The URL can be used to link to this page

03-08-2006 ARC Packet1. 2. 3. 4. 5 � � CITY OF MENDOTA I3EIGHTS , �..�. . � � 1 I � 1 March 8, 2006 — Large Conference Room Call to Order — 7:00 P.M. Roll Call Approval of the Februaiy 8, 2006, Airport Relations Commission Minutes Un�nished and New Business: a. Update Brochure b. LeMay Shores Review c. NOISE Membership d. Plan of Action Policy Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence: a. Technical Advisor's Repoi�t — Januaiy 2006 b. Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis — January 2006 c. Airport Noise Report, February 3, 2006 d. Airport Noise Report, February 7, 2006 e. Airport Noise Report, February 14, 2006 f. Airpoi�t Noise Report, February 21, 2006 Other Commissioner Comments or Concerns Uncoming Meetin�s City Councii Meeting NOC Meeting MAC Meeting 8. Public Comments 9. Adjourn 3-21-06 — 7:30 3-15-06 — 1:30 3-20-06 — 1:00 Awtiliary aids of persons with disabilities 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 wiii make every attempt to provide the aids. This may not, however, be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at 651-452-1850 with requests. f� , CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO March 1, 2006 TO: Airport Relations Commission �+'IE�OM: James E. Danielson, City Adminis SUBJECT: Update Brochure DISCU5SION: Attached is the air noise brochure. At the last meeting, Commissioners asked me to place this brochure on this agenda so that it could be reviewed and updated. . C �� :�: _.>;;;�;:�r_F; `'"`":��:�=`a N � � � Q� � � ,� \ � 0. a �, U N p O � � � � � � ��a 'o o � � o , � P-+ � � U �c N � ,�-'F, � h �—' "" N J U H �O 3 .�� i � .� � � � U cd .�,' 4 �� o � LV � U � O �� t �t � ��:�.�' . � a� _o � � ' ai � � � .b � r��c� ��..� � �x � i� CTi �"� ++ �, '� 0 � � � C�p �H' �, ,� � � � � U � U o ' � � cu „� � et rn � .,� � � � � N � o� o.o U.s7 �° b a�i U � � b � � � � � � p� N� U N�' �'' � O � 'd O N � �'-r � U !� '� 01 N S� � � O � � C� � Q� i-� td y� ,--� �� 4-� O I�i .-r � N O � �'' O c� o.� � � � �, °' � � �b � N � � � � � � ,� ��-, � s� � �p � ;� � R V � y 'd N � �� • �. •� J � Ir o �' C �°-o 0 7� o � �• a w o C � � � x N �l O\ _ � � c�c � � � CD a � a C H � ,� �' ,�' GS � O�. ��' w�, o� r.�' �,�' ��c3 �' C'� �• � "" � � ''�'t ti c~�n' o ��'n p � p � �~p �� @ � c'p��u' � � P.' tv a' cD tv o � �' 1�'` , �.+. O P'� A CD ('� . , a n � `"' � �. � p, � �' ��,,,� � o y '* '� Pj � � o , �;.. 4N� � � a" �• R,, �. p� -�g"s cp � ��Cp�,� �j �''. p �d a,, � ; �, c� O f� C!� fD �O aq `(D �''�' ?C �. N a � N � p�, ', '��.. �d '� t�, v' '� �t. i� � " � � A� � � � @ O � � p�j n C�D � � A� � 0��; a P., �s � � � � cn r* o,� v� �' �: cv t� • co a., o. � � � � w . � �' @b� �D o � ,� y �. � a � � � p. b4 CD � • �� Q 3 D �,i o �. � � � �' f�D � p, �` N. o � � � �, � '� � - �` .{,, e m o �. � � � �O� � . � m n � � � r�n � N � n',.�� doNo -R �'�,' F-�- � a� o n O d '� u�i R �� O p� `� ��1Ci Q � 'z p �-s p,, �; ,,�� `',�' �' @ � �� O�g � � O � � ' � � �0 Q � � w � �. �. . �� "� u �1 i � cJ� P w � N �.� �� . � m . � f� fD � � �° � �. � � �' � co. � � � c� `�'' � • � �. � �, �' €,�, p, �, � � � �+ �' � ° o � � �, w �'... �°' � � o ,n r+ o �... � a� r* �n v�' p�q .�, a� K� x mi o a � �' ,..,. � o �°- c� '�,h- � �' � '' � t� '� t�c cn p p„ cu v� � �-, � '::�� , � ;,��,`:;� �.. °�, � cn ;� � ..,., � A�'- ;- �-* y :��' � ��`� � o N `� � U�4 � rn p W n't1 CD �-'• !r� t-�j O,� �-! � y' � � r� � C� � �� tn ,U� � �':-,' � � � � � s !-d � �„ � � �,, .. r�o �,a � �., ' � � � ,�.�.-:� � � ��,• � �,. �' �, H c�c �°- C:> � • �;',°�':, � �D �- �C � � � f � � °;�'"..t�-n c�Di p �n ',� .'; ;j� ks` cu _ . , • e . �A+.r 0 , , t r, � ��.�� v� . ''� p ,��. : � � � p � � �,, '° x °a i� 't3 � � �' ca o•��`��° � �' a H �' � �. �' '.,. � �. o �; � cu r-,' F--+ A� O...Cp,"'�p -1�s' �•�,� � o � �. ac� '� � � v�'".•cu �.. � �% p "{''�' . � . � �� v� `, v� � CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS �� March 1, 2006 TO: Airport Relations Commission FROM: James E. Danielson, City Administr SUBJECT: LeMay Shores Review DISCUSSION: Attached is the LeMay Shores Concept plan materials for your review and comment. ��q� �--�rz�uJ � p—.__.--. � ��'''�l "�-t�.�C1ti��`-''C. OC► � �1 `�7 U'" �9--� C�� ---�� ..-�`�9�--��.e.�e,� ,�..--. .y�'�-�' � � �-�--,��-,,.� �� ,, ,� ,�- yL.� � ._ ____. /� e.�—� r �- � ��l�{' �►.,�-r�.,'ca� �v m , � �`,,9 4� �t Y��' � a S C� G 1�i T� t� � t3 i�! S 9J L'A" A 8�9 7' S, ( 9�H +� . 4800 Oasor� IVlemnriai t;ighway, Surte 202, Goiden Valley, MN 55422 '�'�lephone: 763.231.25�5 Facsimile: 7�3.231.2�61 pianners�r�ac�lanning.com ICIIEMORA/VDUM TO: FROM: DATE: MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: CASE NO: APPLICANT(S): LOCATION: ZONING: GUIDE PLAN: �escri�tia�r� of a�Zec�caest Mendota Heights Planning Commission Stephen Grittman January 25, 2006 January 31, 2006 Lemay Shores - PUD- Concept P1an Application Planning Case 06-02; NAC Case 254.04 — 06.02 Hoffman-Mendota Shore L�C 2105 Lexington Avenue � Low Density Residential Hoffman-Mendota Shore, �LC has submitted a PUD Concept Plan for the development of cottage-style twin home buildings north of the Augusta Shore development. The concept calls for the development of 31 twin home buildings for a total of 62 homes. The overall site area includes 68 acres of which a total of 41 acres is proposed to remain as open space. The overall project densiiy is 0.91 units per gross acre with an upland density of 1.28 units per acre. This density is well below the maximum allowable density for this area. The subject site is currently zoned R-1. The applicant is proposing to rezone the property to R-1 PUD to allow for flexibility from the cul-de-sac length and lot area requirements of the Ordinance, and to allow sir►gle family attached units. This process was utilized for the Augusta Shores project by the same developer, just north of this proposed project. � Backqraund Information and /ssues Analvsis � In 1997, the City considered a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Cemetery fo Low Density Residential as part of the Augusta Shores residential development applicatian. The area is currently guided for residential uses and is Zoned R-1. As part of the current request, a PUD is being sought by the applicant. The purpose of a planned unit development is to allow flexibility from certain zoning standards to achieve a higher quality project than whafi would otherwise be achieved through conventional zoning. Ex�mples of flexibility from the strict interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance include design standards, increased open space, natural resource preservation, superior building quality, and / or a higher standard in landscaping design. According to the Ordinance, all PUD development applications should be reviewed based upon the following guidelines as found in the Ordinance: 1. Encourage flexibility in the design and development of land. 2. Preserve the natural and scenic quality of open spaces. 3. Encourage a diversity of housing types within a developrnent. 4. Permit a mixture of several zoning district uses within a development project. 5. Permit modification and variance of zoning district requirements. 6. �imit develbpment to a scale appropriate to the existing terrain and surrounding land uses. The City will need to make a finding that the proposed project is consistent with the goals of the PUD ordinance as a part of the next phase of PUD review. Subdivisson �nc9 Loi �.ayout The City has enacted a rnoratorium prohibiting the processing ofi new Subdivision applications. At this stage, the project is proceeding as a PUD (a zoning process). Because the City merely comments an Concept Plans and no formal action is taken, this project may proceed at this time. A Preliminary Plat will be a part of the next phase of review. All of the lots are located to have direct access off of the e�ended public street. Due to topographic conditions that exist within the site, major elevation changes will be required for the development to proceed. As a result, the overall landscape of the site will change dramatically. All of the lots are outside of the shoreland setback area as identified on the concept however, Lot 17 and 18 are located 20 feet from the edge of the deck to the setback area. This will limit the usable yard area. It would appear that these �� lots could be shifted east (toward Lot 15 and16) while still meeting the side yard setback requirement. �� Airport iVoise It appears that a majority of the site is located within the Airport Noise Reduction Zone 4. The zone allows single/multiplexes with individual entrances as long as construction meets the noise reduction level numbers established by the Aircraft Noise Attenuation Ordinance. According to the applicant, all homes will be noise attenuated to meet and exceed the Metropolitan Council and City construction standards, similar to the Augusta Shores development. LeMay Shores is located within the same 60-65 DNL noise zones of Augusta Shores. The applicant's submission material indicates that prior to the new runway opening, the Augusta Shores neighborhood was located with the 65-70 DNL, an area with greater airport noise impact. Circulation The street right-of-way as shown on the concept plan is 60 feet wide and therefore meets the Ciiy's right-of-way requirement. The concept plan calls for a single access onto the site off of Rogers Raad. Due to the shape of the praject area, LeMay Lake and topographic conditions such as steep sloops, access from aliernate location will be difficult or impossible. The majority of the lots are designed to have access off of a cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac length is measured at 2,000 feet and therefore, flexibility from the overall cul-de-sac length requirement is being sought by the applicant. According to the Subdivision Ordinance, Section 5.3 (2), cul-de-sac lengths are �� recommended to be 500 feet. The current length is 1,500 feet over the recommended length. As a point of reference, during the Augusta Shores development, the cul-de-sac length was measured at approximately 1,200 feet and 1,400 feet. Long cul-de-sacs present some general concerns within urban design. Most of these concerns relate to emergency vehicle access and general circulation issues. Another concern specific to this cul-de-sac is the grade change within the subject site. From north to south there is a 32 foot elevation change. A significant amount of grading wil) be required within this area to allow safe driving conditions. To mitigate the emergency vehicle access concern, the applicant has arranged to reserve an emergency access point through Resurrection Cemetery near the far north end of the project. The applicant has also provided for future extension of the roadway to the south. The applicant should work with City Engineering staff to ensure that this location provides for a reasonable connection to the adjoining property. � i Setbacks Within a PUD, the perimeter setbacks imposed in the base zoning district are � considered. Within the base R-1 district, the following perimeter setbacks are applicable: ` , Front yard setback 30 feet Side yard setback 10 feet Rear yard setback 30 feet The overall lot layout conforms with the setback standards of the Ordinance. As the plans move fonnrard to the development stage, the applicant will be required to verify setbacks to ensure conformity with these standards. Building Architecture As a PUD, the City has the ability to offer recommendations with regard to building architecture. The applicant has submitted exterior designs for the buildings front elevation. The homes will incorporate a cottage style design. An additional three-car garage option will be available with a turned garage design as shown on the development plan. These buildings are similar to those constructed in Augusta Shores. Landscaping No landscaping plan has been submitted to date. As part of forthcoming submissions, a landscape plan will be required. Such plan should specify the location, variety and size of all proposed plantings as well as a tree protection and replacement plan. Buffer plantings should also be incorporated around the proposed pond and shoreland setback areas. Additionally, the landscaping plan should incorporate specific boulevard plantings and plantings specific to the garden areas. Crading, L7rainage, and iJtilities A grading plan is not required during the concepf stage. As a condition of approval however, the applicant will be required to provide detailed grading, drainage, and tree protection plans to minimize runoff and preserve the site area. According to the applicant, the development plan incorporates a natural wooded entryway, with a proposed newly created pond area and fountain. The neighborhood has been designed to allow for many single-loaded streets. The development will however result in a drastic change to the surraunding grade and landscape of the area_ According to the Subdivision Ordinance, Sectian 5.8 discaurages construction and grading on slopes steeper than 18%. Based upon the concept plan, it appears that several of the proposed house pads exceed this requirement. The grading plan required as a part of the Preliminary Plat stage will illustrate the level of impact on the slopes. It would appear that without PUD flexibility in this area, little development land would be available. � Buffer plantings should also be incorporated around the proposed pond and shoreland setback areas. m The landscaping plan should incorporate specific boulevard piantings and garden area plantings. SupplementarV Materials: 1. Site Location Map 2. Application materials dated December 28, 2005. 0 � ; Development /�greemeni As a condition of fiinal plat approval, the applicant will be required to enter into subdivision and PUD agreements with the City and post all the necessary securities required by them. SummarV and Conclusion The overall concept plan is laid out in a fashion that allows for a residential development within a tight site area. The overall development proposes to dedicate a significant amount of open space. The intent of the concept plan review is to allow the City to provide comments and recommendations to the applicant prior to the development stage of the PUD. In review of the conceptual plan for LeMay Shores the following comments are offered for consideration. Site Planning m The applicant should prepare information with regard to the garden areas proposed for the site. What restrictions will be placed upon these areas and what percentage of these areas will be usable space (exclusive of sleep slopes)? � �� The City may wish to require a trail system that links the garden areas to _ the adjoining homes. A conceptual trail connection is shown on the concept plans. Cercula�ion a The Citv will need to make a finding at the next stage of review that the cul-de-sac length is acceptable. Issues to consider relate to emergency vehicle access as well as the elevation change from north to south which may make winter driving an issue. .. . � The change in elevation within the site will be significant. e Cusfiom design and grading within the site area could be required in an effort to preserve the surrounding area. Landscaping � �andscaping within the site should specify the location, variety and size af all proposed plantings as well as a tree protection and replacement plan. �� ) 5 �_� f. dd �d' �1Wlt`jll V— 13'.L.Lil a'.�.9�d � l�3��.Lld'ij �� 13i95 FI201VT.IEd� C'OII.R�', �'�TITE 200 .��IR.1�iS�LLE, .l�dl� 55337 PkIONE: 952-997-3333 FAX: 952-997-6666 December 28, 2005 LElVIA3I S�IO1�S -- I'YTD Concept Plan Applicatflon I)e�elopment Schednle: 1. E�pian�tion of the claaracter of the Pla�ned iTnit l�evelopanent: The LeMay Shores neighborhood is planned as a continuation of the Augusta Shores development located to the immediate north of this proposal. The homes will incorporate a new cottage style design, allowing for a mix of natural color tones throughout the development. The twin homes will be a move-up rambler � design product with an average sales price over $500;000. This neighborhood proposal includes thirty-one twin home buildings, for a total of sixty-two homes. One new additional feature incorporated into the neighborhood, as requested by homeowners, is a 3-car garage option tha.t is available with the turued garage design and additional setbacks as shown on the development plan. .All hornes will be noise attenuated to meet, and exceed, the Metropolitan Council and City of Mendota Heights construction standards, simiilar to the Augusta Shores development recently completed. LeMay Shores is located within the same 60 — 65 DNL noise zones as the existing Augusta Shores project. Prior to the new runway opening, the Augusta Shores neighborhood was located within the 65 — 70 DNL, which is considered an area with greater airport noise impact. The development plan includes a dxama.tic natural wooded entryway, with a proposed newly created pond area and fountain. The neighborhood has been designed to allow for many single-loaded streets (homes only on one side of the street). It includes extended home setbacks and curvilinear street features, garden areas and large areas of open space. The low overall project density of 0.91 units per gross acre and an upland density of 1.28 units per acre fits within the existing R-1 zoni.ng of the property. The � proposed LeMay Shores project compares favorably to the Augusta Shores project which is developed at 1.7 units per gross acre and over 2 units per upland acre. 2. St�.tement oi prop�sed �ana�fl�ang: All site preparation costs will be paid directly by the developer. The streets and public infrastructure will be installed under city contract and will be assessed proportionally to the newly created lots, similar to the Augusta Shores development. 3. Stateaaient of preseaat ownership: The property is currently owned by The Catholic Cemeteries. Hoffman Mendota Shore, LLC is the contract purchaser of the property. �4. Eapected schedule of d�v�lopgnea�t and phasing: This project will be constructed as one phase. All physical i.mprovements will be done at the same time and will not be phased. Homes will be constructed as sales dictate, but we anticipate completion within three years. �. C➢narae�e� and deaasaiy of t�e dw��n� una�s: See response to item # 1. 6. ��nd�astr�al �r co�mere�a� acre��e �sad pr�je��ed ea�ploy�n��t: There is not any industrial or commercial acreage within the development and therefore no projected employment. 7e O�Sen �p�ce an¢� g�e�-c�ng��e �� nm��a�a��ae� sa��: The 68 acre praperty provides �ignificant open space, as shown on the proposed development plans. Approximately 41.15 acres of the site will be left as open space. The approximate impervious surface area of the site is 7.15 acres or 10.5%. $. Pxoje�eci tra%��: This neighborhood is proposed to generate approximately 49G trips per day, utilizing 8 trips per day average per home. This iraffic can he accommodated by the existing adjoining public roads. Attached please find: 1) Application for PUD Concept Plan \ 2) PUD Concept Plan Checklist 3) Proposed development plan 4) Surrounding area plan 5) MAC contour map overlay 6) Conceptual unit rendering If you need any additional information please give me a call. Sincerely, Patrick C. Hoffman President Attachments C+ � � 20C�-'PfIN �AK CR��CC!'AlG S�t4K'77�/G C�CRN, NINVC.'.CTP =5522 FtONL (651) d05-66CC HOFFMAN—MENDOTA SHORE, LI�C. �at.e � G �L � /OJ MENDOTA HEIGHTS CONCEPT .. . ... FC4'V. . .. . % � HOFFMAN—MENDOTA o.SHORE, LLC. °ate, � � � � MENDOTA HEIGHTS CONCEPT '`�` ,o� P[fNl/MG cw�.ntcr.mc s.�mit'mic 20C� PIN 7AK CPoVE C�CfJJ,V�N�CGCiA:5122 MAC CONTOUR MAP OVERLAY ��"� hONL• (651) 905-S6CC / , °Ne (651) d05-66C3 C f� CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS March 1, 2006 TO: Airport Relations Commission FROM: James E. Danielson, City Adminis t SUBJECT: NOISE Membership DISCUSSION: Attached is the invoice frorn NOICE for membership. At least one City Council mernber has indicated that he does not support membership in this organization. Review and make a recommendation to the Ciry Council on whether the City should belong to NOISE. C � C CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS I\/ 1 _►�I �� March 1, 2006 T4: A' n < < �'ROM: James E. Danielson, City Administra SUBJECT: POA Presentation DISCUS5ION: Each year the ARC Chair makes a presentation to the City Council on the Pian of Action for the year. Attached is the 2006 Plan of Action presentation *�a��,�-�=L�1'' u�r 'ng i y ouneii-�zee�i�.. `�+. �' ,q-,QC G�Cc %� L% z P� �S t 2� �� ,�� s.t.�' �G �., C� e. ,�. �-- a..,c,� �� s �� . �. �Q��.�. ,� � � � `ii• � �• � - Mendota Heights Airport �2..elations Corrim.issio�. -.�� '. - . � .� � �• Q. C The Mendota Heights Aixport Relations Commission is charged with monitoring proposed � aixport rules, procedures, and programs and advising the City Council on matters pertaining to airport noise and operations. In an effort to znitigate airport noise in the Mendota Heights community and assure equity of the current runway use system, the Commission has given high prioriiy to the following issues: Residential land use in Mendota Heights, particularly developable parcels that may be affected by airport noise. Continue input and dialog with the MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC). Monitor Adherence to the environmental impact statement for Runway 17-35. Elunination of head to head operations. Conversion from hush kitted to Manufacfured Stage III and Stage IV a.ircraft. Non simultaneous departure procedures. Noise abatement depariure profiles. Nighttime restrictions on aircraft operations Continue efforts to keep planes in the air corridor over Mendota Heights. Legislative oversight of the MAC. Develop a relationship with FAA representatives and legislative leaders regarding airport issues. Define Capacity at MSP Oversight of 2020 Plan Assess Anoms Locations Monitor CDC for any collateral positive effects to Mendota Heights Other issues that will require continued monitorin�: Noise mitigation in the Rogers Lake East neighborhood. The implementation of global positioning satellite technology and magnetic ground tracking depa.rture procedures. International noise mitigation efforts including a new DNL metric. Part 150 Study Heighten awareness and communication of Mendota Heights noise concerns. �) Mendota Heights land use planx�ing has hiuged on limitation to the MSP air corridor _ 2 - 3/1/2006 Issue #1: Residential land use in Mendota Heights, particularly developable parcels that may be affected by airport noise. Action Steps• Who• When• 1. Monitor applications for development for the Acacia site and the Furlong neighborhood. 2. Provide recommendations to the City Council for development rezoning and or acquisition of these sites. 3. Provide ARC with all application materials submitted sites. ARC/Staff ARC/Staff Staff As apps are filed As apps are filed As apps are filed Issue #2: Continue input and dialog with the MSP Noise Oversight Commfttee (NOC} Action Stens• Who• When• 1. Monitor activities and processes of MSP Noise Oversight Committee 2. Regular meetings with NOC representatives and ARC to identify issues that can be advocated •'• AR.C/NOC Issue #3: Adherence of Runway 17-35 to the environmental impact staiement. as needed Action Steps: Who• When� 1. Monitor data and information regarding the use and ARC/Staff as avail impact of new runway 17-35 in the technical advisors report and its conformance to the EIS. 2. Ask MAC to provide ARC with data regardang runway ARC/Staff monthly 17-35 use (staying under 93%) on parallel 3. Revisit corridor operations after a few months of use of the new Runway and impact on head to head operations, non- simultaneous departures, turning etc. ARC/Staff 4. Communicate reaction to the analysis of 17-35 completion ARC/Staff 5. Ask MAC to revisit/revamp the Technical Advisors report once the new runway is complete 6. Review tower operations with MA.0 staff for 17-35 effects. AR.C/Staff ARC/Staff 7. Monitor MAC/FA.A accommodations to communities ARC/Staff affected by 17/35 operations for consistency with treatment of Mendota Heights and adherence to EIS -3- C as avail as avail as avail as avail as appropriate �� 3/1/2006 Issue #4: Elimination of head to head operations Action Steps: Who: When: l. Negotiate elimuzation/minimization of head to head ARClNOC when possible operations (with MAC assistance) with FAA Issne #5: Conversion from hush latted to Manufactured Stage III and Stage IV aircraft. Action Steps: Who: When: 1. Detennine when phase out of hush ldtted aircraft will occur. 2. Advocate for incentives/penalties program for Stage III compliance by airlines 3. Determine what constitutes a Stage N aircraft and when conversion to Stage N will occur ARC/Staff ARC/Staff ARC/StafF as appropriate as appropriate as avail Issue-#C: �=••L�to.0 simultaneous departure procedures , � Action Steps: Who: When: 1. Monitor and encourage use of non-simultaneous departuxe .ARC/Staff as appropriate Procedures. Issue #�7;,.j� ;Nighttime restrictions on afrcraft operations Action Steps: Who: When: l. Have NOC representative lobby for further restrictions on Nighttime operations (preferred nighttrme headings) 2. Monitor legal precedendlitigation concerning noise level averaging � C h�� ' Issue #8: Definition of the air corridor over Mendota Heights. ongomg continuous Action Steps: Who: When: 1. Monitor flight data to ensure adherence to corridor ARC/Staff monthly - 4 - 3/1/2006 Issue #9: Legislative oversight of the MAC Action Steps: Who: When: 1. Establish strong Felationship with legislators and airport StafflARC continuous officials 2. Testify as necessary on MAC/airport legislation Staff/AR.0 as necessary 3. Propose a bill to our Legislators to have MAC Board ARC/Staff as necessary Members be elected to improve MAC accountability Issue #10: Develop a relationship with FAA representatives and legislative leaders regarding airport issues Action Steps: Who: When• 1. Invite Senator MeCzen and Rep. Hanson to an ARC mtg StafF/ARC Winter 2006 Encourage Senator Metzen and Rep. Hanson to have Mac Board elected. 2. Invite Tower Operator Cindy Green ta an ARC mtg (Update on how 17-35 is working) 3. Invite MAC Commissioner Tom Foley to an ARC mtg Yssue #11: Define Capacity at MSP Staff/ARC Staff/ARC Winter 2006 Surn��" ;� 2006 Action Steps: Who: When• 1. Deteiznive parameters to define capacity at MSP ARC/Staff 5��2006 - Dialog with FAA/MAC/NOC - Voluniary night time restrictions - 15° Separation - Runway use - After zunway 17-35 opening Issue #12: Oversight of 2020 Plan Action Steps: Who: Wheu• 1. Identify effects of 2020 Plan on MH ARC/Staff ongoing 2. Work proactively with other Cities to require MAC to ARC/StafF address and minimize adverse effects of implementing 2020 Plan 3. Work to require MAC's expanded use of reliever airports ARC/Staff -5- C ongomg ongoing �, 3/1 /2006 Issue #13: Assess Anoms Locations 1. Work with NOC to determine if noise monitors are at the besi locations, are they moveable, is technology updated Other Issues To Be Monitored: ARC/Staff Issue #l: Noise mitigation in the Rogers Lake East Neighborhood ongoing Action SteAs: Who: When: 1. Monitor correspondence between Rogers Lake East Noise AR.C/Staff as avail Noise Reduction Comm.ittee and MAC 2. Provide a forum for dialogue between MAC and Rogers Lake East Noise Reduction Committee 3. Provide supportlinformation to Rogers Lake East Noise Reduction Committee as requested if possible 4. Provide recommendations to the City Council on Rogers Lake East Neighborhood issues S. Facilitate political solutions for the neighborhoods with MAC .• ARGStaff ARC/Staff AR.C/Staff as needed as needed as needed as needed Issue #2: �'he implementation of global positionuing satellite technology and naagnetic ground tracidng departure procedures Action Steps: Who: When: 1. Promote standard instrument departures and final ARC/Staff continuously approaches through the use of global posiiioniug satellites io keep planes from flying over residential areas of the City (Tracks vs. heading) Issue #3: International noise mitigation efforts including a new DNL metric Action Steps: Who: When: 1. Monitor correspondence and new information on international noise mitigation efforts 2. Monitor legal precedentllitigation regarding noise level Averaging � Staff/ARC Staff/ARC continuously continuously 3/1/2006 Issue #4: P�rt 150 Study Action Steps: Who: When• 1. Monitor/Support Mpls's efforts to require greater sound ARC/Staff continuously abatement measures 2. Monitor the MPLS and Bloomington lawsuits continuously ARC/Staff Issue #5: Heighten awareness and communication of Mendota Heights noise concerns � Action Steps: Who: When� 1. Develop long term strategic approach to relationship with ARC/Staff continuously the legislature. 2. Convey to MAC representatives our concerns and A.RC/Staff continuously issues with operations and the use of the MSP airport 3. Contir�ue to work on fmding efficient means of communication with fihe residents 4. Heighten Council awareness of airport issues AR.C/Staff ARC/Staff continuously continuously Issue #6: Mendota �eights land use planning has respected limitations to the MSP air corridor Action Stens: Who: When� 1. Investigate wheiher lack of respect/enforcement of Arc/Staff 2006 corridor by MAC and FAA. constitutes an inverse condemnation? - 7 - 3/1/2006 C,: � ,� y�.w Vii� ,-, = .. -.- --.-,- --.. �` , � . , ., - -1- , - - - _ - ;1 1 1 ' . :�f � �"R' �� r r: r u t it' Pr.t!ex � �� i i: yy� � t� y� } 4.� 4 � ,k 7 ' '"'""t� "x� �` � e , ,..i7af� �' ,7.�..z.' `n �..s>�_' ,.�,... .. � . 5.;, v� �„�.�r'.a:h� ._..... . . .. !.. , .� �t s �� a n �. f �M .7� { �n:� � � ' G ` Y t'' � � ,-� 4 r ?'. 1,_r -� ��r' �; i t t � � �. E. s x � . ... ,. _,.I.i . , .. Metropolitan Airports Commission 5011 Carrier Jets Departed I�unways 12I, ancl 1212 i� January 2006 4739 (94.6%) of those Operat�ons I�emained i� the Corr�dor , � - ` +�,?: . �,Xr+" � .',...,-'9{- -. r � : A � i L.�- t ..�. . _ � � .,, ry {t j 5'. 1.. �.«n�.. ....�__. �+w.._ ...�.......� Y�.._.. .., ..., _,.,5 �..�� .�c. .... .4.,�..,..._... ;t.,..� .. , .^:sz.:i_ .,� . .,._. �2, I , �„t .: � ,-_., � t._._.. ,_.i:�. � `.. 5011 Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure 4739 (94.6%) Total 12L & 12R Carrier Operations Departure Operations in the Corridor fVlinneapolis-St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for Gate In Corridor 01/01/2006 00:00:00 - 02/01/2006 00:00:00 4739 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 2161 (45.6%), Right = 2578 (54.4%) :� 6000 m w v 5000 c 0 u 4000 > a� W 3000 � 0 °- 2000 Q � 1000 0 .n a 0 F..................:...................:..................:..................i � �: .............) -2 -1 0 1 2 Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) � Arr�val � Departure ❑ Overtlight �.. , .:. � ...... .. . . . :::: �. ,.>.:. .. . ,;;,. .�:;.: .: ,. . .. . . . . � _.. :. , ; i. ,,..., .. ..:.> , . .. l Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Comdor Analysis Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission ' 118 (2.4%)12unway 12I., amd 12R. Carrie�r Je� I9eparture Operations were North of the 090° Corrid.or Boundary During January �006 ( j Page 2 Minneapolis—St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for Gate North_Corridor 01/01/2006 00:00:00 — 02/01/2006 00:00:00 118 Tracks Crossed Gaie: Left = 3(2.5%), Right = 115 (97.5%) r 6000 . . • a� • • : v5000 ..................:...................:..................:.................. c : � � o ; : : � 4000 ..................:......................................................... . - J W 3000 ............................................... ... f;, ......... . . �G ��V,�� . C�;r�.1'`��is Y � } f ��" . . . . . . . . . ,. � °- 2000 ..................•..........�...�.. � .�� '��,��,,�... • �, �,4 � •, �.� d : � ": .� � 1000 ............................................................................ o : : � a o . . . —2 (Runway End) -4- Arrival —1 0 1 2 Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) iCorridor End) ,; � �,' ��: .. ` _., �.::� ._ . � ._ .. �, . ; O �� Departure ❑ Overflight� Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Metropolitan Airports Commission 154 (3.1 %) I�unway 12I.� and 12R �arrier Jet Departure Operations were South of the Corrid.or (South of 30L I.ocalizer) Iiurrmg January 2006 im�i� i�:" �... � Minneapolis—St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for Gate South Corridor 01/01/2006 00:00:00 — 02/01/2006 00:00:00 154 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 83 (53.9%), Right = 71 (46.1 %j � 6000 : : � . . . � 5000 ..................:...................:..................:.................. � : . . o • : : m4000 ..................:..................:..................:.................. d C� . : : W3000 C�. �.�....r." .....:...................:..................................... o � C; �{_ 0V,��`�:�(`'1{, �,?,C; : . a 2��0 ^�'�'�y��C}.;�T..'t`.Jr•; `-'��'v,.'l...�..t . .......... . ................. .� ` i] �; f�r� ;� � 7�� U . � 1000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . �. ..:. .... t,•:.��. . . �' �q Jc � ��. � -t�:�"'�� ... . ... . : . ' : ' C� 4 n —2 —1 0 1 2 (Corridor End) Deviation From Genter of Gate (Miles) �WY Mid-Point) ' � � > ` -I- Arr�val C D ❑ � � eparture �,..__ �_. .. _ .., .. . , ,.. ,._.< ......., ..�..�, .: . ,.�., ,. . ve ig t , � , (. . : ..`,�...,. . Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Comdor Analysis mm Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission 12 (0.2%) Runway �2L and 12I� Carrier Jet Departure i�perations were 5° South of the Corridor (5° South of 30L I�ocalizer) Durir�g .Tanuary 2006 Page 4 Minneapolis—St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for Gate South_Corridor_5deg 01/01l2006 00:00:00 — 02/01/2006 00:00:00 12 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 10 (83.3%), Right = 2(16.7%) .;� 6000 . • d • : � : : . v5000 ..................:...................:..................:.................. � : � � o • : : m4000 ..................:...................•..................,.................. > : : : W3000 � ................:...................:..................:.................. O � � ' : ' o � J • ' °- 2000 ..................� �.�............:..........�......:.................. Q � � �. � • ' ....� ...........:.................. � 1000 ..................:...................:. o ' � � a o � � . —2 (Corridor End) x ,,.:�a,,,, <.... ,�_..w ,.,�,,.,_.�..._,,.. :: -}- Arrival -� o � 2 Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) �R� O Departure � Overflight Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Gomdor Analysis Metropolitan Airports Commission '�op 15 I�unway 12L and 12R. I)eparture I)estinations for January 2006 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 5 � � , 1 , , ; � � / � ; , �,��, �,;`: , :ar%j/��', a � ..,e...y �. � w ,.tsi.yw�,s . .� re 7 . � �.... H r �� +'� } '�' � ,�.r�.�,.,,� , �,,�w, �:`r � a ?t . � a._. � - s—�s's?ld �.r."� " �-�i .r�—.r ��,�.,.....�'�"� :.;. i""�.,`1.,,� 7..' r""K'y � �K �. . .. E , . .:., Minneapolis/St. Paul International Ai�port Tab1e of Contents for January 2046 � Complaint Summary 1 Noise Complaint Map 2 F.A.A Available Time for Runway Usage 3 MSP All Operations Runway Usage q. MSP Carrier Jet Operations Runway Usage 5 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition 6 MSP All Operations Nighttime Runway Usage � MSP Carrier Jet Operations Nighttime Runway Usage g MSP Top 15 Nighttime (Operator's by Type g MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operator's Stage Mix 1 p C,� Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 11-14 MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoruig Tower Site Locations 1VFap 15 Minutes Above dB Threshold for Anival Related Noise Events 16 Minutes Above dB Threshold for Depa.rture Related Noise Events l'7 Arrival Related Noise Events . 1 g Departure Related Noise Events 19 MSP Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per RMT 20-32 Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events Aircraft Ldn dBA 33-35 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program MSP Complaints by City January 2006 .,,,. .. � ,. ; , , .,. r� � ': ; ' � Yumber uf, � Nuurber ot . �i'c of Total � Arrn�l �� ,.Ae��zture� �� Otber Compi�mts Coniplanianfs Campiaznts APt'LL 1.1LLL•'Y 67 232' 12 ']U� � 7 4, 473 ]OG 72.9"� ,n:'a � ' � ;� IILqUA•SINGTON 1? I1 ;' ;; I.SC �$ 'g 11 3 2&6 ^_5 ?.3°/u �. � � LiL?RNSVILt.E �) � I�'��. '';� 32 �93 '.`'� 0 i; 3 3�Q 2� J.390 L•AG<lN 21 3I{:: � II7 527 �,:,� �� L P " 93S 88 '_S.S°6 EUENPtv\IRtE � �U ';��:: � l� ,.� 2 'i ) t..� 2 1 tl.15�� EL11'iVA D !\, ,;, 1 9`r D 3 i '. 13 4 03°� CiULL)EN VALl.,EI Q 0 i.' �� `:�] i 0 �, l 1 U.0%6 tNVER.GROVt? ? 2 0 ' 0 ( 2 Q3`Y�, HEltil?TS � ` � ': ,; € LAIiE VJ7..LE _ �4';� :} 0 i ::i3 ! � (1 �' � S ' ,� 7-.' S 2.Q"/� �; s n•t�rrnar:� s�cic,:xrs , p ' o;` �: 7 at�8 p :,,, t� 415 s 1 t.3�r� � ?tii'1NN�:1POt.15 lOp 7z�� ;: 14l i.".l9 .'�� 4. �06 �rl � t3.b'90 � � '� ,4,i ..�. �;.r Mlf'Viv'ETONIZA 7 3`i. '', . D q '� t� '_ (�-4`•''� A•1?N.N�TRl.5Te1 7 il ti '�0 � p � t� 1 ---� Q.0°o i ... ,� ' t, ."r.. PI..Yi��iC�UTFf ti 2,:y `� 0 �;'r0, 0 � 2 1 O.t':u ;i: - R1Clii'1ri.D 4 �'' S07 � lil ;,� 7 � 5?5 2d 1�13% i SA.tN't P,ON2F:iC1'C7S 0 0.: '; 4 la ','� t 0 L ] � D.Q�%6 SAiNT LC)USS PATtIC� U �}9'' 0 �'tt �� 0 0 f� 44 t ?.3`•'�� ; � .�__" S:3INT PAttL 3 G t r� 3 ia 1'.'� P ] 1 f 7 Q.3 :o _,�_.__ �,_'� �-.�... S�V:1GE t1 0; 2 ii a D U,, � 3 _ t),I°�u r SOUfI� $AtN'1' D �i,%� � Q ;': L � iJ il ' 1 l. 0.0?i. PAL!l: { SllN'G15t1 I..AK13 0 0;,' "' 0 `b '. � 0 p'. R t O.3'0 �E\��JiS'i' SA �`T P:lUL U 0,''. ; � 0 '� 0 {)� 1 1 U.U9 � € rTotal . ' 70$ £ 26G5 ' � :� �)5. �� 3GGfi i � j , i::�lv1. �:� `,`:1fl0.(!�0 ': . �.a.::.,�,�,��..,.�„m,...�.,� .M.�.�..�,..�....e,�,� �....�M..�M Notc Shnded Columns represrnt MSP complainls filed vin the lnlemct Sum oC % Totat of ComptainLs may not equnl 100% duc to rounding. •As oCMay 2003, thc MSP Complainls by Ciry rcport includes multiplc �� comptaint descriptors per individuni complaint.'IhereCore, the number oC � compiaint descriptors m� be more Umn the number oC ,__ rcporledcomplaints. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program C� Available �'ime for Y2unway Use January 2006 (Source: FAA Runway Use Logs) �t�t�. :�vet•�►ge �ai��- �:nu�ai ,,;� , < �annary 200� 'i; , ; Janaarv 2006 `.'''' '�ir Cani�r �� 91? !8� �� Camn3uter �0 � 3?8 �' ' General:�i�;��ti<n� 72 39 :�Ii li t1n, ; r 'I'i�tal �� 1394 ;.,� 1263 . A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 3 All Operations � h2unway IJse 12eport January 2006 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equai 100°k due to rounding. 4 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program Carrier Jet Operations �2unway Use Report January 2006 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 10D°� due to rounding. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program January 2006 MSP Carrier Jet �+'leet Composition , FAII 3 art 46 .I'akc . . , �' ;. :.. A Tr e otr�v��n ��,�ca �, '` r�irc.r.ift Descr� iion St ae � Coiiuf Percent . F3'd2 1 JC3.0 Boei��e 7=l;-2D0 3 3 O.Q°�o B;dl It?�.� Boein�x ,47-t�U 3 0 � f1.0'%0 B'.tl? iOS.S Bo�in=',0?-3Q9 3 � 2 t1.0°� B?�3 lt)S.� Boeir *;Yi-3U0 3 Q U.f)';o [)C;3( f ] t?;S Mc�onneil n�tu >>as UC'8-Si?U;'ci4!} '' � 0.0'; o DCIO I0�.0 htcDonncll Dou�tas DC7f! 3 364 i.I."� R'2Q ![t? 4 �:}ein;! ?2 i 20p 2 0 i).U'%o iS'.4�a ?Oi.G Boein� i1? ltli) 3 66 0,29u DCBQ ]00.5 ivicDunn�ll 17uu�*tas DC9 tt�iodiiiecl St�. 3> ;1 p.2':�„ Llbi 99.3 LocldieedL-IOiI ^_ U,04o I7(.'9 9�.1 IvicDottneti Dau-las i7C9 2 0 � 0.0'%� �s ��c� a;.� ��,�:::� r� �ao a o �,.ou� BAl i 9;.0 Hritish Aerosonce BA t-1 i A4adiFed St =. .i 3 � 2 O,pgb A394 96._' Airbus Indu,tries A_�0 Q � O.{}°o A4Dl 1 95.6 1vfcDonnell Doiu;las 11I�] 1 ; 3 U.p°% B%67 15.7 33oein 7Ci-2Q0�300 3 2 00°%� A330 95.G AirbtulndusfriesA's?� 3 62 i1,3°u II,3Q 9AS f3oeir,� 727 ��Sodified S[n. 3) g �(69 I..S°� _ __ _ . .------ - --�GBIl--- 9d.-5 h�lcUc�mic-I! D�us?las-DC:3-:iUO --3- -U- U.O.^,� Bi7i 4d.3 BOeIR� i?7 .i O O.G",�o - - - A=Oq 9�,0 Airbusln�iusiries S3{)OIl�_6q(i 3 73.9 1}.��J A�ao �z.a :a;,�ti,ra,;It1517'ICS.A�I�� s s� o.�u� F=S 929 Fokke[ 2S 2 U O.Q��n D?3l7 92.1 IiOLiii� %i^ (N(odificd 5`[2. 3� 3 772 U.�`'r i4tD80 91.5 141cDonnell Dnu �as hfD-SO 3 q'g � z,�.�;, B?5', 91.=1 Eio�iit�z 75,-2()0(300 3 31:1 � 9.fi°o �C�Q 9! A .�1•IcDUtulzll 7aeu�las llC� {h;odiiiui Stk. z, : �3fi] 1.5.3"�� A321 St3.:S '�irbiLs :ndusvies A= 3l _ U 0.04�0 �, 13%3� $3.9 Poe;n�?"s7-QOG .i 1G QJ."�o A3�� 37.8 Airbus lndiu:rres A32(� 3 a.?75 � ] 3.-�'.o Bi35 S?.' 8aein = 73?-St)U 3 g90 7.S°u B??3 S7.' �3nciit�73^-$t)0 = l61.S �.190 :'+313 S'.5 Airbt�sIndu�tries �3iS 3 '_2 U.1°jn :�?19 87.5 �irbuslndiistriesAil9 3 ;!:.0 12.39u f37't3 R?.5 � Boe�'3?-3Q� 3 ?30 ^.�°iu .�7:5;% $iJ T�u0�1(I> i.ii-iliO i j.: (}.4)°n RiSS SA.) 33rihshAeioa-nace iab 3 laS9 4.7°0 B%72. 33.0 SUeinx 71?_2t}p 3 1�£ i.4"in Ei"G $?.i Etnbraer l70 3 3.84 (}.�9b E1�l5 8!.R ['_mh��eri•45 3 1Q3? 3.?9b F 100 S 1.3 t7okkeC 1 C�0 3 p 0.09�n Cit.f ?4.R Can:ui:tr Rc .ior�1 !et 3 7 i o 1 22.d" n E73i '•^.9 Liritisl�:'lerus ace 135 3 28 t).t'%� .(32& ;c+ i Ftirchild Domier 33R 3 0 (?.0�>0 ; Totals . . , .�. �.. �i ��, . . , Note: Stage III represent a'vcraft modified to meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. This Includes hushkit engines, engine retrofits or aircraft operational flight configurations. •The Provided Noise levels from FAR Part 36 are the loudest leveis documented per aircra$i type during take-off measured in EPNL dBA (Effective Perceived Noise Level). �' •EPNL is the levei of the rime integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone-corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover measured in A-weiehted decibels. 6 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program _ Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. '' Runway Use Iteport January 2006 li . - /n-�{ �.=.p,�:: , �.�:_, _,� � �k:�' . �. ,, , �,.1 � W�� --= �-;'' �� r 4�,. w ..�,.v�C t{.3��ti "4i,'Fc� fl d�jo V} �h �' 41'j ��`~�i ,.. � . �� iR+n�� ' �`f � ti„ Er., i � cn::n� ;:.�' t°,. , .�:•w ,,��;t Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100°h due io rounding. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program � Nightti�ne Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. � R.unway Use ]E�eport January 2006 Note: Sum of RUS °� may not equal 10D% due to rounding. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program January 2006 Top �5 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Total Nighttime Jet �aerations bY Hour ?230 ?3Q0 240U I00 20Q 30Q 4QQ S00 �1_5 �3! 1=�0 {� 17 G-t 81 397 �tnerican Americau A�nerica. West �uizerica West 4m�rica ��jest �nerica 1��rest Continental Ex� Cham}�ion �ir DeIta _______ Delta 17e1.t� I)FIL DI-�L. Ainericail Eaa FedE�; � PedEx FedEx FedL� Pi�macle I{ittS�Ha�l�lc Kiity Ha«�k t�i.esaba ?lflesaba l�ortln��est Nortl»vest �rozn��.��5�: Northulest itiTorth�;�est Naz�tfi�est i�Toittawest Sun Cauntn United. United UPS L71'S UPS UPS A.�L 3 A�L 3 A1�i� 3 AWE 3 A�V� 3 r11�rI 3 BTA 3 CCP 3 I}AL 3 Ii�L 3 D�L 3 DHL 3 DF-II. 3 EGF 3 FDX 3 FDX 3 FDa' � FllX 3 FLG 3 IG�i �. 3 KH:4 3 �fr�s 3 n�iES 3 \�4 � 3 Uwa � ��. ; \TZ�' 3 \R�t'< 3 �,T\�T 3 IvWA 3 SC}n 3 U:'1L 3 U:�.L 3 L:PS 3 UPS 3 TJPS 3 UPS 3 B738 MD�Q A319 �320 8733 c�.r E145 Li72Q Li73� B73Q MD80 �']7Q E1.�5 A300 A310 B72Q DC10 GR.T B72Q 87i3 c�.r itJBS A319 A320 ,�� Bi4� B;Si DC 10 B733 8733 B73ti A30Q }37� % B7fi7 31 � 2� 33 1.9 a:v 3R 33 � 3b 1 52 I 30 12 17 3 38 I93 I� 36 C �3 65 13� i` i Il8 ?7 65 �4� 2� 20 ]3 3 1 35 Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 87.9% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 9 10 January 2006 Nighttime Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. 500 � 400 a 0 '� e� � 300 � O 4. 0 � 200 � � a z 100 a � . �: . �,,...� >�::. � < � : � �; � :, � :, � �y;-�-�-,-� .-�� ------- -- -__ __ __ . �'v �,,��' Cr.��.�ti� G�'4 ,�Q,y.�,�,,v .�,��. �..��. .c�,�'CS,�'�,�.,�'�'.�5��. �G�.-��y �,4g � Stage 2 ❑ Stage 3 � Manufactured Stage 3 Jfanuary 2006 Nighttime I+'leet Stage 1VIix for "I"op 15 Airiines `' lU:�U p.m. to 6:U0 a.m. ' , , , � � , . ° , ; � �Tanuiactured : , �'. , � �. � A�irhr�e ` , Sfage 2 ,�� `Stage 3 �" � , ` Stage 'i �'To%�il, ;` .. , .>. .., . . . � ..., � ..� �.�:L �} t) 33 33 �U1E U 0 81 41 �C��.t 0 0 40 40 BT;� 0 () 38 38 CCP () � 3 � 0 33 Dr�L 0 � 36 3 39 DHL 0 .53 p ]3 EGF 0 0 47 4? FDn � 3 (�^ f Q FLf.r 0 0 1.93 1.93 KHA 0 1 3b 3 r tUf�S U 0 44 4� N�t'v:A. U CS 3�7 $12 SCX � il � � 24� 245 UA:I, o a �4 �4 LTF'S t) 35 I7 � 52 ;`�ot�l . ,--- . ; ': 0 . �' 226 . .: : � , 1�40 �'' 1456 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program f Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations — January 2006 Jan 1 thru 8, 2006 — 4185 Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 1 thru 8, 2006 — 4160 Carrier Jet Deparkures Jan 1 thru 8, 2006 — 269 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 1 thru 8, 2006 — 195 Nighttime Carrier Jet Deparhues A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 11 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations — January 2006 Jan 9 thru 16, 2006 — 4104 Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 9 t1u�u 16, 2006 — 4110 Carrier Jet Deparhares Jan 9 thru 16, 2006 — 273 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 9 thru 16, 2006 — 140 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures 12 A Product of the Metropo(itan Airports Commission ANOMS Program C Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracics Carrier Jet Operations — January 2006 Jan 17 thru 24, 2006 — 4109 Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 17 thru 24, 2006 — 4091 Carrier Jet Depariures Jan 17 thru 24, 2006 — 275 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 17 thru 24, 2006 — 137 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 13 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrler Jet Operations — January 2006 Jan 25 thru 31, 2006 — 3586 Carrier Jet Arrivals Jan 25 thru 31, 2006 — 3582 Carrier Jet Depariures Jan 25 t1u-u 31, 2006 — 237 Nighttime Carrier Jet Anrivals Jan 25 thru 31, 2006 - 141 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures 14 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program C: � f� Remote Monito�ing 'Tower Siie I,ocations Aixport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Le�end � �'� Remote Monitoring Tower A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 15 16 Minutes Above d8 Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events January 2006 �r 14 1 f .:� t � t,: -'. t ,'� ', �.,� ft..�,. t Ri1�T � ' � , i � ` ' � �1�nntes 1wTinuEes 14I►nutes � l4�mutes ± ` ID � Cat�' � � �` � Addr'e�s . ,,, �`� > '�iSciB >- 8QdB.'' > 94dB � •>_' 10(}riB : 1 minneanulis ;\erxes Ave. & 4lst St. (07:i.0 (.) p.q p,p ? Ytin.naa•�olis Pretnont Ave. R a3rd St. 4R?.0 5.? 0.0 0.0 3 l�linneanolis �'�%estLim�vood St. �'., Belmoi.it,4t�e. I3)o.; 65.5 (},� p,Q 4 :Yiin�iea-7ulis Parlc �.ve. �X. �5�h St. I] 16.6 223 0.� Q.0 � i�:tiuneat}olis 121h r1��e. R 56th St. 1�& 1.3 27R3 3.4 0.0 6 R4inne,3poGs 2�th Ase. 8: 5ith St. 1-:�8.0 209.4 � u (1.0 7 Richlie?d 4i�renhX+etth Ave. &. 6�tlt Sf. ?7.4 0.6 U.0 O.0 8 4iinnza e�li� L�nefello��> Ai�e. & 43rd Si. -;7.9 0.� p.Q p.p 9 St. Paul Sarutnaa St.. & Hartford A��e. 0.0 O.Q C1.0 0.4 ] 0 St. Pau! .l.tz�.sca :1vz. fi Betvauin St. 03 i 0,0 !}.p p,p __ . � ,� . __ _ _. . St.-Pavl __ _._ ----- Fiiui Sf: 3r�Schefier tLve: __ _ ._ ___..._ i),�. _. . _ .__0_0 _. __ __._ . �:d--- - - O:Q--- - 12 St. Paul �liton St. 3. Rockk�ood r1ve. U.3 0.t� 0.0 O.0 !3 119endota T3eights Sontheast end nf J��Tul�ican Crnui 2U.2 0.1. OA � 0.0 14 ��an ist St. �C, �Ickee St. 171�.'1 0.9 O.G ().0 [ 5 44endoki Hei Ut5 CulJou St. & Lcxin �,t�it r't��c. 79.3 0.7 � O.Q D.0 16 L:agan �15-alon �.t�e. u- Vilas'Lane ICi?t.7 93A ;1.2 Q.l) 17 Bloom,in�;ten B;U� St. 3i. �th At�e. 2.9 0.0 p.t} U.p ]'a IticLt�eld 75th St. 1k 17th �ve 23.0 O.Q �.0 0.0 I9 Bloomin�fon 16th A�>e. l� R4th Sc. R? 0. ( U.0 O.0 20 Richfield 75t1i St. �: 3;d r'tve. 3.1 0.O 0.{? 0.0 '_ I I��t�er Grove Hei = �ts 13;.rb;tra .:1ve. & 67th St. 9.2 O.l O.0 0.0 22 im�er C'.noti�e Hei�*ht� . Anue I�Itvie Trt!i1 �5�.0 1."s Q.Q O.0 23 YTendota Hei h�s G�d of Kenndon A�:e. 332.0 3.(i O,t} p.q 2? L:a zn C:ha e1:Ln. & 1i'ren Ln. 1 C�61.9 2.3 p.0 t>.tl 25 Ei�a?n :h�tootishine F�vk T327 lura • R�I. ]��.1 fl.2 0.0 UA �6 InverG�o�•�He;ghL 579(i ;rkans��sllc-e. E'��. 32.6 �1.5 0.1 Q.0 27 i9imienpotis :�ntiion�� Schoal �?ii [rvin�Ar•c.. S. �'>.4 0.0 Q.0 O.Q 28 RicltTield C645 ltitli Avenn� S. 1��.2 1.4 O.0 0.0 29 i�l.inne olis Eriesson Elem. School 43I � 3 tct Ave. S. O..i 0.� 4.0 0.{) 3p Blooniinton 5715 Rii�er Rid�*e Rcl. 203.R O.I �.Q 0.0 3 i. Bloomintnn 9�O1 12th A��e. 5. 5.0 0.0 O,Q p,0 32 Bloomintnn 7�i2� Y7e��s;ant Av�. S. 0.7 ().i� 0.0 U.() 33 Btu-nsvilie North River L-litis P�rk 2.�) OA U.0 0.0 y�t Burnsviile [ted Onk T'ark 5.(i 0.(1 O.fl O.D 3� ra�s�i ?IUpGaia�et.ln. 3�4.G 0.G 0.0 0.0 36 �1�ple V�tlley T3ri:ar Oalcs & Scout Pond 559.3 0.4 t?.0 Q.0 3? Ez zn �3491TTuod�aie Ln. :N. ;:1 � O.f) O.p {).{) 36 t3:! an ?})i7 Tnrquois� C"ir. 2.7 O.4 O.(7 �.0 ?9 L•a�ns i�?i7 St C:harles PI. 2.b 0.0 p.p U.p Total:?4iinute:�; for ririiacal Relnted Eveu�s 156?Q.6 688.6 A 8.5 (7.0 A Product of the Metropolitan Auports Connmission ANOMS Program 22 Minutes Above dB Threshold for Departure Related Noise Events January 2006 I�rl.inneapol Richfield St. Paul Si. Paul St. Paul St. Paul I�•i:endota Bloomii�gtc Richfielti T�loumin�tc Rict�field Iever Gi•ove H� tnver Grov� Hi [vleudota Hei s Za �a ra�n i.� �r1C311 26 I:m•er Gro��e t-iea 27 ?��Iit�nea �olis 2$ Richrield 29 :Ylinnea �olis �() Bloom.in[on 31 E3laominton 32 Sloomintoii 33 Burnsville �4 35 3G 37 33 39 l.e , ' ?4Ttnutes , ;i ' � Address �' fSdB 3:zrxes .4ve. & 41st St, 19G.5 Fremont Ace. & 4�rd St, 225.4 �Uest E] a�t� ooci St. �: Iiehnont ?.t� e. 639.9 Park A�°e. �: 48th St. 753.2 iZth ��s. & 58rh St. 2724.4 25tti �ve. �. 57th St. �4Z2.7 ��'entworth ��=e. 1L 64th St. 140C.� Lo�trrfelltns� tive. �;. 43rd St. 315.9 Saratu�a St. R Hartford .�ve. 2.8 Itasca Aee. ��: Bo�=doin St. �.2 Fit�n St. & Scheffer.�c�a. 4? -- -- _ -- ---- ----- __-- -- - - - -- ._...' Alton St. & Rockl�ood Ave. 3. t Southeast end of I�Iohicaii C'ouil 618.=� i s� st. �e ri�t�kz.� s�. �9�.a CuIloi� St. Px Les;neton A.ve. $72.3 Avalon Ave. &, Vilas Lane 95�.4 � �;4th Si. �. 4th ?.re. 38.7 'r5th St. �C: 17t1t Av; �02.7 ].6tt, :a��e. �: � 4th St. 349. 3 ?Stla St. & 3rd AY�e. 6�.£i its I3arbara :��e. c.�C 67t1i Si. 20 �.8 its Anne i�9ar,'e Trt�il 211.0 Eud cii'Kennclon A��e. 1�l29.? Cba.e] Ln. ck: \1�ren Ln. �Si3.6 � i�laonshine Park l z21 Jnruy R.d. 535.2 ils b79b Arkans.0 A<<e. Gti'. 308.R ��nthony SchooI i7_57 lrvin Y r�.ve. S. 69�.3 fifi45 l 6t1� tive:nue S. i; 9�1. i Fricsson Ele.t��. School ?3l S 3).st A�e. S: .5U�.5 F i]S River Rid�e Rd 68�.3 ��01 .l?th:�ee. S. 63.5 1Q32i Pleasant At��.. S. 32.2 Norttt Ki��oz Nills Parlc ?2a,H R�d Oak Parlc 97.4 ? 100 G�rnet !n. 1 �Q.G Briar Oalcs & Scout 1'ond 5�..9 �399 Woad�ate T u. �. 71.9 39�7 Tnr uolse C'ir. 11 �.2 3477 St C'l�a,rles Pl. b£3.Y for DeUarliire Rei�ted `EvenLs - 22357 6. ,:' A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Comznission ANOMS Program 2.0 a.o 16.G l fi.3 �? 7.2 357.5 �7.3 2?.? O.0 (}__;__0 . p,2 _ O.1 �.9 ��.� 1 ?.0 67. 3 U.4 7.7 2.Q 0.� �� 1.7 xs.s 11.1 0.G �1.8 21.2 25.3 7.2 ; 5.7 0:� 0.2 O. Ci ti.2 0.6 0.] 0,7 O.Q l.0 Q.0 O.Q 0. ] 0.0 Z,0 i),0 i).4 0.0 31.7 1.5 U�.� o.� 2.(� U.0 0.� U.� 0.0 U.(1 0.O 0.0 0.0 O.ti 0.0 0.0 z.s a.o 0.0 O.0 6.9 ' 0.6 0.0 �.0 0.0 0.0 U.0 Q.0 O.Q 0.0 o.o n.o O.f? O.D '7.l (?.q � (?.3 Q.(1 0.() 0.0 ().0 0.() 2.0 O.0 U.:i ().0 (?.(1 O.t) i.�+ a.c� {}.t! 0.t) 0.{) 0.O t).C) � 0.O 0.0 0.0 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 t)A t).0 0.0 0.() � 0.0 0.0 20.8 , . : 1.8 ': 17 l I�4inneupolis 2 �l4innenpn?i, 3 �M1iintaeapoiis 4 �1in��capolis � S 1�tinu�apo?is 6 Minneapolie ? Tticlifield H :hli�ineapalis � 9� �i,. St. Paui ^ ] 0 St. Paul 11 St. Paul ] 2 St. Paul 1.3 ?�4endota Iieiglits .� ii �3�31i 1� � i��endata T-iai�l�ts ifi Eagan � I7 _Bloominbton ' 1� �1CI1�'IC�d ��''�,.. l�? Alaomi�igten ' 3(1 Richfield ' 21 luver Cn•ot�e Heights '' 22 [uver C'.rro�•e Hei.n�hts'� 2� [�iendoc<t Hei�ht�s ' 2a � La�!an � 2� Lagan � 26 [nver Groee Hei,eh� 27 A�tinncapolis 2� Iticl�field 29 I�-fii.ineapolis 3(} E3loominton 3? f3laomimon 33 Eilooininttin y3 Burnsvilie 3�} E3UiRSVille• 3i �agtttt 76 App?e V�1?e�� 3"t Eaban 3�3 �agan 34 � T�� an � '`' 'Totai Ax Arrival �2elated l�toise Events January 2006 ri.eixe5 ,SVe. �C: 47.SL SY. Fremont Ac�e. & ��rd St, Gt`est Eltnc�aod St. & E3elmori A��e. Parlc Atre. &. ��th St•. 12th Ave. & 58th St. 25fh �ve. & 57th St. t'�'erit�s�vrtn Ave. �2 64th 5t. L.oiigfello«� r�ve, cS;. 43rd St. � Sarat��a St. & Harfiord Ati�e. itasca Ave. �. k3o��-doin St. � Fiun St. & Scheffer Ave. Alton St. �S: Rocictivooci A1re. Southeast end of zvToi�icax� C ouri l M: S1. & �'1Ck�e St. C'ullon St. & Lexin�ton Avc. Avalon as=e. c�, Vil� L•ane b'�}tll rvt. c�', �tt1 .'^iV2. i5th St. �:, 17th a�•e l 6ih :A.ve. �. 84th 5�. lSfh Si. fi 3rci A.i'e. l3arbara Ac�e. & 6%th St. Anne i4fari; T'rai] Encl of Kenndo.n Ave. C;l��ipel L•n. ck. ��/ren Ln. i�l:aonshinc Parl. 1,21 Jurdy Rd. � G79E, Arkai�sas Ave. ��i�, Antho�i}� School. 5%57 T��°ing tive. S. G6�5 16th A��enuz. S. Ericsson �lem. School 43l 5 3l si. Ave. S. 871 S River R;dge Rd. 95U 1 12th A��e. 5. i{)32� P1Lasant��ve. S. t��rth Ri.c��x l�liiis Park. Reil. {}ak l'ark 2l()D Garz�et lu. P�r.iar Oaks �S� Scout Poud �399 �[%oocl�ate Ln. I�. ,9S"i Turqz�oise Cir. � 3'�7? St Cla�.rl.es PI. L�'8I IVT075C �Yf`11G.S 4115 ^,�47 4261 39�4 4551 �157 ta� 125 0 6 4 ? 72 fi �4 2�7 5�19 16 ill 3� t? 54 �4SU 1332 (i1�� 460 1;j 130 3�i 1 __,'.__ 950 17 � ll ?4 1.4()� 171(i 1� ll � 19 ]08 ��9 �OS 30�2 2954 t 3 0 0 0 U 2 7 �j 9 1{i�6 0 0 � 0 1 25 2l Sl 1 9 � �� 0 3 0 0 0 0 9 5 U 0 0 U 0 (} tr 0 () 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 � 0 Q Q Q 4 � U U U Ct U 0 U 0 U U Q i)� 0 0 Q () f) D Q 0 18 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program t C. ,__ Departure Ite�ated. Noise Events ' January 2006 1�eparture Depa � . , , , ,, � . � . '._ . _ _ , ' . , . . � � �:! E` ents > E� en � . ,._ .� �,. 1 2 3 '� 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 1' 13 l� ]5 ]6 17 18 19 2U "T ?Z �3 ��} '� � �(� ?7 ?� ?y 30 3 ]. 3^ 3� ' 3� ' 35 ' 36 3?. �� 9 t��Unne;�po:is Minneapolis .�'17715'1�3])071 S Mim�eapulis Minneapo?is Richfield Minue��oli� St. FauJ St. Paul St. Paul Si. Paul Meudo�a HeigY Eagan Alendata HeigY �ag�n Rloon�ingfon Richi�zld Blocai�ineYon Etichi�3eld Inc�er Cir�7te T-lei; Tncer Gra�°e l�lei; IvIendota I-�ei��l :Cagan La��n. Tt�ver Crrove Hri, �4innea��li� Riclafield T31oon�inton Blonminion I3]onzninton 13nrnsvii le 13urns�ril le :Ken:es Ave. �: � 1 st St. Fremoni Avz. �C. �3rd St. V4'est Elmtcoqd St. ��: i3eln�onf Ave. �1i�i Av�. c% �$tIl SC. 12ch A��e. ��. 58th Sr. 2sthAve. � s;tli sr. Wentu�oi �h r�ve. �. 64th S�. Langfello�v Ave. &; �3r.ci Sc. S�uatoga St. &. H<ircford Ave. Itason :�ve. & Bat��doin SY. Finn St. & Scheffer. �ve. Aiton St. �. Rockl��ood :��e. Southeast end of h4ohican C:�7urt 1 st Sf. b'c h1ckee St. Cul.lon 5Y. c�. Lexington Ace. ;'��alon Ave. � tiilas Lane 8�IT1� St, c4. 4i11 Ave. 7�tli St. 1�. 1?th ?.��e lfitlt ILve. & 84tt� St. i5th ST. & 3rd Ave. I3arbar�t Ave. � 67tli St. Anr.e htSarie Trail Erid of Kemidc»i A��e. Chaa�el L.n, c�; t��r�n Z.ii. ,�-loanshiue Park 1331 .iu�:rty 1�d. G i 9G Axkausas ave. 4��. At:tllc�n� S�hool a"7�7 Inrin;,�+ Aae. S. G64� 16th Avenue S. Lricsson �tem. Sclioo14;15 � l s? AYe. S. �715 River Rid4,� Rd 9�01 12t1� Ave. S. 10�25 Pleasant ��e. S. North River Hi1ls Park Red Oak Park 21(?0 Garnet tn. Briar Oa'.�cs c�. Scuiif Poi.id �4391 ��ciodnacc Ln. ?��. 3957 Tu�•quoise C:i�'. 3�?? St Charles Pl. �rture l�i►ise EFents " 67� "19i 1954 232U 67�5 FGU3 3£i 13 2352 13 14 19 ]6 19�6 ia•1 � 2�i� Z�j1 s� 7.�63 lOGI 24{) 677 66Ci 3626 16ty2 1Q52 ro�o �,11? 4545 1613 ]h7? ?33 l02 tig5 36:� Sil t i4 229 3�J z�� Y� 4t1 110 1G3 a��G 23�1 33� 209 0 0 2 1 g(} 266 1"t6 372 7 12y ;7 6 I4 I2 Sai 87 ? 4? 1 �6 29� 6� 342 4 ,� 12 2 1 t3 � 11 l () 3 � � U 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 � Q 0 Q b 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t3 0 0 31; ,;,: A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 19 �o� 'T'�rn �,��des� A.�r��t I�o�s� ��T��a�s %�-1��P .Tan-Q6 (RMT Site# 1) Xerxes Ave. & 41St St., Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway De arfure 01/04/2006 07:16 CCI706 B72Q D 30L 01/08/200615:50 NWA455 DC9Q A 12R 01/22/200616:00 CCP1462 B72Q D 30L 01/02/200613:48 NWA1715 DC9Q A 12L 01 /27/200613:19 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/20/200613:26 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/12/200613:21 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/07/200613:25 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/19/200613:17 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/31/2006 08:21 NWA410 DC9Q A 12R Date/Time 01/06/200613:21 01/23/200614:22 01/18/200612:12 01 /25%200613:08 01/16/2006 08:24 01/05/200613:14 01/04/2006 07:16 01 /03 /2006 17:37 01/22/200616:00 01 /27/200613:19 Date/Time 01/30/2006 08:31 01/22/200615:59 01/29/200613:10 01 /23/200614:22 01/20/2006 07:36 01/06/200613:21 01/04/2006 07:16 01 /07/200613:25 01 /27/200613:18 01 / 17/200613:40 20 (RMT Site#2) Fremont Ave. & 43rd St., Minnf Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur� NWA19 B744 D NWA19 B744 D NWA167 B757 D NWA19 B744 D UAL799 B735 A NWA19 B744 D CCI706 B72Q D NWA940 DC9Q A CCP1462 B72Q D NWA19 B744 D Runway 30L 30L 30L 30L 12L 30L 30L 12L 30L 30L � , .: .� � : � : � : • :� : • : • : . � � . .: —_� . � :• : : : . : � :. : :. : • . . (RMT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave., l�tinneapolis Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture CCP402 B72Q D 30L 97.3 CCP1462 B72Q D 30L 94.6 NWA19 B744 D 30L 94.5 NWA19 B744 D 30L 94.2 CCP1450 B72Q D 30L 94.2 NWA19 B744 D 30L 94.0 CCI706 B72Q D 30L 93.8 NWA19 B744 D 30L 93.2 NWAl9 B744 D 30L 93.1 NWA19 B744 D 30L 92.9 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program C n '�'c�� '�'en I.��d�si ��-��-��i I�a�s� ��T��ets �ar� 1VV��I� _ Jan-06 (RMT Site#4) Park Ave. & 48�' Si., Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway De arture 01/11/200615:39 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/11/200616:08 NWA42 DC10 D 30L 01/13/200613:22 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/16/200614:46 NWA19 B744 D 30L 01/07/200610:39 NWA768 DC9Q D 30R 01/17/2006 07:37 CCI706 B72Q D 30R 01/25/200615:55 NWA42 DC10 D 30L 01/04/200618:16 NWA46 DC10 D 30L 01/07/200616:05 NWA42 DC10 D 30L 01/30/2006 21:16 NWA1957 DC9Q D 30R Date/Time ,.-- , 01/29/2006 06:22 ( � 01/29/200616:13 _.,_ 01/27/2006 09:21 01/27/2006 08:11 01 /27/200610:11 01/30/200611:19 01/18/2006 09:11 01/22/2006 06:19 01/27/200616:29 01 / 16/200611:12 (RMT Site#S) 12th Ave. & 58�' St., Mi Flight Number .Aircraft Type Ar De CCP436 m�B72Q CCP420 B72Q CCP422 B72Q CCP432 -. B72Q CCP1490 B72Q CCP434 B72Q CCP1400 B72Q CCP436 B72Q CCP1464 B72Q CCP434 B72Q Runway 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L (RMT Site#6) 25�` Ave. & 57th Si., Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway 01/06/2006 07:41 CCI706 B72Q D 01/27/200610:27 NWA748 DC9Q D 01/07/200613:49 NWA754 DC9Q D Ol/04/200616:37 NWA1787 DC9Q D 01/22/2006 22:21 NWA1469 DC9Q D 01/07/200610:38 NWA768 DC9Q D 01/30/2006 23:41 CCI705 B72Q D 01/07/200617:52 NWA758 DC9Q D 01/29/2006 22:38 NWA1469 DC9Q D 01/30/2006 22:25 NWA1469 DC9Q D A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R �, .: .� • . ; •1: .� �� . .� •� � :• :• � :: Lmax (dB) - 104.5 104.2 104.2 104.0 102.8 102.7 102.6 102.2 102.1 102.0 21 Date/Time 01/08/200617:30 01/30/2006 07:34 01/29/2006 07:27 01/13/200610:18 01 /07/200611:34 01 /29 /200619:23 01/09/2006 06:41 01/04/2006 21:03 01/17/2006 07:13 01/04/2006 09:41 'T'�g� 'Ten I,aud�st t�i��a�'� I�oise ��l��s fa�r l��P .lan-Qb (RMT Siie#7) Wentworth Ave. & 64�' St., Richfield Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway De arture CCP1462 B72Q D 30L CCP1450 B72Q D 30L DHL1648 B72Q D 30L CCP1490 B72Q D 30L CCP1400 B72Q D 30L CCP468 B72Q D 30L CCP1490 B72Q D 30L DHL197 B72Q D 30L DHL1648 B72Q D 30L CCP400 B72Q D 30L (RMT Site#8) Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St., Min� Dat�/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur� 01/18/200611:02 AA.L1435 MD80 D 01/30/2006 23:42 CCI705 B72Q D 01/07/200611:06 AAL1435 MD80 D 01/24/2006 23:16 CCI705 B72Q D 01/05/200611:04 AAL1435 MD80 D 01/04/200611:16 AAL1435 MD80 D 01/27/2006 21:12 NWA1957 DC9Q D 01/27/200611:05 AAL1435 MD80 D 01/22/200616:09 CCP2056 B72Q D 01/05/2006 23:27 XNA123 B72Q D Runway 30R 30R 30R 30L 30R 30R 30R 30R 30L 30L Lmax (dB) 96.8 96.0 95.7 95.5 94.8 94.3 93.3 92.6 92.0 91.6 � . .: . � � � •i . •� , :• .. . :• i :: : �.. (RMT Site#9) Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave., St. Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type .Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/24/2006 07:49 UNKN BE18 D 30R 78.2 01/09/2006 23:26 XNA123 B72Q D 30L 73.9 01/19/2006 07:41 LTNKN BE18 D 12L 73 3 Ol/26/200613:43 BMJ01 01/OS/200619:44 NWA1472 01/28/2006 07:34 BMJ52 01 /28/2006 07:48 BMJ66 01/02/200612:20 N4VA1703 01/12/2006 06:40 SCX245 01/31/200610:15 TCA1 22 BE80 D 12L 72.0 DC9Q D 30L 70.0 BE80 D 12L 69.1 BE80 D 12L 69.0 DC9Q D 12L 68.7 B738 D 30L 65.8 UNKN D 12R 65.6 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program C `T'�p 'T�� Laucies� t��r�ra�� l�Tois� �v�� '�a-1�� Jan-66 (RMT Site#10) Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St., St. Pau1 Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/31/200610:15 TCA1 IJNKN D 12R 73.4 01/24/2006 07:49 IJNIQ�T BE18 D 30R 72.5 01/06/2006 07:47 UNKN BE18 D 30R 72.0 01/31/2006 07:18 UN[Q�T BE18 D 17 71.8 01 /31 /2006 09:26 MES2757 SF34 D 12L 71.3 01/30/200616:23 XNH85 UNKN D 30R 70.8 01/24/2006 07:03 BMJ48 BE80 D 30R 70.2 01/14/2006 07:57 BMJ68 BE99 D 12L 70.1 01 /31 /200611:06 MES2759 SF34 D 12L 70.0 01/17/2006 07:37 tTNKN BE18 D 30R 68.3 (RMT Site# 11) Finn St. & SchefFer Ave., St. Pau1 Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/05/2006 07:41 UNKN BE18 D 30R 81.8 01/30/200616:24 XNH85 UNKN D 30R 81.4. 01/24/2006 07:49 UNICi�t BE18 D 30R 79.4 Ol/24/2006 07:03 BMJ48 BE80 D 30R 76.5 01/25/2006 07:28 BMJ48 BE80 D 30R 75.1 01/09/2006 23:26 XNA123 B72Q D 30L 71.4 01/12/2006 06:40 SCX245 B738 D 30L 70.9 01/13/2006 06:41 BMj48 BE80 D 30L 70.5 01/24/200613:29 NWA1048 A319 D 30R 70.2 01/31/2006 09:22 TTNIQ�T C172 D 30R 69.7 (RMT Site#12) Alton St. & Rockwood Ave., St. Paul Date/Tune Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/30/200616:23 XNH85 LTNKN D 30R 82.2 01/31/2006 07:19 LTNICN BE18 D 17 78.9 01/26/200613:43 BMJ01 BE80 D 12L 77.3 01/12/200616:58 NWA1272 A319 A 30R 72.1 01/02/200617:28 UNKN SR22 D 12L 71.6 01/31/2006 07:14 BMJ13 BE80 D 17 71.2 01/03/2006 07:14 BMJ01 BE80 D 12L 68.9 01/10/200617:15 BMJ33 BE58 D 12L 68.6 01/27/2006 23:47 KI IA2850 B733 D 30L 65.6 01/31/200610:15 TCA1 UNKN D 12R 65.3 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 23 Date/Time 01 / 15 /200613:38 01 / 11 /200610:31 01/10/2006 01:29 01/19/2006 07:38 01/15/200611:06 01 /28 /200613:26 01 /31 /200617:09 01/28/2006 07:17 01/26/2006 09:06 01/01/2006 09:25 'I'�p '�'�n I�o�a��st t�i�e��.�� l�to�s� Ev�nks f�r I�� Jan-Ofi (RMT Site#13) Southeast End Of Mohican Court, Mendota. Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arture NWA19 B744 D CCI706 B72Q D CCP2041 $72Q D CCI706 B72Q b AAL1435 MD80 D NWA19 B744 D AAL1975 MD80 D DAL199 MD80 D AA.L1127 MD80 D .AA�.1127 MD80 D (RMT Site#14) 1 st St. & Mckee St., Ea�an Runway 12R 12L 12R 12L 12L 12R 12L 12L 12L 12L Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/16/2006 06:26 CCP1490 B72Q D 12R 95.9 01/26/200615:43 CCP420 B72Q D 12R 95.8 01/26/200616:02 CCP1462 B72Q D 12R 95.4 01/11/2006 09:27 CCP400 B72Q D 12R 95.3 01/01/200616:23 CCP1462 B72Q D 12R 95.0 01/21/200616:10 CCP420 B72Q D 12R 94.3 01/14/2006 06:47 CCP438 B72Q D 12R 94.2 01/23/2006 08:29 CCP402 B72Q D 12R 94.2 01/28/2006 06:25 CCP438 B72Q D 12R 93.7 01/16/2006 07:23 CCP450 B72Q D 12R 93.2 (RMT Site#15) Cullon St. & Lexington Ave., Mendota DaEe/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arture 01/31/2006 21:42 NWA1843 DC9Q D 01/26/200610:56 NWA600 DC9Q D Ol/14/200614:37 AAL827 MD80 D 01/26/200617:13 AAL1975 MD80 D 01/15/2006 09:03 AAL1127 MD80 D 01/31/2006 21:35 NWA1087 DC9Q D 01/23/200610:35 NWA748 DC9Q D 01/11/200610:30 CCI706 B72Q D 01/11/2006 07:35 UNKN BE18 D 01/03/200615:10 NWA1809 DC9Q D Runway 12L 12L 12L 12L 12L 12L 12L 12L 12L 12L . .: .� �.. :• :' 1 :• 1 :: � :: :: 1' � : 1 24 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program � � , ; �� _ � �� i Date /Time 01/02/2006 07:41 01/26/200611:15 01/28/200616:02 01/02/200611:11 01/16/2006 07:23 01 /21 /200616:09 01/28/2006 07:21 01/14/200611:39 01 /01 /200616:23 01/19/2006 07:51 T�� '�'��a Lo�.i.��s� ��c��t I�ois� ��T��s fo�- l��P .�an-06 (RMT Site#16) Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane, E Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur� CCP450 B72Q D CCP468 B72Q D CCP420 B72Q D CCP434 B72Q D CCP450 B72Q D CCP420 B72Q D CCP436 B72Q D CCP1400 B72Q D CCP1462 B72Q D CCP1460 B72Q D (RMT Site#17) 84th St. & 4th Ave., Bloom�n Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ - De artur� 01/27/2006 07:33 CCI706 B72Q D 01/13/2006 20:23 TCA1 UNKN D 01/26/2006 20:48 TCA1 LJ��TKN D 01/10/2006 20:00 TCA1 LTNKN D 01/31/2006 20:17 TCA1 IJNIQ�T D 01/27/2006 07:17 DAL199 MD80 D 01/11/200616:30 A.AL1073 MD80 D 01/06/200613:00 DAL553 MD80 D 01/30/2006 20:24 TCA1 UNKN D 01 /27/200610:19 NWA1286 DC9Q D (RMT Site#18) 75th St. & 17th Ave, Richfield Runway 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R Runway 17 17 17 17 17 30L 30L 30L 17 30L � . .: �. :. :� :� . : � .� . :1 :• � � Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/30/2006 20:24 TCA1 UNKN D 17 88.7 01/23/2006 07:49 UNKN BE18 D 17 85.9 01/15/200611:57 NWA452 DC9Q D 17 85.9 01/31/200619:41 NWA1872 DC9Q D 17 84.6 Ol/26/200619:04 NWA1472 DC9Q D 17 84.6 01/15/200610:29 DAL1097 B73Q D 17 84.5 01/31/200613:11 NWA1441 DC9Q D 17 84.4 01/16/2006 07:35 NWA500 DC9Q D 17 84.3 01/31/2006 09:32 NWA410 DC9Q D 17 84.3 01/13/2006 20:23 TCA1 UNKN D 17 83.7 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 25 'I'o� '�'��a L,o��de�t �.��c�a�t 1�€�a�� v�ngs �'a�r 1@��' 3an-06 (RMT Site#19) 16th Ave. & 84th St., Bloomii Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur� '31/2006 20:17 TCA1 UNKN D '19/2006 07:04 BMJ64 BE80 D 1 16:30 A.AL1073 MD80 D 12:04 NWA452 DC9Q D 09:19 XN5078G BE65 D 20:47 TCA1 LTNKN D 11:57 NWA452 DC9Q D 19:59 TCA1 LTNTQ�T D 20:34 TCA1 UNKN D 19:42 NWA1872 DC90 D (RMT Site#20) 75th St. & 3rd Ave., Richfield Runway 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 . . .: � : 1 :.� : . ;, . : • : • � � : • Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01 / 11 /2d0616:30 AAL1073 MD80 D 30L 84.5 01/27/2006 07:17 DAL199 MD80 D 30L 82.7 01/29/200611:08 AAL1435 MD80 D 30L 82.3 Ol/17/200614:32 NWA113 A320 D 30L 81.3 01/24/2006 22:01 FDX1106 B72Q D 30L 80.2 01/11/200616:32 DAL1587 B73Q D 30L 80.1 01/23/2006 08:01 AAL1755 MD80 A 30L 79:8 01/23/200618:47 NWA1535 DC9Q D 30L 79.5 01/27/2006 22:10 NWA144 DC9Q D 30L 79.2 01/23/2006 22:48 DHL304 B72Q D 30L 79.0 (RMT Site#21) Barbara Ave. & 67th St., Inver Grove Heights Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture Ol/08/200613:33 NWA19 B744 D 12R 82.6 01/11/2006 07:27 NWA362 B757 D 12L 82.3 01/31/200613:27 NWA19 $744 D 12R 81.3 01/14/200621:16 NWA1087 DC9Q D 12L 81.2 01/31/2006 23:29 CCI705 B72Q D 12R 81.1 01/15/200615:30 NWA690 DC9Q D 12L 81.0 01/10/2006 07:18 CCI706 B72Q D 12L 81.0 01/11/2006 23:06 ROC72 B72Q D 12R 80.9 01/11/2006 23:11 CCI705 B72Q D 12R 809 01/01/200619:25 NWA924 DC9Q D 12L 80.4 26 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program � C "�'o� �'�� Lm�ticl�st 14��c��t I�ois� ��T��s �€�r l�SP Jan-Ob (RMT Site#22) Anne Marie Trail, Inver Grove Heights Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway De arture 01/14/2006 06:48 CCP438 B72Q D 12R 01/21/2006 06:33 CCP438 B72Q D 12R 01/30/2006 23:17 CCP1465 B72Q A 30R 01/26/2006 23:24 XNA123 B72Q D 12R 01/23/200615:26 CCP1451 B72Q A 30L 01/10/200610:47 FDX600 B72Q D 12R 01/06/2006 07:51 NWA1803 DC9Q A 30L 01/02/2006 06:33 CCP1490 B72Q D 12R 01/02/200611:13 CCP434 B72Q D 12R 01/01/2006 08:02 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R (RMT Site#23) End of Kenndon Avenue, Mendota Heights Lmax (dB) 87.1 84.4 83.7 83.4 83.3 83.1 82.5 82.3 82.3 82.3 Date/Time Flight Nwnber Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01 / 11 /200610:30 CCI706 B72Q D 12L 96.7 01/11/2006 22:12 NWA1469 DC9Q D 12L 94.9 01/28/200613:27 NWA754 DC9Q D 12L 94.8 01/31/2006 21:15 NWA1957 DC9Q D 12L 94.7 01/11/2006 21:11 NWA1957 DC9Q D 12L 94.4 Ol/10/2006 50:20 NWA768 DC9Q D 12L 94.1 01/03/2006 21:54 NWA867 DC9Q D 12L 94.1 01/21/200610:28 NWA748 DC9Q D 12L 93.9 01/19/200610:33 NWA768 DC9Q D 12L 93.7 01/15/200610:21 NWA748 DC9Q D 12L 93.7 (RMT Site#24) Chapel Lane & Wren Lane, Eagan Date/Tune Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De ariure 01/16/2006 07:24 CCP450 B72Q D 01/11/2006 09:27 CCP400 B72Q D 01/26/200615:44 CCP420 B72Q D 01/14/2006 06:47 CCP438 B72Q D 01/26/200616:02 CCP1462 B72Q D 01/23/200619:20 CCP435 B72Q A 01/23/200610:54. NWA19D B744 D 01/21/2006 06:33 CCP438 B72Q D 01/02/2006 06:32 CCP1490 B72Q D Ol/23/200611:16 CCP434 B72Q D A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program Runway 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 30L 12R 12R 12R 12R . . .: �� . � .� . .� ;.. ;•. :: : :: :: 27 '�m�► T�� Lc�a�des� A��c��.�� IV��s� �v��s for 1��° .Tan-06 (RMT Site#25) Moonshine Park, 1321 Jurdy Rd., Date/Time Flight Number A.ircraft Type Arrival/ De arture 01/28/200616:02 CCP420 B72Q D 01/30/2006 08:43 NWAl$40 DC9Q A 01/02/200616:03 NWA1170 DC9Q D 01/02/2006 07:35 NWA456 DC9Q D 01/28/200611:33 CCP1400 B72Q D 01/28/2006 07:46 CCP1410 B72Q D 01/28/2006 07:21 CCP436 B72Q D 01/15/2006 07:43 CCP1460 B72Q D 01/14/200611:39 CCP1400 B72Q D 01/19/2006 07:51 CCP1460 B72Q D Runway (RMT Site#26) 6796 Arkansas Ave. W., Inver Grove Hei�hts 12R 30L 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R 12R Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/26/2006 08:22 CCI706 B72Q D 12L 86.9 01/10/200613:31 NWA19 B744 D 12R 86.4 01/31/2006 23:21 DHL304 B72Q D 12R 85.5 01/08/200613:33 NWA19 B744 D 12R 85.4 01/10/2006 07:17 CCI706 B72Q D 12L 85.2 01/31/200615:53 NWA42 DC10 D 12R 84.7 01/31/2006 23:29 CCI705 B72Q D 12R 84.3 01/31/200613:27 NWA19 57�14 D 12R $4.1 01/03/200612:00 NWA99 DC10 D 12R 83.9 Ol/�1/200623:29 CCI705 B72Q D 12R 84.3 Date/Time 01/27/2006 07:12 01 /29 /200616:14 01/29/2006 06:23 01 /27/2006 09:22 01 /30 /200616:42 01 / 16/200611:13 01/20/2006 09:08 01/06/2006 07:40 01 / 19 /200616:30 01/22/2006 09:05 (RMT Site#27) Anthony Middle School, 5757 Irving Ave. S., Flight Nwnber .Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arture CCP1450 B72Q D CCP420 B72Q D CCP436 B72Q D CCP422 B72Q D ' CCP1464 B72Q D CCP434 B72Q D CCP432 B72Q D CCP1450 B72Q D CCP1462 B72Q D CCP1452 $72Q D Runway 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 28 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program C ( j Z'o� Z'�� I,��dest �4ir�raft 1�to�s� E��s %a�- I1!I�� a,�-a6 (RMT Site#28) 6645 16th Avenue S., Richfield Date/Time Flight Ntunber Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arture 01/06/2006 22:46 DHL304 B72Q D 01 /04/200617:11 NWA1156 DC9Q D 01/24/200612:18 NWA452 DC9Q D 01/06/200612:47 NWA1280 DC9Q D 01/16/200622:57 FDX1106 B72Q D 01/23/2006 22:47 DHL304 B72Q D 01/08/200616:39 NWA502 DC9Q D 01/30/200613:24 NWA494 DC9Q D 01/29/200612:03 NWA125 DC9Q D 01/24/2006 07:46 DHL1648 B72Q D (RMT Site#29) Ericsson Elementary School, 4315 31 st Ave. S., Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De axture 01/27/2006 07:42 NWA1470 DC9Q D 01/13/2006 07:21 ITNKN BE18 D 01/24/2006 23:37 XNA123 B72Q D 01/23/200614:34 AAL827 MD80 D 01/30/2006 09:08 AAL1127 MD80 D 01/12/200617:17 AAL1975 MD80 D 01/12/2006 07:35 LTI�IIQ�T BE18 D 01/04/2006 08:01 LTNKN BE18 D 01/24/200619:36 FDX1336 B72Q D 01/23/2006 23:46 KFS523 B72Q D (RMT Site#30) 8715 River Ridge Rd., Bloomi Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur� 01/01/200617:23 NWA1839 DC9Q D 01/01/200619:53 NWA975 DC9Q D 01/OS/200613:45 NWA409 DC9Q D 01/15/200614:07 NWA409 DC9Q D 01/OS/200611:54 NWA452 DC9Q D 01/28/200612:04 NWA452 DC9Q D 01/01/200616:28 NWA1531 DC9Q D 01/31/2006 07:46 I<I�A712 B72Q D 01/16/2006 07:14 NWA122 DC9Q D Ol/15/200611:46 AAL1316 MD80 D A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program Runway 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L 30L inneapolis Runway 30R 30R 30L 30R 30R 30R 30R 30R 30L 30L Runway 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 . . .:` .� :• :: . : . : . :.� : . : � � ;, , 29 T�� Te� I,m�,d�s� Ai�-cr�� l�t�is� �v�ra�s fa�-11�IS� .�a�i-Ob (RMT Site#31) 9501 12th Ave. S., Bloornin� � Date/Tune Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur '01/23/200616:31 AAL1073 MD80 D 01/27/2006 07:33 CCI706 B72Q D 01/11/200614:29 ELT105 BE9L D 01/31/2006 06:52 BMJ64 BE80 D 01/06/200611:58 NWA623 A319 D 01/06/200614:56 DAL1099 B73Q D 01/27/2006 07:17 DAL199 MD80 D 01/06/200612:48 NWA1280 DC9Q D 01/15/200616:31 AAL1073 MD80 D 01/19/2006 08:44 LTNKN C750 D (RMT Site#32) 10325 Pleasant Ave. S., Bloom: Date/Time Flight Nuxnber Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arturE 01/27/200612:10 NWA452 DC9Q D 01/23/200619:27 NWA415 DC9Q D 01/07/2006 06:39 CCP438 B72Q D 01/23/200611:42 NWA1527 DC9Q D 01/23/200618:48 NWA1535 DC9Q D 01/13/2006 22:52 DHL304 B72Q D 01/27/2006 09:25 NWA410 DC9Q D 01/23/200616:31 AAL1073 MD80 D 01/27/200610:20 NWA1286 DC9Q D 01/11/200616:31 AA.L1073 MD80 D (RMT Site#33) North River Hilis Park, Burnsville Runway 17 17 17 17 17 30L 30L 30L 17 17 Runway 30L 17 30L 17 30L 30L 17 17 30L 30L Lmax (dB) 81.5 $1.4 80.5 80.4 79.5 77.7 77.0 76.9 76.5 76.4 Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture Ol/26/200615:32 NWA1531 DC9Q D 17 83.1 Ol/27/2006 08:29 AAL631 MD80 D 17 82.3 01/31/200619:26 NWA415 DC9Q D 17 81.7 01/31/2006 07:47 KHA.712 B72Q � D 17 81.3 Ol/14/200619:09 NWA1230 DC9Q D 17 81.2 01/08/200611:46 AAL1316 MD80 D 17 81.0 01/18/200616:40 AAL1073 MD80 D 17 80.9 01/27/2006 06:15 AAL1240 MD80 D 17 gp.7 01/15/200611:47 AAL1316 MD80 D 17 80.3 01/31/2006 09:34 NWA1153 DC9Q D 17 80.3 30 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program � F � \ C ( � �og� �['�� o�cl�s% ��ft l��is� E�T��s ��r 1�� .Xa�-as (RMT Site#34) Red Oak Park, Burnsville Date/Time Flight Ntunber Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arture 01/21/200611:37 CCP1400 B72Q D 01/21/200611:34 NWA1441 DC9Q D 01/11/200611:33 NWA1441 DC9Q D 01/26/200611:45 NWA1441 DC9Q D 01/31/200611:21 NWA1527 DC9Q D Ol/11/200613:36 NWA1529 DC9Q D 01/11/200611:54 NWA9752 DC9Q D 01/23/200613:41 NWA1529 DC9Q D 01/31/2006 09:35 NWA1153 DC9Q D 01/11/200619:26 NWA415 DC9Q D (RMT Site#35) 2100 Garnet Ln., Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De artur� 01/30/200619:00 CCP403 B72Q A 01/28/200612:05 NWA452 DC9Q D 01/23/200619:17 DAL1587 B73Q D 01/30/2006 20:00 BMJ69 BE80 A 01/09/200615:13 AAL1118 MD80 A 01/21/200611:36 CCP1400 B72Q D 01/11/200611:50 .AAL1316 MD80 D 01/24/200610:13 NWA1171 DC9Q A 01/26/200611:46 AAL1316 MD80 D 01/13/200615:51 NWA449 DC9Q A (RMT Site#36) Briar Oaks & Scott Pond, Apple V Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arture 01/09/2006 07:38 NWA1803 DC9Q A 01/05/200616:39 DHL1748 B72Q A 01/06/200615:39 NWA1494 DC9Q D 01/09/200619:08 CCP435 B72Q A 01/13/200619:34 BMJ69 BE80 A 01/24/200610:35 NWA1526 DC9Q A Ol/31/200610:26 NWA1286 DC9Q D 01/11/200615:28 NWA1170 DC9Q D 01/25/200612:06 iJNKN GLF3 A 01/27/2006 07:04 NWA448 DC9Q D A Product of the Meiropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program Runway 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Runway 35 17 17 35 35 17 17 35 17 35 Runway 35 35 17 35 35 35 17 17 35 17 � . .: � � .. .� ., :• :• :. :1 �:� . .: . . .� . �� : . : : : : : : : � . , . � �� 31 01 01 01 01 T'op T�n Lo�udes� �ircz•aft N�ise E�e��s far I�ISP ,��,-os (RMT Site#37) 4399 Woodgate Ln. N., Eagan Date/Tune Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway De arture '31/200617;10 NWA1156 DC9Q D 17 '03/200610:37 COA1617 B735 D 12R '26/200613:15 NWA19 B744 D 12R '07/200619:14 NWA1168 DC9Q D 17 '16/2006 07:15 NWA122 DC9Q D 17 '07/200619:29 NWA1208 DC9Q D 19 '18/200619:27 NWA876 DC9Q D 17 '31/2Q0619:21 NWA1168 DC9Q D 17 '14/200612:04 NWA452 DC4Q D 17 '11/200612:00 NWA452 DC9Q D 17 (RMT Site#38) 3957 Turquoise Cir., Eagan Date/Time F1igh,t Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ De arEure 01/10/2006 07:01 DHL1648 B72Q D Ol/10/200615:36 NWA1170 DC9Q D 01/26/200617:01 CCP466 B72Q D 01/19/200610:26 NWA124 DC9Q D 01/07/200619:08 NWA1496 DC9Q D 01/31/200615:52 NWA502 DC9Q D 01/31/200612:03 NWA452 DC9Q D Ol/10/2006 07:24 NWA448 DC9Q D 01/03/2006 07:27 NWA44S DC9Q D 01/28/200610:27 NWA124 DC9Q D Lmax (dB} 84.4 84.3 83.6 80.8 80.8 80.7 80.6 80.6 80.5 80.0 Runway Lmax (dB) 1'7 85.0 17 82.5 12R 82.3 17 81.6 17 81.4 17 80.7 17 80.6 17 80.2 17 80.2 17 80.1 (RMT Site#39) 3477 St. Charles Pl., Eagan ' Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax (dB) De arture 01/31/200616:16 CCP8702 B72Q D 17 88.1 01/26/2006 07:14 DHL1648 B72Q D 17 86.7 01/31/2006 07:19 DHL1648 B72Q D 17 55.2 Ol/11/200606:51 DHL1648 B72Q D 17 84.3 01/11/200613:17 NWA494 DC9Q D 17 82.5 01/31/200610:30 NWA124 DC9Q D 17 80.8 Ol/10/200613:19 NWA494 DC9Q D 17 80.5 01/11/200619:13 NWA1168 DC9Q D 17 80.3 Ol/11/200619:25 NWA876 DC9Q D 17 79.9 01/28/200610:32 YV455CP FA50 D 17 79.5 January 2006 Remote Monitorinq Tower Top Ten Summarv The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for January 2006 were comprised of 94.1 % departure operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the 8727 Hushed with 33.8% of the highest Lmax events. Januarv 2006 Technical Advisor Report Notes Unknown fields are due to unavailability of FAA flight track data. Missing FAA radar data for 0.0 days during the month of January 2006. 32 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program Q C. Analysis of A,�.rcraft No�se Events - Aircraft I.dn d.:BA ' �' January 2006 Remote Monitoring Towers Il 12 13 14 1� IG 17 l� 1.9 �� 21 23 23 2� �� 2(i 2i 2R 29 3Q 31 ivJ:o. Ldn 59.8 59.7 65.4 � 60.9 6.9.1 66.9 52.0 � 46.0 �va. n!a il%3 nla 57.0 63.9 5�.5 6.1.7 61.8 C6.b 62.4 C9.6 b3.2 �b.4 � 3�.9 25.7 n,ta ��/a �0.5 �8.1 67.� �9.9 _St).1 6Q.S G�.7 � f�2.4 (i9.�3 69.3 37.5 4Q.4 �.11a nia 31.3 2��.� 54.1 b4.3 6U.5 S�.G �"a.1 60.7 59.4 69 � 73.1 65.0 51,�.2 SU? nra 37.0 ai,a � 3�.0 G2.4 47.0 >0.7 $ 51.7 b0.0 G1.8 71.� 71.3 � G6.0 61.3 39.6 37.3 '�1.3 26.8 nia Gl.i 3�.3 �Q.6 � 53.1 �7.0 58.3 (i7.2 ?2.8 62.2 �9.1 37.0 29.9 n%a x�1a �2.8 61.1 SU.S 5�4.4 � S7.I. 51.� 60.5 71.5 7Q..9 b2.6 �4.5 �va �n/a nia i�Ja �4.4 �(0.4 57.3 58.7 � 78.0 G�. � 6?.5 70.5 72.4 6]..2 5&.9 29.� 26.7 ��/a ;O.G 5;.� 64.4 55.2 50.9 �2.3 57.3 61.� 72.�3 71.7 p 6$.3 5$.9 �5.4 il/a �2.3 � iva ��2.2 79.3 34.2 57.4 � 57.9 6�.4 � Gl.� � 6�.7 69.1 � 48.8 51.5 nia n/a 29.5 ��.�la 6(1.8 G6.0 62.6 3 �33 � 53.9 ��9.6 �9.fi 71.9 ?3.� 6�.{) 63.5 3b.7 31.7 �O.�i 32.3 4fi.l Ci2.; 47.C} 5{).9 � 52.3 �6.6 �9.1 70.1 ?l.fi' ob.9 6U.o 2�.0 nia 3�.7 � 26.i 302 E1.9 46.! 57.1 ��.t� 64.5 60.� G9.] C7.7 46.i �3.5 rva 29.7 ��/a rU'a � ��.-� 66.2 �9.5 S9.(i 6U.8 C�C.7 . 62.� ?0.1 6�.8 �2.� 46.7 � n,%a nia 3�.1 3�.9 � Ci0.0 62.1 G1.8 57.7 55.3 64.4 G0.9 71.9 73.4 C 1.9 E 1.9 � n; � ��; a n/a �sia 51.7 (i 1.0 52.6 j2.9 532 �6.� 58.0 G7.6 70.7 66.2 6U.6 rv'a 2�.9 n/a 2;.? a8.�i ��93 �0.7 ____ .�..�..__._ ��.7 � 57.2 61.5 60.4 69.5 ?0.3 ° 64.0 �>7.8 �va n�'a 26.3 � iva �7.9 62.�} 59.6 �6..4 � 57.3 C�.� s9.8 71..1. 7�.2 � 65.0 �4.y 3�.3 n.•'a �u''a �7.� 53.4 6t1.� 57.7 52.2 �2.6 5.9.8 59.1 i 1..7 72.1 � 66.9 ��9.1 rv`a 24.4 31.2 n1a �?9.5 � 59.7 36.4 5;.5 59.1 � 64.8 i9.9 C}8.2 6G.7 �1.0, 38.2 n,`a Z6.1 t�1�7 nla � 56.J b5.1 59.7 i5.0 54.1 61.4 �8.6 73.G 73.� C2.0 _57.2 n/a �l/a nia nia 37.9 �8.1. 42.6 50.9 54.4 >8.6 �8.4 bl.t� 7?..� 62.0 : 60.� � nla 41.0 rv'"a ��ir'a 70.0 61.9 5�.7 �1.5 52.f �1.5 5$.i 6�.6 71.2 � fi5.0 Ei3.4 �0.2 77.0 43A �^a�3 �9.0 � 62.0 44.� � SU.� 53.6 59.3 Sb.S 68.9 f4.8 61.0 �82 n'a n/a 36.0 2�.5 55.] h2.4 56.7 G0.{? 603 Ci7.; 6?.2 7U.S 69.9 �8.1 49.6 33.� �6.� 33.a ��7.1 �9.8 67.� (i3.3 S�i.h �7.1 662 b1.3 ?;.8 73.4 63.5 59.7 � 0�3 Z6.fi �1..1. 31.5 4i.8 61.0 52.9 J8.? Ci().� f7.0 CI..0 ?1.2 �i9.Q ��.2 4�.0 32.6 ii%a r�'a nia S£.3 t�5.6 59.3 � >6.4 � 57.3 63.9 CiO.� 75. � 73.1 � Ci4�2 59.G r�la n�`a nia ii%a � n�`� (i1.2 40.8 5�.2 6 SC.O b3.4 64.d 73.9 75.5 � bC.S � b 6 34.1 29.8 H��1.9 �2.0 37.7 E,0.7 ;9.0 a9.2 Ei().l G6.0 fil 1 70.1 6�.9 i 50.3 . Sl.fi ��ila �Q.2 3t 2� 4U 9 GO : fi7 t� 63.� _56.8 � 57.6 63.7 ;60 9,71.0 '71:5 g 62.8 5$.9 3'7.6 3�:3 36 0�;33.7 6 55:4 �:63.7 ,57:$ �,. _. - ,.,.. . � �,. . , � . -:..... ,..�... .. ,. A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 33 � ; , � . � , � , . � ; � � � � � , 1 � 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 l.0 lI l2 l.� � l� li 1 fi 11 18 19 20 21 22 23 ?�. 2� �b ?7 �� ?9 30 31 1-r��. L�n 34 Januan-y 2006 Remote Monitoring Towers 65.9 � 27.9 i32 j;0.8 � 33.� �2.3 � 55.2 65.7 60.7 �5.1 j5.2 44.3 ;R.1 ' 26.b 70.9 24.9 nia n�a 33.7 �5.8 57.3 67.4 C�3.8 �79 �7.1 �2.7 i7.Ci 31.fi �8.� n••`a S.t.Q 47.7 3fi.8 54.2 5(,.4 6�.5 61.4 53.9 59.2 38.4 52.9 34.3 bS.O 3�.4 �3.8 43.Q 45.1 53.� S7.0 5�.4 61.9 39.5 �7.3 56.4 62.9 G.5.9 67.4 � 3�.7 41.2 39.8 45.6 3>.; 59.1 47.4 62.0 42.0 42.5 � 57.8 b3.G �4.G � 67.0 49.i _5�.i 51.9 53.6 34.7 56.9 5?_4 60.7 72.% 44.2 56S 64.1 i7.$ 6j.� nla SQ.O 47.j 38.3 46.2 5�.8 67.6 59.2 49.3 48.3 59.3 59.8 53.7 6�.7 iva 52.1 50.; 3=�.1 50.0 5�.9 � b3.1 61.2 .52.9 56.7 51.7 61..0 53.6 C5.1 �4.0 413 3�.8 4i.5 40.'� 5(i.0 51.9 Sf3.6 � 47.� 49.2 54.8 61.0 5�}.5 GS.8 43.6 583 53.� 3�.2 5;.� 5�.b 67.3 bl.� 53.6 59.6 32.6 57.9 � 3t.3 G53 44.9 57.2 54.4 4'1.2 57.6 �7.8 6'8.9 Ei22 � 53.3 58.7 �4.7 562 4G.5 6; .1 4%.0 47.3 �S.Ei 50.6 46.7 �5.3 �G.O 61.5 SQ.6 55.2 b2.2 f.i3.8 � 58.9 67.9 49.6 4�;.4 4U.0 49.5 42.0 �9.4 �2.9 62.2 4�.3 41.8 5$.2 62.8 � 5�?.1 b7.8 =F7.8 53.5 =�9.7 ;9.G �7.7 �9�7� 6�? t2.9 54.�1 ��.2 41.5 59.5 3b.8 63.7 nia >5.1 j1.3 � 26.9 >5.1. �9.9 67.0 �$.2 �3.�i �8.7 41.5 �6.6 E 26.C, b7.0 3�!? 49.b �Ei.b 49..t '��5.(} ;6.2 61.1 62.Ci ;3.7 �5.5 tib�7 64.d � �6.G 55.7 n1a 39.b 29.5 50.0 �0.3 �4.� ��2.? �;9.5 ;'7.E� �b.0 75.G G1.f3 � 579 6C.i 28.3 5().7 47.8 33.0 71.6 �fi2 65.9 61.I 73.5 �?.6 Sfi.3 59.2 � 5?.3 6�.0 39.; 51.2 49.2 45.7 48.0 a4'.9 52.3 � 59.1 52.7 71.� 78.3 6Q.9 SEi.S 6?.$ iva 4C�.0 3G.3 4C.1 422 :i"!.� �7.0 60.1 31.9 �5.2 63.1 62.0 56.� 65.2 iva 54.Q SQ.6 � 2£�.fi S2.Cl 59.2 fi;.7 62.8 S�.() tiG.Q 40.� S23 2G.1 6�.2 27.8 �I.4 2G.4 42.b z�la 53.1 48.; Si.6 43.8 38.4 62.1 60.I f 5�.9� 67.4 46.1 56.6 53.7 53.1 47.2 55.7 61.3 b0.7 53.� 53.Q _57.2 63.0 59.8 G7.5 ��3.6 47.5 42.? 5�.2 ��la 59.8 52.9 Ci3.4 4�.1 47.? 5b'.4 Ci�l-.5 59.7 65.6 i�ia 29.7 34.9 33.'7 41.4 57.1. C3.�i 6t}.6 4;.g 54.1 SG.4 5�.6 54.6 ti7.8 �3.7 �6.7 j2.5 2�).� 52? �8.8 fi8.0 (i2.8 �6? GU.! �3.5 �9.1 43.2 64.5 i?.1 i5.7 j3.� �2.t) �$.3 jS.S 51.0 �Q.�) �5.3 55.4 (i2.8 60.2 �5.6 '' 6"t.a 41.3 54.v 53.5 38.3 �1.� 55.6 67.� 6Q.� 57.7 �4.6 47.5 61.3 n;`a � 65.7 34Z 35.5 nia =�2.� nia �8.5 i�.i; 61.3 43.0 40.7 66.� C1.0 ��5.4 65.7 4�.9 50.1 3�.G �fi.5 4U.; S9..t 51.1 61.? �2.� 79.E� 64.8 b3.7 58.3 j 67.$ 1;.7 5�.3 S7.�i 4l .fi 5i.$ 79.$ 68.� 6' ! 56 7 62 0 47.� 5�)^9 �=�7.7 f 66;8 .=�=�.2 53:4 :54.0 � 47.5 50.9 57.3 � 64.4 ��61.4 �29 55.8 ;58.� 6T.3 � 5 � A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program � 0 � � � : 1 � ', • � ! � , , , ; ( �1 2 J � 5 fi ! 8 9 �a I1 I2 l� 1� 15 l.6 17 l� 19 20 21 �� 23 � 24 2S 26 27 2� � ' � �.. � j0 Mc�. Ldn January 2�006 Remote Monitoring Towers til..l � 41.1 ( 26.6 ��.9 28.0 �1.2 41..� '�3.6 �.1 42.4 �i�a nr'a ��/a n1a nla nl�� 31..I 24.9 30.1 37.� 6�� 57.1 �i6.7 i�faY 49.4 �k2.g 40.4 � 36.7 45.5 47.6 43.� � 40.7 �;S.Ei 29.2 n�a n/a �v'a. n!a n/a i11a 2F.5 ; 4E�.1 � 31.; 4;.5 nIa 7�!a. 49.1 51.9 zva n,''a nia '� 6(l.0 50.1 � 46.1 48.2 45.7 52.6 51. �� 4l .8 37.0 33.2 ' i5.0 33.4 53.8 44.2 ( 37.7 �19.� 51.1 47.6 47.0 32.3 60.1 40.2 n1a. 50.1�4�.1 4'4.1 ��0.6 42.2 41.1 3I.1 � � =�7.5 �5.7 =�9.4 n/a 35.7 7�.C� � 53.2 42.2 r�,•`a. 25.:( f.i0.1 38.7 Y�1a 50.4 47.3 �7.7 � 4U.8 45.3 51.3 �0.4 61.0 45.1 3?.5 53.0 51.2 51..1 48.5 4G.8 4�.2 �f.l 50.6 42.0 47.5 42.1 a1..3 52.? � 54.2 ii.4 36.I n,'a 49.4 � 40.5 SI.6 47.Ci 40.5 51.9 � 5�.9 ��.2 4�.G � n�a 55.5 �2.$ i�/a. 49.4 �3.4 38.� ' 40.2 =�3.9 48.7 ��6.4 ��. ]. 43.8 u/a 50.0 43.5 4�3.0 � 36 1��2.1 47.6 =�i.4 �4.9 � 34.5 26.5 4U.5 32.7 36.9 � 29.� 40.3 41.1 38.9 49.2 'Z�.3 nr'a n!a 31.5 50.8 53.3 40.2 �3.1 �}.7 aC�4 � 36.7 n;`a 46.f3 42.0 >1.5 � 50.8 45.5 �5.9 39.6 ��.5 � 46.7 �&.(� 47.t) 39.5 S I.Q � 52.I =�C.S 47.3 4�.3 !; ' _�-' _50.3 43.0 30.� �»la 2�.6 54.4 � 53.0 Y1/a iala 39.0 � 5�.8 �1.=� ni� 50.9 4$.9 47.1 2�.�� =�U.b 43.; �8.7 47.2 n�a ? 4.7 24.6 ��,•'� 50.0 � S l. fi 1L�a nia nla 60.1 � 1.7 � 48.8 48.5 47.4 �3,g� �U.B 4�.6 43, l 39.4 50.7 � 45.3 45.1 48.3 28.4 >4.2 � 7�.8 iai� 43.1 �aJa � '�9.� z�i� � n;'a �x/�� 28.5 i1.0 a 5�2 4Ci.1 . 2�.fi 30.3 � � 55.7 3�.� 37.2 S l.4 48.1 �O.0 � 4�.4 47.� 48.7 51.3 . fi2.5 � 53.2 �U.S S'�.� 45:� 56.5 53.9 51.9 �9.Q 39.7 60.0 � 43.�} n;a 50.b 42.7 �7.5 3fi.7 � 47.7� '�fi.3 4�.b n�� n!a � a� 3 nl�i �nr'a n!a � 27.7 a 3. l i� %a zu'a � �.9.�i 31.8 ��.� 35.0 322 � Sa.3 � 54.0 31.6 � 30.0 i8.�} fi2.0 � �]..$ 37_2 � 5�.t} 4�.0 { 47.7 � i?,�� Q.� 52.4 � 53.2 � A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 35 192 � . ,� � { �r � i'�.,�i� � .,�'s �r �:� �,:a �� r fl '. t r� �.,�+ r',�;5 �''u -�5. a v�� ;,� � t Y �,�: � � i" �: e �9 S � �,1 R+ `"t1k� p. � . a ,A � 'i,4�.; ''", i � `i t�r '3E PF.�lYi ��` ii.,+ � YrJ¢ �s` k aSw.� `�.� �tr wn+"' .6; F�a•f f. A A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 17,Number44 February3,2006 Special Report SAE A.21 COlviMITTEE WIL]L SOON CONSIDER In Thas Issue... � I M � i, il� 1� by Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. (In this special repor•t, Vincent E. Mestre, president of the acoustical consult- ing fzrm Mestre Greve Associates located in Laguna Niguel, CA, and a member of the ANR EditoriaZAdvisory Board, discusses a new ��ecommended practice on aircrait noise monitoring svstems which will soon be considered bv the A21 Aircraft noise monitoring systems are becoming more and more common because they are integral to assessing noise impact, iracking flight paths, deter- mining compliance with operational restrictions and flight procedures, and giving airports credibility in dealing with communities. Yet there is a dearth of public guidance documents on how such systems should operate. So users of aircraft noise monitoring systems are left to their own devices to answer many questions: What should a noise monitoring system include? How do you locate noise monitoring sites? What kind of data should be collected? How do you know if the system is working correctly? How do you assess the quality of the data? What are the best practices for collecting aircraft noise data? For the first time, answers to these questions, based on a concensus of profes- sional opinion, will be provided in a recommended practice that is in the final phases of development by the A21 Aircraft Noise Measurement Committee of the Society ofAutomotive Engineets (SAE). This spring, the committee will consider the final draft of Aerospace Recom- mended Practice 4721, " Monitoring Aircraft Noise and Operations in the Vicinity of Airports." After the A21 Committee has approved the draft, it will be sent to the SAE Aerospace Committee for final adoption. The recommended practice will then be ready for publication and will be available from SAE (http://www.sae.org). Potential users of such guidance include airport proprietors, airport neighbors, federal, state and local govemment agencies, equipment vendors, and other public bodies. Years in Development SAE's A21 committee has been working on Recommended Practice 4721 off and on for many years. It began as an effort to help airports define specifications for noise monitoring systems and to qnantify the uncertainty associated with short- term measurement samples, such as how well a one- or two-day measurement of DNL represents the actual annual DNL at a given location. That effort grew in scope to address such issues as measuring how well aircraft noise systems work, working with aircraft position data, system administration, calibration and equipment certification, data analysis and reporting, and system (Continued on p. 193) Noise Monitoring ... In this special report, ANR.Editorial Advisory Board rnember V incent E. Mestre discusses a guidance document on aircraft noise monitoring systems that is inthe A21 AircraftNoiseMeasurement Committee ofthe Socieiy of Automotive Engineers. This spring, the committee will considerthe fmal draft ofAero- space Recommended Practice 4721 on "MonitoringAircraft Noise and Operations in the V1CI2111y OfA1IpOl'�S." Years in development, the recomrnendedpractice will, for the first time, provide users of aircraftnoise monitoring systems with long-sought expert guidance on all aspects of system opera- tiozl. The two-part recommended practice will address the design of airport noise monitoring systezns, location and insta llation of noise monitors, system adminisiration and maintenance, sampling requirements for short-term noise measurements, post-insta llation screening tests, va] idation o f system operations for special studies, and data analysis and reporting - p. 192 3,2006 testing for special studies. Measuring 24 hour annual exposure metrics, such as DNL, is not difficult and airports will fit�d that the ARP provides support for current practices. Also, segregating aircraft noise from community noise and identifying specific aircxaft noise levels is not diffcult for monitor sites close to the airport. However, we are seeing demands for monitoring sites 193 Site Selection and Installation —Describes what steps should be taken in locating noise monitors, and provides minimum requirements formonitor and microphone installa- tion. The AR.P recognizes the need to place monitors according to local policy demands but discourages the placement near busy roads or other major noise sources. much farther from airports than in the past and segregating aircraft noise from community noise at distant monitors is System Administration—Describes basic administrative muchmoredifficult. and maintenance activities necessary to ensure an installed Measuring aircraft noise levels by aircraft type is easy for system performs as intended. It is recommended that each i the loudest aircraft types. But measuring aircraft noise site be calibrated every 6 months, unless a record of perfor- levels for the quieter aircraft Types, such as the regional jets, mance shows such stability that it can be extended to an is more difficult because some of these aircraft may fly by annuai test. without triggering a noise event. The ARP distinguishes between an acoustical sensitivity This leads to a sample bias that may affect the reported test (what most people call calibration) and the act of average noise level for quieter aircraft types. For example, if calibration, which is an adjustment of the system sensitivity 100 regional jets fly over a noise monitor and only 10 of based on an observed drift in the acoustical sensitivity of the them are loud enough to trigger a noise event, an average system. A single frequency sensitivity check is acceptable, noise level calculated from the measured 10 flights would be but a two frequency test is preferred (250 and 1000 Hz). ou er han an average a wou ave een compu e a ecause e ie acous ica sensi iv� es is usua �one the system been able to measure all 100 flights. Generally, it at a single frequency and single amplitude, the ARP recom- is a combination of high ambient noise levels and low mends that each monitoring system undergo a certification aircraft noise levels that prevent systems from being able to every 1 to 3 years depending on the use of the data to verify measure all of the flights, thus introducing a potential bias the instrumentation is operating correctly over a larger ' into the measurements of noise level by aircraft type. The frequency and amplitude range. ARP provides guidance on how to detect and account for The ARP provides a list of recommended parameters that such bias. should be tested as part of insirument certification testing. � The ARP also addresses the addition of aircraft position data to noise monitoring systems, which has led to major improvements in the functionality of the systems. Acquiring aircraft position data presents unique problems independent of the noise data collection system. The ARP provides guidance, but not specific methodolo- gies, for dealing with incompiete aircraft tracks and smooth- ing aircraft tracks. The intent here was not to define a specific methodology but to acknowledge and support the efforts used to make aircraft position data useable in an aircraft noise monitoring system. Guidance Will be in Two Parts The draft ARP will be considered in 2 parts. The first part will address such topics as the following: System Descr'tption — Describes the basic components of a complete airport noise and operations monitoring system and gives minimum requirements. Acoustic instrumentation, aircraft position data, meteoro- logical data, noise complaint data and time clock issues are discussed. A description of the software needed to integrate these data and compute vazious noise metrics is described. Guidance is provided on event detection, correlating noise events with aircraft operations, transm ission of data from remote sites, and data storage and reporting. Q Temporal Sampling -Provides detailed guidance for making and reporting on aircraft noise measurements made using attended or unattended portable noise monitors for short term measurement programs of less than 1 year. This section will be most helpful in determining if short term measurements are adequate for drawing conclusions about the long term noise exposure at any given location. This section is quite complex and deals with sampling requirements during different periods of runway use and associated statistical uncertainty of the data. Part 2 of Guidance: Part 2 of the ARP will address the following issues: Post-Installation Screening Tests - Identifies tests that may be conducted immediately after a system has been installed and is operational. These tests use only data directly from the system and should efficiently identify any major short-comings, such as missing significant numbers of operations, missing or erroneous aircraft noise event data. These tests may also be run at any time that some major aspect of the system reported data is in question. Vafidating System Operation For Special Studies - Provides rnore rigorous and time consuming methods for ( , Airport Noise Report February3,2006 194 ANR E]DITORIAL statistically validating a permanent system's operation when special needs AD.VISORy BOA� require detailed, quantitative analysis of system reported data. i' ! This section describes metrics and associated tests and calculations that can be used to determine how well the system is: 1) capturing all aircraft John J. Corbett, Esq. flight tracking information, 2) matching captured tracks to runways, aircraft Spiegel & McDiazmid types and flights, 3) capiuring aircraft noise events, 4) matching those Washington, DC events with correct tracks, runways and aircraft, 5} measuring aircraft sound Car! E. Burieson levels, and 6) properly locating aircraft flight tracks. Director, Off,ce of Environment and Energy Data Analysis and Reporting— Suggests what general steps can be taken Federai Aviation Administration to improve the quality of system data and how measured data should be reported to provide su�cient information so that reviewers can easily judge John C. Rreytag, P.E. data quality. Director, Charles M. Salter Associates Note that the uidance of the ARP is intended for a lication to ai ort San Francisco g PP � rP noise-monitoring systexns that are designed and installed (or refurbished) Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. after the publication date of the ARP. Gatzke, Aillon & Ballance Cartsbad, CA Scope of SAE Work Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. SAE consists of Automotive and Aerospace divisions. Within the Kapian, Kirsch & Rockweli LLP Aerospace Division, the AircraftNoise Measurement Committee, A21, Denver develops guidance documents related to aviation noise. For example, the Suzanne C. McLean acoustic computation algorithms used within the FAA.'s Integrated Noise Cl�ief Development Officer Model, INM, are based on guidance documents developed by the SAE A21 Tucson Airport Authority cOmmittee. Vineent E. Mestre, P.E. According to SAE, an Aerospace Recommended Practice is "a documen- President, Mestre Greve Associates tation of practices, procedures, and technology that are intended as guides Laguna Niguel, CA to standard engineering practice. The content may be of a more general nature, or may present data that ha�e not yet gained broad engineering Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. acceptance." ChDa oott, Will & Emery p� 1 of the ARP is being edited by Vince Mestre of Mestre Greve � �� g , Associates and Part 2 is being edited by Nick Miller ofHarris Miller Miller & Mary L. Vigilante Hanson Inc. (�IlVIlV��. President, 3ynergy Consultants For more information, contact Vince Mestre at vmestr ae�izgal.com or 3eattie NickMillerat�Zmiller@Izmml:.com AIRPORT NOISE REPOR7' A.mxe H. Kohut, Publisher www.airporfnoisereport.com Published44times ayearat43978UrbancrestCt.,Ashburn, Va.20147;Phone: (703)729-4867;FAX: (703)729-4528. e-mail:editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price$694. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personai 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, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA. �- C 13 af E . N,^ � . Flwa� . , �� ` � .7�'�� ;' r -^z'"+su'� ' :� � 11.�& 6 '��: "S� 4i:... e t-- J F �. '�." � � y �' ti�' �� d.�Ma ��.Ea I}'� '� } � y .``� j � ,�.� � , � �� :�� Y�.�� „�. �r' �:�` s�. *��.� ��. � � ��.� � � � �" � � �,_ „§i::. �.fl . A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 18, Number 4 February 7, 2006 Los Angeles Int'l ---- MINETA T�2AVELS TO LAX TO AV6VA1tD -�1z 7'hiS I�SSlIe... GRANTS FOR SOUND INSULATION, RU7�IVVAY Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta tra�eled to Los Angeles Feb. 2 to award Los Angeles International Airport officials a grant of $27 million to help residential sound insulation efforts and a separate grant of $29.5 million to help pay to relocate one of the airport's four runways in order to add a taxiway and reduce runway incursions and delay. Mineta's trip to LAX follows a unanimous vote by the Los Angeles City Council on Jan. 18 to scrap a controversial $11 billion modemization plan for LAX, which had been challenged by cities near the airport on the grounds that its environmentat impacts had been understated. The City Council accepted a legal settlement of the lawsuits under which the airport will develop a new "community sensitive" modernization plan for LAX, which will provide $266 million over 10 years for residential sound insulation and will direct increased air traffic to other airports in the Southern California region. That effort to move air tra�c away from LAX most likely concerns DOT because the airlines have not supported it and because it could prove very difficult to do (Continued on p. 14) 2007 Budget Request �'� � � � i l�. �/.. f� f i' � 1� i � �', :' ��, : ;�; , _ ' _ � . - � . ; ;�: ; � :�: . . Aithough the Bush Administration has proposed a sharp cut in the level of funding for the federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) in fiscal 2007, the aircraft noise and emissions set-aside in the program will actually grow from a level of$298 million in fisca12006 to $322 million in fisca12007, accordingto theFederal Aviation Administration. That $24 million increase in the set-aside, which is one of the main funding mechanisms for aircraft noise mitigation projects, 9s due to the formula by which the set-aside is calculated and some recent adjustments to the overall formula by which AIP funding is calculated. The 2003 FAA reauthorization bill increased the noise and emissions set-aside from 34 percent of the AIl' discretionary fund to 35 percent. But the increase in the AII' noise and emissions set-aside may be the only bright spot in a budget request for FAA that did not meet airports' expectations. The Airports Council International —North America (ACI-NA) expressed disappointment that the budget request is recommending a$1 billion cut in funding for the federal Airport Improvement Program — a drop of more than 25 percent — at a time when record levels of passengers and cargo are moving through the U.S. aviation system. The Administration announced Feb. 6 that it wants to cut fiscal year 2007 (Continued on p. 14) Los Angeles Int'1... Secre- tary of Transportation Norman Mineta travels to Los Angeles to present grants for sound insula- tion, runway relocation in wake o City Council`s approval ofsettle- ' "communitysensitive"moderniza- tion plan for LAX - p.13 Sudget ... Despite sharp cut in AIP funding level in Bush Administration's fisca12007 budget request, the set-aside for aircraftnoise and emissions projects will grow - p.13 NfdSA ... The agency is restructuring its aeranautics program to make it a collabora- tive effort with industry - p.15 Resea�•ch ... ACRP will fund a project on assessingthe impacts ofincompatible land uses near airports - p. 15 News Briefs ... A new news- letterwill followresearchefforts ontransportation noise mitigation being conducted by European countries ... ��VIMHto offerApri] training course on INM in San Francisco ... FAA approves noise maps forAlexandria, LA, Airport ... FAA announces deadline by which airports must inform agency ofplans to use 2006 entitlement funds - p. 16 Februarv 7, 2006 14 �: given the fact that most other airports in the region are jeopardize airports' ability to accommodate system growth," surrounded by communities that also do not want to see saidACI-NAPresidentGregPrincipato. growth in air traffic. But Mineta did not address the issue of The administration also proposes to cut the FAA''s Facili- ` � regionalizing airiraffic in his remarks. ties and Equipment budget from the authorized level of $3.1 \ "Today we see reai progress in making the airport safer, billionto $2.5 billion. � more efficient, and a better neighbor," the Secretary told "The Administration's recommended levels for both A.IP airport and community o�cials in awarding the grants. He and the Facilities and Equipment account are inadequate," said the noise grant, which will help insulate more than 500 Principato said. "Our airports and their communities will work f homes in Lennox, El Segundo, and Inglewood, was intended hard this year to ensure Congress adequately funds system "to give families a break from jet noise:' needs. � Mineta also did not refer directly in his remarks to the legal "Given that ACI-NA has projected total airport capital settlement agreement but referred to it indirectly. "This has needs at $14.3 billion per year for the next five years, these � been a long, di�cult process. But as a former mayor [of San reductions mean that airports will have a harder time upgrad- Jose, CA], I know it is an important one. Everyone deserves ing facilities to meet increased demand," Principato added. to have a voice and needs to be heard, so that we can move The fiscal 2007 budget requests $13.7 billion for the FAA, forward knowing that we are working toward the same including $8.4 billion to address operational needs, hire 194 goal:' inspectors and other safety personnel and 1,136 new air "This is a tough road, and it is a necessary part of doing traffic controllers to offset retirements expected in 2007. DOT business in the public arena — but you did it. As a result, the said the $2.8 billion sought for the AIP program is meant to work occurring here is work that we can all support. construct new runways and to meet DOT's goal for improv- + Congratulations on achieving a major milestone on the ing runway safety, capacity, and e�ciency. project. Congratu ations on e atest roun o grant money to help pay the bill. And, congratulations on the work that FAA NoYse Office you are doing to make sure LAX reznains central to life in In terms of funding for the FAA's O�ce of Environment California." and Energy, the fiscal 2007 budget request seeks $16 million During his visit, Mineta met with homeowners to see new for Research, Engineering, and Development (RE&D) and the sound-resistant windows, doors, and insulation. He was office hopes to award grants totaling between $4 million and joined by Los Angeles World Airports Executive Director $5 million to indusiry and universiiy participants in its Center Lydia Kennard. They also toured the current runway and ofExcellence for AircraftNoise and Aviation Emissions the area where the runway will be relocated and the new Mitigation, known informally as PARTNER (Parinership for �- taxiway added. AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction). The $29 million runway grant will help support relocating one of LAX's four runways further to the south, making FAA. Reauthorization Proces5 room for the taxiway. The new layout for LAX's South Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta noted that Airfield will make it easier for planes to taaci to and from the Administration wil] propose a reauthorization plan for runways and help avoid take off and landing delays at the FAA that will include new financing proposals for the airport. The grant brings the total federal investment in the Aviation Trust Fund, from which AIP funds are ctrawn. runway to $69.3 million and Mineta said that the Federal Current revenue coming into the fund, which provides Aviation Administration ultimately expects to invest over resources for maintaining and expanding airport capacity one hundred million dollazs in the runway project. nationwide, is tied to the price of a ticket. The Secretary said "Fixing the runway will make this a safer airport and that the funding proposals will include "forward-looking ideas," gives us all reason to be more confdent in the safety of but did not define them. flights in and out of Los Angeles," Mineta said. °°'Z'here is generai agreement that our growing aviation He added that, including the latest grant, the FAA has system needs a more stable and predictable revenue stream invested over $106 nnillion to date to soundproof more than that creates a more direct relationship between revenues 2,400 homes in near LAX since 1998 and that 8,000 homes collected and services provided," Mineta said. will be included in the LAX residential sound insulation '�he current three-year congressional authorization for program when it is completed. FAA's programs expires at the end of fiscal 2007. This Budget, from p. 13 funding for the FAA's AIP grant program from the $3.7 billion level set under reauthorization legislation signed into law by President Bush three years ago to $2.7 billion. The Administcation's proposed 2007 funding level for the AIP program is $765 million less than the program's 2006 funding leveL "Such a severe budget cut is shortsighted and would spring, FAA. is expected to present reauthorization legislation which wiil include a new Aviation Trust Fund financing mechanism. It is unclear how it will affect the current AIP noise and emissions set-aside. The legisiation is still under development. The FAA reauthorization process also is the likely mecha- nism by which proponents of a mandatory phase out of Stage 2 business jets will seek to get such a requirement imposed. Airport Noise Report Febrnary 7, 2006 15 �eronautics the environmental impact and increase the public benefit of future aircraft: lower emissions, less noise, higher e�ciency, 7. NASA SEEKS COLLABORATION and safer operation. WITH INDUSTRY ON R.ESEARC]EI NASA, which participates in FAA's PART'NER program, said it will establish research relationships with FAA, the The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Deparhnent of Defense, and the Joint Planning and Develop- (NASA) is in the process of restructuring its aeronautics ment O�ce, which is responsible for developing the next research program to make it a collaborative public-private generation air transportation system. parinership with the aviation industry, other federal agen- In early January, NASA published a Request for Informa- cies, and universities. tion (RFI) soliciting interest, mainly from industry, to To that end, the agency recently restructured its Aeronau- collaborate at the systems level on its Fundamental Aero- tics Research division into three separate programs: Funda- nautics Program. The agency said that it is "particularly mental Aeronautics, Aviation Safety, and Airspace Systems. interested in coliaborating with industry consortia, and What was formerly called the NASA Vehicle Systems responses from existing or proposed consortia are encour- Program, and housed reseazch on aviation noise reduction, aged. is now called the Fundamental Aeronautics Program. "While educational institutions may also respond to the The goal of the Fundamental Aeronautics Program is to do �'I, �t is anticipated that a NASA Research Announcement the basic research needed to develop technological innova- (�) soliciting participation by educational institutions, tions in four areas: subsonic fixed wing aircraft, subsonic non-profit organizations, and companies engaged in rotary wing aircraft, supersonic aircraft, and hypersonic foundational research will be issued in early 2006." aircraft. Noise and emissions reduction is a component of That announcement is due to be issued this week. It will h-ef€a� . . The NASA Aeronautics program also is being restructured agency will review these proposals to determine if they fit to provide long-term investment in research and to sustain into a research "roadmap" that was recently developed. By expert competency in critical core areas of aeronautics the end of July, NASA plans to announce what projects it technology. has selected for a collaborative research effort. The new NASA research program is similar to the Federal Further information on NASA's restructured aeronautiGs Aviation Adminisiration's Center ofExcellence on Aircraft program is available on line at http:// Noise and Aviation Emissions Mitigation (i�forc�ally known �,�,�,,aerospace.nasa.gov. Click on "RFI" on the grey bar on f � as PARTNER for Partnership in AiR Transportation Noise the left side of the page. --' and Emissions Reduction) in that it seeks to fonn a consor- tium of parties to focus on various research projects that are �ZeseaYCh j ointly defined. But, while FAA's Center of Excellence focuses on issues other than source noise reduction (such 1�� '� �� C� as metrics, modeling, and other uncertainties to inform �� S� policy), NASA's program will focus solely on source noise reduction. In terms of noise, NASA research projects will seek to find new ways to reduce airplane airframe and engine noise and to increase high-lift performance with noise reduction. NASA Will Not Provide Funding Funding of the FAA's Center of Excellence and NASA's new Aeronautics Research Program also differs. FAA is providing several million in funding per year to support its Center in the hope that it will become f nancially self- su�cient within a decade. NASA, on the other hand, said it plans to use its authority under the National Aeronautics and Space Act to enter into "non-reimbursable agreements" where each pariy funds their own participation in the research effort. NASA expects one or more such agreements to be reached this year. NASA hopes that the results of this new collaborative research effort will be technological innovations and analysas tools that (1) provide.rapid evaluation of new concepts and technology, (2) accelerate the application of new technology to a wide array of vehicles, and (3) reduce The governing board of the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) met Jan. 31 and selected the recipients for 24 grants totaling $7.09 million in airport research funds from more than 400 projects proposed. Among the 24 projects selected for funding was one on assessing the impacts of incompatible land uses near airports. A description of each of the selected projects will be in a press release ACRP plans to issue this week. While a summary of the project on incompatible land use was included in an earlier issue of ANR.(Volume 17, p. 185), it may have been revised slightly by the ACRP governing board. That will not be clear until the press release is issued. But, when submitted, the goal of the project was "to define incompatible land use and its limits, and to develop a tool that state and local governments can use to assess the current and future impacts incompatible land uses will ha�e on future airport expansion and ultimately the life ofthe airport." The research was expected to cost $500,000 and take 18 znonths. It was developed by the Minnesota Depart- ment of Transportation in conjunction with the National Association of State Aviation O�cials. Airport Noise Report February 7, 2006 16 . '�'�• a i i � ��'%�i'i •r'� �� :��r> John J. Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiazrnid Washington, DC Carl E. Burleson Director, O�ce of Environment and Energy Federal Aviation Administration John C. Freytag, P.E. Director, Charles M. Salter Associates San Francisco Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. Cmtzke, Dillon & Ballance Cazlsbad, CA In B��ief ... Newsletter on European Research For those interested in following research efforts on transportation noise mitigation being conducted by European countries, there is a new newsletter available. The newsletter, which will be published three or four times per year, contains information on action being taken under a program sponsored by the Commission of the European IJnion. Called the Coordination of European Research for Advanced Transport Noise Mitigation, the effort is dubbed CALM II. It seeks to coordinate transportation noise research being con- ducted by European countries and stakehoiders in transportation noise. The CALM Newslefter will be distributed electronically via a mailing list and on the CALM website (www.calm-network.com). Those wishing to subscribe, should send a request via e-mail to alfred.rust@avl.com. The first CALM Newsletter, dated December 2005, notes that CALM is t Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. preparing a booklet with an inventory of the most relevant noise research Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP projects in Europe. The inventory will cover current and completed projects Denver not older than five years and includes a CD with the same information. The Suzanne C. McLean booklet is expected to be published this spring. ( Chief Development O�cer Tucson Airport Authority related to environmental noise and European noise legislation. ` Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. President, Mestre Greve Associates Laguna Niguel, CA Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. McDermott, Will & Emery Chicago MaryL•. Vigilante President, Synergy Consultants Seattle �IlVIlVI�i Course on INM The acoustical consulting firm Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. (ITIvIIv�� will hold a course on the Federal Aviation Adzninistration's Integrated Noise Model (INM) on April 18-20 in San Francisco. For further information, visit the firm's website at http://www.hmmh.com/ irainin�.httnL Alexandria lnt'1 Noise Ndaps Approved The Federal Aviation Administration announced Feb. 3 that noise exposure maps submitted by the England Economic and Industrial Development District for Alexandria lnternational Airport in Alexandria, Louisiana, meet federal requirements. For further information, contact Tim Tandy in FAA's Fort Worth, Texas, office; tel: (817) 222-5635. Notification Deadline for Use of Entittement Funds On Feb. 3, the FAA announced that May 1 is the deadline for airports to notify the agency that they will use their fiscal year 2006 entitlement funds to carry out projects identified in their 2005 Airports Capital ImprovementPlans. For further information, contact Barry Molar, manager of the FAA's Airports Financial Assistance Division Programming; tel: (202) 267-3 831. . , , . . . :_ _ � _� _ � / _` _ _� _ _ / _�►_ _ Anne H. Kohnt, Publisher Published 44 times ayearat43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price $750. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base £ee of US$1.03 per page per copy is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA. C �� 2 fi i.::aa� �'^' �� Y [; f � � 4 € 4.x� .,.. �� } t:f� ,E.: ,<4 j. 4� .' k ? �� kn,.�� .�X ,.: ?,��!f ,' . } �, L.a {r. , � Q:.. ..A.w �twrk' .C:� ' (, A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 18,Number5 February 14, 2006 Research ------ ACRP �OMPATIBLE LAND USE STUDY I12 ThiS ISSLce... I TO FOCUS ON NOISE MORE THA,N SAFETY T'he governing board of the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) revised the research statement for a study on land use compatibility around airports that it will fund this year in order to stress that the focas of the study will be on noise impact more than safety concerns. The $500,000 study on "Assessing the Impacts of Incompatible Land Use Near n:�......�,, » ,,..,.. ,...,, ,.r,...i.. 7A «,,..,,.,..,.1 . ............a.. ,,,,1,.,.�,.,7 ,.,.+,.F,...�,,. dhA ......«....,,. for inclusion in the new reseazch program, which was established by Congress in 2003 in the Vision 100 Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The purpose of the ACRP program is to carry out applied research on problems shared by airport operating agencies but not adequately addressed by other federal research programs. The ACRP is sponsored by the Federal Aviation Adminisiration and managed by the Naiional Academies of Science acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB). The ACRP Oversight Committee, the governing board for the program, met on Jan. 30 and 31 and selected projects for funding in the fiscal.year 2005/2006 program. The board considered 118 projects in the fields of administration, (Continued on p. I S) Department of Defense ' � �; �; :�. �: � � � �: ,• . � � . . . � � • Last November, the Department of Defense issued Instruction No. 4715.13 which coordinated the noise programs of all the military services and established the DoD Noise Working Group (DNWG), which will serve as the lynchpin for executing the Instruction and a catalyst for advancing the state-of-the-art in azeas such as noise modeling, noise effects, and public education about aircraft noise. DoD consolidated the noise programs of its individual military services in an effort to pool resources and to stretch limited funding but the fruit of this effort will benefit commercial airports also, according to Alan Zusman, who is chairman of the DNWG and serves as deputy director of Base Development in the Naval Facilities Engineering Command. Zusman also acts as program manager of the Navy's Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) program. Among other things, the Nov. 15, 2005, Instruction requires the consolidated DoD noise program to "promote scientifc research and the use of sound scientific methods and validated noise data as the basis for and the establishment of noise program guidance" and to "promote the development of initiatives to educate and train DoD military, civilian, and contractor personnel, and the public on noise issues." As part of the unified DoD noise program, each service must take the lead in (Confinued on p. 18) Researclz ... The governing board of the new Airport Coop- erative ResearchProgram wants study itwill fund on land use compatibiliiy around airports to safety issues. It is the only noise study, out of 12 proposed, that will be funded - p.17 .l)epartment of Defense ... A new DoD Instruction inerges the noiseprograms ofalithe military services and seeks to advance the state-of-the-art inmodeling, noise effects, education-p.17 Clzicago O'Hare Int'l ... Noise complaints will be handled by Chicago's non-emergency call centerwhich is expectedto glean moreprecise information-p.19 Tulsa Int'l ... C&S Compa- nies takes overmanagement of airport's noise mitigation program. Previouslnanagementfirm sues airport to recover costs - p. 19 News Sriefs ... FAA ap- proves imposition ofPFCs by Port ofPortland, City of Chicago AviationDeparimentto support noise mitigationprojects ... New Jersey Rep. Donald Payne joins other state politicians opposedio airspace changes overthe staie proposed by FAA - p. 20 February14,2006 18 environment, policy and planning, safety, security, human governments can use to assess the current and future resources, design, construction, maintenance, operafions, impacts that ancompatible land uses will have on the expan- � j and special projects. It selected 24 grants totaling $7.09 sion of airports in the future. millioninfunding. The research results are intended to give state and local The land use compatibility study was the only research governments a common basis for establishing wning proposal addressing aircraft noise that was selected for regulations that could protect the public interest and funding. Some 12 research proposals addressing various investments 9n airports. aspects of aircraft noise had been submitted (17 ANR 179). j21'ps Will Be Issued Four of these proposals were submitted by participants in the FAA's Center of Excellence on Aircraft Noise and Now that the ACRP governing board has selected the ( Aviation Emissions Mitigation (also knows as PARTNER projects it will fund in fiscal 2005/2006, the next step is for (Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Bmissions 'IRB to form a project panel for each project selected to Reduction). The PARTNER members were looking for a develop a detailed Request for Proposal (RFP), formally � funding mechanism for their research projects but were not soliciting proposals to conduct the project. 'These RFPs are successful in that effort. expected to be issued in June. The ACRP governing board felt that the PARTNER 'TRB is seeking nominations for individuals to serve on projects should be funded though the PARTNER program. ACRP project panels for its fisca12005/2006 program. That program will be funded at a level of $4 million to $5 Nominations and self-nominations will be accepted until million in fiscal 2006 by the FAA and requires PARTNER March 17. Nomination forms and other information on the members to match FAA fundjng levels. PARTNER has an ACRP projects are available on the intemet at http:// .�, �,;+-,.,,�,,, L - , - � . . . wetroiet�irri:z�,� Land Use Compatibility Siudy hand column. TRB also is seeking to fll several staff openings for up to The Minnesota Department of Transportation in conjunc- tion with the National Association of State Aviation Officials submitted the proposal for the land use compatibil- ity siudy to the ACRP. However, the ACRP governing board deleted two of the research tasks submitted in that proposal which addressed safety. Deleted from the study agenda were proposals to collect data on aircraft accident locations in the vicinity of airports to update past studies and development of a third party risk analysis for persons in the runway approach areas. However, the ACRP board retained the following research tasks: • Collect and publish data on existing land uses that are incomp.atible with federal and/or state land use safety standards for airports, including types of development and numbers of people congregating in the approaches to airports; � Collect and evaluate state compatible land use legislation, rules, and directives to identify commonality; • Identify airports where major expansion projects have been delayed or abandoned due to opposition from surrounding cornmunities that arose from a failure to have taken appropriate measures to ensure compatible land uses around those airports and attempt to quantify the cost of those delays or the inability to implement the, expansion plans in relation to the costs that would have been involved if land use planning were in place; and • Based on the data collected, produce a land use compatibility zoning model incorporating land use and third party risk that state and Iocal governments can use as a basis for their ordinances. The goal of this research is to define incompatible land use and its limits and to develop a tool that state and local three senior program officers for its ACRP program. They would work with the expert panels established for each research project and prepare project statements and progress reports. Further information is available on the internet at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=5 850. .DoD, from p. l7 different areas and the Navy is heading efforts to advance the art of public education on aircraft noise and military blast noise. In that regard, the Navy is engaged in a three-part study of the use of supplemental noise metrics to help the public better understand noise impacts. The first step was to find out what people in the field are saying about the need for supplemental metrics, Zusman explained. The results of this efFort were a mixed bag, he said. Some people felt that the standard DNL (Day Night Average Noise Level) metric, used in environmental analyses, was hard to understand and others did not. Step two of the study is being undertaken by Wyle Laboratories under contract with the Navy. Wyle is analyzing the pros and cons of various supp]emental noise metrics and developing guidelines on ways to use them. But, Zusman said, the final step of the study is the hard part. That is "to determine the significance of it all. What does the metric mean? So what if it gives additional informa- tion on noise." The Navy is considering conducting a social survey to try to relate public reaction to noise to various supplemental noise metrics. In that way, some kind of dose-response relationship could be developed similar to the Federal Aviation Administration's use of 65 dB DNL as the point at which people become "highiy annoyed" to aircraft noise. Of course, that criteria has come under chailenge because it is Airport Noise Report C February14,2006 based on the findings of a group of outdated social surveys that covered noise from not only aircraft but other transpor- tation sources. A social survey by the Navy would not be easy to do, said Zusman. It would need the approval of the O�ce of Man- agement and Budget, would be very time consuming and expensive, and would pull from very tight funding. But he noted that the Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAI�, which is comprised of noise experts from various federal agencies, including DoD, supports the use of supplemental noise metrics and that the Navy's work stems from that endorsement. Zusman said that commercial airports would be able to apply any guidance on the use of supplemental noise metrics developed by the DNWG and that other efforts the committee will undertake also will have application at commercial airports. The new DoD Instruction is available on the internet by Googling for "DOD Instruction 4715.13." 19 2001 and then took a precipitous plunge to 5,100 in 2002. They have gradually dropped to below 2,000 over the past three years. In other action, the commission said it has launched an awareness campaign targeted at the Illinois congressional delegation regarding the sharp reduction in Airport Improve- ment Program funding proposed in the Bush Administration's fisca12007 budget request. The commission also adopted a resolution accepting the role the Federal Aviation Adrninistration assigned it in the Record of Approvai for the O'Hare Modernization Plan, which includes overseeing the residential sound insulation program, the school sound insulation program, the Fly Quiet Program, and evaluating changes to the airport noise monitoring system and other noise issues related to the expansion of O'Hare. FAA directed the commission to add some 5,000 additional homes to the sound insulation program before the modernization of O'Hare is completed. Tulsa Int'1 . .l••:••�••�� \l��_I��_�'�:Z�Z!!:�_�1�/ �:i �!.`11 Ye\:i1 Y �!i NOISE COMPLAINT CALLS GO TC) NON-EMERGENCY C�NTER The O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission said that it is looking forward to getting more precise information about aircraft noise around O'Hare International Airport because the City of Chicago is now using its non-emergency center to handle aircraft noise complaints. Callers to the O'Hare Noise Hotline are automatically routed to the Chicago cail center. Acting Chicago Aviation Commissioner Patrick Harney told the commission at its Feb. 10 meeting that the call center's operators have been frained to handle aircraft noise complaints and that live operators will be available to take those calls on a 24-hour basis. Previously, a recorded message and a voice mail system greeted callers during non-business hours. With ]ive operators now asking the callers specifc questions, the commission said it expects to obtain more accurate informa- tion to use in addressing aircraft noise issues. The commission uses the information collected from noise complaints to identify specific aircraft that deviate from the nighttime Ply Quiet Program at O'Hare which is designed to reduce aircraft noise over residential areas through the use of preferred departure runways and flight paths, the commis- sion explained. The airlines are questioned when specific Fly Quiet deviations are identified. The commission also reported that noise complaints phoned in to the O'Hare Noise Hotline in 2005 fell for the seventh consecutive year, from a high of 25,773 in 1998 to 1,958 in 2005. The commission attributedthe drop in complaints in ]arge part to the gradual reduction in overall aircraft noise around the airport, especially since the retirement of all older and noisier Stage 2 aircraft in 2000. Noise complaints dropped from 17,652 in 2000 to 13,760 in UNDER NEW MA.NAG]EMENT Tulsa International Airport is poised to soon restart its $40 million noise mitigation program under new management following the airport trustee's decision last August to not extend its contract with the local firm managing the program, Cinnabar Service Co. of Tulsa, due to high adminzstrative costs. Last October, the trustees approved a$2.1 million, one- year contract with C&S Companies, Inc. of Syracuse, NY, to manage the program. C&S is putting together bid packages for sound insulation of 62 homes, according to JefFHough, deputy airport director for engineering and facilities. The goal of the five-year-old program is to reduce noise levels in 1,672 homes, four schools, and three churches in the high noise contours of Tulsa Intemational. Property owners are given the choice of sound insulation, sales assistance, or avigation easements. Cinnabar's contract was not extended because the trustees felt that its administrative costs, an average of $14,000 per home, were too high. That conclusion was based on a comparison of the administrative costs incurred by the firm in sound insulating 492 homes compared to program costs at other airports. The trustees said that Cinnabar's administra- tive costs were on the high side of the national average but acknowledges that some of that increase was due to federal funding coming in at a slower rate than anticipated and the airport board's decision to run a more neighbor-friendly and costly program. In December 2005, Cinnabar sued the airport board for $682,317 to recover costs it alleges were incurred during its tenure managing the noise mitigation program over a 32- month period. The majority of the claims stem from a nine- month period just preceding the board's decision to drop the �. Airport Noise Report 14,2006 . . � , ,� � - . � ',� � '� , �,i �' • � '� John J. Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiarmid Washington, DC Carl E. Burleson Director, Office of Environment and Energy Federal Aviation Administration John C. Freytag, P.E. Director, Chazles M. Salter Associates San Francisco Michaet Scott Gatzke, Esg. Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance Carlsbad, CA 20 In Brief ... PFCs Approved for Noise Mitigation On Feb. 13, the Federal Aviation Administration published its monthly list of approvals and disapprovals of applications by airports to impose Passen- ger Facility Charges (PFCs) to support airport projects. Following are PFCs approved for noise-related projects: • Port of Portland's application to impose both a$3 and $4.50 PFC from May 1, 2016, to March l, 2018, for a total estimated PFC revenue of $68.2 million to support various projects at Portland International Airport, including upgrading the noise system; • City of Chicago Aviation Deparhnent's application to impose a$4.50 PFC from June 1, 2013, to July 1, 2013, for atotal estimated PFC revenue of $11.6 million to support various projects at O'Hare Intemationai Airport, ineluding school soundproo�ng. Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. Another NJ Congressmen Opposes Airspace Change Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP Denver New Jersey Rep. Donald Payne (D) recently joined the chorus of other state - politician¢ o}�noaed to the Federal Aviatinn Adminictratinn'� nr��tn�Prl _ uzanne c. c ean redesi of the airs ace in the New York/New Jerse /Philadel hia are which Chief Development Officer � P Y P � Tucson Airport Authority they say will increase noise impact on communities azound Newark Interna- tional Airport (18 ANR 1). Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. "While all of us recognize the iznportance of reducing delays at major President, Mestre Greve Associates Laguna Niguel, CA airports, the health and safety ofNew Jersey residents must come first," Payne said. "After cazefully reviewing the Airspace Redesign Draft Environ- Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. mental Impact Statement, I am very concerned about the impact on my McDermott, Wilt & Emery congressional district. One of the options put forth by the FAA would result ( Chicago � in an increase of three times as much noise over Elizabeth as well as Roselle, Mary L. Vigilante Linden, and Hillside. This is not a reasonable or balanced approach." President, Synergy Consuitants Payne, a former chairman ofthe Congressional Black Caucus, also expressed Seattie concern over the fact that the proposed airspace change would ha�e a disproportionate impact on minority communities. "Too many times in the past, minority communities have been subjected to unfair, excessive noise pollution. As a matter of environmental justice, we cannot allow minority communities to bear the brunt of increased air noise" The congressman also plans to discuss his concerns about the safety of the airspace redesign with FAA officials. "Many of us still recall the tragic airplane crashes in Elizabeth in the 1950s. We have to be certain that any change in aircraft patterns maintains high safety standards. We cannot accept any pian that jeopardizes the safety of passengers and local residents." AIRPORT NOISE REPORT Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times ayear at43978 UrbancrestCt., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-rnail: editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price $750. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Airport Noise Report, provided that the base fee of US$1.03 per page per copy is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. � 21 � � �" ` �::� ��°: �X ��,,, ( ��K �. �: •,.,,. �*�E a�. �„• . �,, �r'!%/�.i (��' y�� ' .��., r: � ' rx; «:,. °n�.- Y.�� r_c�'� ,<� 4..,: r 'S n #,. Sn..+ =»;Ct;. 4. �' � 9. ,1" ,�c:: A weekly npdate on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 18, Number 6 February 21, 2006 Research 1vEW UF WIND TUNNEL WILL ALLOW STUDY OI' AIRFRAME NOISE COMPONENTS In This Issue... Research ... A new wind The University of Florida has just completed a new $400,000 wind tunnel that will �el specificailydesignedto be used to study the nature of aerodynamic noise from airframe components. IJF studynoisecausedbyair&ame engineers hope it will lead to a reduction in noise from commercial aircraft over- components -- such as landing flights ofcommunities. geaT, flaps, slats, andtrailing Airframe noise is generated by non-propulsion components, such as landing edges -- has just been completed ,....,_ tti,._.. ..�,.... .._a a....:1:_.... ...1....... .._..l :.. .. ,7.�.vI_..�a ....��..__._a .,laL' ._"" produced by airplanes, especially during landing, according to Lou Caitafesta, associate professor of inechanical and aerospace engineering at ITF. He said the UF wind tunnel is one of only a few in the country, and the largest at any university, designed specifically to study noise that is created from airflow over the fuselage, wings, flaps, and landing gear. The University of Florida 3s not a member of the Federal Aviation Administration's Center ofExcellence (COE) on Aircra$ Noise and Emissions Reduction (informally known as PART'NER). However, Cattafesta said the university's new wind tunnel is a research tool that could be of benefit to the COE (Continued on p. 22) Matlaer Airport , �. . , �. �:�,:. � � , �, ,� _ � �, , � � . ,�. , , ; Mather Airport, the designated cargo facility for the Sacramento, CA, airport system, is the first airport in the country to fully implement during nighttime hours the Continuous Descent Approach (CDA), a new landing procedure developed over the past three years that results in reductions in aircraft noise levels of 4-6 dB in areas 10 to 20 miles from the runway as well as lower aircraft emission levels. Aithough the CDA was developed at Lousiville International Airport, Mather is the first to fully implement the procedure at night because it has a much simpler approach path: between 40-50 rniles from the airport, the planes get set and glide in, explained Monica Newhouse, noise program manager for the Sacramento County airport system. The approach procedure at Louisville is more complicated because it is curving. UPS is using the CDA at Mather as its standard approach procedure with 757 aircraft, she said. Airborne is using the procedure with it 767 planes. The CDA also was easy to implement at Mather because there are few night operations. Airborne has only one nighttime arrival four nights a week and UPS has only six operations during its busiest night. The only commercial cargo aircraft coming into Mather at night not using the CDA is the Airborne DC-9, which has as many as four arrivals on its peak night. (Continued on p. 22) The university is not a member � of the FAA's Center of Excel- I lence on AircraftNoise and Emissions Reductionbutfeels its new tunnel can be of value to the research consortium. NASA says that its wind tunnel technology is being used during the aircraft design phase more now than it has in the past - p. 21 MatlaerAirport ... The designated aircargo facility for Sacramento County, CA, is the firsi airport inthe country to fully implementthenew Continuous Descent Approach pzocedure during nighttime hours. CDAs can reduce noise levels by 4-6 dB in areas 10 to 20 miles fromtherunway. UPS Assistant ChiefPilotKarl Blackmun, who was key to instituting the procedure at Mather, answers questions posed by ANR on how feasible it is for otherairportsto implement CDAs, which also reduce aircraft einission levels -p. 21 _ February 21, 2006 � � and that he is excited about the opporiunities for participa- Boeing is evaluating high-lift systems for its new 787 jet tion in the research consortium that the tunnel presents. aircraft, according to NASA. The agency said that high-lift As word of the completion of the new wind tunnel gets systems include the flaps and slats used to increase the lift out, it is generating interest from firms in the aerospace performance of the wing, allowing the airplane to take offand �' community, such as Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., and from land safely and efficiently. the media. The Discovery Channel is considering doing a "Unlike conventional wind tunnels, the National Transonic show on the LTF wind tunnel, Cattafesta noted. Facility can duplicate the aerodynamics of the flight environ- The new wind iunnel is located in one of the university's ment, even with small-sca]e models," said Rich Wahls, chief mechanical and aerospace buildings at its Gainesville, FL, aerodynamicist of the facility. "That allows the aircra£t campus. It is located in an anechoic chamber so that rnanufacturers to produced better performing airplanes with engineers can isolate specific noises that they are interested less risk." in and find ways to reduce them. To test its new high-lift concepts, Boeing engineers The walls, ceilings, and door of the chamber are covered in designed new 787-style trailing edge flaps and fit them to an three-foot fiberglass wedges that absorb 99 percent of the existing 5.2 percent scale 777 semi-span model. The stainless noise being studied. Models of real aircraft will vary in size steel model, which looks like one-half of an airplane cut down from one-tenth to one-fifth the size of actual aircraft. the middle from nose to tail, is mounted on the sidewall of the Through filtering and other soundproofmg techniques, the wind tunnel, NASA explained. only noise that will be heard in the chamber will be from "Even small improvements in performance of a high-lift airflow. system can significantly improve the take-offfield length, � A 300-horsepower fan, located outside the building on its weight carrying capability, and range of a transport aircraft. own concrete pad, can pull air through the wind tunnel at The improvements aiso can help reduce aircraft noise. But � approach speed of commercial aircraft. airflow issues encountered when flaps and slats are extended While noise from jet engines has been significantly from awing," NASA said. reduced over the last decade, noise from airflow over the NASA said its National Transonic Facility is a unique wind airframeisbecomingtheprominentnoisemakerfromlow- tunnel that uses super cold nitrogen gas at high pressure to flying pianes. Today, most of the noise that people on the duplicate true flight aerodynamics. It can accommodate ground hear is from aircraft components other than the models as small as one-fiftieth the size of the actual aircraft. engines, the university explained in a recent press release. Unlike conventional wind tunnels, the NASA facility can "Since jet noise was the main concern many years ago, adjust the characteristics of the air#low to match the size of / attention was focused at reducing that noise rather than the model. Results help engineers determine how new l airframe noise. As the jets have become quieter, attention designs will work on real planes in flight. can now be turned towards understanding the effect that "In the past, engineers have come to the National Tran- airflow has on the noise emitted from the aircraft," UF said. sonic Facility to further understand and solve problems with In addition to the university, several other sponsors systems that have already been developed," Wahls said. contributed funding for construction of the wind tunnel. "Now we're also seeing this test capability being used during The Air Force O�ce of Scientific Research funded the the aircraft design phase." original chamber, which cost approximately $300,000, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Mat12eY, fl'o1•t2 p. 21 (NASA) contributed about $100,000 to add a tunnel inside the chamber. The LTF College of Engineering and the Deparhnent of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering gave The DC-9 aircraft lacks the sophisticated Flight Management the $200,000 needed to complete the proj ect. Systems that enable more modern aircraft to perform the CDA The LTF engineering team hopes to have the tunnel procedure. operational by the end of spring. The tunnel is expected to Newhouse said that the process of getting all flight data provide the university with new research opportunities. recordings from aircraft using the CDA to document its noise NASA TunnelAiding Aircraft Design In related news, NASA said that its wind tunnel technol- ogy is being used by the aviation industry to perfect new airplane designs throughout the entire development process. The Boeing Company is one airplane manufacturer that is purchasing wind tunnel time in the U.S. National Transonic facility at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, VA, in order to test new aviation concepts before applying them in flight. benefits has �ust started and that it is hoped that the data analysis will be completed by the end of March. Initiai data indicate that the CDA is resulting in noise level reductions of 2-5.7 dB, she said. She praised Oakland air tra�c controllers for being ex- tremely helpful to the airline pilots in instituting the new approach procedure and ironing out small problems. The CDA procedure at Mather would never have been implemented without the assistance ofKarl Blackmun, assistant chief pilot for UPS Plight Standards, Newhouse said. "He has been absolutely essential." C� Airport Noise Report February21,2006 .In the following interview with Blackmun, the UPS pilot answers questions posed by ANR about the CDA: O: Is ityour understmzding tlzat Matlzer is tlte ftrst airport in tlze country to fully implement tlze CDA proce- dure at niglzt? A: I believe that Monica is conect that Mather is the first airport to implement CDAs at night. Sacramento Approach may restrict their CDAs to the period between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. but I have asked for it at other times, like 8 p.m., and received permission to do it. Louisville has run several DCA trials during the past 18 months but has nothing in place to utilize them on a regular basas today. Their approach was much more complex than the one we use at Mather. It involved a customized arrival 23 Technology will probably never be capable of reducing the spacing requirements between big jet aircraft. The spacing is there to aliow wake turbulence to dissipate by the time the following aircraft flies through the same position in space that the preceding aircraft occupied. Wake turbulence vortices are generated whenever aircraft wings develop lift — whenever the airplane is airborne. The turbulence trails the aircraft and tends to diminish and descend from the planes flight profile over time. The heavier the plane, the stronger the wake turbulence. Thus, wake turbulence is an issue all the way down to landing when flying behind another large airplane. Q: Will C�As ever be able to be employed at all or most commercial airports? If so, wJzen? procedure approved by the FAA and it involved more A: I believe that a CDA can be developed for any airport. aircraft then the Mather CDA. Mather provided us with a very simple, two-dimensional arrival that takes a plane from a location 60 miles away and Q: Wl:ere else besides Louisville and Matlter is tlze CDA flies it to the runway on a single track. The Louisville CDAs being used and is it only being used witlt �ziglzt operations? were three-dimensional. This added to the complexity of the �'o��bl A: Currently, I have not read anything about CDAs being with that test. used at any other airports. However, I know that the airport To develop a CDA, all that is needed is a three-dimensional authorities at King County Internationai Airport (also known model of the arrival path and some performance modeling as Boeing Field) are trying to work with the FAA 9n develop- data for the aircraft that are expected to fly the arrival. I ing [a CDA] for aircraft landing on Runway 13R at night ... tested our B-757 CDA profiles in the UPS simulators in Long Beach Airport is interested in building a CDA to its Louisviile before I tried them out in the airplane. With some primary Runway 30. In the United Kingdom, UPS is working minor changes, they work fairly well today. ' with their Air Traffic Control to implement CDAs at two As I mentioned before, the drawback to the CDA is that it ' � locations: East Midlands and London Stansted. does not readily allow multiple planes to use it at the same Because the CDA profile is "continuous" in nature, planes time. Thus, during periods of high-density arrival tra�c, flying it need tra�c priority over other aircraft in their most controllers would not be willing to have their tra�c fly vicinity. That is one reason why most airports are willing to CDAs as that would slow down the tra�c into their airports. allow it at night when the tr�c is usually much less than More airplane tra�c can be brought into an airport using during the day. Another reason for CDAs at night is that the conventional radar vectors and assigned airspeeds as the planes are much quieter than their counterparts flying planes can stay faster longer than with a CDA. conventional arrivals. The successful completion of a CDA Having said that, the CDA is perfect for lower traffic can therefore alleviate local community activity against periods. It is espec9ally beneficial during time periods when airport nighttime operations. the local population is trying to get some sleep. Flying the CDA also reduces fuel consumption by allowing the planes Q: W1aa1 kind of aircraft spaci�zg is required to do a to fly like gliders from cruise altitude to just four miles from CDA? I read tlzaf a 15 mile in trail separation is required the airport. I have brought my planes' engines back to idle at Louisville and I'm not sure w/zat is needed at Mat/zer. thrust at 35,000 feet and not added any additiona] power Will teclznology allow spacing to be closer in tlze future? until I was 1,300 feet above the airport elevation. Reducing fuel consumption also reduces the amount of A: Because of the infrequent aircraft arrivals at Mather, pollutants that the engines produce by not burning that aircraft spacing is almost never an issue. A 15 mile separa- additional fuel. So the community also benefits by lower air tion equa,ls two minutes between planes at cruise altitude — pollution levels as well as lower noise levels when CDAs are that is not an unreasonable distance for spacing. At airports flown. r � with single runway operations, like Mather, this separation probably cannot be decreased. At airports with multiple runways, aircraft could be sequenced to different runways depending upon their position from the airport. The minimum spacing between large jets is two minutes and this is increased to four minutes for large jets landing after heavy (jumbo) jets. O: Does FAA lzave to approve tlze CDA at eaclt airpori tlzat wm2ts to use it? Will tl:at always be t1:e case? A: The FAA must approve all published arrivals and approaches within the area of their jurisdiction. At Sacra- mento Mather Airport, UPS is using a company-developed Airpori Noise Report February21,2006 ANR E�I,�,o�AL arrival that overlays an existing FAA.-approved approach into the airport. A�VIS��.Y $oARD We simply have our pilots fly company-selected airspeeds at published points on the arrival and we recommend aircraft configuration changes at three of the arrival points. John J. Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiarmid Washington, DC Carl E. $urleson Director, O�ce of Environment and Energy Federai Aviation Administration John C. Freytag, P.E. Director, Charles M. Salter Associates San Francisco Michaei Scott Gatzke, Esq. Gatzke, Dillon & .Ballance Carisbad, CA Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP D This arrival method keeps the CDA guidelines fairly simple. This simplic- ity has allowed them to become widely used by our pilots. Thus, today we are using a published approach at Mather, the ILS RWY 22L, with addi- tional "guidelines" for our crews to follow. Our crews do identify the fact that they are using CDA "procedures" to Air Traffic Control because they are flying slower than they would normally starting at a point 40 miles from the airport. This also keys the controller to vector the other aircraft out of our way in the event of a traffic conflict. UPS Involved in Louisville Test The new CDA descent procedure was designed to keep planes higher longer and thus reduce noise impact by taking advantage of the ability of modern airplane Flight Management Systems to pre-program aircraft flight trajectories. Louisville Intemational Airport hosted the first test of the CDA in late enver 2002. It was conducted by a team from Boeing, the FAA, the Massachu- Suzanne C. McLean setts Institute of Technology, UPS, and the Regional Airport Authority of Chief Development Officer ouisvi e an e erson ounty. e proce ure was eve ope to re uce Tucson Airport Authority fuel burn but it has the added benefit of also reducing noise. ,.. 24 ' Aircraft using the typical approach procedure step down in a series of Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. descents and eriods of levelin off which re uire reducin thrust and fla President, Mestre Greve Associates P g q � p Laguna Niguel, CA settings, before finally merging with the required 3 degree giide slope about fivemiles from landing. Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. In the CDA procedure, aircraft descend steadily from as high as en route McDermott, Will & Bmery altitudes, which reduces noise by keeping them higher from the ground and Chicago by stabilizing flap settings, which reduces airframe noise and the amount of MaryL. Vigilante thrust needed. President, Synergy Consultants The CDA has the potential to reduce noise impact in areas well outside of Seattie the 65 dB DNL contour. Within six miles of the runway, aircraft using either the CDA or typical approach procedure are at approximately the same height and thus would ha�e equal noise impact. AIRPORT NOISE REPORT Anne H. Kohut,Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashbum, V a. 2014'1; Phone: (703 ) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail:editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price$750. Authorization to ghotocopy 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, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA.