01-10-2007 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION AGENDA
January 10, 2007 — City Council Chambers
l. Call to Order'- 7:00 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of the Minutes from the October 11, 2006 and November 22, 2006
Airport Relations Cornmission Meetings.
4. Unfinished and New Business:
a. Legislative Worlc Shop Update
b. Runway 17/35 Inpacts Update Discussion
c. Updates for Introduction Book
5. Acknowled�e Receint of Various Renorts/Correspondence:
a. Agenda for the December 6, 2006 Meeting of the Finance, Development,
and Environment Cornmittee
b. Approved 2007 CIP
c. December 6, 2006 Finance Development & Environment Meeting Minutes
and the December 18, 2006 Commission Meeting Agenda.
d. MSP Noise News
e. November 2006 ANOM Technical Advisor's Report
f. November 2006 ANOM Eagan/Mendota Heights Depa.rture Corridor
Analysis
g. Airport Noise Report, November 15, 2006.
h. Airport Noise Report, November 22, 2006.
i. Airport Noise Report, December l, 2006.
j. Airport Noise Report, December 8, 2006.
k. Airport Noise Report, December 15, 2006.
i. Airport Noise Report, December 22, 2006.
6. Other Commissioner Comments or Concerns
C
7. Uncomin� Meetin�s
City Council Meeting
NOC Meeting
MAC Meeting
8. Public Comments
9. Adjourn
1-16-07-7:30
1-17-07 - 1:30
1-23-07 - 1:00
Auxiliary aids for 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 will
malce every attempt to provide the aids. This may not, however, be possibie on short
notice. Please contact City Administration at (651) 452-1850 with requests.
CITY OF MEIVDOTA HEIGHTS
�C7
January 5, 2007
TO: Airport Relations Commission
FROM: James E. Danielson, City Administr
SUBJECT: 117/35 Runway Impacts
DISCUSSION:
Chair Petschel and 1 recently met to discuss what the impacts Runway 17/35
actually are versus what they were supposed to be. I have attached some
documentation that shows in writing what the impacts were supposed to be.
FAA RECORD OF DECISION
MSP DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
planning studies comparing the expansion of MSP with construction of a new replacement
airport (see Section II.0 for a more detailed project history).
�. Introduction
The FAA is issuing this Record of Decision (ftOD) in accordance with the reguire�ents of the
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), 40 CFR 1505.2 to provide: '
(a) a statement of the agency's decision; .
(b) identification of all alternatives considered by the agency in reaching its decision,
specifying the alternative considered to be envirorunentally preferable; and
(c) ideniification of all practicable means to avoid or m.inimize harm from the alternative
selected and adoption and sumrnary of monitoring and enforcement program, if
applicable, for any mitigation. .
FAA Approvals
This ROD provides final approval for the federal actions necessary to support the
construction and operation of a new air carrier length runway, designated Runway 17/35, as
well as related facilities at Mi.nneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP). The federal
actions and associated airport development are described in Ehe Dual Track Airport Planning
Process Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Section 4(fl EvaTuation, dated May
1998.
Federal approval and implementation of the proposed action, as explained in detail in
Section I.E of the FEIS, also involve the following FAA Division approvals and actions.
• Air Traffic. The propased action will require that the FAA's Air Traffic Division expand
the Class B airspace surrounding MSP and establish new air traffic control procedures,
consistent with the information contained in the FEIS. Related Air Traffic actions may
also involve redesign of the terminal radar approach control (TR.ACON) airspace
surrounding MSP.
• Airway Facilities. The Airway Facilities Ilivision will be responsible for the installation,
operation, and maintenance of the aids to navigation required to support the proposed
action.
• Airports. The Airports Division will be responsible for the technical and environmental
approval of the ALP, administration of Airport Improvement Program (AIl')
development grants funding the project, approvals to impose Passenger Facility Charges
(PFCs) for similar purposes, and environmental approvals under NEPA.
o Flight Standards. T'he Flight Standards Division will be responsible for establishing
instrument approach and departure procedures for the new runway and new or revised
instrument approach and departure procedures for the existing runways, as well as
specific aircraft and airline authorizations.
• Civil Aviation Security. The Civil Aviation Security Division will be responsible for
ensuring the integrity of the airport perimeter and secured areas of the terminal and
( ) support facilities against intrusions; therefore, Security provides input to the approval of
the ALP.
4
(SEPTEMBER1998)
C
FAA RECORDOF DECISION MSP DUAL TRACK AIRPOFiT PLANNING PROCESS
aufihorized the MAC to implement the MSP 2010 Comprehensive Plan which includes the
;' new Runway 17/35, new taxiways, and associated facilities. The legislation (attached to the
FEIS in Appendix A) also requixes fizrther legislative approval prior to implernentation of the
MSP 2020 Concept Plan, which includes new terrninal construction and further facility
development. �
�
�
The joint FEIS for development of MSP was prepared by the FAA arid MAC, pubPished in
May 1998, and serves as both a state and federal document prepared under NEPA and
Minnesota environmental regulations. The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB)
will review the project and render a determination of adequacy on the FEIS and proposed
project at its next scheduled meeting, planned for October 29,1998. An EQB adequacy
deterrnination on the FEIS, including responses to comments, will conclude the state's
environmental compliance requirernents for the proposed action. Ta allow sufficient time for
consideration of MAC's pending application for a Letter of Intent (LOI) in fiscal year 1998,
and to complete congressional notification, the FAA must complete this ROD before the EQB
rneets in October. The F.AA may issue a letter to a project sponsor to announce its intent to
obligate federal funds for an airport development project under the Airport Improvement
Program. Letters of Intent allow project sponsors to receive reimbursement for certain
e�cpenditures made in advance of a receiving an actual federal grant. F.AA regul.ations
require completion of the NEPA environmental review process before an LOI can be issued?
According to these regulations, federal enviranmental work rnust be complete and the
project work must be �mmi„ent before an LOI can be approved.
FAA's Role in the Dual Track Pracess. Throughout this extensive process, the FAA has
. manitored the rnethods and procedures used by th.e MAC in arriving at a preferred
alternative. The FAA assisted in the analysis by providing guidance and advice in various
technical committees. This included FAA participation in more than 75 comrnittee meetings,
including meetings of the following groups: the Capacity Design Team, the New .Airport
Technical Committee, the MSP Technical Committee, the Technical Advisory Committee for
the LTCP, the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning, and the Surface
Transportation Committee.
In addition to jointly preparing the Draft and Final EISs, the FAA has independently
reviewed and evaluated all of the material presented in the scoping and environmental
documents, and critical portions of fihe material have been independently verified. At each
rnajor milestone, the FAA reviewed the scoping and AED process to ensure coverage of a
reasonable range of alternatives. This has included the FAA's independent evaluation of
airspace modifications, which have concluded that the existing MSP terminal airspace can be
reconfigured to accommodate th.e new north-south runway.8 The F.AA and the MAC also
provided for and participated in several opportunities for public participation. These
included more than 20 public meetings held during the EIS scoping period, organized to
obtain input on specific issues related to new airport site selection and the layout of the
preferred build alternatives for both fihe New Airport and the MSP Alternative. The public
and agency involvement aspects of the process are described further in the FEIS, Section VIII
(Public and Agency Involvement) and in Section VII of this ROD.
� 59 FR 54482-54483 (October 31,1894}
8 Airport Capacity Enhancement—TeRninat Airspace Study, Minneapolis-St Paul lntemational Airpod; FAA, August 1996.
11
(SEPTEMBER1998�
r
t
FAA RECORD OF DECISION M5P DUAL TFIACK AIRPORT PLANNING PflOCESS
The FAA served on numerous committees throughout the Dual Track Process (see Section
; II.C) and assisted in the analysis of AED alternatives, which has been previously established
as an integral part of this long and detailed NEPA process. The FAA has participated
during this process through direct consultation with the MAC, and it jointly prepared the
First Phase Scoping Report, Second Phase Scoping Report, the DEIS and the FEIS.,
Throughout the planning effort, the FAA reviewed the methods and procedures �sed by the
MAC and its consultants in site selection and evaluation of new airport and MSP expansion
alternatives considered in the AED process, and assisted in their analysis. The FAA also
conducted independent aixspace and airfield capacity studies for MSP.
C. Governor's Air and Water Quality Certifications
The air and water quality certifications frorn the Governor of the State of Minnesota are
included as an attachment to the FEIS, as required for compliance with Section 102(2)(c) of
the NEPA and with regulations codified at 49 U.S.C. 47106(c)(1)(B), implementin.g Section
509(b) of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982. See the FEIS Appendix K.
The FAA makes the following determinations for this project, based upon appropriate
evidence set forth in the FEIS and other portions of the administrative record:
A. There has been consultation with the Secretary of Interior and Administrator of
the US EPA. (49 USC 47101(h)). No possible and prudent alternative to the project
� exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect
on the environment [49 U.S.C. 47106 (c)(1)(C)].
This Record of Decision highlights the consultaiion with the Secretary of Interior and
Administrator of the U.S. EPA in accordance with 49 USC 47101(h). It also highlights the
alternatives and other factors considered by the FAA in making its decisions, as well as the
mitigation measures that have been considered for the alternative selected and made a
condition of project approvals. The north parallel runway, and other development
alternatives were determined not to be possible or prudent alteznatives far the reasons
summarized above in Section V of this ROD. Therefore, approval of the proposed
improvements is in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 447106 (c)(1)(C). A wide range of alternatives
has been thoroughly analyzed and the project includes every reasonable measure to
mini.rnize adverse effects on the envirorunent of the airport and its environs. Mitigation
requirements are discussed in detail below, in Section X of this ROD.
B. The Governor af the State of Minnesota has certified in writing that there is
reasonable assurance that the project will be located, designed, constructed and
aperated in cornpliance with applicable air and water quality standards [49 U.S.C.
47106 (c)(1)(B)].
By letter dated Apri124,1997 the Governor of the State of Minnesota certified that the airport
proposed project evaluated in the FEIS will comply with applicable aix and water quality
standards, as discussed in Section VIII.0 of this Record of Decision. The FAA must have this
certification to approve grants of federal funds for projects invalving location of a runway.
55
(SEPTEMBER1998)
FAA RECqRD OF DECI510N
MSP DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
C. The project is consistent with existing plans of public agencies authorized by
the state in which the airport is located to plan for the development of the area
surrounding the airport [49 U.S.C. 47106 (a)(1) and Executive Order 12372,
Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, respectively].
The Metropolitan Council. (MC) is the public agency authorized by the State of T�innesota to
plan for development of the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area. Given the MC's review
of the FEIS and its continued involvement throughout the environmental process, the FAA is
satisfied that the project is reasonably consistent with the plans of this public agency. T'he
MC is a cooperating agency in the preparation of the FEIS and has been involved in the Dual
Track 1�i.rport Planning Process since its inception. 'The MC comments on the FEIS are
included in Attachment A of this Record of Decision, and incorporate the finding that the
MSP 2010 and 2020 development plans are consistent with the aviation chapter of the
Metropolitan DeveTopment Guide.
D. The interests of the community in or near which the project may be located
have been given fair consideration [49 USC 47106 (b) (2}].
This determination is supported by a long history of communication between the MAC and
the surrouncling political jurisdictions, documented in the FEI5 and begu-u�ing at the earliest
project planning stages when the Dual Track Airport Planning Process was mandated by the
Minnesota Legislature. Through the course of preparing numerous planning and
environmental studies, providing for committee structures and public hearings, and as a
result of the state's legislative mandates, the participation process has remained open and
available to interested parties. The MAC has executed agreements with surrounding
communities and special interests (historic, noise, refuge, surface transportation, etc.) in
consideraiion of concerns and conunitrnents of interested parties regarding the proposed
project. Further, the MAC is currently in the process of adopting contracts with affected
communities regarding the planning and development of a north parallel runway. The
language in force or proposed in these contracts33 generally provides that the communiiies
will not oppose construction of the new north-south runway while the MAC agrees to not
advocate the construction of a north parallel runway, nor construct such a runway, for an
extended time period (the actual or proposed contract terms extend as far into the future as
2050).
Consistent with FAA commitments made to the City of Minneapolis,� MSP control tower
personnel will utilize Runway 17/35 in accordance with the conditions set forth in the Dual
Track Airport Planning Process FEIS, Appendix A, page A.3-17. 'Therefore, tower personnel
will utilize Runway 17/35 so that the runway is not used for departures to the north and
arrivals to the south, except under the following limited circumstances, described on page
A.3-17 of the FEIS: (1) safety reasons; (2) weather conditions; or (3) temporary runway
closures due to snow removal, due to construction, or due to other activities at the airport.
� As stated in Section V.A of this ROD, lhe City of Mendota Heights finalized its contract with the MAC on Decem6er 23,1996. Contracts with the Cities of
Minneapolis and Eagan are still being finalized.
� Letter from Jane F. Garvey, FAA Administrator, to Minneapolis Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton, dated July 15,1998.
56
(SEPTEMBER1998)
E.1 Air Traffic
Air Traffic is responsible for the safe and expeditious fiow of aircraft to and from the airport. This is
accomplished by establishing airspace structure, air traffic control sectors, flight routes ar�d air traffic
control procedures. �
Development of the proposed action may require redesign of the termina( radar approach control
(TRACON) airspace surrounding the MSP airport. It will require establishment of new air traffic control
procedures and, therefore, modification of existing tower orders. The project will also require the
expansion of the Class B Airspace sur�ounding MSP. Class B Airspace generally extends from the
surface to an altitude of 10,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL) and may extend 30 or more miles
from its center. The current MSP Class B Airspace extends from the surface to 8,000 feet and a 20-
mile radius from its center. Independent of this project, MSP Air Traffic Control Tower has requested
that their Class B airspace be expanded to include the airspace up to 10,000 feet MSL and a 30-mile
radius of the airport. This Class B airspace expansion was needed independent of this project to
accommodate turns on the runway finals beyond 20 miles from the airport.
FAA conducted a terminal airspace study for MSP in 1996 to identify airspace capacity around MSP
and to evaluate impacts on airspace capacity that might result in accommodating a new north-south
runway at MSP. The study found that changes could be made in the airspace to accommodate the
new runway and identified additional airspace routings for arrivais to, and departures from, the
runway.
Because these new airspace routings wili result in new overflights of residential areas, the FAA
� required an analysis of potential noise impacts of operations over 3,000 feet AGL iper FAA Notice
� � 7210.360). That analysis is presented in Appendix G the impacts of operations below 3,000 feet
AG� are addressed within the body and in other parts of this FEIS). The new alternative airspace
routings are also shown in Appendix G as Figures G-2, G-3, and G-4. The noise screening analysis
was performed on tHe airspace alternatives using FAA screening criteria for both the 2005 "Baseline"
and "High" forecasts of operations to determine if additional environmental analysis is needed (i.e., to
assure that the proposed air traffic changes would not result in a 5-decibel or more increase in the
overall Day Night Average Sound Level, DNL, of any residential area). The analysis showed that no
additional environmentai documentation would be .needed, based on the FAA noise screening
procedure.
Table A.3-7 (Runway Use for the MSP Aiternative - Average Annual Use) shows the percentage of
annual operations that are expected to occur in achieving operational goals for use of the new north-
sbuth runway, as well as the other runways at MSP. The new runway, Runway 17-35, would
predominantly operate to and from the south and is expected to be used for about one-third of the
aircraft departures when the airfield is in a south fiow configuration and for every sixth arrival when
operating to the north. A very minimal amount of traffic would operate to and from the north, as
indicated in Appendix A. These limited north operations on Runway 17-35 would most likely only
occur when dictated by weather, so as to support minimal airport capacity, when other runways are
closed for maintenance or emergency situations, or when benefiting air cargo operations during
periods of light daytime activity. FAA Air Traffic will establish the final procedures, consistent with
the conditions set forth in this FEIS, for all runway ends and for airspace at MSP following the Record
of Decision.
in addition to assessing the effects of overflights in the immediate environs of MSP, Air Traffic is
responsible for examining the integration of aircraft using the new north-south runway into the flight
�' � procedures and maneuvering of aircraft as they enter the terminal airspace and begin the initial phases
`-- of arrival and departure. As previousiy noted, the FAA has already conducted an analysis of the
airspace structure's ability to support the new runway from as far as 45 miles from MSP and found
Dual Track Final EIS ���-� � r; ��. t�;�:
I-6
(�'Y I!'r � i �..� kF �;,a
Takeoff and landing profiles (the verticai path aircraft foilow when departing from and arriving at an
airport) .were based on airline operating procedures, aircraft type and aircraft operating weight. Air
carrier aircraft were assumed to fiy standard three-degree descent angle approach profiles. Departure
profiles for those aircraft for which Northwest Airiines has developed unique procedures were created to
more accurately modei the Northwest procedures within the INM runs. The INM data ;base, which
includes typicai takeoff and landing profiles, was utilized for all other aircraft.
Stage lengths for each aircraft type were derived from the Officiai Airline Guide. Stage lengths we�e
adjusted to more accurately reflect Northwest nighttime departure profiles for severai specific aircraft
types. For the Northwest fleet, specialized departure profiles where developed for the DC9Q7, DC9Q9,
DC950 and 727-200 aircrafts through coordination with the airline's operations department.
Runway use for the MSP Alternative is shown in Table A.3-7 and for the No Action Alternative in Table
A.3-8. The runway use percentages in Table A.3-7 are operational goals based on weather conditions
(both wind and visibility), direction of flight, noise impacts and operationai efficiency; however, the actuai
use of the runways could vary on a daily, weekiy or monthly basis, but shouid closely approximate the
percentage goals over an average year. FAA tower personnel will utilize Runway 17-35 in accordance
with the conditions set forth in this FEIS. Therefore, tower personnel will utilize Runway 17-35 so that
the runway is not used to and fram the north, except under the following limited circumstances: 1) safety
reasons, 2) weather conditions, or 3) temporary runway closures due to snow removal, due to
construction, or due to other activities at the �irpori. �or nighttime hours (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM), aircraft
operations were assigned basec� on existing noise abatement procedures which includes MAC's
voluntary nighttime limits on flights. As with the aircraft fleet mix, runway use input to the INM reflects
average daily use based on the entire year.
Table A.3-7 - Runway Use for MSP Aiternative - Average Annual Use
Runway Percentage of Departures Percentage of Arrivals
4
i2�
12R
17
22
30�
30R
35
Total
1.0 percent
7.4 percent
16.3 percent
36.6 percent
less than 0.05 percent
15.4 percent
23.3 percent
less than 0.05 percent
100.00 percent
Source: HNTB Analysis
Dual Track Finai EIS
A.3-17
less than 0.05 percent
21.3 percent
15.1 percent
less than 0.05 percent
less than 0.05 percent
21.7 percent
25.0 percent
16.9 percent
100.0 percent
�'� S P �r1..1�A�� V Y������ 1. 4r���rJ����.�`r�'r �ti �+1��
MiY�neap+�lislSt. :Paul :�n?�er�ational Airp��rt (11�.SP)
G044 ••• 2$"� �l.vettue Svttth — il7inaea�oiis, MN 55450-2793
Q Phone(612)72S-64S5
e t�
o A''>.S)Ci(1' 4:Of11�t1iti4
��� i V� .i..V�V
Minneapolis AirpQrt FAA ATCT
A�n: Mr. c�ri Rydeen
Manag�r �- MSP l�ir Tr��Fic Gontrot Tc�w�r
B3'41 34th Avenue Sc�uih
Minneapolis, MN 654�0
��: Use of the 19�1-aegree [7epart�t'e Heading aff R�tnw�y 17 at Nli�tneapalis-
St. Paullnternational Airp��t {MSPj
Dear Mr. �2ydeer€,
Thank yc�u far yc�ur tV��y 4 5, 20p6 lettec defiailinc� FAA's inves#igations infica �he u�e af t��
'i90-degree depar�ure �eading aff Runway 'iT during southeast operationat t�c�ws �t
Mir�t�t�apc+�is-5t. Pau! Ir��ematia�al Airp€�r� �M�P}. As we know you a�'e awar�, fi�is tt�pic
was a c�is�ussic�r� item at t�e Ntay '17, �Q06 MSP Nois� O�rersic�F�t Cpmmittee �N�3C�
meetirtg and car�cerr�s st�li exist in the cor�text t�f a 200-de�ree heading.
�y way af background, it is �1OC's b�tief that fi�e plartnirt� prracess �nd the cansu{tatior�
and tx�ordir��iior� th�t w�nt inta tt�� deuela�me�� of F�unway � 7I35 afi lttlSP has been
e�ensive. This planning pracess adhered �o �AA c�uidance �nder t�re �rovisic�ns of FAA
Qrder 5fi5D.� anc� F'AA C?rder �(1�0.'f. It was �hrough this prc�cess that dacuments sucf�
as �he May 1998 MSP i�ual�Track Airport Planning �'racess Fir�al Enuicvnrne��ai impact
Statement �here�fter refet'red to as t�te Dua}-Tr�ck �ElS), the J�iy 2043 Environm�nial
Ass�ssment (EA} far � Depark�re Procedure {i�P) off Runway 17 �her�after referred ta
as the Runway 97 I�P EA) and the November 2�04 MSp 14 C.F.R. Par� '15D Upda#e
�nrere dev�loped.
The mast recent FAA doc�mentatfon related to the aperation af Runway 17/3� �t MSf'
was an A�gus� 27, �UQ3 F'indi�g c�f Nc� �ignificant Imp�ct (FONSI}/Rec:�rd af Decisian
(I�C?�} issued by th� FAA �pprowing the July 2�03 FZunway 17 DP EA. The ca�iys� far
tf�e EA was FAA's pasitiQ� khat an air traffic control proced�re chanc�e rtat anticipated iri
�he Dua��Track FEIS, w�rrch rc�uiir�eiy rc�u#ed air firaffic aver noise sensitive areas at less
tha� 3,0{�Q feet AG�.y ��quired ar� evafuatiar� cvnsister�t with �AA C3rder 105€i.1.
!t was und�rs�c�od En the p#anning pr�cess far Runway 1713� that cer�ain op�rational
intet�dep�ndences �xist vvith the paralleC runways at N15P. Speci�caily, wt�en t�e
oper�tiortal f�c�w a� MSP is irt a southeast configuratian with arrival and depar�ure
crperations �n Runways 1�R and 12l�, w�stbuund depa�ture capera�io�s o�€ Runway 17
have a weste�4y he2�dir�g restrictic�n. It was documentec� that tt�is prov�sic�� was to de-
conflict R�nway �t 7 rl�partures from �rrivals an Runways � 2�. anti 12R.
M�y'{9� 2dCJ6
Mr. Rydee�t
Page 2
Ir� tf�e Niay 1998 Dual-Tracic FE�S, the Juiy 20€�3 Ftunway � 7 i�P EA and the November
2Qa4 MSP Part 150 ll�ciate, per FAA input, t��s was assumed ��a translate into a 230-
degree ex�ent {INM Flig�t Track L c�ver fih�e �tinnesofia River Va{iey� fQr westbound
Runway 17 depar�ure oper-a�iar�s vvhen the �ir�ot� is in a sai.t�heast flow.�
Nowever, ft�ilawing t�e oper�irt� of Runway 17135 at ItIiSF, it w�s learr�ed thafi th� FAA
had �nalized �he �irs�sace des�gn arc�und MSP in Augc�st 2005 and determined t1�e
�urthes� extent of westbounci departure h�adings o€f Runway 17 wc�uld �ae 19t} degrees
vvhen ftur�ways 'i2R and �2L wer+� being used for arriva! oper�tic�r�s.
It is vur understanding t�tat �his procedura! cha�ge was impiemented for the following
twc� reasans;
1. Aircr�ft that are being ciirected by Air Traffic Contra[ tcr Iand an Runways '12L or
1�R begin a clescent when they crass �h�� 19{�-cle�ree track QfF Runway 17.
Keeping Runway '[7 depar�uce �ircraft at or east af th� �190-degree headi�g
a#Ivws #f�� arr-iving air�raf� io descend fc�r landing wl�i[e en�ur�ng they are
separafiect frflm aircraft that a�-e dep�rtinc� Runway � 7.
2. Ther� is a corridor c�f ��rspac� just tc� the wesfi oi the � 9Q-degre� frack �hat a1lav�rs
Air Traffic Con�rol tc� transi�ian non-�5P aircraf� rtorth artd sauth af t�e airpor�
while ensurirtg they are separated frr�m aircra� arrivir�g an Runways �2C. ar�c� '�2R
rar departir�c� Runway 1 �.
The operatianal change repres�r�tecf t�y ctse crf fit�e '�9E3-degree headir�g, as defiailed
abpve: has resulted ir� ct�r�cer�tra#ed dep�r�ure operatic�r�� beiow 3,OOC� feet AGL aver
r�:s�dential neighborhoc�cts in nartheasfi Ru�msviile.
Fvr re�erence, irt fihe abaue rrt�ntianed E�unway 17 DF' EA dc�curtierti ti�e �8�•degree
t�ack (ctosest trac�c tc� a�sc�-c���re� ne�d�n�3 w�s m���iec� �t s�.� �v����e �a�ty
depar�ure operatians represent€ng apprc�ximatety 12.t3% of the total average c�aify
Runuvay 'f7 de�aarture operations and ap�rox�matety 2Q.7°lo of th� to�al westbo�nc!
depar�ure t�perations with � forecast of 575,OOQ total It�SP op�rations (�89.4 �verage
c#�ily Runway 17 departure operatic�ns}.
Ta further anaiyze the sp�cif�c flighfi track �rends that resutt fram ihe 190-degree
headinc� prQvisic�n MAG staff analyzed �ctu�( flight �rack d�ta off Runw�y 17. The
Geogr�phicaf [nfQrmatian Sys�em {GIS} ar�afysis foct�sed c�r� an are� defined by a
geoc�rapi�ic extent that was determin�d by the actual lacatian af the 194-d�gree heading
flight iracks c�wer fhe groc€nd. Tf�e speci�c at-ea anatyzed fvr averflights was defined by
the ftig�i frack cc�ncentratior� Qn tFte west side of runway h�ading off Runway 1 i[n
January 2006 during �ime periods wher� Ru�ways 12L and 't2R w�re being use� for
arr�vai flperatiQns.
v"Final Envlronmenfal Assess�r�ent and Fnding c�f No Sfgn�frcant impact{FQNSt�+ Recad nf lledsic�n {ROCr) ft�r the
trr�pierr�entatlon of a€�eparture Pra�dure off fturtway 1 i�" FAA� duly 2{H}3. p. A-S.
l'
May 'I S, �(306
Mr, Rydeen
Page 3
In summary, �h�re were 16,�94 �otal �92.1 �verage da�fy} Runv�ray 17 departure
operati�€�s from t�c�ober 27, 2005 ta Apri124, 20�6. t3f t�ose �5.5% or 4=1 �9 tv#�i {23.5
average daily} operations with westbound d�:stinations passed thrc��gh t�e � 9Q-degree
headirtg gat�. The 190-degree �teadir�g op�rations u�rith westbound des#inations
represented �.4°la of th� tv�al T,6t?7 {43.2 average daily} Runway 17 departure
operatians v+�ifih wes#bound desti�atiQns. aur�ng thPs fiime p�r3od there were '# �.8
aver�ge daily C1ass B A�rspace transition operatic�rrs ta iY�e northwest of MSF�.
1n ��e cont�xt c�f the mcsst recen� e�viror�menfial dacurnenfi�#Ec�n on Runway �# 7/�5
(Runway 1`� DP EA} the exisiing ap�rational irends would restait in 91.2 average daily
Runw�y '!7 dep�rture operatiar�s on a 190-degree head'€n�. �`his c�perat�onal pravisit�n
re�c€its in the l�ig�est utifized departur� heading aff Rur�way 17, by €�rders of m�gr��tue4e,
ar�d mpreover, it is NUC's b�tief ti�at this resirictian r�presents a hea+�ing th�t vvas nc�t
mcadeled in pri�ar environmenial dacumentation.
As a result of these depa�t�re operatiorts N4AC Naise Program s�af� a�td the City of
Burnsvitle h�ve been receiving nurneraus complaints fram Burr�svilie residents under
the Rt��way 17, '�90-degree departure heading. A cflrnman inquiry is v3rhy some
r��erafiians cannafi b� directed aver the �n�aopulated Nlinnesota River Va[N�:y {i.e. ��VNf
Track L-- 23�3-dec�ree heading), which is mare an caufse `nrith tf�e destirs��ic�r� they
appear to presently be rout�d ta by �i�e FAA after passing aver the residential areas on
tF�e ncsri�ieas# side of Burnsviite.
In consic�eration Qf t�i� car�cern anci the c€�mmen�s presented by the Gity of BumsvilEe �t
��� May 17, 2t1U� Nf�C me�tir�g, t�e t�4C unanima�siy voted to farward the fo�lawing
t�ue�tians to the FAA fQr a writt+�n response:
1. Ve�fy the discr�pancy betweer� t�� a�tual de�a�kure procedures and ##�ose
+�nvisiQned in the documents listed above.
�. Explain why the 19�-he�ding restric�ion w�s not incfuded in �he planr�ing
dacum+�n#s fi�ted abpve if it is c�perationa(ly necessary today.
3. If the Final Environmental Imp�ct St�tement �rtd the Er�virrs€�mentai A�sessment
were bas�ci on d�p,�rture prc�cedures €rom Runway 17 fihafi �re signi�canily
c�ifferent frQrn the prc�cedures actual[y being used, won't new er�vironrnen�!
�vaivatians be neces�ary incluc�ing a r�avaluation of the QN�. noise car��ours
resulting from th� ariginai mvdelir�g?
4. What proced�res vrriil the FAA imptement to prc�vide rei[ef fio those �e�a�ivety
affected by this t�r�foresee�t, unplanned, anct unannou�ced ciepar#ure �rc�cadure?
�, Assuming thafi fihe Cias� 8 Airspace trar�siiicans are a significant driver qf #he 190-
degree s�ip�iatian, vuhat is FAA�'s positivn on the pr�o�i#ization of mir�ima� Class B
transifiion operaiions {11.8 average daily operatior�s} aver thvusands crf departure
r�pe�ativns ofi� Runuvay 17 at MSP?
C�
May �9, 20E36
Mr. Ry�eer�
Page �
We are fc�rwarding the abc�ve fve questiQns v€� behalf of t�e 1�4C and [ac�k #r�rward ta
yaur respanse.
As always thank you fve yc�ur cansiderativn and att�ntion to air tr��c no�se issues
�round l�SP,
Sinc�rely,
�
Vem Wii�ax
I�t3C Go-Ct�air &
C�ty Cauncii Member — C��y o� Bloomingtc��
�G%L�"j�7 ��.-�.-�� _J��'7�.....r`
K�thleen Netso�
NUC Co-Chair &
I�r�rthwes� Air�ines
R+�gianal D�r+�ctor -- Airline Affairs
cc: MSP N{�C
Mr. Tom Nanser� — Depu�jr City Ma�ager, G�iy of 8ur�sville
Mr. Nigel Finney -- G��uiy �xc�cuiive Director, Planning and �.nvironment
Ntr. Tc�rn Ar�ctersan — MAe General Cc�u�s�l
Mr. Ray �uhrttt�r�� — Direc#ar af �nuironment
Mr. Ghuc(c Proclt -- �AA Creat [.akes I�egic�n �ega# Cour�s��
M�r. Gler� C3rcutt —�AA Minn�apc�lis ADO
Ms. Anne�e Davis — FAA Gr�:at Lakes Rec�ion Environrnental Spe�ial�st
� s p I'�t)I�� C���I�.SIG]�'�' CC)���'�T:�� �N�C}
Min�eapolislSt :Paul :[�t�ernatit�nai A.�rport �N��P)
604f►-• 2$'�� Avet►ue South — tl7iaaea�oiis, MN 5545Q-Z749
.Q _ Phor�e {612} T25-6455
e x°
4`'
r'�.T1���. Co>1N�1i �
iYiR� ��� ��V�
Minneapc�lis Aicpc�rt �AA ATCT
/��rt: Nfr. Gari F�ydeen
Manager -- MSP Air �'r�ffic Cantrai Tower
�3't � 34th Avenue Sauth
Minneapolis, MN 55450
i�E: Use ni ��e 19�-�egree Q�par�ure H�adir�g o�f Run�ray'17 at Minneapoli�-
St. Pat�llnterr�atic�nal Airport (�li��}
Dear Mr Rydee�,
Thar�k yfl�t far yvur fv�ay � 5, 20Q6 tetter defia�ling FAA°s inves#igatic�ns infia the use of the
'f9Q-degree departure E�eading aff F�unway 'i7 during sc�utheast oper�tionai ftows at
Mi�rteapc+(is-5t. Paul I�tema�it�r�al Ai�par� �11�SP}. As we knovv yc�u ar� awar�, t�is to�ic
was a d'sscussiar� i#em at the May � 7, 20f�� MS�' iVoise Overs�ght Gammitiee (IVt7C�
meetir�g ane� cc�ncem� stili exist in the conte�ct c�f a 2t10-degree h�ading.
By way af backgmc�ndy 1� I5 NUC's be�ief tha� fihe plar�nir�g prc�cess and the consu{tation
and aoondin�tic�n th�t w�nt intn fi�� deveio�tment c�f F�unway 'f 7135 afi MSP has 6een
extensive. This pl�r�ning pracess acfhered �c� FAA c�uidance under the pravisic�ns af FAA
C}rder 505t�.4 anc� F`AA tJrder 1 D50. �t . 1� was thrvugh t#�is pmcess th�t dacumenfis suct�
�s ih� May '�998 M�P Dual�Track Airpcar� Planning Pracess Final Environrner�tal Irr�pact
Statement �hereafter referred to as t�e pual-Track �EIS), the J�ly 2(}t�3 Enuironmen#ai
Ass�ssment (EA} for a Departur� Proceduee {DPj off Runway 17 {herea�ier referred to
�s the Ftunway 9 7[3p EA} and the N�avember 2�3U4 MSP '#4 C.F.R. Pa� '150 Update
were dev+�loped.
The mast r�cent �AA dc�c+�mentatian related tQ the Qperatian af Runway �f 7135 at MSP
was an Augus� 27, �OQ3 F'rndi�c� �f Nra Sic,�, nificant Irnpact (FC?N�!}fRecard of Decision
(ROC?j issued tay the FAA �pproving �e J�ly 2Q03 Fiunway 17 I�P EA. The cataiyst for
the EA was FAA's position that an air iraffic con#rol proc�dure change nc�� anticipat�►d in
the f3ua�-Track FEIS, wt�ic3� rc�u��nely rc�uted �ir �raffic �►uer r�oise sensitive areas at less
ihan 3,C1£�Q fest AG�., required ar� eval�atian cvnsist�nt with F�1 C?rder 'i 050.1.
It was understac�d in the pl�nninc� proc�ss far Runw�y � 7i3� t�€at cert�in operatic�nai
interdependences exist �rvith the paraliel runways at MSP. Sp�ci�cally� when tY�e
operatiortal flow at MSP is in a southeast configuration with arrival anci depa�ur�
aperativns on Etunways 12R and 12L, west�Qund ds�arture o�eratic�r€s �fif Runway �7
have a westerly heading restriction. It was docurrientec! that t�is pro�isio� was ta de�
cc�nflict Runway 97 departures frorr� arrivals an F�unways 12�, ar�d 12R.
hl�ay '19, 2d06
Mr. i�.ydeen
Page 2
In t�e May 199� Dua1-Tracic FE{S, the Ju(y 2�a3 R�snway 'i 7�P EE1 ar�d the Nov�mk�er
2(�(l4 MSP Part ��0 Upciate, per FAA input, this wa� assumed �o translate in�o a'230-
degree ex�ent �il��ri Ffig�rt Track L crver fihe Minnesata Riv�r Valfey) fc�r westbaund
Run�nray �i 7 depart€�re operatians v�hen the �irpor� is in a sou�heas�t flow.�
FEawever, �oii4w�ng #he oper�ir�g of Runway 17/35 at NiSP, it w�s learned thafi fihe FAA
had �nalized the airspace desigr� arc�und MSP in Aug►�st 2005 and deterr�tir�ed the
�urthes� extenfi of westbourtd depa�kure headirigs off Runway 17 woufd be 19t� degrees
rnrhen R�€nw�tys 'i2R and 12i. were being used for arriva! o�eraticrns.
it is c�ur ur�derys�nding t�a# #his pracedura! ci�ange was impiemented for the following
finro reasc�ns:
1. Aircraft that are being directed by Air Traffic Cantrol ta [and on Runw�ys ��L c�r
12Et 6egin a clescent when they cross ihe 19�-dec�ree track €�ff F�untnr�y 17.
Keepir�g Runway 17 ciepa�ture �ircraft at ar east of the 190-degree heading
atfaws th� arriving aircraft �o descend far I�ndrr�g whi�e ertsur�ng they are
separaied from aircraft that ar� €�ep�rtinc� Runway �?.
2. 7here ss a car�idvr of airspace �ust tti the wes� �f the � 9D-degree track tha� a!lc�ws
Air Traffic CQr�fral tt� trans�tia€� non-MSP �ircraf# r�ort� �nd soc�th af the airpor�
while ensuring they are se�arate� from aircra� arrtving on Ftunways 12L. anc� '�2R
c�r d�partinc� Runway 17.
The flperat"sonal change re�resented by use of fi�e 19�}�deg�ee headi�g, as defiailed
above, has resui�ed i� ct�r�cer�tra#ed depar�ure aper�tic,ns b�tow 3,tlflt3 fest AG�. aver
residenti�l neighborhaods in northeasfi Burnsville.
�or refierence, in the abvve m�ntt'Qned Runway �i 7 D�' �A d�cum��t the 185•degree
�rack (cic�sest track ta a 19Q-d��ree he�ding} was mc�cteled at 34.7 average daily
depar�ure operatians re�r�senting approxfirnateiy 12.0% of the total average daify
Runuvay 1� de�ra�re opera�ions and apprvxtmafi��y 20.7°/a of the #o#a# westbound
tieparture operatians with a fort�cast a€ �75,OOU to�l MSP operations (289.4 average
ci�iiy Runway 17 depariure apera�iQns).
Ta #urther anaiyz� the speaific �light track �rands that result from the 190-degree
i�eading provisian MAC stafF ar�alyzed actuai fli�ht ira�k d�#a ofF Runway 17, i"he
G�ographical Infc�rmatio� Systern {Gi�} ana(ysis focused nn an are� de�r�ed by a
geflgraphic extent that was determined by the �ctual lacatior� af the 9 9(�-degree headi€��
fi�ght tracks c�ver tF�e grraunct. TF�e speci�ic ar�a anatyzed for overf#ights was defined by
the fligi�t track c�ncentration on the wesi s�de of runway headir�g aff Run�nray 17 in
January 2006 during #ime peric�ds wh�r€ Runways 1�L and 12R w�rc� ��ing use� far
arr�va! operations.
'"Pina! Envtronme.nfai Assassinent and Finct'rng a[ No 5ignificant impact (FqNSE}t Rec�rd of t�fon (ROpj ft�r tt�
Impte�rsenh�doR of a 13epat#uie Prot�dure off Ruttway 97�" FAA, July 2fltl3. p. A-9.
May � 9, 2006
Mr. Rydeen
Page 3
In summary, there were 16,�14 ��tai �92.1 �verage da�ly} �tunway 17' de�arture
operatiar�s from Oc�ober 27, 2Q05 to Aprii 2t�, 2i3t��. C3f those �5.5°l0 or 4,139 tot.�[ {23.5
avera�e dailyj aperations w€'th wes�bound ciestinations passed thraugh t�e � 9C3-degree
heading gate. TF�e 190-degree tteadi�g opera�ic�ns with westbpund dest�nativns
represenfied 5�.4% of the to�a� 7,607 (432 average daily} Runway 17 depar�ure
operatic�ns wifih wes�bound ciesti�atio�ts. Ducing this time per�od there were '� 1.8
averac�e daily Class B Airspace tr�nsit€on o�eratic��s to the nc�rthwest af IV�Sf'.
�n the conte�ct af the mc�st t-ecent er�vironmenfial dacumenta#ion on Ftunw�y '17�35
(Runv�ray 17 DP Ep) the existing vperatior�al trends would resul� €� 91.2 avera�e daily
Runway 'f i depart�re opera�ic�ns c�n a 19Q-de�r$e hear��ng. Th�s aperational prc�visi€�n
res�tEis in the hig�est utiiized departure heading c�ff Runway 17, by €�r�ers ofi rrr�gnitude,
�r�d mar��r�r, it is N�?C's bef'ref th�t ihis r��ir�ction re�esents a h��c�ing that w�s nat
modeled in priar environmer�tal documentat'ron.
As a result o� t�ese dep�rture operaticrns MAC Noise Proc�ram sta€€ artd the �i�ty of
Burnsville have been receiving nurr�erous camplaints €rom Burnsvilie residents under
the Ru�way 17, 190-ciegree deparkure heading. A cc�mmc�n inquiry is why som+�
aperatiQns can�afi b� directed �ver the �npopulated Nlinnescsta River Va1Ney {i.e. iNN!
Track L— 23C3-degree heading), whici� is mare on coc�rse virith tf�e destirsa�it�� they
a��ear t� presently be routeci to by �F�e FAA after passing c�ver the residenti�l areas on
t�e nortF�east side Qf Burnsvil(e.
tn cvnsidera�ian of t�►is co�€cern and the eommenis presented by the Ciiy c�f BumsvilEe a�
the May 17, 2Q0� NOC meet�r��, t%e i�4C unanimousiy vated to farlvard the failowing
c�uestions �Q the FAA for a written response:
�f . Veri�jr the discrepart�y befinreen the actc�al de�a�kctre pracedures and ihose
envisioned ir� the dc,cuments listed abave,
2. Explain why the 19t�-he�ding restriction w�s not includer� in ihe planr�ing
dc�cuments iisted above if it is operationally necessary today.
3. If the Fin�t Envirc�nmentat Impact S�iement �nd tt�e Er�vironmentat Assessment
were bas�cf an depariure prc�cedures fr+am Runway 17 fihafi are signi�cantly
different from the proc�dures �ctual[y being used, won'i new er��riranmen�l
eva[uatigns �e rtecessary including a re�valuatian ofi the DNL naise �orttours
resulting from �h� ariginal modeling?
4. Whafi procedure� will the FAA impl�m�;nt �ti prc�vid� relief to #hose nega�ivefy
a�fected by this �tnfc�reseen, unplanrted, at�d unannaur�cac� tfepartur� procedure?
5. t�ssuming that fih�� Class 8 Airspace trar�sitians ars a�igr�ificant tiri�er flf th+� 1�0-
dec�rse siipulatic�n, wf�at is FAA's pnsitit�n on the pria�itizatic�n of n�inimai C�ass �
transifiion pper�tipr�s (11.8 average d�ily operatians} t�ver thQusands t�f de�aarkur�
ope�-ations off Runway '! 7 at M5P?
May �t9, 20t36
Mr. Rydeen
Page 4
t/1ie are fc�rwarding the a�nve �ve c�ues�ians c�r� behalf af t�e NC7C and took fc�rward to
your response.
As always thank yau for your ct�nsEderation and attentic�n t� air tra�c no�se issues
around it�SP.
S�ncerely,
�
Vem Wilcc�x
NC?C Go-Cl�air &
C�ty Councit IVlember — Ci�y o� Bloor�ington
��t,-��"7 �..� .� �..��-✓`
Kathte�n Neisc�n
NCi� �a-Chair &
I�orthwest Air€in�s
F2eg�onal p�recfior �- Airline A�fairs
cc: MSP NOC
Mr. Tom Nanserr — Gtepu�jr City Manager, C�iy of �urr�s�ilie
Mr. Nigel �inney -- Depuiy Execuiiv� Director, Planning and Ertvir�r�rr�ent
Mr. Tom Anderson -- MAC Ger�er�l Cvunsel
11�r. Roy Fuhrm�r�� — Qirec#or of Enviro�rrrent
N[r. Chuck I�rack — Ft�A Great �.ak+�s Re�ic�n Lega� Cour�s�!
Mr. �ien tJrcutt — FAA Mit�n��pcslis RDC)
Ms. Anttc:tte D�vis —�AA +�rea� Lake� Rec�ion �nvironmental Speai�li�t
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
��i.l�:ltC�.7
January 4, 2007
TO: ARC Commissioners
FROM: Lincia Shipton, Senior Secretary
SUBJECT: Updates for Introduction Packet
Please replace the following pages in your ARC Introduction Packet
Table of Contents
Operations North of the 090° Corridor Boundary
The following should be replaced from your manthly ARC Meeting Agenda Packet.
# 7 Airport Noise Report — Put the latest issue of this in your Intro Packet
#13 November 2006 - Technical Advisors Report
#14 November 2006 - Eagan Mendota Heights Corridor Report
C.
Section
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19:
20.
21.
22.
Glossary
Historical Review Eagan-MH Corridor
Creation of ARC
Ordinance No. 290
ARC Brochure
2006 Airport Noise Plan of Action
Airport Noise Report,
NOC Bylaws
P&E Committee Regular Monthly Meeting Minutes
MAC Approved 2005 Capital Improvement Program
What's New at the MAC Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
ANOMS Monthly Reports
November 2006 Technical Advisor's Report
November 2006 Eagan Mendota Heights Corridor Report
Frequently Asked Questions
Contract Pertaining to Limits on Construction of a Third Parallel Runway
Crossing in the Corridor
Minneapolis Tower Operational Order
Runway Use
Nighttime Voluntary Noise Agreements
Maps
ARC DVD
�
;•tl
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
�
Airport Relations Commission
Linda Shipton, Senior Secretary
January 4, 2007
SUBJECT: Operations North of the 090° Corridor Boundary
The following is a tabulation of tracks crossed gate from June 2002 to May 2006
(tracking sheets attached).
2002, June - 137 Tracks Crossed Gate
2002 July - 85 "
2002 August - 176 "
2002 Sept. - 111 "
2002 Oct. - N/A "
2002 Nov. - N/A "
2002 Dec. - N/A "
2003 Jan. - 33
2003 Feb. - 42
2003 March - 64
2003 April - 103
2003 May - 45
2003 June - 80
2003 July - 80
2003 Aug. - 35
2003 Sept. - 45
2003 Oct. - 29
2003 Nov - 52
2003 Dec. - 94
2004 Jan. - 84
2004 Feb. - 129
2004 Mar. - 100
2004 Apr. - 54
2004 May - 204
2004 June - 50
2004 July - 93
2004 August - 117
2004 Sept. - 174
2004 October - 180
2004 November —108
2004 December — 135
2005 January - 169
2005 February — 113
2005 March — 79
2005 April — 175
2005 May - 189
2005 June - 156
2005 July - 103
2005 August — 61
2005 September — 175
2005 October - 100
2005 November — 81
2005 December — 60
2006 January —118
2006 February — 39
2006 March — 79
2006 April — 121
2006 May — 58
2006 June — 96
2006 July - 85
2006 August - 110
2006 Septernber— 95
2006 October - 114
2006 November - 118
Tracks Crossed Gate
«
«
„
«
«
«
«
«
«
«
«
��
«
«
«
«
,�
«
«
«
«
«
�`r
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
►fT[�TC�]
TO: Airport Relations Commission
FROM: James E. Danielson, City Administra
SUBJECT: Legislative Update
January 4, 2007
- � _ --
-;::: _ DISCUS�I.ON: _ �_ . :
: �. , � _ _,_. .. ;> -.: _
- � . - _ _ ._.._
< . __ ;
-�� = Jake Sedia�ek and l recently attended a meeting with State Legislators for .-
.^ _
� communities surrounding-the`airport: We will update you orally on �that meeting. I
�� � `-- have also attached an Airport 101 document distributed af the meeting by Merland,
_..
, _ Otto, Mirrne�-polis: ,
�_ -::. ..
; � > _ - : -.
-_ � : _
7.. . . . .. . ._ .
C
t
1'
�,
��—
—
}' �
�� -
��r�
� lb
e '•
o � •
� •
�
�
�
� '�
�
• .�
� �:
•� �
---- - - - - - - � - - - � - -
� � -�.-�
..�
U � CCS
c� .�.� zs � U .
---U_ S�- = -�- �- - _�- '`�-
� � � �: --
_ � �---.
�
U � �, � � �
O v � �"' � �
N CC� � � s" ' CC�
O � N N-
Q �, V ._ � V,
� � � Q � �
� � � ..�., � �
� �
. � Q. � � �, r� �.
C6 � � .�,,,, � t1�
� ---
-�+ Q- � � � �
� � -�-� -�-�► -�.-�' • =
�
. � , � : s� p � =-� �
� � r �
_ � � � z �-' �-�- -=�
= c� � m c� :
Q,_, � CU .�N N�� N cl'
` � � C� � O C5� t3�
� �- (� �- � U � � '
� �� �
#' � � _�
.��.
s��.
���
��� ,
��
� ��
r�`,
P�
� � � �
� � � t�0
� � M M
- _ -�-- '� -- -_
�. ' �
� tQ
� �
_ _ c� (A
a �
� E
�- o
� � �� o
0 0
c�
, t,0.. N O C) N 0
O � � N � O
O N
t� - M' M N-- N
> N M t� t�� �'+ "p
O �.
� �
C t'��
>N �
� N
`a 0
� �
c W
a� t�
>
� rn
; a� �
� o 0 0 � � �
�.� .. .... v r•
� N N , � � .,.
r
�
1� ' �
� �
r- :0
� ; t/�
�
O
O
N
O
O
O
N
_ � -: _ - -
� ,
� � ,
, � � .
� . ,
; _ � : , _ _. . ���. . � � �_
�
� �
V� ••
.
�
�
�
U :.
,_ _________
s_. ========
�
s��
��
�� _
��
�
I
�
. .
4-
-- - - -- --�� -
�
Q� (n � -� - - —
�
._ . .._-- - (V - -� = �=
s-�. - -- _ _ _ —. _�» _: . _ - --
i2 � =� � . _
:
� � �n� �
o � � �
� � � �
� � o �
� '� V �
: . _ __ - ---
� � .� �
� � � �
� C6 �
� � � �
� Cll � • �
� � � :� �
4) ._ � —
a� � .—
> �— `� �
� � � Q -�
� �-' \ \ \
o ,o 0
(,� � o 0 0.
� o d- dr e� :
0
Q� N - -
�
..�
-
-
_
�
6 . � .. . . . , ��: .
�
' �
� �
�
��� .�.
C =
_ tti �
���
N�Q� -.0
Rf,� �v'�'=�—�
... `C n� .�: � �
�� "'.F+ L L �=
���� �� ��E
—
�'p��c��,. , ��
�'�.l. �-: � O v-�_� --. � j_�
: ,r•� (� -0 `C�,,,, ._ ��(� �
.�Q���� Q�
v������,:� .:�1
co ; � co
—
�3'O�,�ttf�� —�.
Q
O�:C �0 � � O.
�p C�-�-� C� t�f '� G.�
C
� � �t� .� ttf � � � .= �
d`� CN
v, O � �. � t= ._ � �
N��=�t/� �O�
�
.c� a� ' �
c�
.c .� � � ""
�.�/ ■� � f� �
3v � r� L '
� ` (Li � '� � �- � �
C�,) �� °'?,,, �' � >,►C),� � C �
cL��.c��„� �,�
� � ,Q = Q,� � C� � p .t/� '
._ �
�1� ` 's-:u�����C ��;
� N.p.�tU.C�O ��,,
�., .t'� (/) .�
V R5'�p���-�� �LG.�'
�, ♦-+��.~_ �
U' C� v C N p� ` Q.}+-
s=�p)Ri�p� s-t1i
. :� �C � � Q., ; a. t� :C .� I
`'`�. _ `
��
��
o�
��
��
—
�
`
� � .
� .,�, '� �
�' � Q �-t�/��'
� ;� o,�,o��o
� �� ��`�'�'`
�� �� o�o.o�o
�� �c �°-'���Q-
IR' O ■ w � �� � �, �
�Y � � A� - O ` � �.
�V
�' �- - � � -'� °� a �s �-u..- _-
._
c-m _ -o _� __ _ _-__�-� -� �- � � - -- - -- -
_OC � � ¢ � o.��-�
c�=�� ��� ' ���` �-�� �+.: :
._ ._
o�' o o c� ��-� i- .�
� �c ,
C0'z7�, O�. ��'��' � Q
m�=- '��' ���s'v��
�G N p�,�,. '� L..
�0 �� �;����Q
C� �� cCS�� ��� �
�.
00 �� U���C��
> �"� ' ` � -� t2 � � � �' `
�0 =�li _�C
._
t0 � � �_ � ,
= .c c c�. � yo �
�� Qo ca-�����o ;
�° � ���Gti..��.�
Q�,�` �� �'.�LL. � O C �
t'�' n� •� n� � td �" C� ��
� � � -}—' Z
�� � � S
� _ �. . _ :t
��Q ��_ t
�����.� `
. �
� _
- - - - — __ ' ,� �_ tts -� � C�� � S
� ��-�C� � s
.,�,
..U���� c
O ., -� .
. _ �_ ,
- - � �-� j �-�_ Q U)-=---i
� N � ,�,� �2�
��p��� t
�Q���.�'�0�.:.... s
C,,,���o��Q- c
Z� �o o�a `
C o a,��-��o ;
�.
.�.a -E-� � � c.� ,� y
„� o � ;a� � �C r.
>� ..
t!� ��o��� �
�e��c� � � �
c� c� � � �- ,� �
S"'v t� � sV • � � ' � ..i
� �. s�-� � cc� c�n �
` �C) � c� '� � �-�— � �
� ;�. Cu F
'C3 � Q� '� � � �
Q� C � �}, -�+ ,.F., . _ ,
� �.������ i
. � t'� � C� s- � s2 �'
.�
. (� ,� �Ty- . � � -� � i
. � �� �.� r�� ��
� � � � ' (U -��+ �
� -�-� � .�r � 4- �
� �
�.� � �� �
_ O .�-� cn � O � v � :
C�. � � � .�._, U
,.,o,�� '� ' tC5 � � � � ' � ` �
I �_ � ._ 2.a--� . _ Ct� C�3
—_
� ;
.e.
o -
_
' '
� O (
' � . -� (u �
� ,� U �
s
� (i� N .-. �
'� � s�� � c
� V- Q � f
� OW
-- - - (1�_-(� - _— p-•-- � !
,�� � NZ�z i
ttS > .u� (v .
.
U� ���� i
� `�. � ti
t1Z `
- � ((� � - � __ � ; �-�=---i
N �,}=- � -��-+ � Q) �
(ll� ��-'� s' �
t,�U ' ��0� ;
�� ' ���Q' i
�
O � � �`� W �
.,� � �..oz
a� '�
� �� o a��
�.cu ��-�'o
� � � <( !�. ~ Z
� � � � cn c�
.
..
Q� �� ^� o� ;
.
� �1 '� Z -Q CCf � ; '
� � `.,� cU LL L
� �� � � o� :
� -V � p ' tCS � '� . .
. �. t� C� `F-' t6 �-�-
� �� �'�U� •
p� ��.�0
� �� �����
�� Z�� �
� o
�� ` ����
.�� ���°
_ �� ��a�� �
v� a� �s � ._
�� ��a�o '
� ,,,� _� _��� .
—
— � 4. .:
— : �
ti
s - -
��
�
f� �
� �
� � � �
.
� � N � � � Cl�
� � " ' s- V � • � s-
U tQ
O CC5 .. -F-" Q. � �
' � ,,� � � � .s � CU
.� O � ,,,_, .� CC� tCi �
O� �� �� CU �
_:. � .
� � �_�__ � ____ __ - �_ --- _ _
- � � � �� p �� p ��� -- - -
.. �LL ��, � �O
�, ..
�,,,� CC5 � � 0 .: � � � � _
•— -�-�
�
� _ _ �
� t'� ' _ •tl'J � � � �
-- �-� �� Q� � �__ � � �
cu'��- � �°'
� �
c� (� Q . `,'—. _ . _ _ _ _. --
� �` � � � V � � :�
�n�ocu Q�
� o � � eC cu �
CL � U � cn :._ .
iC �`�'Uj� ` ��Q
_ �; W -� cn - � -s— �3 � �
__
Cv- a��'000-� - o�,�
.� � z .,_,, c� � }, :
a�
�=- s� � � o
o�c,�o� ��
Z�,�,����, ���c�
(� �:���� tu��
C1� � sZ -� o.cn cu .� � c�
'— W���oo o��
O Z�t�c��s�. Z�.o
� -_ �.
�:
� �� _� �
_
_
._ _
�
_
_
1 . cn :cv
_
z� � ` o �
��� s...'� ��,�
t6 C� Z3 (ll. (U ; � � Ct
; .,._, � � ..� � " (�S > �
����� ��S
a� _ __ . o
--- -- - - -_}, o v,_�-�__ —�-z
QU�UCU
N Q
.�—+ � . � � — — . C� � V
,��,�� �_—
-� •— -�-� � -
� �CU_ � CU_ _O N-� C
- � v -� � � . �� . . ;�--�-- -
� C��' .�'O.� s- 'V �:a
� � O � "_" .�.. . t ° t.,� ..uj �
, �.��`�- Cll` '�-- Q
Z3 ��•� ��-
�•��sV..CCS>+ '��U
UCCS�•�s-c� �.0
o � s.- � �, ; ; � --�
�����a `��
� (� � � .�-� q�j � '� � - �
� 4� �,a,,, O Z� -
_ �
:�,C�SO�� ZN.
� O � -�-� � � Z�� "� � � �
s=-�� C •—
� . _ � tn
� � '� -� �_-�, � ' � CCi �
`��OCll�� ��z
�- �, .� W
..+, 0cn� �a
�.y- tl� ,�, s-' p � � 4;
� •- .�, •�
♦� � � � � � Q, i�� �
V J
a
•— �.�:�•° o= •�'o s
O LLc�F—sz��: cl���
� ��
� ----
—
�
�
�
_
_
_
� N
m N
"t7 '�
.0 . N� ; iC �
,� .v �N NL
.
� �' �� �
� � v � a
- --- - � � �v m � .0
� � � C
� � �+r� � , ,
�
v �� �a� c�r,
a)_:...___�- �-- -C `
- � ` .0 � - -= A .:.., _� �
� N � 0 � +
N � N :.�
° '� °- �; a
. ,�,
� � ;° c�n � c
�.. .� c
a� a� .
.;
' � � u � -c ,
0 0'�. � _�' � a
.� � m � cv _ -v ,
c � -v o� M ,
�
a� c� o �
E v-� o � �°` r �
� � �;�� �q��iii +
�' _ �cu�.�� �cQ.�p :
� � ���m ���-p �
� o o -� o -c
� � �Nx� �c��� s
� � C��p C w � ♦
O �T3 � �� -F �
�
, C N� m Ny � .�
� � � � � 3 � � s
•N � ��-" O -F� a Q t
� ' .a C � � C •� f
� -� ` � � t
.0 'i� O Zi O �
� E-- Q _ '�C t/�
� - x�-4 �.
.�_
�_
��
�.
—
� �
_
-�-+ �
Q� � '
Q� ' '�'u _ _ _ _ :
� � � � , �
� � �
" � .�,, � CU
� � � � � .�
� _ N � � _._ �. � �
C6 � 's- •� v � N
._
� � � � _ � � �
c ; c� �
_ � .cn � , � � � : �.
CC� O� C� .�` � V� -�
� � � � �- � o 0
0 o a o 0 0'� c�
�� CV M i,n C4 � �
_ _ _ ' i i -
� .
_ • �:... �: �:
i I �
�. .. .. . C x �.
_. _'. . 1 .-..... ���..� _ .. .._. , : .-..-� . �. : � ... _^^!: �. � .:.. �...-
' � � W
� � �
-�-+ ' `�+
� � � � �
. _. � ..,.� � v,
`C � U '_
� �
- -- - - - -_____�_- c-��- cC � : � z
c����o.�
cn �= � � v
�
Cu o>°o -~�
- � - -Q-_ - _� � _ c.�-== - �- _-c
� �— -� •—�
s- ' — � cn
-� -�-� c,,,� � — .
. ,— ` � q,) � C„� ��� .: s- �
.._ � q� --
� � � � ` �' C
I O � � (.� ; �-
�= U -�-, �
U .,,_, � � . C� _ �,
O �C � .� � .cn C
� � � o � p u
�C � � •— � u
Cv cn `�- a
� G'- .� o � �
c13 C, � � c
-
. � o � � -z� _
O o ,�C � �p u
� � �
�� c� ' — a
� � � � _
� � N -
� � � O � 0 �
C� � � O '0 �
Cn �cn��c��
� � � � r� ��
{
�
—
�
�
�
� �
_
� 1,
C"�
� ���
f'rj , ,
-- -� -- �: - - - - -
� "�i" ' ����
�
�
� �
�
r-� '�#'
�
�, � . . �C� ����
.�,,,:, C''�
��Iz
Q.
� � �
d.�
�
� �
O °� , ��
t� t�
�
t� � �
� �
� �
�
� � :
� �;
� �
� �
b1� � :
�
�
tl.) �
"� �'� �-
N �
� ���
N
� `^�.� � � r� N N
r �
�
� �
� �
� ��
o����
—_— ---______��_— ------ -- -- — -- cr
CCS : � °�CL �
� � � z� — a:
� � �c� °� `�
. _ - _ _ _� _ o _ --- - =� - -=-----_=__
O �cuo�-. a
5,.. � �. �
� .� :�,� : . � cu. �� � a
� � s� � .,
�, _ � � � �� - - = �.
�.- �
_ � 0' � � �+- .
�
CU O
Q� CU � � ; � '�
� � � � .� �
� � � �
� � � � � '� C
� � � � 4,) • � „%
Z� • � -E-o '
� � � � � ' _ y-
� O � ? � � C
� �. O C� -�
Q � O t1�
% .� .,,� � �._ V
Q� CC� s- � � � V
� � . :'' � �
. � t� O � � s- C
C� ��OC��C:
�� � =
�
�
�
_
0
� —
�
�
� �
� .�
� �
- -- -- - -- - __.____� _ __��� -�
� � �
� ' � �
- -- � _ -�-
� : � _ -- �- --� --____O
� �. .� ._
, .
. :: . � � .� ..:..,.� .
�c�� � �� � c.�
�> � = z -a�
� .-
� �� o
� � � �
� .-. �
� a� � � �
1 cn � � �
Cl� ca � c�
� -� �'— �ua cn
� o z c� �
� � � s� o .�,
a�
' W � � ��� �.�
Cll :�
_..V� � � �� �
(u 4� � -�-A� O � p
� ��� V /
.C/) oo �� ��
��° `��
C) � � � Q ._
��f�� � f,
�
'- .
-
� - ..., . . -.
3 �� r
�
� _
� ._.._�._......�.�w iF s'>.tYf=+^ .� r ��.�,d 'S'�1' A.+*`V�'� i � i 3 ,�� �
�'A� .�s.�'k�,r.,'�-- `.�"rFv,c�r.�'+�•�¢ ` � 9'{ . a+ ' 1'.�Y ��x� ���kp�'`,
r, j'a '€�S � .,�.-f^� $ .*'� i'�i.*^. n.. "�'� � 4 p (^ �. � � �+74 a �,
� „..^.�.-1�,^�y�^�.r � �, r ,�'s: � � �yi ,:,�[� e � �� `s" � a ��t �� � '-�
,.� �;. � � � � 1 ll" yGasrt'YI°� �� �t�i, �`�� (Y �i t,'M^k.. R! � ��A���ir�� .�.,. f�'6'�_. W:"5�..'i
��ti�� ��'�, .Fi�x t "S, c�' �+�hk�- r
. L' Y J �.,�,ik� i"i+^e .4'.q rE �C . tl �'� x • 'M '"^'� � �
[ t -�, .��' a �'�+�"'� �;�" ��, �J +"
'_ ' ' fy �F i�f ��� hF� M �,, $ 'rC'�' . 2'
, z �.�� � -� ��
�� 1,%,��"�'�� ���ir-. r`�' � �F Y �,r» .,, � ,,.�''• � �,, � ���
_���'�s�.:� ;§ � �. r�� s�s,'��"a�:� : ��'�+s�r rtM�,�-�;�+;;
"" �'� �,i•d�'���� � `r�'"�T fi%�i� a 5 ;` rr°"'' `� a e!' '4..,+ ,
i a ..jj� $�.,
� � � ,e� r,
����" � :.,��"��M��hy�'� +f���` � � t S . �b'} � �$! � �� .
� �4 � � �i�;..,,. �,�, ry ,� � w� ;¢: e k,
. . � /� �,�E' �" ,{� .f�i . �'�'� ;`� i � ;"" af ,'��` .f.
�� � / ��� t��y�� �� _� ����r^dyY�4��� .�f{� ifj�ka'F�:Y :� - ��•. ����` ��� N�„���
�_._ ._ . _ _ .:. _ � �
.. �� t i}4i�...:Y f"4-.: 5M1. a.�� P�.i�.,. iy,.:ii 3� _�rew _ �.. �.42w-�4.'a
� . F ( KS ' �r,� �� .� '"i�'g.� 1�, .� et �'a''jc �
� 1 ��i�'� � �'� �+'�#k} kn^�"{� '" � +u.� �-0` .�a��"'t �yt` ,�i' ����
�'�}y�-:�,y.� yA%+ � r���� �,,� �r ���t; ��n�" ���,��` � � ���us ��4
{+'�m�k+�M'�R�'i ir��2a��p"2'r� a�`�p�r'�5„��� i�� ,��H �,r �^T���4 i,,,r�';�
� �'vrA 1
'4 ,w."�s � �- �� #":� ��^a-� ia �,�t4r"x"�'�.. ,z � ly„� s +�• a�t '"^r,�i�,r.
. � � �rt2r4�;��'�^{st"� E wl} ��r:.+r�+'� �� iti���+�i�t��� �<, ��;
�,�[��+, r..
� ��r�.. � r:,F�' '��1�-i��� �"'�` e''�-r °'* eft�^ rf'.� �l��e},'.r �e�Y'�. �k
� � �a��yr6^+» .: .� '�•I.r � ��_�. bA n� �"'�xF $ .�m�.~ �`� �rr.A!<n -
�� Rpr.R'=��'i. ,i„ L"�4"..��*f�� �"�S'd`�„��T�� j��.i�d.'� �.
� ( �� ix-{ � � s+ � „� I�yr � s'
� .�p ' �'�� �,� �'��r��3� � � �, �
/�♦ t'� r v� ��. M1S�� � $�.��y�"'� ��"'��g��r �r � Tv �'�s �� W��'��
�i/ � � °r"4'"r"�l �" L3�t�� �',r. �y" a•1 +�'�„1�`,� ��r�''�� ���s�,'�
p+'. � � .�
Z ��-i{'s� It � � {� a �-�y�,p. •r _ �� �..�L��7"
L � "{�y ��.Y � � ^ rr. ' fi � �' � �iiYY
� T ������� . ...: � � '$�� �� ��� �I
iW �, �. t ?� � � �.�G fi� I . .�� � `i»'rc'
!d��,L,�ce�''��'�t `. w ''��b�',�y�fl+'� ��� �y.:'. � ..,�`"'�,�p' , �
a . , �+ �'
7ti�� ;w`�"^�a{k 1� `�,C+�"�r�'�5�,+� '�'���,�,.,,�
jj,, � +�..� ^ti
�
� �E � ♦ 4�';'1 i" � ii^��iN y CuM� d�. h 9rY4
�� ` �y N-4 � s b f�' �'r-^ ",,,,'� a y�,3� '�i � t�.Et
' ^Y 4 .�. �i..4��"(�3p '� . _.�� } t "�K'�'
� � ` s s .�yr .,. w y��: �
� �yF ��� � � 5� �' �inS � 'r'.�� {r,. � � o� �i�� �
� �p T;1��i F� _ �_ �.�f�, tr . � i�4'� 4'> 7+4�,� .y��'x d"
� Y Y'1�' �j"k4�d � t s�'Fe c �F� .�i, ��'�F$ �'�i�r���,o---�
�,2 {'f . ' Y �"� ' � � e�,j�3en' '°� � �
� � i � :>ta �'x' :�. sr-.: * ' �,� �� Eru?,` � �=�q`,�'�� �
O � 3 � � ;.�,�'F� � � �� � '� �'�k�
.,n ~�! �"�i���4. � � , � -�si' '�j�' v�' � � �'�k
, d+ "� 4.. � � e;. �' 4 ih � � �r�.�c.''i i.2y� '��.i`t ����*
� �� ` �, � ,� k �, ;,� t.v�Y �� �� J-�z�� f t° �-
� rrr�,�It�,F� �i � t r! �t� T=' �J���� � ��/�a!ty,``dz ��^t� 7
, 7�� �,F � . "�*'T`�'� , y�'+..� S � 0 d �f � �S F '`'�7 ��,t}"�'yS$-�'{i
� �� f r t t �E ��s i'�"@r x" �if CT
s, ,- � + �. r a .� � 1 { � r� : r �' (` '�}1..c�"-�� ; .� �mi�.rS`'
• � .#`' !
' �°` � ,�fi -'� � F i � i�
� i �"}�i, �����+t r '`r 'kr"� ,+t�� a� Ar�i,'�°4H � �"��u���'�'�� n���`,� � '�t�,a��,'`��
{' r G �,�� �jt�
� N-�'� �a� 7'�t��� � .'� N�� �� �tk �, q � �� �.�,F�i�j l��'� ��t� � 1t�� . �� �'•��
� +. k'�;�k � � 4 r3"'n I� �s a�,�v p.
" �,�, �` � � ' �ri �+ � �
n � '�,rt �,�y�'�� �''�(�"� :j,.#'a� �` .. � � ����,,.� �� i�� � ��7Ycl, �t��;��,r-r �t�„���
\i�� ,�'^. '�}� �� , %� �� ` 3 3 �, , ,�A+, S ,y �r `�+� �, �� i 7 -�,� N "�(
t i 3 '# '� �"'c N J :.. M��M� ����.�"� � � � � jy {� t � ti�
{ i'�'t'�'" 2 �'�,a� . ti , s1�S I �' �'s'�;i`�-.�,�E
� ���,,�,r�aR1 �a+�`��+��r���,� �' ����{+��'"sw ��y�����G�"',K'�i���"'r J
� . : w«�, N � fi � 3� � '� �� � 'i i' � 4 i � ��.'� � �S "y'� �±,�r.Mm `s
t g �
. � � n`�' � ���� a«n,� r'iy ""`�� ���'�'�`r����wi,���lh t�� ��'�
� . �{ �i♦ a U.'w,„u�r�,,,�` w i� "^' p ; � 4 1.('�..►., k+ �,,,�ifk:'i"'r +�.,
��� �' y,`Jin ,vt � 7.�fw4.� �.+�wa�rinwrrrjai'"'"',�.r"tE�R�� �3L r�fP'�{r�
�- +�.�� h � ° t* � s"� �'
r'y r } { a , �, �� t � �r � �¢ 4 { r�k
I � � � 1 � i � �} 5� i� � i Sr � a",�,,� �'rt'" ,�.�k ��� �'1 ,�� .� f�� fi�)
' .. F'La "'' -�p� � ., � �- � � >. � ��''.�ha{ 4 1..�Hr� a,." � c 1,�
,, �, t,� �ry r s% --lh F:��-�.i� Ih�"� {�(.t� `��.,,�'�fi g aL u:� i�,y
N . ,
��...�. t w�...�i�.*,..u,C ��. �t:� �.^�_..'r^s..:��,w,�Wu%. �
sa
�a ; .
�o
s�o
��
0
9
�
�
�
a
�
��
r
M
�
�
4
C
t�
��
f
t
C
e
0
w
i�
Q
�
ws
R
e
�
x
_
C
C.
6
0
i
C
,�
■ ' �
� �
� � �
c� —
._ �
_ �.
tL •— � � �
��� ,� ._��
U O �
O
LL' Oa N
� �^ -
W �
� �
� � �
� /'�
� �
r . - - - -- �W� ��.� - —
�I—
� �
� � � �� : � �.� . ' .� � . '�
.� �
� n�
- �- _ _ W—__-- - - -
�/� �-------- ---
� '
V J... ___ ___ _ . ____ _�----
W � ----
� � ..� ....
. C� cn �
_,-., .— �
� � c�
� � �
O � o-`
.— .�
! �'j � � c� u�
�
.�
� � C� ,,,� '
� �- � -- .
� � p �
� C� � � - -�-� � .
a� � � o �
� �sz� �.�
�
Cv .o � � c� � �.
e � � � � �� o
� . � � 4--
(.� �" �D
� � �
�
0
�
—
e
� ;
a �o
�
�
U �
Q � �'
�>_ -cU -�
-�-� ---
,.,_ . —
O � �'
� � �� .
s_ � � U t!�
- - -°�- =-�_�=�--`-� - --
�.-��— � U O_- O � - - _- -- ;
'�'— � C,) � U
' CC�- �, �: . � .� .
� � � � 0
.. „ � „ U
_ _ � �� �
! , ��� .: . �.:. � ,�.
' . -F-� S- � � �
� O �. � _. �. -
_.CU � �' O � � �
-�-� s_ g� • �, � -�
. _.
_
.0 O � � � �
� V ///���
V �J
i � . �.o. � � � _ O , _ _
4- QI '°-'° y -�-'
V
I � � � � � �
i � � � � .�
� . _ -�—� .�
i -�' ''--' � C�. . • — . : C.)�
i � �' C� � �; �
�, � c � �., cU
�
/^� :
y__ LL
O �
C/)
- - - -- - __ __ � -- _-- >,,_ - ____ >,=--- � ;
�
O o •�' a�
� -� o � �
- C-t3 - -`�'- - -=o- ---� =�
� --
- -o
� :au � � m
� � :�,
�_' �� � �' �- � � �
._ o � o o �
--1 - � z U
.� •-
� o �, �
r � O
� � � C.� v N
� � v � ° _ _.
i t�f �C � N 4) ; � �
` � � � Z � � � '�
� � .. � +� � �
CU ' - � s-
. � (� � (, � • -
-�+ -- s-
-�-r • - � �, �, 'Q
CC� •- � � �
� C� �. _ �
� � � � o —
._ �..� oU o 'o.
(.� � . _ c� J � ' --�
._. � � i � � �
s- O O
. Ct� C.� S
�.. -
_
f �s�
��
��
�o
+� �'
�
i
�
s �
s o
: �,
� �
� �
^ �
i � .-. �
- cn � o 0
s _ ��- ° _ _ -~ -- -
-�=�� v—L-�_ - -- -
S � V; � 4=
_..
. � � t!� � .:..
5 V t1 CCS -�
S c( � v U
� v � �
� � �
'� � p tJ)
� U .,._,
= � �C z�, . °' �1
i ° � •� � --�
s � > � ��
�v •- � � � cn
_ �. � ��— - � o cn
_ o-� m v .-.
� �
'— � — � > C� c/�
_ �, m tv ' _. � . _ . .
� � � � � ��`
� � � � � �
u= �,,•� c� �, �U
- o_ � � .� �C
� �
)�U� ��U ��
o __
- - - N _
i
�
.
� �
.� .-
�
- - - � ■
- - - - �
U •-
� �
{
� s
- - - — _- -�
_ �_
o �
�= c
:c
� c
� � -
� o -
•— �
';"' � S
� � �
' � �
C� -
N � z
� � X s
�
a� ..
� s
� � � c
t� � � c..: r
— �
� �-�
S� ���� � � 5
U �=► � (
� � � s
� Q o � •-
-�-�► � U c� �
� f ' ` .
�`_,;
-
'-
-
�
� . . - :.. �. .
0
��
� �
0 �
� � �
s._ � .
� �� �-� � � _. : � �� ��� �'
� � �
0 4)
� � � °�S
_ _ -Q�-: . _ - -O _ _ ___,_ _ _.� _ _ _ _ -- — -
_
- -- — - �
_ _t1_� . _. ___ _ --
s,=. -- - � — -- ,`�; (,7 - _ —
� � � �
°: -�=� � : � � � �
C.) p � '
-� �'' -V�
_ ���_ _ _ � � Cu . . �
; - � �,, .O ' � �
C13 � � .� � -
� � � � 1
� � � � .�
� o
O � � `� : �
- . � ? • - ` �: � ,.�
,.. }, � , �
� � �
� o
� � �. c6
� ° � ��' �
0
� � �;
� � �
I� W ��
t.�
e
�
�
• �
e
►
�
� • � s
t
►
• �
0
�
s �
a , � s e
4
o ,
e ,
�► � o
, � �
� �
. 4► , a e
• • � �.
•
o ' �
�if � 0
•
�
� d �
� � ` o
�
�
, � 0
6 �
.0 / � � 1
e � � a '
�� A� A 1
�
e
e �
0
►
� �
�
�' o •
e e �
•
• e
� � e
� � �
� �
0
� �
• �
o ,
� .. a
� �
�
� � � �° •
o �
� t � ,
� e �
�
� � e
d
� � < �
• ,
-- � � �
e
e �
� � � '
�
, e
. � �► �
A � �
� � • � ° a
� � � �
�
• �
�
1 • � � � • � o
. a ` • ,
•
� ► a� • � �
�
,.
0
. -•__�� � . ' .
G v�
. . ./"�r�l��
;� `
AIRPORT LEGISLATION MEETING
On Monday, Jake Sedlacek and I attended an airport legislation meeting at the Eagan
Community Center. Representatives, Senators, Mayor RT Rybek, Council Members and staff
from Bloomin.gton, Eagan, Mendota Heights, Minneapolis and R.ichfield attended. The purpqse
of the meefing was to share information for the new elected officials and for community leaders
io touch base on issues regarding the Airport.
Our effort to improve representation on MAC for 65dn1 cities is only the tip of the iceberg of
concerns regarding the MAC. Legislation to change MAC representation made it as a part of the
2006 Transportation Bill which failed to move forward at the end of the session. (T'here is some
positive momentum for change at the Capitol). Mayor Rybek from Minneapolis made a pitch for
sweeping reform of the MAC structure, creating a state-wide aviation oversight group, which
would report to the MN Legislature. Under this model, the MAC would still exist, bui focus
only on MAC operations. It would be part of a larger organization tying together all MN
Airports; looking at airports as a system of resources. The group felt that legislation such as the
current proposal from Bloomington/Eagan/Mendota Heights/Richfield is a step in the right
direction, which may create conversation around the nature of MA,C representation. Legislators
and Senators discussed how they might build state-wide interest in revisiting the stna.cture,
purpose and representation of communities in MAC, and how bills may be introduced.
The call to action for comsnunities is to continue dialogue on the topic, keeping it on the top of
the minds of our public and our elected officials. If we have other ideas for bills, we should
communicate those ideas to our legislators prom.ptly. The group discussed meeting again in
Mid-January, with more details on proposed bills worked out.
THE VILLAGE AT MENDOTA HEIGHTS UPDATE
Ross Fefezcorn and Sue Sauter met with Council-xnembers Vitelli and Duggan, as well as Mike
Aschenbrener, Jake Sedlacek and myself on Wednesday. The group discussed concerns Council
rnembers had heard about conduct on premise at the Village, to make sure that everyone was on
the same page. Issues such as identifying key-holders and what rules are enforceable were
discussed.
Ross also provided the group an update on construction and leasing. While the Metropolitan
Council Grant didn't go through, the plans for the ABC building are still moving ahead. There
are a number of irons in the fire for potential leasers, and December has been good for the
C
� �
�
�
��� �� �
�� �� Proposed Language for a Bill Pertaining to City Representation on the Metropolitan Airport
� r� � Commission (2006-2007 Legisiative Session)
(��V
v�
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.16
1.17
1.18
1.19
1.20
1.21
1.22
1.23
1.24
1.25
1.26
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.15
2.16
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.21
2.22
2.23
2.24
2.25
A bill for an act
relating to the metropolitan airports commission;
adding mayors to the commissioner membership; amending
Minnesota Statutes 2002, sections 473.604, subdivision
1; 473.605, subdivision 2; 473.622; repealing
Minnesota Statutes 2002, section 473.601, subdivisions
3, 6.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2002, section 473.604,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [COMPOSITION.] The commission consists of:
(1) the mayor of each of the cities of Minneapolis, St.
Paul, Bloomington, Eagan, Mendota Heights, and Richfield,
or a qualified voter appointed by the mayor, for the term of
office as mayor;
(2) eight members, appointed by the governor from each of
the following agency districts:
(i) district A, consisting of council districts 1 and 2;
(ii) district B, consisting of council districts 3 and 4;
(iii) district C, consisting of council districts 5 and 6;
(iv) district D, consisting of council districts 7 and 8;
(v) district E, consisting of council districts 9 and 10;
(vi) district F, consisting of council districts 11 and 12;
(vii) district G, consisting of council districts 13 and
14 ; and
(viii) district H, consisting of council districts 15 and
16.
Each member shall be a resident of the district represented.
Before making an appointment, the governor shall consult with
each member of the legislature from the district for which the
member is to be appointed, to solicit the legislator's
recommendation on the appointment;
(3) four members appointed by the governor from outside of
the metropolitan area to reflect fairly the various regions and
interests throughout the state that are affected by the
operation of the commission's major airport and airport system.
Two of these members must be residents of statutory or home rule
charter cities, towns, or counties containing an airport
designated by the commissioner of transportation as a key
airport. The other.two must be residents of statutory or home
rule charter cities, towns, or counties containing an airport
designated by the commissioner of transportation as an
intermediate airport. The members must be appointed by the
governor as follows: one for a term of one year, one for a term
of two years, one for a term of three years, and one for a term
of four years. All of the terms start on July 1, 1989. The
successors of each member must be appointed to four-year terms
commencing on the first Monday in January of each fourth year
after the expiration of the original term. Before making an
appointment, the governor shall consult each member of the
legislature representing the municipality or county from which
2.26
2.27
2.28
2.29
2.30
2.31
2.32
2.33
2.34
2.35
2.36
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
3.16
3.17
3.18
3.19
3.20
3.21
3.22
3.23
3.24
3.25
3.26
3.27
3.28
3.29
3.30
3.31
3.32
3.33
3.34
3.35
3.36
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
the member is to be appointed, to solicit the legislator's
recommendation on the appointment; and
(4) a chair appointed by the governor for a term of four
years. The chair may be removed at the pleasure of the governor.
Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2002, section 473.605,
subdivision 2, is amended to read:
Subd. 2. [PER DIEM, EXPENSES; EXCEPTION.] Each commission
member shall receive $50 per diem compensation and be reimbursed
for actual and necessary expenses. The chair shall receive a
salary as prescribed in section 15A.0815 and shall be reimbursed
for reasonable expenses to the same extent as a member. The
mayors and members of the city councils of Minneapolis �, St.
Paul, Bloomington, Eagan, Mendota Heights, and Richfield shall
not be eligible for per diem compensation. The annual budget
of the commission shall provide as a separate account
anticipated expenditures for per diem, travel, and
associated expenses for the chair and members, and compensation
or reimbursement shall be made to the chair and members only
when budgeted.
Sec. 3. Minnesota Statutes 2002, section 473.622, is
amended to read:
473.622 [EXISTING AIRPORTS; CONTROL, JURISDICTION.]
The corporation shall exercise control and jurisdiction
over any other airport within either 35 miles of the city hall
of either the city of Minneapolis or St. Paul or within the
metropolitan area. Control and jurisdiction of the corporation
over any privately or publicly owned airport shall be limited to
control and jurisdiction of the flight and traffic patterns of
such airport in the interests of safety of the operation of any
airport owned or operated by the corporation. No airport shall
be acquired or operated within the metropolitan area without
first securing the approval of the corporation, provided,
however, such approval shall not be withheld except after notice
to all interested parties and a public hearing held thereon, as
provided in section 360.018, subdivision 7, and then only upon a
finding by the corporation that the acquisition or operation of
such airport would create a flight hazard to any airport or
airports owned or operated by it. As to any airport once
licensed with the approval of the corporation, approval of the
continued operation of such airport shall at no time be
withdrawn by the corporation except after notice to all
interested parties, a public hearing had, and a finding by the
corporation based on substantial evidence that the operation of
such airport is inconsistent with the safety of flight to and
from an airport owned or operated or presently to be or being
constructed to be operated by the corporation, and then only
after payment of just compensation to cover the loss sustained
by reason of such withdrawal, such just compensation, if not
arrived at by agreement, to be ascertained in the condemnation
of said airport by the corporation under the power of eminent
domain, the commission to institute the condemnation proceedings
promptly and to pay in connection with the prosecution thereof
all reasonable and necessary expenses incurred not only by it
but also by the owner of such airport.
Sec. 4. [REPEALER.]
Minnesota Statutes 2002, section 473.601, subdivisions 3
and 6, are repealed.
C
� •�
/. � ' � ., .. . .
RECONINiENDATIONS FOR ST�iTE LEG6SL/�TIVE ACTIONS
� RELATED 1"O AIRPORY tANID USE COMPATIBILITY
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS �
LEGISLATNE CHANGES TO ADDRESS ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING LAWS 3
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO CLARIFY OR CORRECT EXISTING LAWS (INCLUDING ADDRESSING INCONSISTENCIES� 3
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO ADOPT NEW LAWS AND/OR RULES $
ATTACNMENT ') : EXAMPLE OF AN EXPANDED LIST OF COMPATIBLE LANp USES 11
Recommendations For Stafe Legislative Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page i
RECC;MMENDATIONS FOR Sl"A�"E LEGISLATIVE ACTIOf�S
RELA7'EL� TO AIRPOR�' L.ANL� 11SE C(JIVIPATI�ILIIY
Prepared for ihe Minnesota Department of Transportation
Office of Aeronautics
Prepared by:
��
Clarion Associates
1700 Broadway, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80290 •
303.830.2890 (tel)
www.clarionassociates.com
February 10, 2006
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS ��
The following list summarizes Clarion's suggestions for targeted legisiative action to bette�
enforce, clarify, correct, or change Minnesota statutes and/or rules regarding governance of
airport land use hazards. In the sections following the summary list, we provide a more detailed
description of each recommended action.
Legisiative Changes to Address Enforcement of Existing Laws:
1. Incorporate airport zoning ordinances into official land use controls.
2. Ensure implementation of comprehensive plan elements relating to airport
compatibility.
3. Require Mn/DOT notification of changes in state law.
4. Authorize new penalties for noncompliance with statutory airport zoning
requirements.
�egislative Changes to Clarify or Correct Existing Laws (Including Addressing
Inconsistencies): '
5. Declare the operation of public airports an essential public service, and not a
� governmental enterprise.
C�Clarify the current real estate disclosure laws to include proximity to an airport as
a"material fact" that must be disclosed to buyers.
�Z� Reconcile multiple inconsistehcies between Chapter 360 airport zoning
provisions and Chapters 462 and 394 general zoning enabling provisions.
8. Clarify whether airport zoning is mandatory or discretionary for owning/controlling
municipalities.
9. Clarify the following issue: If a county does not own or control an airport (and is
therefore not a"municipality" for purposes of Chapter 360), but has within i#s
territorial limits an airport hazard area, does the airport have any. authority under
Chapter 360 to adopt, on its own initiative, airport zoning regulations?
10. Clarify the following issue: If a county does not own or control an airport (and is
therefore not a"municipality" for purposes of Chapter 360), can it sit on a joint
airport zoning board?
11. Clarify the following issue: Does an owning/controlling municipality have the
discretion to request that some, but not all, eligible counties and municipalities
adopt airport zoning regulations or join a joint airport zoning board?
� 12. Clarify the intent of Minnesota's prohibition of amortization as applied to existing
airport hazards.
� 13 Reconcile the minimum 4-month timeline for board action on an airport zoning
� variance in Chapter 360 with the newer, minimum "60-day" deadline for agency
action on zoning requests in M.R.S. Section 15.99.
Recommendations For State Legislative Actions .
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 9
�
�
Legislative Changes to Adopt New Laws and/or Rules: ,
14. Mandatory comprehensive land use pianning for jurisdictions containing airport
hazards or influence areas.
15. Mandatory airport compatibility plan element for jurisdictions containing airport
safety zones or hazards.
16. Provide clear criteria for determining when Mn/DOT Commissioner may grant
exceptions to airport safety zone dimensions.
17. Authorize Mn/DOT review of major development applications within airport safety .
zones and variance requests.
18. Amend rules to update.performance standards for compatibility — address wildlife
hazards.
19. uthorize or require use restrictions in Safety Zone C.
2. imit height exceptions and variances—require concurrence by airport sponsor,
Mn/DOT, and the FAA. �
21. Amend rules to more clearly and comprehensively address treatment of legal
nonconformities.
22. Allow deed notice or avigation easements as condi#ions of local approval.
Recommendafions For State Legislative Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 2
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO ADDRESS ENFORCEMEMT OF EXISTING LAWS
1. Incorporate airport zoning ordinances into official land use controls.
Require local governments who are members of a joint airpott zoning board to
. incorporate or reference adopted airport zoning in their official land use controls,
including their zoning and subdivision regulations. New rules could also authorize
and require Mn/DOT to formally certify local compliance with this step.
2: Ensure implementation of comprehensive plan elements relating to airport
compatibility.
As a condition of receipt of state transportation funding, direct Mn/DOT Aeronautics
to certify that local land use regulations are consistent with local comprehensive pian .
elements addressing airport land use compatibility...(See recommendations for new.
legislation to mandate land use planning for airport compatibility, below).
3. Require Mn/DOT notification of changes in state law.
Require Mn/DOT to notify all public airports and affected local governments of
changes in state law, rules, or regulations that will necessitate amendments to
previously adopted airport zoning ordinances. '
4. Authorize new penalties for noncompliance with statutory airport zoning
requirements.
( ) For example, the state might withhold or delay funding for local airport-related or
-' highway/road improvement until the affected city, county, or township complies. .
Alternately, the legislature may grant Mn/DOT the authority and standing to enforce
an adopted airport zoning ordinance that is not being_ implemented or enforced by a
� municipality.
�EGISLATIVE CHANGES TO CLARIFY OR CORRECT EXISTING LAWS (INCLUDING ADDRESSING
INCONSISTENCIES� . .
5. Declare the operation of public airports an essential public service, and not a
governmental enterprise.
Amend M.R.S. Chapter 360 to declare the operation of public airports an essential
public service, and not a governmental enterprise, as held by the IVIcShane case.
Clearly link this declaration to a statement that airport zoning is a valid exercise of
the police power. Also consider codifying the majority takings rule adopted by the
U.S. Supreme Court holdings and other states. While legislative declarations are not
binding on the state's independent judicial branch, courts will often take notice of
such declarations and may give them some weight.
6. Clarify the current real estate disclosure laws to include proximity to an.airport as
a"material fact" that must be disclosed to buyers.
Minnesota Statutes 2004, .Chapter 593—Frauds, Sections 593.52 through 593.60:
This statute requires sellers of residential property to disclose in writing "all material
facts of which the seller is aware that could adversely and significantly affect: (1) an
i i ordinary buyer's use and enjoyment of the property; or (2) any intended use of the
Recommendations For State Legislative Acfions _'
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 3
property of which the seiler is aware" before the parties sign the sales agreement.
"The disciosure must be made in good faith and based upon the best of the seiler's
knowledge at the time of the disclosure." The Minnesota statute does NOT define
"material facts." While the statute does list several fiacts and circumstances that the
seller does not have to disclose to a buyer, it does not list any specific facts or
circumstances that seller must affirmatively investigate to be true or must disclose if
known.
7. Reconcile inconsistencies between Chapter 360 airport zoning provisions and
general zoning enabling authority under Chapters 462 and 394:
• Reconcile use of the term "comprehensive zoning orrtinance" in Chapter 360 with
the term "official contr+ols" in Chapfers 462 and 394:
Sec. 360.064, Subdiv. 1: Refers to when a municipality adopts a
"comprehensive zoning ordinance", airport zoning regulations °may" be
incorporated therein.
Sec. 462.352 Subdiv. 15: Definition of "Official controls" or "controls"
means ordinances and regulations which control the physical
' development of a city, county or town or any part thereof.o� any detail •
thereof and implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan.
"Official controls" may include ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision
controls, site plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and official
maps. (Chapter 394, the county planning and zoning enabling act uses
the same definition of "official controls°.)
�
• Reconcile public Fiearing and notice requirements to adopt/amend an airport
zoning ordinance versus all other zoning ondinances:
Sec. 360.065, Subdiv. 1: Two public hearings by the zoning authority
(the goveming body or the joint board) are required — one before the
ordinance is submitted for the commissioner's certification, and one after
the commissioner's approval but before final adoption. Published notice.
in two different newspapers (and not in the legal notice sectian of the �
paper) must be given 3 times in the period befinreen 15 days and 5 days
before the hearing. Mailed notice must be given to each affected
municipality, and 15 days notice to all property owners within zones A and
B, and to other persons/municipalities that have previously requested mail
notice. �
Sec. 462.357. Subdiv. 3: At least one public hearing by the municipal
planning agency orgoverning body is �equired prior to adoption. 10 days
published notice, and if zoning amendment/ordinance affects 5 acres or
less—,10 days mailed notice to property owners within 350 feet of subject
prope�ty boundaries. (Note: County public hearing notice requirements
in Chapter 394 are virtually identical to the municipal requirements.)
• Reconcile findings and paramefers for the grant of an airport zoning variances
with those for all other zoning variances;
Sec. 360.067, Subdiv. 2: Use variances allowed. Variances from the
airport zoning regulations may be granted based upon a finding that their �
"literal application or enforcement...would result in practical difficultv or
Recommendafions For State Legislative Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 4
unnecessary hardship and the relief granted would not be contrary. to the
public interest...:" No definition or explanation of the te�ms "practical
di�culty or unnecessary hardship° provided.
Sec. 462.357. Subdiv. 6: Variances may be granted by a municipai BOA
(or by the governing body if no BOA is appointed) based only upon a
finding that °their strict enfo�cement would cause undue hardship
because of circumstances unique to the individuai p�operty under
consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated
that such actions will be in keeping with.the spirit and intent of the
ordinance" Includes definition of "undue hardship," which means "the
property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the o�cial controls, the plight of the landowner is
due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not
.� constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists
under the terms of the ordinance." No use variances allowed.
Sec. 394.27, Subdiv. 7: Variances may be granted by a county BOA (or
by the governing body if no BOA is appointed) based only upon a finding
that the variance is "in harmony with the general purposes and intent of
the official control in cases when there are practical difficulties or
particular hardship in the way of carrying out the strict letter. of any official
control, and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the
comprehensive plan. Includes a definition of "hardship," which means
) "the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under
the conditions allowed by the official controls; the plight of the landowner
is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the
landawner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the locality. Ecanomic considerations alone shall not
constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under the .
terms of the ordinance." No use variances allowed:
o Reconcile treatment of nonconforming uses under Chapter 360 and Zoning
Enabling Acfs. Specifically, treatment if the nonconformity is damaged or
destroyec�i.e., "any subseguent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall
be a conforming use or occupancy."
Sec. 360.067, Subdiv. 1(b): If a nonconforming use or structure is more
than 80% "torn down, dete�iorated, or decayed", the subsequent use or
structure must be replaced, altered, or repaired to conform with the airport
regulations.
Sec. 462.357, Subdiv. 1e(2): If nonconformity is "destroyed by fire or
other peril" to the extent of greater than 50% of its market value, and no
building permit has been apptied for within 180 days of when the property
is damaged. (Chapter 394 uses the same 50% threshold for counties.)
8. Clarify whether airport zoning is mandatory or discretionary for
owning/controlling municipalities:
• The authority to adopt airport zoning in Sec. 360.061 et seq. appears to be
i ; discretionary—i.e., a municipality or the owning/controlling municipality (including
'---' MAC) "ma}�' adopt airport zoning (Sec. 360.063, Subdivs. 1 and 3).
Recommendations For State Legislative Acfions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 5
, , (..
�
Sec. 360.063, Subdiv. 6: When a municipality, county, or jt. zoning board "fails to
adopt within a reasonable time airport zoning regulations in accordance with the
provisions of sections 360.011 to 360.076, or adopts regulations or amendments
that do not conform to the standard prescribed by the commissioner, the
commissioner may... adopt or supplement... or repeal the regulations for the
municipality or county" until such time that the municipality or county acts to
adopt or comply. °The commissioner shall have the same poweirs with reference
to the airport zoning regulations as are granted to municipalities..."
Question: If an owning/controlling municipality has the choice/discretion under
Chapter 360; subdiv. 1, to adopt airport zoning regulations (i.e., "may" do so),
what does subdivision 6 mean? Is there really discretion when the state can step
in when a municipality chooses not to act "within a reasonable time° and .
unilaterally impose airport zoning? The penaliy and.p�eemption of local control in
Subdivision 6 would make more sense if the very act of adopting airport zoning
regulations was mandatory, and not discretionary.
9. Clarify the following issue:. If a county does not own or control an airport (and is
therefore not a"municipality" for purposes of Chapter 360), but has within its
teeritorial timits an airport hazard area, does the airport have any authority under
.. Chapter 360 to adopt, on its own initiative, airport zoning regulations7
Arguably the answer is "no° under Section 360.063, Subdivision 1. This
subdivision states the general enabling authority that gives all °municipalities"
having an airport hazard area within its territorial limitsthe power to adopt airport
zoning regulations. This authority does not include °counties" unless a county ��
owns or controls the subject airport; in which case the definition of the term
"municipalities," as stated in Section 360.061, includes such county.
There is ane way for such counties to be involved in airport zoning under Section
360.063, Subdivision 3. This subdivision requires a non-owner/controlling county
to adopt airport zoning regulations or join a joint zoning board, but only if
requested by the municipality owning/controlling the airport. In this case, if
requested to take action, but the county does not adopt or enforce airport zoning
regulations, or join the joint board, the owning/controlling municipality or joint
board may adopt, administer, and enforce airport zoning regulations for the
airport hazard area in question (i.e., preempt the non-responding county's zoning
authority).
10. Clarify the following issue: If a county does not own or control an airport (and is
therefore not a"municipality" for purposes of Chapter 360), can it sit on a joint
airport zoning board?
It appears the answer.is "yes," but only if requested to join by the owning/controlling
municipality. Section 360.063, Subdivision 3.
Recommendations For State Legislative Acfions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 6
11. Clarify the foilowing issue: Does an owning/controlling municipality have the
discretion to request that some, but not all, eligible counties and municipalities
adopt airport zoning regulations or join a joint airport zoning board?
a. The answer to this question is not clear unde� Section 360.063, Subdivision 3(a).
This subdivision states that the owning/contralling municipality °may" request a
county or municipality in which an airport hazard area is located to adopt airport
zoning regulations or join in the creation of a joint zoning board. The pravision
leaves several questions unanswered:
i. Does the municipality have to state a request to all eligible counties or
_ municipalities to take action (i.e., can it request action from only 2 of 4
eligible counties and townships)?
ii. Does the municipality have to make the same request of all eligible
counties or municipalities (i.e., can it request county "x". to join in the
creation of a joint zoning board, but ask township "y" to directly adopt a,
zoning regulation meeting the state's minimum standards)? �
iii. If the municipality seeks to form a joint zoning board, does it have to ask
all eligible counties and townships to join (i.e., can it ask county "x" to join
in creating th�e joint board, but not ask township °y")?
1. It is clear under Section 360.063, Subdivisian 3, that a joint airport
board may exert ai�port zoning power over territory within a non-
participating county or municipality only when the non-participating
county/municipality was originally requested to join the board but
did not do so (Subdivision 3(c)).
b. There may be alternative, •legal avenues under the municipal planning and
zoning enabling authority (Chapters 394 and 462) to have some, but not all,
affected jurisdictions jointly adopt and enforce airport zoning regulations without
forming a joint airport zoning board under Chapter 360. There may also be.
avenues for the one county or municipality to adopt airport zoning regulations
and impose them on another municipality or township without the latter parties'
participation in a joint zoning board under Chapter 360. These alternative
avenues may be viewed as either desirable flexibility or loopholes that should be
closed, depending on your point of view. Note:. The arguments for these
alternative avenues are more colorable under an interpretation of Chapter 360
that gives a municipality discretion to adopt airpo�t zoning in the first place.
i. For example; Section 462.3535 (Community-based planning), Section
462.3585 (Joint planning board), and Sections 462.381 to 462.398 (the
Regional Development Act) provide alternative paths for joint, sub-
regional, and regional planning and zoning action and implementation
involving multiple cities, counties, and/or towns. These might be used to
address airport planning and zoning outside of the parameters in Chapter
360.
ii. An owning/controlling municipality and/or county might be able to exert
extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction over non-participating townships or other
municipalities under either the specific sections cited above, or under
general powers granted in Section 462.357 (for municipalities) and
Section 394.24, 394.32, and 394.33 (for counties).
Recommendafions For State Legislative Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 7
Municipalities. Section 462.357, Subdivision 1, giVes cities the authority (
to adopt, administer, and enforce zoning regulations in unincorporated
territory up to two miles from its limits, but not in a county or township that
has adopted zoning regulations. The city may continue to exercise such
extra-territorial zoning authority until such time as the county or town
adopts zoning regulations. �
Counties. Section 394.24 give counties the authority to apply county- .
adopted zoning regulations within the incorporated limits of a municipality
(including cities or towns), when requested by the municipality under
section 394.32. Section 394.32 gives authority for a municipality and a
county to agree that the county will adopt, administer, and enforce zoning
regulations within the incorporated limits of the municipality. Section -
394.33 states the general rule that a town may exercise zoning authority
like an incorpotated municipality, but if the town's zoning regulations are
inconsistent with or less restrictive than the county's adopted zoning .
regulations, the town may not administer or enforce its controls. The
town, however, may adqpt official controls that are more restrictive than
the county's controls.
12. Clarify the intent of Minnesota's prohibition of amortization as applied to airport
hazards:
• The Minnesota legislature banned the use of zoning amortization by counties and
municipalities in 1999 (See Minnesota statues, Sections 462.357 and 394.21:),. �
except to abate "public nuisances." Minnesota's statutes are unclear whether '
"airport hazards," which Chapter 360 declares as "public nuisances," are included �.
in the exception. to the general: ban on amortization. If they are, amortization
' would be an available tool to phase out incompatible uses over time without
cornpensation. �
• If the intent of the Minnesota legislature was indeed to allow amortization to be
used ta control airport hazards—at least in very limited circumstances, the
statutes would more clearly indicate this intent if ttie legislature had specifically
exempted airport hazards in this section, similar to its express exception for
adult-only businesses. �
13. Reconcile the minimum 4-month timeline for board action on an airport zoning ,
variance in Chapter 360 with the newer, minimum "60-day" deadline for agency
action on zoning requests in M.R.S. Section 15.99.
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO AQOPT NEW LAWS ANDIOR RULES
14. Mandatory Comprehensive Land Use Planning
Amend the municipal and county planning and zoning enabling acts (M.R.S.,
Chapters 462 and 394) to make comprehensive planning mandatorv for cities and
coanties that contain airport hazard areas/safety zones as identified in an adopted
airport master or layout plan.
15. Mandatory Airport Compatibility Plan Element
At a minimum, local governments that have planning and zoning authority over
airport hazard areas/safety zones, as identified in an adopted airport master or layout �
plan, will prepare comprehensive land use plans that contain a specific element �.I.
Recommendations For Sfafe Legislative Actions
Clarion Associates February 2�05 Page 8.
, addressing airport-related land use compatibility issues. This element should.
address issues such as safety, noise, access, and economic development. Local
communities must also ensure that their comprehensive land use plans designate
alternative growth areas for uses found to be incompatible with airport operations.
These alternative areas must be sufficient and adequate to accommodate growth
pressures that would otherwise encroach upon the airport. These areas should also
reasonably accommodate uses that might need to relocate out of the airport safety
zones under applicable airport zoning rules. The local government should ensure
. that periodic updates are completed in coordination with updates to local airport .
master plans.
16. Provide Clear Criteria for Determining When Mn/DOT Commissioner IVlay G�ant
Exceptions to Airport Safety Zone Dimensions � .
Chapter 360 and/or the Minnesota Rules should be amended to clearly state and
describe a review process for municipal or airport requests to reduce the dimensions
of a safety zone. Those rules should state the specific evidence the State will
consider (such as practical hardsh'ip, economic benefits, social costs, airport
accident data or third party risk research), and the criteria by which the State will
review and: decide such requests.
17. Authorize Mn/DOT Review of Major Development Applications and Vaeiance
Requests .
• Amend Chapter 360 to authorize or direct local zoning agencies to refer "major"
airport development permits to Mn/DOT for review before final local action
�'" � (similar to the FAA referrals under FAR Part 150). "Major" airport development
`_ - would need to be defined; for example, all conditional uses in the locally adopted
airport zoning ordinance. �
Similarly, the statutes should be amended to authorize or direct local agencies to
refer variance applications to Mn/DOT for review and comment before a final
local decision. � .
18. Amend MN Rules to Update Performance Standards for Compatibility
Lirriit water impoundmenUbird strike hazards by adopting standards and guidelines to
more clearly prohibit land uses that attract hazardous wildlife such as birds and
waterfowl.
19. Authorize or Require Use Restrictions in Zone C�
Amend M.R.S Chapter 360 to authorize or require use restrictions in Safety Zone C
to forestall future noise complaints and potential safety issues and to facilitate
runway expansions. Best practice suggests limits on multi-family residential uses
and public assembly uses, and possibly communications towers and wind turbines.
In addition, limits on the density of permitted single-family residential uses may be
appropriate (e.g., establish a maximum density of 1 dwelling unit per 3 acres, the
same as the Zone B limit). Such use restrictions need not apply to the entire Zone
C—some jurisdiction may find these use limits most effective applied only in Zone C
areas within a specified horizontal distance (e.g., 250 or 500 ft.) from the runway
centerline extended.
Recoinmendafions For State Legislative Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 9
:ourage Expansion of Specific Prohibited, Allowed, and Conditional Uses
Amend Minnesota rules to encourage airport zoning ordinances to incorporate a
more inclusive list of compatible and incompatible land uses as well as uses that
may be compatible subject to additionai conditions. See Attachment 9 to this report
for an exampie of such an expanded use list.
� �Limit Height Exceptions and Variances
Amend Minnesota rules to permit height exceptions or variances only when
supported in writing by the airport sponsor, Mn/DOT, and the FAA, and subject to
such conditions and terms as recommended by Mn/DOT and the FAA.
��Amend Rules to More Clearly and Comprehensively Address Treatment of
� Nonconformities
e Repairs and Mainfenance. Amend rules to clearly permit o�dinary repairs and
normal maintenance required to keep nonconforming uses, structures,. and trees
in a safe condition. All ordinary repair and normal maintenance should be
subject to other limitations regarding expansion and enlargement of the .
nonconforming structure or use. � .
• Expansions/Enlargements of Nonconfomiing Structunes and Uses. Amend rules
to make clear the extent of expansions or enlargements allowed and prohibited.
(See' model ordinance for specific regulatory language.)
• Relocation of a Nonconforming Use. Amend �ules to make clear when and if a
nonconforming use may be relocated to another site.
• Changes in Use. . Amend rules to make clear limits on changes in a �"
nonconforming use to a different use.
Reesfablishment of Abandoned Nonconforming Uses. Amend rules to make
clear when and if a nonconforming use may be reestablished after it has been
abandoned.
�. Allow Deed Notice or Avigation Easements as Conditions of Local Approval
Specifically grant local governments the authority to condition approval of any.new
development located within an airport influence area upon recordation of a deed
notice or dedication of an avigation easement. �
Recommendations For State Legislafive Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 90
ATTACHMENT 1: EXAMPLE OF AN EXPANDED LIST OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES
COMPATIBLE LAND USES WITHIN AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES
Use Categories and Specific Use Safety Zones
Types � ; � Additional conditions and comments
Zone A Zone B Zone C�
•:,x . - -
:.....,.,..._ .:..,...,._., :.. ..� .......... . .
P. = Prohibited Use �
C = Recommended as Permitted Compatible Use
NR = Not Recommended as Compatible Use
♦ = Additional Review Re uued — Ma Be Allowed with Conditions or More S ec'it"ic Stud �
"�"�.� �„- `���Y 4 � ¢ �.� ir.+..>2ti'x �15� , •-* �i-,x,?��'"+,v �-�- `�.-y+E.,�y��� �� ;�-�r�+�5.£i�1} ��f '' .�ce.-+��� ..�.�� `�',. .
,�Ger�e a11y�Proib�te�cfiUses�A;�tlmAc�iu�t es�ln�All3Zones������.�� �� ���������?.��
Uses creating large areas of
standing water
Uses causing electrical,
navigational, or radio .
interference between airport and
aircraft
Uses (or structiires) emitting fly
ash, dust,.vapor, gases or other -
emissions
Uses fostering increase in bird
population
Use, device, structure making it
difficult to distinguish airport
lights (billboazds, lights, signs) �
Use, device, structure causing .
glaze or impairing pilot visibiliry '
Uses or structures that promotes :
concentrations of flanunable _
substances or materials
,��.�� .�': -u. +�" ^�-a_, t *�. ca rr �- v,., � � �. s- . " ,:se� �- �a
r �i5-� k-." �`p, L...�c d`t''�`�,��-�r '�"t'�M1 �r',31 -'*�'�[";� �'-, . .�'� -4.� +�_.
�Resrden`�iai�i�nd Ac�or.�rnodatior� Uses��`� -��r��� �,����- .�,�q� - �� �
�taF`c'�;:.�-..�?'6�e���'.�`i"c��'v�-'.:`:�E�-''"�.-°.�.�a�.'-.:'�_u..:. +..:f.'4�a.�:..�.::"s: "�'�t.�:q' `lE`..r�.>t..4s's_'+..'.����cfit- �:�'s d�..*„� •`�3.__. - ��
. . _ . .... . . . .. . . . . . .
RESIDEIV'TIAL USES ,
Single Family, Two-Family,
Duplex Dwellings -
Multi-Family Dwellings
Nursing Homes and Other
Group Living for the Elderly •
Permanent Mobile Home Pazks
and Courts ,
ACCOMMODATION USES
Hotels & motels
Transient mobile home parks
courts (R.V Parks) or lodgings
r'z,s.,>-€" c�,-a ��`.,-�^' Y^. ex� i"K ,�' `c:a'-sr-''�t,x �.�.s�-3"�'.s� .�`�-'�"t'.s"��k�'"'.�`�r''+.�"-s„ N i.c.x���.� �-t"-�-�§. f�'"Kr�i�'t'^.r'�'.�_,"��`��{^-"�'''�`"3`s�
r$P,ubiica �rv���andf<Ins�t�tut�onal_��S@S���� x'� .-;. � �t.���v V;:����s��S��'�,.-? ��,�������°�-:'��,�`���� ����
EDUCATIONAL USES
Schools and Other Educational
Services
Recommendations For State Legislafive Actions
Clarion Associates February 2006 Page 91
COMPATIBLE LAND USES WITHIN AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES
Use Categories and Specific Use Safety Zones
YP ; r � Additional conditions and comments
T es � - ;
�Zone A Zone B Zone G
' :�il<4::�1:"i'��rli'�f. _ .
r',. ...�..�i_..._ ..._ r.i. ._ ......... .....�.
P = Prolu"bited Use
C = Recommended as Permitted Compatible Use
NR = Not ttecommended as Compatible Use
� = Additional Review Re uired — Ma Be Allowed with Condidons or Mare S ecific Stud
Day Caze Faciliries '
INSTITUTIONAT. AND ASSEMBLY LTSES : `
Correctional Insriturions
Govemment Offices 1.
Hospitals
Libraries
Religious or Cultural Assembly
Uses (Outdoor or Indoor)
Other Miscellaneous Public,
Civic, or Insriturional Uses Not
Specifically Listed
,, .
OTHER P..UBLIC TJSES ;. , . ;
Cemeteries
Parks and Nature Exhibitions
� � � �' �"w� � ,`�''�����rt,` �'" �`" . � ,_ '� �
'C��+�7G1= US�� ya .�� F �i 7• rµ�, , � ,. �µ _
y �� _�, ,��._�• -� :. _t?� , u � � s
BitSINESS'& PROF,ESSIONAI.O,FFtCES , '� �., ` L .:�; ry � � ��' 3 �; '' `� . �,
'�-w-a...�i F+.�.�... J ..�+r.� • . ..._z.;..�.. ..mv�. .. . �,., -
... _ . . .... ... . .. . .. .�n_... ....:.._. .. �...��i. .1 .,. ., ti . . .:...� r. ��
Medical & Other Health Care �
Offices Or Clinics
All Other Business and
Professional Offices �
RETAIL SALL�S t7R.SERVICES . .
Shopping Malls & Centers
All Other Retail Sales or Service
Uses, Including Repairs and
Personal Services
EATING AND/OR DRINSINGESTABLISfIME1VT
..... ......
Eating and ctrinki:ig places
AMUSEMENT�: EIVT'ERTAIIVMENT AND RECREATION:ESTABLISHMENTS
Fairgrounds, .Amusement Parks,
Theaters, Amphitheaters, and
.All Other Amusement,
Entertainment, and Recreation
Establishments Not Specifically
Listed (Indoor or Outdoor)
Golf Courses, Driving Ranges, -
Riding Stables & Water
Recreation Establishments (&
Related Club Houses) "
Recommendations For State Legislative Actions
Glarion Associates February 2006 Page 92
r�� �
COMPATIB�E LAND USES WITHIN AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES
Safety Zones
Use Categories and Specific Use __ Additional conditions and comments
Types � • �
Zone A; Zone B Zone C�
- � -
P = Prohibited Use
C = Recommended as Permitted Compatible Use
NR = Not Recommended as Compatible Use • �
♦ = Additional Review Re uired — Ma Be Allowed with Conditions or More S ecific Stud
Recrearional Vehicle
Accommodations l',nd �
Gampgrounds
Zoos
_
- . . �. .
VEHICLE SALL7S OR'SERVIGE ES'TABLI$HMENT ` ` '
Automotive related; body repair
shops, parts and supply
distributors, rentai/leasing
agencies,.sales and service
�`'�, '�,r"�,,..i� -�'�`�f""��)i'�'.��.,�' �' � .ar -c�.r="`�-�9s"�1�� �+-+„-r �:.+*.�'�^r,�'� � �d',' e� i�-.�,�� ..,�.� �, sx—� . _-
'�I��r�al-,c�olesale.:� ra�`'�d�e,,and S�orage'��Uses�,��� � �N� �-�����;� � d
. -_.. -
�.�?����'•3ti'i3:�a,�V�.'Lx_.�Aao.,L�'�fix�'.rx-'•a'°a.�.r'€u+�'�,�:wc`;is'4;�F_„F....�-�.��- .�'.�'� .b;4r,k.=s,:-�y ���'���"'.+�+`��s:'�-3�_.�'.�.._��.�rs� '.""._:_ .-'�'..�-"'��°.a���.
MANUFAC3'URING,.ASSEMBLY�:OR;PROCESSING,USE$ _ .,: ,..::_,... .. 4:
Chemicals and Allied
Production;
Liquefied & Bottled Gas
Psoduction or Distribution;
Rubber & Misc. Plastics
Manufacturin� Primary Metal
Industsies; Fabricated Metal � �
Producdon
Explosives and Pyrotechnic
Producdon •
General Industry, Heavy — Not
Otheiwise Listed
General Industry, Light — Not
Otherwise Listed �
Mail Order House
Mini-Storage Warehouse
Petroleum Refining & Related
Industries (Gasoline, Diesel &
Heating Oil)
BUI7.DING AND: GONTRACTING .
Buiiding Materials And
Hardware; Construcaon,
General Building Contractors;
Building Materials Supply
Manufactured/Mobile Home —
Sales Only
WHOLESALE TRADE
Wholesale Trade �
Automotive, Marine & Aircrafr
Accessories
Recommendations For Sfate Legislative Acfions
Ciarion Associates February 2006 Page 93
COMPATIB�E LAND USES WITHIN AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES
' Safety Zones
Use Categories and Specific Use Additionai conditions and comments
TYPeS r -' � �` �
, u� �
Zone �1 �Zo�e Y B,Zone, C
.,_..r...,�..... .,..,.� .. .. , .
P = Prohibited Use
C = Recommended as Permitted Compatible Use
NR = Not Recommended as Compatible Use
e = Additional Review Re uiied — Ma Be Allowed with Conditions or More S ecific Stud
.; ,..
WAREIiOUSE`ANp STORAGE SERyICES ` _ _ ` 4'
Warehousing And Storage ' '
Services
Explosives Storage '
WASTEANLI SALVAGEUSES . •: ' '�
.
.:
..
_ ;,.
'• ,
...._ ......... .. .._... .. ,.
.. . � .:.
Hazardous Waste Facility
Landfills; Solid Waste Facility
Rerycling Collecrion Facility � �
Refuse Hauling Facility
Salvage Or Junk Yard �
� ���� ��-�'•� �. �-�;� {�.�� �"`" - � .,. , �--- �
�o`rta ro �'a �c� ;�r&�-�����`-� � � �, � �� � � . � - ��'-„
� � � _.�.�:t. �=
Transportation Facilities (Rail
Ways, Highways/Roads,
Terminals, Vehicle Parking or
Storage)
Passenger Facilities
Cargo-Freight Facilities
Coinmunicarions/
Telecommunications/ Broadcast
Communicarions
Utilides, Including Large Wind � . .
Energy Conversion Facilines � _ _
�' CXCU,� U�C.a7'�'An� es arce --lC�C�Gt[:�I�US � ���� ` ;__ � 4 F � r �
°.� �s �.�c��i"'���.�u`x�'��xs �'i'�rs'�,����"'':� .�it°��` �'i�?,� � +�Sr. � _ � '�' .r...�
.r. . � ' - . . . t. . � h�� . —
. . , ., . .. . ... . .�.. ,... . . , .
AGRICTJLTURAL USES ' ' -
Agriculture, General (Except
Livestock) '
Agricultural Accessory Housing
Agricuitnral Related and Support
Activiries
Forestry Activiries & Related
Services
Fishing and Hunting Activities
& Related Services
Greenhouses
Livestock Fazms And Ranches
Not Otherwise LisCed
Mink .And Poultsy
Production/Bieeding
Recommendations For State Legislative Actions
Ciarion Associates February 2006 Page 14
COMPATIBLE LAND USES WITHIN AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES
Use Categories and Specific Use Safety Zones
Types ;, „, r 4 u�.;�t , Additional conditions and comments
Zone,A zone B Zone, ,G'.:
P = Prohibited Use
C = Recommended as Permitted Compatible Use
NR = Not Recommended as Compadble Use
� = Additional Review Re uired — Ma Be Allowed with Conditions or More S ecific Stud
RESOURCE EXTRAG'TION USES .
Mining Activiries And Related
Services
Oil & Natural Gas Wells; Stone
& Mineral Quazries
.��e���- � a' �'d �-�� x '�' ""-�y ,�'��*.� � ";-�-�.`Y'� � '� `��-� � w ' `
����d. -x p sh:1' r � L � �"�i� ��"Cf�xE'- C"�..��.�d� �`--.,
��fi@,�"Uses"'�-�����������.��G i���-���r- raF a--"�`ur�'-3�'�`�; �- yt �;�'_ _'� � -�
Ft-u>�x,`+�.� �s..�Fr�w:�.� -�^��-_ �s,...��tv._'�, „-3`,r� �,'��..�.. ��.�.�a-.F._`��'_T'�'�-�"���y,.� F r.���:� =�'x i�.c , _ �..r�..
Water Areas '
Open Space
Stonnwater Detention Facilides '
Accessary to .Another Use
(Surface Only)
Undeveloped And Vacarit Land
Recommendafions For State Legislative Actions.
Clarion Associafes February 2006 Page 95
e
� T�ZO�C.���TA� � ��'�� C� SSI�l�
- 2r�pP+ i5 SA-tiTq Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
F + 9� 6040 - 28th Avenue South o Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
1 � � z Phone(612)726-8100
�t t N
� �
o �
9 �
�' �.
r t- �o
QH 4lRPORYy
November 29, 2006
Jim Danielson, Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4106
Dear Mr. Danielson:
Enclosed you will find the agenda for the December meeting of the Finance,
Development, and Environment Committee.
At the meeting, the Committee wili make a recommendation to the full Commission to
approve a final version of the 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Included
with the agenda are pertinent Committee memos regarding the CIP.
Sincerely,
Robert J. Vorpahl, .E.
Program Development Engineer
Enclosures
RJV/I rk
c: Nigel Finney
Gary Warren
CIP File
Day File
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
www mspairport.com
Reliever Airports: AIIZLAKE � ANOKA COLTNT'Y/BLAINE � CRYSTAL � FLYII�tG CLOUD � LAKE ELMO � SAINT PAUL DOWNT'OWN
C�
�
� � � �� � 0,, ,,, � •,� � ��
\' ��ll_= �l
FINANCE DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITfEE
Tammy McGee; Chair
Bert McKasy, Vice Chair
Dan Boivin
Tom Foley
Robert Mars
Molly Sigel
John Wiiliams
Jack L.anners, Commission Chair
Chair — M&O Cornmittee
Chair— HR/AA Committee
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING
FINANCE, DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
Wednesday, December 6, 2006, 10:00 a.m.
Room 3040, Lindbergh Terminal
Wold-Chamberlain Field
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
AGENDA
Cr7i7�[+'�����
1. REPORTS
a. Budget Variance Report — October 2006
b. Statements of Revenues and Expenses and Changes in Net Unrestricted Cash —
October 2006
c. Accounts Receivable Summary
d. Budget Impact Report Regarding Management & Operations Committee Action Items
e. Change Management Policy and Project Status Report
f. Bloomington Land Acguisition Status Report
Steve Busch, Finance Director
Nigel D. Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment
2. FINAL PAYMENTS — MAC CONTRACTS
a. Runway 4I22 Reconstruction Segment 3(Bridget Rief, Assistant Director — Airside
Develoment)
b. 2006 Multi-Family Sound Insulation Program BP#3 (John Nelson, Part 150 Program
Manager)
c. South Maintenance Fueling Facility (Robert J. Vorpahl, Pragram Development
Engineer)
C j 3. SEMI-FINAL PAYMENT — MAC CONTRACT
-- a. South End Runway 17/35 Construction (Allen Dye, Airside Project Manager)
4. BIDS RECEIVED- MAC CONTRACTS
a. Humphrey Terminal Parking Facility Expansion BP#R2 - Finishes and LRT
Modifications (Dennis Kowalke, Landside Project Manager)
DISCUSSION
5. NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE - 2007 WORK PLAN
. Kathleen Nelson, NOC Co-Chair, Northwest Airlines
Vern Wilcox, NOC Co-Chair, City of Bloomington
6. AIRLINE YEAR-END RECONCILIATIONS
a. 2005 — Actual Year-End Reconciliation
b. 2006.— Forecasted Year-End Reconciliatian
Steve Busch, Finance Director
7. ACQUISITION OF JET LOADERS AND OUTBOUND BAGGAGE SYSTEMS
Nigel D. Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment
8. 2007 OPERATING BUDGET FINAL PRESENTATION
Steve Busch, Finance Director
9. 2007-2013 CAPtTAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
a. Environmental Review .
b. Adjacent Communify ReviewProcess
c. Program Funding
d. Program Approval
Nigel D. Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment
Steve Busch, Finance Director
10. BOND REFUNDING UPDATE
Steve Busch, Finance Director
Materials for this meeting are available at the following website:
www.ms pairport.com/mac/meeti nqs/fde.aspx
�
C�
' '• . •' � : •`
Stop by the information booth near the tram station on the Tram Level. At the information booth, you
will be asked to complete a security checkpoint access form and show valid, government-issued
photo identification, such as a driver's license. Take your cornpleted access form with you up two
floors, to the Ticketing Level security checkpoints. Show your approved access form to security
checkpoint personnel. You will then be screened just as if you were traveling. Access forms are only
valid for the purpose of attending a public MAC meeting at a particular date and time.
Commission Chambers are located on the Mezzanine Level overlooking the airport's central shopping
area (above Chili's Restaurant), past the main security checkpoints.
Allow yourself at least 30 minutes to park, complete the access form and get through the security
checkpoint prior to the meeting.
Parkinq will be validated; please brinq vour parkinq ticket to the meetinq.
Directians to the Tram Level Information Booth
From short-term parking: At the Lindbergh Terminal entrance, take the escalator or elevator down
to the Tram Level. The information booth is straight ahead, in the center af the room.
From general parking: If you park in the Blue or Red ramps, take the elevator down to the tram,
�" � which will transport you directly to the Lindbergh Terminal's Tram Level. When you exit the tram, the
-' information booth is straight ahead, in the center of the room. If you park in the Green or Gold
ramps, take the skyway to the L.indbergh Terminal's Mezzanine Level. From there, take an elevator
or escalator fia Tram Level. The information booth is straight ahead, in the center of the room.
•'�. �
.
TO: Finance, Development and Environment Committee
FROM: Nigel D. Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning & Environment (726.8187)
SUBJECT: 2007-2013 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
a. Environmental Review
DATE: November 27, 2006
Since Commission approval of the Preliminary 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) on
September 18, 2006, the environmental review process has continued as scheduled. One document
was prepared to meet the requirements of the legislation prior to final action on the CIP. This
document was an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AOEE) for the Metropolitan Airports
Commission Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program (2007 — 2013). This document examines the
cumulative environmental effects of the projects in the seven year CIP at each of the MAC's seven
airports.
On November 8, 2006, a public hearing to receive public testimony was held as part of the Finance,
Development & Environment Committee meeting in Room 3040, Mezzanine level of the Lindbergh
Terminal. The hearing was advertised in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, St. Paul Pioneer Press and
EQB Monitor. One person representing the South Metro Airport Action Council (SMAAC) testified at
the hearing. The public record remained open until 5:00 p.m. on November 22, 2006. Three letters
were received providing comments regarding the AOEE.
A proposed "Hearing Officer's Report" is included in this package for adoption by the Committee as
hearing officers. The report includes the Findings of Fact and Recommendation for the AOEE. A copy
of fihe letters received as well as the responses for the AOEE and a copy of the transcript of the Public
Hearing are also included. Specific project comments will be addressed as part of the appropriate
project specific environmental processes.
The CIP itself is only "firm" for the first year of the program. Projects listed in the CIP for 20Q7 will be
brought back to the Commission for award of contracts after plans and specifications have been
prepared and bids have been received. The 2008 project work scopes/costs will be developed further
through additional studies and plans and specifications will be prepared for consideration in the 2008
CIP process. The 2009 project work scopes/costs will be developed further through additional studies
and preparation of preliminary plans and specifications. Likewise, the projects listed in the CIP for all
other years will be reviewed again when the CIP is revised.
COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED
RECOMMEND TO THE FULL COMMISSION THE ADOPTION OF THE HEARING OFFICER'S
REPORT, INCLUDING THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDIfVG TME
ASSESSMENTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED 2007-2013 C,4PI%AL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. FURTHER, THAT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE
BE AUTHORIZED TO NOTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD AND THOSE ON ITS
DISiRIBUTION LIST OF THE COMMISSION ACTION.
HEARING OFFICER'S REPORT
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
OF THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
2007-2013 SEVEN-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
A public hearing was heid on Wednesday, November 8, �2006 in Roam 3040, Mezzanine
Level, Lindbergh Terminal beginning at 10:10 a.m. The purpose of this public hearing
was to receive testimony regarding the assessment of environmentai effects of ali
projects in the Metropolitan Airports Commission's seven-year Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) from 2007 through 2013.
This hearing was held pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1988, Chapter 664, which
requires the MAC to prepare an assessment of environmental effects of all projects at
each MAC airport in the Commission's seven-year CIP. The statute also requires MAC
ta prepare Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EAWs) in accordance with the
Environmentai Quality Board rules for projects in the CIP thai� meet the conditions
prescribed in the statute, and to hoid a public hearing. An Assessment of the
Environmental Effects for all projects in the proposed 2007-2013 CIP has been
prepared and available for public review since October 23, 2006.
_
�� ) Representing the Commission at the hearing were Committee Chair Tammy McGee,
Commissioners Daniel Boivin, Tom Foley, Robert Mars, Bert McKasy, Paul Rehkamp,
Mike Landy and John Williams, Nigel Finney, Deputy Executive Director, Planning and
Environrnent, and Thomas Anderson, General CounseL
Fallowing introductory statements presented by Chair McGee, comments fram the public
were invited. One person made oral comments and submitted written commenfs
regarding the AOEE. The hearing record remained open until November 22, 2006.
Written comments received on the AOEE and responses are presented in Appendix A. A
court stenographer prepared a transcript of the public hearing, which is attached as
Appendix B.
offices. It was also published in the StarTribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Fress on ��
October 28, 2006. The public hearing was held on Wednesday, November 8, 2006. One
person made oral comments and submitted written testimony at the AOEE hearing, which
is presented in Appendix A. The hearing record remained open until November 22, 2006.
Written comments received on tlie AOEE and responses are presented in Appendix A.
A copy of the hearing transcript is presented in Appendix 8.
FINDINGS OF FACT
�• �
MSP Projecfis .
All projects in the MSP 2007-2013 CIP except those in the 2020 Development Program
are part of the MSP 2010 Long-Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP). The cumulative
environrnental effects of the MSP 2010 LTCP were assessed in the Final EIS of the
Dual Track Airport Planning Process that was determined adequate by the Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on November 18, �998.
The 2007-2013 CIP projects in the 2020 Development Program were assessed for their
environrnental effects in the 2015 Terminal Expansion Project EA that includes Phases
1 and 2 of the MSP 2020 Develapment Program.
Since the completion of the �Dual Track Final EIS in 1998, several CIP projects at MSP
have required the preparation of an EAW or substitute EA. An assessment of the
cumulative effects of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects was
included in each of these documen#s, which incorporated any changes in the
environrnental effects disclosed in the 1998 Dual Track Final EIS that would be
cumulative with the environmental effects of the project in the EAW or EA document.
The EA for the 2015 Terminal Expansion Project included an update of the� forecast of
operations based on #he 2010 LTCP in the Dual Track Final EIS, an update of parking
spaces and an update of impervious surface area, storage ponds, groundwater
monitoring and wastewater discharges. Therefore, the EA assessed the cumulative
effects of noise, air quality, parking and water quality for all projects in the 2010 LTCP
and those projects planned for the year 2015 at MSP. No significant enviranrnentaf
effects were determined.
Assessments of environmental effects for the Flying Cloud, Crystal and Anoka County-
Blaine Airports were not prepared since their Capital Improvement Programs have not
changed from previous years or the changes will have only trivial environmental effects
Airlake Reliever Airport Proiects
An EAW was prepared for the Airfake Airport South Building Area Development Project
in January 1999. The EAW assessed the cumulative effects of projects in the CIP and
no significant environrnental effects were determined. -. - ('
3
� Lake Elmo Reliever Air�ort Projects
An EAW was prepared for the Lake Elmo Airport East Building Area Development in
October 2001. The EAW assessed the cumulative effects of projects in the CIP and no
significant environmental effects were either determined or mitigated.
St, Paul Dawntown Airport Proiects
A Final EA was prepared for the Perimeter Dike and Runway Safety Area Improvements
Projects in January 2006. The EA assessed the cumulative effects of projects in the
CIP and no significant environmental effects were either determined or mitigated.
RECOIVIMENDATION
That the assessment of environmental effects prepared for the 2007-2013 seven-year
capital improvement program (CIP) adequately assesses the cumulative environmental
effects of the projects at MSP and at each reliever airport included in the CIP.
0
,■■ � �
�
� � � , � . . �
Oral Comments at the Public Hearing
Mr. James Spensley submitted the attached comments on the AOEE for the 2007-2013
CIP. Responses to his comments follow.
Written Cornments Received During the Comment Period
The foilowing parties submitted written comments and are attached in the order listed.
MAC responses to substantive comments follow each letter.
James Spensley, SMAAC
Dennis Gimmestad, State Historic Preservation Office
�� _ � Tod Sh�rman, MnDOT
c
\
� �.
, . ' . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. : _... .. . . . .. ��'..
South Metro Airport Actian Council �� SMAAC
� Post Office Sox 19436
Minneapolis, MN 55419
Metropolitan Airp�rts Commissiou
Assessment of Environmentai Effects
of the Metropolitan Airports Commission
Capital Improvements Prograrn 2007-2013
Testimony af James R. Spensley,
President, South Metro Airport Action Council
November S, 2006
Mr. Spensley: On behalf of our Mernbers, and for citizens and landowners neighboring MSP, we ask you
to more carefully consider projects in the 2007 Capital Improvements Program. Some risk harm to the
natural environment, or might adversely affect public health.
In our opinion, neither the public nor other govemrnental units are adequately informed or reassured about
environmental risks at MSP, considering increased aperational use of new or modified facilities and
equipment. Past AOBE Hearings produced a sparse record that avoided meaningful deliberations. There
was little data presented about impacted properties adjacent or downstream to MAC sites, and no
testimony by landowners or respansible environmental agencies. We suggested that comments $olicited
from municipalities should be considered AOEE testirnony on the record, and environmental impacts,
pernuts, or concerns addressed by the Hearing Officer. _
-, Your staff disagreed with us on one point, and the Environmental Quality Board ruled that Petitions for an
�, ) Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on any project (or operation) were not farecdosed by the
Findings of this Hearing: Put another way, landowners, and the general public through the Minnesota �
Environmental Rights Act, may petition EQB for preparation of a complete EART by a responsible
governmental unit other than the MAG
Solid candidates for this are the R12R130L Paving Project and Terminal Expansion.
The Consultant's report fails to raise the issue of air and water pollntion related to "temporary" changes in
runway use or of the drainage or stormwater management plans. Erosion control and alternative drainage
scherna, with calcularions, elevations, location, drainage certified by an engineer, would be required.for a
$17 million dollar pzoject anywhere else in Minnesota. The statement, page 4, that eonstruction effects are
"not ... cumulative, long-term effects" serves to justify omitting the project from yonr consideration (See
the Table on the preceding page), since the project was not part of any prior approvals. The staternent is
ridiculous.as applied to "best stormwater management practices". If there should be a storm event during
re-paving when loose and potentially contaminated soils are exposed, then what?
The Consultant's discussion of "cumulative effects," Part D, is argurnent, not analysis. Were "Typical
mitigation measures" during construetion (Part C, Paragraph 1) adequate in the case of fuel leaks and
glycol ernissions? Is quality assurance, free of conflicts of interest, in construction contrac.ts found ta be
sufficient by. the Hearing Officer based on the record? Oz is it an assumption? Or are the conditions
subject contract negotiations? Limited documentation and discussion on the Record raises doubt about
the validity of the Hearing C?f�cer's Findings.
We disagree with the Consultant's characterization of small or "temporary" increases, as "negligible."
Changes should be cumulatively compared to the FEIS base year (1996}, not to 2006. Here are few
instarrces.
1) Carbon Monoxide. Carbon Monoxide (CO) and other greenhouse gases are not released by
projected oparations but by actuai operations. Aircraft CO emissions may be roughly proportional to
3
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Page two.
November 8, 2006
"delay levels" at gates and reduced by decreasing delays compared to "no action" (assuzning no increase in �
gate use}. However, it is not apparent that reductions projected for 2015 have occurred or will occur, and ,
the 2015 plan was amended in 20d2 to construct additional gates. There is clearly a cumulative effect from Ld�(/�"
this and other sources.
2] CBODS Emissions. We applaud all expenditures made to limit glycol conveyed directly to the
Minnesota River. Although the basis for the claimed 80% reduction is unstated, the reduction is asserted
to be the result of improvements. It is our belief, how�ever, that MSP operations increasingIy release glycol �
that is transported in aerosols by wind and on aircraft beyond the MSP watersheds. The reported reduction
in glycol that reaches the River could also be explained by higher off-site losses oi fairer weather.
Tfie Commission should consider that the ratio of storrnwater storage votume to watershed runoff
volume was reduced after FEIS approval, lessening the capacity and efficiency of the ponds cornpared to
assurned FEIS conditions. The removal af various pollutants from the stormwater strearn, assuming regular
maintenance of the ponds, is proportional to this ratio. This difference has little relation to capturing
glycols and ather "floatables" most of the tirrie. During large stornns or floads, however, glycol collection
at the pond outlets is insu�cient and additional areas are "washed" into the stonmwater system as well as
around it or into sanitary sewers.
3) Noise. "Long term substantive noise" is unde�ned. The standards far noise exposure
regulation or mitigation include both event intensity and average daily noise exposure levels (DNL). The ��-
DNL levels for areas under Runway 4-22 were the result of modeling (in 2004 for 2007 projected use) for
very low use. Frequent use for even a few weeks would probably result in a DNL increase above the 1.5
dbA threshold for Part 150 revision. In short, a significant unmitigated noise exposure risk
Tk�e AOEE Statute may have been sound in the context of the Duai-Track studies, but MSP Expansion is
governed by the FEIS. We note that in 19$6 and in 1998, other responsible governznental units (RGtn �
provided comments and their Rules and subsequent proceedings were intended to supplement the FEIS.
Local RGU proceedings take into account the rights, concerns, and questions of neighbors and adjacent
property owners which are reasonably different a decade later. Compared to previous communications, Mr.
Vorpahl minim.izes this aspect.
We do not intend, by these remarks, to criticize engineering work, sp'eci�cations; or project management
by professional staff. We do note that past Hearing Officer Reports purport to have formerly found ` j�
internal engineering data and procedures sufficient based on a Hearing Record absent even testimony thaf
they exist.
A few years ago, Ms. Reif sent voluminous background information and engineering data on stormwater
management pianning in response to our request. This plan was presented in suffcient detail for a permit
application to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. However, it noted exceptions to several District /�
Rules, such as basing flood elevation and discharge rates on lower-intensity storm (flood) events,
modifying natural watershed boundaries, and not committing to maintenance and inspection protocols.
I would be pleased to address any questions you may have about our concerns.
Responses to James Spensley Hearing Comments
1 See response to your written Comment 12.
2 See response to your written Comment 20.
3 The temporary effects of construction that occur in 2007, for example, are not
cumulative with the effects of cons#ruction planned for 2008 and future years. If
contaminated soils are exposed during construction they are handled in
accordance with MPCA requirements. See also response to your written
Comment 14.
4 See response to your written Comment 14.
5 The cumulative effects of the CIP projects with all past projects were presented,
regardless of a base year. For example, the cumulative effect on impervious
surface is approximately 1403 acres. Although the change from the existing
conditian is mentioned to show the effect of the CIP projects, the cumulative effect
of al! past projects is included. See response to yaur written Comment 16
regarding CO, etc.
6 See response to your written Comment 17.
7 See response to your written Comment 18.
8 See response to yaur written Comment 19
9 See response to your written Comment 20
10 Comments noted.
11 Comments noted.
South Metro Airport Action Council � SMAAC
Metrapolitar� Airports Commission
t�.ttentioa: AflEE, Robert J Vorpalil
6040 — 28�' Avenue South
Minneapalis, MN 55450-2'109
Re: Assessment of Environmental Effects
of the Metrapolitan Airports eommission
1Capital Improvements Frograrn 2007-2013:
rnitial Tesfamany and Comments.
Dear Commissioner MeGee, Hearing Offieer(s), and Mr. Vorpahl:
Post O��ce Bo� 19036
h�tinneapolis, MN 55419
November 2006
I��ceivec�
N0V 0 Z 2006
Airport peveloprnenf
A. Intrcxluction. (ln behalf of our Members, and for citizens and landawners neighboiing MSP, we asl� you to
earefully consider projects in the 2007 Capital Improvements Program that risk harm to the nai.ural
environment, adversely affact public health, ar coniribute cumutative negative environmental impacts de�ring
construction or in operation.
For lack of time to review plans for R.eliev�r Airports and the unavailability of local government comments on
,--- the 2007 CIl', we can only address M5P projects related to prior cancerns. . In our opinion, neither the public
( ) nor other governmental units are adeguately informed or reassured about environmental risks from MSP
capital projects, considering increased operational use of new or modified facilities and equipment.
Hopefully, more information will be available about the risks of environmentai harm at the AOEE Hearing. In
ttze past, the AOEE Hearing.lacked suffioient data, particularly testimony of passibly impacteci prop�rties
adjacent or dawnstream to MAC sit�s. We suggested previously that cornmcnts solicited fro� municipalities
on the CIP shauld be cousidered AOEE testimony on the r�cord, and any comments about environmentat
impacts, pe�rmits, or concerns addressed. 'This letter will be supplcznented by additional testimany at khe
AOEE Hearing.
/z
B. Consultant R�part. We not� tha� the Cons�ltant's (IIlVTB's} report, Octobcr 2006, is more complef,� than in
previous years. We object again to Consultant's interpFetations of MS 1986 Chapter 473 as amended in 1998. ��
The Connmission is seemingly receiving legal advice thai project criteria for separate reviews excuse ths
Commission and the Hearing Officer from finding that indiuidual EAW's or EIS's are needed based on other
concerns or risks.
Tuble 2 expresses in more detai.l how projects were evaluated; and, stormwater management anc� extension of
the fueling system are mentioned in Part D, the discussion of cumulative effects. However, Part C does not
includ� speeific meas�res to avoid, or minimi�e the risk of, dacnage to �c fueling system, sewers, deacing
stations or other shuctures and equipment during consfruction. Considering pastproblems, we thinkFart C rs
fnsu, f�'icient to support a findrng that no EA�3'''s or E1S's are needed. �
°`Typical tnitigahon measures" during construction (Part C, Paragraph 1) may not have been adequate in the
case of fuel leaks and g}ycol einissions. �'hc Cornmission shauld raview, publish for conuncn� and approve
its project mauagement practices. Outsiders cannot be sure that separate staff' quality assurancey fi�ee of
conflicts of interest, is in place. Tlie public is entitled to tt�is informatian and regulAtors nee�! it . to monitor
that appropriaie�metliads are fully documented in specificaiions and contracts, monitored and enfarced.�
Limited docwnentation and discussion on the Recvrd raises doubt about the v�iidity of the Hearing O$5cer's
Rindings.
Metropolitan Airparts ComtMission
Page Lwa
November 2006
The Carnmissian is told, in Table 2 Column 2, that old EIS's addressed environmental effects (impacts); but
the FEIS approved in May 1998, in parkicular, was based on significantly less use of MSP and in.cludes
language suggesting supplemental EIS's will be ordered ifpldns and assumptrons change.
We also noted before that the public and impacted landowners are abstructecl by the AOEE short-cuts
compareci to praject-by-project reviaws and penmit applications. It is eiementary that constn�ction cost
(referiring to the $5 million lYmit at MSP), is not necessarily propartional to the cost-risk of projeets. For
example: failure to maintaiu or repair the stormwater facilaities, a zero cost if not programmad, can result in $5
million in property damage ovemight; and incalculable harm to the enviranment.
We disagree with the Consultaut's characterizatiau of small or "temporary" increases , as "negligihle."
Changes should be cumulatively compared to the FEIS base year (1996), not to 20�6. Here are few instances.
1] Carbon Monoaride. Carbon Monoxide (CO} and other greenhouse gases are not released by
projected operations but by actual operations. Aircraft CO emissions may be roughly proporkional to "delay
levels" at gates and reduced.by decreasing delays compared to "no ackion" (assuining no increase in ga�te use).
However, it is not apparent that reductions projectec� for 2015 have oc+curced ar will occur, and the 2015 plan
�cvas ameniled in 2002 to construct additional gates. There is clearly a cumul�tive effect from this and other
sources.
�C�
�
2J CBO�S Emissians. We applaud all expenditures made to limit glycoI conveyed directly to the
Minnesota River. .Although the basis for the claimed 80% reduction is unstated, the reduction is asseited to be / 7 �
the resralt of improvemeuts. It is our belief, hawever, that MSP operatians increasingly release gtycol that is
transported in aerosols by wind and on aircraft beyond the MSP watersheds. The reported. reduction in giycol
that reaches the River could also bc e�plaincxi by t�igher off-site losses or fairer weather_
The Commission should consider that the ratio of stormwater storage volume to watershed runoff
volume was reduced after FF1S approval, lessening the cap�city and efficiency of the ponds campazed to
asswmed FEIS conditions. The removal of various pollutants from the stormwater sfream, assuming regular ��
maint�nance of th� ponds, is propoitional to this ra#io. This di#�erence has little rel�atiou to caphuing glycals
and other "floatables" mast of the time. During large stornas or floads, hawever, glycol colleckion at the pond
outlets is insufficient and additio�al areas are "washed" into the starmwater system as well as aro�nd it or into
sanitary sewers.
3] Noise. "Longtenn substantive noise" is undefined. The standards for noise eacpasure regulatian or
mitigatian inchzde both ev�nt infensity and average daily noise �ntensity (DNL). Tt�e DI+IZ, levels for areas
under Rumway 4-22 were the result of mocleling (in 2004 for 200� projected use) for very low use. Frequent � 9
use for even a few weeks woutd prp6at�Iy resutt in a TiNL inerease above the l. S dYtA t.�reshold for Part 1 Sa
revision: In. short, a significant immitigated noise expos�re risk
C. Reconnmenclaiians. The AQEE Hearing substitutes for responsi0le governmental unit (RGIT) prc�eecc�iugs
that are inteuded to find if an envirornnentai assessment worksheet (EAV� or environtnental im�act statement
(EIS) is, or is not, needed. ��ca] RGU procee�ings take into account the righ�s, cone�rns, ace�i questions of
neiglibors and adjacent properfy owners. Findings in an EAW can be appealed by tl�c involved parties or
emcter the Minuesota Enviranmental Itights Act.
Compareci to previous commnnications, Mr. Vorpahl.�nirrri�e� this aspect. His cover letter dated Oct. 20,
2006 asserks that "An �A�, EA, or EIS .._ and publiahearing ... for each project in the 2007 - 2013 CI�'" that
requires an EAW." This misleads the Carnmission even more than the HYt�itTB assertion in Part A.
IVletropolitan Airports Commission November 2006
Page thrce..
Thc EQB would, we were told, accept pctitians for an EAW of a project or changc in land use. Your finding
or instntetion for an EAW is sunpler and morc efficient than deating with a petiiion, dcfending the refusal on
appeal, likely aecumulating negative publicity, and perhaps delay by EQB's selecting another agency to
conduct the EAVV.
As notec� by the Consultant, the tern��irtal expansion (2015) was "reviewed in a substitute Federal assessment"
supposing that dctc;ction equipment and "... best management practices currently employed with the (fuel)
brydrant syste�m ... ensure that the potential for undesrred releases is minimized. F,rnphases added.
Currently employed, if intended to imply "in Uecember 2005" skips over cumulative impacts (not part
of the Federal EA criteria); if intended as"no significant change in rnanagement praetices since iuitial
implemcntation," the Consultant suggests accepting thc massive losses in 2003-04 as ininimal and
unavoidable. Both qv�alitative and quantitative information about "unwanted releases" and changes, if any, in
equipment or management practi�es should be disclosed in the AOEE record.
Both continuing construction projects and the three projects at MSP sct�eduled to begin in 2fl07 nre
being built as projected peak-hour operations (rates} are increasing. The pmject mobilizations, w4rk, and
clean-up very 1ikely will change gound traffic patterns and tenninal access sevesal times during 2007. This
not a irivial impact, as may be indicated by the collision in May 2005, if the risk of undesireci fuel releases is
to be minimi�.ed, Considcrable fuel was lost and mostly recovcred af�er the accident. Recovery from variaus
undesired fuel releases is ongoing_
There is a undesirable message ahout safety in snch a sipuplistic position about min;mizing releases while
increasing bc�th construction around and use of runways, ramps, and taxiways.
��
Sincerely,
FOR THE BOARD OF DIltECTORS
�___----.
�---
James R Spensley, President1_~
Responses to James Spensley Written Co�nments
12 Comments noted. The public and governmental units are informed of the AOEE
in accardance with State requirements. All written comments on the AOEE.
received during the comment period are considered AOEE testimony and are
presented with responses in the Hearing Officers report.
13 Each praject in the CIP was evaluated as to whether an EAW ar EIS is required
in accordance with the conditions set forkh in the AOEE statute and the criteria
specified in the EQB Environmental Review Program contained in Chapter 4410
of the 1999 Minnesota Rules.
14 MAC specifications include language requiring environmental safeguards during
construction, including the location and protection of all in place utilities, plugging
storm sewer inlets, pressure reductions or full utility shut offs if necessary,
disposal requirements for solid wastes and/or hazardous materials, spill
response and reporting, dust and erosion control and cleanup. In addition,
projects disturbing one or more acres require a MPCA erosion control permit and
related stormwater modeling. Fuel related prajects require a comprehensive
. testing program that includes hydrostatic testing, pressure testing, pit liner
requirements, and design review by MPCA, Also, the MPCA requires a 30-day
` notification to the MPCA prior to the commissioning of any new or reconstructed
fuel line at MSP. Projects creating or impacting glycol collection systems are
also subject to design review by MPCA.
15 The comment an the 1998 FEIS is not correct; the 1998 FEIS (in Appendix H)
considered the environmental effects of 640,200 operations and 47.4 million
passengers compared to 531,947 operations and 35.6 million passengers.
reported for 2005. Also, the 2015 EA was based on updated forecasts of
723,575 operations and 52.9 million passengers. MAC projects 480,705
operations for 2006, based on activity through July 2006.
The AOEE is not based on "short-cuts" or solely on construction costs; each
project was considered separately based on the criteria in the AOEE statute and
the EQB rules in the determinatian of need for an EAW (see response to
Comment 13 above).
16 It should be obvious that all environmental review documents for proposed
projects are not based on "actual" conditions, but on future conditians with. and:
without the proposed project, based on methodologies approved by, or agreed
to, by the regulatory agencies. The 2015 EA included the additional gates and
appropriately considered their cumulative effects.
� � 17 The baseline for.calculating the percentre.duction in glycol discharges to the river
is based on what glycol would go to the river if there were no source control
activities. (collection .and containment) at the airport. MSP's containment and
�
collection efforts began in 1993 and fiave now expanded to include 16 plug and �,
pump lacations, five dedicated deicing pads and four tenant-operated glycol
recovery vehicles for cover and sweep operations. Combined with the benefits
of the stormwater retention ponds, these glycol collection and containment
activities have reduced the amount of glycol that would otherwise have been
discharged directly to the river by over 80% during the past three years. MAC
recognizes that the amount of glycol sprayed by airport tenants each year is
directly related to the weather; regardless, the data demonstrate the Glycol
Recovery Program performs at a very high level during above and below average
deicing winters.
Regarding aerosol or offsite transportation of glycol through wind or carried off
on the aircraft, the MAC and airlines do not believe this is a significant path for
off-site depositian. Type I fluid (which comprises �92% of the glycol applied at
MSP) is design�d to be delivered onto the aircraft surfaces in a liquid form and
subsequently the majority of Type I fluids run-off the aircraft in the contained
deicing locations. Type IV anti-icers (�g% of glycols applied) are designed to
stay on the aircraft while taxiing to the runways and typically shear off as the
aircraft approaches take-off speeds, thus limiting the amounfi ofi fluid transported
off the airport's drainage area.
18 The MAC does not agree with your assertions about the ratio of stormwater
storage volume to watershed runoff volume, and maintains that significant �.
improvements have been made through the 2010 pragram to the storm sewer
discharge infrastructure. Prior to the 2010 construction projects, there was
minimal pond vo(ume servicing the major drainage areas, including no pond for
the primary drainage area comprising the majority of airport operations in and
around the �indbergh Terminal. The result of the 2010 improvements is that the
ratio� of impervious surface area and therefore watershed runoff volume to
storrnwater storage/pond volume is now 93% greater than (almost double) what
it was prior to the irnprovements.
Glycol collection activities are focused at. the point of application r.ather than
attempting to capture glycol at stormwafier ponds or other locations. MSP has
five dedicated deicing pads where approximately 70% of all glyco) is applied.
The storm ponds were originally designed to remove total suspended solids.
Modifications to the ponds over the past three years now require stormwater to
flow through at least two underflow structures as well as containment booms
prior to pond discharge. This process captures "floatables" and has proven. to be
extremely efficient in capturing undesired fuel releases.
Heavy precipitation in the form of rain is most often associated with large storms
or floods, which do not typically occur during deicing activity. Most airlines only
apply glycol and deicing products when temperatures are near or below freezing.
Therefore, it is highly unlikely that glycol will be washed away by flood or heavy �,
rain events. The airport storm sewer system is completely independent from the
sanitary sewer network.
� 19 The. reference to °long-term substantive noise" when assessing the noise impact
implications of runway use modification in the name of airport construction was
construed in reference to federal guidance on such assessments. Specifically,
FAA Order 1050.1 E, when describing actions that are considered Categorical
Excfusions for procedural actions, states the following at point 311m:
"A short-term change in air traffic control procedures, not exceeding six months,
conducted under 3,000 feet above ground level (AGL) to accommodate airport
construction."
In reference to the guidance pravided in FAA Order 1050.1 E, any action resufting
in operational modification for less than six months, due to construction, is
considered short-term and is a categorical exclusion relative to environmental
analysis.
2� The AOEE hearing does not substitute for the RGU proceedings; it is a part of
the AOEE proces.s specified by the State statute. The Commission considers
the comments presented at the hearing, together with the comments received
during the AOEE comment period, in the determination of cumulative
environmental effects and the need for an EAW or EIS.
---. The statement by Mr. Vorpahl is accurate; see response to Comment 13 above.
�. � As stated in EQB Rule 4410.1100, Petition Process, Subpart 3, a petition
requesting the preparation of an EAW for a proposed project is filed with the
�EQB who determines the appropriate RGU, but the decision on the need for an
EAW is made by the selected RGU, which in this case would be the MAC.
21 The comment on cumulative impacts is not correct; they must be assessed in
Federal- environmental review documents. In March 2005 regulated parties
signed a Stipulation.Agreement with the MPCA as a result of the hydrant fuel
release discovered in 2003. This agreement identified corrective actions for the
Parties to implement which were designed to improve the management practices
when handling fuel and fuel products at the airport. These efforts where
previously reported to the MAC Commission in January 2005 and included
modifications to and/or development of: Integrated Spill Response and
Coordination Plan, Leak Detection Prevention Plans, Storm water Management
Plans, Spill Prevention and Control Plans, Storm water Pollution Prevention
Plan, Recovered Fuels and Fuel Water Mixtures Plans, and additions to the
Ground Water Monitoring network. Additionally, the Minneapolis Fuel
Consortium replaced their tank farm managernent firm and added an in-to-plane
refueling contractor in November 2005 as part of a major effort by the airlines to
improve environment�al practices associated with "unwanted [fuel] releases".
22 Daily and peak-hour operations are not increasing; they have decreased in 2005
( j and 2006 and are expected to remain at 2006 levels in 2007 (see response to
` Comment 15 above). The projects scheduled to start in 2007 are designed to
minimize taxiway closures and impacts to ground movements. This is
accomplished by completing work at night and/or phasing the work. Some of the
projects listed in the CIP will change ground�traffic patterns. The MAC is working �,
cooperatively with airport tenants and-the Federal Aviafiion Administration's Air
Traffic Control. Tower, who is responsible for the safe movement of aircraft from
the terminal gates to the runways, to minimize traffic congestion and potential
conflict areas. It should be noted that the collision referenced by the commenter
in May 2Q05, was not in or near a construcfiion project.
, �_
Y
J
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Attention: AOEE, Robert d. Vorp.ahl
6�� — 2�'� Aven�e South
Minneapotis, MN 5545U-27(t9
Re: Assessment ofEnvironmental.Effects
of fhe M[etropolitan Airports Commissian
Capital Improvements Program 20U7-2013:
-Initial T+estimony and Commen#s.
I?ear Mr. Vorpahl:
South Metro Airport Action Coe�ncil � Sl'VlAAC
- Posi Uf�ice Boz 19036
���e�v�� Minneapolis, Mi� 55419
NO V X 3 Z006
�irpor� Development
November 10, 2006
Please cansider the enclosed Emai� message as suppl�nental written Testimony on the record. Reasonably,
Mr. Furman's response, or that of other. MAC tcchnicat staff having the infornaation or knowledge of reIated
siudies would also be available for AOEE deliberations by the Hearing Exazniner(s).
Wbuld you aLso please notify us how to aceess other tcstunony in the 2005 Hearing iZecord as well as for the
current 2006 Hearing? Mr. F�mey stated ai the Hearing I�ov�anber S, 2006 thn� alI tes#imony was publically
available. Also, do you know if Memoranda or other Staf:f communications with HN'1'B for prcpazation of the
AOEE Oetober 200�61Zeport are eonsidcred testimony?
Sincerely,
FOR THE BUARD OF DIl2ECTORS
�.���---�i`���---.
James R. Spcnsley, Ptesident
K
From: "Jim Spenslsy" <m�ds�visi.com>
To: "Fuhrmann, Roy" {rfuhrmanQmspmac.org>; "Kanner, Michaei"
<michael.kanner@ pca.state.mn. us>
Cc: "WageniWs, Jean" �crep.jean.wagenius�house.mn>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Chemicats and By-Producls in ADFs
In a discussion with an airport group, I was told that some or a/1 aircraft deicingfiuufs (A��'s) contarn, or leaNe as resirlue
from readions in wa7er or air, ba�rned substunces includ'r,ng dioxin. This is a different issue than CBUDs.
Previous research I did with ethylene glycol manufacturers determined that its reaetartts in water were thought.to be
implicated in miscairiages or birth defects if ingested by pregnant women. There was a spill of stored ethylene glycol in
/�tlanta fduring the Sutnrner months. Following an investigation, a settlement was made with elaimants who complained
after suffering miscarriages after huving swum or waded as few miles downstream in fhe contaminated stream
At least one major manufactarer switched, on the advice of insurers, to making prophylene (sp?) glycol ADF even though it
was more costly.
I'�tot tao long ago, MAC sfated that a] airlines supplied their own ADF and b] use of ethylene glycol formulae was now less
than 10%, with the balance mostly prophylene (sp?) glycoL
What other chemicals are used. in .ADFs7 Are you fnmilar with reactants resulting firom ADFs? Does either include dioxin or
other substances known to be harmful in sma(1 concetrations? If so, what coneentrations, if any, have been tested for in MSP
effluent or stormwater ponds? If any, what were the concentrations?
(, '
Jim Spensley
11/9/2006
\
From: Roy Fuhrmann [rfuhrmann@mspmac.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 4:1.3 PM
To: 'Jim Spensley'
Cc: 'Vllagen(us, Jean'; 'Kanner, Mlchael'
Subject: RE: Chemicals and By-Products in ADFs
fV1r. Spensley,
By way of background, at MSP, only one airiine uses ethylene glycol (EG). MAC has had many conversatlons
with the airline and has asked them to switch to propylene giycol (PG) when their current suppiy is exhausted.
Last year, EG use at MSP accounted for 1.06% of the total glycol used by the airlines and tenants at the airport.
Except for the aforementioned airline, the remaining airlines/tenants use PG based aircraft deicing fluid (ADF).
With respect to your questlons about what other chemicals are used in ADFs, concentrations and reactants, most
glycol manufacturers produce an additive package (add packs) that is added to Ehe base glycoi cornponent.
Availabls praduct literature states that these products rypically consist of flame retardants and corrosion inhibitors.
Neither EPA nor MAC is privy to the identity of the chemicals used as additives in these add packs because the
manufacturers have indlcated that this information is confidential and/or proprletary.
However, as noted above, the primary component of ADF used at the airport is PG, which accordfng to the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA); as stated in Agency for 7oxic Substances and Disease Registry, has classifled
PG as "generally recognized as safe" and is acceptable for use in flavorings, drugs and cosmetics, and as a food
additive.
Sincerely,
Roy Fuhrmann
Director of Environment
MAC
. . .. .._._ .._ ..-- �- ---. _ _ .. ..---� -�----
From: Jim Spenstey [mpds@visi.comJ
Sent: Tuesday, November �4, 2006 7:40 PM
To: Roy Fuhrmann
Subject: Re: Chemicals and By-Products in ADFs
Roy Thanlcs for the infornaation.. I am encouraged by tlie steep reduction in use of ethylene glycol, but discouraged by
increased use of ADF's -- not because of pollution as much as because of the safety risk asociated with more operations under
adverse conditions.
I take it that you do not think dioxin is in any way associated with ADF or by-products. Dioxin has been produced by
various industries, I know, although I associated it with chlozine processes — bleaching pulp for paper, for example.
I do not lrnow what information, if any, stimulated fhe message I received warning about ADF waste and by-products or
reactants. Perhaps someone accessed studies or scientific.reports.
r�
f`
l 1116/2006
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY-
State Historic Preservation Office
November 16, 2006
Mr. Robert Vorphal
Program Development Engineer
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
6040 28�'�Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
Re: 2007-2013 MAC Capitai Improvement Program
SHPO Number: 2007-0335
Dear Mr. Vorphai:
� .� . . �. .. �'
NOV � 0 2006
► '! 1 ' �: . .: � � .
Thank you for submitting the above referenced report to our office for review.
� �� Unfortunately, the information included in this submittai is inadequate to initiate a Section
106. reyiew of the individual projects included. iNe note that your transmittal letter
indicates tfiat�an EAW,� EIS, or EA has`been previousiy prepared for projects that require
EAW's: "Please be aware that:
1. Projects may require a Section 106 review even if they do not require an
EAW :
2. Submittal of an EAW alone does not initiate a Section 106 review with our
office. Such a review requires that FAA specifically initiate a Section 106 review
Lack of response to an EAW submitted to our office should not be construed that
we do not have concerns pertinent to a Section 106 reView.
Gontact us at 651-296-5462 witfi questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
�---�,� %`1��.._.�'
D�nnis A: Giri�mestad �
...,. ...�. ...: .
. . :.
G:o`vernmeht°.Programs ;& Compliance; Officer� � � � � � • � � �
� � ,.
.. ..� � . . . , ... . . � . . . . ... . ,
�cc: Glen'�Orci�tt; FAA �.. ... � , _ .. � . � : � .
345 Kellogg Boulevard West/Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102-1906/Telephone 651-296-6126
Z�
�,.
Responses to State Historic Preservation Office Comments
23 Cornment noted.
24 At this time, preliminary review of the projects in the CIP indicates that no
projects will require a Section 106 review. As the e scopes are more fully
develaped, additional review will be made and any projects requiring a
Section 106 review will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation
Office.
��`'"�O� Minnesa$a Department of iransporiation
��� �
� �� Metropolitan District
�"'��p� Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville MN 55� 13-3174
Noveinber 22, 2006
Mr. Robert Vorpahl, P.E.
Prograrn Development Engineer
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 — 28`i' Averiue South,
Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
Subject: Metropoliian Airport Comrnission--MnIDOT Review AAOEE06-001
South Side of Airport, NW Quad of I-494 and TH 5
Bloomington IVIAC, Hennepin County
Control Section 2785
Dear Mr. Vorp�hl:
<� .. .�, : . .� �,
�: ,� .f �. : ,.�
NOV 2 7 2006
�6rp�� �ev�lap.�en�
� Thank you for the opportiuuty to review the Assessment of Environmental Effects (AOEE).
� Mn%DOT's staff has reviewed the document and has the following comment:
It appears that the airport drainage does not connect directly to Mri/DOT facilities. It does though
� appear to cross Mn/DOT right-of-way. As the plans are developed, coordination with Mi1/DOT is
� � recommended in order to determine drainage impacts. A Mn/DOT drainage permit may be
needed. Please direct questions concerning these issues to Richard Cady (651-634-2075) of
Mn/DOT's. Water Resources section.
Please address all initial future correspondence for development activity sucli. as plats and site
plans to:
Development Reyiew Coordinator
Mn/I)OT - Metro Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, Mii�nesota 55113
Mxi/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2)
copies of other r.eview documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a
plat and/or two (2) copies of other review documents will malce a submittal incoxnplete and delay
Mn/DOT's 30-day review and response process�to development proposals. If you have the
Property Id # available, please include that with the submitted rnaterials. We appreciate your
anticipated cooperation in pzoviding the necessary number of copies, as this will prevent us from
having to delay and/or r� incomplete submittals.
�If you have
Planning Supervrsor
please feel free to contact me at 651-582-1548.
�
2�
Copy: Richard. Cady
Mn/UOT Division File - C.S: 2785
MxilDOT LGL — Bloomington
Responses to MnDOT Comt�ents
25 As plans are developed, MAC will coordinate with MnDOT staff to
determine if there will be any drainage impacts an MnDOT right-of-way. If
there are, a drainage permit will be obtained.
26 Comments noted.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
( ) 11
. 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
�� ) 2S
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
***
PUBLIC HEARING
�
2007-2013 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
ASSESSMENTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
HELD ON
NOVEMBER 8, 2006
10:00 AM
�--�-----------------------------------------------
ORIGI�IAL
REPORTED BY: ELIZABETH J. GANGL, RPR
PARADIGM REPORTING & CAPTIONZNG INC.
1400 RAND TOWER, 527 MARQUETTE AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1331
612/339-0545 � 1/8�00/545-9668 * Fax: 612/339/5575
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
2
The Metropolitan Airports Commission Public
Hearing re Environmental, Review Process, held on the 8th
day of November, 2006, commencing at 10:17 a.m. in .
Room 3040, Mezzanine Level, Lindbergh Terminal,
Minneapolis-St. Pau1 International Airport, before
Elizabeth J. Gangl, Registered Professional Reporter and
Notary Public in and for the State of Minnesota.
***
APPEARANCES
FINANCE, DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE AND
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Tammy McGee, Chair
Bert McKasy, Vice Chair
Dan Boivin
Tom Foley
Robert Mars
John Williams
Paul Rehkarnp
Iyike Landy �
Jack Lanners, Commission Chair
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION STAFF PRESENT:
Nigel Finney, Deputy Executive Director - Planning
and Environment
Thomas Anderson, General Counsel -
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Susan Warner-Dooley, Deputy Executive Director -
Finance and Administrative Services
Jenn Unruh, Secretary - Finance, Development and
' Environment Committee
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
C
�' i
l
2
3
4
5
6
. 7
8,
9
10
11
12
�' )
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
31
CHAIR MCGEE:� Good morning. I wo.uld like
to call this meeting of the Finance, Developmerit and
Environment Committee to order, and as a first order of
business, I arn going to read from a script to open the
Capital Improvement Program public hearing. With that in
mind, this public hearing will now come to order.
The purpose of this public meeting is to receive
'testimony regarding the assessment of environmental
�leffects of all projects within the Metropolitan Airports
;�Commission's seven-year Capital Improvement Program for
�
2007 through•2013. This hearing is being held pursuant
to Minnesota statutes that require.the MAC to prepare an
assessment of environmental effects of all projects at
each MAC airport in the Commission`s seven-year Capital
Improvement Program. The statute also requires the MAC
to prepare Environmental Assessment Worksheets, EAWs, in
accordance with Environmental Quality Board rules for
projects in the Capital Improvement Program that meet
conditions prescribed in the statute and to hold a public
hearing. An Assessment of the Environmental Effects for
all projects in the proposed 2007 to 2013 Capital
Improvement Program has been prepared and available for
public review and comment since October 23rd, 2006. ,
Notice of this public hearing was published on
October 23rd, 2006, in the Environmental Quality Board
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612=339-0545
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropoli.tan Airports Commission
Monitor, and on October 28th in the Minneapolis Star
Tribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
The Assessment of Environmental Effects examines
the cumulative environmental effects of all Capital
Improveznent Projects for the period 2007 through 2013.
Many of the projects are repairs or rehabilitation of
existing facilities. Such work should not affect the use
of the facilities and as such, would not add to, or
subtract from, the cumulative effects. A number of
projects are ongoing from previous years or have been
previously analyzed for their environmental impacts. An
EAW, EA or EIS has been previously prepared and public
hearing held for each MSP and reliever airport project in
the 2007 to 2013 CIP that requires an EAW.
I will now open the hearing for public comment_
To those wishing to make statements, I would ask that you
state your name, address and affiliation with any
organization, should yau have any, for the court
reporter.
Is there anyone who would like to give testimony
at this time? I have one person I'm aware of;
Mr. Spensley. Is there any others that are willing or
interested in making comrnent? .
(No response.)
CHAIR MCGEE: If not, Mr. Spensley?
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning,�inc.
612-339-0545
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
51
MR. SPENSLEY: Good morning. I'm Jim
Sp�nsley. I live at 5117 Chicago Avenue South, that
would be directly lined up with the north parallel
runway, and I'm the president of the South Metro Airport
Action Council. It might be helpful to note that I'm
also a past manager and past president of the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District. I've caused to be prepared a
written summary of my remarks, and I'm going to read from
it somewhat.
One of the points that was in�a prior letter,
which has been distributed to the hearing, is that the
statute that requires the AOEE and establishes criteria
for EAWs for projects based on their scope, the state of
previous review and the like, in the script that the
Chairman just read seems to, seems to imply that if
�, projects might cause environmental damage but they don't
meet those criteria, you don't have to do an EAW. That's
,an incorrect interpretation. You can choose to .do an EAW
if you think it's needed for a project. In iact, that's
one of the purposes of the AOEE is to find that.
I am speaking not only for aur members but on
behalf of landowners adjacent and particularly downstream
and downwind from tl-ie airport. The assessment and the
work of your consultant is mostly concentrated on effects
on the airport proper and, in particular, the measures
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, In�.
612-339-0545
u�
�
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Corrmmission
�that you are, that you take or purport to take for
project management during construction, erosion control,
extended use of facilities compared to their ordinary
thing during construction does lead to cumulative
effects, both in terms of CBOD5 emissions to the river,
and it should be noted that most, most glycol emissions
and CBOD5 emissions from the airport are unaccounted for,
rather than -- and that there's, it's possible, of
course, that the reduction, which is claimed in the
� consultant's report, and relied upon apparently by the
Commissi`on, that glycol reductions through investments,
which we all applaud and appreciate, have been reduced to
the Minnesota River when, in fact, the.same reduction
could be Chat more glycols have been transported off the
airport watershed in the form of windborne aerosols or on
the wings of airplanes.
Similarly, similarly there is a discussion in
the report about the possibility of glycol fuel residues,
sediments and other consequence of floods and drainage
programs and changes in the drainage program during
construction reaching the sanitary sewers.
One of the projects I want to point out is the
$17 million repair and resurfacing of one of the main
runways. During that construction, large quantities of
soil that's possibly contaminated with fuel and other
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
�(
6
�
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
' ..... ) 12
� 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
�
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
7
chemicals from airport operations is going to be exposed,
'��and there's little discussion of what might happen if
�there were a major storm or a flood'during the time all
the soils are exposed.
It would be better if the record of this hearing
and other information that you purport to have when you
find that EAWs aren't required, such as the investigation
of the management practices that staff and contractors
use, the fact tha� the erosion, efforts like erosion
control during construction are subject after your
approval are still subject to negotiation with the �
contractors and supervision by your staff using rules
which may or may -- you may or may not have seen, but
certainly are not transparent in the sense that Watershed
District rules or MPCA rules would be transparent and
available to the public.
I'm hope�ul that you'll thoroughly consider and
make an appropriate record of these findings and do some,
some EAWs, particularly for projects like that. I notice
that your staff said, well, there's no cumulative effect
of doing all this work on the runways and exposing all
these soils because we just won't use those runways as
much. But that implies, of course, that you'll use other
runways more, and that will change, it also could
increase the number o�f idling�vehicles and airplanes that
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 1118/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
are emitting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses
at the airport compared to when al1 of your runways are
in service. I would be happy to respond to any
questions.
In my written testimony, I do note that
following our discussions last year, we made a formal
inquiry of the EQB about the possibility of appeals to
findings of the Commission that no EAWs would be
required. In most responsible government unit deci.sions,
an appeal process exists if you refuse to do an EAW, and
an appeal process exists if you choose to do an EAW,
because the outcome of the EAW could be an EIS and could
be a lot of trouble either for the Commission or the
developer, the contractor, or for the downstream
landowners in case of floods and such like that, so I
would like to say that the result of that was we were
formally advised-by the EQB that the statute that
establishes the AOEE would no preclude an ordinary
petition by a landowner or by private citizens, through
the Minnesota Environmental Quality Act, to petition for
an EAW for a particular project, and there are a couple
of.projects where that might be the outcome.
Thank you very much. If you have any questions,
I would be happy to try to answer them.
CHAIR MCGEE: Any questi�ons of _
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
(,.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PublicHearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Coxnmission
� Mr. Spensley?
Gl
(No response.)
CHAIR MCGEE: Mr. Spensley, we wil1, I was
taking notes as you were speaking, and I think a couple
of the, there's a couple consistent themes from when you
spoke to us before that I think we can come back to you
and try to address again next month, but one of the
fundamental issues is what do we choose to do and what
are we legally obligated to do, I think, and that was, I
think in some of your opening comments, that was some of
what I was hearing from your comments.
• Your other conversation around; you know, as an
exaniple, the glycol transfer, windborne or water, had a
conversation around that topic, and transparency of ,
various, what do I call it, ways that our staff manages
some of the projects that we have on campus, on the
airport property. You have given us written comments as
well, but I'm just letting you know those are some of the
I,themes that I was picking up from your conversation just
i now .
MR. SPENSLEY: That would be accurate.
Thank you very much.
CHAIR MCGEE: Thank you.
MR. SPENSLEY: I have one question of you;
now that you've mentioned it. It`s been puzzling to me
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
10
how the hearing and the deliberations, which are
conducted at this meeting, are somehow continued now for
another period of weeks or so while written comments are
received, and the -- with no apparent reconvening of the
board as the hearing examiners to consider the testimony
that might be submitted after today and before the
deadline.
Should you receive additional testimony, would
you reconvene a hearing or would this be some sort of
deliberation in part without ever the hearing examiners
being toge�her again to ask each other questions or to
clarify the tes�.imony2
CHAIR MCGEE: It is my understanding that
qiven this committee has been delegated as the hearing
examiners, that when this subject comes back up at our
rneeting on December 6th, we will come back and have a
conversation about what additional comments there were
and, as I had just mentioned, staff's response to the
findings or the comments that we have received to date.
So the answer would be that December 6th w.ould be the
next time this group would be reconvening so, yes, it
will.
MR. SPENSLEY: Would responsive testimony,
Ms. C.hair, be in order then, assuming that the additional
' testimony that you receive from staff or others between
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Tilc.
612-339-0545
� �
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 �
� 8
9
10
11
-.) 12
_ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
( ) � 2 5�
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
now and then might raise new issues of concern to the
public?
CHAIR MCGEE: I'm not sure what "responsive
MR. FINNEY: Madame Chair, Committee
Members, this issue comes back to the Commission as part
of the discussion you have in December related to the
Capital Improvement Program. Procedurally, the comment
period on the document stays open for a period of time.
Either additional verbal or written comments are
received, staff catalogs those comments, and provides
responses to them. You again deal with that issue as a
committee and as hearing officers at the December meeting
of the Planning and Environment Committee, and again that
is a public meeting. Certainly people have the
opportunity to comment on the responses that are
prepared, or the AOEE, at that point also.
CHAIR MCGEE: Commissioner Landy?
COMMISSIONER LANDY: I just have a question
for Mr. Spensley. I've read the document that you sent,
I think dated November 8th. It raises some issues but
doesn't offer much in the way of solutions, if t.here are
any, and I would like to hear some. The one with respect
to the glycol being airborne; other than towel-drying an
aircraft, I can't for the life o€ me figure out what to
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Tnc.
612-339-0545
�
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1�
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 1 l/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
MR. SPENSLEY: Chairman McGee, Commissioner.
Landy, it's been, as Commissioner McGee has said, a
constant theme of ours that these are ma�ters of detail
which suggest that an EIS or an EAW might be in order for
the whole issue of maintenance of the MPDS or MPDS
permits about glycol emissions. We've suggested, now
over three years ago, that the Commission might quantify
this problem of aerosol glycol losses by the simple
measure of maintaining a budget. You know how much is
purchased, you know how much is applied, you know how
much is recovered, and you know the large or small, I
think small portion of glycol that leaks, tha�t reaches
the Minnesota River in terms of flow concentrations.
That can be turned into volume. In fact, a couple years
ago we did those computations. And so there's two things
I think you can do about the airborne glycols. One is
you can atternpt to measure it by doing the budget
calculations, the information is all available, you just
need to choose to do it. The other is you could have an
EAW about projects to modify and maintain the collection
facilities and to monitor the time in transit and things
like that of the aircraft after they've been deiced.
And, of course, you could do, you could dispense less
glycol by more often not operating in icy weather
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
f
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
� 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
I conditions.
COMMISSIONER LANDY: Thank you.
CHAIR MCGEE: Any other questions of
�Mr. Spensley?
13 I
(No response.) •
� CHAIR MCGEE: Thank you very much, Jim.
MR. SPENSLEY: Thank you.
CHAIR MCGEE: Are there any other comments
from the audience?
(No response.)
CHAIR MCGEE: If not, before I close this
hearing what I would like to do is, for the commissioners
around the room, is ask if Nigel could just walk us
through highlights relative to the Assessment of
Environmental Effects packet that was mailed to you as
part of this meeting.
MR. FINNEY: Madame Chair, Committee
Members, the document that was prepared and distributed
for review and comment has a somewhat different look this
year than it has in previous years. We have attempted to
pravide a good deal of additional information in the
document for those doing the review in two ways. Number
one, we provided additional project information, a more
comple�e description ot the various projects,
particularly for the initial years of the capital
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-Q545
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
�
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
14
program. One of the camplaints we heard previously was
there's not enough information for those reviewing the
document to know what the specifics of the project were,
so that has been done in Appendix A, as well as the
spreadsheet that shows the detail of the capital program.
CHAIR MCGEE: That was page 3 that you're
talking about, the spreadsheet?
MR. FINNEY: The spreadsheet begins on page
2, and the more detailed information is contained in
Appendix A, which, both with graphics and text, gives a
much more complete explanation c�f the various projects
that make up the program.
The,second thing that we've tried to do this
year is give a little bit more information for reviewers
in terms of potential environmental effects of the
projects specifically in the next year of the program --
that is shown on Table 2-- where we've identified the
more subs,tantive projects that are to be carried out and
identified the major categories of potential
environmental effects across the top, and given an
indication as to where there may or may not be impacts to
serve as a basis for decision-making elements related to
whether or not an EAW is required or whether or not there
is a potential for a significant environmental effect.
So I think those two pieces of the document should
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
('
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
�' �� 2 5
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
15
provide a good deal of additional information.
That notwithstanding, I think the conclusion, at
least that was reached by staff, was that there were no
projects that were of substantive-enough irnpact to
require an EAW, and that the AOEE adequately addresses
these various elements of the projects.
We will be responding to comments from
Mr. Spensley. We have a couple of written communications
which were provided to you, as well as his comments
today. As far as I know, those are about the only
comments that we've received on the document to date.
CHAIR MCGEE: The public record on the
MAC's assessment of environmental effects for the
2007-2013 -- oops, I'm sorry, I didn't see a question.
Commissioner Mars?
COMMISSIONER MARS: T would just like to
add to the question that Commissioner Landy asked. What
if there is CO2 going off in the air from airplanes taking
off, and what if there is some glycol emissions in the
air? Are these things, running a place like this, are
these things that have any rules of prohibition? We have
cars with CO2 going off in the air, we've got antifreeze
in cars that must produce some emission of some kind. So
you have it in airplanes, does that mean there are
certain functions of an airport that you can't do because
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning; Inc'.
612-339-0545
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearin.g 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
16
some assessment program discovers that these things are
going on? How do you run an airport in Minneapolis,
Minnesota without taking ice off of wings and what's the
consequence for whatever?
His answer was simply that if you did an EAW,
you'll probably find some. So you find it. Where are
You7
MR. FINNEY: Madame Chair, Commissioner
Mars� I'm not sure we would find anything that was
substantive enough to have to deal with. As you know,
MAC, as an entity, does not buy glycol, we don't deice
air.planes, we don't fly airplanes, so that's an element
that's a little bit beyond our control.
We do, however, have the discharqe permit for
the storm system, s�.orm drainage system to the Minnesota
River. We have an annual limit on discharge. As you
know, the Commission has spent considerable sums for
capital improyements on the deicing pa�ds and the
stormwater ponds to try and minimize that discharge.
That having been said, we are clearly subject to the
vagaries of the weather in Minnesota. As Mr. Spensley
indicated, under snow and ice conditions you can either
deice the aircraft or you don't f1y, and I don't think
the latter is a particularly effective way to run an
airport. So then you have to deal with the discharge
Paradigm Reporting &.Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
� �� '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Met�opolitan Airports Connmission
17
and, I think, you know, we've done a fairly good job of
that.
There is no doubt that when deicing takes place,
some of the material that is sprayed from the deicing
vehicle gets into the air and is either blown somewhere,
probably not off the airport boundaries, when you look at
the locations of the deicing pads quite frankly; and some
of it obviously does adhere to the aircraft, and we hope
that's the case. That's partly why you deice the
airplane. So, you know, there aren't any rules in terms
of those kinds of emissions, but there are limits on the
discharge to the river, and that's what we`ve been
dealing with historically.
CHAIR MCGEE: Any other questions or
15 Icomments?
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response.)
CHAIR MCGEE: Hearing and seeing none, I
will try this again t.o close the meeting. The public
record on the MAC's assessment of environmental effects
of the 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Program will remain
open until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, November 22nd, 2006.
All cornrnents should be directed to Robert
Vorpahl, V-O-R-P-A-H-L, Capital Improvement File,
Metropolitan Airports Commission, 6040 28th Avenue South,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450. The Finance, Development
Paradigna Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
� 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
' 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Public Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Comrnission
18
and Environment Committee wi11 consider the 2007 to 2013
Capital Improvement Program at its meeting on
Decernber 6th, 2006. Final action on the Capitai
Improvement Program is expected at the December 18th,
2006 meeting of the full Metropolitan Airports
Commission.
The public hearing is now concluded. Thank you.
(Proceedings concluded at 10:44 a.m.)
Paradigm Reporting & Captioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
�
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1 5'
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Pub�ic Hearing 11/8/2006
Metropolitan Airports Commission
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
I, Elizabeth J. Gangl, a Registered Professional
Reparter in the State of Minnesota, do hereby certify
that the foregoing pages of typewritten material
constitutes an accurate verbatim record transeribed from
the stenotype notes taken by me of the proceedings
aforementioned before the Finance, Development and
Environment Committee of the Metropolitan Airports
Comission on the 8th day of November 2006, at the times
and place specified.
DATED: November 14, 2006
% n , ; � f` %%
(('''`�G,�..C�f..:it;.�"�2- ;�. -� Jc�.r,�, t
�� � ��i
Elizabeth J. Gangl
Registered Professional Reporter
Paradigm Reporting & Capiioning, Inc.
612-339-0545
7H J. GANGL
ary Public
innesota
Expires January 31, 2010
� ' � :� ' • •
TO: Finance, Developmenfi and Environment Committee
FROM: Nigel D. Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning & Environment (726.8187)
Sl11B�EC"!": 2007 - 2013 CAPITAL IMPRO�/EMENT PROGRAM
b. Adjacent Community Review Pracess
DATE: November 27, 2006
Legislation concerning local review of the CIP (MS473.621 Subd 6 as amended) requires the
Commission to complete a process to provide "affected municipalities" surrounding the airport the
opporiunity for discussion and public participation in the Commission's CIP process. An "affected
municipality" is a municipality that is either adjacent to a MAC airport, is within the noise zone of a MAC
airport as defined in the Metropolitan Development Guide, or has notified the Commission that it
considers itself an "affected municipality." The legislation requires that the Commission provide
adequate and timely notice including a description of the projects in the CIP to each affected
municipality. Tfie notices must include agendas and meeting minutes at which the proposed CIP is to
be discussed or voted on in order to provide the municipalities the opportunity to solicit public comment
and participate in the development of the CIP on an ongoing basis. Comments received from the
affected municipalities will be reviewed and a response returned. Staff therefore developed a schedule
that outlined the dates/actions required for the development of the CIP and the local review by
"affected municipalities." This schedule included a date for submittal of comments. -
Three letters were received providing comments on the CIP. A copy of the letters received and
responses is included in Appendix A.
THIS IS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM ONLY; NO COMMITf"EE ACTION IS REQUIRED.
CHF(ELD
November 16, 2006
` �. �� �
'. ��
NO V 1 7 Z006
Airpar� D�veoop�nent
Robert Vorpahl
� Program Development Engineer
Metropolitan Airports Commission
' MAYOR 6040 — 28th Avenue
MARTIN J. KIRSCH Mlllll@apOIIS, MN 55450
cir�r couNci�
BI�L KILIAN Subject: �2007-2013 MAC Capitai Improvement Program
SUSAN ROSENBERG
SUZANNE M. SANDAH� Dear Mr. VorpahL•
� �RED L. WROGE, JR. .
City Manager's OfFice
� Thank you for the oppo�tunity to comment on the Metropolitan Airports Commission's (MAC)
cirv nnaNaG�R 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Program. (CIP). � � �
STEVEN L. DEVICH
The�City af Richfield has several concerns related ta the Noise Mitigation Program item.
Aithough the noise environment has not improved for Richfield residents, the MAC is not
allocating any maney in 2007 for noise mitigation and plans only a small pilot program for
2008. Under this schedule, hundreds of Richfield residents wiil continue to �be subjected to
unmitigated airport noise for years without relief. �
In addition, the City is concerned that the CIP only reflects a total expenditure of $51.1 million
from 2008 through 2011 to�address noise in the 60-64 noise contaurs. This amount "reflects
a cost estirnate for a noise mitigation program that is unacceptable to the commuriities with
residents living in those contours. We r�quest that the MAC provide: sufficient funds for noise
relief that reflects a.more extensive program than mechanical packages-only with a
homeowner co-pay component. - .
�
Also, as the MAC is well aware, the City continues to monitor�the PARTNER study on the
measurernent and ef�ects of low frequency noise (LFN). Earmarking some funds to
amelibrate LFN impacts should be a component of the CIP, as well as anticipating ways to Z
monitor the LFN levels, once an agreed upon metric has been determined. 1"he impacted
co.mmunifies sh4uld not be made to shoulder the burd�n of identifying and monitoring aircraft
LFN. � '
As previously mentioned in last year's comments, the Gity is very concerned abaut the 2009
plans to construct more cargo facilities. The current cargo arid charter facilities that were
relocated across TH 77 from Richfield residents create a level of noi.se and activity that was
not anticipated: The constancy of ground operations adds to the noise and pollution
experienced by Richfield residents. The City requests that before additional facilities are
constructed, a better sound and visual b�rrier stiould be built on the east side of TH 77 to
protect residents from•these negative irripacts. Additi�nally, the MAC should ensure that all
precautions are taken 6y freight and charter carriers ta reduce air toxics emitted as part of
nori-nal grour�d operatians and tQ implement any measures, such. as'aircraft towing, t� red�lce
the no'ise level.
�
The Urban Hometown
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE, RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423
612.861.9.700 FAX: 612.861.9748
�
Page 2
Again, we apprecia'te the opportunity to comment on the 2Q07-2013 CIP.
vuy �v�a� �ay�r
SLD:pd .
Copy: Richfield City Council
Assistant to the �ify Manager
r
� b' :
Responses to City of Richfield Comments
The start of the noise mitigation program in the 2007 60-64DNL noise contours is
affected by the resolution of the following items:
1) FAA approval of the 2007 Noise Compatibility Plan and Noise Exposure
Map, and;
2) Noise mitigation litigation
All of the participating Richfield single and multipie family residential structures in
the current mitigated 65 DNL noise contour have been completed or are in the
process of completing noise mitigation or acquisition.
2. MAC will review any FAA adopted policy on �FN for applicability to the areas
surrounding MSR. At presen#, there is no consensus on an appropriate metric,
levels of impact, or mitigation.
3. The CIP budget as presented shows the estimated cost of the noise mitigation
program approved by the full Commission on November 15, 2004.
0
("
,
Minneapolis
City of Lakes
City Council
Scott Benson
Council Member, Elevenih Ward
350 Souih 51h Street - Room 307
Minneapolis �MN 55415-1363
qtfice 612 673-2211
Fax 612 673•3940
TTY 612 673-2157
www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Affirmative Aciion Employer
November 17, 2006
CIP File
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 28"' Ave. So.
Minneapolis, MN 55450
-. RE: Review of Proposed 2007-2013 CIP
"�� .
Dear f�r. Vorpahl:
� .. . � + j'
NOV 2•0 2006
.� ��.. _�* � �� -
Thank you for the apportunity to comment on MAC's Capital Improvement Prograrn.
The 2007 CIP budget is proposed at approximately $87.7million far projects at MSP 4
and the reliever airports. We note that no funding is proposed for noise mitigation in
2007 and only a small pilot program is proposed for 2008. We find �it problematic that
noise mitigation is again proposed to be deferred until the second of iwo construction
seasons during which air traffic distribution will be dramatically different.
The pavement rehabilitation projects scheduled for 2007 and 20�8 are of significant
concern for us particularly regarding runway utilization during the construction
periods. . While not meeting the threshold for an environmentai review, we believe it
is incumbent on the MAC to explore options which will minimize the noise impacts
during construction through a public participatory process. We request that the MAC
engage the public eariy in the process as soon as construction staging and projected
runway utilization during construction are developed: We would further request that
the MAC consider options that best minimize impacts on neighbors rather than simply
the "least cost" option.
�
We are concerned that no amounts are shown for noise mitigation for single family
homes in future years beyond 2011. For 2008 through 2011, $51.1 million is
budgeted to address noise in the 60-64 DNL area. This, of course, reflects a cost
estirnate for a mitigation program unacceptable to every neighboring community. We �a
encourage the MAC to approve a GIP with sufficient funding for noise mitigation so
that those residents who will experience high levels of noise actually receive relief in
a timely manrier. Neighboring residents should not have to be irripacted by naise for
years before MAC addresses the problem.
We look forward to r respanse and deliberations as you continue developing your
CIP.
Scott Benson,
NOC RePresentative for the City of Minneapolis
CC: Chauncey Case, Sr. Aviation Planner, Metropolitan Council
Responses to City af Minneapolis Comments i
4. The start of the noise rnitigation program in the 2007 60-64DNL noise contours is
affected by the resolution of the foliowing items:
�) FAA approval of the 2007 Noise Campatibility Plan and Noise Exposure
Map, and;
2) Noise mitigation litigation
All of the participating Minneapolis single and multipie family residential
structures in the current miiigated 65 DNL noise contour have been completed
noise mitigation. � �
5. MAC has been working with the FAA to identify the optimum window for
construction as it relates to airport operations and runway use to minimize the
construction duration and impacts both on and off of the airfield.. Determining the
shortest possible construction period is the key to minimizing noise issues and
airport operational impacts. There are many lower cost options MAC is not
considering because of extended construction schedules. MAC will shortly begin
working with the MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) to review the timelines
and runway use plans, and define the appropriate public notification program.
6. The CIP budget as presented shows the estimated cost of the noise mitigation l'
program approved by the full Comrnission on November 15, 2004.
November 22, 2006 � .
Mr. John Lanners, Chairman
Metropolitan .Airports Commission
6040 �28�` Avenue 5outh
Minneapolis, MN 35450 .
� � . . �'
�
i : I1�
� � i �. .�. ' // � , .
SUBJECT: Comm�nts on MAC's 2007-2013 Capital Improvemeni Program
Dear Mr. Lanners: �
�
OFG 9529496300
FAX 952 949 8390
TDD"952 949 8399
8080 Mitchell Rd
' Eden Prairie, MN
55344-4A85
edenprairie:org
The City of Eden Prairie has completed its review of the Meixopolitan Airports Cornmission's
2007-2013 Capital Im�rovement Program as it� relates to the Flying Cloud Airport.
We are concerned and disappointed that the Metropolitan Airports Coinmission cor�tinues to
...c��ia:�` the.fund•i�g-and implementing the.needed. sar-utary sewer and water project along Pioneer
Trail. This project is long oyerdue and should be funded now, regardless.oi the timing ior the
airport exparision.
This vnportant project would significantly reduce the potential for ground water contaminafion
by allowing for the removal of well and�septic systems that have been in place for�years, whil�e
greatly improving water quality. It would. also provide iriiportant fire protection capability for all
airport tenants and fixed based operators and :th,eir business investment.
Sincerely,
G,%�"�- %'�� F°�
JG .
� Scott H. Ne�l
City Managez
cc: Mr. Robert J. Vorpahl, MAC
Mr.Chauncey Case,lVletropolitan Council
Responses fio Eden Prairoe Commen�s
7 The Commission is currently conducting a study of all of the
Commission's Reliever Airports. During this study, only reliever projects
that have a funding source other than Commission funds are being
implemented.
�"
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
� ' � � �' '
Finance, Development and Environment Committee
Steve Busch, Director of Finance (612-726-8148)
PREUMINARY 2007-2013 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP)
c. Program Funding �
November 22, 2006
The 2007 - 2013 Capital Improvement Program will be funded from a variety of sources that
include Passenger Facility Charges, Federal Grants, MNDOT Grants, internally generated funds
and bond proceeds (including commercial paper). Based on information presented, sufficient
funds are available to fund the 2007 - 2013 Capital Program.
MAC will have approximately $150 million available in cammercial paper as a cantingency. A
table showing the sources of funds follows:
Metropolitan Airports �omm�ss�on
Capital Improvement Program Funding Summary 2007 - 2009
DR.4FT
2007 2008 2009
Fundin Fundin Fundin
% Of Total
2007 - 2009 2007 - 2009
Fundin GIP
PFC Application #8 - Bonds Qssued 2005) 2010 Plan $15,600 $ - $ - $ 15,600
PFC Application #10 - Pay As You Go (2007) 2010 Plan 10,300 26,200 9,600 46,100
PFC Application #11 - Pay As You Go (2008) 2020 Plan - 50,598 - 50,598
PFC Application #11 - Bonds Qssued 2008) 2020 Plan - - 72,408 72,408
PFC Application #12 - Pay As You Go (2009) 2010 Plan - 400 9,850 10,250
Total PFC Funding $25,900 $ 77,198 $ 91,858 $ 194,956 39.
Federal�Entitlement v $ 6,300 $ 6,200 $ 6,000 $ 18,500
Federal Discretionary 7,900 21,496 24,133 53,529
Federal Non Primary Aid Relievers 1,321 675 875 2,871
MNDOT Grants 7,400 - - 7,400
Total Federal & MNDOT Grants $22,921 $ 28,371 $ 31,008 $ 82,300 16.6
;mallv Generafed Funds $28,349 $ 24,745 $ 22,225 $ 75,319 15.1
mmercial Paper & Non PFC Garb Debt
2005 Garbs $ 8,900 $ 3,500 $ 9,000 $ 21,400
2008 Garbs 2010 Plan - 9,900 - 9,900
2008 Garbs 2020 Plan - 36,463 24,983 61,446
Total Commercial Paper & Non PFC Garb Debt $ 8,900 $ 49,863 $ 33,983 $ 92,746 18.7
�tal Funding All Sources
Funding Sources
60-64 DNL - Funding To Be Determined
Totals 2007 - 2009
$86,070 $180,177 $179,074 $ 445,321
$ 7,600 $ 14,813 $ 10,876 $ 33,289
$ $ 3,200 $ 13,900 $ 17,100
$ 93,670 $198,190 $ 203,850 $ 495,710
1
�
10.17%�
Passenger Facility Charges
The purpose of the PFC program was to develop an additional capital funding source to provide
for the expansion of the national airport system. Under the PFC legislation, the proceeds from
PFCs are required to be used to finance airport-related projects that serve or enhance safety,
capacity or securitjr of the national air transportation system, reduce noise from an airport that is
part of such system, or furnish opportunities for enhanced competition among air carriers.
The Commission has currently received approval from the FAA for nine separate applications
totaling approximately $1.66 billion (including interest). The Comrnission first began collecting a
$3.00 PFC in 1992. In 2001, the Commission received approval from the FAA to collect an
additional $1.50 on each enplaning passenger resulting in a$4.50 PFC now being collected on
enplaning passengers. The Commission �has collected all funds approved under the first five
applications and is currently collecting funds approved in Applications #6, #7, #8 and #9.
Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) are used by the Commission iwo ways. Under the Pay As
You Go method, funds are collected and used to pay project costs on a current basis. The
Commission also uses PFCs to pay debt service for bonds issued to construct projects. With
either use of PFCs, the FAA must have approved the project's eligibility. As shown in #he table
above, four different PFC applications are projected to be used to fund all or a portion of the 2006-
2008 projects. PFC application #8 has already been approved by the FAA and collections are
being applied and/or accumulated for use. Application #10 is anticipated to be applied for and
approved by the FAA in 2007. This $105 million Pay As You Go application will fund a portion of (+
the remaining 2010 Plan Projects scheduled for 2007, 2008 and 2009, as well as certain projects
from 2006. PFC application #12 is forecasted to be applied for and approved by the FAA in 2009.
This $10 million Pay As You Go application will fund the remaining eligible 2010 Plan Projects.
PFC application #11 would be issued for projects associated with the Humphrey Terminal Phase I
and Lindbergh Terminal Phase I portion of the 2020 Plan. This application would be required to be
filed in late 2007 or early 2008: It would be a combination of new debt and Pay As You Go. The
split between the two methods of PFC use is currently estimated to be $51 million Pay As You Go
and $72 million in new debt.
Federal Grants & MNDOT Grants
The Commission receives various forms of grant money from the FAA each year. For 2007-2009
these grants include: Federal Entitlement, anticipated Federal Discretionary and Federal Non-
Primary-Relievers. Each of these is discussed below.
� Federal Entitlement - Entitlement grants are based on the number of enplaning passengers
and the arnount of landed cargo weight. Staff anticipates receiving approximately $6.2 million
per year or $18.5 million over the 2007-2009 period.
s Federal Discretionary — Grants are based ori project priority and availability of funding. Staff
anticipates receiving approximately $53.5 million over the 2007-2009 period. ($27.4 million of
this figure is associated with the 2020 Plan.)
� Federal Non-Primary — Relievers - These funds are provided for projects at the Reliever
Airports. The grant amount is $150,000 per year per airport. The funds can be accumulated (
for up to 4 years. The estimated total amount to be used for the 2007-2009 period is $2.9
million.
The Commission receives grants from the Minnesota Department of Transportation for projects
that meet the required criteria of the State. It is projected that the Commission will receive a total
of $7.4 rnillion between 2007 - 2009 f�om the State. $6.0 million of this amount is committed for
the St. Paul dike in 2007.
Internally Generated MAC Funds
The Commission will apply certain amounts it generates from operations after the payment of all
of its operating expenses, debt service and other payment obligations. In determining the amount
that would be applied to the capital program, it was assumed that the Commission would no
longer hold airline rates and charges flat, but would return to the rate calculation methodology in
the Airline Agreement. It is projected that a total of $73.6 million will be applied to the Capital
Program between 2007 - 2009.
Bond Proceeds (GARBs & Commercial Paper)
The costs of the Capital Program that are not funded by any of the sources previously identified
will be funded from the proceeds of General Airport Revenue Bonds (GARBs) and Commercial
Paper. It is projected that $21.4 million in GARBs from the 2005 issue will be used to fund- .
projects in this CIP. Any cost incurred prior to the sale of the bonds in 2005 were funded on an .
, � ���
interim basis through the issuance of commercial paper.
Approximately $71.3 million in General Airport Revenue Bonds will be required in 2008 (as well as
PFC supported bonds currently estimated at $72 million). lt is anticipated that any outstanding
Commercial Paper at the end of 2008 would be paid off with internally generated funds and/or
Federal Letter of Intent (LOI) dollars received between 20p7 and 2010.
Other Funding
These projects ($33.3 million) are funded by MAC initially. Through various agreements, they will
be paid back to the Commission by tenants or others. Pclso included in this category is the 60-64
Noise Program. Funding of this program has not yet been determined.
Attached is the list of funding by project for 2007, 2008 and 2009.
THIS IS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM ONLY; NO Ct�MMIl-("EE ACTION 1S REQUIRED.
(� I
0 0� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � �, �, o 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
�',�� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
� O O O O O O O O C.i O O O O O O O
C 1� t� tV N �n c� ��D �n N N N V� �n O m
�� c0 f0 fV (7 h h r tV t7
LL
0 0 0 0 � � � o 0
� � i i � � O O� O�O ' ' O O
(,� � O O O O 0 Q
�L'I N N � V N O O�
fV c7
yl 1 1 � t 1 1 1 1 � 1 1 1 t I 1
W
0
o�� ,�, ,�. .. , . ....,..
N
�
0 o fii
0 0 � � � � � � � � � � � � .
Y� � . � � � p p � .
�o �° O o E
tn 4) v_ v °
N
V
'• � � � � �� � �� r� .
O O O O � O O O O
a o 0 0� o
� i y , o o , o o ' . c� o o ci o�
01 ( O O O O p�j M C�") �'�'/
y �Q Q . W O� K '7 . C
> IL . V V� �' . �. � .
N N
� L
� O O O O O O O O O O p)
O O O O O O O O O O O O � � � � � r � �_ � � � �
� O O O O O O O O O O
�� O O O O O O O O O O � �
(� O O O O O O O O O O . C
N LL l0 �` ^ M � N� W N N N � . .
6. � M c'i N ' � .
'D
m
� N
O O �
� � � � � � � � i r � m � i � �
� � y) � i � � � p O ' L
b LL'p �O O O
� N tD N
,v�i d (n uJ V� .L�
� ro
� , r �
m
. W �,,, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ro o 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o� o 0 0 o v�i �
o O�� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, ... r
n. � r� n N N �n M co co u� �n cv cv v�n t- m o �r n �n <v n
7 O �. a0 ai N t') h 1� � �- O t+i N CV c�1
� a V U va
N
E � �
Z o o N E� E@ o ° �q c
E '' � °'
'N 'V E � � O1 m. �n O
Z A a rn � .. o' m Q a' � O O c y.�°� a a .`° d � U
o � y H � � a a a a o � m m E �
u�. o� m j x E R a' �o- °� a ° a y'' w m.o :�o o.Tu i."-_.. o a � �� ��
a�
4 a m
V m rn a in o. rn-� a' �=R °�T ��'� � a.�c :o'��—' � o� cn ,°nn �,p � �
v> a c � c E�.�c o� n� m°8 m � 00 d m� :n 'v �;� L E .� m ���.'�c
N� ��d .� U� U a K;u '� .ctic c� �. m N.n. o� m. m�� a° al .o �.� 4 Q m m �
t� � 3� d E O O 7 a(n �. O.� ��, �> L� d m.� ((� �� � C fV V � � C (n � M
^ Z � �� a o c� � o m v,� m m��t m- E� o`_ 'c ,c � E� N a Q'v � w.
� = tn ; E U 3 c.c c' m_ d 3 4�.=p >�' u u� d,� v rn= �,'' �,-
� N� . c � c o p�— E�-°, 't :n [C �� w: t-:, m ro 2'mTi m w� 1- m � o _O m m� d>.
p � o�� V c� 1- c�o � c c.¢.@c � c. K F o� � m� y u] W���` y.� a m� ° U aEi 3 0
O U � 3� y, 3 n v b>> .n �> .n @ m p'@° c'� v €€ E E E�` ."'on �� Z in in o a� in
po � �� in Xf� v� mQ�aa in �o�. v�� � cq���am't�-I�I�ic�J c'n d¢ dc
rt � c � 'm
aN � � a � � � �
0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O N N
y- r. N N h�
N vY
0 0 0 0 0
O O N N 7
O O
O O �
� O O �
� ti
N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �
�R„ :a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o co . ro 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 0� o 0 o ci ci o� �
tv o c� � o 0 0. o 0 0 0 0 0
� C M N m th V N u� r V' t7 M �V � N c�o a�0 O o O�(�D � O(�O N t�'J � .
� fV (V fV (V N (V � sy p'j '- '- r N O
V' . � N N M � � �
o O A ' O o o O o o O O o o O o 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O � O O O O O� O O O O O O� O O O O
� O O O � O O O O O O O O O � O O O � O � � O O O � O �
V' O tY t!') tn � O O O O O O (h O O O O O O O O
Q N O N h I� . o o O O O o a� Vf O u7 o N o O t() �
�`) N r M N tG �- r N [t 1`7 N N o O ID w o � �
�<D i+ co fV c�i r nj � ..
0 0 0 0 0
O O O
�. � � O O O � i � � p � � � � i � � � � O O O
01I
= O o , o p p , O o � �
QO o m t�o N m
N (V N N cii
O o 0 0 0 0 0� o 0
OS � � � � � p i � � p p � � O O O � O O � � � � p .
o ro o � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � �
N U' o 0 o w m o 0
[V tV �cV pj .- i- uj
O O O
m � � � � � � � t � � � �..
,N .�) O O O � � � � � t � � � � � �
(n a O � O O . . .
� � �
� � O O O'. .� p p � O � � O O O 1 � � i � � � � � � i .
� QI m"t' d' N N I��. N rn N
� v1 N n rn
(,i � � O O , . . . .
(j� � � i � � � � � � � � � � � t � � � � � � ' .
O O
O. � . . o o � . .
�a a v
H �
� � � � , , � � � � � � � � � � � � , � � �
LL pl
am
0 n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0..
�1J p o 0 0 0 0 0, o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �
Op O O o O o O O o O o O o O O o t7 o O o o Cl O o. o O O o O
N O O o o O o O o O O O O O o o O O O O O O O O O o O O O
N O N O O O O O O O O ' O � O O � V1 O tn O O O O h O.O O O N'
a. � M N c0 . .- M �t �N N r r �} M ch V� ? ' N t0 c0 O O O (O W O fD N fJ
O �. � N tV � N N �� N sr sf M�- N O
a V N ' N c'1 . .
. . ' N .�.. � � � . .
�
. � � � � C G � � � � .
' a�p. � N� � E m C .�.. N
N
� m � . � E � � a � m .a m �.m� m c�i � � a. � � . . , .
°�� m�- m >, rn E °� o E o
o. o m �°a �� EV� ° uJ aa � c'�«. a
.� o ••�• � rn 2 �u o m. � o � d � o
� o > o `� v� m. o a i° � v a o. � z' g , y � E� x
N '.7 61 • ;p � •�p C • �S � LL Q J�. C .. ��>..?m.. � .� O W..O, .
ro »d � :� ro �e o_ »: m . 'C �� �.� � '_ � � O - -Q � � ��
E �'- •- L d c d� o� V m `m � v� a, � a� c
:9 °� �n °��cr'm .o e'Ka ova � �n �a c m � E � �
p� y L . m � c Y� Q � Q� m y�.�tt �. o ;� � p �>� � c m .
° � m m a=i m°� �� m '- 'a :C c�a v o c ro L° c a� u�i � L o W'o
_ •
o- c� c K ��� � ro� > m 4 — � ` rn v� t� ° u�i o
� o � v � � g U v� � m`a � � J' o m°� o€. m�. ci,_ �, c�`�i � o. �. a _.
c �
, a v d m o•9 °� c�g v p, c>>, m� m N o� � m�°- � a Im-. > m o`° � W f� '� : m . . ..
� m o E°� m° m'o R m 3 a E i °� a �� a�� �.� t��m v� m m m i� Z
a aoa c�n �wa inamii °��a in o� a� °�a n' ° o.a �`m-oz o c°>�� �
� y U .. J .. .� ? . . . � m � � �. d t � � G. � c c :c � � o'� a � m 'n . . � �.
�n q� rn wcix cn 3�wc� `�°>¢c.>�a° v�
� � � Z
u C
F�- �
{7.
UI�
� Q
o �
o �
N ur
� �I�a
m
'Q QI
Ci
�
0
W �
a
O �
r.. a
O p
N .r
W y
'O
am
�r
W
� o
ON
a
Oa
av
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0�o 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
ooci000 0000000 0 0 od
u> o 0 0 0 0 0 0 �n o 0 0 0 o u� n r
t0 V�. t7 �O c0 � O� O N c0 N c0 (7 h tD O� tD lD
r. '- �- �= O N O�i O�i
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O � � O O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 o co 0 0 0 0 o m
N O O O O O N O O O O O N V
(D u1 P1 t0 f0 � m N tD C) h '? c0 M
.- .- co N N
0 0
� � � � � � � � � � � � o 0
m �
r
0 0
0 0
� � � � r � � � � � � � o 0
o �
�fl t0
O
O
�� � r i � � � � �� � p
, O
0
r
0
0
� � � � � � � � � � � � o
N
N
O O O O O
� � � � � � O O i � � � O O O
O O O O O
O N N N �
•- '- N N O
0
0
� ���� � � � �� p
O
�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
v� o 0 0 0 0 0 o w o 0 0 0 o u� n�
(D N c7 c0 cO 01 O N c0 N tD t'7 h W 4? �D
•- �- �- �- O N O�i
a��i ; � o
... >, ° v m
� U� E ro t0 °o
m '
o O d— a ��
a m� a m c��e m E
o b v a `m m � d c N . c�
m E � � m
�� °� m m v� o. m cn o
c m•�� d
o� � a�, �� m� w� � w�� cmi a
� c a� �' w m m c c c ro> �� C N
E m U� a a v d m o� u. d� c u 19 m E
� o �' `o � � � U E � m � � c a c o •o .i°.
O N m IL � j' fA (0 . p�
p� w � d V. p= a� 0' M�- tL' N C fD Q a O
ro O � � 3 a`
a� �� o m� o E o E� o>. = d a�i z'�
� c S 'c in 'N d 'p^
d.� �,°� y � tj �.� a a a° w._ `O � a t0 coi
. a c Eo E' o.� � o
° 3'a V E m o E u c E� m 3.0 1°
°' ziic>UHu°.Uv� C�x¢� z in °
a
Z y
O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0�.� ,,, o 0
0 0� o 0 0 o a o 0 0 0
� C O O O O� O O O O O O O O O
� O O O O O O O O O O O O O
p C N N O O N ln O O O C' T O �
F� t0 M tV N N N N t�i
W
O O� O O � O O � � � O O
O O ' � O O ' O O � � O O
UI �� o ci o co 0 0
� W� u�i v�i �� o m
N M
O O
O O � � � � � �
L O O � � � � �
�
wI V� 7
� � r
N � � r � � � � � � � �
� p
N �)
i�
o �I ,I . �I ,
N
O O O O O O O O O O �
O O� O O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11� 1� N O N O O O O O
!>
f0 � c7 O t'7 01 O �1 M c7
tV tV t� t�
O O O � O O
� O O O �
tp N
T � � � r
O O � O O O �
O O '
p O O O O
m m n o n
h h
� ,I � �� � � � � � � � , �� � ,� � , �� � � ,� � �� �
�Q� ,I, ,I, „I, ,I, ,,,.,..,I,
O O O O
��� O O � � � � � � � r
i�� � - p O � O O
� � � �
\ i � N� O O 0 �� .
... 'a Q) . N N
m u1 N
�p LL r
A
� p � (r� r � � � � � � � � � � � i
� N 11.. 10
�, a a
a
�m � � � , � �����,. �
o •- .�
ov�
N LL
a ,�
a
w
^ o 0 0 0 0 0
� � O O � o 0 0 0 0 0 � � � ' ' ' ' '
o`' � o 0 0 0 0 0
yN(L 10 a�o � N N c0 co
•S a a
�
�
� � i � � i �
�oo 0 0 00
� O O O O O O O
T O N N �. N N
� �p N N
� I � � � I � � �( � i� r
�I � � �I � � �� � �� �
�I � � �I � � �� � �� �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q� o o � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
� N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o d o 0 0 0 0 o ci o 0 0 0 0 0
o O N N c�v_ o o v�i v�i o 0 o v uQi_ •'``' o m �m � � o � m o m M r�i
j O(y, c') l0 N N M Of a- (V M (V fV h- i�
N a V N N
N
Z
2
4�..
Q.
U
o>
0
0
N
� C9
N ,q'Z,'
0 LL
4 V
O °p
0
(1, N
X
N E °'
o � �
°' 4 E "� � 10 � � ¢ �
z �a o, m o� ° a � g E
o N c w o � p, � �� o.
o c c �- o w o� E m � o.
� m o o � o- � c.'_- ' � c• � ro a 2 � o
o � V ..� � E�o,� o m�,a° o°- m U m � in ° ar
m a� � b'° d° �� ;o m a 1° ��,r°-_. o a � E � c a?i o
o in�� :o � :9 rn � _ �� m = � � v � v� .o .� o. � p. S m 0 'a
E� p p . E�o.% rn���� roNS d m:ov� ��� L � �� W m :°
� o '� V � U �' � '� .�0c c � m o � d.. � � �7 � `C o . � A c � � � � �. Q � .
m' � X Q. C- . y 01 p � C 2' U C 10 O p� N Q .a N �O �
p iu m � E , O o � � tA . � • .d y, � � a� � � •c �a � N a O m � , � .c ] � � �, a
a N� c o U*' o �o ,� c° m_ ��`o �c � € E N n`, � d d :o .
� m E U .'�.9 � c m_ d 3;a > ��� ii c'�i � m° c C�'.Q a r v� 5 �
o �, o p �= E°`c ,n n= � ca '° 2� °' m y t- w v� rn m m T m�� m °'
'm � Z � U 1- m � c Q.c c� m� rn uJ w�� `� � a o c o �� o U 3� p E� o
�� o U� ro o��. E o. � E p m y c c c c c� O: o Q. m��.� � m �� o> > o� W m�
.�. >, .� v >. v 'o 'o �`o E E� E� a `m o m � m Q K v1 �� v� tn y n. cn
p � a .o ro �.n v �n >. .n � > .o c : .
m� '� � ro� m� m m m� d d d� m>> c Z' �• m
� q� � tn X �-- tn �¢ a cn �. a tn � � a m h �--� �- x c.) rn ?' ¢. � t) . . u- --� .
a` z° � a ce �
�
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0�0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.,� '�='p o 0 o v�i v�i N o o. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vi o
O O O O O O n n O O O �� O O O Ci O In p O O
(� C r r c0 a0 W N f0 (D ? T N N fD C7 O W N O (D 1� O� r N '�7 M� N N V�" f�D � O O �
~ LL �. � N .� � M N M N V' O �- e- r tD � tn N 17
N r {*) O>
O o O o 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O. O O ��� � O � O p O O O O O O O O O p O O
� O O O � � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
QI o 0 0 0 o v o p , o 0 0 0 � ci o a �ci o 0 0 0 0 o vi o 0
�, e- �- t0 h N N t0 t0 N(�O M V t�D � O�i e~- O�i M O M O O t7 O O O
nj N N V' tD N f0
� � N M t[i r '- r
tCi V� ' (O
*- N
� O O
�- ' ' O � � � � � O O
� .o . � ��� r p p � i� �� �� r i r� r O O
'�'I f0 � I� h O �Y
O � N N N N
O
O O O O O
��� � � r . � 1 1 � � �� O O O t� �� t � �� ��
L
0� O O O O O
N o rn m rn rn
vi v oi oi m
N N� � � � �� o p o 0
o a . o � � � � � o � � � � � � � � � � � � o 0
o � o 0 0
. N � � � ' � , N N
� � M M
� .0) � � � i � � � � � � � � i � � � � � � � i �
� Q
O O O O
O O O O �
ip ' � o 0 0 o i � i � � � � � � . .
�' �D O O O N ' . � � � � � � � � � � � p ��
�o �n v� . . � .
� 4I N ,- r� �
LL . co . o0 0 . u�i ,
m
� O o 0
o � , o 0 0
0 0 � � � � � � � � � � � . , o .
N LL ' ' O O � � � � � � p
a am. v v o
N
� m � � �
p r ' , � �� t � � �� �� .� � i � i ��
o V o ,
N lL
a ,�
a
O O � � � , � o 0 0 0 0 �
o r V. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � o � o � � � � o 0 0
0 0 0
[�v tVi �o - � v�i m m c�v
aa � � � �
N
W� O O O O O O . O 0 O O' O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
� O O O O O O O O O. O O O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O N o o O N N N � � o o O o � O O o O O O O o N o O O O O O o Ci Ifi o O O
a � �- ��p pp N: � � � O O O O O O O h. h. O O O� O O(O O O lh O O(+1 O n � �
� � V' V'� � N tD M O O1 N O (O h. p> p1 .y t� 1n N N�j' tD O O t7
� d oD ai N c7 M c7 N t�1 tn V CJ �- r � f0 � tA tfj t7 . .
n, V � . N r � ,- r� m
� � E �
0
� . � a O. � � G �� . w d N. � � . .
? °� m A ° E w 4 � E i, m � >,
E n' w� m � a °� E¢ u c`rn � c tn vJ a � 3
m c c Q° a. > m o 0 o m o d � � E �
� � N 'm �' n. �� t� a a°1i � a�i `a m a E v � �� �� �
E U V 0� m ftl N U) � � E
. . ` G O a � € = 3 � a � E � � L m � 0 W a p Q . � N E � � . � . .
• C N �O
a°: m m � x m r c° t i • c o E a'� �° N �� v� ro� m o w � o
m � w_ °� W S' a� v � tn � o m c�� c°'i � ���`m N�¢ R d[C o m a
y g�, L Q =u °� q°s m a°� E m c ayi Fa ��u �� m m a a v m a�i �° a 0 0° c m u E
L° �'°�,-'� w` � ; m`�OQ m'rn€ �'� � mLL o 0 o�n �� rnm mti a?i> >� �� o o �
V._ ro� � m� m — o p. a— � a q=.c a c> E� N o � rn
� m m m«� .° � Z. d w o� a- t°'- P: m€ � ti �j m �� ��° y° a m N N� o �.3 N 3 a
� o (;
� c U c aEi o w �' � j'. 4 � o �� �`��` _ ` v Z m m m�d ��� E�� i o'R c- � � m o
� 'p Q 7 N 7 O ' Q � � .� C @ .�.. CI � � 'O � (0 .0 �y «N, � C N C U j ,�L• y � (n y � 0 �. O Z . .
�--,��a c� ,o -� cN °_o � o c,n m�.ou. a oa. E� E•ca c� m��� p_ o'�`i
`w. �
� U% m lL (n N TL Ui 3...1 U� J IL S Lr' � Z� U 7��� U? U Q�Q (n O Z fn +�' .
' F- LL C� tn (�
. � � � .. . . � .
� Z �
�
.m.. �p
H �
�
Q) �
�I,
N
�
O
W N
o �
o iy
N �
N y
a
N�
�
w y
� QI
R
� dI
d
LL
N �
o '�' (�
Naa
N
T �
0 T m
0
N W
a �
a
o 'On
0 T V
c�i tU1. N
a n.
0 �
W
Vi G
O cv
a �
av
0 0 o a o 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o O o o O o 0�1 �
tq �11 O(O M W
v'i N �� O�i O m�
O
� � O
N
N
� O O O O
� ' '7 V �
m m rn +-
ui u� �ri id
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 o vi o vi ai vi
v�i � m� rn v r�i
�fi N � � t��Y M V�'
�) � � O
O
0
O
m
�� � r �� �� �� i
0 o O o
� O O O O
� � �
n t�'-_ � �
r N
0
� � o
' ' �
� o 0 0 0
� � � �
N N v1 N
1�(� tf�7 N N
0
� � o
0
N
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O o O O
N u7 O t7 c`') W �
N Vl O�D � � O �
E y
`� E
m o �
o a � o
o c a
O_ N O
I`0 N N C C ON
O> o C � p, € N
o `� g � � a� E ,y
a o' � � h c� o
Y d� � C'�—'� ��.. O �
m`m � o- m E� a a w
E� m� � d�- e N c
o. p c o� i- �� o 0
� a'O N N` C= N e-
m U� � f' L m Ry j� c(
i m
o�eW °�ao ° ° a
Le a.�
a cn � Q > > > > �
N o U' ul E x¢ v� cq . �
� o
N N 2 f'
�
m
Q
N
C9
Z
Z
l�l.
�
U
0
0
N
� (9
NZ
� �
av
�
O
a N
0 0 0 0� o 0 0 0 0. o 0 0 0
.o 0 0 0 0 0� o 0 0 0 0 ���� o 0
C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0
�q o 0 0 0 0 o ci o o- o 0 0 0
'}� O O O O O O O O O O O p �
� M M p) m (7 M N� O V' O
h 7 V �Y ri T N cV �t
LL
O O O O O O O O
O O � � O O O O � � t � � O O
al oo �� ao o�
�L � � N N <Y
O O
O O i
L � .� p O i � r � r � � � � �
m O O
w N �
OI N in
N � � � � � � � i � �
�a
N �I � i � i
�
�y � � r � � � i � � � �
uy a � �
N � � '
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ci o
O O O O O O O O O �t1 N
O O 7 V' V' t7 N O 01 fD tO
� � �'
O o O o O o 0 o O O
O O O O O O O O O O
O O N N N M� , N N N
N �
O O
O O
� t � � � O O �
O O
t�I t`'1
iI � �I � � � � �) � �I i
� �) � � � � � � � � i � � � � � � i � � �
N a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0� o 0 0 0
� � � � O O � � t � � � � � � � ' O O O O O . � N
m 9 O O � � r N �O V d'
� a� o o � � o
m �� -
LL �
1]
O O N
N O � � . � o o i � � � � � . � � � � � � �. :p
o*"U' o o v
U �
NLL N 'n 'n � (4
a � �,
>
0
y `o.
Y m � 1 1 t 1 t t� 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 � 1 1 1 �
r �
N V o
N LL �
aa o
U
O O � � � �
O O � � � O O � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
�� C� o O O o N
M o�� M �') L'' .
N LL t6 �; �- N� C
a �
0
O O. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O �
�� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
� QO p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q
� N � �v�j p�j O�i M M N N O � O♦ r • r • � � O O R V�' V� N O W N f�D
N
O a d' <f i7 M N N `? T c'� V' ...0
� O
0. V 'D
N
E
� E ° ...
y N
E o E o `� o �
m E .`°. � m '� .N y
(0 m '� V L� � . G y � y , C C
� o z 2 0, o y o� a � m m �
rn n, o Y c N o p, c ❑ a �� o
c c o m • o.
° ti u° o o � a ' � c° � m o. in o
0. w � 01 u U 'y 'm c in :3 ° o o m!- V m � rn m o.
v ` �� Q o a- o v � m c> � c
c o. �o a m �:= m m:n :9 'R m� o a ay �- c c>•� w o tn
m o o a n:rn�� :9� m=:��v�rn a X o o° w� '� �
<p c � m .c :6 0 � R E a ro
n. 3 w A c'°a V x o�a a'�i . �. m c K � L°� o Mf �� E c°� ro ��� � . � A o
� v� ON o ro°i�m a p�o � m�°.� �.� �� ro c�N m o m > � m . m c N rn � y �
�€`� n. �'n � a o c:> o� v'? E� o� m'w € E a a` o °L' m.° �� � Q
m � .T � U � ,� c c �- m .� '�S. .c � p .o .� � �. . � � o ip
� in ?. o � o p �^ E-°, `C � m� °' m a�i N F ro o� m �,Y = ro m �. m' m o d m d
. N� 3" c Z V C� t- � m � � Q y a' � W u1 �� �. � � a o Q o o° `° ��� o E. E p v
`�' �n `»4 ��n =4 V�'� m m E'� m'n c c c c c a � o Q m v �.� �� rn�� �'o � W m� �-
,u,3 >. 0 3>, .� °�:4 a� B v'o x v €�€ �€ E�.n `m o m v� N'q v� c¢ x� cn tn Y a u� L
V co 'rt' � � vi .o m x .n v � > .a c � m � . > c � . �, .
°1 Co❑ d� m� m� w m m 5 d m m .� f-
z cn u�i�� cn.��-t- cn m�Za �n C�aml-hh-x�U �n?�¢ U. u- .
�. 0.' Z 1- a -i
� �
0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
c o 0 0 0 0
� o 0 0 0 0
�'p O O O O N
O F cn o rn
f" � r fV c0
�
O O O O O
O O O O O
V o 0 0 0 0
C() o O u�i tr�j � N
� N W h
�
O
�-I � � O
� O
� O
O
� �
o�� ., ,�,
0
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0� o 0 0 0 0
O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0�n u� o 0 0�n o�n o o �n
N t7 N O .r sr �(p In N t� N N � t0 O O M m N N O N m
N � `- � � � �- � �- r N r tp N O (V
� r N [O
O O O O
O O O O � � � � � � O O O O p � � O O O O O
o� t�n o o . O� N v�i �
N M h O � N i- iD O O N v7 (� � N
N M , r N'- t� i� O
r �
O
� i i i i � � r � � i �
� t � p
O
N
�
., .,. .,, ..,. .,�. ,,,,. ..,.►.�.�,
0 o O
' ' ' � o O o
m m voi
.- o-i vi
� � �� � �I � � �� �
0 0 0
0 0 0
R � � o 0 0 � , , , � ,
� v_I o o �i
„6 Q m v� .n, .
ti r � °�
N O
o � � � � � � � o o � �
ci o
N (J.. fC V�' QV
aa
o � m ' ' � � � �
N V p
$a�
a
O O O O
o � o r � � � � � � � � o 0
"� '� v�i o
ri oi t*i m
0
� , � , � � �
� � , , o
�
�
0 0
� o o � � � � � o o� o 0 0
r n� . c��i m ' N m�
� n co rn
0
o � � � � � � � � . � , � � � � � � � � � o
0
N tL lp �
aa �
� o 0 0 0 0. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
�� O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O�.
OO . O O O O O O O O O O O �- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O�`� o00 o u�i oo' o 0 o a o0 0 00 0 ov�iv�ioo ou�iou�i o o v4i
. p. . ,- ao o rn c� M �n o v v m cn v� �n
I� N N r tD p o M� N� O N �
. Q d N c0 � N � oi r t7 N p'/ �- � r � N r tD N 0 N
aU *- �v co
m
d N �
C
� `� o ° A >, �i E E �n
rn "w p. o, ='" L� A? v
� � m � a�i m � m o o � E �+ �
a % m � a u_ o, a n, � � ��. a .
. � � 'uZ � � ° � 3 s�j m >. � m. d ��
m m° im ;v 'm w n. i� E°' ?, � v� a E E'v_ c
` � � o � � E'- >, oti '�'- ti m'o m o m � c m g°'
'� ��o n. m ° w N+y c'o o m� c o E m N A: m a.
Q m �. '� X O p� ctl � C 0 il d.c( 01 J . . v. �. C � C O .
Y g m q� �� °� � o D � u°�� o'<L � E� y � m m�att� m°�'� p m �
�' �� �� .�c 3 3 d m Q m � v rn m m c Q o o rn� �`w m ti �> o �
U a c °� '�L m in in m'u. � N � m' m N °€� 3 y t� c U o w`� m� ¢ o
� m E.`9 �° 5`' c� o�� � m��° m a' ~ o m o j °o t0 u_ N a� m c � n.
m$ �' m:° E!3 o c o L' � ,� .c co Z m=� m.� � E E rn o m'9 �
� �¢ > a:9 m c W c:9 m t0 :9 m,�j U:9 m��' ;u o�. �. m> o�, N m m �� o
o m� o a y m m o � d o � o m co a� ro c a m a n iv
n. -, � a cn ,n a m a rn Y �n .o `—° � .o `—° V V .o ° � � � � � € � � � d �
�� t � m�� m a`L n a. c❑� m a� � a a�i o= d� p
o' �°fa � N a�i� u� a�i�� u> 3 �� �nzcnv�l-t-Oq� c.>o z
m y a
� `g � Z y
O O O O O O O O O O
= O O O O�O O O O O O
�O O O O O O O O O O
'Q O O O O O O O O � N
p m m o v_ •- �n o m m co
F- 5 o V' r M� N 0 D
V' r N N
O
O
UI � � � � o
Q N
'� o
M
O O O O
t,. � � O � � O O O
N
.0 h. h ti c��i
O t0 t0 c0 V
n n' n� co
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
y "� O o o � � o 0 0 0
o a o ro ri o o c�i ri ri
0 N ONi O�i 'd � N O O�i rn
N� � T� N N N
0
� N � r � � � p
O 'nI O
N � o
U a;
M 'Z1
� QI
ro
'O QI
m
�
N O
o 'r' U'
t��i IUL N
aa
N
� �
0 T m
�
N lL
a ,�
a
o O
o •- (9
N LL (p
aa
� o,
W p
N o
O �`+
a �
O a
aV
�i � � � � �i � �i �
O O O O
� O � � O O O
M M M W
cMD t�D � O
N N N r
r r- '- (h
O
0
� � � � � o
0
u7
m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
� N h O ' b O O
� m O 'C 'P 'V� �C
W � t� n r
0
�) � � � � �I � �) o
0
0
rn
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m rn o v� u�i o m �
O'C r f7 � N O
� N
�
� E
m
w
o_ y E
rn,�e n. N. E o'
0
itl > a
m
E a � N o
0
L N� N C a G N
q�o ro o ro E �
N p, N
� o V w � c € E M
p. rn ii o w t- �o 0
C m m Q G 'C '.�—�- � O �
� U L
N
E� m o�€ � w E N c
O�~ � �>, ro :9 =N a
� t N N � F... .�
ar v m F- >. � m`m 4
> a� °' `-�'�am c� o 0
p ° v .n L E $S, 'o ° .o .n a
No'._�-i in Ei"nC9Q t�nin �
N N = F�-
�
f�
�
O O O O
p O O O
:°'onrnu�i �
p C�r�rn o
F" � [� o') tV O
LL � � N N
O O O O
O O O O
0 0 0 0
QIv o m �
� t� tD N �f1
W fD O N
N N (7 (O
O O O O
O O O O
t� O O O O
tl O � t�D r
O �O N N t`)
h O m N
O O
O O
� O O
� ,Npl O O
o `N m rn
N (7 p> pj
O O O O
N O O O O
oal000 0
o �rnu>o v
N(�) aD c7 Oi N
O O
O O
� ,� O ' O
m
� a v a
r. r
0 0 0 0
O O O O
y� N ti n n
v 4'v� �n c� v
N � �D tA �
Il..
�mJ
t� O O O
r � (o,�� � o 0 0
� �,J o v�i u�i
y N lL tf! V' W N
$ a a� �+ a
�
� � �
N �I ,
U �
N LL �
a
�
�
ti < � � � �
O r
N
y N lL a
� 0'
m
�
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O� O O O O
O ��� O O O O
O V t7 N fD
Q N a a � N m V
N
O O
O O
y O � O
0
p U C o O
N LL O fD c(?
� a m � a
z
� q � o 0 0 0
� � � O O O O
O a N O��O O
O
n' n-Un.�ma`i o
� � � p O�i O�i � N
p a N
0
' O O O
m m ti
.�- N N
� � � I �
� O O O
M (O Qf
m�% eo
�ri n ri
O O O
O O O
' O O O
c�i ri �
7 rn
� N t0
� � � I i
� � � i r
� O O O
� ri oi
� `�n, v
� � N
� � � I r
' ' O O
7 <
� �
0 0
� O O
� �
Ntm[1
N N
� � � � �
� o 0 0
O O O
m m r
r N N
N
n
0
N
w° ° °
O � �
a 4 4
�Y o 000 o a o00 0
LL N� N N N �-- N N N N F-
O O O O
O O O O
0 0 0 0
ooci o
m � m r
� � N 7
O O O O
O O O O
M � N N
co �o o vi
N N C9 m
O O O O
O O O O
O � f`�') �
� V
r�o� ov
O O O
O O O
' O O O
m rn �
v N n
p O O O
O O O O
0 0 0 0
rnv, o v
� � � N
O O
O O
O � O
v v
� �
O O O O
O O O O
O O O O
m o
N n o 0
u� r� o m
� N � ti
� O O O
`�d' � N
rn o
� � o O
V V_
� �
0 0
� O O
� m
LLm'/ lafl
� N
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O O O O
M N � �
O N N �
O O
O O
O � O
� m
Y �
0 0 0 0
p O O O
n � N O
co ,- m r_
ri m ni �n
m rn N 7
0 0 0 0
N N N f-
p O O O O O
� m v rn M v n
� � f�'7 N 1-� r �
V
5
�
� N N N N
e O �O O pj
E a`a`n`. N
N
.i !0 t0 {0 N � m
�i �. �. �. � H N O
0 � O O O t!] N �'
N N �
� � N N N a U- d
� t9 a o
D �J N N N I- N I-�
____.. _........
p O O O O
� rn o v v
u�i � `� n
rn
0
0
N
m
v
m Q o>
a
O � O
N � N
�' s
0 10
y � O
� E c
u'� � �
U � �
N �p
O1
C
� � m � m
0 �
� ~ � F'�� � N U
N L O D� � T Q.
R a m °' p, �
a= n. ° _ �'�
� x �n
O
O
m
0
�
0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
�- tD N �D N
u°'i � N m o
N N N N
19
O F D O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 o d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o d o 0 0 0 0 0 o d o
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Oi O tD f0 (� N W W �f! V O N h aJ tn O �t 1n t0 c0 N
f0 O fD N CI '- .- �- t0 f0 V' N �
'?
O 0 �
N N N N N
m ' � a: o m
O m ?. � V � N U'
m N o �?
m� � � o n N N° c� � N c
C O. 'D N N 0 N C� il N N� lL
N d �
�� U1 C C N � � O. � C C � O
�,o � o o � u O � o 0 o y o w
N 00
tn � m ti 3 0. a� ? o E c o ,� t',> E a
mm ro O.a ¢i �� G c0 N d N ,`p � d. N N N
�,
ro v�cy �v �� Va a� m a�
om� �m v� ��� c.c� d°� �c w3 a
N�€ � o o m� m¢ E E c o o� E_� E
O pl U! UI U C L C L y p }::. C) C L p y� U
oHN Ho e�� �. o a a°12 €� a;,v,o
�`m v`w � m a�i w a�i m E E o m m°1 E v� � m
'C v v v X w>>> y� u J'3R �> u� r x
c c c ._
F-�� �t% 4 ao`�.. a�cn inri� ¢ ain¢z t�
.. ... ... ...-
�.�
' � � • �
TO: Finance, Development and Environment Committee
�ROtVI: Nigel D. Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning & Environment (726.8187)
Sl1BJEG`T: 2007-2013 CAPITAL IIViPROVEMEtVT PROGRAM
d. Program Approval
DATE: November 27, 2005
Concurrent with the public review process pertaining to the environmental and affecfed municipality
review of the draft 2007-2013 CIP, additional information has become available regarding the
estimated costs for projects listed in the CIP and several new projects have been added. The projects
that are to be included in the New Projects Allowance have also been listed. A copy of the revised
CIP spreadsheet and narratives are attached for your review.
COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED
RECOMMEND TO THE FULL COMMISSION ADOPTION OF THE 2007-2013 CIP AS MODIFIED;
AUTHORIZE STAFF TO HAVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS PREPARED AND ADVERTISE FOR
BIDS FOR THE 2007 PROJECTS; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CONDUCT FURTHER STUDIES AS
APPROPRIATE AND DEVELOP PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 2008 PROJECTS,
UTILIZING CONSIJ�TANT SERVICES, TO REFINE THE PROJECTS FOR INCLUSION IN THE
FOLLOWING YEAR'S PROJECT CATEGORY; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CONDUCT STUDIES. AND
DEVELOP PRE�IMINARY PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FUR THE 2009 PROJECTS UTILIZING
CONSULTANTS AS NECESSARY; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO INITIATE APPROPRIATE
DOCUMENTATION TO APPLY FOR FEDERAL, STATE AND PFC FUNDING; RECOMMEND TO
THE COMMISSION APPROVA� OF THE FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (2009-2013)
AS A GUIDE TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR THEIR REVIEW, PURSUANT TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE METROPOLITAN INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK GUIDELINES; AND
AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS.
C
�
a
C
N
�
7 �',,,,,,.
O
�
Q.
�
N
�+
.�
N
U
C
@
y � o0
� � O
O
Q 0 N
E °'
++
C
m
d cUi o
O
N
Q. 0.
�
�
�
LO
CL
C
G1
�.
O
( - )� o
,+��' o
z
� N
ti
0
0
N
� o
a
rn
c
v
�a o E
0 0� z L°
�- � c o `'
� �
a � � �.�
3 a � �
CO ?. �
c m �
0 J C O �
=Y� ;�
m � y v
c � � p cA
N
0 � � T Z
c c
� �
0
0
0
0
O
O
ti
v�
0
0
0
0
0
0
ti
vi
0
O
O
O
O
�
M
tft
O
O
O
0
0
u�
E13
0
0
� o
0
0
u�
�
0 0
0 0
0 0
O �
t� �
�
0 0
0 0
0 0
o �
r
�
O O p O
O�) � c*pJ M �
c7 �- r
� � �
fF} EA Vi
O O O O
O O O O
N O O N
�3
� � �
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 o ci
N N � M
� � � �
O
O
O
O
0
0
M
�
I O O O
O O O
0 0 0
� a o
�' tV CV * * • * •
�i �}
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
<t o 0
� N N r � r � a
Ef} 69
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
p O O
eh O O
�' N N + e � * +�
�r �s
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
�t o 0
� N N � � + t +
69 ff}
0 0 0
� O O
� N N * * * * *
' ffT b9
O O O
C? O O
O O o
d' !11 O
�' N � �. + ��� ��.�..
EF} H9� . . �.
0 0 o I
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
� � o
� N s t� r i
� fF}
O N N E
d � � � �
J .J � � � . ul O
N C1 � p o Q d � d
Q1 . �`' r" U M M
C O � Q
a o o � E � a.ro °� �
N N C . Lb eN- .N- Ol , a C� a N
� ��� O �tA p N N O E� � 1`C � C ' G C� y ro NS
� U c o- �O a� � o o�'.E
a c�"o m°� a�i �� ro c ��� o N� °� ° :9 � cG o a o
c c a � a � a o :G L m f� a . v� tA �
�. o oa ° E :n4�� [CtC m a_xf .. @'� m o� ��.n
'm �m c � a m c E c c:n �• �.a ar .c :o ,c (� o�tS
� � N N'G ,+ X v E m� C'� i'.�R 'a L d LL L N Q' L N � 5` (y C fII -C I
� c C m � � � rn � ,� m .c p � .� � o,, `-� � � c � _ � '� � � � �
,y. . o. Cj o v, d � � - - � ro c�S � o ,c�� € �
m LE° >>� c.� E>' a o ro rn � n. :o :o �., �-°� > � � E m c� '� � �� m v
o m c.c c`� �.% .t0c ro > o��� m a� y�- N
3 a• a� o�� 3 m¢�' '� > Tia �w�� �,v
� n`. m m Z °' U Fm- ro�� c;Q ,� ��� o!S o� =' �l 2� c c c c.c` .�
= c c o - m a� m - a� m ,a • :a °' �. m;v '' Q co
ro o a� m'� U ro�° .c m E E fD �° E E`.9 m io .',� �`� � c �€ � E.� o
o .«. v v o 3 o m a a� m o ca . m m o ,= E o s� ` 5 �v m a� � o 0
.n t6 m m.o �'R .fl .c >>.n "c >>.a N y.o d c � m 1- F- F- S,n N
�. m w m� V m� d�' �o ro� � m m� a �� � �o m� � �
(Q � fY 0..' ln � f- (A OG Q d LL (n T.d d fA �_(/)' „d� _7 � F- � N
ca a ca c y �
z° � a a F �
�r
C
l0
a
,.,
c
d
N '
O
a
�
N
�+
.Q
ro
V
C
N
'� �
�o
0
Q 0 N
�a
C
d
d a�i o
> •-� p
N
aa`
H
v�
#
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
� n
� I
c
0
.�
�.o
m
-� c
� a
� c
� >
m
4 �
m �
� �
�Q
E rn a
� __
m � :�
° � �
a. m °°
� � �
Q Y O O
�. N Z (!.1
aQ
��
y m
D'�
�a
0
0
0
0
0
<!'
d3
�
i o � o
0 0
i o 0 0'
}� � o
� � �
N
t
O
a
.O
� o
01 0
� o
.�
0 0
a o
.n i
O
V
N
�O �
Q O
N �
� O
O
tC)
O �
rn
c
`o
c
ti
�
0
o Q Q
0
0 o p
0
mc� , � �»
0
0
0
0
0
m
Ef)
0
0
0
0
0
'�'
� N
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
� c�o
� � �
N
O
.a
o �' Q
o .o 0
.� o
0
0 0, �
�
�r .o
O
U
N
O
00 0. o
o v_> o 0
O
O. � O O
fFl, � . � � . O
c �
'a
c
ti
� �
a o 0
? o 0
n o 0
� ��
� o o " •
0 0 �
0 0 / �
h r ( N
.= �- \ N
64 Et} �
�
a
� o 0
� o 0
M M CO
�
tV N
Ff? 69
0 0 0 �
0
0
0 0 0 0
O O M ' O
N ' � �
v> �r
0 0 0 �
0 0 0 �
0
0 0 0 �
� � � h
� � �i
N
L
O
$ �
0 0 0 �
0 0 o v �
0
0 00 0 00'` o
v ,d co 0 0 0
�» ey v�� �`! o m a m
T M
v� m �
� � � O
U
�` 'p
� o00 °' o
� O O O N p
N O O O� p
�,� o00 � o
rn o rn o M
� ��� m � .
. c
'v
c
�
� $
� o 0
0
� o 0
0
� � M
�? �
� '
�
N
�
O
n
o a
o `o
o `
� a
m
.a
_O �ii .
N
O
0 0.
O. �
O �
O
� o
rn
c
: 'v
�
ti
�
0
�
c
0
'O =
aXi � � '�
c �
� � � J
�? � M B
�' �- aNi E m 'N
W X S' °� o o � a�i a�
� � � �� � � % c a a�i
� ... ' O �
a�i a�i m �� c c c ro �°� �� � ��
0 0 0� � -a m�a �m m o�� c m°' o � o�, 2
m m a� m�.c o_�� � m�° ��� m �,.�9_ � c
m�Oo�cJo m mtNN :n rnm���¢`. �' m� �
�,m � ��� ����a �:��Ma� = m�MN
�QKt<L c � o � �. � S. c000a c .�.N
; � rn rn rn � >, - � '� ro >, � �, [o � g � v c •- �r
� o c c c � ro .� ro � � _�o . � � ` m >, >. >, ap m •� . � y, �„ �
U v°a v m 3 0 � 2 E o o c� � m m ro o m ro.�
' � � 9 '� m > > .� °� n � � � � m �' � > c c c � :n W m > c c .n co
� ammma�cn Z,¢on���u� c¢sa`�.crc���nrn �wa��u� �.
Q, . . . � U . . LL . . � . � J ' �.
N
�
�
C
l0
a
r
c
d
E
>
O
O.
�
cC
�+
�Q.
�
u
C
d c
� � G
L �''',
Q. .0 � p .....�..���
� a, ° cv
�a
a-'
C
d
� � �
ti
N O 0 N
v �a
I
0 0
0 0
0 0
O O
ff} b9
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
� r
�{} V3
o �
o �
o �
o c
o �
N <
�J �
a o 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 � o
ss E» �R �
v�
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 oa oa
N O O CO O�
h• i-- r d' M
ER E!J Ef3 f�} ':
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O �
� 00 O tA
� � r N o0
� �
v3
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O
O O O � ��!) N
•- 00 a� 00 N
. Ff3 H9 CO Ef} Qj
�r �i �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N � N � � '�d' r�� M
�sr � �s v3 � s��s �'
c
o �
m
� a � c �
-� C N (9 � f�V
L �'Y m c w —
� � o � � Q =
mU�� �° �'��.
� tn .O � = � G
'O �� a G > >+ N
a� o..o + U 3 aEi
m m o o•o ¢� m
n- m C��IL ^a.� � d
�
w I
0
a
�
�
O O O
Q O O
O O O
N r�o ��fJ
H3 N E9
vi
m
�
d
rn
c
� E
._
m rn
N tp `O
z o o a-
� c c o
v�� N N 'N
E y ro � � m
� w
E � � v��i � G� � o
o '� c 'ro �
� � � � �' �' � � N
V� c
'C N � €. . . � ,�'C . Q. �
o c ;� � v v o `� V
e- a� m c c 3'o
� � C N
Q � � � � - � 'Q . � �C
tY. —
� � ro c� cn u� °' °� �
� � 'S 'G' o Z` o�� a� c
o ��.,�� E 1 V�. ro = co
:Y � m w m rn m a �
� ..roacn Yv) .Sv� � � N
tl=) a Q J: t� tA ��
m m�
v
� �
O O
O O
O O
O O
� �
� �
0 0
0 0
0 0
O O
N c�0.
�r d.
�
a
0
0
0
0
0
�ri
v�
O
O
O
O
O
�
M
�
0 0 0
0 0 0
O O - O
� � � '
ffl ffl
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O O O O
O O d �
� � � �
c
0
� a�
�
� ^ o
y • U
c 'ro Qy Q
a� o E v Q
a
� rn � �
ro c = �,° rn m
U o. � U o E = c �
�
o '�'�- _ a , � � aEi � o
� Q'.rn m v � p o a w
�'� '� m v', � o. o E
a� �- c c .ac � E>'°o
�rn�.QQ N � �,�c� o� �
c
° �tA rnrn= o� � �• � c�
� � 'p .0 � O N
n' �� °� � �� p c: d c ti`ni 'c
�.o cvv �
N� �m'm "� �' N � � �
�� a rn oi � °i �€ m E m U�
��= ro m a Z rn�n„'S � v
a � U p � m �n
v
a�i w� Q Q'� � � � c:c :c � a
�US��(n pQJW(�U��
�
m d
o }+
� Z
�
4-
0
M
�
N
a i
� I
0
0
N '
N
�
C
N
y m ao
y o
�o;
� p N
�a
E
C
d
� V n
� � O
O O N
G � �
O Q O
o a o
O O �
O O� (y
�r
� �
0 0 oofl ao
� � O c�0 N� � U
�} E9 � N E/3 fFk 69� EF}
64
0
0
0
0
�
�r
O
. p
O
O
O
�
0
0
0
O
O
N
6F}
0 0
0 0
0 0
� N
v �
�
� � � �
O h tf7 �
� N
� � E!f
0 0 0 0 0
o c�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N�� ! o O � O
� T M m
�- � G�j � - � �p bg
6H Efi 69 6q �/i
O O O O O
a o 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
000'uio
O O O h O
co r. rn � m
�r e�r �=
�r v� �
0
0
O
0
0
v_
m
Ff}
O O O O O p O
M O�O � � O �N . �
ff1 V3 H3 � � �-- t- . �ry'
�} Wi d3
0
0
0
O
O
N
Ef}
O O o o O o
0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0
CO O O M O O
� � � � � �
O
O
O
O
O
N
�
O O O O �
O O O p / �
a0 O O Op ( � �'
'7 � ln s- �`.. N
f!T 69 64 � N
a
0 0
0 0
a o
O O
O O
00 O
d' �
ER fli
0 0
0 0
0 0
v o
(� T
�
0 � �
M � O
�i v� �
�
0 0
0 0
U) O
({} �--
6fi
0 0
0 0
� O
�
�
�i
x.
• a
0 o O O 'n
O O O O 'O
O O O O N
O O O O �
c�0 M h W �
� � �r- O O
ff?��
m
O_.
�
�
y
� � d J
O y � � � G
� � a��i � ` � o � = 3 °
� 4'-Ol . O� . y,N„ , . tn n' p O� � C N O
E � n � c' >. � � O cA � c � �p o
� � � c� �� oi p m .�' o� � m 0 � E � c�
o. � c ° c ° o c ��° v ro� c °- �E �:� E� N � c°�' in ��c � �
Q1 y E c� °� c� t� tr � E�° a ° a� a� m a`�i ��'� m N o m � o c N �
� � � N L O � � � � � '� m � �. � . � G C m D � LT1 a m � � > N � N m (n O
.a� c�i !� °� ,c�i o c c a �� � �[C m m m m�� m -� � v m� , a� E i� �
U N � � c .� � � w � � o � � � � � U t� E o � � u. c � � � Q � �o c C� � c `�c '�
r� �� �� m v o m� � c a� �° C 9 >> ... N m � m�
G� �°t l i J � w `C o 3 c °> =.c � a c c> io m o� m� � m >. �v c
Q.c .m u. o o � o ro �- U ��c C� o� o m o� u. � �- � o ro W E'. � o� m'� � o�
€ m a� �� W o��. c�� � o�0 � �' �� N E O� m c o m� m�>, c�� a�i E€ a v m
.~c .t m �� �°� U v m�° c� >, a� N��� Q o E Q� ��� o� N� � m m. m 0 Z'
,` v
°' °' >. -i � � � � . o o :o o �° t0 � E p .o � -m ,= ro .m � o � N � .. c � . N � � '� � a � o :°
,a.= 3 otL ��u-ICd a�UYS$,Y�i.€ o�$ o o.mdn.v�dm �UUa ��-O c a� E m m.o
�� � a� E c�-in 3iiUtAl�1 f�i-u_ UOu�. z o.�� m�.� > c�
�� � e'> > otn p rp C�4U<tQuJ�=Q�t4
. .: . . � �I J � � �' Q LL = U �L d Z . . .. .. . " . � . ..
i��
�� +
o �'.
0
N •
� �
a o
O
� ti
N
�
e=
N I
a �
w �
C
N
� �i
N '
"i
O
�
� li
N
a+
.�
IQ
V
I� �
�
d
d b �
'� � O
� � N
�a
.r
c
d
0 0�
� ti. N
aa
E
O O
O O
O O
0 0
0 0
N N
� �
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
p O
O O
N N
fR Vi
0 0 0
0 0 0
O O O
o O o
tt7 <!' W
� � �
O O O O O C
O O O ON � u'
� � � N � �
� � �
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
� o 0 0 0 0
� o 0 0 0 0
� rn o<r��n
� O �t (�
0 tii �T 69 fR
m �
Y �
�
� Q � Q
� u�i o «�
U7 tt) M CO
EA 69 � �
m
m �
� �
<L .c � E
o. ,�
.� c� fA � ,�N,
� O N
� N N � (1, E
� E� � t0 0 o N o
� tif a„ m:a N Q.
a U � �� ��° o a E
E O m� O O'.0 N � � ��N
� C� � '�.'i c
� y c c�� c� o � o�� c
4 € a
° v � � � � € � o �u � ti '�
a� F� F� �?•`- F�- V p ro� N� u
OCl � m ` � N ` � N � � � T � C `
E o m m m a� ro� € o, ro c�°
o�vvW av Q'� °' �,� ° 3
V �7 A E-- E p N
�' p_! J C� (Y � J m U1 ,- L T(Ji i� Q F
r� a �
a
N � E
�
N N =
O O O O O O
, O O O O O O
O CP � m m
� a0 d� N c+7 N�
� � � v� �i
0
0
0
0
0
d
�
�--
�
�
�
a
0
0
r>
Oi
�
O
O
O
O
O
�
N
�
O O O
O O O
O O C7
O O O
vva�o
i� M o
cD r- a0
���
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0'
O O
r- n
ff3 ER
N
�
c a
o � m �
N O �
C > p7 O (A � C
.€ aoi •� .�0 0�(. 0_ € o
7. N C� !� N C�.0 y y m
� m .a o � � a� °� m � �
a a m� E c Y i � a� .c
� ui >. m s o � �' o. U'
� ��UU'�- m
C� J m� p J C� j
O � o "' � N !!1 O � �
� v Y m� N S` C
� �- o �'m � m� � d o
cA �U�mC�mtn �4C�.
n a
� c
J —�
N
m I
N
L
a
N
C
N
�
rn
�
v'
c
J
0
.n
�
�
fPr�
9
:
]
�
9
��
o�
tfy
�
O
tc> '
N
� '
a '
f
2007 Capital lmprovement Program
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
November, 2006
Runway Deicing/Holding Pad program
Runwav 12L Snow Melting Pad Expansion $1,700,000
This project provides for the expansion of the Runway 12� snow storage/melting area inciuding the
� replacement of the existing snow melter with a.three burner melter. These improvements wi(I provide for a
larger snow storage pad and increased melting capacity that will result in increased efficiency of the pad.
Taxiway C/D Complex Construction .
Taxiwav C/D Complex $8,200,000
This project is the third phase of a multi-phase pragram to reconstruct and reconfigure Taxiways C and D
between Runway 12�/30R and Runway 12R/30L. This project provides for the realignrnent of Taxiway C
befween Taxiways A and Taxiway C6 and the reconstruction of pavement bounded by new alignments of
Taxiways A, B, C and D.
Airfield Rehabilitation Program
Airside Bituminous Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program to construct or reconstruct bituminous pavements within the Air Operations Area. Two
projects areas are planned for implementation in 2007. One involves construction of bituminous shoulders
on Taxiway R from Taxiway R8 to Taxiway R3. The second provides for the mili and overlay of the
bituminous roadway in the tunnel under Runway 12R/30L.
Pavement Rehabilitation — Aprons _ $2,300,000
This is an ongoing program to replace sections of concrete pavement in. the aircraft operational areas that
� have deteriorated to a point where maintenance is no longer a viable option. This year's project will
_ replace approximately 6,000 square yards of apron pavement at gates C1 and D6 including associated
gate fuel hydrant systems...
Pavemen.t Joint Seatinq Repair $800,000
An ongoing program to provide for the resealing af joinfs in existing concrete pavements. The project also
provides for limited crack and surface repair. This year's project is located adjacent to Concourses C, D
and G including adjacent taxiways.
Runway Rehabilitation Program
Pavement Rehabilitation — Runwav 12R/30L Seq. 2 $17,500,U00
This project provides for the reconstruction of the middle section of Runway 12R/30L located between
Runway 4/22 and Taxiway A4. Reconstruction of two separate segments has been completed in previous
years with Segment 2 being the final section of pavement requiring reconstruction.
Terminal Rehabilitation & Development Program
International Arrivals Facilities $200,000
This project provide.s for improvements to the International Arrivals Facility at both the Lindbergh and
Humphrey Terminals as required.
Landside Rehabilitation & Repair Program
Landside Pavement Construction $400,000
An ongoing program to reconstruct the airport's roadways and parking lots. A specific project has not been
identified at this time. Pavements will be evaluated in� the spring of 2007 to determine whether a: pavement
repairproject is needed.
Parkinq Structure Rehabilitation $1,500,000
! � An ongoing program. to maintain the integrity of the airporYs multi level parkmg structures. Projects.
typically include concrete repair, joint sealant replacement, expansion joint repairs, concrete sealing and
lighting improvements. A Parking Facility Maintenance, Rehabilitation and Management I'rogram is
currently being prepared and will define the scope of the projects to be completed in 2007.
11/27/06 1
TerminallVlodifications $2,000,000
Each year, MAC staff compiles a list of "maintenance" projects that are beyond the capability of the MAC's (
maintenance siaff. These projects are then prioritized and complefed either as a series of contracts or as \
purchase orders. A list was compiled for 2006 and any projects that did not fit wifhin the budget will be
carried over into 2007. New projects wili be discussed in early 2007.
Summarized below are fhe categories of the projects that are included in the Terminal Modifications
program:
Buildinq Exterior Rehabilitation *
This is a continuatian of the program to rehabilitate the exferior of the Lindbergh l'erminal and other
MAC buildings inciuding roof and curtain wail rehabilifation.
Terminal Electrical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address electrical issues in the terminais due to age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability.
Terminal Mechanical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address .mechanical issues in the terminals due to age and deterioration of the
exisfing systems or modificafions necessary for improved reliability.
Termina! Miscellaneous IVlodifications *
An ongoing program to update and remodel areas within the terminals to keep abreast with changing
requirements. This may be accomplished through a series of small �individual projects to meet the
requirements of the various tenants or may be conso(idated into a single project.
Humphrev Terminal & MSP Carnpus Modifications *
An ongomg program to modify or remodet areas within fhe West Terminal Complex, the Humphrey
Terminal and other facilities around the MSP Campus to meet the needs of the various tenantslgeneral (�
public/MAC departments utilizing�the facilities
*Historically, projecfs have been defined for each of these five categories. With reduced dollars
available to fund non-revenue generating projects, a total dollar allocation of $2,000,000 has been
allocafed to fund the highest priority projects within any of these project categories.
Reliever Airport Program
Airlake
North Buildina Area Allevwav Rehabilitation $400,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways; aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstcuction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will ihclude fhe second phase
in the rehabilitation of the pavements in the Northeast Building Area.
South Buildinq Area Development $2,700,000 **
This project is the second phase in the program to develop a new South Building Area. This year's project
will include placement of aggregates and bituminous pavement along with minor drainage improvements
and general site clean up. It may also provide for the installation of sanitary sewer and water main. The
paving of a section of 225th Street to connect to Cedar Avenue is also included in this project.
�*Funding for tiiis project to be provided by others
Anoka County - Blaine
Pavement Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program ta rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surtaces to a smooth,
even condition and.improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of portions of Taxiway G and Taxiway A, connectors E1 and E2 to Runway 18/36 and crack sealing in the i�
west annex and west, easf and south building areas. ' � .._
11l27/06 2
Runwav 18/36 Liqhtinq Replacement � $250,000
Tests of the runway lighting wiring have indicated that the wiring has deteriorated to the point that
replacement is required.
Crystal
Obstruction Removals $320,000
This project provides for the removal of trees that have become obstructions to the Crystal air space.
Costs include location surveys, appraisals, negofiations and tree removal.
Pavement Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
biturninous overiays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project wili include the reconstruction
of pavement sections of Taxiways A and E that are close to failure.
Lake Elmo
East Buildinq Area Development $2,100,000 **
This project includes the grading and paving for alleyways, an access road and connecting taxiway for a
riew East Building Area, inciuding taxiway pavement marking and reflectors. This project will aiso include
storm water management and, if necessary, wetland mitigation.
**Funding for this project to be provided by others.
Pavement Rehabilitation $300,000 �
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons} through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surFaces to a smooth,
even condition and irnprove overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of the no�theast end of Taxiway 4/22 and any necessary airfield pavement crack repairs.
( � St. Paul
_ Bavfield Street Rehabilitation $200,000
This year project provides for the completion of the rehabilitation of the segments of Bayfield Street
impacted by the perimeter dike construction between the MAC Administration Building and the south end
cu( de sac including the installation of the final wear course of asphalt pavement.
Flood Protection Dike $22,500,000
This year's project provides for th� construction of the full perimeter dike including procurement of
temporary deployment walls, installation of permanent sheet pile walls, earthen berms and landscaping.
The project also includes the construction of a storage building for temporary wall materials.
Joint and Crack Repairs $100,000
The pavement subgrade at the St. Paul Downtown Airport is extremely poor. An ann.ua! joint and crack
repair program has therefore been initiated to maintain pavement strength and pavement life.
MAC Buildinq Maintenance $100,000
An ongoing program to provide for facility modifications to ensure continued efficient operation of buildings
or rnodifications necessary to meet the requirements of the tenants.
Runwav Safetv Area $2,400,000
This project consists of improvements to the end of all runway safety areas to meet current FAA
requirements. This year's project is the second phase in the project and will include relocation of Taxiway
D at the Runway 9 end, relocation of Taxiway E north of Runway 27 and new PAPIs for the Runway 27
approach. This work is being done to coincide with the impacts fram the perimeter dike project.
Miscellaneous Field and Runway Program
Miscellaneous Construction $400,000
( ) An ongoing program to consolidafe various incidental items beyond the capabilities af the maintenance
' personnel, projects too small to be accomplished independently or to handle airside problems requiring
repair which come up unexpectedly.
11/27/06
Miscellaneous Landside Program �
Centrai Alarm/Monitorina Svstem/Fiber Optic Cabie Installation� $250,000
This pro�ect wili provide a centralized monitoring system consolidating data and alarms from several facility �
systems info a higher level acquisition and alarm display system. Previous projects have aiready installed �
a fiber optic backbone and associated communication hub rooms throughout the �indbergh Terminal and
between the Lindbergh and Humphrey Terrninais and have relocated the Lindbergh TerminaPs main
communications infrastructure room and a dafa transport system. This is a continuation of the program
that started in 2003 and will include adding monitors #o the #ug doors, the groundwater surnp pumps in the
Lindbergh Terminal and to the automatic doors thraughout the Lindbergh and Humphrey terminals.
Humphrey Parkina Structure Expansion $4,600,000
This projecf provides for the expansion of the Humphrey Parking Structure to provide an additional 4,550
parking spaces. The existing parking structures continue to fill up on a regular basis and additional parking
will be required ahead of the expansion of the Humphrey Terminal under Phase 1 of the 2020 Development
Plan_ The ramp structure and building core finishes projects were bid in 2006. This year's project will
provide for all site work.
New Projects Program �
Lindberqh Terminal Sprinkler Svstem $3,000,000
Changes in the state building code require that the terminals be fully sprinkled. The Lindbergh Terminal
will be sprinkled as renovation work is completed.
Enerqv Savinqs Proiects $1,000,000
A program was initiated in 2002 to provide for the implementation of projects that would save the
Commission energy costs in its operating budget. Discussions wifh both Xcef and Reliant have identified
additional projects that are eligible for energy saving rebates and will save the Commission additional
energy costs.
Chiller PumpNariable Speed Drive Upqrade $1,000,000
This project will provide a new 600 horsepower chilled water pump . to replace the two existing 250 �;
horsepower pumps. This project will also replace the existing 4160-volt starters on three .chillers with
variable speed drives. The variable speed drive retrofits will provide energy cost savings and may qualify
for a rebate from Xcel Energy.
Landside Concessions Development $1,100,000
The Commission .approved a$2.2M CIP adjustment in 2005 to develop five landside concessions. This
project provides for the concession work that needs to carry over to 2007.
VMS Hiqhwav Siqns $650,000
Landside Operations has requested that iwo variable message signs (VMS) be installed along the highway
system that would provide travelers with information on parking at the airport.
Airport Lane/34th Avenue Access Reconfiauration $800,000
This access from 34 Avenue and Airport Lane does not meet current traffic engineering standards. This
project will realign the access to conform to standards for similar types of intersections.
Concourse E Roof Replacement $2,DOO,OdO
This project provides for the replacement af the roof an Concourse E as the existing roof has reached its
useful life and repairs are no longer economically. feasibie.
MSP Fuel ConsorEium Modifications $600,000
The MSP Fuel Consortium operates the.air(ine fuel system that was insfalled by the MAC. The Consortium
has requested fhat upgrades to the system are required over the next several years. Projects #hat have
been �equested include installation of a load rack/test stand, installing a low point sump on Concourse G
and inifiating a two year program to upgrade its emergency generator. The Fuel Consortium will reimburse t%
MAC for these costs. _ . _ _ . ...
11/2'7/06
Post Road Taxi Lot Entrance/Exit Improvements $200,000
This project wili add one entrance and one exit #o the taxi hoiding lot on Post Road. Currently, 2,040 taxis
per day enter and leave this facility. If one lane fails, automated control of the taxis terminates. Police
officers and Landside agents must then manually confrol taxis untii the system is brought back on line.
New Proiects Allowance
An allowance has been established for new projects that have been requested:
Fieid Maintenance Center Roof $650,000
A 2006 Roof Evaluation Report indicates that approximately 43,000 square feet of the roof of the
Field Maintenance Facility is in need of repiacement. This project wili provide for the insfaliation of
a new rock ballasted EPDM roof.
C Concourse Fioor Repair $500,000
The concrete floor on Concourse C has deteriorated to the point where replacement is required. A
program to replace the decking began in 2004 and this year's project will be the final the phase in
the program. The project is located adjacent to Gate C3.
Commission Chambers Upqrade $300,000
The MAC Commission Chambers/Grieve Conference Center has been in use for the last ten years
without substantial modification. This project will include upgrades to the audio, video, video-
conferencing and technology presentation equipment and interfaces in the Commission Chambers
and three conference rooms. The project will also provide new carpeting and furniture and
additional way finding signage. The project wiil be phased over two years with upgrades to the
audio technology proposed for 2007
Tuq Drive Floor Repair ` $800,000
The mernbrane waierproofing system on the tug drive floor is deteriorating and coming apart in
various areas or has been damaged allowing water to leak into work areas, electrical vault rooms,
the valet garage and other operational areas. The membrane system is nearing the end of its
designated life of 5 years and must fherefore be replaced in a phased program. It is proposed to
replace the membrane system over areas critica.( to terminal operations and life safety systems in
2007:
Food Courts Upgrade/Remodel $600,000
The Food Court projects include updating and remode(ing fixtures, furnishings, and equipment at
the A, F, C, and E Concourses food courts. This project is being implemented in conjunction with
significant tenant funded leasehold improvements initiated with the Concessions Transition Project.
The project will be phased over two years, with the E and F Concourse Food Courts scheduled in
2007 and the A and C Food Courts scheduled in 2008.
Communications Center Expansion $1,900,000
The existing Communications Center space is inadequate to meet the needs of the current staff as
well as future staffing needs. Existing equipment has not been upgraded since 1995 and there is a
need to make strategic investments in new electronic technology to maximize productivify.
Currently, the Comrnunications Center and Operations Center are located together on Concourse
E. Both departments are in need of additional operational space. A proposal to move both
departments to a common location is under study. The Communications Department would be
moved in 2007 with the Operations Department moving into the vacated space on an interim basis.
Remodeling of the space for Operations would be required and once Communications has
relocated. This project will be phased over iwo years. The facility build-out will occur in 2007 and
the equipment installation will be in 20Q8.
Securitv Improvements
Patro) Operations Center $1,000,000
The Airport Police Department staffs a Patrol Operations Center (POC) located on the
i j north end of the bag claim level at the Lindbergh Terminal. This facility provides
� administrative o�ce space for patrol sergeants and community service officers,
interrogation and booking rooms, a first aid room and two holding cells. The. Badging and
Lost and Found offices were previously located in this space but have been relocatecl. An
inferim remodel of these areas was completed in 2006 to provide some additional
11/27/06
11/27/06
administrative area. The proposed projecfi would provide additional remodeling and �
improvements�to the electrical and mechanical systems and woutd include a sally port on ,
the north side of the POC �
Perimeter Fence/Gate Barrier Svstem $1,200,000
This project is part of a phased program to strengthen the perimeter security fence and
airtield access gates. Proposed work includes the repiacement of the existing chain link
fence with a welded wire mesh fence. The new fence will be constructed on a concrete
retaining wall in areas susceptible to vehicle intrusions. Jersey barriers will be placed in
front of gates not in use and a hydraulic crash barrier will be constructed at one gate
location.
Post Road Fuel Farm Securitv improvements $850,000
The fuei farm on Post Road is a high security priority. The Police Department is
recommending that a physical security enhancement is needed to adequately protect the
site. This project will provide for the an improved perimeter security fence around fhe tank
farm to include the construction of 8-foot and 6-foot welded wire mesh fence on concrete
retaining walls or Jersey barriers. The project will also include the addition of gate barriers.
Concessions Revenue Development/Uparades $200,000
This project will fund miscellaneous upgrades (finishes, furniture, condiment stations, etc.), signage
and/or modified connections to utilities for the concession programs at the Lindbergh and
Humphrey Terminals.
Humphrev Terminal Duct Bank Installation $600,Op0
l"his project provides for the construction of an electrical duct bank from Service Road K to the
Humphrey Terminal and from 34'h Avenue west along Airpo�t �ane. The Duct bank will be used by
Xcel #o provide a redundant electrical feed to the Humphrey ?erminaL The cost of this project will
be funded by Xcel. �
Avava Buildinq Sprinkler Svstem/Roof $300,000
MAC has acquired the former Avaya building on 28th Avenue with the intent to re-lease the
building. Prior to putting the building on the market, a fire sprinkler sysiem must be installed and
the existing roof replaced. The sprinkler system is required according to MAC Standards that are
over and above any code requirements. A roof survey completed earlier this year indicates that a
new roof is required.
, Unallocated Allowance $1,700,OU0
A fotal of $10M has been allocated for new projects in 2007. There is currently $1,700;000 that
has nat been allocated and may be used to fund new work.
6
M� � �
� ,��\y��T
, � `J
�l
� ! ,' i
�� ./,�i-
�: I�� //
;';;I;� �;.
( f �Lf r;.
,I/r^7rb'"
./ f�
W ~ ` /�/
� � � `u�'� ___�_�
�' � `� , �� �
c� ��_ ,,,�
� �° ,f,,� W ; ���
r� f,� � �.r' �„1
%�ry r
� �//„f �
� � �l%
; ', '
� �
� � �r � �.
� . �� '� %
v i�: � ,1%�.
� ' ' I `�'j%
� �" ' �� ,�i�'`..,, o
� ,
C� � l, � �. . � ,
. f f` . . �Ft�'^ .
� �.' a�� - `i l�� � � � l
'� /� j / � / ��---' % � %� �_:_- '�;�
/ ' � `� -� � i
,., (�(�Y f ��,,�v�r �' ��
l .....
r.. ��', � ,. � �
i I ; L , , + i���/'' �'�
�� ,.,1,,�' /
� ,�-- �\ � .. [� •��
��� � `'f� � n °� � o
_ ���� � �
- ��.� =.�
c�l � ..:
�"-."_'..'T� �x .. �. '• l._.� .i � .�1
:�. � t.�.�-„{=="�.' ?'� :'_'�.'_" ��� ��.-�=' f• - r `
�� .-��'� i ,� .-ar����.�"�,t,�-.!'i� ✓
�_C F- �n � _L t� ;-�'-�-�.�—;/�,�i
��.
2008 Capital improvement Program
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
November, 2006
Noise Mitigation Program
Residential Sound Insulation (60-64 2007 DNL) Pilot $3,200,000
There wiii be a series of projects to provide noise mitigation for single family residential houses within the
certified 2007 DNL 60-64 noise contour. The mitigation will consist of a mechanical package that wiil
provide air conditioning for homes that do not have air conditioning. Residentiai homeowners would be
subject to.a copay based on the foilowing percentages: 64 DNL — 10%. 63DNL — 20%, 62 DNL — 30%, 61
DNL — 40%, 60DNL — 50%. Prior to proceeding with this program, a pilot program will be rolled out. The
pilot program will be used to help determine manageabie production goals for the program and to help
determine out year project budgets
Taxiway C/D Complex Construction
Taxiwav C/D Compiex $2,000,000
This project is the fourth phase of a multi-phase program to reconstruct and reconfigure Taxiways C and D
between Runway 12L/30R and Runway 12R/30L. This project provides for the reconstruction of pavement
bounded by new alignments of Taxiways C, D, P and Q.
Airfield Rehabilitation Program
Airside Bituminous Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program to construct or reconstruct bituminous pavements within the Air Operations Area.
Inspection of taxiway pavements and other airfield areas will be made to determine whether or not a
bituminous repair project is requi�ed.
_ Pavement Joint Sealinq $500,000
( 1 An ongoing program to provide for the resealing of joints in existing concrete pavements. The project also
-'' provides for limited crack and surface repairs. This year's project is located along Taxiways G and R at the
east end of Runway 12U30R.
Runway Rehabilitation Program
PavementRehabilitation — Runway 12L/30R Seq. 2 $23,000,000
This project provides for the reconstrucfion of the middle section of Runway 12U30R located beiween
Runway 4/22 and Taxiway P3 as well as the middle segment of Taxiway P and associated taxiway
connectors. Reconstruction of two separate segments has been compiefed in previous years with
Segment 2 being the final section of pavement requiring reconstruction.
Landside Rehabilitation & Repair. Program
Landside Pavernent Rehabilitation $400,000
An ongoing program to reconstruct the airport's roadways and parking lots. A specific project has not been
identified at this time. Pavements will be evaluated in the spring of 2006 to determine whether a pavement
repair project is needed.
11/27/06
Parkinq Structure Rehabilitation $1,500,000
An ongoing program to maintain the integrity of the airport's multi level parking str:uctures. Projects
typically include concrete repair, joint sealant replacement, expansion joint repairs, cancrete sealing and
lighting improvements.
Terminal Modifications $2,000,000
�ach year, MAC staff compiles a list of "maintenancen projects that are beyond. the capability of the MAC's
maintenance staff. These projects are fhen prioritized and completed either as a series of contracts or as
purchase orders. A list was compiled for 2007 and,any projecfs that did fit within the budget will be carried
over into 2008. New projects will be discussed in early 2008.
7
Surnmarized below are the categories of the projects which are included in the Terininal Modifications �
program:
Buildinq Exterior Rehabilitation *
This is a continuation of the program to rehabiiitate the exterior of the Lindbergh Terminal and other
MAC buildings inciuding roof and curtain wall rehabilitation.
Terminai Electrical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address electrical issues in the terminals due to age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modificatians necessary for improved reliabifity.
Terminal Mechanical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address mechanical issues in the terrninais due io age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability.
Terminai Miscelianeous Modifications *
An ongoing program to update and remodel areas within the terminals to keep abreast with changing
requirernents. This may be accomplished through a series of small individual projects to meet the
requirernents of the various tenants or may be consolidated into a singie project.
Humphrev Terminal & MSP Campus ModificaEions *
An ongoing program to modify or remodel areas within the West Terminal Complex, the Humphrey
Terminal and ofher facilities around the MSP Campus to meet the needs of the various tenantslgeneral
public/MAC departments utilizing the facilities
*Historically, projects have been defined for each of these five categories. With reduced dollars
available to fund non-revenue generating projects, a total dollar allocation of $2,000,000 has been
allocated to fund the highest priority projects within any of these project categories.
ReFiever Airport Program �
Anoka County - Blaine
Buildinq Area Development — West Annex $850,000 **
This project provides for the construction of two alleyways for eight sforage hangars and three corporate
hangars, sanitary sewer and water main and accommodation of storm water drainage.
**Funding for this project to be provided by others.
CrysfaL
Allevwav Rehabilitation $320,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surtaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of taxilanes in the west and south buifding areas. The project will also include any necessary ai�eld
pavement crack repairs. �
Runwav 14U32R Reconstruction $2,000,000
This project provides for the reconstruction of Runway 14L/32R with new bituminous pavement and
subgrade correction.
Flying Cloud , -
Runwav 10L/28R Extension $900,000
This project is the �rst phase of the airport expansion and includes the extension of the north parallel
runway from 3,600.to 3,900 feet
�, ,
South Buildinq Area Development $7,000,000 **
This project will provide for the first phase in the construction af the new South Building Area and will
inclu.de site grading and sanitary sewer and water main installation. - (
**Funding for this project is to be provided by others.
11/27/06
�ake Elmo
Pavement Rehabilitation $300,000
� An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overiays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overail operating condi#ions. This year's project will include the rehabilitation of
taxiway connectors to Runway 14/32.
St. Paul
Joint and Crack Repairs $100,000
The pavement subgrade at the St. Paul Downtown Airport is extrernely poor. An annual pavement joint
and crack repair program wili therefore be initiated fo maintain pavemeni strength and pavement life.
MAC Buildinq Maintenance $100,000
An ongoing program to provide for facility modifications to ensure continued efficient operation of buildings
or rnodifications necessary to meet the requirements of the tenants.
Runwav Safetv Area $8,800,000
This project is the third and final stage of safety area improvements at St. Paul. This year's project
includes the installation of an Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS) at both ends of Runway
14/32, the retocation of the Runway 32 localizer antenna and minor modifications to the approach lighting
system.
Pavement Rehabititation $850,000 ;
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of pavement and subbase for Taxiways D, W and a portion of N.
� Reliever Airports Utility Extension Program
� Flying Cloud
� Sanitarv Sewer and Water Main Extensions $3,600,000
In accordance with the Mernorandum of Agreement with the Ciiy of Eden Prairie and the requirement by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency #o close aH private weN and septic systems at the airp�rt, staff proposes
to complete the installation of sanitary sewer and water along Pioneer Trail to serve the FBOs and interesied
tenants in the north building areas. In addition, the project will include construction of a restroom facility for
tenants who da not or cannot connect to the new utilities (many are in a non-service area) and a plane wash
facility.
Miscellaneous Field and Runway Program
Miscellaneous Construction $400,000
An ongoir�g program to consolidate various incidental items beyond the capabilities of the maintenance
personnel, projects too small to be accomplished independently or to handle airside problems requiring
repair which come up unexpectedly.
New Projects Program
L.indberqh Terminal Sprinkler System $3,500,000
Changes in the state building code require that the terminals be fully sprinkled. The Lindbergh Terminal
wil) be sprinkled as renovation work is completed.
11/27/06
Chilled Water Distribution Improvements $2,500,OOU
Concourses E, F and the south end of the Lindbergh Terminal experience warrn conditions during the
summer months due to bottlenecks in the chilled water system that serve these areas. This project
provides for increasing the size of existing.chilled wafer piping and replacing four existing chilled water coils
in order to increase the capacity of chilled water distribution system.
Upqrade Mezzanine Restrooms to meet ADA Code $600,000
The restrooms located on the mezzanine level of the Lindbergh Terminal do not meet the current ADA
Code. A project to upgrade these bathrooms to meet the current code is being studied.
9
Lindberqh Terminal Carpet Repiacement . $3,300,000
The carpet in the Lindbergh Termina! was repiaced in phases starting in 1998. Some areas are showing
excessive wear and a phased program to replace the carpet is being proposed to start in 2008. �
Fuel Farm Lease Extinquishment $5,000,000
These costs are for payment of the unamortized portion of the existing fuel farm lease when the facilities
are demolished and the loading rack relocated adjacent to the Humphrey remote apron.
Humphrev Fuel Facilitv Relocation $4,900,000
This project wiii provide fbr the demolition of the Humphrey fuel farm and construction of replacement load
islands for Jet-A, diesel and unleaded fuel adjacent to the north end of the Humphrey remote apron.
Completion of this projecf will pravide for reduced operating expenses of the fuel hydrant system by the
MSP Fuei Committee.
iVISP Fuel Consortium Modifications $270,000
The MSP Fuel Consortium operates the airline fuel system that was installed by the MAC. The Consortium
has requested that upgrades to the system are required over the next several years. Projects that have
been requested indude the second phase in the program to upgrade its emergency generator. The Fuel
Consortium will reimburse MAC for these costs.
New Proiects Aliowance
An allowance has been established for new projects that have been requested.
Terminal Backlit Siqn Replacements $1,600,000
Many of the illuminated way finding signs in both the Lindbergh and Humphrey Terrninals have
neon lamps that are burned out. These lamps are di�cult and costly to repiace and have limited
longevity. . A Signage Managernent and Maintenance Work Group (SMMWG) reviewed options
ranging from replacing the existing lamps to replacing the illumination units. The SMMWG is
recommending that the unit be replaced with a single row of LED units. The LEDs are easy to.
maintain, have an extended life (7 years}, and are compareble in cost to a new fluorescent sign '
that has a two year bulb life. A phased four year program to retrofit the illuminated signs in bofh ��
the Lindbergh and Humphrey Terminals is proposed to start in 2008.
Commission Chambers Upqrade $700,000
The MAC Commission Chambers/Grieve Conference Center has been in use for the last ten years
without substantial modification. This project will include upgrades to the audio, video, video-
conferencing and technology presentation equipment and interfaces in the Commission Chambers
and three conference rooms. The project will also provide new carpeting and furniture and
additional way finding signage. The project will be phased over two years with upgrades to the
audio technology proposed for 2007.
Tuq Drive Floor Repair $1,900,000
The membrane waterproofing system on the tug drive floor is deteriorating and coming apart in
various areas or has been damaged allowing water to leak into work areas, electrical vault rooms,
the valet garage and other operational areas. The membrane system is nearing the end of its
designated life of 5 years and must therefore be replaced in a phased prograrn. The first phase
was completed in 2007.
Food Courts Upgrade/Remodel $175,000
The Food Court projects include updating and remodeling fixtures, furnishings, and equipment at
the A, F, C, and E Concourses food courts. This project is being implemented in conjunction with
signi�cant tenant funded leasehold improvements initiated with the Concessions Transition Project.
The project will be phased over two years, with the E and F Concourse Faad Courts scheduled in
2007 and the A and C Food Courts scheduled in 2008.
: �"
11/27/06 10
Communications Center Expansion $1,900,000
The exisiing Communications Center space is inadequate to meet the needs of the current staff as
well as future staffing needs. Existing equipment has not been upgraded since 1995 and there is a
need to make strategic investments in new electronic technology to maximize productivity.
Currentiy, the Communications Center and Operations Center are located together on Concourse
E. Both departrnents are in need of additional operational space. A proposai to move both
departments to a common location is under study. The Communications Department would be
moved in 2007 with the Operations Department moving into the vacated space on an interim basis.
Remodeling of the space for Operations would be required and once Comrnunications has
relocated. This project will be phased over two years. The facility build-out will occur in 2007 and
the equipment installation wifl be in 2008.
Securitv lmprovements
Perimeier Fence/Gate Barrier Svstem $6,400,000
This project is part of a phased program to strengthen the perimeter security fence and
airfield access gates. Proposed work includes the replacement of the existing chain link
fence with a weided wire mesh fence. The new fence will be constructed on a concrete
� retaining wall in areas susceptibie to vehicle intrusions. Jersey barriers will be placed in
front of gates not in use and a hydraulic crash barrier wili be constructed at one gate
location.
C Concourse Elevator to D Street $360,000
Currently, the C Concourse elevator stops at the concourse level. MAC sfaff has requested that
this elevator be modified to allow for access to D Street. This would allow the MAC trades to get lift
equipment used to change lights and clean high areas fo the easf end of the C Concourse.
ANOMS Svstem Upqrade $500,000
To ensure continued application of the Airport Noise and Operafions Monitoring Systems (ANOMS)
technology, it is necessary to provide for periodic system upgrades. The upgraded system would
consist of three main components: new analysis system software; upgraded analysis system
hardware; and a multilateration flight track acquisition system. The multilateration system would
include installation of 6-9 remote sensors that provide precise aircraft tracking and positional
information by interrogating aircraft transponder signals and triangulating an aircraft's exact
position. The project would include complete installation of all components associated with the
ANOMS central processing system. Modem connectivity would be installed and the system would
be integrated with the existing 39 Remate Monitoring Terminals (RMTs) and integrafion with all
ANOMS central processing computers.
Concessions Revenue Development/Upqrades $200,000
This project wi11 fund miscellaneous upgrades (finishes, furniture, condiment stations, etc.), signage
and/or modified connections to utiliiies for the concession programs at the Lindbergh and
Humphrey Terminals.
ARFF Station #2 Roof Replacement $230,000
A roof condition study completed in 2006 indicates that the roof on the old ARFF station has
reached its useful life and is need of replacement.
ADO Modificaiions $400,U00
l'he MAC Airport Director's Office (ADO) kitchenette and copy area requires modification and
consolidation of functions to accommodate additional o�ces to support communication and
coordination within the ADO and associated departments. This project will add three offices, a
modified kitchenette, break room, and copy center.
Sanitarv Sewer/Manhole Repair — Runwav 12L $600,000
Th�e 12-inch sanitary sewer fhat is located in the approach to Runway 12L was constructed in 1948
( ) utilizing vitrified clay pipe and brick and mortar manholes. Cleaning of this sewer has been
'-' hindered by blockages in the pipe and this line was televised to determine the condition of the pipe.
The televising report indicated cracked and broken sections of pipe. A complete replacement of
the pipe and manholes is being considered versus repairing only. those pipe sections that have
deteriorafed.
11/2'7/06
11
�:
:
_ _
Unallocated Allowance � $35,000 �
A totai of $15M has been ailocated for new projects in 2008. There is currentiy $35,000 that� has
not been aliocated and may be used to fund new work. �'
2020 Development Program
2010 Projects deferred to 2020 Prograrn
Ground Services Equipment Buildina Relocation $5,500,000
This project provides for the relocation of the existing ground service equipment (GSE) buiiding to make
way for the expansion of gates at the Humphrey Terminai.
Humphrey Terminal
Humphrev Terminal Expansion $83,000,000
The Humphrey Terminal will be expanded from 10 gates fo 22 gates over a three-year period. The
expansion wiii include the construction of 12 new gates and all associated facilities including ticketing,
baggage ciaim, baggage make up and in-line baggage screening, road improvements, new aircraft apron
and hydranf fueling at all gates.
Auto Rental Facilities $16,300,000
This project provides for auto rentai facilities including counters, back office and ready and return facilities
for ail an-airport auto rental providers as well as a new quick-turn-around (QTA) facility ta serve vehicles at
the Humphrey Terminaf.
11/27/06
12
I
� i
I
Oti I
❑ O E
� p CII
t
a 0
' c
'7'}' cG%o � G oo . �
�ao_ o� �ac o�-II—�� � �
p J ° � o
c �
I, � o �
� o �
a �
,ag
n C� tr
v c�
. 4 G 0 0 0 �� o � n� �
� o n❑
o _ annn
0 0
on �
a�` �n a
� ° �
" ° G cu o o . � � � ❑
�--� o c q'a . -� n _' '_
� 6�f .�i�,� ����,`� " �j ° �"� n n
� ..+e� � ! � �
!�i 8�� �'��� � ��(3��� —�-� - - - --"
�Jv�J� � � �--- --. -- -
� .��
----�r-----�� �
_ ____.� �
---��_.._...--�� M �
0
� � �� �/ �
C_=��\ ;r � _ —/i� �
C� /�' � o � - -----�� '�_ '
x ��----'---� OCi � .
Z � � - � �( � A �� �
'�C t� W � 1
c~n � a ' r.� �1 j
w 00 ' � o $ ❑ ° � !
� ❑ II� �
D CI j C� Ooo o� ��
i�C p��° �[��oco L o ,
�J � ❑ ��
❑ � �j !- ��
�! ilJ "(��"ila� � 0� �
. � U�... �' . �� �
' - - �� � r � C� � p
- � �L�
������,-_____^_,
�� ��
s o� � ��
� �Q
/�'_ "a GG1�� �
� � o
� �� ��� . � q . .
� ��� :I
Y�
�
a^u ��/�� 4 ���`
�� ���' �,-� ~ \'
P. � ��� 7 �. .�- �
��' �� �
" `J=` � �! \�
-�� � ;;�-___,�,; � '�
i'°"'�Q.,�,r.,,�-_._ '.
,
#
�
� l �% ���i�` �
� � � ji~ 1
t � . - `�. j �
c� � � i� `.
� f � 1��
� f.�:
�.. i,�'
� 1 �.
� :n � `�O
�� � �' x �✓ � ;_��°� _�' '—'
�: F ,
,/' ` � , `�„`�'` ' ;'�
. : . . . ' ! ��6 .%���_...-._.,\ ��{. ' ,. ��
:C.
�, � �_.
�..; _..�.�
f ��lc,i�.��
>>�r: �� 1 �-�
�: -, �_.__:�_
�I (�,��� �,
��t�g,, �,�'��-�J ,
/� ♦ ,r�r� ;�m�
i.� ,„_..~ ��IL.�} }-+
,�' f���
�.' . .. � f��� � �+�.� v �1
� � l�} bl!� ��.' ` _�_ (
" �i� r, �.
,,��,';, ��v � t�::=x:�..-;n ' =f
� �, � �� ��,.,:�.� ; .-
� � . ' F � . ti"� ` I"..-,..-
� r�., �;o �,��'.�-"�-��,;1 -
u.��'�� �� �- �-�` I
� �/ rc� . �
� �;�� �.�.� r =
�± ��,9 � ' `'�- � ,,�� � �_!� `_1'..,,
. � . , � � �� � F .
� . ' � / � \���df ` � . . � . .
,��/ �%`'� �-� �
I ��
2
�_....�' � f l._._�__..���� ��� J � v /� �' �'!'
`� ��� ' . • i
�
I — ;��'-J � ..�
I � � � � � �'' -----��.; � �
� ; � � �------% (� I � ; --.. _____......�.� �``—_`` , �\ ,
��� �.__.._.._.�? �`�r-� --�--,.__1 �__,___,.__._ I .: `��. "�� G
� �1� j t � ��J r'=;�;-.-_.____.�-�! ____�-_.______---�ii � ' � � � �� �\�
r{ { .l j l j j .. ,''( � —"'--------''---_�:,! � `'•� � �
,=�}� �:...J r ; j : i �J t�ryJi -�Z�,� :,�
% ( � � 1;
�- j � / J }t`�! I
' �� r �` � 1`� ' �����' ��'1 �
; .j •� ��
�y � ! J �. fj � / •�"`''�_ c'� '�,�ji' .� !
i :�l f 1' ,j' �r ; ,/ J ���� � . � �`�
f�(
_ t � t. �
� � t ; `/% � �••�"` �
+
j ,� � .
F !'
��it � Jij I �, �.'
fl � � l ��
%� ) I�,� o �
1 ? !l ��--_____...-_. ___� T
\.._.,' ' ( �` W �
.. ��j i � � N
���.�� � l .=�a
� _1 I '�o Q
;" ' . '� y W
' �
' i
� / '��..,`"'---`.: `
� .;! r,,--�'"� tA
� /' �:
f W
� � i
---._....___ - � O
� �� >-
i % 0�
- -1;t
�� ,� ! �J c�
� ,,.,� i, � �
.� �� ; i � o
,� � �` - f �=� _
� ; �. -,�=-� �
� . � __� �;� � � \\
J
•
r
�
n
,;
\, ./3rq \
-�. �l�I � ti
�.
F t . ���, g p s a : ;'"w
� � �S g e �`M1, � @)+ i�s � r� �t�k r � � ,��y
._.�C''e � � �� �,j s ',� s � 5 ��; � 7'! i �,� E ' �+ � ( Y ,�d 7 F ° � � '+. K ji
Ppl.�S Sq�
EP t ' �r
?� t °c
F � �
r � � z
-1'i �' N
p � N
O
9 F
O �.
r t G�
� 9� 91RPOaSS
December 19, 2006
Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
6040 - 28th Avenue South � Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
Phone(612)726-8100
Jim Danielson, Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4106
RE: Metropolitan Airports Commission
Approved 2007 Capital Improvement Program
Dear Mr. Danielson:
The Metropolitan Airports Commission, at its meeting on December 18, 2006, approved the
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) to be accomplished on its airport system in 2007 along with
a 2008 Capital Improvement Program. The 2008 projects have been approved for further study
and development of plans and specifications for implementation in the following year.
Staff has also been authorized to conduct studies and develop preliminary plans and
specifications for year 2009 projects. The documentation necessary to encumber Federal
funding for eligible projects will be initiated in conjunction with the development of the
preliminary and final plans. A copy of the CIP spreadsheet that lists the projects and estimated
project costs and a short narrative of each project proposed for 2007 and 2008 are included for
your information.
Sincerely,
�
Robert J. Vorpahl, P.E.
Program Development Engineer
RJV/lrk
Enclosure
cc: Nigel Finney
Gary Warren
CIP file
FD&E packet file
Day file
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmarive action employer.
www.mspairport.com
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE > ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE � CRYSTAL ^ FLYII�TG CLOUD � LAKE ELMO � SAINT PAtTL DOWNTOWN
C
2007 Capital Improvement Program
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
� November, 2006
Runway Deicing/Holding Pad program
Runwav 12L Snow Meltinq Pad Expansion $1,700,000
This project provides for the expansion of the Runway 12L snow storage/melting area including the
replacement of the existing snow melter with a three burner melter. These improvements wiil provide for a
larger snow storage pad and increased meiting capacity that will result in increased efficiency of the pad.
Taxiway C/D Complex Construction
Taxiwav C/D Complex $8,200,000
This project is the third phase of a multi-phase program to reconstruct and reconfigure Taxiways C and D
between Runway 12L/30R and Runway 12R/30.L. This project provides for the realignment of Taxiway C
between Taxiways A and Taxiway C6 and the reconstruction of pavement bounded by new alignments of
Taxiways A, B; C and D. �
AirField Rehabilitatian Program
Airside Bituminous Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program to construct or reconstruct bituminous pavements within the Air Operations Area. Two
projects areas are planned for implementation in 2007. One involves construction of bituminous shoulders
on Taxiway R from Taxiway R8 to Taxiway R3. The second provides for the mill and overlay of the
bituminous roadway in the tunnel under Runway 12R/30�.
Pavement Rehabilitation — Aprons $2,300,000
This is an ongoing program to replace sections of concrete pavement in the aircraft operational areas that
have deteriorated to a point where maintenance is. no longer a viable. option: This year's project will
replace approximately 6,000 square yards of apron pavement at gates C1 and D6 including associated
gate fuel hydrant systems...
Pavement Joint Sealinq Repair $800,000
An ongoing program to provide for the resealing of joints in existing concrete pavements. The project also
provides. for limited crack and surface repair. This year's project is located adjacent to Concourses C, D
and G including�adjacenttaxiways.
Runway Rehabilitation Program
Pavement Rehabilitation — Runwav 12R/30L Seq. 2 $17,500,000
This project provides for the reconstruction of the middle section of Runway 12R/30L located between
Runway 4/22 and Taxiway A4. Reconstruction of two separate segments has been completed in previous
years wifh Segment 2 being the final section of pavement requiring reconstruction.
Terminal Rehabilitation & Development Program
International Arrivals Facilities $200,000
This project provides for improvements to the International Arrivals Facility at both the Lindbergh and
Humphrey Terminals as required.
Landside Rehabilitation & Repair Program
Landside Pavement Construction $400,000
An ongoing program. to reconstruct the airport's raadways. and parking lots. A specific project has not been
identified at this time. Pavements will be evaluated in the spring of 2007 to determine whether a pavement
repair project is needed.
Parkinq Structure Rehabilitation $1,500,000
An ongoing program � to maintain the integrity of the airpott's multi level parking, structures. Projects
� ) typically include concrete repair, joint sealant replacement, expansion joint repairs, concrete sealing and
__ ;
lighting improvements. A Parking Facility Maintenance, Rehabilitation and Managemen� Program is
currently lieing prepared and will define the scope of the projects to be completed in 2007.
12/14/06
Terminal Modifications $2,000,000 �
Each year, MAC staff compiles a list of "maintenance" projects that are beyond the capability of the MAC's
maintenance staff. These projects are then prioritized and completed either as a series of contracts or as '
purchase orders. A list was compiled for 2006 and any projects that did not fit within the budget will be �•
carried over into 2007. New projects will be discussed in early 2007.
Summarized below are the categories of the projects that are included in the Terminal Modifications
program:
Buildinq Exterior Rehabilitation *
This is a continuation of the program to rehabilitate the exterior of the Lindbergh Terminal and other
MAC buildings including roof and ct�rtain wall rehabilitation.
Terminal Electrical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address electrical issues in the terminals due to age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability.
Terminal Mechanical Modificafiions *
An ongoing program to address mechanical issues in the terminals due to age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability.
Terminal Miscellaneous Modifications *
An ongoing program to update and remodel areas within the terminals to keep abreast with changing
requirements. This may be accomplished through a series of small individual projects to meet the
requirements of the various tenants or may be consolidated into a single project.
Humptirev Terminal & MSP Campus Modifications *
An ongoing program to modify or remodel areas within the West Terminal Complex, the Humphrey
Terminal and other facilities around the MSP Campus to meet the needs of the various tenantsJgeneral
public/MAC departments utilizing the facilities
�
*Historically, projects have been defined for each of these five categories. With reduced dollars
available to fund non-revenue generating projects, a total dollar allocation of $2,000,000 has been
allocated to fund the highe�t priority projects within any of these project categories.
Reliever Airport Program
Airlake
North Buildinq Area Allevwav Rehabilitation $400,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons} ihrough
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some insfances, reconstruction; to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the second phase
in the rehabilitation of the pavements in the Northeast Building Area.
South Buildinq Area Development $2,700,000 **
This project is the second phase in the program to develop a new South Building Area. This year's project
will include placement of aggregates and bituminous pavement along with minor drainage improve�nents
and general site clean up. It may also provide for the installation of sanitary sewer and water main. The
paving of a section of 225th Street to connect to Cedar Avenue is also included in this project.
**Funding for this project to be provided by others
Anaka County — Blaine
Pavement Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstructian, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of portions of Taxiway C and Taxiway A, connectors E1 and E2 to Runway 18/36 and crack sealing in the ,
west annex and west, east and south building areas. ,. _ _ _ (
12/14/06 Z
Runwav 18/36 Liqhtinq Replacement $250,000
Tests of the runway lighting wiring have indicated that the wiring has deteriorated tci the point that
,
replacemenf is required.
Crystal
Obstruction Removals $320,000
This project provides for the removal of trees that have become obstructions to the Crystal air space.
Costs include location surveys, appraisals, negotiations and tree removal:
Pavement Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing prograrn to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and. improve overall operating canditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of pavement sections of Taxiways A and E that are�close to failure.
Lake Elmo
East Buildinq Area Development $2,100,000 **
This project includes the grading and paving for alleyways, an access road and connecting taxiway for a
new East Building Area, including taxiway pavement marking and reflectors. This project will also include
storm water management and, if necessary, wetland mitigation.
**Funding for this project to be provided by others.
Pavement Rehabilitation $300,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve, overall operating conditions. This year's. project will include the reconstruction
of fhe northeast end of Taxiway 4/22 and any necessary airfield pavement crack repairs.
St. Paul
� ) Bavfield Street Rehabilitation . $200,000
This year project provides for the completion of fhe �ehabilitation of the segments of BayField Street
impacted by the perimeter dike construction between the MAC Administration Building and the south end
cul de sac including the installation of the final wear course of asphalt pavement.
Flood Protection Dike $22;500,000
This year's project provides for the construction of the full perimeter dike including procurement of
temporary deploym.ent walls, installation of permanent sheet pile walls, earthen berms and landscaping.
The project also includes the construction of a storage building for ternporary wall materials.
Joint and Crack Repairs $100,000
The pavement subgrade at the St. Paul Downtown Airport is extremely poor. An annual joint and crack
repair program has therefore been initiated to maintain pavement strength and pavement life.
MAC Buildina Maintenance $100,000
An ongoing• program to provide for facility modifications to ensure continued efficient operation of buildings
or modifications necessary to meet the requirements of the tenants.
Runwav Safetv Area $2,400,000
_ _. .
This project consists of improvements to the end of all runway safety areas to meet . current FAA
requirements. This year's project is�the second phase in the. project and will include relocation of Taxiway
D at the Runway 9 end, relocation of Taxiway E north of Runway 27 and new PAPIs for the Runway 27
approach. This work is being done to coincide with the irnpacts from the perimeter dike project.
Miscellaneous Field and Runway Program
Miscellaneous Construction $400,000
� � An ongoing program to consolidate variaus incidental items beyond the capabilities of the maintenance
�.. � personnel, projects too small to be accomplished independently or to handle airside problems requiring
__
repair which come up unexpectedly.
12/14/06 �
IUliscellaneous Landside Program
Central Alarm/Monitorinq SVstem/Fiber Optic Cable Instaliation $250,000
This project wiii provide a centralized monitoring system consolidating data and alarms from �severai facility �'
systems into a higher level acquisition and alarm display system. Previous projects have already installed ��
a fiber optic backbone and associated communication hub rooms throughout the Lindbergh Terminal and
befween the Lindbergh and Humphrey Terminals and have relocated the Lindbergh Terminal's main
communications infrastructure room and a data transport system. This is a continuation of fhe program
that started in 2003 and will include adding monitors to the tug doors, the groundwater sump pumps in the
Lindbergh Terminal and to the automatic doors throughout the Lindbergh and Humphrey terminals.
Humphrev Parkinp Structure Expansion $4,600,000
This project provides for the expansion of the Humphrey Parking Structure to provide an additional 4,550
parking spaces. The existing parking structures continue to fill up on a regular basis and additional parking
will be required ahead of the expansion of the Humphrey Terminal under Phase 1 of the 2020 Development
Plan. The ramp structure and building core finishes projects were bid in 2006. This year's project will
provide for all site work.
New Projects Program
Lindberqh Terminal Sprinkler Svstem $3,000,000
Changes in the state building code require that the terrrtinals be fully sprinkled. The Lindbergh Terminal
will be sprinkled as renovation work is completed. �
Enerqv Savings Proiects $1,000,000
A program was initiated in 2002 to provide for the implementation of projects that would save the
Commission energy costs in its operating budget. Discussions with both Xcel and Reliant have identified
additional projects that are eligible for energy saving rebates and will save the Commission additional
energy costs.
Chiller PumpNariable Speed Drive Uparade $1,000,000
This project will provide a new 600 horsepawer chilled water pump to replace the two existing 250 �..
horsepower pumps. This project will also replace the existing 4160-volt starters on three chi(lers with
variable speed drives. The variable speed drive retrofits will provide energy cost savings and may qualify
for a rebate from Xcel Energy.
Landside Concessions Development $1,100,000
The Cornmission approved a$22M CIP adjustment in 2005 fo develop five landside concessions. This
project provides for the concession work that needs to carry over to 2007.
VMS Hiqhwav Siqns $650,000
Landside Operations has requested that two variable m�ssage signs (VMS) be installed along the highway
system that would provide travelers with information on parking at the airport.
Airport Lane/34th Avenue Access Reconfiquration $8p0,000
This access from 34 Avenue and Airport Lane does not meet current traffic engineering standards. This
project will realign the access to conform to standards for similar types of intersec#ions.
Concourse E Roof Replacement $2,000,000
This project provides for the replacement of the roof on Concourse E as the existing roof has reached its
useful life and repairs are no longer economically feasible.
MSP Fuel Consortium Modifications $600,000
The MSP Fuel Consortium operates the airline fuel system that was installed by the MAC. The Consortium
has requested that upgrades to the system are required over the next several years. Projects that have
been requested include installation of a load rack/test stand, installing a low point sump on Concourse G
and initiating a two year program to upgrade its emergency generator. The Fuel Consortium will reimburse
MAC for these costs. �' ,
12/ 14/06
Post Road Taui Lot Entrance/Exit Improvements ' $200,000
This project wiil add one entrance and one exit to the taxi holding lot on Post Road. Currently, 2,040 taxis
per day enter and leave this facility. If one lane faiis, automated control of the taxis terminates. Police
( ) o�cers and Landside agents must then manually control taxis until the system is brought back on line.
New Proiects Allowance
An allowance has been estabiished for new projects that have been requested.
Field Maintenance Center Roof $650,000
A 2006 Roof Evaluation Report indicates that approximately 43,000 square feet of the roof of the
Field Maintenance Facility is in need of replacement. This project will provide for the installation of
a new rock ballasted EPDM roof.
C Concourse Floor Repair $500,000
The concrete floor on Concourse C fias deteriorated to the point where replacement is required. A
program to replace the decking. began in 2004. and this year's project will be the final the phase in
the program. The project is located adjacent to Gate C3.
Commission Chambers Uparade $300,000
The MAC Commission Chambers/Grieve Conference Center has been in use for the last ten years
without substantial modification. This project will include upgrades to the audio, video, video-
conferencing and technology presentation equipment and intertaces in the Commission Chambers
and three conference rooms. The project will also provide new carpeting and furniture and
additional way finding signage. The project will be phased over two years with upgrades to the
audio #echnology proposed for 2007
Tuq Drive Floor Repair $800,000
The membrane waterproofing system on the tug drive floor is deteriorating and coming apart in
various areas or has been damaged allowing water to leak into work areas, electrical vault rooms,
the valet garage and other operational areas. The membrane system is nearing the end of its
designated life of 5 years and must therefore be replaced in a phasecl program. It is proposed to
replace the membrane system over areas critical to terminal operaiions and life safety systems in
2007.
Food Caurts Upqrade/Remodel $600,00.0
The Food Court projects include updating and remodeling fixtures, furnishings, and equipment at
the A, F, C, and E Concourses food courts. This project is being implemented in conjunction with
significant tenant funded leasehold improvements initiated with the Concessions Transition Project.
The project will be phased over two years, with the E and F Concourse Food Courts scheduled in
2007 and the A and C Food Courts scheduled in 2008.
Communications Center Expansion $1,900,000
The existing Communications Center space is inadequate to meet the needs of the current staff as
well as future sfaffing needs. Existing equipment has not been upgraded since 1995 and there is a
need to make strategic investments in new electronic technology to maximize productivity.
Currently, the Communications Center and Operations Center are located together on Concourse
E. Both departments are in need of additional operational space. A proposal to move both
departments to a common location is under study. The Communications Department wou(d be
moved in 2007 with the Operations Department moving into the vacated space on an interim basis.
Remodeling of the space for Operations would be required and once Communications has
relocated. This project will be phased over two years. The facility build-out will occur in 2007 and
the equipment installation will be in 2008.
Securitv Improvements
Patrol Operations Center $1,000,000
The Airport Police Department staffs a Patrol Operations Center (POC) located on the
north end of the bag claim level at the �indbergh Terminal. This facility provides
administrative office space for patrol sergeants and community service officers,
interrogation and booking rooms, a first aid room and two holding cells. The Badging and
Lost and Found offices were previously located in this space but have been relocated. An
interim remodel of these areas was completed in 2006 to provide some additional
12/14/06
� ��'r�..
administrative area. The proposed project would provide additional remodeling and
improvements to the electrical and mechanical systems and wouid include a saily port on
the north side of the POC
Perimeter Fence/Gate Barrier SVstem $1,200,000
This project is part of a phased pragram to strengthen the perimeter security fence and
airfield �access gates. Proposed work includes the repiacement of the existing chain link
fence with a welded wire mesh fence. The new fence will be constructed on a concrete
retaining wall in areas susceptible to vehicle intrusions. Jersey barriers will be placed in
front of gates not in use and a hydraulic crash barrier will be constructed at ane gate
location.
Post Road Fuel Farm Securitv Improvements $850,000
T.he fuel farm on Post Road is a high securiiy priority. The Police Department is
recommending that a physical security enhancement is needed to adequately protect the
site. This project will provide for the an improved perimeter security fence around the tank
farm to include the construction of 8-foot and 6-foot welded wire mesh fence on concrete
retaining walls or Jersey barriers. The project will also include the addition of gate barriers.
Concessions Revenue Development/Upqrades $200,000
This project will fund miscellaneous upgrades (finishes, furniture, condiment stations, etc.), signage
and/or modified connec#ions to utilities for the concession programs at the Lindbergh and
Humphrey Terminals.
Humphrev Terminal Duct Bank Installation $600,000
This project provides for the construction of an electrical duct bank from Service Road K to the
Humphrey Terminal and from 34�' Avenue west along Airport Lane. The Duct bank will be used by
Xcel to provide a redundant electrical feed to the Humphrey Terminal. The cost of this project will
be funded by Xcel.
�.
Avava Building Sprinkler System/Roof $300,000
MAC has acquired the former Avaya building .on 28th Avenue with the intent to re-lease the
building. Prior to putting the building on the market, a fire sprinkler system must be installed and
the existing roof replaced. The sprinkler system is required according to MAC Standards that are
over and above any code requirements. A roof survey completed earlier this year indicates that a
new roof is required.
Unallocated Allowance $1,700,000
A total of $10M has been allocated for new projects in 2007. There is currently $1,700,000 that
has not been allocated and may be used to fund new wark.
_ _ �
12/14/06 6
2008 Capital improvement Program
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
i� � ) November, 2006
Noise Mitigation Program
Residential Sound Insulation (60-64 2007 DNL) Pilot $3,200,000
There wiil be a series of projects to provide noise mitigation for single family residential houses within the
certified 2007 DNL 60-64 noise contour. The mitigation will consist af a mechanicai package that will
provide air conditioning for homes that do not have air conditioning. Residential homeowners would be
subject to a copay based on the following percentages: 64 DNL — 10%. 63DN� — 20%, 62 DNL — 30%, 61
DNL — 40%, 60DNL — 50%. Prior to proceeding with this program, a pilot program will be rolled out. The
pilot program will be used to help determine manageable production goals for the program and to help
determine out year project budgets
Taxiway C/D Complex Construction
Taxiwav C/D Comp.lex � $2,000,000
This project is the fourth phase of a multi-phase program to reconstruct and reconfigure Taxiways C and D
between Runway 12U30R and Runway 12R/30L. This project provides for the reconstruction of pavement
bounded by new alignments of Taxiways C, D, P and Q.
Airfield Rehabilitation Program
Airside Bituminous Rehabilitation $500,000
An ongoing program to construct or reconstruct bituminous pavements within the Air Operations Area.
Inspection of taxiway pavements and other airfield areas will be made to determine whether or not a
bituminous repair project is required.
Pavement Joint Sealinq $500,000
-.. An ongoing program to provide for the resealing of joints in existing concrete pavements. The project also _
( i provides for limited crack and. surface. repairs.. This year's project is located along Taxiways G and R at the
- easf end of Runway 12U30R.
Runway Rehabilitation Pragram - -
Pavement Rehabilitation — Runwav 12L/30R Seq. 2 $23,000,000
This project provides for the reconstruction of the middle section of Runway 12L/30R located between
Runway 4/22 and Taxiway P3 as well as the middle segment of Taxiway P and associated taxiway
connectors. Reconstruetion of two separate segments has been completed in previous years with
Segment 2 being the final section of pavement requiring reconstruction.
Landside Rehabi(itation & Repair Program
�andside Pavement Rehabilitation $400,000
An ongoing program to reconstruct the airport's roadways and parking. lots. A specific project has not been
identified at this time. Pavements will be evaluated in the spring of 2006 to determine whether a pavement
repair project is needed.
Parkinq Structure Rehabilitation $1,500,000
An ongoing prog�am to maintain the integrity of the airport's multi level parking structures: Projects
typically include concrete repair, joint sealant replacement, expansion joint repairs, conc�ete sealing and
lighting improvements.
Terminal Modifications $2,000,000
Each year, MAC staff compiles a list of "maintenance" projects that are beyond the capability of the MAC's
maintenance staff. These projects are then prioritized and completed either as a series of contracts or as
purchase orders. A list was compiled for 2007 and any projects that did fit within the budget irvill be carried
over in.to 2008. New projects will be discussed in early 2008.
12/14/06
Summarized below are the categories of the projects which are included in the Terminal Modifications
program:
Buildinq Exterior Rehabilitation * (
This is a continuation of the program to rehabilitate the exterior of the Lindbergh Terminal and other �
MAC buildings including roof and curtain wall rehabilitation.
Terminal Electrical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address electrical issues in the terminals�due to age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability.
Terminal Mechanical Modifications *
An ongoing program to address mechanical issues in the terminals due to age and deterioration of the
existing systems or modifications necessary for improved reliability.
Terminal Miscellaneous Modifications *
An ongoing program to updaie and remodel areas witMin the terminals to keep abreast with changing
requiremenis. This may be accomplished through a series of small individual projects to meet the
requirements of ihe various tenants or may be consolidated into a single project.
Humphrev Terminal & MSP Campus Modifications *
An ongoing program to modify or remodel areas within fhe West Terminal Complex, the Humphrey
Terminal and other facilities around the MSP Campus to meet the needs of the various tenants/general
public/MAC departments utilizing the facilities
*Historically, projects have been defined for each of these five categories. With reduced dollars
available to fund non-revenue generating projects, a total dollar allocation of $2,000,000 has been
allocated to fund the highest priority projects within any of these project categories.
Reliever Airport Program � " .
Anoka County — Blaine �
Buildinq Area Development — West Annex $850,000 **
This project provides for the construction of iwo alleyways for eight storage hangars and three corporate
hangars, sanitary sewer and water main and accommodation of storm water drainage.
**Funding for this project to be provided by others. .
Crystal
Allevwav Rehabilitation _ $320,000
An angoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operafional areas (runways, . taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coais, or in some instances, reconsfruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condiiion and improve overall operating conditions. This year's. project will include the reconstruction
of taxilanes in the west and south building areas. The project will also include any necessary airField
pavement crack repairs.
Runwav 14L/32R Reconstruction $2,000,000
This project provides for the reconstruction of Runway 14L/32R with new bituminous pavement and
subgrade correction.
Flying Cloud
Runwav 10L/28R Extension $900,000
This project is the first phase of the airport expansion and includes ti�e extension of the north parallel
runway from 3,600 to 3,900 feet. �
South Buildinq Area Development $7,000,000 ** .
This project will provide for the first phase in the consfruction of the new South Building Area and will
include site grading and sanitary sewer and water main installation. �-
**Funding for this project is to be provided by others. ,
12/14/06 g
Lake Elmo
Pavement Rehabilitation $300,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
� bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and irnprove overall operating conditions. This years project will include the rehabilitation of
� taxiway connectors to Runway 14/32.
St. Paul
Joint and Crack Repairs $100,000
The pavement subgrade at the St. Paul Downtown Airport is extremely poor. An annual pavement joint
and crack repair program will therefore be initiated to maintain pavement strength and pavement life.
MAC Buildinq Maintenance $100,000
An ongoing program to provide for facility modifications to ensure continued efficient operation of buildings
or modi�caiions necessary to meet the requirements of the tenants. �
Runwav Safetv Area $8,800,000
This project is the third and. final stage of. safety area improvements at St. Paul. This. year's project
includes th.e installation of an Engineered Material Arresting System (EMAS) at both ends of Runway
14/32, the relocation of the Runway 32 localizer antenna and minor modifications to the approach lighting
system.
Pavement Rehabilitation $850,000
An ongoing program to rehabilitate aircraft operational areas (runways, taxiways, aprons) through
bituminous overlays, seal coats, or in some instances, reconstruction, to restore the surfaces to a smooth,
even condition and improve overall operating conditions. This year's project will include the reconstruction
of pavement and subbase for Taxiways D, W and a portion of N.
Reliever Airports Utility Extension Program
_.,) Flying Cloud.
__,; Sanitarv Sewer and Water Main Extensions � $3,600,000
In accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Eden Prairie and the requirement by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to close all private well and septic systems at the airport, steff proposes
to complete the installation of sanitary sewer and water along Pianeer Trail to serve the FBOs and interested
tenants in the north building areas. In addition, the project will include construction of a restroom facility for
tenants who do not or cannot connect to the new utilities (many are in a non-service area) and a plane wash
facility.
Miscellaneous Field and Runway Program
Miscellaneous Construction $400,000
An ongoing program to consolidafe various incidental items beyond the capabilities of the maintenance
personnel, projects too small to be accomplished independently or to handle airside problems requiring
repair which come up unexpectedly.
New Projects Program
Lindberqh Terminal Sprinkler Svstem $3,5Q0,000
Changes in the state building code require that the terminals be fully sprinkled. The Lindbergh Terminal
__. will be sprinkled as renovation wor{c is completed.
Chilled Water Distribution Improvements $2,500,000
Concourses E, F and the south end of the Lindbergh Terminal experience warm conditions during the
suinmer months due to bottlenecks in the chilled water system that serve these areas. This project
provides for increasing the size of existing chilled water piping and replacing four existing chilled water coils
in order to increase the capacity of chilled water distribution system.
Upqrade Mezzanine Restrooms to meet ADA Code $600,000
The restrooms located on the mezzanine level of the Lindbergh Terminal do not meet the current ADA
Code. A project to upgrade these bathrooms to meet the current code is being studied.
12/14/06
Lindberqh Terminal Carpet Repiacement $3,300,000
The carpet in the Lindbergh Terminal was replaced in phases starting in 1998. Some areas are showing
excessive wear and a phased program to replace the carpet is being proposed to start in 2008. �-
Fuei Farm Lease Extinquishment $5,000,000
These costs are for payment of the unamortized portion of the existing fuel farm lease when the facilities
are demolished and the loading rack relocated adjacent to the Humphrey remote apron.
Humphrey Fuel Facilitv Relocation $4,900,000
This project will provide for the demolition of the Humphrey fuel farm and construction of repiacement load
islands for Jet-A, diesel and unleaded fuei adjacent to the north end of the Humphrey remote apron.
Compietion of this project will provide for reduced operating expenses of the fuel hydrant system by the
MSP Fuel Committee.
MSP Fuel Consortium Modifications $270,000
The MSP Fuel Consortium operates the airline fuel system that was installed by the MAC. The Consortiurn
has requested that upgrades to fhe system are required over the next several years. Projects that have
been requested include the second phase in the program to upgrade its emergency generator. The Fuet
Consortium will reimburse MAC for these costs.
New Proiects Allowance
An allowance has been established for new projects that have been requested.
Termina) Backlit Siqn Replacements $1,600,000
Many of the illuminated Way finding signs in both the Lindbergh and Humphrey Terminals have
�neon lamps that are burned out. These lamps are difficult and costly to replace and have limited
longevity. A Signage Management and Maintenance Work Group (SMMWG) reviewed options
ranging from replacing the existing lamps to replacing the illumination units. The SMMWG is
recommending that the unit be replaced with a single row of �ED units. The �EDs are easy to
maintain, have an extended life (7 years), and are comparable in cost to a new fluorescent sign
that has a two year bulb life. A phasecJ four year program to retrofit the, illuminated signs in both �
the Lindbergh and Humphrey Terminals is proposed to start in 2008.
Commission Chambers Upqrade $700,000
The MAC Commission Chambers/Grieve Conference Center has been in use for the last ten years
without substantial modificafion. This project will include upgrades to the audio, video, video-
conferencing and technology presenfation equipment and interfaces in the Commission Chambers
and three conference rooms. The project will also provide new carpeting and furniture and
additional way finding signage. The project will be phased over two years with upgrades to fhe
audio technology proposed for 2007. ;
Tuq Drive Floor Repair $1,900,000
The membrane waterproofing system on the tug drive floor is de�eriorating and coming apart in
. various areas or has been damaged allowing water to leak into work areas, electrical vault rooms,
the valet garage and other operational areas. The membrane system is nearing the end of its
designated life of 5 years and must therefore be replaced in a phased program. The first phase
was completed in 2007. •
Food Courts Upqrade/Remodel $175,000
The Food Court projects include updating and remodeling fixtures, furnishings, and equiprnent at
the A, F, C, and E Concourses food courts. This project is being implemented in conjunction with
significant tenant funded leasehold improvements initiated with the Concessions Transition Project.
The project will be phased over two years, with the E and F Concourse Food Courts scheduled in
2007 and the A and C Food Courts scheduled in 2008.
12/14/06 10
Communications Center Expansion $1,900,000
The existing Communications Center space is inadequate to meet the needs of the current staff as
weli as future staffing needs. Existing equipment has not been upgraded since 1995 and there is a
,' � need to make strategic investments in new electronic technology to maximize productivity.
Currently, fhe Communications Center and Operations Center are located together on Concourse
E. Both departments are in need of additional operational space. A proposal to move both
departments to a common locatian is under study. .The Communications Department would be
moved in 2007 with the Operations Department moving into the vacated space on an inferim basis.
Remodeling of the space for Operations would be required and once Communications has
relocated. This project will be phased over two years. The facility build-out will occur in 2007 and
the equipment installation will be in 2008.
Securitv Improvements
Perimeter Fence/Gate Barrier Svstem $6,400,000
This project is part of a phased program to strengthen the perimeter security fence and
airtield access gates. Proposed work includes the replacement of the existing chain link
fence with a welded wire mesh fence. The new fence will be constructed on a concrete
retaining wall in areas susceptible to vehicle intrusions. Jersey barriers will be placed in
front of gates not in use and a hydraulic crash barrier wiil be constructed at one gate
location.
C Concourse Elevator to D Street $360,000
Currently, the C Concourse elevator stops at the concourse level. MAC staff has requested that
this elevator be modified to ailow for access to D Street. This would allow the MAC trades to get lift
equipment used to change lights and clean high areas to the east end of the C Concourse.
ANOMS SVstem Upqrade $500,000
To ensure continued application of the Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems (ANOMS)
technology, it is necessary to provide for periodic system upgrades. The upgraded system would
consist of three main components: new analysis system sofkware; upgraded analysis system
hardware; and a multilateration flight track acquisition system. The multilateration system wauld
include installation of 6-9 remote sensors that provide precise aircraft tracking and positional
information by interrogating aircraft transponder signals and triangulating an aircraft's exact
position. The project would include complete installation of all components associated with the
ANOMS central processing system. Modem connectivity would be installed and the system would
be integrated with the existing 39 Remote Monitoring Terminals (RMTs) and integration with all
ANOMS central processing computers.
Concessions Revenue Development/Upqrades $200,000
This project will fund miscellaneous upgrades (finishes, furniture, condiment stations, etc.), signage
and/or modified connections to utilities for the concession programs at the Lindbergh and
Humphrey Terminals.
ARFF Station #2 Roof Replacement $230,000
A roof condition study completed in 2006 indicates that the roof on the old ARFF station has
reached its useful life and is need of replacement.
ADO Modifications $400,OQ0
The MAC Airport Director's O�ce (ADO) kitchenette. and copy area requires modification and
consolidation of functions to accdmmodate additional offices to support communication and
coordination within the ADO and associated departrnents. This project will add three o�ces, a
modified kitchenette, break room, and copy center.
Sanitarv Sewer/Manhole Repair — Runwav 12L $600,000
The 12-inch sanitary sewer that is located in the approach to Runway 12L was constructed in 1948
ufilizing vitrified clay pipe and brick and mortar manholes. Cleaning of this sewer has been
� � hindered by blockages in the pipe and this line was televised to determine the condition of the pipe.
-' The televising report indicated cracked and broken sections of pipe. A complete replacement of
the pipe and manholes is being considered versus repairing only those pipe sections that have
deteriorated.
12/14/06 11
Unallocated Allowance $35,000
A total of $15M has been allocated for new projects in 2008. There is currently $35,000 that has
not been allocated and may be used to fund new work.
2020 Development Program �
2010 Projects deferred to 2020 Program
Ground Services Equipment Buildinq Relocation $5,500;000
This project provides for the relocation of the exisiing ground service equipment (GSE) building to rnake
way for the expansion of gates at the Hurnphrey Terminal.
Humphrey Terminal �
Humphrev Terminal Expansion $83,000,000
The Humphrey Terminal wi�l be expanded from 10 gates to 22 gates over a three-year period. The
expansion will inciude the construction of 12 new gates and all associated facilities including ticketing,
baggage claim, baggage make up and in-line baggage screening, road improvements, new aircraft apron
and hydrant fueling at all gates.
Auto Rental Facilities $16,300,000
This project provides for auto rental facilities including counters, back office and ready and return facilities
for all on-airport auto rental providers as well as a new quick-turn-around (QTA) facility to serve vehicles at
the Humphrey Terminal.
�
�;
12/14/06 12
t��4
�,
O
0.
C
d
d
O
L
a
�
� �
t�
U
ti
O
O
N
c
m
w d � �
Q � O
O
U � o c�
Q- a
E
�
i
� y
w � ;+
� 0
ro i•� N
v aa
E
- c
� n. o �
o m= �
a` � �" c'
c o �
a � 'a ° a�i
3 o c �
c � � °�
0 J C O �
x�� m a�
> �
C � � p tA
O N
� � tA d' Z
a �
> >
� �
0
0
O
O
O
O
r"
v>
0
0
0
O
O
O
ti
E!!
0
0
0
O
O
�
CO
� I
��
0 0
0 0
0 0
o co
� �
H? ff3
O O
O O
O O
� �
0 0 0
C7 O O
O O O
� � O
�s
0 0 0'
0 0 0
O O 4'I
Vi H3 �
�3
a o 0 0 0
O p O O O
O O O O O
(7 M � � C1
Ei3
�i �
0 0 0 0 0
00 � u`�io
N N � � t-
ff} f�Ii � ffl
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
N N � Ch c0 tD
rfl in � �s � �a
0
0
0
0
O
O
M
N
�r
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
� o 0
� CV N + + • « «
� �
O O O
O O O
O O O
O O O
O O O
V' O O
� N N + * +� t •
EA ff3
a o 0
0 0 0
o O O
V' O O
� N N s s ♦ + �
� �
0 0 0
a o 0
O O O
V O O
� N N + � + s *
Efi} y3
0 0 0
0 0 0
O O O
� O O
�'�N�a t * +.� t
0 0 0
0 0 0
� u�i o
�' r- N � w • x �
E9 ft} I
O O O
O O O
O O O
0 0 0
� � O
� � � i� �k 1� �k ii
� N N
d � • � m
Z Z � � ` � �
c �
O � o 0 o d o a
� ._
0 0 " ``� " E a�i �� Q.
NN � � Na� � ��Q�
� � a E y c� �
� ir�o E � � � m m a E � :u c c c�� m�S
0 o c� U o �` a 3 3 � �.� �� c g� � a(� c
c� co, � o.� � c c o a� N m o ro o �w m�. o n. �
� � Q c m o. � o. ��' o� � n. = _�'o � tA m
o = Q � � m � o
0 op_ E � a�� n.'=�tf L�_ :n'v� w�=
� o � ��:° E c c:n c ro m c. 'c 'n ,_ � o ds �
� � o � U � = g � :n c�a o o m °� � .c w °' `° N � � v � m =
c c ro n�a�i � rn�:° m.f0c °� � ro w E �i � �� � o� c� � t° €�
E .o. .o o � C� o � :6 � � p`, :n :fl � � > � °� a�i � �� � �� .t°c o�
Z° ��� U o ro a o m -a c�° �° � d'E � � E�,� a� �. a�i � F� .�
�� �� � U 3 = � a�i o a� o a'�i a'=i � m'Q :� > i� 'v W�� v
a m mZ �UIro �'_' ��-,� "���� : � � � �a ���.c G cL j.
c �c �c ro o � � m a�i a�i . �y � a�i a=i � ,Q � @ ' � � � � :o . . a »3
;;� v v o V 3 0 �� �� o m�� o ,� E o .c ,o c c.5 a€i �€� o
� ai m� � m� a'�i � m m� � m m� �°3 � � m m� m I- i- f- '= j
,"'��'(� �F-fn �¢aau� ��o..(n =5fn ,�JaF- Ui
m� d � •� . �
i Z � Q 0..'' F� ,j
u�
0
�
�
�
(CS
�
�
0
O
N
V'
�
N
�
0�
C
cO
a
r
C
dc
G
� �
O Q
� N
�
�
=
a
U
0
w.+
G
W
� ; f�9 �
Q O
O
U ` � N
Qa
E
�+
C
d �
+ y �
� � •� �'
N
v c a`
E
0
0
0
#
0 0
O O
� ~ I
�
0
O
O
O
O
tt
�?
z
0 0 0
� v o
� � �
N
.0
O
?+
�
'8 q
� O
'O p
'` O
❑. O
.�O H>
O '
U
N
,�',, , O . . �` .
Q O
y 4
� O
O
� �
v�- �
� �
C
:o :
�
�
u.
�
0 0 0
O O t�
�n
M � �
�
0
0
0
0
0
�
0 0
0 0
0 0
� �
0 0 0 0 0
� O O M C+�)
� �
� �
0 0 0 0 0 0
v � �. � o �
M
�' � � ffl. -fl��-. �j
L �
L
� O
� ?.
�
O
O
O� O � O O O O O O� ��O
> p '>
�� a O O O O O O� t(j
� � � � � � � N � � O) p_ � . .
ffl .a M � �
p � � � O
U V
N �
'p � •d
O tl. O C7 O O O O Q O
O� O O O O O O� � O
�O ' O o O � O o O � O
0�0 �O . M O PN7 � � � O O) O (Lj ..
tf} [fT �. N N , y3. �,- � v- . �. .
m . K3 bq. . 6F} b4 � . . . .
a 'v
� �
u =
� � �
0 0
O O O O p q
O m
�� � � �
� �
0
o �`
o ,�
o �
i. N
�
� i �
�
0 0
0 0
0 0
M M
N N
E1} ({}
�
N
L
O
�
O �
O �
C�O Q_
EF} �
�
4
U
N J
O /
O � ,' . �
O N
O w
� O
rn
c
�o
�
�i
t
O
O
O
0
0
v:
�
�
0
.�° rn
= o �
o � � �
x �
'ro c C �
:o � � Q = c+� co
m � �
� °� �° T � � o o � a�i a�i � . ....
�a WX''S m 'U� c'�e E � c
z o — o w E o c
c� c c � 2 2 � o Q •� o
5. � �N N 41 .. fA N V� O.� O
� Q Q� .. d Q Q. •� � . p �U � V U � G ��� y C N� � > O y�
� � �a o 0 0 �a • m ;g � � � E :v o � '� � p �� c v,
.� � � � C > > > � .G ,t�„0 O _ � 2� ,,�,rO � — U W � � � � � U O
N N N �
� �_ � m0�� � � � a�is�m . . m c.c��Nq Q.�°cN�
rn. `a;n fY ��� d� � m���� �`a��ao;o m�MN
p •_ �� �QQQ � � o � e.. ��m �. o .= a ��<t
� m m �E o U c c c� m o �` � m m o o`O m� m m m m�° o� E c� c� � '
'C . �c �>.n v v v a� 3 a� 3 3 V 5�', : rn a� 3 3 3� � E c�, 3� o �
a � o o m � Y a �' � ro > >. � °� � m � � � rn °? m m � > > o � W m m � > >
�� o
L mzrnn.u� pmmma�cn u+Qoa��cn c¢=����cncn ;�w���u� N
¢ �Q � . "y . � U .. . LL . J � . V'�'
j� � � � � � . . � � �
d N
s-
G�
Y ..
C
¢d
a
C
d
�
i '
O
L
�C
G
�
'a
co
U
v
N
j G
� L �I
O
i � N
ia`
i N
: .«+
� aUi o
1 �O N
L a
O O O
O O O
0 0 0
0 0 0
O O N
� � H3
O O O
O O O
O O O
(fl Cf} �
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O O O� O
� � � r
�
I�i O O O O O 'I
0 0 0 0 0
, o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
� O O �Y M
. fA� d} F,F} �} �
�ri
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0� o0
� � e- N
Ef} EfT
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
� � � � W
� �
O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
N � 'ct M
�' N � � N t[')
� � �
N I
0
:a
�.
�
.,.—�. �
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
N M �
� N �
�}
olo
O O O O
O O O O
0 o c
0 o c
0 o c
0 o c
O O C
O> CO �!'
s- t7 tf
fii 64 Efi
o. o
a o
0 0
0 0
u� o .
� `D
'�!'
64
0
0
0
0
0
0
�tf
T
�
0
0
0
0
0
�
M.
EF}
o O o
O O O
O O O
O O O
O O O
� � �
�:. �
O O O O
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
O O O
M � '
4/3 6/} !� � EH
u'i
�
0
M
�
m
t6
�
� I
N
Q
� � i
'O E �� �
•� � cb _ O ��I
CO —
m m o � N �v U
c Q
z o oa o � � � o
c .c 'c o a � .� � � �.° � ¢
�.
� N m '°��-c ��c m U o'� ro m o. � � -- I
�� W uJ ,� � �.'G �. U. o � _� c E I
E m 'c� c in ' n u� ��� p�9 � a� a> >, �> E�
� o � €_ �xs ���mv � p o a�n
n`. o o � � � � a �' � � ` � .c � � °' E u, �
m m � a� � i.,,�i� � L � � � > Q
.� 'N O� S' ' S� �„ o u- �a rn� Q Q- � .� u� n.o� y I
U� � 2�� N c a tn . ¢�
e. a�i �`° c c° 3 v � o'a y m o o u) ��� ��
� m m = a� p, � c c �� ro'o a. o m
¢ W dS v � �¢ ��� m o c v v � o c�•c in n �
m � � 3 �u q ag�.=..� � y m� n� �
°� � m� � v�.� a�� ��d mm � m� � c?� o a�i
r � m E�a . o m[Y � �� J Q � rn�� p o�� � t0 ��
�� (p � N N ��� � � . CO
o Q� m. m .� � m � m o � �,� -���-° a. V V o �{ U, a � a`� . a� i ;� m . p ���..
= a ro d tn ro tn .T t� � a�i �' � m a�i � 4 Q � d � c �:c :c � a �
� L Q J LL (/i � Sc (A � U = �L � !/) •� Q _I W U C) J � .
�
'm � c�i °' N
�
� � � Z
��
C
Uf �
y ` �
� � O
O
� 0 N
�a
D y
v a�i o
� �O N
ia
O
O
O
O
O
�
th
E9
O
0
0
0
0
r:
�
O O O
4 O O
O O O
O � N
�
� 6�9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O p O O O O
tf� O O O O � ��f! O
� � � � � � �
N
�
0 0
� �
f9 �
O O O O
0 0 00
0 0 00
n o o �
" ' �
c�r En ui
O O O O O O O
N`�m o o m rn
�-' 64 N tfl . EF}
EA Efi: EH E9 d3
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
.� n � � � . . .� � .
� 'Ep'� ffl'� . �.
�} � . f9 .6F3 ' E�}
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M 0�0 t�0 m O N �� .
EF} �fF} H} � ({}
tt! � �
0
0
0
O
O
N
�3
O
O
O
O
O
N
�3
0
O
O
O
0
N
Ef}
O
0
0
0
0
�
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
O O O O O O
Cfl O O M O O
M tn N N<!' CO
EPr �? f9 ER F}3 F!�}
0
0
O
O
0
�
0 0
0 0
O O
O O
O O
c0 O
V u�
� �
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
N O
d' u�
� �
O O
V�'_ O
� �
�
O O O
0 00
0 00
C'> 1 y O
� � r
fF}
0 0
� o
�
Ef?
fJ3
C? O
O O
4n O
EA O
�
fff
°3
X
« �, ,
0 0 0 0� j
0 0 0 o v
O O O O N
O O O O C
o a o 0
' CO M i _ CO �.�-
� � �-- O O
� � �
d
'o
d
+
�
� � � J
G C � �
O
�m E � > a ` � a � o
c � > in a o o� � � m�
� c `o. c � � � � � � c u�i � "� �
E o tj � � a� p � ` � fY
� a�i c o E o E v a� c � E '� c m,-as" o E� . c Y � �
� � � � � � w . � ` � m Q . ° � o � m � m � '� m �n � a � � � � - �
r E._. � a� ��N n�v�cp °� > m � a�mvJ o
� � ,rtn a�i c� o . � c a � � � � � m m � a� m � € � a� _' tO m � � � � � � `�
m 4 c�, Q� c°c� C� � a�-i rn.�o a v aci �� ��= Ii �� ��0 ��� o � V� c� �
� v, �- > ''S'c = � � u.1 m � `o [C � E � @ U � E o � c a� � U' �0 > � � � N '� � � �Q � �
Q ti� " Q � m rn v� a� •` � o�= o� a� �� N �� w• ���b
��—� .c � ii �. o � o t6 �- t� �-Y U�� o aGi L ro ii � u' � W� a� �k � a� �€ � n-
u) `t �j. w � rn . � a> Q o � c� N• V o. a`- �'� o m� in IY c � 3 a� c. Q �
� t° � a� � ti W � !� �' � � S u�.. °0 '� a� � � c � � � � � m � � � cn o 'ro � � v >. � m Z
c.3c r�i � �+ m V,� ��° coi >, >. �`� c Cj ��.�` � �¢ in rn;u v cai tn N iA � Z.' >, � m � m
rn rn�, �€�_� o.o � o m mz. E p� E m•� m m�. o m� m c� ��� c.., u t A Q. m o 0
�_ ��Cti= ou.�a U�S,€ E-rno E a� od dtnn.m � V�� o�p m�� j c�
°a� c�� E c�-in 3iiUtA�F�'UF=u�..C�Oti� U,QU<t�ttnu.=Q�tn
�>�a�ii��n z
���.._...��1— d
,',. y � y fLC 00
L�. +1 . � O',�..
U ` o N ,.
Qa
E
++
c
� N
� � r-�
� •
N O
� O O N
V aa
E
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
iri iri
� �
O O
O O
O O
O O
N N
vi E»
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
� � �
o O O O O O O o O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O q O O O � O 4 O O O O O
O . O O O. O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O p O � � O s- (O � m�
CF �Y V- N N �.f) W 'cF N C�J N�
tf3 r 6v9 N Ef} i- .- 64 EH d3
ff} EH 64 Ff} H3
I O O O O O O
O O O O O O
O '
� - � O 4 O O O O ..
O . O) O V r tt) O .''.
O _ �
O � � � � � �
�
� �
Ef}
O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O O
C� O O O O
� U) O M M
� E/} CO � O? .
s� �r �
O
O
O
O
O
'�7'
�i'
N
Ef3
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
vvao
r" ri o
� � �
�� 69
O p
O O
O O
O O
O h
6r'9 E/>
�
m c
� 'c
, Q a�
c �
I O. O V
���.,. N ."'�' � � N N N
Y � � � C
. ,�5, lII N � � (6 N
� "G � m O G N C � Ll. Q.
m�'� � fp C N O p � G.? i �
rn'm � m o o �y � m �m �� o m m
� V O O p) Ip CV � �' G p t� p N E C C
� � � C G C _ O � �E . € C p �� tCO � � C �
. O t6 C � p =' .O N � C N � ' > � � N � fU
C I— U �� F— N F—
c�a N m �a o cUi ��°� m �ro °� o>, a� t� 4. a�i � �.� � v�i a�i .c
� o c c � � c � � � �C = .� � m -o `a � T ai rn � � � rn
� v � � � � � E o � � m � o. � m � E cYi � ,p � � � �
�. �I�F� �`'i�V o m� ` �� � � W�C�V � � � ° c� � �
a�
d N� m� 0? m lU N � � �" C V C � O N N� J C U� J i
� 0 = lp �' m tII = T�p � ro RS � J m:D p t0 F �� IO
Q fU N m t� N� til O � O. � C� O �� � tn (n O C i. p �
m.«+ N � `�i U N p� U
� � c c� aQi c m� F' 3� o � m� � o � m� ro� � d o� .
Q�.J J C.� �' J CO fn L S(n C� Q F- UJ � C.i F- fd U CCl (n .� Q U fn t
Q N N
� �,
N N = J .J
��I
���
,..�'��..��. N . . .
H9
O
O
O
O
�
�
rn
�
0
0
0
(D
O
O
N
'd'
N
r
I,�� �'� � . �,� Y,. �,f��,; aE � A .t ... �';•� �tifeE �•> � F � � :,;� � ;' � �,.'�� 4�i �t � Z,�, °••�i.-
.�
����
����_
.7�'�-K;ly`i4':�L
L�"l�k�',`�:
��
� �'1111ACS:�w
.�,�,�, y�. �J �,�, �..,:�:
December 12, 2006
Minneapolis-Saini Paul International Airport
6040 - 28th Avenue South � Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
Phone(612)726-8100
Jim Danielson, Administrator
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4106
RE: 2007-2013 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
DECEMBER 6, 2006, FINANCE, DEVELOPMENT, & ENVIRONMENT MEETING MINUTES
Dear Mr. Danielson:
The Finance, Development, and Environment Committee of the Metropolitan Airports
Commission on Wednesday, December 6, 2006 recommended to the full Commission adoption
of the 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Program with no modifications. The spreadsheet and
( ) project narratives previously sent to you remain unchanged.
Enclosed are the minutes from the December meeting as well as the agenda for the December
18, 2006 Commission meeting.
Sincerel ,
� ��
>
Robert J. Vorpahl, P.E.
Program Development Engineer
RJV/Irk
Enclosures
cc: Nigel Finney, MAC
Gary Warren, MAC
CIP File
FD&E Packet
Day File
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative acHon employer.
www.mspairport.com
Reliever Airports: AIRLAI<E e ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE o CRYSTAL • FLYIIVG CLOUD e LAKE ELMO • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
� C
C
,, , . M�iropole�an e4irpo�s �ornmiss�on
a
, � - • � . •' • , �
Regular Monthly Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
10:00 am
y ,�'`�x'f ,�-rl }7}� �i' �, . ��
. . . . ' . ` � C, ��� �;�. (� � ^��
� � �� �ft �+�.Ai� �t�� „ i�
r°� L�L���������.��ri'�
�::..
�' � www.mspairport.com
Finance, Development & Environment Committee
December 6, 2006
Page 4 �
the Part 150 Litigation item; the Co-Chairs ciarified that the updates would be strictly
infarmationai.
COMMISSIDNER LANDY. MOVED AND COMMISSIUNER WILLIAMS SECC�NDED TO
RECOiVIMEND TO THE FULL COMMISSION APPROVAL OF THE 2007 NOISE OVERSIGHT
COMMITI'EE WORK PLAN (CONTAINED IN THE CO�VIMII?EE PACKAGE}. THE MOTION
CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. .
A9. 2007-20'13 CAPITAL IMPROVEIVIENT PROGRAM — CF 278
a. Environmental Review
Nigei Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment, reported that
since Commission approval of the Preliminary 2007-2013 Capital improvement Program
(CIP) on September 18, 2006, the environmentai review process has continued as
scheduled. One document was prepared to meet the requirements of the legislation
prior to final action on the CIP. This document was an Assessment of Environmental
Effects (AOEE) for the Meiropolitan Airports Commission Seven-Year Capital
Improvement Program (2007 — 20'13). This document examines the cumulative
environmental effects af the projects in the seven year CIP at each of the MAC's seven
airports.
On November 8, 2006, a public hearing to receive public testimony was held as part of �
the Finance, Development & Environment Committee meeting in Room 3040,
Mezzanine level of the Lindbergh Terminal. The hearing was advertised in the
Minneapolis Star Tribune, Sf. Paul Pioneer Press and EQB Monitor. One person
representing the South Metro Airport Action Council (SMAAC) testified at the hearing.
The public record remained open until 5:00 p.m. on November 22, 2046_ Three letters
were received providing camments regarding the AOEE.
A proposed "Hearing Officer's Report" was included in the Committee package for
adoption by the Committee as hearing o�cers. The report includes the Findings of Fact
and Recommendation for the ADEE. A copy of the letters received as well as the
responses for the AOEE and a copy of the transcript of the Public Hearing were also
included. Specific project comments will be addressed as part of the appropriate project
specific environmental processes.
CC�MIUIISSlOiVER WILL.IAMS MOVED AND COMMlS510NER MARS SECONDED TO
RECOMMEND TO THE FULL COMMISSION THE ADOPTION C�F THE HEARING
OFFICER'S REPORT, INCLUDING THE FINDtNGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING THE ASSESSMENTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED
2007-2013 CAPITA� IMPROVEMENT PRC?GRAIVI. FURTHE�2, THAT THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE BE AUTHORIZED TO NaTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTA�
QUA�ITY BCIARD AND TH03E ON ITS DISTRIBUTION LIST i0F THE COMMISSION
ACTION. THE MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
�
Finance, Development & Environment Committee
December 6, 2006
Page 5
b. Adiacent Communitv Review Process
Nigel Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment, reported that
Legisiation concerning local review of the CIP (MS473.621 Subd 6 as amended)
requires the Commission to complete a process to provide "affected municipalities"
surrounding the airport the opportunity for discussion and public participation in the
Cammission's CIP process. An "affected municipality" is a municipality that is either
adjacent to a MAC airport, is within the noise zone of a MAC airport as defined in the
Metropolitan Development Guide, or has notified the Commission that it considers itself
an "affected municipality.° The legisiation requires that the Gommission provide
adequate and timely notice including a description of the projects in the CIP to each
affected municipaliiy. .
Three letters were received� providing comments on the CIP. A copy of the letters
received and responses is included in Appendix A(contained in the Committee
package).
THIS WAS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM ONLY; NO C�MMTfEE ACTION WAS
REQUESTED.
Steve Busch, Director of Finance, reviewed the 2007 - 2013 Capital lmprovement
Program funding. He noted that the program will be funded from a variety of sources that
include Passenger Facility Charges, Federal Grants, MNDOT Grants, intemally generated
funds and prior bond proceeds (including commercial paper). No new debt will be issued
unless the 2020 Plan moves forward (driven by demand). Based on informaiion
presented, su�cient funds are available to.fund the 2007 - 2013 Capital Program. In
addition, MAC will have approximately $150 million available in commercial paper as a
contingency. A table showing the sources of funds and a list of funding by project for
2007, 2008, and 2009 was included in the Committee package.
THIS WAS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM ON�Y; NO COMMITTEE ACTION WAS REQUESTED.
. • .. _ • .. .
Nigel Finney, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment, reported that
concurrent with the public review process pe�taining ta the environmental and affected
municipality review of the draft 2007-2013 CIP, additional information has become
available regarding the estimated costs for projects listed in the CIP and three new
prajects have been added. The projects that are to be included in the New Projects
Allowance have also been listed. A copy of the revised CIP spreadsheet and narratives
were contained in the Cammittee package.
Finance, Development & Environment Committee
• December 6, 2006 (-
Page 6 �,,
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS MOVED AND COMMISSIONER LANDY SECONDED TO
RECONIMEND TO THE FULL COMMISSION ADOPTION OF THE 200?-2013 CIP AS
MODIFIED; AUTHORtZE STAFF TO. HAVE PLANS AND SPECIFIC/�TIONS PREPARED
AfVD ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR THE 2007 PRCIJECTS; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO
CONDUCT FURTHER STUDIES AS APPROPRIATE AND DEVELOP PLANS APJD
SPECIFICATIDNS FOR THE 2008 PRCIJECTS, UTILIZING CONSULTANT SERVICES, TO
REFINE THE PROJECTS FOR INCLUSIt�iV (N THE FOLLOWING YEAR'S PROJECT
CATEGORY; AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CONDUCT 5TUDIES AND:DEVELUP PRELIMIiVARY
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 2009 PROJECTS UTILIZING CONSULTANTS AS
NECESSARY; AUTHORIZE STAFF TU INITIATE APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION TO
APPLY FOR FEDERAL, STATE AND PFC FUNDING; RECOMMEND TO THE COMMISSION
APPROVAL t�F THE FIVE YIEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (2009-2013) AS A GUIDE
TO THE. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR �'HEIR REVIEW, PURSUANT TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE METROPOLITAN INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK GUIDELIPIES;
AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECT�R C?R HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE THE
NECESSARY DOCUiUIENTS. THE MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
A10. BOND REFUPIDING UPDATE — CF 27�1
Sieve Busch, Director of Finance, reported that in structuring this bond refunding, staff,
along with First Albany and Kutak Rock, have been reviewing two altematives, a
Conventional Advance Refunding Bond lssue and a Private Placement, in an effort to
maximize current savings opportunities. ��
in order to preserve MACs options, Staff is seeking Commission approval to proceed
with the negotiations and documentation required to execute a private placement of fhe
bonds. However, at the same time, the financing team wi0 continue to explore the
viability of a conventional sale in early 2007. All details and documentation for a private
placement would be presented for approval at the full Commission meeting on December
18.
COiVIMISSIONER MCKASY MOVED AND COMMISSIONER LANDY SECUPVDED THAT THE
FINANCE, DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMEIVT COMMITTEE AUTHORIZE STAFF TO
PROCEED WITH tdEGOTIATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED FUR EXECUTtON OF
A PRIVATE PLACEMENT BOND REFUNDING IN ORDER TO PRESERVE MAC'S OPTIONS.
ALL DETAILS AND DOCUMENTATION F(?R A PR{VATE PLACEMENT WOULD BE
PRESENTED FOR APPROVAL AT THE FU�L COMMISSlON MEETING ON DECEMBER 18.
THE IVIOTION CARRIED BY UNANINIOUS VOTE.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:40 p.m.
�
- � � 1 �• c � - �-� - •�
• ' � •
FULL COMMISSION
Jack Lanners, Commission Chair
Bert McKasy, Commissian Vice Chair
Daniel Boivin, HR/AA Chair
Tom Foley
Pat Harris
Mike Landy, M&O Chair
Robert Mars
Tammy McGee, FD&E Chair
Paul Rehkamp
Molly Sigel `
Sherry Stenerson
Greg Warner
John Williams
METROPOL.ITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
FULL COMMISSION
Monday, December 18, 2006 1:00 p.m.
Room 3040, Lindbergh Terminal
Wold-Chamberlain Field
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
AGENDA
� ��� CONSENT � � � �
, Reports
1. Monthly and Year-To-Date Passenger Activity Reportand IndustryUpdate
Approval of Minutes
a- Regular November 20, 2006
Lease Actions
a- Recommendation Re: Airport Leases
Accounts
a� Approval of Bills, Expenses, Payrolls, Transfers of Funds, etc.
Finance. Development and Environment Committee
A1 Reports
a. Budget Variance Report - October 2006
b. Statements of Revenues and Expenses and Changes in Net Unrestricted Cash -
October
c. DISCUSSION Accounts Receivable Summary .
d. Budget Impact Report Regarding Management and Operations Committee Action
Items
e. Change Management Policy and Project Status Report
f. Bloornington Land Acquisition Status Report
A2 Final Payments - MAC Contracts
a. Runway 4/22 Reconstruction Segment 3
b. 2006 Multi-Family Sound Insulation Program BP#3
c. South Maintenance Fueling Facility .
A3 Semi-Final Payment - MAC Contract 4
a. South End Runway 17/35 Construction
A4 Bids Received - MAC Contracts
a. Humphrey Terminal Parking Facility Expansion BP#R2 - Finishes and LRT
Modifications
A5 Noise Oversight Committee - 2007 Work Plan
A6 DISCUSSION - Airline Year-End Reconciliations
a. 2005 - Actual Year-End Reconciliation
b. 2006 Forecasted Year-End Reconciliation
A7 DISCUSSION - Acquisition of Jet Loaders and Outbound Baggage Systems
A8 DISCUSSION - 2007 Operating Budget Final Presentation
A9 2007-2013 Capital Improvement Program
a. Environmental Review
b. Adjacent Community Review Process
c. Program Funding
d. Program Approval
A10 Bond Refunding Update
DISCUSSION
Finance, Development and Environment Committee
A - Reports
c. Accounts Receivable Summary
A6 Airline Year-End Reconciliations
A7 Acquisition of Jet Loaders and Outbound Baggage Systems �,
A8 2007 Operating Budget Final Presentation
Manaqement and Operatinns Committee
B1 USDA Wildlife Services Contract
B2 2007 Property and Casualty Insurance Renewals
B3 MAC Staffing Presentation
NEW BUSINESS
1. Bond Refunding - Private Placement Document Approval
2. Northwest Airlines Presentation
OLD BUSINESS
PUBLIC APPEARANCES
Materials for this meeting are available at the following website: �
www.mspairport.com/MAC-Public Meetinqs/Full Commission
_ _ _ _ � :. .
Stop by the information booth near the tram station on ihe Tram Level. At the information booth, you
wili be asked to complete a security checkpoint access form and show valid, government-issued
photo identification, such as a driver's license. Take your completed access form with you up two
floors, to the Ticketing Level security checkpoints. Show your approved access form to security
checkpoint personnel. You wili then be screened just as if you were traveling. Access forms are onfy
valid for the purpose of attending a public MAC meeting at a particular date and time.
Commission Chambers are located on the Mezzanine Levei overlooking the airport's central shopping
area (above Chili's Restaurant), past the main security checkpoints.
Allow yourse(f at least 30 minutes to park, compiete the access form and get through the security
checkpoint prior to the rneeting.
Parkina wilf be validated; please brina vour parkinq ticket to the meetinQ.
Directions to the Tram Level Information Booth
From short-term parking: At the Lindbergh Terminal entrance, take the escalator or elevator down
to the Tram Level. The information booth is straighi ahead, in the center of the room.
From generai parking: If you park in the Blue or Red ramps, take the elevator down to the tram,
which will transport you directly ta the Lindbergh TerminaPs Tram �evel. When you exit the iram, �the
( � infarmation booth is straight ahead, in the center of the room. if you park in the Green or Goid
`-- ' ramps, take the skyway to the Lindbergh TerminaPs Mezzanine Level. From there, take an elevator
or escalator to Tram Level. The information booth is straight ahead, in the center of the room.
� i'
A Quacterly Publicapon of che MetropoGtan Airports Commissivn Aviarion Noise and Satellite Piograms
- _ : ' . - -
�', ,r � % . 1 L- � � �
In 1990, the U.S. Co�gress
passed the Airport Noise and
�a�acity Act requiring alI aircraft
t�vei�lung over 75,OQU pounds
operating in the United States
(with nunor e,cceptions) to ineet a
new noise certiiication standard
by Ja�uary l, 2000.
Thc new "Stage 3" standlyd
representecl a rn.ajor
advancei11ei1t in �►ii�craft noise
recluction and is based on aiz
aircraft's cveight and nun7ber of
eizgines. Ulzder the Stage 3
standaz•d, heati�.er aucraft t11at
requue more thrust are allo�ved
i� �to get�erate inore iloise tha�1
���-'�lighter aucraft. Yet, coizlpared
with tlze earliest jet �ircraft frazn
the 1JGOs, Stage 3 aircr�ft �ue ZO-
30 decibels c�uieter.
Options to Quiet Aircraft
Airlines w°ere given tluee ol�tions
for tr�nsitioning to aiz �l] Stage 3
aircraft fl�et: {:1) l�urchasene�v
aircraft that were manufact�.lred
to ineet the izew standlyd, (2)
moclify their airplanes' existing
Stage 2 ci�gines with a noise
recluction clevice to malce them
colnl�liant - a Z�rocess gei�erally
referred to as "husl�l:itting," or
(3) coinpletely replace the Stage 2
en�i�aes oiz existing aucraft with
new Stage 3 engilzes.
Se�eral companies made the
decision to hushkit their older
aircraft, such as the 1vlcDonnell
Douglas DC-9 and the Boeing 727.
�\ �.,�1lthough hush]utted aircraft
meet the Stage 3 noise stanclard,
these aucraft are still considered
to be the noisiest aircraft
operatulg at our nation's airports,
includiiig Milvleapolis-St. Paul
International (1vISP).
In fact, it is estinzated that one
hushkit DC-9 aircraft takeoff
generates the same amoLuzt of
noise energy as 15 Airbus 319
talceoffs or 43 Bomnbarclier CRJ-
200 talceoffs (l�ased on Sound
Exposure Levels recorded at the
Metropolitan Airports
Conunissioll's iloise monitor
nLunber 6 in Min.nea�olis?.
Highs and Lows
The number of hushkit �nd
Stage 2 aircraft operations at
MSP reached an all-tilne high of
over 1G,aoo in Jl,�y 199G. After
t11e January l, 2000 de�dline
passed, MSP experienced 13,OU1
hushkit o�erations. Later that
year, uz August, there were over
15,500 hushlcit ol�erations at
the auport.
Aftei Septelnber 11, 2001,
however, the number of },
montla.lj= hushkit aircraft �
operations dropped i
s�anificantly to only 9,450. I
. �
More recently, hushkit �
operations clropped to an all- �
rime low of 4,95G in Fel�ruaiy , I
200G ancl were re�ortecl at
5,458 in Septelnber 200G. :
What does the future hold?
At this same time, use of ne�i7er,
qlueter manufactL�red Stage 3
aircraft is on the rise.
Ii1 July 2000, MSP experienced
only 279 Bonlbarctier CRJ
operations. Six years later there
were 7,902 such operations
re��resentilzg � oile-lnonth high
at MSP. With airfrarne and wing
design inlprovements and state-
of-the-art engine noise
reducrion technology, this type
of aircraft represents one of the
quietest and znost efficient
aircraft operating at MSP today.
Reductions in aircraft noise
coiztinues to be investigated
b�th natiol�ally and
internationally �vitli manS� •
inanufacti.irers seeking out the
(Contiraued an page 3)
1�! '�h� �t�VVS— Birds Provide Inspiration for Noise Reduction
"Qnieter Aircraft to Talce Cues �he che�non shape, such as
from Sirds, NASA Expert Says" - tliloring thein arld inalcing them
National Geographic News, l�on-uniform, can reduce noise
Augusi 22, 2006 even further.
For years the National Aeronautics
and Space Aclministration (NASA),
along with the aircraft
inanufacturing industry, has been
studying �vays to reduce the noise
caused by aircraft when tlley are
talcing off, landing or in flight.
Several areas on a coznznercial jet
aii:craft have been identified as
sources of noise, primarily the
engines and the airframe.
Taking Cues from Nature
For centuries hunz�ils have bcen
looking to nature for inspiration,
and understanding flight is
certair�7.y Iza exception. In fact, the
sfiudy �f how birds fly has been
'ntegral to the devel�pment of
`' _.. :.�ne m.odern air��lane. ,�
Nlore recently, an e�pert in �
acoustics atNAS�1 said that
ne�v bird-inspired technologies are
helping engineers design quieter
aircraft.
For eYample, chevron nozzles
inilizic the j�gged pattern of some
bircis' �n�ngs and dampen
turl�ulence and reduce noise
comi.ng fr�m the engine.
Alreacly uz use in newer jet
eilbines, chevrons are attached to
the bacic of engines. They chai7ge
the flo�v of air as it passes through
tlle engine and reduces noise bp
about three decibels.
Researchers at NASA recently
found that small modificarions to
"The chevron nozzle is one of the
nzore recent success stories for jet
noise recluction," said Dennis Huff
a researcher at NASA's Glenn
Research Center.
Forward Motion
Other research has loolced at
reducing noise coming from an
aircraft's airfra�e.
High lift devices such as flaps and
slats, as well as an aircr�ft's
landing gear, contribute to
`�, the noise caused by
air flowing aver
� \ ,. an
aircraft's aufraine.
�Air passing;.
� over the
landing gear
while an airliner is on approach
cari also produce noise that is
soinetimes as louct as the aircraft's
engii7es. _
Placing a covcr, or a fairing; over
the landing gear reduces the
lnzount of contact with the air and
produces less noise. Early
laboratory tests show that this
technique may reduce noise by as
lnuch as four decibels.
To find out more about how birds
are inspiring researchers in
reducing aircraft noise, go to
htt�://news.Nationalgeographic
.com/news/ ancl type "aircraft
noise" into the search bar. A linlc t
the article referenced above will be
listed. o
LLe^ `""�r 2= 6t "+ "+ �Lz
ax r ,.n �arilc i`c.
� � ����,�� °F-��'�'���� �-�i r�� ��'� w
"��h-�'''���By��,t�r��um��+�rs�'��.�.��,�„
`�s 3�`f `�dn u ..�,^a � s.�.e
� � r� �, � � �,. �a �-„�.�.'�i�, r o-�'�;.�
� ��`R�ri�v��l����a�Su[t�ma � �'�"� �
�' '�' �b`e�27' ODS�,��Q�iaG"" � ° �D`�` `��
„"�,,��'-`n a� � �°� �� r�'���6��"°�'�:
k: ����`.����,�•
:n1.''�E'� -
35,144 - total number of
departures to the south off
Runway'17
15% - percentage of all departures
atthe airport using Runway 17
27,274 - totai number of arrivals
from the south on Runway 35
11.5% - percentage of all arrivals
at the airport using Runway 35
96.1% - percent compliance with
the Runway 17/35 Turnpoint
Procedure (October 2006=99.7% -
the highest monthly compliance
rate)
31,823 - number of complaints
received due to operations on
Runway 17/35
1,448 - number of households
logging complaints about
operations on Runway 17/35
243 - number of nighttime fiights
on Runway 17-35 (between 10:30
p.m. and 6 a.m.), an average of 19
per month
Quieter Aircraft
(Continued from page I)
latest technology since these
quieter, more efficient aircraft
enjoy a competitive advantage.
The Boeing Company, for
eYample, has developed the 787
Dreamliner, an aircraft made of
o light-weight coinposite material
and employing the latest in
aircraft engine and airframe
noise r�duction technology. The
aircraft is expected to emit 20
- decibels fewei, or better; thaii
' even the Stage 3 standard.e :
Web site: www.macnoise.com
Noise Complaint and Information Line: 612.726.9411
�PP+IS SAI'Y
r
2� -�- 9L
� �
� z
mt o
p 1 t N
p N
O' F
t .}: �o
9ry.4iRPORtS .
A�a<arterly PuGlication of the Nletroj�olitan Airj�ort.r
r
Comrrris.rian Aviation Noi.re ancl Satellite Programs
6040 28th Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Phone: 612-725-6455
E-mail: info@macnoise.com
Web site: www.macnoise.com
Managing Editor: Scott Skramstad
Editor and Layout: Melissa Scovronski
l,I�i��l�l,���ll���lll„L,I��I��,II11����11��11������111��1�1
�**�'t'°***AUTO**3-DIGIT 551 �
CARI LINDBERG
ADMINISTRATOR
11a1 VICTORIA CURV
MENDOTA HEIGHTS. MN 55118-4106
, , PRSRl' STD
US POSTAGE
�F\IL�
PERMIT N0.(
MINNEAPOLIS; ...�v
Fali 2006
�'
New Fac� �ehind #he Airport Noise s�ompl�Bnt and
In$ormation Line
inside this issue: Aaron Frase, who has been with the Metropolitan
Airports Commission (MA�) nearly four years and
Hushkit Aircraft on the 1 brings with him over 14 years of experience in
Decline, Quieter Aircraft aviation operations, is undertalcing a new role in the
Increasing noise office. Aaron w�ill be taking over the
responsibilities of the Noise Complaint and
NOC News 2 Information Line after l�ielissa Scovronsld recently
Ask rhe Controller 2 accepted a new positioiz in the NIAC's Ptiblic Affairs
clep artment
In the News— Birdr Pmvide 3
Inrpiration jorNorre Ked,rrtion FOT tI12 p1SY tI.1T2e y2c1TS, �laroil has operated and
n�aintained the NIA.C's Airport Noise and O�erltions,
Runway 17-35 Summary- 3 Nlonitorulg System (AN�NSS), gaining valuable
By rhe Nurnbers experience thlt ��ill heli� in his new capacity_ Aaron'`.
will utilize his degree in aviation operations, extensive
lcno��ledge of airport operations, and ANONIS to
respond to residents' inqturies and complaults and to
explain complex airport noise issues.o
Web site: www:macnoise.com
Noise Complaint a�d lniurmation Line: 612.726.9411
m
� 1= ' '1' .��1
1 ' -� ' � i � � �
�
. � . � � � . � �
� ��� ��
G
f' � � ��
Ot.�"�a-��� ` S y{�
S
� rr'�r4H1' CO�t��
'. � � .,. .' .. .' � ,� . � . . � �. . ' ..: . � •.:. .'.:,� ' �
.e - � • • � • - �- ilr
Complaint Summary
Noise Complaint Map
FA.A Available Time for Runway Usage
MSP All Operations Runway Usage
MSP Carrier Jet Operations Runway Usage
MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition
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 ` 10
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 11-14
MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoring Tower Site Locations Map 15
Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events 16
Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier. Jet Depariure Related Noise Events 17
Carrier Jet A.rrival Related Noise Events 1 g.
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events 19
MSP Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per RMT 20-32
:Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL ' 33-35
A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program
'
MSP Complaints by City
Novem.ber 2006
�� Note. Shaded Columns rcprescnt MSP compioints filed vio the Intcmet.
�\ Sum of % Tmsl of Compinin�s may not cqual 100% duc to rounding.
.( � � , "As of May 2005, the MSP Complainu by City report includes mut�iple
� compieint daeriptors per individuai comploini. Therefore, �he number of
�-��-- complaint dcscripiors may bc more than thc numbcr of reponed comploin�s.
Report Generated: 12/08l2006 12:02 - � -
e
MSP International Air�ort �
Aviation Noise Complaints for November 2006
,
Number of Complaints per Address
,
� �:; �' ;:
.. � :
1-3 4-12 13-26 27-37 38-50 51-101 102-211 212-518
' 2- Report Generated: 12l08/2006 12:02
Available Hours for Runway Use
November 2006
(Source: FAA Runway Use �ogs)
FAA Average Dail. Count
, � � , No�ember 2005 Ni
..�.. .....,._. ..._ �..... , .,
Air Carrier 813
Commuter 403
General Aviation 84
Militarv 8
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
:•
�
m
0
-3-
' ••- . s
' . • '•�• � - •• 11•
�- � _.
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. " �
" 4' Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Garrier Jet Operations
' . - '-•• • - �- 11•
Reporf Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding.
-5-
November 2006 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition
� FAR Part 36 Take ' a ; °` , � r , : , , � � k � .
, Type . ,Off No�se Levet „; s, A�rcraft Descr�ption ;,, Stage Count �� Percen'try' �
8741 109.4 Boeing 747-100 3 4 0%
DC10 103 McDonnell Douglas DC10 3 257 0.8%
B744 101.6 Baeing 747-400 3 70 0.2%
DC8Q 100.5 McDonnell Dougias DC8 Modified Stage 3 3 58 0.2%
MD11 95.8 McDannell Douglas MD11 3 6 0%
A330 95.6 Airbus Industries A330 3 180 0.6%
B72Q 94.5 Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3 3 342 1.1 %
8777 94.3 Boeing 777-200 3 3 0%
A300 94 Airbus Industries A300 3 165 0.5%
A310 92.9 Airbus Industries A31 Q 3 34 0.1 %
B73Q 92.1 Boeing 737 Modified Stage 3 3 6 0%
MD80 91.5 McDonnell Douglas MD80 3 993 3.2%
8757 91.4 Boeing 757 3 3086 9.9%
DC9Q 91 McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3 3 5120 16.4%
8734 8$.9 Boeing 737-400 3 18 0.1 %
A320 87.8 Airbus Industries A320 3 4843 15.5%
8738 87.7 Boeing 737-800 3 1237 4%
8735 87.7 Boeing 737-500 3 687 2.2%
A319 87.5 Airbus Industries A319 3 4261 13.7%
8737 87.5 Boeing 737-700 3 55 0.2%
B733 87.5 Boeing 737-300 3 530 1.7%
A318 87.5 Airbus Industries A318 3 106 0.3%
RJ85 84.9 Avro RJ85 3 7 0%
MD90 842 McDonnell Dougias MD90 3 55 0.2%
E170 83.7 Embraer ERJ-170 3 445 1.4%
E145 83.7 Embraer ERJ-145 3 664 2.1 %
B717 83 Boeing 717-200 3 942 3%
CRJ 82.7 Canadair Regional Jet 3 6673 21.4% '
E135 77.9 Embraer ERJ-135 3 344 1.1 %
D328 � 76.5 Fairchiid Dornier 328 3 5 0%
r �, � � T.otals . , � z
. .:� :.... , .,:. . : .. . : �;< ,::: �. .... .: : �,
� ,: 31196 ,
,:. __ .. ........ ... .._ :�,:
Note: Sum of fleet mix % may not equal 10D % due to munding. .
Note: Stage III represent aircraft modified to meet aIl 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 levels documented per aircraft type during
take-off measured in EPNL dBA (Effective Perceived Noise Level).
•EPNL is the level of the fime integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone-corrected perceived noise levei
of an aircraft flyover measured in A-weighted decibels.
' 6' Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
.
� '_, �`�
c �
Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Runway Use Report November 2006
Report Generafed: 12/08/2006 12:02
Note: Sum of Rt1S % may not equal 100% due to rounding. '
-7-
�lighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. �
Runway Use Report November 2006 ,-
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100 % due to rounding.
- 8" Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
November 2006 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Total Nighttime Jet
�perations by Hour
, Haur;:;;;'' � Cnun#.
,.. ,._:..._....,..
2230 511
2300 428
2400 119
100 43
2Q0 18
300 27
400 79
500 476
American AA�
American AAL
America West AWE
Arnerica West AWE
Continental Exp BTA
DHL DHL
FedEx FDX
FedEx FDX
FedEx FDX
FedEx FDX
FedEx FDX
Pinnacle FL.G
Kitty Hawk KHA
Kitty Hawk KHA
Midwest Airlines MEP
Midwest Airlines MEP
Northwest NWA
Narthwest NWA
Northwest NWA
Northwest NWA
Northwesf NWA
Northwest NWA
Repub(ic Airlines RPA
Sun Counfry SCX
Shuttle America TCF
Airtran TRS
United UAL
United UAL
UPS UPS
UPS UPS
UPS UPS
UPS UPS
= � �
�:� �
, . �
` � �
� �:
: � �
. �� �
` � �
: t� �
� � �
��
� ��
:
.
: �
: �
�:� �
• • �i
` � �
` � �
: :
� � �
� • t� ..
��
: : ''�
��
: t'
.
: �
: �
. �� �
: t� �
: �
� :E �
Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 96% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations.
Report Generated: 12/OS/2006 12:02
-9-
November 2006 Nighttime Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
?50
700
650
600
550
�
� 500
:v�
� 450
�:
�
� 400
�
y�,,, 350
�Tk
��t2
� 300
�
� 250
200
150
100
50
9
rjr-i� Hwt � t3-rR oHL FOX FLG kHA MEP NWA RPA SCX TCF TRS URL . UPS
AY .r�Yrsc
�ManuFactured�;St .ge,3 �Stage�3,.; �Stage,2;: .
November 2006 Nighttime Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines
( ..
Note: UPS DCSQ and 6727Q aircraft are re-engined with manufactured stage 3 engines.
- � � - Report Generated: 12/08l2006 12:02
� Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
,
Carrier Jet Operations — November 2006
j �
Nov 1 thru 8, 2006 — 4196 Carrier Jet Arrivals
Nov 1 thru 8, 2006 — 4178 Carrier Jet Departures
Nov 1 thru 8, 2006 — 271 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals
Nov 1 thru 8, 2006 —160 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02 - ��-
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations — November 2006 (
Nov 9 thru 16, 2006 — 4218 Carrier Jet Arrivals
Nov 9 thru 16, 2006 — 4201 Carrier Jet Depa�tures
Nov 9 thru 16, 2006 — 287 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals
Nov 9 thru 16, 2006 —180 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures
�
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations — November 2006
Nov 17 thru 24, 2006 — 4060 Carrier Jet Arrivais
Nov 17 thru 24, 2006 — 4028 Carrier Jet Departures
Nov 17 thru 24, 2006 — 280 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivais Nov 17 thru 24, 2006 —150 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
-13=
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Uperations -- November 2006
Nov 25 thru 30, 2006 — 3148 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 25 thru 30, 2006 — 3167 Carrier Jet Departures
\
,
Nov 25 thru 30, 2006 — 221 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 25 thru 30, 2006 —152 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures
-14-
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
MSP International Airport
Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations
.,-; �.
� � `� �`` Remote Monitoring Tower
` : ::
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02 - 15 -
" �•• � •i � • • • � . �� . �• • � �
• � •� ��•
i i{ , �: , . ,i � � � � .� p v 3Z f j �p , i � r : � i ' , i � � . r � �S r .'i tr ::�x fi � jia � . .
�RMT.�� r� 4 I nrir �. xr r,: i L �, � �� y i �X� � 4�. t' F � �ki �d�.
' ` ' � � � ; N � T�me'> T�me >� G T�me ? a � �me > ,
ID � �
" CiiY.�. .. '....F � '.. _ � '..:�".: ` ' Adaress ;t _ �_....` . '�.' 65tlB ''� �...�:80dB �� �, a 90dB�� �� �'�OOcIB� � �
.,.....�:� ..............4 .._..
..,_. .. ....... ...... . .. . .i.. . .t.. ... .. ...�.:.. .. . . :.�..._. .... ..�..:..._ . �..... . . .. ..�.:._�.....':.
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st Sf. 21:09:20 00:00:50 00:00:00 00:00:40
2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 21:14:11 00:09:39 00:00:00 00:00:00
3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 27:59:23 01:26:46 00:00:23. 00:00:00
4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 23:20:03 00:32:02 00:00:05 00:00:00
5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 30:56:08 06:09:43 ` 00:03:53 00:00:00
6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57ih Sf. 29:35:2Q 04:47:46 00:07:21 00:00:00
7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 00:54:25 OO:Q1:19 00:00:01 00:00:00
8 Minneapolis �ongfeilow Ave. & 43rd St. 00:35:51 00:00:15 00:00:00 00:00:00
9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:01:24 Q0:00:07 00:00:00 oo:ao:ao
10 St. Paul ftasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:01:20 00:00:07 OO:OQ:00 00:00:00
11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:00:35 00:00`.00 00:00:00 00:00:00
12 St. Paul Aiton St. & Rockwood Ave. 00:00:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 00:08:14 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
14 Eagan 1 st St. & McKee St. 19:37:46 00:01:51 00:00:00 00:00:00
15 Mendota Heights Cullan St. & Lexington Ave. �0:24:27 00:00:15 00:00:00 00:00:00
16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 17:47:18 00:57:15 00:00:00 00:00:00
17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:01:02 00:00:00 �0:00:00 00:00:00
_ .. _. . . � _....... .
18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 00:3221 00:00:05 00:00:00 00:00:00
19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 00:09:30 00:00:02 00:00:00 00:00:00
20 Richfield 75fh St. & 3rd Ave. 00:03:31 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 00:10:30 �0:00:00 00:00:00 OO:OO:OQ
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 11:33:06 00:00:14 00:00:00 00:00:00
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Rve. 02:30:42 00:01:19 00:00:00 00:00:00
24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren �n. 20:09:47 00:01:28 00:00:00 00:00:00
25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 00:54:53 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
26 inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 02:06:26 00:01:13 00:00:00 00:00:00
27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 00:21:38 00:00:02 OQ:00:00 00:00:00
28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 02:06:48 00:02:02 00:00:00 00:00:00
29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S. 00:01:44 00:00:06 00:00:00 00:00:00
30 Blooming#on 8715 River Ridge Rd. 03:47:55 00:01:37 00:00:00 00:00:00
31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 00:02:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
32 Bioomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:00:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 00:00:46 00:00:00 00:00:00 OO:Op:00
34 Burnsviile Red Oak Park 00:03:47 00:00:02 00:00:00 00:00:00
35 Eagan 2100 Garnet �n. 05:50:25 00:00:20 00:00:00 00:00:00
36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 09:28:00 00:00:27 00:00:00 00:00:00
37 Eagan 4399 Woodgafe Ln. N. 00:03:32 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 00:00:31 00:00:00 00`.00:00 00:00:00
39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pi. 00:00:09 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
,
� � ;, Total T�me,for Art�val No�se Events ', ,: ,253 45:3$ '14 1fi 52 00 '11 43 00 00 00 '
,., , ., . :, . . . . . . . .... .. .. . ,. . . .. � . �:._
�
- 16 - Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
� �•• � � • • •i • �••. � �� . �• • • �
• ' •� ��•
.
�'i f' '� 4 � �� i � 1�.'�. � ���, � � �i� L t' � � �. ��� i'. i � '� � 1� J
�,. � . i f " � � h I � 4 .... A �. �. � i ' ) �
;RMT' �' s r � r , 'e r �`��I, ��+ � '- � C � y� � ' ' ' T�me > f `Tiine > Time � r ' Time >
1 . � t� ' . I 5 � . 1 : 1 � � . � � � : .
E�4...��,��� . � ,. .....;:.:.� .C.��tY... �.'..` ' ` � � ' �: 5.... :.. : i� E� Address� �.�... L... , . .: �� 65dB: .. 80dB. ..: ,' 90,dB i ,100dB..:
�
. ......�,,.. .. _ �. � c� �
.., ....... ...... ... .......... _ . ..,
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. 02:47:31 00:01:01 00:00:00 00:00:00
2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 03:34:57 00:02:09 00:00:00 00:00:00
3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Beimont Ave. 10:38:45 00:13:54 00:00:36 0�:00:00
4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th Sf. 12:13:53 00:23:48 00:00:19 00:00:00
5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 38:58:20 04:20:59 00:43:02 00:00:24
6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 45:04:59 05:47:56 01:07:36 00:00:42
7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 20:45:44 00:57:49 00:01:03 00:00:00
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 12:17:08 00:30:49 00:00:19 00:00:00
9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:03:24 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
10 St. Paul liasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:03:44 00:00:45 00:00:06 00:00:00
11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. OQ:03:05 00:00:46 00:00:12 00:00:00
12 St. Paul Alton 5t. & Rockwood Ave. 00:02:59 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 12:55:12 00:08:24 00:00:00 00:00:00
14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 15:25:39 00:43:47 00:01:07 00:00:00
15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 16:43:17 00:20:55 00:00:17 00:00:00
16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 15:59:44 01:13:36 00:03:52 00:00:04
17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:21:45 00:03:13 00:00:39 00:00:00
18 Richfeld 75th St. & 17th Ave. 12:56:04 00:14:22 00:01:35 00:00:02
19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th Sf. 09:01:18 00:03:22 OO:OO:Q9 00:00:00
20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:5221 00:00:44 00:00:00 00:00:00
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 05:15:43 00:01:35 00:00:00 00:00:00
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 03:57:11 00:01:29 OO:OO:OQ 00:00:00
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 25:04:31 01:55:59 00:10:56 00:00:00
24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 09:52:23 00:09:22 00:00:00 00:00:00
25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 07:28:41 00:00:45 OO:OO:QO 00:00:00
26 inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 09:37:19 00:08:40 00:00:01 00:00:00
27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 11:02:16 00:18:42 00:00:30 00:00:00
28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 29:34:44 00:37:00 00:00:05 00:00:00
29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. Schoal 4315 31 st Ave. S. 07:46:31 00:04:59 00:00:00 OO:OQ:00
3Q Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 17:38:43 01:28:20 00:03:35 00:00:00
31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 01:06:43 00:01:12 00:00:04 00:00:00
32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:19:15 00:00:13 00:00:00 00:00:00
33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 04:16:42 00:00:37 00:00:00 00:00:00
34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 01:06:33 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00
35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 03:08:17 00:02:55 00:00:00 00:00:00
36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 00:52:11 00:00:31 00:00:00 00:00:00
37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. �2:31:29 00:01:32 00:00:00 00:00:00
38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 04:11:40 00:03:46 00:00:01 00:00:00
39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 03:00:05 00:02:14 00:00:00 00:00:00
`; , r Tv4al�Time fqr Depar#ure, Noi,se Events :378 40"46 20 D8 13 02 16'04 QO 01 12'
. . , ,. ,. ... �.. �
�
,,,..� .. .... , . . . , ,<... .�., � , .: . _. ... _. !., . ....,. _ ��.
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02 - 17 -
Arrival Related Noise Events -
NnvPmhPr �(1nF
_ ------ ----
i
' ; ; � F ' � r � � � n � ;a , ° � � , � ; � F h � "Arnua � %�rrival 'Arrivatr' drrivalr
..�r . � . e� t! � v �i{ ., � �� � i .i 1 � i a .. .
RMT ���� � ' G , ` � r , ;� , �tt F „ � � K ' � ` � � ' � Events > Events � Ea'ients > � f E�e'nts >
°7D `�4 t �H R C�iy,.�'$.'� ...... �� : �a �.,.:.:::>"�' . .. '--rAddre'ss� .,. : .....:. :" �� � ,..;�.,! 65ciB:�.' . 1..�:80dB _:_:� r C 5:90dB,�. �{�... �'lOUdB; G t.
.., . . .... .... ..� ...,._ P ._ ---�...:.. � .,.::
1 Minnea olis Xe�es Ave. & 41st St. 5003 19 0 ` 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 4432 159 0 0
3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 5026 1926 8 0
4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 4826 510 1 0
5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 5393 3808 85 0
6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 5061 3903 243 0
7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 158 9 1 0
8 Minneapolis Longfeliow Ave. & 43rd Sf. 101 3 0 0
9 St. Paui Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 4 1 0 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bawdoin St. 4 1 0 0
11 . St. Paul Finn St. & SchefFer Ave. 1 0 0 0
12 St. Paul Aiton St. & Rockwood Ave. 2 p p 0
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Gourt 34 0 0 0
14 Eagan 1sf St. & McKee St. 4465 18 0 D
15 Mendota Heights Gullon St. & �exington Ave. 92 3 0 0
16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 3531 681 0 0
17 Bloomington $4th St. & 4th Ave. 4 0 0 0
18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. - 148 3 0 0
19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 40 1 0 0
20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 15 0 0 0
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 52 0 0 0 �
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Traii 2747 7 0 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 610 13 0 0
24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 4443 29 0 0
25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 195 0 0 0
26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 564 10 0 0
27 Minneapolis Anthony Schooi 5757 irving Ave. S. 81 2 0 0
28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 364 22 0 0
29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. Schaol 4315 31 st Ave. S. 6 1 0 0
30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 1049 6 0 0
31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 10 0 0 0
32 Bloomingfon 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 2 0 0 0
33 Burnsville North River Hilis Park 4 0 0 0
34 Bumsville Red Oak Park 21 1 � 0
35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 1470 10 0 0
36 Apple Vailey Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 1971 8 0 0
37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 11 0 0 0
38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 2 0 0 0
39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 1 0 0 0
°`� �;' ' r Totai /arrival No�se Ev'ents ' � r ' , , ' , �
... ��'!.r... .�n�. .... �. ., .. �:... � ..�i C...'. . � .�.�:t�:..�.. .,...��� ... :� , � .. - k l�'. 11 1 .,� A
, _. : : . ...,: .., 5'1943 7 Q354 338 0.
. : . . . . .:... . . ... . ... . . ... ... . ....:.. . . .. ... . . ,
........ .,?...,.: �.::.;
\
' �$' Report Generated: 12/08l2006 12:02
a
. � � � � � � • . . • � �
• • •� ��•
, ;�z i, � ; � , �, � ; ' � � '� � r De arture Departure Departure lleparture ',
� �
RMT� "� , �{ ` ` ' � ; Ev nts >� Events � Events �> Events >
, , � , � , �,
_r.�D�..�_, ::.�...�.�.G�tS!..�...t;!."......r� �.�.....�...iAddress � � � 7 ' :65dB.... �...a.8UdB' � 90dB 700dB,};:
_ . . . .:.... ... . ..... ... � ... _,..:� �.......� .. .
.. ..... ... . ... ...... .
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 578 17 0 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 726 27 0 0
3 Minneapplis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 1899 113 7 0
4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 2155 201 7 0
5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 5681 1444 415 7
6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 6718 2179 535 21
7 Richfield Wentwarth Ave. & 64th St. 3218 419 15 0
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 2029 229 8 0
9 St. Paul. Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 14 0 0 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 11 3 1 0
11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 8 3 3 0
12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 11 0 Q 0
13 Mendata Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 2420 116 0 0
14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 2553 316 17 0
15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 2911 201 3 0
16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas �ane 2452 433 44 0
17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 60 13 7 0
18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 2189 187 13 1
19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 1574 39 2 0
2Q Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 195 10 0 0
21 Inver Grove Heighfs Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 1018 30 0 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 669 18 � 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 3830 662 131 0
24 "`Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 1662 116 0 0
25 : Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 932 7 � 0
26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 1744 90 1 0
27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 1999 192 4 0
28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 4419 406 2 0
29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 1413 51 4 0
30 Bloamington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 2583 502 58 0
31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 242 8 1 0
32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 62 2 0 0
33 Burnsville North River Hilis Park 823 7 0 0
34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 234 0 0 0
35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 564 31 0 0
36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 145 5 0 0
37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 431 22 0 0
38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 696 46 0 0
39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 582 26 0 0
�. 7� '�'` ;; Totai Departure No�se Events� � 61450 48171 1274� ' 29 -
.., .:,,;. ,. ,, , ,.:. .,_ ., .: ., ... .,: .,. ,. . : ....... .. . . .. . . . .... , .: . _. . :. . :,: r �. ,
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
��
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP �
November 2006
�.
(RMT Site#1)
Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St.
(RMT Site#2)
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
(RMT Site#3)
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
' 20 ' Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
'; �
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#4)
Park Ave. & 48th St.
(RMT Site#5)
12th Ave. & 58th St.
(RMT Site#6)
25th Ave. & 57th St.
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
-21-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006 `
(RMT Site#7)
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
(RMT Site#8)
Longfeliow Ave. & 43rd St.
(RMT Site#9)
Saratoaa St. & HartFord Ave.
'?2' Report Gene�ated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#10)
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoi� St.
(RMT Site#11)
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
(RMT Site#12)
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02 - 23 -
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#13)
Southeast end of Mohican Court
(RMT Site#14)
1 st St. & McKee St.
11 /21 /2006 7:24 GC 1706
11/05/2006 21:19 NWA867
11/2212006 7:16 NWA744
11/20/200617:06 NWA926
11/121200610:30 NWA768
11/07/200617:18 AAL1093
11/21/2006 21:48 NWA1057
11/06/2006 7:09 NWA744
11/21 /2006 9:06 N1/1/A752
11/07l2006 21:09 NWA764
(RMT Site#15)
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
: e
� •�
r •�
� • t�
� •�
�:�
� •�
� •�
� •�
� •A
12L
12L
12L
12L
12L
12L
12L
12L
42�
12L
. ,
�
. ;
:•
;. .
:•
:: �
::
::
::
' 24 ' Report Generated: 12/08/2006 .12:02
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#16)
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane
(RMT Site#17)
84th St. & 4th Ave.
(RMT Site#18)
75th St. & 17th Ave. -
Repo�t Generated:,12/08/2006 12:02 - 25 -
,:
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
�
(RMT Site#19)
16th Ave. & 84th St.
(RMT Site#20)
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
(RMT Site#21)
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
(,.:.
. �.
' 26 - Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Top Ten L.oudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#22)
Anne Marie Trail
(RMT Site#23)
End of Kenndon Ave
11107/2006 22:35
11/11/2006 9:27
11/04/2006 9:04
11/20/2006 20:42
11 /07/2006 22:13
11/19/2006 9:04
11/22/2006 23:02
11 /22/2006 13:47
11 /22/2006 16:49
11/25/2Q06 17:36
DHL304
CCP1430
CCP1430
DHL197
FDX1106
NWA1072
DHL304
DAL625
N WA682
CCP450
Repbrt Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
(RMT Site#24)
Chapel L.n. & Wren Ln.
: �
: e
: �
: !�
�
, .
: �
�:�
� • l��
: �
G
G
C
C
Q
�
0
Q
0
❑�
89.8
88.7
88.1
86.8
85.7
85.5
85.5
85.4
85.4
85.3
-27-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
Novemb�r 2006
(RMT Site#25)
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdv Rd.
(RMT Site#26)
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
(RMT Site#27)
Anthonv School 5757 Irvina Ave. S.
11/15/2006 8:04 CCP1430
11/27/2006 8:04 CCP1464
11/29/200610:23 CCP1430
11/03/2006 8:16 CCP1464
11/18/200610:26 CCP450
11/13/200612:03 NWA99
11%09/200612:02 NWA99
11/01/200616:25 AAL1655
11/26/200618:05 AAL1605
11/09/200611:42 DAL1590
-28-
: �
�
: e
: R
: e
� �
� �
�:�
�:�
�:�
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
30L 98.2
30L 95.4
30L .. g1..._
30L 90.7
30L 89.4
30L 89.3
30L 89.3
30� 88J
30L 88.5
30L 87.3
C
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#28)
6645 16th Ave. S.
(RMT Site#29)
Ericsson Elem. Schooi 4315 31 st Ave. S:
11 /24/2006 9:16
11/17/2006 8:01
11 /26/2006 11:39
11 /21 /2006 12:03
11/15/2006 6:46
11 /23/2006 16:51
11 /04/2006 11:31
11 /13/2006 16:34
11 /26/2006 13:40
11 /03/2006 17:52
NWA126
CCP1464
NWA1171
N WA413
CC 1706
NWA1531
N WA733
N WA1531
NWA1529
N WA1533
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
(RMT Site#30)
8715 River Ridae Rd.
. •�
�
� •�
� ��
: t�
� •�
� • t�
r •�
� ��
� • t�
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
94.8
94.1
93.6
93.1
93
92.7
92.5
92.4
92.3
92
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#31)
9501 12th Ave. S.
(RMT Site#32)
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
(RMT Site#33)
North Ri�er Hills Park
-30-
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
�
,.
Top Ten Loudest Aircrafit Noise Events for MSP
November 2006
(RMT Site#34)
Red Oak Park
(RMT Site#35)
2100 Garnet Ln
(RMT Site#36)
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
-31 -
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP �
November 2006
(RMT Site#37) ( .
4399 Woodgate Ln. N,
(RMT Site#38)
3957 Turquoise Cir.
� (RMT Site#39)
3477 St. Charles PI.
November 2006 Remote Monitoring Tower Top Ten Summary
The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for November 2006 were comprised of 89.2%
• departure operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the DC9Q with 31.9% of the highest Lmax (
events. �
November 2006 Technical Advisor Report Notes
Unknown fields are due to unavailability of FAA flight track data. Missing FAA radar data for 0 days during the
month of November 2006.
- 32 - Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
November 2006
Remote Monitoring Towers
�; ,�� ` Date � ��',! , ., #� � , � .#2 � `_#3, .� 4 i �Jy Y'#6 �#7 '�. #8 , �, #9 � #10 �#� 1 ; #12, #13 r#14 #13 ';
11(01 /2006 53.6 52 58.3 60.9 69.6 72.7 63.8 61.2 44.7 27.9 NA 28.2 NA 62.8 41
11/02/2006 51.7 53.3 58.2 60 71.1 73.5 64.6 63.6 38 46.8 45.7 43.9 NA 61.1 43.6
11/03/2006 55.$ 59.1 63.3 61.5 68.3 68.9 59.2 52.9 26.8 NA 28.5 34 58.2 62.7 59.5
11 /04/2006 56.4 58.7 64.9 60.3 69.7 66.9 39.9 41.3 NA NA NA NA 56.1 62.4 58.7
11/05/2006 58.1 59.5 64.4 61 68.6 66.9 46.4 37.3 36 35.5 NA 28.3 59.4 66 61.1
11/06/ZOQ6 57.9 61.4 66.1 62.7 69.7 69.3 37.4 45.2 NA NA NA NA 58.7 64.4 60.7
11/07/2006 59.9 62.7 66 63,9 70.7 70.$ 44.3 43 NA 38.4 NA NA 59.4 67.4 61.3
41 /08/2006 51.6 54.8 58.5 61.9 70 73.7 61.4 60.9 NA 33 NA 31.7 53.8 62.9 55.4
11/09i2006 53.9 56.1 61.8 63.2 74.4 75:7 67.7 65.8 44.8 37.6 NA 33.7 NA 61.8 43.1
11/10/20Q6 52.6 54.4 60.4 63.1 72.4 74.6 65.9 65.9 44.2 48.7 49.1 36.9 NA 60.5 39.7
11/11/2006 56.3 57.9 63.4 61.2 70.2 69.7 59.5 54.8 39.6 24.9 41.8 NA 57.2 60.3 58.1
11/12/2Q06 59.1 61.3 65.8 63 69.1 68.7 35.2 29.2 NA 33.4 29.4 NA 61.3 61.7 63.2
11/13/2006 56.3 58.1 63.7 61.8 72.2 72.9 62.2 58 37.9 35.6 NA 33 56.5 65.9 60.1
11/14/2006 61 62.8 67.8 63.6 71.8 69.7. 44 46.5 36.4 42.9 35.9 43.3 59.2 65.8 61.3
11/15/2006 53.4 52.9 59.8 60.6 72 73 65.8 64 35.4 3Q2 NA 30.7 28.2 61.7 36.3
11/16/2006 55.8 58.1 63.9 64.2 73.5 72.5 63.7 60.9 44.4 40.7 35.6 41.1 52.9 64.8 60.1
11 /17I2006 57.2 57.9 63.6 61.3 72.1 75.3 62.7 61.7 36.5 NA NA 29 54.2 65 53.5
11/18/2006 53.9 54.7 61.1 62.3 71.5 74.5 66 59.4 34.3 48.3 51.8 26.1 NA 59.8 NA
11/19/2006 51.3 54.3 57.7 57.7 67.7 71.3 61.3 60.2 NA NA NA NA 53.4 62.9 53.9
11 /20I2006 58 59.8 65.4 61.4 70.2 68 47.5 49 43.1 44.4 28.8 35.5 58.8 65.3 62.2
11 /21 /2006 60.1 60.5 66.6 61.7 70.9 68.7 37 33.4 NA 43.1 NA NA 61.2 66.1 63.5
11/22/2006 59.7 60.8 67.3 63.2 72 72.6 57 55.7 NA 32.9 33.7 28.5 58.8 67.1 �0.1
11 /23/2006 59.5 59.9 66.7 61.2 70 66.3 53.5 46.9 NA NA NA NA 55.7 60.4 57.1
11/24/20Q6 56.1 54.6 64.2 58.8 70.3 69.2 59.4 56.9 30.6 NA NA NA 53.8 64.9 58.1
11 /25I2006 56 58.2 65 61.5 69.9 70.3 49 49.8 36.9 27.3 NA NA 54.6 64.9 56.3
11 /26/2006 58.6 60.7 65.1 62.5 69.9 69 58.1 51.6 NA NA NA NA 59.3 65.2 62.2
11 /27/2006 59.4 61.5 65.8 62.7 72.1 69.7 62 53.1 NA (�FA NA 33.9 54.8 63.6 56.3
11/28/2006 61.3 61.6 69.7 63.9 74 73.4 60.5 58.4 28.9 NA NA 37.1 55.2 63.3 57.$
11 /29/20d6 52.8 54.9 57.9 59.6 69.9 74.5 64.5 63.1 NA NA NA NA 38.7 612 39
11130/2006 53.8 54.6 60.6 59.1 68.8 70.1 61.8 58.3 38.7 52.7 51.1 NA 53.8 63.7 54
IU10 � D1V L 57 3 5$ 9 64 � 6'1 9 71 1 71 S 61 5 59 3 38 ; 42� 1 41 5 34 7 56 4 64 58 6
:._� ,,. . .�....� ...� . :•. .. ..,.,_, ,�,.
r.,. . .. ..... . . .: .. . . .:.:... _ ,. .. . . ... ... . : �.. _. <<
Report Generated: 12/OS/2006 12:02
-33-
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Even�s DNL
November 2006 ,-
Remote Monitoring Towers �,
�
�z' ;;Date �ry�` " , #164' #17� ! #18 "#19 #20 #21 #22;, #23. #24 #25 #26 � #,27 #28.. , #28;�'.
,�N ,.. ,... ,,. ,., . ,. ,.,�,_� ,. .,.. ,., �.,.
_ r.,.,.... t.,. ,.r.: .,.��. ..
11/01/2006 66.4 41.1 51 552 48.8 39.4 58.2 50.6 61.4 46.8 54J 59 59.1 70.1
11/02/2006 662 52.4 52.9 44.8 46.6 44.2 57.5 51.1 61.1 36.5 51.2 60 61.5 58.6
11/03/2006 65.3 49.9 58.5 53.9 39 52.4 57.6 55.6 61.1 52.9 59.8 55.2 57.7 48.6
11/04/2006 63 52.6 58.3 52.1 40.6 53.8 54.5 NA 59.4 51.9 59.6 38.2 562 NA
11/Q5/2006 64.1 31.8 55.5 53.3 NA 55 58 69 61.3 52.4 61.1.28.6 55.9 NA
11 /06/2006 66.5 47 60.8 53.2 40.2 56.7 58.6 69.4 61.9 51.1 59.1 39.5 58.9 29.2
11/07/2006 66:3 NA 59.9 56.6 442 55.9 57.9 69 63.6 53 61.3 42.4 59 51.4
11 /08/20�6 66.3 49.6 58 55 48.2 51 59.5 63.2 62 50.8 58 56.1 60.7 53.8
11 /09/2006 67.6 36.4 48.3 44.8 49.3 38.7 59.3 46.2 61.7 40.2 48.2 61.1 63.3 58
11/1012006 66.4 NA 46.6 28.5 37.7 31.2 58.7 45.2 60.7 45.4 45.9 62.2 62.2 57.7
11/11/2006 64.4 45.9 54.8 52 44.2 51.9 56.1 65.6 58.7 49.3 58.3 58.8 55.$ 49.7
11/12/2006 63 50.6 58.6 54 40.4 55.3 55.2 69.3 58.1 50.8 59.9 40.7 58 NA
11/13/2006 66.9 34.9 52.7 51.2 34.2 49.8 58.6 64.4 63.2 52.1 59.1 57.6 59.5 53.1
11 /14/2006 66.9 30.3 60.5 56.4 46 54.7 56 69.5 61 55.1 61.3 41.2 62:4 41.4
11/15/2006 66.8 62.7 55.8 57.7 47.5 41.4 59.2 47.8 62.2 37.6 51:4 62 62.2 57.8
11 /16/2006 67.5 41.8 50.7 46.4 49.7 44.8 59.3 65 62.5 53.9 57.6 60.4 62.2 53.7
11/17/2006 66.7 52.5 57.6 51.3 47.2 44.9 59.6 61 62.3 48.4 57.8 58J 60.6 57.9
11/18/2006 64.9 NA 43.4 NA 40.1 39.2 58 43.3 60.3 33.1 47.6 59.3 60.2 56
11/19/2006 64 NA 46.5 43.2 37.4 53.5 57 64.6 60.7 41.2 57�.1 54.8 58.1 56
11I20/2006 64:9 NA 59.1 55.9 42.1 53.3 58.1 69.4 61.5 51.8 602 32.4 59.7 35.5
11/21/2006 67.9 33.6 57.2 54.4 45.8 57.3 59.3 70.4 62.7 55.7 62.9 41.8 57.7 34.3
11 /22/2006 66.6 53.1 59.6 56.6 56.4 55.9 58.5 66.7 62.4 47.9 59.9 49.9 61.7 53
11 /23/2006 62.9 NA 56.3 54.1 29.8 52.3 51.1 63.6 56.3 54.3 57.6 42.8 60.4 NA
11 /24/2006 64.8 46.9 49.4 47.7 47.5 47.4 55.5 63.5 60.7 52.6 56.6 54.8 56.9 52.7
11/25/2006 66J NA 53.3 51.3 NA 50.1 54.4 642 59.6 53.2 55.7 52.9 60 41.3
11 /26/2006 68.4 53.9 56.9 52.2 41 55.1 57.8 67.5 61.9 55.7 59.6 55.3 58.9 45.1
11/27/2006 67.6 33.7 39.2 44 38.6 50.1 572 642 61.5 56.9 56.1 58.6 62.4 41.7
11 /28I2006 64.9 49.9 61.7 57.3 56.3 47.6 57.4 63.3 61, 5 48.5 55.4 49.7 65.2 54.6
11 /29/2006 66.5 48.7 53.8 46.8 49.6 36.1 59.3 45.8 61.2 36.6 48.6 57.6 61.7 59.7
11 /30/2006 68 41:7 43 37.9 43.3 49.2 57 61.3 60.8 55.6 54.8 55.3 57.2 55.6
,�Mo`�DN �L,, y 66 2;�50 7 5B 6 53 1 47 6 52 2 57 8r 65 5 61 3 51� 9�58 Z 5G'7 6Q`�5 57 6'
,.... ..._. . �,_.� ... .,... , �.. r � � .. . . .: .. .. ... 4� . . , .. ,:,�. , .. � ,..:: ,.... . a.
,. __ .. ........::.�...:.��.�
C
__ �
- 34 - R�porf Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
November 2006
Remote Monitoring Towers
:�� s Date , � #30 #31 #32 -#33 `#34 ,#35 #36 #37 #38 #39 '
� ,,
.. :,...�, , . ;., ,,. �,, „ ... v:. ., ... , _ ,. . .
11 /01 /2006 60.2 50.5 53.3 44.3 45.3 54.3 55 45.9 43.6 32.3
11/02/2006 48.6 36.9 NA NA 35.1 52.1 54.2 42 NA NA
11/03/2006 62.9 42.1 32.3 49.6 43 49.1 45.2 502 52.7 50
11 /04/2006 60.5 45.5 NA 50.3 45.2 47.9 39.1 48.7 50.7 46.7
11/05/20�6 62.2 41.1 31.7 51 40.4 45 36.4 48.3 50.7 50.7
11/06/2006 62.7 51.3 25.5 51.5 43.5 48.9 36.9 50.8 52.4 47
11 /07/2006 63.4 47.6 40.8 51.8 43.8 49 47.4 51.3 54 51.8
11 /08/2006 64.4 43.4 45.3 51.3 48 60.6 58.8 48.1 5Q.7 47
11/09/2006 52.7 37.9 392 .NA NA 52.4 55.7 43.1 43.7 26.2
11/10/2Q06 56.5 NA NA 38.5 44.5 52 55.5 42.3 27.3 NA
11/11/2006 60 48.9 33.8 49.9 36.7 47.2 43.4 47.7 48.6 45.$
11/12/2006 61.7 46.9 35.5 49.4 42.3 49.6 37.2 50.9 52.3 49.7
11 /13/2006 60.3 41.4 38.2 43.3 30.2 48.3 47.3 42.3 48.6 43
11/1412006 64.4 45.2 25.3 49.3 38.3 48.3 34.6 50.5 53.2 57.7
11/15/2006 62 43.5 43.5 392 29.9 51.8 54.5 NA NA NA
11 /16/2006 53.1 30.2 NA 30.4 29.4 51.8 53.9 NA NA NA
11/1,7/2006 60.1 41.9 39.6 482 43.2 54.4 55.5 44.6 48.4 39
11 /18/2006 47.8 NA NA NA 29.8 50.1 53.8 42.8 NA NA
11/19l2006 55.4 34.9 32.1 37.4 35.5 50.3 52 NA NA NA
11 /20/2006 63.3 44.7 31.7 52.1 49.6 52.4 43.8 47.7 51.2 51.5
11 /2.1 /2006 63.1 40.7 42.2 53 44.9 5Q.3 45.4 50.8 52.5 51.3
11 /22/2006 64.2 53.9 49.9 54 48.6 54.3 50.7 51.3 54.4 51.4
11/23/2006 81.9 452 39.8 46 31.4 46.6 55.4 50.2 50.7 47.8
11/24/2006 59.1 39.7 37.2 46.4 46.1 51.6 53.9 48.4 47.5 43.6
11 /25/2006 60.7 32.6 NA 49.5 42.2 46.5 34.8 44.6 48.3 46.7
11 J26/2006 62 41.2 46.1 47.7 42.9 51.7 51.8 47.8 51.3 46.9
11/27/2006 28.9 292 NA NA NA NA 352 NA NA 30.2
11/28/2006 66.4 50.6 47.1 52 45.4 61.4 58 49.8 52.2 51.9
11 /29/2006 54.2 40.4 NA NA 36.5 52.7 55.7 NA NA NA
11/30/2006 46.1 NA 45.6 NA 35.3 49.2 52.3 NA NA NA
�Mo DNL 61 2 45'6 42 8 48 6 43 'i `52 9 52 7 47 5 49 6 48�3
: .�. ....�:. , . ,... ,.. ., . .. , ;, , . . .
Report Generated: 12/08/2006 12:02
-35-
��' ;�
� 1 ' 1' ` � � 1
= ..- � ..- - - - � = - -�- � - -.- - - � - � - - - =r- -• -�- ..- - - - - _ .
_ _
� �� � .
Metropolitan Airports Commission
5457 Carrier Jets Depa�ted Runv�ays 12L and 12R. in Noverrlber 2006 '
5111 (93.7%) of those Operations I2emained in the Cor�ridor
5457 Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure
Operations
5111 (93.7%) Tota112L & 12R Carrier
Departure Operations in the Corridor
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for Gate In Corridor
11/01/2006 00:00:00 -12/01/2006 00:00:00
5111 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 2635 (51.6%), Right = 2476 (48.4%)
.� 6000
a�
a�
� 5000
c
0
� 4000
� 3000
O
Q' 2���
<C
� 1000
0
.Q
`� 0
.........................................................:..................
: f;: � :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ��.:. . . . .��-%�;7 �. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
n ' _ j2 � � ' .�a.i
. .. ..... ... .t��-J �Y""�fc3�:r T� .i..�r } ,.rYL 5..�- � '� ,", ... .... ... .. .
� x` ;. ��Y.`3:'�7 ��..�}v"i ,� , 7 . ^2v�' N.Y`1'�� k"�y'i .
... � � ��L �/�' i rxu s ,v� ,ry�� i'-"'�'�.ta�lt�. �, �t.
r !»*`i��sz.���7,.�3?.+"^u'�'�,5k�� ��wr^.-���""�+,}�SI'�.. ���.i j4,�.fp � .
. . . . . . . . . . . - � ' { 5� r�a�'�'�*��`'�c,�� "y ������y-�.rr�`�`T`.u�,` k; �e+��'✓�,�r-�3� :r'''"� `
,' � �y �c-������"�� �,.� ��i ��; :+, °' tv�- 4�,yt �s'�, �� . . . . . . . . . . . .
� ' ' � `�y����
..................:.. .:�...�.. .,�'"`- � :� .��.............
: . J O : � • ��. J �j : '
-2 -1 0 1 2
Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles)
`' ~'- Arrival r= Departure ❑ Overfli ht�.:
� ' } � ,.�: ..���.� ...� � ..��,..:� �.�....�..,.,� g .��°�
,,
. ... . ..:.:.. ....... . .....:.:. „,..;..,.. .
.
,.:...., ,; . .,, ,::;. ., , �,� � � :. >, , , ��
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Deparlure Corridor Analysis
�
\:
l
� \.
Page 1
Metropolitan Airports Coilunission
118 (2.2%) Runway 12I, and 1212 Carr�er Jet I9eparture Operations were
North of the 090° Corridor Boundary During November 2006
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for Gate North Corridor
11/01/2006 00:00:00 — 12/01i2006 00:00:00
118 Tracks Crossed Gate: �eft = 8(6.8%), Right = 110 (93.2%)
� 6000 : : :
� . . .
v5000 ..................:...................:..................:..................
_ . . .
o � � :
u4000 ................ : ............... : ................ : .. n............
y . . .
W3000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �:� . � y . . . . . . . . .
'� . ',-� . !l'r• t � �iic�i.=,,i
p ;'') : ., t• � ;ds�{.' � �`�'�� c-3'4J�
°- 2000 ..... . .... . . . . .. ��� .. ... . ..{�::.; t.`.:,-:�G� <Y���-�`�`;s��''�s'�� %�"�'.. . . ... ..
" • �} , u� C�' � �.�'i ��
Q : �� ;::s �� . ; ��
� 1000 ...... ..... .......:.... .. . .. .... ... ...... ................:... . .. .: ... . .... ..
o . . : ;._,
.n : : :
¢ 0
—2 —1 0 1 2
(Runway Bnd) Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles} (Corridor End)
�- Arrival ��� Departure ❑ Overflight
Page 2 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Comdor Analysis
Metropolitan Airports Commissior
22� (4.2%)12unway 12L and 12R Carrier �et Departure Operations were
South of the Co�rridor (South of 30L I�ocalizer) During Noveinber 2006
Minneapolis—St. Paui
Penetration Gate Plot for Gate South Corridor
11 /01/2006 00:00:00 — 12/01/2006 00:00:00
228 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 140 (61.4%), Right = 88 (38.6%)
.� 600"
�
m
u' 500
c
0
i 400
>
m
� 300
�
0
� 200
Q
� 100
O
.!]
Q
—2 —1 0 1 2
(Comdor End) Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) �� Mid-Poin
' -`- Arrival � � Departure ❑ Overfl
,
,
, , � �.� ..., , � �.-��»�..�,.�»��..�,�.�.�������+.���:�,�..�.����.�.:.��
, �.,� ,. .. �,:, .. , ... . . �. .. . . . . . . ;..., . , . :.,,:.... . � .::.,,. �:�.. .., .
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights DeparLure Comdor Analysis
C
\
Page 3
Metropolitan Airports Coixunission
8(0.1%) Runway 12I� and 12J[� Carrier Jei I)epartu�e C.�perations were 5°
South of the Corridor (5° South of 30I, I,ocalizer) During November 2006
Page 4
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for Gate South Corridor 5deg
11/01/2006 00:00:00 - 12/01/2006 00:00:00
8 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 7(87.5%), Righi = 1(12.5%)
� tiuuu : . :
� . . .
� 5000 ..................:...................:..................:..................
c : : :
o • •
a4000 ..................:...................:..................:..................
� : : :
d : : :
W3000 .......�,;.. .......:...................:..................:..................
o ;1 . c'� : :
°- 2000 .....0 ...........:.....-.............:..................:..................
Q c_; : �:; : „ :
. . ,. , .
� 1000 ............................................................................
Q : : :
.Q . . .
<t n
-2
(Corridor End)
-�- Arrival
-1 0 1 2
Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) �RWY Mid-Point)
�; % Departure O Overflight
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Depariure Corridor Analysis
Metropolitan Airports Commission
� ,� � . . 1 � i� . � � . �, . � ,, � � , � . y i 1 ' ' � ', ,1,
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
��
`°.�
Page 5
�
��
& � � g,�,��,�-�
s��e a� £.;oi € ,"3','_a MYk:�.w �i'�� � �' �-c` !G f'�'�d` `z1M,,�'�: .�i� �� .�,^i�* ut'�`.,.
���F.. Y.+ �?a �,� �.r '� yt f d5r� �`',� � �,� '�� � ��' � �, �' ,� �, a
„b �' �� 4 -„x� � �x.n �: �::�.,�' .&, "t �. �° `k,u.. �irx. " „�d;: 'iM 8:.e.r' x �: e.. .R:, :
i�; .t��"i.
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 18, Nunr►ber 39
Part 1 SO Program
FAA PLANNING COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE
OF PA.RT 150 PROGF►AM ADVISORY CIl2CULAR
The Federal Aviation Administration plans to update the Part 150 airport noise
compatibility program guidance contained in Advisory Circular 150/5020-1, a
proj ect that is expected to take two years from start to finish.
Although the FAA has issued internal updates to the advisory circular, no
comprehensive update of the document has been done since it was issued in
August 1983 when the Part 150 program began.
AC 150/5020-1 provides "general guidance for noise control and compatibility
planning for airports as well as specific guidance for preparation of airport noise
exposure maps and airport noise compatibility programs by airport operators for
submission under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 150, and the Aviation
Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979," the agency explains on its website.
It notes that the AC also contains an expanded "Table of Land Uses Normally
Compatible with Various Levels ofNoise." That tabie, which states that 65 DNL is
the threshold of residential compatibility with airports, will not be altered.
The current AC is so old that it does not even include requirements imposed by
the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. ANCA will be addressed in the
(Continued orz p. 170)
Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood lizt'l
MITIGATING RUNWAY EXT�NSION
�N 60 CON'I"O�Tk2 UNDER CONSII3ERA'�'ION
To address strong opposition by communities that would be impacted by a
proposed extension of the South runway at Fort Lauderdale-FIollywood Interna-
tional Airport, the Broward County Board of County Commissioners in 2003
agreed to provide noise mitigation in excess of minimum Federal Aviation Admin-
istration requirements.
That means addressing noise impacts not only in the 65 DNL noise contour of
the proposed 3,000 foot runway extension but also beyond it, although how much
beyond has not yet been defined.
The County Commissioners hired Jacobs Consuitancy, based in Fort Lauderdale,
to prepare a report estimating the number of residential housing units and people
that would be included in those contours in 2012 if the Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration approved the runway extension.
The report, submitted on Nov. 8, shows that the 65 DNL contour in 2012 would
include 1,134 people and 523 housing units. There were only 10 housing units in
that contour in 2005.
The 60 DNL contour in 2012 was estimated to include 9,577 people and 4,458
housing units (1,227 more than in 2005).
The County commissioners will meet in January 2007 to consider the report and
to decide what kind of mitigation can be provided in the 60 DNL contour of the
(Continued on p. 170)
169
November 15,2006
In This Issue...
Part 1 SO Program ... FAA is
planning a comprehensive update
of its advisory circular for the Part
150 airportnoise compatibility
prograrn. The AC has not been
updated formally since itwas first
issued in 1983. FAA says it needs
to provide better guidance to
airports and consuitants because
theyare submittingnoisestudies
with inadequate analysis ofthe
benefitsofPart 150noisemitiga-
tion measures - p. 169
Ft. Lauderdale ... Report
estirnates number ofpeople,
homes that would fall in 65 and
60 DNL contours ofproposed
runway extension - p.169
lYoise Metrics ... Wyle Noise
Bulletin urges airports to break '
DNL downto componentparts
to bettercorrnnunicatenoise
exposure to public - p. 170 �
Columbia Metro ... FAA ,
partially approves Part 150 I,
program for airport; more data '
needed on ops changes - p. 171
News Briefs ... Rena-Tahoe
AirportAuthority seeks Airport
Noise Analyst ... FAA says it
intends to prepare an EIS and
hold scoping meetings for
Haleakala, Hawaii, National Park
airtourmanageinentplan -p.172
November 15, 2006
update, which also will incorporate interim guidance to FAA
field personnel issued over ihe past 23 years.
"We're brainstorming on how to update the Part 150 AC
and on how to provide better guidance," said Vicki Catlett,
the environmental specialist in the FAA's Office of Airport
Planning and Programming managing the project.
The updated guidance is much needed, Catlett said, but
explained that the agency does not yet have funding for the
project. The funding could be provided in the fiscal 2007
Department of Transportation appropriation which Con-
gress is expected to pass soon.
For now, the project is being worked on in-house. FAA
headquarters staff is sketching out how it would like to see
the AC changed and what new content shouid be added.
When funding becomes available for the project, FAA will
put it out to bid on by consulting firms.
In addition to FA.A personnel, the Part 150 program
guidance is used by consultants, airports, and the public.
When the update is completed, it will be available on-line,
on a CD, and as a paper copy.
FA.A headquarters staff is able to focus on updating the
AC because in fisca] 2006 it transferred to agency regional
offices the task of approving individual airport Part 150
programs.
All the regions ha�e been trained to review Part 150
programs and are kept current on agency guidance through
annual courses, Catlett said. Now that headquarters staff is
no Ionger doing the day-to-day management of Part 150
program reviews, it can get back to providing program
guidance, she said.
Noise Studies Lacking Anaiysis
Catlett said the agency realized that the program guidance
needed to be updated when it began to see more noise
studies being submitted without a full analysis of the noise
impact of proposed noise mitigation measures. If the airport
and its consultant cannot show a noise benefit associated
with a particular noise mitigation measure, then the FA.A
cannot approve it, she explained.
For instanca, the FAA disapproved almost all of the
operational noise mitigation measures proposed in the Part
150 program for Columbia (SC) Metropolitan Airport
because the agency was not presented with DNL or
supplennental noise metric data documenting a benefit from
the measures (See related story in this issue).
The Part 150 process raises expectations in the community
that aircraft noise will be addressed but, in Columbia's case,
the airport lacks the funding at this point to do the addi-
tional noise analyses required by the FAA to approve the
changes in operations it seeks to make to reduce noise
impact.
Not all noise studies lack a well-done noise analysis,
Catlett said. She pointed to a very detailed noise analysis
done using supplemental noise metrics in a noise study for
Portland (ME) Jetport by the acoustical consulting firm
�IlVIME-I Inc. in cooperation with John Silva, an environmen-
�
170 .
tal specialist in FAA's New England Region o�ce.
The analysis in that study showed the net noise benefit of ("�
using advanced navigation procedures and changes in ��
runway use patterns as noise mitigation measures.
Ft. Laude�°dale, fi•om p. 169
extended runway. FAA's Draft EIS on the proposed runway
extension is due out around the same time.
The Federal Aviation Administration provides funding to
mitigate noise impacts on homes within the 65 DNL contour
but not beyond that point, so the couniy would have to fund
mitigation within the 60 DNL contour on its own.
The County has established a"Mitigation Bank," fed by
increases in Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs), proceeds of
airport revenue-backed bonds, and airline fees, to fund noise
mitigation for the runway extension. It currentiy holds more
than $33 million.
The Jacobs Consultancy report said that bank couid be
increased by adding future FAA Airport Improvement
Program (AIP) reimbursement grants, future state grants, and
future airport bonds. _
The report did not estimate the cost of mitigating noise from
the proposed runway extension but the firm is expected to
submit another report to the County commission by the end
of the year in which it will estimate costs.
Bob Bielek, the County's interim aviation director, esti-
mated that it would cost $30 million to $50 rnillion just to
sound insulate homes within the 2012 65 DNL contour. It
would cost three to five times that to buyout homes in the
future 65 DNL contour, he said. Bielek said the County
commissioners do not want mitigation measures to end in the
middle of neighborhoods.
The Jacobs Consultancy report said that a noise mitigation
program for areas beyond the 6S DNL contour could include
a combination of sound insulation and easements similar but
"less intensive" than that provided for homes in the 65 DNL
contour, as well as making contributions to the County
affordable housing fund that.would give residents in mobile
homes priority for affordable housing units.
Noise Metrics
LOOK AT COMPONENTS
OF DNL, WXLE RECOMMENDS
The consulting firm Wyle Laboratories recently issued a
Noise Bulletin addressing the public's dissatisfaction with
the use of the Day/Night Average Sound Level (DNL) as the
sole descriptor of airport noise exposure.
The article recommends that airport o�cials "look inside"
the DNL metric using supplemental noise metrics, a practice
that has elicited very positive public response when em-
ployed by Wyle.
"The basic approach is to break DNL down into its
component parts in order to communicate noise exposure in
greater detail in terms the public easily understands," Wyle
Airport Noise Report
November 15, 2006
explained. "This is achieved by using noise metrics and
innovative color graphics and tables that show how much
time aircraft noise will exceed one or more threshold noise
levels and how many times in a given time period (hour, day,
week, etc.) aircraft noise will exceed those thresholds on the
average annual day."
"The steadily increas9ng number of operations at most air
carrier and many general aviation airports is a factor that can
no longer be ignored in describing changes in noise
exposure over time. We can no longer regard total sound
energy as the sole measure of noise exposure. Frequency of
operations is a component of noise exposure that defines the
noise environmental for many individuals (perhaps even
better than average sound energy); and the sooner we
incorporate frequency of operations into the analysis of
airport noise exposure, the better we wili manage public
opposition to the many needed airport eapansion projects,"
the Bulletin states.
"Simply looking at the location of their home on a DNL
contour map does not tell residents how many times
airplanes fly over them, at what time of day, what type of
airplanes, or how those flights may interfere with activities,
such as sleep and watching television. There is growing
evidence that the number and intensity of the individual
noise events that make up DNL are more important to public
understanding of the effects of noise around airports," the
Bulletin asserts.
The Wyle Noise Builetin, "What's In Your DNL," was
written by William Albee and Thomas Connor (who both
retired as division managers in the Federal Aviation
Administration's O�ce of Environment and Energy) in
collaboration with Roger Odegard, Royce Bassarab, and
Clint Morrow, who are experienced airport noise consultants
on Wyle's staff.
The Noise Bulletin is available on Wyle's web site at http://
www.wylelabs.com/contentlglobal/docum ents/dnl.pdf.
Colurnbia Met�•opolitan
� � ' - -�- , -,i-- -� � - �
0 '•' 1 �' • ''
On Nov. 9, the Federal Aviation Administration announced
its overall approval of the Part 150 Airport Noise Mitigation
Program for Columbia (SC) Metropolitan Airport, an airport
facing noise problems from nighttime cargo flights and
engine maintenance operations as well as daytime low-
altitude touch-and-go training operations by large military
cargo aircraft.
The airport is a UPS hub and also has nighttime cargo
operations by FedEx and DHL.
FAA approved most measures in the program intended to
improve land use compatibility such as local zoning and
subdivision regulation changes, imposition of noise overlay
zoning, and acquisition of avigation easements to improve
land use compatibility.
171
The agency also approved a voluntary sound insulation
program, although it would only apply to 18 home in the 65
DNL contour initially but could be expanded to include 126
homes as well as a church and school by 2022.
But the FAA disapproved, pending submission of
additional information, most operational measures intended
to address overflight noise. T'he airport commission said that
it will not have the funding needed to do the additional
study required by the FAA until July 2007 at the earliest.
FAA disapproved flight track modifications on approach
and departure that the airport said were designed to reduce
the areas that would be exposed to aircraft overflights,
especially at low altitudes.
FAA said the airport had not submitted enough informa-
tion for the agency to determine the number of persons
benefited (either by a change in DNL noise contour or
appropriate supplemental rnetric), versus people that may get
increased noise impact due to changes in flight tracks.
The FAA, however, did approve as an informal, voluntary
measure, the use of the "close-in" noise abatement departure
profile for severai runways.
But the agency disapproved for purposes of the Part 150
program a proposal to establish a nighttime noise abatement
preferential runway use program by making eligible for
construction a full-length taxiway needed to make the
program work.
FAA said the airport did not submit sufficient information
to demonstrate a noise benefit from such a project.
It also said that additional noise information is needed to
determine the benefit of voluntary restrictions on military
touch-and-go operations.
Run-Up Enclosure
The FAA did not give outright approval for construction
of a ground run-up enclosure to reduce nighttime engine
maintenance noise. But it did approve further study of the
enclosure and said such study should include information
on speech interference and sieep disturbance, and should
show the benefits in terms of numbers of homes benefited
versus homes that would get increased noise impact.
"If the study demonstrates, from a costlbenefit analysis,
that a pen type enclosure would be beneficial to the sur-
rounding airport community, the airport may recommend
construction of the enclosure in a supplement or amendment
to the noise compatibility program," FAA said.
The FAA also approved a public relations program
designed to improve communications about the Part 150
program to the public and pilots: The FAA, in addition,
approved the purchase of three portable noise monitors.
The LPA Group did the Part 150 study for the airport.
For further information on the ColumbiaMetropolitan Part
150 program, contact Bonnie Baskin in FAA's Atlanta
Airports Districtoffice; tel: (404) 305-7152. The FAA's
Record of Approval for the program is available on-line at:
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffi c/airports/environm en-
tal/airport_noi se/part_ 150/states/.
Airport Noise Report
November 15, 2006
. • � �• .
.� �. ;�.•�
John J. Corbett, Esq.
Spiegel & McDiarmid
Washington, DC
Carl E. Burleson
Director, O�ce of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
John C. Freytag, P.E.
Director, Chazles M. Salter Associates
San Francisco
Michaei Scott Gatzke, Esq.
Gatzke; Dillon & Ballance
Carlsbad, CA
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Denver
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Laguna Niguel, CA
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq.
McDermott, Will & Emery
Chicago
Mary L. Vigilante
President, Synergy Consultants
Seattie
172
In Brief ..-1
Reno Tahoe Seeking Airport Noise Analyst
Airport Noise Analyst — Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority — Reno, NV. Salary
Range: $42,016 -$62,917. Assists in the development, implementation, and
management of a comprehensive aircraft noise and operations monitoring
program.
Responsibilities include but are not limited to: monitoring aircraft noise and
airlines' compliance with FAA, State and Airport noise policies and regula-
tions; maintaining the Aircraft Noise and Operations Monitoring System;
retrieving and correlating data from the Airport's remote noise monitoring
sites.
Minimum Qualifications: one year ofprogram experience in noise abatement,
sound measurement monitoring, and/or in the use of commercial Aircraft
Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems; Associate of Arts or Science in
aviation, business, or public administration; a valid driver's license is required
at the time of appointment.
Excellent benefits package, including 100%Airport Authority-paid retire-
ment contribution, medical, dental and vision insurance for the employee and
dependents. Nevada has no state income tax. All employment offers are
subject to successful completion of a drug-screening test anda fingerprint
criminal history records check.
For a required RTAA application and complete job announcement, please
visit www.renoairport.com or call (775) 328-6450.
EIS forParkAirTonrManagementPlan
The FAA announced on Nov. 15 that it intends to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) and initiate a public and agency scoping process for
the Haleakala (Hawaii) National Park Air TourManagement Plan.
The public and agencies have until7an. 16, 2007, to submit comments
regarding the scope of issues that should be addressed in the EIS. Comments
can be submitted to Docket Management System, Docket No. FAA-2006-
26113, U.S. DOT, Room Plaza401, 400 Seventh St., S W, Washington, DC.
20590-0001. The DocketNo. must be identified at the beginning of comments.
Correction
FAA incorrectly included four Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) for
Charlotte-Douglas International t�irport totaling $58.7 million on its list of
PFCs being devoted for noise mitigation purposes reported in the Nov. 1
issue of ANR (Vol. 18, Nos. 36, 37). Charlotte is using thos.e PFCs to purchase
land for a new runway under its Master Plan.
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Published 44 times ayear at 43978 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 fee of US$1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA.
�
\, .
� � �; �
`�t � � .� / � �1 � S.•'�, ,"'`..:., �:r i �� � '"+s �: ,� r4:i►,,,3 a��-.�k' �� � `�}. �3 � �-; �,1,. � ;,,,.
, a`>. i � �x ' �k T � v� A��Y ft 6 .�5:, e; ;�,�'� � l�� �.,,� �1:�a � � "�xa, � �! �_a�*�t ,z; �,�'
��c.
A weekly update on litigation, regulaiions, and technological developments
Volume 18, Number 40
Noise Modeling
. . . , �, � l • � �
� . . � ;� . �i � . ► � � � . '�, . ' .
On Nov. 3 the Federal Aviation Administration issued an update to its Integrated
Noise Model (INM), the standard tooi used by the agency for determining the
predicted noise impact in the vicinity of airports.
INM 62a updates INM 6.2, which was issued on May 22 and inctuded updated
noise data on several models of Boeang aircraft, contained new audibility metrics
for assessing noise in national parks, accounted for noise attenuation due to
terrain shielding, and allowed lateral attenuation for helicopter and propeller
aircraft to be disabled in order to simulate the propagation of sound over acousti-
cally hard surfaces (18 ANR 69).
The new INM 6.2a updates noise data for additional aircraft to better reflect the
current operating fleet. INM 6.2a also "corrects minor problems with Detail Grid
Reporting for Maximum Level (LAMAX) and Time Above metrics (TA.LA,
TAPNL, TALC), and also corrects problems with the processing of No Data
values in terrain data," FAA noted on its website.
The agency said that the INM 6.2a Release Notes also further clarify the use of
the Ambient Screening Analysis capability introduced in INM Version 6.2.
(Continued on p. 174)
Resem•ch
ACRP SEEKS CONSULTANT TO UPDATE
1985 FAA DOCUMENT ON NOISE EFFECTS
The Transportation Research Board (TRB) announced Nov. 21 that it is seeking
a consultant to update the Federal Aviation Administration's 1985 "Aviation
Noise Effects" document, which was intended to serve as a compendium of
current research on the effects of aircraft and airport noise but is now very
outdated.
TRB also is seeking experts on the effects of aircraft noise to serve on a commit-
tee to oversee the seven-month project, which will compile a new compendium of
current research on the effects of noise in a broad range of areas.
The project to update the FAA's noise effects document is one of five new
projects that will be conducted as part of the Airport Cooperative Research
Program (ACRP), which is managed by TRB and was established by Congress in
December 2003 to provide a mechanism for conducting applied research that
responds to the needs of airport operators. The ACRP is sponsored by the FAA
and managed by the National Academies of Science acting through the TRB.
Since the FAA first compiled its document on Aviation Noise Effects 21 years
ago, the agency and industry "have conducted extensive amounts of research
concerning all of the topics addressed in the 1985 document. However, no
centralized location exists that summarizes the findings of new research and
conclusions that were drawn," TRB explained in its solicitation.
(Continued on p. 174)
173
November 22 , 2006
IIZ ThZS ISSue...
Noise Modeling ... FA.A
releases the first update to Ver-
sion 6.2 ofthe agency's Integrated
Noise Model (T.N1V�.
INM 6.2a includes updated
aircraftperformance data to
betterreflectthe currentairline
operating fleet as well as correc-
tions ofminorproblems found in
INM 6.2 - p. 173
Researclz ... TRB is seeking
consultants for aproj ect io update
FAA's 1985 "AviationNoise
Effects" document and experts on
aviationnoise effects to serve on
an oversightpanel fortheproject.
A updated compendium of
research on a broad range of
noise effects, based on current
research, will be prepared for use
by FAA and airports - p. 173
Piedryzont Triad Int'l ... A
draft Part 15 0 program for the
airport, which will be the site of a
newFedEx cargo hub, is released
forpublic comment-p.174
Tec/inology ... Rannoch
' CorporationannouncesthatDave
Ellison has been appointedthe
frm's newpresident and chief
operating officer - p.175
News Briefs ... PAA ap-
proves noise maps forBurlington
(VT) Int'1 Airport - p.176
November 22, 2006
Noise contours prepazed with INM 6.2a will not show
much difference from those developed with INM 6.2, said
Robert Mentzer Jr., senior scientist at the acoustical
consulting firm Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. "If any
changes are seen, they will be at major airports with
scheduled air carrier operations."
Any airport projects beginning after the release of INM
6.2a are required to use the update.
Aircraft Updated in INM 6.2a
INM 6.2a includes updated noise and performance data for
the following aircraft:
• AirbusA300-622RwithPW4158engines(A30062);
• Airbus A310-304 with GE CF6-80CA2 engines
(A310);
• Airbus A319-131 withIAE V2522-AS engines
(A319);
� Airbus A320-21 � with CFMS6-SA-1 engines
(A320);
• Airbus A320-232with V2527-AS engines (A32023);
• Airbus A321-232 with V2530-AS engines (A32123);
• AirbusA330-301withGECF6-80ElA2engines
(A330);
• AirbusA330-343withRRTRENT772Bengines
(A33034); _
� Airbus A340-211 with CFM-SC-2 engines (A340);
• Boeing737-300withCFM56-3B-lengines(737300);
• Boeing737-400withCFM56-3C-lengines(737400);
• Boeing737-SOOwithCFM56-3Glengines(737500);
� BoeingMD-8lwithJT8D-217engines(MD81);
• BoeingMD-82withJT8D-217Aengines(MD81);
� BoeinglvID-83withJT8D-219engines(IvID81).
Specifics of Update
Mentzer said that the Airbus aircraft have updated Noise-
power-distance (NPD) curves, performance coe�cients, and
flight profiles. In addition to these updates, the iVID-80
aircraft now have fixed-point arrival profiles with a level
segment at 3000 feet A.FE (Above Field Elevation).
"The Airbus and much of the Boeing fleet in the model
already have the fixed-point anival profiles with the level
segment at 3000 feet AFE," Mentzer explained.
The Boeing 737-300, -400, and -500 aircraft in INM 6.2a
have only updated NPD curves. The flight profiles had been
updated previously in the INM 6.2 release, he said.
Mentzer said that INM 6.2a also changes the substitution
aircraft forthe EMB 135 from the CL600 to the EMB 145 and
adds five new aircraft to the substitution list for INM 6.2a:
the new EMB 145 aircraft is substituted with the EMB 145
and the new EMB 170, EMB 190, CFJ701, and CRJ900 are all
substituted with the GV.
INM 6.2a is a software update to Version 6.2 and can be
downioaded from the FAA's website at: littp://
www. faa.gov/about/o� ce_org/headquarters_offices/aep/
models/inm modeUinm6 2a/.
174 �
ACItP, fi�om p. 173
The updated compendium "will compile research and field
notes conceming all of the topics addressed in the 1985
document, as well as new topics concerning the effects of
noise on nearby communities," TRB explained.
It said the intended users of the updated research compen-
dium are airport operators undertaking a Part 150 Noise
Compatibility Plan study or environmental impact analysis for
an airport project or the FAA noise team updating 20-year-
old airport noise guidance.
The consultant preparing the updated noise research
compendium must gather and synthesize information on the
effects of airport and aircraft noise in the following areas:
• Health effects
• Annoyance
• S1eepEffects
• Effects on schools, hospitals, and caze homes
• Impact on property values
• Effects of low frequency and vibration
• Effectsonwildlife
• Community responses
• Effectiveness of airport land use regulations
• EfFects of local land use decisions on numbers and
types of affected persons
• Legal issues
• Analysis requirements resulting from community
response
• Response requirements by airports
• Amelioratingeffects
• Mitigation measures.
The consultant seiected for the project will be paid $25,000
and an additional $5,000 if a publishable report final draft is
delivered within the seven-month contract period.
To participate in the project, send at maxiumum a two-page
letter of interest, a resume providing qualiftcations, and a
statement that you can meet the contract requirements to Gail
Staba, A.ICP senior program officer; e-mail: GStaba@nas.edu
orfax: (202)334-2081;te1: (202)334-2116.
The submission deadline for consultants seeking to prepare
the updated research compendium is Jan. 26, 2007. The
deadline for oversight panel participation is Dec.l, 2006.
The project announcement is available at http://
www.trb.org/Studies/Synthesis/SynthesesACRPNew.asp.
Piedmont Ti�iad Int'Z
,1'� '•'' 1 ',i ,•
� ' 1 ', ' i /
�.
,
C�
A draft Part 150 Airport Noise Mitigation Program for
Piedmont Triad International Airport (PTTA) in Greensboro,
NC — the site of a new FedEx cargo hub that is expected to
open in 2009 and add as many as 60 takeoffs and landings
each night— was issued for public comment in early �
November.
Airport Noise Report
November 22, 2006
The Piedmont Triad Airport Authority is expected to
endorse the study at its Jan. 16, 2007, meeting. The study
will then be submitted to the Federal Aviation Administra-
tion for approval.
Andrew Harris of Andrew S. Harris, Inc., Manchester, MA.,
the acoustical consultant who prepared the study, said it is
unique because of three existing conditions at PTTA:
• The noise of greatest concern to the community is
associated with a future change in aircraft activity (the Fedex
mid-Altantic hub), not a current condition;
• An operational procedure evaluated in the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for an expansion of
the airport needed to accommodate the FedEx hub will
significantly reduce noise exposure in the nearest residential
neighborhoods to the northeast of the airport. The EIS
evaluated the use of head-to-head operations to the
southwest of PTTA under which nighttime cargo flights will
approach and depart in that direction to avoid more densely
populated areas); and
• Local land use planning by the City of High Point,
NC, has helped to limit dense residential development to the
southwest of the airport on the extended centerline of a new
runway needed for the cargo hub.
"Because of the head-to-head operations established by
the Federal Aviation Administration's Record of Decision
[on the airport expansion] and good planning to the south-
west of the airport, the Noise Compatibility Plan study began
with important measures already planned," the Draft Part 150
study notes.
In addition to the use of head-to-head operations at night
to reduce noise impact, the study also proposes the buyout
of homes estimated to be within the 70 dB DNL noise
contour in 2014 when the FedEx hub is expected to be fully
operational, and the sound insulation of homes within the
proj ected 65 dB DNL contour in 2014.
There are very few homes in those future contours. Only
12 homes are estimated to be in the future 70 dB DNL
contour and most of those already have been bought out,
Harris said. At most, only 116 homes are in the projected 65
dB DNL contour and that is based on the assumption that
FedExwill still be operating aging hushkitted 727 aircraft.
Worst-Case Scenario Modeled
FedEx announced in Septemberthat it will spend $2.6 billion
to replace 90 727-200s with significantly quieter and more
fuel efficient Boeing 757-200s.
' Harris said FedEx has not yet decided where it will operate
the new 757s and, therefore, the Draft Part 150 study is
based on the worst-case scenario that the 727s will continue
to operate at PTIA.
The draft study includes updated forecasts for the iwo
years covered in the study (2006 and 2014) but they found
only very minor changes in the overall number of aircraft
operations expected in those years.
The Draft Part 150 study was prepared with input from
three groups: a Citizens Advisory Committee consisting of
25 representatives of neighborhoods around PTIA, a
175
Government Advisory Committee comprised of 25 represen-
tatives of local governmental bodies, and a User's Advisory
Committee comprised of 25 representatives of airlines, airport
tenants, and other entities using the airport.
Representatives of the PTIA Air Tr�c Control Tower
participated in both the Government and Users' advisory
committees.
The Draft Part 150 study, prepared at a cost of $1.3 million
over two years is available at the PT1A web site:
www.ptipart150.com:
A group of residents near the airport fled a legal challenge
of FAA's approval of the FedEx hub in federal court and
challenges of state permit approvals for the hub in state
court but lost them all.
Teclanology
; � • � ► � �;
� � . � , � � . ' .
Rannoch Corporation announced Nov. 20 that Dave
Ellison has been appointed as the new president and chief
executive officer (CEO) ofthe firm, which is a pioneer and
leading supplier of next-generation surveillance and flight
tracking technology, which among other things, allows
planes to fly very precise noise-abatement paths.
Ellison joined the firm in May as chief operating officer to
solidify business operations and to formulate the company's
business and growth strategy. He brought to the firm over
25 years of experience leading high-tech software firms.
Ellison replaces Alex Smith, who will step into the newly-
created role of chief market strategist where he will focus on
new market development and strategic international pro-
grams. Smith also serves as chairman of the Rannoch Board
ofDirectors.
"I am privileged to be leading this organization during a
time of great growth and potential," said Ellison. "Rannoch
is now in the position to deliver unsurpassed solutions to
improve worldwide surveillance and coverage in an ex-
tremely cost effective manner. Our recent selection by some
of the world's largest nations and ATC organizations
demonstrates the trust placed in our ability to improve air
tra�c capacity and safety in an era of exponential air traffic
growth. Our technology serves as the perfect bridge to the
future by providing the seamless integration of ADS-B and
multilateration [technology that is used for planes not
advanced enough to use ADS-B] to deliver immediate
benefits today, while concurrently establishing the infra-
structure that will support ADS-B tracking once full aircraft
equipage is achieved."
Said Smith: "Dave Ellison is the right leader for our busi-
ness as we expand our operations to satisfy the unprec-
edented demand for our technologies and solutions. Dave's
vision, experience; and track record of successfully merging
and integrating business units on a global basis are crucial
to the company's growth plans at this stage in our busi-
ness."
Aitport Noise Report
November 22, 2006 176
ANR EI�ITORIAI.� Backbone' to Next Gen ATC System
A�VYSORY BOARD ADS-B is an acronym for Automatic Dependent Surveillance—Broadcast �
system, which provides real-time cockpit displays of air tra�c information,
JohnJ.Corbett,Esq. both on the ground and in the air.
Spiegel & McDiarmid Rannoch was founded in 1991 and installs and produces the sensors and
Washington, DC software that provide the ADS-B flight tracking. Last year, it acquired one of
its two competitors (ER.A, based in the Gzech Republic), but still faces
Carl E. Burteson competition from Censis, bases in Syracuse, NY.
Director, O�ce of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration In a speech given this summer, Federal Aviation Administrator Marion C.
Blakey cailed ADS-B "tlie enabler" ofthe Next Generation Air Transport
John C. Freytag, P.E. System(NGATS).
Director, Chazles M. Salter Associates "What [ADS-B] is gong to mean for NGATS can be summed up in three
San Francisco words: safety, e�ciency, and capacity," Blakey said.
Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. "In practical terms, ADS-B will give us real-time displays of air iraffic
Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance information, both on the ground and in the air. This means for the first time,
Carlsbad, CA pilots and confirollers will have a much better sense of what's going on
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. around them at any given time. And that, in turn, will allow us to increase
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP capacity.
Denver "And then there's the safety benefit. We've been running ADS-B in Alaska,
and the results are impressive. Since ADS-B came on the scene, the accident
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. rate has dropped by 49 percent. Now that's what I call a worthwhile invest-
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Laguna Niguei, CA merit " .
Blakey has committed to making ADS-B "the backbone" of the Next
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. Generation Air Transport System and that is reflected in President Bush's
McDermott, will & Emery fiscal 2007 budget request, which proposes $80 million forthe program.
Chicago The next step is for the FAA to begin selecting companies to instaIl the
Mary L. Vigilante ADS-B equipment, which is hundreds of sensors that will be placed through-
President, Synergy Consultants out the country. �
Seattie Several teams of high technology aerospace companies are competing for
that contract, which is expected to be announced in 7uly 2007.
Rannoch is on a team led by Lockheed Martin. But Boeing, Northrop
Grumman, and M[TRE are also in competition for the contract.
In B�•ief ... �
Burlington Noise Maps
On Nov. 17, the Federal Aviation Administration announced its approval of
noise exposure maps submitted by the City ofBurlington, VT, forBurlington
International Airport.
For further information, contact Richard Doucette, FAA, New England
Region Airports Division,l2 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803. No telephone number or e-maii address was provided.
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Published 44 times ayear at43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashbum, 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 fee of US$1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA.
,� , , , $ , x
� � � �, � g ,� �- � � � �
,� �`1� $ �r' � 3�� � ��' �' C.,-: � � �'.•� f�#A e�,.ri.,�� ��r � $1 � a '� _ �',t. r :.�" r' a . '� ,,,
it ..n S .ar. 1.,. .,�,.— :�+,��• ,.� �. �.
�' 4,`-:
A week(y update on litigation, regulations, and iechnological developments
Volumel8,Number4l
ICAO
AIRPORTS WILL ASK CAEP TO TIGHTEN
AIl2CRAFT NOISE, EMISSION STANDARDS
Airports are preparing a series of working papers intended to get from the
Interr►ational Civil Aviation Organization's Committee on Aviation Environmental
Protection (C�,EP) what they failed to get at two previous meetings: significantly
more stringent aircraft noise and emission standards for new aircraft type designs
and a recommendation that member countries phase out the oldest and noisiest
Stage 3 aircraft currently operating in airline fleets, especially huskitted planes.
The Airports Council International — North America (ACI-NA) currently is
circulating the working papers which will be presented to CAEP at its upcoming
triennial meeting in Montreal in February 2007. The papers are in the process of
being finalized and are expected to be made public in a few weeks.
One of the papers is expected to support a new noise certification standard
tighter than Chapter 4(perhaps called Chapter 5). ACI-NA currently is canvassing
member airports to find examples of places where airport development has been
impeded because of continuing noise problems, explained Richard Marchi, ACI-
NA's senior advisor for policy and regulatory affairs.
The other working paper, he said, will ask for the phase out of the oldest, noisiest
(Continued on p. 178)
Modeling
FAA TO DEMONSTRATE CAPABILITIES
OF NEW 'APMT' ECONOMYC ANA]LYSIS T�.1C)L
On Dec. 6-8, the Federal Aviation Administration will demonstrate the capabili-
ties of a suite of new software tools it is developing, which the agency says are
critically needed to assess the interdependencies between aircraft noise and
emissions impacts and to define the economic costs and benefits on the aviation
industry and the public of future policies and procedures that will be used to
address those impacts.
A committee of experts convened to assist the FAA in developing these new
tools questioned in early 2005 whether the progress the agency had made at that
time on the economic analysis tool was su�cient to meet that FAA's goal of
having it ready for acceptance by the International Civil Aviation Organization's
Committee on Aviation EnvSronmental Protection (CAEP) by 2010.
While the committee supported the FAA's general vision of the new economic
analysis tool, called the Aviation Portfolio Management Tool (A.PMT), it ques-
tioned whether the agency housed the economic expertise to develop the new tool
and said the funding level for the project appeared to be inadequate.
Whether these concerns have been addressed by the agency will become
apparent at the Dec. 6-8 demonstration, which will be held at the Transportation
Research Board in Washington, DC, as the last of four workshops held to get
public input on the project:
(Continued on p. 178)
177
December 1, 2006
In This Issue...
ICAO ... Airports are in the
process ofpreparing a series of
workingpapers aimed atconvinc-
ing ICAO's Committee on Avia-
tion Environmental Protection at
its upcozning meeting in February
to significantlytightenaircraft
noise and emission standards and
to recommendthephaseout of
aircraftwithin 5 dB of Stage 3
noise standards - p. 177
Modeling ... In early Decem-
ber, FAA will demonstrate the
capability ofthreenew software
tools it is developingthatwill be
usedto considerthe tradeoffs
between aircraftnoise and emis-
sions and to define tl�e costs and
benefits ofpolicies andproce-
dures to reduce noise and emis-
sions - p. 177
Husla Sits ... Rep. Price is
helpingRDUint'1 findoutwhy
theNavy Reserve has not spent
$6 million appropriated in fiscal
2005 to hushkit old, noisy Stage 2
C-9 planes that are allowed to fly
into civilian airports -p.179
News B�•iefs ... Former head
of FAA noise o�ce, James
Densmore, dies ... Oberstar
warns White House notto finalize
rules to ease foreign ownership of
U. S. airlines - p:180
December l, 2006
Chapter 3 aircraft, which would be defined as any within 5
dB of the Chapter 3limits. [ICAO Chapter 3 and 4 noise
standards are essentially identicaIto U.S. Stage 3 and 4
noise standards.]
CAEP, which is dominated by countries where the aircraft
manufacturing industry is based, meets only once every
three years. In 2001, it adopted a new Chapter 4 noise
standard for new aircraft type designs that was only 10 dB
more stringent than the Chapter 3 standard it replaced and
could be met by almost every Chapter 3 plane currently
operating. T'he new Chapter 4 noise standard was far below
the stringency airports sought and was quickly adopted by
the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration as its new Stage 4
noise standard.
CAEP also failed at its 2001 meeting to reach agreement on
whether marginally compliant Stage 3 planes should be
phased out; perhaps the issue of greatest concern to
airports because those planes cause the most noise
complaints and spur opposition to airport development
projects.
ACI-NA was extremely disappointed with the outcome of
the 2001 CAEP meeting (dubbed CAEP 5), saying it left
airports "to continue to struggle to develop critically
needed capacity in the face of intense public and political
opposition to aircraft noise" (13 ANR 5).
Airports also were disappointed with the outcome of
CAEP's ne�ctmeeting in 2004 (dubbed CAEP 6). After
assessing NOx reductions between 5 percent and 30 percent
lower than the current standard, CAEP recommended a
reduction of only 12 percerit. Airports called the new
standard "timid" (16 ANR25).
The focus of the upcoming CAEP meeting (dubbed CAEP
7) is on very technical issues. The most that could happen
at CA.EP 7 is for the committee to agree to take on new tasks
to tighten aircraft noise and emission standards that wouid
be considered at the CAEP 8 meeting in 2010, Marchi said.
Airports See'Systemic' Problem
Earlier this year, ACI-NA raised the idea of tighter aircraft
noise and emission standards with a CA.EP steering
committee but it said that noise issues should be addressed
through the "Balanced Approach to Aircraft Noise Mitiga-
tion" process adopted in 2001 at CAEP 5.
That process, which is similar to the FAA's Part 161
regulations, requires airport operators to conduct an
extensive cost-benefit analysis to support the noise
mitigation measures they select and that the measures be
shown to be the most cost-effective. In the United States,
the Part 161 process has made it virtually impossible for
airports to impose noise restrictions on aircraft operations.
"We told the CAEP steering group that noise problems
should be handled through the `Balanced Approach' at
individual airports but, ifwe see systemic noiseproblems
[being faced by many airports], then CAEP needs to act,"
Marchi said.
He said offered the following exanlple to show the money
being wasted by airports on noise problems. Denver Interna-
tional Aiiport, built with a large buffer zone, constructed a
new 16,000 foot nznway at a cost of only $175 million. But
Atlanta, St. Louis, and Seattle are building much shorter
runways (7,000 — 9,000 feet) that will cost over $1 billion each.
The difference is land acquisition, mitigation, and environ-
mentai controversy centered around aircraft noise, he said.
It is unclear at this point whether airports will be successful
in their pursuit of tighter aircraft noise and emission stan-
dards and the phaseout of the noisiest Stage 3 planes left in
the operating fleet.
The CAEP committee works through consensus and
countries on the committee where aircraft manufacturing
companies are based have been successful in the past in
convincing developing couniries on CAEP that tighter
environmental standards would hurt them economically.
But there is support for tighter noise and emission standards
from some European countries and Japan.
Modelzng, fi�om p. 177
In addition to demonstrations of the capabilities of the
APMT, the FAA also will show what its other new tools can
do. The Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT)
integrates existing noise and emissions models with a new
aircraft and engine analysis tool, called the Environmental
Design Space (EDS).
Together, the three new software toois will enable CAEP —
but also others — to assess the global, regional, national, and �
airport-specific environmental impacts of aviation and their
associated economic costs and benefits.
Those that could use the A.PMT range from the public,
including homeowners and neighborhood organizations,
academia, non-governmental organizations, financial�
organizations, airports, airlines, and manufacturers, as well as
government research and regulatory organizations at all
levels of government, including international.
The APMT will be used to support decisions for aircraf�
and engine technology programs and applications, opera-
tional measures, stringency requirement, and phaseouts and
operational bans on aircraft.
`Improbable' FAA Will Meet Goal
But in a letter report following the third workshop held on
the new tools on Jan. 31—Feb. 2, 2005, a committee of 12
experts in aviation noise and air emissions, law, and engineer-
ing, set up to assist in the development of the new tools, told
the FAA that it found it "improbable that, considering the
currently identified resources and expertise, FAA will be able
to succeed in implementing its vision for APMT."
"While the committee supports the general vision of
APMT, there has been little definition of the requirements for
APMT or even common tezminology regarding its ends or
means. This is of concern given the limited timed and
resources available to deveiop APMT before CAEP 8[in l�
2010]," the committee report notes.
Airport Noise Report
December l, 2006
Their report summarized concerns about A.PMT raised by
the almost 50 participants who had attended the workshop.
Among those concerns is the need to identify all costs and
benefits in the early stages of APMT development.
One mechanism that could be used to do that and was
popular with workshop participants was the use of a
"balance sheet" to understand how costs and benefits affect
all stakeholders in noise and emission issues.
While it would not replace a cost-benefit analysis, the
balance sheet would "help ensure all cost and benefits are
accounted for and allow for easier user recognition of the
benefifs and costs associated with a particular policy," the
report explained. "The concept here is to prepare a series of
balance sheets for the different parties so that the benefits
and costs for each would be identified and the incentives for
each would be understood."
Monetizing all costs and benefits associated with aircraft
noise and emissions impacts is the best way to compare the
tradeoffs between noise and emissions and among various
emissions produced by aircraft, the participants agreed. But
they said it could be extremely di�cult to monetize some
costs, such as that from sleep disturbance.
"For the tool to gain international acceptance, there must
be some means of accounting for different value systems
across regions and cultures," the report noted. Workshop
participants said the APMT must be flexible enough to allow
stakeholders, such as Buropean countries, to insert their
own modules for impact assessment, cost analysis, or other
issues.
Transparency ofModel Called `Critical'
The transparency of the new A.PMT model also was seen
as critical to its success. "First, APMT will be a sophisti-
cated tool, and all stakeho(ders and users of the results may
not be users of the tool. Therefore, the methods, data, and
calculations the tool uses must be transparent at some level
to convince stakeholders of the validity of the results," the
committee said in its report.
"Second, the FAA requires international acceptance of
APMT for use in the CAEP process. Again, different
stakeholders, particularly other member countries belonging
to CAEP, may wish to compare assumptions and methodolo-
gies in APMT with tools that they are familiar with and have
used in the past.'
"Finally, the issue of proprietary data surfaced in a number
of discussians; this issue prompted the question of how
transparency is achieved while proprietary data are pro-
tected. FAA must devise some accepted means of describ-
ing proprietary data and methodologies without releasing
the data or algorithms This requirement is considered critical
since the development and validation of AEDT-APMT relies
on use of proprietary data. Without assurances that
proprietary data will be protected, data owners will be
reluctant to provide them to FAA. And some proprietary
data may also need evaluation by independent experts
before those data can be accepted as valid."
179
The committee told FAA thai it is critical for the agency to
account for the "considerable challenges" associated with
implementing the APMT. "The legacy [noise and emission]
models that will be used by AEDT are at a significantly
greater level of maturity and have a proven track record in
contrast to the models and methodologies contemplated for
APMT," their report said.
For AEDT, the committee said, "the risk is integration and
improvement to known products. In the context of APMT, it
is the development of new analytic capabilities and models
as well as their integration into an overail framework. The
economic models for APMT would use valuation methods
that are not universally accepted and embody a levei of
uncertainty in the resultant values."
Hush Sits
REP. PRICE ASKS NAVY I�ESERVE
WHY C-9S ARE NOT HUSHKITTED
Rep. David Price (D-NC) is trying to assist Raleigh-Durham
International Airport in finding out why the Navy Reserve
has failed to use $6 million in funding provided in the fiscal
2005 Defense appropriations bill to purchase Stage 3 hush
kits for 17 old Stage 2 aircraft that continue to fly into civilian
airports and bother nearby communities.
In an Oct. 241etter to Vice Admiral John G. Cotton, Chief of
the Navy Reserve, Price, who sits on the House Appropria-
tions Committee, asked for an update on the status of efforts
to install hush kits, including how many of the 15 C-9B and
two DC-9 aircraft operated by the Navy Reserve continue to
lack hush kits, how much of the fisca12005 funding l�as been
spent, and what plans the Navy Reserve has to equip any
remaining C-9 aircraft with hush kits.
The aircraft have been used by the Navy Reserve since the
early 1970s and 1980s.
The C-9s are DC-9 aircraft are assigned to four fleet tactical
support squadrons to provide cargo, passenger transporta-
tion, and forward deployment logistics support. The aircraft
are based at Naval Air Stations at Atlanta (GA), Norfolk
(VA), Whidbey Island (WA), near Seattle, and Willow Grove
(PA), near Philadelphia but can operate in and out of any
civilian airport because they are exempt from meeting Stage 3
noise rules for civil aircraft.
The U.S. Marine Corps operates two C-9Bs with hushkits
and there is a substantial difference in the noise they
produce compared to the unhushkitted Na�y Reserve C-9Bs,
said RDU Noise O�cer Armando Tovar.
�In Bs•ief ...
Former Director of FAA Noise Office Dies
James E. Densmore, 80, who served as director of the
Federal Aviation Administration's Office ofEnvironment
and Energy from 1988 to 1991, died of an aortic aneurysm on
Nov. 2 at a hospital in Bethesda, MD.
Airport Noise Report
December 1, 2006
. � ' � ,,� �,'.
� l, � . �,� � (. ,�
John J. Corbett, Esq.
3piegel & McDiazmid
Washington, DC
Carl E. Burleson
Director, O�ce of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
John C. Freytag, P.E.
Director, Chazles M. Salter Associates
San Francisco
Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq.
Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance
Carlsbad, CA
Peter J. Kirsch, Esg.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Denver
180
He joined the FAA as chief of the Noise Abatement Division of the Office of .
Environment and Energy in 1975. In 1967, he moved to Washington, DC, to (
serve in the newly-formed Department of Transportation as deputy assistant �
secretary for research and technology. While serving in that position at DOT,
Mr. Densmore created the FAA Office of Noise Abatement within the FAA.
Later the office name was expanded to become the Office ofEnvironment and
Energy.
He was responsible at FAA for helping formulate environmental policy,
drafting tighter aircraft noise rules, and representing the United States at
meetings of the Intemational Civil Aviation Organization.
When he retired from the FAA in 1991, he was presented with the agency's
Distinguished Career Service Award.
Mr. Densmore was born in Monrovia, CA and was a graduate of the Califor-
nia lnstitute of Technology. He received a master's degree in engineering
from Caltech in 1946 and completed two years of advanced study in aeronau-
tical engineering at Caltech following that.
He is survived by his wife of 56 years, Linda H. Densmore of Solomons, NID;
a son, James E. Densmore, Jr., of Colorado Springs; and three grandchildren.
Lawnnakers Warn WhiteHouse on Airline Ownership Plan
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. The White House was warned by a bi-partisan group of congressmen, led
President, Mestre Greve Associates by incoming House Transportation Chairman James Oberstar (D-� not to
Laguna Niguel, CA proceed with a proposal to ease restrictions on foreign ownership of U.S.
airlines.
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. Oberstar and other House members are concerned that the White House is
McDermot� Will & Emery
Chicago planning an end run around Congress by finalizing the controversial owner-
ship rules prior to the Democrats taking over in the new Congress in January
Mary L. Vigilante 2007
President, Synergy Consultants
Seattte The Bush administration's proposal to give foreign interests some control
over how U.S. airlines aze operated stalled in August when Congress added
language to the Department of Transportation appropriations bill barring any
change to the ownership rules. But that bill wili not be passed by the end of
the lame-duck session and is not likely to be addressed until February at the
earliest.
The European Union will not approve a draft open skies treaty with the
United States until the ownership rules for U.S. airiines are eased.
The draft open skies treaty includes provisions that would require European
airports to weigh the costs and benefits of imposing measures to protect the
environment, such as aircraft noise and emissions restrictions and to refer
disagreements over them that cannot be resolved by a committee of govern-
ments, airlines, and airports to an international arbitration panel (18 ANR.33).
AIRPORT NDISE REPORT
Anne Ii. Kohut, Pubiisher
Publ ished 44 times ayear at 43978 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 internai 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.
�E, Lf T� ti" � vV �,:
ljs � � �LSp �V � Y "�Ta yP TY � �� F� �� '� y� i Cs. A ..
� t� ��.� �� t f'�,�� 3 r `�� x� �i< � �� ,.r' �1u5 ;r.. 4,;..
�, �..< .,f.; rt. "v�� ..��''
�.;.
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volumel8,Number42
Aircraft
Y.UFTHANSA PLAC�S FIRST ORDER
FOR PASSENGER VERSION OF BOEING �47-8
The Boeing Company announced Dec. 6 that the German carrier Lufthansa is the
first airline to place an order for the passenger version of Boeing's quieter and
more fuel efficient 747-8.
Lufthansa's order for 20 $oeing 747-8 Intercontinental jetliners plus 20 purchase
r3ghts is the main component of the carrier's plan to modernize its fleet and
increase environmental stewardship.
The order, with a total average list-price value of $5.5 billion, is set for delivery
beginning in 2010. Including Lufthansa's order, Boeing now has 73 orders for the
new plane, which was introduced last year.
"Lufthansa operates one of the youngest and most environmentaily friendly
fleets in the world," said Scott Caxson, president and chief executive o�cer,
Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "The 747-8 will use state-of-the-arttechnology
innovations from the 787 Dreamliner to significantly increase the capabilities of
Lufthansa's fleet. This airplane improves upon the economics of the 747-400, while
greatly enhancing fuel e�ciency, reducing emissions and noise. We are thrilled
that this world-class airline has chosen this world-class airplane."
(Continued on p. 182)
Jacksonville Int'l
CITY COUNCIL POISE:D TO CHANGE
ZONING TO REQUIRE NOISE 1)ISCLOSURE
The Jacksonville, FL, City Council is poised to approve a change of its zoning
code to require that airport noise disclosure notices be attached to the deeds of
homes in the 60 dB DNL and higher noise contours of Jacksonville International
Airport and other civil and military airports in Duval County, FL.
The noise disclosure requirement was agreed to by o�cials of the City of
Jacksonville, the Jacksonville Aviation Authority, and the Northeast Florida
Builders Association, following a year-long discussion process.
It is part of broader rewrite of the city's ordinance governing regulations relating
to land use near airports that was undertaken to produce a clearer and more
enforceable code and to cover issues, such as the disclosure notice, not currently
addressed.
The legislation (Ordinance 2006-1225) has already been read fwice by.the
Jacksonville City Council. A final reading will be done following a public hearing
and workshop on the disclosure notice requirement that will be held in January.
In addition to the disclosure notice, the legislation also would bar residential
development in the 70 DNL contour and in accident potential zones; would allow
one single family unit per one-half acre in the 65 DNL contour; proposes a noise
test certificate, building to certain standards, or an engineering judgment stating
that the submitted plans will meet noise attenuation requirements.
(Continued on p. 182)
181
December 8, 2006
I�t �"his Issue...
Aircraft ... The German airline
Lufthansa i s the first passenger
carrier to place an order for
Boeing's new quieter and more
fuel-efficient 747-8 -p.181
Jacksonville Int'Z ... City
Council ispoised to change
zoning to require disclosure of
airport noise impact - p.181
Spokane Int'l ... County
moving to undo zoning change
; thatinadvertentlyallowedresiden-
' tialencroachment-p.182
Chandler Municipal ... City
approves developmentthat
includes housing in airportprotec-
tion area despite opposition by
airport officials -p.182
Europe ... DOT withdraws
rule thatwould have eased
foreignownershipofU.Sairlines. '
Move j eopardizes Open Skies
agreement with EU - p.183
O'Hare Int'l ... Chicago
Mayor Daley open to proposal by
VirginAtlantic chiefto towplanes
to runways - p. 183
News B��iefs ... Former FAA.
official joins Rannoch Corp. ...
FAA seeks comments on burden
imposed by PFC requirement to
submit connpetition plans -p.184
December 8, 2006
Boeing plans to flight test the 787 Dreamliner next summer
and deliveries to airlines are scheduled to begin in 2008.
Company o�cials said in early fall that they are trying to
significantly lighten the weight of the new aircraft so that it
can meets fuel ��ciency goals.
Boeing said the 747-8 will reduce fuel consumption and
carbon dioxide emissions by 16 percent compared to the
747-400 itwill replace. It also wili meet and exceed the
nitrogen-oxide regulations being incorporated by the
International Civil Aviation Organization's Committee on
Aviation Environmental Protection.
In addition, the 747-8 will generate 30 percent ]ess noise
than the 747-400 and will meet the London Quota Count
(QC) 2 metric, which dictates operating hours both into and
out of London's three main airports based on noise levels.
"The 747-8 is a perfect complement to our fleet in the 400-
seat category and environmental initiatives," said Nico
Buchholz, senior vice president, Corporate Fleet, Deutsche
Lufthansa AG. "Environmental protection and
sustainability, underpinned by investment in innovation, are
integral elements of our corporate strategy. The 747-8
represents the essence of this strategy and closes a
capacity gap regarding aircraft size between our 300- and
500-seat aircraft in our future fleet "
Boeing said the 747-8 achieved improved performance by
incorporating many of the innovations from the 787. Most
notably, it will feature a new wing design, next-generation
General Electric GEnx engines, an upgraded flight deck, and
a new interior.
A new wing design on the 747-8 integrates the most recent
aerodynamic advancements, Boeing said. Some of the key
design features are new state-of-the-art raked wing tips, a
new flap system, and increased fuei capacity, which allow
the plane to fly farther and more e�ciently.
Jacksonville, fi•onz p. X81
The airport first considered trying to acquire avigation
easements from homeowners on the north side of the airport
where rapid residential growth is occuring.
However, it decided not to pursue that strategy and to
back the city's efforts to require disclosure instead.
Spokane Int'l
COUNTY MAY UNDO '1VV�ISTAKE'
ALLOWING ENCROACHMENT
In May 2005, Spokane County, WA, revised a zoning
ordinance to allow residential development in light industrial
zones, not realizing that they came ciose to Spokane
International Airport and Fairchild Air Force Base.
The zoning change was made to allow Kaiser Aluminum,
one of the county's largest employers, to redevelop land
they owned that was zoned light industrial but located away
182
from airports.
Spokane County Commission Chairman Todd Mielke said
the commission was so focused on trying to redevelop the
Kaiser land that it did not realize how close light industrial
areas came to airports within the county. He called the
commission's original zoning change "an honest mistake"
and said that within nine months of making the change, the
commission realized it was too broad.
On Oct. 3, the county commission approved a moratorium
on residential construction in a light industrial zone near one
of the airports called West Plains, which sparked outrage
among land developers who already had been granted
permits to construct iwo apartment complexes with 380 new
units in that light industriai area.
But state aviation o�cials, airport o�cials, and military
officials have urged the county to prevent residential
encroachment around Spokane Intemational and Fairchild
AFB to reduce noise complaints and increase safety.
Fairchild officials said that residential encroachment was the
primary reason that Air Force bases get shut down in the
national base closure process.
The county is considering the option of barring residential
development in light industrial zones near airports but
aliowing it elsewhere in the county.
On Dec. 7, the Spokane County Planning Commission
began considering proposed amendments to the county's
comprehensive plan, including those proposed to bar
residential encroachment near airports.
Fairchild is the largest employer in the Spokane region
providing an economic impact of $1.2 billion, the Spokane
Regional Chamber of Commerce said, but added that the
economic impact of Spokane International is similar.
Cha�idler Municipal
,��,� ,�
�''� / i � ''�'
�
Although it was staunchly opposed by officials of Chan-
dler Municipal Airpori and the airport commission, the City
of Chandler, AZ, recently approved a project one mile off the
end of a runway that includes residential development within
an airport protection area where no residential construction
was to have occurred.
However, the protection area extends out to the 55 dB DNL
noise contour of the growing general aviation and business
a�iation airport located just 20 miles southeast of downtown
Phoenix.
The area is zoned agricultural and the City Council consid-
ers rezoning requests for residential development on a case-
by-case basis, said Christine MacKay, a city economic
development specialist. She said she supported the project,
called Paseo Lindo, which includes 41 acres of commerciai,
retail, and office development with 27 acres of houses. The �
homes will not be in the airport's flight path, she said, and
will be located across from a high school where cotnmercial or
Airport Noise Report
December 8, 2006
industrial development would have disrupted the students.
When the City Council approved the project, it stipulated
that it wanted the builders to include sound insulation in the
homes, she added.
In addition, Chandler has adopted a noise disclosure
requirement for all homes in the SS dB DNL contour of the
airport to ]et potentials buyers know they will be impacted
by noise.
The noise disclosure area around Chandler Municipal is
defined in terms of square miles rather than noise contours.
It covers a nine square-mile area around the airport.
Although the airport is in the process of updating its
Master PIan and is likely to expand the airport, MacKay did
not feel the Paseo Lindo project would cause noise com-
plaints.
Chandler Mayor Boyd Dunn toid the ]ocal press that the
Paseo Lindo project was faz enough away from the airport
that it would not cause noise problems. "The project is
pretty innovative and the kind we'd like to see more of, a
place where people can live, work, and shop," he told the
ArizonaRepublic.
Airport o�cials do not agree and feaz the project and
another one, called Vina Escondida, that the City Council will
consider soon, wil] jeopardize airport growth.
MacKay said she agrees with the airport that the Vina
Escondida project, a 15-lot custom-home subdivision,
should not be approved but not for noise reasons. She said
the city needs to balance the growth of residential and
industrial development.
Eu�•ope
DOT DROPS PROPOSAL
ON FOREIGN C�WNERSI3IP
Bowing to pressure from the incoming Democratic chairs of
the House Transportation Committee and its Aviation
Subcommittee, Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters
announced Dec. 5 that DOT is withdrawing a proposal that
would have lifted a 25-percent limit on foreign ownership of
U.S. airlines.
Her action makes it less likely that the European Union will
approve an Open Skies agreement this year with the United
States, which it had conditioned on relaxation of the foreign
ownership rules.
The draft Open Skies agreement includes provisions that
would require European airports to weigh the costs and
benefits of imposing measures to protect the environment,
such as aircraft noise and emissions restrictions, and to refer
disagreements over them that cannot be resolved by a
committee of governrnent, airlines, and airports to an
international arbitration panel (18 ANR 33).
Peters said that DOT remains committed to seeking an
Open Skies agreement with the EU and, while she asserted
that the foreign ownership rules were not directly linked to
183
the Open Skies agreement, she acknowledged that some
involved with the European negotiations had aligned the
twa
"Today's announcement in no way deters us from our goal
of giving U.S. airlines compete access to the world's capital
markets, Peters said, adding she was eager to work with
Congress and the aviation industry to find new ways to
make it easierfor airlines to raise money from global inves-
tors.
Regarding the foreign ownership rules, Peters said "It was
clear from reviewing the comments, that [DOT'] needs to do
more to inform the public, labor groups, and Congress about
the benefits of allowing more international investment."
Labor unions, some airlines, and some Democrats in
Congress, led by Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), the incoming
chairman of the House Transportation Committee, opposed
relaxation of the foreign ownership rules out of concern that
it would give foreign investors control over an industry
critical to the national security.
Oberstar recently warned the Bush administration not to try
an end-run around the new Congress and finalize the rules
before the 110''' Congress convenes in January.
O'Hare Int'Z
. �• � i� � � �il
� t I . .�.� .� � _ ,
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, who wants his ciry to be
the greenest in America, said he will investigate the idea of
using electric tugs to tow aircraft departing O'Hare Interna-
tional Airport from their gates to a parking bay near the
runways as a way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
Richard Branson, head of Virgin Atlantic Airways, pressed
Daley to use the tugs as Virgin readies to resume daily
flights between Chicago and London that were halted after
the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Branson said that Virgin will experiment with using the
tugs in a few weeks at London Heathrow and Gatwick
airports and he wants Chicago to be the next airport in the
world to try to implement the measure, which he contends
will reduce aircraft emissions by 18 percent.
Branson contends that towing aircraft also will reduce
n.oise impact on communities near airports.
Daley said city aviation o�cials will study the concept and
will discuss it with the Federal Aviation Administration to
determine whether it would slow operations.
Skeptics contend that Branson's plan to tow approximately
1,150 planes that operate daily at O'Hare would bring
operations to a standstill because the tugs do not travel as
fast as aircraft do under their own power.
Spokesmen for United Airlines and American Airlines, who
dominate operations at O'Hare, said they did not have
enough information on Branson's proposal to cornment on it
but noted that their aircraft currently use only one engine to
move to and from runways which reduces emissions.
Airport Noise Report
December S, 2006 184 �
. �I � �: .
• "1 �' :�•'=1
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. Satter Associates
San Francisco
Michael Scott Gatzlce, Esq.
Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance
Cazisbad, CA
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Denver
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
I�z Br�ief ..--1
Former FAA Official Joins Rannoch
Rannoch Corporation, a leader in aircraft flight tracking technologies,
announced Dec. 5 that David Ford has been appointed Vice President of
Strategic Programs after recently retiring from a 31-year career at the Federal
Aviation Administration.
He will be responsible for znanaging Rannoch's strategic surveillance
programs where the company's ADS-B and multilateration aircraft tracking
technologies are positioned to amprove air traffic safety, capacity and effi-
ciency for the next-generation of air traffic management
Ford led the FAA team that deployed the Advanced Technologies and
Oceanic Procedures (ATOP) program that controis traffic over 24 million
square miles of oceanic airspace. "ATOP is widely regarded as a monumental
success in the industry as it dramatically increases capacity through reduction
of aircraft separation standards from 100 miles to 30 miles which significantly
reduces airline costs," Rannoch said.
"David brings a track record of innovation and a remarkable ability to
introduce progressive thinking to the issues facing our industry," said Dave
Ellison, Rannoch's new president and CEO. "Rannoch, together with our
strategic partners, is helping to shape the future, of air traffic control and
David's Ieadership and experience will ensure that our efforts are successful."
Comments on PFC ReportingRequirements Sought
The FAA announced Dec. 5 that it is seeking public comment, especially from
medium and large hub airports, on whether current information collection
requirements airports must meet in order to impose Passenger Facility Charges (�
(PFCs) are too burdensome. �•
Cunent law stipulates that no PFC application can be approved for an airport
and no federal Airport Improvement Program grants awarded unless the airport
has submitted a written competition plan in accordance with federal law.
FAA. wants to know whether the competition plans have any practical utility,
whether the FAA's estimate of the burden on airports to provide the informa-
tion (150 hours) is aecurate, whether there are ways to enhance the quality and
clarity of the information provided, and what would be needed to minimize the
burden on airports.
For further information, contact CarlaMauney attel: (202) 267-9896; e-mail:
Carla.Mauney@faa.gov.
Comments must be submitted by Feb. 5 to Mauney in Room 712, FAA,
Strategy and Investment Analysis Division, AIO-20, 800 Independence Ave.
SW, Washington, DC, 20591.
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Published 44 times ayear at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashbum, 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 fee of US$1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Giearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA.
I`- t (`
� � ;� .. ,:., �it �... � i{ r� �� £�� ��y �i �y��'£ �'+,, q, �� ..�t.µ �,...
£+-r ��lo +cin F'x�V � ..� E.�.f �],��J �r' ,.ki�, ; � ve✓ k s:.,r' ,.�'F}y vS,.. K �' � 4,sr � y; ,
; i�
A weelcly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 18, Number 43
Legislation
. ; � � . �. � . �
Cia 1�.�I M.�l�_�►�_:iiA� I�I-�f.�►'�!a_�]I_11.y_��►�1 M_�l_��_�_�'/ �.\_��.�
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N� introduced legislation on Dec. 7 that would
amend the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) to mandate the
phaseout of Stage 1 and 2 aircraft under 75,000 lb. (business jets) within three
years of passage of the bill, although individual airports would be allowed to opt
out of the phaseout requirement and let noisier business jets continue to operate if
they choseto do so.
The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) has long anticipated such
legislation but said it has not yet formulated a position on the provisions in
Lautenberg's bilL
Steve Brown, NBAA's senior vice president for operations, said the association
looks forward to entering into a dialogue with Sen. Lautenberg and others on the
legislation but stressed that the three-year phaseout period in the bill "does not
recognize the investment and economic value" of the Stage 2 aircraft. Historically,
a 10-year period has been provided for phasing out aircraft, he said.
He also challenged Lautenberg's estimate that there currently are 1,330 Stage 2
business jets operating in the United States, contending the number is probably
(Continued on p. 186)
Noise Monitoring
RANNOCH ACQUIRES TAMIS SYSTEM
I+,OR NOISE, OPS MONIT012ING �+ROM BA�
Rannoch Corporation, which produces aircraft surveillance and flight tracking
equipment, announced Dec. 12 that is has acquired BAE's TAMIS airport noise
and operations monitoring system (NOMS), which is deployed at some of the
world's largest airports, including Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, Baltimore, and New
Yoric
Observers say it is a good move for Rannoch because BAE's NOMS soflware is
solid and the company has a history of providing good technical support to
airport customers.
Rannoch's acquisition of the TAMIS system is not expected to hurt its main rival
Lochard Corp., which has captured about half of the world-wide airport noise
monitoringmarket.
"Tlie TAMIS product group brings a long track record of success in the NOMS
business, having installed their first fully integrated system in 1974," Rannoch
said. "The TAMIS group also revolutionized the industry when they produced the
first secure web-based NOMS software, eTAMIS, early in 2002. The group
possesses the most experienced workforce in the industry, with many members
exceeding 20 years in the NOMS field. That dedication to industry excellence
remains a core value today."
(Continued on p. 187)
185
December 15 , 2006
IYt �'%2tS .ISSIIe...
Legislation ... In a strategic
move intended to letthe incoming
Congress knowthis is an issuehe
wants addressed, Sen. Frank
Lautenberg (D-N�, a senior
memberofthe Senate Commerce
Committee, introduces legislation
that would amend the Airport
Noise and Capacity Act of 1990
to requirethephaseoutofolder,
noisier, Stage 1 and 2 business
j ets with in three years.
However, the bill would allow
airports to opt out of the phaseout
if they choose to do so.
NBAA says that, historically,
aircraftphaseouts have occurred
over 10-year periods - p. l 85
Noise Monitoring ...
Rannoch Corp. announces that it
has acquired BAE's TAMIS
airport noise and operations
monitoring system - p.185
Ai�planes ... The Airbus
A380 receives jointtype certifica-
tion by the FAA and its European
counterpart - p. 187
News Brzefs ... ACI-NA
selects the governmentrelations
fum Van Scoyoc Associates to
assistaizports in FAA reauthori-
zationprocess ... FAA cancels
EISs for Ontario Int'1 and Sacra-
mento Int`I airports -p. 188
December 15, 2006
half that. Lautenberg's staff said the estimate of 1,330 was
provided by the Federal Aviation Administration:
But Brown argued that a"superficial" count of aircraft in
FAA's aircraft registry would not provide accurate data
because it would not take into account modifications to
planes that were made after its registration.
Introduction of Lautenberg's bill, The Aircraft Noise
Reduction Act of 2006 (S. 4109), at the end of the 109�''
Congress was a tactical move designed to let the Senate
know that this is an issue Lautenberg wants to address in
the new 110"' Congress, which will convene in January.
With the Senate moving to control by the Democrats,
Lautenberg's senior standing on the Connmerce Committee,
which has jurisdiction over aviation issues, wil] give him the
leverage needed to have his colleagues on the committee
consider his phaseout bill. It is nat yet clear whether
Lautenberg will serve on the Commerce Committee's
Aviation Subcommittee, however.
Lautenberg also introduced his legislation at a time when
it can be attached to the Federal Aviation Administration
reauthorization bill, which is expected to be sent to Con-
gress early next year and will be one the main pieces of
legislation considered by Senate and House Aviation
subcoinmittees in 2007. Attaching the phaseout bill to
crucial legislation like the FAA reauthorization bill would
make it more difficultto block.
A coalition of airports, communities, and local govemmen-
tal bodies formed in 2004 to lobby Congress to ban the
operation of Stage 1 and 2 business jets — called Sound
Initiative, a Coalition for Quieter Skies — applauded
Lautenberg's bill and promised to work to secure additional
support and to encourage bi-partisan support in the
upcoming Congress.
Sound Inititative helped Lautenberg develop S. 4109 and
two of the airports in the coalition —Morristown and
Teterboro (owned by the politically powerful Port Authority
of New York and New Jersey) — are in Lautenberg's state
ofNew 7ersey.
NationwideBan Proposed
FAA estimates that 1,330 Stage 1 and 2 business jets are
still operating within the United States, Lautenberg said in
introducing his bill. At general aviation airports, those
aircrait account for most of the noise complaints received
because their noise stands out above that of newer, quieter
business jets. Lautenberg said that Stage 2 business jets
are, on average, twice as loud as newer, quieter Stage 3
aircraft.
"Older business jets constitute an unnecessary daily
nuisance for, literally, hundreds of thousands of my
constituents, and I believe it is time to take decisive action
to correct the problem. Voluntarily banning these aircraft
from one airport will only force them to use another ]ocal
airport, so I believe that a nationwide ban is necessary," he
said in introducing his bill.
Lautenberg also asserted that his legislation would
186 _. .
promote energy conservation because Stage 2 aircraft, on
average, use 30 percent more fuel than comparable Stage 3
jets. Passage of his bill, he argued, "would eliminate usage of
many of the most fuel-inefficient aircraft still operational in
America."
Lautenberg said his legislation "takes an approach which is
sensitive to the economic hardship of communities who want
to allow these aircraft to continue in use. Individuai airports
would still be allowed to opt out of this measure by choosing
to accommodate these noisier business jets. Also, the act
would not take effect unti] fully three years after enactment,
allowing ample time for businesses to adapt to the new
regulations."
Message Being Sent
John Lindemann, campaign coordinator for Sound Initia-
tive, said Lautenberg's bill sends "an important message to
airports, aircraft owners, and airport neighbors that the
impacts of these [Stage 2] aircraft can no longer be tolerated.
S. 41091ays important groundwork for this issue to be
considered when the new Congress convenes in January.
Congress has an opportunity to finish what it started when it
ordered airlines to retire older, noisier aircraft in 1990."
ANCA gave operators of Stage 1 and 2 aircraft weighing
more than 75,000 ib. a decade to either retire their planes or
retrofit them to Stage 3 standards. But, due to excellent
lobbying by the National Business Aircraft Association,
aircrafE weighing less than 75,000 lb. were excluded from the
phaseout requirement.
"In the 15 years since ANCA was passed, advanced
technologies have provided aircraft owners with new, quieter
and more e�cient options that provide measurable improve-
ment for people living near airports," Lindemann said.
"Estimates show that appro�cimately 1,000 to 1,300 Stage 2
aircraft are still in operation out of a fleet 10 times that size
but they account for an inordinate percentage of noise
complaints at some of the nation's busiest airports, many of
which are located in densely populated areas."
At Morristown Municipal, he said, neighborhood com-
plaints related to Stage 2 aircraft account for up to 80 percent
of complaints lodged with the airport.
"Tenants at many of Ehese airports have replaced their
outdated aircraft with newer, quieter models. The complaints
occur when transient Stage 2 aircraft arrive and depart,"
Lindemann said. "All the efforts by the airport to maintain
good relationships with neighbors become meaningless with
the actions of a few."
The Sound Initiative coalition has 19 airport members,
among which are many of the busiest general aviation
airports in the country: Scottsdale Airport (AZ), Livenmore
Airport (CA), Redding Municipal Airport (CA), SantaBarbara
Municipal Airport (CA), Santa Monica Airport (CA), Sonoma
County Airport (CA), Truckee Tahoe Airport (CA), Centen-
nial Airport (CO), Bradley International Airport (CT), Boca
Raton Airport (FL), Key West International Airport (FL),
Martin County Airport (FL), Naples Municipal Airport (FL),
Airport Noise RepoR
�
l�
December 15, 2006
St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport (FL),
Hanscom Field (MA), Reno/Tahoe International Airport
(NV), Port Authority ofNew York and New Jersey (JFK,
Teterboro, LaGuardia, andNewark), Trenton-MercerAirport
(N�, and Collin County Regional Airport (TX).
HushkitsAvailable
The economic impact of a phaseout of Stage 1 and 2
business jets will be a key factor in deliberations on
Lautenberg's bill but the fact that hushkSts are available for
several of the most widely flown Stage 2 business jets
arrieliorates that impact.
Lautenberg's legislation, if passed, would likely revive the
market for Stage 3 hushkits for older business jets, and kits
aze available for the Gulfstream II and III and some models of
the Learjet, which constitute much of the Stage 2 business
jet fleet operating in the Unified States.
According to Armando Tovar, noise o�cer for Raleigh-
Durham International Airport, who closely follows the
hushkit industry, there are two hushkits available for the
Gulfstream II and III; one kit is a�ailable for the Learj et 23, 24,
and 25 but nothing for the Learjet 28 and 29; one kit may be
available for the Dassault Falcon 20 but a successful re-
engining program was discontinued in 2005; a kit is available
for the Sabreliner 75A and 80 but there are no hushkits for
the Sabreliner 40, 60, and 75.
In addirion, no Stage 3 hushkit or re-engine programs exist
for the Stage 2 Lockheed Jetstar, Hawker Siddeley, IAI
Commodore or Westwind, HansaHFB 320, FokkerF28, or
BAC 111-200 but relatively few ofthose are flying.
Monitoring, from p. I85
Said Dave Ellison, president and CEO of Rannoch, "The
eTAM[S software is widely regarded as the best supported
product in the industry. With our ADS-X technology
providing real-time accurate flight tracking data, we are now
able to offer onr customers a solution that delivers the most
accurate flight tracking data with the most powerful analyti-
cal tools for flight and noise analysis."
The eTAMIS product, Rannoch said, "is the only proven
web-based NOMS software installed in the U.S. and has a
fast-growing client list. Used throughout the airport noise
community, the eTAMIS solution includes a powerful
reporting engine and graphical tools which correlate various
flight, noise, weather, and complaint metrics."
Rannoch said the eTAMIS product now forms the basis of
its AirScene NOMS, which combines the eTAMIS analytical
tools with Rannoch's multilateration flight tracking and
noise monitors from its strategic partner B&K, the leading
manufacturer of noise monitoring equipment.
Rannoch said that with its recently announced acquisition
of ERA a.s. in October, it has become "the global leader in
ADX-X (eXtended ADS) multilateration and ADS-B flight
trackingtechnologies for airtraffic control, military, and •
airport operations. With the acquisition of the TAMIS
group, Rannoch's AirScene is now able to provide the most
187
powerful NOMS tools in the industry with the most accurate
real-time flight tracking data provided by the same infrastruc-
ture of sensors."
Air�c��aft
AIlZB�TS A380 RECENES
JOINT TYPE CERTIFICATION
The world's largest commercial airliner, the Airbus A380, is
now cleared to fly passengers and cargo, U.S. Secretary of
Transportation Mary E. Peters announced Dec. 14 at a
ceremony in Toulouse, France.
The 555-seat, double-decker A380 received the first ever
joint type certification by the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration
on Dec.12. The certified aircraft is powered by Rolls-Royce
Trent 900 engines.
Airbus applied to the FAA for certification of the A380 in
1998 but the new aircraft's size and complexity required the
FAA to extend its normal five year certification period to
seven years.
FAA Administrator Marion Blakey said that the FAA
continues to work with the EASA in areas where the A380s
size poses unique challenges. For example, she said, flight
tests needed for FAA approval of A380 operations on 150-
foot-wide runways aze expected to be completed in the
second quarter of 2007. The International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) also is considering the minimum
separation criteria for airplanes operating behind an A380 in
all phases of flight to minimize wake vortex effects.
'MajorLeap in Capaciiy'
Blakey called the A380 "the first major leap in aircraft
capacity in over 35 years." The plane is 300,000 pounds
heavier than the next largest passenger commercial plane
and, in its largest configuration, also carrier roughly 200
more passengers than any other aircraft on the market, she
said. The A380 has atakeoffweight ofmore than 1.2 million
pounds.
The A380 has been plagued by cost overruns and delays
but Airbus said that flight tests show that it meets guaran-
teed performance both in terms of fuel burn and range.
"Because of its very low fuel burn, contributing to the
lowest operating costs, it will produce very low emissions.
An environmental champion, it is also quieter than any other
airliner, meeting the stringent noise restrictions at London
Heathrow. The A380 also has the quietest cabin in the skies
and provides a very smooth ride," Airbus said.
During its flight testing, the A380 was welcomed at 38
airports around the world, proving its easy airport accep-
tance and compatibility, Airbus said.
To date, Airbus has received 166 orders and commitments
from 15 customers for the A3 80, with the first due to be
delivered to first operator Singapore Airlines in October
2007.
Airport Noise Report
December 15, 2006
-- I. • � �. .
.iy ;,�• ;�.•�
John J. Corbett, Esq.
Spiegef & McDiarmid
Washington, DC
Cart E. Burleson
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
John C. Freytag, P.E.
Director, Charles M. Salter Associates
San Francisco
Michaei Scott Gatzke, Esq.
Gatzke, Diilon & Ballance
Cazlsbad, CA
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP.
Denver
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Laguna Niguel, CA
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq.
McDermott, Will & Emery
Chicago
188
In B�zef ...
ACI-NA Selecis Van Scoyoc
The Airports Council Internationai –North America (ACI-NA) announced
Dec. 12 that it has selected the Washington, DC-based government relations
firm Van Scoyoc Associates, Inc. (VSA) to join the association's legislative
efforts. VSA Vice President Steve Palmer will lead the team.
Van Scoyoc was chosen because of the firm's expertise in the aviation
industry through its work with several ACI-NA member airports, the FAA,
and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Van Scoyoc will assist
ACI-NA in developing the association's�government affairs strategy on
airport issues included in the upcoming FAA reauthorization.
The FAA. reauthorization process will address issues of importance to the
airport industry, including the Airport and Airways Trust Fund, the air traffic
control system, homeland security, and other issues, including aircraft noise
mitigation. CurrentFAA authorization legislationwill expire on Sept. 30, 2007.
Deborah McElroy, who will join ACI-NA on Dec. 18 as senior vice president
of government affairs, will oversee the association's efforts on Capitol Hill.
"We are eager to work with Steve Palmer and his professional team from Van
Scoyoc Associates, Inc.," said ACI-NA President Greg Principato. "Their
competence in aviation policy and issues will be especially critical during the
upcoming FAA reauthorization and will be beneficial to our anport and
associate members."
FAA Cancels EISs for Ontario, Sacramento
Mary L. Vigilante In separate notices, the FAA announced on Dec. 12 that it is canceling
President, Synergy Consultants preparation of environmental impact statements for proposed expansion
seattie projects at iwo California airports —Ontario Intemational and Sacramento
International — at the request of the airport proprietors.
Los Angeles World Airports, proprietor of Ontario International, decided to
discontinue pursuit of a master plan for the airport that included the proposed
relocation and increased separatian of runways, a new taxiway, and a new
terminal, among other projects.
Sacramento County, proprietor of Sacramento International, told the FAA
that it has decided to defer consideration of a proposed runway e�ctension and
other projects to a long-term planning horizon (2020).
For further information on the Sacramento notice, contact Camille Garibaldi,
an environmental specialist in FAA's San Francisco airports district office; tel:
(650)876-2778;ext.613.
For further information on the Ontario notice, contact Victor Globa, an
environmental protection specialist in FAA's Los Angeles airports district
office;tel:(310)725 �637.
AIRPORT NOISE REPORT
Anne I3. Kohut, Publisher
Published 44 times ayear at43978 UrbancrestCt., Ashbuin, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528.
e-mail: editor@airporinoisereport.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. �� `'
189
�� f_ � ... . ,it
�5 y��,..»+r �4 i�` ss +� ��.°'"" �'. 6n�r �� '� " ��,"'n rn%�, P� v �I.� ""` "� .nt ti..
} "� �� ��� a�.� .. � � � {� �+ � �i � � fl c�� �a � � ��� 4 �i� �., x
.a� . .�1:,. �. . ,.�= a-,.,.:� `.`�.� �,,.. .w�M,• �' ...u� 4..t .r�- ,! ,r'
.i,l� �r
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 18, Number 44 December 22 , 2006
Por•tland Int'Z
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS ACROSS RIVER
BROUGHT 1NT0 PDX P]LANNING PI20CESS
On Dec.12, the Port or Portland, OR, Commission adopted a resolution that
formalizes the voices of the City of Vancouver and Clark County, WA, in the
planning and development activities for Portland International Airport, including
an upcoming master pianning process.
The Port of Portland has an existing intergovernmental agreement with the Port of
Vancouver on the development of maritime facilities but, until now, had no similar
agreement on aviation issues.
Portland International Airport is located in the City of Portland, OR, adjacent to
the ColumbiaRiver, which serves as the primary jet arrival and depariure route for
the airport. The City of Vancouver and Clark County are located on the other side
of the river in southwest Washington and experience both the positive and
negative impacts of the airport.
A small part of Vancouver is located within the 65 DNL contour ofthe airport
and the 55 DNL contour encompasses a large part of mostly residenYial communi-
ties on the city's waterfront. Aircraft noise travels across the water to impact these
communities, which have complained about operations at the airport.
(Continued on p. 190)
Research
MEAD & �]LUNT A�VARDED CONTRACT
FOR ACRP LAND USE COMPATIBILITX STUDY
The architectural and engineering firm Mead & Hunt will develop guidance to
protect airports from incompatible land uses under a$500,000 contract funded
through the new Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP), which was
established by Congress in 2003 and is managed by the Transportation Research
Board.
The project, entitled "Enhancing Airport Land Use Compatibility," wiil address
encroachment of incompatible ]and uses around airports, particularly in approach
and departure paths. It is expected to take two years to complete.
Mike Salamone, who will manage the project at TRB, announced the contract
award on Dec. 2 L
Stephanie Ward, the senior aviation planner at Mead & Hunt who will serve as
principal investigator on the project, said she was very excited about it. "We have
assembled a great team of six different consulting firms, including Clarion Associ-
ates [a national land-use and real estate consulting firm] and Harris Miller Miller &
Hanson Inc. [a noise and vibration control consulting firm] to address this issue."
Ward said that her firm has a great base of experience and information to draw
on for the ACRP project. Her colleague Ken Brody was the author of the California
Land Use Guidebook and she was the primary author of land use guides for
(Contii2ued on p. 190)
.jh .TlZtS .jSSll�...
Portlmid Int'Z ... Port of
Portland Comrnissioners adopt a
resolution formalizingthe voice of
twopolitical jurisdictions inthe
neighboring state of Washington-
- the City of Vancouver and
Clark County -- in the planning
process forPortland International
Airport - p. 189
Land Use ... TRB announces
that Mead & Hunt has been
awarded a $500,000 contract
under the new ACRP program to
develop guidance forairports and
coirununities nearthem on com-
patible land use planning -p.189
San Jose Int'Z ... City Council
approves $1.35 million upgrade
to ANOMS system - p. 190
McClellan Paloma�� ...
Airport appears to be f.irst in
country to have an upgrade to its
noise inonitoring system barred by
Lott Amendm ent - p. 191
News Br•iefs ... FAA ap-
proves noise maps forPortland
Int'1 and Spirit of St. Louis air-
ports ... EU includes aviation in
CO2 emissions trading scheme ...
Jainieson joins ESA airports
practice ... FAA clarifies cancella-
tionofEIS on expansionprojects
at Ontario Int'] - p. 192
December 22. 2006
The Port's resolution acknowledges that airport operations
and the growth of the airport have an impact on the City of
Vancouver and Ciark County and that these political
jurisdictions are key stakeholders in an upcoming master
planning process. The resolution also stipulates that the
City of Vancouver will serve as vice chair of the upcoming
PDX Master Plan and Legislative Process Planning Advi-
sory Group. The process of updating the PDX Master Plan
is expected to begin in May 2007.
On Dec. 18, the Vancouver City Council adopted a
companion resolution recognizing that land use decisions in
southwest Washington have implications for the airport and
for its citizens and urging coordination with the airport on
planning issues. Clark County, WA, is expected to adopt a
similar resolution by early next yeaz.
In their companion resolutions, the City of Vancouver and
Clazk County agree to provide notice to the Port of Portland
on development projects that may impact Port facilities.
Strengthen StakeholderInvolvement
The Port of Portiand said that a strategic objective of its
resolution is "to strengthen stakeholder involvement and to
integrate stakehoider concerns into Port planning and
decision-making."
The Port already informally includes Vancouver and Clark
County on several standing committees, including the PDX
Citizen Noise Advisory Committee, the PDX Land Use
Advisory Committee, the PDX Part 150 Noise Compatibility
Study Project Advisory Committee, International Air Service
Committee, PDX Cargo Feeder Ad Hoc Committee, and
VancouverCargo Feeder Subcommittee.
The Port's resolution requires the participation of the City
of Vancouver and Clark County on the Citizen Noise
Advisory Committee and International Air Service Commit-
tee. It also promises that the Port ofPortland staff will
provide regular updates to the City of Vancouver and Clark
County on implementation ofthe Part 150 program, the
proposed extension of the north runway, and other aviation-
related development. The Port also agreed to hold periodic
public meetings in Vancouver on its development activities
where public comment will be sought.
ACRP, from p. 189
Oregon and Wisconsin. The firm currently is working on
land use compatibility projects in Iowa and Washington and
for the National Association of State Aviation O�cials. The
firms that will work with Mead & Hunt on the ACRP project
also have experience preparing numerous Part 150 airport
noise compatibility studies and the Minnesota Land Use
Guidebook.
Ward invited ANR readers to contact her to share their
thoughts on the topic of airport land use compatibility and
stories of their experience with land use issues ("the good,
the bad, or the ugly"). Part of our study, she said, "is
focused on evaluating case studies and'conducting key
stakeholder interviews so we're looking for stories from the
190
trenches on the topic of compatible land use." �.
Ward, who works in Mead & Hunt's Lansing, MI, office,
canbereachedattel:(517)321-8334;orviae mail:
stephanie.ward@meadhunt.com.
Project Will Have Two Phases
The project will be divided into two phases. �n the first
phase, cunent and past land use guidelines and their
effectiveness will be reviewed, interviews with key stakehold-
ers will be conducted, and airports will be identified for
further case study.
Under the second phase of the project, case studies will be
done to illustrate good and innovative land use compatibility
guidelines near airports, land use tools and strategies that
have been effective, types of problems for which sate and
local land use agencies have little or no guidance, situations
where existing guidelines and regulations are not being
implemented appropriately, and barriers that prevent compat-
ible development and conditions that lead to incompatible
development.
Mead & Hunt also will develop a framework for assessing
the types of problems and costs attributable to incompatibie
land uses near airports; analyze the reasons for success and
failures in land use compatibility planning; recommend best
practices; develop model state legislation and land use tools,
such as zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, and
building codes; identify additional research needs; and
prepare a final report with a stand-alone executive summary. �
"Continued development of incompatible uses threatens
the e�cient operations, potential expansion, and, in some
cases, the very existence of airports," noted a summary of the
project, available on the TRB website at http://www4.trb.org/
trb/crp.nsf/All+proej cts/ACRP+3-03 .
"The fact that such concems are being raised nationwide
indicates a need for a national discussion of the problem and
a review of laws, policies, regulations, and practices pertain-
ing to land uses aroand airports. Guidance is needed to
protect airports from incompatible land uses that impair
current and future airport and aircraft operations and safety."
San Jose Int'�'
CITY COUNCIL APPROVES
UPGRADE TO ANOMS SYSTEM
On Dec. 5, the San Jose, CA, City Council unanimously
approved the purchase of a$135 million upgrade to the
airport noise and flight track monitoring system for San Jose
International Airport.
The airport currently has a Lochard system and will
upgrade to the latest Lochard ANOMS 8 Airport Noise and
Operations Monitoring System because it is PG-based, costs
less to maintain, and can provide information faster than the
older system; said Jaime Locquiao, noise officer for the
airport.
The airport plans to upgrade its internet site to provide
Airport Noise Report
�
December 22, 2006
additional features to help citizens investigate and report
noise impacts, he told ANR. The upgraded ANOMS system
will include some portable features allowing airport o�cials
to take to community meetings actual information gleaned
from the system. It also will provide educational tools, such
as a 3D rendering af actual operations at San Jose Interna-
tiona] that can show how flights are flown in and out of the
airport.
The upgrade to San Jose's ANOMS system will be funded
by a federal Airport Improvement Program grant awarded
last year. It is expected to be installed by next summer.
In related action, the San 7ose City Council on Nov. 21
approved the expenditure of funds collected from violations
of the airport's nighttime noise curfew, which now total over
$300,000. "
The fines will be used to fund a"Fly Quiet" software
application designed by BridgeNet International, based in
Costa Mesa, CA, that also is used at San Francisco Interna-
tional Airport to monitor airline performance with noise
abatement procedures. The system will supplement San
Jose's curfew program by monitoring exceedances, fleet
mixes, procedure adherence, and noise abatement flight
standards by the operators, said Locquiao. "We will be able
to grade them and report out to the public how well the
operators comply with our noise programs and policies."
McClellan Palomar
I � � � • ' ' • i
: • ' ' 1 : � • 1
McClellan Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, CA, appears to be
the first airport in the country to have a proposed upgrade to
its airport noise monitoring system barred by the so-called
"Lott Amendment," a provision added to legislation passed
by Congress in 2003 to reauthorize the programs of the
Federal Aviation Administration.
Section 189 of the Vision 100 — Century of Aviation Act
(Pubiic Law 108-176), specifically bars the FAA from
approving Part 150 program rneasures that require Airport
ImprovementProgram (AIP) funding to mitigate aircraft
r[oise outside of the 65 DNL contour.
The provision, opposed by the FAA, will expire when the
legislation does at the end of fiscal 2007 (Sept. 30, 2007). It
remains to be seen whether Congress will retain the provi-
sion in its upcoming consideration ofFAA's next reauthori-
zationbill.
Lott appears to have added the provision to the 2003
legislation as a favor to Northwest Airlines, which did not
want to fund the expansion of the residential sound insula-
tion program at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
beyond the 65 DNL contour. After the reauthorization bill
passed, Northwest added new flights to Lott's state of
Mississippi.
But, while other airport noise mitigation measures have
gotten caught by the Lott Amendment, MSP's has not
because the airport has not yet submitted a proposed update
191
to its Part 150 program to the FAA for approval. It is likely
waiting for the Lott Amendment to expire.
However, an update to the noise monitoring system for
Washington Reagan National Airport, already under review
by the FAA, is expected to get caught by the Lott Amend-
ment.
An FAA o�cial said that the only parts of a noise
monitoring system upgrade or installation that can be caught
by the Lott Amendment are noise monitors placed outside
the 65 DNL contour.
Any additions of software or hardware or monitors that are
physically located within the 65 DNL contour can still be
funded. And any monitors located outside the 65 DNL
contour that cannot be funded with AIP funds can be
funded with airport revenue or Passenger Facility Charge
(PFC) revenue.
Most of PalomarProgram Approved
FAA approved most of the 32 proposed noise mitigation
measures in the McClellan PalomarPart I50 program.
Outright approval to seven of the 10 proposed noise
abatement measures; all six land use management measures
and 12 program management measures were approved.
The FAA did not approve a measure to instruct pilots to
delay a turn because it would negatively impact the effi-
ciency of the airspace, the agency said. It also did not
approve a measure to work with the FAA to develop a GPS/
RNAV departure procedure saying additional information
was needed.
Details of the Part 150 program are included in the FAA's
Record of Approval, available on-line at: http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airh�affic/airports/environm ental/
airport_noise/part 150/states/.
For further information, contact Victor Globa, an environ-
mental specialist in the FAA's Los Angeles Airports District
Office; tel: (310) 725-3637.
� In Brief ... �
Portland Internaiional Noise Maps Approved
The Federal Aviation Administration announced Dec. 20
that noise exposure maps submitted for Portland Interna-
tional Airport meet federal requirements and that the agency
will complete its review of a proposed Part 150 airport noise
compatibility program forthe airportby June 15, 2007.
For further information, contact Cayla Morgan in FAA's
Seattle Airports Division; tel: (425) 227-2653.
Spirit of St. Louis Noise Maps Approved
The Federal Aviation Adrninistration announced Dec. 18
that noise exposure maps submitted by St. Louis County,
MO, for Spirit of St. Louis Airport meet federal requirements.
The agency also announced that it is reviewing a proposed
Part 150 airport noise mitigation program for the airport and
that its review will be completed by 7une 10, 2007.
Airport Noise Report
December 22, 2006
,
i
192
A� E��T�RIA�, For additional information, contact Mark Schenkelberg in FAA's Kansas
City, MO, office; tel: (816) 329-2645. �
AIIVISOR'Y BOARD
EU Includes Airlines in CO2 Trading Scheme
John J. Corbett, Esq.
Spiegel & McDiazmid
Washington, DC
Carl E. Burleson
Director, O�ce of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
John C. Freytag, P.E.
Director, Chazles M. Salter Associates
San Francisco
Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq.
Cratzke, Dillon & Ballance
Carlsbad, CA
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Denver
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Laguna Niguel, CA
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq.
McDermott, Will & Emery
Chicago
Mary L. Vigilante
President, Synergy Consultants
Seattle
The European Union adopted a proposal on Dec. 20 to include aviation in
its emission trading scheme for carbon dioxide (CO2). Intra-EU flights will be
brought into the trading scheme in 2011. Flights into and out of the EU,
including U.S. flights, will be included in the scheme in 2012.
The U.S. mission to the EU warned that the "non-consensual" inclusion of
non-EU airlines in the EU trading scheme violated international aviation law
and undermined efforts by the International Civil Aviation Organization to
limit CO2 emissions from aircraft.
The Air Transport Association of America said it was disappointed in the
EU action, calling it "misguided" and in violation of internationallaw and
bilateral air service agreements.
ATA said that ICAO "is working on appropriate multi-lateral solutions to
address greenhouse gas emissions of intemationai aviaticsn, including
emissions trading guidance. The EU is alone in its efforts to bypass that
ongoing work. W e urge the EU to join with the rest of the world in working
through ICAO to find constructive solutions to this issue."
Jamieson Joins ESA Airports
Environmental Science Associates (ESA) announced Dec. 15 that Sarah
Jamieson has joined the firm's national airport consulting services practice in
its Tampa, FL, o�ce.
"Ms Jamieson brings over eight years of experience in the environmental
and planning fields," ESA said. "Her unique experience with environmental
permitting, pollution prevention, natural resource management, hazardous
wildlife and noise program management offerESA Airport clients and their
stakeholders the necessary expertise to guide them through complicated
permitting and environmental compliance processes.
Jamieson was previously a senior manager for Lee County, FL, Port Author-
ity where she oversaw planning and environmental compliance for Southwest
Florida International and Page Field General Aviation airports.
FAA Clarifies EIS Cancellation
The FAA issued a notice on Dec. 20 to clarify an earlier notice announcing
that the agency had terminated preparation of an environmental impact
statement on proposed expansion projects at Ontario (CA) International
Airport because no projects were ripe for review.
The FAA said that Los Angeles World Airport, the proprietor of Ontario
International, will continue to prepare a master plan for the airport.
AIRPOR7' NOISE REPORT
AnneH. Kohut,Publisher
Published 44 times ayear at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, V a. 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 fee of US$1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA.