours projected as
far as 10-20 years into the
future - p. 94 ,
Fleet Mix ... Data for end
of 1997 show aarlines, as a
group, have only phased out
51.2 percent of their Stage 2
aircraft and are waiting to the
last m.inute to meet the end of
1998 requirement that 75
percent of Stage 2 aircraft be
phased out of fleet - p. 89
Hushkits ... AvAERO will
provide hushkits to a11 opera-
tors of Boeing 737-200s in
Canada - p. 92 �
90 Airport Noise Report
Land Use, from p. 89
It would have predicted the increased sensitivity of the
New Jersey communities to changes in flight paths that
occurred during the impiementation of the FAA's Expanded
East Coast Plan a decade ago and it would have predicted
the community reaction related to changes in aircraft flight
paths that occurred with the opening of the new Denver
International Airport, Beckwith said.
The acceptable level of noise for urban residential
communities near airports was determined by the state to be
65 dB CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level), but the
normalization process, he said, is particularly useful in
California for justifying the use of a 55 dB CNEL for
restricting residential use near rural airports that have
relatively low backa ound noise levels and a small number
of aircraft operations.
Beckwith also recommended that FAA's Part 150 Airport
Noise Compatibility Program require airports to look further
into the future than the cunent five year window. Other
commenters to the FAA docket echoed this idea.
Noise contours at airports will shrink in the near term
because of the retirement of Stage 2 aircraft but will begin
growing again after 2004 as the numbers of Stage 3 aircraft
operations increase, he said. In California, state legislation
requires that land use plans developed by local Airport Land
Use Commissions look 20 years into the future.
Beckwith also suggested that federal funding should cover
the costs of acquisition or condemnation of property,
easements, or the rights to use property when proposed uses
of the property threaten the efficient use of pnblicly owned
airports.
New Washington State Law
The FAA must clarify what its role in land use planning
will be, said Theresa Smith, manager of aviation planning
for the Washington State Department of Transportation.
Like the State of Washington, the FAA has no control over
local land use decisions, she said. But she noted that a new
state law passed in June 1996 has put the state Aviation
Department in the role of an advocate for good land use
planning and has significantly changed the approach the
state takes to land use planning adjacent to airports.
The law amended the Washington State Growth Manage-
ment Act which outlines planning requirements for local
jurisdictions. Over the past two years, Smith said, the state's
Airport Land Use Compatibility Program "has grown
exponentially" and the acceptance by cities and counties,
previously opposed to the proa am has enabled its success.
The lack of definitions in the new state law for the terms
"adjacent, general aviation, discourage, and incompatible,"
has prompted local jurisdictions to run to the state Aviation
Division for guidance on how to comply with the new law,
she told the FAA.
The state Aviation Department recognized the need to
protect airports from incompatible uses in three primary
areas: height hazazds, safety, and noise, Smith said. Like the
State of California, assumptions within the State of Wash-
ington's Airport Land Use Compatibility Program are based
on accident data from the National Transportation Safety
Board for the yeazs 1983-1994 and on an analysis of those
data performed by the Institute of Transportation Studies at
the University of California, Berkeley, plotting accident
locations identified by NTSB.
"'I'he plotted data indicate a significant trend of aircraft
accidenis concentrated at an airport's r�nway end to five
thousand feet," Smith said, noting that "the safety data
serves as a guide in identifying possible situations of
reduced safety and potential incompatible land use develop-
ment.
"For example, the [Washington] Airport Land Use
Compatibility Proo am would find proposed school devel-
opment, nursing home, hospital, concentrated residential
development and development concentrating large numbers
of people within the five thousand foot envelope, an
incompatible use due to the proximity to the airport. �As
well, the liability associated with increased risk in pernut-
ting incompatible development may increase and affect the
permitting agency's liability insurance," she said.
"The politicai realities associated with tough land use
decision making make good land use planrung decisions
exceedingly complex," she said. "The financial realities
associated with these tough decisions do not evaporate when
the baton is passed from party to party. The tough decisions
come at a cost. We encourage jurisdictions and sponsors to
recognize these financial realities prior to land use decision
making. Punting costs from one party to the other is an
ineffective approach. Advocacy, bridging communication,
valid research, and data are the components to moving land
use decision making to an effective level," Smith told the
FAA.
Model Zoning Documents
Thomas E. Highland, an aviation planner with the t?regon
Department of Transportation, urged the FAA to develop
model airport compatibility zoning documents, based on
NTSB accident data, that include areas that my be at
increased risk due to the potential for an aircraft crash.
Such a document could be based on the NTSB accident
data, but the University of California's study of that data
needs to be expanded on and applied, on a continuing basis,
at the national level, Highland said. The FAA, he said,
should request that the NTSB include the coordinates of all
crashes within 10 miles of an active airport and forward this
information to the land use planning section of the FAA for
evaluation.
"Local governments generally have litde expertise at
predicting, planning for, and developing zoning to protect
citizens in these areas off the airport," he said, adding that
making federal grant funds available to local planners
specificalIy for development of compatible land use zoning
for airports "wouid be a major step forward in fornung a
Airport Noise RepoR
�
:� �
July 17,199$
stronger par[nership between aviation and locai jurisdic-
tions."
"Compatible land use planning around airports cannot
only be linked to noise and height but also needs to address
safety concerns for both the users of the airport and those
living in close proximity to these airports," Highland said.
He told the FAA that providing a strong national policy on
compatible land use zoning around airports wiil suengthen
state and local jurisdictions' ability to implement compatible
land use zoning.
Wayne A. Bryant, director, Aviation Noise & A6atement
for the Maryland Aviation Administration, told that FAA
that, if the agency changed its policy and provided federal
funding for noise mitigation projects to include areas within
the 60-65 dB DNL noise contours, airporks and state and
local governments might be included to develop or expand
airport zoning regulations to include this area.
Revise Outdated Publication
Charles H. Thompson, secretary of the Wisconsin Depart-
ment of Transportation, urged the FAA to revise its outdated
1977 "Airport Land Use Compatibility Planning" publica-
tion (AC 150/5050-6) and include examples of successful
measures that other states have used to control incompatible
development around publicly owned airports.
He noted that a Wisconsin state statute permits public
airport owners to establish extraterritorial land use conirols
over their airport approaches up to a distance of three miles
from the boundary of the airport. These land nse controls
supersede all other applicable zoning limits by other
municipalities that might apply, he explained. Four of the
state's busiest airports have adopted land use controls based
on this statute, limiting the further development of incom-
patible land uses. A general aviation airport currendy is in
the process of enacting similar zoning authority, he said.
"In Wisconsin the use of state statutes by local govern-
ment airport owners supplements and extends local zoning
and land use authority and is an effective deterrent to the
development of incompatible and uses around airparts,"
Thompson said. Wisconsin also encourages local govern-
ments to protect their a.irports through the use of state funds
and low interest state loans to purchase land in fee or
easement rights, especially prior to any development around
the airport, he told the FAA.
Jerry M. Matsuda, airports adminisirator of the State of
Hawaii Depamnent of Transportation's Airports Division,
recommended that the FAA:
� Fund updates of noise contours without airports being
required to update their entire Part 150 Airport Noise
Compatibility proa ams;
• Provide guidance for the estabiishment of avigation
easement for noise and overflights;
• Establish regulations for disclosure of aircraft activities
and aviation noise impacts;
• Recognize the local noise standards that are based on
community and climatic conditions, and especially in the
91
area of Part I50 prob am funding.
The Arizona Departrnent of Transportation's Aeronautics
Division told the FAA that no more land use tools are
needed for airports, but what is needed is the ability to
enforce the tools already available.
"Poliacal pressure on the jurisdictional agencies is the
single most influential factor in obviating or ignoring
compatible land use guidelines in the vicinity of airports,"
the Arizona DOT said. "It may be necessary to assign partial
responsibility to the federal or state oraans for not only
establishing guidelines but assumina some of the responsi-
bility for `enforcing' the guidelines once established." The
state DOT said this approach is currently under review in
Arizona.
State Implementation of Federal Guidelines
FAA souDht the opinion of Peter A. Buchsbaum, chairman
of the American Bar Association's Subcommittee on
Federal Laws Affecting Land Use, on how it could improve
compatible land use planning around airports.
Speaking only for himself and not the ABA, Buchsbaum
said "the FAA might consider a form of interactive mecha-
nism, perhaps expedited through the grant or aid process; in
which federal land use regulations aze recommended to state
regulatory agencies" which could, under a statute like that in
New 7ersey's airport hazard law, require enforcement
through the local land use approval process.
New Jersey has created a system of airport hazard zones
which result in regulation of the use of land, he told the
FAA. Under a state law adopted in 1983 and amended in
1992, an airport hazard is defined "as uses of land or water
which create a dangerous condition azound an airport or an
aircraft landing area."
An airport safety zone is defned as any area in which an
airport hazard mi�ht be created, if not prevented, he said.
The New Jersey Commission of Transportation is empow-
ered to adopt regulations specifying permitted and prohib-
ited land uses in hazard areas. "'These standards must be
incorporated into municipal zoning which is to that extent
pre-empted," the attorney said.
"Hazard zones while state defined, are set forth on local
zoning maps," he explained. "As a result the state makes
standards which limit land uses and localities are required to
enforce them through their local zoning codes."
Thus, Buchsbaum said, the model used in New Jersey is a
state statute providing for administrative regulations that
forb3d certain land uses. These regulations are enforced
locally throu�h municipal land use regulatory a�encies. This
modet for state regulation and local enforcement could be
replicated elsewhere, he told the FAA.
"Further, the New Jersey model could additionally be
implemented by cooperative interaction between the federal
government and the state Departrnents of Transportation."
With appropriate voluntary federal guidelines, the kinds of
land use regulations the states adopt could implement
federal policy for airports, he said.�
Airport Noise Report
92 Airport Noise Report
Hushkits
A'VAERO TO SUPPLY KITS
FOR ALL CANADIAN B737-200s
Florida-based AvAERO, which supplies hushkits for
Boeing 737-200 aircraft, announced July 7 that it is deliver-
ing hushkits to all Canadian operators of B�37-200s.
Some four Canadian airlines have contracted with the
company for 58 orders and options for hushkits. AvAERO's
kits cost $13 million on average, according to Ron
Suihkonen, director of sales for the company, which is
based in Safety Harbor, FL,.
Suihkonen declined to discuss how many total orders for
hushkits AvAERO has received.
The four Canadian carrier with orders are WestJet
Airlines, Canadian Airlines International, Royal Cargo, and
First Air. Air Canada does not operate B737-200s.
The Canadian schedule for retiring Stage 2 aircraft is one
year behind that of the United States. It requires operators to
have fleet comprised of 50 percent Stage 3 by 7an. l, 1999.
1fie U.S. schedule requires a fleet mix of 75 percent Stage 3
aircraft by that date.b
Fleet Mix, , from p. 89
Secretary of Transportation for. approval. It is not exgected
to be released to the public undl early September.
Albee did not provide data on individual major carriers,
but said that, as a a oup, the U.S. major airlines have fleet
comprised of 78.7 percent Stage 3 aircraft.
He provided the following additional data from the report:
• The total fleet operating in the U.S. (domestic and
foreign operators) is comprised of 79.b percent Stage 3
aircraft (up from 75.5 percent at the end of 1996);
• The domestic Stage 3 fleet (majors, nationals, cugo, and
other airlines) is comprised of 77.1 percent Stage 3 aircraft
(compared to 72.8 percent at the end of 1996);
• The foreign fleet operating in the U.S. is comprised of
853 percent Stage 3 aircraft (up from 81.8 percent at the
end of 1996);
• Some 260 operators of Stage 2 aircraft had a baseline
fleet of 3,005 at the end of 1997. This compares to 277
Stage 2 operators with a baseline fleet of 2,244 aircraft at
the end of 1996;
• A total of 1,46� Stage 2 aircraft and 5,725 Stage 3
aircraft were in operation at the end of 1997 for a total fleet
size of 7,190 aircraft. This compares to the 1,678 Stage 2
aircraft, 5,165 Stage 3 aircraft, and 6,843 total aircraft in the
fleet at the end of 1996;
• Between the and of 1996 and 1997, 213 SEase 2 aircraft
were removed from the fleet, 560 Stage 3 aircraft were
added to the fleet, and the tota] fleeT size grew by 347
aircraft;
The FAA recently wrote every operator of Sta�e 2 aircraft
that indicated they will have to phaseout aircraft by the end
of 1998 to obtain their specific plan, including dates, for
doing so. T'he agency wants to make it very difficult for any
Stage 2 operators to seek exemptions from the end of 1998
interim compliance deadline of the finai phaseout deadline
at the end of 1999.
FAA's Part 91 regulation set three interim compliance
deadlines (at the end of 1994, 1996, and 1998) to ensure that
the airlines will make steady proa ess in transformin� their
fleets tq all Stage 3 aircraft. By the end of 1994, the airlines
were required to have fleets comprised of 55 percent Stage 3
aircraft or to have reduced their baseline Stage 2 fleets by 25
percent. By the end of 1996, the airlines were required to
have fleets comprised of either 65 percent Staoe 3 aircraft or
to have reduced their baseline Stage 2 fleets by 50 percent,
and by the end of 1998, the airlines must have fleet com-
prised of 75 percent Stage 3 aircraft or have reduced cheir
Stage 2 baseline fleet by 75 percent A11 Stage 2 aircraft
must be retired by the end of 1999 unless they receive a
waiver which would allow them to operate until the end of
2003.�
Land Use
� •�� , � � � �
� � , e , � � � `
The Federal Aviation Adminisffation should establish
itself as a"continually-updated clearinghouse" of informa-
tion and national examples of successfu] land use planning
azound airports, Teresa M. Arnold, principal planner for the
Clark County (NE) Department of Aviation, told the
agency.
Others echoed her plea in comments solicited by the
agency to help it find new and innovative ways to foster
compatible land use near airports.
FAA's acting as a clearinghouse would be "extr�emely
valnable" to airports attempting to work with state and local
governments to develop land use cornpadbility ordinances,
she said. Arnold said the agency could develop model
proviSrons regardino noise disclosure and sound attenuation,
and conduct studies regarding the economic effect of these
types of ineasures.
Such provisions, she said, "would have been invaluable"
to the DOA recently as it has been attempting to pass a local
ordinance requiring disclosure (within all contours, 60 DNL
and up) and expandina attenuation to include the 60-65 dB
DNL contour. "Without sound scientific studies regarding
the economic effects of disclosure and auenuation, it has
been impossible to convincingly refute the many claims by
opponents of the ordinance that discIosure requirements will
in themselves lower property values, or that attenuation of
homes within the airport environs will lower the value of
non-attenuated homes both within and without the envi-
rons," Arnold said.
AirpoR Noise Report
C�
� 1
July 1�,1998
The FAA should consider amending the table on land use
compatibility in its guidance on Part 150 Airport Noise
Compatibility programs, she said, to indicate tha[ certain
land uses, such as residential, schools, and hospitals, are not
compatible in the 60-65 DNL contour without sound
attenuation. She noted that scientific studies, the Federal
Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON - the precursor to
the current Federal Interagency Committee on Aircraft
Noise (FICAN), and the experiences of airport operators
indicate that "large numbers of people within the 60-65 dB
DNL contour consider themselves highly annoyed by
aircraft noise."
"Airports attemp6ng to regulate land uses within [the 60-
65 DNL] noise contour would have more success if Part 150
included recommendations for attenuation wit}un it," she
said. "In our recent efforts to pass an ordinance requiring
disclosure and attenuation within ihe 60-65 DNL contoar,
opponents frequently referenced Part 150's `Table i' as
evidence that the FAA does not find such regnlations
necessary or useful, despite the facts that we submitted for
the record letters from the FAA supporting the ordinance,
and an FAA representative attended one public hearing in
support of the ordinance."
Arnold suggested that the FAA develop a relationship
with the American Planning Association and the American
Institute of Certified Planners to increase awareness among
land use planning professionals of aircraft noise-related
issues and sound planning practices for azeas within the
airport environment.
Maintain Flight Tracks
The City of Eagan, MN, located near Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport, told the FAA that "the greatest
incentive for local governments to provide and maintain
noise compatible land use is for air tr�c conuollers to
establish and adhere to operating procedures that will
effectively maintain air traffic over such areas."
GPS (the Global Positioning System), naviDational aids,
and "other tools should be used to establish oprimum flight
tracks, and analys3s should be performed of additional
deparlure profile alternatives to optimize climb rates over
compatible areas," the city said.
But, the Regional Commission on Airport Affairs, a non-
prof t organization in the Seattle area concerned with
regional transportation issues affecting residents in the
Puget 5ound area, urged the FAA "to focus on more rational
distribution of air traffic in the state, rather than on penaliz-
ing homeowners, municipalities, and the home-construction
industry."
The FAA should coordinate its activities with other
federal agencies and with local government a?encies to
assure that aviation capacity enhancement initiatives lead to
successful results, Allan M. Furney, president of RCAA,
said. He added that the FAA's Northwest Regional O�ce
"has been grossly ne?ligent and remiss in this regard."
"Our conclusion is tha[ the aviation noise problem would
93
be best addressed by a reversal of FAA's present policy of
encouraging and enabling b eat increases in air traffic at
existing urban and suburban airports. FAA should not
subsidize increases in capacity at airports whose operations
impact existing built-up residential communities. FA.A
should urgently encourage, support, and even direct the
expansion of rural airports. Tinkering with federal housin�
programs, attempting ta secure rezonina of built-up commu-
nities now coming under fli�ht comdors, and meddling with
local sovereignty over land use, will not do much to reduce
impacts. It is not practical to relocate whole cities to
accommodate a owth in aviation. It is much more realistic
to direct aviation a owth to more appropriate sites."
Encourage Disclosure
The Raleigh-Durham Auport Authority urged the FAA to
require all owners of homes acoustically treated in part or in
total by federal, state, or local b ants to disclose to prospec-
tive purchasers the existence of aircraft noise impact on the
property.
RDU's own disclosure program, required by an amend-
ment to state law, "has had a significant positive effect on
public awareness of the aircraft noise environment," the
airport authority said. Under RDU's program, all property
owners within the 55 DNL noise contour around Raleigh-
Durham International Airport must be sent notices annually
noting they are subject to airport noise and that this fact
must be disciosed when the property is sold.
The airport authority also recommended that the FAA
encourage "all jurisdictions nationwide that approve land
use in areas impacted by commerciai aircraft noise to
routinely submit a listing of all zoning change requests
within the jurisdiction to the airport administrative staff in a
timely manner. Such action will enable airport administra-
tive staff to provide comments on proposed zoning changes
pertaining to land situated within noise impacted areas
without possibility of oversight," the airport authority said.
'The FAA should set up a small grants prob am for airports
ta hire professional planner to interface with local govern-
ments and to suDgest compatible regional planning for
airports, RDU told the FAA.
It also said that the FAA should encourage airport
operators to publish noise exposure maps and disciosure
statements in local newspapers and other media on an
annual basis and to make noise exposure maps available
through the world wide web.
Los Angeles World Airports was the only other airport
authority to respond to FAA's request for comments on land
use, although the Airports Council International - North
America, the trade group that represents large governmental
bodies that operate airports in the United States, is expected
to file comments shortly.
The action the FAA could take that would most directly
affect land use decisions would be for the agency to deny
funding to jurisdictions that allow development of incom-
patible land uses, said Robert M. Beazd, airport environ-'
Airport Noise Report
en a manager for Los Angeles International Airport. But,
he said such action is not advisable because it would hinder
sound insulation and land acquisition programs.
But Beard offered ideas on direct action the FAA could
take outside land use area to reduce the impact of noise
around airports. He said the FAA could:
• Promote and subsidize research and development of
inexpensive, effective sound insulating building materials
and designs;
• Expand noise mitigation activities by temporarily
subsidizing the sound insulation of all new noise sensitive
construction in jurisdictions that adopt and agree to maintain
requirements for new construction sound insulation and
avigation easements;
• Promote and subsidize significant research into indoor
and outdoor noise concellation technologies;
° ConEinue to set more restrictive aircraft noise standard —
Stage 3.5 or 4;
• Establish a reasonable phaseout requirement for hushkit-
ted aircraft that do not meet Stage 3.5 standards;
° Provide greater air traffic control support for in-flight
noise abatement procedures, including formal and routine
consultations with airports and communities; and
• Make FA.A data freely available for both monitoring and
enforcement of noise abatement in-flight procedures and
access restricdons.�
94
Airport Noise Report
m t 1
Land Use
�PA WANTS CONTOURS
PROJECTED FOR 10-15 YEARS
Airport noise maps should project contours for at least 10-
15 years in the future the Environmental Protec6on Agency
told the Federal Aviation Administration in comments
submitted in response to an FAA request for ideas on how to
improve land use compatibility around airports.
Currently, the Part 150 A.irport Noise Compatibility
Prob am requires noise contours for only the fifth calendaz
year after the date of submission of a Part 150 prod am and
a revised map is required only if the airport operator
determines that a change in operations has caused a substan-
tial new non-compatible use, EPA said.
In addition, both FAA Order 1050 (FAA National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) guidance) and FAA
Order 5050 (Airport NEPA guidance) require only one
future year noise analysis, EPA noted. The agency said it
believes FAA could "provide a framework in its guidance
and regulations to disclose additional future year noise
contours to help airpor[ and local land use authorities plan
for future compatible land use around airports. These
informational contours would not need to invoIved the
detailed analysis that the cunent NEPA document contours
require," EPA said. "While the operational projections used
to develop these contours will be somewhat uncertain, the
contours will give some general indication on what future
impacts could be," EPA said.
It noted that both FAA orders currently are undergoing
revision and the FAA could add sections in these documents
that would provide guidance to the effect that FAA NEPA
documents should tnclude additionai fvture year noise
contours.
"Because of the ongoing nature of the Part 150 process
(not dependent of FA,A approva] of new actions), we believe
that the suggested changes in the Part 150 program could be
most.effective," Richazd E. Sanderson, director of the
FAA's Office of Federal Activities, said. EPA, he added,
"encourages FAA to revise Part 150 to require updated
future year informational contours be submitted to FAA
every five years."
The EPA o�cial offered another suggestion to the FAA
related to the FAA's approval of airport layout plans and
funding where the current action may not cause addidonal
non-compatible land uses but where there akeady exists
significant non-compatible land uses. An example of such a
situa6on is Miami International Airport, Sanderson said. In
1995, there were approximately 163,000 people located in
the 65 dB DNL or a eater noise contours ther.e. EPA
"believes that the FAA should not just consider the `deita'
of the current action when considering approval and
mitigation but assess the total aircraft noise situation at the
�o�,>
EPA noted that Miami International, alona with some
other major commercial airports, cioes not participate in the
Part 150 proa am, which is voluntary. EpA said it recom-
mends that the part 150 program be revised to require ali
commercial airports to participate in the program.
N.O.I.S.E. Comments
The National Organization to Insure a Sound-controlled
Environment (NOISE) also urged the FAA to make partici-
pation in the Part 150 pro�am mandatory for all airports
eligible for federal Airport Improvement Proa am (AIP)
fundin�.
NOISE told the FAA that it "firmly believes that land use
plannin� is best done at the local level," and that the
organization "stronoly supports the pre-eminent role of local
jurisdictions in any land use decisions."
Among the recommendations of NOTSE to the FAA were:
• To provide direct federal funding through the AIP
pro�am to non-airport sponsors who have responsibility for
land use planning in the vicinity of an airport, and the
exclusion of any requirernent that such funding may be
made only with the concurrence of the airport sponsor;
• Encourage cooperative aa eements taetween airport
sponsors and surrounding communities;
• Revise FA.A part 150 regulations and guidelines to
recognize and publicize successfuI land use compatibility
concepts, encoura�e more effective public participation, and
encourage innovative land use control concepts.
NOISE urged the FAA to work with the American
Planning Association and national organizations of local
Aiiport Noise Report
July 17,1998
oovernments such as the National League of Cities and
National Association of Counties to hold workshops and to
publish a guide for local elected and planning officials;
• Strengthen the linkage between Part 150 noise compati-
bility programs and other federal programs that reinforce
land use planning, such as the Federal Housing Administra-
tion and Depar[ment of Veterans Affairs policies not to
accept properties in high-noise areas for mortgaae insur-
ance;
• Adopt as FAA policy the EPA's 1974 determination that
55 dB DNL is the level at which incompatible use should be
controlled around airports in order to protect the puhlic
health and welfare and make noise mitigation iunding
available for projects in the 55 dB DNL and greater con-
tours;
• Encouraae land use planning that avoids new develop-
ment within shrunk contours by allowina airports and local
governments to fix contours at the current 55 dB DNL level
and remain eligible for mitigation funding and controls
within those original contours;
• Require airports to make an equal commitment with
local governments to stick to their master plans and estab-
lish a high hurdle for approval of runways and other master
plan chanaes that have an impact on sunounding land use;
• Make preparatian and approval of a Part 150 plan
mandatory for approval of Passenger Facility Char?es and
do not approve PFCs for projects that violate local land use
plans;
• Fully carry out ttie directive to the secretary�of transpor-
tation in the FAA Reauthorization Act to encourage the
involvement of airport operators and sponsors in the work
and deliberations of Metropolitan Planning Organizations;
• Work with the Department of Defense to establish
consistent policies and procedures to determine the unpacts
of noise and land use decisions around both civilian and
military airports. The models and measurements used by
civilian and military airports currently are not consistent
causing surrounding jurisdictions to have to consider
adoption of different land use restrictions, NOISE said. It
predicted this will be a b owing problem as former military
airports convert to mixed or all civilian use;
• Expand assessment of noise impact to include single
events, low frequency noise, the level of backgraund noise,
terrain and climate effects, and clear zones for takeoffs and
landin�s; and
• Require the use of actual noise monitoring rather than
just predictive modeling in developina noise contours.
NOISE is an organization of predominantly local govern-
ments located near major metropolitan airports.
