08-11-2010 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION AGENDA
August 11, 2010 — City Hall Council Chambers
1. Call toOrder - 7:00 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of the Minutes from the June 9, 2010 Airport Relations Cormnission Meeting
4. Unfinished and New Business
a. MAC Appointment
b, MSP LTCP/Met Council Update
C. Real Time Flight Tracker Development
d. NOC Meeting Update
e. Updates for Introduction Book
5. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence:
a
7.
a. Letter to FAA from NOC Co -Chair Vern Wilcox
b. Monthly Statistical Review
C. May and June 2010 ANOM Technical Advisor's Report
d. May and June 2010 ANOM Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor
Analysis
e. May and June 2010 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report
f. Airport Noise Report, June 11, 2010
g. Airport Noise Report, June 25, 2010
h. Airport Noise Report, July 2, 2010
i. Airport Noise Report, July 9, 2010
j. Airport Noise Report, July 16, 2010
k. Airport Noise Report, July 23, 2010
1. Airport Noise Report, July 30, 2010
In. Aviation Emissions Report, July 20, 2010
n. Aviation Emissions Report, August 3, 2010
Other Commissioner Comments or Concerns
Upcoming Meetings
MAC Meeting
City Council Meeting
NOC Meeting
8. Public Comments
9. Adjourn
8-16-10 1:00 p.m.
8-17-10 7:00 p.m.
9-15-10 1:30 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
June 6, 2010
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on
Wednesday, June 6, 2010, at 7:00 p.m., 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, Bill Dunn and Joe Hennessy.
Also present were: Jill Smith(resident), Assistant to the City Administrator Jake
Sedlacek, Gretchen Keenan (Sunfish Lake).
Not Present: David Sloan (excused)
Approval of Minutes
Commissioners noted two changes — Commissioner Ehrlich's name was spelled wrong on
the first page, the Planning Commission Meeting should be 5-25-2010. A motion was
made by Commissioner Sloan, seconded by Commissioner Dunn, to approve the minutes
of the May 12, 2010, ARC meeting as corrected. Commissioner moved approval of the
minutes as corrected, Commissioner Dunn seconded the motion, which was approved
unanimously.
Unfinished and New Business
A. Randy Jones Award of Excellence Application
The commission reviewed the draft application, nominating the MAC Noise Oversight
Committee for the Randy Jones Award for Excellence in Noise Mitigation. Several
changes were discussed, the commission supported making the changes as discussed, and
submitting the application.
Commissioner Lorberbawn made a motion
suggested changes. Commissioner Du
unanimously.
to proceed with the nomination with the
Dunn
seconded the motion, which passed
Jake Sedlacek described the Library of Congress web page which can be used to track bill
status for federal legislation — the site is easy to navigate, laid ouf in a similar fashion to
the MN Legislature's own bill tracking web site. Jake recommended that commissioners
take a moment to check out http://thomas.loc.gov, when they have an opportunity.
Commission Meeting —June 9, 2010
Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission
Chair Petschel discussed how NextGen technology is a sticking point for the legislation
as proposed — airlines are (generally) willing to pay for upgrades for aircraft, but no one is
stepping forward with funding for the ground technology. HR 915 includes FAA
reauthorization, which needs to be passed, but it may continue to be delayed as NextGen
issues are worked out.
C. MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
The Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee is set to discuss the MAC Long
Term Comprehensive plan on Monday, June 14. Chair Petschel, Jill Smith and Jake
Sediacek explained the process so far, and how we are participating in the process to get
three conditions added to the approval of the LTCP:
• Five -Year reviews of the document
• Recognizing the 60dnl as the regional standard for noise mitigation
• Establishing some set number of operations when further study for airfield
capacity needs to occur
The Commission also reviewed a letter sent to Met Council member Richard Aguilar,
who represents Mendota Heights at the Metropolitan Council. The idea of finding the
FAA standards for comprehensive planning was also considered. The City could make a
Freedom of Information Act Request of FAA, so that we could compare what the plan is
supposed to include, and how it stacks up. Commissioner Hennessy mentioned that staff
should utilize the FAA website to look for the related advisory circular as a good starting
point.
D. Noise Oversight Committee
Chair Petschel served as our representative at the May NOC meeting. Commissioner
Ehrlich also attended the meeting. Chair Petshel noted that the City of Inver Grove
Heights (IGH) had a staff person attend the meeting, as the City is attempting to distance
itself from a pair of activist residents. Airport noise will be a challenge for IGH, as they
seek to develop considerable land under the current turning point for many planes
departing south off the parallel runways.
The NOC agenda included a new section: an "operations report" where MAC noise staff
will seek out trends at the airport, specifically night time operations and corridor
excursions.
The Commissioners took a little time to explain to Jill Smith how the ARC tracks airport
operations utilizing monthly reports from MAC.
Chair Petschel was pleased to announce that MAC is moving ahead with a new flight -
tracking program, which is scheduled to go live on August 31. The new "multilateration"
software will provide residents flight tracks and information approximately 10 minutes
after a plan passes overhead. The ARC discussed potential for promoting this new
resource, as well as inviting Chad Leqve to present the information later this year.
2
Commission Meeting—June 9, 2010
Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission
E. Updates for Introduction Book
The commission reviewed the night time departure spreadsheet, and provided staff
with feedback on a chart tracking excursions from the Eagan/Mendota Heights
corridor. The commission explained to Jill Smith, that we keep a close eye on
corridor compliance, and that 3% of flights outside of the corridor is viewed as
acceptable, in order to accommodate for wind and weather. The Commission made
some suggestions/requests for format, which staff will make for next month's report.
Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence
a. Monthly Statistical Review
b. April 2010 ANOM Teclmical Advisor's Report
C. April 2010 ANOM Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
d. April 2010 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report
e. Airport Noise Report, May 7, 2010
f. Airport Noise Report, May 14, 2010
g. Airport Noise Report, May 21, 2010
h. Airport Noise Report, May 28, 2010
Reports acknowledged
l Other Commission Comments or Concerns
The Delta fleet is currently changing — we can expect to see a significant increase in the
number of MD 80's and 90's operating at MSP. This is an unfortunate turn for our
region, as these planes are noticeably louder than the Airbus planes that Northwest had
operated.
Upcoming Meetings
• City Council Meeting 6-15-10 7:00 p.m.
• MAC Meeting 6-21-10 1:00 P.M.
• Planning Commission Meeting 6-22-10 7:00 p.m.
Public Comments
None.
Adjourn
Commissioner Dunn made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Odlund to adjourn the
meeting at 9:02 p.m.
I j
-' Respectfully submitted,
3
Jake Sedlacek
Asst. to the City Administrator
.19
i
Commission Meeting—June 9, 2010
Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission
' CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, MN 55118
MEMO
DATE: August 3, 2010
TO: Airport Relations Commission
FROM: David J. McKnight, City Administrator 4
SUBJECT: MAC Commissioner Appointment
DISCUSSION
As you are aware of by now, Governor Pawlenty appointed John McClung as the District G
Commissioner on the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Mr. McClung's term will run though
January 7, 2013.
A retired business executive, his experience includes serving as Chairman and CEO of Moniterm
Corporation., Minnetonka, MN. He was also employed by Gould Inc./GNB as Vice President -
General Manager of the Automotive Battery Division in Mendota Heights. Previously he was
Vice —President -Operations in Mendota Heights and Plant Manager of the company's plant in
Dallas, Texas.
Commissioner McClung has served on the Boards of Rollouts, Inc., Electrosource, Inc., and
Moniterm Corporation. Currently he serves on the Board of Trustees of Ithaca College in Ithaca,
New York, where he chairs the Audit Committee.
He received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Valparaiso University in Valparaiso, Indiana, and
his MBA from Roosevelt University in Chicago, Illinois. He is also an instrument rated private
pilot and lives in Mendota Heights with his wife Paula. Together they have two grown
children, Brian and Alison.
rty
10 I 1 1
I recommend that the Airport Relations Commission instruct staff to write a congratulatory letter
to Mr. McClung for the mayor's signature and request that the city council extend an invitation
for Mr. McClung to attend upcoming City Council and Airport Relations Commission meetings.
ACTION REQ�D
If the commission agrees with my recommendation, a motion should be made to request staff to
draft a letter to Mr. McClung congratulating him on his appointment to the MAC for the mayor's
signature and request that the city council invite Mr. McClung to upcoming City Council and
Airport Relations Commission meetings. A simple majority vote is all that is required on this
issue.
I
'�
6h
CITY OF MENDOTA BEIGHTS
Mendota Heights, MN M55118
LAI
1101 victoria Curve,
MEM
DATE: June 23, 2010
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: David J. McKnight, City Administrator
SUBJECT: MSP Airport Long Term Comprehensive plan Update
DISCUSSION
has been tracking the status of the,
As you know, the Airport Relations Commission sive Plan (LTCP) Progress over the past
Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport Long ear
LTCP looks out to they2030 and is submitted to the Metropolitan Council for
yeah. This Metropolitan Airports Commission will adopt its final
review and comment, after which the
LTCP. Council's Transportation Committee on June 14,
The LTCP was reviewed by the Metropolitan Co
onJune23,2010. Both orsp02010 and the full. Metropolitan CouncilMetropolitan cil's 2030 Transportation
LTCP for the MSP Airport is consistent with the
Policy Plan, if the following issues are addressed in the final plan:
the MAC will update the plan every first five update is prepared years and that MAC
1. The LTCP should note that by
will budget for this in the appropriate years to ensure
that the
2015. capacity study two years then
SP2. MAC should initiate a cap incorporatesults of this study in the following
annualope
have, 540,000 rations and
LTCP update. initiate an FAA Part 150 study update (which includes a comprehensive
3. MAC should I Oversight
noise analysis and mitigation program) , in consultation with the MSP Noise
Committee (NOC), when the forecast level of operations five years into the future exceed
the level nuitigated in the Consent Decree (592,366 annual operations). The results of this
d into the firszOspbae
study should be incorporate4. MAC shall continue to work with all ppritagencies to Implement the Interstate
494/34 th Avenue, Trunk Highway 5/Glumack Drive and Trunk Highway 5/Post . Road
nTe 2030 Concept Plan, incluwren
inpreliminary
interchange modifications included I modifications ot currently
environmental scoping and analysis. ese highway
included in the region's fiscally -constrained 2030 highway plan.
5. The LTCP needs to acknowledge that storm water froha
aPrerde
dgto the reaches of the Minnesota and Mississippi rientifiedas water-qualitY
impaired for a number of pollutants and stressors.
6. The LTCP should include a general discussion of financial assumptions and funding
mechanisms available to implement the proposed development.
UK
The cities of Minneapolis, Richfield and Mendota Heights all spoke in favor of the actions
proposed by the Metropolitan Council and expressed a clear desire to continue discussions about
airport noise levels, particularly the 60 DNL issue. Mendota Heights was represented at the
meetings by Ultan Duggan., Liz Petschel, Jill Smith, David McKnight and Jake Sedlacek. All of
us were very happy with the conditions that were included with the plan and the clear message
that was sent in regards to airport noise.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
I recommend that the city council review and support by consent the conditions attached to the
Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport Long Term Comprehensive Plan as listed by the
Metropolitan Council.
ACTION REQUIRED
If the city council agrees with my recommendation a motion should be made to support the
conditions attached to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport Long Term Comprehensive
Plan as listed by the Metropolitan Council. A simple majority is needed to support this request.
A i
Corrfmittee Report
Item: 2010-214
Transportation Committee
TFor the Metropolitan Council meeting of _1une 23, 2010
Date June 15, 2010 ive Plan (LTCP) (TAB
Prepared: MSP International Airport Long-term Comprehens
Subject: Action 2010-34)
Proposed Action: the Metropolitan Airport Commission's 2030 Long Term
That the Metropolitan Council finds that consistent with the, Council's 2030 Transportation
-Plan for MSP International Airport Is cO
Policy Plan, if the following issues are addressed in the final Plan' f.ive years and that MAC will budget
Id note that MAC will update the plan every by 2015.
1) The LTCP should s to ensure that the first update is Prepared
for this in the appropriate Year p expected to have
initiate a capacity study two years in advance of when 1\4S cp update.
2) MAC should i of this ude
howg Lannual operations and incorporate , the resltcomprelleDsive noiseanalysis
540,000 V update (which incls a
1) MAC should initiate an FAA Part 1.50 stud, upda
Committee (NOC), When
with
� MSP Noise oversight Com,
and mitigation Program), in consultation W1 t1" exceeds the levels mitigated in the, Consent
the forecast level of operations - five years into the future ex be incorporated into the first
rations), The results of this study should
Decree (582,366 annual operations). to implement the Interstate 494/314"
subsequent LTCP Update. with all appropriate agencies -
4) MAC shall. continue to work ack Drive and Trunk Highway 5/post Road interchange
Avenue, Trunk Highway 5/Glum plan, including preliminary environmental scoping and
modifications included in the, 2030 Conceptnot currently included in the, region's fiscally -
analysis. These highway modifications are
t. Iway plan.
constrained 2030 highway water ftorn 1\4SP detention ponds dischimpaired
rges ' to the
ledcr that ston-n . impaired for a
5) The LTCP needs to acknowledge s qlat are identified as water -quality
reaches of the Minnesota and Mississippi River
number of pollutants and stressors.
6discussion of financial assumptions and funding mechanisms The LTCP should include a general
available to implement the proposed development-
Surnmary Of Corn rnittee Discussion / Questions'pointed ou t that the TAC
Systems Planning, presented this item to the cornrn'ttee'
Connie, Koziak, Manager Koz1ak answered questions from the cornmittee regarding the
reviewed and approved the item then it will
and TAB have The co, tep/Council will be making contingent approval of the LTCP,
process for this approval. nrn It address the conditions in their final plan. 61 action and
go back to the Me Din and actions proposed for COuel
I
Metropolitan Airport COI ssion to a
The following audience members spoke in favor ' Of the comments particularly to the 60 DNL level-.
expressed desire, to continue discussions about airport noise level,
John Quincy, City of Minneapolis COIJ)"cilinember Richfield City Councillnernber
f Richfield, Tom Fitzbenry, I
Debbie Goettel, Mayor 0 1 ember
-t Duggan, Mendota Heights City COunr-'lrn Mendota Heights
Ultat C rep. for the City Of Men
Liz petschel, Air -ports COmm'ss Oil No
Jim Spensley, Southwest Metro Area Airport Council (SMAAC) spoke- about capacity issues.
stated that the, MAC is Willing to work with
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
Denny Probst, MetrOPO 11
communities, however there is no 60 DNL standard".
M
David Gepner, Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) liaison reported that the TAB feels strongly about noise
issues and urges the Metropolitan Council to approve the TAB recommendations on the LTCP.
Councihnember Aguilar stated he would be in favor of looking at the 60 DNL and jurisdiction issues. McParlin
stated that there have been and continue to be major discussions on these issues, but it shouldn't deter movement
on this action. Discussions will continue to take place in the future at many levels (legislative, cities, etc.).
Motion by Leppik, seconded by Aguilar and passed unanimously.
TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee N0C\
FROM: Chad E.Leove.Manager — Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs
SUBJECT' K0D[DLATERAT|[)N (K0L&T) SYSTEM INSTALLATION AND
DATE:REAL-TIME FLIGHT TRACKER DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
May 12.2O1O
Background
In 1992' the "^""r~'~n Airports Commission (MAC) Noise and Satellite Programs
Office installed one of the most sophisticated and comprehensive Airport Noism and
Operations Monitoring Systems (\NLMS) of its kind in the United States. At an initial cost ofapproximately $1 nni|Uon' AN0K4S became the central element ofon evolving
that �s beonusedextenaive|yby��ACstofftoaid
noise and airspace analysis program o ti
in the process of reporting and analyzing aircraft opena ono and related noise levels
around K4inneapo|is-St.Paul International Airport (K4SP).
One of the key components ofANDMS is the flight track data acquisition system.
Currently, the ^~R-9 radar located at MSP provides the aircraft position and aircraft-
/\---/ opecif4~ ""`"'"~x'~"n for each flight track. Thisinformation is eosenhain noise program
»enaQanmn« and is used for airspace analysis, community reporting, data requesto,
developing environmental planning documentation (e.g. Environmental Asmesanents.
Part 150, etc.), Airport Long -Term Comprehensive Panning, identifying possible trends or irregularities that need to be addressed and maintaining information that community
residents, representatives and government officials have come to rely upon.
The last flight tnsck data acquisition upgrade occurred in 2001 when the FAA upgraded
its radar
oxs""rn which required the MAC to upgrade the method used to acquire radar
�°~^ The h'~MAC is completely dependent on the ASR -8 radar and FAA Air Traffic
Control ) personnel for flight track and eircraft-apeci�r information. Several
(ATC) p f the ��AC's control that limit the amount of flight track
variables exist that ore outside o
data received. Severa|restrictions and conditions are also placed on the data's use via a
�
Letter of Agreementwith ith tha FAAthat limits the MAC's reporting and analysis
capabilities. Staff conducted a comprehensive analysis of the ANOKAS radar flight track
ti acquired from the ASR -9 radar'and found that over on
82 -hour pnriod, approxirnota|y4.1Y6 of
fthm flight track data were not received due tndata
unavailability from the FAA ATC.
Effective flight truck data collection within the MAC Noise Office is critical to the
continued success of the cost-effective noise reduction and outreach initiatives
performed in the Noise Office. In addiUVn, provisions were outlined in the{�onsent
Decree (for settlement of the noise lawsuit between the City of W1inneepo\ie. el a|.'
and tha` .AC)' for maintaining a flight tracking and noise monitoring syahann and to
MAC),
develop annual noise contours ntnurs and reports based on actual flight track data received
from that system.
The Consent Decree states that "by March 1 of each year, MAC shall develop and make
available to the public o noise contour report using the F/V\o Integrated Noise Model to
reflect noise conditions from the prior calendar year, using actual MSP operations data
derived from the Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System or a functionally
equivalent flight tracking and noise monitoring system ("Monitoring System")."
As a result, it was determinedthat oD upgrade investment in the flight track and noise
monitoring system
'atMSP was necessary. The system upgrade is needed to provide a
stable and expandable platform for airspace and noise analysis, as well as to provide a
flight track data acquisition solution that is more accurate than the current system, and to
eliminate data unavailability to the greatest extent possible.
The 2008 MAC Capital Improvement Program included $500,000 to upgrade the/Vrpod
Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems (AN(}MG) technology otK4SF.TheupQnoded
system consists of three main components: new analysis ovatonn ooftvvona; upgraded
analysis system hardware; and a rnu|U|ahmnation flight track data acquisition system.
Staff evaluated the available flight track data acquisition technologies, d� ���
requirements and other airports' experiences with technologies
and determined '
that a muKi|atanabon flight track data acquisition architecture is the best option for
track flight �ck data needs in the Noise Office well into the future at MSP. A
nnultila1eratkon' flight track data acquisition system is essential to the continuation of
enhanced flight track and noise monitoring capabilities at MSP and to provide successful
noise and airspace analysis into the future. This new system will provide, with o high
degree of confidence, more accurate data, greater update nates, better coverage and
improved reliability to the noise and operations monitoring system. '\
Additionally, mnuKUaterotion technology is completely expandable and can be configured
to add radar flight track coverage to the outlying reliever airports in the futuna, thus
improving flight tracking, operations reporting and analysis at those airports. This is
significant due to the fact that communities around the ru/ievnrairpods n*/y heavily on
the limited flight track data and the reporting capabilities that are presently provided by
the existing system at MSP.
The components of a rnu(b|ateraton flight track data acquisition system include the
installation of remote sensors that will provide precjam, real-time aircraft flight backing
and positional information. The sensors scan the airspace for transponder and collision
avoidance signals (TCAS) given off by other aircraft and triangulates on aircraft's exact
position.
Throughout the second half of 2008 and early 2009 MAC Noise Office staff was
engaged in extensive contract negotiations with the ERA Corporation for the installation
of a rnu|ti|ebanabon flight tracking system at MSP. Due to the acquisition of ERA
Corporation byS.RACorporation the contract negotiation and finalization process was
`mmmatemtionisthe process mlocating anaircraft based onthe TimeDifference mAmval (Tooxmasignal
emitted from that aircraft wthree mmore sensors. When asignal is transmitted from the aircraft, uwill be received
uytwo spatially separate sensors mdifferent times. The time difference iethen used mcalculate the aircraft's
position. avusing three vrmore sensors, aprecise position can uoobtained.
co��i��m� md.A���|��C��w�in�epm���m���ng
—' � ''--" government and private communication tower owners to locate
|eosoa with various gov�rn
nnu0|otera1on sensors on eight communication towers in the metropolitan area.
On June 1 �O0Sth� rnu\U|�te�dion sensor installation process began and by June 5,
' complete o\� eightoornnnunicetiontovvena The attached
2OO8 the installations were conop .
map provides the tower locations of the eight sensors around the metro area.
The mu\ti|uteration system installation is: complete and the system is performing vve|i.
The data stream is presently being integrated into the new MAC Noise and Operations
Monitoring System (��ACN(}��S\. By June 30. 2010 the integration will be complete,
ppoviding �ighttreck` data with e 'ne-doy delay on the rnecnoise.00rn website.
Addihnna\|y, development and integration of Harris, Miller, Wii||erand Hanson (H���WH)
fUy'"t
In-Flightn track and noise data processing system is complete and operating as a
centna| part of the K8ACN[)K8S and MAC staffhas completed the development of the
MACNOMS noise and flight track data analysis and mapping applications.
Real -Time Flight Tracker Development
working
As part "system development process MAC staff iawith HKMH on the
development of a real-time flight tracking application for the macnoise.com website. The
e«e|o mntof°raol-tineOightbadkingapp|ioatonforthomacnoise.convebeite.The
nearu/"flight tracker will utilize the KACNOMS nu|ti|atoradion data feed to provide the
ability /view an animated aircraft operations nap with only a 10-ninute delay in the
flight track data feed. It is anticipated that this application will be available on the
nnacnoioe.00nnwebsite bvAugust 31'2010.
At the May 20, 2010 NOC meeting MAC staff will provide an update on this significant
development effort.
i
f t o r` E
7
.yi 1 +jodjvmat��
Z N. C
r t 02
y cf
S
I
:" �� III i3 ��C .,�� i. � I 6 � I� � t'•CY,
3 4 J ` • �� V
1.6
to j r9
._.F' F
EE
IS
7
3
1 i, l �: J 'i
' w
c 'Fj ,� • J ' , vv a lrttr:� l i j 1' j :} r �. � j , •� � F-. ,i, c
C t'•J � } ° i c I• '''t C 'k-� i`.: d` : '!, : ( � x t f� .r r .+• v4 4+5t, ''?L :. J J^ [ I it y` t.. J 'S;J •—ai
�! 3
it.
-yv IL
mi
� e
5 .-� � I:i `J 't. , s5._„ ";�"'•. GS2j,i3
rf
0 Z-lt�".
LZ
Ln
IN
0 ' it i3 �T J r� '�. t � ' ❑: ..;. ff� ~
O� .�_i_._. a ,,.! 7•.31 a p U �'',;, -. x, to UU �1r1•�
�
7 5•
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.:1 Airport Noise Report, July 30, 2010
8. NOC Bylaws
9. NOC Meeting Minutes
10. MAC Approved 2010 Capital Improvement Program
11. What's New at the MAC Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
12. ANOMS Monthly Reports
13.1- June 2010 Technical Advisor's Report
14. June 2010 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 montl-Ay ARC packet
Metropolitan Airports Commission
57 (1.3%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were
north of the 090° Corridor Boundary during May 2010.
3o mEa N rnfiirnenri fn (.nrridor before reaching SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park
Of LHOSt-,, k
I.� �i� iij j r�' ` ' h / mil t
55
7f 11 i 1 11 l� iI r�\Nb dbt
,n id 0,,,cq1.,
NP
@'Vyp� 1�
'
fiii
Ic ield
..........
rt
6,71
tom_ y
W 11
'iner r
jkp
6
urng''file,
IJ F � t1 b;�,'.l i 5j- r C"'J^/c� 3 .�_.... I?I :;;1 y)PW�r•IvC k.rhi�,
TO
HN
F o s e M o n t
ey
Vall
Page Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18
Metropolitan Airports Commission
81 (2.4%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were
north of the 090° Corridor Boundary during June 2010.
Of 01 12 (®) rpturneri to Corridor before reaching SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park
U011,
?� .1�}pj i �1! + ti,,,�4 I 5 11
1 /F�i;
A
r
-11-- - -
tl-
--v , ., , ,
'd
'Y N
j
id el' N'
2i
N
.... .......
j?-Paoj,p
;-:0061mi t
nr Gro Heigh
Z,
r e�,-I'b. Cloud} d'j I s 16 r)-d.T
G YVP
a`
"'Kt
oz/
7'
,i
7
pplqNalley
P F.1 ose ml nt
6F
Page 2 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 07/09/2010 08:33
Im
U)CD
cn
75
00
m
ca
co\
C=l
�?
Lr,
-o-o
r—
§CN
\
0
C,
T
C�
o6
-0
og
7cq
U-
.0
C�
CD
co
Lq
L6
0
0-0 0-0 -.0 0,
0
rL
0
0-1 C) 0 C)
a C)
a)
Lo ce)
(1)
E
E
0
0
0
6
,0-
-0,0
_j
�2
0 -.0-
-0 �.Ol0 op q o p m (D
(.0
00
N
cl
> 0
0
Z
CD
0
L O
a)
(/)
'D
O C)
C,
co
C)
o-,
0
C)
0
CD
a)
4 -
CD 0
CUr =
0
Z
ocn
a3
0 CD
z
CD
O
L c,
a) CD
0)o
O
0)
CD
ao
CU CD
4
0)
0-0
CU CD
CD
m
CD
H
CO CD
0 -.0-
-0 �.Ol0 op q o p m (D
(.0
(r
�P'0 ,s SA,ryr Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport
t 9� 6040 - 28th Avenue South - Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799
` Phone (612) 726-8100
3
z
1t t O
b 4 N
O
ro
o ,^ t God
VN A/R PO aKS
June 29, 2010
FAA ATO Central Service Center
Operations Support Group, AJV-C23
Attn: Mr. Rich Hall
Project Manager, Airspace Redesign
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76137
Dear Mr. Hall,
As you are aware, the reduction of environmental impacts from airport operations is, increasingly,
a major focus for our nation's airport operators. At Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport
(MSP) this effort has been organized in the form of our Stewards of Tomorrow's Airport Resources
(STAR) Program and. the ongoing efforts of the MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC). The
NOC is comprised of elected community officials and airport user representatives who advise the
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) on noise related issues.
As part of these efforts at MSP, the MAC's STAR Team and the NOC have been focusing on
aircraft operational efficiencies that could reduce noise impacts and reduce fossil fuel
consumption/emissions. The analyses conducted show. that Area Navigation (RNAV) terminal
procedures are an essential first step in the process of improving compliance with existing noise
procedures and paving the way for future use of Required Navigation Performance (RNP) at MSP
to further enhance both environmental and operational improvements for the community and the
airlines.
The cooperation and team work that has defined this effort to=date is 'extraordinary. The local
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Tower/TRACON, Delta Air .Lines, the NOC and the MAC
have collaborated extensively resulting in the development of the GWAIT RNAV departure
procedure for Runways 12L and 12R, and the HSTIN and Worthington RNAV departure
procedures for Runway 17. These procedures have been submitted by the MSP Tower for FAA
approval.
As I know you are aware, on May 26, 2010 the NOC took unanimous action to request the
FAA's expedited review and approval of the procedures. On June 21, 2010, the MAC Full
Commission unanimously approved a similar action.
Given the unique opportunity provided by the implementation of these RNAV departure
procedures, the MAC respectfully requests the FAA's expedited review and approval of the
GWAIT, HSTIN and Worthington RNAV departure procedures for MSP. Please provide
notification when the procedures have been approved for publication. It is my. understanding
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
www.mspairport.com
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE • ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE • CRYSTAL -FLYING CLOUD • LAKE ELMO • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
that the. publication process can take over 16 months. Anything you can do to expedite the
publication process, or to provide an appropriate contact for such a 'request, would be greatly
appreciated.
It is my hope that the NOC, airlines and local FAA representatives will continue to investigate.
more Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedures at MSP to reduce local environmental
impacts, as well as increase airspace operational efficiencies, thereby positioning MSP as one
of the nation's leading airports in this regard. Having said this, I pledge the resources available
in the MAC's Noise and Satellite Programs Office to aid in the FAA's further implementation
of these technologies at MSP.
I look forward to your response and future collaboration.
Sincerely,
Jack Lanners
Chairman
Metropolitan Airports Commission
cc: MAC Commissioners
MSP NOC
MAC STAR Team
Mr. Jeff Hamiel — MAC Executive Director
Mr. Carl Rydeen — FAA MSP Tower Manager
Mr. Chad Leqve — Manager, Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs
NT s P NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMI'T'TEE (NOC)
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP)
0
f .�
OfERslglfY C0»1i�YS�V
Jane 9, 2010
FAA ATO Central Service Center
Operations Support Group, ATV -C23
Attn: Mr. Rich Hall
Project Manager, Airspace Redesign
2601 Meacham Blvd.
Fort Worth, TX 76137
Dear Mr. Hall,
As I am sure you are aware, given the present financial and environmental pressures ori the
airport and airlines industries, the development of new and innovative ways of reducing the
consumption of natural resources and curbing environmental impacts has been the focus of both
private and public sectors within the aviation industry. At Minneapolis/St. Paul International
Airport (MSP) this effort has been initialized by the MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC).
The NOC is comprised of elected community officials and airport user representatives who
advise the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) on noise -related issues.
In 2008 the NOC began the process of reviewing possible aircraft procedures at MSP that could
reduce noise impacts. As part of these discussions, consideration was given to the utilization of
Area Navigation (RNAV) terminal procedures as a means of improving compliance with existing
noise procedures and paving the way for future use of Required Navigation Performance (RNP)
to further enhance both environmental and operational improvements for the community and the
operators at MSP.
This initiative has been'a model for cooperative efforts on behalf of all stakeholders. ]Extensive
cooperation from Delta Air Lines (and, previously, Northwest) and its regional airline partners,
local Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) tower personnel (namely, Mr. Carl Rydeen), and
the communities located around the airport resulted in the development of three RNAV departure
procedures. The GWAIT RNAV departure procedure for Runways 12L and 12R and the HSTIN
and Worthington RNAV departure procedures for Runway 17 have been submitted by the MSP
Tower for the FAA's review and final approval.
As you are probably aware, it is very rare to have an operational initiative at a major airport that
has significant support from all stakeholders. This effort is all the more unique given the support
already expressed by the local FAA, airlines and cities. Both the NOC' and the MAC have taken
action endorsing policy statements in support of the development and implementation of these
RNAV procedures at MSP. More recently, at the May 26, 2010 MSP NOC meeting, the
Committee took unanimous action to send this letter to the FAA.
In closing, given the unique circumstances surrounding the Runways 12L, 12R and 17 RNAV
departure procedures, the MSP NOC requests the FAA's expedited review and approval of the
procedures. Additionally, we request notification when the procedures are forwarded for
publication upon completion of your review. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Vern Wilcox
NOC Co -Chair &
City Council Member — City of Bloomington
iiena Air Lines
Regional Director — Airport Affairs
cc: MAC Commissioners
MSP NOC
Mr. Carl Rydeen — FAA MSP Tower Manager
Mr. Denny Probst, Deputy Executive Director — Planning and Environment
Mr. Chad Leqve, Manager — Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs
Table of Contents for May 2010
Complaint Summary I
Noise Complaint Map 2
FAA Available Time for Runway Usage —3
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
4
5
6
7
8
9-11
12
13
14-17
18
19
20
21
22
23-35
Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL —36-38
A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program
MSP Complaints by City
May 2010
City
Arrival
Departure
Other
Number of
Complaints
Number of
Complainants
% of Total
Complaints
EAGAN
0
5
3
1521
16
230
1775
40
46.3%
MINNEAPOLIS
1
88
4
179
313
171
756
70
19.7%
SAINT PAUL
0
129
1
217
2
64
413
35
10,8%
SAINT LOUIS PARK
0
308
0
1
0
18
327
4
8.5%
APPLE VALLEY
0
.147
0
5
4
17
173
11
4.5%
BLOOMINGTON
0
1
0
57
19
61
138
7
3.6%
HE DOTHTS
0
0
0
98
5
25
128
8
3.3%
BURNSVILLE
0
3
1
30
4
1
39
7
1%
RICHFIELD
0
0
0
19
4
6
29
7
0.8%
MAPLEWOOD
0
0
0
0
0
16
16
2
0.4%
GOLDEN VALLEY
0
4
0
0
1
6
11
2
0.3%
CHANHASSEN
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
1
0.2%
MINNETONKA
0
1
0
0
3
2
6
3
0.2%
NEW BRIGHTON
0
0
0
5
0
0
5
1
0.1%
INVER GROVE
HEIGHTS
0
0
0
0
3
.0
3
3
0.1%
EDEN PRAIRIE
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0.1%
EDINA
0
1
0
0
0
2
2
0.1%
WEST SAINT PAUL
0
0
0
0
El
0
1
1
0"/0
PLYMOUTH
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0%
PRIOR LAKE"
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0' y.
BLAINE
0
0
0
0
0
1
l
1
0%
Total.
688
2142
1005
3835
208
Nature of MSP Complaints
of Day
Complaint
Total
Total
Early/Late
18
607
Engine Run-up
0
83
Excessive Noise
384
3344
Frequency
244
2384
Ground Noise
0
153
Helicopter
0
3
Low Flying
72
2070
Structural Disturbance
4
608
Other
0
124,
Total
10098
Note: Shaded Columns represent MSP complaints filed via the Internet.
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
Total
Time
Total
Airlake
0000-0559
9
58
0600-0659
6
84
0700-1159
132
1194
1200-1559
141
730
1600-1959
52
934
2000-2159
2310
32---F3
0
2200-2259
9
94
2300-2359
6
44
Total
3835
Complaints by Airport
Airport
Total
MSP
3835
Airlake
2
Anoka
61
Crystal
3
Plying Cloud
489
Lake Elmo
0
St. Paul
12
Misc.
0
Total
4402
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50 - 1
MSP International Airport
Aviation Noise Complaints for May 2010
ER
-A
hKO
V
DOyto
-*,Qon R apicl&, P
Man G, pi
Nl -,�l ne
A -
i
Tv 1
A
Wo -6'ke-
T
kv
lrQorcoran jJWlajl Grave Vni e,ea
P1.
1--l—Ft, 101✓ nb,
Sbdr v
51
qxg, 'awl
-41
--g,�Wnt ne Bear juaKel
Li
o --nm 5
V". i�
CqY.§T91'-
q N
na g
V
U-th 11
E-6
'l;". �
�!Jvlp AeW
vo
Q
tY
U�' ? . ... .
F1,_1'E Lake EI4
q k
7
cfi
hi
ron6.,v.A
?
RglZoNItA-V
Ar- t V
��
illXF
ar
'U
R
15
0
1;5 v, 7{T y,
J�
a,
" , - -., ')
"A
o "k.
db
–Sf:a-1
Ed""
Al 47NU nor� South W. Uf.-yjF M5
!tIf'.7 �Cf*?,,, rel J
, :-.v t - -! ,
Tp mellip, g�.,kb
f
OW
T .I
z
J F h-gfihass.dh
.�v;VUI
A
W.,
o ieth
i n
C, P
Inver G iove. e ihtshask6, ,li,'
g
AN
'j,
R,�
8- h a kop:o--e
05
U s`nM 1 -5�5i I.SS 1 P� I R 1,V
Save
Pe
ElF., Rosemount .1 N-1. 1* ger I v,
VP ri.o,- 112
UL
(w
n Tw
4P Vermillion P
7"
77
Empire Tw011
- p
S ring Lake Tw
I Nk
Farmington
Vj
Number of Complaints per Address
0 0 0 Is
0
1-5 6-16 17-33 34-66
67-113
114-178
179-288
289-946
- 2 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Available Hours for Runway Use
May 2010
rce: FAA Aviation Systems Performance Metrics data/
All Hours
U,
t
vA
DAV'E,
AV".n
ar 5
N
I d
"Y
Nighttime Hours
10:30pm to 6:00am
US t V,.oul
L..
55
4. V t
". 'T
4
77
D B. -oO min n
it
it
-3-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
gg'-""'
n, AZ n
rg�
itiea
Nighttime Hours
10:30pm to 6:00am
US t V,.oul
L..
55
4. V t
". 'T
4
77
D B. -oO min n
it
it
-3-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
All Operations
Runway Use Report May 2010
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area
Count
Operati,ons
Percent'
Last Year
Count
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
Arr
So. Richfield/Bloomington
0
0%
2
0%
12L
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
5281
29.7%
3539
19.4%
12R
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
5236
29.4%
3268
17.9%
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
81
0.5%
169
0.9%
22
Arr
St. Paul/Highland Park
176
1%
236
1.3%
30L
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2598
14.6%
3361
18.4%
30R
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2640
14.8%
4165
22.8%
35
Arr
Bloomington/Eagan
1785
10%
3515
19.3%
Total Arrivals
17797
18255
RWY
Arrival/.
Departure
Overflight Area
Count
Operations
Percent
Last Year
Count
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
Dep
St. Paul/Highland Park
8
0%
7
0%
12L
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
3354
19.2%
1942
11%
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2107
12%
1166
6.6%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
5733
32.8%
4333
24.5%
22
Dep
So. Richfield/Bloomington
27
0.2%
30
0.2%
30L
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
2760
15.8%
4538
25.6%
30R
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
3502
20%
5681
32.1%
35
-Dep
So. Minneapolis
0
0%
3
0%
Total Departures
17491
17700
Total Operations
35288
35955
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding.
-4- Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report May 2010
%;�,Paul
U7
.......... i,,0
'U
7,
91 F1
W -W
9JIIE,
I 1g. -git.0 no rg�,,.
Rkhfield
Lhit
`4
1i r
R.-
c
Fx .^
t EJ Blp mingTO
rf,
IA R �v
4
-5-
Report Generated: 06/1012010 12:50
Last Year
Arrival/
Count
Count
Last Year
RWY.
DepartureOverflight
Area .
Operations
Percent
Operations
Pec
04
Arr
So. Richfield/Bloomington
0
0%
0r%ent
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
4572
29.6%
2940
---2—
19%
--1-2R
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
4593
297%—
18.3%
—
---
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
69
0.4%
130
--0.8%
22
Arr
—Paul/Highland Park
156
10/0
—
210
40/
0
—
--3—OL
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2233
14.4%
2915
18.8%
30R J—Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2319
15%
3465
22.4%
35
Arr
Bloomington/Eagan
1513
---1-5455
9.8%
—
2994
19.3%
Total Arrivals
15-493
—
Last Year
Arrival/
Count
Count
Last Year
RWY
Departure
Overflight Area
Operations
Percent
Operations
Percent
04
Dep
_
St. Paul/Highland Park
7
0%
6
0%
12L
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2/01
17.6%
1468
9.7%—
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
185
12%
1028
6.8%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
5361
34.9%
3904
25.8%
—
---6291.
22
Dep
So. Richfield/Bloomington
21
0.1 %
--
26
--�6.1 —9/6
30
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
----�404
--
15.69%
3960
---No.
§O—R—
Dep
So. Minneapolis/ Richfield
3036
19.7%
4753
31.4%—
--
35
Dep
So. Minneapolis
Q
0%
3
0%--
Total Departures
15380
15148
Total operations
30835
30641
Note: Sum of RUS %may not equal 100% due to rounding.
-5-
Report Generated: 06/1012010 12:50
May 2010 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition
Type
FAR Part 36 Take -
Off Noise Level
Aircraft Description
Stage
Count
Percent
DC10
103
McDonnell Douglas DC10
3
102
0.3%
B744
101.6
Boeing 747-400
3
62
0.2%
DCBQ
100.5
McDonnell Douglas DC8 Re -manufactured
3
62
0.2%
MD11
95.8
McDonnell Douglas MD11
3
129
0.4%
8767
95.7
Boeing 767
3
133
0.4%
A330
95.6
Airbus Industries A330
3
236
0.8%
B72Q
94.5
Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3
3
11
0%
B777
94.3
Boeing 777
3
2
0%
A300
94
Airbus Industries A300
3
4
0%
B73Q
92.1
Boeing 737 Modified Stage 3
3
2
0%
MD80
91.5
McDonnell Douglas MD80
3
589
1.9%
8757
91.4
Boeing 757
3
2199
7.1%
DC9Q
91
McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3
3
2151
7%
A321
89.8
Airbus Industries A321
3
46
0.1%
B734
88.9
Boeing 737-400
3
2
0%
A320
87.8
Airbus Industries A320
3
3592
11.6%
B735
87.7
Boeing 737-500
3
64
0.2%
B738
87.7
Boeing 737-800
3
884
2.9%
A319
87.5
Airbus Industries A319
3
3123
10.1%
B7377
87.5
Boeing 737-700
3
732
2.4%
A318
87.5
Airbus Industries A318
3
104
0.3%
8733
87.5
Boeing 737-300
3
429
1.4%
MD90
84.2
McDonnell Douglas MD90
3
692
2.2%
E190
83.7
Embraer 190
3
12
0%
E145
83.7
Embraer 145
3
1113
3.6%
E170
83.7
Embraer 170
3
3851
12.5%
8717
83
Boeing 717
3
266
0.9%
CRJ
79.8
Canadair Regional Jet
3
10237
33.2%
E135
77.9
Embraer 135
3
6
0%
Totals
30835
Note: Sum of fleet mix % may not equal 100% due to rounding.
Note: Stage 3 represent aircraft modified to meet all Stage 3 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 3 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: 06/10/2010 12:50
Count
Current
Percent
Last Years
Percent
Stage 2
0
0%
0%
Stage 3
2164
7%
9.5%
Stage 3 Manufactured
28671
93%
90.50o
Total Stage 3
30835
Note: Stage 3 represent aircraft modified to meet all Stage 3 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 3 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: 06/10/2010 12:50
Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Runway Use Report May 2010
. RWY
1/0
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area
04
Arr
So. Rictifield/Blooming
--1 —2L
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Ric
12R
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Ric
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
22
Arr
St. Paul/Highland P
---d-0L
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heig
30R
I Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heig
35 —F—Arr
98
Bloomington/Saga
164
Total Arrivals
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area
04
Dep
St. Haul/Highland P
12L
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heig
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heig
17
Dep
n/Eaga
Bloomington/Saga
22
Dep
So. Richfield/Bloornin
30L
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Ri
30R
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No..Ri
35
Dep
So, Minneapolis
10.4%
Total Departures
27.5%
7 , Total (Operations
ark
Last Year
Count
Count
Last Year
Operations_
Percent
Operations
Percent
ton
0
0%
0
0%
hfield
98
11.4%
164
16.9%
hfield
306
35.6%
222
22.8%
0
0-/,,
2
0.2%
0
0%
0
0%
hts
352
41%
316
32.5%
hts
89
10.4%
267
27.5%
114
1.6%
1
E�
0 0
0.1 %
859
97 2
Last Year
Count
Count .
Last.Year
Operation
Percent
Operations
Percent
ark
0
0%
1
0.2
hts
20
8.8%
158
27.6%
hts
116
51.1%
81
14.1%
n
26
11.5%
28
4.9%
gton
0—
0%
2
0.3%
chfield
46
20.3%
65
11.3%
chfield
19
8.4%
238
41.5%
0
0%
0
0%
227
.573
1086
1.
1 1545
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding._
-7-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Runway Use Report May 2010
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area.
Count
Operations_
Percent
Last Year
Count
tions
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
Arr
So. Richfield/Bloomington
0
0%
0
0%
12L
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
95
12.1%
1 146
16.3%
12R
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
279
35.6%
202
22.6%
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
0
0%
2
0.2%
22
Arr
St. Paul/Highland Park
0
0%
0
0%
30L
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
313
40%
294
32.9%
30R
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
84
10.7%
249
27.9%
35
Arr
I Bloomington/Eagan
12
1.5%
0
0%
Total Arrivals
783
893
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area.
Count
Operations
Percent
Last Year
Count
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
Dep
St. Paul/Highland Park
0
0%
0
0%
12L
Pep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
19
9.2%
153
29%
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
103
50%
70
13.3%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
26
12.6%
25
4.7%
22
Dep
So. Richfield/Bloomington
0
0%
2
0.4%
30L
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
40
19.4%
55
10.4%
30R
Dep 1
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
18
8.7%
222
42.1%
35
Dep
So. Minneapolis
0
0%
0
0%
Total Departures
206
.527
'Total Operations
.989
1420
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding.
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
120
100
C, so
4-
O
60
CU
E 40
Z
Q-31
a
June 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
10:30 D.M. to 6:00 a.m.
<> <:> <>
C7 C -,J- M-- J�- C"'>' C,,- 12'1 U tr U
,j <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
<> <> <> <> <> <> C> <=, <> <5 <5 <>
Time
June 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
,, ri.on - — + Pmnn :, m
DAL
CJ SCx
USA
MEP j
Ed UAL
FDX
FFT
SWn
AAL
TRS
CUA
-9-
Report Generated: 06/1012010 12:50
Manufactured
Airline
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 3
Total
Delta (DAL)
0
3
103
106
Sun Country (SCX)
0
0
61
61
US Airways (USA)
0
0
60
60
UPS (UPS)
0
0
56
56
Midwest Airlines (MEP)
0
0
52
52
United (UAL).
—0
0
35
35
FedEx (FDX)
0
0
34
34
Frontier Airlines (FFT)
0
0
30
30
Southwest (SWA)
0
0
26
26
American (AAL)
0
0
22
22
Airtran (TRS)
0
0
21
21
Continental (COA)
0
0
13
13
Total
��o
3
513
516
-9-
Report Generated: 06/1012010 12:50
June 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
Time
A/D
Carrier
Flight
Number
Equipment
Stage 3
Days of
Operation
Routing
22:31
A
Frontier Airlines
108
A319
M
MTWThFSSu
DEN MSP
22:35
A
Sun Country
246
B738
M
Su
JFK MSP
A
Delta
2197
B738
M
F
DTW MSP
E36
A
Delta
2197
A320
M
ThSSu
DTW MSP
22-40
A
Sun Country
274
8738
M
Su
IAD MSP
22:40
A
—D
Continental
2877
E145
M
MTW
EWR MSP
22:45
Sun Country
109
B738
M
ThSu
MSP LAS
E-45
A
American
1284
MD80
M
MTW
DFW MSP
22:47
A
Delta
2197
A320
M
W
DTW MSP
22:47
--22.50
A
Delta
2197
DC9Q
H
MT
DTW MSP
A
American
1284
MD80
M
ThFSu
XNA DFW MSP
2E55
A
Sun Country
422
B737
M
MTh
LAX MSP
22:55
--23:01
A
Sun Country
422
8738
M
F
LAX MSP
A
United
726
A319
M
MT
OAK DEN MSP
23:05
--23.05
A
Sun Country
106
8738
M
Th
LAS MSP
A
Sun Country
106
B737
M
TWF
LAS MSP
23:07
A
—A
United
726
A320
M
WThFSu
OAK DEN MSP
23:10
United
463
A320
M
M
ORD MSP
23:15
—2�3-15
A
Southwest
393
B737
M
MTWThFSu
PHX DEN MSP
—23:20
A
Sun Country
284
8738
M
Su
SEA MSP
A
United
463
A320
M
WThF
ORD MSP
23:21
--2E25
A
Delta
1568
8738
M
MT
LAX MSP
A
Delta
3274
CRJ
M
ThFSSu
SLC MSP
23:33
A
Continental
2816
E145
M
MT
IAH MSP
23:35
--2-3-35
A
—A
Sun Country
422
8737
M
Su
LAX MSP
—A
Delta
2414
8757
M
ThFSu
SEA MSP
23--35
Delta
1426
8757
M
ThFSSu
FLL ATL MSP
23:36
A
Midwest Airlines
1578
E170
M
MTWThFSu
DFW MKE MSP
23:40
A
Sun Country
286
8738
M
WS
SEA MSP
23:40
A
United
463
A320
M
T
ORD MSP
23:41
--5:42
A
Delta
2160
8757
M
MTW
MIA ATL MSP
A
Airtran
869
8737
M
TWThFSSu
ATL MSP
23:43
—5*45
A
United
726
A320
M
S
OAK DEN MSP
-5:47
A
American
3731
CRJ
M
MTW
ORD MSP
A
—A
United
463
A320
M
Su
ORD MSP
2-3-52
United
463
A320
M
S
ORD MSP
A
US Airways
984
A320
M
MTWThFSSu
CLT MSP
2E55
A
American
3731
CRJ
M
ThFSu
ORD MSP
23:55
-5.56
A
Sun Country
310
B737
M
MThF
SFO MSP
--23:56
A
Airtran
869
8737
M
M
ATL MSP
—'23*58
A
US Airways
940
A321
M
MTWThFSSu
LAS PHX MSP
A
—A
Delta
1568
A320
M
FSu
LAX MSP
2-3-58
—A
Delta
1568
738
M
Th
LAX MSP
5.58
Delta
1568
B757
M
S
LAX MSP
00:18
A
Delta
2306
738
M
IVIS
SFO MSP
00:18
A
Delta
2306
A320
M
F
SFO MSP
00:29
A
Delta
2851
B757
M
Th
ATL MSP
01:05
A
Sun Country
106
B738
M
M
LAS MSP
04:14 1
A
UPS
556
8757
M
TWThF
04:24
A
UPS ------
558
8757
M
TWThF_
- 10 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
June 2010 Nighttime Scheduled
Carrier Jet Operations
Time
AID
Carrier
Flight
Number
Equipment
Stage 3
Days. of
Operation
Routing
—057—
A
FedEx
1718
MD11
M
WThFS
.o8
05:15
A
UPS
560
MD11
M
TWThFFSSu
—05-20
D
Delta
717
MD80
M
MSP ATL NAS
05:20
D
Delta
717
B757
M
Th
SP ATL NAS
MSP
—
--65.20
D
Delta
1481
8738
M
MTW
ATL
--65.30
D
Continental
1517
B735
TW
MSP IAH
65---30
D
Continental
2017
E145
M
M
MSP IAH
05:36
A
FedEx
1407
MD11
M
WThFSSu
05:42
05:43
D
A
Midwest Airlines
Delta
1620
1492
E170
A320
M
M
MTWThFS
MTW
MSP MKE DCA
PHX MSP DTW—
----
—b5-44
A
Delta
1088
B757
M
TWTh
ANC MSP
0550 —-. —
A
—
Sun Country
110
8738
M
MF
LAS MSP
--
--65-.52
A
UPS
496
B757
M
S
A
Delta
1244
B757
M
MFSSu
FAI MSP
.56
--6-5--59
05-59
—To -,59 I—A
A
A
Delta
Delta
1088
1244
B753
8757
8757
M
M
M
MFSSu
TWTh
Th
ANC MSP
FAI MSP
I. -LAS MSP BWl
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
May 2010 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Total Nighttime Jet
Operations by Hour
Airline
ID .
Stage
Type
1/
Air Transport Intl
ATN
3
DC8Q
38
America West
AWE
3
A319
4
America West
AWE
3
A321
22
Airline
ID .
Stage
Type
Count
Air Transport Intl
ATN
3
DC8Q
38
America West
AWE
3
A319
4
America West
AWE
3
A321
22
America West
AWE
3
A320
34
American
AAL
3
B738
7
American
AAL
3
MD80
23
American Eagle
EGF
3
E145
1
American Eagle
EGF
3
CRJ
28
Compass
CPZ
3
E170
28
Continental Exp.
BTA
3
E145
58
Delta
DAL
3
B767
2
Delta
DAL
3
MD80
8
Delta
DAL
3
A330
11
Delta
DAL
3
A319
13
Delta
DAL
3
MD90
19
Delta
DAL
3
DC9Q
25
Delta
DAL
3
B738
55
Delta
DAL
3
A320
72
Delta
DAL
3
B757
107
FedEx
FDX
3
B72Q
2
FedEx
FDX
3
A300
2
FedEx
FDX
3
MD11
13
FedEx
FDX
3
DC10
22
Mesaba
MES
3
CRJ
15
Pinnacle
FLG
3
CRJ
25
Republic Airlines
RPA
3
E170
44
Southwest
SWA
3
B733
6
Southwest
SWA
3
B7377
27
Sun Country
SCX
3
B7377
24
Sun Country
SCX
3
B738
79
UPS
UPS
3
MD11
16
UPS
UPS
3
8757
40
United
UAL
3
A320
28
United
UAL
3
A319
28
TOTAL
926
Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 93.6% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations.
-12- Report Generated: 06/10(2010 12:50
140
120
:Loo
Ci
ro
ay 80
0
60
CiY
z 40
20
0
c> m-) c> u-) <> -�4 M tZ� 6 Z_� co t- — �! 12
-i! In .. ;; �; �; ;;
6. c> <>
C'j 8 1 8 8 <3 <3 <5 <> <>
May 2010 Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations Mix for Top 15 Airlines
lo -30 n.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Time
May 2010 Nighttime Carrier Jet Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines
I- __ _ - - n - -
[D DAL
E9 SCX
El AWE
[D BTA
Do�Ups
0:.UAL
RPA' -
FDX:
RTt4
0
ARL,
b :Eq'F:.
0 CPZ
0 FLG
E3 MES
r -I *
-13-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Manufactured
Airline
2
Stage 3
Stage 3
Total
Delta (DAL)
-Stage
0
25
287 —
312
Sun Country (SCX)
0
0
103
103
America West (AWE)
0
0
60
60
58
Continental Exp. (BTA)
0
0
58 —
56
UPS (UPS)
0
0
56
56
56
United (UAL)
0
0
—
44
44
Republic Airlines (RPA)_
0
0
39
FedEx (FDX)
0
2
37
38
38
Air Transport Intl (ATN)
0
0
33
Southwest (SVVA)
0
0
33
30
American (AAL)
0
0
30
29
American Eagle (EGF)
0
0
29
28
Compass (CPZ)
0
0
28
25
Pinnacle (FLG)
0
0
25
15
Mesaba (MES)
0
0
15
63
Other
Total
0
0
1
28
62
961
989
-13-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - May 2010
May 1 thru 8, 2010 - 3969 Carrier Jet Arrivals
May 1 thru 8, 2010 - 3939 Carrier Jet Departures
May 1 thru 8, 2010 - 207 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals
May 1 thru 8, 2010 - 50 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures
k
Renort Generated- 06/10/2010 1250
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - May 2010
May 17 thru 24, 2010 - 4117 Carrier Jet Arrivals
May 17 thru 24, 2010 - 3999 Carrier Jet Departures
May 17 thru 24, 2010 - 205 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals
May 17 thru 24, 2010 - 55 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures
- 16 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
MSP International Aimort
Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations
(D Remote Monitoring Tower
-18- Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Time Above d13 Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events
May 2010
------��� 19-
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St.
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
22:54:30
00:o8:o8
00:00:04
00:00:00
3
Minneapolis
West.Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
25:02:06
00:49:10
00:00:23
00:00:00
5
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
25:37:42
04:53:31
00:02:23
-
00:00:00
6
Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
22:50:20
03:48:31
00:04:04
00:00:03
3rd St.
00:30:59
00:00:09
00:00:00
00:00:00
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
01:00:40
00:04:26
00:00:01
-
11
St. Paul
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
00:01:07
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
1-3
ta Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
00:28:46
00:00:02
00:00 :00
00:00:00
-
14
Eagan
1st St. & McKee St.
14:33:23
00:00:31
00:00:00
00:00:00
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
00:19:02
00:00:19
00:00:00
00:00:00
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
17
-
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
00:01:31
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:0U0
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
00:36:03
00:00:07
00:00:00
00:00:00
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
00:05:21
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
20
Richfield
---
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
00:12:03
--68-.5645
00:00:00
-6-0—:0a0i
00:00:00
—6-070-0:00
00:00:00
--6-0—'0000
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Oarie Trail
—
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
01:57:52
00:00:22
00:00:00
00:00:00
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
14:22:51
__6_0�4_729
00:00:35
00:00:00
00:00:00
2-5
-Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
0 00-0T
00:00:00
00:00:00
26
Inver Grove Heights
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
-
27
Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
00:16:57
00:00:04
00:00:00
00:00:00
28
-Richfield
6645 16th Ave, S.
03:44:42
00:00:50
00:00:00
00:00:00
29
Minneapolis
-
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S.
00:04:26
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
30
BI omington
loomi
8715 River Ridge Rd.
i
02:09:38
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
00:01:48
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
34
3urnsville
Red Oak Park
00:14:23
00:00:00
00:00;00
00:00:00
35
Eaga 1
-
2100 Garnet Ln.
-T7.09.55
3-6
-Apple Valley
Briar Oaks& Scout Pond
-
Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
00:08:48
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
3-8
Eagan
3957 Turquoise ��,�r
39
Eagan
3477 St. Charles PI.
07-
.00. ]ill
Total Time for Arrival Noise Events
220:17:45
0.41-57
00:07:23
00:00:03
------��� 19-
Time Above Threshold dB for Departure Related Noise Events
May 2010
RMT
ID
City
Address
Time >=
65dB
Time >=
80d B*
Time >=
90dB
Time >=
100dB
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
02:41:09
00:00:42
00:00:00
00:00:00
—2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
03:35:08
00:01:27
00:00:00
00:00:00
3
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
07:05:53
00:05:13
00:00:10
00:00:00
4
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
09:56:13
00:10:58
00:00:14
00:00:00
5
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
24:06:53
01:50:07
00:09:24
00:00:00
6
Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
29:34:20
03:58:32
00:30:02
00:00:17
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
11:43:05
00:13:25
00:00:01
00:00:00
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
09:44:20
00:11:47
00:00:03
00:00:00
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
00:07:22
00:01:23
00:00:20
00:00:00
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
00:07:30
00:02:30
00:01:10
00:00:00
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
00:07:02
00:02:12
00:00:35
00:00:00
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
00:03:29
00:00:42
00:00:00
00:00:00
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
09:43:59
00:00:23
00:00:00
00:00:00
14
Eagan
I st St. & McKee St.
11:41:02
00:10:07
00:00:14
00:00:00
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
11:44:19
00:03:28
00:00:00
00:00:00
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
12:40:14
00:39:49
00:02:18
00:00:00
17
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
00:26:27
00:03:42
00:00:25
00:00:00
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
14:36:48
00:16:38
00:02:03
00:00:00
19
--20
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
08:15:08
00:04:24
00:00:07
00:00:00
Richfield
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
00:27:01
00:00:51
00:00:00
00:00:00
21
Inver Grove Heights
—Inver
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
03:47:46
00:00:29
00:00:00
00:00:00
22
Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
01:56:46
00:00:05
00:00:00
00:00:00
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
20:53:59
00:41:53
00:02:31
00:00:00
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
07:07:14
00:01:37
00:00:00
00:00:00
25
Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
10:14:11
00:00:10
00:00:00
00:00:00
26
Inver Grove Heights
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
06:10:38
00:02:16
00:00:00
00:00:00
27
—Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
08:01:34
00:07:23
00:00:00
00:00:00
28
Richfield
6645 16th Ave. S.
17:53:48
00:09:50
00:00:00
00:00:00
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S.
04:23:16
00:01:44
00:00:00
00:00:00
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
25:52:52
01:12:37
00:01:30
00:00:00
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
01:50:21
00:00:35
00:00:00
00:00:00
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
00:40:56
00:00:12
00:00:00
00:00:00
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
02:38:35
00:01:02
00:00:00
00:00:00
34
Burnsville
Red Oak Park
00:50:28
00:00:09
00:00:00
00:00:00
35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
03:32:47
00:01:02
00:00:00
00:00:00
36
Apple Valley
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
01:08:50
00:00:14
00:00:00
00:00:00
37
Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
03:00:30
00:01:15
00:00:00
00:00:00
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
05:58:39
00:04:42
00:00:00
00:00:00
39
Eagan
3477 St. Charles Pl.
07:26:26
00:03:38
00:00:00
00:00:00
Total Time for Departure Noise Events
1301756:58
10:29:13
00:51:07
00:00:17
- 20 - ReDort Generated: 06/1 0/201 0 12:50
Arrival Related Noise Events
May 2010
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
--Arrival
Arrival
Arrival
Arrival
Events >=
Ev ents >=
Events >=
Events >-
RMT
ID
City
Address
65dB
80dIB
90dB .
100dB
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
5804
12
1
0
2
— Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
4993
154
1
0
3
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
5108
731
5
0
4
—
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
5049
254
---5-799
2
0
5
—
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
5223
2
0
6
Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
5263
3901
149
2
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave. & 64th §-t.—
156
2
0
0
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
115
3
0
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
175
52
1
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
177
129
4
0
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
10
0
0
0
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
4
0
0
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
94
1
0
0
14
Eagan_
1st St. & McKee St.
3357
8
0
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
74
2
0
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave, & Vilas Ln.
2607
347
1
0
17
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
9
0
0
0---
0---
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
112
6
0
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
24
0
0
0
20
Richfield
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
5
0
0
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
47
0
0
0--
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
2073
1
0
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kerindon Ave.
456
4
0
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
3229
15
0
0
25
Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
182
0
0
0
26
Inver Grove Heights
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
381
0
0
0
27
-----7-6
Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
7
—
1
0
0
28
Richfield
6645 16th Ave. S.
750
23
0
0
—
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S.
14
0
0
0
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
610
0
0
0
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
5
0
0
0
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
1
0
0
0----
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
8
0
0
0
34
Burnsville
Red Oak Park
44
0
0
00
35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
1096
1
--
0
36
Apple Valley
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
1456
2
0
0
37
—Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
32
0
0
0
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
6
0
0
0
9
Eagan
3477 St. Charles Pl.
1
0
0
0
0
+ —2
_3
Total Arrival Noise Events
48826
9448
2
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Departure Related Noise Event
May 2010 1
RMT
ID
City
::,Address
Departure
Events >=
65dB
Departure
Events,>=
80dB
Departure
Events >=
90dB
Departure
Events >=
I OOdB
I
Minneapolis,
Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
525
8
0
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
724
17
0
3
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
1376
59
—0
2
0
4
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
1878
126
4
0
5
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
3787
879
109
0
6
—Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
4768
1779
252
11
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
1916
132
1
0
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
1698
117
1
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
18
4
3
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
15
8
8
0
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
13
7
5
0
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
11
2
0
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
1895
12
0
0
14
Eagan
1st St. & McKee St.
2009
89
4
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
2162
46
0
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
2038
287
30
0
17
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
73
19
6
0
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
3011
209
17
0
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
1666
60
1
0
20
Richfield
—
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
75
6
0
0
21
7-
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
838
9
0
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
411
4
0
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
3413
354
39
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
1375
28
0
0
25
Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
1404
3
0
0
26
Inver Grove Heights
679-6 Arkansas Ave. W.
1327
24
0
0
27
Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
1554
81
0
0
28
Richfield
6645 16th Ave. S.
3005
174
1
0
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S.
844
22
0
0
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
4326
522
27
0
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
443
9
0
0
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
158
3
0
0
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
525
15
0
0
34
Burnsville
Red Oak Park
185
5
0
0
35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
715
16
0
0
36
Apple Valley
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
248
3
0
0
37
Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
625
28
0
0
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
1126
62
0
0
39
Eagan
3477 St. Charles Pl.
1424
70
0
0
Total Departure Noise Events
53604
5298
510
11
- 22 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#1)
A— 2. A 1 c!f qf l\AinnPqnnli.-,
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/13/2010 T50
D kL2976
DC9Q
A
12L
92.1
—
05/31/2010
DAL1770
B757
A
12R
88.6
05/14/201015:34
DAL619
8744
D
30L
85.7
—
05/14/201010:21
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
30R
84.3
05/02/201015:44
DAL619
8744
D
22
83.8
05/16/201013:31
DAL2068
B757
A
-6—
12R
82.8
05!03/201015:47
DAL619
8744
A
2-2
82.5
—T--
05110/2010 9:05
DAL340
MD80
A
1-2 L
82.3
05/13/201019:40
DAL2793
DC9Q
D
30R
81.7
05/11/2010 20:36
DA 2772
DC9Q
111,
12R
81.3
(RMT Site#2)
E: + Awn R. Aqrri.qt NAirinp-nnnfis,
Date/Time
Flight.Number
v Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway..
Lmax(dB)
05/10/2010 20:51
UPS495
B757
A
12L
94.4
05/11/201017:02
DAU 832
DC9Q
A
12L
87.9
05/10/2010 22:53
DAL2197
DC9Q
A
12L
87.8
05/12/2010 20:33
DAL1732
DC9Q
A
12L
86.5
05/11/201016:38
DAL2746
DC9Q
A
12L
86.4
05/10/201016:25
DAL2304
MD80
A
12L
86
05/12/201016:58
DAL1832
DC9Q
A
12L
85.8
05/31/201012:51
DAL2393
B757
A
12L
85.8
05/13/2010 7:50
DAL2976
DC9Q
A
12L
85.7
05/11/201016:14
DAL2883
DC9Q
A
12L
85.7
(KIVI I Z)ILUH-O)
A Q+ R. Pnlmr)nf A%ip NAinnPRnolis
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
--
-97
05/16/2010 20--08
D \L1674
8757
A
12R
05/16/201013:32
DAL2068
B757
A
12R
05/17/2010 20:03
DAU 850
B757
A
12R
996.2
5.4
—
05/31/2010 20:28
DAU 770
B757
A
12R
93.9
05/14/201015:34
DAL619
8744
D
30L
93.8
—
05/13/2010 T3.43
Ll 226
DC9Q
D
30L
91.6
05/23/2010 23:05
DAL2197
DC9Q
A
12R
90
05/10/2010 21:23
DAL2772
DC9Q
A
12R
89.8
05/07/2010
L2716
DC9Q
D
30L
89
05/22/201013:51
DAL400
MD80
A
12R
88.8
-23-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#4)
Park Ave. & 48th St-- Minnt-,qnnli.q
bate/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Typb:,:
'Arrival/..,
Departure .
-RunwayLmax(dB)
Lmax(dB)
05/08/201015:32
6AL619
8744
D
30L
94.3
05/16/201013:28
DAL2760
DC9Q
A
12L
91.8
05/22/201012:05
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
30R
91.1
05/26/201015:13
DAL2870
DC9Q
D
30L
90.8
05/25/201015:37
DAL2407
DC9Q
D
30E—
90.8
05/10/2010 20:51
UPS495
B757
A
12L
90.8
05/02/201010:20
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
30L
89.2
05/25/201019:06
DAL2716
DC9Q
D
30L
89.1
05/22/201015:58
DAL2883
DC9Q
A
12L
89
05/02/201014:49
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30L
88.6
(RMT Site#5)
12th Avp- & 5,9th St l\AinnPPnr)Hcz
.Dat6/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway,
Lmax(dB)
05/13/201017:33
DAL2866
DC9Q
D
30L
99.2
05/18/2010
DAL9856
DC9Q
D
30L
98.6
05/13/201015.56
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30L
98.1
05/07/201019:06
DAL2716
DC9Q
D
30L
98.1
05/25/201015:25
DAL2909
---DC9Q
D
30L
—67—.8
05/16/2010
DAL2068
—DAL1226
B757
A
12R
97.6
05/13/201013:43
DAL2218
—FC -9Q
D
30L
97.6
05/06/201015:27
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30R
97.4
05/31/201010:15
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
30L
96.9
05/14/201015:36
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30L
96.8
(Ki\A i 6itelt6)
2,9th Avp & filth Rt l\AinnP,:4nnlicz
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Oeparfuire,
Run way
Lmax(dB)
05/14/201010:14
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
30R
102.5
05/31/201012:52
DAL2393
8757
A
12L
102
05/07/201017:45
DAL2850
DC9Q
D
30R
101.8
05/02/201011:49
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
30-R
101.6
05/01/201019:05
DAL2716
DC9Q
D
30R
100.9
05/10/2010 20:52
UPS495
B757
A
12L
100.9
05/22/201012:04
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
30R
100.7
05/05/201010:18
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
30R
100.5
05/13/201015:02
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30R
100.4
05/04/2010 7:18
DAL2900
DC9Q
D
30R
100.4
- 24 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#7)
1Rlorifiernrth Axtim- A RAth .cif Richfield
Date/Time
Flight Number
'Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/06/201010:22
DAL1 975
MD80
D
30L
90.1
05/06/201010:47
AAL1683
MD80
D
30L
89.7
—
05/18/2010 10:40
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
30L
—
89
05/13/201015:04
AAL541
MD80
D
30L
89
05/26/201016:21
AAL1415
MD80
[5
30L
88.4
05/14/2010 8:38
AAL1750
MD80
D
30L —
88.2
05/13/201019:12
AAL479
MD80
D
30L
88
05/30/201017:34
DAU 193
MD80
-6—
30L —87.6
05/03/201011:43
—
05/03/201013:28
AAL541
MD80
D
--
30L
—t7jj
876
DAL2900
DAU 934
MD80
D
30L
j05/03/201013:45
(RMT Site#8)
I rnrlflalln%Af AWC1 A Agri 4t Minnpnnofis
DatefTime
Flight Number Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/01/2010 7:24
DAL2900
DC9Q
D
30R
90.7
--
05/13/201012:17
DAL2874
DC9Q
D
30R
89
05/15/2010 7:19
DAL2788
DC9Q
D
30R
88.8
05/13/201012:30
AAL1120
MD80
D
30R
88.5
6-5/14/2010 7:28
DAL2900
DC9Q
D
30R
87.5
---
05/03/201019:05
DAL2716
DC9Q
D
30R
87.4
05/13/201019:16
DAL2716
DC9Q
D
30R
87.4
05/30/201014:40
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30R
87.3
05/03/201011:43
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
30R
87.2
05/19/2010 7:31
DAL2900
DC9Q
D
30R
87.2
kKIVI I olwf�zl)
0 ,+r,.,., Qf 9. Worffnrri A%/P' of Pal it
Date/Time
Flight Number Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway.
Lmax(dB)
05/04/201012:27
DETOX01
UKN
D
04
93.5
05/19/201015:37
DAL619
B744
D
04
93.2
05/17/201019:35
DAL619A—
B744
D
04
91.5
05/25/2010 20:15
DAL1832—
DC9Q
A
22
90.2
05/25/2010 20:25
DAL1732
DC9Q
A
22
89.2
05/01/201012:50
DAL2877
DC9Q
A
22
88.9
05/01/201014:45
DALI 998
MD80
A
22
88.8
05/01/201012:43
DAL620
B744
A
22
87.7
05/01/201012:55
DAL2601
DC9Q
A
22
85.3
05/01/201015:47
DAL2253
MD80
A
22
84.9
-25-
Report Generated: 06110/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#10)
Itasca Avp- & RnAA/rinin Ot Of Ppi if
Date/Time
Flight Num . ber
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/04/201012:26
DETOX01
UKN
D
674
99.3
05/19/201015:37
DAL619
B744
D
04
97.4
05/17/201019:35
DAL619A
B744
D
04
96.4
05/06/201016:27
DAL619
8744
D
04
95.1
05/01/201013:55
DAL219
B767
A
22
94.5
05/10/201015:35
DAL619
B744
D
04
94.3
05/26/201016:49
DAL619
8744
D
04
94.1
05/01/201012:44
DAL620
8744
A
22
92.8
05/27/201019:23
-k
DAL619
B744
D
04
92.4
5�/ 15:-.' � f:::j-AL
L:O::7/2010
DAL2787
B744
D
04
91.7
(RMT Site#1 1)
Finn St- & Sr-hp-ffpr A\/P qf Pni if
Date/Time.
'flight Number-
Air6raft Type
Arrival/ 'Runway
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/0712010 15:48
DALE 1-9
B744
D
04-
96.1
05/27/201019:24
DAL619
B744
D
04
95.4
05/10/201015:35
DAL619
B744
D
04
94.6
05/06/201016:28
DAL619
B744
D
04
94.2
05/26/2010 16--50
DA6619
8744
D
04
93.9
05/04/2010
DETOX01
UKN
D
04
89.8
05/17/201019:35
DAL619A
8744
D
04
81.2
05/25/2010 20:14
COM365
6R -J
A
22-
79.6
05/19/201015:37
DAL619
8744
D
04
78.7
05/06/2010 8:32
DAL2787
DC9Q
A
30L
75.6
kmvi i bite3Tiz)
Altnn Rt & Rr)r-k%Alr)r)tl Ax/im qt Paid
Date/Time
Flight Number
Airciaft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(d!3)
05/04/201012:27
DETOX01
-BMJ66
UKN
D
04
89.6
05/0-/20107:16
BE80
D
12L
81.2
05/13/2010 7:34
BMJ62
BE65
D
12L
78.1
05/29/2010 7;13
BMJ70
BE65
D
12R
74.8
05/22/2010 7:17
BMJ52
BE65
D
12L
73.4
05/16/201010:11
DAL2699
A320
A
12L
73.3
05/11/2010 7:28
BMJ62
BE65
D
12L
71.3
05/10/201015:43
N655MW
8190
D
12L
69.7
05/04/201016:26
DAU 963
A319
A
30L
69.1
05/09/201018:16
AMF918
SW4
D
-17
69
- 26 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#1 3)
4- —4 --F NAr k;rinn Cn,Irf Nilpnrintn Hpiahts
Date/Time
Flight Number v
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/30/2010 7:24
DAL2900
DC9Q
D
12L
82.5
05/01/201011:57
DAL1230
MD80.
A
22
82.2
05/11/201015:25
DAL2870
DC9Q
D
12L
81.4
—
05/11/201010:36
DAL2889
DC9Q
D
12L
81.3
05/21/201013:58
DAL2877
DC9Q
D
12L
80.980.8
05/20/201015:50
DAL1552
DC
D
12L
88.6—
05/24/201017:41
DALI 832
DC9Q
D
12L —
80.7
05/06/201019:51
DAL2770
DC9Q
D
12L —
80.6
—
05/23/2010 19-40
DAL2793
'�2
DC9Q
D
12L
80.4
05/22/201019:17 -1���A
7 ��9;
DC9Q
D
12L
80.2
(RMT Site#14)
4 -+ Q+ Q. UrVna� -qt Ppripn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/11/201016:00
DAL619
B744
D
12R
94.112R
05/16/201015:27
DAL619
8744
D
87.4
91.7
05/28/201015:36
DAL619
B744
D
12R
91
—,9-0.,
05/22/201015:56
DAL619
B744
D
12R
05/20/201019:24
05/12/201015:51
DAL619
8744
D
12R
89
05/18/2010 20:10
KFS724
B72Q
D
12R
88.6—
05/31/201016:32
TCF7729—
E170
D
12R
88.3
05/31/201019:48
DAL2608—
DC9Q
D
12R
87.5
05/21/201015:25
DAL619
B744
D
12R
87.2
05/07/201010:14
8
DAL2918
C
DC9Q
D
12R
87
(KIVI 1 0 1 LUfP I J)
Q+ Q. I iavinnfnn Ax/,- Mpnrint;:; Heights
Date/Time
Flight Number Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/24/2010 20:24
DAL2793
DC9Q
D
12L
89
05/16/201014:02
DAL2877
DC9Q
[5--
22L
87.4
05/31/201019:40
DAL2793
DC9Q
D
12L
86.4
05/01/201011:57
DALI 230
MD80
A
22
86.2
05/20/201019:24
DAL2793
DC9Q
D
12L
85.2
05/27/201017:39
DAL1832
DC9Q
D
12L
84.9
05/11/2010 7:13
DAL2788—
DC9Q
D
12L
84.2
05/12/201019:43
DAL2793—
DC9Q
D
12L
84
05/13/201010:11
DAL2796
DC9Q
D
1 2L �83.8
�
05/25/2010 6:56
------
EMJ48
BE65
D
12L
83.7
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50 -27-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#1 6)
Avalon Avt- & Vila-, I n Fqrinn
Pate/Time
Flight Number
Airc'rqft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/26/2010 4:16
UPS558
8757
A
30L
96.5
05/16/201015:27
DAL619
B744
D
12R
94.7
05/31/201019:47
DAL2608
DC9Q
D
12R
93.6
05/31/201014:14
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
12R
93.4
05/23/201010:14
DAI-2918
DC9Q
D
12R
--63—.3
05/27/201015:49
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
93.2
05/21/201015:35
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
92.8
05/31/201014:38
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
12R
92.5
05/23/201015:37
DAL2760
—DAL2866
DC9Q
D
12R
92.3
05/27/201017:31
DAL619
DC9Q
D
12R
92
(RMT Site#1 7)
84th St- & 4th AVP. RInr)minnfnn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/ v
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/29/201016:02
DAL619
B744
D
22
94.9
05/15/201015:36
DAL619
8744
D
22
94.4
05/31/201015:30
DAL619
8744
D
22
93.7
05/24/201016:30
DAL619
B744
D
22—
92.9
05/05/201015:57
DAL619
B744
D
22
90.6
05/30/201015:28
DAL619
B744
D
22
90.3
05/03/201015:45
DAL619
8744
D
22
89.2
05/25/201016:06
DAL619 I
B744
D
22
89
05/01/201015:38
— DAL619
8744
D
22
87.7
05/02/201015:42
DAL619
8744
D
22
87.2
(Rivi i bite* -i 6)
7Sth St A 17th Avin Pir-hficalri
Date/Timp
Flight Number:.
Aircraft TvDe
Arrival/Runway
Departure
Lmax(dB)
05/29/201016:02
DAL619
8744
D
22
99.9
05/15/201015:36
DAL619
B744
D
22
99.1
05/23/2010 15-29
DAL619
8744
D
22
99.1
05/24/201013:15
DAL9881
B744
—D
22
98.9
05/13/201015:53
DAL619
B744
D
22
98.2
05/24/201016:30
DAL619
B744
D
22
97.7
05/01/201015:37
DAL619
B744
D
22
97.4
05/31/201015:30
DAL619
B744
D
22
97.4
05/09/201015:38
DAL619
B744
D
22
05/25/201016:06
DAL619
B744
D
_=97.4
22 1
97.3
- 28 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#1 9)
4P,tk Awn k JqAfh -qt RInnrninntnn
-- Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/ V
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
024/2010 . 13:15
DAL9881
B744
D
22
93.9
05/23/201015:29
DAL619
B744
D
22
89.2
05/24/2010 20:21
DAL2770
DC9Q
D
22
89.1
05/05/201015:57
DAL619
B744
D
22
88.3
05/28/201017:55
DAL244
A330
D
22
87
05/30/201015:28
DAL619
8744
D
22
84.9
05/03/201015:45
DAL619
8744
D
22
84.5
05/25/201016:06
DAL619
B744
D
22
84.5
05/07/201013:25
DAL2828
DC9Q
D
17
83.6
05/31/201015:30
DAL619
8744
D_
22
83.5
(RMT Site#20)
7r,+k Q+ R. qrr4 Axfr� Pir-hfiPld
Date/Time
Flight Number
Airceaft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/13/201015:53
DAL619
B744
D
22
87.222
05/04/20101
DAL619
B744
D
12R
86.1
05/02/201015:42
DAL619 —
B744
D
22
86
05/01/201015:38
DAL619 —
B744
D
22
82.6
05/13/2010 22:06
FDX1 358
DC10
D
30L
80.8
05/09/201015:39
DAL619
8744
D
22
80.4
05/25/201016:06
DAL619
B744
D
22
79.6
05/15/2010 7:19
BMJ64
BE65
D
22
79.6
05/23/201015:29
DAL619
B744
D
22
79.4
05/29/201016:02
DAL619
B744
D
22
78.2
tKivi i �otefFz i)
RnrhAwn P- R7fh qt ln%tpr (-,rnvp Hpiahts
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/22/201015:57
DAL619
B744
D
12R
83.4
05/18/2010 20:11
KFS724
B72Q
D
12R
82.1
05/12/201015:52
DAL619
8744
D
12R
81.9
05/06/201019:52
DAL2770
DC9Q
D
12L
81
05/17/201016:03
DAL1 552
DC9Q
D
12L
80.5
05/13/201010:29
DAL2889
DC9Q
D
12L
80.5
05/17/2010 9:17
DAL2913
DC9Q
D
12L
80.3
05/29/201011:37
DAL2874
DC9Q —
D
12L
80.2
05/21/201015:45
DALI 552
DC9Q —
-6—
12L
80.1
05/16/201015:28
DAL619
B744
6--12R
79*8
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50 -29-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#22)
Anne Marie Trail Inver (,rn%/p Hi=irihfcz
Da;te./T.ime
Flight Number
Aircr6ft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runw6 Y,
L.max(dB)
05;/1;8/2010 15:37
DAL619
8744
D
12R
81.3
05/11/201016:01
DAL619
B744
D
12R
80.8--
05/14/2010 4:59
FDX1 718
MD11
A
30L
80.4
05/21/201015:37
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
80.1
05/07/201011:53
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
-12R
80.1
05/10/201015:31
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
79.6
05/16/201011:41
DAL2218
DC9Q
---E—
12R
79.4
05/23/201015:38
DAL2760
--L1
DC9Q
D
12R
79.4
05/24/201017:34
D A 193
MD80
D j
12R
79.1
05/30/201014:11
ME 3214
SF34
A 1
30R
78.7
. (RMT Site#23)
End of KPnn(Inn AN/P Upnrinfn lA,:,irihfc
Date/Time
Flight Number
AirceaftType
—DC9Q
Arrival/
Departure
Ru—nway-
Lmax(dB)
05/25/2010 9:28
DAL2790
B744
D
12L
94.5
05/12/2010 20:32
DAE7-70
DC9Q
D
12L
93.7
05/21/201013:58
DAL2877
DC9Q
D
12L
93.3
05/11/2010 7:13
DAL2788
DC9Q
D
12L
93.1
05/13/2010 9:24
DAL2790
DC9Q
D
12L
93.1
05/27/201017:39
DAL1832
DC9Q
D
12L
92.7
05/11/201011:43
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
12L
92.7
05/21/2010 20:11
DAL2793
DC9Q
D
12L
92.5
05/15/201012:00
DIAL2876
—DC9Q
D
12L
92.4
L 05/18/201014.47
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
12L
92.2
(NIVI I -jite4Z4)
Ch2DeI 1-n- & Wrt-n I n Fqnqn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/Runway
Departure
Lma. �(dB).
05/11/201016:01
DAL619
B744
D
12R
85.6
05/14/201016:07
DAL2746
DC9Q
A
30L
85.4
05/30/2010 8:30
AAL1 750
MD80
D
12L
83.4
05/31/201013:41
AALI 120
MD80
D
12L
83.1
05/12/2010 22:21
FDX1685
B72Q
D
12R
82.9
05/03/201013:20
DAL2819
DC9Q
A
30R
82.3
05/21/201016:45
DAL 1934
MD80
D
12R
82.2
05/18/2010 20:10
KFS724
B72Q
D
12R
82.2
05/05/2010 8:06
DAL2624
DC9Q
A
30L
82.1
05/18/201015:37
DAL619
B744
D
12R
82
- 30 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#25)
K A I_; 0 L- 1X71 hirrixt PH Fqnqn
Date/Tinie
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Runway
Lmax(dB)
Departure
05/18/201015:36
DAL619
B744
D
12R
83.1
05)24/201013:16
D \L9881
B744
D
22
82.4
05/31/201014:14
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
12R
80.1
-
05/01/201013:23
DAL2828
DC9Q
D
17
79.4
05/11/201010:54
AAL1683
MD80
D
12R
79.112R
05/13/2010 8:42
\L1750
MD80
D
12R
78.7
-
-
05/23T201016-.38
D \L1832
DC9Q
A
12R
78.6
05/19)201011:30
AAL1120
MD80
D
12R
78.4
05/27/201010:17
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
12R
78.3
05/11/201018:57
DAL721
MD80
D
12R
78.2
(RMT Site#26)
A- XAI Invar (-,rn\fp Hp.inht.q
Date/Time
W -
Flight Number
. .. - . - -1
Aircraft Type
- -
Arrival/
-
Runway
..Lm.ax(dB),
Departure
05/21/201015:26
DAL619
8744
D
12R
85.9D
05/18/2010 20:10
KFS724
B72Q
D
12R
85.3
05/16/201015:28
DAL619
B744
D
12R
84.5
05/22/201015:56
DAL619
B744
D
12R
84.4
05/12/201015:52
DAL619
B744
D
12R
83.6
05/28/201015:37
DAL619
B744
D
12R
83.1
05116/2010 5:34
DAL1481
MD80
D
12R
82.7
05/10/201019:33
DAL2608
DC9Q
D
12L
82.4
05/07/201010:14
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
12R
82.2
05/12/201017:53
-DAL1 832
DC9Q
D
12L
82.1
kMIVI I OILUff/-[ )
A -IL- I F -7r-7 Axrm -q NAinnPqnnIi.q
Date/Timo
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Runway
Lmax(d.B)
Departure
05/30/201015:29
DAL619
B744
D
22
88.4
05/14/2010 7:44
AAL1629
MD80
D
30L
88.3
05/25/201019:07
DAL721
MD80
D
30L
87.9
05/08/201013:54
DAL1934
MD80
D
30L
87.2
05/02/201019:59
DAL721
MD80
D
30
87.186.7
05/26/201013:46
DAL1 934
MD80
D
30L
05/06/201017:34
DALI 193
MD80
D
30L
86.5
05/17/2010 7:31
AAL1629
MD80
D
30L
86.4
-
05/14/2010 20:29
AAL479
MD80
D
30L
5 .9
85.985.9
05/13/201011:32
AAL1683
MD80
D
30L
-31 -
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
(RMT Site#28)
664.5 16th A%/P q Pir-hfi.-Irl
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/20/201014:51
FAST14
UKN
D
17
90
05/01/2010 13:49
DAL1864
8757
5—
17
87.5
05/15/2010 7:10
DAL2853
DC9Q
D
17
86.4
05/01/201011:34
AAL1120
MD80
D
30R
85.6
05/12/201014:41
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
17
85.5
05/07/201015:37
DAL9857
DC9Q
D —
17
85.5
05/05/201013:21
DAL1226
DC9Q
D
30L
85.5
05/20/2010 7:1 3
D \—L2853
DC9Q
D —
17
85.5
05/16/201015:41
DAL2689
A320
D
17
85.2
05/22/2010 15:48
DTL250-7
DC9Q
D
17
84.9
(RMT Site#29)
Ericsson Rpm Rrhnnl A-ql-'; 31 c Awn (z RA;nno�f;-
Date/Time
Flight Nufriber
Aircraft Type
Ar . rival/.-
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/03/201011:41
AAL1 120
_120
MD80
D
30R
86.9
05/08/201011.34
AAL 1
MD80
D
30R
86.7
05/26/201015.46
DAL1552
DC9Q
D
30R
86.5
05/03/2010 14:14
DA99852DC9Q
DC9Q
D
30L
85
05/26/201011:21
DAL2876
DC9Q
D
30R
83.3
05/06/2010 7:46
BMj48
BE65
D
30R
83.1
05/03/201014:55
DAL2760
_BMJ54
DC9Q
D
30R
83
05/07/-20108-.02
DAU 132
BE65
D
30R
82.2
05/30/201011:40
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
30R
8118
05/03/201019:39
DAL2497
DC9Q
D
30R 1
81.4
kmivi i 6iteiFou)
871.9 Rivpr Ririnp PH Pinnminntnn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival(:
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/07/201010:19
DTk-L-2827
-2766
_DC9Q
D
17
94.4
05/12/201010:20
DAL
DC9Q
D
17
93.4
05/07/201010:21
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
17
93.2
05/17/201010.20
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
17
93.1
05/30/201013:36
DAL1413
DC9Q
D
17
92.9
05/20/201015:50
DAL2507
DC9Q
D
17
92.4
05/17/201017:42
DAL2866
DC9Q
_D
17
92
05/28/201010:17
DAU 132
DC9Q
D
17
92
05/12/201015:35
DAL_2950
DC9Q
D
17
91.6
05/27/201013:57
DAI-2614
DC9Q
D
17
91.5
-32- Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#31)
wini 12th Ave. S.. Bloomington
Date/Time
Flight Nurbber'Aircraft
Type [;Departure
Arrival/.
u ;Depart;re
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/23/201015:29
DAL619
B744
D
22
87.2
05/24/201013:15
DAL9881
8744
nD
22
86.6
05/10/201018:23
AAL479
MD80
D
17
83.5
05/24/2010 20:22
DAL2770
DC9Q
D
22
82.6
05/12/2010 7:09
BMD64
BE65
D
17
81
05/29/201016:17
AAL1415
MD80
D
17
80.9
05/01/201010:50
AAL1475
MD80
D
17
80.5
—
05/24/201010:32
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
17
80.2
05/01/201010:36
1 DAL1687
8738
D
17
80.1
05/25/2010 7.04
BMJ64
—
BE65
_D
17
79.3.
(RMT Site#32)
10325 Pleasant Ave. S., Bloomington
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/24/201016:31
DAL 619
B744
D
22
84.6
05/01/2010 10:50
-
AAL1475
MD80
D
17
81.6
05/01/201018:21
DAL9807
DC9Q
D
17
80.4
—
05/01/201010:36
DAL1687
8738
D
17
78.7
05/29/201016:17
AAL1415
MD80
D
17
77.8
05/05/2010 7:41
SWA2888
8733
D
17
76.6
05/13/2010 22:02
DAL2999
A320
D
17
75.7
05/01/201015:07
DAL2799
A320
D
17
75.6
05/0212010j0�ISFFT111
AAL1415
A319
D
17
—75.3
05/15/2010.15:37
DAL619
13744
D
22
75
(RM i 6ite466)
Nlnrfh Riv(-r Hills Park Burnsville
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/,,
Departure
Runway.
Lmax(dl3)
05/02/2010-5—,44
—DAL1 481
MD80
D
17
84.9
05/01/2010 9:23
DAL1009—
MD80
D
17
84.5
05/21/201016:26
AAL1415
MD80
D
17
83.1
05/26/2010 6:45
ATN808
DC8Q
D
17
83
05/27/201010:55
AAL1683
MD80
D
17
82.8
05/02/201010:49
AAL1683
---MED78700::::D
17
82.1
05/01/2010 7:16
DAL2853
DC9Q
D
17
82
05/17/201010:58
AAL1683
MD80
D
17
8-1-3
05/15/201016:26
AAL1415
MD80
D
17
81.2
05/07/201013:47
AAL541
MD80
D
17
81.1
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
SKICIE
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#34)
Red Oak Park, Burnsville
Date/Time
Flight Number.
Aircraft Type.
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmak(dB)
05/30/201013:46
DALI 934
MD80
D
17
82.5
05/23/201018:00
AWE415
A320
D
17
81.7
05/20/201010:46
AAL1683
MD80
D
17
80.7
05/31/201013:44
DAU 934
MD80
D
17
80.3
05/01/2010 7:21
AAL1 629
MD80
D
17
80
05/01/2010 8:37
AAL1 750
MD80
D
17
79.7
05/02/2010 5:44
DAL1481
MD80
D
17
79.6
05/02/201010:50
AAL1683
MD80
D
17
79.4
05/22/2010
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
17
79
05/04/201010:48
AAL1683
MD80
D
17
78.7
(RMT Site#35)
2100 Garnet Ln.. Eagan
Date/Time.,
Flight Number
Aircraft Type,
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
max(d13)
05/01/2010 7:43
DAL2268
MD80
D
17
85.7
05/01/201018:09
DALI 193
MD80
D
17
84.6
05/1972-61616-23
AAL1415
MD80D
A
17
83.8
05/28/201010:18
DAU 132
DC9Q
D
17
83.1
05/23/201016:52
AAL1415
MD80
D
17
82.6
05/19/201010:05
AAL851
MD80
A
35
81.9
05/07/201010:11
DAU 132
DC9Q
—D
17
81,5
05/01/201016:16
AAL1415
MD80
D
17
81.3
05/20/201013:53
DAL1934
MD80
D
17
81.3
05/17/201015:21
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
17
81.2
(RMT Site#36)
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond. ADDle Vqllpv
Date/Tim*'e
FlightNumber,
Aircraft Type .,:
Arrival/::
Departure
Runway
Lmax'(dB)
05/01/2010 7:44
DAL2268
—132
MD80
D
17
82.3
05/02/201010:10
DAC1
DC9Q
D
17
81.4
05/14/201016:11
DAL2866
DC9Q
A
35
80.5
05/02/201010:05
DAL2488
DC9Q
D
17
80.4
05/26/201017:01
UPS2558
MD11
A
35
80
05/22/201014:06
DALI 934
MD80
D
17
79.9
05/13/201015:12
DAL2074
8757
A
35
79.8
05/30/201017:01
FDX728
—
MDI 1
A
35
79.7
05/01/201019.03
DAL2390
DC9Q
D
17
79.6
05/02/201015.52
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
17
79.5
V
- 34 - Report Generated: 06/1012010 12:50
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
May 2010
(RMT Site#37)
A'�C)q IiAInnrinRtP. Ln. N.. Eagan
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
05/17/201013:51
DAU 934
MD80
D
17
83.6
05/15/201013:28
DAL1 226
DC9Q
D
17
83.5
05/16/201015:48
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
17
83
05/04/201010:55
-ffAL1 1-32
DC9Q—
D
17
82.7
05/28/201013:35
--AAL541
MD80
D
17
82.5
05/07/201011:55
-TA L 112-0
MD80
D
17
82
05/06/201019:16
dA --L721
MD80
D
17
81.9
05/31/201019:53
DAL721 --
MD80
D
17
81.8
05/23/2010 8:39
AAL1 750
MD80
D
17
81.6
05/01/201016:18
DAL
77A:L:j �62 =0
IMDWEEEED
D
17�
81.5
(RMT Site#38)
�PlS7 Tijrnuoise Cir.. Eaqan
Date/Time
Flight Number
. .Aircraft Type .:,
irrivall-
Departure
Runway
.
Lmax(dB)
05/15/201014:02
DAL1 934
MD80
D
17
86.9
05/31/201019:53
DAL721
MD80
D
17
86.7
05/27/201019:01
DAL721
MD80
D
17
86.3
05/22/201015:13
DALI 781
MD80
D
17
85.7
05/27/2010 13:50
—DAL1 934
MD80
D
17
85.5
05/10/201017:43
DAL1 193
MD80
D
17
84.5
05/23/201013:50
DALI 934
MD80
D
17
84.4
05/16/2010 19:21
MES3568
CRJ
D
17
844
05/09/201013:55
---ETA L 19 3-4
MD80
D
17
84�3
05/24/201019:35
DAL721
MD80
D
17
84.3
(RMT Site#39)
`1477 St- Charles PL Eagan
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
—
Lmax(dB)
05/24/2010 7:29
--bA—L2900
DC9Q
D
17
84.5
05/07/201015:29
DAL2870
DC9Q
D
17
84.5
05/21/201014:59
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
17
84.4
05/29/201010:41
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
17
84.1
05/12/201014:06
-----5A- L 19 3-3-4
MD80
D
17 —
83.9
05/04/201011:28
AAL1 120
MD80
D
17 —
83.8
05/12/201017:16
DAL2507
DC9Q
D
17
83.6
05/15/2010 11:28
Tj �L1120
MD80
D
17 --
83.4�
05/04/2010 13:07
DAL2407
DC9Q
D
17
83.2
05/07/201014:51
DC9Q
D
17
83
May 2010, Remote Monitoring Tower Top Ten Summary
The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for May 2010 were comprised of 85.9% departure
operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the DC9Q with 41 % of the highest Lmax events.
May 2010 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 May 2010.
-35-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
May 2010
Remote Monitoring Towers
- 36 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
.Date
#1,
#2
#3
#4.
#5
06
#7
#8
#9
#IQ
#11
#12
#13
#14
#15
05/01/2010
-05-/02/-2010
43.2
47.3
49.1
54.6
59.4
67.5
46.9
57
61
63.7
36.9
NA
43
57.7
43.7
51-7
54-6
.1
59.1
64
69.6
53.9
57.6
NA
NA
NA
33.4
44
58.9
37.4
05/03/2010
50.1
52.5
56.1
58.3
67.1
70.2
60.9
60.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
43.2
59.2
36.2
05/04/2010
-651-05120-10
53.4
-50.3
57.1
59.1
60
66
69.2
58
55.5
54.3
59.2
53.5
51.1
51.6
60
53
-6-5/06/2010
54-2
.8
57.4
-59----
65
69.8
60.3
59.3
35.7
48.4
29.7
I-
34.5
46.6
62.2
44.6
-05/07/2010
56-7
56-1
62
.8
69.1
69.9
60.9
58.9
37.5
-
53.1
52.6
26.5
54.4
60.6
55.4
58.1
58.7
65
61.3
70.4
69.2
60.2
55.7
34
51.7
53.3
NA
51.2
59.4
51.3
05/08/2010
48.2
50.1
55.1
58.2
65.3
68.5
60.6
57.2
NA
39.2
37.1
30.2
44.4
58.4
42.3
05/09/2010
53.7
56.9
60.6
58
65.2
66.3
49.1
49
NA
26.7
NA
29.5
52.4
58.5
52.7
05/10/2010
59.7
62.
65
62.2
68.5
67.4
37
38.8
32.5
354152.4
52.7
27
56.9
58.9
59.4
05/11/2010
-65/12/2010
61.3
62.7
66.7
61.7
70.6
67.1
40.7
35.3
39.6
38.8
36.5
31.3
56.8
61.9
59.9
60.7
62.6
66.7
62
70.3
67.4
39.4
44.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
56.7
61.2
59.5
05/13/2010
-05/14/2010
58.1
58.9
64.3
61.1
70.2
70.7
58.6
58.8
41.2
NA
NA
38.3
54.5
61.6
55.4
-05/15/2010
53.6
54.4
59.6
60.3
68.5
70.3
61.3
59.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
61.3
42.9
-05/16/2010
55.2
57.8
60.5
57.8
65.1
65.1
45.4
51.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
50.7
56.7
51.2
-65/17/2010
56.9
60
62.9
60.4
66.4
66.4
43.9
42.2
35
35
NA
34.2
55.2
59.8
54.4
--05/18/2010
57
59.7
62.9
59.4
67.7
66.7
54.6
51.2
51.9
55.1
42.3
40.5
53.3
60.2
54.8
55.1
57.6
62.2
57.7
67.3
66
54.5
49.9
30.9
28.9
29.9
NA
53
60.61
54
05/19/2010
54
56.5
60.8
57.9
66.3
65.8
53.3
51.8
52
t54.8
39.9
:NA
51.7
59.2 i
53.4
05/20/2010
-05/21/2010
56.9
60.4
62.7
59.5
66.9
65.8
40.4
32.3
NA
NA
NA
NA 155.6
61
56.8
-6512212010
60.2
61.1
66.2
60.3
70.2
66.4
42.5
39.4
40.9
35.1
38.3
34.1
57.6
61.4
58.11
-65/23/2010
58.7
59.3
64.9
60.2
68.8
66.9
48.5
48.5
41.6
34.2
NA
41.8
54.6
546
56.7
55.2]
-65/24/2010
57.4
59.9
64.6
60.2
68.3
66.6
35.6
38.5
38.4
41.9
28.7
NA
538
53.8
60.5
54.3
-65/25/2010
57.4
59.5
64.5
60.5
68.6
66.5
39.2
40.4
NA
NA
NA
32.3
54.2
58.5
56.8
-05/26/2010
56.8
58.4
62
61.4
68.3
69.6
58.8
54
53.6
54.1
33.4
NA
521.9
60.6
56
49.6
F52. 1
55.5
59.2
67.5
69.8
61
59.9
33.6
52.51,
52.7
32.4
40.4
59.9
43.11
05/27/2010
57
58 4
58.4
62.9
59.8
67.6
66.2
52.2
55.8
33.6
51.3
53
NA
54.1
60
54.61
05/28/2010
-05/29/2010
57.8
60.6
65
60.4
69.5
66.8
49.9
43.7
45.3
NA
NA
NA
55
60.3
58.4
57.2
58
63.8
58.4
67.9
65.1
37.6
48.5
NA
NA
NA
34
52.9
58.1
53.5
05/30/2010
-05/31/201
53.9
56.5
58.4
58.3
64.3
69.1
55.6
57
NA
NA
NA
NA
52.4
57.1
49.4
0
56.6
57.7
62.2
58.8
67.6
68.4
54.2
54.3
NA
NA
NA
NA
S516589
53.5
L Mo.DN *L 56.7,
58.6
62.8
59.8
67.9,:
68.1
56.1
55
48.*5
52
46]
59 .9
54.8
- 36 - Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
May 2010
Remote Monitoring Towers
Date
-
#16
#17
#18
#19
#20*
#21
#22
#23
#24
#25
#26
---
#27
#28
#29
05/01/2010
62.4
49.5
59.7
54.2
47
45.3
54.2
49.1
57.5
51.5
48.1
45.7
53.9
50.1
05/02/2010
63.7
48
56.9
51.8
48.4
41.4
56.6
47.3
58.8
37.5
47.5
53.5
54.8
51.6
05/03/2010
64
49.5
55.6
48.4
44.9
46
56.9
46.8
59.4
40.9
50.6
58.7
56.6
55.7
05/04/2010
64.8
45.5
58.6
52.3
46.8
45.8
57
57.3
60
52.3
52.1
54.5
60.1
51.9
05/05/2010
65.3
50.6
56.8
49.9
47.1
47.7
58.1
55
61.8
49.3
55.3
56.4
56.7
55.3
05/06/2010
62
NA
51.9
47.1
32.9
47.9
55.6
60.4
59.3
49.3
53.3
59.1
57.2
51.5
05/07/2010
63.4
28.4
56.5
53.8
29.6
49.1
55.4
57.8
57.9
51.5
52.5
54.6
60.4
47.5
05/08/2010
62.8
NA
39.1
39.6
35.6
47
56
50.6
57.5
31.9
50.1
56.4
56.5
52.6
05/09/2010
60.7
47
57.4
50.5
40.8
48.5
51
59.2
55.2
48.6
53.1
48.8
51.6
42.3
05/10/2010
61.9
31.6
57.6
54.6
NA
46.9
49.5
62.9
55.4
53
54.1
38.7
58
NA
05/11/2010
64.5
28.8
37.3
33.6
NA
49.3
48.8
64.9
56,9
56.5
53.6
37.5
50
--
32
05/12/2010
63.4
27.7
59.1
56.1
NA
51,5
51
F6.
63.5
57.7
55.4
55.5
33.4
60.3
31.9
05/13/2010
65.3
51.4
56.7
49.4
53.1
50,9
5 9
61
60.2
52.5
53.7
56
55.1
51.9
05/14/2010
66.4
26.4
43.7
39.6
40.2
43.4
59.3
49
61.2
38.5
43.2
57.9
-
58.6
55.7
05/15/2010
59.8
52.9
59.8
54.2
43
48.9
51.4
58.5
54
45.7
52.8
34.9
60.3
42.9
05/16/2010
60.7
NA
56.6
53.2
NA
51
46.9
60.9
53.7
51.9
57.4
36
55.8
NA
05/17/2010
61.2
43
56.4
53.2
NA
51.8
48.3
61.7
56.5
52.8
55.5
54.2
56.3
40.1
05/18/2010
63.7
F63.8
41.2
-
52.5
45.5
25.4
51.4
52.9
61.5
57.3
53.2
55.6
52.8
55
--
41.5
05/19/2010
8
NA
55.7
49.3
NA
48.7
54.9
59.2
3
5 F7. 8
5 F3. 5
51.6
54.2
58.1
42.2
05/20/2010
64.8
25.4
56.5
52.7
34.5
50.8
53.7
62.2
58.1
52.3
53.1
49.6
57.6
39.9
05/21/2010
65.1
NA
55.7
52.8
NA
52.1
54.1
64.2
58.2
54.3
55.7
34.9
54.9
34.8
05/22/2010
58.5
40.9
56.6
52.3
40.8
48.8
48.7
60.1
52.9
50.1
53.2
41
56.6
36.2
05/23/2010
62.2
44.8
58.2
51.8
37.2
49.6
49.1
61.4
56.3
54.5
54.8
NA
53.3
NA
05/24/2010
58.2
52.4
61
55.5
39.3
50
49.1
61.5
53.5
52.8
55.4
37.2
56.6
NA
05/25/2010
66.1
48.7
56.1
49
42.8
49.5
F57.4
61.4
59.5
46.7
51.9
54.5
56.3
47
05/26/2010
67.1
37.8
55
51.4
NA
40.6
57.1
47.1
58.8
42.9
44.7
56,9
56.5
53.2
05/27/2010
65.7
51.8
56.7
53.9
28.6
50.5
54.7
62.2
58.6
53.7
54.8
48.3
56.8
44.1
05/28/2010
62.7
38
57.5
54
NA
50.4
49.9
63.1
56
55
53.6
36.2
55.6
5 * 6
26.5
05/29/2010
59.1
52.8
58.5
51.3
37.9
47.5
48
60
55.1
50.4
51.4
NA
52.8
NA
05/30/2010
60.9
49.7
54.9
47.8
42.1
50
52.7
57.1
55.3
40.4
53.1
51.8
50.7
49.1
05/31/2010
--
63
52.4
5 F7. 4
51.2
35.8
48.9
51.6
60.5
55.6
50.5
53.2
51.7
52.9
52 .
44
-
Mo.DNL
--
163.61
47.5
56.851.942.749.154.460.4
57.8
51.7
53.4
53.1
56 . 7
56.7
49.1
-37-
Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
May 2010
Remote Monitoring Towers
-38- Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
Date
#30
#31
#32
#33
#34
#35
#36
#37
#38
#39
05/01/2010
62.6
49.4
48.6
52.5
47.2
56.7
50.2
52.5
51.6
49.4
05/02/2010
61.6
50.6
43.5
55
50.2
53.9
51
44.4
38.5
NA
05/03/2010
60.5
-61.1
44.8
43.2
45.7
47.9
54
56.4
37.4
NA
NA
05/04/2010
-65-/05-/2010
45-1
43-4
-46
-45-----
.5
46.8
52.6
50.6
47.5
49.3
51.4
59-1
34-9
.1
50.6
47
55.5
53.6
48.8
45
NA
05/06/2010
55.6
33.7
27.4
33.9
34.4
50.8
54.3
46.3
47.5
47
05/07/2010
60.9
43.1
36.8
44
27.1
49.7
46.7
48.8
51.4
52.2
05/08/2010
47.2
35
NA
NA
NA
50.8
54.8
40.8
NA
NA
05/09/2010
58.8
40.4
32.4
44.4
28.5
48.2
51.5
43
50
50
05/10/2010
61.5
47.3
42.2
47
37.4
46
33.2
6.2
51.6
54.6
05/11/2010
34.3
NA
NA
31.9
31.3
T.2846.9
30.6
NA
36.6
35
37
05/12/2010
63.9
46.9
38.7
44.7
.40
48.3
51.7
55.1
05/13/2010
56.2
49.5
46.1
48.9
47.4
52.2
54.5
42.4
-39.4
41.2
05/14/2010
-6511512010
51
36.5
32.2
25.5
41.5
53.4
56.3
44.7
NA
NA
-6511612010
64.1
51.3
47.4
51.6
49.9
49.6
47.8
48.1
52.2
52.7
62.5
42.9
38.8
47.7
43.6
50.4
50.4
48.5
52.3
54.8
05/17/2010
62.9
50.3
32.4
47.8
49
52.1
53.2
50.4
53.5
52.5
05/18/2010
-05/19/2010
59.8
45.1
45.5
44.7
38.2
52.8
51.5
42.6
45.5
47.1
-05/20/2010
60.8
42.7
42.1
42
38.1
54.2
50.5
50.1
50.7
51.2
62.9
45.1
41.4
48.8
43.7
47.6
42.5
48.5
52.8
54.3
05/21/2010
-05/22/2010
61.8
43.2
32.8
47.4
35.2
44.1
30.2
47.1
52.1
53.4
59.8
45.7
39.6
44
42.9
47.5
43.3
47.8
51.2
52.4
05/23/2010
-65/24/2010
59.8
47.8
43.9
40
36.4
46.6
41.6
47.2
52.2
53.8
59.7
48.8
44.3
43.7
37.4
47.3
38.7
48.6
53.1
53.5
05/25/2010
-65/26/2010
60.4
46.2
28.9
46.1
37.9
51.9
52.2
46
48.6
44.5
-65/27/2010
61.2
NA
NA
52.8
49.6
53.9
56.4
43.4
NA
NA
-65/28/2010
64.5
47.3
38.2
52.1
50.4
50.2
51----
.3
49.3
53
52.1
-05/29/2010
62.4
45.9
42
43.1
41.7
48.1
33.3
50.9
53.7
54
60.2
42.6
38.2
44.8
33.2
39.7
NA
45.6
51.1
53.2
05/30/2010
-05/31/2010
57.5
36.3
27.6
44.2
46.7
49
51
41.4
36.3
4 7
62.4
E60.9
38.6
F41.9 47.8
45
52.8
53.3
45.5
51.2
W4.
49
Mo.DNL
45.9
429 47.9
44.9 51.4
E51.A. 1
C
1
51
-38- Report Generated: 06/10/2010 12:50
r
I
Noise Oversight Committee
Technical Advisor's Report
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
Table of Contents for June 2010
Complaint Summary
1
Noise Complaint Map
2
FAA Available Time for Runway Usage
3
MSP All Operations Runway Usage
4
MSP Carrier Jet Operations Runway Usage
5
MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition
6
MSP All Operations Nighttime Runway Usage
7
MSP Carrier Jet Operations Nighttime Runway Usage
8
MSP Scheduled Nighttime Operators
9-11
MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operators by Type
12
MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operators Stage Mix
13
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
14-17
MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoring Tower Site Locations Map
18
Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events
19
Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events
20
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events
21
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events
22
MSP Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per RMT
23-35 i
Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL
36-38
A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program
MSP Complaints by City
June 2010
City
Arrival
Departure
Other
Number of
Complaints
Number of
Complainants
% of Total
Complaints
EAGAN
0
14
3
1350
42
432
1841
44
39.6%
MINNEAPOLIS
I
111
3
447
241
531
1334
150
28.7%
SAINT PAUL
0
1
1
287
3
73
365
35
7.9%
SAINT LOUIS PARK
0
200
0
5
0
42
247
6
5.3%
APPLE VALLEY
0
169
0
13
5
35
222
13
4.8%
RICHFIELD
0
0
0
188
5
8
201
7
4.3%
MENDOTA
HEIGHTS
0
0
1
151
11
22
185
12
4%
LAKEVILLE
0
82
0
0
2
0
84
4
1.8%
BLOOMINGTON
0
1.
0
12
23
35
71
13
1.5%
BURNSVILLE
0
0
1
19
14
5
39
11
0.8%
INVER GROVE
HEIGHTS
0
0
0
0
1
22
23
2
0.5%
EDINA
0
0
0
5
4
2
11
9
0.2%
SOUTH SAINT
PAUL
0
0
0
2
3
0
5
2
0.1%
MINNETONKA
0
0
0
0
4
0
4
1
0.1%
GOLDEN VALLEY
0
2
0
0
0
1
3
2
0.1%
WEST SAINT PAUL
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
2
0%
NEW BRIGHTON
0
0.
0
2
0
0
2
1
0%
PLYMOUTH
0
1
0
0
1
0
2
2
0%
ROSEMOUNT
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0%
CHANHASSEN
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0%
SPRING LAKE TWP
0
0 .,
0
0
1
0
1
1
0%
SUNFISH LAKE
0
0
0
1
0
0
i
I
0%
EDEN PRAIRIE
0
0
0
0-
0
1
1
1
00/n
Total
582
2492
1 1572
4646
321
Nature of MSP Complaints
of Day
Complaint
Total
Total
Early/Late
36
1303
Engine Run-up
1
102
Excessive Noise
340
4159
Frequency
118
2962
Ground Noise
2
323
Helicopter
0
13
Low Flying
147
2555
Structural Disturbance
8
872
Other
0
541
Total 1.
13482
Note: Shaded Columns represent MSP complaints filed via the Internet.
Sum of %Total of Complaints may not equal 100% due to rounding.
`As of Mny 2005, the MSP Complaints by City report includes multiple
( i complaint descriptors per individual complaint. Therefore, the number of
complaint descriptors may be more than the number of repuned complaints.
Time
of Day
_
Time
Total
Airlake
0000-0559
13
100
0600-0659
15
125
0700-1159
128
1690
1200-1559
87
567
1600-1959
76
1017
2000-2159
34
430
2200-2259
10
238
2300-2359
9
107
Total
4646
Complaints by Airport
Airport
Total
MSP
4646
Airlake
0
Anoka
70
Crystal
0
Flying Cloud
410
Lake Elmo
0
St. Paul
25
M isc.
0
Total
5151
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32 1
MSP International Airport
Aviation Noise Complaints for June 2010
, 75�'
7
Brooklyn Park )r�tn
Grove
16.
Shoreview
f
".1, p Lai
...........
f
'e d i nqa 1'yO
i.L'.t
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
E PI An,
�j
;RkRR
ry T
J-01
Orono
IF
A—
a W;V,�
IS :J IVI I qn,144411'
SnellTH gox
Ma
M L 4�"'
4
3 R
j
r Y .� � r1 ' j' �' _� s � I i'°� t, t��tr' Bloomington Ci,
P, rjr
er ei. in
*eh-
i"q
Shakopee; rV I
U SVII
12Y,
k. - - I , I
son mp. 71T -F 41�, .1 .
avage P.
b 6- i -s Hie Tv A Rosemount
IT
10r,
7K="
FT
4J.
11,a kevi I I e Empire Twp.
Spring fake Twp :Maple`
Medina
FarMi n to At
12.
H - 1enq,,.,,T-
p. gib,Marked T"
New Mark ji�
0 Eureka Twp. Came RoQk Tw.
T
Number of Complaints per Address
0 0 ID 0 0 0 0 0
1-5 6-16 17-39 40-80 81-104 105-153 154-214 215-1013
-2- Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Available Hours for Runway Use
June 2010
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
All Operations
Runway Use Report June 2010
tiwl'aul
PI4VER
( rr r
�7
i yy
FottfSnell�ng�(,unor9l
RichfieldIYff�r4 :6P
ol
i
I Blo min o, 4
s t� g� Icn 4�?.or,4Jt I E� �� { Cyt 1 Ea
if
i .�.5 '..2 y 1 .. '• , .rte°'. ) I
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area
Count
Operations
: Percent
Last Year
Count
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
Arr
So. Richfield/Bloomington
6
0%
0
0%
12L
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
3620
19.1%
1 2859
14.7%
12R
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
3617
19.1%
2716
14%
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
5
0%
0
0%
22
Arr
St. Paul/Highland Park
0
0%
1
0%
30L
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
3716
19.6%
4248
21.9%
30R
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
4269
22.6%
5090
26.2%
35
Arr
Bloomington/Eagan
3680
19.5%
4496
23.2%
Total Arrivals
18913
19410
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area,
Count
Operations
Percent
Last Year
Count
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
Dep
St. Paul/Highland Park
11
0.1%
11
0.1%
12L
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
2471
13.2%
2012
11.9%
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
1623
8.7%
1297
7.8%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
3839
20.6%
2924
19.6%
22
Dep
So. Richfield/Bloomington
23
0.1%
18
0.6%
30L
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
4807
25.7%
1 5862
27.1%
30R
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
5895
31.6%
7057
32.8%
35
Dep
So. Minneapolis
0
0%
0
0%
Total Departures
18669
19181
Total Operations
37582
38591
Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding
-4- Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
C
Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report June 2010
.. . .........
ti
pq)s
t� -aul
0 ,11-7
Q
R P.
Id
13U
Rionfleld 3
�77 V
mIngk
Report Generated: 07109/2010 09:32
-5-
Last Year
Arrival/
Count
Count
Last Year
RWY
Departure
Overflight Area
Operations
Percent
Operations
Percent
--
04
Arr
So. Richfield/Bloomington
5
0%
0
0%
12L
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
3133
19%
2433
14.6%
-Arr
so. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
3190
19.3%
2382
14.3%
17
Arr
--
So. Minneapolis
5
0%
0
06/0
22
Arr
St. Paul/Highland Park
0
0%
1
0%
30L
Eagan/Mendota Heights
3197
19.4%
3681 -
22.2%
_Arr
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
3790
23%
4326 -
35
Arr
Bloomington/Eagan
3166
19.2%
3793
22.8%
Total Arrivals
16486
16616
Last Year
Arrival/
Count
Count
Last Year
RVVY
Departure
Overflight Area
Operations
Percent
Operations
Percent
04
Dep
St. Paul/Highland Park
10
0.1%
11
0.1%
12L
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
1979
12.1%
1574
9.6%
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
1420
8.7%
1159
7.1%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
3541
21.7%
2634
16%
22
Dep
§—o. Richfield/Bloomington
23
0.1%
16
0.1%
—
30L
Dep
ISO Minneapolis/No. Richfield
4218
25.9%
5132
31.2%
30R
I Dep
ISo. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
5116 --
31.4%
5907
35.9%
—
35
Dep
So.
0
---16307
0%
0
0%
—
.,Minneapolis
Tot , al Departures
16433
Total Operations
32793
33049
Report Generated: 07109/2010 09:32
-5-
June 2010 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition
Type
FAR Part 36 Take -
Off Noise Level
Aircraft Description
Stage
Count
Percent
DC10
103
McDonnell Douglas DC10
3
97
0.3%
B744
101.6
Boeing 747-400
3
64
0.2%
DCBQ
100.5
McDonnell Douglas DC8 Re -manufactured
3
65
0.2%
MD11
95.8
McDonnell Douglas MD11
3
141
0.4%
B767
95.7
Boeing 767
3
169
0.5%
A330
95.6
Airbus Industries A330
3
220
0.7%
B72Q
94.5
Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3
3
15
0%
B777
94.3
Boeing 777
3
3
0%
A300
94
Airbus Industries A300
3
2
0%
A310
92.9
Airbus Industries A310
3
1
0%
B73Q
92.1
Boeing 737 Modified Stage 3
3
2
0%
MD80
91.5
McDonnell Douglas MD80
3
920
2.8%
8757
91.4
Boeing 757
3
2368
7.2%
DC9Q
91
McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3
3
2225
6.8%
A321
89.8
Airbus Industries A321
3
59
0.2%
8734
88.9
Boeing 737-400
3
10
0%
A320
87.8
Airbus Industries A320
3
3030
9.2%
8735
87.7
Boeing 737-500
3
59
0.2%
B738
87.7
Boeing 737-800
3
1399
4.3%
A319
87.5
Airbus Industries A319
3
3082
9.4%
B7377
87.5
Boeing 737-700
3
702
2.1%
A318
87.5
Airbus Industries A318
3
69
0.2%
8733
87.5
Boeing 737-300
3
488
1.5%
MD90
84.2
McDonnell Douglas MD90
3
1326
4%
E190
83.7
Embraer 190
3
48
0.1%
E145
83.7
Embraer 145
3
1074
3.3%
E170
83.7
Embraer 170
3
4143
12.6%
B717
83
Boeing 717
3
256
0.8%
CRJ
79.8
Canadair Regional Jet
3
10748
32.8%
E135
77.9
Embraer 135
3
8
0%
Totals
32793
Note: Sum of fleet mix % may not equal 100% due to rounding.
Note: Stage 3 represent aircraft modified to meet all Stage 3 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 3 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: 07/09/2010 09:32
Count
Current
Percent
Last Years
Percent
Stage 2
0
0%
0%
Stage 3
2242
6.8%
9.40/.
Stage 3 Manufactured
30551
93.2%
90.6%
Total Stage 3
32793
Note: Stage 3 represent aircraft modified to meet all Stage 3 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 3 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: 07/09/2010 09:32
Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Runway Use Report June 2010
Paul
O /0!
5
041
R�Ohfield ti i yA
1:9
9
VI
B161� ming o
ad
#
r:
-7-
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Last Year
Arrival/
Count
Count
Last Year
RWY
Departure
Overflight Area
Operations
Percent
Operations
Percent
04
Arr
So, Richfield/Bloomington
0
0
0%
12L
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
118
11.2
137
11.5%
—1-2R
Arr
--So. —Minneapolis/No. Richfield
280
26.6%
254
21.4%
--1
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
0
0 -%
—
0
0%
22
Arr
t. Paul/Highland Park
----
d
0%
—
0.1%
—
30L
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights—
399
38%
424
35.7%
—3-0R
—Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
250
23.8%
371
31.2%
35
Arr
Bloomington/Eagan
4
0.4%
1
0.1%
rivals
Total Arrivals
1051
1188
—
Last Year
Arrival/
Count
Count
Last Year
RWY
Departure
Overflight Area
Operations
Percent
operations
Percent
04
Dep
St. Paul/Highland Park
0
0%
—
0
0%
—
12L
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
79
19%
156
26.6%
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
118
28.4%
84
1 4.3%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
7
16.9%
56
9 .6%
—
22
Dep
So. Richfield/Bloomington
0
0%
2
0.3%
——
30L
Dep
so. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
84
20.2%
70
TI.9%
—
30R
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
64
15.4%
218
37.2%
—
35
Dep
So. Minneapolis
0
0%
0
0%
Total Departures
415
—
586
Total Operations
1466
1774
1
— „f ..t pnual 100% due to rounding.
-7-
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Runway Use Report June 2010
Vi
,Polls
,,:Paul
v
vp 'RIVIEF
Or L
Li
l4"
4
7'
k4,
p,eqipg;(unorgr,�)
A
Richfield
ljil
1.4
7,
kix ,
BI
Zr '2'
RWY
04
—1-2L
Arrival/
Departure
Arr
Overflight Area
So. Richfield/Bloomington
Count
Operations
0
Percent
—0-/-
Last Year.
Count
Operations
0
Last
s Year
Percent
0%
Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
11-0
11.2%
128
11.6%
12R
—Arr
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
266
27%
235
21.2%
17
Arr
So. Minneapolis
—Paul/Highland
—0-
0%
0
0%
22
Arr
St. Park
0
0%
1
0.1%
30L
--3-0R-
Arr
Eagan/Mendota Heights
370
37.6%
394
35.6%
Arr
.—Eagan/Mendota Heights
236
24%
348
31.5%
35
Arr
Bloomington/Eagan
3
0.3%
0%
Total Arrivals
985
11016
RWY
Arrival/
Departure
Overflight Area
Count
Operations
Percent
Last Year
Count
Operations
Last Year
Percent
04
—12—L
Dep
St. Paul/Highland Park
0
0%
0
0%
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
75
20.-1—%
142
26.8%
12R
Dep
Eagan/Mendota Heights
1-00
26.7%
71
13.4%
17
Dep
Bloomington/Eagan
65
17.4%
51
9.6%
22
Dep
So–--Richfield/Bloomington
-So.
0
0%
1
0.2%
30L
Dep
Minneapolis/No. Richfield
78
20.9%
64
12.1%
30R
Dep
So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield
56
15%
201
37.9%
35
Dep
So. Minneapolis
0
0%
—0
0%
Total Departures
374
530
Total Operations
1359
1636
Note: Sum of RUS % may note ual 100% due to rounding.
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
I*
240
220
200
too
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
July 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Time
July 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
4 n.,:?n - — + P nn n m
EN NWA
.00 set.
ED DAL
❑ AAL
AWE
Us—
C6
ED UAL
UPS
MEP
0 KHA
0 78W
IM FDX
0 FFT
F -I TRS,
Airline
Stage 2
Stage 3
Manufactured
Stage 3
Total
Northwest (NWA)
0
1 5
413 --418
Sun Country (SCX)
0
0
300
300
Delta (DAL)
0
0
249
249
American (AAL)
0
0
125
125
America West (AWE)
0
0
92
92
US Airways (USA)
0
0
82 --82
Continental (COA)
0
0
75
75
United (UAL)
0
0
71
71
UPS (UPS)
0
0
57
57
Midwest Airlines (MEP)
0
0
50
---50
My Hawk (KHA)
0
0
45
45
BAX (78W)
0
44
0
44
FedEx (FDX)
0
0
38
38
Frontier Airlines (FFT)
0
0
31
31
Airtran (TRS)
0
0
25
25
Southwest (SWA)
0
0
6
6
Total--
0
49
1659
1708
-9-
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
July 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
Time
A/D
Carrier
—
Flight
Number
Equipment
Stage 3
Days of
Operation
Routing
22:30
A
—D
BAX -705
B72Q
H
MTWThF
YYC MSP TOL_
22:35
Northwest
106
DC9Q
H
S
PHX MSP GRB
22:35
—22--36
D
—A
Northwest
106
A319
M
MTWThFSu
PHX MSP GRB
—D
Delta
2197
A320
M
MTWThFSSu
DTW MSP
22:40
_D
Northwest
—Northwest
760
A319
M
MTWThFSu
MSP DTW
2_2-40
760
A320
M
S
MSP DTW
22:42
A
— Northwest
316
A320
M
MTWThFSu
LAX MSP
22:42
A
Northwest
316
A319
M
S
LAX MSP
22:45
D
Sun Country
283
8738
M
MF
MSP SEA
D
Sun Country
109
B737
M
Su
MSP LAS
22.45
D
Sun Country
109
8738
M
ThF
MSP LAS
22:50
A
Sun Country
206
B738
M
T_
LAS MSP
22:50
A
American
1284
MD80
M
MTWThFSu
XNA DFW MSP
22:55
A
Northwest
358
B757
M
MTWThFSSu
SFO MSP
22:55
A
—A
Sun Country
422
8737
M
TTh '
LAX MSP
22_-57
American
1880
B738
M
MTWThFSSu
CUR MIA MSP
23:00
A
United
460
8733
M
S
DEN MSP
23:00
A
United
460
B735
M
MTVVThSu
DEN MSP
23:05 �O5
A
Sun Country
106
8737
M
MTV\fThF
LAS MSP
23:05
A
—A
Sun Country
472
B738
M
TWFS
ANC MSP
2_3-07
Northwest
168
M
MTWThFSSu
SEA MSP
23:07
A
United
726
_13757
A320
M
MTWThFSu
OAK DEN MSP
23:08
A
Northwest
767
A319
M
MTWThFSSu
DTW MSP
23:10
A
Sun Country
288
8738
M
MWFSSu
SEA MSP
H"I 0
A
A
Sun Country
—Country
310
8737
M
MTWFS
SFO MSP
23:10—
Sun
472
B738
M
M
ANC MSP
23:10
D
Northwest
114
A319
M
MTWThFSu
PHX MSP DLH
2_3-12
A
United
7748
E170
M
F
DEN MSP
23:15
A
—A
Kitty Hawk
772
8733
M
MTWTh
DEN MSP FWA
23_15
—A
Southwest
393
B737
M
MTWThFSu
PHX DEN MSP
2_3-20
United
693
A320
M
MTVVThF
LGA ORD MSP
23-21
A
America West
759
A320
M
MTWThFSSu
_PVR PHX MSP
2_3-22
A
America West
694
A320
M
MTWThFSSu
PHX LAS MSP
2E25
A
—A
American
4185
CRJ
M
MTWThFSSu
ORD MSP
23_25
Frontier Airlines
108
A319
M
MTWThFSSu
DEN MSP
23_-25
_23:30
A
Delta
3274
CRJ
M
MTWThFSSu
SLC MSP
D
—A
BAX
705
B72Q
H
MTVVThF
YYC MSP TOL
23:35
—A
Delta
1426
B757
M
MTWThFSSu
FLL ATL MSP
23:35
Delta
2414
B757
M
MTWThFSu
SEA MSP
23:36
A
Midwest Airlines
1578
E170
—M
MTWThFSu
DFW MKE MSP
23:40
A
Sun Country
286
B738
M
WS
SEA MSP
23:40
_23:_40
A
—A
Continental
2816
E145
M
MTWThFSu
JAH MSP
—A
United
463
B733
M
WThFSu
PHL ORD MSP
23_-42
—23--43
—A
Airtran
869
8737
M
MTWThFSSu
ATL MSP
United
726
A320
M
S
OAK DEN MSP
23:45
A
American
3731
CRJ
M
MTWThFSu
ORD MSP
23:45 -
A
United
463
A320
M
S
ORD MSP
23:45
_23.-_47
A
Sun Country
208
B738
M
Su
LAS MSP
A
United
463
_A_320
_M
Su
ORD MSP
23749
A
Continental
3295
E145
M
TWThFSu
IAH MSP
_10- Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
July 2010 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations
Time
AID
Carrier
Flight
Number
Equipment
Stage 3
Days of
Operation
Routing
23:53
—A
US —Airways
984
A320
—
MTWThFSSu
CLT MSP
23:55
A
Sun Country
508
B738
M
ThSu ---PVR
DFW MSP
23:56
A
US Airways
940
A321
M
MTWThFSSu
LAS PHX MSP
23:58
00:01
00:05
00:05
A
D
A
A
Delta
Kitty Hawk
Sun Country
Sun Country
1568
772
404
106
A320
B733
B738
B738
M
M
M
M
MTWThFSu
TWThF
MTWThFSSu
M
LAX MSP
DEN MSP FWA
SAN MSP
LAS MSP
00:10
00: 18
—A
A
Sun Country
Delta
288
2306
B738
738
M
M
F
MTWThFS
SEA MSP
SFO MSP
.18
--60--30
00:30
00:44
—A
A
A
Sun —Country
Kitty Hawk
Airtran
7-06
1850
109
8738
8733
8717
M
M
M
Su
S
MFSSu
PHX MSP
SEA MSP FWA
MCO ATL MSP
.45
00-
-1 1-5
02:25
03:58
A
— D
—A
A
Sun country
Kitty
Sun —Country
America West
210
--S
1850
710
690
B738
8733
B738
A320
M
M
M
M
Su
MTWThFS
MTWThFSSu
LAS MSP
PDX SEA MSP
PHX MSP
PHX LAS MSP
--6-4--14
—A
—UPS
556
8757
M
TWThF
04:24
—A
UPS
558
8757
—M
TWThF
04:59
A
US Airways
358
A319
—
T
PHX MSP
05:00
A
Sun Country
290
B738
M
ThSu
SEA MSP
05:04
A
FedEx
1718
MD11
M
MFSSu
05:15 —5
—A
UPS
560
MD11
M
TWThF
--MTWThFSSu
05:20
D
Delta
5619
CRJ
M
MSP ATL
05:20
05:20
05:20
05.20
05:30
05:30
A
D
A
D
A
D
Sun Country
Delta
Sun Country
US Airways
Sun Country
Continental
422
717
410
3490
398
2017
8738
MD80
8738
E170
B738
E145
M
M
M
M
M
M
MTWThFSSu
TThSSu
MTWThFS
MF
TVVThFS
LAX MSP
MSP ATL NAS
LAX MSP
MSP PHL
SFO MSP
MSP IAH
05:33
A
Northwest
166
B757
M
VVThFSSu
SEA MSP
--6-57-38
A
Northwest
596
8757
M
MTWThFSSu
PDX MSP
T5-:3 —9
05:40
05A0
A
D
D
—FedEx
Midwest Airlines
Continental
1407
1620
2042
MD11
E170
E145
M
M
M
MTFSSu
MTWThFS
WThFS
MSP MKE DCA
MSP IAH GDL
05:43
D
American
4092
CRJ
M
MTWThFSSu
MSP ORD
–65-4-9
A
Northwest
98
DC10
M
MTWThFSSu
HNL MSP
6-5-5-0
05:50
—A
A
Sun —Country
Sun Country
398
110
B738
B737
M
M
MTWThFSSu
M
SFO MSP
LAS MSP
05:50
A
Sun Country
110
B738
M
FS
LAS MSP
05:52—
—A
Northwest
774
8757
M
MTWThFSSu
LAS MSP LGA
05:52
05:54
A
A
UPS
Northwest
496
864
B757
B757
M
M
S
MTWThFSSu
FAI MSP BOS
05:56
A
Delta
1244
8757
M
MTWThFSSu
FAI MSP
05:57
A
Northwest
844
8753
M
—MTWThFSSu
ANC MSP
05:58
—A
Northwest
154
8753
M
MTWThFSSu
SEA MSP
05:59
A
Delta
1081
B753
M
MTWThFSSu
ANC MSP
Report Generated: 07/0912010 09:32
June 2010 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type
10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Total Nighttime Jet
Operations by Hour
Airline
ID
Stage
Type
Count
Air Transport Intl
ATN
3
DC8Q
32
Airtran
TRS
3
B717
8
Airtran
TRS
3
�
11�
Airline
ID
Stage
Type
Count
Air Transport Intl
ATN
3
DC8Q
32
Airtran
TRS
3
B717
8
Airtran
TRS
3
B7377
26
America West
AWE
3
A320
25
America West
AWE
3
A321
30
American
AAL
3
B738
17
American
AAL
3
MD80
24
American Eagle
EGF
3
CRJ
25
Compass
CPZ
3
E170
59
Delta
DAL
3
A330
10
Delta
DAL
3
MD80
31
Delta
DAL
3
DC9Q
40
Delta
DAL
3
A319
53
Delta
DAL
3
B738
59
Delta
DAL
3
MD90
69
Delta
DAL
3
A320
115
Delta
DAL
3
B757
143
FedEx
FDX
3
B72Q
5
FedEx
FDX
3
MD11
15
FedEx
FDX
3
DC10
25
Mesaba
MES
3
CRJ
51
Pinnacle
FLG
3
CRJ
56
Republic Airlines
RPA
3
E190
2
Republic Airlines
RPA
3
E170
41
Southwest
SWA
3
B735
1
Southwest
SWA
3
8733
17
Southwest
SWA
3
B7377
23
Sun Country
SCX
3
MD80
1
Sun Country
SCX
3
B7377
36
Sun Country
SCX
3
B738
94
UPS
UPS
3
MD11
16
UPS
UPS
3
8757
35
United
UAL
3
A319
6
United
UAL
3
A320
50
TOTAL
1240
Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 91.2% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations.
-12- Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
200
ISO
160
140
120
0 100
4-
80
60
z
40
20
0
June 2010 Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations Mix for Top 15 Airlines
10:30 D.m. to 6:00 a.m.
11 <1 LO 4 Lr-) <> w) O U-) <> w') <> W") d— O— - - (— — :�� �4 Z'7 CO Z5 -�4 Z,5
tt T! C2 �t R n �t .. .. ..
" " " 2 M C") 4; t�;
cli <> <5
"
Time
June 2010 Nighttime Carrier Jet Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines
in zn m +n r,.nn a m
[E] DAL
SCX
El CPZ
UAL
FLG
AWE
N UPS
NES
FDX
RPA
SWA
F-1. TRS
El ATN
EGF
Airline
Stage 2
Stage 3
Manufactured
Stage 3
Total
Delta (DAL)
0
40
480
520
Sun Country (SCX)
0
0
131
131
Compass (CPZ)
0
0
59
59
United (UAL)
0
0
56
56
Pinnacle (FLG)
0
0
56
56
America West (AWE)
0
0
55 --
55
UPS (UPS)
0
0
51
51
...
Mesaba (MES)
0
0
51
51
FedEx (FDX)
0
5
40
45
Republic Airlines (RPA)
0
0
43
43
Southwest (SWA)
0
0
41
41
American (AAL)
0
0
41
41
Airtran (TRS)
0
0
34
34
Air Transport Intl (ATN)
0
0
32
32
American Eagle (EGF)
0
0
25
25
Other
0
2
117
119
Total
0
47
1312
1359
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
-13-
MSP International Airport
Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations
@ Remote Monitoring Tower
- 18 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Time Above dB Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events
June 2010
RMT
ID
1
city
Minneapolis
Address
Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
Time >=
65dB
7— _7
—.3T.53
T4
Time >=
80dB --6
6-0:0039
-O
Time >=
90dB
0,00.00
Time >=
100dB
00:00:00--
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
T6713-13
b 0 �81 6
0
00:00:00--
3
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
16:28:26
00:41:19
00:00:09
00:00:00
4
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
15:33:30
--
00:15:56
00:00:05
00:00:00
5
6
Minneapolis
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
25th Ave. & 57th St.
16733:03
15:22:58 --0
7--
03.33.37
2--00:03.49
.49:00
00702.29
—00:00:02
--
00:00:00
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
21-17
00:00:10
60 �0000
00:00:00
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
00:14:42
00:00:03
00:00:00
00:00:00
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
00:00:25
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
00:00:52
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
00:00.43
0:00:00
0
00:00:00
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
00:01:41
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
00:07:40
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
14
Eagan
I st St. & McKee St.
19:42:37
00:00:17
00:00:00
00:00:00
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
00:25:55
--7—
—16.47:00
nO-00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
16
17
Eagan
Bloomington
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
84th St. & 4th Ave.
3
.1 6
00:02:16
0�
—00:00:01
00:41:32
00:00:17
—
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
00:32:19
00:00:02
00:00:00
00:00:00
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
00:15:25
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
20
Richfield
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
00:00:33
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
—6-0:-12.27
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
11:58:07
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
01:58:25
00:01:16
00:00:00
00:00:00
24
25
26
Eagan
Eagan
Inver Grove Heights
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
18:58:39
00:52:39
01:54:58
00:00:23
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
27
28
Minneapolis
Richfield
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
6645 16th Ave. S.
00:13:22
03:21:31
00:00:13
00:01:14
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S.
00-:03:17
00:00:21
00:00:00
00:00:00
—00:00:00
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
04:11:02
00:00:27
007000-0
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
00:01:36
-
00:00:00
00:00:00
-
00:00:00
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S. .
..... 00:00:42
00:00:00
6-0
:00:00 --
00:00:00
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
0 - �O2.1 T
00:00:08
00:00:00
00:00:00
34
Burnsville
---60.14-.43
0.00:00
0700.00
00:00:00
35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
07:54:15
00:00:03
-00:00:14
00:00:00
00:00:00
36
37
Apple Valley
Eagan
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
14:41:50
--
00:03:29
00:00:14
00:00:00
00:00:00
—6-0.0-0:00
—
00:00:00
--60--700 —00
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
00:01:42
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
39
Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl.
Total Time for Arrival Noise Events
00:00:55
200:08:22
00:00:00
1 08:15:27
00:00:
1 00:06:33
:00
1 00:00:02
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32 -19-
Time Above Threshold dB for Departure Related Noise Events
June 2010
RMT
ID
City
Address
Time >=
65dIB
Time >=
80d1B
Time >=
60d1B
Time >=
100dB
I
Minneapolis
Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
04:47:04
00:00:28
00:00:00
00:00:00
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
06:05:15
00:02:21
00:00:00
00:00:00
3
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
12:53:33
00:14:25
00:00:31
00:00:00
4
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
16:59:13
00:34:13
00:01:33
00:00:00
5
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
40:10:27
04:24:35
00:28:43
00:00:01
6
Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
46:37:56
07:16:38
00:58:35
00:01:01
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
19:13:20
00:26:17
00:00:31
00:00:00
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
15:59:54
00:28:18
00:00:42
00:00:00
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
00:08:42
00:01:02
00:00:00
00:00:00
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
00:09:03
00:02:38
00:01:06
00:00:00
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
00:08:24
00:01:43
00:00:03
00:00:00
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
00:07:52
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
06:31:00
00:01:56
00:00:00
00:00:00
14
Eagan
I st St. & McKee St.
08:13:47
00:13:18
00:00:00
00:00:00
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
08:19:58
00:04:51
00:00:03
00:00:00
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
08:42:42
00:46:28
00:06:09
00:00:00
17
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
00:22:27
00:05:36
00:01:19
00:00:00
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
09:24:06
00:10:20
00:02:50
00:00:00
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
05:31:21
00:04:15
00:00:05
00:00:00
20
Richfield
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
00:30:51
00:00:17
00:00:00
00:00:00
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
02:42:11
00:00:15
00:00:00
00:00:00
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
02:07:29
00:00:05
00:00:00
00:00:00
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
14:11:01
00:35:01
00:02:06
00:00:00
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
05:23:48
1 00:02:21
00:00:00
00:00:00
25
Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
06:40:26
00:00:24
00:00:00
00:00:00
26
Inver Grove Heights
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
04:21:35
00:00:49
00:00:00
00:00:00
27
Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
12:46:02
00:14:09
00:00:02
00:00:00
28
Richfield
6645 16th Ave. S.
17:36:33
00:11:02
00:00:04
00:00:00
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S.
05:43:24 1
00-.02:19
00:00:00
00:00:00
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
17:41:29
01:06:04
00:02:36
00:00:00
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
01:05:14
00:00:31
00:00:02
00:00:00
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
00:25:19
00:00:00
00:00:00
00:00:00
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
02:02:28
00:00:15
00:00:00
00:00:00
34
Burnsville
Red Oak Park
00:38:31
00:00:06
00:00:00
00:00:00
.35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
02:30:53
00:01:57
00:00:00
00:00:00
36
Apple Valley
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
01:04:15
00:00:25
00:00:00
00:00:00
37
Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
01:45:25
00:00:27
00:00:00
00:00:00
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
03:53:36
00:03:02
00:00:00
00:00:00
39
Eagan
3 477 St. Charles Pl.
1 05:02:26
00:05:19
00:00:00
00:00:00
Total Time for Departure Noise Events
1318:39:00 1
17:24:10 ,
01:47:00
00:01:02
- 20 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Arrival Related Noise Events
June 2010
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
—Tr—rival
--Arrival
7Arrival
—Arrival
RMT
Events >=
Events >=
Events >=
Events >=
ID
city
Address
65dIB
80d1B
90d1B
100dB
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. --3672
9
0
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.3487
142
0
0--
3
-----7---
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
3348
----
577
2
0
4
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
3551
227
2
0
5
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
3411--2619
61
0---
6
Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
3394
2834
119
1
7
:field
Rich
Wentworth Ave
91
----
2
0
0
8—
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.—
59
1
0
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
1
0
0
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
0
0
0
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheller Ave.
--3
2
0
0
--
0
12
St. Paul
Rockwood Ave.
6
0
0
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
30
0
0
0
14
Eagan
1 st St. & McKee St.
4778
13
0
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
94
0
0
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
3626
543
1
0
17
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
8
2
0
0
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
143
4
0
0
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
53
0
0
0
20
Richfield
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
2
0
0
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
39
0
0
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
2970
0
0
0
23
--Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
453
12
0
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
4641
10
0
0
25
Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
197
0
0
0----
26
Inver Grove Heights
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
436
0
0
0
27
Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
49
4
0
0
—
28
Richfield
6645 16th Ave. S.
660
34
0
0
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson EIbm. School 4315 31st Ave, S.
8
1
0
0
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
1224
5
0
0
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
6
0
0
0
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
3
0
0
0
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
8
1
0
0
34
Burnsville
Red Oak Park
56
0
0
0
35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
2171
2
0
0
36
Apple Valley
Briar Oaks& Scout Pond
3140
7
0
0----
37
Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
--15
0
0
0
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
6
0
0
0
39
Eagan
I3477 St. Charles PI.4
0
0
0---
Total Arrival Noise Events
45845
7049
185
1
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Departure Related Noise Events
June 2010
RMT
ID
city
Address
Departure
Events >—
65dB
Departure
Events >=
80d1B
Departure
Events >=
90d1B
Departure
Events >=
100dB
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St.
988
9
0
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
1264
28
0
0
3
Minneapolis
West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
2430
138
6
0
4
Minneapolis
Park Ave. & 48th St.
3149
305
26
0
5
Minneapolis
12th Ave. & 58th St.
6341
1976
289
1
6
Minneapolis
25th Ave. & 57th St.
8011
3204
455
36
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
3240
286
9
0
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
2834
242
10
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
23
7
0
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
22
10
9
0
11
St. Paul
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
21
7
1
0
12
St. Paul
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
27
0
0
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
1345
25
0
0
14
Eagan
I st St. & McKee St.
1450
134
0
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
1576
62
1
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln.
1405
302
68
0
17
Bloomington
84th St. & 4th Ave.
55
24
15
0
18
Richfield
75th St. & 17th Ave.
1912
108
23
0
19
Bloomington
16th Ave. & 84th St.
1040
49
2
0
20
Richfield
75th St. & 3rd Ave.
85
3
0
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
655
5
0
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
426
6
0
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Ave.
2353
345
28
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
991
41
0
0
25
Eagan
Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd.
974
6
0
0
26
Inver Grove Heights
6796 Arkansas Ave. W.
945
14
0
0
27
Minneapolis
Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S.
2463
182
2
0
28
Richfield
6645 16th Ave. S.
3200
196
1
0
29
Minneapolis
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S.
1143
26
0
0
30
Bloomington
8715 River Ridge Rd.
2896
409
36
0
31
Bloomington
9501 12th Ave. S.
250
3
1
0
32
Bloomington
10325 Pleasant Ave. S.
100
0
0
0
33
Burnsville
North River Hills Park
417
5
0
0
34
Burnsville
Red Oak Park
136
2
0
0
35
Eagan
2100 Garnet Ln.
522
24
0
0
36
Apple Valley
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond
229
6
0
0
37
Eagan
4399 Woodgate Ln. N.
376
9
0
0
38
Eagan
3957 Turquoise Cir.
740
38
0
0
39
Eagan
3477 St. Charles Pl.
1004
68
0
0
Total Departure Noise Events
57038
8304
982 1
37
- 22 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#1)
Y,nrv,zQ Am= A 41st St Minneapolis
,Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/08/201013:35
DAL1482
B757
A
12R
85.6
06/13/201019:10
SCX255
MD80
D
30L
84.4
06/04/2010 0:07
AAL1284—
MD80
A
12R
83.6
06/22/201015:03
DAL247
A330
A
12R
82.8
06/22/201018:02
DAL2156
DC9Q
A
12R
82.8
06/26/2010 20:19
DAL2,136
DC9Q
A
12R
82.7
06/10/201018:36
DAL2156
DC9Q
A
12R
82.4
06/19/201019:32
DAL2174
DC9Q
D
30L
81.8
06/23/201010:54
N7000C
CL30
D
30L
81.7
06/19/201018:01
DALI 832
DC9Q
D
30L
81...6
(RMT Site#2)
C: or"r%n+ Atign A AIrri of hilinnpRnnlis
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/.
Departure.
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/08/2010 E:-03
DAL2976
DC9Q
A
12L
89.3
06/29/201019:25
DAU 596
MD80
D
30R
89
06/20/2010 13:37
DAL2819
DC9Q
A
12L
87.1
06/07/201013:28
FAST12
UKN
A
12L
86.7
06/02/2010 7:46 .
DAL2900
DC9Q
D
30L
86.5
06/08/201012:05
DAL2873
DC9Q
A
12L
86.4
06117/2010 5:06
UPS560
MD1 I
A
12L
86
06/01/201014:05
DAL2819
DC9Q
A
12L
85.8
06/11/2010 9:16
DAL2341
DC9Q
A
12L
85.8
06/07/201013:25
FA T1 3
UKN
A
12L
85.8
(KIVI I bile?T'5)
Winc+ f=IMXAir)r)rI qt A Rplmnnt AvP - MinneaDOUS
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure,
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/07/201012:57
DAL2973
B757
A
12R
96.2
06/26/2010 23:08
DAU 870
DC9Q
D
30L
95.1
06/13/201014:06
DUKE1 1
UKN
D
30L
94.9
06/08/201013:36
DAL1482
8757
A
12R
94.8
06/27/201012:26
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
30L
92.7
06/21/201019:44
DAL2156
DC9Q
D
30L
91.9
06/12/201015:49
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30L
90.9
06/18/201017:17
DALI 137
DC9Q
D
30L
90.7
06/08/201012:39
AAL450
MD80
A
12R
89.6
06/04/201010:27
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
30L
89
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
-23-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#4)
Park Ave. & 48th St., Minneapolis
Date/Time
Flight Number.
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure.
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/16/201016:15
DAL1274
DC9Q
D
30L
94.7
06/17/201012:01
DAL2873
DC9Q
A
12L
94.1
06/26/2010 21:32
DAL2107
DC9Q
D
30L
93.3
06/03/201015:38
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30R
93.1
06/15/201013:41
DAL2407
DC9Q
D
30L
92.8
06/29/201015:02
DAL1 644
DC9Q
D
30L
92.7
06/18/201013:44
DAL2407
DC9Q
D
30L
92.4
06/02/201010:23
DAL2918
DC9Q
D
30L
92
06/29/201018:23
DAL1274
DC9Q
D
30L
—92
:::�
06/05/201014:47
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30R
9 1 .9
(RMT Site#5)
12th Ave. & 58th St., Minneapolis
Dat.e[Time,
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
.Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/11/201013:58
DAL2144
DC9Q
D
30L
100.1
06/13/201014:06
DUKEI 1
UKN
D
30L
99.8
06/26/2010 23:07
DALI 870
DC9Q
D
30L
99.8
06/23/201011:12
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
30L
99.5
06/13/201011:16
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
30L
99.1
06/12/201015:48
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30L
99
06/02/2010 7:41
DAL2853
DC9Q
D
30L
98.7
06/15/201012:12
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
30L
98.5
06/28/201011:19
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
30L
98.4
06/13/201010:30
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
30L
98.4
(RMT Site#6)
25th Ave. & 57th St., Minneapolis
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/03/201015:37
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
30R
103.4
06/13/2010 20:02
DAU 870
DC9Q
D
30R
102.6
06/18/201016:05
DAL2870
DC9Q
D
30R
102.5
06/18/2010 7:40
DAL2658
DC9Q
D
30R
102.5
06/06/201014:59
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30R
102.4
06/27/201015:13
DAL2834
DC9Q
D
30R
102.1
06/17/201016:37
DAL2420
DC9Q
A
12L
101.7
06/03/201014:49
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30R
101.4
06/16/201016:01
DALI 644
DC9Q
D
30R
101.4
06/01/201019:23
DAL2608
DC9Q
D
30R
101.2
- 24 - Report Generated: 07109/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#7)
Wentworth Ave. & 64th St., Richfield
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
ZDC9Q
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
—
06/02/2010 7:48
DAL2268
DC9Q
D
30L
94.5
06/23/201010:13
DAL2390
DC9Q
D
30L
92.9
06/07/201010:49
DAL2897
DC9Q
D
36L
92.8
06/15/201014:18
DAL2144
DC9Q
D
30L
91.6
06/13/2010 9:42
DAL2813
DC9Q
D
30L
91
06/27/201013:36
DAL2167
DC9Q
D
30L
91
06/12/2010 19:13
DAL721
MD80
D
30L
90.9
06/28/201019:28 .
DAU 137
DC9Q
D
30L
90.6
06/19/201015:49
DAL1665
DC9Q
D
30L
90.4
06/28/201016:28
DAU 620
MD80
D
30L
89.9
(RMT Site#8)
Lonafellow Ave. & 43rd St., Minneapolis
Date/Time
ber
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/13/2010 20:02
DAU 870
DC9Q
D
30R
93
06/13/201013:43
DAU 314
DC9Q
D
30R
92.9
06/14/2010 7:23
DAL2658
DC9Q
D
30R
92.2
06/15/2010 21:45
DAL9834
DC9Q
D
30R
91.7
06/12/2010 21:50
DAL2798
DC9Q
D
30R
91.5
06/28/201019:46
DALI 870
DC9Q
D
30R
91.3
06/09/201014:42
DAL2760
DC9Q
D
30R
91.2
06/16/2010 20:53
DAL2919
DC9Q
D
30R
91
06/19/201017:42
DAL2296
MD80
D
30R
90.8
06/19/201019:59
DALI 870
DC9Q
D
30R
90.4
(RMT Site#9)
Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave., St. Paul
Date/Time
Flight Number
—Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/10/201015:55
DAL619
8744
D
04
88.5
06/02/201015:50
DAL619
B744
D
04
88.1
06/14/201016:42
DAL619
8744
D
04
85.5
06/26/201015:31
DAL619
B744
D
04
83.3
06/23/2010 15:46
DAL619
B744
D
04
83
06/13/201015:43
DAL619
B744
D
04
80.5
06/28/201016:06
DAL619
D
04
80
06/05/201015:52
DAL619
_8744
8744
D
04
79.6
06/21/201019:52
BMJ47
BE65
A
30R
78.2
06/15/2010 7:45
BMJ54
BE65
D
12L
77
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32 -25-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#1 0)
Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.. St. Paul
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/23/201015:45
DAL619
8744
D
04
99.9
06/02/201015:49
DAL619
B744
D
04
99.2
06/10/201015:54
DAL619
8744
D
04
98.4
06/13/201015:43
DAL619
8744
D
04
98
06/05/201015:52
DAL619
B744
D
04
97.9
06/28/201016:06
DAL619
B744
D
04
97.7
06/26/201015:30
DAL619
B744
D
04
97.6
06/14/201016:42
DAL619
B744
D
04
97.4
06/12/201016:07
DAL619
8744
D
04
91
06/29/2010 20:16
DAU 944
DC9Q
D
04
89
(RMT Site#1 1)
Finn St. & Scheffer Ave., St. Paul
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type;
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/05/201015:52
DAL619
8744
D
04
91.6
06/28/201016:06
DAL619
8744
D
04
89.3
06/13/201015:43
DAL619
B744
D
04
89.2
06/12/201016:07
DAL619
B744
D
04
89.2
06/10/201015:54
DAL619
8744
D
04
86.1
06/14/201016:42
DAL619
8744
D
04
85.5
06/26/201015:31
DAL619
8744
D
04
81.8
06/02/201015:50
DAL619
B744
D
04
79.4
06/29/2010 20:16
DALI 944
DC9Q
D
04
78.9
06/29/2010 7:36
BMJ48
BE65
D
30R
77.9
(KMT Site#12)
Alton St. & Rockwood Ave., St. Paul
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/17/2010 6:43
BMJ44
BE80
D
12L
79.8
06/12/201018:25
DAL2784
DC9Q
A
30R
79
06/11/2010 7:39
BMJ68
BE99
D
12L
78.7
06/1 7/201 0 6:45
BMJ62
BE65
D
12L
77.5
06/17/2010 6:47
BMJ72
BE65
D
12L
76.8
06/26/2010 23:49
DAL2422
A320
D
12L
76.8
06/26/2010 23:27
DAL2158
A319
D
12L
76.7
06117/2010 6:40
BMJ54
BE65
D
12L
75
06/15/2010 8:04
BMJ44
BE80
D
12R
73.5
06/25/2010 21:31
DAL1456
A320
D
17
72.9
- 26 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#1 3)
czniifh.,zn(zf canri of Mnhinnn (.nijrt- Mendota Heiahts
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/.
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/12/201013:21
DAL2201
MD80
D
12L
85.4
06/20/201014:38
ATU 797
MD80
D
12L
84.7
06/25/201011:31
DAL30
MD80
D
12L
84.3
06/14/201018:13
DAL2064
MD80
D
12L
83.3
06/17/2010 22:52
DAU 596
MD80
D
12L
83.3
06/12/201010:23
DAL30
MD80
D
121
82.8
06/21/2010 21:23
DA Ll 870
DC9Q
D
12L
82.5
06/10/201019:54
DAL29-19
DC9Q
D
12L
82.4
06/10/2010 9:57
DAL2435
MD80
D
12L
82.4
06/10/201012:26
DAL2132
MD80
D I
1.2L
82.3
(RMT Site#14)
lczf.O,t 9 hAr.KPP St-- Faaan
Daie/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/26/201011:44
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
12R
89.8
06/26/2010 5:33
DAL717
MD80
D
12R
87.9
06/17/201011:46
DAL2218
DC9Q
D
12R
87.8
06/14/201017:45
DAU 137
DC9Q
D
12R
87.8
06/14/201010:17
DAL2390
DC9Q
D
12R
87.6
—
06/14/201011:05
AAL1683
MD80
D
12L
87.2
06/14/2010 5:33
DAL717
MD80
D
12R
86.9
--06—/21/2010 5:31
DAL717
MD80
D
12 " R
86.7
06/20/201011:27
D;�L2330
DC9Q
D
12R
86.7
06/20/201013:09
DAL2201
—MD80
D
12L
86.6
(Nivi i oae7T 10)
ridlnn -(Zf A I z3vinntnn AN/t- Mendota Heiahts
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/17/2010 20:19
DAL2152
—DC9Q
D
12L
91.4
06/24/2010 21:48
DAL2798
DC9Q
D
12L
89.4
06/21/201010:22
DAL2096
MD80
D
12L
88.6
06/17/201018:09
DAL2296
MD80
D
12L
86.4
06/20/201014:38
AAL1 797
MD80
D
12L
86.1
06/25/201019:59
DAL2296
MD80
D
12L
86
06/17/2010 22:42
UPS559
MD11
D
12R
85.9
06/12/201013:21
DAL2201
MD80
D
12L
85.4
06/17/2010 22:52
DALI 596
MD80
D
12L
85.3
06/17/2010 20:39
DAL2919
DC9Q
D I
12R .—
85.2
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32 -27-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#16)
Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln., Eagan
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/18/201011:39
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
95.5
06/21/201013:38
DAL2144
DC9Q
D
12R
95
06/21/2010 7:12
DAL2897
DC9Q
D
12R
94.7
06/21/201016:28
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
94.6
06/14/201015:55
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
94.4
06/26/201011:49
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
94.2
06/01/201011:02
DAU 132
DC9Q
D
12R
93.9
06/11/201012:09
DAL2457
DC9Q
D
12R
93.9
06/25/201011:38
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
93.8
06/21/201018:10
DAL2207
DC9Q
D
12R
93.8
(RMT Site#1 7)
84th St. & 4th Ave., Bloominqton
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/.
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/11/201015:40
DAL619
B744
D
22
95.9
06/03/201015:57
DAL619
B744
D
22
95.7
06/22/201016:12
DAL619
8744
D
22
95.4
06/30/201019:22
DAL619
8744
D
22
94.2
06/29/201015:47
DAL619
8744
D
22
93.9
06/27/201015:40
DAL619
B744
D
22
93.9
06/16/201016:09
DAL619
B744
D
22
93.7
06/20/201016:11
DAL619
B744
D
22
93.5
06/06/201015:33
DAL619 _T
B744
D
22
92.9
06/07/201015:47
DAL619 I
8744
D
22
92.2
(RMT Site#1 8)
75th St. & 17th Ave., Richfield
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/.
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/22/201016:12
DAL619
8744
D
22
99.7
06/01/201015:51
DAL619
8744
D
22
99.5
06/07/201015:46
DAL619
B744
D
22
99.5
06/17/201016:01
DAL619
B744
D
22
98.7
06/30/201019:22
DAL619
B744
D
22
98.6
06/03/201015:57
DAL619
B744
D
22
98.3
06/15/201015:38
DAL619
8744
D
22
98.1
06/16/201016:09
DAL619
B744
D
22
98
06/20/201016:11
DAL619
8744
D
22
97.8
06/19/201019:39
DAL619A
B744
D
22
97.7
- 28 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#1 9)
16th Ave. & 84th St., Bloominqton
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/17/201016:01
DAL619
B744
D
22
90.8
06/25/201015:34
DAL619
B744
D
22
90.1
06/21/201016:11
DAL619
B744
D
22
85.4
06/15/201015:38
DAL619
8744
D
22
85.4
06/18/201016:04
DAL619
B744
D
22
85.2
06/11/201015:40
DAL619
8744
D
22
84.8
06/04/201015:58.
DAL619-
8744
D
22
84.6
06/16/201016:09
DAL619
B744
D
22
84.5
06/06/201015:33
DAL619
B744
D
22
84.3
06/03/201015:57
DAL619
B744
D
22
84.1
(RMT Site#20)
75th St. & 3rd Ave., Richfield
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure -
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/08/2010 16:21
DAL619
B744
D
22
84.1
06/01/2010 20:25
DAL9801
DC9Q
D
22
81.5
06/18/201016:04
DAL619
8744
D
22
80.2
06/30/201019:22
DAL619
B744
D
22
79.2
06/04/201015:58
DAL619
8744
D
22
79.1
06/17/201016:01
DAL619
B744
D
22
79.1
06/27/2010 7:06
DAL2513
A320
D
30L
78.7
06/29/201015:47
DAL619
8744
D
22
78.5
06/20/201016:11
DAL619
8744
D
22
78.3
06/03/2010 6:08
SWA459
8733
D
30L
78.2
(RMT Site#21)
Rnrhara Ave. & 67th St.. Inver Grove Heights
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
-
06/21/201017:53
DAL2296
MD80
D
12L
81.8
06/25/201011:32
DAL30
MD80
D
12L
81.3
06/14/201014:28
DAL2201
MD80
D
12L
81.2
06/10/2010 9:58
DAL2435
MD80
D
12L
80.9
06/22/201019:50
DAL2919
DC9Q
D
12L
80.1
06/10/2010 19:54
DAL2919
DC9Q
D
12L
79.9
06/14/201010:19
DAL2096
MD80
D
12L
79.7
06/21/201018:07
DAL9831
DC9Q
D
12L
79.3
06/17/201013:15
DAL2407
DC9Q
D
12R
79.3
06/17/201015:41
DAL1 552
DC9Q
D
12L
79.1
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32 -29-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#22)
Anne Marie Trail. Inver Grove Heiahts
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/20/2010 13:10
DAL2201
MD80
-
D
12L
82
06/20/201011:06
AAL1683
MD80
D
12R
80.7
06/14/2010 9:21
DAL2790
DC9Q
D
12L
80.6
06/30/201012:58
DAL2869
DC9Q
D
12R
80.6
06/17/201017:44
DAL2207
DC9Q
D
12R
80.5
06/10/201016:37
DAL1620
MD80
D
12R
80.1
06/20/201013:46
DAL2144
DC9Q
D
12R
79.5
06/10/201011:39
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
79.4
06/14/201017:46
DAL1 137
DC9Q
D
12R
79.3
06/30/201019:15
DAL721
MD80
D
12R
79.1
(RMT Site#23)
End of Kenndon Ave.. Mendota Heiahts
Date/Time
Flight Number.
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/21/2010 21:22
DALI 870
DC9Q
D
12L
95.1
06/25/201017:51
DAL1832
DC9Q
D
12L
94.1
06/01/2010 9:23
DAL2913
DC9Q
D
12L
94
06/19/2010 21:54
DAL2798
DC9Q
D
12L
94
06/20/201015:36
DAU 552
DC9Q
D
12L
93.1
06/17/2010 20:39
DAL2919
DC9Q
D
12R
92.6
06/14/2010 20:22
DAL2919
DC9Q
D
12L
92.5
06/17/201015:39
DAU 552
DC9Q
D
12L
92.3
06/07/2010 20:53
DAL2770
DC9Q
D
12L
92.3
06/24/2010 21:48
DAL2798
DC9Q
D
12L
92.2
(RMT Site#24)
ChaDel Ln. & Wren Ln.. Eaaan
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/16/201010:06
DAL9861
DC9Q
A
30L
85.5
06/21/2010 5:32
DAL717
MD80
D
12R
85.1
06/12/201013:35
DAL2700
MD90
D
12L
84.5
06/17/2010 6:05
DAL717
MD80
D
12R
84.3
06/09/2010 7:38
DAL2790
DC9Q
A
30L
83.4
06/22/201015:43
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
12R
83.3
06/18/201011:40
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
83.3
06/11/2010 7:58
DAL2853
DC9Q
D
12R
83
06/14/201014:09
DAL2661
DC9Q
D
12R
82.9
06/14/201016:52
DAL1620
MD80
D
12R
82.8
- 30 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#25)
DnrL-lq*?l Iiirrl%/Rri Fnnnn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/07/201014:50
---F7AST1 3
UKN
D
12R
89.5
06/12/201013:48
DAL2661
DC9Q
D
12R
82.4
06/26/201011:49
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
81.5
—
06/14/201011:15
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
12R
80.8
06/14/201010:21
DAL1 132
DC9Q
D
12R
80.2
-
06/24/201015:15
DAU 644
DC9Q
D
12R
80.1
06/07/201014:51
FAST12
UKN
D
12R
79.6
06/11/201011:03
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
12R
79.6
06/14/2010 11:20
j DAL2766
DC9Q
D
1 ZR
79.5
06/26/201010:37
1 DAL2918
DC9Q
D
12R
78.7
(RMT Site#26)
a A I —n Axin XAI In%/tmrrrr)%/p Hpights
'Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/21/201011:22
DAL1 564
MD80
D
12R
83.3
06/16/2010 23:44
DAL2901
MD80
D
12L
83
06/10/2010 23:11
DAL2798
DC9Q
D
12R
82.5
06/22/201018:07
DAL2296
MD80
D
12R
81.4
06/14/201010:19
DAL2096
MD80
D
121
81.3
06/21/201017:52
DAL2296
MD80
D
12L
81.3
06/17/201014:03
DAL2201
MD80
D
12L
80.9
06/14/201017:54
—
DAL9802
DC9Q
D
12L
80.8
06/14/201013:16
—
AALI 120
MD80
D
12L
80.7
06/17/201013:15
DAL2407
DC9Q
— - -- —
D
--I
12R
80.6
kKIVI I 01tufl-zi)
r,7r,7 Irwinn AVP q Minnpnnnlis
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
v Arrival/,
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/05/201015:03
DAU 781
MD80
D
30L
90.2
06/29/201016:32
DALI 620
MD80
D
30L
90.1
06/05/2010 3:17
DAL2487
MD80
D
30L
89.4
12:07
BEAR71
UKN
D
301 —
88.9
06/19/201019:45
DA7721MD80
D
30L
88.8
06/11/201014:10
AAL1 220
MD80
D
30L
88
06/04/201013:53
DALI 934
MD80
D
30L —
87.7
06/15/2010 0-21
DAL1620
MD80
D
30L
87.6
06/29/2010 5:29
DAL717
MD80
D
30R
87.2
06/13/201011:29
AAL1 683
MD80
D
30L
87.1
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
-31-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#28)
6645 16th Ave- S-- Rinhfiplri
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/09/2010 7:07
DAL2853
DC9Q
D
30L
93.4
06/19/201013:15
DAL2167
DC9Q
D
30L
88.3
06/01/201010:22
DAU 009
MD90
D
17
88
06/13/201016:08
DAL1017
DC9Q
D
30L
87.1
06/28/201010:46
DAU 508
MD90
A
35
86.1
06/08/201014:07
DAL2614
DC9Q
D
17
85.8
06/05/201013:24
DAU 226
DC9Q
D
30L
85.6
06/23/201013:24
DAL2167 I
DC9Q
D
30L
85.6
1 06/10/2010 7:38
DAL2658
DC9Q
D
17
85.4
1 06/23/2010 9:33
DAL2813 I
DC9Q
D
30L
85.2
(RMT Site#29)
Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31qtAvp- R Minnpnnnii.q
'Date/Time.
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/25/201010:13
DAL2457
DC9Q
A
30R
87.5
06/12/201016:22
DAL2870
DC9Q
D
30R
87.4
06/16/201014:36
AAL1 797
MD80
D
30R
86.5
06/19/201014:41
AALI 797
MD80
D
30R
86.5
06/23/201015:48
AAL1797
MD80
D
30R
85.4
06/28/201017:36
DAL2834
DC9Q
D
30R
85.4
06/27/201011:48
DAL9821
DC9Q
D
30R
85
06/13/2010 7:23
DAL2658
DC9Q
D
30R
84.9
06/25/2010 7:44
BMJ48
BE65
D
30R
83.9
06/15/201011:41
AALI 120
MD80
D
30R
83.8
(Vivi i z5itei;m)
8715 River Ridae Rd.. Bloorninaton
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure,
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/12/201011:40
DAL2457
DC9Q
D
17
94.7
06/26/201015:16
DAL1665
DC9Q
D
17
94.4
06/14/201015:50
DAL1017
DC9Q
D
17
94.1
06/14/201019:48
DAU 870
DC9Q
D
17
93.7
06/10/201015:50
DAL1017
DC9Q
D
17
93.5
06/14/2010 20:01
DAL2156
DC9Q
D
17
93.4
06/14/201019:43
DAL2784
DC9Q
D
17
93
06/15/2010 9:50
DAL2790
DC9Q
D
17
92.4
06/08/201016:18
DAL9818
DC9Q
D
17
92.3
06/26/201015:43
DAL1017
DC9Q
D
17
92.1
- 32 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#31)
nr-n4 -10+k Ait,= Q Pinnminntr)n
Date/Time
Flight Number vV
Aircraft Type
Arrival/ v
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/21/2010 16:12
DAL619
B744
D
22
90.6A
06/25/201015:34
DAL619
8744
D
22
86.281.1
06/17/201016:01
DAL619
B744
D
22
77.7
06/21/201014:06
---6A L 12 7-4
DC9Q
A
30L
79.8
06/10/2010 20:03
DAL41
B738
D
17
78.5
06/07/201015:47
DAL619
B744
D
22
77.9
06/27/2010 7:28
SCX401
67377
D
17
77.7
—66—/10/2010 5:58
DAL9933
MD80
D
17
77.2
06/26/201014:15
FLG-9-15A
CRJ
D
17
77
06/21/201011:51
—DAL1 712
A320
P
17
76.7
(RMT Site#32)
,lr)o,)r- Axir:k -q PInnminntnn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure_
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/16/2010 E:-34
ATN808
DC8Q
D
17
79.5
06/27/2010 7:16
DAL1 851
A320
D
17
77.
06/22/201016:13
DAL619
8744
D
22
77.7
06/24/2010 5:43
DAL717
MD80
D
30L
76.9
06/18/201015:33
DAL2834
DC9Q
D
30L
76.2
06/08/201016:19
DAL9818
DC9Q
D
17
75.6
06/07/201015:47
DAL619
B744
D
22
75.6
06/15/201014:53
DAL2799
A320
D
17
74.6
06/30/201019:23
DAL619
8744
D
22
74.5
06/1 5/201 0 12:14
DAL2330
DC9Q
D
30L
74.5
kMIVI I C)Ittlff-00)
KI r+In Pi%inr I4HIQ Park- Rijrn-qvillp
Date/Time
Flight Number ~
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/13/201017:35
AALI 175
MD80
A
35 —
84
06/20/2010 5:51
DAL717
MD80
D
17
83.2
06/27/2010 7:22
AALI 315
MD80
D
17
81.3
06/14/201015:51
DAL1017
DC9Q
D
17
81
06/17/2010 9:48
DAL2163
MD80
D
17 —
80.9
06/16/201011:05
DAL2766
DC9Q
D
17 —80.8
06/26/201011:10
AAL1 683
MD80
D
17
79.9
06/20/201013:08
DAL2167
DC9Q
D
17 —
79.5
06/15/2010 7:27
AAL1 315
MD80
D
17
79.3
06/17/201013:31
DAL2167
DC9Q
D
17
79.2
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
-33-
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#34)
Red Oak Park. Burnsville
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/20/2010 5:51
DAL717
MD80
D
17
80.5
06/27/2010 7:22
AALI 315
MD80
D
17
80.2
06/30/201011:51
DAL2457
DC9Q
D
17
78.4
06/01/201016:31
DAL1017
DC9Q
D
17
78.3
06/17/2010 9:48
DAL2163
MD80
D
17
78.2
06/30/2010 5:33
DAL717
MD80
D
17
77.7
06/15/2010 7:27
AAL1 315
MD80
D
17
77.2
06/15/201015:09
AALI 797
MD80
D
17
76.8
06/25/201012:08
DAL1 302
DC9Q
D
17
75.6
06/17/201014:35
FFT107
A319
D
17
75.2
(RMT Site#35)
2100 Garnet Ln- Faaan
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/21/201016:12
DAL619
B744
D
22
86
06/07/201015:48
DAL619
8744
D
22
84.2
06/25/201011:19
AAL1683
MD80
D
17
83.7
06/06/2010 7:28
AAL1629
MD80
D
17
83.6
06/21/201015:41
DAL2271
MD80
D
17
83.2
06/25/2010 6:27
DAL717
MD80
D
17
83.2
06/15/201014:07
AAL1220
MD80
D
17
82.9
06/15/201011:45
DAL1564
MD80
D
17
82.8
06/15/201015:09
AAL1 797
MD80
D
17
82.5
06/16/2010 5:40
DAL717
MD80 r
--D
17
82.2
(KM I 6ite#:36)
Briar Oaks & Scout Pond. AoDle Vallev
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/16/2010 5:41
DAL717
MD80
D
17
85.3
06/07/201014:51
FASTI 3
UKN
D
12R
83.3
06/15/201011:46
DALI 564
MD80
D
17
82.3
06/28/201013:23
FAST1 2
UKN
A
35
81.1
06/28/2010 7:51
DAL2913
DC9Q
A
35
80.9
06106/2010 7:28
AAL1629
MD80
D
17
80.7
06/24/201016:47
UPS2558
MD1 I
A
35
80.7
06/09/201010:31
DAL2874
DC9Q
A
35
80.6
06/23/201018:13
FDX728
MD1 1
A
35
80.3
06/11/201016:17
DUKEI 1
UKN
A
35
80.3
- 34 - Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP
June 2010
(RMT Site#37)
A qOa XAInnrincittm I n N I=n(-jqn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival!
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/20/201013:52
DAL2661
DC9Q
D
17
83.3
06/07/201017:37
06/17/201016:33
06/01/2010 9:07
DAL1 193
DAL1 620
AAL1 750
MD80
MD80
MD80
D
D
D
17
17
17
83
81.8
81.7
06/12/2010 7:26
AAL1 315
MD80
D
17
81.6
06/07/201013:47
DAL1 226
DC9Q
D
17
81.2
06/21/2010 7:28
DAL2853
DICK
D
17
80.9
06/10/201019:00
DAL2909
DC9Q
D
17
80.2
06/20/201019:59
AAL533
MD80
D
17
80.1
06/25/201013:42
-5A—L2144
DC9Q
D
17
79.9
(RMT Site#38)
qQr,7 Ti irrii iniQiz (ir Fnnnn
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/30/201014:46
06/10/201016:25
DAL2201
DAL2271
MD80
MD80
Departure
17
17
87.4
86.2
:-49
006/03/201016:495
---
AL1 (320
—
MD80
D
17
86.8
06/11/201012:07
AAL1 120
MD80
D
17
86.5
06/14/201015:33
DAL2271
MD80
D
17
85.9
06/20/201016:24
DALI 620
MD80
D
17
85.8
06/01/2010 7:27
AAL1 629
MD80
D
17
85.5
06/30/201015:21
DAL2271
MD80
D
17
84.9
06/26/201011:32
—DAL1 564
MD80—
D
17
84.7
06/25/201015:35
DAL619
8744
D
22
84.3
06/17/201014:13
AAL1 220
MD80
D
17
84.3
06/03/201019:06
DAL721
MD80
D
17
83.9
(RMT Site#39)
4A77 qt (.hcirlp-q PI FRoan
Date/Time
Flight Number
Aircraft Type
Arrival/
Departure
Runway
Lmax(dB)
06/30/201014:46
06/10/201016:25
DAL2201
DAL2271
MD80
MD80
D
D
17
17
87.4
86.2
06/20/201017:58
DAL2064
MD80
D
17
86.1
06/01/201014:01
DAL1 934
MD80
D
17 —
86
06/20/201011:30
DAL1 564
MD80
D
17 —
85.8
06/10/2010 20:02
06/26/201014:49
--UAL1 17-0
DAL2201
MD80
MD80
D
D
17 —
17 —84.8
85
06/10/201018:24
DAL2064
MD80
D
17
84.7
06/30/201011:41
)/ALzOuI9X6)
DAL2
MD80
D
17
84.6
06/21 C )1010,23
L30
DAL30
MD80
D
17
84.5
June 2010 Remote Monitoring Tower Top Ten Summary
The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for June 2010 were comprised of 91.5% departure
operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the DC9Q with 42.6% of the highest Lmax events.
June 2010 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 June 2010.
Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32 - 35 -
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
June 2010
Remote Monitoring Towers
Date
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5,
#6
#7
#8
. #9
#10
#11
#12
#13
#14
#151
06101/2010
54.6
57.4
59.4
60.8
66.7
70.4
61
56.5
26.8
NA
NA
NA
52.2
58.8
54.4
06/02/2010
52.5
55.9
58.7
61.1
68.9
70.6
62.9
58.1
47.7
55.9
40.1
NA
30.6
60
39
06/03/2010
57
57
62.3
60.6
68.7
69.9
58.1
58.2
NA
NA
NA
36.4
54.3
61.5
55.8
06/04/2010
57.5
56.1
64.1
59.4
70.2
70.3
59.1
58.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
50.3
58.9
53.2
06/05/2010
53.8
53.5
60.6
60.1
68.6
70.3
58.5
57.5
40
55.4
50.3
NA
29.8
57.51
28
06/06/2010
54.6
55.4
61.1
59.9
68.3
71.1
58.8
57.4
45.4
NA
41.6
NA
50.6
59.5
49.5
06/07/2010
56.3
58.1
64
60
69.3
68.715
.5
55
37.8
30.3
31.7
33.4
53.1
61.2
54.6
06/08/2010
57.9.59.9
65.1
60.9
69.7
69
157.7
155.7
NA
.27.7
NA
126.1.52.3
60.9
56
06/09/2010
52.7
53.7
57.3
57.5
67
70.3
62.2
59.2
NA
33.3
NA
128.6
50.5
59.6
45
06/10/2010
60.2
60.6
66
60
69.8
65.8
45.8
42.4
48
55.9
47.8
35.5
57.6
59.9
58.5
06/11/2010
59.1
60
66.7
62.8
73.5
72.2
61.3
57.9
NA
NA
NA
33.7
53.8
59.7
54
06/12/2010
54.1
57.5
61.3
60.1
68.8
69.81
59
57.9
NA
50.3
49.1
39.3
51.5
58.9
52.4
06/13/2010
54.4
56.9
61.1
60.6
70
71.5
60.9
60.9
41.7
56
48.6
26.5
54.7
60
53
06/14/2010
59.4
62.7
64.7
62.4
69.1
68.2
51.2
55.3
45.5
55.6
45.9
40.5
57.6
64.3
59.8
06/15/2010
55.9
59.2
63.3
62.1
70.4
72.4
59.7
58.3
41.1
28.7
40.1
36.9
50
58.4
52.2
06/16/2010
55
59.6
60.6
62.5
68.8
71.9
58.4
58
NA
32.8
NA
NA
52.4
62
54.3
06/17/2010
59.8
65
65.3
66.1
70.3
71.9
51.4
54
50.7
43.3
39.2
54.1
58.7
61.3
63.9
06/18/2010
51.2
54.7
59.6
62.4
70.5
72.5
59.7
60.3
NA
27.9
NA
31.9
45.8
62.1
47
06/19/2010
52.5
54.7
59.5
59.2
69
70.1
61.1
60.1
36.6
NA
39.9
NA
48.8
59.4
48.1
06/20/2010
56.6
58.8
62.9 1
59.8 168.6
67.8
52.2
55.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
54.9
59.3
55.2
06/21/2010
57.2
59.7
64.2
60
68.4
66.7
49.2
50.2
37.6
37.8
NA
30.9
57.2
63.2
58
06/22/2010
55.3
57.8
62.6
59.5
67.5
68.11
54
54.4
27.9
NA
35.2
31.2
55
63.2
56.8
06/23/2010
52.61
54
60.3
60.1
70
71.5
62.1
60.61
43
56.81
NA I
NA
44.8
61.6
42.91
06/24/2010
58.6
57.4
66.1 .60.2.72.4
70.8
59.2
57.6
29.3
NA
30.5
39.1
53.5
62.6
57.5
06/25/2010
57.8
60.5
64.4
61.6
69.5
69.5
53
56.1
39.3
36
NA
44.1
58.8
611.6
59.9
06/26/2010
58 1
62
67.3
62.2
71.3
68.1
47.7
45.8
49.4
55.6
45.9
51.2
53.3
61.8
53.7
06/27/2010
53.7
55.1
60.8
60.4
69.3
70.9
60.1
59.9
43.1
NA I
NA 145.4
48
60
46.41
06/28/2010
50.8
52.8
58.2
59.8
69.2
71.9
64.2
62.1
39.4
55.6
49.1
NA
27.9
59.7
36.9
06/29/2010
52.6
54
60
60
68.4
71
59.4
59.4
35.3
47.3
41.3
34.6
50.4
61.7
51.5
06/30/2010
NA
59.3
NA
60.5
NA
NA
50.8
47.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
44.4
NA
Mo.DNL, 156
1 .2
58.7
63
61.1
69.5
70.3
59.1
57.8
42.4.150.4
42.7
42.2
53.5
60.8
55.4
- 36 - Report Generated: 07/0912010 09:32
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
Juneu��/� �
�O1�
Remote Monitoring Towers
-37-
Report Generated: O709/201no9:oc
F42
524
52*2
41
54 1
L44.
06/08/2010
64.5
9
59.4
52.9
45.7
40.3
54.8
61
58.7
45.1
52.9
55.1
59.7
50.3
r58.7
06/11/2010
64.21
54.1
56.5
52.9
36.4
49.1
54.2
57.6
51.7
52.1
59.7
58.4
50.5
F5
58
48
L5.
06/19/2010
63.3
47.4
55.4
42.8
41.4
4 j88
5 4
57.7
58.6
44.4
52.4
58.2
57.4
544
54.4
[447
41
06/27/2010
64.2
54.2
56.2
46.9
42.5
39.7
56.5
56.1
58.1
48.8
51.1
56.2
56.5
5 OF, 5
-37-
Report Generated: O709/201no9:oc
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL
June 2010
Remote Monitoring Towers
Date
#30
#31
#32
1 #33
#34
#35
#36
#37
#38
#39
06/01/2010
61.4
39.5
38.4
48.8
43.9
53.8
49.8
51.3
53.4
53.5
06/02/2010
54.5
43.8
42.11
35
38.1
51.1
56
NA
NA
NA
06/03/2010
60.3
48.4
36.3
44.3
41.4
53.4
54.5
44.3
50.2
46.6
06/04/2010
57.7
36.1
31.1
48.8
44.8
51.1
54.6
39.9
41.4
48
06/05/2010
56.14
43.6
NA
48.6
45.6
51.7
55.8
NA
NA
NA
06/06/2010
60.2
NA
41.9
46.1
37.7
56.3
57
34
NA
NA
06/07/2010
63.8
46
43.1
48.4
49.1
54.7
53.8
50.11
54
51.41
06/08/2010
61.2
43.7
37.7
43.7
38.9
49.5
51.1
42.5
48.7
52.6
06/09/2010
51.4
NA
NA
29.7
33.1
52.9
57
24.81
NA
NA
06/10/2010
65.2
52.2
45.2
50.7
45
.47.9
42.4
48.3
53.3
56.3
06/11/2010
59.9
38.6
33
39.7
30.2
50.5
53.2
46
50.6
52.2
06/12/2010
58.5
38.7
NA
36.2
28.9
41.9
37.5
44.9
47.5
48.5
06/13/2010
48.3
NA
35.1
45.5
43.2
50.3
54.6
43.3
NA
NA
06/14/2010
60.2
32.8
NA
42.7
36.3
45.7
46.7
42.9
49.6
47.5
06/15/2010
62
42.2
42.3
48.1
46.4
53.6
54.1
44.2
48.5
48.9
06/16/2010
61.4
41
44.6
46
45.6
55.8
57.4
NA
32.6
30.7
06/17/2010
61.5
45.7
36.8
50.7
40.7
46
41.2
46.3
51.8
53.8
06/1812010
62
46
42.7
48.2
40.5
54.9
53.8
40.1
38.1
42.7
06/19/2010
48.9
NA
36 1
NA
28.2
51.7
55.2
25.7
NA
NA
06/20/2010
64.4
45.4
39.9
54.3
52.2
48.7
47.6
49.4
52.8
53
06/21/2010
62
50.4
41.3
46.2
41.3
51.3
48.2
49.3
51.9
54.3
06/22/2010
62.2
37.5
40.2
50.3
44.3
55.4
52.4
46.2
48.1
51.31
06/23/2010
56.8
35.831.8
39.5.35.8
53.6
56.8
42.3
NA
NA
06/24/2010
60.6
41
48.3
42.3
45.6
55
56.3
45.9
43.3
41.3
06/25/2010
66.8
48.6
43.7
51.7
46.1
56.1
53.8
48.6
56.6
56.7
06/26/2010
63.2
40.1
34.2
48.3
36.7
47.8
46.8
51.6
55.6
54.1
06/27/2010
55.1
43.6
40.1
42
41.7
53.1
56.7
NA
NA
NA
06/28/2010
49.9
NA
39.9
37.6
45.1
52.8
56.3
39.9
NA
NA
06/29/2010
50.3
33.9
NA
NA
37.2
49.7
54.2
24.7
NA
34.2
06/30/2010
64.9
47.2
45.2
51.8
51.1
52.6
52.2
47.3
53.3
54.6
Mo.DNL
61.1
44.3
40.8
47.5
44.5
52.7
54
45.7
49.8
50.5
-38- Report Generated: 07/09/2010 09:32
5/1/2010
Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
Gar, W
4 Jitl
14a ul-An$ir�.��+��+V
aVb�fpl'Y� FAY:
This report is for informational purposes only
and cannot be used for enforcement purposes.
Metropolitan Airports Commission
4551 * Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L and 12R in May 2010
4365 (95.9%) of those operations remained in the Corridor
4551 * Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure
Operations
4365 (95.9%) Total 12L & 12R Carrier
Departure Operations in the Corridor
*This number Includes 3 12U12R departure tracks that began beyond the corridor boundaries; therefore the compliance of these tracks is undetermined.
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18 Page 1
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Ir ri
Penetration Gate Plot for In Corridor Gate
9 +4175
5/1/2010 00:00:00 - 5/31/2010 23:59:59
4365 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left 2269 (52%), Right 2096 (48%)
V..
...... .
J 1.
%�q tj
'Fill 'R 1'1�27 0-
0
5v
1k4
1171
I.N. 1 #)�, - . ct
-'n �5R
3,
6Xi'-A!.",
C, 2Q-
009 !q 6L C,
9 t9 eo, Rn
illlt� ~11-0-noomb,
W,
Ni
�I n
OD.,�KYS
—
'L.4
'4
44,
. .......
*This number Includes 3 12U12R departure tracks that began beyond the corridor boundaries; therefore the compliance of these tracks is undetermined.
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18 Page 1
Metropolitan Airports Commbsion
57 /1 3��) Runway 12L and 12R <�@[�Departure ��@[tU[� [)perB�0OSVVe[e
` ' / north 0fthe 0S0"Corridor Boundary during May 2010.
0 r�fi irnnrl tn Corridnr before reachinq SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park
U/umme.^u\—
Page Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 000S/2010151O
Metropolitan Airports Commission
126 (2.8%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were
south of the Corridor (South of 30L Localizer) during May 2010.
Of those, 11 ( ®) returned to Corridor before reaching SE Border of Ft. Snelling State Park
0
Minneapolis St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for South Corridor Gate
5/1/2010 00:00:00 - 5/31/2010 23:59:59
126 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left 93 (73.8%), Right 33 (26.2%)
t
R"
iti/, 450
v, z
Wd
ii
C,
Q.
C9 0 .0
0
-6
OY7,1
�6
'
.. .
...... U
d
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18 Page
Metropolitan Airports Commission
4 (0.1 %) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were 5'
south of the Corridor (5' South of 30L Localizer) during May 2010
Page 4 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18
Metropolitan Airports Commission
DepartureTop 15 Runway 12L/1 2R ' 2
010
Airport
City.
--k—eidigg
(deg.)
#O.ps
Percent of
Total Ops
ORD
CHICAGO (O'HARE)
124-
149
3.3%
�EA
SEATTLE
27-80
12-9
2.8%
BOS
BOSTON
—FRANCISCO
97-
94
2.1%
�F0
SAN
—25-
-6E—N
DENVER
2370
79
1.7%
ATL
ATLANTA
1490
79
1.7%
SLC
SALT LAKE CITY
2520
78
1.7%
PDX
PORTLAND
2720
72
1.6%
—BISMARCK
2910
5-4
—1.2%
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18 Page
//2010 - 6/30/
Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
;' IP
k.
Car -rid'
5 it �(hri2N�'i
im .
9'sa.4.'1
This report is for informational purposes only
and cannot be used for enforcement purposes.
Metropolitan Airports Commission
3399* Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L and 12R in June 2010
3216 (94.6%) of those operations remained in the Corridor
3399* Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure
Operations
t M21�
-3
R
5
'6W
� MM
- T1
B V.,
I vyp
L
F
ti �gj!
i� N W, '7
g "�tv
�AWONg�t
g__
. . . . . . . . . .
11�i Ni"i
1:5110ZO71 g!q
�I.Ulv r
2,
�'g
_511
5L
7.
ve L, "_ �E `Iw. . I
. . . . . . . . . .
r NO
ga
Rig
F.
p
W
:.N
p
N
ffl,
'ig
-OR�i"
-'r. yry V
n
3216 (94.6%) Total 12L & 12R Carrier
Departure Operations in the Corridor
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for In Corridor Gate
6/1/2010 00:00:00 - 6/30/2010 23:59:59
3216 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 1669 (51.9%), Right = 1547 (48.1 %)
0
6* q
C'
's
*This number Includes 4 12U12R departure tracks that began beyond the corridor boundaries; therefore the compliance of these tracks is undetermined.
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 07109/2010 08:33 Pagel
Metropolitan Airports Commission
81 (2.4%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were
north of the 090° Corridor Boundary during June 2010.
Of those. 12 (I®) returned to Corridor before reaching SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park
AI JLJ
W
I izo
7
�A� I'� I �I' ii� ' �. 5t `•� 4 Y' t��f���� ,`�\ r���..����(����..�.dA 11 dl� ����� �
1F
r
lw
46
-1 Jr
�t. bneillogjun ■!m
Ris field ,
r1\1 vpqrt
tt
r7 r r ., I � r �r ..L .. '�` yY,�it i `..,
AL -4 /I
AF{rlt) 52
lti
.4, t
:bloom g i" .- sl
q ton`rri P.U11
)n7�,3r Gr�H ht
reyqloud Isla P
W
V
Burn'" llie,
16
r_Wt`el nuunt
P�Iq'.Yzlley
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for North Corridor Gate
6/1/2010 00:00:00 - 6/30/2010 23:59:59
81 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 16 (19.8%), Right = 65 (80.2%
Page 2 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Ueparture uorriaor/Anmysis. MepUlt UU[leldl.UU. V7/UZ7I/-U IV
�
Metropolitan Airports Commission ,
88/2.Q%\Runway 12Land 12RCarrier Jet Departure Operations were
south Ofthe Corridor (south Of3O[LVcgliZ8hduring June 2010.
Of those, 2 (—) returned to Corridor before reaching SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for South Corridor Gate
6/1/2010 00:00:00-6/30/201023:59:59
S8Tracks Crossed Gate: Left =7O(71.4Y6).Rioht=28C28.SY6
Monthly Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: O7/UQ/2U10O0:33 Page3
Metropolitan Airports Commission
26 (0.8%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were 5'
south of the Corridor (5* south of 30L Localizer) during June 2010
. . . . . . . . . .
N
,
�ia
IL
rg,.
13 'N'-"dbL
149
=Z/Z-
110 th t
I'Y , J
N tijI
I T
P�!
PIC
t. Paul ark
-RU �e i,
]IF
11� i4jji�6 In R1
.1 P�; %
kM �Iu
In tfl k1l U-
�l MR
1! Id
V11- oj\^'p
14 3
V
orf.
j
V -
11z X/
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Penetration Gate Plot for 5- South Corridor Gate
6/1/2010 00:00:00 - 6/30/2010 23:59:59
26 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 19 (73.1 %), Right = 7
Page 4 Monthly Eagan/Mendota meignts uepariure uorriuui tA1jd1Y515. r-,t::PUIL
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Top 15 Runway 12L/1 2R Departure Destinations for June 2010
Airport
City
I
Heading
(deg.)
#10ps
Percent of
Total Ops
SEA
SEATTLE
2780
99
2.9%
SFO
SAN FRANCISCO
2510
60
1.8%
DEN
DENVER
2370
55
1.6%
LAX
LOS ANGELES
2380
45
1.3%
PDX
PORTLAND
2720
43
1.3%
LAS
LAS VEGAS
2430
42
1.2%
BOS
BOSTON
970
41
1.2%
ATL
ATLANTA
1490
38
1.1%
DTW
DETROIT
1050
37
1.1%
SAN
SAN DIEGO
2350
34
1%
SLC
SALT LAKE CITY
2520
32
0.9%
YVR
VANCOUVER
2830
32
0.9%
AMS
AMSTERDAM
830
32
0.9%
Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 07/09/2010 08:33 Page
5/1 /2010 - 5/31 /2010
Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
L
IS
M
"s No Tura POW
This report is for informational purposes only
and cannot be used for enforcement purposes.
I
5361 Carrier Jets Departed Runway 17 - 5/1/2010 - 5/31/2010
ap6T-1
. . . . . . .....
q,.
1010 K
A
�
v � '� , ,00 y l� ��/ / : � J� � y7 n �'`• � � � ., 7 �� �3 �� ,ae '� SlrSf ��{ C.� �j � 3'it
H n
. _ y p
gip
e,,
ff
JIM
'N
v0. .,
gyg
gnr
Qj
4�
W,
121 4M.
0 q�3
0-3311
12
yg%
a
,gg�
g 'I
Runway 17 Departure Overflight Grid Analysis
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 51112010-513112010. Report Generated: 0610912010 15:18 - 1 -
0
&EMi��.P/'�r.��
�`��\
®'
��� re�r��:'�w� �i�`,
� ,
®�®�
Flt
rom
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 51112010-513112010. Report Generated: 0610912010 15:18 - 1 -
Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 5/1/2010-5/31/2010
5354 (99.9%) westbound Carrier Jet 7 (0.1 %) Carrier Jet Departure
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 0.3% of
turn point) and Runway 17 eastbound Carrier Jet 2009 total westbound departures
Departure Operations
r
dx17 t a
Mneapolls St Faul lriternatwD# A
mirport Gate Plot
i ,Ir �1 t rli.ji a ,' 1 I a 1i
,31 , t,�F��17Runway 17 Departures,That Turned West Before 2 5NM Tui n
+ 't iI� ti ri`� � 5/1/2010 00 00 00 5/3112010 23 59159' ' '�, `. {
74TI acl<s�Crossetl Gate, Ceftl 7��°),' J t }
10d°/ RI ht 0 0%
fi
y
!qtr lift `a.9oo:
1 irN{ X15 IY.
,t;JU+x'1700': II ,I
O. ryl�p0a a
�j Q4
�U'!g1200 i ti r 7r
p TI° t r,r
O .
Z
a4' 4r n far
,I iy ,I -i`10001 2� ' 1 00 p 60 t q 'G 60 0 40 I '0 201 t r 0 00 e0} 20 t 0 40 0; 60 0 60, 1 00 1 20 1
�{',I hil tt t { ,ItRmYw I nd} L(,c tCorndor End}., r
�;,� t� i'll,v � `',` r t' �ht �i pevration From Center of Gate (Miles} - } s ' I I �
�i/'}sz rEfr �{r a lin- x'�' � YiIry'J li .II 1 Iff aII t'r' I11 ' +�
+
lnr.cases.where'alki�`Ude`'ihF.ormation'. is Uiiel%aiiable,;khat operation isnot: represented in: above graph.'+ - , ...
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 5/1/2010-5/31/2010. Report Generated: 06/09/2010 15:18 - 2 -
Runway 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 5/1/2010 - 5/31/2010
... .......
wL
I Mi
,e
10077
1121
T. oft Sneltln
.11 J
1'V'41
VA,
".
urn sville M
i6.i. Pgr
7A 2
a
26 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of
Runway 17 in 5/1/2010 - 5/31/2010 (10:30 p.m. -6:00 a.m.)
0 (0%) Westbound Carrier Jet
- 2 (7.7%) Westbound 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)
On
0 (0%) Carrier Jet Departures turned
9 (34.6%) Remaining westbound
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
15 (57.7%) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations
Ti
26 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of
Runway 17 in 5/1/2010 - 5/31/2010 (10:30 p.m. -6:00 a.m.)
0 (0%) Westbound Carrier Jet
- 2 (7.7%) Westbound 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
9 (34.6%) Remaining westbound
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
15 (57.7%) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 51112010-513112010. Report Generated: 0610912010 15:18 - 3 -
Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations
'grP-
62
T
�I 1147'
B'oojningl
Al
0
urns,
�hle
avage
le"Vall
`4rZ 771
LEGEND
Existing RMT's
Runilivay 17-35 RIVITS
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 51112010-513112010. Report Generated. 0610912010 15:18 - 4 -
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Levels - QNL dBA 5/1/2010-5/31/2010
--bate
#30.,
#31
#32'
#33.
#34
#35
#36
#37
#38
#39
1 1
62.6
49.4
48.6
52.5
47.2
56.7
50.2
52.5
51.6
49.4
2
61.6
50.6
43.5
55
50.2
53.9
51
44.4
38.5
NA
3
60.5
44.8
43.2
45.7
52.5
54
56.4
37.4
NA
NA
4
61.1
45.1
43.4
45.5
46.8
52.6
50.6
47.5
49.3
51.4
5
59.1
34.9
46.1
50.6
47
55.5
53.6
48.8
45
NA
6
55.6
33.7
27.4
33.9
34.4
50.8
54.3
46.3
47.5
47
7
60.9
43.1
36.8
44
27.1
49.7
46.7
48.8
51.4
52.2
8
47.2
35
NA
NA
NA
50.8
54.8
40.8
NA
NA
9
58.8
40.4
32.4
44.4
28.5
48.2
51.5
43
50
50
10
61.5
47.3
42.2
47
37.4
46
33.2
46.2
51.6
54.6
11
34.3
NA
NA
31.9
31.3
30.6
NA
36.6
35
37
12
63.9
46.9
38.7
44.7
28
46.9
40
48.3
51.7
55.1
13
56.2
49.5
46.1
48.9
47.4
52.2
54.5
42.4
39.4
41.2
14
51
36.5
32.2
25.5
41.5
53.4
56.3
44.7
NA
NA
15
64.1
51.3
47.4
51.6
49.9
49.6
47.8
48.1
52.2
52.7
16
62.5
42.9
38.8
47.7
43.6
50.4
50.4
48.5
52.3
54.8
17
62.9
50.3
32.4
47.8
49
52.1
53.2
50.4
53.5
52.5
18
59.8
45.1
45.5
44.7
38.2
52.8
51.5
42.6
45.5
47.1
19
60.8
42.7
42.1
42
38.1
54.2
50.5
50.1
50.7
51.2
20
62.9
45.1
41.4
48.8
43.7
47.6
42.5
48.5
52.8
54.3
21
61.8
43.2
32.8
47.4
35.2
44.1
30.2
47.1
52.1
53.4
22
59.8
45.7 1
39.6
44
42.9
47.5
43.3
47.8
51.2
52.4
23
59.8
47.8
43.9
40
36.4
46.6
41.6
47.2
52.2
53.8
24
59.7
48.8
44.3--
43.7
37.4
47.3
38.7
48.6
53.1
53.5
25
60.4
46.2
28.9
46.1
37.9
51.9
52.2
46
48.6
44.5
26
61.2
NA
NA
52.8
49.6
53.9
56.4
43.4
NA
NA
27
64.5
47.3 j
38.2
52.1
50.4
50.2
51.3
49.3
53
52.1
28
62.4
45.9 1
42
43.1
41.7
48.1
33.3
50.9 1
53.7
54
29
60.2
42.6
38.2
44.8
33.2
39.7
NA
45.6
51.1
53.2
30
57.5
36.3
27.6
44.2
46.7
49
51
41.4
36.3
44.7
31
62.4
38.6
41.9
47.8
45
52.8
53.3
45.5
51.2
49
Av. DNL
60.9
45.9
42
47.9
45.4
51.4
51.4
47.3
50.1
51
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 51112010-513112010. Report Generated., 0610912010 15:18 - 5 -
Aircraft Noise Levels
DN L d BA 5/1/2 010-5/31/2 010
-RMT
Aircraft DNL
Aircraft DNL
Aircraft DNL
Aircraft D L
-
05/01/07-05/31/07
05/01/08-05/31/08
05/01/09-05/31/09
5/1/2010-5/31/2010
30
-
66.2
62.9
61.4
60.9
--
31
52.1
49.2
49.3
45.9
32
49.2
47
42.9
42
33
50
47
44.8
47.9
--
34
48.4
46.2
43.5
45.4
35
55.9
53.7
53.3
51.4
36
55.1
3.9
53.9
�A
53.6
51.4
37
52.2
2
48
47.7
47.3
38
54.2
50.8
50.1
50.1
-51
39
56.7
51.3----j
50-8
1.2%
Top 15 Runway 17 Departure Destination Report
Airport
DEN
City
DENVER
Heading (deg.)
237*
#Ops.
247
Percent of Total Ops
4.6%
ORD
CHICAGO (O'HARE)
124'
230
4.3%
ATL
ATLANTA
149'
205
3.8%
MKE
MILWAUKEE
114*
138
2.6%
DFW
DALLAS/ FORT WORTH
193'
118
2.2%
MDW
CHICAGO (MIDWAY)
124'
101
1.9%
DTW
DETROIT
105,
86
1.6%
PHX
PHOENIX
231'
85
1.6%
DCA
WASHINGTON D.C. (REAGAN NATIONAL)
117 -79
1.5%
LGA
NEW YORK (LA GUARDIA)
105*
77
1.4%
IAN
HOUSTON
185' -73
1.4%
MCO
ORLANDO
151' -
67
1.2%
EWR
NEW YORK
106.
66
1.2%
MEM
LAS
MEMPHIS
LAS VEGAS
162*
243'
65
61
1.2%
1.1%
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 51112010-513112010. Report Generated.* 0610912010 15:18 - 6 -
6/1/2010
Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
Sip,
x+6
Iip�
r
i a� S
This report is for informational purposes only
and cannot be used for enforcement purposes.
3541 Carrier Jets Departed Runway 17 - 6/1/2010 - 6/30/2010
Runway 17 Departure Overflight Grid Analysis
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 61112010-613012010. Report Generated: 0710812010 14:45 - 1-
ragam
I IN .11
PP-0-
��®L/ �I
:r�/r ��` � '®�� I N
ILA
III
� �
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 61112010-613012010. Report Generated: 0710812010 14:45 - 1-
Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 6/1/2010-6/30/2010
-3535 (99.8%) Westbound Carrier Jet (0.2%) Carrier Jet Departure
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 0.5% of
turn point) and Runway 17 eastbound Carrier Jet 1315 westbound departures
Departure Operations
((L.
�i1 f1 �� j�I Alir15'y ^t'
` X r
z7 I e� olis ? r t / Y
r j r(� n A
f�ii ,yam
l Vii) .--y� �"� f !{� �( 1 \/�'� A 'r(% L✓ c��j iy�/` �, �,"` ai
t
, a4. -.r rt+':. ,� ?f1 '�C.. 'X -[ 'r.• t,o .t�- , ✓4d�Qut 'St fa�'.'
_ `'so t Sneifinguno �1 a Cyt' Y rt Y/�1f Jic� 7f
r Ichferd y v ll3/ ssrl`s
P, f; �, 7-•�,Su-fish alk ��n-. � j /l.
lz ® Y�7�'{f { ,sem --t�
s 1
\!4 j —�c�7url�{'` �Y
r`,�!' ayjt Q Runway 1;7135 2 5 Nal�ttcaj Ml T�fOyjp{om� _ s
{."1
00�lj g 10
...ke>�I
, t �'„ .i• +sv J'`.'.,
,gpe s cl
.!
y'
6' v ,r kt i , `i, r u *xS
tgt
t'rT�a ls' i v^�Y R+"+ SiPfj. 47 fr'Y'{ -t !L r it 7' �� t;Yri•� "`
),. t.f3
'' •:,� �75 i � f'r�iY4'tL � f �}.� 1+y'�>,'K.y i a a' , , t I 7 i c J � .vac--�
F;YJ,+�'
}4 ke .,.r 1 4P-}"S��I,.ii� F jitt�.] 4:2 St�x� rt rlt r$1 f 1 {
N '�••v KC Yfi r rr? r` � l'�1�i�"r �r}r#f F L N+S'�{Gs y1 � 7 Y r v G t ft uC �, , w:i r
}.3<�`e.'tc �-y f•!s'%t"�r+C �ka�'r1;Sr7t rY �.� J 9,t a7 14: , r jay; l..ts;r*t 7 ,7 1
r t'
, tC� x;. '
''f ✓y $ 91 kJ }4yy r J BUrnsYIIF lY�,xs,erTtr'd✓•i't'be7 r74 ( )S�',
ie"iJ .t �' `,"[ 4 r k✓7 f 11 i ,.. t �' t rit TTY M'v r
' ��S rC+ 4 g '` 4y�t� 'tf, 4� 7 s J in, t 4t rt w s>• ',i t i7 �. s t "'.`
`2Ua B � � u u iFa1 ° 3�„'4 t it•��� ? t:Y � t }? � y�WY .' ,r L 'r �. r -t• n���vs ' t
7 � '-7`� ^t93;` `���+��� � rr ��4 ts" • t'{ '�l��' t r�" /1PPI�r�U,�J�y" i"s ��x >~ rl Rosemount , r n , � s '
�, �i a• a t „�i5� ./� Pj � r .it t a`� ?tet 'e k � �
�..�.,-s+t•�' ..t�.,,�2r�zs'.�.��1'+:.ver§�'��'%� P{ 1 .,'fit.,..er�uS:'•h1....._,�.._1:s::�,....,..»�.t � .tea ��. v �, x:t..:._ ...._-.�`
O
O
0
0
O O
0.60. 0
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 6/1/2010-6/30/2010. Report Generated: 07/08/2010 14:45 - 2 -
Runway 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 6/1/2010 - 6/30/2010
S -In fish L R'
Erma f/t( �,J� Jr.—_-• :I � i.1,•�. "'If !
IIIG ti'G't7c..f Rit /�� ��\. ,,.i �'i (I(' .��•,.3'1� ,�> �s �' ,� '-
kj \ +�NZII lF'
+�! � 4t r.�
rr�l agan � � � i
.l
s o
I+ 'i
alley ., II Rosemount -�
65 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of
Runway 17 in 6/1/2010 - 6/30/2010 (10:30 p.m. -6:00 a.m.)
0 (0%) West bound Carrier Jet
X14 (21.5%) 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)
1 (1.5%) Carrier Jet Departures turned
18 (27.7%) Remaining westbound
west before passing over the Runway 17 2.5 NM
Carrier Jet Departures Clew 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
32 (49.2%) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 6/1/2010-6/30/2010. Report Generated: 07/08/2010 14:45 - 3 -
Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations
f, UI
5
L t
4,ffi
A
W,
�
qPt Si.,
;p
�j
i R
'Tdl
dl
FOR
k
0"1
.. ...........
'4 4K� "130U,
W,
0
-1, `4
T. lvt
1�
I ilfl(1L.'+� A gl�l�F --''l , ,� "'��VJJ i' `� �01
N,
J,
Bloomin gio
i22 k%l
lagan .0"
0
V
T,11
rns 'll
-a [17
,S'ava'gely
2 4
I 'Valley ROS amount=
LEGEND,
E ing RNIT's
xi'sti
Runway 17-35 RPOT's
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 61112010-613012010. Report Generated: 0710812010 14:45 - 4 -
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Levels - QNL dBA 6/1/2010-6/30/2010
Date
#30
#31
1 #32
#33
#34
#35
#36
#37
#38
#39
1
61.4
39.5
38.4
48.8
43.9
53.8
49.8
51.3
53.4
53.5
2
54.5
43.8
42.1
35
38.1
51.1
56
NA
NA
NA
3
60.3
48.4
36.3
44.3
41.4
53.4
54.5
44.3
50.2
46.6
4
57.7
36.1
31.1
48.8
44.8
51.1
54.6
39.9
41.4
48
5
56.4
43.6
NA
48.6
45.6
51.7
55.8
NA
NA
NA
6
60.2
NA
41.9
46.1
37.7
56.3
57
34
NA
NA
7
63.8
46
43.1
48.4
49.1
54.7
53.8
50.1
54
51.4
8
61.2
43.7
37.7
43.7
38.9
49.5
51.1
42.5
48.7
52.6
9
51.4
NA
NA
29.7
33.1
52.9
57
24.8
NA
NA
10
65.2
52.2
45.2
50.7
45
47.9
42.4
48.3
53.3
56.3
11
59.9
38.6
33
39.7
30.2
50.5
53.2
46
50.6
52.2
12
58.5
38.7
NA
36.2
28.9
41.9
37.5
44.9
47.5
48.5
13
48.3
NA
35.1
45.5
43.2
50.3
54.6
43.3
NA
NA
14
60.2
32.8
NA
42.7
36.3
45.7
46.7
42.9
49.6
47.5
15
62
42.2
42.3
48.1
46.4
53.6
54.1
44.2
48.5
48.9
16
61.4
41
44.6
46
45.6
55.8
57.4
NA
32.6
30.7
17
61.5
45.7
36.8
50.7
40.7
46
41.2
46.3
51.8
53.8
18
1 62
46
1 42.7
48.2
1 40.5
54.9
53.8
40.1
38.1
42.7
19
48.9
NA
36
NA
28.2
51.7
55.2
25.7
NA
NA
20
64.4
45.4
39.9
54.3
52.2
48.7
47.6
49.4
52.8
53
21
62
50.4
41.3
46.2
41.3
51.3
48.2
49.3
51.9
54.3
22
62.2
37.5
40.2
50.3
44.3
55.4
52.4
46.2
48.1
51.3
23
56.8
35.8
31.8
39.5
35.8
53.6
56.8
42.3
NA
NA
24 1
60.6
41
1 48.3
42.3
45.6
55
56.3
45.9
43.3
41.3
25
66.8
48.6
43.7
51.7
46.1
56.1
53.8
48.6
56.6
56.7
26
63.2
40.1
34.2
48.3
36.7
47.8
46.8
51.6
55.6
54.1
27
55.1
43.6
40.1
42
41.7
53.1
56.7
NA
NA
NA
28
49.9
NA
39.9
37.6
45.1
52.8
56.3
39.9
NA
NA
29
50.3
33.9
NA
NA
37.2
49.7
54.2
24.7
NA
34.2
30
64.9
47.2
45.2
51.8
51.1
52.6
52.2
47.3
53.3
54.6
Av. DNL
61.1
44.3
40.8
47.5
44.5
52.7
54
45.7
49.8
50.5
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 61112010-613012010. Report Generated: 0710812010 14:45 - 5 -
Aircraft Noise Levels
DNL dBA 6/1/2010-6/30/2010
RMT
Aircraft DNL
Aircraft DNL
Aircraft DNL
Aircraft DNL
--5-EN
06/01/07-06/30/07
06/01/08-06/30/08
06/01/09-06/30/09
6/1/2010-6/30/2010
30
64.6
62.9
62.1
61.1-
--
31
49.8
49.2
47.3
44.3-
32
47
45.8
44.5 -
40.8
33
49.4
49.1
46.6
47.5
34
46
46.1
46.7
44.5
35
53.4
56
54.5
52.7
36
53.3
55.1
54.6
54
37
50.2
48.4
48.4
45.7
3853.6
5�3 �5.2�0
105*
50.2
49.8
39
56.3
1 52
48.6
50.5
Top 15 Runway 17 Departure Destination Report
Airport
ATL
city
ATLANTA
Heading (deg.)
149.
-Wo-ps
143
Percent of Total Ops
4%
--5-EN
DENVER
237'
139
--121
3.9%
--6-R-D
CHICAGO (O'HARE)
124-
3.4%
MKE
MILWAUKEE
114*
83
2.3%
MDW
CHICAGO (MIDWAY)
124o
75
2.1%
--d-FW
-DALLAS/ FORT WORTH
193'
58
1.6%
IAH
HOUSTON
57
1.6%
--§-T-L
ST LOUIS
160o
55
1.6%
EWR
NEW YORK
106o
54
1.5%
LAS
LAS VEGAS
243*
52
1.5%
LGA
NEW YORK (LA GUARDIA)
105*
49
1.4%
PHX
PHOENIX
231'
48
1.4%
-6-C-A
WASHINGTON D.C. (REAGAN NATIONAL)
117'
46
1.3%
MEM
MEMPHIS
162o
39
1.1%
DTW
DETROIT
1050
39
1.1 %
Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 61112010-613012010. Report Generated: 0710812010 14:45 - 6 -
r
��
Report
G 0
irport Noise
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 22, Number 18
70
June 11, 2010
Bob Hope Ah port
In ThisIssue...
TENT
AIRLINES REFUSE TO ENTER COMMITMENT
TO MAKE VOLUNTARY CURF'E'W BINDING
Bob Hope Airport ... Air -
The airlines serving Bob Hope Airport have decided not to enter into a contrac-
-Pasadena Airport Authority that would
lines will not enter contrac-
tual agreement with the Burbank -Glendale
make the 10 p.m. to 7 a.m_ airport curfew in effect for the past 30 years binding on
tual agreement to make
voluntary curfew binding on
the carriers.
The Authority sought to interest the airlines in a contractual commitment to per-
them out of fear such action
manently abide by the voluntary curfew on scheduled flights as an alternative to the
would set national precedent.
Federal Aviation Administration's Part 161 process on notice and approval of air-
Airport Authority pledges to
port noise and access restrictions, which lasted eight years and cost over $7 million.
continue efforts to address
In November 2009, the FAA rejected the Airport Authority's Part 161 applica-
i 70
noise - p'
tion to impose the mandatory curfew on the grounds that is was unreasonable, un-
safe, and a burden on commerce and the national aviation system (21 ANR 143).
The curfew would have been the first restriction on Stage 3 aircraft since passage
FAA ... A former FAA attor-
of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA).
ney says agency's NPRM
j "Our commitment to abide by this voluntary curfew remains solid," Steve
imposing a mandatory heli -
Hubbell, chair of the Airport -Airline Airport Affairs Committee, told the Airport
cop- ter route off Long Is -
(Continued on p. 71)
land could provide an alter-
native path for airports and
communities to follow in im-
FAA
posing noise restrictions. The
HELICOPTER NPRM SEEN AS OFFERING
public has until June 25 to
ALTERNATIVE PATH TO NOISE. RESTRICTIONS
comment on NPRM - p. 70
The Federal Aviation Administration's recent proposal to impose a mandatory
off Long Island, NY, may provide a regulatory
Research ... NASA seeks
noise abatement helicopter route
pathway for airports and conu-nunities to follow in seeking their own mandatory
proposals for studies to iden-
for making air.-
noise abatement procedures, a fonner FAA attorney now representing airports told
tify concepts
greener by 2025 - p. 71
ANR.craft
On May 26, FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRr'v1) that would
require civil helicopters operating under visual flight rules along a section o£ the
CDAs ... Continuous De -
northern shoreline of Long Island to follow the published New York North Shore
2008 a way to address
scent Approaches are not
Route, which was adopted on a voluntary basis in May as
more stressful on pilots than
thousands of noise complaints.
The only reason that FAA offered in its NPRM for imposed the mandatory
standard approach proce-
flight path for helicopters is that New York elected officials had advised the agency
dures, Gennan researchers
that noise complaints continued to be filed after the voluntary noise route was insti-
report. But they find that ex-
tuted and that local FAA Flight Standards Division also continued to receive noise
posure to nighttime noise im-
complaints.
pairs people's performance
the next morning - p. 72
1 (Contiruted orr p. 73
Airport Noise Report
June 11, 201.0
Bob Hope, froin jl. 70
Authority in a June 4 letter. "We understand and have demon-
strated the balance needed to work with the surrounding com-
munity to address noise concerns while also meeting the
demands of the residents and businesses that use the Airport
to provide safe, secure, convenient, reliable and economical
airline service."
The airline committee represents the signatory carriers
serving Bob Hope Airport (Alaska Airlines, American Air-
lines, JetBlueAinvays, Skywest Airlines, Southwest Airlines,
and US Airways).
In their letter to the Airport Authority, the airlines cited
three reasons for not making a written commitment to the
voluntary curfew:
• The Airport Authority's Part 161 application, seeking a
mandatory curfew, was rejected by the FAA;
• "Any contractual curfew locally agreed to would set a
precedent on a national basis that could potentially become a
mechanism for airports across the country to circumvent the
intent of the federal law"; and
• `Even if allowed by the FAA, any contractual curfew
agreed to locally by the Airport Signatory carriers would not
be binding upon firture new entrant carriers at the airport be-
cause it would constitute a mandatory restriction. Such
mandatory restrictions are required to be approved through a
Part 16 t FAA review process. It would also potentially create
a competitive scheduling advantage for the new entrant."
"The airline industry has consistently opposed the manda-
tory imposition by local airport sponsors of access restric-
tions that impact the national aviation system," Southwest's
Hubbell told the Airport Authority. He noted that Congress
passed the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 in order to
stop the proliferation of local access restrictions by individual
I operators. The Act led to the Part 161 process that pro-
vided a mechanism for airport sponsors to seek approval from
the FAA to implement new access restrictions.
Hubbell said that FAA rejected the Burbank -Glendale -
Pasadena Airport Authority's application to impose a manda-
tory curfew at Bob Hope Airport on a variety of grounds and
that the Airport Authority "now seeks an alternative to the
Part 161 process to achieve a curfew."
Airport Authority Statement
In response to the airlines' letter, the Burbank -Glendale -
Pasadena Airport Authority issued a statement on June 7
pledging to continue efforts to address aircraft noise -related
issues at Bob Hope Airport.
Airport Authority President Frank Quintero said the Au-
thority remains committed to seeking implementation of
meaningful aviation -related noise relief on a Valley -wide
basis.
"The Authority is appreciative of the commitment the air-
lines have made in adhering to the voluntary curfew, and of
their effort to explore the potential to execute a contractual
curfew. The Authority also acknowledges the leadership the
71
City of Burbank is taking in seeking a legislative solution to
the issue of nighttime noise," he said in a statement made at
the close of an Authority meeting.
Following FAA's rej ection of the Airport Authority's Part
161 application on the mandatory curfew, Rep. Brad Sherman
(D -CA) announced that he planned to introduce federal legis-
lation to allow Bob Hope Airport and nearby Van Nuys Air-
port to impose mandatory curfews from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.,
thus bypassing the need for FAA approval of a Part 161 study.
Sherman has not yet introduced the promised legislation,
although the congressional process of approving the new
FAA reauthorization bill is still underway and could provide a.
vehicle for it.
Quintero also said the Authority will continue its Resi-
dential Acoustical Treatment Program for residences and
schools within the noise impact area; will maintain its ongo-
ing dialogue with the City of Burbank and the community to
address noise -related issues; and will shortly begin a Part 150
Study in an effort to identify additional noise abatement or
mitigation opportunities that may exist.
Research
NASA SEEKS PROPOSALS FOR
GREEN AIRCRAFT CONCEPTS
The National Aviation and. Space Administration (NASA)
announced June 2 that it is soliciting proposals for studies de-
signed to identify advanced vehicle concepts and enabling
technologies for commercial airliners to fly more economi-
cally, quieter, and cleaner by 2025.
This research will support the Integrated Systems Re-
search Program in NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Di-
rectorate in Washington. The solicitation is the first of several
expected. under the directorate's "Research Opportunities in
Aeronautics" announcement for 2010, released the same day.
The total potential value of the research contracts is $36.6
million, and proposals are due by July 15.
NASA will select up to four teams for 12 -month studies
beginning in fiscal year 2011. The studies will define pre-
ferred concepts for advanced vehicles that can operate within
the Next Generation Air Transportation System, or NextGen.
The system is a U.S. government air traffic modernization ef-
fort that includes NASA.
The concepts must incorporate technologies enabling
large, twin -aisle passenger aircraft to achieve ambitious envi-
ronmental goals. Goals include 50 percent less fuel consump-
tion and nitrogen oxide emissions compared with today's
airliners and an approximately 80 percent reduction in the
nuisance noise footprint around airports.
After nine months work on preferred systems' concepts,
each tearn will be eligible to subunit proposals for a subscale
flight demonstrator design. NASA will select one or two con-
cepts for 17 months of preliminary design work and risk re-
duction testing for completion by mid -2013.
This research is supported by the Environmentally Re-
Airport Noise Report
1\
June 11, 2010
sponsible Aviation Project within the Integrated Systems Re-
search Program. It also will benefit an emerging new project
related. to the use of remotely -piloted aircraft in the national
air space.
Because the subscale flight demonstrator will be capable
of operating in autonomous and remotely -piloted modes, it
will test environmental technology, other suites and tech-
niques. Test areas may include separation assurance and colli-
sion avoidance; command, control and communications;
remote pilot and vehicle interfaces; environmental hazards
detection and avoidance that could enable routine operation
of future unpiloted air vehicles. NASA anticipates conducting
test flights with the demonstrator in. 2015.
Specific evaluation criteria, deadlines and points of con-
tact for this research topic and other project areas are avail-
able in the announcement at: http://nspires.nasaprs.com.
Research
NOISE ABATEMENT DESCENT IS
NOT MORE STRESSFUL ON PILOTS
Continuous descent approaches are being used increas-
ingly to reduce noise impact on communities near airports.
They result in significant reductions in noise impact but are
they more stressful on pilots?
According to the findings of a German study, they are not.
A flight simulator study of 40 pilots found that a Segmented
Continuous Descent Approach (SCDA) is not more demand-
ing and does not lead to a greater workload for the pilots than
the standard Low Drag Low Power (LDLP) approach.
Physiological measures of blood pressure, heart rate, and
blink frequency were not found to increase during the SCDA
compared to the LDLP. 1n fact, the SCDA was associated
with reduced blood pressure and heart rate values compared
to the LDLP procedure.
"Sophisticated landing procedures must not compromise
either technical flight safety or the capability of the human
operator. Therefore, the assessment of pilots' workload during
the approach is an important aspect for maintaining aviation
safety," researchers from the DLR -German Aerospace Center,
Institute of Aerospace Medicine and the Technical University
of Berlin Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics explained
in their paper, "Pilot Workload During Approaches: Compari-
son of Simulated Standard and Noise -Abatement Profiles."
The paper was reported in the journal Aviation, Space,
and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 80, No. 4, April 2009. The
lead author of the paper is Eva -Maria Elmenhorst, M.D.
Under continuous descent approaches, aircraft are kept far
from the ground as long as possible, which means that steeper
glide paths are used. The SCDA was developed by the Insti-
tute of Flight Systems of the German Aerospace Center
(DLR). It includes a steep approach gradient of 5.5 degrees
and is, therefore, predicted to reduce noise on the ground.
A real flight test of the SCDA was conducted and showed
72
that a single -spot noise recording directly below the glide
path showed a noise abatement potential of up to 5 dB(A)
compared to the standard approach procedure. The area on
the ground in which more than 50 dB(A) maximum noise
levels were recorded was reduced by about 40 percent by the
SODA compared to the standard. LDLP approach.
The researchers noted that the flight simulation of the
SODA was conducted under ideal conditions and that further
studies in the flight simulator and during real flight maneu-
vers are needed to examine the influences of additional chal-
lenges such as wind and weather conditions on noise
abatement procedures.
Night Noise Impairs Morning Performance
Nighttime noise from nearby road traffic, passing trains,
and overhead planes disturbs sleep and impairs morning per-
formance, according to a the findings of another study by El-
menhorst, who is a postdoctoral research fellow at the
German Aerospace Center institite of Aerospace Medicine in
Cologne, Germany.
The study was presented June 8 in San Antonio at SLEEP
2010, the 24th annual meeting of the Associated Professional
Sleep Societies LLC.
Results indicate that mean reaction time on a morning
psychomotor vigilance task slowed significantly by 3.6 mil-
liseconds (ms) after exposure to recorded traffic noise during
sleep, and the slowing of reaction times was directly and sig-
nificantly related to increases in both the frequency and
sound -pressure level of the nightly noise events, Elmenhorst
reported.
The sound of passing trains caused the highest awaken-
ing and arousal probabilities followed by automobile traffic
and airplane noise. However, this ranking was not reflected in
the measures of morning neurobehavioral performance, as
each mode of noise caused a similar level of impairment. Fur-
thermore, exposure to more than one of the three modes of
traffic noise did not lead to stronger perfonnance impair-
ments than exposure to only one noise source.
"The study demonstrated that traffic noise may disturb
sleep and consequently impede recuperation, as was shown
by deterioration of neurobehavioral performance," said El-
menhorst. "The study therefore stresses the importance of
sleep hygiene in terns of a quiet environment for healthy,
undisturbed sleep."
Elmenhorst noted that nighttime traffic noise may have
even stronger effects on the perfonnance of people who are
more susceptible to sleep disturbances. Risk groups include
children, shift workers, the elderly and people with chronic
medical conditions.
The study involved 72 people with an average age of 40
years. Their steep was monitored by polysomnography for 11
consecutive nights. Recorded traffic noise from airplanes, au-
tomobiles and trains was played in the laboratory while they
slept. Each mode of traffic noise consisted of eight different
noise events played back at five sound pressure levels -
Ai rpoi t
evels_
Airport Noise Report
June 11, 2010
FAA, fromp. 70
"What is interesting is that FAA has consistently rejected
any airport request for a mandatory noise abatement proce-
dure, approving under Part 150 only voluntary procedures,"
the former FAA attorney told ANR. He did not want to be
identified because he represents airports.
"This proposed rule, if adopted, may be inviting to both
airports and community groups who desire mandatory noise
abatement procedures. Heretofore they have been stymied
somewhat because of the Part 161 requirements. This offers
them an alternative path: ask the FAA itself to impose
the noise abatement procedure, citing complaints that the
voluntary route has not been observed."
"The sole reason cited for this proposal is to
address noise complaints. I am not aware of the FAA dictat-
ing the use of navigable airspace based solely on noise," he
told ANR.
He also questioned whether FAA has the statutory author-
ity to impose a mandatory helicopter noise abatement route.
The NPRM relies on two statutory authorities: Section
40103(b)(2)(B), which gives the FAA authority to issue air
traffic riles on the flight of aircraft for protecting individuals
and property on the ground, and Section 44715(a), which
gives the FAA authority to issue rules to control and abate
aircraft noise, he explained.
"The proposed mandatory routing does not appear to
have any safety basis but is intended solely to reduce noise
impacts, so I fail to see how section 40103 applies. As for
section 44715(a), this section was enacted in 1968 as section
611 of the Federal Aviation Act. As Chief Justice Rehnquist
explained at length in his dissent in City of Burbank v Lock-
heed Air Terminal, the 1968 amendment was intended to en-
able the FAA to deal with the aircraft noise problem "through
study and regulation of the `source' of the problem — the me-
chanical and structural aspects of jet and turbine aircraft de-
sign."
"I do not know of any situation where FAA has in the
past issued a rule or decision relying on this subsection to
control noise by regulating aircraft routes or procedures — in
other words, not at the source."
NPRM Is Effort to Avoid Study
Another lawyer familiar with airport issues, who also de-
clined to be identified because of airport clients, told ANR
that the NRPM appears to be an effort by FAA to get Con-
gress to strike language in Section 818 of the House version
of the FAA Reauthorization bill that would mandate the FAA
to conduct a study of helicopter operations over Long Island
and Staten Island, NY.
That provision of the House bill would require the FAA,
within six mouths, to submit to Congress a report on the re-
sults of the study, which would have to examine:
• The effects of helicopter operations on residential areas
(including safety issues, noise levels and ways to abate noise,
and other issues relating to helicopter operations on residen-
tial areas);
73
• The feasibility of diverting helicopters from residential
areas;
The feasibility of creating specific air lanes for helicop-
ter operations; and
• The feasibility of establishing altitude limits for helicop-
ter operations.
The FAA noted in its NPRM that New York Sen. Charles
Schumer (D) and former Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D)
wanted the mandatory helicopter route to be imposed. The
agency is letting the public know that it was held hostage by
Schumer and Clinton. The last thing FAA wants is to have
Congress tell them what to do. Rather than that, it issued the
NPRM, the attorney told ANR.
But he also stressed that the NPRM was unusual because
it includes no noise analysis. Mandatory noise abatement air-
craft routes come out of Part 150 studies or environmental
impact statements, he said, "but here there is no analysis."
He called the FAA's NPRI\4 "a sloppy and very basic
way" to address the helicopter noise problem because it does
not direct how helicopters fly over land. The over -water heli-
copter noise route is of some advantage but the real question
is what is their route over land to their landing areas, he said.
The attorney called it "very dangerous" that FAA has
done no environmental review of the mandatory helicopter
route proposed in. its NTPRM. He believes this omission oc-
curred for two reasons: (1) to get the NPRM out very quickly
and (2) because there has been an ongoing controversy be-
tween the FAA and the National Park Service over how to
measure helicopter noise and the proper metric to use.
"I'm not aware of any other noise rile issued without an
environmental assessment," he said. FAA said in the NPRM
that the mandatory helicopter noise abatement route is not ex-
pected to have a significant effect on the human environment.
If that is so, he asked, then why is FAA imposing it?
NPRM Not Seen as Harbinger
Steven Pflaum of the Chicago law firm Neal, Gerber &
Eisenberg, told ANR that "any predictions about whether
mandatory compliance with the North Shore (Long Island)
Helicopter route will be a trend-setter should be taken with
several grains of salt."
There are several reasons to doubt whether the pending
N -PRM is a harbinger of more such regulations to come, he
said.
"First and foremost, issues involving helicopters are fun-
damentally different — in terns of the nature of the problems
they pose, the relatively small number of passengers they
concern, and the comparative lack of prominence within the
commercial aviation industry of the operators affected — than
issues involving commercial operations by fixed -wing air-
craft. These factors combine to simultaneously provide more
reason for the FAA to regulate an intractable helicopter noise
problem, fewer viable alternatives for effectively addressing
that problem, and less industry pressure on the FAA to refrain
from intervening decisively.
"Second, the Long Island issue is not fturdamcntally an
Airport Noise Report
June 11, 2020 74
ANR EDITORIAL
airport noise problem and, as a result, the usual tools for addressing that
kind of problem are unavailable. This is not the garden-variety situation
ADVISORY BOARD
where residents in the vicinity of a specific airport are impacted by noise
from arriving or departing flights. Helicopters often produce noise impacts
throughout the course of their operations, including areas beyond the im-
John J. Corbett, Esq.
mediate vicinity of where their flights happen to begin or end. It is there -
Spiegel & McDiarmid
fore not surprising that there was apparently no airport or heliport
Washington, DC
spearheading the proposed Long Island NPRM.
"Yet it is airport operators that, for a variety of legal, practical, and po-
Carl E. Burleson
litical reasons, typically initiate efforts to limit noise from aircraft opera -
Director, Office of Environment and Energy tions and have some ability, subject to FAA oversight, to address noise
Federal Aviation Administration
issues. And even if an airport or heliport had been leading the charge in
Long Island, airport -initiated noise abatement tools would be ineffective.
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
In particular, Parts 150 and 161 would be useless because, among other
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
reasons, the helicopter noise impacts are likely far below 65 DNL.
Denver
"Third, strong political pressure from a United States Senator, such as
that which occurred in Long Island; rarely occurs in airport noise contro-
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
versies. It is not unusual for a local member of Congress to weigh in on
President, Mestre Greve Associates
aircraft noise issues on the side of impacted communities (that apparently
Laguna Niguel, CA
occurred here, too), but their effectiveness is generally limited. A senator
is more powerful, particularly, as in this instance, with respect to activities
Steven R Pflaum, Esq.
and impacts occurring virtually entirely within the borders of their own
Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
Chicago
state.
"Finally," Pflaum said, "it bears noting that it is by no means clear that
the proposed NPRM, if adopted, will. effectively address the problem at
Mary L. Vigilante
which it is directed. The difficulties of implementing and policing the
President, Synergy Consultants
proposed restrictions on VFR helicopter operations appear to be profound.
Seattle
Evidence of this can be found in the FAA's December 2004 Report to
Congress Regarding Nonmilitary Helicopter Urban Noise Study; where it
is stated:
The priority for tracking [aircraft] focuses primarily on IFR
controlled airspace and connnercial transport operations. The
FAA main priority is dedicated to maintaining the IFR system
functions. FAA has limited infrastructure tracking resources and
budget to expand capabilities to VFR operations. M., p. 6-13.
"Under these circumstances, only time will tell whether adoption of
the proposed regulation purporting to mandate use of the New York North
Shore Helicopter Route will yield the noise relief sought by its support-
ers," Pflaum told ANR.
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@,airportnoiserepoit.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'
� �.
`r
Airport Noise Report
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments2.
Volume 22, Number 19
Helicopters
FAA REFUSES REQUEST BY TRADE GROUPS
TO EXTEND COMMENT PERIOD ON NPRIYI
Despite concerns by aviation trade groups that a Federal Aviation Administra-
tion proposal to impose a mandatory noise -abatement helicopter route off Long Is-
land would have potentially far-reaching implications nationwide and set a
dangerous precedent, the FAA has refused their request to extend the public com-
ment period on the proposal.
The Eastern Regional Helicopter Council, the Helicopter Association Interna-
tional (HA1), the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), the National Air
Transportation Association (NATA), and the General Aviation Manufacturers Asso-
ciation (GAMA) jointly asked the FAA on June 14 to extend the original 30 -day
comment period, which closed on June 25, by a minimum of 60 day.
In addition, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) asked the FAA
to extend the continent period by 90 days.
However, Edith Parish, manager, Airspace and Rules Group of FAA's Air Traf-
I
tic Organization, told the trade groups that the agency "does not find it in the best
interest of the public to extend the comment period." However, she noted that FAA
(Continued on p. 76)
CLEEN Program
FAA AWARDS $125 ISI IN C®NRAC`I'S TO SPEED
INTRODUCTION OF GLEN TECHNOLOGY.
.
The Federal Aviation Administration on June 24 announced $125 million in
contracts with aircraft and engine manufacturers Boeing, General Electric, Honey-
well, Pratt &Whitney, and Rolls Royce - North Americato develop and demon-
strate technologies that will reduce commercial jet fuel consumption, emissions,
and noise.
The contracts are part of the FAA's Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions and
Noise (CLEEN) program to speed. the introduction of "green" technology into avia-
tion.
"The FAA is working with the aviation community to aggressively meet critical
enviromnental and energy goals," said FAAAdministrator Randy Babbitt. "The
CLEEN program is a central piece of the Next. Generation air traffic modernization
environ nental strategy."
The five companies will research and demonstrate a variety of technologies, in-
cluding:
• Sustainable alternative aviation ftiels;
• Lighter and more efficient gas turbine engine components;
(Continued ons p. 77
Airport Noise Report
75
June 25, 2010
.In This Issue...
Helicopters ... FAA refuses
to extend comment period on
controversial NPRM to im-
pose mandatory helicopter
route off Long Island despite
warnings from aviation trade
groups that proposal could
have far-reaching national
implications, would set a
dangerous precedent, and has
not been properly analyzed -
p. 75
CLEEN Progranz ... FAA
announces $125 million in
grants to Boeing, GE, Hon-
eywell, P&W, and Rolls to
speed development of tech-
nologies to cut aircraft noise
and emissions. Boeing said it
will flight test new green
technologies in 2012 and
2013 - p. 75
Seattle -Tacoma Int'l...
Three airlines honored by
Port of Seattle as winners of.
Fly Quiet Awards - p. 77
Buckeye Hunicipa[Ahport
... FAA announces approval
of all five proposed noise
mitigation measures in Part
1.50 Airport Noise Compati-
bility Program - p. 77
lune 25, 2010
Helicopters, firoin p. 75
will consider comments filed late "if at all possible to do so
without incurring expense or delay."
In a joint letter sent June 14, the Helicopter Council, HAI,
NBAA, NATA, and GAMA told FAA that its proposal "is not
only significant in the local region, but potentially has far-
reaching implications nationwide."
"We respectfully believe the FAA in this NPRM has
failed to analyze properly its economic and environmental
consequences; engages in a dangerous precedent of imposing
noise abatement rules without the rigor of actual data collec-
tion, objective measurements, and cost benefit analysis, and
improperly has sought to avoid meaningfirl Administration
review. Indeed, the NPRM appears politically inspired, not
scientifically based, and lacks an adequate purpose and
need," the trade groups told FAA.
FAA noted in the NPRM that NY Sen. Charles Schumer
(D) and former senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) wanted
the mandatory helicopter route to be imposed.
The proposed rile (22 ANR 66) would require civil heli-
copters operating under visual flight rules along a section of
the northern shoreline of Long Island, NY, to follow the pub-
lished New York .North Shore Route, which was adopted on a
voluntary basis in 2008 as a way to address thousands of
complaints about helicopter noise, especially in the summer,
when helicopters ferry people from Manhattan to Long Island
beaches.
Four )Reasons to Extend Comment Period
In their joint letter, the aviation trade groups cited four
reasons to extend the continent period oil the proposed lieli-
copter route.
"First, the potential economic impact of the proposed reg-
ulatory changes, particularly on small. businesses, is signifi-
cant. The NPRM staters that the FAA identified only five
small entities in the New York market that would be impacted
by the proposed regulatory- changes. Our initial analysis indi-
cates that the proposed regulatory changes have the potential
to impact over fifty small businesses.
"Second, the environmental impact of the proposed regu-
latory changes does not appear to be well-documented. The
NPRM states that the proposed rulemaking action qualifies
for the categorical exclusion from the requirement for an en-
vironmental assessment or environmental impact statement
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4321 et. seq., because it does not have a significant ef-
fect on the human environment.
"We believe the potential environmental impact could be
significant with the concentration of noise on selected areas
and the additional fuel buns that will be the result of more cir-
cuitous routes. As a result, the categorical exclusion finding
may not be in accord with FAA Order JO 7400.2G Proce-
dures for Handling Airspace Matters, and. FAA Order
1050.1E Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. JO
7400.2G.
76
"Third, the FAA in this NPRM appears to be responding
more to subjective complaints, observations, and local poli-
tics than technical or safety-related data, while engaging in
the relatively uncharted practice of using its regulatory au-
thority, as opposed to an airport sponsor's proprietary powers,
for the purpose of imposing mandatory noise abatement pro-
cedures. As a result, the NPRM may have unintended and far-
reaching consequences that impact both the industry as well
as the FAA itself, while having the unintended result of de-
creasing the margin of safety.
Two aviation also criticized the NPRM for similar reasons
(22 ANR 70).
"More time is needed so that we may fully understand
and evaluate the potentially extensive and wide-ranging con-
sequences of the proposed regulatory action," the trade
groups told FAA.
"Finally," they said, "we are concerned that the NPRM
did not undergo review by the Office of Management and
Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
("O1RA").
"The NPRM states that the FAA has determined that the
proposed rule is not a `significant regulatory action' within
the meaning of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and
therefore is exempt from a full evaluation. Given the contro-
versy this NPRM has generated, and the above policy and
legal issues, we believe that full OIRA evaluation of the
NPRM is warranted."
The FAA has received over 300 comments on the pro-
posed mandatory helicopter route. Many are from residents
supporting the proposal but others, some from helicopter pi-
lots, oppose it.
Southampton Concerned about Safety
The Village of Southampton, NY, located 70 miles east of
New York City on Long island, asked FAA to formally recog
nize its heliport in the New York North Shore Helicopter
Route and to require helicopters to approach and depart from
the north.
Last September, citing safety concerns, the Village asked
the FAA to restrict helicopter operations at the Southampton
heliport and to define flight paths for helicopters and small
planes.
"During the summer months in Southampton, we have
planes that pull. banners, private and commercial helicopters
operating, Coast Guard operations both in the air and at sea,
and no control system in place," Southampton Mayor Mark
Epley, told FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt in a Sept. 4,
2009, letter.
The mayor asked FAA to begin restricing helicopter- oper-
ations citing the "cowboy attitude of many of the pilots and
the blatant disregard of their own `neighborhood. friendly'
guidelines."
"I envision the worst; a helicopter pilot departing the heli -
pad to the south over homes and a. crowded beach encounter-
ing a. plane pulling a banner. The Village code is written to
prevent that from happening but is appears the only govern -
Airport Noise Report
June 25, 2010
meat body who has the ability to control airspace is yours,"
Mayor Epley told the FAA administrator.
However, in a Dec. 4, 2009, reply, Carmine Gallo, Re-
gional Administrator of FAA's Eastern Region, told the
mayor that his request was denied.
"To our knowledge there have been no known incidences
where safety has been compromised due to operations at this
heliport," the FAA official said.
Seattle -Tacoma Int'l
AIR.. CANADA JAZZ WINS FIRST
PLACE IN FLY QUIET AWARDS
Three airlines were honored by the Port of Seattle Com-
mission on June 22 as winners of the 2010 Fly Quiet Awards
for their efforts in 2009 at Seattle -Tacoma International Air-
port.
Air Canada Jazz finished first this year, with SkyWest
Airlines (United Express) second, and Virgin America recog-
nized as honorable mention.
The Fly Quiet incentive program was designed to honor
airline companies that work to reduce the impacts of jet noise
on the region. Evaluations include measuring each airline on
its compliance with noise abatement flight paths, overall
noise level of its operations and compliance for testing en-
gines on the ground, the Port explained.
The annual awards were established by Port staff and a
citizen advisory committee to increase airline and pilot
awareness to benefit local communities.
"We applaud the Fly Quiet Award winners as good. neigh-
bors to the communities affected by aircraft noise," said Bill
Bryant, Port of Seattle Commission President.
Both Air Canada Jazz and SkyWest scored well due to
their jets following noise abatement flight paths and through
operation of quieter Canadair. Regional Jet (CRJ) aircraft. Vir-
gin America operates Airbus 319/320 aircraft, the Port said.
Part .150 Program
FAA. APPROVES 1.50 PROGRAM
FOR BUCKEYE MUNICIPAL
Oil June 21, the Federal Aviation Administration an-
nounced its approval of the Part 150 Airport Noise Compati-
bility Program for Buckeye (AZ) Municipal Airport.
The agency gave outright approval to all five proposed
program measures:
• Developing a pilot and community outreach program;
• .Developing project review guidelines for development
of proposals within the Public Airport Disclosure Area;
• Ask Town of Buckeye to discourage re -zoning of
parcels near the airport that would allow more than one
dwelling unit per acre;
77
• Update noise exposure maps and, noise compatibility
program; and
• Oversee implementation of Part 150 program.
For further information, contact Ruben Cabalbag, acting
manager of FAA's Los Angeles Airports District Office; tel:
(310) 725-3621.
CLEEN, fi•orn p. 75
• Noise -reducing engine nozzles;
• Advanced wing trailing edges;
• Optimized flight trajectories using onboard flight man-
agement systems; and
• Open rotor and geared turbofan engines.
The five contracts are expected to total $125 million over
the five-year span of the program. Under this "cost sharing"
arrangement the companies will match or exceed the FAA's
contribution, bringing the overall value of tine program to
more than $250 million.
The CLEEN program helps develop environn-ientally
friendly and energy efficient aircraft and engine technology
that could be introduced into the commercial aircraft fleet be-
ginning in 2015.
The CLEEN companies will participate in a government -
industry consortium. The consortium will work to develop
technologies that will. reduce noise, emissions, and fuel burn
to enable the aviation industry to expedite integration of these
technologies into current and future aircraft.
CLEEN Program Goals
Specifically, CLEEN's goals include developing and
demonstrating by 2015:
• Aircraft technology that reduces aircraft fuel bum by 33
percent relative to current subsonic aircraft technology, and
which reduces energy consumption and greenhouse gas emis-
sions;
• Engine technology that reduces landing and takeoff
cycle (LTO) nitrogen oxide emissions by 60 percent, without
increasing other gaseous or particle emissions, over the Inter-
national Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standard
adopted in 2004;
• Certifiable aircraft technology that reduces noise levels
by 32 dB cumulative, relative to the current Stage 4 noise
standard; and
• The extent to which new engine and aircraft technolo-
gies may be used to retrofit or re -engine aircraft to decrease
aviation's enviromnental impact. Wide ranging sustainable
aviation jet fuels, including quantification of benefits; and
• Safety and transition strategies that enable "drop in" re-
placennent for petroleum -derived aviation fuels. Drop-in al-
ternative ftrels will require no significant modifications to
aircraft and engines and with a. goal of performing more effi-
ciently, and cleaner than current fossil -based fuels.
The FAA said it will conduct independent assessments of
CLEEN teclujologies using a modeling tool developed at
Georgia Institute of Technology for the FAA.
Airport Noise Report
June 2S, 2010
78
ANREDITORIAL
"By combining our resources and expertise, we believe we can transi-
ADVISORY BOARD
tion promising technologies from development into service more quickly
to help reduce the environmental footprint of airplanes," said Matt Ganz,
vice president and general manager of Boeing Research & Technology,
John J. Corbett, Esq.
which is leading the program at Boeing.
"We recognize the importance of protecting our ecosystem and are
Spiegel & McDiarnid
looking forward to working with the FAA on a variety of innovative solu-
Washington, DC
tions to help define the future."
Boeing said that the technologies being developed under the CLEEN
Carl E. Burleson
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
program will be flight tested aboard two demonstration vehicles, a Next -
Generation Boeing 737 in 2012,
Federal Aviation Administration
with a second series of test flights aboard
a yet -to -be -determined twin -aisle airplane in 2013.
This flight -test program builds on the success of the company's Quiet
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Technology Demonstrators, which successfully highlighted a. variety of
noise reduction technologies during test flights aboard Boeing 777 aircraft
Denver
from 2001 to 2005.
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
According to Boeing CLEEN Program Manager Craig Wilsey, the
technologies that will be developed and tested during demonstration
President, Mestre Greve Associates
flights include adaptive wing trailing edges and ceramic matrix composite
Laguna Niguel, CA
acoustic engine nozzles.
Adaptive trailing edges pertain to a collection of small controllable de -
Steven E Pflaum, Esq.
vices that are integrated into the aft portion of the wing. Most traditional
Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
Chicago
wings are designed for best performance while at cruise, and have per -
formance compromises during other flight phases. Adaptive trailing edges
Alary L. Vigilante
can help tailor the wing configuration to reduce fuel bunt at takeoff, climb
and cruise, and to reduce community noise at takeoff and landing_
President, Synergy Consultants
New -generation engines on commercial airplanes are more efficient,
Seattle
but require materials that are capable of withstanding higher temperatures
than previous engines. Ceramic matrix composites offer the potential of
better thermal and structural performance, while helping to reduce weight
and acoustic footprint, Boeing said.
Alan Epstein, Pratt & Whitney vice president, Technology & Environ-
ment, also commented on the CLEEN program. "The PurePower
PW1000G(r) engine, which is scheduled for entry into service in 2013, al-
ready enables Pratt & Whitney to deliver world class levels of fuel buns,
noise, and emissions," lie said.
"Unlike conventional turbofans based on existing technology that
have been stretched to its limits to achieve added efficiencies, the geared
turbofan engine technology has runway and should achieve fuel bun. sav-
ings of 25-35 percent by the 2020s. The gear changes everything."
"The PurePower family of engines is designed to power the next gen-
eration of passenger aircraft. The combination of its gear system and ad-
vanced core allows PurePower engines to deliver double-digit
improvements in fuel efficiency and. emissions with a 50 -percent reduc-
tion in noise over today's engines," Pratt & Whitney 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: cdicor@airportroisereport.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.
A a
.iku Report
A'weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 22, Number 20
Helicopters
TOWN ASKS F'AA. TO FORM STAK 4OLDEI2
GROUP TO HELP GUIDE HELICOPTER STUDY
The Town of East Hampton, NY, has asked the Federal. Aviation Administration
to convene a formal stakeholder group to participate in a study of alternative heli-
copter routes over eastern Long Island.
Rep. Tim Bishop (D -NY) inserted language into the pending House version of
the FAA Reauthorization bill that would require the FAA to conduct a study of beli-
copter routes and altitudes over eastern Long Island and to recommend ways to
abate the impact of helicopter operations over residential areas.
The Town of East Hampton fears that FAA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRIvI) to impose a mandatory helicopter route off the north shore of Long Island
will obviate the need for the study included in the House bill.
The Town urged FAA to make clear that its NPRM is not intended to do that.
"The final rile should explicitly include an FAA commitment to fund, and to con-
vene the relevant stakeholders to oversee such a study," East Hampton Town Su-
pervisor William J. Wilkinson, told the FAA in comments on its NPRM.
He said the stakeholder group should consist of municipalities and airport pro -
(Continued on p. 80)
Santa Monica Airport
CA ASSEMBLY PASSES RESOLUTION ASKING
F'EDS TO COLLABORATE ON NOISE, EMISSIONS
On June 21, the California Assembly passed a resolution asking federal agen-
cies and members of the California congressional delegation to work collabora-
tively to address aircraft noise levels and emissions at Santa Monica Airport.
Assembly Joint Resolution (AJR) 41, authored by California Assemblyman Ted
Lieu (D) was sent to the California Senate for consideration.
The Resolution. asks the Federal Aviation Administration, the federal Environ-
mental Protection Agency, the federal. Department of Transportation, and the mem-
bers of the state congressional delegation "to work collaboratively to review noise
levels, the safety of flight operations at Santa Monica Airport, and to carefully ex-
amine the air pollution impact on the surrounding communities."
Lieu noted in his Resolution that "more large, high -polluting jet aircraft use
Santa Monica Airport than ever before and, in recent years, the number of jet air-
craft operations at Santa Monica Airport has increased exponentially, from an an-
nual total of 1,000 in 1984 to tens of thousands today."
The Resolution asks the federal agencies and congressional delegation:
l • To "enlist the help of expert scientists to study the effects of emissions from
(Confinrued on. p. 80
Airport Noise Report
79
July 2, 2010
In This Issue...
Helicopters ... Town of East
Hampton asks FAA to con-
vene a formal stakeholders
group to participate in study
of alternative helicopter
routes over eastern Long Is-
land - p. 79
Santa Monica Airport ...
California Assembly passes
resolution asking federal
agencies to help mitigate
noise, emissions - p. 79
ACRP... New legal research
digest summarizes federal,
state cases challenging air-
port development projects,
airport operations - p. 80
Open Skies Agreernent ...
U.S. and EU sign "Second
Stage" civil aviation agree-
ment that provides greater
protection for U.S. carriers
from arbitrary restrictions on
night flights at European air-
ports - p. 82
Park Over flights ... FAA
will prepare EA for Air Tour
M.anagernent. Plan program.
at Petrified Forest National
Park; seeks comments on
scope of EA - P. 82
July 2, 2010
Helicopters, from p. 79
prietors in eastern Long Island and operator groups who are
most potentially affected by proposed helicopter routes.
"Most important, each of the stakeholders should have a
seat at the table to ensure the study's legitimacy and. to ensure
that it genuinely and. transparently addresses the problem of
helicopter overflight noise in eastern Long Island in a com-
prehensive manner," Wilkinson told the FAA.
Sucha. study committee has precedent in FAA-fimded
Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility programs, he asserted.
"Since most noise -related flight patterns in the country are
the result of Part 150 -initiated efforts, these types of stake-
holder -driven studies are standard practice. We urge the FAA
to adapt the principles underlying the Part 150 process to this
effort."
Wilkinson also said the study should include not only the
North off -shore route proposed in its NPR114 but also a route
along the South Shore of Long Island and transition routes
between those off -shore routes and destinations inland in
eastern Long Island.
The FAA's NPRM would require civil helicopters operat-
ing under visual flight rules along a section of the northern
shoreline of Long Island to follow the published New York
North Shore Route, which was adopted as a voluntary route.
Like several aviation trade groups, the Town of East
Hampton asserted that FAA was wrong in determining that
the NPRM is categorically excluded from environmental re-
view.
The Town urged FAA to conduct an environmental review
of the proposed mandatoy helicopter route, to consider a
South Shore route as an alternative or complement to the
North Shore Route, to consider alternative minimum altitudes
as a means of reducing helicopter noise, and to mandate way -
points and/or routes for helicopters enroute and over land at
the east end of Long Island.
Over 800 comments, practically all from individual citi-
zens, have been submitted to the docket on the NPRIvi.
ACRP
DIGEST SUMMARIZES CASES
CHALLENGING DEVELOPMENT
A new 60 -page legal research digest entitled "Case Stud-
ies on Community Challenges to Airport Development," was
issued by the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRD)
in June.
ACRP Legal Digest 9 includes a comprehensive review
of judicial decisions on community challenges to airport de-
velopment projects and explains the bases of the challenges,
the defense to the challenges, and the outcome of the cases.
"This collection is intended to convey the strategies the
Federal Aviation Administration and airport operators rely
upon to address community challenges to airport develop -
:1
meat projects and to identify which strategies have suc-
ceeded, which have failed, and the reasons for both, the di-
gest explains.
In addition to the case studies, the digest also includes a
summary of responses from airport proprietors to a survey re-
garding litigation strategies. "It appears that a major compo-
nent of such strategies is directed. toward litigation
avoidance," the digest notes.
The digest should be useful to airport attorneys, environ-
mental specialists, managers, planners, administrators, real
estate specialists, right-of-way specialists, zoning experts,
and project development specialists.
The digest addresses both federal and state cases brought
by communities and non-profit groups opposed to airport ex-
pansion projects or to development or operations at airports.
The digest does not address challenges to the exercise of emi-
nent domain that have been filed by individual property own-
ers against airport proprietors seeking to expand their
boundaries through such takings.
The litigation summarized in the digest is organized by
environmental law challenges, constitutional law challenges,
state law issues, jurisdictional issues, challenges to Passenger
Facility Charges, and other statutory challenges.
"The volume of case law regarding community chal-
lenges to airport development and operations clearly indicates
that litigation. is always a threat from municipalities and conn-
munity groups seeking to modify or prevent airport expan-
sion and development. Nevertheless, airport proprietors have
managed to avoid such litigation through prior planning and
buffering, positive community relations and Iocal govermnent
support, and compliance with environmental regulation.
Strategically, airport proprietors are well advised to pursue a
proactive relationship with parties of interest in the commu-
nity as part of their airport development planning," the digest
concludes.
Legal Research Digest 9 was prepared under ACRD Proj-
ect 11-01, "Legal Aspects of Airport Programs." The digest is
available at
http://www.trb.org/Pub lications/Blurbs/Case_S tudies_on_Co
nnnunity_ h.allenges_to Airport De_163599.aspx.
Santa Afonica, frons p. 79
Santa Monica Airport and apply that science into remediation
efforts;
• To establish and implement a reasonable minimum dis-
tance between aircraft operations at Santa Monica Airport
and the neighboring communities; and
• To develop and offer federally funded relocation assis-
tance to affected homeowners who desire it.
The Resolution also "strongly urges the Federal Avia-
tion Administration to honor the decision of the City of Santa
Monica. to increase safety precautions at Santa Monica Air-
port, and restrict the use of Category C and D aircraft at Santa
Monica Airport."
The City of Santa Monica has challenged FAA's conclu-
Airport Noisc Report
July 2, 2010
Sion that its ordinance banning Category C and D aircraft is
unreasonable and discriminatory. The City imposed the ordi-
nance, which is unprecedented, out of concern that faster jets
would. overshoot the ends of runways and crash into homes,
which are as close as 300 feet from the airport.
FAA Departure Path Change
Assemblyman Lieu also noted in his Resolution that
changes in FAA flight riles requiring jet aircraft to receive
permission from air traffic controllers at .Los Angeles Interna-
tional Airport before tatting off have created significant de- .
pasture delays at Santa Monica Airport and forced jet aircraft
to idle with their engines running for longer times while
awaiting permission from LAX to take off.
In an effort to reduce that delay, the FAA conducted a
180 -day test of a change in the departure flight patter at
Santa Monica designed to separate small propeller -powered
aircraft from larger jets departing LAX.
That flight pattern test ended on June 8 and FAA is now
in the process of determining whether it was successful. Pre-
liminary findings indicated that it reduced delays and emis-
sions levels but some Santa Monica Airport neighbors
complained that it shifted noise over their heads.
The City of Santa Monica is aggressively pushing the
FAA to conduce a fall environmental impact study of any
permanent change to a departure flight path for small pro-
peller -powered aircraft (22 ANR 66).
The City recently hired several consulting firms to help it
with its own analysis of FAA s flight pattern test. ASRC Re-
search and Technology Solutions (ARTS) will analyze the
FAA's departure flight pattern change and will advise the
City on. possible alternative departure paths to remedy the
noise problem.
The City also hired the airport consulting firm Landrum
and Brown Consulting to quantify and model the noise im-
pact from the aircraft that participated in the FAA flight test.
Also, Lochard Corp. has be retained to install its Web -
Trak near -real-time flight tracking system on the airport's
website. Complaints can be filed through the system.
Open Skies Agreement
U.S. CARRIERS GET PROTECTION
FROM EST NIGHT RESTRICTIONS
On June 24 in Luxembourg, representatives of the United
States and the European Union (EU) and its 27 Member
States signed a "Second Stage" civil aviation agreement, pro-
viding for greater U.S.-EU cooperation on a wide range of
aviation issues and giving U.S. carriers greater protection
from nighttime noise restrictions at European airports.
"The accord builds on the historic U.S.-EU `Open Skies'
agreement that was signed in April 2007. That pro -consumer,
pro -competitive agreement eliminated restrictions on air
services between the United States and EU member states, al-
lowing airlines from both sides to select routes and destina-
tions based on consumer demand for both passenger and
cargo services, without limitations on the number of U.S. or
EU carriers that can fly or the number of flights they can op-
erate," the U.S. State Department explained.
It said that the "Second Stage" agreement affirms that the
terms of the 2007 agreement will remain in place indefinitely.
It also deepens U.S.-EU cooperation in aviation security,
safety, competition, and ease of travel.
"In addition, it provides greater protections for U.S. carri-
ers from arbitrary restrictions on night flights at European air-
ports and provides for further discussion of whether
legislation in the fields of noise regulation and foreign invest-
ment in airlines is appropriate," the State Department said.
However; the State Department did not discuss in detail
what kind of protections U.S. carriers would be provided
from arbitrary restrictions on night flights at EU airports. The
Department official who can provide that information is on
vacation until next week.
The State Department said that the new agreement "also
adds a new article on the importance of high labor standards
in the airline industry and underscores the importance of
close transatlantic cooperation on aviation environmental
matters in order to advance a global approach to global chal-
lenges."
Legislative Chaiiges Required
The EU explained that, under the Second Stage, the U.S.
and Europe have committed to the goal of removing remain-
ing access barriers, and will review progress toward this ob-
jective on an annual basis.
Additional commercial rights will be exchanged in the fu-
ture subject to following legislative changes:
• Reciprocal liberalization of airline ownership and con-
trol. Currently, foreign ownership in US airlines is limited to
25 percent of voting rights. Upon legislative change in the
U.S., the EU will reciprocally allow majority ownership of
EU airlines by U.S. nationals;
• Airport noise -based restrictions. Subject to legislative
changes in the EU concerning the process for introducing
noise -based airport restrictions, EU airlines will gain addi-
tional rights to fly between the U.S. and a number of non-Eu-
ropean countries. Furthennore, a number of obstacles for EU
investment in third -country airlines will be removed. Similar
rights will be available for U.S. airlines when the US laws
allow EU majority ownership of U.S. airlines.
The EU said that the negotiators also achieved significant
improvements in terms of regulatory cooperation:
• The agreement will strengthen cooperation on environ-
mental matters by requiring the compatibility and interaction
of market-based measures (such as emission trading schemes)
to avoid duplication; by promoting greater transparency for
noise -based airport measures; and by enhancing green tech-
nologies, fuels and air traffic management. This cooperation
is key to making international aviation more sustainable.
• For the first time in aviation history, the agreement in -
Airport Noise Report
J
2010 82
ANR EDITORIAL
eludes a dedicated. article on the social dimension of EU -U.S. aviation re-
lations. This will not only ensure that the existing legal rights of airline
ADVISORY BOARD
employees are preserved, but that the implementation of the agreement
will contribute to high labor standards.
- The agreement will raise the already high level of cooperation on se -
John J. Corbett, Esq.
curity to allocate resources better at threats to the aviation system by pro -
Spiegel & McDiarmid
moting maximum mutual reliance on each other's security measures as
Washington, DC
well as swift and coordinated responses to new threats.
- The agreement further extends the role of the EU -U.S. Joint Com -
Carl E. Burleson
mittee, the body that monitors the implementation of the agreement and
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
coordinates the various work streams of regulatory cooperation. The new
Federal Aviation Administration
rules will reduce red tape (e.g. by mutual recognition of each other's regu-
latory decisions) and avoid the wasteful duplication of resources.
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Denver
In Brief- _
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Air Tour Plan for Petrified Forest
Laguna Niguel, CA
The FAA announced July 1 that it intends to prepare an environmental
assessment for the Air Tour Management Plan (ATMP) Program at Petri -
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq.
fied Forest National Parkin Arizona.
Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
The goal of the ATMP "is to develop acceptable and effective meas-
Chicagoores
to mitigate or prevent the significant adverse impacts, if any, of com-
mercial air tour operations on the natural resources, cultural resources, and
Mary L. Vigilante
visitor experiences of a national park unit and any Tribal lands within or
President, Synergy Consultants
abutting the park," FAA explained.
Seattle
The agency is seeking comments, suggestions, and input on. the scope
of issues to be addressed in the environmental process. They must be sub-
mitted by Aug. 2. Comments can be submitted electronically via the elec-
tronic public comment form on the NPS website at:
http://parkplanning.nps.gov/proj ectHome.cfm?parkId=88&.proj ectfd=308
02.
Correction
ANR reported on p. 67 of the May 28, 2010, issue that the Wisconsin
Department of Transportation had announced the release of $700,000 in
state funds to help fund a $7 million residential sound insulation program
at General Mitchell International Airport.
The Wisconsin DOT said the completion date for the program was De-
cember 2010. That is incorrect. The release of finds was the first grant for
an ongoing multi-year sound insulation program to sound insulate approx-
imately 560 homes in total, according to Kim Berry, Noise Program
Manger for the airport.
111 _0 UUM N IM
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@airporhnoiserepot.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.
EW
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 22, Number 21 July 9, 2010
Hillsboro All Jiort
AVIGATION EASEMENT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
OREGON LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS RULES
A City of.Hillsboro, OR, ordinance that creates au Airport Safety and Compati-
bility Zone around Hillsboro Airport that imposes avigation easements on property
owners is unconstitutional, the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals ruled June 30.
Steve Johnson, a spokesman for the Port of Portland, proprietor of the airport,
said the Port is aware of the decision and is disappointed by it. The Port is taking it
under advisement, lie said, but had no further comment.
It is unclear at this point what the implications of the Board's ruling are on the
constitutionality of avigation easements imposed on homeowners around other air-
ports. Neither the attorney for the plaintiff, the City of Hillsboro, or the Port of
Portland returned calls from ANR by deadline.
In 2009, the City of Hillsboro adopted the ordinance, which rezoned over 7,000
properties to make new development subject to the obligation for the landowner to
- provide the Port of Portland with an avigation easement as a condition of develop-
ment approval.
(Continued on p. 84)
EU
The number one priority of the United States in negotiating the "Second Stage"
Aviation Open Skies agreement with the European Union was to get the Europeans
to accept limits on their imposition of airport noise restrictions, according to State
Department Deputy Assistance Secretary for Transportation Affairs John Byerly.
U.S. airlines, especially overnight cargo carriers, had concerns about the contin-
uing move in Europe toward nighttime flight curfews. "They can't do business if
they can't fly at night," he said, adding that FedEx is pulling out of Frankfurt and
Cologne airports because of their nighttime flight curfews.
The U.S. felt that the European airports were responding to political pressure in
imposing airport noise restrictions and wanted them to base their restrictions on
costibenefit analyses and the so-called 'Balanced Approach' to adopting airport
noise restrictions adopted by the International Civil Aviation Organization in 1990,
lie told ANR.
The U.S. asked to see the cost/benefit analyses for the nighttime operating re-
strictions at Frankfurt and other airports but the EU could not produce then, Byerly
said.
The U.S. was successful in the Second Stage Open Skies Agreement, signed
( (Continued on p. 85
Airport Noise Report
In This Issue...
Easements ... Oregon Land
Use Board of Appeals rules
that avigation easement re-
quirement imposed by City
of Hillsboro, OR, on home-
owners 111 compatibility zone
around Hillsboro Airport is
unconstitutional - p. 83
Europe ... No. 1 priority of
U.S. in negotiating Second
Stage Open Skies agreement
with EU was limiting new
noise restrictions - p. 83
Sonic Boom ... Researchers
conclude it is possible to
construct a portable sonic
boom simulator that can be
used at individual houses but
recommends small-scale
simulator be built first - p. 85
AIP Noise Grants ... Atlanta.
Harstfield, Chicago O'Hare,
and Philadelphia Interna-
tional airports get AIP noise
mitigation grants - p. 86
Part X 50 .Prograin ... FAA
gives overall. approval. to
noise compatibility program
for Modesto City -County
Airport - p. 86
July 9, 2010 84
Hillsboro, frontp. 83
Hillsboro resident Michelle Barnes challenged the ordi-
nance, alleging that it violated the Fifth Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution, which prohibits taking private property for
public use, without just compensation, and with the similar
provisions in Article 1, Section 18 of the Oregon Constitu-
tion.
Barnes argued that the city ordinance was unconstitu-
tional on its face because it failed to meet the required legal
tests enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court in two cases
(Nollaln a California Coastal Commission and Dolan v City
of Tigard) that govern payment of just compensation for ex-
acting property rights.
The Nollann case held that the obligation to pay just com-
pensation for exacting property interest could be avoided
only if there is a demonstration that an "essential nexus" ex-
ists between the exaction and a substantial government pur-
pose. The Dolan case said that the exaction must be "roughly
proportional" to the impacts of the proposed development.
The City of Hillsboro and the Port of Portland, which in-
tervened in the case, argued that the avigation easement re-
quirement is intended to address airport compatibility issues
and avoid land use conflicts in areas surrounding airports.
"Reducing land use conflicts with the airport is certainly
a legitimate governmental objective,"' the Land Use Board of
Appeals said in its ruling. "The avigation easement require-
ment presumably attempts to further that objective by requir-
ing as a condition of development that surrounding property
owners convey a property interest to the Port, allowing,
among other things, the Port "free and unobstructed passage
of aircraft through the airspace over the property" above a
certain height, and the "right to subject the property to noise,
vibrations, fumes, dust and fuel particle emissions associated
with normal airport activity."
"However, as in Nollann, the exaction of property does not
advance the purported governmental interest, because grant-
ing the Port an easement to physically invade private property
would do nothing to actually reduce conflicts between the
Airport and surrounding land uses. The same conflicts (noise,
etc.) would exist to the exact same degree, with or without
the easement," the Board said.
Easement Makes Lawsuits More Difficult
"The only arguable effect of requiring property owners to
grant such an easement as a condition of land use approval is
to make it more difficult for property owners to advance a
successful inverse condennration or other legal action against
the Port, based on trespass or the externalized impacts of the
airport operations on surrounding uses. We think it highly
doubtful that talcing private property for that purpose consti-
tutes a legitimate govennnent objective," the Board wrote.
"Moreover, requiring an easement to allow for passage of
aircraft over the property and the right to subject the property
to airplane noise, etc., appears to have no comiection whatso-
ever to the development of property surrounding the airport
or the impacts of development. It is difficult to understand
how allowing the Port to externalize adverse impacts onto
property surrounding the airport could be "roughly propor-
tional," or related at all, to the impacts of any kind of devel-
opment on that property. Respondents offer no scenario or
argument under which such an exaction could possibly be
proportional to the impacts of any potential development al-
lowed in the base [Airport Use] zone and the Airport Safety
and Compatibility zone."
The Board ruled that the first two elements of the aviga-
tion easement required by the Hillsboro ordinance "are fa-
cially inconsistent with the state and federal Takings Clauses,
under the reasoning in Nollan and Dolan, and are incapable
of any constitutionally permissible application." These two
elements are:
• (1) A right-of-way for free and unobstructed passage of
aircraft through the airspace over the property at any altitude
above a surface specified in the easement (set in accordance
with Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 criteria) and
• (2) A right to subject the property to noise, vibrations,
fumes, dust, and fuel particle emissions associated with nor-
mal airport activity.
The Board held that "whether the three remaining ele-
ments of an avigation easement are also unconstitutional for
the reasons set out above is less clear, since those elements
arguable function to actually reduce airport/land use conflicts,
have some bearing on the city's presumed objective in reduc-
ing land use conflicts, and could have, at least in some cases,
some relationship to the impacts of developing property."
The final three elements of the avigation easement are:
(3) A right to prohibit the erection or growth of any
structure, tree, or other object that would penetrate the imagi-
nary surfaces as defined in this ordinance;
• (4) A right -of -entry onto the property, with proper ad-
vance notice, for the purpose of marking or lighting any
structure or other object that penetrates the imaginary sur-
faces as defined in this ordinance; and
• (5) A right to prohibit electrical interference, glare, mis-
leading lights, visual impainnents, and other hazards to air-
craft flight as defined in this ordinance from being created on
the property.
The Board said that if the avigation easement requirement
included only the latter three elements, "we might well con-
clude that it would survive a facial challenge, and could be
challenged only on an as -applied basis. However, the aviga-
tion easement requires all five elements, and therefore even if
an easement that included only the three remaining elements
would pass facial scrutiny, the avigation easement requires{
under [the city ordinance] is still unconstitutional."
The Board's final order and opinion in 11,Iichelle Barnes v
City of Hillsboro is available at its website http://wivw.ore-
gon.gov/LUBA/index.shtml. Click on Final Opinions on top
right side of home page.
Airport Noise Report
I
July 9, 2010
EU, from p. 83
June 24 (22 ANR 81) in getting the EU to agree to conduct
cost/benefit analyses of their proposed noise restrictions at
airports with more than 50,000 annual operations and to
adopt what appears to be the U.S. framework for determining
the legality of the noise restrictions.
However, the U.S. could not get the EU to agree to feder-
alize approval of local airport noise restrictions, an approach
imposed by the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990
(ANCA) in the United States that has been successful in es-
sentially blocking the imposition of new airport noise restric-
tions here for the past 20 years.
But the U.S. is still trying to tempt the EU to accept fed-
eral approval of airport noise restrictions. The Second Stage
agreement would provide European airlines with additional
passenger service to the Unites States if and when the EU re-
vises its laws and regulations to provide that the European
Commission can take "appropriate legal action" against noise
restrictions at European airports with more than. 50,000 an-
nual operations that it feels are unwarranted.
Byerly said that the EU has given no indication, however,
that it will change its regulations to allow EC approval of air-
port noise restrictions.
The State Department official said that ANCA was a good
thing to do in the U.S. and he would like the EU to look at the
level. at which decisions on airport noise restrictions are
made. "The U.S asked the Europeans to do in Europe what
the U.S. has done with ANCA: to federalize the decisions on
noise restrictions. We said this is the way to have coherence
and balance" and to consider the macro -economic effects
more broadly.
But the EU said it cannot do that; it is contrary to how
they make decisions. The result is that they did not agree to
federalize decisions on noise restrictions.
New Article on Environment
The Second Stage Agreement includes Article 3 on the
Environment, which replaces Article 15 in the original Open
Skies Agreement signed in 2007.
The EU agreed in Article 3 to provide the following in
imposing new mandatory noise -based operating restrictions at
airports with more than 50,000 movements of civil subsonic
jet airplanes per calendar year:
• To provide an opportunity for the views of interested
parties to be considered in the decision-making process of
new noise restrictions;
• To provide to the U.S. notice of the introduction of any
new operating restriction at least 150 days prior to its entry
into force. At the request of the U.S., to provide a written re-
port "without delay explaining the reasons for introducing the
operating restriction, the environmental objective established
for the airport, and the measures that were considered to meet
that objective. The report shall include the relevant evaluation
of the likely costs and benefits of the various measures con-
sidered";
• "Operating restrictions shall be (i) non-discriminatory,
(ii) not more restrictive than necessary in order to achieve the
environmental objective established for a specific airport, and
(iii) non -arbitrary."
In Article 3, the EU and U.S. also agreed to exchange in-
formation and have regular dialogue among experts on the
following:
Research and development of enviromnentally-friendly
aviation technology;
• Improvement of scientific understanding regarding avia-
tion emissions impacts in order to better inform policy deci-
sions;
Air traffic management innovation with a view to reduc-
ing the environmental impacts of aviation;
• Research and development of sustainable alternative
fuels for aviation; and
Exchange of views on issues and options in intema-
tional for a dealing with the enviromnental effects of aviation
including the coordination of positions, where appropriate.
The goal of the Balanced Approach is to address the
noise problem in the most cost-effective manner and not to
impose aircraft operating restrictions as a first step.
The Second Stage civil aviation agreement is available at
v,,wiv.state.gov/e/ceb/rls/otlir/ata/e/eulindex.btm
Sonic Boom
Researchers at Penn State University concluded that it is
possible to construct a portable sonic boom simulator that can
be used at individual houses but reconnnended that a small-
scale simulator be built first.
Their recommendations were made in a new study placed
on the website of the PARTNER (Partriership for AiR Trans-
portation Noise and Emissions Reduction) research consor-
tium.
The study, "Sonic Boom Subsonic Aircraft Noise Out-
door Simulation Design Study," is part of PARTNER Project
24 on Noise Exposure Response: Annoyance.
The goal of PARTNER Project 24 "is to develop a deeper
understanding of how noise affects annoyance in communi-
ties in proximity to airports. The ultimate aim is to construct
models that can be coupled with sound prediction models to
predict annoyance that would result from future airport de-
velopments or changes in air traffic patterns," PARTNER ex-
plained.
Another aspect of Project 24, it said, "is focused on un-
derstanding the impact of low frequency noise on annoyance.
High levels of low frequency noise can cause vibration and
rattle and sometimes people can feel as well as hear the
sounds. This might be a particular problem for transient
sounds from next -generation supersonic aircraft."
Included in Project 24 activities is this design study for
Airport Noise Report
July 9. 2010
the development of a portable indoor sonic boom/noise simu-
lator. "This device would allow researchers to `boom' exist-
ing residences with arbitrary waveforms and survey people to
determine annoyance caused by the `booms'. It could also be
used to characterize the physical responses of different types
of constriction and improve sound transmission models for
prediction of noise exposure indoors. This device could also
be used for subsonic studies of noise transmission and human
response" PARTNER explained.
Victor Sparrow and Steven Garett of the Penn State Grad-
uate Program in Acoustics, conducted the portable sonic
boom simulator study.
Their study showed "that such a simulator likely can be
constructed to meet every design goal, but it will not be inex-
pensive."
They recommended that a small-scale simulator "be used
to assess whether the system components can meet the strict
volume velocity and impulse response requirements, and thus
provide an experimental basis for the construction of a more
expensive, full scale simulator."
A number of simulators have been created by NASA Lan-
gley, Gulfstream, and Georgia Tech but they are stationary
and the listener knows they are in a simulation device. Sub-
jects' reactions may not be the same as in their own house
where pictures and bric-a-brac on the wall can rattle.
"What would be useful is a simulator with the audio capa-
bility to play either a sonic boom or other aircraft sound out-
side an actual house (or portion of a house) to assess
annoyance thresholds of occupants inside the house. The sim-
ulator would need to be portable, so that a number of differ-
ent types of houses, using different types of home
construction, could be evaluated. This type of simulator
would be helpfinl in assessing people's reactions to sonic
boom and subsonic aircraft noise being heard and/or felt in
their own homes ... even from aircraft that have not yet been
built," the researchers explained in their study.
"This would allow for the accurate determination of an-
noyance thresholds, in realistic non -laboratory settings, for
current and future FAA regulation development, both for
sonic booms and for subsonic aircraft noise. Such a new sim-
ulator would provide a good bridge between (a.) laboratory
testing in existing or currently planned simulators and (b.) ac-
tual flight testing. Although flight testing is possible for sub-
sonic aircraft noise, it is often cost -prohibitive. Flight testing
is not possible for low -boom sonic boom since no low -boom
demonstrator vehicle currently exists."
AIP Grants
HARTSFIELD, OWARE, PH L GET
GRANTS FOR NOISE MITIGATION
Atlanta Harstfield-Jackson International, Chicago O'Hare
International, and Philadelphia International airports re-
ceived Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants for noise
W.
mitigation projects in fiscal 2010, according to Federal Avia-
tion Administration data.
The City of Atlanta received a $10 million AIP grant for
noise mitigation measures for public buildings and for resi-
dences within the 65-69 DNL contour of Hartsfield -Jackson
International Airport.
The City of Chicago received a $4.5 million AIP grant for
noise mitigation measures for public buildings (an elementary
school) near O'Hare International Airport.
The City of Philadelphia received a $5,449,600 AIP grant
for noise mitigation measures for residences in the 65-69
DNL contour of Philadelphia International Airport.
These AIP noise grants are in addition to those awarded to
28 airports thus far in fiscal 2010 reported earlier (22 ANR
54).
Part 150 Programa
Wei • i ,�, i i , • i •
On July 9, the Federal Aviation Administration announced
its overall approval of the Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibil-
ity Program for Modesto City -County Airport in Modesto,
CA.
Approval was granted for one noise abatement element,
four land use management elements and one program man-
agement element. The approved measures included:
• Designate a commercial service hold area near midfield;
• Adopt the Modesto City -County Airport Part 150 Noise
Compatibility Program by reference in the cities of
Modesto and Ceres, and Stanislaus County General Plans;
• Consistently designate the area northwest of the airport
within the City of Modesto and Stanislaus County General
Plan;
• The City of Modesto should consider adopting an air-
port compatibility checklist for discretionary review of proj-
ects within its vicinity;
• Adopt a Noise Overlay Zone; and
• Update Noise Exposure Maps and Noise Compatibility
Program.
The Noise Abatement Element — Pursue a change to the
Department of Defense's Instrument Flight Rule Supplement
— was disapproved for purposes of Part 150.
The FAA disapproved the element due to lack of support-
ing analysis in the Noise Compatibility' Plan. However, the
disapproval does not prohibit the City of Modesto from work-
ing with the Department of Defense to revise the recom-
mended operational hours in the Instrument Flight Rule
Supplement on a voluntary basis.
For further information, contact Camille Garibaldi, Envi-
ronmental Protection Specialist, FAA Western -Pacific Re-
gion, San Francisco; tel; (650) 876-2778; ext. 613.
Airport Noise Report
Of
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
M
Volume 22, Number 22 July 16, 2010
Easements
EASEMENT RULING WILL BE INFLUENTIAL
IN OREGON BUT NOT BEYOND, EXPERT SAYS
An Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) ruling striking down a city or-
dinance that required property owners in an airport compatibility zone to give an
avigation easement as a condition of property development approval will be influ-
ential within the state but it is doubtful that it will influence local governments in
other states, especially since it is not a court decision, a property rights expert told
AN"R.
However, there is federal case law and state case law in many states that would
support similar decisions in other states, Mefiern Hubbard, a Principal Attorney at
the Pacific Legal Foundation, explained.
The Foundation is a non-profit group, based in Sacramento, CA, that advocates
for individual liberty and limited government and is known nationally for fighting
for the rights of private property owners.
Hubbard litigates property rights cases, including regulatory takings cases such
as the one LUBA just decided in Oregon (Kfiehelle Barnes v. 00, of Hillsboro).
She also represented a property owner in California in a similar case.
(Continued on p. 88)
Health Effects
CARDIOVASCULAR EFFECTS OF EXPOSURE
TO TRANSPORTATION NOISE IS REPORT FOCUS
A literature review focusing on the cardiovascular effects of exposure to trans-
portation noise was released this month by the research consortium PARTNER
(Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction).
The report, "A Review of the Literature Related to Potential Health Effects of
Aircraft Noise," also considers two possible pathways by which noise may affect
the cardiovascular system: sleep disruption and noise -induced stress.
The report was prepared by Hales Swift of the Ray W. Herrick Laboratories at
Purdue University with input from Dr. Larry Finegold, an expert on health effects
of noise. It is available on the PARTNER website:
bttp://web.i-nit.edu/acroasti-o/pai-tner/rel)oi-ts/index.btnil.
"Previous reports have dealt with the 'health effects of noise' in some capacity.
Many of these have considered various quality of life factors as the primary health
effects. This is in line with the World Health Organization (WHO, 1946) definition
of health, which reads, 'Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social
well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.' Noise was seen as
detracting primarily from mental well being (annoyance for instance) or social well
being (speech interference)," the Executive Summary of the report explains.
(Continued on p. 89
Airport Noise Report
Ire
I n Th is -is-sue. a.
Easements ... The Port of
Portland and City of Hills-
boro have not yet decided
whether to appeal a ruling by
the Oregon Land Use Board
of Appeals finding unconsti-
tutional a city ordinance that
required property owners to
give an avigation easement
to the Port as a condition of
getting approval to develop
their property.
An expert in property
rights law predicts the ruling
will be influential in Oregon
but not in other states but
says that federal, state case
law would support similar
decisions elsewhere - p. 87
Health Effects ... A new
PARTNER report focuses on
the cardiovascular effects of
exposure to transportation
noise and on two possible
pathways by which noise
may affect the cardiovascular
system - p. 87
LAX... LAWA announces
award of $1.09 million con-
tract for portion of work
being done under LAX Resi-
dential Soundproofing, Pro-
gram - p. 90
July 16, 2010
.Easements, from p. 87
Although the Barnes ruling may not influence courts out-
side of Oregon, it is of interest to airports because many local
jurisdictions around the country have adopted. ordinances
similar to Hillsboro's that require property owners near air-
ports to give avigation easements in exchange for local ap-
proval to develop their property.
FAA does not keep statistics on the number of such ordi-
nances but said they are common.
LUBA ruled that the City of Hillsboro's ordinance was
unconstitutional on its face because it required property own-
ers to give the Port of Portland, proprietor of Hillsboro Air-
port, an avigation easement without being compensated for it
(22 ANR 83). The ruling reversed the City's rezoning of over
7,000 parcels located within 6,000 feet of the Hillsboro Air-
port.
The Hillsboro ordinance failed to meet the legal test laid
out by the U.S. Supreme Court in its ruling in. Nollan v. Cali-
fornia Coastal Convrrission that the obligation to pay just
compensation for exacting property interest could be avoided
only if there is a demonstration that an "essential nexus" ex-
ists between the exaction and a substantial government pur-
pose, LUBA concluded. It held that no such "essential nexus"
existed in the Hillsboro case.
The Pacific Legal Foundation represented the plaintiffs in
the Nollan case, although it was decided by the Supreme
Court in tine 1980s before Hubbard was employed by the
Foundation. Because of her broad expertise in the area of
property rights, ANR asked her to analyze the Barnes ruling.
Following is that analysis.
`Government Tried to Take a Short Cut'
"The decision is a bit confusing," Hubbard said. "But the
basic law is as follows. Government can take private property
for a public use so long as it pays just compensation. That is
true under both the state and federal constitutions. So if the
City (or the Port) in this case wants avigation easements for
public safety reasons having to do with the operation of the
airport, they need to file an eminent domain action and offer
to pay for the easements. It's the same as if the City wanted
to widen a street in front of your house and needed to take 6
feet of your front yard. The City would have to pay for it.
"The problem in this case is that the government tried to
take a short cut by saying that, if you want a building permit
or other land use approval, you need to give us an avigation
easement free of charge. That can only be done if the pro-
posed development creates the problem that will be solved by
the dedication of an avigation easement. It's hard to imagine
what sort of development project would conflict with airport
operations, primarily because, if a proposed development
does create problems (a high rise building, a large antenna,
etc.) the local government could simply deny the project or
tell the applicant to revise the project to alleviate the danger-
ous conditions.
"The board [LUBA] is correct that this case should be an-
88
alyzed under the N611a77 a California Coastal C0171771i,4sion
case, which requires a close connection between the proposed
project and the harm to be alleviated by the condition o£de-
velopment — here, an easement. Dolan a City of Tigard re-
quires that the condition be roughly proportional to the harm.
It doesn't work here because this is a facial challenge wherein
the property owner claims that the law is unconstitutional in
all circumstances, regardless of the facts of an individual
case.
"Both Nollan and Dolan would apply in an as -applied
challenge, where one property owner or a group of property
owners with the same relevant facts bring(s) a case saying
that `as applied to me, this law is unconstitutional'. So as -ap-
plied challenges depend on the individual facts of a particular
case, where a facial challenge does not. A facial challenge is
purely about the law.
"The board is also correct that the City is probably requir-
ing these easements in. order to avoid being sued for a physi-
cal taking of property due to noise, light, emissions, etc.,
created by aircraft flying overhead. If a property owner brings
such a lawsuit, and wins, then. the government will have to
purchase the property outright. An easy way to avoid such
lawsuits is to get an easement from the property owner. Gov-
ernment knows that property owners won't give an easement
(a property right) willingly, so they make it a condition of a
permit allowing you to do something on your property (for
example, build a house or pool, remodel, put in a new air
conditioner).
"I disagree with the board's attempt to analyze the last
three elements of the avigation easement under takings law. I
don't think those elements are subject to takings analysis at
all. Government can impose reasonable regulations on private
property, and prohibiting tali structures and trees, and electri-
cal interference, visual impairments, and other hazards to air-
craft on properties near an airport would most certainty fall in
this category. A limited right -of -entry provision could simi-
larly be justified.
"An interesting side note is that, in my avigation ease-
ment case [Datta a Coma y of'EI Dorado; 20 ANR 74], the
County of El Dorado tried to say that it needed the easement
to get Mr. Dutta to prune or cut down mature trees. (As in the
Oregon case, dedication of an easement required property
owners to keep vegetation below the flight envelope.) That
argument failed for two reasons: (1) Mr. Dutta's property
was not in a direct flight path; and (2) if the trees were endan-
gering aircraft, the County could have required that he prune
them. But making Mr. Dutta provide an easement in ex-
change for a permit to build a small garage made no sense at
all. The garage would not interfere with aircraft. So dedica-
tion of an easement would be totally unrelated to the building
project. Thus, we prevailed in our case.
"So, the upshot is that the board correctly analyzed tak-
ings law, and this decision puts all airports on notice that the
law will be enforced in Oregon. It will be interesting to see if
the government appeals this decision to a court, but I doubt it
will.,,
Airport Noise Report
Julv 16, 2010
Hubbard said that LUBA's ruling in Bal77es will not force
the City of Hillsboro to buy any easements. "But if it wants
easements, it will have to purchase them. This decision will
force the City to figure out which, if any, casements are es-
sential to airport operations. I strongly suspect that the City
doesn't need casements for most of the properties in the zone.
As I understand it, easements are generally only required at
either end of the take off and landing strips. And as to some
of those properties, the City has probably already purchased
the properties outright."
Must Appeal by June 21
July 21 is the deadline for appealing LUBA's ruling in
Barnes to the Oregon Court of Appeals. The City of Hillsboro
and the Port of Portland have announced no decision yet re-
garding an appeal and will not comment on the case until that
announcement has been made.
LUBA is an administrative adjudicative body and not a
court but it has exclusive jurisdiction to review all govern-
ment land use decisions in Oregon and its rulings are rarely
overturned. If the state appeals court would uphold the LUBA
ruling in Barnes, it would gain legal weight; a prospect that is
surely being considered by the Port and Hillsboro.
The Portland law firm Garvey Schubert Barer represented
Miki Barnes in her challenge of the Hillsboro ordinance.
Lead attorney on the case William Kabeiseman said in a press
release on the LUBA ruling, "These avigation easement
rights do not run to the public or even to the City; instead, a
developing property owner must provide property rights to
their neighbor; the Hillsboro Airport, whereby the neighbor
gains substantial control over their land and gains the ability
to inflict substantial damage, like noise impacts and tree re-
moval, to that property without payment of compensation."
"This case prevents the City from overreaching in its ef-
forts to grant the airport widespread access to neighboring
property to directly and adversely impact new development
which may not even affect airport operations," the law film
said.
"LUBA rarely grants reversals, instead favoring remand
to allow local governments to fix problems associated with
improper zone changes. However, in this instance, the takings
claim along with Petitioner's success in its argument of un-
lawful prospective delegation of authority from the City of
Hillsboro to the Port of Portland supported LUBA's decision
to reverse this unconstitutional zone change."
PARTNER, f troll, T. 87
It continues, "However, recent studies have demon-
strated a possible relationship between noise exposure, such
as that caused by aircraft, and the more physiological side of
the WHO definition: disease or infirmity. Led in part by in-
dustrial and laboratory studies showing acute effects such as
transient blood pressure increases, a number of other recent
studies have been conducted showing a mixture of possible
shortand Ion; -term cardiovascular effects of noise.
"While not all studies have resulted in significant find-
ings, a pattern of increased incidence of cardiovascular ef-
fects, hypertension and ischemic heart disease in particular,
seems to have emerged. These purported effects are only re-
cently documented and thus models accounting for their by-
pothesized societal costs are still in early stages.
"A feature of this literature survey is its emphasis on car-
diovascular outcomes and an evaluation of the potential path-
ways from aircraft noise to health outcomes for possible
cardiovascular endpoints. This is in contrast to most previous
reports on this subject, which were not focused as much on
potential mechanisms for the proposed or observed effects.
Two potential pathways are discussed: sleep disruption and
noise -induced stress; because both have been related to possi-
ble cardiovascular outcomes.
"The focus on the two pathways primarily covered in this
report is because of the results of recent studies in Europe fo-
cused on the health impacts of transportation noise. Through
these studies researchers have shown nighttime aircraft noise
to be more highly correlated to health impacts than twenty-
four hour or daytime noise, and have found that observed ef-
fects
ffects in road noise studies have become stronger when house
orientation and window opening habits at night have been
taken into account.
"Research into health effects of industrial noise exposure
as well as health effects associated with annoyance from
community noise suggests that stress reactions, such as
arousal of the cardiovascular system in response to a loud
noise, may lead to negative cardiovascular outcomes as well.
It has been proposed that repeated short-tenn increases of
blood pressure and heart rate associated with these reactions
may lead to changes in the fimctioning of the cardiovascular
system and eventual hypertension. Thus, both sleep and
stress, because they have been proposed as pathways leading
from noise exposure to eventual cardiovascular outcomes, are
of interest and have been focused on in this report."
Effects Need to Be Quantified
"Potential cardiovascular health effects of exposure to air-
craft noise need to be quantified so that the economic and
ease -of -travel benefits of airports can be weighed against po-
tential health effects of noise and other pollutants," the report
said.
"Currently, hedonic measures [such as a change in prop-
erty value] are used to assess the negative impacts of noise
around airports, yet it does not seem likely that they would
reflect the impacts of cardiovascular effects of noise, which
are largely unknown in the general population.
`'Some would argue that hedonic measures do not even
reflect non health-related quality of life effects, because peo-
ple need to experience noise exposure before they truly un-
derstand its impacts, and the ability to move is limited once a
house has been purchased. Others make strong arguments in
favor of hedonic measures.
"With regards to cardiovascular health effects, it may be
possible to extend the usefulness of hedonic measures
Airport Noise Report
.E
July 16, 2010
ANR EDITORIAL
through education of the public concerning potential risks, enabling them
their homes.
to make more informed choices when purchasing
ADVISORY BOARD
"Other possibilities include the use of the system of Disability Ad-
justed Life Years (DALY's), which has been recommended as an effective
decision making tool where both quality of life and disease issues were
John J. Corbett, Esq.
being considered in balance alongside potential economic benefits. This
Spiegel & McDiarmid
system is also used for other disease -related and quality -of -life outcomes
it
Washington, DC
resulting from air quality and climate change. Thus, using such a system
better the relative contributions of each of
might be possible to understand
Carl E. Burleson
these three undesirable outcomes of aircraft operations."
the report discuss unanswered questions and
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
The final two chapters of
ideas and recommendations for future research that would: (1) help further
Federal Aviation Administration
elucidate the relationship between aircraft noise and health and (2) pro -
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
vide decision makers with the tools that they need to optimize policy with
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
regards to noise producing infrastructure in order to minimize negative
that might help address these
Denver
health outcomes. Ways to conduct studies
unanswered questions and their feasibility are also discussed.
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Los A Intl
Laguna Niguel, CAAngeles
I.,AWA AWARDS $1.09 MILLION CONTRACT
Steven .F. Ptlaum, Esq.
Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
FOR RESIDENTIAL SOUND INSULATION
Chicago
The Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners July 14 awarded a
contract to Karabuild Development, Inc. of Inglewood, CA, for a portion
Mary L. Vigilante
of the work being undertaken as part of the Los Angeles International Air -
President, Synergy Consultants
port (LAX) Residential Soundproofing Program.
Seattle
The contract, for $1,094,500, covers sound -insulation modifications
on 70 dwelling units located in various complexes in Playa del Rey, all
within Los Angeles City Council District 11.
The overall LAX Residential Soundproofing Program includes 9,449
residences in the Los Angeles communities of South Los Angeles,
Westchester and Playa del Rey with a. recorded Community Noise Equiva-
lent Level (CNL) of 65 decibels or higher.
Contractors typically install double -paned windows, solid -core doors,
fireplace doors and dampers, attic baffles, insulation and heating -ventila-
tion -air conditioning (HVAC) to achieve a noise level reduction of ap-
proximately one-half in a home's interior.
The 70 dwelling units in this project will bring the total units com-
pleted, under construction, or approved by the Board to date to 6,683. The
remaining 2,766 units are either in the design phase, awaiting commence-
ment of design, or the owners have not responded or declined to partici-
pate. The program is administered by Los Angeles World Airports'
Residential Soundproofing Bureau.
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@,aiil)ortnoisereport.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.
�, ,,,� � a" � " J► mok-
H
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
91
Volume 22, Number 23 July 23, 2010
Technology
BOEING'S ECO -]DEMONSTRATOR PROGRAM
WILL ACCELERATE GREEN TECHNOLOGIES
On July 21, at the Farnborough Airshow, Boeing announced its ecoDemonstra-
tor Program for accelerating environmental technologies.
The program will emphasize emerging technologies in the areas of fuel effi-
ciency, noise reduction, and operational efficiency, while readying technologies at a.
faster pace for aviation applications.
"Commercial aviation is in rapid pursuit of its goal of carbon -neutral growth by
2020, primarily driven by technology advancements," said Billy Glover, managing
director of Environmental. Strategy for Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
"The ecoDemonstrator Program can help accelerate industry efforts by provid-
ing a platform that integrates innovation and technologies in a way that ensures as
they mature, they are market -ready. The program also will enable emerging tech-
nologies to be tested for further research. consideration."
�. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, through its Continuous Lower En-
ergy Emissions Noise (CLEEN) program recently awarded Boeing a $25 million
(Continued an p. 92)
Palm Beach Int'l
TRUMP SITES COUNTY AGAIN OVER NOISE
IMPACT ON CLUB; SEEDS TO BLOCK. RUNWAY
Once again, businessman Donald Trump has filed suit against Palm Beach
County, FL, over the impact of aircraft noise on his historic Mar-a-Lago club,
which sits two and one-half miles off the end of the main runway at Palm Beach
County International Airport (PBIA).
Trump filed the lawsuit in Palm Beach County Circuit Court on July 19 seeking
to block the airport's plan to add a second commercial runway. The lawsuit claims
that overflights have created a public nuisance, are a continuing trespass, and have
resulted in a taking of Mar-a-Lago, which is on the National Register of Historic
Places.
Trump also named County Airports Director Brice Pelly as a defendant in his
lawsuit and accused Pelly of "seeking revenge [for an earlier lawsuit filed by
Trump against Pelly in 1995] by attacking Mar-a-Lago from the air."
"By promoting single file departures, and opposing fanning, and refusing to
adopt other noise abatement procedures, the Defendants have concentrated noise,
vibration, and pollution effects of aircraft departures and arrivals over Mar-a-
Lago," the lawsuit alleges.
(Continued on p. 92
Airport Noise Report
In This Issue...
Green Technology ... Boe-
ing launches ecoDemonstra-
tion Program to accelerate
the introduction of environ-
mental technologies and
build on FAA's CLEEN Pro-
gram - p. 91
Palm. Beach Int'l ... Donald
Trump files suit against Palm
Beach County and airport di-
rector seeking to block new
runway - p. 91
ACRP... GAO report to
House Science Committee
recommends ways to im-
prove Airport Cooperative
Research Program - p. 93
Noise Monitoring ... Brunel &
Kjwr announces that new
unit Lochard is now called
Environment Management
Solutions (EMS) - p. 93
Easements ... Port of Port-
land, City of Hillsboro de-
cide to appeal. ruling striking
city ordinance requiring
easement - p. 94
New Srnyr•na Beach ... FAA
approves noise exposure
maps for airport - p. 94
Julv 23, 2010
Boeing, fr•oma p. 91
matching cost contract for technology development (22 ANR
75). Under this contract, which will be a part of the
ecoDemonstrator Program, Boeing said it will deliver the
flight test portion of the program and targeted technologies.
Two ecoDemonstrator aircraft will be used, including a. Next -
Generation 737 in 2012, with a second series of flights
aboard a Boeing twin -aisle aircraft in 2013.
Builds on CLEEN Program
"The ecoDemonstrator Program will build on the FAA
CLEEN program foundation and be a continuum of focused
technology testing, which will include further collaboration
across the aviation industry," Boeing said. "Technologies in
development for the FAA CLEEN program include ceramic
matrix composite acoustic engine nozzles, advanced inlets,
and adaptive wing trailing edge flaps that can help reduce
fuel consumption and noise during the take -off, climb and
landing phases of flight."
Boeing said its ecoDemonstrator Program also will in-
clude collaborative work with IHI Aerospace of Japan to
evaluate regenerative fuel cell technology for onboard auxil-
iary power applications. That technology also will be flight
tested with other emerging technologies in an effort to
quicken technology development through rapid prototyping
methods, challenging goals and the rigorous process of inte-
grating technologies onto a flight -test platform.
"The ecoDemonstrator Program allows aviation to accel-
erate promising environmental technologies, from discover-
ing to feasibility and airplane applicability. Moving these
technologies from the laboratory to flight test enables indus-
try to learn faster about addressing airplane integration chal-
lenges, making demonstrator programs a proven part of our
commitment to environmental performance," said Jeanne Yu,
director of Environmental Performance for Boeing Commer-
cial Airplanes.
Boeing said it recently completed a successful series of
sustainable biofuel test flights, which demonstrated the tech-
nical feasibility of flying jetliners and military aircraft using
renewable fuel sources. Other recent demonstration program
examples include in-service evaluations of chrome -free paint
systems, Tailored Arrivals for optimizing aircraft landing pro-
cedures and in-flight testing of recycled carpet developed for
cabin interiors.
The ecoDemonstrator Program builds on the Quiet Tech-
nology Demonstrators, which successfully highlighted ad-
vanced noise reduction technologies aboard a Boeing 777
aircraft from 2001 to 2005.
Trump, frorrc p. 91
It also asserts that the County's informal voluntary noise
control procedures did not reduce noise (except at night) and
that the County has failed to use alternative noise mitigation
measures, such as (1) fanning departures, (2) "calm wind"
procedures where departures and arrivals can be evenly di -
92
vided to spread noise impacts, (3) close -iii departure proce-
dures, and (4) expansion of the North County Airport to
allow general aviation flights to be shifted there.
There is no need to expand PBIA, Trump asserted. "As
early as 1991, the County declared that the Airport was near-
ing capacity. In the meanwhile, the number of aircraft opera-
tions at the Airport has significantly declined by 42 percent
since 1984 and 15 percent for airlines flights."
"The only possible reason for possible future congestion
is private jet traffic, which accounts for about two-thirds of
the total flights at [PBIA] but less than I percent of the pas-
sengers. As the county has admitted, 50 percent of those pri-
vate jets could be shifted to the North County airport if it
were upgraded."
"The use of fanning at PBIA and the expansion of the
North County Airport, will do far more to alleviate any possi-
ble fature PBIA congestion and do so more effectively and
far more economically than building a new runway and taxi-
ways, demolishing all the businesses on the south side of the
air field, and relocating them far away from the new runway."
In 2007, the County formally proposed a $600 million
plan to expand PBIA primarily by adding an 8,000 -foot
east/west runway, south of the existing 10,000 ft. main run-
way. To make room, for the new nroway, the County proposed
demolishing all of the building on the airport's south side and
relocating them to the northeast corner of the airport.
The expansion plan was opposed by the City of West
Palm Beach, the Town of Palm Beach, the National Trust for
Historic Preservation, Mar-a-Lago, and Trump.
In August 2009, the FAA told PBIA that the agency's own
forecasts showed that the new runway would not be needed
until 2040. In response, the County wrote FAA in January
2010 saying that the new runway is no longer "an immediate
pressing need" and modifying the project to include only
piecemeal projects. The FAA approved $1.07 million for a
partial environmental study of components of the expansion
plan, according to Trump's lawsuit.
Trump contends that approval was improper "because the
environmental impact study is still pending and because the
projects it seeks unconditional approval of are not, in fact,
`independent' but are enabling and connected actions to the
runway expansion project."
In 1995, Trump first filed suit against the County and
Pelly over the impact of overflights on Mar-a-Lago. A deal
was brokered to end tlne lawsuit under which Trump agreed to
drop his lawsuit and build a golf course on 215 acres of
rented bounty land and the County agreed. that noise impact
of the club would not worsen.
Trump told the Pahn Beach Post that the County has not
held up its end of that bargain. "They agreed to do things they
didn't do," he told the paper.
The case (Donald J. Trump n. Paha Beach Countv,
Florida, acrd Bruce V. Pelly (No. 50 20 h OCA 018444) was
filed in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, in
and for Palm Beach County, Florida.
Palin Beach County has not yet commented on the case.
Airport Noise Report
July 23, 2010
Research
Recommendations for improving the Airport Cooperative
Research Program (ACRP) were included in a Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report to the House Committee
on Science and Technology submitted in July.
The program, sponsored by the Federal Aviation Admin-
istration and managed by the Transportation Research Board,
was authorized in 2003 as part of the Vision 100 – Century of
Aviation Reauthorization Act to carry out applied research on
problems shared by airport operators.
Through 2009, ACRP approved 169 projects, about half
of which have been completed, and published 66 reports on
topics such as environmental impacts, policy and planning,
and administration.
The House Science Committee asked the GAO to evalu-
ate the progress ACRP has made in addressing airports' re-
search needs focusing on two questions: (1) To what extent
does ACRP have processes in place that reflect established
criteria for conducting high-quality research programs? and
(2) What are ACRP's results to date and how useful have the
results been for the aviation conmlunity?
GAO concluded, from a review of ACRP reports and in-
terviews with FAA, TRB, and aviation industry officials,
"that ACRP is regarded by the officials we interviewed as a
generally valuable resource for addressing the shared chal-
lenges faced by airport operators but improving some aspects
of its processes could further erthances it effectiveness."
GAO Recommendations
GAO concluded that ACRP conducts its research with
processes that align with many of GAO's criteria for produc-
ing high-quality research, but some gaps exist:
• Selecting projects: "ACRP has established a governing
board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), which is
composed of airport executives and other key industry stake-
holders, and processes to determine the research needs of
users and to select specific projects for funding. However,
one organization that participates on the board—the Airport
Consultants Council—and the consensus approach used to
make project selection decisions are not included in the pro-
gram's documented operating procedures. ACRP stakehold-
ers commended the council's participation and the consensus
approach, but their omission from documentation potentially
diminishes program transparency;
• Implementing projects: "ACRP's processes for estab-
lishing a project panel to manage research projects, selecting
a researcher, and overseeing projects are well documented
and include quality control steps. However, product dissemi-
nation efforts may miss some potential users, particularly
staff at smaller airports and mid-level staff. The AOC has ini-
tiated a project to improve research dissemination to better
serve these groups, although the project's scope and time
R
frame is still being determined;
• Evaluating projects and the program overall: "ACRD
maintains considerable information on ongoing and com-
pleted projects that are used by program managers and the
AOC to review project progress. The program, however, does
not currently have a systematic process for evaluating the im-
pact of individual projects or implementing continuous im-
provements to the program's overall performance. Two
initiatives—the dissemination project and a project initiated
to review ACRP processes—could address current gaps in
project and program evaluation, though the scope and time
frames of these projects are still being determined."
The GAO also recommended that the role of ACRP in
conducting airport security research be clarified.
The report, "Airport Cooperative Research Program Ad-
dresses Many Needs but Could Enhance Transparency and
Clarify Scope of Research Role," (GAO -10-729) is available
online at: http://www.gao.gov/new.itenis/d1.0729.pdf
Noise Monitoring
LOCHARD NOW `E+ NVIRONMENT
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS'
Briiel & Kjwr announced that, following its acquisition of
Lochard Corporation, it has now fully integrated Lochard as a
business unit called Environment Management Solutions
(EMS).
Australia -based Lochard Corporation, a leading supplier
of airport noise monitoring and flight tracking systems, was
acquired by Br Uel & Kjwr, a manufacturer of sound and vi-
bration equipment based in Denmark in February 2009 (21
ANR 19).
B&K said that to complete the acquisition "Lochard has
taken the decision, with immediate effect, to adopt the trusted
brand of Briiel & Kjaer, the world's leading company in
sound and vibration measurement."
Lars Rami, CEO of Briiel and Kjwr said "We have been
working hard through challenging market conditions to unite
the companies combining in the best parts of both organiza-
tions – Lochard's innovation and deep application knowledge
coupled with Bru.el & Kjxr's instrumentation and interna-
tional reach. This has been very successful and puts us in a
strong position to better serve our existing customer base and.
deliver increased value into additional market areas in the fri-
ture."
Mat -tin Adams, Vice President of EMS said "The last 19
months has been about combining our strengths and building
on our respective reputations in the aviation, urban and indus-
trial markets. As Bi -Ciel & Kj2cr EMS, as well as maintaining
our focus on aviation we are now taking our innovation into
other markets and loot: forward to leveraging the Briiel &
Kjwr brand worldwide."
Briiel & Kja:r Environment Management Solutions can
now be found on the web at ww,w.bksv.com/ems where de -
Airport Noise Report
2010 94
ANR EDITORIAL tails of its airport, industrial and urban area environment management so-
lutions, case studies, white papers and more also can be found.. These re -
ADVISORY BOARD sources will continue to be updated, B&K said.
John J. Corbett, Esq.
Easeinents
Spiegel & McDiarmid
Washington, DC
PORT OF PORTLAND, HILLSBORO DECIDE
TO APPEAL LUBA RULING ON EASEMENT
Carl E. Burleson
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
The Port of Portland and City of Hillsboro, OR, have appealed a ruling
Federal Aviation Administration
by the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) striking down a city
ordinance that required property owners in an airport compatibility zone
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
to give an avigation easement as a condition of property development ap-
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
proval.
Denver
On July 21, the Port and Hillsboro filed a Petition for Judicial Review
in the Court of Appeals of the State of Oregon. It states that they are nega-
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
tively affected by LUBA's opinion and order in the case, Michelle Barnes
President, Mestre Greve Associates
v City of Hillsboro.
Laguna Niguel, CA
The Port and Hillsboro must submit briefs to the Court of Appeals lay-
ing out their arguments for overturning LUBA s ruling within 21 days.
Steven F. Pflaum, Esq.
A spokesman for the Port declined to talk about the substance of the
Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
appeal because the litigation is active.
Chicago
There is some risk to the Port in appealing the ruling because LUBA is
not a court. It is an administrative adjudicative body that has exclusive ju-
Mary L. Vigilante
risdiction to review all government land use decisions in Oregon. If the
President, Synergy Consultants
Port loses its appeal, LUBA's ruling will take on added legal weight be -
Seattle
cause it will have been upheld by the state Court of Appeals.
LUBA ruled that the City of Hillsboro's ordinance was unconstitu-
tional on its face because it required property owners to give the Port of
Portland, proprietor of Hillsboro Airport, an avigation easement without
being compensated for it (22 ANR 83, 87).
I In .$Y^lGf'__� I
New Smyrna Beach Noise Maps Approved
FAA announced July 19 that noise exposure maps submitted by the
City of New Smyrna Beach, FL, for New Smyrna Beach Municipal Air-
port meet applicable federal requirements.
For further information, contact Lindy McDowell in FAA's Orlando
Airports District Office; tel: (407) 812-6331.
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 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.
95
A weekly update on litigation, regulations, and technological developments
Volume 22, Number 24 July 30, 2010
Curfeivs
CAA, ATA, OPPOSE EFFORT TO AMEND ANCA
TO ALLOW CURFEWS AT BOB MOPE, VAN NUB'S
The Cargo Airline Association and Air. Transport Association strongly oppose
an effort by California congressmen to add language to pending legislation reautho-
rizing the Federal Aviation Administration that would amend the section of federal
code embodying the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) to allow Bob
Hope Airport and Van Nuys Airport to impose mandatory nighttime curfews.
In October 2009, the FAA denied the Burbank -Glendale -Pasadena Airport Au-
thority's application filed under FAA's Part 161 regulations on Notice and Approval
of Airport Noise and Access Restrictions — which were issued pursuant to ANCA —
to impose a nighttime curfew at Bob Hope Airport.
"Having failed to meet the standards set fourth in Part 161, Burbank (and Van
Nuys), through their elected representatives, are now trying to convince Congress
to modify ANCA solely to permit Burbank's unneeded curfew," asserted the CAA,
which represents FedEx Express, UPS, and other cargo carriers, in a July 26 letter
to the leaders of the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure.
(Continued on p. 96)
Los Angeles Int'l
3,400 FEWER. BIOMES IN EL SEGUNDO ELIGIBLE
FOR FAA FUNDING OF SOUND INSULATION
The Federal Aviation Administration informed the City of El Segundo, CA, that
it will not provide sound insulation funding for homes located outside of an up-
dated noise contour line on the Master Plan for Los Angeles International Airport
that serves as the eligibility boundary for participation in the LAX Residential
Sound Insulation Program.
Under the earlier "Alternative D Contour" line, FAA had agreed to find insula-
tion of 5,600 homes in El Segundo. Under the revised and shrunken contour line,
which is based on predicted noise contours in 2015, only 2,200 homes now qualify
for FAA finding.
In a July 9 letter to El Segundo residents, James O'Neill, program manager for
the City's Residential Sound Insulation Program, said El Segundo "is communicat-
ing with both FAA and Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) to ask that FAA re-
verse its decision and/or have LAWA verify that it will provide 100 percent funding
for homes located beyond Alternative D contour" [which appears to be the 65
CNEL contour line.]
I (Continued orr p. 99
Airport Noise Report
In This Issue...
Curfews ... Cargo airlines,
ATA oppose an effort by CA
congressmen to amend
ANCA to allow curfews at
Bob Hope, Van Nuys - p. 95
LAX ... FAA tells El Se-
gundo it will not fund insula-
tor of homes outside updated
contour line - p. 95
Saga Jose Intl... Citizens
groups files lawsuit over
change to master plan refo-
cusing development on cor-
porate aviation - p. 97
Part 150 Progr-atta ... FAA
approves noise exposure
maps for Philadelphia Int'l,
Portland Int'l airports - p. 97
Flight Tracking ... First in-
stallation of new B&K
FlightOps flight track moni-
toring is at Lunken - p. 97
Land Use... TRB Webinar
on ACRP report on enhanc-
ing land use compatibility
will be held Sept. 2 - p. 98
Asbestos ... EPA fines RIAC,
firms for failure to notify
agency of demolition - p. 98
30.2010
Cui fetvs, froutp. 95
"In addition to the fact that the agency with jurisdiction
over Part 161 has already determined the curfew to be unnec-
essary, the requested action would set a precedent that would
encourage other communities similarly situated to make simi-
lar curfew requests; thereby raising the potential of a. patch-
work quilt of local regulations that work against the mainte-
nance of a needed national air transportation systenn," CAA
argued.
ATA also opposes the request to create an exemption from
AN that would allow Burbank Airport to impose a manda-
tory nighttime curfew. "Last year, FAA carefiifly considered
and then denied Burbank's application to impose a mandatory
nighttime noise curfew. In its decision, FAA noted that Bur-
bank has the lowest percentage of scheduled nighttime air
carrier operations among the West Coast airports. FAA also
noted that the limited number of nighttime flights was due, in
part, to the highly effective voluntary nighttime curfew cur-
rently in place at Burbank," said ATA's Environmental Affairs
Regulatory Manager Kevin Welsh in comments to ANR.
Omission Called "Oversight'
In a July 21 letter to the leaders of the House Transporta-
tion Committee, California Reps. Brad Sherman (D), Howard
Berman (D), and Adam Schiff (D) called it "an oversight"
that Bob Hope and Van Nuys airports were not among those
airports whose existing curfews were exempted from the Part
161 regulations mandated by ANCA. However, they did not
explain why Bob Hope and Van Nuys airports' curfews were
not grandfathered under ANCA when it was enacted in 1990.
The provision they proposed, the California lawmakers
said, "would clarify that, for many of the same reasons that
several other airports were exempted when [ANCA] was en-
acted in 1.990, these two airports should be exempted from
the Airport Noise and Capacity Act. h1 the case of the Bob
Hope Airport, this was one of the first airports in the country
to impose a curfew. The Van Nuys curfew was a partial cur-
few that applied to some, but not all operators."
The language they proposed, the congressmen said,
would allow Burbank and Van Nuys Airports to adopt non-
discriminatory curfews applicable to all operators from 10
p.m. to 7 a.m. `But," they stressed, "it is not intended to
open the door to any further exemptions" from ANCA, the
congressmen told Rep. James Oberstar (D -MN), chairman of
the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure, and
Rep. John Mica (R -FL), Ranking Member of the Committee.
"Further," the congressmen wrote, "the provision would
address concerns that the FAA cited in rejecting Burbanks'
Part 161 application for a curfew — that it would add conges-
tion to an already crowded airspace and it would impact the
national system of airports because it would cause system
wide delays. The proposal would have a minimal impact on
local airspace because a joint curfew for both airports is de-
signed to ensure that air traffic is not shifted for one airport to
the other.
"Additionally, as Van Nuys Airport is part of a larger con-
sortium of airports, including one of the largest in the coun-
try, LAX, that is willing and able to accept nighttime traffic,
the consortium can structure and implement the curfew in a
manner that ensures that it does not negatively affect local
and national airspace."
Curfew Not Needed
But the cargo carriers argued that the Bob Hope Airport
curfew is not needed. In its Part 161 application, `Burbank
alleged that the noise situation at Bob Hope warranted such a
curfew even though there were only two nighttime landings,
four days a week, by large jet aircraft and a handful of night-
time turboprop takeoffs and landings at Bob Hope. This ap-
plication also basically ignored the fact that any noise
mitigation could easily be accomplished by less draconian
measures than a full curfew, such as a continuation of an al-
ready successful soundproofing program," the cargo airlines
wrote.
They told Oberstar and Mica that by denying them the
ability to operate into Bob Hope during nighttime hours, "the
citizens of the area served by Bob Hope would be denied the
service they deserve and expect. Moreover, any such curfew
would have the negative environmental effect of forcing more
trucks onto the already crowded Southern California streets
during morning rush hours in order to truck cargo from air-
ports further from shippers and consignees than Bob Hope."
The California congressmen proposed amending Section
47524 of Title 49, subtitle VIT of U.S. Code to, in effect,
grandfather curfews at Bob Hope and Van Nuys airports
under ANCA.
They also proposed language that would require Bob
Hope and Van Nuys airports to provide only "reasonable no-
tice" of their curfews before imposing them. "Reasonable no-
tice" is defined as (1) posting the terms of the restrictions on
their websites and (2) providing the terms of the curfews "to
known direct tenants of the airport sponsor who operate air-
craft at the airport, either at their leasehold or the address they
have provided to the airport for receipt of notices under their
lease."
The proposed provision also would allow the curfews at
Bob Hope and Van Nuys to be imposed 90 days after the re-
quired notice is given.
San Jose Int'l
CITIZENS GROUP FILES LAWSUIT
OVER CHANGE TO MASTER PLAN
Citizens Against Airport Pollution (CAAP), which repre-
sents residents near San Jose International Airport, filed a
lawsuit against the City of San Jose on July 19 alleging that
the City failed to conduct the proper environmental investiga-
tion necessary prior to the approval of a major amendment to
the Airport Master Plan.
Airport Noise Report
Julv 30, 2010
In early June, the San Jose City Council approved an
amendment to the airport Master Plan that changed the land
use on the far side of the airfield from being designated for
cargo activity, which has been in decline, to more lucrative
corporate aviation development.
San Jose International Airport is in the heart of Silicon
Valley and there are no support facilities here for corporate
aviation, David Vossbrink, airport commi lications director,
explained. Airport officials sense from inquiries they have
received that there is a long-term market for serving corpo-
rate aviation at SJC, lie told ANR. Next year, the airport plans
to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for development of
fixed base operations for corporate aircraft at the airport.
The citizens group argued in its lawsuit that air pollution
impacts, noise pollution impacts, and impacts on wildlife
from the change in the airport's Master plan are unknown.
CAAP said that, in an effort to avoid litigation, it previously
requested the City to defer action approving the major
amendment so that these issues could be evaluated and dis-
cussed without litigation.
"The City chose to ignore these concerns and approved
the major amendment to the Airport Master Plan without a
clear understanding of its impact on the environment," CRAP
said.
In a press release, CRAP said it "has always supported a
first class airport to serve the needs of the South. Bay. Protect-
ing the quality of life for San Jose residents and maintaining a
first class airport is doable. However, it requires thoughtful
planning and a keen sensitivity to environmental protections.
If Silicon Valley is to become the center of 'green' technol-
ogy, the City of San Jose must make every effort to make its
airport environmentally sensitive and a good neighbor. CAAP
believes that the protection of the quality of life in the neigh-
borhoods should be the highest priority to the City of San
Jose."
Among the allegations in the lawsuit are the following:
The City abused its discretion and failed to act in the
mariner required by law or with findings supported by sub-
stantial evidence in approving a major amendment to the Air-
port Master Plan without preparing a supplemental or
subsequent EIR;
- The City failed to provide an assessment of the current
environmental setting, comparing development under the
major amendment with current operations rather than with
operations that had been approved under the master plan;
• The City failed to adequately describe the addition and
extension of taxiways and the construction of general avia-
tion facilities in locations that were not anticipated in the Air-
port Master Plan;
• The City failed to comply with newly adopted CEQA
(California Environmental Quality Act) guidelines mandating
review of project impacts for contribution to green house -
gases and. climate change;
• The City failed to assess noise impacts using the best
available data and latest approved assessment technology and
relies on unproven assumptions and forecasts;
'WY
• The City failed to adequately analyze air quality impacts
from toxic air contaminants in jet exhaust relating to the in-
crease in corporate aircraft, using the best available data and.
approved assessment technology.
The lawsuit seeks a court order ordering the City of San
Jose to set aside and void approvals relative to their recent
major amendment to the Airport: Master Plan and to refrain
from consideration of any further approvals until full compli-
ance with CEQA is achieved, including the preparation and
certification of a supplemental or subsequent EIR.
The lawsuit further requests that the court issue a tempo-
rary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining
the city and its agents and employees from any and all physi-
cal actions in furtherance of the major amendment while this
petition is pending.
The lawsuit, Citiaens Against Airport Pollution a City of
Saiz ,Tose and City Council of Saiz. ,lase, Case No.
110CV 177290, was filed in Santa Clara County Superior
Court.
Part 150 Program
M19011-41 mlik
On July 27, FAA announced that noise exposure maps
submitted by the City of Philadelphia for Philadelphia Inter-
national Airport meet applicable requirements of the agency's
Part 150 Alport Noise Compatibility Program.
For further information, contact Edward Gabsewics in
FAA's Harrisburg, PA, Airports District Office; tel: (717)
730-2832.
On July 28, FAA announced that noise exposure maps
submitted by the Port of Portland for Portland Intemational
Airport meet applicable federal requircnient.s.
For further information, contact Cayla Morgan in FAA's
Renton, WA, Airports Division; tel: (425) 227-2653.
Flight Tracking
FIRST INSTALLATION OF B&K
FLIGHT -OPS DONE AT LUNK EN
On July 28, Briiel and Kjwr announced the first installa-
tion of FlightOps, its new flight track monitoring service, at
Cincinnati's Lunken Airport.
FlightOps provides airports with timely access to infor-
mation about where and when aircraft are flying, B&K ex-
plained.
The information is used for a variety of purposes such as
responding to community noise complaints, reacting to and
learning from incidents, and collecting valuable summary
flight statistics for use with landing fee programs and to aid
planning decisions.
"FlightOps is delivering exactly what the City of Cinci.n-
Airport Noise Report
July 30, 2010 98
na.ti needs in terms of tracking aircraft flights for use with our
Community Outreach and Landing Fee Management Pro-
grams," said Lunken Airport Director Fred Anderton. `Best
of all, it comes at a greatly reduced operational cost com-
pared to our legacy system."
"We were impressed with Briiel & Kjwr's quick setup of
FlightOps. We can access the system via the internet fi-om
any airport PC, anywhere, anytime —even from our Opera-
tions and Maintenance vehicles while on the field," Anderton
said.
"FlightOps near -time aircraft situation display, historical
replay and automated aircraft operations reports make man-
aging the airport easier," B&K said in a press release.
"Operational since May 2010, FlightOps has replaced the
airport's existing system with improved technology and relia-
bility and integrates with the AMSTAT general aviation air-
craft operations database, supplying complete aircraft
operator contact details directly to Airport Management,"
B&K said.
Matt Majoli, account manager with Briiel & Kjwr added,
"FlightOps linking with AMSTAT identifies the right aircraft
operator, enabling immediate contact with the actual operator
unlike other systems which only link contact details with an
FAA or other governmental aircraft registry database."
Land Use
A Webinar on "Enhancing Airport Land Use Compatibil-
ity," hosted by the Transportation Research Board, will be
held Sept. 2 at 4 p.m.
Encroachment of incompatible land uses around airports
is a significant national problem, TRB said.
The Webinar will discuss the findings of a recent report
issued by TRB under its Airport Cooperative Research Pro-
gram (ACRP) that provides guidance to help protect airports
from incompatible land uses that impair airport and aircraft
operations and safety.
Panelists will discuss the findings of the report including
stakeholder responsibilities, federal regulations, economic
and safety concerns, and tools and techniques that can be
used to facilitate land use compatibility.
On April 26, TRB issued a three -volume report on Airport
Land Use Compatibility that is intended to act as a compre-
hensive resource for both airports and local jurisdictions near
airport (22 ANR 50).
Presenters at the Webinar include Stephanie A.D. Ward of
Mead and Hunt, Chris Duerksen of Clarion Associates, and
Nick Miller of Harris, Miller, Miller, and Hanson, Inc., who
prepared the report.
The Webinar will be moderated by TRB Staff Officer
Mike Salamone.
Participants must register 24 hours in advance. There is
no fee for current Chairs of TRB Standing Committees, Sec-
tions, or Groups.
For further information, go to https:/hvwwl.gotomeet-
ing.com/rcgister/68 8072449
T.F. Green Airport
The Environmental Protection Agency announced July 26
that the Rhode Island Airport Corporation (RIAC) and its
demolition contractors — O.R. Colan Associates and The
Jones Payne Group, Inc. — have agreed to pay $25,000 for al-
leged violations of the federal Clean Air Act and National
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)
for Asbestos in conjunction with the demolition of single
family homes near T.F. Green State Airport.
Jones Payne will pay the full amount of the $25,000
penalty for its failure to provide EPA with prior written notifi-
cation of its intent to demolish 146 residences during a Noise
Management Program and voluntary land acquisition at T.F.
Green Airport in Warwick, R.I., EPA said.
"From September 2004 to December 2008, respondents
demolished 146 residences. Although the demolition or reno-
vation of a single-family residence is exempt from Asbestos
NESHAP requirements, the exemption does not apply where
the demolition is part of a larger commercial project," EPA
explained.
"In accordance with federal regulations, as the owner or
operator of a demolition activity, RIAC, Colan, and Jones
Payne were required to provide the [EPA] Administrator with
written notice of intention to demolish or renovate prior to
the commencement of the activity. Respondents failed to pro-
vide EPA with the required notice, although the State of
Rhode Island was notified.
"Based on inspections conducted by Rhode Island De-
partment of Environmental Management during the course of
the demolition, other work practice requirements of the As-
bestos NESHAP appear to have been met. No apparent risk
was posed to human health or the environment as a result of
the violations," EPA said.
Comment on Fine
The Jones Payne Group, O. R. Colan Associates, and
Rhode Island Airport Corporation (RIAC) said in a statement
to ANR that they "entered into a Consent Agreement and
Final Order with the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 1 (`'EPA"), in which Jones Payne agreed to
pay a twenty-five thousand dollar ($25,000.00) penalty for
failure to provide the EPA with notice prior to demolishing
homes containing asbestos in accordance with 40 C.F.R.
61..145(b) [the notification section of the Asbestos NESHAP].
"Although the code of federal regulations excludes sin-
gle-family residences from the notice requirement, EPA
Airport Noise Report
ti
July 30, 2010
ANR EDITORIAL
John J. Corbett, Esq.
Spiegel & MCDiarnid
Washington, DC
Carl E. Burleson
Director, Office of Environment and Energy
Federal Aviation Administration
Peter J. Kirsch, Esq.
Kaplan, Kirsch & Rockwell LLP
Denver
Vincent E. Mestre, P.E.
President, Mestre Greve Associates
Laguna Niguel, CA
Steven .F. Pfl.aum, Esq.
Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
Chicago
Mary L. Vigilante
President, Synergy Consultants
Seattle
stated in the Consent Agreement that it 'does not consider a residence of
four or fewer dwelling units, which is demolished or renovated, as part of
a cormnereial or public project to be excluded from the Asbestos NE-
SHAP'.
"The EPA acknowledged that other than the administrative oversight
of not having provided notice of demolition to the Agency, there was at no
time a risk to public health or to the environment. All asbestos containing
materials were identified and removed prior to the commencement of
demolition. Asbestos abatement plans were submitted to and approved by
the state's jurisdictional agency, Rhode Island Department of Health. A
state certified asbestos abatement contractor performed asbestos removal,
in accordance with all NESHAP and OSHA regulatory requirements."
"In an effort to expedite closure, The Jones Payne Group, agreed to
pay the penalty rather than challenging the validity of the EPA's position.
RIAC expressed appreciation to Jones Payne and O. R. Colan for immedi-
ately resolving this matter."
EPA's issuance of the fine at T.F. Green raises the spectre that frons
conducting similar ]ionic demolitions or residential sound insulation proj-
ects (which are renovations) around other airports also my have failed to
provide EPA with the notification required under the Asbestos NESHAP.
The notification issue is complicated. In some states, the notification
need not go beyond the state level but other states require EPA to be noti-
fied.
oti-
fed. An EPA spokesman said that is likely because some states are fully
delegated to manage compliance with. the Asbesto NESHAP and others
are not.
For a list of EPA regional and state asbestos contacts, go to
bttp:HNvww.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/region.coiitact.htmi.
El Segundo, fr oyn p. 95
"The City is actively working on this issue and hopes to have a defini-
tive resolution in the near future," O'Neill wrote. "Until this issue is re-
solved, the City will need to suspend work relating to homes located
outside Alternative D contour. The City will, however, continue with de-
sign work already started for homes that are not impacted by this deci-
sion."
O'Neill did not reply to inquiries by ANR by deadline; however, the
Manhattan Beach Reporter explained in a July 22 story that "the FAA
based its cut on a study, which predicted that by 2015, there will be no ex-
cessive noise issues for all but 2,200 homes in El Segundo. According to
the study, the planes will be quieter and the air traffic will be less fre-
quent, resulting in less noise."
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@airportinoisereport.conn; 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.
Aviatx�vonl! xwions Reporr
A bi-weekly update on research, technology, and reduction strategies
Volume 3, Number I July 20, 2010
Alternative Fuel
INITIATIVE ANNOUNCED TO PROMOTE
AVIATION IIIOFUEL IN PACIFIC NORTHWEST
Alaska Airlines, Boeing, Portland International Airport, Seattle -Tacoma
International Airport, Spokane International Airport, and Washington State
University on July 12 announced a strategic initiative to promote aviation biofuel
development in the Pacific Northwest.
The project is jointly funded by the participating parties and is expected to be
completed in approximately six months.
The first regional assessment of its kind in the United States, the "Sustainable
Aviation Fuels Northwest" project will look at biomass options within a four -state
area as possible sources for creating renewable jet fuel..
The comprehensive assessment will examine all phases of developing a sustain-
able biofirel industry, including biomass production and harvest, refining, transport,
infrastructure, and actual use by airlines.
It also will include an analysis of potential biomass sources that are indigenous
(Continued on p. 2)
Airlines
P&W LAUNCHES `ECO -FLIGHT SOLUTIONS'
TO HELP AIRLINES SAVE FUEL, CUT EMISSIONS
At the Farnborough Airshow on July 19, Pratt & Whitney launched its new
comprehensive fuel conservation program, EcoFlight Solutions, to help airlines
save fuel and reduce emissions.
P&W said its program can typically save an airline 3 to 8 percent in fuel costs
annually, even for airlines with fuel conservation programs already in place.
EcoFlight Solutions, offered through Pratt & Whitney's Global Service Partners
network, is a comprehensive fuel conservation service that analyzes airline opera-
tions, identifies potential fuel. savings, drives implementation and tracks results.
"Fuel is the number one expense for the airline industry and can account for up
to 50 percent of an airline's operating costs. Airlines struggle to safely use as little
fuel as possible, especially in these tough economic times. Pratt & Whitney is
excited to help airlines reduce firer and operating costs with EcoFlight Solutions,"
said Joanne Hastings, director, Pratt & Whitney Line Maintenance Services.
"This innovative fuel conservation program is an elegant solution for airlines
committed to reducing their environmental impact while realizing significant sav-
ings."
(Continued on p. 8)
In This Issue...
Alternative Fuel ... Initia-
tive announced to promote
aviation biofiiel development
in Pacific Northwest - p. 1
... Castor oil meets ASTM
standard, p. 4
... 100% algae -based jet fuel
delivered for testing - p. 6
Airlines ... P&W launches
prograrn to help airlines cut
emissions, save fuel - p. 1
CLEEN ... Rolls-Royce
will do engine tests - p. 2
Europe ... Summer airspace
improvements planned - p. 3
... SESAR selects 18 projects
for AIRE 2, p. 3 -
... First "perfect flight" flown
from Heathrow, p. 5
Ringlets ... China Southern
orders 737 winglets, p. 6
JFK Int'l Airport...
Departure management sys-
tem will continue at airport
under trial, p. 7
Boston. Logan Iut'l Airport
... Massport votes to pur-
chase 50 alternative fuel
buses to replace fleet, p. 7
Julv 20, 2010
Alter natuve Fuel, frons p. I
to the Pacific Northwest, including algae, agriculturally based
oilseeds such as camelina, wood byproducts and others.
"By transitioning to a more fuel-efficient fleet and adopt-
ing technology to follow more direct flight paths, Alaska
Airlines has made significant strides in minimizing the envi-
ronmental impact of our flying in the communities we serve,"
said Alaska Air Group Chairman and CEO Bill Ayer.
"Through this initiative, we are joining other key stakehold-
ers in our region to explore the development of alternatives to
jet fuel that could further reduce our carbon footprint."
"The Pacific Northwest is a global gateway for people,
cultures and commerce and aviation is a vital contributor to
that process," said Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim
Albaugh. "Developing a sustainable aviation fuel supply now
is a top priority both to ensure continued economic growth
and prosperity at regional levels and to support the broader
aim of achieving carbon -neutral growth across the industry
by 2020."
"The Port of Seattle is committed to finding new ways to
protect the environment while sustaining jobs and economic
growth," said Port of Seattle CEO Tay Yoshitani."
Sustainable biofuels for aircraft could help reduce Sea -
Tac Airport's environmental impact even further and also cre-
ate jobs in an emerging industry."
The assessment process will be managed by Climate
Solutions, a Northwest -based environmental nonprofit organ-
ization, which will align the effort to sustainability criteria
developed by the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels. The
goal of the project is to identify potential pathways and nec-
essary actions to make aviation biofirei commercially avail-
able to airline operators serving the region.
Project Begins in July
The project will begin in July with a kickoff meeting, fol-
lowed by additional meetings throughout the assessment
process. The group of biomass producers, refiners, airport
operators, environmental and government organizations, air-
lines, academic representatives and Boeing will address
issues such as scale, conunercial viability and environmental
considerations.
"Washington State University is uniquely poised to tackle
this project," said John Gardner, WSU vice president of eco-
nomic development and global engagement. "It's critical that
understanding and policy keep pace with the science and
technology as we shape this next era of biofuels that we are
convinced will be sustainable."
Because biomass sources absorb carbon dioxide while
growing and can have higher energy content than fossil -based
fuel, their increased efficiency and use as aviation biofuel
could potentially save millions of tons of aviation greenhouse
gas emissions.
.......... .
2
CLEEN Progre nr
ROLLS-ROYCE WILL DO ENGINE
TEST DEMOS UNDER $16 M. GRANT
Rolls-Royce said July 16 that it has received S16 million
in grants for its participation in the Federal Aviation
Administration's Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions &
Noise (CLEEN) Technologies Program.
Under this contract, Rolls will. perform aero engine test
demonstrations specifically focused on reduced fuel burn
technologies and evaluating alternative aviation fuels.
The goals established by the CLEEN program are to
achieve a 33 per cent reduction in fuel burn, against a base-
line of current performance technology and advance sustain-
able alternative aviation fuels, by 2015.
James E. Skinner, Program Manager, CLEEN
Technologies, Rolls-Royce said, "We are conunitted to evalu-
ating alternative fuels and advancing future technologies that
are `match fit for purpose' and meet criteria. of critical impor-
tance for our environment, energy conservation, energy and
industry economies."
Rolls said its work in the CLEEN program will be per-
formed in concert with undertakings already established
under the UK Environmentally Friendly Engine (EFE) pro-
gram. EFE, part of the UK's National Aerospace Technology
Strategy, is an aero engine technology demonstration prod am
that will validate new technologies aimed at reducing noise,
fuel burn and emissions.
Rolls-Royce said it will evaluate alternative product
designs to achieve fuel burn reduction by providing large
gains in cycle efficiency through reductions in turbine cool-
ing airflow. Design and manufacture of these alternative
product parts will be conducted in Indianapolis, IN, and test-
ing will be conducted in Bristol, UK.
Rolls-Royce future engine technologies are aimed at pro-
gressing advanced engine cycles that meet or exceed CLEEN
goals for fuel burn reduction, while improving engine weight
and noise.
Alternative fuels
Under the CLEEN Program initiative, Rolls will charac-
terize alternative fuels using accepted ASTM International
procedures, through component, engine, rig and flight testing
of a Rolls-Royce AE 3007 engine and Cessna. Model 750 air-
craft. Testing will be carried out by Rolls-Royce at its
Indianapolis, Indiana, USA facilities and by Cessna Aircraft
Company at its Wichita, Kansas, USA facility.
A complementary alternative fuels program of laboratory -
scale, rig and engine testing also will be performed in a con-
trolled environment at Rolls-Royce facilities in Derby, UK,
the company said.
Roll's aim is to assess various characteristics of alterna-
tive fuels, including suitability, environmental sustainability,
and industrial and commercial viability. Rolls-Royce said it
will strive to build on the fundamental scientific understand -
Aviation Emissions Report
July 20, 2010
ing of the roles of alternative fuel properties and composition,
aimed at improving the overall environmental performance
relative to current day performance.
Rolls-Royce collaboration in the CLEEN program further
enables the company's drive to meet ACARE (Advisory
Council for Aeronautics Research in Europe) established tar-
gets of reducing CO2 and noise by half and NOx by 80 per
cent by 2020, relative to a baseline for technology in 2000.
Europe
1 20191 U, AI. �;.
EUROCONTROL released its implementation plan for
short-term. airspace structure improvements for the Surnmer
2010 season. It includes 217 packages of airspace changes
developed over the past year, each of which will contribute to
improved performance of European Air Traffic Management.
Continuous upgrading of the route network and support-
ing ATC sectorization in Europe is needed to meet the capac-
ity and flight efficiency needs of air traffic and cater for the
changing patterns of traffic flows, EUROCONTROL said.
Under the implementation plan, by the end of the
Summer season, flying distances will have been reduced by
approximately 20,000 nautical miles each day, saving the air-
lines 40,000 tons of fuel and reducing CO2 emissions by
140,000 tons over a 12 month period.
Airspace improvements are agreed to within a dedicated
group of 43 States and their air navigation service providers,
eight international organizations, including airspace users,
and EUROCONTROL.
This group meets regularly to discuss and improve the
European Air Traffic Services route network, the supporting
airspace sectorization and to optimize the use of the airspace.
Measures agreed are monitored by the Directors of
Operations of the European air navigation service providers,
through the EUROCONTROL Operations Coordination
Group.
"These short-term improvements to the airspace structure
are yet another means to deliver on the actions to save fuel
and reduce emissions contained in the Flight Efficiency Plan
we signed with the Civil Air Navigation Services
Organization (CANSO) and the International Air
Transportation Association (IATA) in September 2008," said
Joe Sultana, Deputy Director - Network Operations Division
at EUROCONTROL.
"The changes will also relieve identified bottlenecks and
increase overall network capacity, and represent pan-
European agreed solutions demonstrating the commitment of
the entire aviation industry to work together to address signif-
icant
ignificant economic and environmental challenges."
3
ALR.E
SESAR SELECTS 18 PROJECTS,
40 PARTNERS TO EXPAND AIRE
The Single European Sky Air Traffic Management
Research (SESAR) Joint Undertaking (SJU) announced July
20 that it has selected I8 projects involving 40 airline, air-
port, air navigation service providers, and industry partners to
expand the Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce
Emissions (AIRE).
One highlight of the program will be a series of green
transatlantic flights with the Airbus A380, the world's largest
airliner. Seven of the 18 proposals include green gate -to -gate
projects, among others between France and the French West
Indies.
Under the AIRE initiative, the SJU supports integrated
flight trials and demonstrations validating solutions for the
reduction of CO2 emissions for surface, terminal, and
oceanic flight operations.
AIRE, launched in 2007, was designed to improve energy
efficiency and aircraft noise in cooperation with the U.S.
Federal Aviation Administration. The SJU is responsible for
its management from a European perspective. In 2009, the
SJU supported 1,152 green flight trials under the AIRE
urnbrella. Some 18 partners in five locations participated in
the trials.
As a result of a call for proposals for the program, more
partners will be involved in AIRE in additional pioneer loca-
tions such as Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic,
Germany, Canada, Morocco, The Netherlands, the United
Kingdom, and Switzerland, SJU said.
"AIRE 2 means more partners in more locations with
more trials for more results. We will demonstrate that green
flight operations can be applied. everywhere immediately,
when partners agree to work together with a common goal.
This is not the future, this is SESAR's reality," says Patrick
Ky, Executive Director of the SJU.
Other new features of the program are, for examples,
gate -to -gate flight trials performed between European city
pairs as an addition to complete green transatlantic flights.
Some of the validation projects will be conducted in the
most congested European airspaces and on the busiest
European airports (e.g Schiphol).
Some projects will focus oil vertical and speed optimiza-
tion, while partners who have already participated in 2009,
will expand on the results achieved so far with a strong link
to routine use of green procedures.
AIRE is building the first blocks of the SESAR Concept
of Operations by testing SESAR 4D trajectory -based opera-
tions and SESAR's concept of performance-based navigation.
Key Green Projects
The second AIRE call for tender (proposals) sought for
commiercial flight trial projects for energy-efficient air traffic
management (ATM) operations enabling lower engine emis-
Aviation Emissions Report
Julv 20, 2010
sions and aircraft noise:
Two proposals were selected for green surface trials. The
project "Greener airports operations under adverse condi-
tions" executed by the French air traffic control service
provider DSNA in partnership with Aeroports de Paris and
Air France will, for example, study operational situations in
adverse conditions, caused by bad weather or other factors
that constrain runway use.
Out of the five projects selected for tenninal operations,
one is conducted by Lufthansa in cooperation with the
German air traffic control authority DFS and Germanwings.
The partners propose to test a new procedure coupling the
arrival flows of Dusseldorf and Cologne. This area has a high
traffic density and is a complex area entailing the achieve-
ment of significant environmental benefits when imple-
mented.
For en-route/oceanic operations, four projects are selected
covering five new locations (Portugal, Canada, Morocco, the
United Kingdom and the United States). NAV Portugal will
for example with TAP Portugal and the Moroccan ONDA
(Office National des Aeroports) aim to offer the shortest
flight paths across the flight information regions of Lisbon
and Casablanca to heavy long-range aircraft that operate
those routes. The miles and minutes saved using this proce-
dure entail significant fuel savings and CO2 reduction.
In total, seven gate -to -gate projects will be conducted
through the program. Among others, Airbus, Air France,
NATS, and NAV Canada will perform a series of transatlantic
green flights with the A380. Another one is looking at green
shuttle flights between Paris and Toulouse.
Partners Involved
In total, some 40 partners involving airlines, airports, air
navigation service providers, and aircraft manufacturers will
demonstrate that significant efficiency gains can be achieved
through new procedures using existing technology.
The 2010/11 AIRE partners include:
• Airlines: Air Europa, Air France, Austrian Airlines,
Brussels Airlines, Czech Airlines, Gernnanwings, Iberia,
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Lufthansa, Na air, SAS, SWISS,
TAP Portugal);
Air navigation service providers for Spain, Czech
Republic, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Morocco, UK,
Portugal, Sweden, The Netherlands, and Switzerland;
• Airport operators: Aeroports de Paris, Brussels Airport,
Flughafen Zu0L%AG, Goteborg Landvetter, and.
• Industry Partners: Adacel, Airbus, CRIDAA.I.E, GE
aviation, INECO, National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR),
Pildo labs, Quovadis, Rockwell Collins, SENASA,
Swedavia).
In addition to the partners listed above, the FAA and NAV
Canada also will directly support some of the gate -to -gate
projects. The respective contracts are expected. to be signed in
September 2010 followed by an immediate start of projects.
0
Alternative Fuels
CASTOR OIL DEMONSTRATES
SUITABILITY AS BIOJET STOCK
The Israel -based agro-biotech company Evogene Ltd.
announced July 7 that biojet produced from castor varieties it
developed meets the key international standards for alterna-
tive aviation fuels.
The analysis was conducted by Evogene, Inc., a fully
owned U.S. subsidiary of Evogene, Ltd., in collaboration
with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), the Air Force Research Laboratory, and
Honeywell's UOP, a leading international developer and
licensor of refining process technology.
In April 2009 Evogene Inc. entered into a feasibility
agreement with NASA, to evaluate the potential use of castor
oil as a viable and sustainable feedstock for production of
biojet fuel. Under this agreement, biojet produced from
Evogene castor oil through UOP's technology, is expected to
undergo additional advanced testing by NASA and the U.S.
Air Force Research Laboratory.
The results being announced demonstrate that such biojet
meets the major American. Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) D7566(2) fuel specifications requirements for alter-
native aviation fuels containing Synthesized Hydrocarbons.
The D7566 fiiel specification is written for fuels produced
using the Fischer-Tropsch process; however, specifications
for alternative aviation fuels containing Bio Synthesized
Paraffinic Kerosene (biojet) are expected to be approved for
conunercial airline use before the end of 2010 or early next
year.
"A diverse range of feedstocks is critical to creating a sus-
tainable biofuels infrastructure," said Jim Rekoske, general
manager of Renewable Energy & Chemicals at Honeywell's
UOP. "Castor oil has proven to be a viable second -generation
source, and we believe it has the potential to be an important
contributor to the production of aviation biofuels."
"We are pleased to see this feasibility support in castor oil
as a viable second -generation feedstock for biofuels. In addi-
tion to the positive properties analysis being reported today,
Evogene recently announced the results of a Life Cycle
Analysis of biodiesel produced from its castor, showing that
such biodiesel reduces greenhouse gases emissions by 90%
compared to petroleum diesel in the U.S.," stated Mr. Ofer
Haviv, Evogene's President and. CEO.
"We highly value our joint efforts with NASA, AFRL
and UOP world leading entities in this field, for this project in
developing castor oil biofuels."
Evogene said that "it is believed that biojet will be one of
the most common mid -terns solutions for the aviation indus-
try as it could be used as a drop-in replacement for jet fuel
and would not require redesign of the engine or airplane."
Evogene said it is focusing on development of high yield-
ing castor varieties, suitable for cost-efficient growth on
semi -arid lands, using fully mechanized production. The eco -
Aviation Emissions Report
JuN20, 2010
noetic target of Evogene's castor development program is for
its varieties to be price competitive without government sub-
sidies at an oil price equivalent to $45 per barrel. Evogcne is
currently testing its castor varieties in field trials in the south-
ern U.S. and. northeastern Brazil
Evogcne said it "is a world leading developer of
improved plant traits. The company's proprietary product
development platform combines state of the art computa-
tional gene discovery technology (The `ATHLETE'), plant
and field validation capabilities and unique selection systems.
Evogene's current programs focus on the improvement of key
plant traits, such as yield and stress tolerance, and the
improvement of plants specifically for biofuel uses. Evogene
has collaboration and licensing agreements with world lead-
ing companies in the agro-biotech and alternative energy
industries. Evogene's headquarters are in Rehovot, Israel.
Aircraft
GE, AVIC PROVIDING SYSTEMS
FOR CHINA'S SINGLE -AISLE 0919
Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China Ltd
(COMAC) announced July 12 that GE Aviation Systems and
AVIC Systems have been selected to provide the avionics
core processing system, display system, and on -board mainte-
nance system for the newly launched C919 single -aisle air-
craft.
The public signing of the Letter of Intent for the C919
avionics selection was attended by senior management from
GE, AVIC and COMAC. AVIC and GE are forming the new
joint venture company to develop and market integrated
avionics systems to the global conunercial aerospace indus-
try, and in particular the avionics systems for the C919.
"China is the world's fastest-growing aviation market and
we need to ensure GE and the United States are part of this
growth," said John Rice, Vice Chairman of GE. "Our partici-
pation helps GE to grow high-tech jobs and capabilities,
while serving the aviation market with the latest commercial
technology. The C919 program will support hundreds of jobs
in US, China and the UK."
The C919 modular avionics system provided by the pro-
posed AVIC GE joint venture will be the central information
system and backbone of the airplane's networks and electron-
ics and will host the airplane's avionics, maintenance and
utility functions. The system replaces dozens of traditional,
standalone computers fitted to aircraft flying today, benefit-
ting in weight savings, improved reliability and reduced oper-
ating cost.
Zhang Xinguo, AVIC vice president, said: "We are build-
ing a. long-term partnership through the joint venture and will
provide the C919 with advanced commercial tcchnologics
and products for its avionics systems. Although this joint ven-
ture is based in China, we anticipate expanding our customer
market to the U.S. and other global markets as we work
5
together to achieve mutual business success."
"The C919 will be more advanced than current operating
commercial air transport aircraft of the same size. It will use
between 12% and 15% less fuel, and help reduce carbon
emissions," said Zhang Qingwei, Chairman, Commercial
Aircraft Corporation of China. "The GE AVIC open systems
architecture avionics enables integration of Third -party appli-
cations with high integrity and performance."
Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd.
(COMAC) was established on May 11, 2003, and is head-
quartered in Shanghai.
UIQ
FIRST'PERFECT FLIGHT' RESULTS
FROM OPTIMIZED PROFILE
Britain's aviation industry said it has come together to
reach an important environmental milestone, turning the nor-
mal July 10 Saturday evening service from Heathrow to
Edinburgh into the UK's first "perfect flight."
"Every factor within the journey — frorn pushback from
the stand and taxiing to an optimized flight profile and con-
tinuous descent approach — was calibrated to achieve minimal
emissions and delay," the UK's National Air Traffic Services
Ltd. (NATS) said July 12.
Data from the British Airways BA1462 flight will now be
gathered and analyzed, together with air traffic control and
airport information, to understand the benefits. Initially, it is
believed up to a quarter ton of firel could be saved, equating
to nearly one ton of CO2.
NATS and BA worked with BAA at Heathrow and
Edinburgh to achieve this landmark flight, which was pro-
posed by NATS' Andy Sampson and Kel Kirkland.
Said Kell, "Unlocking each individual link in the chain on
a single flight is not easy. Everyone has had a part to play. "It
will be some time before we can expect to see the "perfect
flight" replicated day in, day out but we have demonstrated it
is possible and we can work towards it in the long -ten -n."
BA Strategy and Environment Manager Dean Plumb said,
"This highlights what can be achieved if every individual part
of a flight is optimized. The data obtained should show that
what seemed to be a normal, scheduled flight actually
achieved something extraordinary."
BAA Heathrow Airside Operations Director Colin Wood
said, "This flight is a great example of what can be achieved
when the aviation industry works together. "The benefits
should include reduced taxi time, lower carbon emissions,
improved air and noise quality and lower airline fuel costs.
We are always looking for ways to improve the environnnen-
tal efficiency of ground operations at our airports and trials
such as this are fundamental in delivering new procedures
and technologies."
The Airbus A321 was able to fly without the everyday but
necessary constraints imposed on air traffic because it was a
Aviation Emissions Report
JuIv 20, 2010
one-off. It was also able to fly at its most fuel-efficient alti-
tude for longer than usual, NATS explained.
The information from the flight will be shared with the
UK industry coalition Sustainable Aviation to support its aim
of reducing aircraft emissions to 2000 levels by 2050. NATS,
BA and BAA are all members.
Wing, lets
CHINA. SOUTHERN ORDERS
WINGLE'I'S FOR 55 NEVI' GEN 7375
China Southern Airlines announced July 19 at the
Farnborough Airshow that it has ordered Blended Winglets
for its future Boeing Next Generation 737 deliveries, posi-
tioning the carrier as China's most efficient and environmen-
tally responsible airline.
The order, which provides for winglet installations on 55
aircraft delivering between 2011 and 2015, is the largest
winglet order to -date in China for Aviation Partners Boeing, a
Seattle -based joint venture of Aviation Partners, Inc. and The
Boeing Company.
"China Southern made this conuuitment after a long eval-
uation process, and they are looking forward. to the perform-
ance improvements that the Blended Winglets will bring,"
says Aviation Partners Boeing CEO John Reimers. "We are
very pleased to reach this monumental agreement with
China's largest airline."
Blended Winglets provide China Southern numerous ben-
efits, all of which result in economic and environmental
improvements, the APB said.
It added, "The improved takeoff performance, reduced
fuel consumption, longer range capability and reduced pollu-
tant emissions provided by APB's patented technology sup-
port China Southern's efforts to maintain its leading position
within China's airline industry."
"Blended Winglets are visible proof of China Southern's
commitment to reducing fuel requirements and pollutant
emissions," says Reimers. "These will be the most efficient
airplanes on routes between the western provinces and
Beijing. Blended Winglets are simply the most effective per-
formance enhancement available on the market today."
Once all 55 aircraft are in-service with Blended Winglets,
China Southern expects annual fuel savings of more than
7,700 tons, an annual carbon dioxide emissions reduction of
more than 24,000 tons, as well as range improvements and a
two -ton improvement in takeoff performance from locations
such as Kunming.
APB and China Southern said they will now discuss
retrofitting Winglets onto China Southern's existing fleet of
Boeing Next Generation 737 aircraft. Retrofit Blended
Winglets offered by APB can be installed in as few as three
days, and provide performance and operational benefits iden-
tical to factory installed winglets. China Southern currently
operates a fleet of about 80 Boeing Next Generation 737s, so
G
the resulting benefit should more than double the above sav-
ings once the entire fleet is winglet equipped.
More than 3,600 Blended Winglet Systems are now in
service with over 120 airlines in more than 80 countries. APB
estimates that Blended Winglets have saved airlines world-
wide more than 2.1 billion gallons of jet fuel to -date.
Alternative Fuel
S®LA.ZYME DELIVERS
ALGAE -BASED JET FUEL TO NAVY
Solazyme, Inc. said July 18 that it has delivered 1,500
gallons of 100 percent algae -based jet fuel for the Navy's
testing and certification program, moving the U.S. military
close to powering its planes, ships, tanks and tricks on
renewable fiiel.
The U.S. Navy' goal is to operate at least 50 percent of its
fleet on clean, renewable fuel by 2020, and the delivery ful-
fills a contract awarded to Solazyme by the U.S. Department
of Defense (DoD) in September 2009.
South San Francisco -based Solazyme is a renewable oil
and green bio -products company and leader in algal biotech-
nology. It manufactured the world's first 100 percent algal -
based jet fuel through its proprietary fermentation process in
collaboration with renewable jet fuel processing technology
from Honeywell's UOP.
Solazyme's renewable SolajetTMHRJ-5 is designed to
meet all of the requirements for Naval renewable aviation
fuel. In preliminary tests, it also meets the fuel requirements
of the U.S. Air Force and meets the standards for commercial
jet fuel, the company said.
"It has been an honor to work with both the Navy and
DESC/DLA to provide the first microbial derived advanced
biojet fuel that will aid the military's transition away from
fossil fuel and toward more secure, renewable and reliable
sources," said Jonathan Wolfson, CEO, Solazyme. "The mili-
tary has recognized the national security imperative of creat-
ing alternative energy solutions, and this project reflects their
leadership and vision in supporting new ways to power our
Department of Defense."
Solazyme said its algal fuel technology will help the DoD
reduce its carbon footprint, minimize reliance on foreign oil,
combat global climate change and pioneer the development
of clean and renewable energy sources for national energy
security.
Verified through external lifecycle analyses, Solazyme's
fuels provide an 85 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emis-
sions compared to traditional fossil fuels, the company said.
Prior to delivery to the Navy, the fuel was tested by an
independent testing laboratory, and met all of the Navy's 19
rigorous requirements for renewable hydrotreated jet fuel.
hi addition, the fuel, meets the proposed ASTM D 7566
specification for Aviation Turbine Fuels containing synthe-
sized hydrocarbons, which is a critical milestone for provid-
Aviation Emissions Report
July 20, 2010
ing fuels not only for the military, but also for the civilian
market.
JFKC Int'I Airport
DEPARTURE MGbIT SYSTEM
WILL CONTINUE AS A TRIAL
A state-ofAhe-art flight departure management system,
which had previously only been used during winter storms
and the recent closure of John F. Kennedy International
Airport's Bay Runway, will be continued as a trial until
year's end at the busy hub to help ease congestion during this
peak travel season, the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey announced July 1, 2010
This system was in large part responsible for the mini-
mal delays that occurred during the recent closure of JFK's
longest runway, a project completed on schedule and on
budget, the Port said.
The Port Authority is joining its airline partners at JFK
International Airport to continue the trial program that
reduces the number of jets queuing on taxiways by letting
passengers remail in the terminal longer before takeoff.
In addition to easing nrnway congestion, the program
will save airlines money in fuel costs, reduce taxi time, limit
pollution and lessen passengers' frustrations.
During normal conditions, the FAA currently operates
on a "first -called, first-served" basis, which requires aircraft
to be in a taxi line to secure a departure spot. Under surface
management, the planes abide by a "reservation' system and
are assigned a time window for departure. The surface man-
agement program works by limiting eight to 12 planes to be
in line for takeoff from a particular runway at any time during
peak hours, a process that prevents large numbers of idling
planes from stacking in lengthy lines.
"This program is a triple -win for the 48 million passen-
gers who travel annually through JFK, our airline partners,
and the environment," said Port Authority Chairman Anthony
Coscia. "The collaboration between the Port Authority, the
FAA, the airlines, and private enterprise has been exemplary
and is critical to the program's success."
This is an exciting new program that the Port Authority
spearheaded to do everything we can to reduce flight
delays. It is a state-of-the-art approach that we hope will
spread to all of our airports in the near fixture and set a
national standard going forward," said Chris Ward, the Port
Authority's executive director. "I want to thank the FAA and
all of the airlines for partnering on this important effort."
Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni
said, "Success with this program can be a model for flight
delay reduction projects at other busy airports nationwide,
including Newark. Liberty International Airport. This and
other programs like promoting Next Gen satellite technology
to move planes more efficiently shows the agency's commit-
ment to reducing flight delays here and across the nation."
A variation of the surface management program was in
effect the past three years during winter operations to help
reduce the length of time between de-icing and takeoff by
maintaining a short departure queue, thereby mitigating the
need for secondary de-icing.
Limiting departure queues to just eight to 12 planes mini-
mizes the time passengers spend waiting in line for takeoff,
while ensuring a steady stream of flights so capacity is not
lost. if a plane must push back from the gate early to accom-
modate an arriving flight, it is sent to locations on the tarmac
for "metering," where it can operate on auxiliary power until
its reservation time when it may taxi for takeoff.
Passeur Aerospace will continue to handle staffing for
the program during the additional trial period. The Port
Authority has taken a series of steps in recent years to reduce
flight delays, including formation of the National Alliance to
Advance NextGen to urge the federal government to move
swiftly to fund satellite navigational technology and away
from the current 1950s -era radar -based equipment. NextGen
allows aircraft the precision of flying closer together and
landing more efficiently without jeopardizing safety.
Boston Logan Int'CAirport
MASSPORT VOTES TO PURCHASE
50 ALTERNATIVE FUEL BUSES
The Massachusetts Port Authority Board voted July 15 to
spend almost $35 million for a fleet of 50 new alternative file]
buses to replace Boston Logan International Airport's aging
fleet of compressed natural gas buses and diesel powered
rental car company buses that currently serve the airport.
Massport said the environmentally -friendly unified fleet
is part of the $337 million Consolidated Rental Car
(ConRAC) facility which will be built in the Southwest
Service Area of the airport.
The purchase includes 32 60=foot long articulated buses
with diesel-electric hybrid propulsion systems, which will
replace the rental car buses, and 18 42 -foot long CNG (conn -
presses natural gas) buses, which will replace the existing
CNG shuttle buses, which have logged more than 13 million
clean -air miles.
"This represents an important investment in building a
better Logan," said. Thomas J. Kinton Jr., Massport's CEO &
Executive Director. "Not only will the new united bus sys-
tem improve air quality through alternative fuels, it will
reduce emissions by cutting congestion and dwell times at the
terminal curbs. It also represents a significant improvement in
customer service, because departing passengers will be
dropped off on the upper level and. a separate bus loop will
pickup arriving passengers on the lower level."
Massport expects the new fleet to be in operation for at
least 12 years during which time it will reduce carbon dioxide
emissions by more than 1,840 tons as compared to the exist-
ing rental car company buses. The reduction is equivalent to
Aviation Emissions Repot
July 20, 2010
the amount of carbon sequestered each year by 356 acres of
pine forest.
As part of the procurement, Massport applied. for a.
Federal Aviation Administration Voluntary Airport Low
Emissions AIP grant to cover 75 percent of the incremental
cost of purchasing alternative fuel buses. If the grant applica-
tion is approved, Massport will be the first New England
recipient of the VALE grant.
The new buses will be built by Anniston, Ala. -based
North American Bus Industries, Inc. and have a sleeker, more
aerodynamic look than the current fleet. The 60 -foot long
buses will have three sets of doors for easy entrance and exit
and storage space for luggage.
Confet•ences
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and
the Institute of Air and Space Law at McGill University are
co -hosting a Worldwide Conference and Exhibition on Air
Transport in Montreal on Sept. 26-27.
The theme of the conference is: What Route to
Sustainability?
"This event will provide a detached and preparatory
forum for State delegates and stakeholders attending and/or
interested in the issues proposed for the 37th Session of the
ICAO Assembly that starts on September 28th," ICAO said.
The special pre -Assembly Conference will bring together
hundreds of international experts from the air transport indus-
try, government, specialized organizations, academia, law,
and finance.
Four fundamental themes of concern to the Assembly and
global aviation will be addressed: (1) the state of the aviation
industry, (2) security and facilitation, (3) aviation and the
environment, and (4) strategies and the way forward.
Luncheon key note speakers are Giovanni Bisignani,
Director General and Chief Executive Officer of the
International Air Transport Association (IATA), and Gary R.
Scott, President, Bombardier Commercial Aircraft.
ICAO said the Conference is a `must attend' for profes-
sionals from civil aviation authorities and transport ministries
(including members of State delegations to the ICAO
Assembly), airlines, airports, air navigation service providers,
aviation security providers as well as personnel of organiza-
tions directly involved in supporting the aviation business
such as manufacturers, law and consulting firms, and interna-
tional and regional organizations.
Further information on the conference, including the pro-
gram, which includes several sessions on environmental
issues, at: http://www.icao.int/ICAO-McGiII2010/.
P& tiV, from P.
Pratt & Whitney is offering EcoFlight Solutions in collab-
oration with Flight Sciences International, a leading provider
of fuel conservation programs. EcoFlight Solutions will
leverage Pratt & Whitney and Flight Sciences International's
proven services, including aircraft fuel consumption opti-
mization, EcoPower(r;) engine wash, advanced engine moni-
toring and line maintenance support - all of which can help
airlines reduce fuel consumption and improve environmental
performance.
In related news fi-om Farnborough, P&W announced that
it has signed an agreement for a two-year extension with
JetBlueAirways for its EcoPower engine washes on the air-
line's fleet of V2500and CF34 engines.
JetBlue started washes last year at John F. Kennedy
International Airport, Fort Lauderdale - Hollywood
International Airport, and at Orlando International Airport in
Florida with options to expand the service to 13 additional
airport locations.
P&W said that the National Aviation Company of India
Ltd, operating under the brand name "Air India," has signed
an agreement to establish an EcoPower engine wash service
at Mumbai International Airport.
With this agreement, Air India will be able to perform
EcoPower engine washes on various engines in its fleet of air-
craft. In addition, it will offer the services to other carriers in
the region. The service center will have the ability to perforn
washes on nearly all commercial engines in service today,
including the PW4000, CFM56-5/-7, V2500, CF6-80C2 and
GE90-115B.
c11 ;1111111 11,12211151111
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Published 22 tunes a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashbum, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528.
e-mail: editor@aviationemissi.onsreport.com; Price $550.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients,
is granted by Aviation Emissions Report, provided that the base fee of US$ 1.03 per page per copy
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. USA.
I
S 0 0 0. Rqport
Aviartord.. Emicsomons
A bi-weekly update on research, technology, and reduction strategies
Volume 3, Number 2 August 3, 2010
ACRP Projeets
ACRP tall RESEARCH PROGRAM INCLUDES
FIVE PROJECTS THAT FOCUS ON EMISSIONS
Five projects focusing on aviation emissions and two on runoff are among the
23 projects that comprise the Fiscal Year 2011 Airport Cooperative Research
Program under which applied research is carried out to develop near-term solutions
to a broad range of issues facing airports.
The emissions projects will:
• Identify best practices for airport sustainability and practical metrics to evalu-
ate sustainability efforts;
• Update and expand the airport -industry database on sustainability practices,
develop additional supporting information, and improve the user interface of the
web -based database;
• Develop guidance and a database to more accurately and consistently quantify
emissions from airport -related construction activities;
• Provide airports with specific guidance regarding the derivation of an effec-
tive methodology to quantify lead emissions at airports serving general aviation air -
Technology
(Continued on p. 10)
9. 9
On July 21, at the Farnborough Airsho,,v, Boeing announced its
ecoDemonstrator Program for accelerating environmental technologies.
The program will emphasize emerging technologies in the areas of fuel effi-
ciency, noise reduction, and operational efficiency, while readying technologies at a
faster pace for aviation applications.
"Commercial aviation is in rapid pursuit of its goal of carbon -neutral growth by
2020, primarily driven by technology advancements," said Billy Glover, managing
director of Environmental Strategy for Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
"The ecoDemonstrator Program can help accelerate industry efforts by provid-
ing a platform that integrates innovation and technologies in a way that ensures as
they mature, they are market -ready. The program also will enable emerging tech-
nologies to be tested. for further research consideration."
The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, through its Continuous Lower
Energy Emissions Noise (CLEEN) program recently awarded Boeing a $25 million
matching cost contract for technology development (22 ANR 75). Under this con -
1 (Continued on p. 15)
In This Issue...
ACRP ... The 2011
Research Program for the
Airport Cooperative
Research Program includes
five emissions projects
focusing on sustainability,
emissions from airport con-
struction, lead emissions
fiom AVGAS, and multi-
modal uses of alterative
fuels - P. 9
... Finn is selected to study
use of alternative fuels as
means to reduce fine particu-
late matter at airports - p. 13
... GAO recommends ways
to improve ACRP - p. 13
Boeing ... ecoDemonstrator
Program launched to acceler-
ate environmental technolo-
gies - P. 9
Sea -Tree ... Test flight over
Puget Sound reduces emis-
sions by 35 percent - p. 14
Climate... Senate unveils
narrow bill with no cap -and -
trade; EPA denies petitions
challenging endangerment
finding - p. 15
August 3, 2010
ACRP, from p. 9
craft using leaded AVGAS;
• Define and quantify costs and benefits for the use of on -
or near -airport alternative firels facilities;
• Evaluate treatment of runoff from deicing at airports;
and
.Provide a reference document that advances understand-
ing and control of nuisance bacteria in airport storm water
outfalls.
Oversight Panels Being Formed
The Transportation Research Board (TRB), which man-
ages the ACRP Program for the Federal Aviation Adminis-
tration, announced .I'uly 30 that it is seeking nominations for
individuals to serve on oversight panels that will be formed
for each of the research projects conducted in the 2011 pro-
gram.
Nominations must be submitted no later than Sept. 15.
For further information, go to
http://onlineput)s.trb.org/onlinepubs/acip/acip_ran elnomin a-
tions201. l .pdf.
Once project panels have been formed, detailed project
statements (e.g., requests for proposals), formally soliciting
research proposals for each of these new projects will be
posted on
http://w«v. trb. o rg/ACRP/Requestsfoi-P roposals. aspx.
Research teams can expect these RFPs to be released
starting in November 2010. In the meantime, the specifica-
tions for preparing proposals may be referenced at
http://www.trb.org/NCHR.P/Public/CRPInfoProposers. aspx.
The ACRP Oversight Committee met on July 18-19 and
selected the Fiscal Year 2011 program. Following are descrip-
tions of the emissions projects:
Project 2-28: Sustainability for Airports: Best
Practices, Success Metrics, and Beyond
($800,000 Allocation)
This project will begin in October 2010
Airport sustainability encompasses a wide variety of prac-
tices that consider environmental protection, maintenance of
high and stable levers of economic growth, and social
progress. Many airports have begun to incorporate sustain-
able practices into their planning, construction, and daily
operations in response to regulation and policy and because
of the tangible benefits to the airport and surrounding com-
munity. Many airports, however, have found barriers to
implementing sustainability practices, which include lack of
funding, staffing challenges, and lack of understanding and/or
awareness. While there have been many efforts to define sus-
tainability as well as to identify airport sustainable practices,
none of the efforts to date have developed evaluation metrics
10
anal/or rating processes for airport sustainability programs.
These metrics are critical to helping airports prioritize proj-
ects and practices and to evaluate their performance.
The objective of this research is to identify best practices
for airport sustainability and to identify practical metrics to
evaluate sustainability efforts and practices. The effort would
likely be undertaken in two phases and build off of the find-
ings of ACRP Synthesis 10: Airport Sustainability Practices.
Phase I would involve holding a series of workshops of air-
port practitioners to share data, models, and methods, and
discuss findings and preliminary conclusions of recent and
ongoing sustainability research as it relates to airports. Phase
I would also help the industry gain a better understanding of
existing and potential drivers, priorities, and impediments to
implementing sustainability practices. Phase 11 would involve
the identification of best practices and potential evaluation
metrics. This second phase would also explore various mod-
els for a sustainability organizational framework. The work
done in Phases I and II would likely lead to a third phase (not
currently funded) that could explore methods for encouraging
greater airport participation in sustainability projects and
practices.
Project 2-30: Enhancing the Airport -Industry
Database of Sustainable Practices
($500,000 Allocation)
There is increased attention and interest toward incorpo-
rating sustainable practices into airport planning, construc-
tion, and everyday operations. Many airport operators have
made commitments to be more sustainable through a variety
of mechanisms, including policy statements, adoption of
goals, measuring and reporting, and development of airport -
specific sustainability guidelines. Airports have undertaken
myriad sustainable practices focused on improving their envi-
ronmental, economic, and social viability. Many airports,
however, do not have the staff expertise or resources avail-
able to learn about the sustainable practices that may be
applicable at their airport. To assist airport operators looking
to undertake a sustainability program or incorporate sustain-
able practices into their projects and operations, Airports
Council Intemational-North America, the Airport Consultants
Council, the American Association of Airport Executives, the
Air Transport Association, and the Federal Aviation
Administration established the Sustainable Aviation Guidance
Alliance (SAGA) in late 2008. SAGA collected information
on hundreds of airport sustainability initiatives that have been
employed by airports across the U.S., Canada, and interna-
tionally and used that information to develop a comprehen-
sive searchable database and. accompanying guidance
document that can assist airport operators in planning, imple-
menting, and maintaining sustainability programs. The SAGA
database was launched in October 2009 and is now available
online at www.airportsrrstainability.org. The current database
Aviation Emissions Report
August 3, 2010
provides a good resource for airports looking to improve their
sustainability. However, because SAGA has been a purely
volunteer effort of association, airport, and consultant experts
in sustainability, the resources were not available to provide
additional supporting information that could make the data-
base of practices a more valuable tool. The database provides
a list of hundreds of sustainable practices, but little support-
ing material or resources to consult for additional informa-
tion. As an example, one practice included is "Develop an
Energy Master .Plan for the organization's facilities." The
database would prove more useful if it also described what an
energy master plan entails; the associated costs/benefits; and
links, cites, or contacts for additional information.
The objective of this research is to update and expand the
airport -industry database, develop additional supporting
information for each of the sustainable practices provided in
the database, and improve the user interface of the web -based
database. Such additional supporting information may
include a brief description of the practice; associated costs
and benefits; and link, references, or contacts for additional
information.
Project 2-33: Understanding Emissions from
Airport Construction
($350,000 Allocation)
As airports continue to expand and modify their infra-
structure to meet the growing demand for air travel, they need
to configure their growth within environmental constraints.
Airport projects that rely on federal funding are required to
have National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)-related
studies conducted to assess the environmental impacts of
these projects. Many airport projects require construction to
deal with additions or changes to runways, taxiways, aprons,
terminal buildings, parking facilities, etc. Although emissions
from construction equipment and associated activities are
temporary in nature, they must be accounted for along with
other applicable sources to meet NEPA requirements. While
the understanding of emissions from various airport sources
is improving, construction emissions still remain largely
unknown. The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's)
Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System
(EDMS)/Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) cur-
rently does Dot explicitly account for construction emissions,
and few resources offer guidance for quantifying explicitly
such emissions. As such, there is variability in estimated
emission levels and components based on what emission fac-
tors are used, how the equipment is characterized, and what
activity data are used.
The objective of this research is to develop guidance and
a database to more accurately and consistently quantify emis-
sions from airport -related construction activities. Research
should also provide consistency in estimating construction
emissions for an airport project by answering questions such
as: (a) what emission factors should be used and how accu-
rate are they; (b) how should activity data (including 8
loads) of the equipment be obtained or measured; (c) how
should construction emissions be included in EDMS/AEDT,
especially if a dispersion analysis is to be conducted; and. (d)
how should suspended dust from airport construction activi-
ties be estimated?
Project 2-34: Quantifying and Monitoring Lead
Emissions from Leaded Aviation Gasoline
($500,000 Allocation)
The current National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) for lead is tell times more stringent than the previ-
ous standard. Existing regulations are believed to affect only
five airports, which have numerous operations from piston
engine aircraft that use leaded aviation gas (AVGAS). On
December 23, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposed to revise the ambient monitoring
requirements for measuring airborne lead. The proposed reg-
ulation changes the lead monitoring threshold and will affect
up to 73 airports. This revised threshold will be the basis for
State Air Quality agencies requiring source -oriented monitors
be installed near any applicable source, and it would require
airports to be treated as any other source of lead when deter-
mining whether source -oriented lead monitoring is needed.
The inputs used to determine applicability were based on a
number of assumptions and can be improved by obtaining
airport specific information. However, the EPA has limited
quantitative data to evaluate on -airport or off -airport ambient
lead concentrations associated with airports. The primary
source of information was from the Santa Monica Airport
study. In addition, the National Association of Clean Air
Agencies (NACAA) monitoring subcommittee members
"claim that lead emissions at airports will have a lesser
impact on ambient lead concentrations since the lead emis-
sions from airplanes taking off from or landing at ail -ports are
spread out over a larger area, unlike industrial sources where
the emissions may be emitted from a few stacks." If this pro-
posed regulation is enacted, airports would need to document
applicability or work with state agencies to monitor ambient
lead concentration of the surrounding air. Airport owners and
operators would face significant financial expenditures to
quantify emissions accurately and design a representative and
effective monitoring program.
The objective of this research is to provide airports with.
specific guidance regarding the derivation of an effective
methodology to quantify lead emissions at airports serving
general aviation (GA) aircraft using leaded AVGAS. In addi-
tion, this research can develop a protocol for a representative
monitoring program that addresses the number and type of
monitoring equipment required, and procedures for identify-
ing locations, monitoring time period, estimated cost, and
other applicable components.
Aviation Emissions Report
3, 2010
Project 2-36: Airports Exploring Multimodal
Opportunities for the Use of Alternative Fuels
($S00,000 Allocation)
Increasingly, airports and their tenants are examining the
potential to introduce sustainable alternative fuels at their
facilities. For example, a potential project for alternative jet
fuel purchase and distribution now is in place in the Seattle
area, and there are plans for use of alternative fuels for
ground service equipment at Los Angeles (LAX). Additional
projects are under consideration in other locales from coast to
coast. Thus, airports and their tenants serve as concentrated
demand centers for potential alternative fel suppliers.
Optimizing the potential of these developments from a broad
business view can offer airports a new sustainable business
and environmental opportunity, call renew aviation growth,
and can create jobs at airports and in the region. Work to date
on soon -to -be -certified Bio SPK (Hydro -treated Renewable
Jet) projects suggests that a project sized to optimize jet fuel
production near an airport is optimally configured to produce
biodiesel and other co -products as well. Consumption from
non -airport customers can add as much as 50% to the con-
sumption volrune, and other transport modes consuming what
remains. Given the concentrated demand for fuel product at
an airport, airports call serve as the best possible distribution
locus for all transportation and cormuerce that serve the air-
port and can benefit from access to green diesel and co -prod-
ucts.
The objective of this research is to define and quantify
costs and benefits (enviromnental, economic, and social [e.g.,
jobs]) for the use of on- or near -airport alternative fuels facil-
ity. This analysis should help frame opportunities for cooper-
ation between an airport and its tenants to serve as a
distribution hub of jet fuel, green diesel, and related co -prod-
ucts for which the airport and its tenants would be the prime
customer (>50% of production volume). This research seeks
to optimize this sustainable business and environmental
opportunity by evaluating options from the perspective of all
transportation services that serve airports building on the
growing discipline of transportation multimodal analysis.
Project 2-29: Evaluating Treatment of Runoff
from Deicing at Airports
($600,000 Allocation)
Airports across the United States face increasing regula-
tory and technical challenges for addressing runoff containing
glycol -based aircraft deicing and anti -icing fluids (ADFs)
associated with deicing operations. The handling and dis-
charging of this runoff, which represents millions of gallons
of stone water and wastewater associated with industrial
activities, present unique challenges for airports as require-
ments vary state to state. Although the Effluent Limitation
12
Guideline (ELG) being developed by EPA will likely stan-
dardize effluent limit and/or collection efficiency require-
ments, it will not provide airports with the information
needed to evaluate treatment options or help them achieve the
new effluent limitations with which they must comply. In
addition, new treatment technologies, including biological
treatment systems, show potential benefit. Several airports
have applied biological treatment as a method of treating
deicing storm water nmoff; however, while there are airports
that do have biological treatment systems in place, the effects
of cold water temperatures on system performance have not
been sufficiently researched or documented. h1 addition, the
potential effect of storm water that contains a mixture of air-
craft and pavement deicers on treatment efficiency has not
been investigated.
The objective of this research is to evaluate proven and
potentially prornising emerging technologies for the treatment
of ADFs and storni water containing spent ADFs for airports
of various sizes, activity levels, and in differing climates and
to provide airports with a thorough review of available
options and emerging technologies for the treatment of this
fluid. This research should evaluate various existing and
emerging treatment options relative to their effectiveness;
capital and annual costs; environmental benefits; practicality
relative to airport size; activity levels, and climate; and other
relevant factors. Alternatives to be considered should include
both onsite and offsite options that could be used as pretreat-
ment or as the final treatment solution for the facility -gener-
ated material. The research should also address offsite
treatment options as well as onsite in-situ active or passive
treatment technologies.
Project 2-32: Understanding and Controlling
Nuisance Bacteria in Airport Storm Water
Outfalls
($400,000 Allocation)
As the more profound environmental. impacts of deicing
activities are mitigated by runoff controls, increasing regula-
tory scrutiny is being directed toward more subtle issues,
including the occurrence of bacterial slimes at storm water
outfalls. The challenge to the aviation community for com-
plying with these emerging regulations is significant, because
bacterial growth associated with deicing discharges is not
currently predictable, the controlling factors are poorly under-
stood, and the costs of treatnnent controls are substantial. For
example, "sewer bacteria" (Sphaerotilus natans), a tilvnen-
tous bacteria associated with organic -rich wastewater dis-
charges, appear to be ubiquitous in the environment, and may
flourish wherever the right conditions exist. This situation
presents a high level of risk associated with the large invest-
ments needed for controls that may or may not eliminate the
bacterial growths. Airports need reliable infonnation on what
Aviation Emissions Report
August 3, 2010
is and is not known about the factors controlling the occur-
rence of nuisance bacteria, and the options for controlling
them. Environmental regulators would also benefit from this
information as they try to establish realistic and appropriate
requirements.
The objective of this research is to provide airport envi-
ronmental managers, airport. consultants, and regulatory
agency persormel with a reference document that presents a
clear description of what is currently known about the occur-
rence of bacterial growths associated with deicing discharges,
and practical quantitative guidance on water quality and other
environmental parameters that must be controlled for their
mitigation.
ACRP
PPC CHOSEN TO STUDY USE OF
ALTERNATIVE FUELS TO CUT PM
The international environmental consulting firm AEA
Group announced July 14 at the Farnborough Airshow that its
American arni, Project Performance Corporation (PPC), has
signed a contract with the Transportation Research Board to
cant' out Airport Cooperative Research Program Project 02-
23 on Alternative Fuels as a Means to Reduce PM2.5 at
Airports.
The project, which got underway in July, is part of the
ACRP 2010 research program.
The objective of the project is to estimate the PM2.5 con-
tribution of airports, evaluate the impact alternative firels may
have in reducing PM2.5 emissions from major contributors,
and identify the opportunities and challenges that alterative
fuels present in reducing airport -related PM2.5 emissions. A
case study approach will be the primary means for undertak-
ing the objective. No announcement has been made yet
regarding what airports will be studied in the project.
PM2.5 emissions are finer and therefore associated with
greater risks than larger PM 10 inlialable particles.
AEA is a leading energy and environmental consultancy
and information management firm. The company operates in
the UK, Europe, the U.S., and China advising the UK
Government, the EU, and major private sector organizations
in energy and climate change, air and water quality, risk man-
agement, carbon management, resources and waste, sustain-
able transport and knowledge transfer.
AEA said its selection for this work is a demonstration of
its growing presence in the U.S. transportation sector. The
$500,000 project will last for 1.6 months and involves staff
from offices in the U.K. and U.S.
"We are delighted to have been selected to undertake this
important research and look fortivard to furthering our under-
standing of airport emissions for the benefit of not only U.S.
airports, but the broader aviation community," said Dr. Hazel
Peace, AEA's Knowledge Leader for Aviation and Co -
Principle Investigator for the project.
13
"This is a great opportunity for collaborative working
across the Atlantic which will help to broaden the airport and
aviation community's knowledge of the impacts of alternative
fuels on PM2.5."
AEA's team includes sub -consultant support from KB
Environmental Sciences inc., Synergy Consultants Inc., the
Department of Aviation Technology at Purdue University, and
Richard Altman, President of RCB Altman Associates.
"More than 60 airports are located in non -attainment
areas for PM2.5," TRB explained in the project sum-
mary. "As demand for air travel continues to grow, these air-
ports will face increasing pressure to reduce their contribution
to local air emissions. Regions of the country where air qual-
ity exceeds the limits imposed by the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) are required to develop a plan to
bring the affected areas back into attainment. Many options
(e.g., aircraft technology advancement, efficient operational
procedures, and use of alternative fuels) are being investi-
gated to limit airport/aircraft emissions, and a combination of
these options is necessary to address existing and future air
quality -related environmental concerns effectively.
"Alten..iative fuels show promise in reducing PM2.5 emis-
sions from airport sources. As such, research is needed to
determine the degree to which these emissions can be
reduced through the use of alteratives to petroleum-based
fuels in major PM2.5 contributors (i.e., aircraft engines, aux-
iliary power units, ground transportation, and other combus-
tion sources).
"Although there is considerable uncertainty in measuring
PM2.5 emissions and assessing their potential impact on local
air quality, existing methods and modeling techniques can
provide airports with an understanding of the relative poten-
tial benefits of the use of alternative fuels. The methodologies
developed in this project may also benefit fixture studies as
characterization of PM2.5 emissions evolves."
ACRP
GA® REPORT RECOMMENDS
'SAYS TO IMPROVE PROGRAM
Recommendations for improving the Airport Cooperative
Research Program (ACRP) were included in a Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report to the House Committee
on Science and Technology submitted in July.
The program, sponsored by the Federal Aviation
Administration and managed by the Transportation. Research
Board, was authorized in 2003 as part of the Vision 100 —
Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act to cavy out applied
research on problems shared by airport operators.
Through 2009, ACRP approved 169 projects, about half
of which have been completed, and published 66 reports on
topics such as environmental impacts, policy and planning,
and administration.
The House Science Committee asked the GAO to evalu-
Aviation .Emissions Report:
August 3, 2010 14
ate the progress ACRP has made in addressing airports'
research needs focusing on two questions: (1) To what extent
does ACRD have processes in place that reflect established
criteria for conducting high-quality research programs? and
(2) What are ACRP's results to date and how useful have the
results been for the aviation commtuiity?
GAO concluded, fi-om a review of ACRP reports and
interviews with FAA, TRB, and aviation industry officials,
"that ACRP is regarded by the officials we interviewed as a
generally valuable resource for addressing the shared chal-
lenges faced by airport operators but improving some aspects
of its processes could further enhances it effectiveness."
GAO Recommendations
GAO concluded that ACRP conducts its research with
processes that align with many of GAO's criteria for produc-
ing high-quality research, but some gaps exist:
• Selecting projects: "ACRP has established a governing
board, the ACRD Oversight Committee (AOC), which is
composed of airport executives and other key industry stake-
holders, and processes to determine the research needs of
users and to select specific projects for fiuiding. However,
one organization that participates on the board—the Airport
Consultants Council—and the consensus approach used to
make project selection decisions are not included in the pro-
gram's documented operating procedures. ACRP stakeholders
commended the council's participation and the consensus
approach, but their omission from documentation potentially
diminishes program transparency;
• Implementing projects: "ACRP's processes for estab-
lishing a project panel to manage research projects, selecting
a researcher, and overseeing projects are well documented
and include quality control steps. However, product dissemi-
nation efforts may miss some potential users, particularly
staff at smaller airports and mid-level staff. The AOC has ini-
tiated a project to improve research dissemination to better
serve these groups, although the project's scope and time
frame is still being determined;
• Evaluating projects and the program overall: `'ACRP
maintains considerable information on ongoing and com-
pleted projects that are used by program managers and the
AOC to review project progress. The program, however, does
not currently have a systematic process for evaluating the
impact of individual projects or implementing continuous
improvements to the program's overall performance. Two ini-
tiatives—the dissemination project and a project initiated to
review ACRP processes—could address current gaps in proj-
ect and program evaluation, though the scope and time
frames of these projects are still being determined."
The GAO also recommended that the role of ACRP in
conducting airport security research be clarified.
The report, "Airport Cooperative Research Program
Addresses Many Needs but Could Enhance Transparency and
Clarify Scope of Research Role," (GAO -10-729) is available
online at: http://www.cao.gov/new.items/d10729.pdf.
Seattle-Tacorrta Int'l
TEST FLIGHT OVER PUGET SOUND
REDUCED EMISSIONS BY 35%
Alaska Airlines announced July 23 that it demonstrated
next -generation flight procedures this week during a test
flight over Puget Sound that burned less fuel and reduced
emissions by 35 percent compared to a conventional landing.
The flight was part of Alaska Air Group's "Greener
Skies" project at Seattle -Tacoma International Airport (Sea -
Tac) focused on using satellite -based guidance technology
pioneered by Alaska Airlines to fly more efficient landing
procedures that will reduce environmental impacts in the
Puget Sound region.
Alaska Airlines, in cooperation with the Port of Seattle,
Boeing, and other airlines serving Sea -Tac, is seeking Federal
Aviation Administration approval for the procedures, which
could ultimately be used by all properly equipped carriers at
Sea -Tac.
"Testing for the project began last summer and, since
then, Alaska Airlines has flown two other demonstration
flights and submitted more than half of the proposed proce-
dures for FAA review," the airlines said.
Representatives fiom Alaska, Boeing, the FAA and the
Port of Seattle participated in the most recent demonstration
to observe the level of flight path precision and fuel con-
sumption on eight landing approaches in a Boeing 737-700.
With a landing weight similar to a typical passenger flight,
the shorter and more efficient approaches reduced carbon
emissions and saved 400 pounds of fuel per approach.
The test flight used satellite guidance technology called
Required Navigation Performance (RNP) to fly more direct,
continuous descent approaches. Alaska Airlines said it esti-
mates the new procedures at Sea -Tac will cut fuel consump-
tion by 2.1 million gallons annually and reduce carbon
emissions by 22,000 metric tons, the equivalent of taking
4,100 cars off the road every year. They also will reduce
overflight noise for all estimated 750,000 people living below
the affected flight corridor.
"Sea -Tac is the ideal location to pursue this cutting-edge
project," said Bell Minicucci, Alaska's chief operating officer.
"Seattle has the highest percentage of advanced RNP -
equipped planes in the nation, and - working with the FAA -
Alaska Airlines, Boeing and the Port of Seattle are committed
to making `Greener Skies' a reality as soon as possible.
Ultimately this project could serve as a blueprint for next -
generation aviation technology throughout the county."
Typically, commercial aircraft follow a lengthy approach
pattern and series of stair -step descents before landing, the
airline explained. Using RNP technology and a continuous
descent, also called an optimized profile descent (OPD), air-
craft can descend from cruise altitude to an airport runway
along a shorter, more direct flight path at low power.
Planning and testing of the procedures will continue
through the remainder of the year and will be integrated into
Aviation Emissions Report
August 3, 2010
Alaska Airlines and sister carrier Horizon Air's commercial
operations at Sea -Tac pending FAA approval.
Alaska Airlines said it pioneered RNP precision flight -
guidance technology during the mid-1990s to help its planes
land. at some of the world's most remote and geographically
challenging airports in the state of Alaska. RNP provides
computer -plotted landing paths by using a combination of
onboard navigation technology and the global positioning
system (GPS) satellite network. It improves safety and relia-
bility in all weather, and reduces reliance on ground-based
navigation aids. Alaska Airlines said it currently uses FAA -
approved RNP procedures at 23 U.S. airports.
The airline said it is the only major U.S. air carrier with a
completely RNP -equipped fleet and fully trained crews.
Alaska is also the first airline approved by the FAA to con-
duct its own RNP flight validation. Horizon Air's fleet will be
firll.y RNP -equipped by the end of 2011.
Boeing, from p. 9
tract, which will be a part of the ecoDemonstrator Program,
Boeing said it will deliver the flight test portion of the pro-
gram and targeted technologies. Two ecoDemonstrator air-
craft will be used, including a Next -Generation 737 in 2012,
with a second series of flights aboard a Boeing twin -aisle air-
craft in 2013.
Builds on CLEEN Programs
"The ecoDennonstrator Program will build on the .FAA
CLEEN program foundation and be a continuum of focused
technology testing, which will include further collaboration
across the aviation industry" Boeing said. "Technologies in
development for the FAA CLEEN program include ceramic
matrix composite acoustic engine nozzles, advanced inlets,
and adaptive wing trailing edge flaps that can help reduce
fuel consumption and noise during the take -off, climb and
landing phases of flight."
Boeing said its ecoDemonstrator Program also will
include collaborative work with IHI Aerospace of Japan to
evaluate regenerative fuel cell technology for onboard auxil-
iary power applications. That technology also will be flight
tested with other emerging technologies in an effort to
quicken technology development through rapid prototyping
methods, challenging goals and the rigorous process of inte-
grating technologies onto a flight -test platform.
"The ecoDemonstrator Program allows aviation to accel-
erate promising environmental technologies, from discover-
ing to feasibility and airplane applicability. Moving these
technologies from the laboratory to flight test enables indus-
try to learn faster about addressing airplane integration chal-
lenges, making demonstrator programs a proven part of our
commitment to environmental performance," said Jeanne Yu,
director of Environmental Performance for Boeing
Commercial Airplanes.
Boeing said it recently completed a successful series of
sustainable biofuel test flights, which demonstrated. the tech -
15
nical feasibility of flying jetliners and military aircraft using
renewable fuel sources. Other recent demonstration program
examples include in-service evaluations of chrome -free paint
systems, Tailored Arrivals for optimizing aircraft landing pro-
cedures and in-flight testing of recycled carpet developed for
cabin interiors.
The ecoDemonstrator Program builds on the Quiet
Technology Demonstrators, which successfully highlighted
advanced noise reduction technologies aboard a Boeing 777
aircraft from 2001 to 2005.
Climate
SENATE UNVEILS NARROW BILL;
®BAMA WILL DEEP PUSHING
Lacking the votes they need to pass a bill that would cap
greenhouse gases, the Senate on July 27 unveiled a narrow
bill that focuses on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and
measures to improve energy efficiency,
The same day, President Obama vowed to continue push-
ing for a broad climate bill and White House spokesman
Robert Gibbs indicated that climate provisions could be
added back into the bill after the Senate passes it and House
and Senate conferees meet to iron out differences in their
bills.
Last year, the House passed its climate legislation, which
does include a cap -and -trade plan for greenhouse gas emis-
sions. However, Republicans strongly oppose the bill assert-
ing it will impose a "national energy tax" that will, be passed
on to consumers.
Obama called the Senate bill "an. important step in the
right direction" but said it was not enough on its own. "I want
to emphasize it's only the first step and I intend to keep push-
ing for broader reform, including climate legislation," he told
reported after meeting with congressional representatives.
In related news, the Environmental Protection Agency on
July 29 denied 10 petitions filed by the Chamber of
Cormnerce, states of Texas and Virginia, and several conser-
vative groups challenging its 2009 deternnination that climate
change is real, is occurring due to emissions of greenhouse
gases from human activities, and tlucatens human health and
the environment.
The petitions to reconsider EPA's Endangerment Finding
claim that climate science cannot be trusted, and assert a con-
spiracy that invalidates the findings of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Clunate Change (IPCC), the U.S. National Academy
of Sciences, and. the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
"After months of serious consideration of the petitions
and of the state of climate change science, EPA finds no evi-
dence to support these claims. In contrast, EPA's review
shows that climate science is credible, compelling, and grow-
ing stronger," the agency said
"The endangerment finding is based on years of science
from the U.S. and around the world. These petitions — based
Aviation Emissions Report
August 3, 2010
as they are on selectively edited, out -of -context data. and a
manufactured. controversy — provide no evidence to under-
mine our determination. Excess greenhouse gases are a threat
to our health and welfare," said EPA Administrator Lisa P.
Jackson.
"Defenders of the status quo will by to slow our efforts to
get America running on clean energy. A better solution would
be to join the vast majority of the American people who want
to see more green jobs, more clean energy innovation and an
end to the oil addiction that pollutes our planet and jeopard-
izes our national security."
The basic assertions by the petitioners and EPA
responses follow:
Claim: Petitioners say that emails disclosed from the
University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit [in
`Climategate'] provide evidence of a conspiracy to manipu-
late global temperature data.
Response: EPA reviewed every e-mail and found this
was simply a candid discussion of scientists working through
issues that arise in compiling and presenting large complex
data sets. Four other independent reviews came to similar
conclusions.
Claim: Petitioners say that errors in the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report call the entire body of work into question.
Response: Of the alleged errors, EPA confirmed only two
in a 3,000 page report. The first pertains to the rate of
Himalayan glacier melt and second to the percentage of the
Netherlands below sea level. IPCC issued correction state-
ments for both of these errors. The errors have no bearing on
Administrator Jackson's decision. None of the errors under-
mines the basic facts that the climate is changing in ways that
threaten our health and welfare.
Claim: Petitioners say that because certain studies were
not included in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, the
IPCC itself is biased and cannot be trusted as a source of reli-
able information.
Response: These claims are incorrect. In fact, the studies
in question were included in the IPCC report, which provided
a comprehensive and balanced discussion of climate science.
Claim: Petitioners say that new scientific studies refute
evidence supporting the Endangennent Finding.
Response: Petitioners misinterpreted the results of these
studies. Contrary to their claims, many of the papers they
submit as evidence are consistent with EPA's Finding. Other
studies submitted by the petitioners were based on unsound
16
methodologies. Detailed discussion of these issues may be
found. in volume one of the response to petition documents,
on EPA's website.
"Climate change is already happening, and human activ-
ity is a contributor. The global wanning trend over the past
100 years is confirmed by three separate records of surface
temperature, all of which are confirmed by satellite data,"
EPA said.
" Beyond this, evidence of climate change is seen in melt-
ing ice in the Arctic, melting glaciers around the world,
increasing ocean temperatures, rising sea levels, shifting pre-
cipitation patterns, and changing ecosystems and wildlife
habitats.
"America's Climate Choices," a report from the
National Academy of Sciences and the most recent assess-
ment of the full body of scientific literature on climate
change, along with the recently released "State of the
Climate" report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration both fully support the conclusion that climate
change is real and poses significant risk to human and natural
systems. The consistency among these and previously issued
assessments only serves to strengthen EPA's conclusion."
Information on EPA's findings and the petitions:
http://epa.gov/cli matecbange/endangerment/petitions.btml
The "endangerment finding" under the Clean Air Act
allows the government to regulate CO2 and five other green-
house gases even if Congress does not pass pending climate
change legislation.
Opponents also have challened EPA'endangennent find-
ing in federal appeals court. Oral arguments are not expected
until next spring with a final decision anticipated by next
summer.
Role of NextGen at Airports
The American Association of Airport Executives and
Denver International Airport will hold "The Role of NextGen
at Airports Conference" on Oct. 3-5 in Denver.
The conference expo will feature exhibits and technology
demonstrations. For further information, go to
http://events.aaae.org/sites/10 10 12/.
Anne H. Kohut, Publisher
Published 22 times a year at 43978 Urbancrest Ct., Ashburn, Va. 20147; Phone: (703) 729-4867; FAX: (703) 729-4528.
e-mail: editor@aviationemissionsreporl.com; Price $550.
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.