The URL can be used to link to this page

01-13-2010 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION AGENDA January 13, 2010 — City Hall Council Chambers 1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of the Minutes from the November 18th, 2009 Airport Relations Commission Meeting. 4. Unfinished and New Business a. Survey Ideas b. Eagan NOC C. Runway Usage d. Review of questions forwarded to the NOC e. Updates for Introduction Book 5. Aclinowledte Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence: 0 7. 8. 9. a. MSP Noise News b. October 2009 ANOM Technical Advisor's Report C. November 2009 ANOM Technical Advisor's Report d. October 2009 ANOM Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis e. November 2009 ANOM Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis f. October 2009 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report g. November 2009 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report h. Airport Noise Report, November 13, 2009 i. Airport Noise Report, November 20, 2009 j. Airport Noise Report, November 27, 2009 k. Airport Noise Report, December 4, 2009 1. Airport Noise Report, December 18, 2009 In. Airport Noise Report, December 25, 2009 n. Airport Noise Report, December 31, 2009 Other Commissioner Comments or Concerns Upcoming Meetings MAC Meeting City Council Meeting NOC Meeting Planning Commission Public Comments Adjourn 1-19-10 1:00 p.m 1-19-10 7:00 p.m. 1-20-10 1:30 p.m 1-26-10 7:00 p.m. 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 make every attempt to provide the aids. This may not, however, be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at (651) 452-1850 with requests. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MINUTES November 18, 2009 The joint meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission with Eagan was held on Wednesday, November 18, 2009, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. The following Commissioners were present: Liz Petschel, Chair; Robin Ehrlich, Vice Chair; Sally Lorberbaum, Lyle Odland, David Sloan and William Dunn. From Eagan: Carol Whisnant, Chuck Thorkildson, Chair; Chad Stambaugh, James Casper, Curtis Aljets, Dan Johnson, Steve Beseke, Luke Olson and Dianne Miller, Assistant to the City Administrator. Also present were: David McKnight, City Administrator; Jake Sedlacek, Assistant to the City Administrator and Jolm Bergman (Apple Valley). Not Present: Gretchen Keenan and Joe Hennessy. Chair Petschel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Approval of Minutes Chair Petschel requested corrections to page one, Commissioner Dunn was present and Commissioner Sloan was not present. A motion was made by Commissioner Odland, seconded by Commissioner Ehrlich, to approve the minutes of the October 14, 2009 ARC meeting as amended. The motion passed unanimously. Unfinished and New ]Business Chair Petschel brought up the work plans of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission for discussion in regards to the Eagan plan. The .issue of keeping airplanes in the corridor was discussed. Chair Petschel reported that MAC considers 3% deviation due to weather as acceptable. The importance of the issue to both cities was stressed. The relationships between the cities and the airport related entities and local legislators was discussed. Keeping these relationships positive with open communication was reviewed. Chair Thorkildson of Eagan discussed noise abatement programs in Eagan that are planned in 2010. He also discussed plans for a public meeting with airport staff planned C for January. A review of the impact of the new runway will also be reviewed. The city will also be doing a survey on airport noise in 2010. Eagan will share the questions they will be asking with Mendota Heights. Commissioner Odland talked about the communication efforts of the Mendota Heights group. The issue of televising meetings was discussed. The pros and cons of televising meetings were shared between members. Assistant to the City Administrator Sedlacek discussed the Metro Cities legislative policies airport noise mitigation proposal. Councilmember Duggan discussed Mendota Height's policy on disclosure of noise issues when homes are sold. Eagan and Mendota Heights seemed to have similar positions on the matter. Chair Petschel asked about the airports long term comprehensive plan. Eagan members brought up issues related to the Delta takeover and the potential impact on the airport. This is a wait and see issue that impacts the entire airport. The impact of the change in the fleet mix was discussed. Both communities shared concern that changes in fleet mix might have a negative impact in terms of noise. There could be a detrimental affect to the economy. Both cities will actively monitor this issue. The NOC meeting held earlier today was discussed. The night time noise issue was reviewed. Traditionally, runway use on the parallel runways was balanced, there is a clear trend emerging where the northern runway is taking a majority of departures in nighttime hours. Mendota Heights is concerned that this approach will become standard operating procedure. The outcome of the NOC meeting on this issue will be a discussion issue at the January 2010 NOC meeting. Eagan members left the meting at 8:35 p.m. Discussion continued on the NOC meeting and the issue of night time noise. This topic will continue to be reviewed at both the ARC and NOC meetings. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Cor-respondence 1. September 2009 NOC Technical Advisor's Report 2. September 2009 Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis 3. September 18, 2009 Airport Noise Report 4. September 25, 2009 Airport Noise Report 5. October 2, 2009 Airport Noise Report 6. October 9, 2009 Airport Noise Report 7. October '16, 2009 Airport Noise Report 8. October 23, 2009 Airport Noise Report 9. October 30, 2009 Airport Noise Report 10. November 4, 2009 Airport Noise Report f Other Commissioner Comments or Concerns Motion by Commissioner Lorberbaum, seconded by Commissioner Dunn to cancel the December 2009 meeting unless an issue arises. Upcoming Meetings City Council Meeting 1-5-09 7:00 p.m. ARC Meeting 1-13-10 7:00 p.m. Public Comments None. Adjourn Commissioner Sloan made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dunn, to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, David McKnight, City Administrator Realtor Survey Summary—Airport Noise May -June 2007 The following is a summary of the responses provided to the Realtor's Survey that was conducted May 15, 2007 -July 15, 2007 through the Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors' (STCAR) continuing education classed. The survey below is in its entirety, with responses and averages to questions noted next to each question (in bold). Thank you for taking the time to assist the City of Eagan in gathering information about how airport noise impacts people's decisions to either buy or sell a home in Eagan. Please take a few minutes to answer these quick questions. Survey results will be shared with the staff of the Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors (STCAR); however, your comments will remain anonymous. 1. How long have you been working in residential real estate in the City of Eagan? years Average Years of Service per Respondent: 9.1 years of service Number of Surveys submitted: 29 surveys 2. Based on your experiences when assisting potential home buyers in Eagan, please rank the following community characteristics in terms of how much of a factor these characteristic make in whether to buy a home in Eagan. j 1=does not matter to most buyers 2=a minor factor 3=neutral (neither a positive or negative factor) 4=somewhat a factor 5=a strong factor School District 1 2 3 4 5 Average Response: 4.66 Neighborhood 1 2 3 4 5 Average Response: 4.62 Aircraft Noise 1 2 3 4 5 Average Response: 4.03 Proximity to Airport 1 2 3 4 5 Average Response: 3.66 Taxes 1 2 3 4 5 Average Response: 4.12 Comments: ® Price? ® Generally I have found most buyers want a good school district and a great neighborhood. a Proximity to airport is a positive for people who travel a lot. 3. Based on your experience assisting buyers in Eagan, what percentage of buyers would you say ask about airport noise levels at specific properties prior to making an offer? (29 responses) 80-100% of buyers 8 responses, 27.6% of respondents .60-79% of buyers 10 responses, 34.5% of respondents 40-59% of buyers 4 responses, 13.8% of respondents Jess than 40% of buyers 7 responses, 24.1% of respondents Comments: ® 91 reason not to buy in Eagan • This question has increased substantially over the last five years. ® Will become a bigger issue in future, especially with new .disclosure rules. 4. When assisting bu ers in Eagan, how often is airport noise mentioned as a reason not to put an offer on a specific property? (28 responses) _Often 5 responses, 17.9% of respondents _Occasionally 15 responses, 53.6% of respondents _Rarely 6 responses, 21.4% of respondents Never 2 responses, 7.1% of respondents Comments: ® [In 21 years of service], I have only had two buyers not buy a home because of airport noise, and one was in South Minneapolis and one was in Richfield. ® If it it an issue, they wouldn't look in a certain area in the first place. ® More when close to flight path. 5. Based on your experience assisting sellers in Eagan, what percentage of sellers would you say note airport noise as a reason for their decision to move? (28 responses) 80-100% of sellers 60-79% of sellers 40-59% of sellers less than 40% of sellers Comments: 0 responses, 0% of respondents 2 responses, 7.1% of respondents 7 responses, 25.0% of respondents 19 responses, 67.9% of respondents ® None. Most people were trading up to newer homes or relocating out of state. Very rare. ® [Less than 40%] at this point anyway—may become issue in future. ® May become bigger issue. I myself am getting annoyed with planes over my home. 6. When assisting a buyer looking for a home in Eagan, how often do you research the aircraft noise level at the properties in which your clients are interested? (27 responses) _Always Research 2 responses, 7.4% of respondents _Sometimes Research 16 responses, 59.3% of respondents _Rarely Research 7 responses, 25.9% of respondents Never Research 2 responses, 7.4% of respondents Comments: • Know the general area. • Depends on location of property. • Usually refer clients to MAC. • Give them info and [City, MAC] website to research themselves. I cannot judge the issue for buyer. • Noise level is different for everyone. I direct them to the [MAC] website and have them sit in the neighborhood. • I give them the website and let them decide their level of comfort. • I stay aware of the usage on active runways in case I am asked. 7. Where do you gather your information about airport noise levels (check all that apply): #of people who checked each option 4 Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) Staff 19 Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) Website 4 City of Eagan Staff 12 City of Eagan Website 5 I don't research airport noise levels 2 Other/Comments: • Rely on personal experience and the buyer to listen to the noise level. • Live in Eagan and rely on personal experience. • MAC Website has the most information. 8. A new runway opened at Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport in October 2005. In your experience working with both buyers and sellers in Eagan, has airport noise changed the real estate market in Eagan? If so, what have been your observations? • Has not really affected a whole lot. Noise is not noticeably louder. • No idea. • There is more noise in certain areas. This can be a concern to some clients. • This [noise] is also an issue in Apple Valley. I have seen several listings in Apple Valley due to airport noise. The McAndrews/Galaxie area. ® No (2) ...- .. ® Hasn't really changed it, but increased noise is definitely present and noticeable. Minneapolis problems previously were important—now suburbs are also somewhat affected. June 9, 1956 was the anniversary of the jet crash in Minneapolis. It's now over 50 years since that happened. ® Yes, people want to live further out. ® No experience. ® I do not believe it has [changed the real estate market in Eagan]. I think there is a growing number of consumers that have figured out how to get free home upgrades. A few keep calling their city hall and make it sound bigger than it is. ® Difficult to tell with all of the other dynamics of the changing market just now. ® Yes, homes near Cedar/Hwy 77 seem to have more noise. ® It hasn't affected me. Some buzz about the change in Apple Valley. ® Very definitely. ® Yes, changed traffic pattern and more homes have come under the flight path. ® Yes, less interest in buying in Eagan for some buyers. They will go to Lakeville or western suburbs. It is a factor, but is a small factor for most. ® Not too much yet. My personal home has definitely seen a significant rise in noise -35E and Johnny Cake. ®_ Yes, dramatically, We used to only have airport noise on the north and northeast corridors. We were promised that they wouldn't fly over the middle of Eagan. Now, there is considerable airplane noise throughout Eagan. As a longtime resident of Eagan myself, I am preparing to move out of Eagan because of airplane noise. ® Yes, the level of traffic due to 17/35 has increased in the west of the City, and buyers sometimes exclude neighborhoods based on that. ® Yes ® Hard to say with the general slow down of the market. It definitely is becoming more of a perception factor—I myself have toyed with moving due to planes -35E and Diffley. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND COMMENTS! If you ever have any questions or comments about airport noise in Eagan, or about this survey, please feel free to contact Dianne Miller, Eagan Assistant to the City Administrator and staff liaison to the Eagan Airport Relations Commission, at 651/675-5014 or dmillerncityofea an.com. 0 I did not receive any calls or e-mails from realtors regarding this survey. 2009-2010 Eagan Airport Relations Commission (ARC) Work Plan Work Plan Topic Presenters Schedulef confirmed)_ 13, 2009 City 1. Review 2009-2010 WorkOctober Eagan City Council Council Wksp* _ 2. Communications Mendota Heights ARC November 18, 2009 ARC Mtg* (at Mendota • Update airport noise page on City Website Heights City Hall) ®Joint mtg with Mendota Heights ARC to discuss nighttime noise, equity of parallel runway traffic, proposed taxiway impact, Runway Use System, and overall operational trends • Staff an ARC booth at the 2011 Showcase Eagan • Continued monthly review of communication efforts (web, cable, newsletter, etc.) John Nelson, MAC December 8, 2009 3. MAC Noise Mitigation • Receive update on noise mitigation program schedule Noise Mitigation ARC Mtg* resulting from settlement Coordinator • Discuss eligibility for reimbursement program 4. Town Hall Meeting (to encourage relationship with MAC Chad Leqve, MAC January 12, 2010 ARC economic development and community, as well as discuss eco Bert McKasy, MAC mtg (off site) impact of airlines/MSP) Tim Beutell, Retired • Hold ARC meeting in a specific neighborhood as a pilot NWA Chief Pilot program to get feedback (at neighborhood church or school)—send postcards to residents in area inviting them to the meeting • Conduct in a round table setting—informal to encourage resident participation • Invite Chad Leqve to provide update on RNAV, new ANOMS system, and new MAC Website capabilities • Invite MAC Commissioner Bert McKasy to give update on MSP, including merger impacts, Southwest presence, operation projections, etc. • Review MSP Long Term Plan Update • Monitor economic impact of Northwest/Delta merger, including impact on jobs in the City (inquire with DEED —on specific job losses) 5. Emergency Preparedness Eagan Police Chief February 9, 2010 ARC 0 Security Coordination between Eagan and MSP Eagan Fire Chief mtg a Emergency Response strategies in the event of a MSP Emergency crash/airport disaster Mgr —0 Future participation of ARC in disaster simulation MAC Environment March 9, 2010 ARC 6. Environment a Fuel dumping procedures Division staff mtg 0 Pollution considerations a Migratory birds Review at monthly 7. Noise Monitoring reports, including Monthly review of MAC technical ARC meetings Corridor compliance [;NL �1 r PPP..' / -• r: r 2008 Actual Contours and 2007 Actual Contours S Rv: Hgura2.i8 r„ � Itt bt.zo:.: Si fk,'� 170 Jake Sedlacek &I oA,-J�Qj\Aazi — n. Page 1 of 4 From: Leqve, Chad [Chad.Legve@mspmac.org] �. jv\L.,J6k1 �_L1l Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:23 AM To: Jake Sedlacek Subject: FW: Air Noise Related Question! Jake — per your request. From: Sirois Kron, Christene Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:21 AM To: Leqve, Chad Subject: RE: Air Noise Related Question! From the 19 September 2007 meeting minutes: IT WAS MOVED BY REPRESENTATIVE WILCOX AND SECONDED BY REPRESENTATIVE MILLER TO SEND A LETTER TO THE FAA TO REQUEST THE PLACEMENT OF EASTBOUND DEPARTURE OPERATIONS (HEADINGS EAST OF 170 -DEGREES) DURING NIGHTTIME ON RUNWAYT17,AST ON OPERATIONAL FLOWS AT MSP, WHICH ARE CURRENTLY OCCURRING RUNWAY 12R CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED RUS. THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. -� From the 14 November 2007 meeting minutes: Update on Nighttime Use of 120 -degree Departure Heading off Runway 17 During Southeast Operational Flows at MSP Chad Leqve, Technical Advisor, reminded the group that on 22 August 2007 Mayor Mike Maguire of the City of Eagan sent a letter to the Committee co-chairs, requesting that the Committee look into the feasibility of moving some of the nighttime eastbound operations off of Runway 17 to Runway 12R when the airport is in a southeast operational flow, consistent with the Runway Use System (RUS). At the 19 September 2007, staff presented the Committee with an analysis of the request, and the Committee directed staff to send a letter to the FAA outlining the City of Eagan's request. Leqve noted that on 17 October 2007, the FAA sent.a letter indicating that "implementation of the [Eagan request] is not consistent with the FAA's 2003 EA and the related FONSI/ROD and the approved MSP RUS". Leqve noted that the FAA's position is that the RUS is fairly broad as it states that the priority for runway use when MSP is in a southeast operational flow is Runway 12L or Runway 12R but that it does not prioritize one of those runways over the other. In regard to Runway 17, the RUS does not get to the level of specificity sufficient to parse operations based on whether they are eastbound or westbound. Therefore, the request put forth to move some of the nighttime eastbound operations off of Runway 17 to Runway 12R is more specific than the RUS is designed to accommodate. Leqve noted that, in response to the FAA's position on the issue, Representative Miller, Eagan, requested additional analysis be conducted; staff analyzed July 2007 data, removing operations impacted by runway closure and/or by head-to- head operations for a total of 115 Runway 17 departures in July 2007. Leqve noted that staff examined how many other operations occurred during the 15 -minute segment when each of the 115 total Runway 17 departure operations took place. As a result, there were: 42 total operations during high -demand periods (with 29 of those being eastbound and 13 being westbound); 66 total operations during mid -demand periods (with 39 of those being eastbound and 27 being westbound); and 7 total operations during low -demand periods (with 3 of those being eastbound and 4 of those being westbound). 12/8/2009 Page 2 of 4 Representative Miller, Eagan, expressed her appreciation for staffs analysis. She asked if the Committee t ' would be in favor of sending a follow-up letter to Carl Rydeen, Assistant Air Traffic Manager, Minneapolis Air Traffic Control Tower, requesting, in light of the FAA's response to and the Committee's discussion of the issue, that during his next briefing of the controllers he "remind supervisors of the importance of maximizing adherence to the approved Runway Use System during nighttime operations". Representative Duggan, Mendota Heights, stated that should such a letter go forward, Mendota Heights would like the Committee to consider requesting a guarantee that, given that one runway is not prioritized over the other, operations would not move from Runway 12R to Runway 12L. Representative Bergman, Apple Valley, suggested asking representatives of the FAA present at today's meeting to confirm whether or not controllers are already briefed on utilization of the RUS, thereby eliminating the need to send a letter. Leqve stated that he thought, given the Committee's credibility on examining and discussing issues, it would not be harmful to communicate to the FAA the request for briefing of the controllers on maximizing use of the RUS. Co-chair Nelson noted that Rydeen and his staff have been cooperative on past issues, and suggested the request be re -worded to express the Committee's appreciation for Rydeen's and his staff's continued efforts at keeping the RUS a priority in their operations. Representative Kilian, Richfield, stated that it appeared to him there were two issues at hand, one being the existence of a Runway Use System and the other being compliance with the system. He noted that he agrees with compliance of the MSP RUS as it exists and that any changes to the RUS would be a separate matter. Leqve stated that, from a staff perspective, forwarding the letter being discussed to the FAA would not imply a belief that controllers were not doing their jobs correctly, but would be a helpful reaffirmation to the controllers of the importance of the RUS. Representative Duggan stated he would be comfortable sending the letter as discussed by the Committee. IT WAS MOVED BY REPRESENTATIVE MILLER AND SECONDED BY REPRESENTATIVE OTTO THAT THE NOC SEND A FOLLOW-UP LETTER TO THE FAA (ATTN: CARL RYDEEN) ASKING THAT, IN LIGHT OF HIS RESPONSE AND THE EXTENSIVE DIALOGUE THE NOC HAS HAD ON THE ISSUE OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE RUS FOR NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS, THE NOC RESPECT -FULLY ASKS THAT DURING YOUR NEXT BRIEFING OF YOUR ATCT SUPERVISORS, YOU CONTINUE TO BRIEF THE SUPERVISORS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF MAXIMIZING ADHERENCE TO THE APPROVED RUS DURING NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS. THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. From the 16 January 2008 meeting minutes: Update on Nighttime Runway Use: Runway 17 Departure Operations Chad Leqve, Technical Advisor, reminded the Committee that, at its 14 November 2007 meeting, it reviewed the FAA's response to its request for the FAA to continue briefing its supervisors on the importance of maximizing adherence to the approved RUS during nighttime operations at MSP.__Legve noted that the FAA i.. has reported that, as of 29 November 2007, the MSP ATCT supervisor briefings were completed. in addition, he pointed out that recent data indicate a significant drop in the number of Runway 17 departure operations in southeast operational flows during the nighttime hours at MSP. In July 2007, 33.5% of departure operations 1-?iRi?nnA Page 3 of 4 were off of Runway 17 during southeast operational flows at the airport. Leqve noted that 30 November 2007 — 11 January 2008 data show that .3% of departure operations were off of Runway 17 during southeast operational flows at MSP. From the 21 May 2008 meeting minutes: IT WAS MOVED BY REPRESENTATIVE MILLER AND SECONDED BY REPRESENTATIVE PETSCHEL THAT THE NOC SEND A LETTER TO MR CARL RYDEEN OF THE FAA AND MR FRANK ALEXANDER OF NORTHWEST AIRLINES TAHINKING THEM FOR THEIR EFFORTS TO DATE TO IMPLEMENT RNAV PROCEDURES DURING THE NIGHTTIME HOURS AT MSP TO HELP REDUCE NOISE IMPACTS TO VOICE THE NOC'S STRONG SUPPORT OF THE TWO ORGANIZATIONS ENTERING INTO A LETTER OF AGREEMENT (LOA) TO BEGIN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RNAV PROCEDURES FOR BOTH THE CROSSING -IN -THE -CORRIDOR POINT FOR DEPARTURES OFF OF 12L AND 12R, AS WELL AS AN RNAV DEPARTURE PROCEDURE FOR THE 215 -DEGREE TRACK OFF RUNWAY 17 FOR USE BY PROPERLY -EQUIPPED NORTHWEST AIRLINES AIRCRAFT DURING THE NIGHTTIME HOURS WHEN AVAILABLE. From the 16 July 2008 meeting minutes: Inver Grove Heights Nighttime Noise Letter to MAC IT WAS MOVED BY REPRESENTATIVE MILLER AND SECONDED BY REPRESENTATIVE PETSCHEL TO ENDORSE THE LONG-STANDING RUNWAY USE SYSTEM (RUS) AT MSP AND FURTHER COMMUNICATE TO THE MAC FD&E COMMITTEE THAT THE NOC BELIEVES THE RUS REPRESENTS A SOUND PUBLIC POLICY DECISION THAT BEST SERVES THE COMMUNITIES AROUND MSP. THE NOC CONFIRMS THAT ITS REQUEST OF THE FAA ON NOVEMBER 14, 2007 WAS IN KEEPING WITH THE PARAMETERS OF THE APPROVED RUS. FURTHER, THE NOC RECOMMENDS THE MAC HOLD ITS 3RD QUARTER 2008 PUBLIC INPUT MEETING IN THE CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS, AND THAT THE MAC AND THE FAA OFFER TO MEET WITH THE INVER GROVE HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY'S AIRCRAFT NOISE ABATEMENT COMMISSION TO PROVIDE AN INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION ON THE AIRPORT AND NOISE -RELATED ISSUES. THE MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. Christene Sirois Kron Metropolitan Airports Commission I Environment Department 16040 23th Ave 5 I Minneapolis MN 55450 Phone: 612.725.6455 I FAX: 612.725.6310 j�Please consider reducing environmental impacts before printing this message. From: Leqve, Chad Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 9:04 AM To: Sirois Kron, Christene Subject: FW: Air Noise Related Question! 12/8/2009 ` ^ Page 4wf 4 . " ^ Christene - can you please locate this in the past minutes - thank you! From: Jake 5ed|mcek[maiKoJakeS@Mendota-Heighto.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:51 PM To: Leqve, Chad Subject: RE: Air Noise Related Question! Thanks Chad! In advance of the NOC meeting tomorrow, Ultan was wondering if you have access to any resolution/motion that the NOCpassed when vvediscussed the nighttime dupoduresoffof17oboutayeorago. | don't recall ifthere was any formal document, anything you can find would be greatly appreciated. JakeGedlacek Asst tothe City Administrator City ofMendota Heights 651.452.1850 www.Mandotu-Heighbs.com From: Leqvm,Chad [nnoi|ho:Chad. Leqva@mspmac.opg] Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 1:42 PM To: Bitner, David Cc: Jake Sad|aosk Subject: FW: Air Noise Related Question! David - Please get Jake the contour in an electronic format. From: Jake Sedlacek[maUtoJake3@Mendota-Heights.cnnl Sent: Monday, November 1G,2OO9 1:36 PM To: deqve@nnacno|se.conn Subject: Air Noise Related Question! Chad - I just sent to non -noise questions, but now I have one you may be able to answer! The Met Council has , asked that we include a copy of the 2007 MSP Noise Contour Map in our Comprehensive Plan update. Would it be possible to have you send an electronic copy to our consultant planner for inclusion in our plan? Thanks, JakeSod|acok Asst to the City Administrator City ofMendota Heights 661.452.1850 wvmm.&4ondota-Heights.00m - 77/K/2004 - W a lntrdLx�j= After yam of discussing the aircraft noise problem with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), members of the amine industry and various groups representing the public, the FAA, lead by the Minneapolis Area Manager,Mr. Robert Zeigler, decided to assist in the effort of addressing the problem of noise. During the year 1988 the FAA, represented by management of the local (MSP) Control Tower, agreed to work with the ne%,Ay formed Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC). The decision was to act as advisor to that group. One of the first tools to be recommended by the MASAC was a method for changing the historical use of the runways. At that time the tower used Only wind and weather as the factors for determining the direction of the traffic patterns. The organization asked the Tower to agree to use the runways In a manner th&t would, as much as feasible, avoid the ugaz with the most noise sensitive land use. After a long period of exhaustive coordination and planning the Tower agreed to what was to be known as the Preferential Runway System (PRS). This change in operation was an informal procedure that began to k>c>k seriously at the aircraft ground tracts in addition to the portion of the airport that was used. As an informal procedure It Was implemented as merely a change in the internal operations directives that controllers and Tower supervisors were required to abide by. By the open window season of 19a9 it was esbiblished as one par -dal solution to the overall noise problem and was heralded throughout the country, the community, industry and the government could work in airport communities, as a breakthrough in how together when each of the parties were committed to seeking* solutions. As with most changes, the PRS had its critics. Some people in South Minneapolis said it did not go far enough. Many in ttle Bloomington/Richfietcl area complained that the new procedures unfairly routed an unequal amount of traffic over their neighborhoods. Even some in St Paul (Highland Park) Heights complaiarGLned wlian any akxwatt overftew their scree Flnajty, thoser9pre"nting the Gagan/Mendo!:2 a complained of getting even more traffic. complaints . sympathy and understanding. They remained steadfast, The MASAC heard all the comPl with I however; in their belief that the PRS was overall worldng the best for the majority of the people. It remained as initially suggested until early 1972. ThS Con-id(X- During the May, 1972 MASAC monthly meeting a contingent of citizens from Eagan comments. Their spokesman, Mr. Green, gave asked to be heard during that portion set aside for citizens an excellent presentation regarding their position on the PRS. The position was that in general. they &gre-ed tud " PRS was, Overall, a good thing for the majority Of the People living around the airport- He ts and Eagan just East of the airport was probably a good also stated that the area between Mendota Heigh e then pointed out however, piace for ti -M overffying of dir=tt since not very many people Ihmd ti -mm. H how those that are effected by the use of 29L, 29R for landing and 11 L. [IR for takeoHe asked ff are being bombarded by noise due to significant increase Of the area as stipulated by the PRS. that the group k>ok into it and try to find some way to avoid all the low flying as the aircraft tumed onto final and others made their departure turns Over the homes in Eagan. it was a very positive statement and a challefge to the group and their advisors. The Noise Abatement officer from the FAA. Great Lakes Regional Office, was in attendance at the meeting along with the Air Transport Association (ATA) Regional Directof. The leaders of the control Tower met with members the Operations Committee of the SEas rthefollaMng " weeks. They agreed to a procedure that would, in effect establish a corridot of the airport, The procedure was to force all inbound turbojet aircraft. landing on runway 29L or 29 R to make a . It established depar.ture h"ding3 that would place aircraft in the four mile turn onto fined approaLch was to assign "runway heading" to all corridor for three miles after departure. The procedure used departing turbojet aircraft as a portion of their departure clearance. This heading was to be maintained until a point wtwe the departure controller would modify it (beyond three mi"). The procedure was, again, Intormal and Implemented by the Tower within their operations dIrectIve. During their deliberations on this procedure the Tower coordinated several times with the FAA Regional Office. They were always careful to point out that the the PRS, of which the new procedure would oe a part would not cause unacceptable delays. They made it clear that like the PRS, the procedure would not be used during periods of conflicting traffic or if thunderstorms or other weather phenomena caused a safety deterioration. At this point only the South boundary was established. That boundary was the lcocalizer of 29L (the 29R ILS had not yet been established). The procedure was agreed to by the MAC, MASAC, ATA and the FAA Regional Office. it was placed into ~ around the middle of June, 1972. It remained as originally developed, with mixed results, until the following MAY. Early in the "open Window' season of 1973 the MAC began to receive what in those days, was considered to be an inordinate amount of noise complaints from the citizens from Eagan. In addition, the Eagan repressentative on the MASAC complained bitterly about how little the corridor was helping Eagan. He eventually realgred from the MASAC. The city of Eagan refused the replace him, in effect, resigning from dw organization. They eventually filed a law suit Q9,21118t UW MAC. The MAC discussed this serious problem with the FAA many times as soon as it became apparent that it wasn't ON to get better on its own. Since the Regional Director and the Deputy Director were, at one time, each Managers of the Minneapolis Area Office, and very much in tune to the overall aircraft noise problem in the area, the MAC elected to bypass normal FAA channels and talk directly with these men. This mod-tod was very effective and did receive the attention of those FAA persons involved in the operation at M S P. In early May, 1973 the Tower Chief announced his retirement The Regional Director selected the FAA, Noise Abatement* officer as his replacement He and the Deputy Director briefed the newly assigned(.,, nVuuKW personalty and placed emphasis on working with the MAC and MASAC on the noise problem.' The Doputy Director sat up a muting With the MAC and members of the operations Committee of the MASAC. The new manager was directed to leave Chicago in time to meet with this group at 1:00 pm on his first day on the job, May 25. On May 25, a meeting took place between the new Tower Chief, the Deputy Chief, the Tower Operations officer and members of the Operations Committee. The meeting was informal and no minutes were taken. The oommitbas members were Claude Schmidt, Noise Abatement officer, Captain Bill Hockbrun, NWA Chief pilot Captain Art Hinks, Chief Pilot North Central Airlines and Stan Olsen, Chairman of MASAC. . The group expkuned OW the problem was on the South edge of the corridor. The four mile turns for anivW3 seemed to be working but the runway heading didn't seem to place the departing aircraft far enough from the residences. In fact they said, for the people living just South of the localizer the problem may even be worse than before since aircraft before, many times, turned before getting to their area. final agreement was to, as traffic permitted, issue a heading of 110 degrees to departing- turbojet aircraft, espe,6ialty those departing on .1-1 R, and to emphasize a ieft turn. Again, an Informal agreement A modli'leatJon was made to the Tower Operations Directive in order to accomplish the change. The neW phraseology was "Turn left after departure, maintain heading one one zero, cleared for take -off". This procedure was placed into effect around June 1, 1973. As previously, TM change received mixed reviews. The complaints continued to come from Eagan even exKjgh somewhat in a reduced number. Those living on the immediate South boundary still seemed 10 - be th;a moat displeased with the situation. The MAC Noise Abatement Officer and the Tower remained in close conb5ct about the problem. The FAA Region effectively dropped out of the picture at this point. The procedure remained the same until, in February, 1974, a significant change in airspace utilization took pla0e at all UW major airports in the USA. This was the establishment of Class 11 Terminal Control Areas (TCA). This new development designed to force the separation of turbojet and smaller general aviation aircraft in the vicinity of major airports, was for avoiding mid-aircollisions. This major change in airsoace ase meant that all procedures within the MSP area required a review. The main problem was that once the I aircraft arriving or leaving the MSP area would be required to be vectored by a TCA was established a] radar controller or to be separated laterally, longitudinally or visually while within six miles of the airport. This would, of course, put a real strain on the use of the corridor East of the airport since previousiv many of the pilots had elected to provide their own separation during visual flight rules conditions. After a numbers of Vials and errors the Tower established a procedure wherebse of 'ty the aihercraQnew sedepartiparation n would be issued a heading of 110 degrees, as previously. However, becau requirement they added that aircraft departing on 111- simultaneously, would be issued a heading ;,, - f 0130 mplir�hed what was ne4dad and allowed the corridor to continue basioa';Y as 1i iiad dagra". This acoo previousty. Abatement officer asked the Tower to look Into the feasibility of turning In August, 1974, the MAC Noise aircraft departing on 11 R to a heading of 105 degrees instead of the 110 degrees. After testing the concept the Tower agreed to the change. At that time it was agreed that only 15 degrees separation was required between simultaneous dapartures. Consequently the 090 heading for 11 i_., when it was needed, was retained. During the summer of 1974, the ILS was established on runway 29R. This provided better runway orientation for aircraft landing on that runway and lower instrument minimums but did not effect the corridor. -Late in 1974 North Cent -al Airlines asked the Towethat tlook into the feasibility of re-esta-blishing the "river p aircraft Their position was thatthe corridorwas for pure jet aircraftand should not departure' for turbopro rimented with taking turboprop aircraft down the river it South effect Meir CV_s8o's. The Tower expe procedure was used only for North C�entral's CV -580s. bound and up the river if North bound. Initially the It was discovered that these aircraft did not increase the noise and actually helped the overall traMc i IV ".W utilization of the corridor for turbojet aircraft- After a period of one year not -rid -Ml for all turboprop* one complaint was received from the public. it was put into effect in the fall of 1975 aircraft ued to receive complaints about utilization of the corridor. In the Spring of 1975 the MAC and Tower contin not used due to weather. Still there were The vast majority of the complaints were when the corridor was the departure controller would, for traffito times where the procedure was not used by the Tower or when ntrollers in maintaining the procedure, a -"was purposes, turn an aircraft early. In order to assist the oo It allowed the contro,11ars boxto see p4w*d on dw radar map. This d4platod the main area to b® protgctod. and avoid the South edge of the boundary. Itworved well for many years. dor for approximately ten years. There were periodic There was no appreciab4e change in the corridor . vestigated with mixed results. For the most compWnts to both the MAC and the Tower. The" were in best that could be done but agreed that it part U -,e Corridor was accepted by everyone as probably the took oonstant surveillanoo to insure it's intogritYwas maintained. I the controller strike occurred. This event caused many temporary difficulties for the tower In August, 19 8 fill maintained but not as well as previously. because of the shortage Of. controllers. The corridor was s an by the tower. This meant many new Soon after ow strike a major training program was undertake cOntro.lW3 and a period of adjustment It also meant that many of the tower management people, normally w&tohing for thirtga like the PRS ware now concentrating on other matters. .During the summer of 1982, as more controllers were trained and managers released to their former junction they tound that deficiencies had deveioped in some of the areas. One of these was the corridor Trwe were two problems. The first was that the new controllers, while trained well on safety, were not as aware of noise abatement as many of their predecessors. The second was that a new problem with the corridor had developed. The re -emphasis on use of the corridor was relatively simple and was corrected The new situation, however, the discovery of Friendly Hills as a noise problem, was not as easy to Im Eariy in the summer of 1984 the complaints from the North side of the corridor increased dramadoaily. New voices began to be heard and pressure began to be asserted from people in that area previously not involved. This activity was mostly directed against the MAC with an occasional complaint to the 1VAS;-C and the Tower. As the MAC Noise Abatement Office coordinated this new problem with the Tower there were :wo reasons discovered for the complaints. The first, and most troublesome one, was that traffic in the corridor had increased dramatically, especially departures on runway 11 L This was due to Republic Airlines establishing a "Hub" at the airport and a resultant tremendous increase in'departures. It meant that the v30 degree heading was being used more than ever before. The second was that the Tower was, many times. using the 090 degree heading off runway 11 L when no conflicting traffic was departing on 11 R. The second problem was addressed unilaterally by the Tower with some, but not complete success. The increAse in traffic, however, required much more involvement by others, particularly the MAC and MASAC. The problem was discussed at length between the Tower, the MAC Noise Abatement Office and at MASAC meetings. The MASAC referred the problem to the Operations Committee During these meetings it became evident that Mendota Heights was being discriminated against in the manner the corridor was being used. The Tower agreed to review the headings being used and to experiment with v,uys to make it more equitable. The Tower reviewed the history of the corridor and how it had evolved. They came to the conciusion that, as itwas originally designed, itwould not be discriminatory. They experimented with several methods for Placing departing aircraft closer to the South boundary of the corridor in order to allow room to maneuver( departures on runway 11 L These various uses of the corridor were discussed with the MAC Noise Abatement Office, the MASAC and with parties from both sides of the communities involved. They were unsuccessful in getting agreement as to which was the most fair and equitable solution. The debate continued as to what was the best way to solve the problem. In the meantime the complaints and activity on both sides of the corridor increased. The Tower unilaterally made the decision to return to ^runv*y heading" off runway 11 R with the 090 heading for runway 11 L departures when a conflict arose. In addition, the Towner, under oertain oonditions, used "visual separation" within the corridor. Both decluns were passed to the Noise Abatement office and the Operations Committee of the MASAC. The results Vesm mbrad and the controversy continued. During the year 1985 the Tower, because of ever increasing traffic and resultant requirements for a review of opwations, began experimenting with "dual local control". This now meant that when traffic was heavy d-FeM would be two controllers working the airport traffic instead of one. One controller would use the North runway, the other' the South. During these periods it became obvious that the "visual" separation would not work Also, it was obvious that actual headings would have to be used instead of the general runway heading. For that reason heading 115 was used for 11 R, and the controller on the lett runway was alkawed to use either 090 or 100 degrees according to how much traffic was expected. By F*bruuy, 1888 the corridor had become status quo. Neither of the communities could agree on what it should be nor were the other parties involved willing to suggest what would be fair. The Tower remained adamant dud the corridor was defined ori the South by the 29L localizer and actually had no North boundary. They did agree that 090 was traditionally the North edge but not officially. They announced that th®y would continue to define it as from the 29L localizer North to 090 degrees and operate within/it as much as feasible. They also agreed to talk with the parties about some permanent solution but were adamant that if they could not agree that no changes were anticipated. Ae of March 1, 1988 no further agreements had been reached. ?. .i, December 14, 2009 Chad Leqve Metropolitan Airports Commission 604028 1h Ave So Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799 RY of t6 "'�'e...t Mendota Dear Chad: As requested at the November 18 MAC Noise Oversight Committee Meeting, we have summarized Mendota Heights Questions regarding nighttime use of the parallel runways. They are as follows: 1. In 2002, 42 additional gates were added to the north concourse; 12R/30L remained a favored runway in 2003. No shift in runway use occurred at that time, why is it occurring now? 2. Between 2001 and 2009 there have been many ups and downs in the number of airport operations including nighttime operations. Despite that, there was a very good balance in night-time operations prior to 17/35. Why has that changed? 3. In 2004, when the airport saw in excess of 540,000 operations, the use of the south parallel was still 1 greater than the north parallel. Why in light of a 17% decrease in operations, including night-time operations, would the FAA not have greater flexibility to achieve a better balance in the night-time use of the parallels? 4. If no change is going to occur until the airport 1) expands gates at Humphrey and on the south concourse; 2)reaches 575,000 operations annually; or 3) constructs the crossover taxiway, does that mean that the communities at the end of 12L and 30R have to wait 6-20 years to get relief from the current distribution of nighttime noise? 5. is the greater use of the north parallel more related to reduced taxi distance to/from gates, and therefore fuel cost savings, than it is to numbers of operations? 6. Why does the number of operations matter in relation to take-offs/landings in light of the statement: "With the reduced levels of traffic, controllers have more opportunities to expedite the traffic flow."? Wouldn't this give them greater flexibility to assign runways? (Quote taken from October 15, 2009 letter from Carl Rydeen to NOC Co -Chairs.) 7. If according to RUS policy there is to be no preference shown for the use of either parallel over the other, why is a clear preference being shown for using the north parallel for departures and the south parallel for landings? a. If the FEIS and RUS are not currently adhered to, what assurance do we have that today's standard procedure does not become standard operating procedure in perpetuity? 8. How do the current runway use percentages match -up with those estimated under the FE IS for runway 17-35? What relief is or will be provided now that 17/35 is fully operational and it's impact on the Airport is more fully understood. Page 1 of 2 noR 4/uctt®mna Caws m Mendota Heights, NN 55118 O (651) 452-RB50 m M (651) 452-6940 www.mmendoita-heightsc®mm 9. Flights were routinely being taxied to runway 17 at night in 2007. Why couldn't they also be taxied the much shorter distance to 12R? 10. Please provide a comparison of the nighttime RUS today versus nighttime RUS in the 1990's and early 2000's (prior to opening 17/35). 11. How often at nighttime is crossing in the corridor used vs. the number of hours that it could potentially be used (with a single controller)? Thank you Chad for your continuing assistance in this matter. Sincerely, f1 G Ultan Liz Petschel _Piepresentative NOC Representative (alternate) CC. Mayor John Huber Commissioner John McDonald, Jr. Page 2 of 2 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS i qi= January 5, 2010 TO: ARC Commissioners FROM: Linda 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 (put with #14) The following should be replaced from your monthly ARC Meeting Agenda Packet. # 7 Airport Noise Report — Put the latest issue of this in your Intro Packet #13 November 2009 - Technical Advisors Report #14 November 2009 - Eagan Mendota Heights Corridor Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1. Glossary 2. Historical Review Eagan -MH Corridor 3. Creation of ARC 4. Ordinance No. 290 5. ARC Brochure 6. 2009 Airport Noise Plan of Action 7." Airport Noise Report, December 31, 2009 8. NOC Bylaws 9. NOC Meeting Minutes 10, MAC Approved 2009 Capital Improvement Program 11. What's New at the MAC Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs 12. ANOMS Monthly Reports 13. November 2009 Technical Advisor's Report 14.-1 November 2009 Eagan Mendota Heights Corridor Report 15. Frequently Asked Questions 16. Contract Pertaining to Limits on Construction of a Third Parallel Runway 17. Crossing in the Corridor 18. Minneapolis Tower Operational Order 19. Runway Use 20. Nighttime Voluntary Noise Agreements 21. Maps 22. ARC DVD * These items should be replace with updates provided in your monthly ARC packet 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO January 5, 2010 TO: Airport Relations Commission FROM: Linda Shipton, Senior Secretary SUBJECT: Operations North of the 090° Corridor Boundary The following is a tabulation of tracks crossed gate from June 2002 to November 2008 (tracking sheets attached). 2002, June - 137 Tracks Crossed Gate 2002 July - 85 99 2002 August - 176 2002 Sept. - 111 2002 Oct. - N/A 2002 Nov. - N/A 2002 Dec. - -N/A 2003 Jan. 33 It 2003 Feb. - 42 It 2003 March - 64 It 2003 April - 103 Is 2003 May - 45 It 2003 June - 80 It 2003 July - 80 It 2003 Aug. - 35 It 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 It 2004 July - 93 1( 2004,August - 117 It 2004 Sept. - 174 2004 October - 180 2004 November — 108 2004 December — 135 C� 2005 January - 169 Tracks Crossed Gate 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 It 2006 July - 85 " 2006 August - 110 " 2006 September — 95 " 2006 October - 114 2006 November - 118 " 2006 December - 96 " ( ) 2007 January — 81 " 2007 February — 88 " 2007 March - 183 " 2007 April - 144 " 2007 May - 193 " 2007 June - 127 It 2007 July — 60 " 2007 August — 108 It 2007 September — 164 it 2007 October - 223 it 2007 November - 63 it 2007 December — 150 it 2008 January - 127 it 2008 February — 99 it 2008 March - 128 it 2008 April - 109 It 2008 May - 144 It 2008 June - 66 It 2008 July - 70 it 2008 August — 73 It 2008 September — 108 it 2008 October — 72 It t Y 2008 November — 90 It -.: 2008 December — 122 It 2009 January - 44 " 2009 February — 71 " 2009 March — 146 " 2009 April — 69 " 2009 May — 51 " 2009 June — 74 " 2009 July - 20 It 2009 August — 22 It 2009 September — 18 " 2009 October — 0 " 2009 November — 31 " 0 A quarterly pubJlcauon or me 1V1UUUjjV-- , _j-'. Area Navigation (RNAV) Procedure Development Pilots soon will have new procedure for departures on departure procedure options at Runways 12L and 12R but will MSP. The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) has been working with the local Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Delta/Northwest, and Pinnacle Airlines on development of Area Navigation (RNAV) departure procedures for Runways 12L and )12R, and Runway 17. RNAV procedures utilize Global Positioning Satellite technology for three-dimensional location guidance. Runways 12L and 120 Crossing - in -the -Corridor RNAV Procedures n ryf }ii "'AZI V, r -40 Rurnwa�qg 12L and !_J -12R.- RNAV Departure Procedur6,. P Q.Z, The Runways 12L and 12R Crossing -in -the -Corridor RNAV Departure Procedures will mirror the existing Crossing—in-the- Corridor noise abatement ensure even more accuracy in an aircraft's flight path. The intent of these procedures is to concentrate aircraft, to the greatest extent possible, over the center of the Eagan -Mendota Heights Industrial Corridor and away from residents. The "Crossing" procedures affect locations witl-dn three miles from the end of the runways. Residential areas outside this three-mile point will not be affected, either negatively Or -Positively, by the Crossing procedure. The 12L/ 12R RNAV procedure can be used only during low -traffic periods as it requires a single air traffic controller coordinating operations for both Runways 12L and 12R. An estimated two operations per day will be able to utilize the new RNAV procedures. At its July 15, 2009 meeting, the MSP Noise oversight Committee (NOC) directed the MAC to - proceed with submission of the procedures to the FAA f6t review and approval. Once approved, the procedure will be published and available for pilots to use. Runway 17 RNAV Departure Procedure Similarly, an RNAV departure procedure is being developed for Runway 17. This procedure uses the same technology as the "Crossing" procedures, but will affect departures off Runway 17. Aircraft utilizing tl-ds Procedure will be concentrated over the Minnesota River, resulting m" fewer aircraft over residential areas in parts of south Bloomington and north Burnsville. The procedure has undergone three separate testing periods with much success. FAA coordination and some fine-tuning of the procedure is underway. Submittal of the final procedure is expected to take place before the end of the year. following items: The MSP Noise Oversight 'Committee (NOC) met on July 15 and September 16, and discussed the RNAV Departure Procedures for Runways :.2L & 12R, and Runway 17 The NOC received a briefing on the status of Area Navigation (RNAV) departure procedures being developed for Runways 12L and 12R. and Runway 17. (See front page article) The NOC unanimously supported a recommendation for the MAC to submit the Runways 12L and 12R Crossing -in -the -Corridor RNAV Procedure to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for review and approval as a public -use procedure. At its September meeting the NOC reviewed updated information regarding the Runway 17 RNAV Departure Procedure and approved it for submission to the FAA. NOC Cargo Carrier Representative The absence of a Cargo Carrier representative during the past several meetings has been a concern for the NOC. After discussion, the NOC members agreed on a communication plan that outlined steps to be taken to solicit participation from FedEx. Residential Noise Mitigation Program Status The NOC received an update to the Noise Mitigation Program. (See article on Page 3) Flight Tracking System Upgrade The MAC briefed NOC members on the status of the flight tracking and noise monitoring system upgrade. (See article on Page 3) Nomination and Election of Co- chairs The NOC is lead by Co-chairs that are nominated and elected by the group to serve two-year terms. One Chair is elected from the community representatives, and one Chair is elected from the airport users representatives. Representative Loeffelholz was elected as Chair from the airport users group, and Representative Wilcox was elected to serve as Chair from the Community group. Next NOC Meeting The next NOC meeting is scheduled for November 18, 2009. The time and location is to be determined. For more information about the MSP NOC or its meetings, please call 612-725-6455 or visit www.macnoise.com/noc. .,,Flight Tracking & Noise Monitoring System Gets an Upgrade The Metropolitan Airports of three days before releasing it to caused by radar reflections or Commission has been working diligently for the past year to upgrade its existing flight tracking and noise monitoring system.' The current Airport Noise and Operations monitoring System was originally installed in 1992 and is used extensively for analyzing aircraft operations and related noise levels around MSP, as well as for reporting those findings. The MAC currently receives aircraft flight track data from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which holds the data for a minimum the MAC. dropped signals. An upgrade to the system, now underway, will give the MAC the ability to acquire flight track data from a source other than the FAA. The new system, which uses ecmultlateradon" (MEAT) technology, offers several advantages. Rather than relying on a single radar signal, MEAT technology uses several strategically -placed receivers on the ground that work together to locate an aircraft's position in the sky. The result is more data covering a wider area and fewer missing tracks Atom, sidential Noise Mitigation Program Update The Residential Noise Mitigation Program is well underway and progressing according to schedule. The program is being implemented in the following Phases: o DNL 63-64: this package includes modifications to homes to achieve a 5 decibel reduction indoors. It may include primary window and door treatments, storm window and storm door application, attic and sidewall insulation and air- conditioning installation if not already present. Of the 453 eligible homes, 400 homeowners are participating in this phase. As of July 2009, 329 homes had been completed. DNL 60-62:homes in this phase will either receive air-conditioning and $4,177 worth of mitigation work (Phase 2A), or $14,620 worth of mitigation work if air- conditioning is already present (Phase 2B). Of the 2,833 eligible homes in Phase 2A, 88 are completed and 329 are in process. Of the 2,515 eligible homes in Phase 2B, 265 homes are in process. Homes in this phase must be completed by December 2012. DNL 60-64 Multi -family units: this phase includes air-conditioning covers for window air -conditioners already present or installation of air-conditioning where none exits. The A/1AC's new system includes eight MLAT sensors. Testing and calibration of those sensors is currently underway. When the system is certified and operational, flight data will be available sooner than it is now. The intent is to eventually be able to provide data online within 10 minutes of a flight. To view available flight tracks, visit: www.macnoise.com/maps and click on the FLIGHT TRACK -ER link. * This phase consists of 2,124 eligible residential units (107 multi -family buildings). Work is scheduled to begin in late 2009 for completion by December 2010. 2005 DNL 60-64: in this phase homes will share $7 million for reimbursement of approved homeowner mitigation efforts. Approximately 2,401 homes are eligible in this phase, making the current value of the "share" $2,892 per home. Reimbursement Will begin in March 2010. To find out if your home is eligible for one of these phases, go online at www.macnoise.com/sip or call 612- 861-9013 or 612-726-9411.® Table of Contents for October 2009 Complaint Summary Noise Complaint Map FAA 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 MSP Scheduled Nighttime Operators MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operators by Type MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operators Stage Mix Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoring Tower Site Locations Map Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events MSP Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per RMT Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 1 2 3 4 5 6 —7 — 8 C —9-11 —12 —13 —14-17 —18 —19 —20 —21 —22 —23-35 —36-38 MSP Complaints by City October 2009 City Arrival Departure Other Number of Complaints Number of Complainants % of Total Complaints SAINT PAUL 0 1848 2 693 10 135 2688 36 44.8% RICHFIELD 0 0 0 6 1108 5 1119 7 18.6% APPLE VALLEY 0 697 0 10 0 38 745 17 12.4% EAGAN I 133' - 0 395 9 155 693 29 11.5% MINNEAPOLIS 0 70 3 116 52 115. 356 73 5.9% HEIGHTSDOA 0 0 1 223 1 0 225 3 3.7% LAKEVILLE 0 41 0 0 2 0 43 4 0.7% SAINT LOUIS PARK 0 37 0 2 1 2 42 6 0.7% BLOOMINGTON 0 0 1 7 12 13 33 7 0.5% CHANHASSEN 0 0 0 0 0 16 16 1 0.3'%6 FORT SNELL.ING 0 0 0 9 1 1 11 3 0.2% EURNSVILLE 0 2 0 1 3 2 8 5 0.1% WESTLAKELAND TWP 0 0 0 5 0 1 6 1 0.1% EDEN PRAIRIE 0 0. 0 1 0 4 5 3 0.1% EDINA 0 1 0 0 2 0 3 2 0% OAKDALE 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 0% COON RAPIDS 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0% IOLUMIA 0 I 0 0 0 0 1 1 00/1. BLAINS 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0% SPRING LAKE PARK 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 00". 1NVER GROVE HEIGHTS 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0% BROOKLYN CENTER 0 I 1 0 0 L 0 0 1 1 0% Total 2832 1476 1693 6001 204 Nature of MSP Complaints of Day Complaint Total Total Early/Late 86 2526 Engine Run-up 2 68 Excessive Noise 1198 4709 Frequency 48 4039 Ground Noise 2 107 Helicopter 0 0 Low Flying 23 3941 Structural Disturbance 8 284 Other 2 112 Total 17155 Note: Shaded Columns represent MSP complaints filed via the Internet. I Sum of %Total of Complaints may not equal 100% due to rounding. -- 'As of May 2005, the MSP Complaints by City report includes multiple complaint descriptors per individual complaint. Thererore, the number of complaint descriptors may be more than the number of reported complaints. Time of Day Total Time Total Airlake 0000-0559 13 73 0600-0659 7 546 0700-1159 284 1585 1200-1559 269 672 1600-1959 304 624 2000-2159 177 600 2200-2259 146 536 2300-2359 12 153 Total 6001 Complaints by Airport Airport Total IVISP 6001 Airlake 0 Anoka 43 Crystal 0 Flying Cloud 235 Lake Elmo 0 St. Paul 2 Misc. 0 Total 6281. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 1 - MSP International Airport Aviation Noise Complaints for October 2009 Ham 'e, Forest Lake Scandia L !I Dayton tl WI P Coon Rapids` go oil Un, -,line It lin al JJf�TIl.t Corcoran -a Brooklyn Part T it -*,Bear.; wP.. of 3�, ds Vii w- IF 16 J� 7- 11-1-WIL i, or view j Tt�`A 6n Hills11 -i; 1�11 y h. t4� W-6rijlilon- -Cen "I A 1�1 0": ldnais H -!bit Ilwa le, 011 . , 11&1)1a s,- I Ft Hii6e" x1vIedina 6.1 it- anad 'a' tJ vv Ply" 1W., , �, 1, ) a )11 sw c —iz: BaylownTwl). Roseville a -2 -.at, .1� Lal 6.1den H Iisy-'-- -IA1,'Psl Lakeland T ly I![La.2P olls P IVa �21t3 St Louis Park o I ul� Ivonka,o. 1v It Hopkinsi,,: Q TonkabayC "rW., 1.w V�p -Sh brewadd y.r ton St 1, 1 D A ry, V T. Po P 9d, _j 4! XCI)a .1 nliassen i-Prairi- Si Pa u I Park E -a Gt-, y C 6'dii isfand Twp. Denmark Tovp!.�J:I' .2 ilo, J 6i , ckson iTwp.Ims?] a "I Shakopp . . ...... J t3avage I'. otlisv ille TwT, pie Ille Rosemount lnger f, R TwpHas_sQ'; tin' 9 FnorL liiq'! 'E 93 Pav anna Tvv Marshan Twp. ,in([ Creek TwPt 'Sp ri ng'Lak e TwP. Credit Rivei.Twp. ll, -'Empire Twp. Lakeville Farny oil . 'i Vermillion Twp. Helena Twp. -11,Cedar Lake TiNp. Neve Mai ket T%vp. Eureka Twp. Castle Rock Twp. j Hampton Twp. Douglas P.... �N Number of Complaints per Address 1-4 5-12 13-26 27-42 43-106 107-223 224-1106 1107-2469 - 2 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Available Hours for Runway Use October 2009 )urce: /-\via LIUll 0y,- lCl l is r-ct IUt n tat'Uc tv,ou w.., --'—/ All Hours { q1G G MMNEN ih rArl';� 15 ' It Dlis i 0 Q. P..1 ,11 I r 1 i it I {�fd is 't 5 it s 4 ti t�tkn t.� r I go ' ' tib fti+s t ,il KNT eui rurif• br ss i of iR I' `� I: -.....-..�--^-• ) �., hf .. ::. roa 411[1tl11G IDtt i. i f' o �... i -ii n it �frr;Mm,'iruntFid ,�= �' Bloomm S1 Eagaji ! `` 1=2 II �,I I .•! LONG 4140 )YL IAI Er kr 11 i { 1 ... _. , . 0 Nighttime Hours 10:30pm to 6:00am i i_ 8t5; m e op,lis St. Paul s „a 28 6 ,.• ?2T,§& � i� t `7.4[t 1f �! `'k lili-7t 71�ty tir !`�' •�., I� 5 t�� d Sr} r I �` !S' It 1 � •I f4ichflald �t , 1 5 ! it r it Ij �� a{4 I ANT IIEInIfG CEDE YI t rAIE �� ;;lI .155 I G r' rl 52 6 f r 5.t. role ' ! ti Bleenun i Eagan li ° f ! � it t 4 '. 1, •. :." f 11..: FAA Avera e Dail Count Note: Sum of daily average count may not equal total due to rounding. "As of January 2009, the FAA Aviation Systems Performance Metric (ASPM) was the source for the Available Hours for Runway Use report. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 3 October 2008 October 2009 Air Carrier 737 709 Commuter 420 335 General Aviation 52 41 Military 12 9 Total 1221 1094 Note: Sum of daily average count may not equal total due to rounding. "As of January 2009, the FAA Aviation Systems Performance Metric (ASPM) was the source for the Available Hours for Runway Use report. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 3 All Operations Runway Use Report October 2009 RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent ..... ..... Last Year Percent 04 Arr P.M' 1 0% 0 7, 2,1 12L Nli; So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4 0% C RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count –Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 1 0% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4 0% 4159 22.5% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2380 14.2% 3869 20..9%____ 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 2166 13% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 984 5.9% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3244 19.4% 3562 19.3% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 105 0.6% 4200 22.7% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 7819 46.8% 2695 14.6% jotal Arrivals 1,6103 18485 IRWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 2973 18.1% 6 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 16 0.1% 2671 14.6% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 3688 22.4% 1540 8.4% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 2060 12.5% 4664 25.6% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 21 0.1% 21 0.1% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 7241 44% 4053 22.26/—.- 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 437 2.7% 5289 29% 35. Dep So. Minneapolis 1 0% 1 0% Total, Departures 16437 18245 Total Operations 33140 36730 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. -4- Report Generated: 11 /16/2009 14:52 Carrier Jet Operations Runway Use Report October 2009 RWY I Overflight Area.. (� u. "'V/ Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 1 0% 0 0% la Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield Vii. 0% 3407 22.5% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2092 14.6% '!4 21.1% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 1786 12.4% 0 N. -4,J, 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 860 6% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 2759 fit 1 2934 19.3% 30R Arr T, 86 0.6% 3457 22.8% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 6763 47.1% 2164 14.3% Total Arrivals 14351 RWY ArrIIV6l/., Departure Overflight Area.. Count Operations erations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 1 0% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4 0% 3407 22.5% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2092 14.6% 3206 21.1% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 1786 12.4% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 860 6% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 2759 19.2% 1 2934 19.3% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 86 0.6% 3457 22.8% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 6763 47.1% 2164 14.3% Total Arrivals 14351 15168 IRWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations. Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 2534 17.9% 5 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 8 0.1% 1956 13% ---8—.59% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 3096 -8-5--U 21.9% —69% 1284 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan —T7 4068 27.1% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 14 0.1% 21 0.1% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 6297 44.6% 3334 22.2% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 384 2.7% 4352 29% 35 -b-e—p 1. So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 --15-020 0% Total Departures 14118 Total Operations 28469 30188 Nutu. 0.111 .1 — ...... nom, c4um Report Generated: 11/1612009 14:52 - 5 - October 2009 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition Type FAR Part 36 Take - Off Noise Level Aircraft Description Stage Count Percent B742 110 Boeing 747-200 3 29 0.1% DC10 103 McDonnell Douglas DC10 3 108 0.4% B744 101.6 Boeing 747-400 3 63 0.2% DC8Q 100.5 McDonnell Douglas DC8 Re -manufactured 3 2 0% MD11 95.8 McDonnell Douglas MD11 3 144 0.5% 8767 95.7 Boeing 767 3 3 0% A330 95.6 Airbus Industries A330 3 218 0.8% B72Q 94.5 Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3 3 92 0.3% A300 94 Airbus Industries A300 3 6 0% MD80 91.5 McDonnell Douglas MD80 3 1105 3.9% B757 91.4 Boeing 757 3 2018 7.1% DC9Q 91 McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3 3 2544 8.9% A321 89.8 Airbus Industries A321 3 179 0.6% 8734 88.9 Boeing 737-400 3 31 0.1% A320 87.8 Airbus Industries A320 3 3958 13.9% 8738 87.7 Boeing 737-800 3 879 3.1% 8735 87.7 Boeing 737-500 3 38 0.1% A319 87.5 Airbus Industries A319 3 3404 12% 8733 87.5 Boeing 737-300 3 525 1.8% 87377 87.5 Boeing 737-700 3 486 1.7% A318 87.5 Airbus Industries A318 3 50 0.2% E190 83.7 Embraer 190 3 183 0.6% E170 83.7 Embraer 170 3 2775 9.7% E145 83.7 Embraer 145 3 992 3.5% 8717 83 Boeing 717 3 397 1.4% CRJ 79.8 Canadair Regional Jet 3 7937 27.9% E135 77.9 Embraer 135 3 299 1.1% J328 76.5 Fairchild Dornier 328 3 4 0% Totals 28469 Note: Sum of fleet mix % may not eaual 100% due to mundinq. Note: Stage III represent aircraft modified to meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. This includes hushkit engines, engine retrofits or aircraft operational flight configurations. UPS DC8Q are re -engined with manufactured stage 3 engines and are classified as Stage III Manufactured as of January 1, 2008. ` -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 time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone -corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover measured in A -weighted decibels. - 6 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Count Current Percent Last Years Percent Stage II 0 0% 0% Stage III 2636 9.3% 9.2% Stage III Manufactured 25833 90.7% 90.8% Total Stage 111 28469 Note: Stage III represent aircraft modified to meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. This includes hushkit engines, engine retrofits or aircraft operational flight configurations. UPS DC8Q are re -engined with manufactured stage 3 engines and are classified as Stage III Manufactured as of January 1, 2008. ` -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 time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone -corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover measured in A -weighted decibels. - 6 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. - Runway Use Report October 2009 �'' j � , • tt ina,polic ? � ' ' 1 41/ i 44/ ,i+ i +�•y�lS i,�,. •,I�tn ,.,,\j•/t1 Ian .�- � :•(411 'I t x�r��;�>I , rw, I ti ,�, l , tt 1 ✓ .. P r '� •.� ` I J t{ tt G i ry i � . t •'' rr rt •meq r S f id.,JG 95/ ( , ! or�- 16& I r fri •�i ,r i a o'0' *n r It RWY 04 Arrival/ Departure Arr Overflight Area So. Richfield/Bloomington Count Operations 0 . Percent 0% Last Year Count Operations 0 Last Year Percent 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2 0.2% 183 14.5% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 515 41% 297 23.5% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 31 2.5% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 496 39.5% 526 41.6% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 0 0% 254 20.1% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 211 16.8% 4 0.3% Total Arrivals 1255 1264 RWY 04 Arrival/ Departure Dep Overflight Area St. Paul/Highland Park Count Operations 125 Percent 15.7% Last Year Count Operations 0 Last Year Percent 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 1 0.1% 244 34.8% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 184 23.1% 133 19% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 104 13% 80 11.4% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 351 44% 78 -11.1 % 30R 35 Dep Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield So. Minneapolis 33 0 4.1% 0% 165 1 23.5% 0.1% Total Departures 798 701 •Total Operations 2053 1965 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 7 - Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Runway Use Report October 2009 RWY:. Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2 0.2% 177 15.7% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 446 41.3% 260 23.1% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 27 2.5% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 442 40.9% 447 39.8% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 0 0% 240 21.4% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 163 15.1% 0 0% Total Arrivals 1080 1124 .RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 100 16.3% 0 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 1 0.2% 209 37.5% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 130 21.2% 84 15.1% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 85 13.8% 71 12.7% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 267 43.5% 55 9.9% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 31 5% 139 24.9% 35 Dep I So. Minneapolis 0 0'0 0 0% Total Departures 614 558 Total Operations 1694 1682 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100-/. clue to rounaing. -8- Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 120 100 80 60 40 z 20 0 November 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. <> LC-) <> LO <> U-7 O W-) <> ICJ O ICJ g U-) C NM M m M W� LC)tilNM <> C11 <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <=> <> <> NN N <> <> <> <> <> <> <> Time November 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations i n.,:zn - L„ to r,.nn 53 m El NWIp Ej scx 0 DAL FDX No UPS COA, CI Ani ED USA UAL. rQ MEP TRS FF Ej "L Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Manufactured Airline-- Stage 2 Stage3 Stage 3 Total Northwest (NWA) 0 0 106 106 Sun Country (SCX) 0 0 82 82 Delta (DAL) 0 0 59 59 FedEx (FDX) —0-15 39 54 —48 UPS (UPS) 0 0 48 Continental (COA) 0 0 47 47 American (AAL) 0 0 46 46 US Airways (USA) 0 0 —0 31 31 United (UAL) 0 30 30 Midwest Airlines (MEP) 0 0 27 27 Airtran (TRS) 0 — 0 22 22 BAX (78W) 0 13 0 13 Frontier Airlines (FFT) 0 0 7 7 Korean Air (KAL) 0 0 1 1 Total 0 28 545 573 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 . November 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations Time A/D Carrier Flight Number, Equipment Stage Days of Operation Routing 22:30 A American 1961 B738 M MTWThFSSu MIA MSP 22:30 A Airtran 869 8737 M WThFSSu FLL ATL MSP 22:30 A Airtran 869 B717 M MT ATL MSP 22:33 A Northwest 3539 CRJ M MTWThFSu DTW MSP 22:34 A Frontier Airlines 108 A319 M M DEN MSP 22:35 A Northwest 2397 A319 M MTWThFSu JFK MSP 22:57 A United 463 A319 M ThF YYZ ORD MSP 22:58 A United 463 A319 M MTW YYZ ORD MSP 22:59 A United 463 A320 M Su YYZ ORD MSP 23:00 D BAX 705 B72Q H TTh YYC MSP TOL 23:07 A Frontier Airlines 108 A318 M F DEN MSP 23:07 A Frontier Airlines 108 A319 M WThSu DEN MSP 23:10 A American 1284 MD80 M MTWThFSSu AUS DFW MSP 23:12 A United 7529 E170 M MTW DEN MSP 23:13 A United 7529 E170 M Su DEN MSP 23:17 A Frontier Airlines 108 A319 M T DEN MSP 23:18 A United 7529 E170 M ThF DEN MSP 23:20 A Delta 1522 B738 M MTWThFSSu ATL MSP 23:20 A Sun Country 106 8738 M MTWThFSSu LAS MSP 23:25 D BAX 705 B72Q H M YYC MSP RFD TOL 23:30 A Midwest Airlines 2210 E170 M MTWThFSu MKE MSP A Sun Country 284 B738 M WS SEA MSP -.2140 23:40 A Sun Country 286 B737 M ThSu SEA MSP 23:45 A American 2045 MD80 M MTWThFSu BOS ORD MSP 23:45 A Sun Country 422 B737 M F LAX MSP 23:47 A Frontier Airlines 108 A319 M S DEN MSP 23:49 A Continental 2816 E145 M MTWThFSu IAH MSP 23:54 A Northwest 2512 A320 M MWThFSu LAX MSP 23:55 A Sun Country 404 8738 M MTThFSu SAN MSP 23:56 A US Airways 940 A321 M MTWThFSu LAS PHX MSP 23:56 A US Airways 984 A320 M Ssu MCO CLT MSP 23:56 A US Airways 984 A320 M WThF CLT MSP 00:10 A Sun Country 422 B737 M TThSu LAX MSP 00:10 A Sun Country 422 B738 M Su LAX MSP 03:36 A FedEx 1407 MD11 M MTSu 04:14 A UPS 556 8757 M TWThF 04:17 A UPS 556 A300 M TW 04:24 A UPS 556 B757 M TWThF 04:31 A UPS 558 B757 M TWThF 04:35 A FedEx 1718 MD11 M MSU 04:37 A UPS 558 B757 M TWThF 04:42 A FedEx 1744 B72Q H MTWTh 05:07 A UPS 560 MD11 M TWThF 05:09 A FedEx 1718 MD11 M MTWTh A Korean Air 7521 B757 M Su SFO MSP 05:10 D Delta 1073 B738 M MTWThFSSu MSP ATL 05:15 A UPS 560 MD11 M TWThF 05:30 D Continental 2823 E145 M MTWThF MSP IAH 41 P05:42 A FedEx 1407 —T MD11 M MTWThF A UPS 496 B757 M S - 10 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 is November 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations Time A/D Carrier Flight Number Equipment Stage Days of Operation Routing 05:48 A Northwest 2256 A320 M MTWThF SEA MSP BOS 05:49 A Northwest 2256 8757 M S SEA MSP BOS 05:50 A Northwest 2326 A320 M MTWThFSSu LAS MSP DTW 05:50 D Midwest Airlines 2298 E170 M TWThFS MSP MIKE DFW 05:50 A UPS 496 B757 M S - 05:55 A UPS 558 8757 M Th 05:55 D Midwest Airlines 2298 E170 M M MSP MKE DFW 05:55 A Northwest 2624 A333 M MTSSu HNL MSP 05:56 A UPS 496 A300 M S Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 11 - October 2009 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. C Total Nighttime Jet Operations by Hour Airline ID Stage Type Count America West AWE 3 A319 6 America West AWE 1 11 A320 i� 11 America West 1 11 3 A321 27 Airline ID Stage Type Count America West AWE 3 A319 6 America West AWE 3 A320 21 America West AWE 3 A321 27 American AAL 3 B738 12 American AAL 3 MD80 58 Comair COM 3 CRJ 28 Compass CPZ 3 E170 98 Continental Exp. BTA 3 E145 80 Delta DAL 3 B757 2 Delta DAL 3 B7377 11 Delta DAL 3 MD80 59 FedEx FDX 3 MD11 16 FedEx FDX 3 DC10 25 Mesaba MES 3 CRJ 243 Northwest NWA 3 8744 1 Northwest NWA 3 B742 4 Northwest NWA 3 A330 16 Northwest NWA 3 DC9Q 53 Northwest NWA 3 A319 61 Northwest NWA 3 B757 112 Northwest NWA 3 A320 136 Pinnacle FLG 3 CRJ 144 Republic Airlines RPA 3 E170 34 Southwest SWA 3 B733 12 Southwest SWA 3 87377 16 Sun Country SCX 3 B7377 40 Sun Country SCX 3 B738 92 UPS UPS 3 A300 1 UPS UPS 3 MD11 21 UPS UPS 3 B757 41 United UAL 3 8757 1 United UAL 3 A319 18 United UAL 3 A320 34 TOTAL 1523 Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 89.9% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations. _ 12 _ Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 October 2009 Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations Mix for Top 15 Airlines 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. 350 300 �2 250 3 200 150 Z 100 50 0 <> LO <> in <> in <> w') <> Ln<> to oin o Lo <> Lo <> <> M U") LO to M CI-) <> <> <> -,a- <> 6 U-) -C> <5 <> Z> N<> <> <> <> C> Th-ne October 2009 Nighttime Carrier Jet Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines i n-�n n m to R -nn q m E] NWA 0 MES El FLG ScX CPz BTA 0 DAL, AAL UPS El AWE Ej UAL FM PPA SWA ❑ COM El Airline Stage 2 Stage 3 Manufactured Stage 3 Total Northwest (NWA) -- 0 53 330 383 Mesaba (MES) 0 0 243 243 Pinnacle (FLG) Sun Country (SCX) 0 0 0 0 144 132 144 132 Compass (CPZ) 0 0 98 —98 Continental Exp. (BTA) 0 0 80.— 80 Delta (DAL) 0 0 72 — 72 American (AAL) 0 0 70 70 UPS (UPS) America West (AWE) 0 0 0 0 63 54 63 —5A — United (UAL) 0 0 53 53 FedEx (FDX) 0 0 41 41 Republic Airlines (RPA) Southwest (SWA) 0 0 0 0 34 28 34 28 Comair (COM) Other 0 0 0 23 28 148 28 171 Total 0 76 1618 1694 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -13- Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - October 2009 Oct I thru 8, 2009 - 3714 Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct I thru 8, 2009 - 3616 Carrier Jet Departures Oct 1 thru 8, 2009 - 292 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 1 thru 8, 2009 - 170 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures - 14 - Report Generated: 11/16/.2009 14:52 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - October 2009 Oct 9 thru 16, 2009 - 3771 Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 9 thru 16, 2009 - 3750 Carrier Jet Departures Oct 9 thru 16, 2009 - 282 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 9 thru 16, 2009 - 168 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -15- Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - October 2009 Oct 17 thru 24, 2009 - 3710 Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 17 thru 24, 2009 - 3596 Carrier Jet Departures Oct 17 thru 24, 2009 - 218 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 17 thru 24, 2009 - 115 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures - 16 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - October 2009 Oct 25 thru 31, 2009 - 3156 Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 25 thru 31, 2009 - 3156 Carrier Jet Departures Oct 25 thru 31, 2009 - 288 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Oct 25 thru 31, 2009 - 161 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures -Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -17- MSP International Airport Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations @ Remote Monitoring Tower Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Time Above dB Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events October 2009 RMT ID city Address Time >= 65dIB Time >= 80dI3 Time >= 90dB Time >= 100dB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 07:41:35 00:00:56 --6— 00:00:00 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 0. 33 . 32 00:33:32 00:00:00 00:000.0004 :00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 12.10:50 0:30 00:00:10 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 01:13:14 00:04:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 12:17:49 --59 02:20:56 -—,0232 00:01:58 00:00:00 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 62.43 '--7 — 60 —4 —60-700-0 00:00:00 00:00:00--07— 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 00:37:18 6 .00,00 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 04:10:11 -04,59.55 00:00:22 00:00:00 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:29:00 00:00:25 00:00:00 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.. 04:46:21 1 --6-0-. 7:19 00:01:05 --- 00:00:00 - 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. '--00:08.18 00-24 00:00:00 T 0-00-00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 00:02:50 00:00:08 00:00:00 00:00:00 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 00:03:16 -12.24-.41 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 - - 14 Eagan 1 st St. & McKee St. 00:00:58 - -00:00:00 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 06.27 00:00:08 60.00,00 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 14:28:27 00:37:49 00:00:33 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:04:25 --64--4925 00:00:05 —6-0702-03 00:00:00 -60700:00 00:00:00 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 60-00-00 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 00:58:28 -6-070-1:58 00:00:31 00:00:00 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave.. 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 00:02:38 60-70-0.02 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 09:10:41 --60--2645 00:00:07 00:00:00 00:00:00 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. .-5-0.0004 00:00:00 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. —Rd 11:25:11 00:01:03 760.00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Ju-rdy 00:52:52 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 00:18:56 00:00:18 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 00:15:24 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 07:21:47 00:04:18 00:00:00 00:00:00 '0 '0 NEI 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 00:22:14 00:00:00 00:00:00 --60 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 12:13:52 -0�0.0121 00:01:12 �0000 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:00:30 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 00:04:24 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 00:25:41 00.00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 22:59:37 00:00:54 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 33:53:04 00:01:49 00:00:00 00:00:00 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 00:10:44 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 00:02:19 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 00:02:19 00:00:00 0 00:00:00 Total Time for Arrival Noise Events 1184:32:591 05:28:01 00:04:11 10�-00,00 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -19- Time Above Threshold dB for Departure Related Noise Events October 2009 RMT ID, City Address Time >= 65d.13 Time >= 80dIB Time >= 90dIB Time >= 100dB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 04:18:40 00:01:28 00:00:00 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 04:59:31 00:02:29 00:00:06 00:00:00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 12:07:52 00:13:35 00:00:34 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 13:08:51 00:19:30 00:00:34 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 37:29:44 03:27:21 00:25:07 00:00:00 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 29:35:40 01:11:58 00:06:01 00:00:02 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 22:13:04 01:0I:27 00:01:13 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 11:48:24 00:13:45 00:00:00 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 01:37:39 00:03:07 00:00:13 00:00:00 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 12:28:09 01:13:27 00:10:07 00:00:00 —.10 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 04:39:21 00:13:16 00:01:03 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 05:34:29 00:27:48 00:02:08 00:00:00 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 07:24:25 00:01:02 00:00:00 00:00:00 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 16:07:50 00:26:08 00:00:05 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 07:54:51 1 00:03:55 00:00:00 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 17:59:57 00:55:59 00:02:30 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Aver 00:28:08 00:02:24 00:00:30 00:00:00 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 09:13:26 00:15:27 00:01:32 00:00:02 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 05:47:27 00:05:31 00:00:11 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:50:25 00:00:31 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 03:43:43 00:00:17 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 03:24:47 00:00:48 00:00:00 00:00:00 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 13:08:23 00:09:23 00:00:05 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 11:03:32 00-.06:47 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 10:05:35 00:00:16 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 08:12:07 00:03:39 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 12:14:30 00:16:34 00:00:06 00:00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 27:25:07 00:27:55 00:00:34 00:00:00 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem, School 4315 31st Ave. S. 07:25:23 00:06:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 09:54:23 00:43:39 00:02:49 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 01:15:07 00:01:42 00:00:05 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:34:04 00:00:48 00:00:00 00:00:00. 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 00:41:18 00:00:06 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 00:17:21 00:00:02 00:00:00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 01:41:43 00:01:32 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 00:31:55 00:00:10 00:00:00 00:00:00 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 02:06:16 00:01:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 02:38:14 00:03:09 00:00:00 00:00:00 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 03:25:11 00:03:03 00:00:00 00:00:00 Total Time for Departure Noise Events 0:55:33 00:00:04 - 20 - Report Generated: 11116/2009 14:52 Arrival Related Noise Events October 2009 Report Generated: 11/16/200914:52 -21 - ---Kr-nval Arrival Arrival Arrival Events >= Events >.,= Events >= Events >= RMT ID city -- Address 65dIB 80dB 90dl3 100dB 11616 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. 15 0 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 133 3 0 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 2144 457 6 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St* 232 63 ------0 0 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 2275 1701 54 6— Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 457 28 0 0 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 138 2 0 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 1058 4 0 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 933 319 7 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 945 753 26 0 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 28 4 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 7 1 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 12 0 0 0 14 —Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 2632 19 0 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 19 3 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 2865 456 5 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 19 1 0 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 1095 41 0 0 —7 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St* 193 --7 0 0 — 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave.--- 0 0 -- 0 21— Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th §t. - 12 1 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 2014 3 0 0 23 ---Mendota Heights End of Kerindon Ave. 84 ---2-54-7 1 :0 —0 0 —0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. — 2-3 25 -- Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 161 0 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 72 6 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 48 0 0 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 1432 67 0 0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S. 86 0 0 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 3347 12 0 0 131 —Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 12 0 0 0 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 2 0 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 16 0 0 089 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park ---- 0 0 0 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 5492 24 0 0 .35 36 AppleValley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 6603 32 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 34 0 0 0 -- 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 15 0 0 0---- 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 0 0 0 0 Total Arrival Noise Events 38874 4046 98 0 Report Generated: 11/16/200914:52 -21 - Departure Related Noise Events October 2009 RMT ID City Address Departure Events >= 65dIB Departure Events >= 80dB Departure Events>= 90db Departure Events >= 100dB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 793 18 0 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 1008 33 1 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 2218 129 8 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 2464 176 7 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 5848 1248 300 0 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 4808 637 59 1 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 3473 439 20 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 2075 136 0 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 297 23 2 0 10 St. PaLul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 2121 424 103 0 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 860 98 16 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 889 160 32 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 1530 23 0 0 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 2661 216 4 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 1543 54 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 2703 412 34 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 84 12 5 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 1525 158 11 1 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 1041 74 1 0 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 150 5 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 795 9 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 644 14 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave, 2311 74 4 0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 1961 95 0 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 1267 4 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 1626 54 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 2252 178 1 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 4345 300 7 0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 1414 63 0 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 1553 255 41 0 31 Bloominqton 9501 12th Ave. S. 238 10 2 0 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 116 6 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 125 1 0 0 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 63 1 0 0 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 299 18 0 0 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 112 4 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 378 21 0 0 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 448 34 0 0 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 597 33 0 0 Total Departure Noise Events 58635 5649 658 2 - 22 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#1) Ypryp-q Ax/p- & 41 c;t St-- MinneaDOHS Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/11/200914:03 NWA9804 B742 D 30L 87.7 10/16/2009 8:35 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 85.1 10/01/2009 9:40 NWAI 696 DC9Q A 12R - 85 10/08/2009 8:22 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 84.2 10/01/200910:29 NWAI 589 DC9Q A 12R 83.7 10/13/200912:21 CPZ5670 E170 D 30L 83.3 10/10/200914:02 AAL1827 MD80 D 30L 83 10/29/2009 20:05 NWA1 537 DC9Q A 12R 83 10/26/200916:22 NWA1 39 DC9Q D 30L 82.4 10/11/200915:38 NWA1 530 DC9Q D 30L 82.3 (RMT Site#2) Frpmnnt A\/P & 43rd St.. MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/11/200915:57 NWA1 9 B744 D 30L 92.7 10108/2009 8:21 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 87.6 10/13/2009 8:31 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 87.4 10/10/200915:12 NWA1 9 8744 D 30L 85.2 10/30/2009 20:00 NWA56W DC9Q D 30R 84.9 10/11/200914:03 NWA9804 8742 D 30L 84.8 10/03/200912:22 NWA1 031 DC9Q D 04 84 10/21/200910:14 NWAI 519 DC9Q D 04 83.6 10/09/200915:56 NWAI 470 DC9Q D 30L 83.4 10/15/2009 20:31 NWA46 A330. D 30L 82.7 (KM i 6ite4j) Wncf IZIMIA/r-inri qt A Rplmnnt AvP - MinneaDOHS Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/11/200914:03 NWA9804 8742 D 30L 96 10/10/200915:11 NWA1 9 B744 D 30L 93.8 10/11/200915:57 NWAI 9 8744 D 30L 93.3 10/16/2009 8:35 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 93.2 10/01/2009 20:54 NWA1 534 DC9Q A 12R 93.2 10/08/2009 6--21 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 92.3 10/05/2009 22:56 NWA1 459 DC9Q A 12R 91.8 10/04/200917:26 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 91.2 10/30/2009 8:08 CC1706 B72Q A 12R 91.1 10/15/2009 8:07 CC1706 B72Q A 12R 91 Report Generated: 11/1.6/2009 14:52 - 23 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#4) Park Ave. & 48th St.. MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft'Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/23/200917:04 NWA1 470 DC9Q D 30L 94.4 10/15/2009 21:36 NWA981 0 B742 D 30L 93.6 10/17/200913:35 NWA9817 B742 D 30L 93.4 10/12/200916:25 NWA1 9 8744 D 30L 93.1 10/16/200911:56 NWA1450 DC9Q D 30L 91.4 10/0512009 20:22 NWA404 DC9Q D 30L 91.2 10/31/200916:02 NWA1456 DC9Q D 30R 90.4 10/26/2009 20:18 NWA404 DC9Q D 30L 89 10/04/200915:14 NWA1 9 B744 D 30L 88.6 10/08/200910:28 FLG4247 CRJ D 30L 88.5 (RMT Site#5) 12th Ave. & 58th St., MinneaDolis Date/Time. Flight Number Aircraft Type. Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/20/2009 8:28 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 99.7 10/11/200914:02 NWA9804 B742 D 30L 99.5 10/24/200913:15 NWA494 DC9Q D 30L 98.7 10/09/2009 9:26 NWA1488 DC9Q D 30L 98.6 10116/2009 9:53 NWA1 646 DC9Q D 30L 98.1 10/16/2009 9:26 NWA1 488 DC9Q D 30L 97.9 10/16/2009 8:34 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 97.8 10/04/200917:25 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 97.7 10/20/2009 7:35 NWA1 38 DC9Q D 30L 97.7 10/16/200915:58 NWA1492 DC9Q D 30L 97.4 (RMT Site#6) 25th Ave. & 57th St.. MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/31/2009 9:20 NWA1452 DC9Q D 30R 102.7 10/30/200919:59 NWA56W DC9Q D 30R 99.5 10/30/200917:56 DAU 640 MD80 D 30R 99.1 10/31/200916:01 NWA1 456 DC9Q D 30R 98.2 10/30/2009 20:15 NWA1 231 DC9Q D 30R 97.6 10/31/200913:12 NWA447 DC9Q D 30R 97.3 10/30/2009 21:48 NWA404 DC9Q D 30R 96.6 10/31/200917:34 NWA1 175 DC9Q D 30R 96.4 10/30/200918:22 NWA1 36 DC9Q D 30R 96.4 10/30/2009 22:17 NWA1460 DC9Q D 30R 96.1 - 24 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#7) \A/PnfNA/nrth A\/t- & 4th St.. Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/15/2009 23:14 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 95.4 10/22/2009 22:32 NWAI 42 DC9Q D 30L 93.9 10/19/2009 22:27 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 93.4 10/08/200911:45 NWA452 DC9Q D 30L 92.7 10/09/200913:07 DAU 627 MD80 D 30L 92.6 10/09/200913:12 NWA494 DC9Q D 30L 92.4 10/05/200919:37 NWA1 537 DC9Q D 30L 92.1 10/31/200911:59 NWA9813 8742 D 30L 92 10/04/200911:47 NWA452 DC9Q D 30L 91.8 10/08/2009 9:15 DAL1567 MD80 D 30L 91.1 (RMT Site#8) I nnnfPlInNA/ Ave_ & 43rd St.. MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/04/200917:22 AAL673 MD80 D 30L 88.4 10/08/200916:16 AAL676 MD80 D 30L 88 10/13/2009 8:17 AAL2317 MD80 D 30L 87.6 10/31/200910:56 NWA1448 DC9Q D 30R 86.8 10/23/2009 8:44 NWA1452 DC9Q D 30L 86.7 10/21/200911:18 AAL835 MD80 D 04 86.6 10/11/200917:19 AAL673 MD80 D 30L 86.5 10/20/2009 9:26 NWA1 452 DC9Q D 30L 86.3 10/08/200919:50 AAL429 MD80 D 30L 86.2 10/02/2009 8:24 CC1706 B72Q D 04 86.1 (Kivi i bitegy) .qqrAtnnP Rt & H;;rffnr(i Ave- St. Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway. Lmax(dB) 10/30/200917:14 NWA417 DC9Q A 22 98.2 10/27/2009 7:20 DAL1726 MD80 A 22 94.6 10/14/200915:37 NWA1 9 8744 D 04 93.2 10/30/200917:05 NWA1 464 DC9Q A 22 92.6 10/27/200910:09 DAL1744 MD80 A 22 92.4 10/30/200915:30 NWA1 39 DC9Q A 22 91.8 10/30/200911:17 DAL1744 MD80 A 22 91.1 10/06/200915:28 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 90.9 10/07/2009 7:54 EIA1460 8742 A 22 90.1 10/30/200911:24 NWA320 B744 A 22 89.9 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -25- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#1 b) Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St., St. Paul Dpte/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmaj((dB) 10/06/2009 15:56 NWA1 530 DC9Q D 04 99.9 10/06/200915:28 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 99.2 10/19/200915:16 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 99.1 10/29/200914:29 NWA321 B744 D 04 99.1 10/08/200916:41 NWA1 9 8744 D 04 98.9 10/25/200914:06 NWA321 B744 D 04 98.4 10/21/200915:09 NWA1 9 8744 D 04 97.8 10/03/200915:35 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 97.5 10/14/200915:37 NWA19 8744 D 04 97.5 10/23/200919:35 NWA1496 DC9Q D 04 97.3 (RMT Site#1 1) Finn St. & Scheffer Ave., St. Paul Date/Time" Flight Number. Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax'(dB) 10/25/200915:27 NWA1 39N DC9Q D 04 96.2 10/02/200915:58 NWA1 9 8744 D 04 96 10/22/200915:23 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 95.7 10/13/200915:30 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 94.3 10/25/2009 21:35 NWA1 231 DC9Q D 04 93.3 10/26/2009 7:38 NWA1 523 DC9Q D 04 92.7 10/25/200914:07 NWA321 B744 D 04 92.4 10/04/2009 7:24 AAL1605 MD80 D 04 92.4 10/29/200914:30 NWA321 B744 D 04 91.9 10/03/200915:36 NWA1 9 B744 D 04 91.4 (RMT Site#1 2) Alton St. & Rockwood Ave., St. Paul Datd/Time.. Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/21/2009 9:05 NWA1452 DC9Q D 04 96.4 10/25/200916:10 NWAI 32 DC9Q D 04 96.2 10/06/200911:52 NWA1 450 DC9Q D 04 94.9 10/02/200911:44 NWA1 450 DC9Q D 04 94.1 10/06/200916:14 NWA1 050 DC9Q D 04 93.9 10/25/200913:14 NWA494 DC9Q D 04 93.7 10/23/2009 22:25 NWA1 42 DC9Q D 04 92.8 10/26/2009 7:30 NWA1 080 DC9Q D 04 92.7 10/25/200920:15 NWA404 DC9Q D 04 92.7 10/23/2009 23:01 NWA1460 DC9Q D 04 92.2 - 26 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#1 3) Cepa i+ke3ncf nnr4 rif KAr)hirnn (r)iirt NAPndntq Heiahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/21/2009 20:24 FDX1 293 B72Q D 04 83.9 10/23/200910:26 DAU 617 MD80 D 04 83.7 10/18/200919:47 AAL429 MD80 D 12R 83.1 10/18/2009 8:50 NWAI 452 DC9Q D 12R 82.9 10/27/200915:30 DAU 563 MD80 D 12R 82.3 10/13/200910:31 DALI 617 MD80 D 04 82 10/02/200919:53 DAU 725 MD80 D 04 82 10/21/200916:32 AAL676 MD80 D 04 81.9 10/06/200915:42 DAL1563 MD80 D 04 81.8 10/21/2009 7:54 DAL361 MD80 D 04 81.2 (RMT Site#14) 1 Qt Of A KAr.KPP St - Fnaan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/19/2009 5:38 DAU 073 MD80 D 12R 91.9 10/18/2009 9:20 DAL1567 MD80 D 12R 91.1 10/30/2009 7:21 NWA1 38 DC9Q D 12R 90.9 10/07/200917:08 DALI 640 MD80 D 12R 90 10/12/2009 5:52 DAU 073 MD80 D 12R 89.8 10/05/2009 6:41 DAL1 747 MD80 D 12R 89.6 10/07/200911:28 DAL1565 MD80 D 12R 89.1 10/18/200912:11 NWA9901 DC9Q D 12R 88.9 15:43 NWA1470 DC9Q D 12R 88.9 10/21/200915:49 DAL1617 MD80 D 12R 88.7 �Kivi i z:)iieTF 1 z)) Qf R. I nvinrifnn Ax/P NApnrintq Ht-iahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/21/200918:05 AAL673 MD80 D 04 85.6 10/02/200913:13 DAL1627 MD80 D 04 85.4 10/23/2009 22:23 CC1705 B72Q D 04 85.2 10/13/200910:30 DAU 617 MD80 D 04 85.1 10/23/2009 22:50 AAL429 MD80 D 04 84.7 10/21/2009 23:02 CC1705 B72Q D 04 84.7 10/21/200916:32 AAL676 MD80 D 04 84.4 10/04/2009 9:24 AAL9676 MD80 A 22 83.8 10/02/2009 8:37 AAL2317 MD80 D 04 83.7 10/21/200915:49 NWAI 492 DC9Q D 04 83.7 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -27- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#1 6) Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane. Eaaan DatelTime Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/17/2009 6:02 UPS496 8757 A 30L 96.4 10/17/200911:23 NWA581 8757 A 30L 96 10/05/200911:52 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 95.5 10/05/2009 7:17 NWA1 021 DC9Q D 12R 94.8 10/07/2009 4:22 UPS558 B757 A 30L 94.3 10/19/2009 7:12 NWA1 021 DC9Q D 12R 94.2 10/19/2009 20:45 UPS495 B757 A 30L 94.2 10/07/2009 8:08 CC1706 B72Q D 12R 94 10/07/2009 8:59 NWA1 452 DC9Q D 12R 93.8 10/23/2009 4:12 UPS556 B757 A 30L 93.7 (RMT Site#1 7) 84th St. & 4th Ave., Bloomington Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/31/200914:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 95.4 10/16/200916:36 NWA1 9 B744 D 22 93.6 10/30/200914:05 NWA321 8744 D 22 93.2 10/07/200916:40 NWA1 9 B744 D 22 91.6 10/05/200915:18 NWA1 9 B744 D 22 91.1 10/28/200915:56 NWA321 8744 D 22 87.7 10/30/200911:57 NWA1450 DC9Q D 22 87.6 10/24/200913:59 NWA321 B744 D 22 86.1 10/18/2009 20:23 CC1706 B72Q D 17 83.4 10/28/2009 7:53 BMJ64 BE65 D 12R 82.3 (RMT Site#1 8) 75th St. & 17th Ave.. Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Typo Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/28/200915:55 NWA321 8744 D 22 100.6 10/05/200915:17 NWA1 9 8744 D 22 98.3 10/30/200914:04 NWA321 B744 D 22 97.9 10/07/200916:40 NWA1 9 8744 D 22 96.8 10/30/200914:04 NWA494 DC9Q D 22 96.7 10/24/200913:59 NWA321 8744 D 22 96.5 10/30/200911:57 NWA1450 DC9Q D 22 96.2 10/31/200914:01 NWA321 8744 D 22 95.4 10/16/2009 16:35 NWA1 9 8744 D 22 94.7 10/30/200913:29 NWA452 DC9Q D 22 94.2 - 28 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#1 9) 1Rth AvP & 84th St-- Bloorninaton Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/30/200914:04 NWA494 DC9Q D 22 96.1 10/01/200915:52 NWA1 39N DC9Q D 17 89.8 10/28/200915:56 NWA321 B744 D 22 88.6 10/30/200913:29 NWA452 DC9Q D 22 88.2 10/01/200916:20 NWA1492 DC9Q D 17 88 10/31/200914:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 86.7 10/14/2009 6:59 BMJ66 BE80 D 17 86.6 10/30/200911:57 N A1450 DC9Q D 22 86.4 10/14/2009 6:58 BMJ62 BE65 D 17 85.5 10/16/200916:35 NWA1 9 B744 D 22 85.1 (RMT Site#20) 75th St- & 3rd Ave.. Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/24/200914:00 NWA321 B744 D 22 84.4 10/13/200913:15 UAL443 A319 D 30L 83 10/14/2009 6:59 BMJ62 BE65 D 17 82.5 10/27/2009 7:06 BMJ64 BE65 D 22 82 10/09/2009 22:22 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 80.2 10/30/200911:57 NWA1 450 DC9Q D 22 79.8 10131/2009 5:32 DAL1073 MD80 D 30L 79.7 10/27/2009 7:19 BMJ72 BE65 D Unknown 79.4 10/28/2009 7:51 BI BE80 D I 12R 78.5 10/28/200915:56 NWA321 B744 D 22 78.4 (RMT Site#21) Rnrh2r,q Ave. & 67th St.. Inver Grove Heiahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/23/200919:18 DAL1725 MD80 D 04 82.9 10/07/200915:37 NWA1 530 DC9Q D 12R 82.6 10/07/200913:55 NWA460 DC9Q D 12R 82.2 10/21/2009 9:30 NWA1 488 DC9Q D 04 80.7 10/06/200919:23 DAL1 725 MD80 D 04 80.6 10/06/200916:16 NWA1 050 DC9Q D 04 80.5 10/30/2009 8:52 NWA1 452 DC9Q D 12R 80.4 10/04/2009 7:26 NWA1 080 DC9Q A 22 80.4 10/07/200916:10 NWA1492 DC9Q D 12R 80.3 10/30/2009 5:34 DAL1 073 MD80 D 12R 80.2 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -29- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009, (RMT Site#22) Anne Marie Trail, Inver Grove Heiahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/18/200917:28 NWA1 25 A320 D 12R 87.9 10/08/200911:37 NWA622 8757 A 30L 84.4 10/07/2009 8:09 CC1706 B72Q D 12R 83.3 10/18/200914:49 NWA1 025 DC9Q D 12R 82.9 10/07/200910:38 DAU 617 MD80 D 12R 82.6 10/07/200915:42 NWA1 470 DC9Q D 12R 82.3 10/18/2009 11:48 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 82.2 10/18/2009 9:17 NWA1488 DC9Q D 12R 82 10/18/200910:34 DAL1617 MD80 D 12R 81.9 10/15/200913:33 NWAI 16 B757 D 12R 81.8 (RMT Site#23) End of Kenndon Ave., Mendota Heiahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/07/200913:02 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 93.4 10/23/2009 22:23 CC1705 B72Q D 04 92.1 10/24/200919:55 NWAI 701 DC9Q D 12R 90.7 10/21/2009 23:02 CC1705 B72Q D 04 90.3 10/07/200915:36 NWA1 530 DC9Q D 12R 89.1 10/02/2009 22:55 CC1705 B72Q D 04 88.4 10/28/2009 22:03 NWA1460 DC9Q D 12R 87.5 10/18/200919:46 AAL429 MD80 D 12R 87 10/22/2009 8:30 AAL2317 MD80 D 04 86.5 10/18/2009 20:15 NWA404 DC9Q D 12R 86.3 (HM I Site#24) Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.. Eaoan DatelTirne Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/07/2009 8:09 CC1706 B72Q D 12R 86.4 10/18/200916:16 DAL1640 MD80 D 12R 86.4 10/18/2009 9:21 DAU 567 MD80 D 12R 86.4 10/18/200913:13 DAU 627 MD80 D 12R 86.4 10/27/200913:14 DAL1627 MD80 D 12R 86.1 10/18/200914:38 DAL1563 MD80 D 12R 85.6 10/18/200910:34 DAU 617 MD80 D 12R 85.3 10/19/2009 5:38 D L1073 MD80 D 12R 85.2 10/18/200911:32 DAL1565 MD80 D 12R 84.8 10/12/2009 5:52 DAU 073 MD80 D 12R 84.8 - 30 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#25) l\AnnnqhinP Park 1291 Jurdv Rd.. Eaaan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/27/200914:01 NWA321 B744 D 12R 82.3 10/18/2009 8:53 AAL675 MD80 D 12R 81.3 10/15/200918:57 DAL1640 MD80 D 12R 81.3 10/14/2009 22:46 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 80 10/18/200911:22 AAL835 MD80 D 12R 79.9 10/14/2009 7:26 AAL1605 MD80 D 12R 79.5 10/05/2009 9:03 AAL675 MD80 D 12R 79.2 10/05/200913:36 NWA1 529 DC9Q D 12R 79.1 10/14/2009 20:04 AAL429 MD80 D 12R 78.9 10/25/200910:09 NWA1 448 DC9Q D 12R 78.6 (RMT Site#26) R7qR Arkqn.qq.q AvP- W.. Inver Grove Heiahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival./ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/07/200913:18 NWA447 DC9Q D 12R 86.3 10/27/200915:30 DAL1563 MD80 D 12R 84.2 10/08/200916:34 AAL665 MD80 A 30L 83.8 10/27/200911:42 DAL1565 MD80 D 12R 83.3 10/07/200917:08 DAL1640 MD80 D 12R 83.2 10/15/200915:21 NWA1 9 B744 D 12R 83.2 10/14/200917:23 DAL1640 MD80 D 12R 83.1 10/14/200910:22 NWA1448 DC9Q D 12R 83.1 10/14/200912:08 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 83.1 10/07/200916:35 NWA1 050 DC9Q D 12R 82,9 (Kivi i bae4z t) AnthnnN/.qr.hnnl 5757 Irvina Ave- S.. MinneaDOHS Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type. Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/23/2009 8:39 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 94.5 10/24/200910:33 DAU 617 MD80 D 30L 89,2 10/17/2009 5:41 DAL1073 MD80 D 30L 88.4 10/12/200917:40 DAL1640 MD80 D 30L 88.3 10/31/2009 9:14 DAU 567 MD80 D 30R 88.2 10/09/200910:30 DAL1617 MD80 D 30L 87.7 10/07/200919:11 DAL1725 MD80 D 30L 87.7 10/24/2009 6:00 DAL1073 MD80 D 30L 87.6 10/16/2009 \L675 MD80 D 30L 87.5 10/16/2009 \L835 MD80 D 30L 87.5 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 -31 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#28) 6645 16th Ave. S., Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Ru n -way Lmax(dB) 10/04/200917:40 NWA1 36 DC9Q D 30L 95.8 10/16/2009 22:42 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 93.7 10/06/2009 20:19 NWAI 527 DC9Q' D 30L 93.1 10/10/200911:40 NWA452 DC9Q D 30L 92.6 10/04/200910:27 NWA696W DC9Q D 30L 91.4 10/04/2009 22:23 NWAI 42 DC9Q D 30L 90.4 10/03/200915:50 NWAI 32 DC9Q D 30L 90.4 10/06/2009 22:46 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 89.9 10/16/200915:17 NWA9905 DC9Q D 30L 89.7 10/10/200910:36 NWAI 519 DC9Q D 30L 88.9 (RMT Site#29) Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S., MinneaDOliS Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/02/2009 7:57 NWA1 523 DC9Q D 04 89.4 10/20/200913:48 AAL1827 MD80 D 04 89.2 10/21/200911:17 AAL835 MD80 D 04 88.9 10/26/2009 7:30 NWAI 021 DC9Q D 04 87.3 10/03/2009 9:03 AAL675 MD80 D 04 86.5 10/23/200911:30 AAL835 MD80 D 04 86.3 10/21/200915:00 AAL1 827 MD80 D 04 86.3 10/21/200912:06 DOJ061 MD80 D 04 86.2 10/06/200912:24 AAL835 MD80 D 04 86 10/23/200914:47 AAL1 827 MD80 D 04 85.7 (RMT Site#30) 8715 River Ridae Rd.. Bloorninaton Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/15/200912:32 NWA452 DC9Q D 17 96.6 10/14/2009 8:43 CC1706 B72Q D 17 96.4 10/15/200910:20 NWA1448 DC9Q D 17 94.9 10/15/200914:13 NWA1 529 DC9Q D 17 93.7 10/29/2009 23:13 CC1705 B72Q D 17 93.7 10/15/2009 7:51 NWA1 523 DC9Q D 17 93.4 10/29/200913:51 NWA447N DC9Q D 17 93.2 10/27/2009 22:35 CC1705 B72Q D 17 92.9 10/01/2009 20:49 NWA1 537 DC9Q D 17 92.7 10/15/200917:40 NWA1492 DC9Q D 17 92.6 - 32 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#31) c).,-)nl I ?th Ave- S.. Bloominaton Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/. Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/28/200915:56 NWA321 B744 D 22 91.5 10/30/2009 9:22 CC1706 B72Q D 17 90.1 10/18/2009 20:23 CC1706 B72Q D 17 88.8 10/27/2009 8:57 CC1706 B72Q D 17 87.7 10/30/200911:58 NWA1 450 DC9Q D 22 83.3 10/30/2009 9:17 AAL1 605 MD80 D 17 81.9 10/01/200912:09 AAL835 MD80 D 17 81.6 10/01/200915:52 NWA1 39N DC9Q D 17 81.4 10/30/200913:29 NWA452 DC9Q D 22 1 81.4 10/30/200915:42 AAL1827 MD80 D 17 1 . — 80.2 (RMT Site#32) 1 m?.r) Pleasant Ave. S.. Bloorninaton Date/Time Flight.Number Aircraft Type., Arrival/ Departure Runway, Lmax(dB) 10/14/2009 8:44 CC1706 B72Q D 17 85.3 10/30/2009 9:22 CC1706 B72Q D 17 84.4 10/27/2009 8:58 CC1706 B72Q D 17 84 10/01/2009 9:54 NWAI 646 DC9Q D 17 82.3 10/30/200915:42 AAL1827 MD80 D 17 81.8 10/30/2009 9:17 AAL1 605 MD80 D 17 81.2 10/15/2009 9:07 NSH610 GLF3 D 17 76.6 10/15/2009 7:54 SWA3545 8733 D 17 76.2 10/01/200910:00 NWA561 A320 D 17 75.4 10/30/2009 4:09 UPS556 8757 A 12-R 74.9 kNivi i bite466) Klnrth Ri\/Pr Hill.-, Park_ Burnsville Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/01/200910:47 DAL1 617 MD80 D 17 811.3 10/29/200916:37 AAL1827 MD80 D 17 79.4 10/09/2009 8:27 NWA1 488 DC9Q A 35 79 10/28/200915:57 NWA321 B744 D 22 78.8 10/15/2009 8:04 AAL2317 MD80 D 17 78.4 10/12/2009 8:02 NWA1 021 DC9Q D 17 78.3 10/17/200919:37 NWA1 537 DC9Q D 17- 77.4 10/14/2009 9:24 NOW5044 C30J D 12R 77.1 10/21/2009 21:16 SCX504 B738 A 35 77 10/24/200919:34 NWA1 537 DC9Q D 17 77 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 33 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 (RMT Site#34) Red Oak Park. Burnsville Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/15/200910:15 NWA1 519 DC9Q D 17 80.3 10/16/2009 8:04 AAL2317 MD80 D 17 79.3 10/16/2009 6:13 AAL570 MD80 D 17 78 10/13/2009 5:53 DAU 073 MD80 D 17 77.9 10/08/2009 6:12 AAL570 MD80 D 17 77.8 10/16/2009 6:25 DAL1073 MD80 D 17 77.7 10/13/2009 6:16 AAL570 MD80 D 17 77.7 10/27/200914:03 NWA321 B744 D 12R 77 10/22/2009 21:28 CC1705 B72Q A 35 76.4 10/21/2009 21:15 SCX504 B738 A 35 75.5 (RMT Site#35) 2100 Garnet Ln.. Eaaan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/15/200916:35 DAL1563 MD80 D 17 88.7 10/30/2009 9:24 DALI 567 MD80 D 17 85.6 10/23/200917:14 NWA448 DC9Q A 35 83.9 10/08/2009 6:11 AAL570 MD80 D 17 83.1 10/28/200915:33 AAL1 827 MD80 D 17 82.8 10/30/200913:30 NWA452 DC9Q D 22 82.7 10112/2009 9:13 NWA1452 DC9Q D 17 82.7 10/13/2009 5:53 DAU 073 MD80 D 17 82.4 10/25/200913:31 NWA1 529 DC9Q A 35 82.4 10/15/200912:33 NWA452 DC9Q D 17 82.3 (RM I 6ite#36) Briar Oaks & Scout Pond. ADDle Vallev Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/21/2009 8:03 NWA449 A320 A 35 85.4 10/22/2009 7:35 CC1706 B72Q A 35 84.9 10/06/200916:26 NWA1 464 DC9Q A 35 84 10/25/200918:14 CC1706 B72Q A 35 83.8 10/06/200919:24 NWA141 DC9Q A 35 83.6 10/06/200919:11 UPS2558 MD11 A 35 82.9 10/30/2009 21:19 NWA1 509 DC9Q A 35 82.4 10/30/2009 21:28 CC1705 B72Q A 35 82.1 10/06/2009 20:52 NWA458 DC9Q A 35 82.1 10/23/2009 20:06 NWAI 64 B757 A 35 81.9 - 34 - Report Generated: 1 1/1 6/2009 14:52 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP October 2009 I (RMT Site#37) A'lQq \A1nnrinntP I n- N-- Fagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/15/200916:35 DAL1 563 MD80 D 17 85.7 10/28/200911:58 NWA1 031 DC9Q D 17 85.1 10/01/200915:53 NWA1 39N DC9Q D 17 84.7 10/01/200919:53 NWA1 36 DC9Q D 17 84.6 10/12/200911:29 DAL1617 MD80 D 17 84.4 10/28/200915:57 NWA321 B744 D 22 83.4 10/12/2009 7:16 DAL1 747 MD80 D 17 83.4 10/30/2009 9:24 DAL1567 MD80 D 17 82.4 10/30/200910:30 NWA1 34 DC9Q D 17 81.9 10/12/2009 9:14 NWA1452 j DC9Q D 17 81.9 (RMT Site#38) 'IQ'W Ti irni inisp Cir. - Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/12/26-09 8-11 -AWE1848 A319 D 17 87.9- 10/12/2009 8:25 DAL361 MD80 D 17 86.4 10/05/2009 22:07 CC1705 B72Q D 17 85.7 10/27/2009 22:36 CC1705 B72Q D 17 85.5 10/12/200910:22 DAL1567 MD80 D 17 85.5 10/12/200912:49 b -A -L 15 6 5 MD80 D 17 85.2 10/30/200916:11 DAL1 563 MD80 D 17 85.1 10/25/2009 9:52 DAL1567 MD80 D 17 84.7 10/12/200911:28 DAL1567 MD80 D 17 84.1 10/30/200911:43 -DAL1617 AAL835 MD80 D_--17 17 83.7 (RMT Site#39) qA77 Of (hArlp--, PI FqnAn DatelTime Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/, Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 10/30/200912:24 DAL1565 MD80 D 17 88.8 10/26/2009 22:28 CC1705 B72Q D 17 88.7 10/30/2009 8:41 DAL361 MD80 D 17 85.4 10/25/2009 8:58 NWA1452 DC9Q b 17 85 10/30/200912:03 NWA1 180 DC9Q D 17 84.8 10/30/200911:29 DAL1617 MD80 D 17 84.5 10/01/2009 7:45 DAL361 MD80 D 17 84.2 10/30/200916:06 NWA1 050 DC9Q D 17 .--83.7 10/01/2009 9:16 DAL1567 MD80 D 17 83.6 10/15/2009 8:53 CC1706 B72Q D 17 83.4 October 2009 Remote Monitoring Tower Top Ten Summary The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for October 2009 were comprised of 89.5% departure operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the DC9Q with 36.2% of the highest Lmax events. October 2009 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 October 2009. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 35 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL October 2009 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 I #15r 10/01/2009 61.7 48.6 69.1 49.7 71.7 50.2 53.6 35.8 47.1 54.7 44.2 NA 51.7 60 50.8 10/02/2009 57.4 50.7 66.3 52.4 69.2 49.7 44.6 56.5 53.5 68.1 60.7 64.1 56.4 57.6 59 10/03/2009 50.5 52.7 58.3 58.1 69 63.5 60.5 59.1 50.6 63 54.2 60.7 53.8 59 54 10/04/2009 52.9 53.6 60 59.8 69.7 64.2 64.5 59.3 45.5 59.3 52.5 59.4 49.4 59 49.9 10/05/2009 55.1 45.5 63.4 53.6 67.3 57.5 58.5 52 60.2 62.6 40.5 26.4 55.9 65.1 54.1 10/06/2009 57.9 54 65.5 59 70 63.5 61.3 57.9 55.1 67.4 58.2 62.2 55.3 59.2 55.4 10/07/2009 47.1 50.1 56.6 61.1 68.2 62.2 63.2 56.4 60.4 62.4 40 NA 54.5 65.1 52.2 10/08/2009 52.7 53.2 60.1 60.6 70 66.4 65.3 59.5 40.2 55.9 47.2 39.8 NA 59.4 36.1 10/09/2009 53.1 154.4 60.4 60.2 71.4 63.3 65.3 57.9 34.3 NA NA 30 30.8 57.3 NA 10/10/2009 49.8 52.4 58.7 58.1 1 68 62.7 62.9 55.1 42.1 30.4 38 NA NA 58.1 NA 10/11/2009 55.9 55.7 62.5 59.9 70.6 62.5 61.6 57.8 37.6 45.7 42.5 48.1 38.6 56.3 NA 10/12/2009 56.6 52.8 64.5 58.7 71 61.4 62.3 54.9 NA NA NA 32.4 50.3 61.6 47 10/13/2009 55.8 52.7 61.9 56.4 68.2 61.2 60.4 57.5 51.9 63.6 58.4 54.3 50.9 59.3 49.4 10/14/2009 57.5 43.4 63.8 39.7 67.1 50.4 45.9 53.1 60.8 63 49.7 41.3 57.2 65.3 56.9 16115/2009 59.7 53.5 67.8 63.2 74 63.3 67.6 58.5 NA 45.4 46.5 36.8 51.3 60.9 52.8 10/16/2009 55 54.6 62.1 60.8 72.7 64.6 65.5 59 NA NA 25.7 NA NA 59.8 34.8 10/17/2009 52.8 49.6 60.6 57.3 68.8 62.5 62 58 38.2 54 50.1 NA 51.9 58.9 49.2 10/18/2009 56.3 42.8 61.4 43.3 64.9 52.7 NA 54.7 61.6 64.1 33.1 NA 57 64 56.4 10/19/2009 54.4 52.1 61.7 59.2 70.5 63.4 66.2 56.4 51.4 58.4 45.2 33.6 47.3 62.5 43 10/20/2009 58.3 52.3 64.2 59.3 71.8 59 60.6 57 55.8 66.1 58.9 59.5 55 57.8 58.1 10/21/2009 52.5 50.5 61.61 54 65.3 52.9 51.5 57.6 55.4 67 58.7 62 57.1 59.9 61.1 10/22/2009 NA NA 43 NA 48.9 61.1 '65.2 58 49.4 64 57.1 61.9 53.2 48.1 55.5 10/23/2009 47.2 52.4 56.3 59.8 67.7 61 62.3 60.3 53.6 69.1 59.3 66.9 57.2 59.3 59.9 10/24/2009 55.3 52.1 61.5 56.3 1 69.5 1 62.4 62.9 55.41 NA NA NA 128.1 50.9 60.5 49.5 10/25/2009 53 48.8 60.5 51.8 66.8 55.7 55.7 53.1 53.9 68.5 60.6 64.4 49.6 56.8 49.4 10/26/2009 52.8 52 59.8 58 169.5 61.3 61.7 55.8 48.9 64.1 54.8 58.6 49.8 59.4 50.4 10/27/2009 56.9 45.4 63.9 51.3 66.4 59.4 139.1 154.1 61.3 62.5 38.6 NA 57.7 64.3 58.1 10/28/2009 56.9 46.4 64.1 52.3 67.7 56.2 44.1 55 56.3 57.4 NA 43.4 56 64.4 55.5 10/29%2009 61.6 44.7 69.1 48.6 72.2 57 147.7 52.6 46.9 57 49 NA 53.2 60.2 51.5 10/30/2009 58.3 52.1 66.3 57 70.7 71.2 61.6 56.9 64.5 65.8148.21 NA 51.81 61 149.21 10/31/2009 51.3 51.5 59.2 57.6 67 70.3 64 55.8 NA NA NA NA 47.4 60.6 48.9 Mo.DNL 56.1 51.6 63.5 57.8 69.6 63.2 62.1 56.9 55.8 63.1 54 57.9 53.4 61.1 54.2 - 36 - Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL October 2009 Remote Monitoring Towers Date. #16, #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #26 #26 #27 #28 #29 10/01/2009 62.2 34.2 64.3 61.1 31.4 49.7 48.7 56.3 55.8 54.2 55.3 49.8 65.4 32.9 10/02/2009 57.4 42 60.7 50.8 36.7 51.1 51.9 60.4 56.2 46.7 54.6 42.8 58.9 58.1 10/03/2009 65.5 30.4 49.9 48.4 37.3 47.5 58 50.4 58.8 43.8 53 58 61.5 53,9 10/04/2009 64.7 43.3 48.3 44.1 46 50.2 56.5 46 58.5 35.9 46.9 58 64.1 53.7 10/05/2009 68.3 51.1 61.7 56.8 41.4 53.4 56.9 60.7 61.6 56.1 59.4 55.4 58.4 41.3 10/06/2009 62.8 31.1 54.7 46 49 52.5 53,9 57.6 57.1 48 56 53.2 63.3 56.7 10/0712009 69.2 55.1 58.6 55.7 52.7 53.7 59.2 61.7 62.8 57.1 57.7 60.2 60.1 51.2 10/0812009 65.4 53.8 55.6 55.1 53.7 NA 57.6 47.7 58.9 32.3 44.2 59.-1 62.6 54.9 10/09/2009 63.2 43.2 50.7 39.6 52.6'i 37.9 54.2 39 56.9 42.1 37.7 60.7 62.5 51.1 10/10/2009 63.5 NA 42.2 NA 44 25.5 55.8 41.6 57.4 31.6 34.7 57.3 60.4 51 10/11/2009 61.2 34.1 46.7 41.5 28.2 33.7 52.6 26.7 j 54.8 36.5 45.8 58.3 58.8 50.1 10/12/2009 63.91 NA 55.3 53.5 38.8 147.6 153.8 54.8 58.4 49.3 55.2 59.5 160.1 146.6 10/13/2009 63.7 50.5 58.5 55.7 45 45.5 56 53.5 58 46.9 52.2 56.3 62.5 55.4 10/14/2009 69 47.3 57.4 58.3 53.6 53.3 57.7 62.4 61 58.3 59,8 43 59.5 37.7 10/15/2009 64.5 33.4 60 57.4 32.1 49.1 57.3 57.7 58.9 55.4 56.2 61 65.4 45.5 10/16/2009 65.6 53.5 55.8 53.1 53 NA 58.5 37.3 60.1 NA 41 62.3 66.1 49.9 10/17/2009 66.7 NA 48.9 44.9 37.1 53.7 55.9 56.2 57.7 48.4 54 59.4 59.5 55.1 10/18/2009 64.7 47.9 54 47.7 43.7 52.8 55.9 61.3 60.7 55.9 57.9 NA 54.7 41.8 10/19/2009 64.7 41.5 53.8 48.6 45.6 42.7 55.4 53.3 58.9 50.5 53.6 57.8 61.2 49.5 10/20/2009 62 31.5 53.4 40.4 31.7 50.6 54.2 60 56 53.2 56.1 57.7 61.8 57 10/21/2009 62.1 29.2 58.2 49,5 37.6 50.5 54.4 62.1 57.8 52.3 58 50.1 54.1 58.7 10/22/2009 54.5 NA 56.1 43.2 NA 46.8 43 54.4 46.9 NA 51.7 45.4 38.8 54.6 10/23/2009 65.5 38 55.6 51.4 44.8 53.6 58 61.9 59.2 47.9 57 58.5 60.3 59.1 10/24/2009 64.7 47.1 55.1 47.6 45.2 51.3 55.7 56.4 58.8 49.4 55 60.2 59.5 52.5 10/25/2009 61.61 27 52.8 46.1 NA 47.9 49.2 49.3 54.7 38.6 49.3 51 54.3 55.2 10/26/2009 64 34.3 57.3 53.4 38 49.1 54.6 53.4 57.2 50.4 52.7 58.5 60.5 51.8 10/27/2009 65.2 43.9 57.8 52.9 45.4 52 54.9 62.7 60.8 56.6 59.2 37 59.5 46.4 10/28/2009 67.1 49.1 59.7 55.2 46.3 50.9 56.4 62.6 60.1 53.5 55.9 40.3 59.1 42.2 10/29/2009 62.6 39,2 62.8 59.2 37.1 51.4 51.2 58.4 55.8 53.5 54.3 44.4 64.9 45.9 10/30/2009 65.2 54.5 63.5 58.2 53.3 51.8 58.5 58.7 61 50.8 52.7 52.5 63.2 56.1 10/31/2009 64.9 53.7 53.4 46.3 50.8 47.4 57.4 57.3 59.4 46.4 52.6 57.2 58 54.1 Mo.DNL 64.9 47.9 57.9 53.9 47.7 50.2 55.9 58.2 58.8 51.9 55 57.1 61.5 53.6 Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 - 37 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL October 2009 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 10/01/2009 68.4 52.2 46.7 46.3 36.8 53.8 29.7 52.3 53 57.1 10/02/2009 60.5 33.7 NA NA 33.5 60.6 62.9 40 NA NA 10/03/2009 52.6 NA NA NA 32.1 55.9 57.9 31.3 27.2 NA 10/04/2009 52.5 42.6 47.5 45.8 43.5 56.1 58.3 NA NA NA 10/05/2009 62.6 40.3 34.8 36.8 39.1 50.8 52.6 52.91 57 49.31 10/06/2009 NA 39 38.2 NA 136.7 58.4 60.6 34.9] NA NA 10/07/2009 NA 45.3 NA 39.2 43.6 52.2 54.2 48.1 42.8 33.9 10/08/2009 53.6 34.3 44.5 43.7 51.7 58.8 59 45.4 40.4 NA 10/09/2009 54.3 NA 38.7 39 36.1 56.4 58.9 33.6 NA 37.2 10/10/2009 48.4 NA NA NA 24.5 53.7 56.4 32.6 NA NA 10/11/2009 47.5 43.8 34.3 NA 32.6 53 56.1 28.6 NA NA 10/12/2009 62.2 45.1 36.3 45.6 39.5 55.1 56.6 52.6 55.2 51.1 10/13/2009 63.3 45 45.4 51.2 52.7 57.4 58.4 52 57.5 51.2 10/14/2009 60.6 49.2 48.6 46.6 44.6 43.5 44.7 48.1 47.5 48.2 10/15/2009 66.4 49.2 42.4 48.1 44.6 57.7 59.1 52.5 54 55.3 10/16/2009 62.3 45.6 43.4 47.4 52.4 58.5 59.5 38.7 38.6 NA 10/17/2009 53.5 34 38.6 41.3 34.8 52.7 55.6 42.1 44.8 46.6 10/18/2009 53.4 48.6 NA 43.5 38.6 41.1 40.7 47.4 48.4 44.21 10/19/2009 53.6 33.3 38 NA 46.5 55.4 58.4 47.2 31.6 NA 10/20/2009 55.5 NA NA NA 39.4 56.6 60.5 35.31 32 NA 10/21/2009 58 NA NA 39.8 42.1 59.2 61.7 NA NA NA 10/22/2009 53 25.1 44.3 32.2 38.4 55.9 59.2 39.9 32.7 NA 10/23/2009 57.4 33.3 27.8 31.1 NA 59.3 62 NA 35.4 NA 10/24/2009 52.9 33.2 30.2 39.3 28.5 53.6 56 40.5 42.7 41.8 10/25/2009 57.6 NA NA 46.7 NA 57.8 58.7 44.1 48.3 48.3 10/26/2009 59.7 44.2 NA 39.5 45.3 56 57.7 52.3 53.1 59.5 10/27/2009 -10/28/2009 62.1 48.8 45.8 38.5 41.4 47.8 39.3 52.6 58.5 NA 60.9 51.5 33.5 41.4 30.2 49 44.2 49.7 50.3 53.2 10/29/2009 67.6 42.5 33.2 46.5 39.9 54.4 40.8 53.9 56.8 55.1 10/30/2009 62.3 54.5 51.7 48.8 35.1 56,9 58.2 49.3 52.6 57.4 10/31/2009 49.3 NA 46.4 NA 32.5 52.2 55.4 NA 26.8 NA Mo.DNL 60.7 45.7 42.7 43.6 44.1 56 57.9 48.1 50.9 ! 50.4 -38- Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:52 Noveember Noise versi t Committee (NOC) Technical visor's Report �f ��'slrrie r ciit�ss�^�" Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport, pi �r t + �.y� .)• , 7` } , �� .�� Vim.:.. iP e .�1 �; 3c. � �' p`^7. 1:.. �r a� 3t* a v � ';u:(t3�`. �. • sr � S4 �j rt d: �f �'.�LF, �a i � '' 4+ i,�.f � �� - .fr x. r y� i �:5'F�- h*tt�t+ t� p.- � 1. '�k"7, ��lf�r��{��ut�.�r.�,�i��, :�t @�4 �,�i✓<i- I Ar,it h j»1{ '�+•• t, s } If •�I ff + �f,`yA? i4'Ty ar� •»b u, ,*'per I +' t ` �) '�+��' ii' + V}h ( 4+� r .r i�� } kt r+ { l •x I��°�ti} r't`Y t f`r rP�ic.- 1 , ia. °fit 4 } "•ill, I } ' , ilr'' �- "�a.`* ( ;30. } d t `!^� t q ,�y;5�.�j,tt,lj}�y'"'II cF ��'}t j' fi� kki t�j I � ry'!m'�;.LY v 1 i'` �i�� t i"°' � 't� '� �,� r r,fl4b*+'e }• 1Y �- t+} '�C�� .� }�� I {�t'l�j ;"�Y'x�'ii�•ai i }� F _ ri .3�'�k ..Y',+µ-�'ti � + t' S� .+�'1 T'� "� y"'�t�l ti r�a ,'1�1 !�M1�, r �.'u! �+3t' t t.. et�+� i .a. .' @ Y'� d �' - ) t7 r S 1 �' y ...y •it 21. rya p -'T" f•�..aa,�� i� � �rk- !I�ni€5F + I> �; }�-0 ''rTru`ga�,�� 2} { I � (j �y '<t '4 �° ,��I �'t ' ;�J° �t ✓a �+ {''"``- '" k �'T¢-�'"��t + ,�4. ..+�5 � �'yr � I rte,, r + ,�jl'� � r' y-� Y'M i� �'�'ic% et ��44 �Q� ii'. '. �"+r.,d 'per' •� s ppL15 SgIN �-�`� �/C45T�;r7� T°�I'-?i j� 4e _ ,� x,..,,h :t , � ''ter .. r •,,:r �,} _ q $ I �GP+ t;JrP N •� I � � S e N �� }r m'hfRP �� ._ o � � o ,-., )��++f✓`v�14t l { �u.� �'`', rt r)+Ifl4jrl ! �, f2y��,� c :w t ��°G t � a,_ 9p is ° �V 1 C "i. ��r }i �t 4\f C 6 i 2 J `3 �t.i r.Jd�•. 'r' AIfl PpR ...�'�Y�'.; v. Table of Contents for November 2009 Complaint Summary Noise Complaint Map FAA 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 MSP Scheduled Nighttime Operators MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operators by Type MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operators Stage Mix Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoring Tower Site Locations Map Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier" Jet Arrival Related Noise Events — Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events Carrier Jet -Departure Related Noise Events MSP Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per RMT Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9-10 11 12 13-16 17 18 19 20 21 22-34 35-37 MSP Complaints by City November 2009 City Arrival Departure Other Number of Complaints Number of Complainants % of Total Complaints RICHFIELD 0 0 0 1 776 14 791 7 26.1% EAGAN 0 173 0 456 9 100 738 31 24.3% APPLE VALLEY 0 415 0 19 0 34 468 11 15.4% MENDOTA HEIGHTS 0 0 0 217 7 55 279 10 9.2% MINNEAPOLIS 1 49 1 74 26 .124 275 39 9.1% SAINT LOUIS PARK 0 177 0 1 2 8 188 7 6.2% SAINT PAUL 0 4 1 22 4 101 132 14 4.3% BURNSVILLE 4 0. 0 48 .' 8 0 60 8 2% CHANHASSEN 0 0 0 0 0 43 43 1 1.4% BLOOMINGTON 0 0 0 0 8 24 32 14 1.1% EDEN PRAIRIE 0 0 0 0 0 17 17 1 0.6% GOLDEN VALLEY 0 3 0 0 1 0 4 2 0.1'% EDINA 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 0.1% SOUTH SAINT PAUL 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0% FARMINGTON 0 .1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0% FRIDLEY 0 0 0 0 1 0 .: - 1 1 0% MINNETONKA 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0% Total 827 840 1368 3035 151. Nature of MSP Complaints Airport Complaint Total 3035 Early/Late 36 489 Engine Rim -up 3 24 Excessive Noise 840 2085 Frequency 32 1360 Ground Noise 1 31 Helicopter 0 0 Low Flying 19 1246 Structural Disturbance 6 308 Other 12 1.52 Total 1 6644 Note: Shaded Columns represent MSP complaints filed vin the Internet. f I - Sum of % Total of Complaints may not equal 100% due to rounding. "As of May 2005, the MSP Complaints by City report includes multiple .- complaint descriptors per individual complaint. Therefore, the number of complaint descriptors may be more than the number of reported complaints. Time of Day Airport Time Total 3035 0000-0559 5 38 0600-0659 13 83 0700-1159 197 492 1200-1559 231 275 1600-1959 234 752 2000-2159 108 364 2200-2259 56 149 2300-2359 8 30 Total 3035 Complaints by Airport Airport Total MSI' 3035 Airlake 2 Anoka 94 Crystal 0 Flying Cloud 314 Lake Elmo 0 St. Paul 17 Misc. 0 Total 3462 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 - 1 - MSP International Airport Aviation Noise Complaints for November 2009 vt -0 A X_ _3.66n Zap. M 'go r pfaine HlU, V'n wP.!_ C � v - Blame E11,11 7- `,Y V 71 !(7 N Twp Corrora r e Bea i n ............. 4, HT i d I b�- - kry ShoreVWMA�` Grant ... 4_ L _10) Rrprpl Birob.Rl tqr, �k pi"WHRO 'Bea:H y Ell j i, &- A Me-dingh. Ah M, ,.,a p Plyrn U w J. tit 71. eIMPANO -E INNE-T-QN] s: rParti r it Rb M nP DU A'RMAPJ E3AY--,. 00 N� T .Ti NO ,Edina1. al n hass�6n Ghti BloofI t1 Y .iremington Con - J Chaska ..q I Cottage Grd Shako. S. :hak, 3- MIS8I!§9jM RIVER ,Bu' R r iv PON ia ,ksofi , I T P mount Louisville Twp I V, K-� E 5! k, e- �F f4 tar - EY -y r ... J i 5, k "i _p evEmpire Twp Spring Lake T\q. S, Farmington _T 11� I j"i e Vermillion Twp H e I e n a 'T w Market UP. Jmpton TO'pi. Number of Complaints per Address 1-9 10-24 25-46 47-75 76-102 103-186 187-403 404-772 - 2 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Available Hours for Runway Use November 2009 (Source: FAA Aviation Systems i-erformance tvteutcb LJata) All Hours M5i:r polis r O It Paul y ;l ❑:, t z � t ' t y „ ti ', ` i rt4� f.,j x.si•,d'P,pFl,"hrly`+, 7i 'n� J ' t n t 55 —I� , , �i ��.� ,. •�''f��c�t�C.}�+ ti wfe uL .,§y. ` '-i �`� :� 1 t.74 a lS it 7 , ii "IRiUhfie:ld j ttl�l'IESCTt F 9 BloomyEagan k� Y i t 1 +. f LT Nighttime Hours `, 10:30pm to 6:00am , �. ',`7 polis tPaul ry �e t` , 'i L ji r. �'� s .. i r: /:, > _ .moi• .G O �,� >. vtlPSSjFR S '� y �tit,''r ....-_ 4 iia�r r t'it'L�r j,Mr qf✓''r 4hty i d`?lit t4 ) r � „S chfield r $�'rJ;,s t 4 rliS`l` 7 y�' O' a " t ill 1ia-' { _.,...{ .i i) Vii44 t rt Bloomin, Q �f6 <' �a; , Eagan rt 1 ff FAA Avera e Daily Count Note: Sum of daily average count may not equal cola, aue w iounuory. 'As of January 2009, the FAA Aviation Systems Performance Metric (ASPM) was the source for the Available Hours for Runway Use report. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 3 .November 2008 November 2009 Air Carrier 733 719 Commuter 396 341 General Aviation 38 45 Military 11 - 12 Total 1177 1117 Note: Sum of daily average count may not equal cola, aue w iounuory. 'As of January 2009, the FAA Aviation Systems Performance Metric (ASPM) was the source for the Available Hours for Runway Use report. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 3 All Operations Runway Use Report November 2009 p t[� s # o t polls s t t tPaul 113,l ^'="_' 1 t L ¢ I, r ; y� t 1,,, fF 7 m, ✓' t` Sr ri, 7 55 1 3 MU ,G.AFort�Sr�erlilmg hfield ul V t i `aJ 1 i i1 no - 1„ `til tis r 1 { i v �` f :�rnrn I i thpaui4 1 IE - t� glO;mingt0 ';�Icf]F our,,iki,Ef jr+` f .f y`t RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count . Operations Last Year Percent. 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3822 23% 3560 20.5% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3698 22.3% 3406 19.6% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 1 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 2696 16.3% 3422 19.7% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3233 19.5% 4139 23.9% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 3136 18.9% 2815 16.2% Total Arrivals 16587 .: ; 17342 RWY . Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count I Operations Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 6 0% 1 3 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 2232 13.6% 2304 13.5% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 1129 6.9% 1183 6.9% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 4808 29.3% 4212 24.7% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 20 0.1% 13 0.1% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3824 23.3% 4099 24% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4411 26.8% 5241 30.7% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 1 0% 0 0% Total Departures 16431 17055 Total Operations 33018 34397 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. - 4 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Carrier Jet Operations Runway Use Report November 2009 'j" Rrchfi.eld 0 B I m in g"t I Last Year Arrival/ count Count Last Year RWY De . parture Overflight Area Operations Percent Operations Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3225 22.8% 2888 20% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3185 22.5% 2878 200% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 .0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 2289 16.2% 2886 20% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 2783 19.7% --3-448 23.9% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 2-6-76 18.9% 2308 16% Total Arrivals, 14158 14408 Last Year Arrival/ Count Count Last Year RWY Departure Overflight Area Operations Percent_ Operations Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 4 0% 3 0% 12L I Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 1637 11.7% 1679 11.8% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 922 6.6% 992 7% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 4345 31% 3709 26% - .22 -Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 18 0.1 - -/o 12 0.1% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3315 23.6% 3552 24.9% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/iq-o.Richfield -3-7-93 27% 4316 30.2% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% Total Departures 14034 14263 tions 28192 28671 Opera Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -5- Total Opera Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -5- November 2009 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition Type FAR Part 36 Take - Off Noise Level Aircraft Description Stage Count Percent 8742 110 Boeing 747-200 3 13 0% DC10 103 McDonnell Douglas DC10 3 159 0.6% 8744 101.6 Boeing 747-400 3 61 0.2% DCBQ 100.5 McDonnell Douglas DC8 Re -manufactured 3 2 0% MD11 95.8 McDonnell Douglas MD11 3 60 0.2% B767 95.7 Boeing 767 3 8 0% A330 95.6 Airbus Industries A330 3 157 0.6% B72Q 94.5 Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3 3 147 0.5% A300 94 Airbus Industries A300 3 16 0.1% A310 92.9 Airbus Industries A310 3 2 0% B73Q 92.1 Boeing 737 Modified Stage 3 3 4 0% MD80 91.5 McDonnell Douglas MD80 3 979 3.5% 8757 91.4 Boeing 757 3 1988 7.1% DC9Q 91 McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3 3 2570 9.1% A321 89.8 Airbus Industries A321 3 166 0.6% 8734 88.9 Boeing 737-400 3 37 0.1% -A320 87.8 Airbus Industries A320 3 3477 12.3% 8738 87.7 - Boeing 737-800 3 1004 3.6% 8735 87.7 Boeing 737-500 3 1 105 0.4% A318 87.5 Airbus Industries A318 3 60 0.2% A319 87.5 Airbus Industries A319 3 3308 11.7% 8733 87.5 Boeing 737-300 3 372 1.3% 87377 87.5 Boeing 737-700 3 533 1.9% E190 83.7 - Embraer 190 3 176 0.6% E170 83.7 Embraer 170 3 3057 10.8% E145 83.7 Embraer 145 3 843 3% 8717 83 Boeing 717 3 344 1.2% CRJ 79.8 Canadair Regional Jet 3 8235 29.2% E135 77.9 Embraer 135 3 305 1.1% J328 76.5 Fairchild Dornier 328 3 4 0% Totals 28192 Note: Sum of Meet mix % may not equal 100% due to rounding. Note: Stage III represent aircraft modified to meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. This includes hushkit engines, engine retrofits or aircraft operational flight configurations. UPS DCBQ are re -engined with manufactured stage 3 engines and are classified as Stage III Manufactured as of January 1, 2008. -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 time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone -corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover measured in A -weighted decibels. 6 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Count Current Percent Last Years Percent Stage II 0 00% 0% Stage III 2721 9.7% 9.3% Stage III Manufactured 25471 90.3% 90.7% Total Stage III 28192 Note: Stage III represent aircraft modified to meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. This includes hushkit engines, engine retrofits or aircraft operational flight configurations. UPS DCBQ are re -engined with manufactured stage 3 engines and are classified as Stage III Manufactured as of January 1, 2008. -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 time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone -corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover measured in A -weighted decibels. 6 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to .6:00 a.m. Runway Use Report November 2009 S -.�Paul Z ns "M ..... . OU Z co" W-11-11.0 I—, 'F'L Richfield 'w 0� %`3 6 0- M PE D "i BIO mingi G'% A RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0%--, 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 112 13.8% 184 16.3% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 234 28.8% 263 23.3% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 1 0.1% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0.1% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 323 39.7% 474 41.9% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 141 17.3% 204 18.1% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 1 0.1% 5 0.4% Total Arrivals 813 1130 RVVY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count. Operations Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0.5% 0 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 31 16.2% 227 32% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 75 39.3% -- —1— 120 — 16.9% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 22 T .5% 65 9.2% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 1 0.1% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 43 22.5% 1 80 11.3% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 18 9.4% 216 30.5% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 1 0.5% 0 0% Total Departures 1,91 709 Total Operations 1,004 1839 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. 7 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Runway Use Report November 2009 Ri6field -J b H i1 4jf RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 108 14.4% 166 16.4% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 216 28.7% 239 23.6% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 300 39.9% 414 40.9% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 128 17% 193 19.1% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 0 0% 1 0.1% Total Arrivals 752 1013 RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0.7% 0 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 20 14.5% 189 32.9% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 54 39.1% 88 15.3% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 17 12.3% 58 10.1% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 0 0% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 32 23.2% 53 9.2% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 14 10.1% 186 32.4% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0----- 0% 0 0% Total Departures 138 574 Total Operations 890.1587 Note: sum of Kub /o may no[ equal tuvw aue tu muijuilly. -8- Report Generated: 12111/2009 12:20 December 2009 Night-time Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. 100 ... . . .. ... 90 so 2 Stage3 Stage 3 70 --.Stage Northwest (NWA) 0 0 60 16111 "1 - Sun Country (SCX) 0 50 87 87 — American (AAL) 40 0 58 58 — 30 z 0 54 20 Continental (COA) 10 December 2009 Night-time Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. <> U-) <> tin •<> t r) <> u-*; <> U_� <> Lc-) <> tr7 <> tr <> IL ) <> tr� <> tr <> U.) <>Lr <> LC <> LC 2 OT! C T! C . . . <<<—<<> 6 < < < M " Tim December 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations In -Zn n m to A -nn n m 0 NWA El scx ED RAL F -I MER. [D COA FDX DFIL. ED UAL 0 TRS ED FFT F-1 USA EI 78W ... . . .. ... Manufactured Airline 2 Stage3 Stage 3 Total --.Stage Northwest (NWA) 0 0 133 —133 16111 "1 - Sun Country (SCX) 0 0 87 87 — American (AAL) 0 0 58 58 — Midwest Airlines (MEP)_ 0 0 54 54 Continental (COA) 0 0 50 —50 — FedEx (FDX) 0 8 39 47 Delta (DAL) 0 0 32 32 -77 0 0 32 32 _ Airtran (TRS) 0 - 0 31 31 — Frontier Airlines (FFT) 0 0 29 29 US Airways (USA) 0 0 18 18 BAX (78W) 0 0 =14 Total 0 r T 563 1 585 .4V 5 <> U-) <> tin •<> t r) <> u-*; <> U_� <> Lc-) <> tr7 <> tr <> IL ) <> tr� <> tr <> U.) <>Lr <> LC <> LC 2 OT! C T! C . . . <<<—<<> 6 < < < M " Tim December 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations In -Zn n m to A -nn n m 0 NWA El scx ED RAL F -I MER. [D COA FDX DFIL. ED UAL 0 TRS ED FFT F-1 USA EI 78W Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Manufactured Airline 2 Stage3 Stage 3 Total --.Stage Northwest (NWA) 0 0 133 —133 — Sun Country (SCX) 0 0 87 87 — American (AAL) 0 0 58 58 — Midwest Airlines (MEP)_ 0 0 54 54 Continental (COA) 0 0 50 —50 — FedEx (FDX) 0 8 39 47 Delta (DAL) 0 0 32 32 United (UAL) 0 0 32 32 _ Airtran (TRS) 0 - 0 31 31 — Frontier Airlines (FFT) 0 0 29 29 US Airways (USA) 0 0 18 18 BAX (78W) 0 0 =14 Total 0 -14 22 563 1 585 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 December 2009 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations Time A/D 'Carrier Flight Number Equipment Stage Days of Operation Routing 22:30 A Sun Country 416 B738 M MF PSP MSP 22:33 A Northwest 3539 CRJ M MTWThFSu DTW MSP 22:35 A Northwest 2397 A319 M MTWThFSu JFK MSP 22:42 A Airtran 869 8737 M MTWThFSSu FLL ATL MSP 22:57 A United 463 A319 M MWThF YYZ ORD MSP 22:57 A United 463 A319 M T ORD MSP 22:59 A United 463 A320 M Su YYZ ORD MSP 23:00 D BAX 705 B72Q H TTh YYC MSP TOL 23:00 A American 1284 MD80 M MTWThFSSu DFW MSP 23:02 A Frontier Airlines 108 A318 M MTWThFSu DEN MSP 23:07 A Frontier Airlines 108 A319 M S DEN MSP 23:13 A United 7529 E170 M Su DEN MSP 23:18 A United 7529 E170 M MTWThF DEN MSP 23:20 A Delta 1522 8738 M WThFSu ATL MSP 23:20 A Delta 1522 MD80 M T ATL MSP 23:20 A Sun Country 106 8738 M MTWThFSSu LAS MSP 23:20 A Delta 1522 B737 M MS ATL MSP 23:25 D BAX 705 B72Q H M YYC MSP RFD TOL 23:30 A Midwest Airlines 2210 E170 M MTWThFSu MKE MSP 23:35 A American 1673 8738 M MTWThFSu DCA ORD MSP 23:40 A Sun Country 284 8738 M W SEA MSP 23:40 A Sun Country 284 8737 M S SEA MSP 23:40 A Sun Country 286 8737 M ThSu SEA MSP 23:45 A Sun Country 422 B737 M F LAX MSP 23:49 A Continental 2816 E145 M MTWThFSu IAN MSP 23:54 A Northwest 2512 A320 M MWThFSu LAX MSP 23:55 A Sun Country 404 B738 M MTThFSu SAN MSP 23:56 A US Airways 940 A321 M MTWThFSu LAS PHX MSP 23:56 A US Airways 354 A319 M FSu CLT MSP 23:56 A US Airways 984 A320 M S MCO CLT MSP 23:56 A US Airways 984 A320 M WTh CLT MSP. 00:10 A Sun Country 422 B737 M TThSu LAX MSP 04:42 A FedEx 1744 B72Q H WThFS 04:42 A FedEx 1749 B72Q H WThF 05:09 A FedEx 1718 MD11 M WThFS 05:09 A FedEx 2718 MD11 M Su 05:17 D FedEx 1744 B72Q H S 05:17 A FedEx 1718 MD11 M WThFS 05:20 D Delta 1073 MD80 M W MSP ATL 05:20 D Delta 1073 8738 M ThFS MSP ATL 05:20 D Delta 1073 B757 M M MSP ATL 05:20 D Delta 1073 8737 M TSu MSP ATL 05:30 D Continental 2823 E145 M MTWThF MSP IAH 05:41 A FedEx 1407 MD11 M WThFSSu 05:45 D Midwest Airlines 2298 E170 M MTWThFS MSP MKE DFW 05:48 A Northwest 2256 A320 M MTWThF SEA MSP BOS 05:49 A Northwest 2256 B757 M S SEA MSP BOS 05:50 A Northwest 2326 B757 M MThFS LAS MSP DTW 05:50 A Northwest 2326 A320 M TWSu LAS MSP DTW 05:55 A Northwest 2624 A333 M MTSSu HNL MSP - 10 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 November 2009 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Total Nighttime Jet Operations by Hour MIMI ID Stage Type Count America West 111111111110, rIUM 3 A319 I America West AWE 3 A320 20 America West AWE 3 A321 24 Airline ID Stage Type Count America West AWE 3 A319 I America West AWE 3 A320 20 America West AWE 3 A321 24 American AAL 3 B738 10 American AAL 3 MD80 45 Compass CPZ 3 E170 27 Continental Exp. BTA 3 E145 53 Delta -DAL 3 MD80 5 Delta DAL 3 8738 57 FedEx FDX 3 B72Q 16 FedEx FDX 3 DC10 33 Frontier Airlines FFT 3 A318 2 Frontier Airlines FFT 3 A319 28 Mesaba MES 3 CRJ 40 Northwest NWA 3 DC9Q 3 Northwest NWA 3 B742 3 Northwest NWA 3 A330 14 Northwest NWA 3 A319 14 Northwest NWA 3 B757 52 Northwest NWA 3 A320 82 Pinnacle FLG 3 CRJ 40 Airlines RPA 3 E170 35 -Republic Shuttle America TCF 3 E170 25 Sun Country Scx 3 _137377 20 Sun Country Scx 3 B738 100 UPS UPS 3 B767 1 UPS UPS 3 A300 4 UPS UPS 3 MD1 1 14 UPS UPS 3 B757 31 United UAL 3 A320 7 United UAL 3 A319 14 TOTAL 820 Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 92.1% of the total nighttime carrierjet operations, Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 November 2009 Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations Mix for Top 15 Airlines 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. 140 120 :L00 80 60 dY 40 20 0 M NWA tu SCX ED DAL E -I RAL BTA UPS FDX AWE MES FLG RPA FFT El CPZ F -I TCF UAL ED <> Lo <> M) In, 1E IR T! In Ct O T! M <t IR T., In "Ct IR cl M ct 'R M < j <C o g " ' g Uo Time November 2009 Nighttime Carrier Jet Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15.Airlines 1n -Rn n m to fi-nn n -m - Airline Stage 2 Stage3 Manufactured Stage 3 Total Northwest (NWA) 0 3 165 168 Sun Country (SCX) 0 0 120 120 Delta (DAL) 0 0 62 62 American (AAL) 0 0 55 55 Continental Exp. (BTA) 0 0 53 53 UPS (UPS) 0 0 50 50 FedEx (FDX) 0 16 33 49 America West (AWE) 0 0 45 45 Mesaba (MES) 0 0 40 40 Pinnacle (FLG) 0 0 40 40 Republic Airlines (RPA) 0 0 35 35 Frontier Airlines (FFT) 0 0 30 30 Compass (CPZ) 0 0 27 27 Shuttle America (TCF) 0 0 25 25 United (UAL) 0 0 21 21 Other 016 54 70 Total 0 35 855 890 -12- Report Generated: 12/11(2009 12:20 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - November 2009 Nov 1 thru 8, 2009 - 3780 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 1 thru 8, 2009 - 3780 Carrier Jet Departures Nov 1 thru 8, 2009 - 199 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 1 thru 8, 2009 - 35 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -13- Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - November 2009 Nov 9 thru 16, 2009 - 3848 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 9 thru 16, 2009 - 3796 Carrier Jet Departures Nov 9 thru 16, 2009 - 199 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 9 thru 16, 2009 - 38 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures -14- Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks - Carrier Jet Operations -November 2009 Nov 17 thru 24, 2009 - 3834 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 17 thru 24, 2009 - 3809 Carrier Jet Departures Nov 17 thru 24, 2009 - 207 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 17 thru 24, 2009 - 39 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -15- Nov 15 - Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - November 2009 Nov 25 thru 30, 2009 - 2696 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 25 thru 30, 2009 - 2649 Carrier Jet Departures t ��+t�py��,,t a K ��, r� 1V� aFsRi Nov 25 thru 30, 2009 - 147 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 25 thru 30, 2009 - 26 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures -16- Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 MSP International Airport Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations Remote Monitoring Tower Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -17- Time Above dB Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events November 2009 RMT ID City Address Time >= 65dB Time >= 80dB Time >= 90dB Time >= 100d13 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 17:03:18 00:00:40 00:00:00 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 17:34:54 00:08:57 00:00:00 00:00:00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 19:03:20 00:42:03 00:00:16 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 17:32:34 00:18:59 00:00:00 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 19:59:19 03:15:23 00:01:41 00:00:00 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 20:40:46 02:50:16 00:03:21 00:00:00 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 00:30:07 00:00:20 00:00:00 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 00:39:27 00:00:05 00:00:00 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:01:58 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:01:35 00:00:02 00:00:00 00:00:00 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:00:24 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 00:01:18 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00_ 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 00:12:26 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 17:36:28 00:00:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 00:26:18 00:00:15 00:00:00 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 14:10:01 00:30:59 00:00:10 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:01:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 01:20:57 00:00:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 00:17:19 00:00:09 00:00:00 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:01:05 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 00:08:12 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 10:02:36 00:00:05 00:00:00 00:00:00 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 02:18:13 00:01:18 00:00:00 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 17:08:57 00:01:19 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 01:11:44 00:00:04 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 01:15:39 00:00:06 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 00:13:16 00:00:00 00:00:00 006'00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 04:22:59 00:01:51 00:00:00 00:00:00 29 Minneapolis - Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S. 00:01:23 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 04:08:30 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 00:01:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 00:02:11 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 00:13:15 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 08:38:38 00:00:24 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 13:57:54 00:00:20 00:00:00 00:00:00 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 00:04:59 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 00:02:15 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 L38 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 00:01:08 00:00:00 00:00:00 1 00-00-00 Total Time for Arrival Noise Events 1211:08:35 1 07:54:47 00:05:28 1 00:00:001 -18- Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Time Above Threshold dB for Departure Related Noise Events November 2009 RMT Time >= Time >= Time >= Time >= ID City Address 65dB -7-- 80d13 90dB 100dB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 03:24:46 00:01:06 — 0 — 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 04:20:35 00:01:31 00:00:00 00:00:00 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 10:33:41 --13,,0259 00:06:18 —00-16:01 00:00:17 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis �— Park Ave. & 48th t. 00:00:17 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 34:25:52 02:43:18 00:21:19 00:00:00 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 40:41:00 -2-0-3147 05:16:39 -60-45-03 00:47:09 00:00:30 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. —11-12:19 2 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 00:16:31 00:00:03 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:03:51 00:00:19 00:00:08 00:00:00 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St, 00:06:01 00:01:10 00:00:28 00:00:03 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:03:40 --5-0—.0000 00:00:51 00:00:15 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 00:02:18 00:00:00 00:00:00 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican 6-0--.0112 00:00:00 00:00:00 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 06:32:11 00:14:37 00:00:28 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 10:01:34 00:05:55 00:00:00 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 06:42:32 --0-0-2413 00:25:35 00:01:12 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. :04:23 00:00:46 00:00:00 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 16:54:26 00:30:37 00:02:05 00:00:00 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 10:36:43 00:05:52 00:00:23 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:31:48 00:00:27 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 02:20:03 00:00:48 —00:01:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 01:58:39 00:00:00 00:00:00 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 14:50:11 -64.2816 00:33:41 00:01:56 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 03:46 00:00:00 00:00:00 .25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 09:48:41 00:00:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 04:09:59 00:02:50 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 11:09:15 00:14:58 00:00:05 00:00:00 28 Richfield Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 29:09:07 00:27:13 00:00:09 00:00:00 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. Ericsson 06:24:37 00:03:30 00:00: 00 00:00:00 — 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 22:43:16 01:20:19 00:03:08 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 01:59:34 -'0 00:02:08 - 00:00:28 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. --60 -762.22-.02 50-0:44:47 -00'.06 — 00.00.00 0.00:00 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park :00:43 --- 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 00:35:58 00:00:09 00:00:00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 63-21.26 ---5-1-0211 00:02:11 -00:00:32 00:00:00 -60.00—:00 00:00:00 -00--.0000 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 02:46:23 00:01:22 00:00:00 00:00:00 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 05:48:59 00:05:39 -�-0.09.00 00:00:00 00:00:00 --39 Eagan — 3477 St. Charles Pl. 08:47:22 .0 :00:00 00:00:00 '00'0 Total Time for Departure Noise Events 332:05:37 1 14:08:21 01:20:48 00:00:33 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -19- Arrival Related Noise Events November 2009 RMT ID City Address Arrival Events >= 65dB Arrival Events >= 80dIB Arrival Events >= 90dB Arrival Events >= 100d13 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 4004 15 0 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 3532 175 0 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 3554 577 6 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 3588 290 0 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 3726 2442 45 0 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 3897 2749 122 0 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 126 7 0 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 118 2 0 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 8 0 0 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 7 1 0 0 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 2 0 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 6 0 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 45 0 0 0 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 4072 12 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 90 1 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 2733 402 3 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 7 0 0 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 329 12 0 0 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 62 4 0 0 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 3 0 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 42 0 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 2400 3 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 537 11 0 0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 3916 26 0 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 237 1 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 340 3 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 56 0 0 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 860 32 0 0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 5 0 0 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 1192 0 0 0 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 6 0 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 9 0 0 0 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 46 0 0 0 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 2244 7 0 0 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 2765 9 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 23 0 0 0 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 12 0 0 0 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 3 0 0 0 Total Arrival Noise Events 44602 6781 176 0 -20- Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Departure Related Noise Events November 2009 Report Generated: 12111/2009 12:20 -21 - Departure Departure Departure Departure RMT Events >= Events >= Events >= Events>= ID City Address 65dB 80dB 90clB 100dB Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. 18 0 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 865 —7-947 22 0 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 57 3 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 2-331 149 ---� —1 —7 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 53 5153 10170 237 0 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 6246 2209 354 21 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 3091 345 6 -- 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd t. 1900 143 2 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 11 2 1 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 14 5 4 1 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.— 7 4 2 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 8 0 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 1398 25 0 0 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 1088 114 4 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 1758 77 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 1045 153 15 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 57 21 10 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 3059 321 17 0 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 1998 78 3 0 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 99 6 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th Sto— 520 13 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 351 17 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 2215 292 24 0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 767 40 0 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jur:dy Rd.. 1112 7 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 840 30 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 2039 151 1 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 4410 328 4 0 29 Minneapolis _ Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 1175 39 0 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 3540 499 46 0 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 418 11 4 0 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 156 --4-65 1 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 11 0 0---- 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 125 2 0 0 35- Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 632 25 0 0 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 190 8 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 501 30 0 0 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 1001 71 � 0 0 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 1495 114 0 0 Total Departure Noise Events 54720 6455 741 22 Report Generated: 12111/2009 12:20 -21 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#1) Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St., Minneapolis MAe/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/23/2009 6:57 NWA2276 8757 A 12R 89.2 11/22/200917:19 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 85.3 11/12/2009 20:45 NWA7169 DC9Q A 12R 82.9 11/05/2009 8:17 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 82.6 11/15/200913:09 NWA321 8744 D 22 81.6 11/1212009 21:18 CC1705 B72Q A 12R 81.6 11/01/200912:04 NWA2329 A319 A 12L 81.6 11/05/200916:51 DAU 760 8738 A 12L 81.4 11/05/200916:52 DAL1760 8738 A 12L 81.4 11/22/200917:14 DAL8875 8767 D _30L 81.3 (RMT Site#2) Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.. MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/08/200915:32 CC1706 B72Q A 12L 88.4 11/22/200912:55 NWA7131 DC9Q A 12L 86 11/02/200913:43 NWA321 8744 D 30L 85.7 11/13/200919:51 NWA7203 DC9Q D 30R 85.5 11/23/200919:34 NWA7037 DC9Q A 12L 85.4 11/03/200915:53 NWA2487 A319 A 12L 85.2 11/08/2009 9:08 NWA7332 DC9Q A 12L 84.9 11/05/200919:40 NWA2589 I B757 A 12L 84.9 11/21/200917:41 NWA7201 DC9Q A 12L 84.9 11/23/2009 20:09 DAL1306 MD80 A 12L 84.9 (RMT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.. MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure. Runway Lmax(dB) 11/23/2009 6:58 NWA2276 B757 A 12R 95.2 11/22/200917:18 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 93.8 11/06/2009 21:04 CC1705 B72Q A 12R 92.8 11/10/2009 7:15 CC1706 B72Q A 12R 91.6 11/06/2009 4:20 FDX1744 B72Q A 12R 91.6 11/05/2009 8:16 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 91.3 11/23/2000 23:29 CC1705 B72Q A 12R 91.2 11/03/2009 21:22 CC1705 B72Q A 12R 90.1 11/05/200913:15 DAL1627 MD80 D 30L 90 11/23/2009 23:46 CC1705 B72Q A 12R 89.6 - 22 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Te.n Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#4) Park A\/P & 48th St. MinneaDOHS Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/16/200919:48 NWA7203 DC9Q D 30R 93.9 11/15/200917:04 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 92.3 11/18/200919:27 NWA7174 DC9Q D 30R 91.6 11/15/200915:34 NWA7239 DC9Q D 30R 91.5 11/12/200916:32 NWA7277 DC9Q A 12L 89.9 11/01/200915:52 CC1706 B72Q A 12L 89.6 11/09/200913:04 NWA321 8744 D 30L 89.5 11/19/200911:49 NWA7238 DC9Q D 30R 88.8 11/20/2009 8:48 NWA7224 DC9Q D 30L 88.5 11/13/200919:51 NWA7203 DC9Q D 308 88.1 (RMT Site#5) 19th A\/P & 58th St.- MinneaDolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway., Lmax(dB) 11/02/2009 6:54 NWA9803 B742 D 30L 99.8 11/22/200917:18 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 98.9 11/19/200910:25 NWA7332 DC9Q D 30L 98.5-- 11/19/2009 15:37 NWA7252 DC9Q D 30L 98.4 11/29/200911:19 NWA7189 DC9Q D 30L 98.4 11/15/200913:34 NWA7242 DC9Q D 30L 98.3 11/16/200914:53 NWA7003 DC9Q D 30L 98 11/18/200915:30 NWA7252 DC9Q D 30L 97.9 11/16/200912:13 NWA7184 DC9Q D 30L 97,8 11/28/200914:46 NWA7003 DC9Q D 30L 97.6 (Kiva i 5ite4b) 95th AN/P A 57th St-- Minne2DOHS Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/13/200919:55 NWA7145 DC9Q D 30R 101.7 11/13/200919:25 NWA7174 DC9Q D 30R 101.6 11/24/200919:17 NWA7174 DC9Q D 30R 101.2 11/29/2009 6:55 NWA7188 DC9Q D 30R 101.1 11/25/200911:44 NWA7238 DC9Q D 30R 101 11/20/200919:48 NWA7203 DC9Q D 308 .100.7 11/19/200913:18 NWA7165 DC9Q D 30R 100.5 11/30/200916:35 NWA7054 DC9Q D 30R 100.5 11/20/200915:22 NWA7150 DC9Q D 308 1-100.5 11/20/200911:46 NWA7238 DC9Q D 308 _I 100.4 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 - 23 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#7) Wentworth Ave. & 64th St., Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/16/2009 8:55 AAL675 MD80 D 30L 90.7 11/13/2009 22:34 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 90.6 11/18/200913:56 AAL1827 MD80 D 30L 90.4 11/29/200914:50 NWA7350 DC9Q D 30L 90.3 11/28/200916:09 DAL1 620 MD80 D 30L 90.2 11/25/2009 8:41 AAL675 MD80 D 30L 90 11/28/200914:49 DAL1563 MD80 D 30L 89.9 11/24/2009 22:31 CC1705 B72Q D 30L 89.5 11/13/200919:05 DAL1725 MD80 D 30L 89.5 11/14/2009 6:42 DAL1500 MD80 D 30L 89.5 (RMT Site#8) I nnnfPlIr)%A/ Avp A 43rd qt-- Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/19/200914:27 AAL1779 MD80 D 30R 90.1 11/13/200919:26 NWA7174 DC9Q D 30R 90.1 11/29/200915:37 NWA7239 DC9Q D 30R 89.2 11/16/200919:29 NWA7174 DC9Q D 30R 89.1 11/19/200913:40 NWA7318 DC9Q D 30R 89 11/16/200912:35 NWA7238 DC9Q D 30R 87.8 11/15/200919:22 NWA7174 DC9Q D 30R 87.7 11/04/2009 7:55 AAL2317 MD80 D 30R 87.6 11/25/200911:12 NWA7232 DC9Q D 30R 87.5 11107/200913:30 NWA7194 DC9Q D 30R 87.5 kmvi i bite4u) .,:Ar.qtr)nn Rt & Hartford Ave.. St- Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft.Type Arrival/ -Departure Runway Lmax(dB,). 11/19/2009 22:56 NWA9800 8742 D 04 99.3 11/16/200913:02 NWA321 8744 D 04 81.8 11/11/2009 22:48 N 1 27GA BE20 A 22 79.8 11/18/200913:05 NWA321 8744 D 04 76.8 11/25/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 04 76.7 11/08/2009B:53 -NWA7226 DC9Q A 12L 75.8 11/25/2009 7:35 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 75.1 11/26/200915:34 NWA2295 A319 A 30R 74.9 11/27/2009 7:06 BMJ62 BE65 D 12R 74.5 11/12/2009 20:36 NWA2369 B757 A 12R 71.8 - 24 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#10) Itacra Ava R RnWr-Inin St-. St. Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type: Arrival/ . Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/19/200922:56 NWA9800 8742 D 04 103.1 11/16/200913:02 NWA321 8744 D 04 98.1 11/25/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 04 95.7 11/18/200913:05 NWA321 B744 D 04 95.5 11/07/2009 7:24 BMJ48 BE65 D 04 82.7 11/11/2009 22:49 N127GA BE20 A 22 81.1 11/27/2009 7:10 BMJ23 BE80 D 12R 76.8 11/11/2009 23:49 TCA1 PARO D 12L 75.5 11/27/200914:37 CPZ5840 E170 A 12L 73.3 11/25/2009 7:34 1 BMJ48 BE65 D - 30R 73 (RMT Site#11) Ginn Ct Q Crhaffar Ava Rt PAlll Date/Time 'Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/18/200913:05 NWA321 8744 D 04 96.3 11/25/200913:01 NWA321 8744 D 04 93.7 11/16/200913:02 NWA321 B744 D 04 88.9 11/19/2009 22:56 NWA9800 B742 D 04 82.7 11/25/2009 7:35 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 79.4 11/27/2009 7:11 BMJ23 BE80 D 12R 75.5 11/03/200915:55 NWA2487 A319 A 12L 72.6 11/02/20091142 NWA2329 A319 A 30R 69.7 11/28/2009 7:29 BMJ70 BE80 D 30L 67.3 (KIVI I Jmelh I G) Ai+nn C+ R RnrllVUnnri AvP St_ Paul Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/12/200920:35 NWA2369 B757 A 12R 75.9 11/24/2009 7:02 BMJ48 BE65 D 12R 74.1 11/27/2009 7:05 BMJ62 BE65 D 12R 72.2 11/08/2009 8:53 NWA7226 DC9Q A 12L 71.7 11/21/200911:46 NWA2472 B757 A 12L 71.5 11/27/2009 7:10 BMJ23 BE80 D 12R 70.4 11/07/2009 7:24 BMJ48 BE65 D 04 70.3 11/27/200914:37 CPZ5840 E170 A 12L 69.8 11/02/200913:01 NWA2473 A320 A 30R 69.6 11/30/200914:44 MES3422 CRJ D 30R 69.5 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -25- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#1 3) Southeast end of Mohican Court, Mendota Heiqhts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/13/2009 8:52 CC1706 B72Q D 17 84 11/13/200917:28 NWA7150 DC9Q D 12L 83.5 11/06/2009 15:25 NWA7150 DC9Q D 12L 82.2 11/10/2009 23:48 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 81.6 11/12/200919:31 NWA7311 DC9Q D 12L 81.3 11/06/200919:50 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 81.3 11121/2009 9:17 NWA7187 DC9Q D 12L 81.2 11/08/200917:00 CC1706 B72Q D 17 81.2 11/03/2009 20:07 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 81.1 11/06/200919:38 NWA7145 DC9Q D 12L 81 (RMT Site#1 4) 1 st St. & McKee St., Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/18/2009 22:50 N104HR B72Q D 12L 95.4 11/18/2009 22:57 N698SS B72Q D 12L 94.3 11723/200012:58 NWA321 B744 D 12R 91.3 11/3012009 22:48 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 90.5 11/18/2009 22:21 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 89.2 11/27/2009 21:41 NWA7270 DC9Q D 12R 88.5 11/24/200913:10 NWA321 8744 D 12R 88.2 11/16/2009 6:56 DAL1500 MD80 D 12R 88.1 11/09/2009 22:21 CC1705 I B72Q D 12R 88 11/06/200912:56 NWA321 I 8744 D 12R 87.8 (RMT Site#1 5) Cullon St. & Lexington Ave., Mendota Heiqhts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/13/200917:27 NWA7150 DC9Q D 12L 88.3 11/03/2009 20:07 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 87.6 11/06/200919:49 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 87.5 11/22/200919:49 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 86.7 11/01/2009 7:23 NWA7222 DC9Q D 12L 86.4 11/06/200915:22 NWA7239 DC9Q D 12L 86.3 11/12/2009 21:03 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 86.1 11/21/2009 7:13 BMJ66 BE80 D 12L 85 11/18/200910:01 NWA7187 DC9Q D 12L 84.2 11/12/200919:38 NWA7145 DC9Q D 12L 84.2 - 26 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP - November 2009 (RMT Site#1 6) A%/nlnn A\/P A ViinG I qnp F2n2n Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/17/200912:47 NWA321 B744 D 12R 95.6 11/28/2009 20:23 NWA251 0 B757 A 30L .95 11/24/200915:43 NWA7252 DC9Q D 12R 93.2 11/08/200914:46 NWA7003 DC9Q D 12R 93.1 11/16/200913:50 NWA2222 8757 A 30L 92.9 11/24/200911:42 NWA7184 DC9Q D 12R 92.4 11/30/2009 21:33 FDX1 644 B72Q D 12R 92.3 11/18/2009 22:21 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 92.3 11/05/200914:52 NWA7003 DC9Q D 12R 92.1 11/29/2009 22:06 NWA7323 DC9Q D 12R 91.9 (RMT Site#1 7) RAfh qf A Afh A\/P Rinnminntnn Date/Time, FlightNumber' Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lma)t(dB) 11/05/200913:55 NWA321 B744 D 22 96.9 11/19/200913:18 NWA321 B744 D 22 96.9 11/28/200913:09 NWA321 8744 D 22 95.8 11/14/200914:23 NWA321 B744 D 22 95.6 11/27/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 94.5 11/10/200913:06 NWA321 B744 D 22 90.9 11/20/200912:57 NWA321 8744 D 22 90.8 11/29/200913:07 NWA321 B744 D 22 90. 11/15/200913:08 NWA321 B744 D 22 90.5 11/07/200913:04 NWA321 B744 D 22 90 (Km i 6ite4i b) 7 t qt A 17th A\/P Rirhfipld Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft, Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/12/200912:56 NWA321 B744 D 22 98.8 11/05/200913:55 NWA321 B744 D 22 98.6 11/13/200913:01 NWA321 8744 D 22 98.-5 11/26/200913:31 NWA321 8744 D 22 98A 11/19/200913:17 NWA321 8744 D 22 98.4 11/27/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 98.1 11/03/200913:09 NWA321 8744 D 22 97.7 11/15/200913:07 NWA321 8744 D 22 97.7 11/07/200913:04 NWA321 8744 D 22 97.6 11/01/2009 13:11 NWA321 B744 D 22 97.4 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 -27- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#1 9) 16th Ave. & 84th St., Bloominqton Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure 'Runway Lmax(dB) 11/21/200913:05 NWA321 B744 D 22 97.2 11/13/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 94.2 11/12/200912:56 NWA321 8744 D 22 94.2 11103/2009 7:00 BMJ64 BE65 D 17 87 11/12/2009 7:14 BMJ75 BE80 D 17 86.9 11/27/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 86.5 11/14/200914:23 NWA321 8744 D 22 85.9 11/28/200913:08 NWA321 8744 D 22 85.4 11/17/2009 6:45 BMJ64 BE65 D 17 85.3 11/16/2009 7:17 NWA2537 A320 D 17 84.7 (RMT Site#20) 75th St. & 3rd Ave., Richfield Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/26/200913:32 NWA321 B744 D 22 89 11/13/200919:05 DAL1725 MD80 D 30L 82.1 11/12/200912:56 NWA321 B744 D 22 81.8 11/27/200913:01 NWA321 B744 D 22 80.1 11/04/200912:56 NWA321 B744 D 22 80.1 11/03/200913:09 NWA321 B744 D 22 80 11/28/2009 8:10 SCX341 87-38-- D 30L 79.2 11701/2009.13:11 NWA321 8744 D 22 79.2 11/05/200913:55 NWA321 B744 D 22 78.1 11/19/200913:18 NWA321 8744 D 22 78.1 (RMT Site#21) Barbara Ave. .& 67th St., Inver Grove Heiqhts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/06/200912:57 NWA321 B744 D 12R 84.4 11/22/200912:51 NWA321 B744 D 12R 83.4 11/08/200913:26 NWA321 8744 D 12R 82.9 11/24/200913:11 NWA321 8744 D 12R 82.4 11/11/200912:58 NWA321 B744 D 12L 81.7 11/03/200914:42 NWA7338 DC9Q D 12L 81.1 11/13/200913:11 NWA2567 A319 D 12L 80.9 11/21/200911:35 NWA7191 DC9Q D 12L 80.7 11/06/2009 9:42 NWA9900 B744 D 12R 80.7 11/17/200912:48 NWA321 8744 D 12R 80.6 -28- Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#22) Annn Maria Trail In\/Pr rirnvp Hpiahts Date/Time Flight -- Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/18/2009 2-2:51 N104HR B72Q D 12L 85.2 11/12/2009 6:20 FDX471 B72Q D 12R 84.9 11 . /18/2009 22:58 N698SS- B72Q D 12L 83.4 11/05/2009 21:25 FDX1 644 B72Q D 12R 83.2 11/12/200915:09 NWA7350 DC9Q D 12R 82.6 11/23/2009 21:35 FDX1 644 B72Q D 12R 82.6 11/06/200915:07 NWA7003 DC9Q D 12R 81.8 11/22/200911:47 NWA7238 DC9Q D 12R 81.8 11/30/2009 21:34 FDX1 644 B72Q D 12R 81.5 11/25/200917:42 FDX571 B72Q A 30L 81.4 (RMT Site#23) C. 4 f Vnnr4rwn Ax/a KApnrlr)fq Hpinhts Date./Time Flight, Number AircraftType Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/13/200917:27 NWA7150 DC9Q D 12L 96.4 11/06/200919:49 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 94.9 11/12/2009 21:03 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 94.6 11/22/200915:24 NWA7239 DC9Q D 12L 94.6 11/05/200914:42 NWA7338 DC9Q D 12L 93.4 11/16/2009 7:38 -NWA7222 DC9Q D 12L 93 11/01/200915:53 NWA7150 DC9Q D 12L 92.7 11/06/200915:22 NWA7239 DC9Q D 12L 92.6 11/03/2009 20:07 NWA7203 DC9Q D 12L 92.5 11/01/2009 7:23 NWA7222 DC9Q D 12L 92.2 kMIVI I OILUI*--+) (-hnn,ml I n A Wrinn I n Fawn Date/Time Flight Number. F Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/18/2009 22:50 N104HR B72Q D 12L 89.2 11/18/2009 22:57 N698SS B72Q D 12L 87.8 11/25/200917:22 DAL1490 MD80 A 30R 86.5 11/30/2009 22:48 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 85.3 11/06/200919:06 DAL1725 MD80 D 12R 84.4 11/16/200915:42 BTA2581 E145 A 30L 84.2 11/13/2009 6:03 FDX471 B72Q D 12R 83.9 11/06/2009 22:11 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 83.8 11/25/2009 20:44 NWA7169 DC9Q A 30R 83.8 11/30/2009 21:34 FDX1644 B72Q D 12R 83.7 Report Generated: 12%1 1/2009 12:20 -29- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#25) Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdv Rd.. Eaaan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/12/2009 8:58 CC1706 B72Q D 17 83.3 11/21/200913:06 NWA321 B744 D 22 83.3 11/10/2009 8:14 CC1706 B72Q D 17 82.5 11111/2009 22:19 CC1705 B72Q D 17 82.1 11/01/2009 13:12 NWA321 B744 D 22 81.8 11/25/200916:03 NWA7280 DC9Q A 30L 81 11/22/200919:47 AAL429 MD80 D 17 81 11/17/200912:47 NWA321 B744 D 12R 80.6 11/23/200910:03 NWA7228 DC9Q D 17 79.4 11/13/200913:03 NWA321 8744 D 22 79.3 (RMT Site#26) 6796 Arkansas Ave. W.. Inver Grove Heiahts Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway, Lmax(dB) 11/06/200912:57 NWA321 B744 D 12R 84.4 11/23/200912:58 NWA321 8744 D 12R 84 11/24/20091:46 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 83.7 11/06/2009 8:22 CC1706 B72Q D 12R 83.7 11/05/2009 22:39 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 83.3 11/06/2009 9:41 NWA9900 8744 D 12R 83.3 11/12/2009 22:35 CC1705 B72Q D 12R 82.7 11/24/200913:11 NWA321 8744 D 12R 82.7 11124/2009 6:45 FDX471 B72Q D 12R 82.6 11/12/2009 8:59 CC1706 B720 D 17 82.6 (RMI s itex) t) Anthnnv School 5757 Irvina Ave. S.. Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/02/2009 6:54 NWA9803 8742 D 30L 95.1 11/18/200916:07 DAU 620 MD80 D 30L 89.7 11/16/200913:16 DAL1627 MD80 D 30L 89.5 11/28/2009 8:48 AAL675 MD80 D 30L 89.5 11/09/200910:22 DAL377 MD80 D 30L 89.2 11/16/200911:27 DAL1565 MD80 D 30L 88.8 11/04/200910:31 DAL377 MD80 D 30L 88.6 11/18/200914:46 DAU 563 MD80 D 30L 88.4 11/15/200919:08 DAL1725 MD80 D 30L 88.1 11/16/200913:36 NWA7242 DC9Q D 30L 88 - 30 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#28) ARAI; lRfh Ax/gk q Rinhfipld Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/25/200912:09 DOJ158 MD80 D 30L 92.3 11/10/2009 7:37 NWA7222 6—C95 D 17 91.2 11/17/2009 6:37 DAL1500 MD80 D 17 91 11/20/200910:11 NWA7291 DC9Q D 30L 90 11/29/200913:32 NWA7197 DC9Q D 30L 89.9 11/14/200918:15 AAL461 MD80 D 30L 88.7 11/18/2009 7:43 NWA7185 DC9Q D 17 88.3 0/2009 7:40 11/10/2009 NWA7183 DC9Q D 17 87.9 11/21/2009 9:15 NWA7228 DC9Q D 17 87.3 11/15/200916:53 NWA7030 DC9Q A 35 87.2 (RMT Site#29) IZI-- Qr�kr%ril Aq1 1; '11 Qf AX/P q Minrip2nolis Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival,./. Departure Runway Lmax(dB) — 11/14/200913:14 NWA7165 DC9Q D 30R 89.830R 11/04/200915:45 AAL676 MD80 D 1-7 87.4 11/20/2009 7:30 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 86 11/30/200917:29 AAL772 MD80 D 30R 85.8 11/02/2009 7:54 AAL2317 MD80 D 30R 85 11/09/2009 8:02 AAL2317 MD80 D 30R 84.9 11/05/2009 8:08 AAL2317 MD80 D 30R 84.8 11/25/2009T.-54 NWA7218 DC9Q D 30R 84.8 11/26/2009 7:11 NWA7218 DC9Q D 30R 83.9 11/29/200917:39 NWA7236 DC9Q D 30R 83.8 (KIVI I OIL(jI+OU) 0-7.1 r, D;,ior Dirlrin PH Pir)nMinritnn Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway, Lmax(dB) 11/19/2009 8:25 CC1706 B72Q D 17 98 11/24/200911:39 NWA7238 DC9Q D 1-7 94.8 11/05/200914:14 NWA7197 DC9Q 6---17 94.5 11/24/2009 9:06 CC1706 B72Q D 17 94.4 11/01/200917:31 CC1706 B72Q D 17 94.3 11/17/2009 8:18 CC1706 B72Q D 17 93.3 11/05/200919:37 NWA7201 DC9Q D 17 93.2 11/30/200911:37 NWA7184 DC9Q D 17 92.9 11/08/200915:23 NWA7252 DC9Q D 17 92.6 11/24/200917:39 NWA7236 DC9Q D 17 92.5 - 31 - Rep6rt Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#31) 9501 12th Ave. S., Bloominaton Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/19/2009 8:25 CC1706 B72Q D 17 96.2 11/01/200913:11 NWA321 B744 D 22 94.1 11/10/200913:07 NWA321 8744 D 22 93.2 11/03/200913:10 NWA321 8744 D 22 92.9 11/13/200913:02 NWA321 B744 D 22 86.8 11/01/200917:31 CC1706 B72Q D 17 85.5 11/12/200912:56 NWA321 8744 D 22 83.7 11/21/2009 13:0.5 NWA321 B744 D 22 83.4 11/06/2009 8:55 AAL675 MD80 D 17 82.9 11/20/2009 8:21 CC1706 B72Q D 17 82.8 (RMT Site#32) 10325 Pleasant Ave. S., Bloominqton .Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/17/2009 8:19 CC1706 B72Q D 17 80.6 11/06/2009 8:56 AAL675 MD80 D 17 78.9 11/30/2009 6:50 DAL1500 MD80 D 30L 77.7 11/28/2009 21:57 NWA7270 DC9Q D 30L 77.6 11/03/200917:30 BTA2951 E145 D 17 77.4 11/13/2009 19:40 FFT797 A318 D 17 77.3 11/11/200913:54 AAL1827 MD80 D 17 76.9 11/12/200911:29 NWA2945 A319 D 17 76.4 11/08/200910:51 NWA7332 DC9Q D 17 76.4 11/19/2009 8:26 CC1706 B72Q D 17 76 (RMT Site#33) North River Hills Park, Burnsville Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d!3) 11/05/200911:15 AAL835 MD80 D 17 82.6 11/24/200918:34 AAL1 167 MD80 D 17 82.6 11/30/200911:02 AAL1408 MD80 D 17 82 11/16/2009 7:44 NWA7185 DC9Q D 17 81.4 11/16/2009 7:21 AAL1605 MD80 D 17 81.3 11/01/200913:47 AAL1827 MD80 D 17 81.3 11/13/2009 9:21 NWA7035 DC9Q D 17 81.2 11/12/2009 20:09 NWA7201 DC9Q D 17 81.2 11/08/200913:52 AAL1827 MD80 D 17 80.7 11/22/200914:43 NWA700 DC9Q D 17 80.4 - 32 - Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#34) Pizri flak Park Riirnsville Dateffime Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/07/2009 23:13 N615PA 672Q D 17 83.4 11/06/2009 20:11 NWA7201 DC9Q D 17 81.5 11/17/2009 9:15 NWA7035 DC9Q D 17 78.6 11/13/200913:41 NWA7197 DC9Q D 17 78.1 11/04/2009 6:11 AAL570 MD80 D 17 78.1 11/10/2009 8:56 AAL675 MD80 D 17 78 11/23/2009 7:28 AAL2263 MD80 D 17 78 11/1112009 22:02 NWA7323 DC9Q D 17 77.9 11/05/200911:15 AAL835 MD80 D —1--17 17 77.4 11/24/200918:34 AAL1 167 MD80 D 17 77.1 (RMT Site#35) 71 ('Znrnpf I n FAnAn Dateffirre Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/. Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/30/2009 6:00 DAL1 073 MD80 D 17 87.3 11/30/200911:30 NWA2945 A320 D 17 86.6 11/30/200910:27 DAL377 MD80 D 17 85.7 11/05/2009 6:03 FDX471 B72Q D 17 84.7 11/04/2009 6:16 FDX471 B72Q D 17 84.5 11/20/2009 6:34 DAL1500 MD80 D 17 84.4 11/02/200911:44 NWA7318 DC9Q A 35 83.8 11/05/2009 6:45 DAL1500 MD80 D 17 83.6 11/20/2009 6:52 FDX471 B72Q D 17 83.2 11/04/2009 8:19 CC1706 B72Q D 17 82.9 (Kivi i bitegoo) Prinr nnlec A qrni if Pnnrl AnnIP \/,qllpv Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/04/2009 6:17 FDX471 B72Q D 17 82.8 11/30/2009 6:01 DAL1073 MD80 D 17 81.9 11/30/200910:14 NWA7291 DC9Q D 17 81.4 11/09/200917:16 NWA2186 A319 A 35 81.3 11/26/200910:22 NWA7168 DC9Q A 35 81.1 11/20/2009 6:34 DAL1500 MD80 D 17 81 11/02/2009 7:43 NWA7226 DC9Q A 35 81 11/19/200919:51 NWA7278 DC9Q A 35 8 11/20/2009 7:36 NWA7298 DC9Q A 35 81 11/16/200912:10 NWA2209 A320 A 35 80.9 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 - 33 - Top'Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2009 (RMT Site#37) 4399 Woodqate Ln. N., Eaqan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure - Runway Lmax(dB) 11/21/200914:51 NWA7350 DC9Q D 17 83 11/22/200914:17 AAL1196 MD80 D 17 82.8 11/06/200912:23 NWA7240 DC9Q D 17 82.5 11/24/200914:37 AAL1779 MD80 D 17 82.5 11/22/200911:51 NWA7184 DC9Q D 17 82.3 11/03/200913:29 NWA7242 DC9Q D 17 82.3 11/12/200917:32 NWA7262 DC9Q D 17 82.2 11/11/200916:03 AAL676 MD80 D 17 81.9 11/27/2009 6:39 FDX471 B72Q D 17 81.9 11/18/200910:22 DAL377 MD80 D 17 81.9 (RMT Site#38) 3957 Turauoise Cir., Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/18/2009 9:23 DAL1597 MD80 D 17 86.8 11/22/200916:16 DAL1620 MD80 D 17 86 11/21/200916:11 DAL1620 MD80 D 17 85.9 11/21/200914:42 DAL1563 MD80 D 17 85.8 11/18/200910:21 DAL377 MD80 D 17 85.7 11/17/200914:41 DAL1563 MD80 D 17 85.5 11/11/200914:46 NWA7003 DC9Q D 17 85.4 11/17/200911:36 DAL1565 MD80 D 17 85.3 11/01/200913:21 DAL1627 MD80 D 17 85 11/13/2009 7:20 AAL1605 MD80 D 17 85 (RMT Site#39) 3477 St. Charles PI.. Eagan Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/22/2009 11:35 DAL1565 MD80 D 17 88.6 11/13/200913:16 DAL1627 MD80 D 17 88 11/18/2009 8:02 CC1706 B72Q D 17 87.9 11/23/200910:33 DAL377 MD80 D 17 87.9 11/13/200913:02 NWA321 B744 D 22 87.6 11/03/200916:10 DAL1620 MD80 D 17 87.5 11/03/2009 22:29 CC1705 B72Q D 17 87.4 11/24/2009 9:07 CC1706 B72Q D 17 87.2 11/05/200916:20 DAL1620 MD80 D 17 86.6 11/27/2009 7:57 AAL543 MD80 D 17 86.3 November 2009 Remote Monitoring Tower Top Ten Summary The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for November 2009 were comprised of 86.9% departure operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the DC9Q with 31.4% of the highest Lmax events. November 2009 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 2009. -34- Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL November 2009 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #1 #2 #3 #4 1 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 11/01/2009 56.8 58.3 61.2 60.6 65.8 67.9 52.5 54.2 24.7 NA NA NA 54.3 59.8 55.7 11/02/2009 50.9 54.4 60.3 59.7 70.6 69.8 63.1 57.8 31.6 29.9 27 40.3 36.6 58.6 44.4 11/03/2009 58.1 59.9 64.3 61 1 67 66.5 52.6 51.6 32.4 NA 30.5 27.9 55 58 58.2 11/04/2009 54.5 56.7 58.4 59.9 65.5 71 64.5 58.7 NA 33.7 NA NA 39.8 59.8 36.9 11/05/2009 57.2 59.7 63.4 60.4 65.9 69 56.5 55.2 NA 134.4 NA 1 33 54.9 61.9 57.9 11/06/2009 58.91 60 66 61.4 67.1 67.1 36.8 42.6 37.6 29.5 NA NA 60 163.6 61.5 11/07/2009 51.2 50.6 56.8 56.5 62.2 68.3 58.6 54.7 28.1 42.9 NA 30 37 57.1 33.2 11/0812009 55.6 58.8 62.1 60.3 64.1 67.7 55.3 51.1 33.5 NA NA 30.4 51.3 59.2 51.8 11/09/2009 50.6 52.3 57.3 57.2 66.1 70.2 61.9 59.1 NA NA NA NA 51.6 62 51.1 11/10/2009 54.5 58 61.7 58.9 66 65.5 45.6 40 31.2 29.1 NA 40 56.4 58.6 58.7 11 /11 /2009 55.7 58.5 62.8 592 66.9 64.8 44.4 44.9 46.6 49.4 NA NA 56.4 60.2 60.9 11112/2009 60.4161.31 67 61.4 69.9 67.1 42.1 45.2 31.1 29.2 NA 135.4 59.1 61.6 61.1 11/13/2009 57.9 60.5 64.4 61.1 70.1 69.4 62.3 54.9 NA NA NA I NA 56.7 61.2 59.8 11/14/2009 50.2 50.5 56 57.7 66 68.7 62.1 56.4 NA NA NA 32.2 NA _ 57.7 29.7 11/15/2009 53.8 54.9 58.9 59.7 67.7 69.7 59.6 56.81 26 36.8 NA NA 52.5.58.8 54.9 11/16/2009 54.4 57.2 60.6 60 68.4 169.8 159.2 57.2 40.5 55.6 46.9 NA 55 163.9 55.3 11/17/2009 54.8 58.5 59.4 60.6 66.1 67.6 55.5 55.4 NA NA NA NA 54.2 58.9 57.4 11/18/2009 56.6 60.2 60.6 61.4 68.2 70.21 59 56.8 35.6 54 153.8 NA 54.8 69.3 58 11/19/2009 54.3 55.1 59 61.5 71.4 72.7 64.9 60.2 66.4 68.9 52.5 NA .30.4 59.1 42.8 11/20/2009 52 54.9 58.5 60.31 69 71.6 61.4 59.3 35.8 32.7 36.8 33.5 39.9 59.4 42.3 11 /21 /2009 57.4 59.5 62.5 59.8 66.2 65.8 34.4 48.2 36.2 33.6 NA 33.5 53.71 56 56.5 11/22/2009 59 62.6 64.1 62.7 67.9 68.9 46.7 49.5 NA 29 NA NA 58.4 64.2 60.4. 11/23/2009 62.3 62.4 67.9 61.6 69.7 66.6 35.6 42 NA NA NA NA 58.9 60.6 60.7 11/24/2009 58.1 59.9 65.8 61.1 71.7 69 60.7 51.1 NA NA NA 34.3 53.4 61.9 53.3 11/25/2009 50.5 54.1 59.2 59.3 70.4 71.2 66.6 58.9 39.6 54.1 52.6 NA 39.4 61.2 39.2 11/26/2009 44.1 46.5 54.6 55.3 66.8 67.5 60 55.9 33.7 NA NA 41.1 NA 57 30.3 11/27/2009 57.9 58.6 61.7 58.4 66.8 64.6 50.3 41.3 36.4 38.9 36.4 36 53.4 57.5 56.2 11/28/2009 55.6 55 60.9 1 59.5 69.7 70.9 62.2 58.1 35.8 33.4 28 28.1 39.1 59.4 34.7 11/29/2009 52.3 53.9 58.9 61.51 69.9 73.3 63.5 60.7 36.5 NA NA NA ---.4 49,8 59.9 52.3 11/30/2009 52.5 55.3 59.1 59.9 1 69.2 70.9 61 58.5 NA 26.3 27.9 40.1 50.6 64 3]7 156 Mo.DNL 56.3 58.2 62.3 69.3 60.2 56 51.8 54.7 1 43.5 33.4 54.1 61 4 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 - 35 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise* Events DNS November 2009 Remote Monitoring Towers bafe #16 #17 #18 #19 kO #21 #22 1 #23 #24 #25 #26 1 #27 #28 #29 11/01/2009 63.1 51.4 58.7 54.6 46.9 52.9 55.8 60.8 57.1 53.5 55.8 50.5 56.1 52.7 11/02/2009 64.3 31.2 46.5 40.9 40.7 37.4 56.4 48.7 58.9 36.8 45.9 64 60 55.7 11/03/2009 62.2 49.2 62.6 58.6 41.91 49 53.7 61.9 57.2 54.8 49.4 47.6 60.8 53.8 11/04/2009 64.3 48 58.8 54.7 43.6 31.4 57.8 46 59.6 39.3 43.1 57.8 60.3 56.6 11/05/2009 64.7 54.6 59.9 55.3 42.4 47.6 57.7 61.8 59.6 53.4 56.4 54.9 58.7 51.9 11/06/2009 65.5 35.3 60.3 55.9 35.9 55.3 55.2 66.5 60 53 58.4 31.6 60.7 33.8 11/07/2009 62.7 49.7 56.8 51.9 43.3 33.8 53.7 51.4 56.6 31.7 42.6 53 56.2 51.8 11/08/2009 62.9 33.8 56.1 53.9 25.5 48.6 52.4 57.7 55.9 52.9 51.4 50.7 58.5 47.5 11/09/2009 63.7 NA 48.2 44.2 36.7 47.3 54.9 59 59.2 55.5 50.4 57.3 56.6 55.4 11/10/2009 61.6 54.4 59.7 55.7 47.6 48.2 53 162.2 56 53.4 55.8 NA 163.4 31.71 11/11/2009 60.8 NA 60.6 55.1 NA 49.4 50 64 56.5 56.6 56 NA 59.2 38.2 11/12/2009 60.2 46.4 60.8 57.1 44.4 53.5 58 65.4 58 54.3 58.9 41.6 58.8 32 11/13/2009 62.8 47.2 60.6 57.7 44.8 55.6 54.9 64.5 59.3 53.3 59.1 53.8 59.3 47.9 11/14/2009 62.4 54.2 54.4 46.6 42 136.4 53.3, 44 156.5 37.9 41.3 55 158.3 55.6 11/15/2009 63.7 49.8 57.2 50.4 40.7 47.4 53.4 60 57.1 52 51.4 56.8 56.9 52.3 11/16/2009 63.6 NA 54.2 50.3 37.9 46.8 54.1 61.9 60 53.9 56 57.7 58.1 51.6 11/17/2009 62.1 48.3 60.2 58.4 33.2 48.5 51.6 62.8 55.8 53.7 54.6 52.7 66.5 48.7.1 11/18/2009 67.2 NA 156.9 53 1 NA 51 160.3.63.7 64.71 57 55.9 56.5 60.2 47 11/19/2009 61.5 55 56.3 46.4 40.6 32 56.2 52.3 59.2 38.8 49 1 62 58.9 56.2 11/20/2009 60.9 55.11 59.3 55.7 50 37.2 55.3 543 58.9 46.3 50.5 NA 59.8 54.2 11/21/2009 59.4 41.9 61.9 58.5 35.6 47.2 52.9 60.7 54.6 54.3 51 37.5 60.5 42.2 11/22/2009 64.9 31.2 58.3 53 34.9 52.1 55.5 65.7 61.3 56.8 59.6 47.1 57.2 42.2 11/23/2009 61.8 NA 59.3 56.7 NA 53.1 52.4 65.2 57.1 55.1 57.2 48.8 60.7 31_ 11/24/2009 65.5 41.3 58.6 55.7 NA 50.2 54.6 61 58.2 53.5 58.2 52.6 61 38.8 11/25/2009 66.2 46.2 42.6 24.6 48.9 NA 58.7 47.6 60.9 44 45.1 60.3 61.7 53.9 11/26/2009 61.8 44.2 56.1 42.2 49.9 31 53.8 43.3 55.6 25.6 36.6 56.7 57.5 52.1 11/27/2009 59.7 53.6 62.6 57.3 45.1 50.3 51.2 60.4 54.9 52.2 54.5 35.3 61.2 28.6 11/28/2009 63.1 54.2 58.4 52.2 46.8 31.4 55 50 58.6 45.4 48.3 58.1 62.5 53.4 11/29/2009 65.3 49.9 54.1 44.1 41.2 48 55.8 58.9 58.7 46.8 52.9 59.7 59.9 51.9 11 /30/2009 65.9 45.9 53.1 49.5 46 50.4 57.1 61 61.1 52.6 56.6 57.9 57.5 55.5 63.6 49.8 58..6 54.5 43.8 .49.5 55.5 61.3 58.9 52.7 54.7 56.2 60.2 52 Report Generated: 12/11/2009 12:20 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL November 2009 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 11/01/2009 62.7 53.7 45.9 51.3 43.1 49 48.8 48.1 53 53.5 11/02/2009 50.6 39.7 NA NA 38.2 53.7 55.9 32 NA 26 11/03/2009 65.2 53.1 42.2 50.6 45.8 57.1 54.9 51.9 54.8 59.7 11/04/2009 64.8 46.8 46.4 50 51.7 59.5 60 42.1 33.3 NA 11/05/2009 64.3 47.7 41.8 47.5 48.7 59.9 57.8 49.9 f 51 51.91 11/06/2009 62.4 47.8 41.3 48.5 42.7 45 145.2 50.9 55.8 57.6 11/07/2009 64.7 42.9 39.3 51.9 54.5 58 57.3 42.8 NA NA 11/08/2009 62.5 45.1 44.2 44.2 38.9 49.6 48.2 49.4 52.1 53.7 11/09/2009 45.4 26.4 42.5 NA 31 50.4 54.6 25,9 34.9 43.3 11/10/2009 63.8 53 41.6 46.5 46.7 53.2 50.8 49.1 54.1 54.8. 11/11/2009 61.4 46.7 39.2 45.8 50.3 49.4 33.9 49.2 53.1 56 11/12/2009 60.7 47.3 40.6 45.8 25.3 47.1 140.2 49.4 52.8 56.3 11/13/2009 63.3 48.9 41.4 47.8 42 51.2 43.7 49.8 52.4 56.7 11/14/2009 48.9 29.4 36.2 42.1 40.4 50 153.6 41.1, NA NA 11/15/2009 60.5 42.6 42.6 45.9 49.1 54.61 56 42.5 NA 41.9 11116/2009 57.3 28.3 NA 46.4 39.7 51.3 54.3 37.8 47.8 48.3 11/17/2009 64.9 49.8 46.3 49.1 49.2 52.9 51.6 51.5 53.5 50.7 11/18/2009 60.4 41.8 39.5 48.2 41.7 50.7 53.3 50.2 53.9 53.3 11/19/2009 57.5 53.6 37.1 1 NA 27.7 53.8 56.4 1 NA 134.7 NA 11/20/2009 65.21 51 45.5 49.3 47.3 60.4 59.8 47.1 44.6 39.3, 11/21/2009 62.9 49.4 43.7 47.8 38.4 49.6 44.3 50.9 54 58.71 11/22/2009 60.7 42.9 40.1 47.3 36 47.8 47.8 50 54.1 55.6 11/23/2009 63 46.1 39.5 48.4 40.1 48.7 37.8 50.7 53.7 57.3 11/24/2009 64.8 41.7 26.7 48.9 38.7 50.9 47.6 50.4 53.4 53.8 11/25/2009 47.7 41.3 NA 29.7 31.7 51.3 54.5 38.7 NA 37.2 11/26/2009 46.1 NA NA NA 38.2 50.7 53.7 43.7 NA NA 11/27/2009 63.3 43.8 40.3 49.2 36.7 51.9 44.7 53.7 55.2 57 11/28/2009 61.11 47 45.8 48.1 145.7 54.7 57.1 38.9 28.8 NA 11/29/2009 48.7 NA NA 44.1 33.3 52.6 54.8 43.9 NA NA 11/30/2009 60.1 3312 48.6 46.3 48.4 58.8 57.7 48.8 44.1 36.9 Mo.DNL 62 47.7 42.3 47.4 45.9 54.3 54.4 48.4. 51.1 53.4 Report Generated: 12/1112009 12:20 -37- 10/01/2009 - 1 Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport MSP r . 1 igi 35 This report is for informational purposes only and cannot be used for enforcement purposes. Metropolitan Airports Commission 3104 Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L and 12R in October 2009 3005 (96.8%) of those Operations Remained in the Corridor 3104* Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations 3005 (96.8%) Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations in the Corridor < "This number includes 8 12R departure tracks that began beyond the corridor boundaries; therefore the compliance of these 8 tracks is undetermined. Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:51 Page 1 l� Minneapolis St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for In Corridor Gate 1 10/01/2009 00:00:00 - 10/31/2009 23:59:59 Gate: Left = 343 Right = 2662 (88.6%) 3005 Tracks Crossed (11.4%), -0 I ..._ t. .. ! 1 .., �........,. .i irf .. ... .... .,.. r •- i 6000. ."+. ,1. i 5000:' T 45001, a000.. ° i"t 0 r 7 N 3800 f! [J Lk 4 �•,� r} p' Ca n{-. W 30001, Cr C,. J r Q'u d 47ir' �'y^''P•'%i� �-�'t `i � yf+rl7ti'r � t y �rS�P�}1r"Il � r W 7 ��} .. r1 "T r •4 7 ii SXr C1 i 4.. T_7l )�J' L i F , J IloZ U i.gtt7 1 77it , tT �1�. Yf��i xi l tti F� i Q 43 7' p ono r ' ;01 aq 1.20 11oq , O e0 60 04o i 0 2oy7 O 00 0 20� 10 90 0 60 -'" O 601 S:oq 1�2o f1 q0 � 1 j'S,0 � t � Dnvi ation Ffom Centers of Gate (Miles} , t � ,, t f �'zin cases; here .altitude 3nF.ar`.inotion is}:unavailat4'ie; that ;o'eratlon;'is':�:not re resented inr'abo a gr h1. ` f t 1 1 < "This number includes 8 12R departure tracks that began beyond the corridor boundaries; therefore the compliance of these 8 tracks is undetermined. Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:51 Page 1 l� Metropolitan Airports Commission 0 (0%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were North of the 090° Corridor Boundary During October 2009 Of Those, 0(—jReturned to Corridor Before Reaching SE Border of Ft. Snelling State Park rpt d > p i 11 uaimii 'iertr'i Lt��k�� ,;.i } ' i�,m:aur V ; jit 1 tt,, Pump i t i VM f : 1 Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for North Corridor Gate 10/01/2009 00:00:00 - 10/31/2009 23:59:59 0 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 0 (0%), Right = 0 Page 2 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 11/1b/zuuy 14:o'i Metropolitan Airports Commission 91 (2.9%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were South of the Corridor (South of 30L Localizer) During October 2009 Of Those, 0(—)Returned to Corridor Before Reaching SE Border of Ft. Snelling State Park ! . Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for South Corridor Gate 10/01/2009 00:00:00 - 10/31/2009,23:59:59 91 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 71 (78%), Right = 20 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:51 Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission 10 (0.3%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were 5° South of the Corridor (5' South of 30L Localizer) During October 2009 A., Minneapolis -St. Paul -.V Penetration Gate Plot for 5' South Corridor Gate 1 10/01/2009 00:00:000/31/2009 23:59:59 'A 10 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 10 (100%), Right = 0 (0%) ... .. .... . .. LL500 C 8000: W 3000: 7 Page 4 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure uornaor Analysis. Nepon UeHeIaLUU. 1 11 1 U14UUZ7 I -t -,J I Metropolitan Airports Commission Top 15 Runway 12L/12R Departure Destinations for October 2009 Airport City H(deg' )g tops Percent of Total Ops ORD CHICAGO (O'HARE) 1240 173 5.6% DEN DENVER 237° 111 3.6% ATL ATLANTA 1490 98 3.2%° MDW CHICAGO (MIDWAY) 1240 93 3% MKE MILWAUKEE 1140 69 2.2% DTW DETROIT 105° 67 2.2% SEA SEATTLE 278° 65 2.1% DFW DALLAS/ FORT WORTH 1930 65 2.1% STL ST LOUIS 1600 62 2% IAH HOUSTON 1850 60 1.9% EWR NEW YORK 1060 52 1.7% SFO SAN FRANCISCO 251 ° 51 1.6% LAX LOS ANGELES 2380 47 1.5% LAS LAS VEGAS 2430 46 1.5% FAR FARGO 312° 42 1.4% Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 14:51 Page 5 //2009 - 11/ Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport 5 oNP dli,r � 5 T 36 `F+ GSAM1' This report is for informational purposes only and cannot be used for enforcement purposes. Metropolitan Airports Commission 2559 Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L and 12R in November 2009 2479 (96.9%) of those Operations Remained in the Corridor Bloomiq\ 2559 Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations 2479(96.9%) Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations in the Corridor it Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for In Corridor Gate 11/1/2009 00:00:00 - 11/30/2009 23:59:59 2479 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 1456 (58.7%), Right =. 1023 (41.3% g Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 15:59 Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission 31 (1.2%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were North of the 090° Corridor Boundary During November 2009 Of Those, 0( )RpturnPd to Corridor Before Reaching SE Border of Ft. Snelling State Park iii i ,' t,• 4 jun �, 1 ''a i� \ 'f � I _ i/+Ili. ��`f i t �\"_t .. .:1� � ` �� ,�� `,a•' li 1 0 ) ',:1• Illy I �j \\t J / f l�li,t f f jai l� SS I ' S7 (� 1 i�� 1��i � � r� 1./.ry° 00b. • �r ti, " r ` sly ,' to � S�'�''�,�� j (' ott Sne111I�g �Gn rg) x ,. Il �tichfleld (a�l + r ��r rj f hflsh Lae ti S, N}wport J'-- � ji I' II �I fA I I g, JE VS7 I!Parrk, LU 1 .t f \ 7n�er Grog HelghE's'i I s. r t ` . Grey/Gloudl1lslan-, w c i� ! urns Vllle �++i 11 r ..� I 7 z pR 5 r ,., le, Valley ' ; r `iRosemo�nt I ..�• ,:, i; ... '__ is Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for North Corridor Gate 11/1/2009 00:00:00 - 11/30/2009 23:59:59 31 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 2 (6.5%), Right = 29 (93.5% Page 2 Monthly Cagannvlenaoia neigrns uctiallut-tt+��+ u,y�,�• ,�r- -- --- Metropolitan Airports Commission 49 (1.9%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were South of the Corridor (South of 30L Localizer) During November 2009 Of Those, 0(—)Returned to Corridor Before Reaching SE Border of Ft. Snelling State Park Irl M Doth St .1 01 f C�1Ne�wport 3, 11� YV'Paul Pa* 1`71 ve H Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 15:59 Page 3 r - Metropolitan Airports Commission 4 (0.2%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were 50 South of the Corridor (5° South of 30L Localizer) During November 2009 Iut,�Paul i \r, sl C 1 { ILIYsr II PI f1`CP- Ilyd 4 /Woodb ` f, / la II<lae jNest St Pani \ i, ~ routh St (- rr Snelling (Un r9 )r IE12 +�. fieI p (� I� r l �{ r �l 1'�I ' 1� Sunrishh L,al�it sl dew ort r I� �l t li �r . Bloomn,`�ton r' - .'r f �/ I n� f '�I j 5 -St, "Paul Park , j L 1131 SJU Il er Gr u NeighCs•'` t�, it L Ib }Tw J;' - • I j Grey Cloud llsiandp .r , .f } :. I( ;. Il F' 't` tV 1 r•IPNi F1vCr� t fIt PPIe Valleyi� osemof�nt i Page 4 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 15:59 Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for 5° South Corridor Gate 11/1/2009 00:00:00 - 11/30/2009 23:59:59 4 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 4 (100%), Right = 0 (0%) } r 1 ,6000 r , ...._ .... .. , ;5500,' m 1 W X000 ` y .- 8 1 6 1':4 1 2 10 0 8 0:6 O 4 OL2 0 O 0:2 0 4 O"6 i].eviati on`.From Center of.;Gate (M }les? '. *in cajbe 6h—e altitudes i infor•matf on .is �un ailnl]le tnat o c� tion is�'ii t r p esented Sn bo e 8 i-� i Page 4 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 15:59 Metropolitan Airports Commission Top 15 Runway 12L/1 2R Departure Destinations for November 2009 Airport City (deg) #ops Percent of Total Ops SEA SEATTLE 2780 112 4.4% ORD CHICAGO (O'HARE) 124- 90 3.5% FAR FARGO 2° —1— 85 3.3% BIS BISMARCK 29- 79 3.1% SLC SALT LAKE CITY --252- 71 2.8% YYZ TORONTO 950 70 2.7% GRB GREEN BAY 90- 67 2.6% DLH DULUTH 190 66 2.6% GFK GRAND FORKS 3160 60 2.3% SFO SANFRANCISCO 58 2.3% PDX PORTLAND 2720 57 2.2% YWG WINNIPEG 3300 55 2.1% —21% LAS LAS VEGAS --24-3- 5-4 LAX LOS ANGELES 2380 53 2.1% BOS—F -BOSTON T7:97 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/11/2009 1 1 5:59 Page 5 10/01/2009 - 10/31/2009 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport MSP 36 'M Tow P1041 r 1 l 1 t� �4��114i •1 ��tf ��''t�i��s ��tt ...........t1ti��itp� t � *This report is for informational purposes only and cannot be used for enforcement purposes. 1785 Carrier Jets Departed Runway 17 - 10/01/2009 - 10/31/2009 Runway 17 Departure Overflight Grid Analysis Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 1010112009-1013112009. Report Generated: 1111612009 15:31 - 1 - J5' Y!J, V, .7 7 j r 0 6 20 0 10 25 F, 17 7, 77, W I 493 3 2 . X384 3 8 333 11,07, 5 24i 278 2 9 � 19 44 59 Art 0249 B6 1 �\ . . ... .. 180 ; 1 2 283 28 V71 Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 1010112009-1013112009. Report Generated: 1111612009 15:31 - 1 - Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 10/01/2009-10/31/2009 77=� 1771 (99.2%) West Bound Carrier JJ 14 (0.8%) Carrier Jet Departure Departure Operations Flying the Runway 17 Jet Operations Turned West Before Passing Over the Departure Procedure (Passing Over the 2.5 NIVI Runway 17 2.5 NM Turn Point. This is 1.4E+14% Turn Point) and Runway 17 Eastbound Carrier Jet of 0 Westbound Departures Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report- 1010112009-1013112009. Report Generated: 1111612009 15:31 - 2 - Runway 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 10/01/2009 - 10/31/2009 Y I ( r i i li. ....... 1 F 85 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of Runway 17 in 10/01/2009 - 10/31/2009 (10:30 p.m.-6:00a.m.) 0 (0%) West Bound Carrier Jet I� 6 (7.1%) West Bound Carrier Jet Departures Turned West Between 2.5 and 3.0 NM Departures Turned West After 3.0 NM from Start of from Start of Takeoff and Remained Over the Takeoff and Remained Over the Minnesota River Minnesota River Valley (trending with Runway 17 Valley (trending with Runway 17 River Departure River Departure Heading) Procedure) 1 (1.2%) Carrier Jet Departures Turned m ' 13 (15.3%) Remaining West Bound West Before Passing Over the Runway 17 2.5 NM Carrier Jet Departures Flew the Runway 17 Jet Turn Point Departure Procedure (Passing Over the 2.5 NM Turn Point), and with an enroute heading to the destination airport 65 (76.5°/x) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 10/01/2009-10/31/2009. Report Generated: 11/16/2009 15:31 - 3 - Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations ..... . .... 1y ) '. ;" it 2 if �l `' tTw,'! } V ?' 1 I: -. 1 77T. --: 4' s 1. P. 10 4_ I Q/ =ti Qom_ {i ` 1 t 0 I 2?t M4 t ua- IW� 5 J � T-7 v7P 11 7)1-4 fj', ti j 22 ........... 21 to q 7" .. .... ...... Su I VA II r—%. LEGENU Existing RNIT's P.Linway 17-35 RMTs Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 1010112009-1013112009. Report Generated. 1111612009 15:31 4 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise Levels - QNL dBA 10/01/2009-10/31/2009 Date #30 , #31 1 #32 #33 #34 #35 1 #36 #37 1 #37 #3 #38 #38 #3 #39 1 68.4 52.2 46.7 46.3 36.8 53.8 29.7 53 57.1 2 60.5 33.7 NA NA 3.5 60.6 62.9 40 NA NA 3 52.6 NA NA NA 32.1 55.9 57.9 31.3 27.2 NA 4 52.5 42.6 47.5 45.8 43.5 56.1 58.3 NA NA NA 5 62.6 40.3 34.8 36.8 39.1 50.8 52.6 52.9 57 49.3 6 NA 39 38.2 NA 36.7 58.4 60.6 NA 7 NA 45.3 NA 39.2 43.6 52.2 54.2 48.1 42.8 33.9 8 53.6 34.3 44.5 43.7 51,7 58.8 59 45.4 40.4 NA 9 54.3 NA 38.7 39 36.1 56.4 58.9 33.6 NA 37.2 10 48.4 NA NA NA 24.5 53.7 56.4 32.6 NA NA 11 47.5 43.8 34.3 NA 32.6 53 56.1 28.6 NA NA 12 62.2 45.1 36.3 45.6 39.5 55.1 56.6 52.6 55.2 51.1 13 63.3 45 45.4 51.2 52.7 57.4 58.4 52 57.5 51.2 14 60.6 49.2 48.6 46.6 44.6 43.5 44.7 48.1 47.5 48.2 15 66.4 49.2 42.4 48.1 44.6 57.7 59.1 52.5 54 55.3 - 16 62.3 45.6 43.4 47.4 924 58.5 59.5 38.7 38.6 NA 17 53.5 34 38.6 41.3 34.8 52.7 55.6 42.1 44.8 46.6 18 53.4 48.6 NA 43.5 38.6 41.1 40.7 47.4 48.4 44.2 19 53.6 33.3 38 NA 46.5 55.4 58.4 47.2 31.6 NA 20 55.5 NA NA NA 39.4 56.6 60.5 35.3 32 NA 21 58 NA NA 39.8 42.1 59.2 61.7 NA NA NA 22 53 25.1 44.3 32.2 38.4 55.9 59.2 39.9 32.7 NA 23 57.4 33.3 27.8 31.1 NA 59.3 62 NA 35.4 NA 24 52.9 33.2 30.2 39.3 28.5 53.6 56 40.5 42.7 41.8 25 57.6 NA NA 46.7 NA 57.8 58.7 44.1 48.3 48.3 26 59.7 44.2 NA 39.5 45.3 56 57.7 52.3 53.1 59.5 27 62.1 48.8 45.8 38.5 41.4 47.8 39.3 52.6 58.5 NA 28 60.9 51.5 33.5 41.4 30.2 49 44.2 49.7 50.3 53.2 29 67.6 42.5 33.2 46.5 39.9 54.4 40.8 53.9 56.8 55.1 30 62.3 54.5 51.7 48.8 35.1 56.9 58.2 49.3 52.6 57.4 31 49.3 NA 46.4 NA 32.5 52.2 55.4 NA 26.8 NA Av. DNL 60.7 45.7 42.7 43.6 44.1 56 57.9 48.1 50.9 50.4 Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report- 1010112009-1013112009. Report Generated: 1111612009 15:31 - 5 - Aircraft Noise Levels DNL dBA 10/01/2009-10/31/2009 RMT Aircraft DNL Aircraft DNL,. Aircraft DNL Aircraft DNL ORD 10/01106-10/31/06 10/01/07-10/31/07 10/01/08-10/31/08 10/01 /2009-10/31/2009 30 60.5 641 64.5 60.7 31 45.6 51.1 48.4 _ 45.7 32 41.7-- 47.6 45.9 42.7 33 48.1-- 48.4 49 - 43.6 34 43.6-- 44.9 48.4 - 44.1 35 52..6-- 58.3 55.8 - 56 36 52.5..-- 58.2 54.8 57.9 37 47.4 50 48.7 48.1 1 38 49 52.2 50.9 50.9 39 48.5 53.8 52.4 50.4 Top 15 Runway 17 Departure Destination Report Airport City Heading (deg.) #Ops Percent of Total Op ORD CHICAGO (O -HARE) 124' 83 4.7% DEN DENVER 237' 63 3.5% MDW CHICAGO (MIDWAY) 124' 56 3.1% ATL ATLANTA 48 2.7% -6-F-W DALLAS/ FORT WORTH 34 1.9% MKE MILWAUKEE 114°-- 3-2 1.8% -STL ST LOUIS 160' 31 1.7% DTW DETROIT 105' 28 1.6% EWR NEW YORK 106' 27 1.5% DCA WASHINGTON D.C. (REAGAN NATIONAL) 117' 27 1.5% PHX PHOENIX 231' -26 1.5% IAH HOUSTON 16-5° 25 1.4% LGA NEW YORK (LA GUARDIA) 105, 25 1.4% PHL PHILADELPHIA ill, 24 1.3% MCO ORLANDO- 151' 23 1.3% Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report- 1010112009-1013112009. Report Generated: 1111612009 15:31 - 6 - 4345 Carrier Jets Departed Runway 17 - 11/1/2009 11/30/2009 ,,,neap plis! APd, t �jt. OUIA a ',2P IN,A FTT S —4 yr I N, M i x 41, x 0 V r r _s t -t + , ;'r t is c} r�Ai � �J � 1 7 , , ,;w t � �, Runway 17 Departure Overflight Grid Analysis JFAU�11� NZWW*Wam� IMMM • H 03� � ` • I i � 01I Icy � � ter® � F0 • - i M-1010 MWWWri 11Z ....... . . . . . BOOM P, E 01 li am F ;& - M� iM SAN I Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 111112009-1113012009. Report Generated. 1211012009 08:47 Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 11/1 /2009-11/30/2009 o 3 (0.1 %) Carrier Jet Departure 4342 (99.9 /o) West Bound Carney Jet Departure Operations Flying the Runway 17 Jet Operations Turned West Before Passing Over the Departure Procedure (Passing Over the 2.5 NM Runway 17 2.5 NM Turn Point. This is 3.0E+13% Turn Point) and Runway 17 Eastbound Carrier Jet of 0 Westbound Departures Departure Operations Vit l 156 ,, , �i �� r,ee t �� West St Pgl�i 1 tt�i i rr� r 1 nu �__, Somt�i St a .. i �i `i, i I( ort ETq,e tng (unor ) ` (- : , ?--� ;� �y{• - f �, x.1i i {i Rlc field 7 F I ._ ss J� �lrifis]i e k— f t `' Y L 1 f � 4 M"I�� t )'l It ±O` Runway 17%35 2 S j�auticaJ e Tt�rrjpg of 4 t I 17S 4f� ypo'mingtp t d 1 S{ , c tiw r.A 1, N '�•�`'� s`�(j /�i �.. '^, � � t� l�s �i >t+i y Iq t }i tai i , , j r � 1 li ty y� r a� 1 Ir t4i� LY xt�t r�, 5� 9� anr°y yS 11 r el �t Y , SLA fp lta i e h1S. FI ,� v r 4 i. ✓'✓ l �✓ I �i: d r i i �, ,� 41 t �� IRJ F � � c r. � v`�'r i y i x [ i -v Jh .� t `� �.: '{ �� 7 � } ..7,jXI �II A e nV rs'ni� t t4 i 1�? rat' l� lyse. , i I{ It Sa�7aget i It 1 u1� d' ! 71 i'I 7fr,s C 3 , x� s,Y t i't .i L �Ir, 1 -hurl Iq r, + 4 tj 15 i t t t sr tis v 1iC 7° r �'dt �. }? 1 r ;tial 4 I i L 1 4 r ;�n� T,�II P , .3. IY rf.�.�x 7,L ✓�J�� If° �J'rA Ie Valu `�r� i tr` 1 Jtr s IiROSerjlOU�t �` ,, of t � 13 ✓ � z �k��flf �f PPi it Yh t5. �c (<4� 4 . t f� t� r iG: �� i +" x ✓r 7fir bi}{{{)L? Sal': r r�r\��-T 1_..iLL.� ..1. to ` o `.. o Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report- 11/1/2009-11/30/2009. Report Generated: 12/10/2009 08:47 - 2 - Runway 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 11/1/2009 - 11/30/2009 zso ti MinneapZilis { r I a-i'rr I •en � j.: 143 West St Pa 'IOU J ape, 1{\ ''t St. aUpS - f; ', o� Snelling {uno g } , ; ! t nu �jSoul� EE I Richfieldf� r�ff� ii l { ' Sunfish La ! _r , 4, e r rk I ( �! �, F rr1 un.t I Ic ,a•:,�rc:r ��i , 111 I � Ill ! I 1 1. ;;eloontingt6g, I .fp , , v5 ,,,-, s -' .. �_ �' _ • -z _ } .._ ___I-,.�__�{ 1. ,Y-- v`}� ,Burnsville �, ( •" it '.(.',. '- -' L. n� {,, 7 z Sava"' "Rose 'ount �tl i 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of Runway 17 in 11/1/2009 - 11/30/2009 (10:30 p.m.-6:00a.m.) 0 (0%) West Bound Carrier Jet 4 (23.5%) West Bound Carrier Jet Departures Turned West Between 2.5 and 3.0 NM Departures Turned West After 3.0 NM from Start of from Start of Takeoff and Remained Over the Takeoff and Remained Over the Minnesota River Minnesota River Valley (trending with Runway 17 Valley (trending with Runway 17 River Departure River Departure Heading) Procedure) 0 (0%) Carrier Jet Departures Turned 4 (23.5%) Remaining West Bound West Before Passing Over the Runway 17 2.5 NM Carrier Jet Departures Flew the Runway 17 Jet Turn Point Departure Procedure (Passing Over the 2.5 NM Turn Point), and with an enroute heading to the destination airport 9 (52.9%) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 11/1/2009-11/30/2009. Report Generated: 12/10/2009 08:47 - 3 - Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations aPklns, I; + 1 r IIS! $x raI AU; West ! 1 v< < ichfield : pp � --h 3, uf,a e; '------��.i`��II`r E' 1 r + I ` .�el ` I ' 3 i) `Bloomingfo� II `� r � . I� , aganON f r 1 � L Jfl 7 tr ti 11 ltti 7 �r��ilE 117 1',�kF .7 ;y � i. 5 —' Burnsville Gal i ..Savage PIe;Velley. Rc i Jl 111 4 i� ?Yi tii1 : 1 r,`„{;,tj` , Existing RNIT's �gi]. g e.. Runway 17-35 R6''+,,IT's Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 11/1/2009-11/30/2009. Report Generated: 12/10/2009 08:47 4 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise Levels - QNL dBA 11/1/2009-11/30/2009 Date #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 1 62.7 53.7 45.9 51.3 43.1 49 48.8 48.1 53 53.5 2 50.6 39.7 NA NA 38.2 53.7 55.9 32 NA 26 3 65.2 53.1 42.2 50.6 45.8 57.1 54.9 51.9 54.8 59.7 4 64.8 46.8 46.4 50 51.7 59.5 60 42.1 33.3 NA 5 64.3 47.7 41.8 47.5 48.7 59.9 57.8 49.9 51 51.9 6 62.4 47.8 41.3 48.5 42.7 45 45.2 50.9 55.8 57.6 7 64.7 42.9 39.3 51.9 54.5 58 57.3 42.8 NA NA 8 62.5 45.1 44.2 44.2 38.9 49.6 48.2 49.4 52.1 53.7 9 45.4 26.4 42.5 NA 31 50.4 54.6 25.9 34.9 43.3 10 63.8 53 41.6 46.5 46.7 53.2 50.8 49.1 54.1 54.8 11 61.4 46.7 39.2 45.8 50.3 49.4 33.9 49.2 53.1 56 12 60.7 47.3 40.6 45.8 25.3 47,1 40.2 49.4 52.8 56.3 13 63.3 48.9 41.4 47.8 42 51.2 43.7 49.8 52.4 56.7 14 48.9 29.4 36.2 42.1 40.4 50 53.6 41.1 NA NA 15 60.5 42.6 42.6 45.9 49.1 54.6 56 42.5 NA 41.9 16 57.3 28.3 NA 46.4 39.7 51.3 54.3 37.8 47.8 48.3 17 64.9 49.8 46.3 49.1 49.2 52.9 51.6 51.5 53.5 50.7 18 60.4 41.8 39.5 48.2 41.7 50.7 53.3 50.2 53.9 53.3 19 57.5 53.6 37.1 NA 27.7 53.8 56.4 NA 34.7 NA 20 65.2 51 45.5 49.3. 47.3 60.4 59.8 47.1 44.6 39.3 21 62.9 49.4 43.7 47.8 38.4 49.6 44.3 50.9 54 58.7 22 60.7 42.9 40.1 47.3 36 47.8 47.8 50 54.1 55..6 23 63 46.1 39.5 48.4 40.1 48.7 37.8 50.7 53.7 57.3 24 64.8 41.7 26.7 48.9 38.7 50.9 47.6 50.4 53.4, 53.8 25 47.7 41.3 NA 29.7 31.7 51.3 54.5 38.7 NA 37.2 26 46.1 NA NA NA 38.2 50.7 53.7 43.7 NA NA 27 63.3 43.8 40.3 49.2 36.7 51.9 44.7 53.7 1 55.2 57 28 61.1 47 45.8 48.1 45.7 54.77 57.1 38.9 28.8 NA 29 48.7 NA NA 44.1 33.3 52.6 54.8 43.9 NA NA 30 60.1 33.2 48.6 46.3 48.4 58.8 57.7 48.8 44.1 36.9 Av. DNL 62 47.7 42.3 47.4 45.9 54.3 54.4 48.4 51.1 53.4 Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 111112009-1113012009. Report Generated. 1211012009 08:47 - 5 - Aircraft Noise Levels DNL dBA 11/l/2009-11/30/2009 RMT, Aircraft DNL Aircraft DNL Aircraft DNL Aircraft DNL ORD 11 /01 /06-11 /30/06 1/07-11/30/07 11 /01 /08-11 /30/08 11/l/2009-11/30/2009 30 61.2 63.1 62.5 62 31 45.6 49.5 47.4 47.7 32 42.8 44.6 45.2 42.3 33 48.6 49.9 46.2 47.4 34 43.1 48.6 43.8 45.9 35 52.9 55.2 54.7 54.3 36 52.7 55 54 54.4 -37 47.5 49.4 46.9 48.4 38 49,6 51.3 48.7 51.1 39 48.3 52.9 50.8 53.4 Top 15 Runway 17 Departure Destination Report Airport City Heading (deg.) #Ops Percent of Total Ops ORD CHICAGO (O'HARE) 124' 243 5.6% DEN DENVER 237' 234 5.4% MDW CHICAGO (MIDWAY) I24T- 199 4.6% ATL ATLANTA 149' 172 4% STL ST LOUIS 160* 138 3.2% DFW DALLAS/ FORT WORTH 193' 128 2.9% IAH HOUSTON 2.5% MKE MILWAUKEE 114' 98 2.3% EWR NEW YORK 106, 94 2.2% DTW DETROIT 105' 89 2% FSD SIOUX FALLS 245o 79 1.8% PHX PHOENIX 231' 75 1.7% DCA WASHINGTON D.C. (REAGAN NATIONAL) 72 1.7% CLE CLEVELAND 109, 71 1.6% MEM MEMPHIS 162' 71 1.6% Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 111112009-1113012009, Report Generated: 1211012009 08:47 - 6 - �� ii �.,. RM Noi Report Awport xse A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21, Number 37 November 13, 2009 NextGen L,ave -1 Jaw �;• How to prioritize airspace redesign efforts will be a key decision that the Fed- eral Aviation Administration and stakeholders in the Next Generation Air Trans- portation System (NextGen) will need to make in the near future, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) told Congress. But, considering the difficulties the FAA has had in redesigning the airspace in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia area, it may be desirable to begin airspace redesigns in less complex metropolitan areas, Gerald L. Dillingham, director of Physical Infrastructure Issues for GAO told the House Aviation Subcommittee on Oct. 28. Dillingham spoke at a hearing on challenges FAA faces in responding to recom- mendations made in the NextGen Midterm Implementation Task Force report is- sued in September. The report presented recommendations on the operational improvements to the air transportation system that should be implemented between now and 2018. It concluded that developing Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Per - (Continued on p. 149) Boston Logan Intl On Nov. 5, the Federal Aviation Administration issued an update to the Boston Logan Airport Noise Study, which is the largest, longest, most expensive, and most unique FAA -funded airport noise study in the nation. Unlike Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Studies, which are confined mainly to high noise contours around airports and consider issues such as land use planning, the Boston study area encompasses 20 nautical miles around Logan and is focused on airspace revisions to avoid overflying communities and on ground procedures to reduce noise on nearby neighborhoods. The study is being conducted in phases: Phase 1 was called the Boston Over- flight Noise Study or BONS and Phase 2 is known as Boston Logan Airport Noise Study or BLANS. A third phase is also anticipated under which environmental im- pact analysis of some of the measures will be done. Phase 1 of the study assessed low hanging fruit: measures that could reduce noise exposure levels and could be implemented as soon as possible without the more detailed review required in an environmental. assessment or environmental impact statement. Phase 2 of the study in now underway and includes both flight route and air- craft gro-und movement measures that will likely require at least an environmental (Continued on p. 150) Airport Noise Report In Th .ECi3sue. e e NextGen ... GAO tells the House Aviation Subcornmit- tee that how airspace re- design efforts are prioritized is a key decision that FAA must soon make - p. 148 Boston Logan Intl ... FAA provides an update on the noise study it is funding at Logan, which is the largest, longest, most expensive, and most unique ever done at a U.S. airport. It's expected to take nine years - p. 148 Bradley bit'l ... The Con- necticut DOT selects Era to install a new noise, flight track monitoring system at Bradley - p. 149 Lochard ... Russell Hul- strom is named vice presi- dent of Business Devel- opment at Lochard - p. 150 News Brief ... Brian Gilligan announces that he will be leaving his 10 -year stint as director of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission. to accept a teaching job at Morton College in Cicero, IL More next week. November 13, 2009 NextGen, from p.148 fonnance (RNP) procedures that redesign airspace and pro- vide significant environmental and fuel -savings benefits is one way to leverage existing technology in the near term and provide immediate benefits to the aviation industry. "RNP procedures could be a key part of relieving current congestion and delays at major metropolitan airports," Dillingham said, but stressed that even greater benefits can be realized when the procedures are part of a comprehensive air- space redesign that includes more efficient flight paths, and are not simply overlays of historical aircraft flight paths. But developing these performance-based navigation pro- cedures expeditiously will be a challenge for FAA, GAO told the committee. "Because airspace redesign and new procedures can change noise patterns, there is the potential for community concerns and legal challenges to the environmental review process, which can further delay efforts to use the airspace more efficiently. "For example, redesign has been particularly controver- sial in the New York, New Jersey, and Philadelphia areas. It took nearly seven years to complete the New York, New Jer- sey, and Philadelphia areas' airspace redesign, and despite an FAA Record of Decision in September 2007, the project still faced a number of legal challenges as well as challenges re- lated to implementation complexities. These difficulties sug- gest that it may be desirable to begin redesign efforts in less complex metropolitan areas." But, Dillingham added, "Regardless of where FAA be- gins, if airspace design is to help reduce delays in congested airspace in the near term or midterni, the Task .Force report concluded that FAA must begin. the environmental review processes now." "As FAA develops new procedures to make more effi- cient use of airspace in congested metropolitan areas, it will be challenged to complete the necessary enviromnental re- views quickly and address local concerns about the develop- ment of new procedures and airspace redesign," Dillingham said. Anytime an airspace redesign or a new procedure changes the noise footprint around an airport, an environmental re- view is initiated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Under NEPA, varying levels of enviromnental re- view must be completed depending on the extent to which FAA deems its actions to have a significant environmental impact. There are three possible levels: • Categorical exclusion determination. Under a categori- cal exclusion, an undertaking may be excluded from a de- tailed environmental review if it meets certain criteria and a federal agency has previously determined that the undertak ing will have no significant environmental impact. • Environmental assessment/finding of no significant im- pact (EA/FONSI). A federal agency prepares a written envi- ronmental assessment (EA) to determine whether or not a. federal undertaking would significantly affect the environ - I J went. If the answer is no, the agency issues a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). • Envirommental impact statement (EIS). If the agency de- termines while preparing the EA that the enviromnental con- sequences of a proposed federal undertaking may be significant, an EIS is prepared. An EIS is a more detailed evaluation of the proposed action and alternatives. "The more extensive the analysis required, the longer the process can take. A full EIS can take several years to com- plete. EAs and categorical exclusions, by contrast, take less time and resources to complete. Because NEPA does not allow consideration of the net impact of an action such as the introduction of new procedures or broader airspace re- design—which may increase noise in some areas but increase capacity at an airport and reduce noise and emissions overall —these action can often result in extensive and time- conusuming reviews," Dillingham told the Committee. "FAA is exploring situations in which it might be more appropriate to use a categorical exclusion or an EA instead of an EIS. The 2009 FAA reauthorization legislation includes language that may expedite the environmental review process. For example, the legislative proposal would allow airport operators to use grant funds for environmental re- views of proposals to implement flight procedures. The pro- posal would also allow project sponsors to provide FAA with funds to hire additional staff as necessary to expedite comple- tion of the environmental review necessary to implement flight procedures. " Bradley Intl CT DOT SELECTS ERA TO INSTALL AIRSCENE SYSTEM AT BRADLEY Era Systems Corporation, a subsidiary of SRA Interna- tional, Inc. announced that the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) has selected Era to install its new noise and flight track monitoring solution. The solution will feature Era's AirScene@.com NOMS (Noise and Operations Monitoring System), Larson Davis semi-permanent 831 noise monitoring terminals and Passur Aerospace flight tracking software. The noise and flight -tracking terminals will be installed at Bradley International Airport in Windsor Locks, Conn. — the state's largest airport and the second -busiest in New England. This advanced technology will allow the airport to handle noise complaints by correlating aircraft identification data with flight tracks to determine what flight caused a commu- nity complaint. "ConnDOT's competitive award to Era strengthens our reputation as the leading NOMS provider in North America," said Era Vice President Bill Colligan. "The hosted architec- ture of the AirScene.com product allows airports like Bradley, with limited noise management capabilities, to rapidly and Airport Noise Report November 13, 2009 cost-effectively deploy a fully functional NOMS solution with minimal airport staff involvement." In addition, Con iDOT selected Era's AirScene.com Con- tours, an optional feature of AirScene.com NOMS. AirScene.com Contours is a powerful integrated noise con- touring application and patented virtual noise monitor tool (VNM). Contours is compatible with the latest version of the FAA's integrated noise model (INM) and also will be compat- ible with the aviation environmental design tool (AEDT), the FAA's next generation modeling tool that integrates both noise and air quality. "Era Systems Corporation provides next -generation air traffic management tools that address core challenges like safety, efficiency, profitability and functionality. Its innova- tive use of proven next -generation technologies, like multilat- eration and ADS -B, help air navigation service providers (ANSPs) and airport operators ease capacity constraints; im- prove airspace and ground space efficiencies; and reduce costs," the firm said. SRA does not announce sales amounts for individual Era contracts; .Era contracts for their airport operations business typically range in value of $500,000 to $2 million. Personnel Lochard EMS, a Member of the Briiel and Kjmr Group, announced on Nov. 5 the appointment of Russell Hulstrom to the role of Vice President of Business Development. The firm said that Hulstrom "will focus on expanding Lochard's strong presence in the provision of managed serv- ices to the global airport and urban environment management market." Hulstrom rejoins Lochard after four years with Era Sys- tems Corporation in business development and general man- agement roles. He was previously Lochard's Chief Operating Officer and a key driver of Loclrard's ANOMS8 and Noise - Office offerings. "It is good to have Russell back in the team", said Martin Adams, head of Lochard EMS. "His strong background in en- vironment management and his proven track record in global business development will help Lochard to take its Managed Service business to the next level." "It is energizing to return to a business with such a com- mitment to innovation and service and such a clear focus on the environment management market", said Russell. `BrOel and Kjwr is clearly the global leader in the airport and urban noise markets, with presence in over 60 countries and the largest range of technologies, resources, and the expertise to help our customers deal with the challenges associated with noise and other envirorurrental impacts." 150 Boston, from p. 148 assessment in Phase 3 of the noise study, prior to implemen- tation. - Phase 1 began in October 2002 and ended in October 2007. Phase 2 began in October 2007 and is expected to end by December 2011. The study is the result of a mitigation requirement con- tained in the FAA's 2002 environmental Record of Decision for the Boston Logan Airside Improvements Planning Proj- ect, which included a controversial new runway at Logan, long -opposed by nearby communities. The ROD required that FAA, Massport, and the Commu- nity Advisory Committee (GAC), a coalition of community groups, work jointly to develop the scope of the noise study. They developed the scope of the noise study to determine viable means to reduce noise from aircraft at, to and from Boston Logan, which would not diminish safety and effi- ciency, and/or cause adverse impacts to other communities. CAC represents more than 30 of the 90 communities within the project study area. The Boston Logan study is unique because, for the first time, the FAA is funding an independent noise consultant (Landrum & Brown) for the, community groups. Why Is Study Taking So Long? ANR asked the FAA several questions regarding the study. Following are those questions and answers to them: Q: Why is the study taking so long and costing so much? ANR reported in 2002 that the entire study was expected to take only two years. Already it has taken seven years and pro- jections take it to 2011. Why has the timeframe for the study been so extended? A: Although the study has taken longer than originally expected, the budget and the goals we (FAA, Massport and the Logan Airport Community Advisory Committee, which represents more than 30 communities) set out to achieve have remained the same. The extended time frame and larger than normal cost for this study is primarily due to the massive co- ordination efforts among the project's participants, on-going education, and the detailed level of noise and operations modeling analysis. The schedule, scope of services and out- reach program require adjustments as we move forward. And as the update points out, Phase 1 has been completed with good results and we continue to make substantial progress on Phase 2. To date, approximately 100 noise abatement con- cepts proposed by CAC have been considered in this project. Measures include air traffic and ground movement proce- dures. Additionally, from its inception, the project was set up to be accomplished in phases. One reason why it was phased was to identify (and implement) the early implementation al- ternatives prior to the completion of the noise study, which is a requirement of the 2002 Record of Decision (ROD) for the Airport Noise Report November 13, 2009 Airside Improvements at Boston Logan Airport. The coordination efforts among FAA Air Traffic Organi- zation, FAA Airports, Massport and the CAC are all required by the jointly developed Statement of Work (SOW), which is on the website. And with any large project, it can be difficult to move forward if any one of the project stakeholders has a substantive issue that must be addressed and resolved. We strive for consensus when possible. Q: The study website states that the study is the largest FAA funded noise study in the nation, costing $83 million to date. The website says these funds are going to two consult- ants (Ricondo and L&B). The noise mitigation measures that have been recommended or are under consideration do not look different from those proposed in regular Part 150 pro- grams that only cost about $500,000 or less to fund. So, what accounts for the very high costs of the process in Boston? Q: The funding breakdown of the total $8.3 million: $6.6 million from FAA and $1.7 million from Massport. The scop- ing for the noise study was to provide technical assistance to a recognized, large community group, namely the CAC and to be available and open to the public. The cost is high, yet the work is complex and involves a great deal of baseline noise work and the active participation of project partici- pants, who have different perspectives and expectations. The 2002 ROD also stated that the CAC should be provided fund- ing for technical assistance, not just the statement of work. Q: I don't understand what is being done in the Boston study that could not be accomplished through the regular Part 150 process. A: The uniqueness of this ongoing effort and its results to date. Because this study was a mitigation condition under the Boston Airside EIS Record of Decision, limitations typically associated with FAA approval of specific noise abatement measures did not apply. And the 2002 ROD also required that the CAC communities participate in the development of the statement of work, which set up the parameters for how far beyond the airport this project would consider noise abate- ment procedures. Q: Why does Boston Logan have no Part 150 study? [This was answered by Massport]. A: Massport implemented noise abatement goals and pro- cedures beginning as early as 1976. During this period Mass - port implemented a series of local noise abatement rules and procedures that included initiatives one would find as a result of a Part 150 process including noise abatement arrival and departures procedures, preferential runway use program, en- gine run up restrictions, extensive sound proofing based on FAA approved noise exposure map. These early noise abate- ment policies include some that have been grandfathered post 1990 ANCA including dB limits on departures on certain run - 151 ways, time of day restrictions, ban on late night stage 2 a/c (now made redundant post ANCA but still in effect for air- craft exempt by the FAA stage 3 rule). The FAA has accepted our program and considers it a Part 150 like program. Phase 1 Results In its update on the study, FAA said that following the de- velopment and implementation of conventional noise abate- ment procedures last year, substantial progress continues to be made in bringing to fruition additional procedures to re- duce noise for communities within 20 nautical miles of Boston Logan International Airport. Under Phase 1 of the project, several measures were put in place, including: • Conventional (air traffic controller issued headings) noise abatement procedure was implemented on Oct. 1, 2009. Under this procedure, runway 22L arrivals from the south proceed east until over the water and then are vectored to in- tercept the final approach for runway 22L. This procedure is expected to reduce noise exposure for communities south of the airport affected by jet aircraft arrivals to runway 221,; • An over -the -water visual approach to runway 33L, was implemented in May 2009. This procedure is expected to re- duce noise exposure for South Shore communities when op- erational. demand levels are low, especially during late night hours; • FAA plans a phased implementation schedule for sev- eral Area Navigation (RNAV) departure procedure; and • Operational training is to be conducted in January 2010. RNAV procedures for runways 4, 9, 15 and 22 will be phased in, with the first being implemented in February and the last RNAV procedures expected by mid-November 2010. Phase 2 Results FAA said that the first level of screening of 53 proposed arrival, departure, and ground noise measures that were con- sidered under Phase 2 of the study has been completed. Some 22 measures were advanced to the next screening level. "The screening was designed to eliminate those proposals that would diminish safety or present substantial operational hurdles. The measures were evaluated independently by FAA and Massport. The CAC also reviewed each of the measures to confirm those that met its goals and objectives related to noise reduction. Those measures that contradicted those goals and objectives were eliminated and measures that were dupli- cates of others previously evaluated in other studies were also dropped from further screening," FAA explained. The next setp is to further define the 22 remaining meas- ures and to eliminate any measure that would significantly compromise the FAA's goals and stated. mission and/or not provide a noise reduction. The Final Report, Boston Logan Airport Noise Study, Level I Screening Analysis, has been posted on the project's redesigned website: http:/hvww.bostonoverflightno i sestudy. coin/docs/BLANS_Ph ase-2—Level I ScreeningReport-091009.pdf Airport Noise Report November 13, 2009 152 AlV R EDITORIAL The 22 noise abatement measures that advance to the next level of 1 -screening can be viewed in detail on the project website and include the ADVISORY BOARD following: - AIRPORT NOISE REPORT Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urban crest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions Report, provided that the base fee of USS 1.03 per page per copy is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA. Ground Concepts, such as: John J. Corbett, Esq. • Runway 4R arrivals on the centerfield taxiway to reduce aircraft Spiegel & McDiarmid ground noise levels for communities west of the taxiway; Washington, DC - Limit use of reverse thrust during landing on all runways; • Erect noise barriers on the commmiity side of the shoreline; Carl E. Burleson • Build a dedicated hush house building for nm -ups; Director, Office of Environment and Energy • Seek a location on the airport for a hold apron/penalty box to park Federal Aviation Administration aircraft as they await takeoff queuing onto Taxiway November; • Erect noise barrier for 15R departures - northwest end of 15R/33L Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. along East Boston shoreline; Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance • Encourage air carriers and based or frequent general aviation users at ..Carlsbad, CA Boston Logan Airport to voluntarily use single-engine taxi operations for ground operations and voluntarily give preference to the use of an engine Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. on the aircraft side away from the nearest communities. Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP Denver Flight Procedure Concepts for Approaches, such as: • Establish continuous descent approach to runways; Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. • Establish an over water visual. or RNAV arrival to runways 33L/32 President, Mestre Greve Associates over the harbor mouth during night hours; Laguna Niguel, CA • Leave runway 32 arrivals where they are indicated by the runway 14/32 environmental impact statement to maintain an offset approach to Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. runway 32 west of Hull at all times, instead of a straight -in approach to McDermott, Will & Emery runway 32; Chicago • Maintain 3 mile in -trail separation intervals between all aircraft on arrival to runways 22R/L. Never let the 2.5 mile exemption to the separa- Mary L. Vigilante tion rule be applied; President, Synergy Consultants Seattle Flight Procedure Concepts for Departures, such as: • Extend runway 27 departure gates farther south to reduce frequency of over flight noise events; • Develop departure procedures to increase altitudes of aircraft over - land; - Establish a departure waypoint from runway 15R for use at night to move departures farther north of Hull; • Shift runway 4R RNAV initial fix to the east to move the course away from Revere Beach, while avoiding noise increases to Nahant; • Departure runways 4R, 9, 27, and 33L: apply cockpit alternatives for thrust and climb management to benefit certain nearby communities through implementation of close -in or distant noise abatement departure procedures. - AIRPORT NOISE REPORT Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urban crest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions Report, provided that the base fee of USS 1.03 per page per copy is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA. r' Airport Noise Report A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21. Number 38 Chicago O'Hare Intl BENSENVILLE, CHICAGO AGREE TO $16 M. SETTLEMENT OF LAWSUIT OVER DEMOLITION The Village of Bensenville, IL, and the City of Chicago announced Nov. 16 that they have reached a $16 million settlement of litigation regarding the City's acqui- sition and demolition of Bensenville property as part of the modernization of O'Hare International Airport. Under the settlement, Chicago agreed to a demolition plan that has been fully reviewed and approved by Bensenville. Chicago will acquire 28 parcels of Bensenville -owned properties (including 600 homes and businesses) and rights-of- way, ights-ofway, and the Village will dismiss the pending demolition court cases and drop its court objections to Chicago's acquisitions of property. A portion of the acquisition area will be de -annexed from Bensenville and annexed to the City of Chicago. "Today is a victory for the residents of the Village," Bensenville Village Presi- dent Frank Soto said. "I want to thank Mayor Daley and Aviation Commissioner Andolino for their efforts to cooperate with Bensenville and to widerstand our needs. We have worked with the City to arrive at a settlement that provides the highest levels of protection for the health and safety of our residents during demoli- (Continued on p. 154) Airspace Redesign SUPREME COURT ASKED TO REVIEW DECISION UPHOLDING FAA EIS ON AIRSPACE REDESIGN The U.S. Supreme Court was asked in two separate petitions filed this week by the State of Connecticut and several Counties and environmental groups to review an appeals court decision upholding the Federal Aviation Administration's contro- versial redesign of the airspace in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia area. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, in a formal petition filed Nov. 17, asked the High Court to rule on whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for'the District of Columbia Circuit wrongly upheld new FAA flight paths that will route more large planes over southwestern Connecticut. Blumenthal, joined by local governments and concerned citizens, said the new flight paths will unnecessarily increase noise and pollution and the FAA failed to follow its own rules and procedures by ignoring vital data and public input. "We are asking the Supreme Court to ground a bad decision — to override the FAA and its failure to follow the law and its own rules," Blumenthal said. "The FAA 'is flying above the law, enabled by a bad appeals court ruling. "The FAA based its new flight paths on defective data concerning noise and traffic — disregarding the impact on millions of residents in the region, and dismiss - (Continued on p. 154) Airport Noise Report 153 November 2U, "LUMP In This Issue... Chicago O'Hare Intl ... Bensenville, City of Chicago agree to settle litigation over acquisition and demolition of property needed for O'Hare expansion. Bensenville gets $16 million for the property plus $20 million for sound insulation and agrees to annex part of the town to Chicago - p. 153 Airspace Redesign ... The U.S. Supreme Court is asked in two separate petitions to revew an appeals court deci- sion upholding FAA's re- design of the airspace in the NY/NJ/PHL area - p. 153 N.O.I.S.E.... The oldest community-based aviation organization in the country declares its first annual Avia- tion Policy Sutnlnit/Commu- nity Involvement Workshop to be a success - p. 155 Louisville Int'l ... FAA re- jects a proposal :for an offset approach to a runway that was a deferred element of the airport's 2003 Part 150 Air- port Noise Compatibility Program - p. 156 November 20, 2009 Chicago O'Hare, fi-onz p.153 tion and construction, includes just compensation for Village owned property, defines landscaping and perimeter improve- ments that will aesthetically improve the gateways to our community; and provides long term financial and economic development opportunities." "Continued litigation on these cases was of no benefit to our Village. This fight has depleted the Village's financial re- sources and put us behind other Villages in planning our eco- nomic future," Soto said. "Working with the City we have ensured that the Village has a strong voice in the City's dem- olition plans, and in the future development of O'Hare Inter- national Airport in the Village of Bensenville." Soto noted that the Court would have detennined the demolition protocol, probably within the next two weeks. "it was essential to take control of our own destiny and develop an agreed upon demolition protocol that far exceeds the pro- tection the Court could have offered. The protocol limits work hours, prohibits heavy tricks from Village streets and guards against any future use of the land that would cause a nuisance to the Village." Aviation Commissioner Rosemarie S. Andolino expressed the City's enthusiasm in securing a working partnership with the Village of Bensenville. "This settlement is a significant accomplishment, allowing the City to continue its efforts to improve efficiency and add capacity at O'Hare, as well. as to the National Aviation System," said Commissioner Andolino. "Now that litigation is complete, we can advance Mayor Richard M. Daley's vision to build an airport for the 21 st Century, ensuring that O'Hare remains the economic engine of our region and state by adding over 195,000 new jobs and $18 billion a year in economic activity." Among the settlement provisions are: • City support of a $1 million Federal Aviation Adminis- tration planning grant for the Village; • City agreement to work with the Village to insure that in addition to the more than $30 million already expended on sound insulation for the schools and homes, an approximately additional $20 million in sound insulation be provided for structures in the Village at no cost to the Village to mitigate the impacts of the OMP consistent with dee policies of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission and Federal Avia- tion Administration grants; and City agreement to cooperate with the Village on an eco- nomic development plan for properties in the Village which are immediately adjacent to O'Hare International Airport in order to enhance Village tax revenues. Former Bensenville President John Geils, who was ousted by Soto in April, expressed. great disappointment over the set- tlement agreement, calling the decision "an abject surrender to Richard Daley and the Chicago political machine." Geils said that the settlement will be an even worse deal for Bensenville "if, as expected Chicago is never able to build out the remainder of the O'Hare Master Plan. Like the 2016 (sure thing) Olympics, Daley's ability to pay for the remain - 154 ing more than $12 billion (still uncommitted) for the remain- der of the OMP Master Plan is an exercise in PR hot air. United and American have already said they don't want the multi -billion dollar Terminal 4, Terminal 6, and the guargan- tuan Western Terminal (Terminal 7) complex that Daley has sold as part of the PR package to justify the destruction of Bensenville. "What Bensenville is likely to face is hundreds of acres of vacant demolished neighborhoods, millions of dollars in an- nual tax revenue losses, higher taxes for its remaining resi- dents, and a political -economic boondoggle of massive proportions," Geils predicted. Regarding the $20 million that will be provided to Bensenville for sound insulation, critics of the settlement say the Village was entitled to those finds earlier but Chicago -bas denied there as a way to punish Bensenville for opposing the expansion of O'Hare. Airspace Redesign, , turn p. 153 ing less damaging alternatives. Our coalition of public offi- cials, environmental advocates, and.concerned citizens are detemnined to redirect these flight paths." The appeals court ruled against Blumenthal and the other plaintiffs on June 10 in a case, Counly oj'Rockland NYv FAA, that consolidated a dozen separate lawsuits that had been filed by the State of Connecticut; Rockland County, NY; Fairfield County, CT, Delaware County, PA; the City of Eliz- abeth, NJ; a coalition of towns mainly in Connecticut; and the New Jersey Coalition Against Aircraft Noise, among oth- ers. A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit concluded that the FAA's environmental impact analysis of the airspace redesign project "was procedurally sound and substantively reason- able" (21 ANR 66). The D.C. Circuit denied a request by the plaintiffs for a review of the three-judge panel's ruling by the full court of appeals. Blumenthal's Petition .. Blumenthal's petition was submitted on behalf of the State of Connecticut, Rockland County, NY, Friends of Rock- efeller State Park Preserve, Inc., the City of Elizabeth, NJ, and the New Jersey Coalition Against Aircraft Noise. The petition asks the High. Court to consider four ques- tions: Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the FAA did not violate the National Enviromnental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to include a critical noise analysis for pub- lic comment as part of the environmental impact statement (EIS) process for the NY/NJ/ Philadelphia Airspace Redesign Project, preventing the public from critically analyzing and commenting on an analysis that was central to the FAA's de- termination that the project would not "use" public trust re- sources protected under section 4(f ) of the Transportation Act; Airport Noise Report November 20, 2009 • Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that the FAA did not violate the mandate of NEPA by failing to im- plement night ocean routing, a fundamental element of the selected alternative, in the Record of Decision (ROD), and by failing to include a. mitigation measure explicitly agreed to in the Final Environmental Impact Statement; • Whether the Court of Appeals erred in approving an FAA decision violating Section 4(f ) of the Transportation Act and the Supreme Court's decision in Overton Park when the agency affirmatively failed to obtain the comments of rel- evant state and local officials regarding protected parks and public trust resources; and • Whether the Court of Appeals erred by holding that the Petitioners had "forfeited" their claim under section 4(f ) of the DOT Act that the FAA had failed to contact state and local Park officials and give "individualized attention" to at least 236 sites because that specific issue had not been raised during the administrative process. Delaware County Petition Delaware County, PA, field tine second petition seeking Supreme Court review of the appeals court's decision on FAA's airspace redesign. That petition focuses on the Clean Air Act's Conformity Provision, which stipulates that "[n]o department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Gov- ernment shall engage in, support in any way or provide finan- cial assistance for, license or permit, or approve, any activity which does not conform to an [state] implementation plan after it has been approved or promulgated under section 7410 of this title." The D.C. Court of Appeals found that, although the FAA "did not directly calculate the level of emissions" resulting from a redesign of approach and departure paths at five major airports across five states with five separate State Implemen- tation Plans (SIPS) in the northeastern United States, it "did not need to quantify the reduction [in emissions] in order to conclude the redesign was exempt from a conformity deter- mination," the petition explains. The Court of Appeals further found that, assuming FAA's omission was error, Petitioners had failed to prove the error harmful. The questions that Delaware County's petition to the Supreme Courts asks are: • Whether FAA's violation of the substantive command of Congress in the Conformity Provision of the Clean Air Act is tine type of error that has the natural effect of prejudicing Pe- titioners' substantial rights, and, thus, may ``generally" be re- garded as likely to prove harmful; and • If so, whether the Court of Appeals erred in placing the burden of proving harm from FAA's error on Petitioners. Each year about 8,000 petitions seeking Supreme Court review of cases are filed and the Court only hears about 1 percent of those (80 cases). 155 Conferences N.O.I.S.E. HOLDS FIRST POLICY SUMMIT/COMMUNITY WORKSHOP The National Organization. to Insure a Sound -controlled Environment (N.O.I.S.E.) hosted its first annual "Aviation Policy Summit/Community involvement Workshop" in San Antonio, TX, — in conjunction with the National League of Cities' Congress of Cities Exposition — and considers the new event to have been a success. The workshop was held Tuesday November 10th at the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in downtown San Arn- tonio. The new format for the annual N.O.I.S.E. gathering was tied in directly with the NLC's convention, where each year more than 2,000 attendees come together, and was designed to expand the opportunities for local elected official participa- tion. Workshop planners wanted to provide participants an in- formal, interactive setting where elected community -leaders and stakeholders would have an opportunity to both listen to experts and converse with each other for tips and pointers. "We wanted a fresh way of connecting with our commu- nities, something that our attendees could walk away from and really feel like they are capable of making a difference and that they have the tools to do so," said Dennis McGrann, Executive Director of N.O.I.S.E., which is the oldest commu- nity-based aviation noise organization in the county. The workshop's morning sessions included presentations from elected officials and Washington insiders on successful airport noise abatement strategies and the benefits of commu- nity action. Several N.O.I.S.E. Board Members gave individ- ual accounts of the history of their communities' struggles with aviation noise and the steps they have taken to actively find solutions. "The N.O.I.S.E. Workshop was a real success and pro- vided me an opportunity to discuss the proactive steps the City of Aurora, Colorado, is doing to communicate with own- ers of residential property near our airports," said Brad Pierce, Council Member Aurora, CO and N.O.I.S.E. Second - Vice President. The afternoon session offered an opportunity for industry experts and policy makers to present to the group on military noise, noise tracking technologies and sound -insulation proj- ects, and included an hour for Q&A and networking opportu- nities. Next Forum Will Be Held in March N.O.I.S.E's next event will be the 2010 N.O.1.S.E Leg islative Forum on March 15, 2010. This legislative fonun will be held in conjunction with the NLC, Congressional Cities Conference, and The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG). The forum is envisioned as an opportunity for both airport representative and elected officials to identify legislative pri- orities for sustainable airports. Policy discussions may in - Airport Noise Report November 20, 2009 156 ANR EDITORIAL elude environmental, energy, and green airports. For additional infortna- tion, please contact the N.O.I.S.E. office at 202-544-9893 or email jew- ADVISORY BOARD hite@locklaw.com. The N.O.I.S.E. website is aviation-noise.org. John J.'Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiarmid Louisville Intl Washington, DC FAA REJECTS DEFERRED 150 MEASURE Carl E. Burleson FOR AN OFFSET RUNWAY APPROACH Director, Office of Environment and Energy Federal Aviation Administration The Federal Aviation Administration announced Nov. 18 that it has re- jected a proposal for an offset approach to Runway 17R at Louisville In - Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. temational Airport as a deferred element of the airport's Part 150 Airport Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance Noise Compatibility Program. Carlsbad, CA On Oct. 29, 2008, the Louisville Regional Airport Authority (LRAA) submitted to the FAA Air Traffic Organization (ATO) a request with sup - Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. porting documentation for an offset approach to Runway 17R. The re - Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP quest was for a re-evaluation of the noise abatement measure and two Denver associated measures that had been submitted to the FAA for action in the .airport authority's 2003 Noise Compatibility Program but were deferred. Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. FAA said that the ATO evaluated the offset approach procedure pro - President, Mestre Greve Associates vided by LRAA. "After considerable review and evaluation, the proce- Laguna Niguel, CA dure was disapproved." The FAA ATO notified LRAA of its detennination on April 3, 2009. Subsequent to ATO's determination, the Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. FAA issued its Record of Approval (ROA) concerning the LRAA's NCP McDennott, Will & Emery update on Aug. 4, 2009, and disapproved the noise abatement measures Chicago under review. FAA said that the proposed offset approach to Runway 17R could not Mary L. Vigilante be implemented "without reducing the level of aviation safety provided President, Synergy Consultants and adversely affecting the efficient use and management of the navigable Seattle airspace and air traffic control systems." The flight path of the proposed offset procedure would cause a signif- icant safety risk, FAA said, because it would place the published missed approach procedure in conflict with arrivals and departures operating from Runway 17L/35R. It also would eliminate the ability to run simulta- neous approaches to Runways 17L and 17R and would require the use of increased separation standards and result in substantial delays for arriving aircraft. The offset approach also is not compatible with an RNAV Stan- dard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARS) procedure being developed by the FAA and UPS, which is expected to provide "significant cost and effi- ciency benefits to UPS and other airport users," FAA said. For further information, contact Stephen Wilson, Community Planner, Federal Aviation Administration, Memphis Airports District Office; tel: (901) 322-8180. Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor@aiiporhioisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions 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. 157 A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21, Number 39 - November 27, 2009 Research EUROPEANS' ANNOYANCE TO AIRCRAFT NOISE HAS INCREASED OVER FEARS, STUDY FINDS The European Union's prediction curve for aircraft noise annoyance should be modified because Europeans' annoyance due to aircraft noise has increased over re- cent years, the latest report in a major study of aircraft and traffic noise around Eu- ropean airports concluded. Averaged aircraft noise levels that were 5 to 7 d13 lower than those indicated in the exposure -response curve used by the Europen Union to predict annoyance to aircraft noise caused the same level of annoyance in northern and central European subjects, the study found. The study findings suggested that southern Europeans may be even more an- noyed than their northern and central European neighbors if the aircraft noise level was below 65 dB Leq 24 hours. The study, "Annoyance due to aircraft noise has increased over the years — Re- sults of the HYENA study," was reported in the journal Environunent International. HYENA is an acronym for Hypertension and Exposure to Noise near Airports. The study assessed annoyance to aircraft and road traffic noise in 4,861 subjects (Continued on p. 158) RNP RNP DEMO FLIGHTS SHOW REDUCTIONS IN NOISE, EMISSIONS AT ARLANDA AIRPORT The last in a series of 10 demonstration flights was conducted recently at Stock- holm Arlanda Airport to show how the use of Required Navigation Performance (RNP) can be used to reduce aviation emissions and noise impact and improve pre- dictability in the air transportation system. The demonstration flights were conducted under the European MINT (Mini- mum CO2 in Terminal Maneuvering Area) project, which builds on greater naviga- tion accuracy derived from GPS and on -board Flight Management Systems and Continuous Descent Arrivals. The MINT project also marked the first time in Europe that flight trials have fully integrated an element of time control enabling the aircraft to fly an optimal trajectory while meeting an air traffic control time gate, reducing the need for hold- ing or `path -stretching', therefore helping to reduce CO2 emissions. Earlier demonstration flights were conducted during the summer and data logged and analyzed in terms of flight efficiency, aircraft navigation performance, and resulting noise. Five of the demonstration flights also were given a time con- straint to meet at a waypoint during the descent. The NRP procedures at Arlanda took advantage of the aircraft's ability to fly (Continued on p. 159) Airport Noise Report In This Issue... Annoyance ... The latest re- port from the European --HYENA study finds that Eu- ropeans' annoyance with air- craft noise has increased over the years. It recommends that the EU dose -response curve for predicting annoyance to aircraft noise be modified to reflect this change. The study is likely to be re- viewed at FAA's upcoming Aviation Research Roadmap Workshop and it puts pres- sure on the FAA to update the U.S. prediction cuu-ve for aircraft annoyance- p. 157 RNP ... Demonstration flights of RNP procedures at Stockholm Arlanda Airport being done under the MINT project show that precise navigation can reduce noise impact and cut aircraft emis- sions - p. 157 News Briefs.... A lawsuit filed by a man living near San Francisco Int'l claims that aircraft noise broke up his marriage ... No sound in- sulation will. be built into a new school very close to Or- lando Sanford Int'l - p. 160 r November 27, 2009 158 Research, from p. 157 that lived for at least five years in the vicinity of six major European airports: London Heathrow, Berlin Tegal, Amster- dam Schiphol, Stockholm Arlanda, Milan Malpensa, and Athens Elephtherios Venizelos. The study was conducted by various universities, federal agencies, and research institutes in Gennany, The Nether- lands, Sweden, Italy, Greece, and the United Kingdom. The dose -response curves used by the EU to predict an- noyance to aircraft noise are based on what is known as the Mied.ema curve," which is a compilation of findings from older studies; some done as long as 25 years ago. The HYENA study noted that newer investigations of air- craft noise annoyance ratings done in the last decade or less have found annoyance to be higher than predicted by the EU standard curve. However, the methodology of at least one of those studies has been challenged. FAA Workshop The HYENA study will likely be discussed at the Federal Aviation Administration's upcoming Aviation Research Roadmap Workshop on Dec. 10-11, which will focus on the issues of annoyance and sleep interference from aircraft noise. Also expected to be discussed is an earlier HYENA study which found that exposure to nighttime aircraft or road traffic noise can increase blood pressure, even if it does not wake people up, and increases their risk of hypertension. If these research findings hold up under tough scrutiny, then it would be very difficult for the FAA not to revise U.S. policy on annoyance and nighttime noise or at least to fiord its own studies. Aircraft noise effects experts from Germany, the UK, and Norway are registered to attend tine FAA workhop, as are rep- resentatives from Boeing, Metron Aviation, the Airports Council International - North America, several universities and consulting firms, as well as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Departments of Transportation and Defense, and the National Park Service. Approximately 54 people have signed up for the work- shop to date. That is more than the agency anticipated and it has asked for volunteers to attend the workhop remotely via telephone conference and the internet. Traffic Noise Annoyance Did Not Increase While the latest HYENA study concluded that Europeans' annoyance due to aircraft noise had increased over the years, it also found that their annoyance due to traffic noise had not. The study findings were in full agreement with the EU curves for the prediction of noise annoyance and sleep disturbance due to road traffic noise. "We compared the relationships between road traffic noise level and annoyance due to road traffic noise on the one hand, and the association between aircraft noise level and an- noyance due to aircraft noise on the other, with the EU stan- dard annoyance curves for both noise sources ... Because both refer to the same subjects, we were able to see whether the relationship between noise and noise annoyance had changed in general or source specifically. In other words, we could use the relationship for road traffic noise as a reference for the judgment upon any change of the annoyance due to aircraft noise curve from the respective EU exposure -re- sponse curve," the researchers explained. "This relative difference of effect between road and air traffic noise makes us confident enough to conclude that the exposure—response relationship between noise and noise an- noyance has changed over the years, and that this is specific to aircraft noise (upwards shift), because the EU curve refers to older studies. To our knowledge, no such relative compar- isons have been made before, because it requires individual noise data for aircraft and road noise for the same subjects. A change in people's perception or attitude towards air- craft noise could be one explanation of the findings. "Our results may not be fully comparable to the EU curve, because in the HYENA study annoyance was assessed in the limited age range of 45-70 year old subjects. In meta- analyses that comprised a much wider age range, an inverse U-shaped association was found between age and annoyance. The age group 30 to 50 years was most annoyed by aircraft noise. Annoyance reactions were found to be lower in younger and older subjects. "in the HYENA study, age was negatively associated with annoyance by trend, which is in line with the findings and results from other countries. This suggests that annoy- ance was more likely to be underestimated than overesti- mated in our study compared to the generalised EU curve that includes all ages," the researchers explained. No Explanation for Increased Annoyance The researchers said that, based on the HYENA data, they could not give any explanation for the possible effect of an increase of annoyance reactions due to aircraft noise over the years. They said that some studies have concluded that an in- crease in the number of aircraft operations each of lower maximum noise level due to quieter aircraft could be a reason for this. Changes in noun -acoustical factors moderating the an- noyance also could play a role. They said the increase in annoyance also has been dis- cussed in the broader context of the "risk society theory", in- cluding aspects of fear, trust and control, and the incapacity of the industrial society to control pollution and prevent se- vere accidents. "Attitude towards the airport varied between our study samples even in the non -exposed reference group (Lden 45 dB(A)). It co -varied with the annoyance. However, the cause—effect direction is not clear. Scientific reporting about risks and adverse effects of noise in the media could have af- fected people's opinion. However, our data does not suggest a shift towards higher noise annoyance, in general, because ino � higher annoyance than predicted by the EU curve was found for road traffic noise." Airport Noise Report November 27, 2009 Noise Monitoring Era Systems Corporation announced Nov. 20 that its AirScenc@.com Noise and Operations Monitoring System for the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority has been successfully installed at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport. "Through a combination of rigorous program manage- ment and close customer cooperation, we were able to suc- cessfully deploy this solution for our customer," said Era Vice President Bill Colligan. "We are providing MWAA with their first public portal to allow concerned citizens to file noise complaints over the web, which will help airport staff continue their pioneering noise mitigation work." MWAA will utilize Era's interactive web portal that in- cludes features such as online complaint entry, report view- ing, address location, noise abatement infornnation, historic replay and other community relations functions. Era said it provides next -generation air traffic manage- ment tools that address core challenges like safety, efficiency, profitability and functionality. The company said that its in- novative use of proven next -generation technologies, like multilateration and ADS -B, help air navigation service providers (ANSPs) and airport operators ease capacity con- straints, improve airspace and ground space efficiencies, and reduce costs. "MWAA has a long and successful history of addressing aircraft noise concerns of the national capital region," Era, a subsidiary of SRA International, Inc., said. Reagan National is located near downtown Washington, D.C., and operates under nighttime noise limits and recom- mended noise abatement procedures. Dulles, located less than 30 miles west of Reagan National, handles more passengers per year than any other airport in the Greater Washington, DC, area. Noise Monitors Replaced The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority also has replaced the 20 year old noise monitors that have been in place around National and Dulles as part of its effort to better respond to community noise related concerns. These improvements are a result of work with the com- munity and local governments over the years on identifying ways that the Airports Authority can provide timely and use- ful infonnation to the public regarding flight paths in the re- gion, MWAA said. The public can access Airscene fiom the Authority's web- site www.mwaa.com by selecting an airport then clicking on "Flight Information." A link to "Aircraft Noise and Flight Tracking Data" is on the left. 159 RNP, from p. 157 curved segments after the Final Approach Point in order to position the noise away from noise -sensitive areas. The MINT project is part of the SESAR Joint Undertak- ing, which is responsible for managing the European Com- mission's part in the European -U.S. Federal Aviation Administration Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions. The initiative aims to reduce carbon dioxide emis- sions and accelerate change using air traffic management best practices and mature technologies. "With the full support of the industry, this, as well as fol- low on projects in Sweden and other locations in Europe, will demonstrate that the ultimate goals of SESAR can be achieved," MINT project manager Christer Forsberg said. Through co-operation between the Swedish Air Naviga- tion Service Provider (LFV), Stockholm Arlanda Airport, No- vair, and Airbus, the MINT demonstration flights have shown a lateral standard deviation of 0.01 nautical miles or 22 me- ters, which is less than the wing span of an Airbus A321. The different flights also showed savings of 145 kg of fuel linked to the optimized vertical descent profile, as well as 20 kg of fuel through track mile savings resulting in a total of 518 kg of CO2 reduction compared to an average Instrument Landing System approach operated by Novair. Time wise, during the trials the aircraft met the time requirement with an. average time accuracy of 8.6 seconds. The MINT project demonstrates that there are capabilities in modern aircraft that can be used to reduce the environmen- tal load in today's air traffic system. The SESAR project has as a goal to refine these capabilities, but even more impor- tantly to develop the link between on board systems and ground-based systems. Alaska Testing RNP At Sea -Tac Alaska Airlines is the first carrier that the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has approved to conduct its own RNP flight validation. Alaska began testing RNP approaches at Seattle -Tacoma International Airport in June and estimates the procedures will reduce noise exposure for an estimated 750,000 people and cut fuel use by 2.1 million gallons a year and carbon emissions by 22,000 rnetric tons a year. "These improved flight procedures at Sea -Tac will help Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air minimize the environmental impact of our flying on the communities we serve," Gary Beck, Alaska's vice president of flight operations, said in June. "With FAA approval, we hope the procedures will be available to all carriers and gradually integrated into the Seat- tle air traffic system. This project could also become a blue- print for expanded use of next -generation technology at more U.S. airports." Alaska hopes for FAA approval to integrate the proce- dures into its commercial operations at Sea -Tac next year. In September, the Seattle -area company Naverus, Inc. an- nounced that it has received approval fiom the FAA to design Airport Noise Report November 27, 2009 160 ANR EDITORIAL and validate environmentally -friendly RNP flight paths for public use by airlines at U.S. airports (21 ANR 119). ADVISORY BOARD In Brief.. John J. Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiarmid Washington, DC ]Lawsuit Maims Noise Broke Up Marriage Carl E. Burleson In a novel legal theory, a man living four miles from San Francisco Director, Office of Environment and Energy International Airport claims that aircraft noise broke up his marriage. Federal Aviation Administration Stanley G. Hilton filed a lawsuit in San Mateo County Superior Court on Nov. 10 seeking $1.0 billion in punitive damages as well as $15 million Michael Scott Gatzke, Esq. for claims of fraud and breach of contract, public nuisance, negligence, Gatzke, Dillon & Ballance assault, 'and battery. He also wants the court to force the former owner of Carlsbad, CA his house to take the $1.47 million property back. The lawsuit was fled against the airport, San Francisco and San Peter J. Kirsch, Esq. Mateo Counties, domestic and foreign airlines operating at SFO, the Boe- Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP ing Corporation, and the realtor and couple who sold him the house. Denver Hilton. bought the house April. 2003 and his marriage, which began in 1995, ended in divorce in February 2008. Vincent E. Mestre, P.E. Although he does not live directly under the SFO flight path, Hilton President, Mestre Greve Associates claimed that the "pollution of noise and smog cause caused [him] to be in Laguna Niguel, CA fear of great bodily injury including lung cancer and also rattle [his] nerves, caused his divorce, and destroyed his family." Steven F. Pflaum, Esq. The Alameda Star Times reported that Hilton is a former civil litiga- McDermott, Will & Emery tion attorney with a law degree from Duke University and was an active Chicago " member of the State Bar of California for most of the past three decades. However, the Bar said that the courts deemed Hilton ineligible to practice Mary L. Vigilante law in August. President, Synergy Consultants Uninsulated School Being Built Near Sanford Int'1 Seattle Seminole County, FL, school officials are building a new $15 million elementary school just across the road from the main runway at Orlando Sanford International Airport. The new school is being constructed with no sound insulation despite being located just outside the airport's 65 dB DI`rl., contour line. The school had originally been located within the 65 dB DNL contour but was moved just slightly beyond it after the FAA said it would be in a noise - sensitive area. The FAA had recommended that the school be insulated. but school officials contend it is not needed because the school is being constructed with concrete block walls. The agency said the school would not be eligi- ble for soundproofing if complaints arise when it opens next month. FAI Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions 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. 0 irport No Lose Report weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21, Number 40 FAA DRAFT RESEARCH ROADMAP FOR ANNOYANCE, SLEEP DIS'T'URBANCE SETS AMBITIOUS AGENDA On Dec. 3, the Federal Aviation Administration released a draft research roadmap that will serve as a starting point to answer fundamental questions that need to be considered in formulating future policy regarding the impact of aircraft noise on sleep disturbance and annoyance. The draft roadmap sets an ambitious research agenda, which could take many years to complete, and strikes out into new research territory for the FAA. The agenda supplements FAA s ongoing research programs. It identifies the cooperation of international researchers and recognizes im- provements in ways to communicate with the public about aircraft noise pioneered in Australia and the UK as elements of the roadmap. The draft roadmap focuses on existing studies and data on sleep disturbance and annoyance but says that additional research may be needed to fill in informa- tion gaps. For instance, the draft envisions future studies in the area of annoyance that de- velop standardized questions for use in annoyance surveys that could be used inter - (Continued on p. 162) Standards ISO WORTHING GROUP ADOPTING ANNOYANCE CURVE SHOWING MORE IMPACT THAN FICON'S Within two to three years, the International Standards Organization (ISO) is likely to adopt a dose/response curve for predicting community annoyance to air- craft noise that will show twice as many people highly annoyed at 65 dB DNL as the curve endorsed by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) in 1992 and used by the Federal Aviation Administration. Instead of the 12.3 percent highly annoyed with aircraft noise at a level of 65 dB DNL as predicted in the FICON curve, the ISO curve will show twice that: roughly a quarter of the population highly annoyed at 65 dB DNL, the noise expo- sure area generally analyzed in environmental studies of airport expansion projects. The point at which 12.3 percent of people are highly annoyed to aircraft noise would be pushed out to around the 55 dB DNL level under dose/response curve that ISO currently is considering. The Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAN), which FICON evolved into, will be under pressure to adopt the revised ISO standard, which is voluntary but represents the consensus of world experts, and FAA will be under pressure to recognize the revision as a significant change and to become more strin- (Continued on p. 163) Airport Noise Report F61 0 December 4, 2009 In This Issue... FAA ... A draft research roadmap that charts a path for developing future policy on the impact of aircraft noise on community musoy- ance and sleep disturbance is issued by the FAA a week before it holds a workshop where a the draft document will be ftither refined by na- tional and international noise experts, academics, represen- tatives of aviation trade groups, and others - p. 161 Standards ... Within two to three years, ISO is likely to adopt a dose/response curve for predicting community an- noyance to aircraft noise that shows twice the number of people highly annoyed to air- craft noise at a level 65 dB DNL as does the curve used by the FAA - p. 161 FAA.... Most of the 106+ airports that had to submit noise land inventories and reuse plans to the FAA by the end of October have done so, although FAA is seeking ad- ditional data from some of the airports - p. 163 December 4, 2009 FAA, ftorn p.161 nationally and noise level measurement techniques to com- plement such surveys. It also notes that new studies may be needed to determine which noise metrics best relate to annoyance. The focus of the research plan for annoyance is to try to improve the simple model that FAA now relies on to defmc the relationship between annoyance and noise exposure by including in the model consideration of non -acoustic factors that cause annoyance, noise complaint data, and improved methods for communicating with the public about aircraft noise. The agenda also proposes research to study metrics other than DNL for characterizing annoyance. The research will test whether metrics that correlate with speech interference, sleep disturbance, and induced house vibration can comple- ment DNL as an indicator of community annoyance. Regarding complaint data, the draft roadmap notes that more than 40 North American airports and many -European airports collect such data and match them with aircraft opera- tions likely to have caused the complaint. "There has been no systematic assembly or analyses of these data. There is some research that suggests complaints result primarily from un- usual events and may not be associated with the extent of an- noyance. Use of such. data should provide an improved understanding of when and why complaints occur," the draft states. In the past FAA has questioned whether complaint data were a reliable indicator of the extent of community annoy- ance. Sleep Research Plan The research plan for sleep disturbance focuses on pulling together, for the first time, the results of all studies on noise induced sleep disturbance into an accessible database that re- searchers can examine to: • Compare awakening responses across populations to de- termine similarity of sleep disturbance response between pop- ulations; • Correlate noise metrics with objective indicators of sleep disturbance; • Study the relation of subjective and objective indicators of sleep disturbance, such as EEG changes and motility; • Study the relation of objective sleep disturbance indic- tors with short-term performance and health effects; . Study differences between aircraft noise exposed and non -aircraft noise exposed populations; • Use the effects of non -noise sleep disturbance studies to help identify which indicators of sleep disturbance are best correlated with the health and performance effects that may result; and • Explore the relationship between the noise metric. Lnight,outside (used by the World Health Organization Euro- pean Region in its new night noise guidelines) and other met- rics of nighttime aircraft noise. 162 - The sleep disturbance research roadmap is designed to an- swer five fundamental questions: 1) What sleep related effects should/can FAA policy seek to limit insofar as public health and welfare is diminished or impaired by nighttime aircraft noise: (a) short-tenn effects (evaluations of the quality of a previous night's sleep or measurements of next -day reaction times) or (b) long-term ef- fects (use of medications, hypertension)? 2) To what extent should these effects be limited? 3) How can these effects be limited? 4) What data/research are available to provide answers? 5) What additional studies are needed? Draft Sent to Workshop Participants The draft roadmap was sent to those who have registered to attend an FAA Noise Impact Research Roadmap Work- shop, which will be held Dec. 10-11 in Washington, DC. The participants list for the workshop includes over 60 people, representing virtually all the U.S. acoustical consult- ing firms, national and international aircraft noise effects ex- perts and university researchers, federal agency noise experts, Boeing, Gulfstream, the Sierra Club, a College Park, GA, city councilman, the Institute of Noise Control Engineering, the Airports Council International — North America, the Air Transport Association, Rep. Joe Sestak (D -PA), the Univer- sity of Pennsylvania and Boston University Schools of Medi- cine, and the Acoustics Unit of Health Canada. FAA has asked these participants to review the draft re- search roadmap, which will be further developed at the work- shop based on their input. The FAA plans to place the draft research roadmap on a public access website in the near future. FAA MOST NOISE LAND INVENTORIES, REUSE PLANS SUBMITTED TO FA.A. Most of the 106+ airports that were required to submit to the Federal Aviation Administration by the end of October in- ventories and reuse plans for land they had acquired for noise mitigation purposes with federal Airport Improvement Pro- gram (AIP) grants have done so. However, FAA regional offices are still wonting with some airports to get the information needed to complete their submissions, according to Rick Etter, an airport acquisition specialist in FAA's Office of Airport Planning and Program- ming. In February 2008, FAA issued guidance of the acquisi- tion, management, and disposal of land acquired for noise mitigation purposes with AIP grant funds (20 ANR 13). The purpose of Program Guidance Letter PGL 08-02 was to pro- vide airports and FAA personnel with information needed to meet the requirements of Grant Assurance 31 for the AIP pro- gram, which ensures that when land acquired by AIP giants is no. longer needed for noise compatibility purposes, it will be Airport Noise Report December 4, 2009 converted to a use compatible with the airport and the federal share of the fair market value of the land will be recycled or will be returned to the Aviation Trust Fund The FAA guidance was issued. in response to a 2005 audit by the FAA Inspector General that was critical of the agency's management of the disposition of land acquired for noise compatibility purposes with AIP grants (19 ANR 50). That audit found no deliberate attempts by airports to cir- cumvent grant obligations but concluded that airports had no clear understanding of their obligations regarding disposal of unneeded noise land. FAA's program guidance letter affected over 106 mainly large and mid-sized airports with over 5,000 acres of land ac- quired for noise mitigation with AIP funds. The OIG audit reviewed 11 of the 108 airport sponsors who had received AIP grants to acquire land under airport noise compatibility programs from fiscal year 1982 through FY 2003. Together these 11 airports had 3,608 acres of un- needed noise land, which represented 53 percent of the 6,820 acres acquires with AIP funds for noise compatibility. Those 1 I airports were required to submit their noise land inventories and reuse plans by March 2009 and have all done so, Etter told ANR. Those 11, airports are: • Bellingham. International Airport • Charlotte/Douglas International Airport • Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport • Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport • Las Vegas McCarran International Airport • Palm Beach International Airport • Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport • Reno -Tahoe International Airport • Seattle -Tacoma International Airport • Toledo Express Airport • Tucson International Airport Etter said that FAA regional offices must complete their reviews of the noise land inventories and reuse plans submit- ted to them by June 2010 and will send out acceptance letters after that date. The reuse plans are living documents, Etter said, and will have to be updated periodically. Additional guidance will be issued regarding the requirement to submit the inventories and reuse plans if FAA feels it is needed, he said. Palm Beach lnt'l Experience Jerry Allen, deputy director of Palm Beach International Airport, discussed his airport's experience with meeting the new requirement to submit noise land inventories and reuse plans to the FAA at the 9th Annual Noise Mitigation Sympo- sium, held in early October in Boca Raton, FL. Palin Beach International has 750+ acres of parcels that had been acquired for noise compatibility purposes and many of the parcels were not funded by FAA. The amount of data involved in these transactions can be overwhelming, he told the symposium. The data are very de- tailed and it is easy to make errors. Further, FAA reuse ap- provals may be difficult to locate. 163 Standards, fr-orni p. 161 gent in how it describes and discloses noise impacts in envi- ronmental impact statements. Working Group Met in Seoul . ISO Working Group 45 is responsible for ISO Standard 1996-1, which defines the basic quantities to be used for the description of noise in community environments and de- scribes basic assessment procedures. it also specifies methods for assessing environmental noise and gives guidance on pre- dicting the potential annoyance response of a community to long-term exposure from various types of environmental noises. Working Group 45 met in Seoul, South Korea, on Nov. 16-17 to discuss various aspects of the current standard, in- cluding uncertainty regarding the prediction of community annoyance from aircraft noise, uncertainty in physical meas- urement of noise, and reconsideration of tone corrections and impulse noise penalties in noise calculations. The Working Group decided at its meeting to move for- ward with the formal process of adopting an amendment to ISO 1996 Part 1 Annex E to include a community annoyance prediction curve based on two data analyses: one done by noted U.S. acoustical expert Dr. Sanford Fidell and another done by Dutch noise experts Henk Miedema and Henk Vos of TNO, a quasi -government research organization in The Netherlands. The TNO curves have been accepted by the Eu- ropean Commission, although they remain under discussion. No Significant Difference Between Curves There is no significant difference between the Fidell and Miedema curves for aircraft noise, said Dr. Paul Schomer, who serves as convenor (chairman) of the ISO working group. The Seoul meeting marked the first time that there was real consensus among working group members on the need to update the dose/response curve. That is because the data were so close together, Schomer told ANR, adding no one expected that. The Fidell and Miedema curves show that the percentage of the population highly annoyed by aircraft noise is greater than that predicted by the curve endorsed by FICON in 1992, particularly in the range of 60-75 dB DNL. That is because the mathematical function that FICON used to fit the curve through data points from various studies of annoyance uses a fitting function that relies on certain as- sumptions to make data fit well at both ends of the dose/re- sponse curve but not in the middle, Schomer explained. The Fidell and Miedema curves better fit the data at the middle of the curve. Also, where the FICON curve was influenced by annoy- ance judgments about noise from rail, road, and aircraft, the Fidell and Miedema aircraft noise annoyance curves are based solely on data from studies of reactions to aircraft noise. Studies indicate that people are more annoyed by air- craft noise than noise from other transportation sources. Airport Noise Report December 4. 2009 John J. Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiarmid Washington, DC Carl E. Burleson Director, Office of Environment and Energy Federal Aviation Administration Michael 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 Seattle 164 The Fidell and. Miedema curves also include significantly more data / and more recent studies than the FICON curve. l However, Schomer said that the Fidell and Miedema curves do not in- dicate, as some of the most recent research in Europe does, that people have become more sensitive to aircraft noise. They only show that there are more people highly annoyed than the FICON curve predicted. Scatter in Data Will Be Explained The ISO Working Group agreed at its meeting to show annoyance to aircraft noise as a smooth curve but also to explain the scatter of individ- ual data. "The aircraft noise data exhibit the greatest variance, diverge the far- thest, and are the least accurately predicted by FICON's [fitting] func- tion," Fidell stated in a 2004 article in the Noise Control Engineering Journal entitled, "Parsimonious alternatives to regression analysis for characterizing prevalence rates of aircraft noise annoyance." [The article can be downloaded from the ANR server until Dec. 11.] Fidell said that the FICON function "accounts for less than 20% of the variance in field measurements of the prevalence of aircraft noise -in- duced annoyance and demonstrably underestimates the annoyance of air- craft noise in many cases." Fidell agreed at the Working Group meeting to draft an explanation of the scatter of data for the revised ISO standard. Schomer told ANR that the Working Group considers transparency of data important to ensuring credibility of the new annoyance prediction curves. He said the group is waiting for further information on how Miedema and Vos conducted their data analysis, which required more data assumptions than the process used by Fidell. Schomer said that the Working Group's acceptance of the Miedema curve is contingent on re- ceiving that additional information, which representatives of the UK and Gennany want to see. In .Brief... HMMH Training Courses Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. will hold a training course on Air- port Noise Control Practices on May 3-4, 2010, at its office in Burlington, MA. A training course on FAA's Integrated Noise Model (INM) will be held on May 5-7, 2010, at the same location. For further information, go to http://uryvw.hmmi-i.com/training.html. Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor(@airportnoisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions 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. 165 13, 73NA'," I "ONCEM A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21, Number 41 December 18, 2009 'Research 001, Am- IN UND In an effort to move its noise research road -mapping exercise forward, the Fed- eral Aviation Administration will be asking experts on the effects of aircraft noise on annoyance and sleep to prepare papers outlining what is known — what research findings are definitive — in these areas and what remains to be studied. "We need to be getting to a point where we agree on priorities to pursue," Lour- des Maurice, chief scientist in the FAA's Office of Environment and Energy and acting director of the office, told more than 70 participants at the end of the agency's second research road -mapping workshop, which was held in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 10-11. The papers will form the basis for further discussion at the third and final work- shop, to be held in San Diego, CA, on March 4, 2010, in conjunction with the an- nual University of California at Davis Symposium on Aviation Noise and Air Quality, which will be held on March 1-3, 2010. Maurice said she hopes that at the March workshop a consensus could be reached on the issues that are critical to pursue. Once that is done, the FAA can (Continued on p. 166) Research A MAN IMMUNIUMM Acoustical experts attending the Federal Aviation Administration's second noise research road -mapping workshop agreed that the simple model the agency uses to predict community annoyance to aircraft noise needs to be improved. Various ideas were discussed for improving the model, which relates noise ex- posure to the percent of the population highly annoyed by it. That relationship is expressed in a dose/response curve endorsed. by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) in 1992 that predicts that 12.3 percent of the population will be highly annoyed by noise at a level of 65 dB DNL. The FICON curve was a reworking with some new data of the older so-called Schultz Curve, which was based on surveys of annoyance to various transportation noise sources that were mostly done in the 1970s and when louder Stage 2 aircraft were still flying. There should be a battery of noise measurements and criteria used to predict an- noyance; not just one, asserted Paul Schomer, chairman of the International Stan- dards Organization working group responsible for ISO Standard 1996-1, which addresses methods to asses environmental noise impacts. (Continued on p. 167) Airport Noise Report In This s Issue.. . Research ... At the end of its second noise research road- mapping workshop, FAA of- ficials said they will ask experts on the effects of air- craft noise on annoyance and sleep to prepare papers iden- tifying the definitive research findings in these areas so that progress on developing a re- search plan can be made at the final workshop, which will be held in San Diego on March 4, 2010 - p. 165 Annoyance ... Noise experts at the second workshop agree that the current simple model used by FAA to predict com- munity annoyance to aircraft noise needs to be improved. A DOT official says, while there may be justification for changing sole reliance on DNL, it could not happen quickly - p. 166 Sleep Disturbance.... A sleep expert at the workshop offers a way forward on re- search in this area: find co- horts in the United States that are similar to those used in European studies and compare the results - p. 168 December 18, 2009 Research, from p.161 begin estimating near, mid-term, and long-term costs for the research program, which will form the basis for future FAA noise policy development. Raquel Girvin, manager of the noise branch of the FAA Office of Enviromnent and Energy, agreed at the end of two days of wide-ranging discussion at the D.C. workshop that one thing was obvious: the need for papers to identify things already known about the effects of aircraft noise on anioy- ance and sleep. They will provide information on things that don't need to be studied and what issues are still debatable and ideas on how to resolve those debates, she told partici- pants. Before FAA changes its noise policy, there has to be doc- umentation that issues have been studied and there is a better way of doing something, Girvin explained. FAA is trying to identify things that need to be done so the agency can figure out whether some change is or is not needed in its current noise policy. However, Girvin stressed that her office does not "have a pot of money" to pursue research identified in the road -map- ping effort and hopes to work on projects with other entities, such as the Airport Cooperative Research Program, to progress more efficiently and effectively. After that statement, the "air went out of the room," one consultant told ANR. The workshop was filled with represen- tatives of acoustical consulting firms hoping to put them- selves in line to land contracts with FAA to do some of the research that will be defined in the road -mapping process. Environmental Issues Will dock Growth At the opening of the workshop, Carl Burleson, acting as- sistant deputy administrator for policy for FAA, said that air- craft noise continues to be the number one community concern with airport expansion projects. "That is recognized by FAA in its NextGen 2025 plan. We have put environment and energy issues at the heart of how to get growth. It is clear that it is the environmental is- sues that will block growth." Burleson stressed that FAA is committed to developing a well thought-out research roadmap for aircraft noise impacts and to have wide public participation in that process. "We seek to use the roadmap to influence policy," he said. "The intent is not to develop a nice binder to put on a shelf and col- lect dust but to use this work to influence policy.'' Lynn Pickard, deputy director of the FAA Office of Envi- romnent and Energy, told participants that FAA is looking for this research "to informs us on how we might adjust our pol- icy." Pickard also serves at co-chair of the NextGen Environ- mental Working Group. "We are having more issues with moderate levels of noise around airports and more issues farther out from airports and in airspace redesigns with aircraft at higher altitudes," she said. But it was clear at the D.C. workshop that there might be r 166 some resistance to changes in FAA's current policy of using 65 dB DNL as the threshold. to demarcate the point of signifi- cant noise impact, which has been in effect for 30 years. Or at least resistance to changing FAA's sole reliance on the DNL metric to determine significant noise impact. "As much as we talk about DNL, the fact is we have been using it for a long time and to introduce other metrics could cause problems for a lot of airports," said Jessica Steinhilber, senior director of Environmental Affairs for the Airports Council International — North America (ACI -NA). Regarding a proposal advocated at the workshop to de- scribe the impacts of airport expansion projects in terms of increases or decreases in noise effects, such as sleep distur- bance or speech interference, Betty Hawkins, an attorney with the Air Transport Association, asked, "Do you think the pubic will accept even one [more] awakening per night?" The ATA representative also asserted that the use of data from foreign studies in determinations regarding U.S. aircraft noise policy could be challenged legally. However, more than half of the studies that underpin the dose/response curve for predicting annoyance that the FAA currently uses were done outside North America, mainly in Europe and some in Aus- tralia. Further, the curve used by the FAA shows significantly more people highly annoyed to aircraft noise at 65 dB DNL in U.S. surveys than in those from outside North America. That may be because most of the U.S. annoyance surveys were done in communities around California airports that were experiencing controversies or were engaged in litigation over aircraft noise. The Department of Transportation even weighed in on the issue of changing FAA noise policy. Arnold Konheim of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation, said, "There may be justification for changing current practice. However, this could not happen quickly. DNL was adopted after extensive scrutiny that included testimony before Congress in which the leading acousticians endorsed this metric ... In reviewing any change in policy, DOT's Office of the Secretary of Trans- portation would be concerned about, among other things, its effect on other Government agencies, and the American Na- tional Standards Institute (ANSI) and the International Stan- dards Organization (ISO) [which develop acoustical standards]. We would need a coordinated effort among all these organizations." But ISO is already in the process of updating the dose/re- sponse curve used to predict community annoyance to aircraft noise and it likely to approve a new curve that shows twice as many people highly annoyed to aircraft noise as the curve used by the FAA (21 ANR 161). New Land Use Guidelines May Be Needed FAA said in its draft noise research roadmap distributed at the DC workshop that it may need to establish new land use compatibility guidelines based on the conclusions reached in the research process that will be outlined in the roadmap. FAA may be able to benefit from the Environmental Pro - Airport Noise Report December 18, 2009 tection Agency's experience in risk assessment, Girvin said. EPA has long experience in judging risks and. costs for setting thresholds of exposure, she explained. FAA's Pickard responded to a suggestion that the aircraft noise problem be addressed by looking first at remedies — sueh as changing flight paths at night to reduce sleep distur- bance or limiting taxi queues to reduce low frequency noise — and then work back to determine the best metrics to reflect that. "We have a broad array of remedies to reduce noise im- pact, such as home buyouts and sound insulation, Pickard said, but the issue is there is no free lunch. The question is when do you have a sufficient problem to apply those reme- dies and ask aircraft to fly longer and create more greenhouse gas emissions. There are limits to what you do and nothing is cost free." Pickard said she wanted the participants at the workshop to tell her "when there is enough of a noise prob- lem to do something about it." San Diego Workshop FAA asks that those who want to attend the San Diego noise research road -mapping workshop register for it by Feb. 4. 2010. There is no attendance fee. The workshop will be held on March 4, 2010, the day following the end of the UC Davis symposium. To register for the FAA workshop, which will be held at the San Diego Holiday Inn on the Bay, contact Patricia Friesenhahn; email: patricia.friesenhahn@faa.gov; or tel: (202)267-3562. Registration for the FAA workshop is not included in the registration for the UC Davis symposium. Research, from p. 165 The working group is in the process of updating the curve for predicting annoyance in the standard. It is likely to adopt a new curve that shows twice as many people highly annoyed by aircraft noise at 65 dB DNL as the FICON curve (21 ANR 161). DNL works fine for annoyance but vibration is another issue, Schomer said. DNL doesn't predict sleep problems or low ambient noise situations, he said. Schomer said he could envision four situations that re- quire separate criteria to predict annoyance: vibration, noise, sleep, and low ambient noise exposure. _, Sandy Fidell, an acoustical expert on the ISO working group, said that the FICON curve cannot explain 80 percent of the variance in the data. Richard Marchi of the Ail -ports Council International — North America, agreed. The correla- tion doesn't work, he said. It treats annoyance as just a noise problem but the problem is more complex than that and in- volves socio-economic and psychological issues. "It would be a mistake to lose site of the fact that community reaction has more involved in it than acoustics," Marchi told the FAA. But Fidell cautioned that there is no systematic under- standing of non -acoustic factors involved in annoyance and it 167 would be "a money sink" to identify all possible ones. It's better to treat non -acoustic factors in the aggregate, he said. Vince Mestre of Landrum & Brown, Inc., said the Schultz data should be parsed into common groups to better under- stand the data. You could come up with 10 different curves to fit the data, he said. The data, for example, could be parsed by North American vs. non -North American data, by data gath- ered before and after the phase out of Stage 2 aircraft; by air- craft vs. road vs. rail data. While policy may be based on composite data, understanding the differences may be helpful, he said. Mestre also urged that the outlier data points in the Schultz Curve be studied to determine wiry some communi- ties were annoyed so much more by noise. Should we resur- vey some of these communities and see if their response has changed and why there is high sensitivity in one community and low in another, he asked. He also proposed that the data be looked at from a geospatial perspective to determine if communities with higher annoyance were under flight paths or not. It was noted at the workshop that TNO, a quasi-govem- mental research organization in The Netherlands, has a much larger and more recent data base of annoyance surveys that the U.S. might be able to mine. Ambrose Clay, a City Councilman from College Park, GA, near Atlanta Hartsfield International, told the FAA he does not believe that low frequency noise and vibration are being taken into account in its prediction of annoyance. Anew sonic boorn/low frequency noise chamber set to open next year at the National Aeronautics and Space Admin- istration's Langley center could be used to study the impact of low frequency noise and low frequency induced building vi- bration effects on sleep disturbance, according to Vic Spar- row, a professor of acoustics at Penn State University. Following that, subjective tests in residences near a major air- port could be done, he said. Jon Woodward of Landrum & Brown said that virtually every annoyance study done in the United States has been at airports that were in a state of change: adding runways or conducting environmental studies or Part 150 noise compati- bility programs. "So, the increased visibility of the airport in the community may have contributed to the rate of highly an- noyed people," he said. Woodward recommended that annoy- ance studies be done at airports undergoing a step change and also at airports where the noise environment is stable. Nick Miller of Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., who served as moderator of the workshop, questioned whether something should be added to the Part 150 process to improve the airport's relationship with the community and to keep the community updated on issues, rather than trying to fine-tune the dose/response curve. Pieter Jan Stallen, professor of Community Noise Annoy- ance at Leiden University in The Netherlands, said that re- search has shown that sounds are less annoying when people believe they are being treated fairly. The difference is be- tween 10-I5 dB. Airport Noise Report December 18, 2009 Asked whether additional metrics should be studied, Fi- dell said, "It's putting the cart before the horse. If you don't understand what is causing the annoyance, then new metrics don't get you very far. The real lack is one of theory and not measurement; what drives annoyance? Discussing this in terms of let's pick another metric is backward." Miller said he agreed with Fidell but has the sense that it is activity interference that is generating annoyance with air- craft noise. He suggested that FAA policy could be based on trying to keep to a minimum effects such as speech interfer- ence or sleep disturbance. Mathias Basner of the German Aerospace Center said that is already being done in Germany. In Leipzig they use a dose/response curve based on number of expected nighttime awakenings from aircraft noise and calculate the contour where it is expected that there will be more than one to three additional awakenings. People in that contour are eligible for sound insulation. People can relate to that, he said, and to the concept of protection. Sleep Disturbance Sleep disturbance from aircraft noise proved to be a more complex topic than annoyance because of the questions of demonstrating causality and linking sleep disturbance with sleep deprivation. However, there are all sorts of risks associated with re- ducing sleep, especially for vulnerable populations, Dr. David Dinges, a sleep expert at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, made clear in his discussion of the re- search. Vulnerable populations include adults that are highly af- fected, children whose brains need good sleep for brain de- velopment, the elderly who have more pain and fragmented sleep, insomniacs, shift workers, and those with sleep apnea and neuropathologies. Dinges said there is no understanding of why some peo- ple need more sleep than others and why there are variations in how lack of sleep affects people. He said that one of the factors the FAA could control for is what happens on the shoulder hours [evening, early morning] where research shows that effects of sleep loss are greater. Workshop moderator Miller asked if the results of sleep studies from other countries are-eneralizable to U.S. popula- tions. Can we rely on whatever was found in another country 168 or do you need to replicate the study here, he asked. This is an issue that needs to be resolved, Miller said. Is there any causality at all between aircraft noise awak- enings and sleep deprivation effects, Fidell asked. We need to answer causality before replicating studies. New long-term studies in the United States would take years to develop and run, Fidell said. And he questioned how good the acoustical data were in some of the European sleep studies. And others said it would be difficult to compare existing studies of sleep disturbance fiom aircraft noise because of differences in study methodologies. Sleep disturbance is an effect of aircraft noise exposure, one participant at the workshop told FAA. It is the responsi- bility of FAA to establish the relationship between it and long and short-term effects. Are we going to end up in the position that sleep disturbance is ok because we could not make an as- sociation with effects? FAA's Girvin responded, "Clearly when we started to think about what we need to consider, sleep disturbance was one of the effects at the top because there is a lot of anecdotal input on it." It is the reason given for imposing curfews and is a concern of the public. But there did not seem to be a cohe- sive way to look at the issue based on the literature available. FAA is trying to determine what it can do and afford, or some other entity can do to help the agency. "We are still in the same place if nothing can be done. I was hoping that we could come up with a path forward." Girvin said that if there is ho path forward, the FAA will continue to use the DNL metric, which does penalize night- time noise. Whether DNL is good enough can be debated, she added. Dinges suggested a way forward: to come up with cohorts in the United States that are similar to those used in European sleep studies. Do similar studies in the United States and compare the results to those obtained in the European studies, Clarification Girvin told ANR that FAA intends to engage in ISO's ef- fort to update the dose/response curve for annoyance and has begun to contact the experts involved. "We also intend to dedicate resources to develop timely policy if warranted, as the results of research and analysis, such as ISO's efforts, ma- ture," she said. Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor a auportnoisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions Report, provided that the base fee of US$ 1.03 per page per copy is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA. Airport Noise Report A weekly update on Iitigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21, Number 42,43 PFCs $3.06 BILLION OF TOTAL PPC REVENUE DEVOTED TO NOISE MITIGATION PROJECTS As of Nov. 30, 2009, some $3.06 billion (5 percent) of the $71.5 billion in Pas- senger Facility Charges (PFCs) that the Federal Aviation Administration has ap- proved for collection and use since 1992 is being designated for airport noise mitigation projects, according to data provided by the agency. A year ago, FAA data showed that some $2.86 billion in PFCs had been ap- prved for collection and use as of Nov. 30, 2008 (20 ANR 165). The FAA subdivides noise mitigation projects into six categories. Following is the total amount airports plan to collect for each category, as of Nov. 30, 2009, as well as the percentage that category represents of the total PFCs for noise mitiga- tion being collected: • $1.33 billion (43.4 percent) for multi -phase projects; • $1.19 billion (39 percent) for soundproofing projects; • $493.5 million (16.1 percent) to purchase land; • $17.01 million (0.6 percent) for noise monitoring systems: • $15.3 million (0.5 percent) for planning; and • $15.02 million (0.5 percent) for miscellaneous projects. 99 Airports Using PTCs for Noise Mitigation A total of 99 airports, four more than a year ago, were using PFCs for noise mitigation projects as of Nov. 30, 2009. The top 16 airports targeting PFC revenue for noise mitigation projects as of Nov. 30, 2009, are: Los Angeles International continues to lead at $788.4 million; Chicago O'Hare International ($411 million); Chicago Midway ($260.9 million); Minneapolis -St. Paul International ($182.9 million); Phoenix Sky Harbor Interna- tional ($173.6 million); Seattle -Tacoma International ($124.2 million); San Jose In- ternational ($121.8 million); Bob Hope Airport ($95.8 million); Ontario International ($84.7 million); Ft. Lauderdale -Hollywood International ($82.1 mil- lion); Cleveland Hopkins International ($78.4 million); Louisville International ($58.9 million); Charlotte -Douglas International ($58.7 million); Las Vegas Inter- national ($51.7 mullion); Detroit Metropolitan International ($49.4 million); and Lambert -St. Louis International ($49.4 million). The only new airport added to this list is Ft. Lauderdale -Hollywood Interna- tional. Some $78 million of the total $82.1 milllion it is collecting in PFCs will go to support a residential sound insulation program for a runway extension project. PFCs are only one source of revenue that airports use to fund noise mitigation projects. The other funding stream is the FAA's Airport Improvement Program. Data on AIP grants for noise mitigation projects were reported earlier (21 ANR 135). _ ( ) Those data show that, in fiscal 2009, some 44 airports received a total of $217.7 million in federal AIP grants for noise mitigation projects. Airport Noise Report 169 December 25, 2009 In This Issue... PFCs .6. This special issue of ANR provides data ob- tained from the FAA on air- ports that are collecting Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) to support various noise mitigation projects. .. The data show that 99 air- ports, four more than on Nov. 30, 2008, are now im- posing PFCs to reduce noise impact. Approximately $3.06 bil- lion in PFCs was being im- posed by airports for noise mitigation projects as of Nov. 30, 2009. Los Angeles International remains far ahead of other airports in using PFCs for noise mitigation projects ($788.4 million), followed by Chicago O'Hare Interna- tional ($41.1 million). Table 1, showing a break- down of all airport projects being supported by PFCs, begins on p. 170. Table 2, showing PFCs being collected by each air- port, begins on p. 171. Table 3, showing PFCs being collected by project type, begins on p. 178. December 25, 2009 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE Monterey CA Planning $15,000 $4.50 2!7108 217/08 Monterey CA Soundproofing $824,321 $3.00 10/8/93 10/31/94 Monterey CA Soundproofing $322,715 $3.00 7/27/01 7/27/01 Monterey CA Soundproofing $211,022 $3.00 5/30/02 5/30/02 Monterey CA Soundproofing $80,026 $4.50 3/16/06 3/16/06 Monterey CA Soundproofing $97,679 $4.50 3/16/06 3/16/06 Monterey CA Soundproofing $444,444 $4.50 2/7/08 2/7/08 Monterey CA Soundproofing $222,222 $4.50 4/23/09 4/23/09 Oakland CA Monitoring $436,267 $3.00 6/26/92 6/26/92 Oakland CA Monitoring $200,000 $3.00 10/23/09 10/23/09 Oakland CA Soundproofing $240,000 $3.00 4/30197 4/30/97 Oakland CA Soundproofing $5,511,000 $3.00 6/18/99 6/18/99 Ontario CA Multi -phase $84,774,000 $3.00 4/28/98 4/28/98 Sacramento CA Monitoring $662,000 $3.00 4/26/96 4/26/96 San Diego CA Monitoring $1,224,000 $3.00 5/20/03 5/20/03 San Diego CA Planning $268,942 $3.00 6/27108 6/27/08 San Diego CA Soundproofing $2,418;000 $3.00 7/26/95 7/26/95 San Diego CA Soundproofing $1,122,000 $3.00 7/24/98 7/24/98 San Diego CA Soundproofing $4,626,000 $4.50 5/20/03 5/20/03 San Diego CA Soundproofing $5,132,960 $4.50 11/22/05 11/22/05 San Diego CA Soundproofing $4,512,915 $4.50 6/27/08 6/27108 San Diego CA Soundproofing $9,612,376 $4.50 9/30/09 9/30/09 San Jose CA Monitoring $184,000 $3.00 6/11/92 6/11/92 San Jose CA Monitoring $100,000 $3.00 11/24/99 11124/99 San Jose CA Monitoring $221,000 $3.00 12/15/00 12/15/00 San Jose CA Soundproofing $47,792,121 $3.00 6/11192 6/11/92 San Jose CA Soundproofing $7,500,000 $4.50 11/24/99 11/24/99 San Jose CA Soundproofing $4,500,000 $4.50 4/20/01 4/20/01 San Jose CA Soundproofing $61,589,000 $4.50 3/1/02 3/1/02 Pueblo CO Planning $21,500 $3.00 4/11/96 4/11/96 Windsor Locks CT Soundproofing $1,450,000 $4.50 11/3/08 11/3/08 Fort Lauderdale FL Land $3,500;000 $3.00 4130/98 4/23/01 Fort Lauderdale FL Monitoring $658,000 $3.00 11/1/94 4/30/98 Fort Lauderdale FL Soundproofing $78,000,000 $4.50 12/22/08 12/22/08 Fort Myers FL Planning $132,000 $3.00 8/31192 8/31/92 Gainesville FL Land $144,869 $4.50 8/29/02 8/29/02 Jacksonville FL Land $6,000,000 $3.00 9/6/06 9/6/06 Key West FL Planning $15,000 $4.50 1/10/03 1/10/03 Key West FL Planning $1,980 $4.50 4/14/04 4/14/04 Key West FL Planning $1,159 $4.50 11/5/04 1115/04 Key West FL Soundproofing $350,000 $3.00 8/31/99 8/31/99 Key West FL Soundproofing $75,000 $4.50 1/10/03 1/10/03 Key West FL Soundproofing $47,500 $4.50 1/10/03 1/10/03 Key West FL Soundproofing $63,316 $4.50 4/14/04 4/14/04 Key West FL Soundproofing $200,239 $4.50 11/5/04 11/5/04 Key West FL Soundproofing $100,000 $4.50 4/5/05 4/5/05 Orlando FL Multi -phase $688,000 $3.00 7/12105 7/12205 Orlando FL Planning $21,919 $3.00 8/28/95 8/28/95 Pensacola FL Land $597,708 $3.00 11/23/92 11/23/92 Airpoit Noise Report 172 •:• e $6,387,267 - $84,774,000 $662,000 $28,917,193 $121,886,121 $21,500 $1,450,000 $82,158,000 $132,000 $144,869 $6,000,000 $854,194 $709,919 $732,264 December 25, 2009 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE Pensacola FL Land $69,480 $3.00 11/23192 8/10/95 Pensacola FL Misc $65,076 $3.00 11/23/92 8/10/95 Sanford FL Planning $23,048 $1.00 12/27/00 12/27/00 Sarasota FL Land $1,474,904 $3.00 6/29/92 1/31/95 Sarasota FL Land $5,400,000 $3.00 6/29/92 12/15/95 Tallahassee FL Land $3,128,225 $3.00 3/3/98 3/3/98 Tampa FL Misc $1,692,110 $4.50 5/16103 5/16/03 West Palm Beach FL Land $1,000,000 $3.00 1/26/94 8/29/96 West Palm Beach FL Land $2,302,300 $3.00 1/26194 8/29/96 West Palm Beach FL Land $374,616 $3.00 1/26/94 6/11/97 West Palm Beach FL Land $1,387,548 $3.00 1/26194 6/11/97 West Palm Beach FL Land $5,000,000 $3.00 1/26/94 6/11/97 West Palm Beach FL Land $2,000,000 $3.00 8/22/00 12/13/02 West Palm Beach FL Planning $168,628 $3.00 1/26/94 6/11/97 Atlanta GA Land $7,280,374 $4.50 11/29/07 11/29/07 Bloomington IL Land $35,000 $3.00 12!5/97 1215!97 Chicago IL Misc $11,493 $3.00 6/28/93 6/28193 Chicago IL Misc $2971-707 $3.00 6/28/93 6/28/93 Chicago IL Misc $2,057,107 $3.00 2/22/00 2/22/00 Chicago IL Misc $2,500,000 $3.00 4!18/02 4/18/02 Chicago IL Monitoring $325,000 $3.00 6/28/93 6/28/93 Chicago IL Planning $1,425,000 $3.00 7/5!95 7!5/95 Chicago IL Soundproofing $4,900,000 $3.00 6/28/93 6/28/93 Chicago IL Soundproofing $1,140,000 $3.00 7/5/95 7/5/95 Chicago IL Soundproofing $8,000,000 $4.50 11/15/96 11/15/96 Chicago IL Soundproofing $28,400,000 $4.50 11/15/96 11/15/96 Chicago IL Soundproofing $10,000,000 $4.50 2/22/00 2/22/00 Chicago IL Soundproofing $20,000,000 $4.50 7/7/00 717/00 Chicago IL Soundproofing $50,000,000 $4.50 4/18/02 4/18/02 Chicago IL Soundproofing $127,542,000 $4.50 1121/09 1/21/09 Chicago IL Soundproofing $4,303,049 $4.50 1/21109 1/21/09 Chicago IL Misc $42,389 $3.00 6/28/93 6128/93 Chicago IL Misc $2,993,028 $4.50 6/28196 6/28/96 Chicago IL Monitoring $3,900,000 $3.00 6128/93 9/16/94 Chicago IL Monitoring $1,000,000 $3.00 8/17/06 8/17/06 Chicago IL Multi -phase $586,857 $4.50 6/28193 6/28/93 Chicago IL Planning $5,700,000 $3.00 6/28/96 6/28/96 Chicago IL Soundproofing $35,300,000 $4.50 6/28/93 6/28/93 Chicago IL Soundproofing $113,271,731 $4.50 6/28/96 6/28/96 Chicago IL Soundproofing $52,000,000 $4.50 6/28/96 6/28/96 Chicago IL Soundproofing $20,000,000 $4.50 3/16/98 3/16/98 Chicago IL Soundproofing $81,000,000 $4.50 4/16/01 4/16/01 Chicago IL Soundproofing $30,000,000 $4.50 4/16/01 4/16/01 Chicago IL Soundproofing $27,200,000 $4.50 4/16101 4/16/01 Chicago IL Soundproofing $4,000,000 $4.50 12/28/05 12/28/05 Chicago IL Soundproofing $16,060,000 $4.50 6/17/04 6/17/04 Chicago IL Soundproofing $2,440,000 $4.50 6/17104 6/17/04 " Chicago IL Soundproofing $24,327,000 $4.50 8/17/06 8/17/06 Chicago IL Soundproofing $11,272,000 $4.50 8/17/06 8/17/06 Airport Noise Report 173 PROJ. TOTAL $23,048 $6,874,904 i $3,128,225 $1,692,110 $12,233,092 j $7,280,374 $35,000 $260,901,356 $411,093,005 December 25, 2009 174 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT RFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJ. TOTAL Moline IL Land $335,915 $4.50 9/29/94 9/29/94 $700,999 Moline IL Land $365,084 $4.50 3/12/98 3/12/98 Peoria IL Land $382,426 $3.00 9/8/94 9/8/94 $816,880 Peoria IL Land $145,441 $4.50 2/3/00 2/3/00 Peoria IL Soundproofing $289,013 $3.00 9/8/94 9/8/94 Rockford IL Planning $16,088 $3.00 7124/92 9/2/93 $16,088 Springfield IL Land $24,740 $3.00 3/27/92 4/28/93 $165,351 Springfield IL Land $12,275 $3.00 3/27/92 4/28/93 Springfield IL Land $24,897 $3.00 3/27/92 4/28/93 Springfield IL Land $14,721 $3.00 3/27/92 4/28/93 Springfield IL Land $551 $3.00 3/27/92 4/28/93 Springfield IL Land $88,167 $3.00 11/24/93 3/11/97 Indianapolis IN Land $42,532,859 $3.00 6/28/93 6/28/93 $43,106,543 Indianapolis IN Misc $498,684 $4.50 12/20/96 12/20/96 Indianapolis IN Planning $75,000 $3.00 12/20/96 12/20/96 Des Moines IA Multi -phase $945,178 $4.50 8/16/05 8/16/05 $945,178 Covington KY Monitoring $140,000 $3.00 3/30/94 3/30/94 $47,828,215 Covington KY Monitoring $387,000 $3.00 7/26/02 7/26/02 Covington KY Multi -phase $21,287,000 $3.00 3/30/94 3/30/94 Covington KY Multi -phase $9,693,000 $3.00 11/29/95 11/29/95 Covington KY Multi -phase $8,448,000 $3.00 3/28/01 3/28/01 Covington KY Planning $337,000 $3.00 3/30/94 3/30/94 Covington KY Planning $344,215 $3.00 3/31/98 3/31/98 Covington KY Planning $1,501,000 $3.00 11/8/01 11/8/01 Covington KY Soundproofing $5,691,000 $3.00 8/3/05 8/3/05 Lexington KY Multi -phase $45,544 $4.50 8/31/93 4/21/95 $156,904 Lexington KY Multi -phase $111,360 $4.50 8/31/93 9/27/96 Louisville KY Land $58,800,000 $3.00 1/29/97 1/29/97 $58,925,000 Louisville KY Monitoring $125,000 $3.00 3/27/01 3/27/01 Baton Rouge LA Multi -phase $1,315,124 $3.00 9/28/92 4/23/93 $1,315,124 New Orleans LA Multi -phase $3,750,000 $4.50 8/26/04 8/26/04 $3,773,858 New Orleans LA Planning $23,858 $3.00 2/21/07 2/21/07 Boston MA Soundproofing $15,323,217 $4.50 8/24/93 1/27/97 $29,113,217 Boston MA Soundprooding $8,590,000 $4.50 4/20/06 4/20/06 Boston MA Soundprooding $5,200,000 $4.50 4/20/06 4/20/06 Detroit MI Misc $225,000 $3.00 9/21/92 9/21/92 $49,482,156 Detroit MI Multi -phase $48,871,000 $3.00 9/21/92 9/21/92 Detroit MI Planning $386,156 $3.00 9/28/04 9/28/04 Traverse City MI Planning $7,238 $4.50 3/2/06 3/2/06 $7,238 Duluth MN Planning $17,255 $3.00 7/1/94 7/1/94 $17,255 Minneapolis MN Land $21,500,000 $3.00 5/13/94 5/13/94 $182,999,539 Minneapolis MN Land $20,500,000 $4.50 5/5/05 5/5/05 Minneapolis MN Monitoring $230,273 $3.00 5/13/94 5/13/94 Minneapolis MN Multi -phase $103,237,546 $3.00 5/13/94 5/13/94 Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $2,617,279 $3.00 5/13/94 5/13/94 Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $450,537 $3.00 5/13/94 5/13/94 Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $19,768,494 $4.50 12/11/98 12/11/98 Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $9,695,410 $4.50 1124/03 1/24/03 \/ Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $5,000,000 $4.50 5/5/05 5/5/05 Airport Noise Report 175 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJTOlAL Kansas City MO Land $10,760850 $3.00 12/21/95 12/21/95 $10760,850 St. Louis MO Land $23.016'867 $3.00 900/92 9/30/92 $49.400.480 St. Louis MO Land $25'683.623 $3.00 10106 1/8/98 St. Louis MO Monitoring $100.000 $3.00 11&4/08 11/2408 St. Louis MO Planning $600.000 $3.00 11/2408 11/2408 Rota MP Soundproofing $4.480 $4.50 101504 101504 $4.480 Saipan MP Soundproofing $80.048 $4.60 101604 101504 $80.648 Tinian MP Soundproofing $4.480 $4.50 10/15/04 10/15/04 $4.480 Missoula -MT Planning $20,670 $4.50 7/2205 7/22/05 $20.670 Las Vegas NV Land $7.991.645 $4.50 2/2402 2/24/92 $51.753.814 Las Vegas NV Land $5.250.000 $3.00 2/24/92 6/7/93 Las Vegas NV Land $20.250.000 _ $4.50 2/24192 0/7/93 Las Vegas NV Lund $1.440.492 $4.50 2/24/92 6/7/93 Las Vegas NV Land $10.854.182 $4.50 2X402 3/15/35 Las Vegas NV Planning $167,495 $3.00 2/24/92 2/24/92 Reno NV Planning $339.994 $8.00 60101 5/31/01 $495.738 Reno NV Soundproofing $155.744 $3.00 10/2803 102093 Manchester NH Multi -phase $1.400.000 $3.00 1013/92 3/406 $4.650.000 Manchester NH Soundproofing $3.260.000 $3.00 0103 4/1/03 Albany NY Planning $45.000 $4.50 9/27/98 9/2706 $45,000 Buffalo NY Multi -phase $1.997.650 $4.50 5/25/07 6/2507 $1'987,550 Islip NY Multi -phase $1.150.000 $3.00 9/23/94 9/23/94 $1.150.000 Syracuse NY Soundproofing $1.354.899 $4.50 8/22/05 8/2205 $1.354.889 Ohodntto NO Lund - $52.270'000 $3.00 8/23/04 8/2304 $58,725.302 Charlotte NC Multi -phase, $1.284.209 $3.00 882304 8/2304 Charlotte NC Multi -phase $3.941.093 $3.00 8/23/04 8/23/04 ' Charlotte NC Planning $1.250'000 $3.00 882304 8/28/04 New Bern NC Lund $30.203 $4.50 5/1106 5/1108 $30.233 Fargo ND Land $361.548 $4.50 180106 101106 $361.648 Akron OH Land $10.210 $3.00 1001/96 102106 $107.252 Akron OH Lund $14.835 $3.00 1021/96 10/21/96 Akron OH Land $5.283 $3.00 1021/96 1021/96 Akron OH Land $21.334 $3.00 10/21/98 1021/96 Akron OH Land $12'911 $4.50 4/4/02 4/402 Akron DH Planning $4.146 $3.00 1021/00 10/2106 Akron OH Planning $27.001 $3.00 1021/96 1021/96 Akron OH Planning $2.722 $3.00 1088/99 10/18/99 Cleveland 0H Land $7.137.600 $3.00 8/1/82 2/2/94 $78.444.570 Cleveland OH Land $28.685.000 $3.00 4/25/97 4/2507 Cleveland OH Planning $684.570 $3.00 4/2507 4/2507 Cleveland OH Soundproofing $22.382.400 $3.00 01/02 9/1/02 - C|mm|ond OH Soundproofing $8.675.000 $3.00 4/26/97 4/25/97 Cleveland OH Soundproofing $10.000.000 $3D0 5/2809 60098 Columbus OH Land $119.600 $3.00 7/14/92 3/27/96 $2'433.499 Columbus 0H Land $379,070 $3.00 7/1402 3/27/96 Columbus OH Land $519,723 $3D0 7A4/02 3/2708 Columbus OH Mioo $61.752 $8.00 7/1903 3/2706 Columbus DH Monitoring $16.509 $3.00 7Y14/92 10/27/93 OH Planning onnng �13822 . �3.OO 5/29/988 5/29/985/29/98Cn|umbuu Airport Noise Report Deceinber 25, 2009 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFG LEVEL IMPOSE USE Columbus OH Soundproofing $20,323 $3.00 7/14/92 10/27/93 Columbus OH Soundproofing $71,974 $3.00 7/14/92 10/27/93 Columbus OH Soundproofing $60,547 $3.00 7/14/92 10/27/93 Columbus OH Soundproofing $269,810 $3.00 7/19/93 3/27/96 Columbus OH Soundproofing $906,369 $4.50 5/29/98 5/29/98 Dayton OH Land $309,206 $4.50 7/25/94 7/25/94 Dayton OH Planning $700,000 $4.50 5/9/02 5/9/02 Toledo OH Multi -phase $1,676,083 $4.50 1/16/98 1/16/98 Tulsa OK Multi -phase $8,400,000 $3.00 4/27/00 4/27/00 Portland OR Monitoring $715,750 $3.00 12/7/05 12/7/05 Allentown PA Land $244,387 $4.50 3/26/01 3/26/01 Allentown PA Land $220,475 $4.50 3/26101 3/26/01 Allentown PA Land $91,944 $4.50 6/6/03 6/6/03 Allentown PA Monitoring $30,556 $4.50 3/26101 3/26/01 Allentown PA Planning $33,334 $4.50 3/26/01 3/26/01 Allentown PA Soundproofing $100,000 $4.50 6/6/03 6/6/03 Allentown PA Soundproofing $500,000 $4.50 6/6/03 6/6/03 Erie PA Land $242,373 $4.50 5/13/03 5113/03 Erie PA Multi -phase $118,518 $3.00 7/21192 7/21/92 Pittsburgh PA Soundproofing $700,541 $4.50 7/27/01 7/27/01 Pittsburgh PA Soundproofing $1,050,207 $4.50 1/7/05 1/7/05 State College PA Planning $10,000 $3.00 5/26/99 5/26/99 Providence RI Land $10,382,213 $4.50 11/27/00 11/27/00 Providence RI Land $12,658,400 $4.50 11/13/09 11/13/09 Chattanooga TN Land $100,000 $3.00 4/25/97 4/25/97 Chattanooga TN Land $15,000 $4.50 11/22/00 11/22/00 Knoxville TN Multi -phase $528,431 $3.00 10/6193 10/6/93 Nashville TN Land $700,000 $3.00 5/10/07 5110/07 Nashville TN Monitoring $200,000 $3.00 5/10/07 5/10/07 Nashville TN Multi -phase $24,065,949 $3.00 2/26/04 2/26/04 Nashville TN Planning $106,272 $3.00 2/23/01 2/23/01 Brownsville TX Land $181,860 $4.50 5/7/07 5/7/07 Brownsville TX Planning $108,702 $4.50 2/7/03 2/7/03 Dallas TX Multi -phase $1,913,478 $3.00 12/20/07 12120/07 Dallas TX Monitoring $1,266,151 $3.00 11!7/96 11/7/96 Harlingen TX Land $96,630 $3.00 7/9/98 7/9/98 Laredo TX Planning $15,786 $4.50 7/23/93 12/31/96 San Antonio TX Monitoring $245,153 $3.00 2/22/05 2/22/05 San Antonio TX Soundproofing $24,840,225 $4.50 8/29/01 12/1/04 Salt Lake City UT Land $465,488 $3.00 10/1/94 10/1/94 Salt Lake City UT Land $331,072 $4.50 4/30101 4/30/01 Salt Lake City UT Land $524,408 $4.50 2/28/02 2/28/02 Lynchburg VA Land $17,762 $3.00 4/14/95 4/14/95 Richmond VA Planning $15,931 $3.00 7/3/97 7/3/97 Roanoke VA Land $65,000" $4.50 11/24104 11/24/04 Roanoke VA Planning $2,458 $4.50 11/24/04 11/24/04 Bellingham WA Land $166,000 $3.00 4/29/93 4/29/93 Bellingham WA Land $732,000 $3.00 10/5/94 10/5/94 Bellingham WA Land $454,350 $3.00 12/11/96 12/11/96 Airport Noise Report PROJ. TOTAL $1,009,206 $1,676,083 $8,400,000 $715,750 $1,220,696 $360,891 $1,750,748 $10,000 $23,040,613 $115,000 $528,431 $25,072,221 $290,562 $1,913,478 $1,266,151 $96,630 $15,786 $245,153 $24,840,225 $1,320,968 $17,762 $15,931 $67,458 $1,352,350 176 ` -- December 25,%009 177 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJTOTAL ( \ Seattle ' NN Multi -phase $14,938111 $3.0 8U3/92 013/92 $124,226,950 Seattle WA Multi -phase $43.000000 $3.00 12/29/95 12/29/95 Seattle WA Multi -phase $50,000.000 $3.00 6X24/98 101601 Seattle WA Soundproofing $10.134.627 $3.00 10/25/98 1025/93 - Seattle WA Soundproofing $153.212 $3.00 1025/93 10/25/93 Appleton VV| Land $14.502 $3.00 4/25/94 4/25/94 $14'502 Milwaukee VV| Land $3.009.197 $3.00 2/24/96 2/24/95 $46.612.580 Milwaukee VV| Land $1.425.187 $3D0 2/2405 2/24/95 Milwaukee VV| Miac $50.000 $3.00 30/01 30/01 Milwaukee VV| Miuc $4.382.162 $3.00 7/9/02 7/902 Milwaukee VV| Monitoring $40,950 $3.00 2/2405 2/2405 . Milwaukee VV| Multi -phase $34,994,828 $3.00 12/2106 12/21/35 - Milwaukee VV| Planning $230.000 $3.00 7002 7002 Milwaukee VV| Soundproofing $2.200.230 $3.00 12/21/95 12/21/95 Cheyenne WY Land $81.102 $4.50 3/28/01 3/28/01 $210.951 Cheyenne WY Mian $129.759 $4.50 3/2801 3/2001 Jackson WY Monitoring $47.272 $4.50 2/904 2/9/04 $73.588 Jackson WY Monitoring $28'318 $4.60 4008 4/8108 _ $3,066,297,200 $3,066,297,200 — Airport Noise Report ' ^ l —` ' -- ` December %5,2009 - ` - 178 ' Airport Noise Repoit PFCFUNDED NOISE PROJECTS (BY WORK CODE) / (as pƒ1 - \ CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJTOTAL Birmingham AL Land $3,173,638 $4.50 7/208 7/208 $493,586121 Huntsville AL Land $6.796.880 $3.00 3/6/92 6/2804 Huntsville AL Land $920.00 $380 3/60 11/22/95 Huntsville AL Land $240.000 $380 3/6/92 5/2807 Huntsville AL Land $68.954 $3.00 10/1098 10/1908 Huntsville AL Land $154.239 $430 1030/02 100002 Mobile AL Land $421,383 .$310 2/2202 2/22/02 Mobile AL Land $126.333 $3.00 3/106 3/106 Mobile AL Lend $158.659 $3.08 3/106 3/1/06 Mobile AL Land $230.906 $3.00 3/108 3/106 Mobile AL Land $103.384 $3.00 3/106 3d00 Mobile AL Lund $282.192 $3.00 3/106 3/106 Juneau AK Land $21.931 $4.50 5/3001 50001 Phoenix AZ Lund $27.327.877 $3l0 6/502 ' 6/5/02 Tucson AZ Lund $3.288'478 $4.50 11/1907 11/18/97 Tucson AZ Land $306.888 $4.50 11/19/97 11/19/97 Fort Smith AR Land $90.756 $3.00 5/8/94 7/24/97 Little Rock AR Land $3.314.737 $4.50 10106 1/3106 Burbank C& Land $27,828.178 $3.00 6/1704 2B07 Fort Lauderdale FL Lund $3G0OOOU . . �3�OO 4�00D 4�3�1 ' Gainesville FL Land $144.869 $4.50 8/2902 / 80902 \. Jacksonville FL Land $6,000000 $3l0 3/606 9/606 Pensacola FL Land $597.708 $3.00 11/2302 11/23/92 Pensacola FL Land $69.480 $3.00 11/2302 8U0/95 Sarasota FL Land $1.474.904 $3.00 6/29/92 1/31/95 Sarasota FL Land $5.400.000 $3.00 02092 12M895 Tallahassee FL Land $3.128.225 $3.00 3/3/98 30/98 West Palm Beach FL Land $1.000,000 $3.08 1/2604 8/29/96 West Palm Beach FL Lund $2.302.300 $3.00 1/2094 02086 West Palm Beach FL Land $374.816 $3.00 1/26/94 6/1107 West Palm Beach FL Land $1.387.548 $3.00 1/26/94 8/11/97 West Palm Beach FL Land $5,000.000 $3.00 1/26/04 6/1107 West Palm Beach FL Land $2.000.000 $3.00 8/2200 12/13/02 Atlanta 8A Land $7.280.374 $4.50 11/2807 11/2907 Bloomington |L Land $35.000 $3.00 12/507 12/5/97 Moline |L Lend $335.015 $4.50 9/2004 9/29/94 Moline |L Land $365.084 $4.50 3/12/98 3/1298 Peoria |L Land $382.426 $3.00 90/94 90/94 Peoria |L Land $145.441 $4.50 2/3/00 2/30 Springfield {L Land $24.740 $3.00 3/27192 4/28/93 Springfield |L Land $12.275 $3.00 3/27/92 4/2093 Springfield |L Land $24.897 $3.00 3/27102 02803 Springfield K Land $14.721 $3.00 3/27/92 4/2098 Springfield |L Land $551 $3.00 3/2702 4/28/93 / Springfield IL Lund $88.167 $3.00 11/24/93 \ 3/11/97 - Airport Noise Repoit ' 2009 '- ' � CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE Louisville KY Land $58,800,000 $310 1/2907 1/28/97 Minneapolis MN Land $21.500.000 $8.00 5113194 511884 Minneapolis MN Land $20.500.000 $4.50 5&5/05 5/505 Kansas City MO Lund $10,768.850 $8.00 12/2105 12/21/95 St. Louis MO Land $23.016.867 $3.00 00002 99002 St. Louis MO Land $25.083.623 $3.00 101/96 1008 Las Vegas NV Land $10.654.182 $4.50 2/2402 3/15/95 NV an Land $7981845 . ' � �45O 2�4�2 2/24/92 Las Lao'~� NV Land $6,250:000 $3.00 2/24/92 6/7/93 Lan Vegas NV Land 25OOUO �2G. ' � �45O 28�02 O��3 ` NV Land �1�40�S2 ��45O 2/24/922/24/92 6/7/93 Chodutta Charlotte NC Land $52.270'000 $3.00 8/2304 8/2304 New Bern NC Land $30.293 $4.50 5/1106 5U106 Fargo ND Land $361.548 $4.50 101106 101106 Akron 0H Land $19.210 $3.00 10/21/96 1021/06 Akron OH Land $14.635 $3.00 102106 1021/96 Akron' 'OH Land $62Q3 �3OO � 1N21�G 1021/0O Akron OH Land $21,334 $3.00 10/21/96 1021/98 Akron. 0H Land $12Q11 . �45O 4M/O2 4��Z Cleveland OH Land $7.137.00 $3.00 9U/92 2/2/94 Cleveland DH Land $29.685.000 $3.00 4/2507 4/25/97 Columbus OH Land $119.000 $3.00 7/14/02 3/27/96 - Columbus OH Lend' $379.070 $3.00 7/14/92 3/27/96 Columbus OH Land $519.723 $3.00 7Y1402 3/27/96 - Dayton OH Land $309.206 $4.50 7/2504 7/25/94 Allentown RA Land $244.387 $4.50 3/2601 3/2601 Allentown PA Land $220.476 $4.50 3/2601 3/26/01 Allentown PA Lund $91,944 $4.50 6/603 6/603 - Erie PA Land $242.373 $4.50 5/1303 5/13/03 Providence RI Lund $10.382.213 $4.50 11/27/00 11/2700 Providence R| RI Land �12G584OO . . � �45O 11/1�0S 11/13�9 Chattanooga TN Lund ' $100,000 $3.00 4/2507 4/25/97 Chattanooga TN Land $15.000 $4.50 11/22N0 11/22/00 Nashville TN Land $700,000 $3.00 5/10/07 5/1007 Brownsville TX Land $181,800 $4.50 51707 5/707 Harlingen TX Land $90.630 $3.00 7/9/98 7/908 Salt Lake City UT Land $465.488 $3.00 101@4 . 101/94 S�tLake Cdy UT Lund $331'072 $4.50 40O01 4/3001 Salt Lake City UT Land $524.408 $4.50 2/2802 2/2002 Lynchburg VA Lend $17,782 $3.00 4/14/95 4/1405 Roanoke VA Land $65.080 $4.50 11/24/04 11/24N4 Bellingham WA Land $166.000 $3.00 4/29/93 4/2903 Bellingham WA Land $732.000 $3D0 10B04 10/504 Bellingham WA Land $454.350 $3.00 12/1106 12/11/96 Appleton VV| Land $14.502 $3.00 4/2504 4/2604 Milwaukee VV\ Land �3.UQ9.197 $3.00 2X��5 2�42/24/955 ( ---� ) Milwaukee VM Land ��25 187 � � �3OO 2��35 2��8S ' Cheyenne . WY Land ��1Q2 . $4�0 3�801 3�D01 ' Airport Noise Repou LOCATION - December %5.2009 180 Airport Noise Report LOCATION ' CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PRO1TDTAL \ Carlsbad OA Miuo $18.220 $4.50 11/24/08 11/2408 $16.034493 Pensacola FL Mino $65,076 $3D0 11/2302 8;0/95 Tampa FL Misc $1.682110 $4.50 5U603 6/1603 Chicago |L Miuo $11.483 $3.00 6/2093 6/2093 - Chicago |L Miuo $297.707 $3.00 6/2803 6/3093 Chicago |L Miao $2.067'107 $3.00 2/2200 02200 Chicago |L Mieo $2.500.000 $380 4/18/02 40802 Chicago |L Wiuu $42.389 $3.00 02093 6/2093 Chicago |L Misc $2.893.028 $4.50 6/28/96 6/28/96 Indianapolis IN Miuc $498.884 $4.50 12/2006 12/20/96 Detroit M| Miac $225,000 $3.00 9121/92 9/21/92 Columbus DH Mioo $61'752 $380 7U9/93 3/27/96 Milwaukee VV| Miuc $50.000 $380 3001 3001 Milwaukee VV| Miuo $4.382.162 $3.00 7/9/02 7/902 Cheyenne WY Miao $129,759 $4.50 3/2801 3/2801 Fort Smith AR Monitoring $20.555 $3.00 50/94 7/2407 $17.016.584 Burbank CA Monitoring $64.836 $3.00 4/2/01 4/201 Burbank CA Monitoring $1.000.000 $8.00 912808 9/2009 Los Angeles CA Monitoring $3.450.000 $3.00 912305 0/23/05 Oakland CA Monitoring $436.267 $3.00 6126/92 6/2602 Oakland CA Monitoring $200.000 $3.00 10/23@9 1012308 Sacramento CA Monitoring $662`000 $380 4/2098 4/2806 . San Diego CA Monitoring $1.224.000 $3.00 512003 5/2003 / \� San Jose CA Monitoring $184.000 $3.00 6/11/92 8/11/92 San Jose C4 Monitoring $100.000 $3.00 11X24/98 11/24/99 San Jose CA Monitoring $221.000 $3.00 12/1500 12/1500 Fort Lauderdale FL Monitoring $658.000 $3.00 11/1/94 4/3098 Chicago |L Monitoring $325,000 $3.00 6/28/93 8/2093 Chicago k Monitoring $3.900.000 $3.00 6/28/93 90604 Chicago IL Monitoring $1.000.000 $3.00 8/17/06 8A708 Covington KY Monitoring $140.000 $3.00 3/3094 3/30/04 Covington KY Monitoring $387.000 $3.00 7/26/02 70602 Louisville KY Monitoring $125.000 $3.00 3/27/01 3/2701 Minneapolis MN Monitoring $230.273 $3.00 5/13/94 503/04 St. Louis MO Monitoring $100.008 $3.00 11/2408 11/24/08 Columbus ' OH Monitoring $16,509 $3.00 7/1402 10/27/98 Portland OR Monitoring $715.750 $3.00 121705 120Y05 Allentown PA Monitoring $30.556 $4.50 3/2601 3/2601 Nashville TN Monitoring $200.000 $3.00 5/1007 810/07 Dallas TX Monitoring $1.266.151 $3.00 11/7/06 11M96 San Antonio TX Monitoring $245.153 $3.00 2/22@5 202/05_ Milwaukee VV| Monitoring $40.966 $3.00 2/24/95 2/2406 Jackson WY Monitoring $47.272 $4.50 2/9/04 2/904 Jackson WY Monitoring $20.316 $4.50 4/8/08 4008 Phoenix AZ Multi -phase $75.000.000 $4.50 12/604 12/604 $1,330.441'859 Phoenix AZ Multi -phase $25.900.000 84.50 9/2707 9/2707 Phoenix AZ Multi -phase $6.400.000 $4.50 4/3009 4/3009 \ ` Los Angeles CA Mu|b'phoao $700.000.000 $4.50 11/28/97 11/28/97 Airport Noise Report December 2089 181 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJTOTAL Los Angeles {A Mu|U-phase $50.000.000 $4.50 10X2307 10/2307 Ontario CA Multi -phase $84.774.000 $3.00 4X2098 4/2808 Orlando FL Multi -phase $888.000 $3.00 7U205 7/1205 Chicago |L Multi -phase $586.857 $4.50 60803 6/28/93 Des Moines |A Multi -phase $945,178 $4,50 8/1805 8/1605 Covington KY Multi -phase $21.287,000 $3.00 30004 30094 Covington KY Multi -phase $9.693.000 $3.00 11/2905 11/2095 Covington KY Multi -phase $8.448.000 $3.00 3/2001 3/28@1 ' Lexington KY Multi -phase $45'544 $430 031/93 4/2105 Lexington ' KY Multi -phase $111.360 $4.50 80103 8/27/98 Baton Rouge LA Multi -phase $1.315,124 $3.00 9/28/92 4/23/93 New Orleans LA Multi -phase $3.750.000 $4.50 026/04 8/2604 Detroit M| Multi -phase $48.871.000 $3.00 9/2102 9/21/92 Minneapolis MN Multi -phase $103.237.646 $3D0 6U3/94 6J13/94 Manchester NH Multi -phase $1.400.000 $3.00 1013/92 3/4196 Buffalo NY Multi -phase $1.997.550 $4.60 5/2507 5/25/07 lu|\p NY Multi -phase $1.150.000 $3.00 9/23/94 9/2304 Charlotte NC Multi -phase $1.264.209 $3.00 8/2304 8/2304 ^ Charlotte NC Multi -phase $3.941.093 $3.00 02304 8/2304 Toledo 0H Multi -phase $1.676.083 $4.50 18608 1/1608 Tulsa OK Multi -phase $8.400.000 $3.00 4/2700 4/2700 Erie PA Multi -phase $118.518 $3.00 82102 7121/92 Knoxville TN Multi -phase $528'431 $3.00 10A6/93 10&V93 \ Nashville TN Multi -phase $24.065.949 $3.00 2/26/04 2/26/04- Dallas �mm�naoe �$1,913,478 $3.00 1212/2b/07 12/20/07- Seattle WA Multi -phase $14.939.111 $3.00 8/1302 8/13/92 Seattle VV4 Multi -phase $48.060.000 $3.00 12Q9/95 12/20/86 Seattle WA Mu|U'phoma $50.000.000 $3.00 6824/98 10M6/01 Milwaukee VV| 'Multi -phase $34.094.828 $3.00 12/2106 12/2105 Mobile AL Planning $118,804 $3.00 2/2202 2/22/02 $15.372,648 Moao AZ Planning $11.175 $4.50 025/08 9/2500 Burbank CA Planning $282.440 $3.00 4X2/01 482/01 ' Burbank 0A Planning $116.460 $3.00 6/16/06 6/16/08 Modesto CA Planning $15.750 $4.50 6/6/08 6A6/08 Monterey CA Planning $50,130 $3.08 7/14/98 7/1098 Monterey CA Planning $15.000 $4.50 2/708 2/708 -' San Diego CA Planning $268.942 $3.00 0/2708 6/27/08 Pueblo CO Planning $21.500 $3.00 411/86 4/11/38 Fort Myers FL Planning $182.000 $3.00 03102 801/92 Key West FL Planning $15.000 $4.50 1/1003 1/1003 Key West FL Planning $1.080 $4.50 4/1404 4/1404 Key West FL Planning $1.150 $4.50 11/504 11/504 Orlando FL Planning $21.919 $3.00 8/28/95 8/2805 Sanford FL Planning $23,048 $1{0 12/2700 12/27/00 West Palm Beach FL Planning $168,628 $3l0 1/26/94 6/1107 Chicago |L Planning $1,425.000 $3.00 7/505 7/5/95 \ Chicago IL Planning $5.700.000 $3.00 028/96 6/2096 '^ Rockford |L Planning $16.088 $3.00 7/24/92 9/2/93 Airport Noise Report December 25, 2009 182 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROD. TOTAL Covington KY Planning $337,000 $3.00 3/30/94 3/30/94 \ Covington KY Planning $344,215 $3.00 3/31/98 3/31/98 Covington KY Planning $1,501,000 $3.00 11/8/01 11/8/01 New Orleans LA Planning $23,858 $3.00 2/21/07 2/21/07 Detroit Ml Planning $386,156 $3.00 9/28/04 9/28/04 Traverse City MI Planning $7,238 $4.50 3/2/06 3/2106 Duluth MN Planning $17,255 $3.00 7/1/94 7/1/94 St. Louis MO Planning $600,000 $3.00 11/24/08 11/24/08 Missoula MT Planning $20,670 $4.50 7/22/05 7/22/05 Las Vegas NV Planning $167,495 $3.00 2124/92 2/24/92 Reno NV Planning $339,994 $3.00 5/31/01 5/31/01 Albany NY Planning $45,000 $4.50 9/27/96 9/27/96 Charlotte NC Planning $1,250,000 $3.00 8/23/04 8/23/04 Akron OH Planning $4,146 $3.00 10/21/96 10/21/96 Akron OH Planning $27,001 $3.00 10/21/96 10/21/96 Akron OH Planning $2,722 $3.00 10/18/99 10/18/99 Cleveland OH Planning $584,570 $3.00 4/25/97 4/25/97 Columbus OH Planning $13,822 $3.00 5/29/98 5/29/98 Dayton OH Planning $700,000 $4.50 5/9/02 5/9/02 Allentown PA Planning $33,334 $4.50 3/26/01 3/26/01 State College PA Planning $10,000 $3.00 5/26/99 5/26/99 Nashville TN Planning $106,272 $3.00 2/23/01 2/23/01 Brownsville TX Planning $108,702 $4.50 217/03 217/03 Laredo TX Planning $15,786 $4.50 7/23/93 12/31/96 Richmond VA Planning $15,931 $3.00 7/3/97 7/3/97 Roanoke VA Planning $2,458 $4.50 11/24/04 11/24/04 Milwaukee WI Planning $230,000 $3.00 7/9/02 7/9/02 Phoenix AZ Soundproofing $4,996,000 $3.00 1/26/96 1/26/96 $1,194,876,485 Phoenix AZ Soundproofing $34,048,279 $4:50 615/02 6/5/02 Burbank CA Soundproofing $43,525,109 $4.50 4/2/01 4/2/01 Burbank CA Soundproofing $730,774 $4.50 4/2/01 4/2101 Burbank CA Soundproofing $437,200 $4.50 4/2/01 4/2/01 Burbank CA Soundproofing $770,931 $4.50 412/01 4/2/01 Burbank CA Soundproofing $429,490 $4.50 4/2/01 4/2/01 Burbank CA Soundproofing $16,000,000 $4.50 4/2/01 4/2/01 Burbank CA Soundproofing $4,570,000 $4.50 4/2/01 4/2/01 Burbank CA Soundproofing $113,000 $4.50 5/27/04 5/27/04 Fresno CA Soundproofing $444,400 $3.00 9/18/96 9/18/96 Los Angeles CA Soundproofing $35,000,000 $4.50 10/23/07 10/23/07 Monterey CA Soundproofing $824,321 $3.00 10/8/93 10/31/94 Monterey CA Soundproofing $322,715 $3.00 7/27/01 7/27/01 Monterey CA Soundproofing $211,022 $3.00 5/30/02 5/30/02 Monterey CA Soundproofing $80,026 $4.50 3/16/06 3/16/06 Monterey CA Soundproofing $97,679 $4.50 3/16/06 3/16/06 Monterey CA Soundproofing $444,444 $4.50 2/7/08 2/7108 Monterey CA Soundproofing $222,222 $4.50 4/23/09 4/23/09 Oakland CA Soundproofing $240,000 $3.00 4/30/97 4/30/97 Oakland CA Soundproofing $5,511,000 $3.00 6/18/99 6/18199 San Diego CA Soundproofing $2,418,000 $3.00 7/26/95 7/26/95 Airport Noise Report December 25, �0 -1 83 / CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFDLEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJTO7AL San Diego CA Soundproofing $1,122,000 $3.00 7/24/98 7%24/98 - San Diego CA Soundproofing $4.628.000 $4.50 5/2803 5/2008 San Diego CA Soundproofing $5.132.800 $4.50 11/22/05 11/2205 - San Diego CA Soundproofing $4.512.915 $4.50 6/2708 8/27/08 San Diego OA Soundproofing $0.612.376 $4.50 9/3009 9/3009 San Jose CA Soundproofing $47.792.121 $3.00 6/11/92 6/11/92 San Jose CA Soundproofing $7.500.000 $4.50 11/24/99 11/24/99 San Jose CA Soundproofing $4.500'000 $4.50 4/2001 4/20/01 San Jose CA Soundproofing $61.589.000 $4.50 3d02 3/102 Windsor Locks CT Soundproofing $1,450.000 $4.50 11/3/08 11008 Fort Lauderdale FL Soundproofing $78.000,000 $4.50 12/22/08 12/22/08 Key FL Soundproofing $350.000 $3.00 801/98 8/31/99 Key West FL Soundproofing $75.000 $4.50 1/1003 1/1003 Key West FL Soundproofing $47.500 $4.50 1/1003 1/1003 Key West FL Soundproofing $63.316 $4.50 4/1404 4/1404 Key West FL Soundproofing $200.239 $430 11/504 11/504 Key West FL Soundproofing $100,000 $4.58 4/505 4/505 Chicago IL Soundproofing $4.000.000 $3.00 6/28/93 6/28/93 Chicago |L Soundproofing $1.140.000 $3.00 7B05 78/96 Chicago |L Soundproofing $8,000.000 $4.50 11/15/98 11/1896 Chicago |L Soundproofing $28.400.000 $4.50 11/15/96 11/1696 Chicago |L Soundproofing $10.000.000 $4.50 2/2200 2/22/00 Chicago |L Soundproofing $20.000.000 $4.50 7/7100 7/700 ) Chicago |L Soundproofing $60.000.000 $4S0 A0802 4U8M2 Chicago IL Soundproofing $127.542.000 $4.50 1/2109 1X2108 Chicago |L Soundproofing $4.303.049 $4.50 1/2109 1/2109 Chicago |L Soundproofing $35.300.000 $4.50 8/28/93 02083 Chicago |L Soundproofing $113.271.731 $4.50 8/28/98 6X28/96 Chicago |L Soundproofing $62.000,000 $4.50 612098 6/28/98 Chicago |L Soundproofing $20.000.000 $4.50 3/1608 8/16/98 Chicago |L Soundproofing $81.000.000 $4f0 4M601 01601 Chicago |L Soundproofing $30.000,000 $4.50 4/1601 4U6/01 Chicago |L Soundproofing $27.200,000 $4.50 4A6/01 4/1601 - Chicago |L Soundproofing $4.000.000 $4.50 12/2005 1212805 Chicago |L Soundproofing $18.060.000 $4.50 8/1704 6/17/04 Chicago |L Soundproofing $2.440.000 $4.50 6U704 6/17/04 Chicago |L Soundproofing $24.327.000 $4.60 01706 01708 Chicago |L Soundproofing $11.272.000 $4.50 8/1706 01708 Peoria |L Soundproofing $289.013 $3.00 9/8/94 9004 Covington KY Soundproofing $5.891.000 $3.00 80@5 8/305 Boston MA Soundproofing $15,323,217 $4.50 8/24/98 1/2707 Boston MA Snundpmoding $8.590.000 $4.50 4/2006 4/20/06 Boston MA Suundpmuding $5.200,000 $4.50 4/20/06 4/20/06 Saipan MP Soundproofing $80.648 $4.50 10/1604 101504 Rota MP Soundproofing $4.480 $4.50 10/15/04 101504 Tinian MP Soundproofing $4,480 $4.50 101504 10/1504 > Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $2.617.273 $3.00 5/1304 5/13/94 ~' Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $450.537 $3D0 5/1804 5/1304 Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $19.768.494 $4.50 1011/98 1�2/11/98 Airport Noise Report December 25, 2009 184 CITY STATE PROJECT AMOUNT PFC LEVEL IMPOSE USE PROJ. TOTAL Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $9,695,410 $4.50 1/24/03 1/24/03 Minneapolis MN Soundproofing $5,000,000 $4.50 -5/5/05 5/5/05 Reno NV Soundproofing $155,744 $3.00 10/29/93 10/29/93 Manchester NH Soundproofing $3,250,000 $3.00 411/03 4/1/03 Syracuse NY Soundproofing $1,354,899 $4.50 8/22/05 8/22/05 Cleveland OH Soundproofing $22,362,400 $3.00 9/1/92 9/1/92 Cleveland OH Soundproofing $8,675,000 $3.00 4/25/97 4/25/97 Cleveland OH Soundproofing $10,000,000 $3.00 5/28/99 5/28/99 Columbus OH Soundproofing $20,323 $3.00 7/14/92 10/27/93 Columbus OH Soundproofing $71,974 $3.00 7/14/92 10/27/93 Columbus OH Soundproofing $60,547 $3.00 7/14/92 10/27/93 Columbus OH Soundproofing $269,810 $3.00 7/19/93 3/27/96 Columbus OH Soundproofing $906,369 $4.50 5/29/98 5/29/98 Allentown PA Soundproofing $100,000 $4.50 6/6/03 6/6/03 Allentown PA Soundproofing $500,000 $4.50 6/6/03 .6/6/03 Pittsburgh PA Soundproofing $700,541 $4.50 7/27/01 7/27/01 Pittsburgh PA Soundproofing $1,050,207 $4.50 117/05 1/7/05 San Antonio TX Soundproofing $24,840,225 $4.50 8/29/01 12/1/04 Seattle WA Soundproofing $16,134,627 $3.00 10/25/93 10/25/93 Seattle WA Soundproofing $153,212 $3.00 10/25/93 10/25/93 Milwaukee WI Soundproofing $2,290,230 $3.00 12/21/95 12/21/95 $3,066,297,200 $3,066,297,200 185 Airporr Nome Report A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments Volume 21, Number 44 December 31, 2009 Bob Hope Airport BURBANK WON'T CHALLENGE FAA REJECTION OF CUR -FEW; WILL FOCUS ON LEGISLATI®N The City of Burbank, CA, has decided not challenge the Federal Aviation Ad- ministration's rejection of the Part 161 application to impose a mandatory night- time curfew at Bob Hope Airport. The 60 -day deadline for challenging FAA's rejection of the proposed curfew at Bob Hope Airport ran out at the end of December. Rather than fighting the agency in court, the city will try a legislative end -run around the Part 161 process. Rep. Brad Shennan (D -CA) is preparing legislation to allow both Bob Hope Airport and nearby Van Nuys Airport to impose mandatory curfews from 10 p.m. to 7 am. The legislation has the support of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and local congressmen but has not yet been introduced. "The City is putting its focus on the legislative effort because it is the most pro- ductive vehicle for achieving meaningful noise relieve for Burbank and its neigh- bors around Bob Hope Airport," said Peter Kirsch, who serves a special counsel to the City of Burbank on airport issues. (Continued on p. 186) Part 150 Program r . r 1 W : ,�i r . E :� 1§11L h: . Only 15 of the 35 proposed noise mitigation measures in the Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program for Van Nuys Airport were approved by the Federal Aviation Administration and many of the measures approved were done so condi- tionally. FAA rejected 20 proposed noise mitigation measures, including any measure that dealt with operational issues. FAA said that many of the measures rejected need to be studied in a Part 161 cost/benefit study. In 2005, Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) awarded a $6.4 million contract to Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc. to conduct two separate Part 161 studies to support proposed restrictions at Los Angeles International Airport and Van Nuys Airport. The Part 161 studies were expected to take until 2010 to prepare at the lat- est. Seven noise restrictions are being considered in the Part 161 study for Van Nuys: incentives to operate quieter aircraft through correlating rental rates for leases and landing fees to aircraft noise level; impose fines on operators who vio- late noise abatement policies; establish maximum daytime noise limit of 77 dBA (Continued on p. 186) Airport Noise Report In This Issue... Bob Hope Airport ... The City of Burbank decides not to challenge FAA's rejection of the Burbank -Glendale - Pasadena Airport Authority's Part 161 application to im- pose a mandatory nighttime curfew at the airport. The city will focus on legislative efforts to impose the curfew. The Airport Authority will convene a stakeholders fonun to consider ways to impose the curfew and will update the airport's Part 150 program - p. 185 Van Nuys Airport ... FAA approves only 20 of the 35 measures proposed in the Part 150 program for Van Nuys; says that many meas- ures need to be considered in the Part 161 process, includ- ing caps on operations and extension of curfew - p. 185 PFC.s.... FAA approves im- position and use of PFCs for noise mitigation projects at Oakland International Air- port, T.F. Green Airport, Bob Hope Airport, and San Diego International Airport - p. 186 December 31, 2009 Bob Mope, ftom p.185 The Burbarilc-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority an- nounced in mid-November that it will continue to seek night- time noise relief even though its nine-year federal Part 161 Study and Application for a proposed full curfew at the Bob Hope Airport was denied by the FAA on Nov. 2 (21 ANR 143). Speaking at the Airport Authority's mid-November meet- ing, Bob Hope Airport Executive Director Dan Feger summa- rized the action that emerged from detailed analysis and discussion of the FAA decision, to include the following steps: • The Authority will explore convening a fonun of stake- holders, including lawmakers, to consider obtaining a curfew either through federal legislation and/or a negotiated settle- ment involving impacted constituents; and • The Authority will also commission a new Part 150 Air- port Noise Compatibility Study to validate its commitment to the airport's ongoing acoustical treatment program, as well as to identify and pursue other noise abatement and mitigation measures. "We believe this process will continue to allow the Air- port Authority to do the right thing to minimize the impact of this airport on its neighbors," Feger said. "All of us on the Authority Commission were deeply disappointed by the FAA's decision, but the steps outlined today do hold potential for further progress, and we believe this course of action is the best way to move ahead," added Authority President Joyce Streator. Feger said that a forum of key stakeholders would allow an effective evaluation of the legislative possibilities, while enhancing the potential for negotiations to lead to meaningful advances on the nighttime noise issue. He noted that the Authority's Part 150 Study was last up- dated nearly 10 years ago, and new noise contours based on updated aviation activity forecasts will be important in con- tinuing the Authority's school and home insulation program, ,,vhich has already reached four schools and 1,642 residences at a cost of over $80 million. PFCs FOUR AIRPORTS GET APPROVAL TO USE PFCS FOR. NOISE PROJECTS The following airport authorities recently received ap- proved from the Federal Aviation Administration to impose and use Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) to support noise mitigation projects at their airports: • Port of Oakland received approval to impose and use a $3 PFC at Oakland International Airport to support an up- grade to the airport's noise monitoring system. A $3 and $4.50 PFC will be imposed from March 1, 2011, to April 1, 2021, for a total estimated revenue of $293.2 million, which will support a wide range of projects; • Rhode Island Airport Commission received approval to collect and use a $4.50 PFC at T.F. Green Airport to support land acquisition for noise mitigation. The PFC will be im- posed fi'orn May 1, 2015, to Nov 1, 2016, for a total esti- mated revenue of $15.8 million and also will fund a project to extend and light a taxiway; • Burbank -Glendale -Pasadena Airport Authority received approved to impose and use a $3 PFC to support acquisition of a noise monitoring system at Bob Hope Airport. FAA ap- proved a $3 and $4.50 PFC to be collected from April 1, 2013, through Jan. 1, 20205, for a total estimated revenue of $20.4 million which will support a number of airport proj- ects; • San Diego County Regional Airport Authority received approval to impose and use a $4.50 PFC at San Diego Inter- national Airport to support phase 4 of the Quieter Home resi- dential sound insulation. program. A $3 and $4.50 PFC will be imposed from Dec. 1, 2009, to Oct. 1, 2012, for a total esti- mated revenue of $85.1 million to support several airport im- provement projects; Van Nuys, from p. 185 for aircraft; cap the number of Stage 3 jets that could be based at the airport; expand the existing 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. curfew to include all non -emergency jet and helicopter opera- tions; and investigate a cap or phaseout of current helicopter operations. All of these measures were proposed in the Van Nuys Part ( ' 150 program but rejected by FAA on the basis that they must be approved through the Part 161 process. FAA approved the following 15 measures: • Airport Land Use Compatibility (ALUC) Plan; • Noise Roundtable; • Automated Feedback System (noise complaint hotline); • Noise Abatement Officer; • Improved Communications for Helicopter Operations was approved for the purpose of improving means of commrr- nication but disapproved for any changes to existing flight procedures not approved in the NCP and flight tracks; • Signage was approved for procedures already in effect at the airport; • Additional Development Within Impact Area is ap- proved with respect to preventing the introduction of new housing but the portion of the measure that permits new non- compatible development within the DNL 65 dB, even with sound attenuation and/or easement is disapproved for pur- poses of Part 150 since it is inconsistent with the FAA's guidelines and 1998 policy; • Noise Management Monitoring System is approved for purposes of Part 150. Approval does not obligate the FAA to participate in funding the acquisition or installation of the permanent noise monitors and associated equipment and does not extend to the'use of monitoring equipment for enforce- ment purposes by in-sihr measurement of any pre-set noise thresholds; (\ • Van Nuys Helicopter Policy is approved for study, how - Airport Noise Report _ December 31, 2009 ever, the portion of the measure that recommends adoption of local plans and ordinances as necessary to regulate the estab- lishment and operation of new helicopter landing facilities is disapproved; • Establish Noise Abatement and Departure Techniques for All Aircraft Departing Van Nuys was approved as a vol- untary measure since the measure refers to the existing vol- untary Fly Friendly program. Any changes to the voluntary nature of the Fly Friendly program or an adjustment to flight profiles is disapproved; • Marketing Policy has been approved as voluntary. Any mandatory enforcement of this policy would constitute an airport noise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Aii port Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, 49 U.S.C. 47524(b), and 14 CFR part 161; • Establish Iroise Abatement and Departure Procedures was approved in part, as voluntary; disapproved in part pend- ing compliance with 14 CFR part 161. The measure related to maintaining the existing flight procedure at the airport is approved as voluntary. Any changes to the voluntary nature of the Fly Friendly program or adjustments to flight profiles is disapproved; • Tenant Association has been approved in part. This ap- proval does not extend to solutions or recommendations by the Tenant Association to existing operational procedures. These must be vetted through the FAA to determine their im- pacts on aviation. safety and efficiency; • Insulation and Financial Assistance have been approved for homes or non -compatible development that was con- structed or existed before October 1, 1998. Homes acousti- cally treated by the City of Los Angeles prior to approval of the Part 150 study cannot be made eligible for federal AIP or PFC funding. Measures Not Approved FAA did not approved the following 20 program meas- ures: • Construction and Capital Improvement was disap- proved due to lack of quantifiable benefits identified and the FAA not being able to detenmine how the measure con- tributes to improving the noise environment around the air- port; • West Side Operations was disapproved due to lack of quantitative analysis and the changes in altitudes would in- crease complexity for pilots and controllers; • Helicopter Training Facility was disapproved since the airport does not have authority to regulate numbers of opera- tions: such action would be subject to analysis and approval under 14 CFR part 161. Also, the NCP does not provide suf- ficient information to determine that there would be a noise benefit; • Improve Use of Established Helicopter Routes was dis- approved since the recommended Stagg Street an-ival/depar- tune procedure would create a safety hazard for FAA. Air Traffic Control. It is also noted that the NCP states that an analysis of benefits was not conducted, and that it is not 187 likely that benefits will occur within the CNEL noise contours of the official Nose Exposure Maps; • Bull Creek Helicopter Route to Balboa was disapproved since the 1991 Helicopter Study indicates a shift in helicopter traffic to Balboa Boulevard would require helicopters to fly over more residential areas and a school. Without current land use information, it is not possible to tell whether new non- compatible land uses would be impacted or benefitted should the route be shifted; • Altitude of Public Service Helicopter Fleets was disap- proved since aircraft altitudes may not be established by local ordinance. Any study of possible changes to the airspace in the vicinity of Van Nuys Airport must be conducted in consul- tation with the FAA's Air Traffic Organization because of the potential impacts on airspace service and efficiency. Should a. study recommend changes in altitude that are demonstrated to be safe, they may be submitted for approval in 14 CFR part 150; • Runway Policy — Full Length Departure was disap- proved since there is no analysis to demonstrate the measure's noise benefits and the FAA cannot determine how the meas- ure contributes to improving the noise environment around the Airport. This disapproval does not prohibit or discourage continuation of exiting practices to use the Rill runway length outside the Part 150 program; • Automatic Tenninal Information Service (ATIS) Mes- sage was disapproved since FAA Order 7110.65 Air Traffic Control, no longer provides for noise abatement advisories; • Noise Abatement Information was disapproved since noise abatement procedures are airport specific and must be evaluated for effectiveness at individual airports. Any new procedures proposed for noise mitigation at VNY may not be implemented prior to conducting a study to determine whether they can be implemented safely and efficiently, and whether they are noise beneficial; Raising Burbank (Bob Hope Airport) Glideslope was disapproved since the FAA has concerns regarding the "rip- ple" effect the change to the glideslope would cause within the Southern California Terminal Radar Control (TRACON) airspace around VNY. Traffic is already constrained by multi- ple regulated airspace areas and high terrain nearby. Raising the glideslope at Bob Hope Airport would require additional changes to vertical altitude for separation changes. This will create the loss of significant designated altitude when there is an aircraft executing the Instrument Landing System to Bob Hope Airport. Loss of any altitude will be detrimental to air traffic operations in the vicinity; • Air Traffic Control Tower (ATC) was disapproved since specific standards must be met prior to extending the hours of operation at any ATC facility. FAA does not enforce locally enacted noise rules. Keeping the tower open solely for the purpose of noise abatement does not meet these criteria; • Lease Policy was disapproved for purposes of Part 150 since the NCP analysis includes very little information on the measure. The measure appears to apply only to jet aircraft, which could be unjustly discriminatory and it does not dis- Airport Noise Report December 31, 2009 John J. Corbett, Esq. Spiegel & McDiaimid Washington, DC Carl E. Burleson Director, Office of Environment and Energy Federal Aviation Administration Michael 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. McDennott, Will & Emery Chicago Mary L. Vigilante President, Synergy Consultants Seattle 188 cuss potential impacts on owners of non -staged, Stage I and other non - Stage 2 aircraft; Aircraft "N" Numbers were disapproved for purposes of Part 150 since there is insufficient information to demonstrate a measurable noise benefit; • Incentives and Disincentives in Rental Rates was disapproved since the proposed. measure could constitute an airport noise and access restric- tion that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, 49 U.S.C. 47521 et seq., and 14 CFR part 161; • Incentives and Disincentives in Landing Fees was disapproved since the proposed measure could constitute an airport noise and access restric- tion that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161; • Expansion of Fines was disapproved since the measure proposes to expand fines to mandate compliance with a voluntary Fly Friendly pro- gram that constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), 49 U.S.C. 47524(b), and 14 CFR part 161; • Maximum Daytime Noise Limits was disapproved since the NCP does not quantify noise benefits derived from implementing this measure and this measure constitutes an airport Iroise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Ca- pacity Act of 1.990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The completed Part 161 analysis may be submitted for FAA reconsideration of this measure under Part 150 if an FAA determination under Part 150 is being sought; • Limit on Stage 3 Jets was disapproved since the NCP does not quan- tify the noise benefits and this measure constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The completed Part 161 analysis may besubmitted for FAA reconsidera- tion of this measure under Part 150 if an FAA determination under Part 150 is being sought; • Expansion of Curfew was disapproved since the NCP does not quan- tify the noise benefits and this measure constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full compliance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), and 14 CFR part 161. The completed Part 161 analysis may be submitted for FAA recon- sideration of this measure under Part 150 if an FAA determination under Part 150 is being sought; • Cap/Phase-Out of Helicopters was disapproved since the NCP does not quantify the noise benefits and this measure constitutes an airport noise and access restriction that may only be adopted after full compli- ance with the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, and. 14 CFR part 161. ;. ,I, i►> i�a ��. tO, sI is, i Anne H. Kohut, Publisher Published 44 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528. e-mail: editor@airportnoisereport.com; Price $850. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Aviation Emissions 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.