Fixed Contour Lines
Ash Campbell of the City of Tempe, AZ, located near
Phoenix Sky Harbor International A.irport, urged the FAA to
� � establish noise contour lines fixed in place for the purpose
of land use planning and noise mitigation. "What we have
instead are sets of semi-public contour lines for various
95
years based on various studies from different consultants,
and there is no acceptable procedure or guidance from FAA
... for drawing a meaningful `line in the sand' to protect both
the airport and the communities nearby," Campbell said.
"'The constant shifting and vagueness appears to under-
mine citizen respect for the lines themselves, and makes it
extremely difficult to implement the kinds of ineasures that
the FAA lines to see included in Part 150 plans, like noise
overlay districts in zoning ordinances, which are very
formal and last for a very long time."
Joanne Parker, a transportation planner for Alameda (CA)
County, told the FAA the easiest way the agency could
positively affect land use planning around airports in
California is to aive county Airport Land Use Commissions
(set up under state law) "the infusion of funds needed to
update plans, train staff, and generally raise the public
profile of ALUC's and the needed role they play in protect-
ing airports from future conflicts with neighboring land use
regulators."
The State of California no longer has funds for updating
ALUC policy plan, Parker said, explaining that this leaves
Alameda County's ALUC "with no tool for making sound
recommendations for land uses around the County's
airPorts•" �
3he urged the FAA to establish "ALUC-equivalents"
natio�ally and to provide "best practice" examples to guide
the development of such land use regulators.
The Alameda ALUC, working with three cities and a
county, was successful in expanding the protection area
around Livermore Municipal Airport in 1993, she said,
which resulted in a larger area surrounding the airport
"being subject to the strictest land use regulations possible:'
Henry A. F. Young of Young Environmental Sciences,
Inc., told the FAA it should move away from strict adher-
ence to noise contours and to create airport districts ciefined
by major, visible community divisions, such as streets;
natural features, zoning districts, and other pre-existing
boundaries. "'This is a more stable and intuitive way to
define influence areas than relying on noise contours
themselves," he said.
But Young said that, while such an approach would work
best in communities where there is a single authority
controlling land use planning, it would work less welt in
areas divided up into numerous local jurisdictions. For the
latter areas, he said, reliance should be-put on performance
standards in construction techniques.
The latter approach has several important advantages, he
said. "It is a sinale uniform approach suitable for most
communities. It could be utilized discretely at the discretion
of a state or region or local municipality without involving
the complications which exist on the federal level where
system wide concerns often necessarily govern decision
making: '
Young said that single event noise levels, not DNL,
should be used as the basis for setting construction stan-
dards. Single event levels are less likely to vary> and if they
do, are more likely to be reduced in the future than DNL.�
Airport Noise Report
96 Airport Noise Report
� ANR EDITORIA.L ON THE AGENDA...
ADVISORY BOARD
Mark Atwood, Esq.
Gailand, Kharasch, Morse & Gartinkle
Washington, D.C.
Lee L. Blackman, Esq.
McDermott. Wili & Emery
Los Angeles, Calif.
Dr. Clifford R. $ragdon, AICP
Dean, Schooi of Aviation & Transportadon Dowling
College
Eliot Cutler, Fsq,
Cuder & Stanfield
Washington. D.C.
J. Spencer Dickerson
Senior Vice President
American Association of Airport Execudves
Edward J. DiPolvere
Administrator, National Association of Noise
Controi Officials
Richard G. "Dick" Dyer
Airport Environmental 5pecialist, Division of
Aeronautics, Calif. Dept, of Transportation
E. Tazeweil Ellett, Fsq.
Hogan & Haztson
Washington, D.C.
Julie H. Ellis, Esq.
Managing Director
Federal Express Corporadon
Angel M. Garcia
Co-Chairman
Citizens Against Newark Noise
E.H. "Moe" Haupt
Manager, Airport and Environmenml Services,
National Business Aircraft Association
Robert P. Silverberg, Esq.
Bagileo, Silverberg & Goldman
Washington, D.C.
Joanne W. Young, Esq.
Baker & Hosteder LLP
Washington, D.C.
Aug. 20-21 American Association of Airport Executives' Aircraft
Noise and Land Use Plannin� Managemen[ Workshops,
Seattle WA (contact AAAE; tel: (703) 824-0504 or
fax-on-demand: (i-800-470-ARPT).
Sept. 14-15 American Association of Airport Executives' Fall
Legislative Issues Conference, Washington, DC
(contact AA.AE; tel: (703) 824-0�04 or fax-on-demand:
(1-800-470-AR.PT).
Oct. 4-7 Airports Council International - North America's 7th
Regional Conference & Exhibition, Marriott's Orlando
World Center (contact ACI, 1775 K St., NW,
Washinb on, DC 20006; tel: (202) 293-8500; fax (202)
331-1362).
Nov. 8-10 American Association of Airport Executives/American
Bar Association Airport Law Workshop, West Palm
Beach, FL (contact AAAE; tel: (�03) 824-0504 or fax-
on-demand: (1-800-470-ARPT),
Nov. 16-18 INTER-NOISE 98, The 1998 International Conb ess on
Noise Control Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand
(c�ntact Conferer_�e Secretariat, IN'TER-NOISE 98 + � ��
Secretary, MpA, PO Box 1181, Aukiand 1001, '
Australia; tel: (+64-9-379-7822; fax: +64-9-302-0098).
Nov. 20 The 1998 International Symposium on Recreational
Noise — The Effects of Man on the Environment,
Queenstown, New Zealand (contact Symposium
Secretary Grant Morgan, Electroacoustic Calibration
Services, PO Box 76-068, Manukau City, New
Zealand; tel: +64-9-279-8883; fax: +64-9-279-8833).
Nov. 22-27 Noise Effects '98, the 7th International Conb ess on
Npise as a Public Heaith Problem, Sydney, Australia
(contact The Cona ess Secretariat, Noise EfFects '98,
GPO Box 128, Sydney NSW 2001 Australia; tel: 61-2-
9262-2277;fax 61-2-9262-2323).
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Charles F. Price, Contributing Editor; Maria T. Norton, Production Editor
Published 25 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528.
Price $495.
Authorization to photacopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients,
is granted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of US$1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 27 Conb ess Street, Salem, MA, 01970. USA.
Copyrieht OO 1998 by Airport Noise Report, Ashbum, Va. 20147
;
��
��
�' � .� `� ; • � � � � � � �
. ''� . `� �`
;/ � � � ' ' • ' � �
� _ . 1 l �
., .F '� ;��.
❑ Agenda for the July 28,1998 MASAC meeti.ng
❑ Minutes of the June 23, 1998 MASAC meeting
❑ Copies of MASAC correspondence not included in Operations minu�es
below �
.
❑ Blank Noise Monitoring and Information Request Form
, . ;,
. . -
, .
, , .
C7 MAC Noise Program Handbook memo '
❑ GPS Govemment Industry ParmershiP Pi'ogram. memo _
❑ Nlinutes of the July 10, 1998 MASAC Operarions meetin.g with
attachments an.d cover rnemos
❑ Monthly Part 150 Update
❑ June 199� Technical Advisor's Report
.
' .
'I ;
f
�• � �•�
��.�. , :
.; � -,� : �.
COUNCIL
General Meetinq
July 28, 1998
7:30 p.m. to 9:95 p.m.
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Call to Order, Roll Call
Approval of Minutes of Meeting June 23, 1998
introduction of Invited Guest�
Receipt of Communicatipns
"�'� � Technical Advisor's Runway System Utilization Report and
��� �`�--� Complaint Summary
f
�5J. Review MAC Noise Program Handbook
�
�.' GPS Govemment-Industry Partnership (GIP) Mesting Brief
Cl/ July 10, 1998 Operations Committee Repo�t - Mar4c Salmen
. � July 20, 1998 Executive CommitEee Report - Bob Johnson
,: Report of the MAC Commission Meeting - Bob Johnson
�-�0 Persons Wishing to Address the Council
�
1�i� Ottier items Noi on the Agenda
c
,1 �.� Adjoumment
c� IVext Meeting:
August 25, 19�8
r� >
MINUTES
METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL
GENERAL MEETING
June 23, 1998
7:30 p.m.
6040 i8th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Call to Order, Roll Call
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bob Jo1�c�son at 7:30 p.m. and the secretary was asked to call
the roll. The following members were in attendance.
Bob Johnson
Steve Holme
Nancy Stoudt
Brian Simonson
Dick Keinz
Tom Veeninga
Brian Bates
Steve Minn
Sandy Colvin Roy
Dean Lindberg
Glenn Strand
Nathae Richardson
Neil Clark
Mike Cramer
Joe Lee
Leo Kurtz
Tom Hueg
Dawn Weitzel .
John Nelson
Petrona Lee
Lance Staricha
Jon Hohenstein
Charles Van Guilder
Dale Hancunoas
Kevin Batchelder
Ellswar#h Stein
Robert Andrews
Sunfish Lake
MBAA
NWA
NWA
DHL Airways
MAC
United Airlines
Airbome
Minneapolis
Niinneapolis
Niinneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
Niinneapolis
Niinneapolis
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
St. Paul
Richfield
Bloomington
Bloomington
Eagan
Ea$an
Burnsville
Inver Grove Heights
Mendota Heights
Mendota Heights
St. Louis Park
Brad Digre
Advisors
Roy FuhiTn�uin
Chad Leqve
Cindy Greene
Visitors
Borys M. Polec
Approval of Minutes
MAC
MAC
FAA
Minneapolis
The minutes of the May 26, 1998 meeting were approved with the following corrections:
➢ The number of aircraft events over 100 decibels at RMT site 18 on page 4 of the minutes should be
233 rather than 33.
➢ The Report of the MAC Commission Meeting was given by Vice Chairperson Tom Hueg rather than
by Chairman Johnson.
Chairman .Tohnson also entertained two clarificarions to the minutes:
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota. Heights, asked if the statement on page 4, item #4 was correct in regards to
runway 04/22 being the busiest runway at MSP. Roy Fuhrn�ann, Technical Advisor, said it was conect
and illustrated this by referring to the May 1998 Technical Advisor's Report. He showed that for the three
e�cisting runways (not runway ends) at MSP, runway 04/22 had the most operations.
Sandy Colvin Roy, Minneapolis, asked for a clarification of the statement on page 8 of the minutes ,
regarding the focus of the "Airport Ground Noise Study," refened to also as a nighttime noise study. She ;� :, _
askerl if it were true thaf the study was not a low-frequency noise study. Chairman Johnson said it was
true. Roy Fuhrrr�ann, Technical Advisor, said the study had gons through a couple of name changes. He
said the study focused on nighttime noise, as well as ground noise generated by the airport.
Introduction of invited guests
Receipt of Communications
There were no invited guests.
The following communications were received:
➢ A letter from Jennifer Sayre, NWA, was received nominating Mark Salmen, NWA, for Vice Chair of
MASAC.
� A letter from the City of Mendota Heights was received designating Mr. Ellsworth Stein as the official
alternate for Mendota Heights for the June 23, 1998 meeting.
➢ A letter from the City of Burnsville was receivesi designating Mr. Charles Van Guilder as the new
Burnsville representative.
➢ A letter from the City of Eagan was receive� indicating that the City Council formally adopted a
request that the "... remote tower monitors associated with the-ANOMS system be located in areas
south and west of the airport prior to the 1999 construction season. Specifically, the City is requesting
that the monitors that are to be installed in association with the Runway 17/35 project be sited and
installed in time to measure the impacts from increased levels of traffic using Runway 04/22 during the
2
parallel runway construction." Chairman Johnson said the letter/request would be forwarded to the
Operations Committee for consideration.
,� �, copy of a letter from the City of Eagan to the FAA was also received regarding comrr►ents to the
FAA's Compatible Land Use Planning initiative.
➢ Two letters were received from a resident of Inver Grove Heights, Richard T. Hemming, in regards to
aircraft tr�affic over his home. Chairman Johnson said staff would reply to these letters. Dale
Hammons, Inver Grove Heights, asked that he receive a copy of the reply.
4. Technical Advisor's Runwav Svstem Utilization Report and Comolaint Summarv
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, reported that:
➢ The percentage of Stage III aircraft by ANOMS count for May 1998 is 58.5%.
➢ There was an increase in the number of complaints and operations over May 1997.
➢ The majority of the percentage of increase in comptaints comes from the Btoomington and Richfield
areas.
� The use of runway 22 for departures compares similarly to the use of the two parallel ninways.
➢ The average number of Nighttime Camer Jet Operations per day for May was 28. Of this number, an
average of 16 operations occurred between 10:30 and 11:00 p.m., about 57% of the total Nighttime
Carrier Jet operations. The remainuig 12 operations between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. is compara.ble
to the number of flights reported for that time period prior to the change in nighttime hours.
Dawn Weitzel, R.ichfield, said she was still very concerned with the number of departure noise events over
100 decibels being recorded at RMT site 18. She said the number of these events had aimost doubled
between April (233) and May (418). She asked what the ciiy should expect with respect to these types of
, -- events.
( !
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said he had attended a"Tower" meeting with the construction group
regarding the use of the shorter parallel runway. He noted that it was still the prerogative of the pilot to
either accept or decline the use of the shorter parallel. He said he didn`t think there would be a change in
the number of these types of events until after the construction was completed. It was also noted that fewer
aircraft would be able to depart the 6000-foot runway the hotter it becomes. Mr. Fuhrn'iann said it was
possible that the number of aircraft able tu accept the shorter runway could decrease depending on the
weather and the ternperatures this summer.
Jce Lee, Minneapolis, asked for a further clarification of the reasons for the high percentage of nighttime �
flights during the 10:30 - 11:00 timeframe. Roy Fuhrmacu�, Technical Advisor, explained that planning for
the soutb parallel construction had begun ear'1y last Yea�' before the change in the nighttime reporting hours.
He said at thai time the airlines made P1ans t° m�n�m� delays due to the construction by pushing the
arrival and departure banks out. He said these plans were ma�le before the nighttime hours were changed.
He noted thai sta,ff re�ently sent a letter to the carriers requesting that they recognize the 10:30 to 6:00
nighttime hours once the canstruction is complete.
Neil Clark, Minneapolis, suggested that the Noise Complaint Hotline ask callers for information on how
long they have lived at their current address. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said it was technically
possible but it was probable that callers would not feel comforta.ble giving out this type of information.
Tom Hueg, St. Paul, asked if the Tower Log reports for the percentage of time availabie for each runway
were conect. He said they seemed too high. Chad Leqve, Advisor, said that because thece were now three
runways simultaneously available for use rather than just two, the percentages would no longer add up to
100%. �/�
�
Vice Chairperson's Vote
Chairman Johnson noted that only one person had been nominaterl for the Vice Chair position and opened
the floor for further nominations. He eYplained that the person receiving the most number of votes would
be elected the First Vice Chair and the person with the second highest number would be elected Second
Vice Chair.
The following members were nominated:
Mark Salmen, NWA
John Nelson, Bloomington
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota. Heights
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis
After a ballot vote, John Nelson, Bloomington, was elected First Vice Chair and Mark Salmeq NWA,
Second Vice Chair.
6. ANOMS Orientation - Chad Leave
Chad Leqve, Advisor, gave a complete briefing on the Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
(ANOMS). (Please refer to the attached copies of the overheads.)
Some of the more pertinent points of the presentation aze as follows:
➢ ANOMS represents a combination of software and hardware that aid in quantifying airspace analysis
azound airports and the resultant impacts of aircraft in and out of a facility.
HISTORY
➢ Initiation of the ANOMS acquisition started in 1991 with an estima.ted cost of $1.2 rriillion.
➢ The functionality of the program was fully realized in 1993.
➢ At the time, ANOMS represented a platform for a noise and airspace management system at MSP.
INPUTS
➢ There are two main data. sets (inputs), noise data and ARTS (or flight tracks) data.
➢ Noise data, information is recorded 24 hours per day at the Remote Monitoring Towers (RMTs).
➢ ARTS data comes from the FAA in two forms. The inter-facility data is the tabular inforn►ation
associated �vith the flight tracks, such as the type of aircraft, the carrier, or the nature of the flight. The
second form is the flight track radar points (x,y,z,t).
NOISE DATA ACQUISTION
➢ 24 RMTs collect and store the noise data daily.
➢ The central ANOMS computer, located in the "Noise Office," downloads the information daily. The
�.
i '
computer will also perforrn post-processing on the collected data to derive the needed information.
➢ Two databases are then populated with noise and summary information.
FLIGHT TRACK DATA ACQUISITION
➢ The Optical Disk Subsystern (ODS) replaced the Discpack at the FAA Air Traffic Control Tower
(ATC'l�.
➢ The FAA ODS records all ARTS data from the ASR9 raciar to an optical disk.
➢ The ODS Disc is then copied to another disc for transfer to the Optical Disk Reader (ODR) located at
the FAA ATCT.
➢ The data is placed in partitions on the Optical Disc as .rel files and then processed using PreFight 32.
At this time an.asc and .pnt file are produced. The .asc file contains the inter-facility data and the .pnt
file contains the radar track data. The information in both these files are tied together by a unique
opera.tions number.
➢ A static beacon code file is used to filter flight track data and then manual filtering is performed as a
security measure on sensitive operations.
➢ The .asc and .pnt files, once filtered, are released to the Aviation Noise Program office and imported
into a monthly ANOMS database. Because the data received from the FAA is raw, a number of scripts
have to be n.ui on the data in order to get the information needed for the Technical Advisor's Report.
➢ Two data.bases are populated from the FAA data. One is the anoms.gdb database, which contains the
inter-facility data (.asc data) and the other is the tracks.gdb database, which contains the radar data
(.pnt data.).
FUNCTIONALITY (WHAT CAN ANOMS OFFER?)
Mr. Leqve illustrated each of these functions with maps and other documents.
l. Q-Map is used to display ogerations data on an ANOMS base map.
2. Event analyzec provides the ability to link noise data to operations daia.
3, Radar Track Replay allows the replay of operations for a certain period of time.
4. Gate Analysis is used to analyze three-dimen.sional airspace aspects in a defined gate area.
5. EZ-Rep allows all databases to be tied together to Senerate reports.
6. ANOMS to GIS is used to tie ANOMS information to Geographic,al Information Systems data
files. (i.e. Part 150 Map)
RESULTANT CAPABILITIES
l. Operations AnalySis
2: Airspace Utilization Analysis
3. Assess Operational Feasibility
4. Spatial Impact Analysis
5. Support Other Applications
INFORMATION DISSEMINATION
Reports, including maps
Data Files of various data sets in multiple forn�ts.
Internet information, including flight track data, noise data and reports
Mr. Leqve also presented a live demonstration of the information found on the departrnent's web site,
www.ma.ca.vsat.orrz including MASAC information, flight tracking data and GIS projects, as well as other
noise related information. r�`
�
Kevin Batcheider, Mendota Heights, asked if the staff ever receive inquires from people buying homes and
where the flight tracks are. Roy Fut►rmann, Technical Advisor, said sta.ff does receive these inquires and
provides people with the requested information.
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked for an update on the "Minneapolis Straight-out Departure Procedure"
proposal from the Operations Committee. Roy Fuhnnann, Technicai Advisor, briefly explained the
proposal and said the FAA was now reviewing the proposal language. He said MASAC could probably
expect an approval or denial from the FAA within one to two months. Cindy Greene, FAA, said if it is
approved, the local tower would require approximately 60 days for implementation.
7. Operations Conunittee Re�ort
Because Operations Committee Chairman Mark Salmen was not present at the meeting, Chad Leqve,
Advisor, reviewed the agenda. of the June 12, 1998 Operations Committee Meeting.
Report of the MAC Commission Meeting
Chairman Johnson said although he was not present he was told that the major portion of the Comrnission
meeting was a discussion regarding the letting of the bids for $350 miilion in revenue bonds and the ietting
of the contract for the parking ramp.
9. Persons Wishin� to Address the Council
(
�
Borys Polec, Minneapolis resident, reiterated his complaints about aircraft noise.
1 l. Other Iterns Not on the A eg nda
Two items that were brought up at the May 1998 meeting were briefetl.
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, showerl a map of the number of homes that had and had not been
insulated in the Richfield and Bloomington areas. He noteri that of the numbers of homes that would have
been eligible for insulation in the deferre� areas of Bloomington and south Richfield were 1199 and �2'7
respectively. Of these numbers, 165 homes were insulated in Bloomington and 119 in south� Richfield.
Roy Fuhrmanq Technical Advisor, showe� an excerpt of the agreement between I�1W'A and MAC that
indicated how the percentage of Stage III aircra.ft use would be calculated for MSP in comparison to
Northwest's to#ai airspace utilization.
12. Adjoumment
Cha.irman Johnson adjoumed the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted.
Melissa Scovronski, MASAC Secretary
0
1 : 'i:: �,q� � .�Y��,t'�,,: � " L. I r_. . . i �: �- . _ � ' : . . . � . ., ' .
p_c� .i - . .f.....
�-_=__ :�,w.C1?a�.�' .i_y'a�i'": r' ti,�� �-+ �i:... � .L ' _ - _ .. - . ' ' .
�' �-C:a � y_� �<=�r,- .ya��� _ .i^ _ _ �;��„ r -a.:�v � - a' _ - w __ _. - .
.. .�e- "4.,'F`�'.a---iL������'� _ �."_"'t' . �. 'j,..J s� �. .�: .. -_-r•` .
- _ :�: �y ._?,�-s��','-a-: - f • ^^.;c,.y--`-•---*r ' „a"'��,,, "r , i ' - - • '
----.._.'s,'::.• �-i�. �.R�. .—�. ��,;i r � --r-� , - _ .. _
- ' ::..,;;�.:. ��si."??�^.,"'- Hx. " '.r';;• ��l+r-�-�.=. t_�.3tsi�. � - - - - ' '- ' ff '' � -
1-tir!':r:'�_..- X.T�'� f
' .�„yi+:;"�',�"�v-.t-;�r�ic`. i.•_ � �'L'�+��!��'- � .._...._._. __` .. � .. . V. M1..'�...."!�7h:.
.; � � c.. ✓" ''..'+;.`�' ,,�, -t.-z=;. . .`: -,�.a�,+r.,; _ .. ^�'.=.-_�a,-......5:;.c:.♦ --�? - �t�7`.� �:
.�,,,y� ���. � �.��.�i.�,.� --.. - ... _: c . .
;<�,i�`'.s�6' a- :,,��, �}�� _ T++,� ..:r: �i��:y.�'3r� � � y: Y � .. q .Y� � +,r 3 �, f�.. .�
. Jt.z?T �f;•'r'��g:. G:..:' 'w-• . Nkr, : i � .�' i�.��.�': ! �'� . {: �-Y.?���' �' .
+j�'y",+�, �''?.�.. �4....r{ ��`'.rYz::�.+.e` ;��.. � ., 7 '"�.� • a'`'�r '%s i '� � ' . ' . ,
_ ��'� �� 'ii'��`�=r� �. a ��-,. :.
�( ,�• .r.•^! �1�r . � t'� �- � .. � „r.:, •.( r"�":�'•:'S" � �'1"
-� SY-t`«•tYl-.�au�y�vK •..Li: ( •'' �.��L���f.�1I!i � ~�+M1a jt � 1S 'Ty S�I.� � ^. � J.;L� MC� i / _ JK. .. a.v.4�....iy��yy. �r.:�" .
��fif i- i—`j:�i+'� (� 1 t f ~si�+� 4 •�^ ..� M" } •)y�.`I-3r : . ` : _ 1 _ _ � .
, , ��i�z,.-r- �'i ! i � .; Y;,�� i � _
: � •, • � S r ..._�. -a :i a. �:�. � �a..m :_.�: .. _ ..���._t S - 'i•-,i � .i.
h.s .i.:'�..�1'.`.e_��.L�. IL �� �^;.^�'S• ' � t� � � +.. Yir �" '.L+.�N�l:"..41� -~..f�!'^�.�{ a�^.J�t:� !r �1 �~.:�4i�,7�,xi„i:... '-
SA -�:�'�;..:::i� T:iY: t�T"....-y'''�.�}.'t"i.. �,� .rt• _�..y .t. ��w.�l.:.°`�".`` ..�".x:'r•.. _.v j= . re "� i- ;�r {�� ..
• ;�: '- i . •t, . .?'-_ -st -' 3.F- :'."�.��:.':
� � i��. � - Yf�.
-.� •:��. .s;F��� -�;"r.r^.�i;+�,tT _`::Sk.:..:� -•'# .z•.: , �'- �„ � _
�a. .�7S�f� . �,�' _ d Y, '" "n. - ��`�t' �j ' � 1-+�, . .... .�. � �_ tv ,�.^",�-�SSSz�+_�:
}` -"1=.-�... ,� 3?'��'# a r.: .��ik.� "s :14l:�.��' - - '' - - -- _" ;' °- " . `' . � - - ..
:! _.. � i� --,fi __ . _ . � X:_�"-,..+-���.�.. 't1' =�'F:�"',a� . .. � ,. _ ' , 4 ...' J ....T
. . .._....... " _ _ ±'-• '_ _" " ' . _ _ ..._." _ _"' .' . ' .. . _ . . . - - . . .
' _' , ' _�. . � ... . . ... . _�� _ :i' . ' . ' '. .. , . ' _
-___.... __ J.. • .. _ _ • -�- ':y.. . Y"� - "'._' "" `"_ ' _ ' . ' " _ "
_'.i.:.�'�.:-:.'a.'' .' '"' ' ""'��. :�..�,..��i:- ' ' . >i.r...:.:...�..�t,._ ..
- - _ �-I _:'..d" �' :_ ;:i '- - '��~�s�-..�r ,..._i� ^'7 i? i+" " _ - - -- -. -" . . - .. -- `'�C - .
.ti..,at,'-�:r.,:.��c +�� � «:�G.�...r"'sC{'`�c, �'..tc.:"�'='%'��':",F..^_� �,� y ':�':..: -.ii::_ _ _ . _ • . _ ... - _
.a'�,.-'�� T �� 3''T._ .:�r"�..r.s-Y �'y'� , _ ,�..''.-� " > . : c*�+: � „` . . _ . ' �-_i.: • .
� `''c3� `�-��-�+q.,.:.r.: :rtt..::�Y.,�.�`�"p..£ . . �� "�� .'�.. f �� —.. � �• . :' :• .. .-
•:s'.Y- . ��i,x,a :. t.
'��_.` . .~ .;i:^'t3.r•-.;�1+3:-����2iY7�i,'Jc.�.��c .� _tr :.ti'!.�`.x-�a-w„+ -:._.:-:-•.��• . . . . ' _- -
'a,:`�'f�.s.YsT..x'..:',r•� $�� _. �c."�„�;-. - " u�' + . xua3• t '�• � � . .. '� :v.. �:i.'.�
� �� "'..Kypf ... rY' -ciR.:.uzMSs�l+- , '�',a"`i ( t4:.. . . - , , .
_t.%.a �.MK= -� 3 � �3: w
��� " '• � . �F���...:'�"' • . v .:� �
;�Ej.�ig.:�i + .Snt,��;-�:. . .
��'73-�--'"�' . - ��i.+�'�'T' - _ .� • a s.. e-YSif ,.....:.a.y� � T .. ; �'T _ _ -. . . .�.
_ ' fi � i4 i� ,I i
�b�}. � [� +�--�-a`.-� �"t' _t
' �+M '� • � y� `a� G..i"�11 I � I I � fi'.,•.«'..,� H'��~�...: i�T.-�� � _ L •� 4 .. . .. , ��r•^y[���;�
sa�y.� w-�,,.. w-W�Ll�M • -� _ �.,��,,,,� '+Y�.�.T . � t�•
� y' �,a.H...T_: �}�
�=G�k?�-i� �-i'�: _ '. � -;s�;%��: . .-,�'"� � •.1 ' . . _ ' - _
- .�-., �Fr;=i e ::-ti -- ,.t �...ai` ���s:: ' - - ~;.z,.sv�. _
, :a+ - _...i:- ;y,3 . " -
—_ _.� -
�y,�� O � : C. ':' J �.- .�"L
- - �-�+3i * �..r. : .;f�. _ . �.�'n
- �"'r ��"; .i : ... . �. .. _ .._. .- � �-.
{' r �
`, I� �i's'�3`.i"'�r,+,a�'.'L
.
a
•
e
.
s
�
.. �'�.�i.::_'�?: r `.,�.c`r
. �- , .,w.'���•
..::a. .-. �is•�.,,.,-s-.
-.'?i��� ; =': '-.:r.s�"_a�'..��',a _- .._- - -�-.
� , .-b�i":. "6�ir.MR3�
'�-'-��,�=7,;�P„�'.�, .-�:y.;'.;;; :�. '�
� :�i� c, :� :� -� -
-- .a,._,,,...
' ~�' "- 't:
� . � -_ s; �:.;'.;S:.�j;..:'
� �: •�
(•_ 5�' : ° r
, � ['+^�'�„r'^z��
�.3-�:���j+rr: �"'�",r`����
� s '' a,,,.' .� � ��,+�' :+
, i ` .«-,.�
. . � . ' r• 12'+' "_ _.�•'�( .. ..0
-sr_
� _.
' � ,t
.� ���f
'•�''
� �
� ���� �
♦ • � a:
� i��� ``'M�*V'�
" r � ::.,t' �'";'-;
. �
r ;�` ��
- � . �' � - •'�
� �
' . " � ;"' " v.
�'. � .-,: � :. ..,. -s+. - t..- ° = .- ..
, - :. `m. �%-_�+.o:� �:'r' , .
���i�-' ' '�� a'.� :iL:� `
't'�. ..,_._....s. ;... .?i.i:... ..,�v
"r ' .
rrr 7'��i-:,i: '���r �r-�,+,G,;
, �j �� . s e t �� i � !:�-
�M'�{ ip ^ � ti 1"i f t
. . �. .. . .. . _ . L 1..:�..;ir i
_ - . . - � •; , - - - ,�.�F
��.-. 'c . t , ' .' '�e5
y� ��� � _ �.• ,
�i. � 7y� V
� ,• `� ,n •�i � . , � -� t':h'�'
4'"�3. :i..: :I:!< • �^.:i;�
�:�.;;'�. . � . .
i �
p...n. ,...... � .�_. ' .
_�s. . :� .
� .�'_.,___:_; _ _�, •�,.,�;C... _ �. � _ . _�=--:=-f-�'4^.� �:--._ .- .. -. -:-. --:=:L-^3
:.�• � ' �� ,�-tyS r.-:.,,�c t-• t• ,f�
d_�-�h�� � +,-+-�
' � '(/'.". �T' _i.--4
� r�i -� �•:� 1��,^N � ` .." .. " . .
` � �l.'r�+.�v �. � .4 ��•
. � N�' : "v;Fi �1_.
•; • -+S�:.a�s. _ �Y;' �'-¢lY;.
- • • ,'.�R ;.k t;;i.
. '^...> .��•._._ � '. :�,
=- '�; ''-;:;�_�'��=: -- -
G� _ '�= � ='��' _ �'�_: �:: . '�
� ... , . �.:��^ i. `:_ _ ' ' . - -
- �� _ � _ _ X-'�:_ � . ._ •--
�. »'- _� a=:.s- . - -- • • ''� . . . �
_ - -:�,r�� T;�_ _ .- - - - -- ��` . .
�' '•�"'..
_ ;�' . ;�,�; • ' ' : . _ • -� :t> � ,- _ - .
'_ �' '- =�'"'' _ � ; :: = _. _ • _.=�- . �.: . . .>. =.�• •::.. _
��1���' _ Y �.:_'�:3�=t�?.'.-.l_- "'•:; ' -��.+;•=.'-:Q±-a:i �'t'�r.',�
�y i�.:.'.... ��
.V��r�....� — :�i..^�:1:� ���� ...IN;� .
- - O - . - - .. — - . .. _. . U:�;,
�Sa� _ N � � �
� �� � :_ � 3 a� � a '.�
�ta� °����
� �. � -b ?� �;a y
�..?-=�" � �' V .SE
-�;�r� ,a '`� c °� c�a
-�� -�� � CG 'L] � C
._°'rt o � � � �
. _ z., u Q .a ;,;
_ -� C� ,4�.1 � v C�
..� � .1". � � � � �
' " ;C �n y� C, ?�, •:�
� � �
, � � U c�'G �
Orp � � CJ� � CY,
. •� � y, �" � �
>.m ,t C+,� O Q �
.VK � c� Z CL �
� '_..� :;T.-•�: ^-;:Y+.'. _ �. -- __. .. . ... .. _ ='LQ.�' *� ~,,
• _:�:_. . � .
-F+F-
:s_ "
,� . ..���;'.._ = ' . . • • . . .. �"Q_`i 5.:� :-T,= ,� .
.. : �►'�.`';�' _' '~ _ : _ ' .- • . " _ ��y ,, L _�. �:.��-
- ''jr� - _ _ y' '-i � - ' , .- ---' - �Y� ie "�'+=y `F• c;
.�"' ,'et�f''?...,r...i• ` ' ' ..-`�: '
" '' �.'3-.3Y _ �.1.r. �' 4�'.. :;.. . j ? (i'�"..' �•.
'`t'- - � � z - �', •v
. -;'s,;t;� ' �s?��'. � �: ,.,,,.� ... -
• ..:�. .:_?ctr'..-�.,�,'i�„s ^''�'d>:� ., ?M' �T'•o,:''=::.r- ,
xt;�r� , I M1 ` ,:; 3 ` . �
�'tm..m's. ^�r-• -- -��,-� i� ..f�tf��o�h;i�: � f.� . . ,,�-_�,. ^
' 7'• ' A; i.::µ?t�; �.�,t?t-�:;- �•t'�:^�+.:-,- ,<,�-:.'^-4c - e" +- -.?_-
. • . .'�,r tn: � - .-_ � l� ` . . ::F�, . :• .
� �, i'._� i
l: '.
. �: '��: "� ':...-.. ... ..p'.:. .Y. , ,. „ 'y''-�.'-.�
.. .7i i- -''�::�.:. ..'.:.fi *ka.�F- - :. .: •`':. r.:� �' . ri
E. .f ls':..�.��� e},� '
Z.- ...�:_•�5,.�. �S_i;.�..��, .` i _ ... . � • `4.j 1?t :MF�� �.
�': �f� - �'....:.i'.t•: •,i. „;
^.. .� _:��-�:_:��;,;�' • �`.:'� i�-scs �:�.
_ -�;=�' ��.�� --���:�'-
.:i _. _ �.:.��.:�:..:�i,•�t�v'�r��' �`�� �~'' `��'
.-�„' �� _• .�y,�
♦".t..•��♦ 1� iYli�~ =Y _ ��� �.% .ya..
.:�-:rs /y � =.'.-T�.
�*� � y U � y '_^ � , ;.: �'---�� .` �w 4. '-�-�
ftj "" ::s..3;.: :,._�'� ' r ;.�.,
:: Qa�� a � 3 „ �_,,, ��;�=-A : .�;.
;� � � a = :, �• _ �;�, = ,; :w.
.s �s d o ,; : L. . � :.:� � �`'�::: .::� :. T� ; „� ' ,��
� y �+ V .0 C t •�. �rr " ���
� s,•y .�y p„ ;�,� �i x , .r-x.�,.. ': -�' r.�itir 'i+�� �
yaa�.� •`� CI.4�i G V C �t .'....._ ""'
C - - � '�r.. _; ':.h;;' .;;:�
� � - U � Ri .� .0 - ' -' '3�;:�-;-� .t:=,:,;, .
,� � a .� � . � '� - : = ..' � - •-_..3 �: -.je�`>Y'•:-'•'' � : �-':: �ii
`' ^*' (`� C `; ��: h'-Y S-i,�.'. - •' �Kr.: ... �,,�r�;,'•L.
•� qq eC � :� .T�}?`�'C�:,. L'z.-�3t,�ds,,�. '.�t::.�i:�.�
r�'-"' •ki v1 y � Rj ;S -."`_" -' .r : �.:�t,�..
z ,� •., � U 'C � t ..
> v :��dY��"`� �, 4 �.;�•• _��� •- �
:�; �U p :p -� `•^.�3 :_._.c�'s;--�- ': _. - 7'=_k
Ri Q - . :; z''`^ � .t _ � . . ,.� ��^�
•.i_ .G U !::r.•,., ::,F=rr'�f�.t ��t�- �..,. .. .:...�i i,�-.�
.��r�a�' s�7K i$��:r �..-.Yi
' '� �'.,:. ,tX ' �,^M , ' "�.�na � xZ^�. .j_ �
. . ' ' +�" . : v:� : _ a. _ - .. . ... .� .: _. . . _ aM-::7G
• • ., ^�'f���.�'�,�: _ .,.�,'� ' _. -.... __ �� " :�.�!
: � . , , ',::' :.y
� -� Z:�� _ " ': � � .� y�..:•:�`-Si
. . . . _ ,�,�. � '�" t �rf� F�-• ' �yl�.� ' ... ' . .�-Te �r? ' � t-.`"'., �'$�
.. _.._ � -'i.� �$^^ . !"r-t. . . .� � `T. .. .� . . . � .r_ _ ..... . _ .< +w 6e
' ' ': _ ' .. `'%T-.fiR�'w.�_
�-.iy��r:iyi'._ . .
r`....'�Y�[wP��"' . �..... � Y.
��3's.:�,: �;�.,�'_.-:�..'.�'.
. �s' -iT� `�'�> 'a-
-, - �'�:-^_ _ � . ` . . .
� - %-�: ' - -
.� '�i" " t • _.
io.�: -.� � w; � ±'-�.:
��;s•= '�.�z==�+�;�.
� �'}�w:_� .^�' "
':�� :`-.">.� �;-+:,�• `�;,,' : -
�,� .rj,al`� � `'i;; r .
'':+��i� :ti '
'r V ir_ � .o'..'
'� (� �' '
�,,� � T. _ '.�', ���..�. - .
�" r '�''�'�
� -��!.at. :i�ti'-., . .
I i :.; '::� ��' ' _ , -
�'.l:ir ,Y`� "f.+R Y:
. ;;'_-_� •br�:''-c�'��
� :�� ^ . ._
_ �.�s� „c_
�'2 ' �'�'.�c.. ��� '�
•.',.`'�i'���j.:,4Y;,,; •, , � . . �
vee � l:..:u,,.1 . ..
.. E�+;iY��r! �' � :}i
;(� y�:.�i; %."`�.3._"�::� /�d •zl
��( �� �-��� Y '� ��
.� .� � F•C '�, . +�
•_KI �Y � � � .�
� _ , : 1;�. ., � � V � • = 2� -.
— _ � C'� >'= J ..
-. � _ -- - �y, � � ,:
.-��-. ..� � ` (�1 U ti • � � � .
`.��' � � ;�1 .
+� v , o I�I � • = '� A . �
;S: _ _ �` ` _� � � r� `-J
�a, ^ :t � �- -� t. ✓�
� �. � � �' `� . ~ Q
U � � Z
~.z �.•' `;;5. �
��_�.:ir, e� �
'F 1.�.'�, ' �
� ��� �
i ' ��
'+�,. �+.
e m � � � 0 m � m � � o � � � m � � m s � � — � � _
�
�. J _ r_ ..4i: s''' � •-
�;, - '.:� � �:.ap�._ •_��:
r� � . ��-�:� � .
' �.L�'�,°.�' �,„ "�`,'".
c�n'��S � Z'S�.
� . e:�;., :
�
n '.�7 � :i :3
Vi � �:.J '.'C3 �j ,� 'C7 > O
y Q � _ s y �
e,� '_a^, �� T y L1� ��j y�,� • O
Q O O���� O O C C
:n �= � � O n :3 C
U:� C� ti e+.. , � ,� � O'S�,
r �" � � ' n '� O � y. '� V , ,��
L- '� '� C =L '�
C� ^ � i" . y C J L.
1 '3
�.� �{s" J 0 � E'+ ��.� � a^
— ..., � rri . � '� c �
`' V U
a7 y�t. N •
��� V A
1_�.
� ■�
k
;:�
� � .�
'?' 'i-f � �,o -3t�a � 2...�: �rj �:�-.'_ H` , ��, _
,'��. .��y ~ � �..,.��,}„ � �.a. � z� �.� �Y.�!y�y� +�'„ �e. �.
.t' • p�:.' ir } y_ . . - i;:�:ZZs1.�.. n.?'. . .
�
� . ;-' ,;
_ 1 1 . , . . . ii 1 � .: i: . .
. i.
,°s � .�. �,.
f • '� , .� •
.
1; ;1 .. : . - i ; .
;,� � r;
� �. � �. ', .r<
�:
.�, ■ � >
`�. �.° s. �;:
���' •
� ���- � ,� � �� ��
Effective communicc�tion c�nd data disseminc�tion
is cr-iticc�l to c� si�ccess ��l anc�lv„ sis.
�
: r
�
�
�,
�;
http://www. macavsa�org/main.htm
�tevopolitart .�u'ports Commission
�
� I1�Ietropolit�n Airports Cornr�ussion
� Department of Environment
e Metropolitan Airports Commission Department of E
�?�°��� �'�, °� Aviation Noise Program The Aviation Noise Program is dedicated to providing
technical noise, auzomated mapping, and other information to the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area.
�s�_ `�'_ `�W • .
( THE FU-GHT�
� ,.
4 �:
zr-}
i;� � �,�
,.t,��,��.y� ��r_
�':to1{�t.is n'
' '�1..�.. .l � .
Aviation Noise �Program Interacdve l�Iaapin� page includes automated flight tracking
information and daily noise level reports from 24 Remote Monitoring Towers located
around Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airpart.
1�linneaaolis St Paul International Airoort The NEW Minneapolis-St. Paul
Tnternational Airport Website provides information such as, directions to the airport,
terminal maps and photos, parking and ground transportation, and airlines serving MSP.
Check it out at www.mspairport•com.
Real-Time Fh�ht Status Heading out of town or picking someone up at the airport and
need to know if your flight is on time? Try the Real-Time Flight Status website at
www.thetrip.com.
This website is best viewed with I�ietscape I�Iavigator
Download Netscape Now!
7/i-1/98 -�:18 P
1�fecropolitan .�irporu Commission Avia[ion Voise Progr.un
IVletropolitan Airports Commission
Aviation Noise Program
hap://www.macavsac.or¢l,�.YSP�ndex.htm �
AN01�IS : Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System at the Metropolitan
Airports Commission.
GIS : Geo�raphic Information Systems at the Metropolitan Airports Commission.
GPS : Global Positioning Systems at the Metropolitan Airports Commission Aviation
Noise Program.
'.. _ i
.. . .� �
� � � Interactive 1�Ia�pirr� at the Metropolitan Airports Commission Aviation Noise
,� Program.
♦�7:rJ:�•�' .t.J .lr�� .
Iw.�K..IF.�.� 1rn. Y��..N
NIASAC Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council: noise information,
����� ��. =i� ogerational updates and monthly technical advisor's reports.
:�:,_
Reliever Airport Information and Noise Abatement Issues.
C
�[ecropoli[an �irporu Comm»sion Aviation `�oise Program
� :". 'M��`"' ' _
"�" : -' .,''
�y tJ
� �� .i :
�► .� 3t•'
:�Ieetinas and Events.
http:!/ww w.maca�sa�org/�Y 5 P/inde z.htm
7/ I �/98 -�:19 F
�fecropo�ican •�irporu Commission ANOMS
IVletropolitan Airport,t,s Corr�mission
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS)
http://www.macavsac.orglA YOtitS�nde�c.hm,
• Continued Development of ANOMS Information Dissemination Technology: Flight Track and
�Ioise Data on the Internet
• Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Story: �n �irport's Perspective on ��(OI�IS
• Technical Advisor's Report: 1�Iay 199g
• Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis: �Iav 1998 •
• Weekly Operations Update .Tune 23-29, 1998
• ANOMS at MSP: :� Slide Presentarion
• E-l�Iail MAC Staff with ANOMS Questions or Comments
Ltevopolitan .�,irports Commission Geo�phic (nformacion Systems
. .
l�etropoli�an A.irporis Coa�nrnission
Geographic Information Systems
h�.���yw.maqvsat.orglGt Srndezh�
• Metropolitan Airports Commission GtS Story: An �irport's Perspective on GIS
Q Ongoing GIS Proj.ects
o User Sup.�ort
• Frequently Asked Questions F�
• GIS Links
s ESRI Product Sc �t_s
• Metropolitan Airports Commission GIS Products Pa�e
7/ i �t/98 -4: 20 F
�tAC ,-�u�tSP [ncecacuve 1�tapp�ng
Nietropolitan A,irports �o�nmission
Interactive Mapping Page
Address and Aircraft Locator
hctp://www.rnacavsa�orglC�l�(AP.hRn1 '
This interactive mapping tool allows the user to input any address within the seven county Twin Cities
metropolitan area, specific day, and time. A map will be retrieved of the specified address with any flight
tracks passing through a one mile window. The user also will be able to use a VRML browser to see flight
tracks in 3-D!
- - -.:;..
� L%y•.:.:,'�:,:..I�h..:. :
- :� � . r . ,:�.?, '. ' �•:::�'
, .. . ..,::r':' :�" . `-'e:-y+a..�Si�.n..,g;�'•
Daily Noise Level Report
This automated mapping tool allows the user to select a Remote Monitoring Terminal (RM'1�. A map of '`.
the selected RMT and yesterday's noise levels are retrieved dynamically.
a
Flight Simulator
The user will be able to choose and view actual fliaht tracks from Minneapolis-St Paul International
Airport. Coming Soon! '
:�tAC .-�NSP [nteracave �tapping
. ... a..n�. ..: � .. _.. n., i
_`.:,,r�:s�r_:i�•' •,.��.�„t.' - ..�=.
_._.. �.. . ..rw.r .
Locator I Noise I Flight Sim
h�://www. macavsa�or�tAP.hat
7/1-�/98 -L:'_0 P
. �tecropo(i�zn .�ircraft Sound .�bacement Council
1V1����
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Providing Airport Noise Related Solutions and Input
• Technical Advisor's Report: 1�Iay 19y8
• Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Comdor Analysis: �Iav 1998
• Minutes: l�fav 1998 :�IASAC �IeEting
http:;/www.macavsaLorv,,/�tr+�SA�tudex.hm� ^
• Weekly Operational Update .Tune ?3-29, 1998 for the Minneapolis/StPaul International Airport.
• 1998 �IAS�C :Yleetin�Schedule.
• 1998 MASAC List of Communitv representatives.
� 199$ MASAC List of Air�ort User representatives.
;
�
�� �
3;
July 9, 1998
City 0�
INVER �aR�VE �iE1GHTS
I�IASAC Secretary
vletropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28`'' Avenue South
l�Iinneapolis, l�Ii�1 ��4�4
JU� 13 l�gg
RE: Appointment of Inver Grove Hei�hts Representative and Alternate
MASAC Secretary,
t i The resignation of Dale Hammons as Commissioner for the Aircraft Noise Abatement
Commission has prompted a change in representation to the Metropolitan Aircraft
Sound Abatement Council effective immediately. The new representative member and
alternate for the MASAC meetings from the City of Inver Grove Heights are as
follows:
Representative Charfes W. Eginton
10 High Road
Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077
Phone: (612) 552-1010 (Home)1
Alternate Rue Shibata
19Q South Robert Trail
inver Grove Heights, MN 55077
Phone: (612) 455-7697 (Home)
(612) 306-9697 (VVork)
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (612) 450-2569.
' Joel L�ttie
A.I�tAC Staff Liaison
City of Inver Grove Heights
8150 BARBARA AVENUE • INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, MN 55077
TELEPNONE (612) 450-2500 • CITY OFFICE FAX (612) 450-2502 • POLICE FAX (612) 450-2543
\ � /
� Metropolitan Aircra�ff Sound �4batement Council (iviASAC�
6040 28th Avenue So�th • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 0(612) 726-8141
Chairman: Roberf P. Johnson
Past Chairs: Scott Bunin, 1990-1995
Walter Rockenstein, Ii. 1982-1990
Jan Dei Calzo, 1979-1982
Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979
Technicai
Advisor: Roy Fuhrman
July 28, 1998
Mayor Norm Coleman
City of St. Paul
Room 390, Courthouse
15 W. Kello�g Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 5� 102
Dear Mayor Coleman:
�-'� � The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Councii (I��fASAC) members and myself
would like to commend NIr. Tom Huea, a St. Paul NIASAC representative since 1995, for
his outstandin� contribution and representation of the city throughout his tenure.
Tom's dili�ent �vork toward the goaf of reducing aircraft noise and his dedication to the
�roup has been exemplary. We hope you will join us in our commendation.
We look forward, as well, to workin� with the city's new Iv1ASAC representative over the
next three years.
Sincerely,
�,��,�G��� �-�,--.___.-
Robert P. Johnson;'
MASAC Chairman
cc: Tom Hueg
FiECYCIED PAPE
M:i�T►`�Ci�ifl l�� � � : . �i%:�11���i
THOMAS HUEG
WHEREAS, Mr. Thomas Hueg served as a City of St. Paul representative
on the Council since 1995; and
WHEREAS, Tom served as M�SAC Vice Chau from January 1997 to June
1998 and has sesved on a number of key committees, including the Operations
Coirunittee and the MAC Part 150 Policy Advisory Commictee; and
WHEREAS, Tom has helped guide noise policy at Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport, helped formulate and develop a number of si�cant noise
abatement initiatives, worked effecrively with the Metropolitan Aircrai't Sound
Abatement Council to address specific noise problems, provided informational
guidance and support as a Public Member, and provided leadership in bringing C
community and industry interests together to discuss and resolve issues of mutual
concern.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound
Abatement Council go on record as commending Mr. Thomas Hueg for his
outstanding service to the Council and the community.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resoludon be given to Mr.
Thomas Hueg with the Council's warmest regazds.
ME7.'ROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL
Dated: J�y Zs, 1998
�Robert John o
Cha'
=st: M 'ssa Scovronski
Cauncil Secretary
C �- )
' Metropoli�an Aircraff Sounci Abatemen� Council (NIASAC�
6040 28th Avenue South • Minnec�polis, Minnesota 55450 •(612) 726-8141
Chairman: Robert P. Johnson
Past Chairs: Scott Bunin, 1990-1995
Waiter Rockenstein. II. 1982-1990
Jan Del Calzo, 1979-1982
Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979
Technical
Advisor: Roy F�hrman
July 23, 1998
�fayor Elizabeth Kautz
City of Burnsville
100 Civic Center Parkway
Burnsville, �IN �>;�7
Dear Mayor Kautz:
The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) members and myself
-. would like to commend Nf'r. Ed Porter, a Burnsville MASAC representative since 1995, for
�, � his outstanding contributi �n and representation of the city throu�hout his tenure.
Ed's diligent work towar the goal of reducing aircraft noise and his dedication to the group
has been exemplary. We hope you will join us in our commendation.
We look forward, as well, �o workin� with the city's new MASAC representative, iVlr.
Charles Van Guilder, over the ne;ct three years. �
Sincerely,
�� /
L�
. Robert P. John�o
MASAC Chairman
cc: Ed Porter
RECYCLED PAPE
� � • � , � . � �
EDPORTER
WHEREAS, Mr. Ed Porter served as a City of Bumsville representative on
the Council since 1995; and
WHEREAS, Ed has helped guide noise policy at Mi.nneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport, helped formulate and develop a number of significant noise
abatement initiatives, worked effectively with the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound
Abatement Council to address specific noise problems, provided informational
guidance and support as a Public Member, and provided lead+ership in bringing
community and industry interests together to discuss and resolve issues of mutual
concem.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound �' ��
Abatement Counci.l go on record as commending Mr. Ed Porter for his outstanding �
service to the Council and the community.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be given to Mr. Ed
Porter with ehe Council's warmest regards.
METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL
Dated: July 28,19 8
� Roberc John n
Ch '
�-' � , e � .
A est: M .issa Scovronsld
Council Secretary
Metropolitan Aircraff Sounci Abatement Council (fv�ASAC�
6040 28th Avenue South � Minneapolis, Mlnnesota 55450 �(612) 726-8141
Chairman: Roberf P. Johnson
Past Chairs: Scott Bunin, 1990-1995
Walter Rockenstein, il: 1982-1990
Jan Dei Calzo, 1979-1982
Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979
Technicai
Advisor: Roy F�hrman
July 28, 1998
Mayor Joe Atkins
City of Inver Grove Heights
8150 Barbara Avenue
Inver Grove Heights, NfN 55077
Dear Mayor Atkins:
The Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) members and myself
would like to commend Mr. Dale Hammons, an Inver Grove Heights MASAC
. .)
representative since 1995, for his outstanding contribution and representation of the city
t. throughout his tenure.
Dale's diligent work toward the goal of reducing aircraft noise and his dedication to the
group has been exemplary. We hope you will join us in our commendation.
We look forward, as well, to working with the city's new MASAC representative, Mr.
Charles W. Eginton, over the next three years.
Sincerely,
.,� �
��__ / � , � L, �`,�..2,.1____.—
��
R'obert P. 7ohns n
MA S AC Chairman
cc: Dale Hammons
n�s
; .�'�' '
� • 'i ,' . �'�� ., �;'
�• � �
WHER]E:AS, Mr. Dale Hammons served as a Ciry of Inver Grove Heights
representative on the Council since 1495; and
WHERE,t�S, Dale has helped guide noise policy at Minneapolis-St. Paul
Incernaiional Aiiport, helped formulate and develop a number of significant noise
abatement initiatives, worked effectively with the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound
Abacement Council to address specific noise problems, provided informational
guidance and support as a Public Member, and provided leadership in bii.n.ging
commwnity and industry interests together to discuss and resotve issues of mutual
concern.
NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound ��,
Abatement Council go on record as commending Mr. Dale Hamxnons for his
outstanding service to the Council and the community.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be given to Mr.
Dale Hammons with the Councx�'s warmest regards.
MEZROPOLITAN AIRCRAF'T SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL
Dated: Juty 28,1
�.
�� 1tiYelissa �covro
Counc� Secretary
C�-�
' Metropolitan Aircraff Sound Abatement Council (MASAC�
6040 28th Avenue South • M(nneapolis, Minnesota 55450 •(612) 726-8141
Chairman: Robert P. Johnson
Past Chairs: Scott eunin, 1990-1995 JUjy 1�, 1998
Walter Rockenstein, il, 1982-1990
Jan Del Caizo. 1979-1982
Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979
Technicai
Advisor: Roy F�hrman
Mr. Jon Hohenstein
Assistant to the City Administrator
City of Ea�an Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 551?2-1897
Dear Mr. Hohenstein:
I would like to begi.n by thanking the city of Eagan for your letter of May 20, 1998 which
contributed su�gestions for topics related to the Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor
review. Your correspondence was distributed as a example to other relevant communities in an
( ) effort to attain similar suggestions.
On July 10, 1998 the MASAC Operations Committee reviewed two of the city's most recent
correspondence. A letter dated Juated1Ju�ne978 1998 rega�d ng a morel xped ent installation of
reporting methodology and a letter d
new ANOMS Remote Monitoring Towers (RMTs) associated with the new 17/35 runway.
Ln response to the first letter, MASAC will review the methodology used for the monthly corridor
analysis. After discussion, the MASAC Operations Committee decided such a topic should be
reviewed in harmony with the upcoming corridor review. As per your request the methodology
will be visited at the time that the MASAC Operations Committee reviews the corridor.
With respect to the City's second letter, the new runway 17/35 encompasses various modifications
and updates that must take place at Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport Included in these
updates are the addition of adequate ANOMS RMTs to provide proper noise measurement
coverage for the new runway. Your proposal to expedite this process from 2Q02 to 1999 was
discussed by the MASAC Operations Committee. It was decided that the existing RMT array
would provide adequate coverage/representation of the noise environment during the upcoming
construction period. Furthermore, the funding process at MAC includes the Capital Improvement
Program (CIP), and a yearly budget approval process. Since the new 17/35 runway EIS is not yet
�' � complete, movement to install the RMTs at this time may be premature.
MAC staff did however, discuss the possibility of potential installation of the additional sites after
the EIS process is complete and movin� the installation time Erame forward one year to ?001 with
RECYCLED PAPE
an operational date of January 2002. This would allow at a minimum, one year of data prior to the �
runway becoming operational. ,_
As always, MASAC appreciates Eagan's insightful input into airport noise related issues.
Cornmunity input is critical to the goals and objectives of the MASAC mission. We will keep you
informed throu�h you communiry representative as to the progress of the above topics.
If there are additional questions or comments please contact Roy Fuhrmannn, MASAC Technical
Advisor, at 725-6326.
Sincerely,
�, � , �,� ,� /� .
" �..G,�r.� � � �v��''�-�'
� /
�Robert Johnson ._ �
Chairperson, Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC)
cc: iNr. Sandy Grieve
Page 2
(; :
MAS� C NOISE MONITORING AND INFO�A TION RE�I UEST FOR1t�
1998
Date: On whose behalf are you requesting:
Name: Yourself
Address: City Council
Mayor
Citizen
Phone: Organization
Other
Is this a one-time request: Yes or No
Beginning Ending
If no, what is the eapected time frame for this request? to
Which of the following best describes the aature of your request: (Circle all th�t apply)
� Ground Noise Overflights Run-Ups Contours Part 150 Other
( .--,1
FORMAL RESOL UTIONS.
1
Over Please
Please indicate the 1998 MASAC objectives supported by this this request:
❑ To provide information to the MAC in their eJj'orts to communicate changes in operations, due to construction
to the surrounding communities.
� Evaluate departure compliance through the Eagan/Mendota Heights Corrrdor and make any necessary
changes to the relevant procedures.
❑ Review the ANOM.S system and noise monitors, and evaluate the need and placement of additional remote
monitoring towers. Also, evaluate remote monitoring capabilities
� RequestAir Tra�c Control personnel to make a presentation on how MSP operations are conducted.
� Look at providing incentives to carriers in acquiring and operating factory-made Stage III aircraft.
❑ Lrvestigate how GPS and other NAVAids could help alleviate aircraft noise.
❑ Review the NADPs and compliance.
❑ Continue discussion of Part 1 SO contour generation.
Please send your reqacest via mail to: MASAC Secreta�y, 6040 28tb Avenue S.,
Minneapolis, MN 55450 or fiar it to :(612) 725-6310.
For Staff Puraoses Onlv:
Request #:
Staff Contact:
Date Received: •
Is this a Phone Or Written Request?
Approved By:
Approval Date:
Data Availability:
Monitoring Start Date:
Monitoring Stop Date:
Analysis Start Date:
Analysis Stop Date:
0
Date:
F ; ...
C;
METROPOLITAN AIRCI:AFT 50UND
ABATEMEI�TT CO U.l�CIL
�. ' ���� ���
TO: MASAC Members
FROIi�: Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
sjJB,j�CT: MAC Noise Program Handbook
DATE: July 20, 1998
MAC staff will present a short overview of the updated MAC Noise Program Handbook. This
document will provide background information on past, current and potential noise programs in
place at MSP and other reliever airports comprising the MAC system. Individual topics will then
be further explored in the future as part of the continuing education process for all MASAC
members.
This document will be provided in a binder to allow members to update materials with monthly
information and new programs or changes as they occur.
�
C�
TO:
FROIVI:
SUB„�EECT:
DATE :
. . I � � . .
I . 1 .
��; ��= � ��.
MASAC
Roy Fuhrrnann, Technical Advisor
GPS Government Industry Partnership Program
July 20, 1998
�
In April, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requested airports, operators, Global
Positioning System (GPS) base statian manufacturers and avionics vendors to become partners
with the FAA to develop a plan for implementation of the Local Area Augmentation System
(LAAS). The LAAS specifically addresses the use of differential GPS capabilities within the
terminal area of an airport.
To date, these diverse groups have usually worked independendy with technology to address the
various needs of each party. As part of this program, each member will identify potential
capabilities and areas of expertise that will aid in the transition to a public L.AAS.
This week, parmership members from around the country met in Minneapolis to discuss the next
steps. As a member, MAC stafF will provide a brief update of the discussion of the meeting.
MEETIiVG NOTIGE
iVIASAC OPERATtONS COMMITTEE
The Operations Committee will meet Friday, Juiv 10, 1998 — 10:00 a.m, at the MAC
Generai Offices of the Metropolitan Airpo�ts Commission, MASAC ROOM, 6040 28th
Avenue South, Minneapolis.
If you are unable to attend, piease notify the committee secretary (Melissa Scovronski 726-
8141) with the name of your designated alternate.
PLEASE NOTE THE CHANGE IN L4CATJO�i
: �;. � � NEW BUSINESS
- Draft Airport Ground Noise Study Update
E1S Briefing
Correspondence
OLD BUSINESS
Construction Update
MEMBER DISTRIBUTION
Maric Salmen, Chairman, NWA
Bob Johnson, MBAA
Bob Kirmis, Eagan
Ron Johnson, ALPA
Brian Bates, Airbome
Tom Hueg, St. Paul
John Nelson, Bloomington
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis
Mayor Charles Mertensotto, Mendota Heights
Dick Keinz, MAC
cc: Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights
( } Charies Curry, ALPA
___ Wi11 Eginton, IGH
Adviso :
ATC Tower Chief, FAA
Ron Glaub, FAA
Cindy Greene, FAA
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC
Chad Leqve, MAC
Shane VanderVoo�t, MAC
MINU1'ES
� N1A5i9►C OPERATIONS COiU1NIITTEE
JULY 10, '9998
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission MASAC Conferenc� Room,
and called to order at 10:00 a.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Me=
Maric Saimen, Chairman - NWA
Bob Johnson - MBAA
Ron Johnson - ALPA
Brian Bates - Airbome
Bob Kirmis - Eagan
Dick Keinz - MAC
Dick Saunders - Minneapalis
Mayor Charles Mertensotto - Mendota Heights
Adviso :
Roy Fuhrmann - MAC Advisory
_ Chad Leqve - MAC Advisory
.{ ( ) Shane VanderVoort - MAC Advisory
- Cindy Greene - FAA
Visitors•
Duane Hudson - Bloomington
Will Eginton - IGH
Neil Clark - Minneapolis MASAC Member
Jennifer Sayre - NWA MASAC Member
Mark Ryan -.MAC Airport Planner
Glenn Orcutt - FAA
Kevin Batchelder - Mendota Heights
, :� :
DR,4F1' AIRPURT GROUIdD NOISE STUDY UPDATE
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said the draft Airport Ground Noise reporfi has been
delayed for approximately one month. He said further analysis is needed in order to provide
the best possible representation of the data. He said staff is also waiting on information
regarding some of the recommendations associated with the study. He said staff plans ta
have the report ready by the August 1998 Operations meeting. �
EIS BRlEF1NG
Chairman Salmen said the EIS briefing was pa�t of an on-going effort to provide information
on pertinent topics to the committee and the MASAC body as a whole. He introduced Maric
Ryan, MAC, and Glenn Orcutt, FAA, as the presenters.
Mark Ryan, MAC, reviewed the handout, E/S Process, included in the package. Some
pertinent points follow:
. The process is quite complex, more than depicted on the graphic. It can take anywhe�e
from 3 months to 3 years to camplete, depending on the nature of the project.
. Any project done in the state of Minnesota starts with an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAV1n. This is a checkiist for identifying a project's possible environmental
affects.
. The process is govemed by the state Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
. The EAW is mandatory for runway projects that are less than 5000 feet, runway
extensions that would allow use by aircraft that generate more than a 3 dba increase,
and any project that is included in MAC's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), including
expansion of any facility for passengers, cargo, vehicles or construction on any runway.
. The EQB, over a 30-day period, will circulate the EAW to the appropriate state
agencies, as well as through the public by publishing it in the EQB Monitor.
. Once the EAW has been reviewed by the appropriate agencies, the EQB works with
MAC (or the appropriate state agency) to identify and respond to any questions and will (, '.
then make a determination of whether an Environmental Impact Statement (E1S) is
needed. Once the decision is made, it is published in the EQB monitor.
. If a state ElS is required, a federal Environmental Assessment (EA) is likely to be
needed. Once the EA is complete, a decision is made whether or not a full E!S is
required.
. If a federal EIS is not required, a federal Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) may
be issued. Othen�vise, a fuil s#ate and federal EIS is begun. '
Glenn Orcutt, FAA, thanked the staff and the committee for inviting him to the meeting to
speak about the EIS process. Mr. Orcutt said understanding the process will help members
have realistic expectations as to the time it takes to complete the process. (A handout was
distributed at this point.)
Mr. Orcutt said the EA identifies the people who need to be involved in the process. The
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requires the FAA to analyze protected
environmental impacts and involve interested parties with an opportunity to participate. The
purpose of NEPA is to help public officials make decisions based on an understanding of
the environmental impacts and take actions that either p�otect, restore or enhance the
�nvironment.
�
2
� Mr. Orcutt said he wouid alse.�' Ro� Fuhrmann, Technical Ad vsor,ns ggested' h sr t p c be
t h e M A S A C b o d y a s a w h o l y
scheduled for the October 27, 1998 MASAC meeting.
Mr. Orcutt then answered questions.
Dick Keinz, MAC, asked who was responsible for preparing an EIS. Mr. Orcutt said that
with both the Flying Cloud and the Dual Track EiS, the FAA and the MAC are producing a
joint document, which is govemed by a Memorandum of Understanding between the two
parties. He said with some projects, both parties will hire separate contractors and with
others they will hire one contractor.
Mr. Keinz also asked what the EQB does and who is on the board. Mark Rya�, MAC, said
the EQB is comprised of representatives from all state agencies' (DOT, PCA, DNR, etc.).
Mr. Ryan said the EQB makes the decision whether or not the submit#ed documentation is
sufficient enough so thatakes the fi al decis one Althougha nrthe ca ed offtFly ng tClo d
related pro�ects, MAC m
Airport, the MAC is requesting that the EQB make a naling instead.
Mr. Orcutt said if a decision is being made on a fede�al level, a Record of Decision (ROD)
will be made, which is broader in scope compared to the state EQB p�ocess. The ROD will
also define the necessary mitigation efforts, the party responsible for the mitigation and will
contain commitments for the mitigation.
�. �.) Neil Clark, Minneapolis, asked how the 3dbA increase that Mr. Ryan mentioned as requiring
an assessment is measured and whether or nat it includes ground noise. Glenn Orcutt,
FAA, said the FAA uses the Ldn measurement generated by the Integrated Noise Model
camputer program. He said if a project or procedure increases the annual 65 Ldn noise
contour by 1.5 Ldn or more in any one area, it would be considered an impact and an EIS
would be called for. �
Bob Johnson, MBAA, asked Mr. Orcutt to talk about the FONSI process. Mr. Orcutt said the
FAA has three types of actions. The first is a Category Exclusion, which is a type of
development that is considered to be low or no impact. The second type of action is a
FONSI or Finding of No Significant Impact. And the third type is an EIS.
Mr. Orcutt said the FONSI action is narmallY easier, accomplished much quicker and
requires less coordination. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, asked how quickly a FONSI
could be accomplished. Mr. 0 onths for�MAC toh go h ough�the process ofnchoosing'a
it usually takes at least 3
consultant.
Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights, asked if an increase in volume (number of operations)
would trigger the need for an environmental assessment. He said his city was concemed
with "contour creep" due to ehsa� e� ��° C dy GreeneeFAA saidtthat onlBatrequest
Mendota Heights, echoed th
�3
for a change in procedure would trigger the FAA to require an assessment, but not an
increase in the number of operations. �
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if the Dual Track EiS and the runway 17/35 EIS
were the same document. Glenn Orcutt, FAA, said that it was, because the Dual Track
process authorized the expansion of MSP at its current location and included the addition of
the 17/35 runway. Mr. Orcutt said, in 1996, the Minnesota legislature decided to expand the
airport at its current location. At that time they directed MAC to implement MSP's Long
Term Comprehensive Plan, which included the new runway. A final E1S was published in
May 1998. Mr. Orcutt said the FAA is now in the process of making a ROD. He said once
the ROD is finished, the MAC would be able to continue with the project.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if the RUS would be updated with the addition of
a new n.inway. Glenn Orcutt, FAA, said that once the runway was fully ope�ational, the
RUS would need to be updated. Mr. Batchelder asked who was responsible for updating
the RUS. Mr. Orcutt said MAC, p�obably through MASAC, would make a recommendation,
within the constructs of the E1S, and wo�ic with the FAA on how the runway should be used.
Cindy Greene, FAA, said the RUS is an agreement between the FAA and the airport
operator as to how the runways will be used. She said once the FAA approves the RUS,
the appropriate procedu�es will be written into the tower orders.
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said that in 1992 MASAC forwarded a recommendation
to MAC regarding the RUS and then MAC forwarded that recommendation to the FAA.
Mr. Fuhrmann also commented on the increase in operations and its affect on the contours. �'� ��
He noted that since there has been a corresponding increase in the percentage of Stage III �
aircraft, the contours probably have not moved outward but inward. He said the no�th/south
runway (17/35) will be used to meet the increased demand at the airport projected for the
future, and wouldn't necessarily, given time, decrease the number of operations off the
parallel runways.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if the published pe�centages for runvyay 17/35
would be implemented right away, or if it would take a while before that nanway was fully
�sed. Cindy Greene, FAA, said operationally all three runways (the two parallels and the
north/south) could be used equally, but that when the RUS is developed, the percentages
may be different. �
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked what recourse the public has if it is not satisfied with the
outcome of the ROD. G1enn Orcutt, FAA, said the only recourse is litigation. Mr. Saunders
asked if a ROD could be made before an agreement with the DNR is reached. Mr. Orcutt
said a ROD can be completed before an agresment, but that the FAA would rather have the
problem resolved frst.
C
4
CORRESPONDENCE
The first correspondence was a lette� from the City of Eagan in regards to the carridor
compliance monthly report methodology. The city has asked staff to investigate whether or
not the methodology is consistent in all respects to what was used prior to the FAA change
in equipment, citing the "dramatic change in compliance levels both north and south of the
corridor area... as the reason for the request. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said the
data is being recorded in the same way and the methodology has not changed. He
recommended that this issue be incorporated into the corridor study in the fall. The
committee members agreed to address the issue at that time.
The secand correspondence was also a letter fcom the City of Eagan requesting that RMT
sites associated with the north/south runway be installed in 1999 rather than in 2002.
Chairman Salmen said he didn't believe the request was feasible and thought it was
probably premature. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said the current plan is to install the
RMTs associated with the north/sauth runway in the fall of 2001 to be ope�ational by
January 2002. He said this would provide a year's worth of data prior to the runway
becoming operational in 2003. Chairman Salmen said since the situation with runway 4/22
was not permanent, there would be no value in gathering data for that runway at this time.
It was decided that the MASAC Chair would draft a letter to the City of Eagan in response to
the city's request explaining the reasons for waiting until 2001 to install the RMTs
associated with the north/south runway.
CONSTRUCTION UPDATE
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said, except for some of the taxiways, most of the
concrete had been laid for the reconstruction portion of the south parailel runway and that
the contractors were now grooving it. He said the project was on schedule and that they
were laying concrete at a rate of 20 yards per minute during the nmway pour period.
He noted that Standish Avenue would be cfosad permanently as of July 15, 1998. He also
noted that the 900-foot extension to the runway had been laid, as well, but that this portion
would not be used until needed.
Chairman Salmen said the replacementlrelocation of the ILS was also being completed at
this time and should be done by August 1, 1998.
OTHER
Kevin Batct�elder, Mendota Heights, said the city believed that the current runway use
con�guration is illustrative of how the runways at MSP should be used.
Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights, stated that IGH was ready and eager to be included in
the comdor review process. � He said he hoped the review would broad in scope.
0
Kevin Batcheider, Mendota Hei�hts, noted that since the Mendota Heights city council
would be meeting on August 17 , a res�onse to the corridor letter would be forwarded to �"
the Operations Committes on August 19 .
Cindy Greene, FAA, inquired about how best to coordinate the August 1998 MASAC
meeting, which would be incorporating tower tours during the meeting. It was decided due
to public safety concems that the meeting would take place at MAC's Environment
Department conference room at the West Terminal and members and altemates would be
escorted across the street for the tours.
The next Operations Meeting will be held August 14, t998.
The meeting was adjoumed at 11:30 a.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski
Committee Secretary
,�
1��.S�.0 C�PEI;ATIO�TS C01��MITTEE
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
I�A"TE:
e� '' • ��
MASAC Operations Committee
Roy Fuhrrnann, Technical Advisor
Runup and Ground Noise Study Review
July 2, 1998
�s�c
At the April 1998 MASAC meeting a Aiiport Ground Noise Study was initiated in an effort to
determine the sources of ground noise on the airport and the resultant impacts of such
operations on the sunounding communities. Since that meeting a period of substantial data
acquisition was accomplished and the preliminary methodology was developed.
The Airport Ground Noise Study is in the summary phase and nearing completion. As stated
at the June 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting, the monitoring is complete and the
analysis and summary of the data will be presented in Draft form at the July Operations
Meeting.
The report will include an Overview of the study requirements, a section on Understanding
Acoustics, the Study Results, an Airline Maintenance Survey and Conclusions and
Recommendations. In addition to the above, noise contours, flight tracks and graphs will be
analyzed and provided to assist•in the determination of study impacts.7
1�ZA.SAC OP�I:ATIONS C01��IMITTEE
TO:
FROIV�:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
�'� 1
MASAC Operations Committee
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
Environmental Impact Statement Process (EIS) Brief
July 1, 1998 .
�
1fie issue of airpoct development is a multi-dimensional topic encompassing the functions of planning,
assessment, funding and agency coordination. A large part of ai.rport capital improvements is the
quantification of environmental consequences resulting from the development of an airport.
At the July 10, 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting, a presentation will be given by Mark
Ryan (MAC Airport Development) and Glen Orcutt (FAA Program Manager) regarding the state and
federal Environmental Impact Statement process as it relates to airport development. Please review the
attached outline of the EIS process.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 725-6326.
C
t
j �
��� O
M N c�i, a "
a ���
� �
m
�
. � �
mv�i00� �
�a°a�i�a� � �
�nwa.cn+a �
I
m �
� �
��H ti
NO OM 2 '—"'J
�� a � � I
I
c�ao �aaa �
�
� '
r� �
.�o N� _J
°'o �o � -
�v°ii �w p
y
� y y
��o���
aW z�n�3a+
uHy v�UUG�*+N
UxF��+ '��
at a o+ W U
a o,— aw
w t� O" vHi v
� o
`.y�-{w�w
W Cc� M a U
7 E�+ cx rn
�iavzia� p
�
.�
�
� r �
� a c
U t+ 4
-+ rn m
.1 m 0„
� aa �
�
� aW
o n � ¢
N H � Z' N
tA 4' E+ O C�
E C S � � � �
�
.,
a
T p (a�j ¢�j
� Q O N .-,
n a 4 4 �
w
a
c
m m
m
� zaw`�aG� �n
�zcqU �34 �
�
W
�
2 � N
h �M
w a o,'
� a o � /�--
Q
z
n o a �
�4
U Gn�� pC
tEf7 Q t4. U
a E z O
o � H
�o � �e
¢
a M 6c7 Q
�c�ow
N N E
Uy vW
U � W � r7
fEt! Q CWq
�
� � F
ri 3
W
a yr, � Wrs,
a1 a c� U� a,
. y,
Ew.~.7 yvl
m 6 � � E
�� a
U M
W a 4 � U
CC
�
�l
`�' H°�az¢o
E a� Z W o w a
v�wa� wrnw—
bq .
�N �
w dq�
� V1 �.7 rT
�a��>�
auo�a�-
�
z
M
CG N Q
W U H
�
a w b' a
g�aH
c
��� �
„"�� �. a
"'�� F���� � . � N �yz2C7
t7 O �C
a�Uv��`° � H����Z �
�
W G �
~ �� � r� F V
�� �� i ao� oa `:
4� �� 1 ��� 8� ^
>p,,� i
W t�Ur�+p � I 3�
� h�� W Q H M1
I Q f,�,, � G� C%� � U
� z W �i
�uQwiM 4 � ^�+ v"�i }- n¢ozaiyw
� ��� `'�� E a Ht� k7Ut5NOn
�n�zowo,Hz—
0
O1
�
W
d
v m t
� t �
� a. c
� ro d
U u �+
� A O.
a a -�
�.� NO
G. I !:: M cA �
�a�Qo� ° 1
�
�
U � I
z �
t� tnO� �
r1 3 R�a � .i G.�
W rW-�yU Gf5 � '
H in �c,, W O >+ ha o�i (
tn O tr h+ U m H
I
�. �
Vy '
O� W
� � Ga V �
a H
a .,u�¢� � �
m��'a a��v�i � �
�
�, � I
N
w �
u�omw ��
�
v�a�aw�¢`r'
� w o
N � s�
G:.
v] O 2
� K �
ao�-+ �
�ww °'
U
axa
���77
� O
CL7
ya 0 E�+ 4
F cr v1 cti O O
�-y+aw Eo0
C�C W V1 rt C::
ti�
� L•7 �C M � C �
c.���tc�Or-
p a ��
�
a -O
E �;
y
c� a
ri N> ft
� b U m O
r H O a W¢ U
[n c� G O H �t
�
(
�
�
� �
' a �
� a
r 40�� N
I w�~>W�W�ca�
' uHiacGt�.7cq
�
�
�
�
� � �H
� ~ `Z
W
❑ �
�' � o a
� a � m w w
Page 3
lune I �. l y93
Bob lohnson, Chair
;��tetropo(itan :�ircraft Sound �batement Council
60�10 ? 8`h Avenue South
'�tinneapolis, �ti�t >j��0
Dear Bob:
ii-:�.^.!.=�J =.. ; �
��,%� ..��.::,
?E� :!.��.,dl. ��
�-� .���:, _ , �;��•i
-:.c��;,a=_ ,�,��;-�r�.<
r!-,�r,1aS c�Gc_
_ _ . `, . . : �5_�_
.. • � � 4
P(ease consider chis (etter a Pormal request that the �vtAS�C Operations Committ�e consider a review of
the corridor comp(iance monthly report methodology to confirm whether it is consistent in all respects
�vith that used prior ro the modification of F� and ytr�C ANOi�tS equipment Por (997.
bVhile the City of Eagan is very hopeful that the results noted in the Technical Advisor's Reports from
1une, 1997 to present are correct, the dramatic change in compliance levels both north and south of the
corridor area are significant and suggest either that the concentration of operations has shifted somewhat
to the north or that the means of ineasuring compliance have shifted somewhat to the south.
Prior to the change in equipment, eYcursions to the south of the corridor averaged around eleven percent.
E:ccursions from the 95 degree policy contour averaged around one percent. In the compliance reports
issued since ANOMS is back on (ine, show e:ccursions to the south averaging less than two percent and
e:ccursions to the north averaging between four and five percent.
I have spoken about this matter with Roy and Chad and they indicate that in the methodology should not
have changed and has not to their knowled�e. On that basis, I wou(d not dispute this further were it not
for the historic and dramatic difference between the prior results and those that correspond with the new
equipment. In addition to a review of the specific methodo(ogy, I would request that one or two months
of data from before the equipment changed be analyzed in the current system to determine whether the
results correspond with those and that using the old system. In addition, I would appreciate inquiring as
to whether the new FAA data storage system would record aircraft locations any differently than the
previous system did. It may be that a change in the FAA equipment is resulting in different outcomes
even though the methodology at the MAC and Roy's office has not changed.
Thank you very much for your consideration of this request. If yau have any questions, please (et me
know.
Sincerely,
J Hohenstein
Assistant to the City Administrator
1H/ms
MAINTENANCE FACILIT'!
MUNIClPAL CENTER T�-E I.ONE OAK TREE 35p� ��qC^r,^.a�; �C��i�
�BJC a'L•�T'�CNCB �CAO THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNIIY �,�GqN. �;INNE�v� a»��?
:,�G,�rv. �nirvr,ESOr,a 55122-� 8a7 �HOr,E �5 i 2) 5C' ���CC
_ . .. , _ .,, _ � , ...:,
C
„� Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
— W�' �� MONTHLY MEETING - Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
� �
cn�;�:
Robert P. Jo6uson
Y�cc Chairman:
Thomas Hueg
Technimf Advimr:
Rnr e�m�
s«n�ry:
+��� s����
A'vbame Ezprtss:
e� a��
Air Tmnsport A.ssociarion:
Paul :NcCraw
,�tpa:
Rm Joa�on
Ciry ajBloo+ningran:
r�u�e u�
Veru Wllcox
Cirv af Bum.rville:
Ed Porter
Ciry of F�gcm:
Jou Eio6easteln
Iance Starleha
Ciry ojlrrver Grove Heights:
Dele Hammoas
Ciry ojMoidow Nrights:
JW Smit6
Ksvin Bnkheldcr
Ciry ojMinneapdis:
Dcan Lndberg
su�� n�
Joe tcc
ca�� s�a
Santra Colvtn Roy
Mll�s Cramer
crrv ofwc��td:
� swrm
n�,o wei��i
crv oisr. rA��� �:
Rnnert Ad,Yws
rn ofsr. Fa�:
Thomas H. Hueg
City of Surtfish Lake:
Gleodn Spioaa
Delra Air [�nes /ne.:
t,arry Coe6ring
OHL Airwms:
Brtan Slmo¢son
Federa! Ezpress:
Den DeHord
Federd Aviation Adminisrrarion:
Bruce Wagoner
Clady Grcene
MACSrajf�
Dick Kelnz
MBAA:
Robert P.3ohavoe
Mesa6a Northwesr Airlink:
Pt,u aurke
Muropditan Airports Co.nmission:
Cunmksbner Altnn Gasper
MN Air Nmiolnl Guanl•
;1�tajor Roy I. Shet)ca
Narthwesr Airlinex
Mark Salmen
Jeanikr Say�e
steve xolme
Nancy Stnudt
St Paul Cfiambei oJCommerce:
RoU �tka�ewo
Sun Cnuntrv Airlines
coraou crsve9
Unitrd Ai�lines (nt.:
Kevin Black
United Poird Servicr:
Hoc� c�y�r
U.S. Ai� Fiircr Rrsrn•e:
Captafn Davkl J. Gerken
Mefropolitan Airports Commission
Declaration of Purposes
1.} Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interest, convenience,
and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, international, national, state,
and local, in and through this state; promote the efficient, safe, and economical
handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international
programs of air transportation; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the
metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with a11
aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and
effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that azea;
2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum envimnmental impact
from air naviga6on and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement,
control of airport azea 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.
Metmpolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Statement of Purpose
This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfaze of the communides
adjoining Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport - Wold-Chamberlain Field, a
public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of
the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airport; through stuciy and
evaluation on a continuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviadon of
the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonabie and effective
procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and
of aircraft using the same; and through dissemination of information to the affected
communities, their affected�residents, and. the users of the air�ort respecting the
problem of aircraft noise nuisance a��- in respect to suggesrions made and actions
initiated and taken to alleviate the problem.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Representation
1'he mernbership shall include representatives appointed by agencies, corporations,
associarions and govemmental bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and
responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users,
have a direct interest in the operation of the airport. Such members will be called User
Representatives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and
Public Representatives shall at all times be equal in number. .
The Airport 24-hour Noise Hotline is 726-94/ 1.
Complaints to the hotline do not resu(t in changes
in Airport activity, but provide a public sounding
board and airport information oudet. The hotline
is staffed during business hours, Monday - Friday.
This report is prepared and printed in house t
Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coorciinator
3hane VanderVoort, ANOMS Technician
Questions or comments may be directed to:
MAC - Aviation Noise Programs
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
6040 28th Avenue 5outh
Minneapolis. MN 55450
Tel: (6l2) 725-6331, Fax: (612) 725-6310
ANSP Home Page: http://www.macavsat.or
Metropolitan Airports Commission Aviation Noise Programs F
� I
Operations and' C'omplaint �urrirriary 1
Operations Summary - All Aircraft ...............................................................................:.....1
MSP June Fleet Mix Percentage ..........................................................................................
Airport June Complaint Summary .......................................................................................1
June Operations Summary - FAA Airport Tra.ffic Record ..................................................1
Minne�cpolis - St. Paul Intern�ztional Ai�port C'omplaint ►�um�raa�°y 2
ComplaintSummary by City ...............................................................................................2
Available Z'ime for .Runway Use 3
TowerLog Reports - All Hours .........................................................................:.................3
Tower Log Reports - Nighttime Hours ............................................................................�....3
.: , � . � � �
RunwayUse Report June 1998 ............................................................................................4
t � � /�, � �,
RunwayUse Report June 1998 ............................................................................................5
liTlg'jZttliiZ�' - �i.11 O�ieD'cataOnS 6
RunwayUse Report June 1998 ............................................................................................6
1�laghttr�ae C'arrier ,Jet Operations i �
RunwayUse Report June 1998 ............................................................................................7
t , , ��, � � � �,, �
.A.i�cra,�'t Identifier cand I�escr�iption T'able 9
. � , �;� , �,: � � •; �r� �� i � /
.
DaytimeHours ...................................................................................................................10
C'ornmunity Overflight Analysis 11
����._.__ � Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours .....................................................................................11
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30 pm - 6 am) ......................................................11
Aviation i�loise & Satellite Programs
diemote tilonitoring Site I.ocations 12 '�
� C'arrier ,%et Ar�aval Related 1Voase Events 13 �I
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT .....................................................13
�
C`arrier ,jet De,partur°e �elcz�ed 1Voise Events 14 j
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ....................... ..,......................14 -- i
Z'en Loud'est A.ircraft li%ise �vents Identified' 15 j
�
�'en Lourlest Aircraft 1�Ioa,se Events Identi, fied 16 �
;
� Ten Loudest A.ircraft 1�Toise �vents Identi, fied ,17 �
Ten Loud'est A.ircra, fi 1Voase Events Identi,�"ied 1� �
;
;
Ten L,oudest Aircraft 1Voise Events Identified 19 ;
Ten Loudest A.arcr°aft 1i�oise �ven�s Iderati,�"ied 20 }
:��.�__? Flight T'rack �ase 1VIap 21
�lirport 1�Toise and Operations 1Vlonitorirtg Sy�tem �'light �'rcacks 22
Canier Jet Operations - June 1998 ....................................................................................22
A.ir�port 11Tois� and Operaiions 1lT�onitor~en� �ystena �'light Tracks 23
Carrier Jet Operations - June 1998 ....................................................................................23
Airpori li�oise a�d Oper'ations Moniio�zng Sysiena �'light T�°acks 24
Carrier Jet Operations - June 199$ ................................................................................... 24
A.irpori 1Voise cznd C�peraetaons tl�lonitor-ing Sys�em Flight T'racks 25
Carrier Jet Operations - June 1998 ................................................................................... 25
�nalysis of �.ircrafi 1�Toise Event� - Al�'C�'Clft ,�dn CII3'(A.� 26
��� �
�lnalys�s o, f�4ircraft 11�oise �vents � Ait'Ci'llft Ldn C����.) 27
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
'� 1
Metropolitan AirpoRs Commission
Operations and Cornplaint Su�n.rnary
June 199�
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
�tunway Arrival % Use Departure
pq. 239 • 1.2°Io 163
22 282 1.5% 7962
l2 8103 42.2% 5061
30 10581 55.1% 5457
1VISP June Fleet Mix Percentage
Stage
Stage 2
Stage 3
% Use
0.9°Io
42.7%
27.1%
29.3%
Scheduled Scheduled ANOIl� AN011�S
� gqg97 1998 Count 1997 Count 1998
42.0% 28.8°l0 45.7% 31.3%
58.0% 71.2% 54.3% 6$.7%
Airport June Complaint Summary
� _ ��rt 1997 199�
MSP 2442 1750
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 6 9
Crystal 2 �
Flying Cloud 4 9
Lake Elmo 1 0
St. Paul 9 6
Misc. 11 1
TOTAL 2475 1775
June Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 1
Metropolitan Airports Commission
1l�Iinneapolis - St. Paul Internatior�al Airport Complaint Surnmary
June1998
Page 2
Comptaint Summary by City
Time of Day Nature of Complaint
,
Metropolitan Airports Commission
A.vailable 'Time for I�unvvay �..Tse
Tower I�og Reports - June 1998
�All Hours
0%
43%
33%
75%
4%
Nighttime Hours
0 °Io
10%
r-� � _ _ „ 22
12�
> D
Oa
� �o
:�: .
i: i � ^; ...
�
Aviation I�Ioise & Satellite Programs
�%
54%
,:-,.,;
.,, a�
,. ,;
Page 3
Metropolitan Airpor[s Commission
t�ll Operations
l�unway Use Report June 19 �
0.9%
Runway A�o� � Count Pe�centage J�e 199'7 June 1997
Departure Count Percentage
04 A 239 1.2% 58 0.7%
12L A 4759 24.8% 2371 27.0%
12R A 3344 17.4% 2363 26.9%
22 A 282 1.5% 106 1.2%
30L A 4733 24.6% 1971 22.4%
30R A 5848 30.5% 1917 21.8%
Total Aa��=; ,__:19205.. _ . -�;-�F:l�%; :: .,,:$7$6_ :.:: ,::,100% ;.
04 D 163 0.9% 25 0.3%
12L D 4047 21.7% 2256 26.2%
12R D 1014 5.4% 2529 29.3%
22 D 7962 42.7% 342 4.0%
30L D 508 2.7°Io 1869 21.7%
30R D 4949 26.6% 1597 18.5%
Total I)ep. 1$643 100% � 8618 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.! ciays.
Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proerams
�
(;.
C�rrier Jei C�perations
I�unway Use Repo� June 19 S
0.7%
26.$% 1S%
42.3
1.3%�--'�'
47.2 0
Meuopotitan Airports Commission
54.9%
25.3%
�
=��o� � Count - Percentage J�e 1997 June 199'1
itunway �P�� Count Percentage
pq, A 166 1.3% 29 0.5%
12L A 3902 30.3% 1491 25.4%
12R A� 1540 12.0% 16$0 28.6%
22 A 19'7 1.5% 56 0.9%
30L A 2435 18.9°l0 1235 21.0%
30R A 4641 36.0% 1390 23.6%
Tota� �.�; . „ - _ 1�°ya: ��;� � ,� �;,�-�;5$�1-;�� ��;-� -1�%a ..
,lZ�t3� ��. . . _
�, D 83 0.7% 12 0.2%
12L D � 2934 23.5% 1368 23.8%
12R D 226 l.$% 1841 32.0%
22 D 5896 47.2% 228 4.0%
30L D 167 1.3% 1408 24.5%
30R D 3179 25.5% 891 15.5%
Tota117ep. 124$5 1Q�U% 574� lOfl%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 5
�ietropolitan Airports Commission
� ' • �`i' . �l
(,� � ` 1 � ; �° �' �'
� �
Itunvaay ArrivaU � Count'; :� Percentage June 1997 June 1997
�P�� Count Percentage
04 A 168 13.7% 15 3.7%
12L A 279 22.7% 55 13.7%
12R A 75 6.1% 50 12.5%
22 A 141 11.5% 4 1.0%
30L A 169 13.7% 149 37.2%
30R A 398 32.3% 128 31.9%
Total �'-�. ,1?.30 _ _ .=:�1�% .:::,; 41D1 : : ; : :. 1Q0%
04 D 69 4.2% 2 0.8%
12L D 427 25.9% 82 35.3%
12R D 94 5.7°Ia 91 39.2%
22 D. 618 37.4% 21 9.1%
30L D 14 0.8% 18 7,g%
.
30R D 429 26.0% 18 7,g�I'o
Total Dep. 1651 100% 232 100°yo
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Page 6 Aviation I�ioise & Satellite Proarams
(' �
Meuop�litan Airports Commission
l�i�httirne Carrier Jet �perations
Iaunway ZJse Report Jun� 19 8
3.2%
;9.0%
r
ArrivaU . �ount Percentage: June 1997- June 19�'7 :
Rnnway . �P�� Count P'erceniage
pq. A 119 13.0% 12 3.6%
12L A 246 26.8% 46 13.8%
12R A 33 3.6% 46 13.8%a
22 A 98 10.7% 3 0.9%
30L A 98 10.7% 124 37.1%
30R A 323 35.2% 103 30.8%
Total Ar�:� 917 100% .;... .:;.-: 334: :�:.� _:. ::, 100%
pq, D 34 3.2% 0 0.0%
12L D 292 27.6% 46 30.1 %
12R D 15 1.4% 61 39.7%
22 D 439 41.4% 18 11.8%
30L D 3 0.3% 14 9.2%
30R D 276 26.1% 14 9.2%
Total Dep. 1059 100% 153 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 7
�tetrupolitan :\�rpurt; �.�?mm�:sic�n
Page 8
� ; . . ; , , � . � � , � � .
11•
•
Aircraft Type Count Percentage
B777 0 0.0%
B727H 359 1.4%
B73B 925 3.7%
B74A 177 0.7%
B74B 50 0.2%
B757 3004 1 l.$%
B767 63 0.2%
BA46 1034 4.1%
CART 223 0.9%
FA 10 0 0.0%
DC 10 596 2.4%
DC8 227 0.9%
DC9H 5057 19.9%
E145 203 0.8%
A300 105 0.4%
A310 45 0.2%
A320 2874 11.3%
F 100 1009 4.0%
L101 4 0.0%
MD 11 7 0.0%
MD80 1297 5.1%
H25B 151 0.6%
H25C 14 0.1%
BA11 0 0.0%
B727 2556 10.1%
B73A 15$2 6.2%
DC8 14 0.1%
DC9 3790 14.9%
F28 0 0.0%
Total � 25366 1Q0%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite ProQrams
. _.
.. . �•- �
�� s� / �bQ�G �
C'
- Metropolitan Airports Commission
A.ircraft Identifier and. I)�escr�ption'Table
l J
IdentiSer
B727
B727H
B73B
B73A
B74A
B74B
B757
B767
B777
H25C
H25B
BAl l
BA45
CARJ
FA 10
DC 10
DC8
DC9
DC9H
E145
A300
A310
A319
A320
F100
F27
F28
L101
MD 11
MD80
SW3
SW4
S F34
Aarcraft Descripiion
BOEING 727
BOEING 727 - HUSH KIT
BOEING 737 - 300/400/500
BOEING 737 100/200
BOEING 747 - 100/200/300
BOEING 747 - 400
BOEING 757
BOEING 767
BOEING 777 •
BRTI'ISH AEROSPACE 125 - 1000
BRITISH AEROSPACE 125 - 700/800
BRITISH AEROSPACE 111
B RITIS H AEROSPACE 146
CANADAIR 650
FALCON 10
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 10
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DCB, DCS 70 - SERIES RE (ALL SERIES)
MCDONNEI.L DOUGLAS DC9
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT
EMBRAER 145
AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300
AIItBUS INDUSTRIES A310
AIl2BUS INDUSTRIF_S A319
AIKBUS INDUSTRIES A320
FOKKER 100
FOKKER F27 (PROP)
FOKKER F28
LOCKHEED TRISTAR L 1011
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 11
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIES
SWEARINGEN METROLII�tER 3
SWEARINGEN METROLINER 4
SAAB 340
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9
Metropolitan Airports Commission
iZunway LTse - l�ay/Night Periods -�11 Operat�ons
IVginneapolis - Sta Paul Interrflaifonal Airport June 1998
Daytime Hours
Runway Departures Percentage Arrivais Percentage Totai Day
Name Day Use Day Use
04 94 0.6% 71 0.4% 165.. ,:.
12L 3620 21.3% 4480 24.9% 8100 _.
12R 920 5.4% 3269 18.2% 4189
22 7344 43.2% 141 0.8% 7485' :-> :
30L 494 2.9%a 4564 25.4% 5058
30R 4520 26.6% 5450 30.3% �` 997Q '-�
Total 16992 ;: - : 10@%d=r; : 3 ��7975�---�:= ° 100%-;;, .,_:. 3496T' ,::
Nighttime Hours
Runway Departures Percentage Arrivals Percentage Total Night�
Name Night Use Night Use __
� 69 4.2% 168 13.7% 237
12L 427 25.9% 279 22.7% 706
12R 94 5.7% 75 6.1% 169
22 618 37.4% 141 11.5% 759
30L � f _ :,
14 0.8% 169 13.7% _ .:.;3�-_I:$3;.:,Ft�,,::;;
z�� : :.�:. : s. ' '. _. ..-.
30R 429 26.0% 398 32.3% ,.:;. .$27 ,.- ,_.
Total . 165L- � _,__ 100% -�. . ";123Q ;,: , ; ..100°lo:w.;, ?.�81
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
_ Metropolitan Airports Commission
� Coma�nuniiy O�erflighi 1�nalysis
IVlinneapolis - St. Paul �nternational �.irport June 1998
����������� �; Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours
Number l�tumber TO� Percent Number of
Overflight Area Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations
. Arrivals _ �P��� :� Operations Operadons per 24 �[ours
Over So. Minneapolis/ 5442 3346 8788 34.6% 293.9
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/ 166 5896 6062 23.9% 202.7
Bloomington
Over St. Paul - 197 83 280 l.l% 9.4
Highland Park �
Over Eagan/ 7076 3160 10236 40.4% 342.3
Mendota Heights
Total 25366 100% 84�.3
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (10:30pm - 6 am)
` ; � =.Total , Percent. Nn�ber of
� Over�ight Area N��r'Y "� ���r �� '��er Jet Carrier Jet Ope�ations
Arnvals 1)epartur�s p�ratfons Operations per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/ 279 279 558 28.2% 18.6
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/ 119 439 55$ 28.2% 18.6
Bloomington
Over St. Paul - 98 34 132 6.7°Io 4.4
Highland Park
bver Eagan/ 421 307 728 36.9°Io 24.3
Mendota Heights
B'otal `�� . � ' ;� : � " ; � 1976 1�% 65.9
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 11
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Remote IV.�onitorin� S�te L,ocations
Airport Noise and Operations Monatoring System
�
Page 12 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
� `.
Metropolitan Airports Commission
. . ., , r'•'. '1 1
, .
.
ut�
Count of Arrival Aircraft I�ioise Events for Each RMT
�T Events Events Evenfs Events
ID �ity . Appro�mate Street Location �� �pdB >90dB >101D�i�
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Streei 3939 60 1 �
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 3875 868 10 �
3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Beimont Avenue 1827 775 92 1
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 3946 1636 20 0
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 2292 1181 97 Z
6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 4572 3601 1377 10
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Screet 11 0 0 0
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 21 4 0 �
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 202 151 5 �
10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 231 203 55 �
11 St Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 39 7 0 0
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 29 7 0 0
`J-� 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 80 4 0 �
14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 5677 98 � �
15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Leacington Avenue 219 5 � �
16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & V'ilas Lane 1104 423 3 l
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue l�� g� 5 �
1& Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 195 81 6 2
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 32 6 1' �
2p Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 19 4 � �
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 272 3 � �
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 2048 9 0 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 1899 19 • 4 0
24 Ea an Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 5088 86 4 0
g
Noie: Alf�J uata m�ss�ng�w v.1 �y�.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13
�tetropolitan �irports Commission
� ' �`'� • �'• •/
. .; , � • .
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT �_
�T Events Events Events Events
� City Appmximate Street Location �5� �B ��� >1�B
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 839 2$1 10 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 1005 479 74 0
3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 1023 559 81 3
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 1896 941 169 5
5 Minneapoiis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 2432 637 45 1
� 6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 3123 2813 1601 451
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 371 123 10 0
g Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Sireet 1751 773 120 0
9 St. Paul Saratoga Sireet & Hartford Avenue 72 28 12 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 83 50 36 12
ll St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 71 29 11 3
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 53 18 2 p
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 1795 417 21 0 •�
14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 1393 600 91 6
15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 1975 498 49 0
16 Eagan Avalon Avenue &�las Lane 261 92 g p
l� Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 3693 1754 506 28
1g Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 5802 5411 3329 669
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th S�reet 5559 3501 1331 72
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 878 298 74 7
21 Inver Grove Heights Bazbara Avenue & 67th Street 910 207 1 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 652 107 1 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 2873 1593 588 49
24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane I 166 351 6 0
Note: AK75 data missing for 0.1 days
C�
Page 14 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
�� )
i�tetropolitan Airpons Comrnission
Ten I.,ouciest �ircr�.ft l�toise Evenf.� Identified
RMT #l: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
Minneapolis
Date 'I"�e A/C � . �
'I�pe Level
98/06/30 20:03:07 B727 92.9 D
98/06/02 21:33:05 B727 92•7 D
98/06/2016:44:56 B727 91.6 D
98/06/0612:53:51 B727 91.4 D
98/06/0717:58:09 B727 91.1 D
98/06/0517:56:58 B727 91.0 D
98/06/0417:25:18 B727 90.6 D
98/06/3011:53:54 B727 90.6 D
98/06/2810:44:35 B727 90.5 D
98/06/1011:33:34 B727 90.4 A
RMT #3: W. Elmwood S� & Belmont Ave.
Minneapolis
Date 'T'� A/C Nlaz' ;;� - � .
Type � Level
98/06/2119:51:36 B727 101.8 D
98/06/0916:02:50 DC9 101.1 A
98/06/0419:33:13 B727 Id0.8 D
98/06/30 20:02:33 B727 100.5 D
98/06/ 11 08:27:55 DC9 99.9 ' A
98/06/0919:19:34 DC9 99.8 A
98/06/26I8:41:46 B727 99.6 A
98/06/18 06:43:34 DC9 99.5 A
98/06/02 08:00:33 B727 99 D
98/06J04 09:�4:39 B727 98.9 D
RMi #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd S�
Minneapolis
Date Time A/C Mas.
�'ype I.�vel ' ' � ;
98/0610711:31:35 B727 99.2 D
98/06/2016:44:41 B727 98.1 D
98/06/24 05:37:42 B757 95.9 A
98/06/0511:35:02 B727 95.7 D
98/06J0711:34:43 B727 95.4 D
98/06/2912:58:29 B757 95.4 D
98/06/1316:37:31 B727 94.9 D
98/06/0712:03:57 B727 94.9 D
98/06/2109:57:53 B727 94.7 D
98/06/2118:00:11 B727 94.7 D
RMT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St.
Minneapolis
- - Date TSme �C ��' : : _ � .�
Type Level
98/Q6/0313:23:28 B727 100.8 D
98/06/2116:16:45 B727 100.4 D
98/06/07 20:19:02 B727 100.3 D
98/Q6/1316:29:27 B727 100.2 D
98/06/O117:32:03 B727 100.1 D
98/06/25 20:55:31 B727 992 D
98/06/20 22:2023 B727 98.9 D
98/06/0516:24:37 B727 98.9 D
98/06/0711:31:05 � B727 98.9 D
98/06/2910:21:33 B727 98.7 D
Note: ARTS dc�ta missing fvr D. l duys.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 15
��tetropolitan Airports Commission
�'en I,oudest Aircraft I�oise Events Ideniified
RMT #5: 12th Ave. & 58th St.
Minneapolis
� � s: � •; = =,,, -. .
Date Tiu�e . . �C � .: , � _A/D
, Type. Levei , ...
98/06/02 08:41:54 B727 103.5 D
98/06/0911:53:54 DC9 100.3 A
98/06/0915:26:18 B727 100.2 A
98/06/09 08:19:53 DC9 99.7 A
98/06/2218:19:13 B727 99.7 D
98/Q6/2516:11:40 B727 99.1 D
98/06/1619:52:00 B727 98.5 D
98/06/02 08:05:37 DC9 98.5 D
98/06/0917:22:23 DC9 98:0 A
98/06/0919:45:46 DC9 97.9 A
RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St
Richfield
_ .= t9/.4 � 1 1�'�8 ? f r�
lJ�ls 111tDG- 1 .s '
- . ;1�pe r �>Eevel "`"
98/06/04 07:59:15 B727 97.7 D
98/Q6/0216:2$:10 B727 94.8 D
98/06/13 06:15:42 B727 93.6 D
98/06/0314:20:25 B727 93.2 D
98/06/1918:28:29 B727 92.8 D
98/06/13 07:12:26 B'727 91.4 D
98/06/3015:17:11 B727 90.9 D
98/06/0216:14:54 $73A 90.7 D
98/06/2516:12:01 B727 90.5 D
98/06/2019:08:31 B727 90.0 D
RMT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th S�
Minneapolis
Date Time `vC. - . . .. Ma� ..,, ,� A,/D '.
. Type Leve1-: :;
98/06/0117:31:31 B727 109.9 D
98/06/2910:21:00 B727 109.7 D
98/06/O118:53:48 B727 109.4 D
98/06/0612:11:12 B727 109.4 D
98/06/19 20:57:43 B727 109.3 D
98/06/27 00:30:59 DC8 109.2 D
98/06/1312:38:45 B727 109.1 D
98/06/1210:57:47 B727 109.0 D
98/06/2214:08:08 B727 108.8 D
98l06/20 22:19:50 B727 108.� D
RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd S�
Minneapolis
� TMr��� . �tllt.i. 'LYf�.i .
`� a:
p.�� Lii� 11111G. . .
-. ' ' T`,ypC I.C9CI' -•,=�._, r,
98/06/1619:08:19 B727 98.4 D
98/06/2017:37:09 B727 97.7 D
98/06/0517:35:11 B727 97.4 D
98/06/2819:03:23 B727 97.3 D
98/06/13 09:18:07 B73A 96.6 D
98/06/03 22:11:02 B727 95.8 D
98/06I2018:13:06 B73A 95.6 D
98/06/2217:43:19 DC9 95.6 D
98/06/0513:16:35 B727 95.5 D
98/06/0613:37:47 B727 95.5 D
Note: ARTS clnta missing for 0. l davs.
Page 16 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proerams
C�
Metropo(itan Airports Commission
'I'ea� L,oudesi A.ircraft 1�1�ise Events Identified.
gMT #9; Saratoga S� & Hartford Ave.
5� Paul
,� . :.:: ' ,�. .: � �;%�; ' + M8S - -
; Date 7ia�=. . �
- ��, :, , - 'Ty� ` Leoel
98/06/02 21:54:27 B74A 96.4 D
98/06/0916:17:31 B74A 96•4 D
98/06/2122:27:13 B74A 96.2 D
98/06/03 21:48:45 B74A 95.4 D
98/06/0812:40:03 B74A 95.1 D
98/06/26 01:07:07 B74A 94.4 A
98/06/22 21:34:15 B74A 94.2 D
98/06/24 06:22:56 B74A 94.0 A
98/06/0912:31:16 B74A 93.6 D
98/06/0512:14:01 B74A 92•8 D
R1VIT #11: Finn S� & Scheffer Ave.
S� Paul
RMT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin S�
S� Paul
:_ , �=�-
-. . .r 1 ..1.�.:�:. J • A /� : � �. �� . - .:
� t'/ �. . 1 Nl . -:
DBtC �I111C � - �YCi ;�s. t�iav
, . . C 1`9p�; .
9g/06/27 20:31:25 B727 105.4 D
98/06/0916:17:05 B74A 102.9 D
98/06/1415:44:24 B74A 102.9 D
98/06/ 16 00:04:39 DC9 102.3 D
98/06/2718:23:57 B74A 102.2 D
98/06/0812:39:36 B'74A 102.0 D
98/06/1412:37:03 B74A 101.7 D
98/06/0614:49:37 B74A 101.6 D
98/06/1813:41:30 B74A 101.5 D
98/06/091230:51 B�4A 101.3 D
RMT #12: Alton St & Rockwood Ave.
S� Paul
Note: ARTS data missing for 0. l days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 17
Metropo(itan Airports Commission
• � � • . � . . • � . . �
.
RMT #13: Southeast End oF Mohican Court
Mendota Heights
Date Tiu� �C ; : ; � -.. . . :. �
- 1`ype I.cvd..
98/06/1513:21:14 B727 96.6 D
98/06/19 00:05:40 DC9 95.0 D
98/06/27 t 1:58:33 B727 95.0 D
98/06/2411:25:05 B727 94.8 D
98/06/1219:07:44 B'727 93.8 D
98/06/12 20:20:03 B727 93.8 D
98/06/1109:48:04 B727 93.7 D
98/Q6/1610:28:15 B727 93.3 D
98/06/25 09:37:12 B'727 93.0 D
98106/13 19:19:24 B727 92.8 D
RMT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
Mendota Heights
�. . Date ZS�:. , . A/G ;. � � � -��y .
,r li/il
, Type _ � Levet� : -
98/06/ 14 19; 03: 27 B727 99, g D
98/06/1219:53:19 B727 98.1 D
98/06/1419:26:30 B727 97.8 D
98/06/18 09:54:02 B727 97.6 D
98/06/18 22:35:2'7 B72� 95.7 D
9$/06/ 10 22:43:11 DC9 95.4 D
98/06/18 22:25:16 B727 95.3 D
98/06/1810:03:12 B727 94.9 D
98/06/08 21:26:06 B727 94.9 D
98/06/1419:06:03 B727 94.2 D
RMT #14: lst St. & 1VdcKee St.
Eagan
Date Time � `�� ��
. . , . '1`ype : �� I.e�cl � `�/D ':
98/06/1219:18:43 B727 101.5 D
98/06/1416:25:29 B727 101.2 D
98/06/1416:26:47 B727 101.0 D
98/06/2712:20:47 B727 101.0 D
98/Q6I1413:19:41 B727 100.8 D
98/06/2314:42:33 B727 1Q0.4 D
98/06/1413:44:58 B727 993 D
98/06/2715:45:49 B727 99.2 D
98/06/1418:31:20 B�27 99.1 D
98I06/23 20:13:56 B�27 99.0 D
RMT #16: Avalon Ave. & V'ilas Lane
Eagan
- . . ' � tlll. *-� r 1�13fS. �s
, DStC T'lita�. � t - �� ." `. LCV@t , L�/li
98/06/2310:09:43 B72'7 101.7 A
98/06/2914:07:24 B73B 97.8 A
98/06/09 07:33:14 DC9 93.8 D
98/06/1120:53:41 DC9 93.1 A
98/06/09 08:08:42 B727 92.4 D
98/06/0915:33:15 G2 92.0 D
98/06/0914:14:33 B727 91.9 D
98/06/26 14:07:19 A320 91.5 � D
98/06/29 21:29:22 B727 90.9 A
98/06/09 09:37:08 B73A 90.9 D
Note: ARTS data missing far 0.1 days.
Page 18 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pro�rams
�
Metropolitan Airports Commission
T'en Loud�si Aircraft I�toise Events Identified
RMT #17: � 84th St & 4th Ave.
Bloomington
�,. - �.-:.
: :.: :� ... - A/C' �
" Date Tim� . ; -- �
- Tyge I:eve1�
98/06/22 09:39:19 B727 104.0 D
98/06/1213:50:08 B727 103.1 D
98/06/2512:02:08 B727 102.4 D
98/06/03 07:15:07 B727 102.4 D
98/06/OS 07:17:56 B727 102.4 D
98/06/1112:04:52 B727 102.2 D
98/06/1216:54:10 B72� 102•2 D
98/06/1617:00:05 B'127 102.1 D
98/06/1816:29:35 B727 101.7 D
98/06/0312:43:12 B727 101.6 D
RMT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th St,
Bloomington
, .� F ��p . r���-51y 4� �*�M' T �'�� fj/j{{. .
r
.. E`t xr F r� � . .. .�. ■ v,� ..iJG.Gi.-� ,_ . . �
. _. . , . -�r'
98/06/0915:23:38 B727 104.4 D
98/06/26 09:57:58 B727 104.1 D
98/06/1216:43:14 B727 103.9 D
98/06/1319:15:24 B72'7 103.8 D
98/06/18 22:06:04 B'727 103.5 D
98/06/2315:24:33 B727 103.5 D
98/06/1019:00:52 B727 103.4 D
98/06/1108:23:09 B727 103.3 D
98l06/2415:10:23 B727 1033 D
98/06/0713:23:51 B72� 102.8 D
�
RM[T #18: 75th S� & 17th Ave.
Richfield
>. �- , � ;. � -
13ate Tim� �'. ' : � '. :. ` I�eoel , �
..,, I��
98/06/13 13:36:03 �� B727 109.7 D
98/06/29 20:00:32 B727 108.8 D
98/06/OS 11:58:42 B727 107.7 D
98/06/2210:27:21 B727 107.2 D
98/06/1013:49:46 B727 106.7 D
98/06/1412:17:14 B727 106.7 D
98/06/2918:59:58 B727 106.6 D
98/06/18 23:Q6:53 B727 106.6 D
98/Q6/07 22:48:08 B727 106.5 D
98/06/06 09:42:25 B727 1d6.2 D
RMT #20: 75th S� & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
A/G ..Nia�
_ .. _ Date '1"un�� � - . ; _� . - `I:cvel �: .
98/06/1912:01:59 B727 101.9 D
98/Ob/19 21:3423 B727 101.2 D
98/06/2919:Q0:19 B727 101.1 D
98/06/0112:01:06 B727 100.8 D
98/06/0115:58:55 DC9 100.7 D
9$/06/OS 22:37:04 B727 100.2 D
98/06/06 20:52:08 B727 100.2 D
98/06/04 07:58:4� B727 99.8 D
98/06/ 19 17:54:34 DC9 99.3 D
98/06/13 06:15:16 B727 99.2 D
Note: ARTS clnta missing for 0.1 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa�e t9
Metropolitan Airports Commission
. ,� �. . , � . . �. .�
RIVIT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St
Inver Grove Heights
DateT'u� ,:_..:.� �/C..:.....1�Yax �
_ � T�'pe I.cvd
98/06/1611:5$:37 B727 91.5 D
98/06/OS 09:36:45 B727 89.8 D
98/06/Q412:24:47 DC9 88.6 A
98/06/1319:02:18 B727 88.5 D
98/06/1011:49:38 B727 8�.2 D
98/06/1412:41:18 B72� 87.1 D
98/06/1517:01:35 B727 87.1 D
98/06/1217:51:54 B727 86J D
98/06/1115:12:40 DC9 86.4 D
98/06/18 08:07:29 . B727 86.3 D
RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave.
NYendota Heights
�...:: �,.:� , � A!� _ �. Mazt {r � <:
Date�T'ttu�4 w„i"� :��;i � ��: � f �=� -
�
- TYE�r- - .
98/06/2711:58:04 B727 104.2 D
98/06/18 09:53:50 B727 104.0 D
98/06/0815:31:47 B727 103.8 D
98/06/0912:15:34 B727 103.1 D
98/06/1610:27:46 B727 103.1 D
98/06/1513:20:45 B727 102.7 D
98/06/2411:24:35 B727 102.� D
98/06/1319:18:54 B727 102.4 D
98/06/24 14:30:17 B727 102.2 D
98/06/16 09:48:59 B727 102.0 D
RMT #22: Anne Marie T7rail
Inver Grove Heights
Date Tlme �C � ' . .:
_ - � �:.1'ype -. Level- , . � �
98/06/14 08:17:17 B727 91.3 D
98/06/09 07:27:12 $727 89.4 D
98/06/14 08:27:01 B�27 86.9 D
98/06/23 07:14:09 B"727 85.6 D
98/06/02 06:50:22 8727 85.2 A
98/06I1015:46:46 B727 $5.1 D
98/06/2715:46:41 B727 85.1 D
98/06/13 18:18:18 B727 84.6 D
98/06/1019:35:09 B727 84.6 D
98/06/0819:28:24 B727 84.4 D
RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
Eagan
E T � �' .r t1JC� �. L�iii7�. �
_ „a F'`_1�pe � = t3/D�
`LeveL . ,
98106/14 08:16:49 B727 97.4 D
98/06/2314:42:54 B727 94.9 D
98/06/OS 07:53:35 DC9 93.2 A
98/06/2919:18:12 DC9 93.0 A
9$/06/1108:01:27 B727 92.8 D
98/06/1413:45:18 B72'7 92.2 D
98/06/1413:20:02 B727 91.9 D
98/06/2515:46:32 B73A 91.8 A
98/06/1316:26:58 B757 91.7 A
98/06/1416:27:07 B727 91.4 D
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days.
Page 20 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
C
Metropolitan Airports Commission
�l�gh� 'l�ack �ase 1l�ap
Airport I�toise and C)perations IVlonitoring System
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 21
�tetr<�politan Airports Commission
� ;, � � . ; 1 • • • � , � � �
.
June O1 to June 30,199�
Naise Monitor Locations
Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12
1 56.5 62.8 63.3 67.0 66.3 81.5 55.7 * 61.4 66.3 59.0 64.3
2 * 63.9 66.9 68.6 69.9 80.7 63.7 70.0 62.1 69.0 61.8 58.$
3 62.6 64.2 63.7 68.5 673 79.9 61.7 70.6 55.8 67.0 65.8 59.0
4 65.8 66.0 69.1 69.5 69.1 81.5 62.9 70.2 54.3 59.6 60.0 57.1
5 64.5 65.9 66J 71.4 70.2 82.0 62.7 71.2 55.7 60.9 58.6 53.5
6 61.8 65.7 67.2 69.3 65.4 79.4 58.3 67.2 53.3 60.4 58.0 54.0
7 63.5 66.7 64.0 � 69.8 65.5 80.3 59.7 * 49.3 52.8 47.4 52.2
$ 61.5 67.4 62.9 68.3 68.6 76.0 55.6 * 55.8 63.1 54.0 53.5
9 65A 69.5 68.1 68.5 70.$ 74.7 57.4 53.0 56.6 62.5 53.9 55.5
10 60.6 65.2 63.8 67.9 68.4 78.3 59.4 66.2 59.6 69.1 65.9 57.7
11 6�.1 70.2 68.0 72.4 69.5 82.8 58.2 66.3 60.7 65.2 59.5 64.6
12 66.6 68.2 67.8 70.4 67.6 81.2 58.4 65.5 66.6 69.9 49.8 58.2
13 60.3 64.7 62.2 69.1 64.5 77.1 64.7 61.6 44.4 53.8 49.6 62.1
14 62.8 66.3 61.7 67.2 67.0 74.1 49.6 55.5 53.2 63.4 56.7 56.8
15 60.5 64.1 66.1 66.7 71.4 77.4 54.4 54.0 55.9 70.0 59.1 62.6
16 66.6 69.0 66.9 72.0 68.5 81.1 57.5 66.9 54.4 71.1 57.0 60.0
17 60.3 65.5 63.9 67.3 68.3 74.2 56.5 57.1 61.3 70.1 62.6 60.7
18 63.7 69.1 68.3 69.8 71.3 * * 59.1 64.1 68.5 61.2 62.3
19 58.0 63.2 60.3 67.8 65.9 79.8 * 67.5 66.6 70.1 * 61.9
20 63.6 68.1 68.1 73.3 67.4 83.3 56.2 68.3 53.8 62.2. 59.0 61.0
21 57.0 62.1 60.0 67.1 62.2 78.9 54.7 67.8 63.3 67.0 50.4 56.4
22 60.7 64.1 61.9 67.1 66.9 80.8 57.2 69.2 61,6 65.2 45.9 59.1
23 61.8 66.6 63.6 68.2 68.2 75.1 54.8 60.9 61.5 66.2 57.1 51.4
24 60.1 67.7 61.8 69.0 67.2 * 67.3 55.8 * 69.0 61.1 63.9
25 60.0 66.6 653 68.5 67.5 78.5 58A 64.3 57.8 69.7 62.2 55.8
26 57.2 63.0 61.6 64.2 66.6 72.1 56.5 59.6 67.5 73.1 62.2 64.1
27 64.9 70.0 64.0 72.$ 70.7 82.2 59.8 68.7 60.8 68.5 60.� 62.3
2$ 589 63.4 59.7 67.1 61.5 79.0 49.6 65.1 58.3 609 449 57.8
29 61.1 64.7 63.0 68.9 65.4 78.7 55.6 65.7 61.4 64.1 53.0 53.4
30 653 65.7 67.8 69.5 67.8 81.4 58.5 66.7 63.0 67.8 58.3 51.5
Mo. Ldn 62.1 66.1 64.4 68.6 67.2 78.5 58.2 64.6 62.0 66.9 60.4 59.2
Page 26 Aviation 1�loise & Sa[ellite Pro;rams Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 ciays.
�
: ��� )
( )
Ltetropolitan Airports Commission
Analysis of Aircraft I�toise Events - Aircraft lLcin d.�(A)
June Ol to June 30, 1998
Noise 1Vlonitor Locations
Date #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #l� #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24
1 54.8 61.5 58.9 * 69.0 79.5 73.2 67.0 53.4 53.4 57.8 60.3
2 47.5 63.0 55.7 68.5 71.9 79.1 74.5 61.5 55.4 59.4 59.8 62.6
3 53.3 62.7 56.5 68.9 73.2 78.8 73.2 * 48.9 55.8 61.5 62.5
4 44,2 6f.5 55.4 66.9 72.7 79.9 73.1 63.8 53.7 58.9 62.4 65.8
5 62.8 68.7 62.4 * 71.0 80.2 73.7 69.0 59.6 62.7 68.4 66.1
6 63.7 65.7 55.9 * 73.1 80.3 74.0 64.9 64.8 57.4 63.7 63.8
� 44.9 62.9 49.6 * 73.9 793 71.4 65:Z 49.7 56.1 58.0 61.8
g 65.9 67.0 68.7 * 68.9 80.7 76.4 62.3 63.0 60.5 75.6 64.3
9 62.1 70.0 64.6 67.7 69.0 78.3 74.6 58.7 61.6 59.� 75.9 � 65.4
10 65.1 66.7 69.2 65.2 72.6 80.9 74.5 63.1 61.3 59.9 75.3 64.8
11 62.7 68.2 64.1 * 74.0 81.6 75.6 63.3 60.7 59.7 72.1 64.6
12 603 69.2 61.9 * 74.0 80.3 74.7 66.7 57.0 60.0 67.4 65.4
13 58.5 68.4 65.0 * 73.0 80.3 75.3 69.4 58.4 61.1 73.4 65.3
14 61.6 71.2 67.0 * 70.0 79.5 74.6 59.3 60.5 62.4 75.3 66.5
15 62•7 * 65.3 * 70.9 79.2 753 58.1 60.4 58.4 72.4 63.1
16 61.4 * 64.1 * 72.3 80.4 75.4 * 59.1 57.8 70.9 63.2
1'7 64.9 673 67.8 * 71.1 81.2 73.8 61.6 62.2 62.6 75.8 64.0
1 g 69.0 65.7 73.3 * 74.7 84.4 78.7 64.9 61.2 56.8 79.1 60.8
19 �•5 62.6 66.1 63.6 73.0 82.6 75.6 68.9 59.6 56.5 73.0 62.2
20 59.1 62.4 61.7 58.7 70.2 78.9 722 62.3 56.1 55.9 68.3 60.0
2l 56.2 63.9 56.4 62.6 75.0 81.4 73.6 64.9 58.0 58.2 64.1 62.5
22 46.6 61.7 56.0 64.0 75.1 81.4 74.8 65.2 47.7 55.6 57.9 61.0
23 62.0 70.2 65.7 64.4 70.7 80.8 75.0 60.8 58.4 62.0 74.7 65.7
24 65.5 71.0 70.1 61.5 71.6 82.3 76.1 66.9 60.0 58.9 76.6 64.2
25 60.0 63.0 61.3 63.7 75.3 82.4 77.1 66.9 55.2 59.2 68.8 62.4
26 60.7 66.$ 43.9 65.6 69.2 76.8 72.1 58.9 56.4 57.2 73.3 62.5
2'7 62.2 71.1 60.0 62.6 * 80.6 72.5 61.2 59.4 61.3 77.4 64.0
28 57.3 65.4 582 61.6 * 80.2 743 64.3 56.5 54.3 66.7 63.1
29 4b.8 63.8 63.1 64.9 * 80.8 76.7 65.7 54.8 56.5 62.8 62.5
30 42.4 62.5 * 6t.7 * 80.0 76.5 66.2 48.6 56.6 56.7 61.0
Mo. Ltln 61 �8 ��g �•6 63.5 71.9 80.1 74.4 63.9 58.7 58.4 72.5 62.9
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 27
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.1 days. * 1,es.t rha» n�•enn• jnur hours of dnta nenilnble
C
i�te�ropolitan Airports Commission
� 1 i i .�' / i 1' 1` . �.
1, t 1'; , i � • • ,';1, ` .
'.11 �.. ' , i ,, • 11
� �ci�:�
- • � • �•�. � , � � ��� �� i� .
, , ,
� � �` ,� i'� � ,.
Paoe 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
C
• Metropo(itan Airports Commission
li�inneapolis - St.1'aul Internatio�al Airport
June 199�
3160.0. 'Total 12L and.12I2 Carrier Jet I)epa�iures.
120 ... �arrier Jei I)epartures 3.� %
North of Proposed 09�° (1Vi) �orridor I'olicy �oundary
�
�
��
a
^ �
_. o
.�. �
120 TRAC'�S CROSSED P-GATE
LEFT COUi�T=96 (80.0�} RIGHT COUNT=24 (20.Q�)
��
DEVIAr�4�! F-t��i Cr v i tR OF GAi �(;k;
, �
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 3
'�tetropolitan Airports Commission
'�neapolis - St. Paul Internati�nal A�rport
� June 199�
��
��
�
�
0
_._. c,
.;.. r--�
3160 ... %ial 12L and 12R Carrier Jet I)epartures
6�... Carrier Jet I)eparture - Early �'urnout (1.9 %
(I�Torth 5ide �efore Three 1lRiles)
61 TRACKS CROSSED P-GATE
LEFT CO�NT=45 (73.8�) RIGHT CO�NT=16 (26.2�)
�i
DEVIATION ��QM Cr �U i; R OF GA i E �i
Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Pron ams
; � .�
�Tetropolitan Airports Commission
1 ; / f . �` . . �. � c ,;
1 ' i, 1 �` •' , .,
'.11: �� . �;,� , • ��
���.
'� : � i ,� • • ' � ' i . '
.:
/ 1, 1 �. � �, . , � ,� � ', , .
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 5
titetropolitan Airports Commission
_ IVl�inneapolis - St. Pau� International Aia�port
June 199�
��
��
�
��
; —ol
3160.... Total 1-2L and 12I� Carrier Jei I)epartu�es
13 ... Carrier Jet Departures (0.4%
South of Corrid.or (Souih of 30L I.ocalizer)
13 TRRCKS CROSScD P-GATE
�EFT COl1NT=2 (15.4�) RIGNT COl1NT=11 ($4.0�)
DEVIaT10�� FR�� C��VT�R 0� GnTE (ff;
Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
_ l�inneapolis - Sto F'aul Internaiional Airport
,�une 199�
�=
��
3160 ... Toial 12L and 12R Carrier Jei I)epartures
13 ... Carrier Jet Depari� res - Early 'Iigrnout 0.4 %
(South Side �efore Three lVliles)
13 TRACKS CROSSED P—GATE
LEFT CO�NT=3 (23,1�� RIGNT COUNT=10 (76.9�)
��
DFUTATION r R0�1 C��1cR OF G�qT� (ff)
��
Aviation Noise & Sateliite Programs Page 7
i�fetropolitan Airports Commission
� . � 1 1 . �; �j � ;, . �. . �; � . �,
. ., 1, 1 ' � , , � �, � , � �
June 1998
0.6% (18) �arrier Jet I)ep�rtures 5° S'outh of Cor�id�r
(5° South of 30L Localizer)
Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
,.:
{,
. Metropolitan Airports Commission
. ll�Iinne�polis - St. Paul International Ai�por�
� June 199�
.. ,
�� l
�
r' � �
��
�
3160 ... Total 12L anci 121.2 Carrier Jet liepartures
� a.. Carrier Jet I�ep�rtures 0( .2 %J
5° �outh of Cor�dor (�° �outh. of 30L Localiz�r)
5 TRRCKS CROSSEO P-GATE
LEFT COUN1=2 (40.0�)� ftiGNT CODUT=3 (6Q.0�)
��
-4
DtVIATiON FR��i CEVTE�� OF GAiE (fk
' �
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 9
Metropolitan Airports Commission �
Minneap�lis - Sta Paul internaiional Airport .
Junel998
�=
�
3160... Total 12L and 12R Caa�rier Jet Departures
13 ... Carri�r Jet I)epartures - Early �rnout 0.4 %J
(South Side �efore Three 1Vliles) -
13 TRa�KS CRO�SED P-GATE
LEFT COUNT=3 (23.1�) RIGHT COUNT=10 (76.9�)
��r
DEU!.qT10i� �;��!� ���-�R oF GaTE (ft}
J O
Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Prob ams ,��
�
i
� � �
w�
�-;.
(,,,
�"
r`
-
<
�: :t
�
•
a :-''
€.'.a".i
�
T
6�
N�
7
� �
rn
�
A
�
cP��v �
� r �
� �
� � �
�� �
� �
J y
� � d
i
� � �
� �
i
9� �' :
� w � �
� �
� �
� � �
� �
� � ;
� , ll�/ J ..`
I
M �7�- 3x.
1��� � ' _'� 1
V \
r- P � � �..
�� �:
� ,;
va i-.� .
c,�.y, c6
.• �"� , ;
Y -1+
�gJ � -
o �
� �
�� �
0�a N
� � �
� �
�,� o
� a
a, m
�� . m
� �
T
�
n �
� � � �
� O O � � O
M N N ^ ""
�ZI�I�'Idi�IO� ,�(� �i��I�I�I�I
� � `O �' �N �
.--�
��O .L����
�
rn
c
�
-,
00
rn
�
�
�
�
o+
Qa
�
�
�
�
�
O�
p
w
�
rn
c
�
ti
�
� ' . .
Q
�
0
z
�
�
�
�
rn
a��'i
in
rn
�
4
rn. I
>;
~
� f ','
d
�.
h
N
�'
.'A
�
�
h
O�
�a
h
O�
�
�
r
�
.�
w
�
rn
q ,
�
ti
�`�.�
mC
,: C
,; �
O
L
�: a
a�
m
�,
�
�' �
�
�,�.
t �''
O
:�.
co
'y
Q
N
i
�
i
:c.,=-
�
�.
-
� -=::;<`"
:;st-..
r .:
e=
..�,��gi:''j:>
�'1
:�
..c
aA
.y
:a .
�
0
�
c
�
� .�
G�0 =+ t"•
a � °
y � •�
>
n
� � � � �
�
�J�oOJ.���C'�o ��.�.�.�. �Ci %
ti�:'r.. ;;
: � ;�
� :;
h Q'' , ]
�
T
� ::
.-�.. t`.' ;':
' QY :
'y -, :
t,� � '
� m
� �
�
� R. �
� O
r �' d
rn G�
.._
'`� �
� n �
� �
a
w °�
rn m
y
° �O
O^ Z
c
0
• �
Q
� m
i
� � � Q
S�O'�����0 �9/�\/. � �o O/�
�
:�
.c
�n
.�
�
�
�
0
�
c
y
� ••�-'
oA a %
ct3
� C GQ
J � �
^ � �
� N
v � � �'
S�OI��Q��O � V.I.O� �� ��O
: -� ;}z;.s:;N:
-'^ �"�jp.'��a,�
_;.�t."�
�.,��;,,
00 '
rn
�
� o
C
' ..J
-: t
; _: G
00
rn
�
�
r, -,,. .,
�
T �
� . ` : ''.'�'?
�'+� C`.:,'.°
a '.
N.:
� :
� r-� ..: . fA
� ;E
� ` �s
°� ' , o
¢ � o-
rn �
� �
� �" �
°� : �
A �
w
rn �
�
O �' Z
�
. �
O
�
Q
�
�
� �C � �
, d' N
� � �' . �' � � _ � � �
.;,7 ;� ,
._J: .i
!' �
- .;
,A �
�:.
�; ,y :
;
�� �
� �; _ .
� �,
� � . .�
� ��
�;
� �.` :
�
�� :,
.� :,
�� -
�
�t� � v,.,;;
� ��� ; .
�, ;� � ;
� � �:�.'
� »:
. 'X. .'+�t.^ J
3 1:�7
� T ^t��
� � _
� . .
}'- �
Z,;'��:,;� ;a
Ot-: ;�
��;5�.�. .
�
�, �,�
a:, °,y
�
� c� e�;
at+«�
�. <:7
ca--
� =�
r Q�
rn
� .
�
�, r;-_:::
rn '
� �
� "y .:'
�c
� . G
CC
� rn :' m
Q .. �
rn m
� _
� �
� �
� �
.a
w '�
rn �
c
,� f, '
O ^ 4
O
N
'�
CU
L'
. ��
st�
�t; ,�t.
y:a
,.,,:
� x',
`.rt? °'
?,i�t�.��.: =s3
<5y„`r
��:
�
_
'i�=i:ir^�`tis!G
,3:;N,...
�"`_j:-^� �1
``*-�;il; r;Tj.kB
...;�'av'�."�
��
�y��.. z�.yt
�
=-;;�
� k.��.
;�i,
� �r .�
�
:i.: :4�`,qrtti'c
=w4 =:it
nz: k;:
:�yi
\
� Q � ^ Z
� � o �t' `� a
SNC?11.��I�ciO �i�'lO.L �(� % Q
ti
i
�� � � `� a "' ( �
� �f' N ,, � ,
. �
sn�o�l����01�.�0.��ooio ;
Q
. �
L
i
�
� �� � ,J�
�� J
��� ->:,_
.: ��,
,, .=�
� �
r:;f':t
.r;• w.. ,... .
�yx^'.
'es'�;'i'-'i;`.:z
. J
�,aF%:
' �: t�'i
.a':=,
:��5
� :ah:
' s::;'''�.
s``.t'B!Gn"'.i
.ii= - !:_�i;�
��:s":r�T.
`'.;�a�:,c''�."a
�i?h �h
z �rz. s
,-,
� t'
-�W-
1: -{:..i.'z`,.;3'4'.
_,.
��{..
���r'
-.�
.i:%f:t.
` �F.. :6
�+tpt »
�_�.;�v�"""•
�
�
�
�
�
� o�o ��'J d' N
S(�o�.�.�d�3�cjO ��J.(�.L �O %
:n
�
^4
J
�
c3
�
"�
C
^.�
� �
w,� � �
y C �
� � �
� � � �N
S�O��V 4l��Y � Y�o� �o O/�
... ,�,
,,�
lCr
: I Y� Y Y
�t�
�... � ta�'F'�
:C V' .�
��� '�
<a � 7� �
1 �
�
�
�
��
�
Q�
i�.� .
�,
� ��
� �� �
�r:�� m
o.;,' o
��
� ��`': a�
�
� 'm
� � m
�: � c�
� °�
� w v
c
O �
-, � ,
J
.�
Q
�
L
'�i�trc,pvliian .y�r}�urt, C:uinn;����un
'�').' •' �; „ � � i • ,'
';. .. �.��
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use Departure % LTse
pq, 64 0.3% 21 0.1%
22 41 0.2% 489 2.6%
12 9895 52.4% 10094 54.1%
30 8878 47.1% 8075 43.2%
MSP January Fleet Mix Percentage
Stage ' Sch�claled 3she€iule�l ; ATdOlVY� '"'��Al�TOIVLS
1937 1!� Count 199'7 Count 199�
Stage 2 43.1% 36.2% 46.4% 37.9%
Stage 3 56.9% 63.8% 53.6% 62.1%
Air�ort J�u�'Y Complaint Summary
��rt ig97 ;: 1998
Msp 593 376
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 0 2
Crystal 1 0
Flying Cloud 1 S
Lake Elmo Q 2
SL Paui � 2
Misc. 0 0
TOT�iI. 5� - �
January A.verage Daily Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record
x
Aviation Noise & Sateliite Programs
Page 1
�t`�rup,.�litan AirFort; Cumr.;!,,irn
. • • � 1' • . i II . 1 .
�, �, .
. . .
Aircraft T�ype Count Percentage
B707 0 0.0%
B727H 162 0.6%
B73B 806 3.1%
B74A 165 0.6%
B74B 47 0.2%
B757 2557 9.8%
B767 69 0.3%
BA46 944 3.6%
CARJ 263 1.0%
FA 10 0 0.0%
DC10." 1171 4.5%
DC8 3 0.0%
DC9H 4795 1$.3%
A300 83 0.3%
A310 39 0.1%
A320 2605 9.9%
F100 1286 4.9%
L101 58 0.2%
MD 11 0 0.0°Io
MD80 1180 4.5%
H25B 43 0.2%
H25C 11 0.0%
BA 11 0 0.0%
B727 � 3210 12.3%
B73A 1589 6.0%
DC8 135 0.5%
DC9 4990 19.1 % -
F28 0 0.0%
Total 262ll 140% .
Note: ARTS ciata missing for 0.2 days.
Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Proa ams
� • � � '� • �/-�
,.; .
. f �.:- ;/
�tetropulitan .��rpv; �., C.�mmis�iun
°�';i' ., 1 . ,1 1 1'. .
. � � �- �, �.
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use Departure °10 Use
04 191 l.l% 63 0.4%
22 84 0.5% 614 3.5%
12 9753 55.4% 10041 57.7%
30 756t 43.0% 6694 38.4%
MSP February Fleet 1VIix Percentage
stage Scheduled 5cheduled. ANOMS ANOii�
199'7 199� Count 1997 Count 1998
Slage 2 42.4% 33.2% 45.6% ' 36.9%
Stage 3 57.6% 66.8% 54.4% 63.1%
Airport February Compl�int Summary
Ai�rt = -, -1997 199$
MSP 725 586
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 1 5
Crystal 3 0
Flying Cloud 4 9
Lake Elmo 1 1
St. Paul 0 2
Misc. 0 2
TOTAL 734 605
February Average I)aily Operations Summary - FAA Airport 'I�-affic Record
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Pagz 1
1.tetropolitan ,airport, Cummi:.;iun
., ; � � , ,� � . ' 1 '1 / :
, i , , �; �' ;
Aircraft Type Count Perce�tage
B777 0 0.0%
B727H 124 0.5%
B73B 732 3.0%
B74A 138 0.6%0
B74B 51 0.2%
B757 2333 9.6%
B767 74 0.3%
BA46 � 930 3.8%
�i�RJ 22� l.�%
FA 10 0 0.0%
DC 10 1157 4.8°l0
DC8 14 0.1°l0
DC9H 4750 19.6°Io
A300 83 0.4%
A310 30 0.1%
A320 2319 9.5%
F100 1121 4.6%
L101 56 0.2%
MD 11 4 0.0%
MD80 1124 4.6°�0
H25 B 45 0.2%
H25C 6 0.0%
BA l 1 3 -0.0%
B727 2969 12.3%
B73A 1391 5.7%
DCS 119 0.5%
DC9 4�91 18.4%
F28 0 0.0%
Total 24292 100°l0
Nvte: ARTS c%ua ntissing for 0.2 days.
Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satel(ite Projrams
� , , � � � � /.
• �'. I. I . /
V���[CU�`�)�1:..�1 .i't�tvll, "�!"�illin�:��il
�perations and Cornplaint Sua�nma�y
IVlarch 199�
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrivai °Io Use Departure °Io Use
04 316 1.6% 141 0.7%
22 38 0.2% 644 3.3%
12 8597 43.8% 8902 45.8°Io
30 10679 54.4% 9752 50.2%
1VYSP March Fleet Mi�c Percentage
Stage - �cheeiuled` Scheduled ANC�1ViS `' `="�NOii�i�
1997 199� Count 1997 Connt 1998 �
Stage 2 40.5% 33.0% 46.2% 34.8%
Stage 3 59.5% 67.0% 53.8% 65.2%
Airport March Complaint Summary
Airpor$ 1997 . 199�
MSP 916 930
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 0 3
Crystal l 2
Flying Cloud 3 5
Lake Elmo 0 0
St. Paul 0 0
Misc. 0 1
TOTAL 920 941
March Average Daily Operations Summary - FAiA Airport Traffic Record
:�
Aviation Noise & Sateilite Prob ams Pa�e 1
til�tropolitan ,�irpc�R� Cumini„ion
Page 8
. . . � /• . 'i 1: 1.
March 1998
Aircrati Type Count Percentage
B707 0 0.0%
B727H 196 0.7%
B73B 755 2.8%
B74A 149 0.5%
B74B 65 0.2%
B757 2618 9.5%
B767 84 0.3%
BA46 1060 3.9%
CARJ 235 0.9%
FA 10 0 0.0%
DC10 1351 4.9%
DC8 1 0.0%
DC9H 5908 21.5%
A300 88 0.3%
A310 39 0.1%
A320 2719 9.9%
F1Q0 1238 4.5%
L101 71 0,3%
MD11 13 0.1%
MD80 1246 4.5%
H25B 72 0.3%
H25C 9 0.0%
BA l 1 1 0.0%
B727 3374 12.3% .
B73A 1528 5.6%
DC8 174 0.6%
DC9 4456 16.3%
Total 27450 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for 0.3 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
F]►5.2% '��d�C, jE' I,�I
, ,,
. . �: � - ;/
�
��
�tztrupviitan �ir�:";.� �.,�,i,;�>>�.vn
, � • , �: „ � � i . .
. � i l �
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use Departure % Use '
pq. 432 2.3% 215 l.l%
22 265 1.4% 5018 26.7%
12 8601 4�.8%a 6866 36.6%
30 9881 51.5% 6692 35.6%
1VISP April Fleet 1Viix Percentage
Schesduled Schednled' ' t�11e101�S � ANOI�S
Stage . 1� � 1g9g Count 1997 Count 1998
Stage 2 42.1% 31.6% 44.8% 31.9%
Stage 3 57.9%a 68.4% 55.2% 68.1%
Airport�pril Complaint Summary
Airport ' .. - 1997 � 1998 �
MSP 977 1019
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 1 6
Crystal 1 0
Fiying Cloud 1 6 -
Lake Elmo 0 0
St. Paul 2 4
Misc. 2 �
TOTAL 9�4 1035
April Operations Summary - FAA. Airport 'Traf�c Record
Aviation Noise & Sateliite Programs Paae 1
'.i�tr��puiitan AirioR� Cu�ni!�i,����rt
,, _ • ��• . 1 1 f'
�, � i' '� :
Aircraft Type Count Percentage
B777 0 O.f�%
B727H 68 0.3%
B73B 755 2.9%
B74A 131 0.5.%
B74B 58 0.2%
B757 2747 1�.�%
B767 86 0.�%
BA46 1024 4.0%
CARJ 233 0.1%
FA 10 0 0.(�%
� DC 10 989 3.8%
DCS 0 O.Q%
DC9H 6263 24.2%
A300 80 0.3%
A310 34 0.1%
A320 2498 9.7%
F 1Q0 1195 4.6%
L101 47 0.2%
MD 11 4 0.0%
MDSO 1290 5.0%
H25B 99 0.4%
H25C 18 O.I%
BA 11 1 0.0%
B727 2635 10.2%
� B73A 1562 6.1%
DC8 183 0.7%
' DC9 3839 14.9%
F28 0 0.0%
Total 25839 100%
Nnte: ARTS ciuta missing for 0.2 dc{vs.
Page 8 Aviation 1�ioise & Satellite Pro�ams
• � ` . • I /`
�:�. ` ! 7 ' r:
�tetropr�litan ,ai:�+urc> C�m�rtii»iim
Operations and �ornplaint Sumgnary
M�y �s9�
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use ISep�rture °Io Use
04 173 1.0% 125 0.7%
22 117 0.6% 7269 41.4%
12 9521 53.0% 6111 34.8%
30 8148 45.4% 4049 23.1%
MSP May Fleet Mix Percentage
` Stage � � SclieduIed Sieheduled � ..: r�l�TOM� ; .A1�10�
1997 199� Count 1997 Count 199�
Stage 2 42.0% 30.9% 44.8% 31.7%
Stage 3 58.0% 69.1% 55.2% 68.3%
" -.t_ ,;�,>��_-
'�` 4" .. Airport May Complaint Summary
:. . Airport _ 1997 .. --1� ._. :;
MSP 995 1490
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 2 9
Crystal 1 4
Flying Cloud 2 7
Lake Elmo 1 0
St. Paul 1 2
Misc. 1 1
T�TAL 100i3 1513
Nlay Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 1
1�tetropolitan ;�irpurts i:ummi»ion
Page 8
. . • , �� ,, � � �,•
1, 1 �
'. ♦
Aircraft Type Count Perce�tage
B777 0 OA�I
B727H 89 0.4°OI,i
B73B 802 3.3°I'o
B74A 116 0.5%0
B74B 62 0.3%
B757 2554 10.5°fo
B767 66 03°�,
BA46 1013 4.2°l0
CARJ 214 0.9°l0
FA 10 0 0.09'0
DC 10 699 2.9%
� DC8 2 0.0°l0
DC9H 5624 23.2%
E145 198 0.8%
A300 70 0.3%
A310 29 0.1°�i
A319 1 OA°I'a
A320 2632 10.8°l0
F100 980 4.0%
L101 0 0.0%
MD11 2 O.Q%
MD80 1265 5.2%
H25B 115 0.5°�0
H25C 25 0.1%
BA 11 0 0.0%
B727 2375 9J%
B73A 1633 6.7%
DC8 157 0.7%
DC9 3551 14.6%
F28 0 0.0%
T'otal 24274 100%
Note: ARTS data missing for !.5 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
• � ', /,/- /
1VIEETING NOTICE
MASAC OPERATIONS COiV1MITTEE
The Operations Committee wiii meet Fridav, July 10, 1998 — 10:00 a.m. at the MAC
Generai Offices of the Metropolitan Airpo�ts Commission, MASAC ROOM, 6040 28th
Avenue South, Minneapolis.
IF yc�u are ui�abi� to afitend, please notify th�: co�nmitt��e secre�ary (Melissa .Scovronski 726-
8141) with the name of your designated alternate.
PLEASE NOTE THE CHAIVGE 1111 LOCATION
�' �� '��i NEW BUSINESS
Draft Airport Ground Noise Study Update
EIS Briefing - �
Correspondence
OLD BUSINESS
Construction Update
MEMBER DISTRIBUTION
Mark Salmen, Chairman, NWA
Bob Johnson, MBAA
Bob Kirmis, 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
Will Eginton, IGH
Advisory:
ATC Tower Chief, FAA
Ron Glaub, FAA
Cindy Greene, FAA
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC
Chad Leqve, MAC
Shane VanderVoort, MAC
�
MINUTES
MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
JUNE '12, 1998
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission West Terminal Building
North Star Conference Room, and called to order at 10:00 a.m.
The foilowing members were in attendance:
Members:
Mark Salmen, Chairrnan - NWA
John Nelson - Bloomington
Kevin Batchelder — Mendota I-leights
Jon Hohenstein - Eagan
Dick Keinz - MAC
Dick Saunders - Minneapolis
Advisory:
Chad Leqve - MAC
Kay Hatlestad - MAC
Ron Glaub - FAA NWA CMO
Cindy Greene - FAA
Visitors;
Bob Kirmis— Eagan
. � .
Rivii �i?� LuCHTiGiv �iniHL'r�iS vvR�i� iii-
Chad Leqve, MAC, said this item was initially put on the agenda in the event MASAC sent it
back to the committee. He said if there were any further questions or comments, he could
address them.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked staff to clarify what steps would need to be taken in order
to continue the process of purchasing and mounting the RMTs.
Dick Keinz, MAC, said the budget request was currentiy in the CIP and that the CIP wouid
have to be approved by the Commission. Once the CIP is appraved, staff wiil proceed with
1
purchasing and installing the RMTs.
AIRPORT GROUND NOISE STUDY UPDATE
Chad Leqve, MAC, said all of the data acquisition has been completed for the study and
that staff was on schedule to have a report availabie at the July Operations meeting.
Mr. Leqve gave a brief overview of the study.
➢ There were six sites selected to be monitored: two on the airport, two east of Cedar
Avenue and iwo west of Cedar Avenue.
➢ Seven full days of data have been acquired.
➢ The sites west of Cedar Avenue were in Christian Park and at 16'h Avenue.
➢ Two of the monitors were manned during thF evening P�o�.!rs: o;�e on airport and one in
ihe community.
➢ Whenever possible, the person on the airfield recorded all operations on the field,
including the heading of aircraft during run-ups.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked staff what types of ineasurements had been taken. Kay
Hatlestad, MAC, said both A and C noise weightings had been monitored.
Mr. Nelson also asked how the data would be reported (i.e. noise metric). Chad �eqve,
MAC, said staff hadn't made a final decision at this point.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked how staff was distinguishing the noise associated with
different types of operations. Chad Leqve, MAC, said the monitors recorded continuously
and the person on the field recorded the various operations as they happened.
Mr. �eqve also reiterated that the study was not a low frequency noise study but nighttime
ground noise study.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked if it was possible that ground operations would change
because of the results of the analysis. Chad Leqve, MAC, said the Operations Committee
would have to discuss the results and, if at that point specific issues are identified, solutions
coui� be discussed.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked what the schedule was for the report to be completed.
Chad Leqve, MAC, said the report would be completed by the July Operations Committee
meeting.
Dick Saunders, Nlinneapolis, asked what frequencies the monitors are able to pick up. Kay
Hatlestad, MAC, said the monitors are able to measure 'A' weighting and 'C' weighting and
that the C weighting picks up more of the low frequencies. She said if the difference
between the 'A' weighting and the 'C' weighting was more than 5 decibels, it could be
assumed that the low frequency noise was significant.
i `�'r
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked about a low frequency noise study he had dated April (�
1997 and asked (1) if it had been done by the noise staff and (2) if the data couid be used
in the study. Dick Keinz, MAC, said the noise staff had not been involved with any low
frequency noise study, and that it was probably park of the EIS for the north/south runway.
Chad Leqve, MAC, said he didn't believe staff would need additional data for the study. He
said the data already gathered was very robust. Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked if staff
had done any research into noise studies at other airports. Mr. Leqve said staff had
consulted some studies to do research on methodologies. He said, though, that staff did
not believe it was appropriate to apply the findings at other airports to MSP.
Kay Hatlestad, MAC, said contours for run ups were also being generated in order to
compare them to the monitored data.
Ch�d Leq��e, MAu, said in addition to the cantours, the re�ort wou!d include interviews with
the carriers and their maintenance crews as to their run up procedures and what their needs
are.
CONSTRUCTION UPDATE
Chad Leqve, MAC, said the construction project for the south parallel runway was going
weii. He said the project was in its 9'h week and that June 15`h is the projected start date for
the first layer of concrete to be laid. He noted that the contractors had only lost 3 days and
that the project was on track to be completed by mid-August.
�+.
Mr. �eqve then referred to the weekly operations updates that had been included in the
packet. He used the week of April 13-19`h as an example noting that the departures off of
runway 22 were within the predicted range of 100-170 operations. He said departure
operations off of runway 22 ranged from mid 20% to mid 30%.
Chairman Salmen said NWA's pilot acceptance of the shortened runway had been generally
good. He also noted that with the increase in temperatures, fewer jet aircraft would be able
to use the shortened runway for departures. He said in wet conditions, 727's can't land on
the shortened runway, as well.
C� aU Laqvc, ��1,^-,C, sai� S:aii 4�OUICI Cvi�tirue tc U�;uat� th� �veb s;te :vith ti�r��u;y op�ra±ion�!
information.
John Nelson, Bloomington, asked staff if it would be possible to brief representatives on
ANOMS and how it works. He asked if it would be possible for the ANOMS computer to be
set up at one of the meetings. Chad Leqve, MAC, said a full briefing on ANOMS was on the
agenda for the June 23, 1998 MASAC meeting. There was a brief discussion abaut
possibly setting up a computer in the MASAC room or having interested representatives tour
the noise office on the same day that the tower tour is scheduled.
Ron Glaub, FAA, asked about the significant difference in operations off runway 22
between the week of May 7`h and the week of April 27�h. He asked staff if they had identified
any thing in particular that could be attributed to such a large difference. It was generally
` agreed that the weather (temperature and wind direction/speed) would be the most
significant factor. Cindy Greene, FAA, said runway 22 cannot be used if there are strong
winds from the northeast.
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked if the shortening of the south paraliel runway had
changed the altitude of aircraft on arrivais and/or departures over Minneapolis. Cindy
Greene, FAA, said that because the end of the runway is not as near to Minneapolis as it
usually is, aircraft altitudes are probably about two hundred feet higher on both arrivals and
departures.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, asked if aircraft are being turned earlier because of the shortened
runway. Cindy Greene, FAA, said the turns have not been changed.
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked if the north parallel runway's operations had changed
because a resident had complained to him that there seemed to be more fiights over her
home off of 38`h Avenue S. south af 50`h Street. Cindy Greene, FAA, said operations off the
north paraliel runway had not changed but that it was possible she was experiencing
additional west bound traffic departing runway 04. She could also be experiencing spool
up noise on runway 22. Ms. Greene said that 33 departures are using the full length of
runway 22 for departures compared to the usual 4 deparkures.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, said during the first weeks of construction there was a noticeable
increase in traffic from runway 22 over Eagan. He said during the past couple of weeks,
though, there had not been as many and asked if the tower had been doing something
�--- � different. Cindy Greene, FAA, explained that when aircraft arrive on 30 left and right, the
controilers have to protect the arriving traffic and must give headings off 22 of 200 degrees
or more. She said in this case, the aircraft would not fly over Eagan. If aircraft are arriving
on 12 left and right, depa�tures off of runway 22 can be directed in the same manner as
departures off of runways 12 left and right. Mr. Hohenstein said it would be impo►tant next
year to hold informational meetings for the City of Eagan (and possibly Burnsvilfe), as was
done for Bloomington and Richfield this year.
CORRE�PONDENCE
�i il�i 2 V✓@i c iiif22 It�iiiS Ot C:�i i 2S��I �G�cilC@ IIIC�UC�nG� I�l :ii? (�u'�- C}:@t.
The first was from the acting air traffic controi tower manager outlining the variables
affecting the use of the non-simultaneous departure procedure.
Kevin Batcheider, Mendota Heights, thanked the FAA for writing the letter and said he
would distribute the information to the appropriate peopie.
The second correspondence was from the City of Eagan indicating its support of the
locations for the additional RMT sites #25 and #26. It also indicated the desire of the
residents in southern and western Eagan to have the RMT sites associated with the
north/south runway installed at an eariier date than has been planned.
0
The third correspondence was also from the City of Eagan in regard to operations in the
corridor.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said he was concerned that the final MASAC/OPS
schedule did not reflect the intent of the Operations Committee to examine the corridor
issue in its entirety.
John Nelson, Bloomington, said he thought the schedule was purposely narrowed down to
specific corridor issues rather than an overview of the specific corridor procedures. He said
if the corridor procedures needed to be examined in full, the Inver Grove Heights
representative should be invited to participate in the discussions in order to be sure all
issues are addressed at ane time. He suggested the discussions could be held during the
fourth quarter of the year and that the individual cities should submit their suggestions for
discussion before then.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, said one of the MSP Noise Mitigation Committee's
recommendations was to reexamine the corridor in its entirety and not just individual
procedures. He also said that since the corridor was not being used in a no�mal fashion this
year or next and because his replacement would need to be brought up to speed on the
issues first, the issue of the corridor should be put off until the fourth qua�ter.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said the Mendota Heights City Council was currently
working on recommendations for the corridor and that addressing the issue during the
fourth quarter would be acceptable.
C_
It was suggested that staff draft a letter to the cities impacted by corridor operations, which
would solicit suggestions for consideration by the Operations Committee on the issue of the
corridor. A copy of Eagan's letter will be included as an example.
The letter will also indicate that the Operations Committee would be taking up the corridor
issue in September or October of 1998 and the cities should have their suggestions into the
Operations Committee by the August 1998 Committee meeting. John Nelson, Bloomington,
also suggested that the letter reference the MSP Noise Mitigation Committee's
recommendation in regard to the corridor.
There was some discussion on the MSP Noise Mitigation Committee's intentions for the
corridor and an expressed desire by the members to fulfill their recommendation.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, suggested that the issue wouldn't necessarily have to be
addressed this year, but thought it would be beneficial for MASAC to look at the corridor in
general terms and make decisions based on what is best operationally for all concerned
parties.
Dick Keinz, MAC, cautioned that any additional study of corridor operations be focused on
something productive and that MASAC would need to work independently of the
communities so as to avoid the counter-productive problems of the early 1990's.
5
OTHER
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said it was his understanding that the non-
simultaneous corridor departure study wouid include weekends, as well as weekdays.
There was a short discussion regarding what hours should be included. It was decided,
based on information provided by Cindy Greene, FAA, that the hours of '15:00 on Saturday
to 13:00 on Sunday be included in the study.
KEVIN BATCHELDER, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MOVED AND JOHN NELSON,
BLOOMINGTON, SECONDED, TO AMEND THE MINUTES OF TNE MAY 8, 1998
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING TO INCLUDE IN THE SIMULTANEOUS
CORRlDOR DEPARTURE STUDY THE WEEKEND HOURS OF 15:00 SATURDAY
THROUGH 13:00 ON SUNDAY. THE VOTE WAS UNANiMOUS. MOTION CARRIED.
Dicic Saunders, Minneapolis, also noted that he was in attendance at the May 8, 1998
meeting but was not included on the list of aftendees.
JOHN NE�SON, BLOOMINGTON, MOVED AND JON HOHENSTEIN, EAGAN,
SECONDED, TO AMEND THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 8, 1998 MEETING TO ADD DICK
SAUNDERS, MINNEAPOLIS, TO THE LIST OF ATTENDEES. THE VOTE . WAS
UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIED.
The minutes will be amended as such.
The next Operations Meeting will be held on July 10, 1998.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski
Committee Secretary
�
1�ZgSAC OPEI.ATIC�NS COMII�IITTEE
T�: MASAC Operations Committee
FR�M: Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
SLT�,JECT: Runup and Ground Noise Study Review
DATE: July 2, 1998
• •.
At the April 1998 MASAC meeting a Airport Ground Noise Study was initiated in an effort to
determine the sources of ground noise on the airport and the resultant impacts of such
operations on the surrounding communities. Since that meeting a period of substantial data
acquisition was accomplished and the preliminary methodology was developed.
The Auport Ground Noise Study is in the summary phase and nearing completion. As stated
at the June 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting, the monitoring is complete and the
analysis and summary of the data will be presented in Draft form at the July Operations � �
Meeting.
The report will include an Overview of the study requirements, a section on Understanding
Acoustics, the Study Results, an Airline Maintenance Survey and Conclusions and
Recommendations. In addition to the above, noise contours, flight tracks and graphs will be
analyzed and provided to assist in the determination of study impacts.7
��1A.SAC OPEI.ATIONS C01��I1VIITTEE
� �� ' �� ;1<<
TO:
�+'ROM:
S�iJB,�CT:
DATE:
MASAC Clperations Committee
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
Environmental Impact Statement Process (EIS) Brief
July 1, 1998
. . -
The issue of airport development is a multi-dimensional topic encompassing the functions of planning,
assessment, funding and agency coordination. A large part of airport capital improvements is the
quantification of environmental consequences resulting from the development of an airport.
At the July 10, 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting, a presentation will be given by Mark
Ryan (MAC Airport Development) and Glen Orcutt (FAA Program Manager) regarding the state and
federal Environmental Impact Statement process as it relates to airport development. Please review the
attached outline of the EIS process.
If you have any questions or comments please contact me at 725-6326.
June l �. l 998
�
Bob Johnson, Chair
Ntetropolitan Aircraft Sound �.batement Council
60�F0 28`h Avenue South
i�tinneapo(is, i�ti�t >j=��0
Dear Bob:
rH�n,!.as ". ;�,
•,.,�. _.
Paraic!a =,.�,�ac.�
EE.a. 3l^ti1�U;S i
�.al��l.�li.'a r.. �Lira.rjii`�
THECGCRE �fVaC;-�TE�
....... _ '.'�r+C=`5
TNO�AAS HE�C-E�
� � ..^•ra o,;��GEi:�
.. . _ � �u
Pfease consider this (etter a formal request that the iVYASAC Operations Committee consider a review of
the corridor compliance monthly report methodoloQy to confirm whether it is consistent in all respects
�vith that used prior to the modification af F.�:� and ivtAC ANOMS equipment for 1997.
1�Vhile the City of Eagan is very hopeful that the resu(ts noted in the Technical Advisor's Reports from
1une, 1997 to present are correct, the dramatic chanQe in comp(iance leve(s both nonh and south of the
corridor area are significant and suQgest either that the concentration of operations has shifted some�vhat
to the north or that the means of ineasuring comp(iance have shifted some�vhat to the south.
Prior to the change in equipment, e:ccursions to the south of the corridor averaged around e(even percent.
E:ccursions from the 9� degree policy contour averaged around one percent. In the compliance reports
issued since ANOIvIS is back on line, show escursions to the south averaging less than two percent and
excursions to the north averaging between four and five percent.
I have spoken about this matter with Roy and Chad and they indicate that in the methodoloQy should not
have changed and has not to their knowledge. On that basis, I wou(d not dispute this further were it not
for the historic and dramatic difference between the prior resuits and those that correspond with the new
equipment. In addition to a review of the specific methodology, I would request that one or two months
of data from before the equipment changed be analyzed in the current system to determine whether the
results correspond with those and that using the old system. In addition, I would appreciate inquiring as
to whether the new FAA data storaje system would record aircraft locations any differently than the
previous system did. It may be that a change in the F.AA equipment is resultins in different outcomes
even thoujh the methodofogy at the MAC and Roy's office has not changed. y
Thank you very much for your considera[ion of this request. If you have any questions, please let me
know.
Sincerely,
J Hohenstein
fl.ssistant to the City Administrator
JH/ms
MUNICIPAL CENTER THE LONE OAK TREE MAINTENANCE FACILITY
3830 �!�Or;c�i08 ROaO 3501 C�A.C:�r�ia�v POiNi
EAGAN. MWNE�OTA 55 1 22-1 897 ThE SYNi80l OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNIT`! EAGaN. ���in�rvE�Cra 55 � 2_
June 17, 1998
i; �
Robert Johnson, Chair
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
6040 28�' Avenue South
Nlinneapolis, NIN 5�450
Dear N1r. Johnson:
2 2 J998
THONIAS EGAN
Mavor
PATRICIA AWADA
BEA BLONiQUiST
SANDRA A. NIASIN
THEODORE WACHTER
Council Nlembers
THOMAS HEDGES
City Administrator
E. J. VAN OVERBEKE
Ci'ry Ciark
In afficial action taken at its meeting of June 16, the Eagan City Council formally
adopted a request that remote tower monitors associated with the ANONIS system be
located in areas south and west of the airport prior to the 1999 construction season.
Specifically, the City is requesting that the monitors that aze to be installed in association
with the Runway 1'7/35 project be sited and installed in time to measure the impacts from
increased levels of traffic using Runway 4/22 durin� the parallel runway construction.
As you know, the City has eYpressed concerns regarding the zxtent of new noise impacts
in South and West Eagan. It is the City's belief that ongoing monitoring of the impacts
of this additional traffic would be useful both in terms of ineasuring noise eYposure to
residents and anticipating the relationship of construction related noise impacts to the
ultiznate installation of the North/South Runway. While rather than request that monitor
locations be implemented for the short term, it is the City's belief that monitors properly
located for the North/South Runway would provide appropriate coverage. The City is
simply asking that the schedule for that installation be accelerated frozn 2002 to 1999.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please let me know. Thank you for your
�orsideration �f t�is re�t�est.
Sincerely,
�;. .���' � ,n
�, �
I�f r II
•� i • '
Assistant to the City Administrator
cc: Sandy Grieve, N1A.0 Chair
JH/ms
MUNICIPAL CENTER THE LONE OAK TREE
3830 PIlOT KNOB ROAC THE SYMBOL OF STREf�lGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
EAGAN. MI�INESOTA 55722-1897
PHO(�IE: (612) 681 •4600
FAX: {b12) 681-4612 Equal Opporfunity/Aifirmafiive Action Empioyer
rnn• r�,i �� asa_as.��
MAINTENANCE FACIIiTY
3501 COACHNiAN POINT
EAGAM. MINMESOTA 55122
PHONE: (672) 681-4300
FAX: (612) 681-a3b0
TDD: (612) 45d-3535
i
M R.O�CILI"I".� .� C)R.TS Ct7 �SSICJN
r�P�t'S 5�,�.o Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
F� fi'� 6040 - 28th Avenue South � Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
3 o Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296
�, t
a , t �,
o �
9
� / 1 �y,
9� 41RP0 <5 GO
�..i ( �`+� '.
`�.�1
IYIG� 1 �Itl V Itlo / �Lr�
IUii4SAC OPER�►TION� COIiANIITTEE
The Operations Committee will meet Fridav. Au4ust 14, 1998 — 10:00 a.m. at the MAC
West Terminal Building of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, North Star Room, 6301
34th Avenue South, Minneapolis.
If you are unable to attend, please notify the committee secretary at 726-8141 with the
name of your designated altemate.
NEW BUSINESS
Runup & Ground Noise Study Brief
Review of Modified NADP Procedures
OLD BUSINESS
Construction Update
MEMBER DISTRIBUTION
Mark Salmen, Chairman, NWA
6VU JVI II ISVf 1� IVIO/'�'i!1
Bob Kirmis, Eagan
Ron Johnson, ALPA
Brian Bates, Airbome
John Nelson, Bloomington
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis
Mayor Charies Mertensotto, Mendota Heights
Dick Keinz, MAC
cc: Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights
Charles Curry, ALPA
Will Eginton, IGH
Jennifer Sayre, NWA
Advisory:
ATC Tower Chief, FAA
D...+ !"t�....M � 1 �
t �v� i v�auu� • r�r�
Cindy Greene, FAA
Roy Fuhrmann, MAC
Chad Leqve, MAC
Shane VanderVoort
The i�fetropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE • ANOKA COUNTY/BLAI\B < CRYSTAL � FLYING CLOUD • LAKE ELMO � Sr1INT PAUL DO�VNTOWN
1�ZA.SAC OPEI:ATIOI�S CO.��IIVIITTEE
t ��� ' •: 1 � ;i �:
T'O: MASAC Operations Committee
i+'RCDIVI: Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor
SUB,j�C'To Runup and Ground Noise Study Review
iDA�i : I-�ugust b, 199£s
At the April 1998 MASAC meeting an Airport Ground Noise Study was initiated in an effort
to determine the sources of ground noise on the airport and the resultant impacts of such
operations on the surrounding communities. Since that meeting a period of substantial data
acquisition was accomplished and the preliminary methodology was developed.
Zfie Airport Ground Noise Study is nearing complerion. As stated at the July 1998 MASAC
_ Operations Committee meeting, the monitoring is complete and the analysis and summary of
i� \) the data. will be presented in Draft form at the August Operations Meeting.
The report will include an Overview of the study requirements, the Study Results, an Airline
Maintenance Survey and Conclusions and Recommendations. In addition to the above, noise
contours, flight tracks and graphs will be analyzed and provided to assist in the determination
of study impacts.
1VIA5AC OPEI,�TIONS C0��IVIITTEE
TO:
F1�OM:
�UB��T:
I)ATE :
��
-
MASAC Operations Committee
Chad Leqve, ANOMS Coordinator
NADP Compliance Assessment
August 6, 1998
�
The issue of Noise Abatement Departure Profiles (NADPs) was a topic of thorough debate and
analysis for the MASAC Operations Committee as a means of providing another level of noise
abatement for the communities surrounding Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP). Upon
committee concurrence and MASAC approval, a desired NADP program was forwarded to the airlines
operating at MSP for implementation no later than First Quarter 1998.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has developed two departure profiles which are available
under the auspices of FAA Advisory Circular 91-53A. The Close-In and Distant Departure Profiles �
comprise the NADPs available for airport implementation. After extensive preliminary analysis by the
MASAC Operations Committee it was discovered that prior to NADP implementation aircraft using
MSP had been utilizing the Distant Departure Profile.
Upon completion of substantiai aircraft performance and impact analysis the MASAC Operations
Committee forwarded a recommendation to the full MASAC outlining the following procedures:
'� Dutant Profile: when departing runways, 12L, 12R, 04 and 22.
'�- Close-In Proft[e: when departing runways 30L and 30R.
Bue t� the pro;.imity� c� resi�ur,tial devel�pment; the �'�ov;, prar,e�ures provided the 1.�listi� �est case
for the communities surrounding MSP. MASAC forwarded the recommendation to the Metropolitan
Airports Commission (MAC) Planning and Environment Committee (P&E) where it was passed on to
the full MAC Commission and approved for implementation, as stated above.
As a result of the pre-NADP implementation use of the Distant Profile off all runway ends, the
proposal represented a change in operation only for departures off runways 30L and 30R. As a result,
in an effort to assess NADP compliance it is necessary to evaluate the change in profile procedures at
MSP, in this case, those operations departing runway 30L and 30R.
At the August 14, 1998 MASAC Operations Committee meeting an analysis will be presented that will
review departure profiles for runways 30L and 30R. This analysis will compare today's operations
with pre-NADP implementation operations using data from the summer of 1997 and 1998.
If there are any questions or comments prior to the MASAC Operations Committee meeting regarding
this topic, please feel free to contact me at 725-6328.
�i�u��s
� �n�s�►c oPE�►zio�s co���rrEE
JULY '90, 1998
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission MASAC Conference Room,
and cailed to order at 10:00 a.m.
The foilowing members were in attendance:
Members•
Mar{c Salmen, Chai�rnan - NWA
Bob .;ohnscr - PJIBAA '
Ron Johnson - ALPA
Brian Bates - Airbome
Bob Kirmis - Eagan
Dick Keinz - MAC
Dick Saunders - Minneapolis
Mayor Charles Mertensotto - Mendota Heights
' Advisory:
Roy Fuhrmann - MAC Advisory
� ` � Chad Leqve - MAC Advisory
__ Shane VanderVoort - MAC Advisory
Cindy Greene - FAA
Visitors�
Duane Hudson - Bloomington
Will Eginton - IGH
Neil Claric - Minneapolis MASAC Member
Jennifer Sayre-- NWA MASAC Member
Mark Ryan - MAC Airport Planner
Glenn Orcutt - FAA
K�vir Ba�ci�eidei - �viendata Hcight� -
DR,4FT A/RPORT GROUidD 11101SE STUDY UPDATE
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said the draft Airport Ground Noise repo�t has been
delayed for approximately one month. He said further analysis is needed in o�der to provide
the best possible representation of the data. He said staff is also waiting on information
regarding some of the recommendations associated with the study. He said staff plans to
have the report ready by the August 1998 Operations meeting.
ElS BRIEFIAIG
Chairman Salmen said the EIS briefing was part of an on-going effort to provide information
on pertinent topics to the committee and the MASAC body as a whole. He introduced Mark
Ryan, MAC, and Glenn Orcutt, FAA, as the presenters.
Mark Ryan, MAC, reviewed the handout, E'lS Process, included in the package. Some
pertinent points follow:
. The process is quite complex, more than depicted on the graphic. It can take anywhere
from 3 mon±r�� tc� 3 ye�rs to s�i-riR!ete, d�pendinc on the n�ture �f the prcject..
. Any project done in the state of Minnesota starts with an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAV1n. This is a checklist for identifying a project's possible environmental
affects.
. The process is govemed by the state Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
. The EAW is mandatory for runway projects that are less than 5000 feet, runway
extensions that would allow use by aircraft that generate more than a 3 dba increase,
and any project that is included in MACs Capital Improvement Program (CIP), including
expansion of any facility for passengers, cargo, vehicles or constnaction on ar�y runway.
. The EQB, over a 30-day period, will circulate the EAW to the appropriate state
agencies, as well as through the public by publishing it in the EQB Monitor. ,
. Once the EAW has been reviewed by the appropriate agencies, the EQB wor{cs with �
MAC (or the appropriate state agency) to identify and respond to any questions and wiil
then make a determination of whether an Environmental Impact Statement (E!S) is
needed. Once the decision is made, it is published in the EQB monitor.
. If a state EIS is required, a federal Environmental Assessment (EA) is likely to be
needed. Once the EA is complete, a decision is made whether or not a full E1S is
required.
v If a federal EIS is not required, a federal Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) may
be issued. Otherwise, a full state and federal EIS is begun.
Glenn Orcutt, FAA, thanked the staff and the committee for inviting him to the meeting to
speak about the EIS process. Mr. Orcutt said understanding the process will help members
have realistic expectations as to the time it takes to complete the process. (A handout was
distributed at this point.)
Mr. Orcutt said the EA identifies the people who need to be involved in the process. The
National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requires the FAA to analyze protected
environmental impacts and involve interested pa�ties with an opportunity to participate. The
purpose of NEPA is to help public officials make decisions based on an understanding of
the environmental impacts and take actions that either protect, restore or enhance the
environment.
C
0
Mr. Orcutt said he wouid also like to present a mo�e in depth briefng of the EIS process to
the MASAC body as a whole. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, suggested this topic be
scheduled fo� the October 27, 1998 MASAC meeting.
Mr. Orcutt then answered questions.
Dick Keinz, MAC, asked who was responsible for preparing an EIS. Mr. Orcutt said that
with both the Flying Cloud and the Dual Track EIS, the FAA and the MAC are producing a
joint document, which is govemed by a IV�emorandum of Understanding befinreen the iwo
parties. He said with some projects, both parties will hire separate contractors and with
others they will hire one contractor.
Mr. Keinz also asked what the EQB does and who is on the board. Mark Ryan, MAC, said
�h� EQB is comprised of re�reseniatives from ali staie agencies (DCi i, PCA, DNR, etc.).
Mr. .Ryan said the EQB makes the decision whether or not the submitted documentation is
sufficient enough so that a decision can be made in the matter. He said with most MAC
related projects, MAC makes the final decision. Although, in the case of Flying Cloud
Airpo�t, the MAC is requesting that the EQB make a ruling instead. ,
Mr. Orcutt said if a decision is being made on a federal level, a Record of Decision (ROD)
will be made, which is broader in scope compared to the state EQB process. The ROD will
also define the necessary mitigation efforts, the party responsible for the mitigation and will
contain commitments for the mitigation.
Neil Clark, Minneapolis, asked how the 3dbA increase that Mr. Ryan mentioned as requiring
an assessment is measured and whether or not it includes ground noise. Glenn Orcutt,
FAA, said the FAA uses the Ldn measurement generated by the Integrated Noise Model
computer program. He said if a project or procedure increases the annual 65 Ldn noise
contour by 1.5 Ldn or more in any one area, it would be considered an impact and an EIS
would be called for.
Bob Johnson, MBAA, asked Mr. Orcutt to talk about the FONSI process. Mr. Orcutt said the
FAA has three types of actions. The first is a Category Exclusion, which is a type of
development that is considered to be low or no impact. The second type of action is a
FONSI o� F�ding of No Sigrificani Ir�act. And the ghird iype is or� c1S.
Mr. Orcutt said the FONSI action is normally easier, accomplished much quicker and
requires less coordination. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, asked how quickly a FONSI
could be accomplished. Mr. Orcutt said 6-9 months is the minimum. Mark Ryan, MAC, said
it usually takes at least 3 months for MAC to go through the process of choosing a
consultant.
Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights, asked if an increase in volume (number of operations)
would trigger the need for an environmental assessment. He said his city was concemed
with "contour creep" due to the increase in operations to the southeast. Kevin Batchelde�,
Mendota Heights, echoed the same concem. Cindy Greene, FAA, said that only a request
3
for a change in procedur� would trigger the FAA to require an assessment, but not an
increase in the number of operations.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if the Dual Track EIS and the runw�y 17/35 EIS
were the same document. Glenn Orcutt, FAA, said that it was, because the Dual Track
process authorized the expansion of MSP at its cuRent location and included the addition of
the 17/35 runway. Mr. Orcutt said, in 1996, the Minnesota legislature decided to expand the
airport at its current location. At that time they directed MAC to implement MSP's Long
Term Comprehensive Plan, which included the new runway. A final EIS was published in
May 1998. Mr. Orcutt said the FAA is now in the process of making a ROD: He said once
the ROD is finished, the MAC would be able to continue with the project.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, asked if the RUS would be updated with the addition of
a new n.�nway. Glenn Orcutt, FAA, said that once the runway was fully operational, the
RUS would need to be updated. Mr. Batchelder asked who w�s responsibie fur updaiing
the RUS. Mr. Orcutt said MAC, probably through MASAC, would make a recommendation,
within th� constructs of the EIS, and work with the FAA on how the runway should be used.
Cindy Greene, FAA, said the RUS is an agreement between the FAA and the airport
operator as to how the runways will be used. She said once the FAA approves the RUS,
the appropriate procedures will be written into the tower orders.
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said that in 1992 MASAC forwarded a recommendation
to MAC regarding the RUS and then MAC forwarded that recommendation to the FAA.
Mr. Fuhrmann also commented on the increase in operations and its affect on the contours. (
He noted that since there has been a corresponding increase in the percentage of Stage III
aircraft, the contours probably have not moved outward but inward. He said the north/south
nmway (17/35) will be used to meet the increased demand at the airport projected for the
future, and wouldn't necessarily, given time, decrease the number of operations off the
parallel nanways.
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights; asked if the published percentages for runway 17/35
would be implemented right away, or if it would take a while before that runway was fully
used. Cindy Greene, FAA, said operationally all three runways (the two parallels and the
north/south) could be used equally, but that when the RUS is developed, the percentages
may be differ�nt.
Dick Saunders, Minneapolis, asked what recourse the public has if it is not satisfied with the
outcome of the ROD. Glenn Orcutt, FAA, said the only recourse is litigation. Mr. Saunders
asked if a ROD could be made before an agreement with the DNR is reached. Mr. Orcutt
said a ROD can be completed before an agreement, but that the FAA would rather have the
problem resolved first.
C�
4
CORRESPONDENCE
The first correspondence was a letter from the City of Eagan in regards to the corridor
compliance monthly report methodology. The city has asked staff to investigate whether or
not the methodology is consistent in all respects to what was used prior to the FAA change
in equipment, citing the "dramatic change in compliance levels both north and south of the
corridor area..." as the reason for the request. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said the
data is being recorded in the same way and the methodology has not changed. He
recommended that this issue be incorporated into the comdor study in the fall. The
committee members agreed to address the issue at that time.
The second correspondence was also a letter from the City of Eagan requesting that RMT
sites associated with the north/south runway be installed in 1999 rather than in 2002.
Chairman �almen said he didn't believe the request was feasible and thought it was
probably premature. Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said the current plan is to install the
RMTs associated with the north/south nanway in the fall of 2001 to be operational by
January 2002. He said this would provide a year's worth of data prior to the runway
becoming operational in 2003. Chairman Salmen said since the situation with runway 4/22
was not permanent, there wouid be no value in gathering data for that runway at this time.
It was decided that the MASAC Chair would draft a letter to the City of Eagan in response to
the city's request explaining the reasons for waiting until 2001 to install the RMTs
associated with the north/south runway.
, ��)
CUIVSTRUCTIOPd UPDATE
Roy Fuhrmann, Technical Advisor, said, except for some of the taxiways, most of the
concrete had been laid for the reconstruction po►tion of the south parallel runway and that
the contraciors were now grooving it. He said the project was on schedule and that they
were laying concrete at a rate of 20 yards per minute during the runway pour period.
He noted that Standish Avenue would be closed permanently as of July 15, 1998. He also
noted that the 900-foot extension to the runway had been laid, as well, but that this po�tion
would not be used until needed.
Chairman Salmen said the replacement/reiocation of the ILS was also being completed at
this time and should be done by August 1, �998.
OTHER
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heights, said the city believed that the cuRent runway use
configuration is illustrative of how the runways at MSP should be used.
Will Eginton, Inver Grove Heights, stated that IGH was ready and eager to be included in
the corridor review process. He said he hoped the review would broad in scope.
5
Kevin Batchelder, Mendota Heiyhts, noted that since the Mendota Heights city council
would be meeting on August 17 , a res�onse to the corridor letter would be forwarded to
the Operations Committee on August 19' .
Cindy Greene, FAA, inquired about how best to coordinate the August 1998 MASAC
meeting, which would be incorporating tower tours during the meeting. It was decided due
to public safety concems that the meeting would take place at MAC's Environment
Department conference room at the West Terminal and members and altemates would be
escorted across the street for the tours.
The next Operations Meeting will be held August 14, 1998.
The meeting waS adjoumed at 11:30 a.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Melissa Scovronski
Committee Secretary
�
;
l
AGElo]IDA
REGULAR IVIEETING
EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COi1�5SION
EAGAN, Nil[PdNESOTA
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL CHAiiRBERS
AUGUST 11,1998
7:00 P.li�.
�
I��
�_ S a :_ ►11 : t � _' - - ���� �!'� �►117:\
a ' • : � c ����11►1i11�5T.y
I �' ;� C 1•' 1
IV. COI�tSEl�1T AGENDA
` r . � � q� ��� � � ,
•,, r � ���-�
.F
� �
;' ;� �UG � 3 9�9$ �%;1
,�,- .._.__��;.
_ , ..:, � �
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Norfih-South Runway Update
B. North-South Runway Funding — Comments to Congressional
Delegation
VI. NEW BiJSII�TESS
A. 1VIAC Noise Programs FIandbook
VII. STAFF REPORT
A. Eagan/lVlendota Heights Corridor
B. NIASAC Update
�. Northern Da�kota County Airport Relations Coalition Update
IX. FU'i'URE MEETINGS Al�ll AGENLiAS
A. � l�iext Commission I�Ieeting — 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, September 8
B. Next 1VYASAC Meeting — 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, August 25
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours.
If a notice �f less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid.
e