Loading...
01-18-2012 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION January 18, 2012 7:00 p.m. Mendota Heights City Hall 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Introduction of Justin Miller, Mendota Heights City Administrator 4. Approval of Minutes from the November 9, 2011 Airport Relations Commission Meeting 5. Unfinished and New Business a. NOC Meeting Update — January 18, 2012 Agenda Packet b. DNL60 Amendment Process c. MAC 2012-2018 Capital Improvements Program Update d. January Noise Complaints e. Joint ARC Meeting with Eagan And Inver Grove Heights f. Commission Items of Interest 5. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence: a. Monthly Statistical Review b. November 2011 NOC Technical Advisor's Report c. November 2011 Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis d. November 2011 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report e. November 2011 Crossing -in -the -Corridor Analysis 6. Upcoming Meetings a. Planning Commission 1-24-2012 7:00 p -m. b. City Council Meeting 2-8-2012* 7:00 p.m. C. Parks & Recreation Commission 2-14-2012 7:00 p.m. d. Next ARC Meeting 2-15-2012 7: 00 p. m. e. Presidents Day **HOLIDAY** - City Offices Closed f City Council Meeting 2-21-2012 7:00 p.m. *Note change in day of the week— Council meeting moved to Wednesday to accommodate Minnesota party caucuses. 7. Public Comments 8. Adjourn Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids. This may not, however, be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at 651-452-1850 with requests. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MINUTES November 9, 2011 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on Wednesday, November 9, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. at 1101 Victoria. Curve, Mendota Heights, MN. The following commissioners were present: David Sloan, Sally Lorberbaum, Jim Neuharth, Kevin Byrnes, and Bill Dunn Absent: Gina Norling, Gretchen Keenan Also present: John Mazzitello Approval of Minutes A motion by Commissioner Dunn, seconded by Commissioner Neuharth to approve the minutes of the September 14, 2011 ARC meeting, with minor corrections. Motion passed unanimously. NOC Meeting Update Commissioners reviewed the agenda packet for the upcoming November 16, 2011 NOC meeting and made the following comments: Commission Chair Sloan is planning on attending the meeting - The meeting will be much longer than normal due to the number of program updates on the agenda - Commission is particularly interested in the review of comments from the October 25`x' Noise Public Hearing held by MAC Noise Program staff - Commission is interested to see the demonstration of the interactive MACNOISE web page which is scheduled for demonstration at the meeting - Commission is interested in trying to get a system in place that can notify concerned residents of upcoming runway closures 2011/2012 Work Plan A motion was made by Commissioner Lorberbaum and seconded by Commissioner Dunn to approve the 2012 Work Plan. The Motion passed unanimously. The 2012 Work Plan will be presented to Council by Commission Chair Sloan at the December 20, 2011 meeting. MAC 2012-2018 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Update Memo Commission reviewed the memo. MAC Aerial Mapping Project Commission commented on the project and the area it covers. Commission asked staff to notify local newspapers and media of the project so the public could be notified. DNL60 Ordinance Amendment Process Staff presented questions asked by Planning Commission at their September 27, 2011 meeting that they wanted the ARC to address. Council Member Liz Petschel addressed the questions for ARC review. Commission reviewed Council Member Petschel's responses and determined them to be accurate and complete. A motion was made by Commissioner Lorberbaum and seconded by Commissioner Dunn to refer answers to Planning Commission questions back to the Planning Commission for inclusion in their November 22, 2011 meeting. Items of Interest Commissioner Dunn presented his noise statistics table of noise sensor data that compares the Mendota Heights sensors to the South Minneapolis and Richfield sensors. It was stated that the statistics do Iend some credence to the issues raised by Minneapolis residents at the October 25, 2011 MAC Noise Public Hearing Articles provided by Commissioner Byrnes were discussed. Commission offered compliments on the quality of in -fon -nation provided by Commissioner Byrnes Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence October 2011 reports were not available at the time of agenda packet publication, so there were no reports to acknowledge. Upcoming Meetings A motion was made by Commissioner Lorberbaum and seconded by Commissioner Dunn to ask City Council to approve cancellation of the December ARC meeting under the provision that if a significant issue arises, the Commission could convene a meeting. The motion passes unanimously. ® Veterans Day ** HOLIDAY** • City Council Meeting • NOC Meeting ® Planning Commission a City Council Meeting Public Comments M •[m Adiourn 11-11-2011 11-15-2011 7:00 p.m. 11-16-2011 1:30 p.m. 11-22-2011 7:00 p.m. 12-6-2011 7:00 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Neuharth and seconded by Commissioner Dunn to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 11 Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) Meeting Agenda January 18, 2012 1:30 P.M. Lindbergh Conference Room MAC General Office Building 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 (Jeff Hart, Delta Air Lines & NOC Co -Chair, will be the acting Chairperson -for the meeting) .*Note: 1:00 to 1:30 — Committee Agenda Review Session (NOC members only in the Coleman Conference Room) 1. 1:30 to 1:45 — Public Comment Period 2. 1:45 to 1:50 — Review and Approval of November 16, 2011 NOC Meeting Minutes 3. 1-50 to 1:55 — Review of Operations Report Summary 4. 1:55 to 2:15 — Review FAA Response to Aircraft Departure Concerns 5. 2-15 to 2-45 — Review Draft FAA Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Procedure Tracks 6. 2:45 to 3:15 — Finalization of Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP) 2020 Environmental Assessment (EA) Noise Analysis 7. 3:15 to 3:35 — Update on N.O.I.S.E. Member NOC Community Representatives' Discussion with Dennis McGrann 8. 3:35 —Adjourn TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee UN(}C\ FROM Chad ELeqve Manager — Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: REVIEW FAA RESPONSE TO DEPARTURE CONCERNS DATE: January 4.2812 Background Recently, no/aeoornolaintshaveincraooedinthe8outh Minneapolis area. Specifically, residents from the Ericsson, Reevvavdin and Standish neighborhoods were expressing concern with an increase in departure aircraft overflights. Moreover, 135 ran/don' attended the Fourth Quarter 2011 Noise Public Input Meeting on October 25. 2011 where 32 individuals made comments. The predominant issue raised by those who commented focused -on increased. departure overflights jn. th'� neighborhoods located north of the Runway 30R extended centerline. 8taffswritten vesponsostothosevvho commented at the meeting are available on the Internet at As a result ofthe dialogue atthe Noise Public Input Meeting, MAC Chairman Dan 0nivin announced that a second public meeting would be conducted to provide the public with additional information on the topics discussed' The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) hosted a noise information public open house for members of the community on December 8ho/n 5:30-8 p.m. Approximately 38 people attended and were provided information about aviation nagu[ations, aircraft noise measurements and metrics, the K8GP Noise Oversight Committee, historical aircraft arrival and departure data and other MAC Noise Program Office functions. The informational display boards that were used at the open house are available on the` Internet at hftp://www.macnoise.com/viewnews.php?id=l 10. NOC Engagement on the Issue At the November lU. 2011 Noise Oversight Con)rnh±ee (NDC'meeting the Committee reviewed comments from the Fourth Quarter 2011 NoisePuInput |io ' Meeting and an analysis of Runway 30R departure operations focusing on areas north of the Runway 30R extended centerline. At the same meeting K8c Carl Rycleen, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) K88P Control TovverK4anage�addressed the Comrnh±eeonthis �s K8 �vdee` ��' � u�� c '---n stated that the FAA was in the process of doing additional study of its operations to provide an accurate response to the issues raised by residents at the October 25, 2011 Noise Public Input Meeting and to examine whether or not possible alternative options oxist Mr. Rydeen onrnnniUndthat aa soon as the results are available they will be providedtothe NDC.the MAC and the surrounding communities. Atthe January 18.2O12NOCmeeting Mr. Rydeen will present the FAA's findings and .� MEMORANDUM ITr-MF;4 TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee(NOC) ' ' -'-- FROM: Chad ChadELeove.Manager — Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: REVIEW DRAFT FAA PERFORMANCE BASED NAVIGATION (PBN) PROCEDURE TRACKS DATE: January 4.2012 The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is in the process of finalizing the Draft Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Performance (RNP) procedure flight tracks. The FAA is conducting operational stakeholder meetings on January 4 and 5, 2012. The operational stakeholders have raised issues and concerns regarding the draft procedures. If these issues have been resolved, draft procedure tracks and the tentative schedule for this process moving forward will be presented to the NOC on January 18. 2012. If the procedure tracks are presented at the January 18m N[XC meeting, ConnnnU±eo members will be asked to report back at the PWoroh 21, 2012 NDC meeting with any comments about or concerns with the procedure tracks. The intent is to receive ' ) Committee approval of Draft procedure tracks in the March — May 2012timeframe for the purposes of conducting the public open houses on the Draft procedure tracks. Following the public open houses, final NDC approval of the procedure tracks will be needed prior tothe FAA starting the environmental review process. The FAA's hope isto have the procedures approved and charted sometime in the first half of 2013. MEMORANDUW TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager — Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: FINALIZATION OF MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MSP) 2020 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) NOISE ANALYSIS DATE: January 4, 2012 1.0 Planning Background In July 2010 the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP) 2030 Long - Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) was approved by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). The plan revised the anticipated future development activities at MSP from those previously outlined as part of the Dual -Track Airport Planning Process that concluded in the mid-1990s. Specifically, the updated MSP LTCP determined that the airfield capacity at MSP is adequate to sustain aircraft operations to the year 2030. However, the analysis concluded that substantial landside and terminal building improvements will be needed to achieve the following goals: • Provide sufficient, environmentally -friendly facilities to serve existing and future demand; • Provide improved energy efficiencies; • Encourage increased use of public transportation; • Minimize confusion associated with having two terminals and multiple access points; • Allow for flexibility in growth; • Utilize and maintain existing facilities to the fullest extent possible; and • Enhance aircraft operational safety and efficiency. Based on existing conditions and the capacity demands placed on the facility as passenger numbers grow, the LTCP determined that development activities that focus on the enhancement of arrival curb, parking and international arrival faculties will be needed at Terminal 1—Lindbergh, in addition to more gate capacity to accommodate existing seasonal demand and new carrier entrants at MSP. In general it was determined that the terminal environment at MSP will also need enhancement in the form of gates, ticket counters, passenger check-in areas, security screening checkpoints and baggage claim areas. 2.0 MSP 2020 Improvements Environmental Assessment Overview The environmental analysis process is being conducted in compliance with both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). This process is guided by -the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) policies and procedures for considering environmental impacts: FAA Order 5050.413, "National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions" and FAA Order 1050.1 E, "Environmental Impacts, Policies and Procedures." Additionally, MEPA requirements as detailed under the Minnesota Environmental Review Program are considered in this process. After review of the federal and state environmental review requirements, it was determined that the implementation of the needed airport capacity improvements would require the preparation of a federal Environmental Assessment (EA) and state Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). By way of background, an EA is a concise document used to describe a proposed action's anticipated . environmental impacts, and provides -a comprehensive approach for identifying and satisfying applicable environmental laws, regulations, and executive orders in an efficient manner. In the case of this combined federal and state environmental analysis, the process must provide analysis sufficient to: Understand the purpose and need for the proposed action, identify reasonable alternatives (including a no action alternative), and assess the proposed action's potential environmental impacts. ® Address all of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet impact categories as well as the FAA NEPA impact categories. * Determine if an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is needed because of the proposed action's potential environmental impacts. * Determine if a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) can be issued by. the FAA because the proposed action will have no significant impacts. In September 2010 the environmental analysis process began when the MAC approved the resources necessary to begin the EA process required for the potential developments at MSP to the year 2020 (referred to as the MSP 2020 Improvements EA). At the May 16, 2011 NOC meeting the Committee was briefed on the MSP 2020 Improvements EA draft forecast aircraft operations and the Committee approved a public information plan for the dissemination of the forecast information to the public. Since that time, HNTB Corporation has been in the process of compiling planning data and finalizing development options for consideration in the EA process. As a result of this work three development options are being evaluated in the EA: the No Action Alternative, Alternative 1 -Airlines Remain, and Alternative 2 -Airlines Relocate. The Airlines Remain Alternative details improvements needed through 2020 that are focused on a scenario in which all airlines remain in their current terminals. The gate, terminal, I - andside,. roadway and, airside facility improvements.. ,in this alternative consist of those necessary to accommodate the forecasted airlines' growth at each terminal. The Airlines Relocate Alternative provides improvements needed through 2020 based on the relocation of the non-SkyTeam airlines currently located in Terminal 1 -Lindbergh to Terminal 2 -Humphrey. This is the Preferred Alternative in recognition of the fact that MSP's 2 -terminal system could be utilized more efficiently. Several factors contributed to this determination: Facilities at Terminal 1 -Lindbergh, such as the bag claim, security check points and arrivals curb roadway are already congested. As passenger activity continues to grow, conditions at Terminal 1 -Lindbergh will further deteriorate. o Different types of airline operations require different passenger facilities. Delta Air Lines operates a major hub at MSP within Terminal 1-1-ihdbergh. Approximately 60 percent of Delta Air Lines' passengers at MSP are connecting passengers who do not begin or end their trips at MSP; they simply fly through on their way to another airport. These connecting passengers do not normally use baggage claim facilities, ticketing facilities, roadways or parking at MSP. Future expansion of the terminal and landside facilities at Terminal 2 - Humphrey is more feasible than expansion at Terminal 1 -Lindbergh because there is more available land and the supporting landside parking facilities have available capacity to serve more passengers. Based on the environmental review process, in addition to the above, it was concluded that relocating all airlines other than Delta and its SkyTeam partners from Terminal 1 -Lindbergh to Terminal 2 -Humphrey would relieve some capacity constraints at Terminal 1 -Lindbergh while better balancing'the mix of passengers beginning and ending their trips at MSP between the two facilities. This will increase the level of customer service, airport efficiency and convenience. The No Action Alternative represents the airport without the improvements included in the Preferred Alternative. The attached supplement to this memo contains additional details on the development alternatives. 3.0 MSP 2020 Improvements EA Noise Analysis 3.0.1 Existing 2010 Noise Conditions The existing noise conditions for the EA were based on the 2010 actual noise environment around MSP. The 2010 actual noise contour developed in the Annual Noise Contour Report that was published in February 2011 was used in ' the EA. The ADOUG| Noise C0DtOU[ Report containing all of the data relative to the 2010 8CtU8l noise contour is available OD\iOe at: 8p8CdiC iDfOn08tiOD OO the existing 2010 noise contour INM inputs can also be found in the attached supplement to this Dl8DlO[@ndU[0. Based ODthe 435`583total operations iD2O1O.8pp[oXiFDGt8|y3.972acres G[eJn- the 85 [)��L noise contour and approximately 0.277 acres are in the 60 DNL noise contour. Table 3.1 COnt@iDS the count of single-family and multi -family dwelling units and population iOthe 2OjUexisting noise contours. The counts are based on parcels that are within or are intersected by the respective DNL contour |iD8S. Parcels with OOG dwelling unit are counted as single-family and parcels with more than one dVv8l)iD0 unit are counted as [nU|ti-f8DliiV. All residential units within the 8CtU@l 2010 GO+ DNi noise CoDtOu[S have been, or will be, provided noise mitigation by virtue of previous noise mitigation prOg[@nnS and the cO[np|8tiOO of the existing p[Og[8nl in 2014 as defined by the Consent Decree. /\ depiction of the residential b|OChS that have been mitigated, and those that will be provided noise mitigation by 2014 per the. noise litigation COD59Ot Decree, and the 2O1D'actual noise contours are" prVVid-ed in Figure 3.1. � Table 3.1 m/wws«pous-SrPAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT . ~ `.mmContour | ---_'-__ �� 9 tooazo lot, 0,11 61 lip '10 K soon on 'k �WME mot low MWki DR P19M Nyii: Mv ir W. Not Athol " pi. D4 70C Y: -N 42 elf OTI . ....... . ... a A C7 MM i W 0 (D 0 a... O . . .. . .. .. .. .... ... . . .. . . "-P u. n to < < Id. E 1 1v( Z L9 it C7 W M yr M. - I t) uyx '-jj Z Lk man- tl 7 NSA. 11911" 0— lot to fill Polk .0- k;7 lilies QM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. z to; r lot, 0,11 61 lip K soon on 'k �WME mot low MWki DR P19M Nyii: Mv ir Not Athol " 70C -N 42 elf OTI tlI W 0 (D 0 O na z X 61 RAW Not Athol " 70C too. MS. tlI 0 (D 0 O na 01 n to < < E 1 1v( L9 it C7 z X 61 70C tlI 0 (D 0 na 01 n to < < E L9 it C7 W M 4 M. - I 3.1 Forecast Development Options Noise Conditions Noise impacts for the various development nntOnS were considered. The forecast noise impacts, and any potential mitigation, are defined hvthe forecast 2020 DOiSR CODtOU[S. The analysis focuses On forecast 2020 noise COOt0U[S in the CODfGXt of existing residential StnUCtUr9S in the K]OiSe Study Area as is detailed in Figure 3.2. A future year @D8k/si6 was also conducted using fo[8C83t' 2025 Gi[C[@ff operational levels. The 60' dB DeV/k>ightAV8[8ge GOUDd Level /DK]L\noise contour iSconsidered the Noise Study Area. The input data for the |NM 8DR\ySiS are provided in the attached supplement. The f0FeC8St oO8|VSis was based OD detailed fleet [DiX and operational assumptions and the development 0f@gated flight schedule. This work was the hJOdaDlCOt8l input into the S|MM{JO GV@/VGtiOD. The 8{W1M{}[) 8VG|U@tiOD provided 8XteD3iVg information on the future airport 0p8[8tiOD patterns for the respective development scenarios. This SiDlU|8tiOD and the operation fOFeC8St dnCU[n8Dt8tiOO were the primary data SoUrC8n used for the |NK8 forecast noise contour analysis. 11 LU U? 4— E C) N C) 0 0 cu W 4- 0 ~3iY/ ���G�R�D18�7A�V�8���O���mact / ,� ' ` Based on the 484.879 total fO[8C@St 0p8[@tioDS in 2020' Gpp[VXin0@t8k/ 4,440 acres are in the 65 DNL noise contour and approximately 10,943 acres are in the OO D@L Of the /\idiDeS R9rD@iD Alternative DNL DOiS8 contours. Table 52 contains the count of single-family and DlU!ti-faD1i|V dwelling units and population in the 2020 and 2025 Airlines 'Remain Alternative DNL noise CODt0U[S. The counts are based OD parcels that are within or are intersected by the respective DyJLcontour lines. Parcelswith one dwelling unit are counted as single-family and parcels with more than one dVVBl|iDQ unit are counted GS multi -family. Figure 3.3 provides the 2020 and 2025 Airlines Remain Alternative DNL DOiS8 � contours and the parcels within the respective contours. There are OO 8Fe85 of sensitive land uses that experience G 1.5 dB' or greater, � increase in the 65 DNL noise C0DtOu[ when coDlp@[iDQ the 2020 and 2035 � Airlines R8Dl8iD Alternative CoOtoU[S to the respective NO Action DNL noise 'cODtOU[3. The F/\/\'S impact threshold of significance is not met with the Airlines 'F{en0GiO Alternative. TheFeh]re, no adverse i[np@CtS to sensitive |@Dd uses would be expected. Table 3.2 MIwwEA,m�ST.PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT . Summary �m2020 and 2025 DNL Alternative z,oise Contour Single4amily and Mulit-Family Unit and Population Counts by Parcel Provided by met Council) w :D c) LL U) 4- C: a) E Q) 0 CL CD C\4 C) C\4 4- 0 CCf CLi cif W 0 0 o z< m E a) f r - as 4-1 d LO N CD Cu I Z 0 C) (D LO Z C) CD C) C.0 N (N CV 3.1.2 Airlines Relocate (Preferred Alternative) Noise Impacts Based on the 484,879 total forecast operations in 2020, approximately 4,441 acres are in the 65 DNL noise contour and approximately 10,945 acres are in the 60 DNL of the Airlines Relocate Alternative (Preferred Alternative) DNL noise contours. Table 3.3 contains the count of single-family and multi -family dwelling units and population in the -2020 and- 2025 Preferred Alternative DNL noise contours. The counts are based on parcels that are within or are intersected by the respective DNL contour lines. Parcels with one dwelling unit are counted as single-family and parcels with more than one dwelling unit are counted as multi- family. Figure 3.4 provides the 2020 and 2025 Airlines Relocate Alternative (Sponsor's Preferred Alternative) DNL noise contours and the parcels within the respective contours. There are no areas of sensitive land uses that experience a 1.5 dB, or greater, increase in the 65 DNL noise contour when comparing the 2020 and 2025 Airlines Relocate Alternative (Preferred Alternative) contours to the respective No Action DNL noise contours. The FAA's impact threshold of significance is not met with the Airlines Relocate Alternative (Preferred Alternative). Therefore, no adverse impacts to sensitive land uses would be expected. Table 3.3 MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT iz­­ of 2n2f) and 2025 DNL Alternative 2 Noise Contour Single -Family and Mulit-Family Unit and population Counts by Parcel (Parcel Intersect City Methodology; Single•Family--1 Unit, Multi-Family>1 Unit; Population Reflects Estimation Based on multipliers Provided by met Council) -Single,Family _ _ Multi -Family 75+ Count60-64 65-69 70-74 75+ Total 60-64 65-69 70-74 Total Minneapolis �26 0 7761 3,641 661 4 0 2306 on"15632 4113 . jj..W�jngton Units 36 1 0 0 37 747 20 749 20 2020 DNL Noise Richfield 'PdpulaUon, Un 0 0 603 39 642 69 "j" � � z - ""i i 6- 0 0 0 6.`. 6 69 .1 1 Contours1574 0 0 Eagan Units 160 0 0 0 6 0 0a 0 0 Mendota Heights Units, 1 41 0 . .. ...... Pop. ... . .... All Cities Units 6969 1654 22 0 8645 2460 663 4 0 3127 ppu..., Minneapolis Units 6662 031 71 0 1711 22364 1883 716 4 0 2603 02. n": Bloomington Units 46 1 0 0 47 .1'12P 747 2 0 0 749 69 Richfield Units 702 94 0 0 786 T; 69 0 0 0 2025 DNL Noise R00ula low -219 0 0 0 Contours Eagan Units 205 0 0 0 205 0 P6 Mendota Heights Units 57 1 0 0 58 3 3 '"4 All Cities Units 7672 2123 71 0 9866 2702 718 .... ­ 6351 Populgtior�.* ;�!19 1333 w 0 4- f= (D E 0 L- CL E CD C14 LL O CL ccS cn cci _0 C: VV D 0 0 W Un 0 z —i z ) M C) 0 ll cu m E E _0 < c CD LO CD CD a) .cn 0 Z 4—:0 3.9.3 No Action Alternative Noise Impacts Based on the 484,879 total forecast operations in 2020, approximately 4,446 acres are in the 65 DNL noise contour and approximately 10,956 acres are in the 60 DNL of the No Action DNL noise contours. Table 3.4 contains the count of single-family and multi -family dwelling units and population in the 2020 and 2025 No Action'DNL noise contours. The -counts are based on parcels that are within. ---' or are intersected by the respective DNL contour lines. Parcels with one dwelling unit are counted as single-family and parcels with more than one dwelling unit are counted as multi -family. Figure 3.5 provides the 2020 and 2025 No Action Alternative DNL noise contours I and the parcels within the respective contours. Table 3.4�� MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ... of 2m0 and 2075 DMI No Action Noise Contour Single -Family and Mulit-Family Unit and Population Counts by Parcel (Parcel Intersect Methodology; Singie-Family=l Unit, Multi-Family>l Unit; Population Reflects Estimation Based on Multipliers Provided by Met Council Single -Family Multi -Family City Count 60-64 65.69 70.74 75+ Total 60-64 65-69 70-74 75+ Total Minneapolis Units 6206 1611 34 0 �- .., ,_ 7851 1665 ., 659 4 D :;• 2328 . Population .,,15825 , :.:4108 ..., ".,: 87 :. D xt .0 ..:'-�. 0 .. ,.4510..1 749 Bloomington Units 34 1 0 0 0 35 747 2 0 PdpulStion :,;.87 .. ri.3 ,... ;: 0, .. ::1,,. . ::'i, 69 2020 DNL Noise Richfield Units 600 36 0 0 636 �:: 69 0 0 0 116 ;; 0 .0;,,: Contours Population •:1b66 - .. 94 - >. 0, :. :;',-0_„ 1660 - -:!, ;: .9,-.:., ,.. 0 0 • Eagan Units 149 0 0 0 D 0 .. i 0. 149 ' ..419, ::`.. _ 0 0 0 .0. si. ,............. Population, ,..415 �': .: •...i., ,. 0 D 41 3 0 0 0 3 Mendota Heights Units 4D 1 "3 112 ,. _ 4 Populagon .110 -. 0 0 0 3149 All Cities Units 7029 1649 34 0 8712 2484 661 4 5837 ` .,. Minneapolis Units 6564 1933 70 0 8567 1852 ,f 712 4 0 � 1320•;;i ,.9:., ,D,,. 2568 ..:4959::,, �'.: Population. . -:16738 :-4929 „ .;'=179 :�'0,. „r...': ,21846, ;i .,3630, .'; , , Bloomington Units 46 1 0 0 47 747 2 0 0 749 1206; i:; ,Populabon -::117 _143 .. •. ":. 0. 0 Richfield Units 690 102 0 0 792 79 0 0 0 79, d„?; 133,.,.;; 2025 DNL Noise.PopulationJSSOS 0 D 0 Contours Eagan Units 208 0 0 0 208 584 < 0 0 �6 0 0 :a D...<�l. ., Population ..� 584, , ....'�;.0 ..:.:•: D, . is , D ;t; . •:.:,. .. Mendota Heights Units 60 1 0 0 0 61 167 3 0 0 0 4 4 Population 164 0 9675 2681 714 4 0 3399 AIICities Units 7568 2037 70 6302. LL U - Ll U 4— E (L C C) N C) CN 0 g. 03 r- 0 CLF C ca CL co 0 a) 0 U, -i ri N C) 0 CD �o cu co OY LO #5 N co 0 z C\l Zcu 7C3 ,p o cu CD iE f.0 (D (N OCN .:z Z. C\l r- a) D L 'o Z -0 U) (D W o < < c C. LO 0 N. N(D CD C\l 04 to LIJ z -i Z 0 CD co LO N C) C\l Zcu 7C3 cu f.0 (D (N OCN CD CVC) C\l r- a) D L 'o Z -0 U) (D W co LIJ < nts��`N iaeR8i�g�ton 4.0 KOSF,282O|noproverna o u not met with either the Airlines Remain FAA's threshold of significance was n /\|he[D@tive or the Airlines R8/oCBhe Alternative, the Preferred /\lhe[n@UV8. The K8/\C has been @ggrBSSiVOlV mitigating residential St[UCtVnaS @n]UDd MSP since 1SSZ The CUrnaDt phase of this mitigation effortwas defined by @ Consent D8C'^° - � th-'~^ resulted |t8d h'fromnoiSe litigation bPDUght by the Cities of Minneapolis, T� dispute [�vO�9� 8n}UD� 1h� nature of an expanded RiC���|� and ��G�8D 8 Sp � ��� - mitigationmitigation pnD0[8Dl out to the 00 DyJ[ noise DVOtOUr, as discussed in the Final EIS for the Dual Track Airport Planning Process. As of August 2011the MAC has completed noise mitigation for all of the single- family homes in t'''� 2007 63-64 DN[ ooDtOU[S with the same level Of noise mitigation that the MAC provided inthe 1S9GO5DyJ[and greater contours. (Four � hUOdFed homes participated iDthe pn0g[oDl,) Mitigation measures designed tO achieve 8 5 dB of noise reduction OD average included the following, depending ' i ti �i�oD� c9Dtn3� 8iFCODditiODiOg'' eXt��O[ and storm U�oO @ home's existing condition: window repair or replacement; prime door and storm door repair or replacement; wall and attic insulation; and baffling of roof vents and chimney treatment. In addition,the W1/�C has completed 3'OOO.]lOrDeS.iD the 2007 60-62 D�JL and haSGOOth[748 hoOleSiDthe design and CVOst[UctiOO phases. Eligible homes reCeive o~ ~ ^ of two mitigation packages: 1\ central air-conditioning and Up to �4OOO /i''~^�OD 8rUUSted, including iDSi8U8|i0n COStS\ in other noise mitigation products and services CO3G ,- chosen O[2\owners of hOnleS that already had central air-conditioning installed or who ChDO5e not to receive central air-conditioning will be eligible for Up to $14,000 (inflation 8rhUStBd' including installation costs) in noise mitigation products and S8rViC8s hz provided by the K8/\<� The mitigation menu could C�0oS� from 8 [n�DV p . includes upgrades such as: exterior and StO'Dl vviOdU\w repair or replacement; prime door and StOOn d0V[ repair or replacement; VV8U Bnd attic insulation; and baffling nfroof vents and chimney treatment. FiDa||y, 8 total of 895 homes have been provided reimbursements for purchase and installation Of pFOdVCt3 included on a menu provided by the, MAC of '' i approved noise mitigation enhancements n the 2007 60 DNL to 2005 00 DNL contour area. With rRg8nj to the multi -family noise rDidg3tiOD program, the MAC has installed acoustical covers oDthe air -conditioners in 1.724 living units and completed the installation Of new air-conditioning Units in 255 living units in 2010 located in the 2OO70ODNLnoise contour. Table 4.1 CODt8iOS the count of single-family dwelling units and population in the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise c0ntVU[5 and Table 4.2 contains the COUDt of multi -family dvV8)|iDg units and population in the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise ''' n0DtOU[s. The cOUDtS are based on the block intersect methodology. This OlethOdOlDgVcounts all structures that are VD parcels located ODthe blocks that are within or intersected by the respective D�JL c0DtOU[ lines. Parcels with one to three dwelling~' units are counted as single-family and parcels with more than three dwelling units are counted as multi -family. This is the same methodology used since 1992 at MSP to determine mitigation eligibility around the airport. The counts in Tables 4.1 and 4.2 detail the 2020 Preferred Alternative counts in relation to previously mitigated areas and the changes in eligibility relative to the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contours. Table 4.1 MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Summary of 2020 DNL Alternative 2 Noise Contour Single -Family Unit and Population Counts by Block �•• _ -----. - - •- •ter•••=••�•• •�_••_�.� oun,miun oases on 1-1111puers Provided by Met Council) city Count 60-62 63-64 65-69 70.74 75+ Total Minneapolis In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 4546 1929 2227 66 g76$ under existingnoise mitigation ro ram v i » g P g Popi lation t 11479„ 889 %' 5538' r� 158 t y a , 221'7 "r In 2020 63 64 DNL previously in 2007" 60 62 DNL > Urntsr E , Po P �� TM,.4� 6�45y `•;n?-,v,..,i, n�+»,-.3ti,. 6R6 t ulafion 2020 Forecast In 2020 60 62 DNL previously between 2005 and Units 7.7 Changes In 2020 60 62 DNL ptewoUsl; : oufside2005 and 2007 Units 293 t >i r t � uw. ai t 293 • 5.:.� .. ,.....; ,• .,.., ' :". �' Po iilaUon�"^r�745's t s'^ xx �; f� 'xt�vzr r k"+<` i t -� c �, Total Units 5076 2185 _ 2227 66 9554 iPop tror_,,.,,1Z823'.;�`,., 5535c�i..,yl�ft56387';t t�I68 1`"a'�.,,» i1�2436Z�"�" Bloomington In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 32 51 3 0 86 under existing noise mitigation program" 1 r s i �Y 1 4 rTM r 21811; Richfield In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 517 185 87 0 789 under existing noise. mitigation program IP2n,,. ,,,13,4.3xr. • 483, °, w227,.; p'; y r! `ri ;2053.x;' . Eagan In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 148 63 0 0 211 under existing noise mitigation program Popuiatiorilt,, : +re415. sa.,.._ 277. f�:i? +ry�,.�,0� .�_J ` .;�6..0 .,1,>%:v, � i.:r),iy •w l �i::5. 43 i' �i Mendota Heights In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units_ 45 0 1 0 46 under existing noise mitigation program All Cities In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 5288 2228 2318 66 99 under existing noise mitigation program In 2020 63 64 DNL previously in 2007 60 62 DNL 4 ,r cri x �, i,t ^,;•-r I ,,�t F 2020 Forecasf In 2020 60 62 DNL previouslyibetweep 2005 and Urtits. } r 237 , y , � Changes ` 2007 60 DNL{ (All Minneapolis) ... r s. lPOpulatiOri �t:588 i c 'l:'ftvl *us'j � Mx t w� I kyA r F '� .�y-ZN' � �, � . ' i In 2020 60 62 DNL premously outside 200$ and 2007 Units r ' 293 ' A + � � � 9 ,...., .. . , .:� �, .. ..,... �. ... ,Population �i,,t746` n " �' � i�'• �,�,,�, i �,,; 6 r: Total Units 5818 2484 2318 66 10686 ,Population 1>.;147831�M`�,6324?;.,',y,�5674,,r�,�268,._, x,Fy � i�,�27�44; C Table 4.2 MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Summary of 2020 DNL Alternative 2 Noise Contour Mulit-Family Unit and Population Counts by Block nn..Iw. nK ov.,,.m.a by mct r ­ .,ill tblOCK mrerseU MUCH-JUSY, ........ .___ ___...-_ _. _.. Count 60-64 65-69 70-74 75+ Total City Mitigation Minneapolis -In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 872 520 1392 under existing noise mitigation program IP:,opulation 1448 869 c 2376 Units 98' 98 <, Additional , , . pp- pTotal Total Units 970 520 1490 rPopulattan Bloomington in 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 1065 1065 PopUlatl under existing noise mitigation program ni;,,1725 ,' ...t,:, Richfield In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 69 69 under existing noise mitigation program ;Population: ,t, "Z i Eagan In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 0 under existing noise mitigation program Po `ulabori' n ' , . t ` . • ! a 0 '= p 1 - Mendota Heights In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 0 under existing noise mitigation program @opula#ion All Cities In 2020 Forecast Contours previously mitigated Units 2006 520 2526 under existing noise mitigation program patior { }332781,Y + 8691r 4147 '. pool Additional Units 8 8 n . t 9 u Alllvlrnnea"olrs population;,,,.. Total Units 2104 520 2624 As detailed in Table 4.1, there are 256 single-family homes that were, or will be, provided air-conditioning and $4,000 for approved mitigation upgrades, or $14,000 for approved mitigation upgrades, that would move from the 60-62 DNL noise contour under the Consent Decree program to the 63 DNL noise contour in the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contours. (Under the terms of the Consent Decree homes in the 63 and greater 2007 DNL noise contour received the full 5 dB noise mitigation package. This estimate assumes the same program would be applied to the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contour.) There are 237 single-family home that were, or will be, provided an estimated $2,902 in reimbursements for approved mitigation enhancements that would move from the 2005 60 DNL noise contour under the Consent Decree to the 60 DNL in the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contours. As stated above, under the terms of the Consent Decree homes in the 2007 60-62 DNL noise contours received air-conditioning and $4,000 for approved mitigation upgrades, or $14,000 for approved mitigation upgrades. Additionally, there are 293 single- family homes that were not eligible for mitigation under the terms of the Consent Decree that would be included in the 60 DNL noise contour for the 2020 Preferred Alternative. These estimates assume the same program would be applied to the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contour. All of the single-family homes added to the DNL noise contours are located in the City of Minneapolis. As is provided in Table 4.2, there are 98 multi -family units that were previously not included in the Consent Decree that would fall within the 2020 Preferred Alternative 60 DNL noise contour. Again, this estimate assumes the same program would be applied to the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contour. All of the multi -family units added to the DNL noise contours are located in the City of Minneapolis. A depiction of the residential blocks that have been mitigated, and those that will be provided noise mitigation by 2014 per the noise litigation Consent Decree, and the changes in eligibility relative to the 2020 Preferred Alternative noise contours is provided in Figure 4.1. .11- IT '01 Lli ao 'U; w IO consideration of the Ci[CUDlSt@DCeS unique to MSP hv virtue Of past mitigation activities, the terms of the Consent DeCn3� . and the local' land use compatibility QUi�e|iDeS d8hO8d by the Metropolitan Council, it is proposed that the rOi mitigation in the E/\ relative to the 2020 Preferred /\/tC[D@tiV8 be provided in a � way that iSconsistent- with the'provisions Ofthe COD38OtDecree. This mitigation is intended to build UpUD K8@P'S pPeViOU3 mitigation under the te[D0S Of the Consent DeCFe8, offering the SaDl8 mitigation, per noise impact l8V8L with eligibility defined by the 2020 Preferred Alternative DNL noise contours. 5.0 Summary mfForecast Noise Impacts There are no areas of sensitive land uses that experience a 1.5 dB, or greater, increase iDthe S5DNLnoise contour and o[83.OdB, o[greater, increase iDthe OU DNL noise COOtOU[ when CUDlp@hDg the 2020 and 2075 Airlines Remain Alternative and the Airlines Relocate Alternative noise contours k}the respective No Action Alternative DNL OOiS8 contours. Figure 5.1 provides o CoD8pa[iSOD Of the 2020 No Action A/t8[O@tiV8. the Airlines R8Dl@iD Alternative and the Airlines R8|OC8te /\/te[O@tiV8 noise C0Ot0U[S. Figure 5.2 provides 8 CO[Op8riSOD of the _ 2025KjOAction /\|t8rDGtive,Airlines Remain /\ltR[n8tiveand the Airlines Relocate V U- I U) E 0 E CD (N C) N 4— I- 0 0- M.- zi cu CL U) I cn Was! If I it I CA cl to iffl i -Ll —H jir IZ, 7-11 - all-Ij L MILL BiFTJI-:i�j �v I V71:: L Jil --,a t:r-j-- R 7 NTEx- F IZJPI lz� J C i1 Ilm a) E 0 E C:) C\j CD C\4 4— L- 0 0- O cu CO I U) O It �wwn. ;u1nd N Lj 2 CD Ll qiqj A h -k PI, X- 44 1 y, b li'&— "M i I Ll p1l -if T Uri. .1 tr1 Ei:. Vz 1JI 'Run"", so FH ter.,,, L-4 I L �u �f I -- Pi M.,LW'�-�^� f'id'-y-��� 4 fl T4 E—r . Fr -- fi--�7 INN-t—i Q-, F U 'L� ly ' ' ASiSdetailed iOTable 5'1 and Table 5,2there are OD|«DliDo[v@�@tk]DSiO2O2O ( > and 2025 between the No Action Alternative and the 'Action Alternatives when looking at noise COOtoU[ acreages, and the unit and population COUOtS within each contour. Table 5.1 MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ..-._-_"-_,"�/ m'^~~r."+"",x,"==pnnaxffex�'dUnbsand Pnnubt�� ��nbyparo �"�"60-64 '- 65-69 70-74 75+ TotalAcreage 6511 2797 959 690 109562020 No Action DNL NoisefiiContours Population 22:635 5406 96 0 28137Acreage 188Acreage 6502 2794 958 688 109432020 Alternative 1 DNL NoiseContours 761 124012025 Alternative 1 DNL Noise 30,Contours .13.0.ul 22685 5432 96 0 28213Population -- 0 Acreage 6504 2793 958 690 109452020 Alternative 2 I)NL Noise2317 123652025 Alternative 2 DNL NoiseContours .7Contours Population 22436 5424 66 0 �27 9 J25 Table 5.2 -— ' MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ~.----_--�'---�"". m.^..r..*"..,u"e"g~x"xxne�edUnbsand Ponu|at�nbyParcel ���5 C" "60-64 65-69 70-74 75+ TotalAcreage 7373 3159 1122 763 124172025 No Action DNL NoisePopulation 24374 6524 188Acreage 7336 3185 1119 761 124012025 Alternative 1 DNL Noise 30,Contours .13.0.ul Pop I ulatio n 24502 6384 157 0 31043Acreage 7330 3149 1124 761 123652025 Alternative 2 DNL NoiseContours Population 24679 6752 190 0 31621 Note: Sum macreage may not equal total due tvrounding; parcel intersect methodology; unit count reflects single-family and multi -family; population reflects estimation based on multipliers provided by Met Council. Committee Action Request that the MAC Planning, Development and Environment Committee re-`--[OrD8OdtVthe y�A(� FUU(�O[DDliSSinOthat noise [Didga�nD in the Dn8ffK�8P - 2020 Improvements EA/EAW be provided in g manner consistent with the p[0viSi0DS of the Consent DeC[ee, offering the 5aDl8 [nitigGdODj per DOiS8 iDlp8CL \RV8l' with eligibility defined by the 2020 Alternative 2 -Airlines Re|OC@ie [}NL noise contours. Supplemental Attachment: Development Alternative Specifics and Integrated Noise Model (INM) Inputs Development Alternatives Specifics Alternative 1 -Airlines Remain Alternative The Airlines Remain Alternative includes the improvements needed through 2020 presuming thatn 'the airlines remain in their --current- terminals. The gate,. terminal, landside, roadway and airside facility improvements consist of those necessary to accommodate the forecasted airlines' growth at each terminal. The specific gate, terminal and landside requirements are identified in the EA. The improvements included in the Airlines Remain Alternative are listed in Table Al and an illustration of the Airlines Remain Alternative is presented on Figure Al. Alternative 2 -Airlines Relocate Alternative The Airlines Relocate Alternative is the Sponsor's Proposed Action and includes the improvements needed through 2020 presuming that the non-SkyTeam airlines currently located in Terminal 1 -Lindbergh are relocated to Terminal 2 - Humphrey. This Alternative was conceived in recognition of the fact that MSP's 2 -terminal system could be utilized more efficiently by relocating all airlines other than Delta and its SlkyTeam partners from Terminal 1 -Lindbergh to Terminal 2 - Humphrey. This would relieve some of the capacity constraints at Terminal 1 - Lindbergh while better balancing the mix of passengers beginning and ending their trips at MSP between the two facilities. The improvements included in the Airlines Relocate Alternative are listed in Table A2 and an illustration of the Airlines Relocate Alternative is presented on Figure A2. No Action Alternative Consideration of the No Action Alternative is required by NEPA per CEQ Regulations. This alternative serves as a basis of comparison with other alternatives considered for detailed analysis. The No Action Alternative represents the airport without the improvements included in the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative includes some airport improvements that will be implemented prior to the completion of the EA. These improvements are independent of the Sponsor's Proposed Action and have already received environmental approval or are categorically excluded from formal environmental assessment by the FAA and the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB). Table A3 lists the improvements that are included in the No Action Alternative and an illustration of the No Action Alternative is presented on Figure A3. Table Al -- _ - ,;�� w', n�� ,�r.� �. LL:�'i��ni •,l >af �; ..,��; ,� "'kik .s '� . t5��" z �'�e��,^{U,F 4 ��l'� ,� 9 �•,1..��t�',. � 1�" ��' '.:,.�'ri'5,91"C+ .`Csc'��... _ `._.- )..6 t.x`h Sh 77 5'+�#t„, 7@9 9 t�}� fi a. ���-�, I) f."�'�„�,'Y j li ��}` �� W�d�tJ�Ijr T41�..) l.i• 4 4.t:'. c,� _'i+.a li�)i .��` �f fl.,.y�=$)'v .. e�`� `,M.�.,,, il V �"��4 & �x � 47. yi. t ��r .4 _��J� J .- �ise.�;'a'1" 2'�'� �.y. �1�•,'l� a 1 sal �y N4 .� yL�,� n�`L,rt. r^ N"y�%'"ft �,� .. fia�L �� `t �xS , — - - - , 1! — �­' t'­!� "... , , -, .� , . v- . — o ­ �, ­,,, , , .. . 11 Z. - � 71 I 'l1_­;l..­ �ljr I., � jK,.',�,,�',�.�l, £r a' , . , , , . 17 - _ �!'-�,�.'. i-,!-":�Z:;!"-:, 7.lj, �.� ., , " , . . - - R, I ,r,�,,,�,-,t,-,V.,,,,,,,,,,',,',,', " j., � '. . I I — �, , . - 11 . , i, _, - I-RNW­N-l­- - " - -� '31 'j *t � � 4 , I I � . � ',� (;� � AW �,';ii -P�§�fl."� i'. ,,,, , --�..�l�-�,,,�,:�%,*itl�'�'-tl�.��n,-:"�::�'�,,!,�,.:,:,*;,,-'�li'�,�I J�-,- , ,;�j :�-:7 .� 'Y : �' q��, ��'. - ,�P:p -..'�f *1 - " ­­ Y:� � *�:!�,,­",;��!f:­4;.�a;o ,� ;,'�, . � , � . - MN , ,�­.. �. .U.1111: ,��,C,17i�� ,,�._J,�.­,-,­_,, ft� � ,� '­�. , ,_,�� '-� , �cj;,. ie,F�,,t " �. � 'i.�,I�2*,� -,�,,, cv ,�- ') ­;, ,�_'�,? , "I,:-, �,,417,&�_ , 4�',,k­.i.. �, ,�� " 11 ?"r ,­,,�. l�-_,�.,il�,..,';�����l"i,a.�i�z���, ,_�,,fj.,q,:,T, � �"-,jy , ,� v,'.;O ,,, ­'_-� 1, � ­­-� ... � � ­�-!=,;_, ­4.-�.�:,. , ",*� ... ..... � %. , , ,�";'A,r,�.� MjW_`:' lr;��q�','- A`j55.'.1', *�i,:`­V-4-- )'047­t�j,,,�'t,Q F" " ��OE , ,z�,�i�,�;.,r-,��-�,-,,'�,*..',"-'�', " 7 �e�-�4'��--,',�5',--�41-.,.�,,-�,�l!;-e,��..�I L C�rj-- - - ., - � vp,._­- q �, � , ,:�,­:: I ��- " " I- L�,�!"­g,_�.'�,,Tr - wvww"bg 02 8 I . ­ � ... ;��,_; - -� , , , j.­p,­," A " - - -$IQ I "I-".-- - -, ,­.­.,­,t,r-, . � , .4, � -4 i't­­ ­ �, :g,'�, �y­,j��,'.I'_-,,;q. ..� ,-;,, qV., "I , �;�­iii_;, i,,'��V-5,-_­_V_.�: - _� - It,", �.�' .,'��,��-""�'���":.��-"-.,-,�,�i�,��,,�14,-�.-I�i�,'�-i'�,�l�-> �ji­ r. " 7, �; �,,�­,A,­ , �. -�Y; ; 0, ,'U, � - . � !" � - __ 1"', i�� �1­ ­­�­,;,;, -- ,5.;V, & V.tis.,H��%. " Ti.,�: _. rv:, � - AR_�_, �-� Z ,!� "g �, , , �� F,2;,tX,_.,­A . i��, � I Vp.�,aiF. ., '. �, - . ­ ­�,=�t,.V! ,-,��'A;4� ,� �;: , .�. -.1. 1, I-, - -IV ✓, ";-,:, ,n� , ,�-,�� " ,�*g -.,,v.,M g ,5­'."��:.R; ,Y � _jn . :e ­ , -- `6. " " �'-­ �-,-, - K-1 ,�­ , , , , M - *_;i2 ,!e�. - ­�', i, 0, -,- t � Y,­-,W"RK` ,�,�z -_Z,4 _ gliw .�'�!!,i�,,,��.�;�?�?.', �,j;��­%F� v ", ­., , MW 0 , - , V , " , , , �L).�, ... 5� , ! , z _ . I` _ ". � .'� , �:i��, low , ',: ` " . . �Z " -P � � T , .,,. I __ . , , I -q. � u �,� . 0;41 V,.V;;�,� O.N,` n %'v, 6 �� I . - .. , ,1�1,0-'N- ,,� ­,p;,�� 'ip_X§,'�,,�-T' u­R-- , - _��A�.,f-�,r_l? as �-, �T . '. , ql�,.iz'� 1 ","'. , , r , a - � Wpi? -OXI-N, �4:;igj;,.",*' A� �U­­­,,,.,�-W�.- ��:,,1x?Q_'i3'E` "!_�iXtvif�VF.�� uMS�r-� _­'­0 �.%..:*e,f'g.,, _.�qR�,,,, � -e `k-- - � p, ,'­ . ­,­,". , _. =1 y,", " � --­; ­ ­j� n� '.�*7'.,"�:(,! .,­.,,.,, '� ", _i� M_W­,:��q qQ,r_ - - 1-111. ." I . -,,zL;� - � .i. igoa ­,,t�-�r,, ", ;� , - ­1;4-01� � �,,i�joi5�,�C-0".��"T,fFl�,.-,Q, - 4 -�J. _r ,�tq=,, � .. - M .U%`O?-'�L?.C±�, .,;,, -M.. - -1 � � ­ , , � � ­-N� " �r " M - I - ?" , ,,.�,I`�. , li'.al�_ monks - , _ HM-- J- � �',�r�,_`�., , F .4A."... -I e 1200 * N"k.,, :F.",", , j , " VVVI_­�­,, ,;i�Z 51;,_.`_�,-� - ;r�agldi ­��-, ��.'v,,. - - V6,-, I . � � , rA"!�� � .... . . M .�� ; , ";� `'s n.. _�� 'f� � - R, �,W=km.tw�; IT" - � , - '114 . � v . ", !z 4 Zr . - , ,l 0 - RA . W" l&.13. , _-Mg-_5.,,�� , .� � I -ir PW , "ll -I..!, ­ .1, .. -i � .;R� lf " , , -'I " ' "ll - F-1 .� v �Mn. �.4.zr,_.�;;�j��4� ,; -, " _� .f§ --p .- 51."-, &�4,'.� ." �-7v t'VE!'t _lNe.11.E RI: -S 1. _� '6�.'-�zj,-`*r,J�' ;�; ,-. , ,g L � , , - ,�, . , ,,,., . ; -, , . . � , � I _RESWER Of.N.� , � ,,, .,. '. 2, ,!". U - "' � ,_: , .. ". R ­, MR ml, IN I , --- AMAMOQ -Ml- - , _­ " _ LkM"!5�1. � ,��',".�,�;%,., NO I 1� cX9 D" A to I O — ­:�T ,1.* F,�,�i,,� ., gj!."-M �V,'p�L,,, W , �_ � "-'^,,.;L";.�r-��,�;..�'-4,,�l-j.,.!�i.=imB�411�-'f�l,�4'�-9), , ", '�i�l, - ,q,f,--I,-,i,-�,;,��-,!,���.�,�'.11�,, � - � - " -, , � , .., , S, 4 * ., - "" TF- .."; " Kk I . , 4 , ­. A, i� V, j;. k� V,�� 07� p ml­t�'-,- �,-��,�,Eii!. ,_ �L,j , , , �1. , .4, . ­ - .- . - ,- Rd@N'z, �f"Y 0 ,!";�'# _ ��,��- - mw_g - ". ,�, - r, I ll%ful§ M. . - . �� .V;5f�kcme.�sg�;.,,��j-.,,,g�,%,�g,�,�', � , i I ", poll"Ry fit I - " I " �� - . �lv) I k�� NP`Mm , a g'aql, p & " -- , � " - ca L ;� 'i'l " ._J-,7�M'--P.._ .;V,F.,�` .��,;.­. � k" , -- � , '.1,3 , ,L? z -R.C6.5), " N , ,�,� � - i ,,A - , - ,§ Ev .�T�A,&Sf , �, mm: � _ �z L4 , �lj I .��:t4�.R,l�,;:m',�;�'-,.u-'Erq.�mlo - - -- z��.--%r�,g5 1� ro � # ­�, �. RIUR . lg, Irf _'_g ,l �1*5�0 :1 ll§ ­;�` * �, �. t � 4,. 0 1 I ei g W W�; . M"ON, r. ,jw,ml - , .,�,�, Q S , 0, - Hn X -'N ,I .��� -1 .. 3 - %, � - - - ,,R��ZM17 -5 , - . .1 'a-",.W�­­,.," T. ­ -0 .- 4 'I'l , ; V .l - .- -P , N:' ��q, 5N �"nt��,;2"1.,�p��ln,g�,f"4:t-,,,r .O.qAe�,�,;.F� - ,�,, "-5. _-�dlrM,­­ SO ra I H - E �� R , ),_­��,­ - .... � ..' - __ ­ .1 , I'— N --Rn -�. -j_;,;;,Q,,.--ff,� -, V�lj��-�� U .- ` �. V� I , l'I I * - .5 R�W_. , .51 *�,;llr=�: �� ­ " "" ­ __� � -'! . " _ __ � _� , ; -, � 'i� , .. �­ �'�,I,;;�5 M I "I"r - ..'s-f"l- 1 ­16.11� . 53 ��V a'N ' , -11 -;,v ,Hz,�-­ ... F -,V'�,jp I ,,V; MON NOR, &OPS-i-mN ,T,,'�,, G- �9��, - ", . , . `i-.�_­j-".`l!.l . _21. "ilz.l I ,,_Y� __ - S -yl § 0614g -. ��R-­­ �,�,',�­t_ _113: , �_ _AliV;, " .�U, � 11 - , � i. �? , - IS " - 'qlEk `­ - 2, " g g f.T il, I - R ­0'1�1�lf��l _L . _pe -i I � ? �M�A W�. 1. - ., 'S Mq i� ' W ...­-, - W.;- - -- - ­­ ­':,-,Z;l��&-._ln,.V ___� 1 -!7- , � , I �,,ff­L,�M 1�__ 1`1 0 �, - 4t_,..�" �, _��,� '_ j: R­i>F -,Z�, * � � � -x-q _n ,�,PQ� -.7-, -t������,,,1'.��,��.*";���A'�.,�Z ... . � , , " ,; �­ 10-04,01's .. - ..; ,� _ 2 .Zil. , , 1, � 94�,r-,:;,- - V�"4-0;i;. ., ,Z",�7�.�,�3; ,.*'��Jt.l --�-,---",D,..,.W�Y""��,,,-,-,----�.---,; . , _ , , . , , , . J. , M,',���:,�,Jm� , 4. .. , **; - , -, , , 1 �,­,�.511_­ T��ig�;�v , ,� r_,Alt*`­_l�l_c0`.T _.­ ­�,t%l, 1,,�;.-.,,,�4�.1.,...--4� vmm �,tt.%. r,7 �;qrf - - - _ �t . X. � -, - ­' - -,j - 1$ . ,. _.. .. - `-i . I—, �§�l N.'J, � . min-� " 0,14 %K" 1,�,�F. , �i� ," _ __, , -/� � I _Moff R=1 �7"q �,�;�'41i�.���!�, ,Z.�­_,�eZ�IiFl_le 1�&,___� _ 11 :­­ �- - -, -� ".", �!P;?, .:;,W�,' .5.;�,4',�-,.�r-,t�,,g.�. �Rrl­milp 'k N ­­ - Aq�'�-­-�i4­ F � , '. , , " , . - - 111-1-1111f ll_---_._!" A ,3 , ,1,71�;. ,1� ,,_��, " '. in 9M .., _.. 41�e.t !­/,,`.�� �., - �. r, ,,a,ig' - ". X, ml �� - � - -7, - . � �, -, ��,­ - ­­ .:�, ,, , � ��- ­­ ..",?- . .,tg - I %-­; --,�� � � 9 V, - , -, , � �'�!;.--��-,, S%v' ,ST �,�.�,­ix ,, 'T�;,,,'� I '�Y jlF,i`Z,T:'�' ­,Zl�,j MM I _/,,---�� IM " ,� " ,,� � 1, - I , _� , , - , _,� , . , �7� ,l I � gt �,�_,�-,f - , !6 ,tp:' ,'Z ,p , -= v - z , , *1 -T�`�'-,4 ,�.,,.,�.-I,�;�,"-,.-I,�,� I �lli,�:��­_,j r�s,-.-.��.I.�,1�,�,,-,- 7p.��Z... j i �P;I�Slllll�­_lr� ,f�,rt,-i,-i;t-.t��.-,�-,-,,,I ...... ,,, , la, ". -, ,.q;", I . -, , . , �,, ,., M - �� I I �;;­111­ lx - I / Sin 71�_i 1� �� - R '4�1.t;5p, ,, , ., , -; Ji4i �-j'�,*J;IC4, 7 , i I I Wlik.?.-V . " ;�.,k;�i7i'.."--i—', W � -*­ ­ i ... ­!:��J�','t...7i�_ , ,� ,,ig jh�, .. .... - - , I .1 " I �4,��, ��__ _,___llzMll­ _ � ENV= "M R___ Z,��,lv'-, - ­_I�j.r, �,',' , ,�_ � � � _�_ I , -'� 1,1.5�- `�,�w­,­­­,_, %m t=?'­.,r­7j,!V,bU�,�,z P�- :­� �. � - f :� !� � .; t4, . * ��-4,1 , - '46'� -T,, 4 �� � .� ., -,,.; �..:, ­ W V, I ""9 ,V .- --`_nZW.lWN I I , �: _ -Mq ,.,�; ?!_ �� �5 X , �,��, 1. t, . I � -�� . ,,t4 , 15 . .r� , XOR ll"�O'U)`V ,, �, I ., �4611133�11' ,.­,..,, j!O);�t�,,,r,---_j .�. - -�: "O 110 , :Z"� ,W4­­y� - - " I ."ig". M�� lira).V.., ,�,, :_:.._;.; ,�,,,, � �,�,, .�� . ��, , I � !!",.., _­ �:; -_X'W R4Z,5,,,�-�;;lri,�-,,V, , , .;J llv_ll&':Yl,",;`ll '.`�.'r�,� _�,:��- ,-, ""�. ,' , ,". �� �-,-4t�­; " , . t ill,V,� ll . ­�� , , ,,, `� - 4;,� ­�1­1,'%` -`S� ­ �i,�r­� " z ��,:'_':NI�141115MT'.*�'.l �. �`;.�;*,;; ,Z�,;,�, .", ... i;;:Vr" ,X -:_L. (,,V'!�,�,��,,'11', �-. , , vw -k "l:�l::­v �, 7,-,,� _Zi!,.��J�L'j ,: !� - ; ­ _""��_�:;.., - k. 'w . U . V, �1­ , .�,, . ',�-,",,,i,l�f��6�t..-c.,� _�Rv.1f,."U- 4'4, _r� , , ,. ".....". �, '-r - , .1 I.... I f , .,N� , , W, - W.". ��A�, � N� ,,"ll'. - Z __ iEi - z�� .,/,�.-r `�4, �­ r ­�.",� " �,. - ,,�-, p�-­­ a o, 1; ,Yy, - ..., ­ I � "I I � , � ,,, , r - ,:,� �r,.' �, �., :�f ,..'�,:,�­. � "I I , " - r6%. - - . - ." 1. 1,111--, _. Ith"V, -L'�47,! ;­ �nI ­�­i IQVI�lw­ �.e" 4,1.:-1 , , , ,� - ,,%� , ,�,z_�­*lcy­ * I- ., �q,,i5 - , :-,*,;J,; �-, . ,­ ,._ "I . I '. !�;,:.. .jj ..4, , 1� � . . 1 - I .t". , -,-,�O .L,�� -- - -�r, ­­ - . � � ",;:t;� �, ..',r,- 1;� , . ., � ��:I 1,1�t� ... 11 _� .... - ­ - " 1, ­ , ... " - �, �;,.. ,_, ". �., , v Al .. � ­ ll­f.l.le'l 11 - I,_ 11".., , ­.; . r I T, . ­3�lk"Vy­,� , �_ yey mmRj�-i.'_ 1,­�r'­ , � ... . .. :;, e 4 � - K-2 . ll�.. I e5 - I.', - - ��,.,%:11_e I I I �- , (�, , , ,­ l'-3, '%77��q� ,=�'. , 17,�_)Op:,,z - �-, .- . I ":�,­", "ll-,�­­­ I _,,l 4,1"p -3_4­7:V,l Z '. ,V, ,� ­ .�� ,.­�,,� �, '1_411:�l "wWRZKOV 1 " )'.l .�_; , � .4'. --", L _ V� w--, -,�`i,r.Y.��111�1, -, _". ". tV _!,.�,.. I �Wyvwgwwl .,f , , , - �:J, - . , �l ­ 1- --1 - ­ ", � t�,��'. �,�,, f,_ : ._ ,6 6. _.. , ., -, I 1, �4: Z�­�: ��=4;..,,, -;�:' ,.,�.:,�.W:;�,.:i,-�.'j'�,,�'�", qi.x,��,?",51� I-— "., , ;, -, - _ -z�����.,'-'.,��.-'��'-'.;-�&"-�''�?i�, . ,K�i�` .1 ­1�4-�, i�.� ,M-Vt,._,�,-,A.,,�v - -,i;.lV;` - - ­ ­ ., 4�� il,.'� - , "' , 7 ... ... . -gw,- 11 E"'Awl `,;",!�� Tyllymm 7.". 4- ­­ ­��­ _­­ �, E'vgtl�; V.,,�­. � � �, � w," ­�_W�-�- i�, � , , ,- I ,�jt'�*..­'­- , 111­1�'4,..; -,.".N,�­-,!j - , ! , , i7$. �- L". r; ',:�; ,� 111-1 I I.. - '15& 111 " I— -'.�,��,��i�.tl,, .. ­7�10`1121.� 11 _� . .. .­. ­'. I., ___ .. � , �:i ,i4 �­A✓";iT!��,,:��';!-,'�",���:���.�;T.Fz�I ,/�,�iif�,e.!:,:�"-i; V . " .. � x � ,- , �;.;. i�.. .- I..", a, , .; - -1 ,; "" -�:. -il�-,�:��.V,J��.l(r v 4 , , , ; ,. ,�­ �--��< , - �'. -1,V , ,_ ".; �: -- -.. .. . ., , .,...! " ­."j,V _­;", - - 131'-M�. I III, �.��' ,.-?, . - -1- - now A` . ,.�� ,�.Tl; I` I. F--�.', �­','&;; 11 �:. � 7�`.,:� ,,,P_,�, ` " . - �­ I , ��',.`��:"e�- �,�,---,�. 0�� I �W=w 4,11. MYRMW, Wr'_ �4.��--��.�z ,­- -1 " -11 , - - - f0p gy.0, %��.&i:'­,L­�_' - 11 5 R W "BA-Zz. -�- I f,�..'idrV,"'J"je. fir:! "­.'.,*'� 4 ­ , -, - I i'J'�,:.""�.�-,,*, ,-�".�elel.iZ,,,�,,.,-.�� ll­�.� ��.,�,-'.,­­_ _ ":7,1 , . A 2 �_jj .... ... � I ­ I ­ I I � I- I -1 ...- 1. �;%�".�" ;, ., .1 " -;iV" - � "'I ­.� &:!;f,�,-,,',,,�,`,* . ­­�.'��', !,.15 , I ,.�,,� � � 1", "'. -j"' ­... ­;I� V,�;�'�- .,m�,_, ",`,--,!�,P,`� 1p---��,-.�.�,-�,,� - T., ...... --11. ­=AMv- nw-" , - W Man C) . . , - �­ ��',�� , .';�"��,,.,i'�W.�*.:��,.,t!.,;��.:.� I -11-1 I—- ­ I . . -� `. .. , r � IS WE. , - _�IIW ­ill_n,_ " , � �gR 7� � ,*.,� 9 it, ,*N',;!:�.`�, _ �� - mw""n=w , I I , ,�; qz­ ,�.6_ ,-j -c, , , I, ..,.�,.;,-�7,-!��-,,�-i.-.[.'j--.;��';"�'-.* - j,""I'T p�'111-:� . . .... .. ,,;i_'�,�O S,-7 , � . .a , . - , 11��N.IP,2�_11.,."'.4," _ ,,�� " , - .0. ��l �­:l 11 ... ___ , vqwww 1­�111.11 '­;�!.-e " ,�41 Nle A ,,­', , -', :;,)-,n5!)rv?.',��,;� . L . - -,.�... "e'.V"', �,� 0 -1� , "A.-� - ; F�!!"� -4, ,, T%,�U�,-��-,'O"��`;i�!, . � iris +- . ..MW , _��i�:." - ,-,; � _.­­,­,;, . ., .­ ._,n,S� ,;, - Ni, -I �.' ��, -, ". 00-0 .�­­l _­� I - , �, � `;f ­ . - . t� F, ;-P:�,O,��;Cl:;�,"�*-, ��:',,'�,t , ! W­F,� .,M­­­,� �'. ,. ---.1t. ­ .1 12 A�l ��,�',Y,,,�.'i�,�,*,-,��i , :kz:� . I ..... ,, , , �!-�T,��'.. '.. . ',-,�t-�I�!,­ . ,v�q; , . ­ - 1 " ,,�,��i�,'��,"�;�-���,,�.'-, 't_ �i���Lol'.�".-, ` I � , , ,e,�.';"�, � 77 .1. r,,"-'--;',,�i'Eb,>-�L', I f , ,�,�",t,d),;:,-i-�.�".i��;,."!t��'�,i'.'.�.i.,-�� �'V.-"�".*, � 1-..'4Z:3� - M : - .9 ?� - - N ,..�,..4�.�i;�.!��'i�,'-'.'����",�,-,�? ..L.,:;�I, '-�,,: ,,,,:;��`i;`, 1_1' g " �' ­ . ..... ., _.", - ,p ,. VFe 1. .:t;,- .- ....11 , ll�' - T,r,;,!,��,' vi ." . .,,!..,.; -A0!',.1 -� -, 1�1 � I .� . �­. - . K� _,", , ..",,� _,,;4" Y�,-'_, .�,:,�-`,.._, . .,,- .-I.I. z , , " t ,� .KJ- I . I �' , =�. `,;;.j,­.*!_l,� - ,V .4, ;, No - _-, I r:ll I ,-­,, �,�-OR91� -�,��'c lll�z�;:l " 11r- 1.1. .,I,. ­­ Z. � ­,�;; �`,.'_ . � � " . _f. i 01" 4,­�. RN -� "��,--,%'.`-,�-�,, �.Y�r�i'-41�:!i�`. _: v . , � 1� .*",��� k'�,�,'-!�,,,,�2��*,�!� ,' ��,,�Vi�i.'::�.', - - "..� .r.l, �,� �4,� .��f"q,.ou,- � -1 . mw-­v:�;.� t..- ..--��­�� ����:,,,,*�.i.�-,:;��.'!,�;�, ��'7�;, . . - --?,�_ _ ,V�.,,_.�F., . ,qpgTw,1(,'.`.l.,P ,--­ , l-,"�%,"';. , - � � '_ . Z;��,'ri,,*,,T . � 11 .. I ". I ��. ,ze . . ­l:;l.. 31,.�'%j"%�-,,��* �.,.;%�:`­�,,4�., my , �:�. - !;��.;,t?�,, 5% 0,'5 !�p!,-��.*, ",, t,l St j , ": ,,, M . �� �, , W ., "� ,,V-­,­�t.'­;l ;R, , �; - r-o',�-0,-",�,"��l�� 4 , ,* -,�,�'.� wgwwm�', I _K%N&p.: Ag."I,.,i - �, . , -"�"; 4"Ay *- R �, I 11 .- ��i �40,, -S , �,i-�f,.-�f�j.!".'..�,'�'�".�",-c,tm�,�- , , .." -.1., -1 " ��'­t ,!.!�, Z�,,,� ,�"!!�!.. `�.�, - � � �u ��,O..', A.-, j, ��' �"" " 1, , __ :;-,.,..� �1� .. " � ..� �,� ., , L*_.,"l*-.--�: � ,. '', , &,40,�: :n i-e,L��-�,,�,,.nu , - � , -, ", 'V1, -11.1 -.,,,-,-,�,,�-,��,-,..,-,^,V,.�,,�:.��'i'5� ­,�,;�,',' � ��nl 1,%`,, . � - !��V��;'x-�*�� YZ �­ ­ ­-, ,­ - 11 �,,'��T:i .,l�".0- - , � ­...',, ,am , T - ­`­;`­ -, I k;:��:_Trf_l c' , -"t..."' - ��"%Wo=z -, ;Wk ,>,',! " "I isf I - tO� W .n� � -,D, ­;­ ­­._ t' aq "�'--I;'��'�--L-�T-�-.--�-"'-�.�'�'� '_ 1 - ,____ -J-xi`,�_ ,,gc��,ks��,*2.:�*,, __ - � -;�`.l 1-1 i;� 1- E� , " , � l` , a ". ', I- , �JZ.�-;jRT�*O �,R 1% , , ��, , , _$4 -��,'z - "' ��:r , - ",--j-!r - � ., , - I ....., . !4 �*�1*�V ��,:', �`_Q � & KA 20% ,,, -, i .�,7­_ V4;2 ,:�;.-, , jmy� Y��,, , - , J�'*ATI,'�:;: L" . 4*�`-,"T' -Z��Z��''�.-` , 4-L.'-. 20 2941 lle� ,;� O1*5�� ._� �M t �-,"..,'i---�, 4�-,7,,'.�:4"-.!;. .V ��.`-`r�.Jl-,i�; ,,,_'��`,:�,-7-'�_' !.� , - ., �, �;:e::�' - .. t� pmmmp FY O�Ap A , , . - I ­, I W111 rVI..., - 7i� J� , "il . �6,0'."p", . ,q , - � �. ­­ ...... , .7.�:11_ ­, I �! ­ ��b_ _� � 'i " �` :, 71� � .. 4..` , , �.-..:I:zz..-,I�.,O',.��-,.��.lit,, � - - I P:VOV: .� , ... ! I'M --- - - I g - ­-, �. (!',.'i`,','i���`:� - . ,.. - I M_ - , I ,_i, . �, , -, - - - , - .��, , , , . .�..��5;,e,�-,�i'�'�.�'�:fl;,�,�;-i"�.,�. .1 , .�'X,?., , L, �;, � , ,�_!7�*,e-, " , " '41 1�*, � 2 ,�;�7` 7,; �l ;?,�T!l ��,.��,fi� Y, 7M. Rg q MMOMWN,:$7._., 1''. , " ... �_ ... ­ i -a I .t _ z-i�V;��.�-,.;� ., ., - `,....-Z,�', �-41-�__,�..:��i�,��, �,'­�' , - ,.� ��­� �. �, . . 1-1111:il .; _p .:, �;,J: , - 1:. 111�il-��,,*,, I . � Ir'' .. Fx__ ", � '.""-;:�­,%*,*�� , . , 't ,� ; �,�l ��t,,�,.,�,,%, . �,_ n­llvl. " �.. ,..l.." _t­�.%;,­;��­, s .... ­,�­ ., 1_�",' 111X ­'�!� ,""�-��qq �t ,,!��­t,­ ...41 ... I .1.. " .- ,�;r� ,. �f�.��w, - ,_11, . � �,- .* `!�__.,: � �_,'­ *, "pr-!%-.-, ,­ I- , -, - ., _. .. " - j"'011 " . =I ,):".,,'�. .. ', VW� , "; 11 " " .; 11.170i : �gi,­� C. , �,�,A,i4 3.,.. "✓ -i", ��:�..,;-�,;',',R,11,� , ,'!,�;!�;�:tx %P�!��,�� n.,�`,�,' - 1'.�l . . . . . . �, - .. qq qki �,,��,,�,,��.�-,- .t­��I'�;��;�: ........... %lp�!�,fr �o � ,. 151, ., .. ..�, i. ... . � I ­ yak ; .1�z ..'­'.".� .1�z ..'­'.".� ... 1. If � I.. i . ­­­. .. , ,L',.I�'ll'.'��=t.�"".i:�..",,ll"', ­'.,,,,... ',%it � ;, :,. , . �,�_:: �%11T�'.-�o , , 11.11111;1.." "Ir" , ��_11, �-1 . . . . . . - _ , , , - �.. n-...,, _. , �111,��- "'. i_..'�_ �:� 1�l;,.!�`��%� , , .3 �� ;' .. ., T, 1*�i r., ,t� . ." . ., ­11�-) , -It -Z�,­;'16UR.:��-, -,P . .., .07 �1, - , ­�!., I ., I :, �w , ., RR - -a-,; -'T--, 'w Yr., _:., ...... - _, ll[� - 4 ".". 1�,, -,-t- 1�;, r, , , . ...... _ , , �. . - 't I �11_1�,*� �,!��. ., - -W Im lei- �,;,.111.- �­;E_­, � � ... � .��,,.-,�,,I,-,." ,,, �.�, , �',". V- ,­� I E M -1 . K__ ­ ... . - ­­ , , e ­ .., , " , N�,� ,,, ;; i� . - � -1 R I - " ... ,.i, - U " . . . I p . . ;,'�,!";, ,� � ­ � ­.. I .1. I .. . " 61 ­."', 11 I., - I '. I ,ll �,�!'­�:;,�,-*, , �­,�'4 ... b., , "'i � I � I �& 1, il .. �. � , .:; 'I % : ,� ,'.I�i"!, . . , l.- ,,,;:, L . � .­ . I - , % D -;: � _', �;: - .. 1� � 10 "I - - � A''� v-7--,�.'.l..,:,ZW'-,!:-' -4 "." '� .. ' , ,*A' I - . ;�.`� r,;� I '�tl'llzl �K .:� .4 .12.11 , .1� I , - I I ..., .�"&:�.�.i�k,�,� :'�,,-ck,',",'_'�*.�; ;i_'N*. .­­ `)"!R:,_ ,�,;.� �,;�,� _ ,_ ;.,f�.'� �� .., A ­ 1. ,1.11- �� ` ,- - I 1. 'i, � n0QYjA_,.%"­�l,­ I- E�;,N�' ; ',­! i tl%_ I 11 I _'I'l , -.;.- , , - , . ,41 � '. 7�,�,�,,�,��',"*,o���-,,I;.,4e - _�� -­­ �7—, , lu', � ­ - " . �M � 1. I ­,�, � , p _. , - 1. ­ 1.11.f , ; ., I 1. "_�, 14, _�,,,,�, 1 17'.��,��,f�,�,�'�­ l 2 �., -�.�'­­�­­- , A; ;�`:t­­.. ?" , .1 . _ - wol, ."'."'.""W'. -t-- -.��,A:JC,­" ',z . . -_,% i,.I��r��,�ct,*.,,*-�,1,7,-�,-,��,,��l-i��.i��, it � "! ,�,�. " ,� _� ,le, ", .. ,k - ;_ imaw-W qg­�.�% t..:, _6T . � -- � , ; -4;�- . , 'i , . I : .. ... . : ,li St -.�r " , - ­ - , * r - b 0 n Xl�t',j , ',�...�_, 'N' 'it, T-_�,-'-�:i­i.,,'�',+, - a, , , 7j.­,�­"_�, -, ., �,. �:.,:: , rq�-t,��"i'i�);�,�-lill.pl,�,,�zf��.',��47�-.:.-"4",i;��,�;,��%7!;:,�'I'�,.� �. . , ., ''. , I .,.., " ,%,� ...... - -,,.jD"-z � . ....... � . ­­L.­0lF. *�lv "� , , 1�=. , ;������'i",,:.r...:,I�.4,.,.."..�,' ;,"`,', —1 , J..;. - , ­ - .. .. , �,� -t .`. , ­ . "�,',':,���4,'���tM�'L�,-.,S-I,� f�`-',t,-' .. . � � . '�� - 'j."... ..... . . . D:,�,, -,"j, 3v.,k , -v--��,_ 4 1 , �­.�­, - . !,� A_i, ,'�,,�j,�l!�,",f��,�.,,,.�I ,=!:�­e�� V�-.,4-N', HV, �.,w­ .-.. .1.11 ­ . - " . , . � U�4 __,­­ ­ .­`.,gj- xgtgg . � 11,"N,.�,,� G- 1-', ,,,,,,-i "0!!!,',",,­,"�`!' �g . Mammom A ... .... _ _C.-7. '.,4i:�",;",::�,*--',i.,�,�.�"IF� ­ I 1-1 I ._-V'X,v­,r ­.. 11 , '" , �, ��j��,411" '. , , p I -4 ib ­1� : -1,..", ���.�.'���-,',�,.� ?4��.%;!�'--,,.--t - ,-;-­!­,_.­-. _.,j��P­ `,�­.,� 1, 'rj .',�;:�!,!;�i�-� �,-.-��3�0'111'�_,�_i�z�.] I ,;,­'!�-,�g�-,`! I,.; �:-;'- _.i �_. I �'; i I ,j��,",_�,;­- -.1 I I �1'1 �., I I - 1­.,�-� - - ­- . � - , 0,4-11 - , ­ �', ,. . �,!,,!.-c�-' - -_. , , 'I. -, 1. F, ''; ; .. . ..... �l � .?;:,:;:, � 2 �Jl - ., ) - I ­­ �, , , ,­. �, ,,, - ­ � , -1 . 1. .41, � 1. - 9 �R .. ­... . I . rll*..,. .111- I.. , , - , * . P , ".." -tl`�EV­"'�:-. � N,-; -;ll,;:. 7 ,���,,i,..,-,'i��!��--.����2��,iI ;.. *, ,. � -"4� _-, , � , �_­,;..�,'-�,­_.j.,��.-.' .� ,­' �,., _. . _ , . ., F­,­",� � �J',"J"%,,��.�4.�,'.,�, 5";`V-.i,,j*'zl, J,-,,,.:, �- � , .""', � , , , ­tl !,�L�­­�.­_. _, W,Q,�, ,:!�"­,�,�,!: _i:..:.��.�.,'.,�,�l�����.""��;i-.P;��-!,'�'.',� A �. - M, RWM:.,e; '; r,-­i'­'�` ll�',�T , _ I vo � ,4 � !:.r. .. ., - an n- _­ :,,��j.�-,','�,.-���..".."�,�.I 1. . , FO-- -,�,% . *-iz!l 4; "". - UMO 9 � __ -11.-- , .. - L. _. � g !_gl-,gglv V. ...... �,,lA,-'l'.:Ul , &�rj­;*�= , ��-.i '. ,., * i�!,,�:vt_ �(')tl_�_, . ..... f., 4�'�': & " �­ ll,�-��,_:­��", � t ;­-, � . _ r... ,r_-�, �. ( - �� , j ., , ,; , �i,�,*,­,!.jj�.,:,j: ��;- -�4* � .* �; �.`F,� �R,.­ 1. , , -41 � . '4��I�_., �'. , . '. 7�1,�� ". f ,;­�,; v ::: � , I YMM, 'i� "", -�� -4;�-, - - , 1�u�.��,i�,�_! I x ,"" �' . 0 '_ �* *_� MM m---- I` , ��6 'f� � '� T., , 11.1 11, � 'l, =, ,-�.�j.. , -0. � - , `- J-,%��,­ '.�. Z -1 , ,t- _ �'; ,j, -.,.,4.,-j,, .. ,.:R,.,j", -,:;14,OjL",;��f-Y,..'�,,,;,.�-�-Ir!�,iI ri_l*:.:.:7_,.011.6 f, , �, � �� .1'�, ..�,�,,,r,,,�.-.T'.''.,t,',"i�� �- -­ -1* ., -, - , ,�%:�7`,,"?E�r� - 1.:.:O�� 'r .1,��, ", � P'. I I - 1-1 �­ .,_ _ ,,",­', -ib"8,f 'FF ) �, . � � i E , ,�. "i- - ..�,.�. , 41 " f5l -::�*,*��- 1 t- �:,.,.�,.��..�.���,,'.'�����,";Tw If 4-sw j', -v , � ; 0. .. . -T*� - ,,� _ - " �t-#- , - ,�,, i,__.,,V, -,T,-, ­,­,­ 4,1"�,�i': 'A ,J,tw, l.Z., . ;!!,-,idM3,.,J�ff " , I ,�� � `� "��:!:�:.�-z,,..I��,5�',�;.;"� z - - ,S_Wqw,"yW4�? M , , - --M�,�.:.".,',,���,',,i,,�, -�� 'M � ;,4-.,,El_.%�l. I...",:::)i*,..,�.q�,.�, -A,A� � . _l'.?�l;_;j.'..Lj'A;,j­ '-%'11- .V:lf.,.�l I; �­, %R W S�',j;�r , �v&,�. _� .T,� yj� 6 M'. . -��!d �130111&,131 --��,4���j6,,�'i.,�����- ILIJ ,. - � ,=�_,,.�, � .,'�. T � , 1, . :LZ�-�,�; , ��� " I t ,.. . - , -l. , '�X,JO­­ - ­�.� ­- ..'� �,a I I . mi.'��.JE�*-F�.;��.,�-,,�T. �K - t , - ;­" 'I "? , " �11 1� M.t,M�!, -,,,�q,� :.. t,�,:""; �-'.�;-��k;.,;�.,-��,'i��'�l,,.F�-�:, �- �z�,tl��­�, ,�T,�.�. , , . '�Z..',' �.' "I '��'. , __. '. .��'� I � . .... . - , � - , , � ­­_ ­ .�-,-.4,�'.1:"I'. �,�'. L - '!� ,� - *A4, .. ­ ,, ft:__ '7­jE,:�;, �T - r);_', ­,f 7;­'�'.,r , 1 , .". -��. - ,�.,�;�-:i�,."-,�.;;,�:�"t;�k,-".,;Ij� �- ,.Ei;,;:_,,��A;'i�i,\ , . .11. . 1,'i , �_ I i - , I .� t_�_ ". �� " ".. 'iL46;­=!��- ',�.,,.­X:��,�, 11 ,:54`­t�. ,� �� 4,��,. ; , , � . __... I , : - "' '�- —­ J.Y;�, n* .��-��,�,�-,,e - - I -.- j,,.,. . - , ,��',��,��,��,�,',-�,�.-"�!'.,�, -;-lB! - . � �_;_4r_ 11 E�;��.E:E�==�_ ,� I I ­ � , .1 ­­.- .�L-_­ �. ..�*�14:�, �­� .­ �P'lv.. �".. - I , ., � � .� . �. ... . _ , ,i�5� , . z �­ - - , . � .- .. 1r. , �.�� _,,,,j4:7� , , , ,­ 0;,-,. 7,- - , ._.l....k:�,_ �, tg m .1 �4;4t�—_* -�.�, " � � , , " !:,-t7��,�,;!=-.4".,4,��=�T'l� ., .EZU�:%M_= - �l --,—,,�'�'_­�.,"',",��-� , ... ... ­!1lWl.,­­- - " � . - �7,4z, ---_A-l ,� " . I ZyN," � , .c_ -Kg . � -M ­ , &J��i i Ya,,f � I ,.r 7 �-,,.T�,�tj�'t_-1 ,e ;, _�', - ?,i:;"! � � ii -I 1-1 —1I ) d el I I , ` _��Oj , 1 . -Q�,-`�,�2. . P.^, .r u"_�.��i_-;­ 'T P, - "".-2, - -, I " - _ ., jr,T,tt;Z�;�. r. .w�4� I., �` 11, - Elfi�,�,'��",��4.,7,,,i,��z -,,Z �,, - f. -, _' ­-­f�:�,� .,!' i �;,�: _.''V�,!.Z�r ­"' ,zim. ,vw� , 4' , -, '4�. �., xv.7 W*- - -- -it & P VilQ�'.,­� A- , b,l �ir .... .. . vt,m�. �.E;'4YNZ�' � =�ftq`r4- ,4 , -�U­ � , ,,��',;,C,�jp.�; _�_,=� :316 ,;� -- " ,Z27,7.-,-,,- `� . ., � ,; '. ,. �� ;��:_ V�­�4, �r., g =_-&-.j , �,��-��,,,;�.ii,�ttl,-,-":;i;"-���l�l";Yl�,;-�I�--'.�",-,'(.'�-�i4�i, A­��,kr,v- . - - ­­,�- -17-��_�V- f ­,P -"4: *i�.,'l -%'T. f : ,; " *� � - MZi-riP; VI ­5;t . 4 - -� -- ,� A �,�, 'i , �,,%�(�*,, " .- �� �,4cLtl,,'A ��'� .,� .� !:I ---. � � �):�t� " ,-,,..%-�=.�t't)�,l�1,0�.I:Vt.-t.,(,!.:t wz=-, ` "'-1- '­..­l�­_­lr. ���4,,__ �,,_ - ... ;---*,*­,'lAk­ U. ­� - - . �p­i­­ --Ill I, f��; .4�..: , - . - , ­ ­�,.,;�,,,��,; 'X�1`4 ��_- ..., �,,—'; � - . y , �� , ­ IQ , �011._ � , .ltx,� �l " A;— r,;!� I�, t�m ­ vmsap V5.v, :�.,qk) ,;api,_A-4.z - ro , . _'. -'lllllxll."`,,�,`��.��- '..i� I- '.� "M , . - !�� ,,!' �' .."�� ,� ... ;tzj j�m��%� 'L.��,-.----,.;,a,'-4c:)I�,�,;�:r���:-,�,J,. , .tl� ,,.,-�.__N g! qn, tp"vp .-,. 4 itO , � - ' -4 � .1�1�L�_Jiiz� �.A ,j� ,� " * '. - . - ­ ­q.t�­ *'-�?"4,7:��--it�I'll.1,.... ... .1- �­­Nl,­,-��',`­�� . ,77-- _': �'� ". , _ - �_ �,5- " "--� - ,_ -,+''C' - � _ .:L,., -,-��ii�f"i�,��,-,7���.. .P-,t.,p,l,,k-..r-,.i��,-..�r,-- ­ p lg,.Al - ­ W­­,�,­ �-,ji�­��­-e%­ , 1, , . . ­ .. ,�,K, ,'; �Z . , - � ,�. ­ ­­ . , � ___i� �f-eP - � 11 - -t�,jx,m-�%,��'_' .,v -,:�V, ': .. - , 1, �! P� ��,�'_,,_ , ­�-,. , I g - . _ Ui.� I i�,i' . , , i'' 4. , , ,4,TP ­ _,", I I _��.. 1. - ,� = . - ,,, .. . - . r,_:'-' - .I- - � �� , , � - S.,i5i4q , . T-411. *,E ,�Vi7 . _1 ?-.'-,I- ., I ,V, ,*7!�..'e, � I (nM," ,M�fTl, ! � - ­­'­ L-* - j,�,-1.,�.4,�1? - n,_L=5' .gt!;.8� � 'k I _fktz� �M �� ­­­ �"ic 6z, - - - - -, - ` '11AL ,� ,� � , - , - `,�t-;,;f, - 9"� . , . 7, . L�*.fjVZ'.'�4'� � ,� !��, 0 - - - -11­­,,�,­ :��t'.i�_ � 1.4 - w"'IP, ,,-ggqm �n ", 't .- " 1 ,nt�zw--a�ng i�.,-�­R,�- *i'.-_�� , - .., I_. -�- ''. , " � �_ �_ , ., .. :"�:4�, t, ,�� � - � 44`�tl:��,,`-7' f-A,V�ik'Z�,!­. , .�;,.44i"?�.6�,E,'r���--,..,:��-,!��- �", _� �, 9- ,. , . .. �",O-�F.�,,R­;ll _� . - - 1 - :�,:�':.", 0,!�*� . - _,,,��,!-,��j­-,,lz� R:�, i.�;,"�K zj; , -f, _t 1,1� i�,��Jr,��,.�' j !.,. -, - ;,;�?,I* .1 I , , , _Nl­ .� " �­F,V­._,,�. - . � PiiR'.;,W,4,,:4;"- ;;Z.-,,�,­'­­q��VVI�lr_ �� . . ," Q. '(D�tpKs,m��_,Z"W. �q,�, . � - ­ J- � --- " I n";­�� " _-­ �­,,,�; , - , __., - , I � .3 - � , .V� 1� " 'I" ­,��,�AV�Eo.�,�il 31�­ _�F_4��­,.,� " -� `,4� "'�,$,7 -,;�*,, -Z_-�-�!�,, '-'4,- ." -;":� ­­­� W �, _,, , , ,tl�� _� , ,�,��.� E,,� � ,.!" 'y 2� ,YYA�,t D_ . . , ­ .1., - ;�.9�i�o7�,.��;�,,,-�u��-�.�,,�"F.�� ,!�,P�, - ,,-_­�";­ �� _._��.­�, �1­1­1­11 , :."�i;?'-'�-j�'6�,�,.�;!��t,-9.',*, t� _ ,, _ I ­,. lz,�;, 4� - . 1, -,P��-r �,..! , -_lj-�. 'Ala�p,-�l ,ly ,�6�ri �, ��. err H� '? - ­ . - *`;51W,R_z iTirt �-.:,P,P��,:i5i4a�-,,,17,' ­�'�1�1_; ,�lx .,,��4,'41,�.- �,;�j, -',. r,tP� .�, �i. 1 'i . .­. -v, _r_ . , �J�X, 4 . ;r ,�­v , "�: ,, .�:. -,'���,�,.�-.,��*.�t�,Vi"-,R" A- � gym- ,_­ ­.. .1 �p%­P�,,!-�-":F,:�Ll:R; e - ., ) "', _. , - n��. � �,_ , 11 ­­.­. 1- "I i . 'p�"�l'.0��m-z�,.�,.,��;k., �l ------ I -­ ,t - 1 1 . �]_­".,­­­J��-%� -� "'1Z.,"', 1� 'RL, I W1. �l "'R 14, _. , , - . I " ��, - � v --- l", ,� ,7.. _�, ,'� ::-Q , S ., -� - o � i � �.4- 1 V? , .�:" !� %qu �fiAt , ., -'r i-., �,) rA�,z.,�,;-j",*!%Z,� - �L�,� i - , _11 , 4�-%!,� .,�,�,. K�_-�,,� =,-�r,.-v!R%!T� �.;,Pn:l ,�,7,�.,f",.7,--�,�:�,,�"i�,-.-,,'4�'�'-��-�',,,�i�,'.).���'. ,", ..., '. 1,4 IF. ��,'."i"t�F,';�-�t'.�zA -4,_�=� �").', "�-,-,,-.-,.--�,����j�i,'-,',,.,I� , ,_ .,��.';tov . - , , JT, : AV - .,� '.. ­��, **!� �§§_­4,� 11 w, 15 60AV"'. ;'­",NQ;nw- �,4,4;�tl,,�,-.�i�,�;-..,�*��-�-l��. Vl�­- f� -- � - , I 11"t",- 0,-,,�! 43,�"(v,-`-!t' 'Lloph K -�; & 1 , :L­y�,l " �..�,.',-�,�,�,t,� pf"If F , 1 1 .. Em 1 " T ,- i��;;� tfix: " �`._­­ 1-1... 'r�:­I:.� .. , ... I 11 +k y5 .. -, , , " , .1,tai -'ulw� ­.,-�;,�5,1,� , � �PI 1 "s ,� ZW=.g.qg -- SAW 0 =&- .. ­ I . , . 1 - - - - - - , ­ - 'r " --- --- - " X, -,am 1. � �` .. ;_ - � _­ .1 ,,, �� e , ri , � , . i� . , , , , , , . - , - � � � � � � � � � � � � I lv . . . . . . . . . . . I :1 '��1�111�_ � �4 .. . "'. SO 'Ems . ,. Table A2 ls r. �����,�:� sa. u.�,.;�:,�.,�,.,,._,a�-�T i ,mac �, �. •�s. i ,�„,�t� ads-. rr �a-..�;� � ..-L,,-2,��r���-�,y� 1'`a.},,�;�,as"�'�;c-i�: .,,, ,, Ar ,4v 4,3 qfi ­qg Sit V A, `rt Ni; N �Atm �g of �M- q M wi M Wom SRI;` .gotIS SM I 0 .Rfc NO MEN, iia) iA mN �12 Ci -s mw -,;g RE 01 - ----- on" 'ir, - 1,� 1Q. "F tiVC, yt g�gz M AM/ 4- , 4 1 W q -on ... .. ... ...... furl ER Ayr WN 0, VIs gum,-- Th to *C Xi 10 . . ............ au "ISO 14 +R A 1�x �g .;ggg 42�j y 11ou Kam no, 4';:­--!'.-��'�.-i:j, C: r'z­ z! t 7 'XiV4 VP ,10 M1ST„ cAI�FlT T MA - w M i wool, ��4, C)l rS 01 LU . T�, woman pq. J Mjt!a9-- . ........ tZrni z�, JJ pi Fy n� ,Fv MA AM :? M !Pipmum—am , r,,, w� 407 to-, Table A3 LU K LL Ld d) O E C) C\l O ca C: O O co U) co Integrated Noise Model (INM) Inputs . The DNL contours were generated using version 7.Ob of the FAA's Integrated Noise Model (INM). INM uses annual average daily operations to compute existing an -d- forecast noise-. Annual -average -daily operations are representative of all aircraft operations that occur over the course of a year. The total annual operations are divided by 365 days to determine the annual average daily operations. Runway and flight track use is also averaged over one year. The use of INM and computer-based noise modeling allow for the projection of future, forecast noise exposure. When the calculations are made in a consistent manner, INM is most accurate for comparing "before -and -after" noise effects resulting from forecast changes or potential alternatives. INM allows noise predictions for such forecast change actions without the actual implementation and noise monitoring of those actions. Atmospheric data from the National Weather Service (NWS) and the Minnesota State Climatologist's Office was gathered for the development of the 2010 existing noise contours. The NWS 2010 annual average temperature of 49.9 degrees Fahrenheit 6nd'2010 average annual Wind speed of 8.2 Knots was used in the INM modeling process. The 2010 average annual pressure of 29.98 inches and a 2010 annual average relative humidity of 63.9 percent, as reported by the Minnesota State Climatologist's Office were also used. The atmospheric data for the 2020 and 2025 forecast noise contours were derived from the annual average values from the past 30 years' historical weather data available from the Minnesota State Climatologist's Office. An annual average temperature of 45.2 degrees Fahrenheit and an average annual wind speed of 9.2 Kts. were used in the INM modeling process. An average annual pressure of 29.11 inches and an annual average relative humidity of 68.0 percent were also used. High temperatures decrease air density, which decreases aircraft performance (e.g.., takeoff distance increases and climb rate decreases) and generally results in increased noise. In conjunction with temperature, humidity affects the propagation of noise through the air. In general, sound travels farther in more humid conditions. Relative humidity is highest at night and gradually drops during the day, with the lowest point generally occurring in the afternoon. Terrain data at 100 -foot intervals were used in the noise model. Existinq and Forecast Fleet Mix and Total Operations Table A4 provides the total number of operations at MSP in 2010 (Existing Conditions) as well as the forecasted operations, detailed by operations category, for 2020 and 2025. The forecast operation levels are the same for the No Action, Airlines Remain and Airlines Relocate Alternative (Sponsor's Preferred Alternative) in 2020 and 2025, respectively. This is due to the belief that the level of future demand at MSP will remain constant among the various options. However, the level of service provided to the traveling public, and efficiency with which aircraft and passengers are accommodated by the airport, are the primary variables affected by the respective alternatives. Table A4 2010, 2020 and 2025 Operations Numbers Operations Categoy - `- -20101'1-- 2020121- ., 2025121 Scheduled Passenger Air Carrier (a) 394,407 439,940 _480,960_ Cargo12,049 ....... ....... ... ........ ... 12,764 12,826 Charter103. ........ ... _.. _._96..... 106_... _....-. ...... GA26,185 ... 29,934 30 003 Milita 2,839 2,145 2,145 Total 435,583 484,879 526,040 Sources: (1) Based on actual year-to-date 2010 MACNOMS data adjusted to match FAA ATADS data (to account for unavailable MACNOMS operations data). (2) Table 10.2 in Aviation Activity Forecast Technical Report, HNTB Corporation 8/5/2011. Table A5 provides a breakdown of the 2010 aircraft fleet mix at MSP. In 2010, the average daily number of total nighttime._ operations was 93.4.. Overall,_ .the 2010 total average daily operations number was 1,190.9. Table A5 2010 Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Daily Operations Group Aircraft Type Day Night Total Manufactured/ Re -engined A300 -622R 0.1 0.1 0.1 Stage 3 Jet A300134-203 0.0 0.0 0.0 A310-304 0.0 0.0 0.0 A318 0.0 0.0 0.0 A319-131 92.2 6.5 98.7 A320-211 92.8 11.7 104.5 A321-232 2.1 0.9 3.0 A330 5.2 0.5 5.6 A340 0.0 0.0 0.0 ASTR 0.0 0.0 0.0 B717-200 8.4 1.5 9.9 8737-300 12.5 0.9 13.4 B737-400 0.4 0.1 0.5 B737-500 1.8 0.7 2.5 B737-700 22.6 4.7 27.3 B737-800 36.3 10.3 46.7 B737-900 0.0 0.0 0.0 B747-100 0.0 0.0 0.0 B747-200 0.1 0.1 0.1 B747-400 1.7 0.0 1.7 B757-200 39.6 6.5 46.2 B757-300 26.8 1.8 28.6 Table A5 2010 Aircraft Fleet Mix Average D . ily Operations .... Group AircraftType Day Total Manufactured/ Re-engined B767-300 2.2 0.1 2.3 stage 3 Jet BEC400 1.5 0.1 1.6 CARJ/CL601 333.8 16.2 350.1 CNA500 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA501 0.1 0.0 0.1 U/ 0.0 OJ ou uU 0.0 5* 0.3 57 2.6 0.2 2.8 5.6 0.5 G] 2.9 1.5 4.4 ou uU 0.0 uu uU 0.0 0.5 1.5 2.0 c/45 uu uU 0.0 EK88135 2.9 01 19 EK88145 30.6 2.7 333 EK8B170 1194 61 125.5 EPNB190 1.9 01 2.0 8LF4 0.0 0.0 0.0 GLF5 11 01 1.2 GLFK/ 1.4 0.1 1.5 HS125 4.0 0.4 4.3 k\1124 0] 0.0 01 K\1125 0.5 01 0.5 L101 0.0 0.0 0.0 LEAR31 0.3 0.0 0.3 L64R35 2.2 8.3 2.5 LEAR45 1.9 01 2.0 LEAR55 0.2 0.0 0.2 LEARGO 07 0.0 0.8 � MD11GE | 2.0 | 1.6 | 3.6 /- Table A5 ( ) Group Aircraft Type Day Night Total MD81 31.0 2.0 33.0 Manufactured/ Re -engined MD83 0.0 0.0 0.0 SABR65 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total 935.0 83.7 1018.6 Hushkit Stage 3 Jet 727Q 0.7 0.7 1.5 Total 62.4 2.0 64.6 Micr )jet CNA510 0.1 0.0 0.1 Stage 2 Less than 75,000 lb. FAL10 0.1 0.0 0.1 Maximum Take -Off Weight 0.6 0.7 1.3 LEAR24 0.0 0.0 0.0 LEAR25 0.0 0.0 0.1 Propeller A748 0.0 0.0 0.0 BEC100 0.0 0.0 0A BEC190 3.8 0.2 4.1 BEC200 1.5 0.2 1.7 BEC300 0.4 0.0 0.5 BEC30B 0.2 0.0 0.2 BEC60 0.0 0.0 00 Table A5 2010 Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Daily Operations - Group Aircraft Type Day Ni ht Total CNA170 0.0 0.0 0.0 Propeller CNA172 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA177 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA1 80 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA182 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA185 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA205 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA206 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA208 0.6 0.1 0.7 C NA21 0 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA303 0.0 0.0 0.0 C NA31 0 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA320 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA337 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA340 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA401 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA402 0.1 0.0 0.1 CNA404 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA414 0.3 0.0 0.3 CNA421 0.2 0.0 0.2 CNA425 0.0 0.0 0.0 CNA441 0.2 0.0 0.2 DHC6 0.0 0.0 0.0 DHC8 0.0 0.0 0.0 D0328 0.1 0.0 0.1 EMB110 0.0 0.0 0.0 FK27 0.0 0.0 0.0 GASEPF 0.3 0.0 0.3 GASEPV 0.2 0.0 0.3 GULF1 0,2 0.0 0.2 LA42 0.0 0.0 0.0 M20J 0.3 0.0 0.4 MU2 0.0 0.0 0.0 PA23AZ 0.0 0.0 0.0 PA24 0.0 0.0 0.0 PA28 0.1 0.0 0.1 PA30 0.0 0.0 0.0 PA31 0.6 0.1 0.6 PA32 0.2 0.0 0.2 PA34 0.2 0.0 0.3 PA42 0.0 0.0 0.0 PA44 0.0 0.0 0.0 Table A5 2010 Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Dail U erations Group Aircraft Type Day Night_ Total PA46- 0.1 0.0 0.1 Propeller PA60 0.0 0.0 0.1 RWGM69 0.0 0.0 0.0 SAMER2 0.0 0.0 0.0 SAMER3 0.1 0.0 0.1 SAMER4 1.5 0.0 1.6 SD330 0.0 0.0 0.0 SF340 65.9 3.2 69.1 Total 92.9 6.7 100.2 Helicopter A109 0.0 0.0 0.0 B206L 0.0 0.0 0.0 B212 0.0 0.0 0.0 B222 0.0 0.0 0.0 EC1 30 0.0 0.0 0.0 S70 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 Military Jet C130 3.1 0.2 3.4 C17 0.0 0.0 0.0 C5 0.0 0.0 0,0 C9A 0.0 0.0 0.0 F-1 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 F16GE 0.0 0.0 0.0 F5E 0.0 0.0 0.0 KC1 35 0.0 0.0 0.0 T -38A 0.1 0.0 0.1 T1 0.0 0.0 0.0 T34 0.0 0.0 0.0 T37 0.0 0.0 0.0 T38 0.0 0.0 0.0 U21 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 12 0.2 3.5 Total 1096.6 93.4 1190.9 Note: - Totals may differ from sum due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. Similar to the total forecast operation numbers, the fleet mix for the respective alternatives shows minimal variation in the respective forecast years. Again, this is a function of future operations trends that are forecasted to transpire regardless of the development alternative selected at MSP. Specifically, it is anticipated that airlines will favor an up -gauging in the size of aircraft at the Airport, regardless of the development option that is selected. The 2020 forecast operation level of 484,879 represents an increase of 49,296 operations (11.3%) from 2010 (Existing Conditions). Although 2020 forecasted operations are anticipated to be 10.4% lower than the peak in 2004, total passengers are expected to increase from the 2004 level of 36.7 million to 41.8 million in 2020. This is a direct result of higher load factors with larger aircraft. For the future years analysis, as previously stated, the fleet mix and operational. level is the same for each alternative (No Action, Airlines Remain Alternative and Airlines Relocate Alternative). However, the split between daytime and nighttime operations vary slightly between alternatives. As an example, the average daily nighttime operations forecasted in 2020 increases from the 2010 Existing Condition of 93.4 to 104.3 under the Airlines Remain Alternative and to a level of 104.4 with the Airlines Relocate Alternative (the Sponsor's Preferred Alternative). Tables A6 - A8 detail the 2020 and 2025 aircraft fleet mix and a day -night operations breakdown for each alternative. The fleet mix was developed from the gated flight schedule that was produced from the aviation activity forecasts. For the noise analysis, the simulation results were used to define the time of day for aircraft operations (i.e., daytime and nighttime periods of DNQ based upon the effect of delay as estimated by the SIMMOD analysis. The gated flight schedule provided information onstage lengths. The forecast fleet mix details the full phase-out of hushkitted Stage 3 aircraft over 75,000 pounds at MSP. Table A6 2020 and 2025 No Action Alternative Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Averacie Dailv Operations C. 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type Day Night Total Day I Night 1 Total Manufactured/Re-engined A300134-203 2.8 2.4 5.2 2.7 2.4 5.2 Stage 3 Jet A319-131 113.8 1 5.9 119.1 125.5 4.7 130.2 A320-211 88.1 9.7 i 97.8 95.4 13.0 1 108.4 A321-232 4.3 0.91 5.2 48.7 5.5 54.2 A330 2.1 0.8 2.9 3.8 0.8 4.6 B717-200 10.2 2.0 12.1 8.6 0.0 8.6 B737-400 0.1 1 1.6 1.7 0.1 1.6 1*1 B737-700 63.1 i 7.6 70.7 89.4 10.0 99.4 B737-800 116.3 18.7 135.0 205.7 26.3 1 232.0 8747-400 4.2 j 0.0E 4.2 1.4 0.0 1 1.4 B757-200 35,9 8.4 44.4 4.0 2.8 6.9 B757-300 26.3 0.9 1 27.2 27.1 1.8 29.0 B767-200 1.7 1 0.0 j 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 B767-300 0.1 1.6 1.7 B767-400 4.0 0.8 1 4.8 7.1 II 0.8 i 7.9 B777-200 2.4 0.8 1 3.2 5.71 0.8 6.5 C. AO able 2020 and 2025 No Action Alternative Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Averaae Dailv Oijdrations 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type yp B787-800 Day 4.3 j Night I 0.0 Total 4.3 Day 5.7 Night 0.0 Total 5.7 BEC400 2.6 0.8 j 3.4 2.6 0.8 3.4 CARJ/CL601 278.0 12.5 290.5 280,8 12.1 292.9 CL600 2.5 0.9 3.4 2.5 0.9 1 3.4 CNA501 1.7 0.0 1 1.1 1.7 0.0 1.7 Manufactured/Re-engined CNA525 4.4 0.8 i 5.2 4.4 0.8 5.1 Stage 3 Jet CNA550 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 i 0.0 1.7 CNA560 8.5 0.0 8.5 8.5 0.0 8.5 CNA650 1.7 0.0 j 1.7 3.4 0.0 3.4 CNA750 6.9 0.0 it 6.9 6.9 0.0 6.9 DC10 1.8 1.6 1 3.5 1.8 1.6 3.4 EMB145 20.5 1.9 22.4 18.6 1 2.0 20.6 EMB170 151.2 3,6 1 154.9 145.5 I 5.6 4 151.1 GLF5 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 II 0.0 1.7 HS125 5.1 1 0.0 5.1 5.1 0.0 5.1 IA1125 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 LEAR35 5.1 0.0 5.1 5.1 1 0.0 i 5.1 LEAR45 3.5 0.0 3.5 15 i 0.0 i 3.5 LEAR60 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 j 0.0 j 1.7 MD11GE 2.7 2.5 5.2 2.4 2.8 i 5.2 MD81 55.8 2.7 58.6 17.6 2.9 20.5 MD9025 88.4 5.7 94.0 89.2 1.1 90.4 Total 1126.9 93.7 1220.6 1239.3 102.9 1342.1 Stage 2 Less than 75,000 FAL200 2.5 1 0.8 3.3 2,5 0.8 3.3 Ib. IVITOW FAL20A 1.7 0.0 1.71.7 1.7 0.0 GII 0.9 0,9 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.7 Total 5.1 1.6 6.7 5.1 1 1.6 6.7 Propeller ATR42 0.9 0.9 i 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.7 BEC190 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1 1.7 BEC200 1.7 j 0.0 f 1.7 1.7 0.0 1 1.7 BEC55 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.9 i 1.7 BEC58 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 BEC65 10.9 1.0 11.9 10.8 1.1 11.9 BEC80 3.41 0.0i 3.4 3.4 0.01 3.4 BEC90 16.2 1.0 17.2 17.7 i 1.2 18.9 BEC99 6.0 0.9 6.9 6.0 0.9 6.9 Table A6 2020 and 2025 No Action Alternative Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Dailv Onpr;qfinn--. Notes: . - Totals may differ from sum due to rounding, Source: MAC, 2011. Table A7 2020 and 2025 Alternative 1 - Airlines Remain Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Daily Operations 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type Day Night Total Day I Night Total A300[34-203 2.7 2.4 5.2 CNA208 1.0 0.8 1.8 1.0 0,8 1.8 125.5 GASEPV 1.7 1 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 13.0 108.4 M20J 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 PA31 2.7 0.9 3.5 2.7 0.9 3.5 8717-200 PA34 SAMER4 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.9 1.7 0.8 1.7 0.0 1.7 Propeller SF340 34.0 0.0 i 34,0 23.7 0.0 23.7 Total 87.1 7.1 94.2 78.1 7.4 85.5 116.2 18.7 135.0 Military Jet C130 3.4 1.6 5.0 3.4 - 1.6 5.0 0.0 1 1.4 T -38A 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 Total 5.2 1.6.6.7 - - 51. 1.6 6.7 1.8 29.0 Total Operations 224.3 104.1 1328.3 1327.6 113.5 , 1441.1 Notes: . - Totals may differ from sum due to rounding, Source: MAC, 2011. Table A7 2020 and 2025 Alternative 1 - Airlines Remain Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Daily Operations 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type Day Night j Total Day i Night I Total Manufactured/Re-engined A300[34-203 2.7 2.4 5.2 2.8 2.4 1 5.2 Stage 3 Jet A319-131 113.8 6.0 119.7 125.5 I 4.7 130.2 A320-211 88.0 # 9.8 97.8 95.4 13.0 108.4 A321-232 4.3 0.9 5.2 48.8 5.5 54.2 A330 2.1 0.8 2.9 3.8 0.8 4.6 8717-200 10.2 j 2.0 12.1 8.6 0.0 8.6 B737-400 0.1 1.6 1.7 0.1 1.6 1.7 B737-700 63.4 7.3 1 70.7 89.4 1 9.9 99.4 B737-800 116.2 18.7 135.0 205.7 26.3 232.0 8747-400 4.2 0.0 4.2 1.4 0.0 1 1.4 B757-200 35.9I 8.5 44.4 4.0 2.8 1 6.9 B757-300 26.3 0.9 27.2 27.2 i 1.8 29.0 B767-200 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1 1.7 B767-300 0.1 1 1.6 i 1.7 B767-400 4.0 0.8 4.8 7.1 1 0.8 1 7.9 Table A7 2020 and 2025 Alternative 1 - Airlines Remain Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Avera aDaily Operations 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type Day Night Total Day Night Total B777-200 2.4 08 i 3.2 5.7 0.8 i 6.5 8787-800 4.3 0.0 i4.3 5.7 I 0.0 5.7 BEC400 2.6 0.8 3.4 2.6 0.8 3.4 CARJ/CL601 277.9 12.6 j 290.5 280.8 12.1 292.9 CL600 2.5 0.9 3.4 2,5 0.9 3.4 Manufactured/Re-engined CNA501 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1 1.7 Stage 3 Jet CNA525 4.4 0.8 5.2 4.4 0.8 5.1 CNA550 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 CNA560 8.5 0.0 1 8.5 8.5 0.0 11 8.5 CNA650 1,7 I U -U 1.7 3.4 0.0 3.4 CNA750 6.9 0.0 it 6.9 6.9 I 0.0 6.9 DC1 0 1.8 i 1.6 3.5 1.8 16 3A EMB145 20.5 1.9 1 i 22.4 186 2.0 20.6 EMB170 151.2 3.6 154.9 145.5 5.6 151.1 GLF5 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 it 1.7 HS125 5.1 0.0 5.1 5.1 0.0 5.1 lA1 125 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 LEAR35 5,1 0.0 1 5.1 5.1 0.0 5.1 LEAR45 3.5 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 15 LEAR60 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1,7 MD11GE 2.5 2.6 it 5.2 2.4 2.8 5.2 MD81 55.8 ± 2.8 1 58.6 17.6 2.9 20.5 MD9025 88.4 5.6 94.0 89.2 1.1 90.4 Total 1126.8 93.8 1220.6 1239.5 102.6 1342.2 -Stage 2 -Less than 75,000 FAL200 2.4 1 0.9 3.3 2.5 0.8 i 3.3 Ib. IVITOW FAL20A 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 GII 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.9 j 0.9 1 1.7 Total 4.9 1.8 6.7 5.1 1 1.6 6.7 Propeller ATR42 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.9 1 0.9 1.7 BEC1 90 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 BEC200 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 BEC55 ag i 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.9 1 1,7 BEC58 11 0.0 1.7 1.7 i 0.0 j 1.7 BEC65 10.9 1.0 11.9 10.8 1.1 11.9 BEC80 3.4 0.0 3.4 3.4 0.0 3.4 BEC90 16.2 1.0 17.2 17.7 1.2 18.9 BEC99 6.0 0.9 6.9 6.0 0.9 6.9 Table A7 2020 and 2025 Alternative I - Airlines Remain Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Averanp nqiiv (Inarnfinnc - Totals may differ from sum due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. Table A8 2020 and 2025 Alternative 2 - Airlines Relocate Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Daily Operations 2020 2025 Group 2020 Day Night I 2025 Day Group Aircraft Type Day Night j Total Da, y Night Total 2.4 CNA208 1.0 0.8 1.8 1 -0 0.8 1.8 4.7 1 GASEPV 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 13.1 1 M20J 1.7 0.0 j 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 5.6 PA31 2.7 0.9 3.5 2.7 0.9; 3.5 0.8 PA34 0.9 It 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.8 it 1.7 0.0 SAMER4 1.7 0.0 1 1.7_ 1.7 0.0 1 1,7 Propeller SF340 34.0 0.0 1 34.0., 23.7 j 0.0 1 23.7 Total 87.1 7.1 94.2 78.2 1 7.4 85.5 205.4 Military Jet C130 3.4 1.61 5.0 3.4 1.611 5.0 0.0 1 T -38A 1.7 0.0 i 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 Total 5.2 1.6 6.7 5.1 1.6 6.7 27.1 Total Operations 29.0 1224.0 104.-8- 1328.3 1327.9 113.2 1441.1 Nnfp,z. 0.0 i 1.7 - B767-300 - Totals may differ from sum due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. Table A8 2020 and 2025 Alternative 2 - Airlines Relocate Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Average Daily Operations 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type Day Night I Total Day Night Total Manufactured/Re-engined Stage 3 Jet A300134-203 2.7 2.5 5.2 2.7 2.4 5.2 A319-131 113.8 5.9 119.7 125.5 11 4.7 1 130.2 A320-211 88.0 i 9.8 i 97.8 95.3 13.1 1 108.4 A321-232 4.3 11 0.9 5.2 48.7 5.6 54.2 A330 2.1 11 0.8 2.9 3.8 0.8 4.6 B717-200 10.2 2.0 12.1 8.6 0.0 8.6 B737-400 0.1 1.6 1 1.7 0.1 1.6 1.7 B737-700 63.5 7.3 1 70.7 89.3 10.1 99.4 B737-800 116.3 18.7 1 135.0 205.4 26.6 1 232.0 B747-400 4.2 0.0 1 4.2 1.4 1 0.0 1 1.4 B757-200 35.9 8.4 1 44.4 4.0 2,8 6.9 8757-300 26.3 0.9 27.2 27.1 1.9 29.0 B767-200 1.7 0,0 1.7 1.7 0.0 i 1.7 B767-300 0.1 1.6 1.7 8767-400 4.0 0.8 4.8 7.1 0.8 7.9 Table A8 2020 and 2025 Alternative 2 - Airlines Relocate Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix Awarnma nqiiv Opprations 2020 2025 Group Aircraft Type Day Night i Tota Day Night Total B777-200 2.4 0.8 3.2 5.7 0.8 6.5 8787-800 4.3 0.0 i 4.3 5.7 0.0 5.7 BEC400 2.6 1 0.8 3.4 2.6 0.8 3.4 CARJ/CL601 277.9 12.6 i 290.5 2807 12.1 292.9 CL600 2.5 0.9 3.4 2.5 0.9 3.4 CNA501 1.7 0.0 1.7 -1.7 0.0 1.7 Manufactured/Re-engined CNA525 4.4 0.8 5.2 4.3 0.8 5.1 Stage 3 JetCNA550 1,7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 I 1.7 CNA560 8.5 0.0 8.5 8.5 0.0 8.5 CNA650 1.7 0.0 '1 1.7 3.4 0.0 3.4 CNA750 6.9 0.0 6.9 6.9 0.0 6.9 DCIO --1-8 J 1.6 3.5, 1.8 1 1.6 1 3.4 EMB145 20.5 1.9 22.4 18.6 ii 2.0 20.6 EMB170 151.3 1 3.6 154.9 145.5 1! 5.6 1.51.1 GLF5 1.7 1 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 HS125 5.1 j 0.0 5.1 5.1 0.0 5.1 IA1125 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 LEAR35 5.1 0.0 5.1 5,1 i 0.0 1 5.1 LEAR45 3'.5 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 3.5 LEAR60 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 MD11GE 2.4 2.8 5.2 2.5 2.6 5.2 MD81 55.8 2.7 i 58.6 17.6 2.9 20.5 MD9025 88.4 j 5.6 94.0 1 89.2 1.1 90.4 Total 1126,8 93.9 1220.6 1238.7 103.4 1342.2 Stage 2 Less than 75,000 FAL200 2.4 1 0.9 3.3 2.5 0-6 1 3.3 Ib. MTOW FAL20A 1.7 1 0.0 1.7 1.7 j 0.0 i 1.7 GII 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.9 1 0.9 1.7 Total 4.9 1.8 6.7 5.0 1.6 6.7 Propeller ATR42 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.7 BEC190 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 BEC200 1.7 1 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 BEC55 0.9 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.7 BEC58 1.7 0.0 1 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 BEC65 10,9 1.0 11.9 10.8 1.1 11.9 BEC80 3.4 0.0 3.4 3.4 0.0 j 3.4 BEC90 16.2 1.0 17.2 17.7 1.2 18.9 BEC99 6.0 0.9 6.9 6.0 0.9 i 6.9 M n M M 2 ffm� 2020 and 2025 Alternative 2 - Airlines Relocate Forecast Aircraft Fleet Mix AVOrnrin rInHit - Totals may differ from_sum due to rouncrin_q. Source: MAC, 2011. Run-up operations were projected to increase from the 2010 Base Case levels in a manner that considers overall operations growth and fleet mix out to 2020 and 2025. The aircraft stage length data were provided by the forecast analysis conducted for the EA. Aircraft types not contained in the INM were modeled with the INM's list of approved substitutions or with aircraft identified as appropriate substitutions through coordination with the FAA. INM Analysis 201_0 {Existing) Runwav Use FAA control of runway use throughout the year for arrival and departure operations at MSP has a notable effect on the noise impact around the airport. The number of people and dwellings impacted by noise is a direct result of the number of operations on a given runway and the land uses off the end of the runway. Historically, prior to the opening of Runway 17/35, arrival and departure operations occurred on the parallel runways at MSP (12L/30R and 12R/30L) in a manner that resulted in approximately 50 percent of the arrival and departure operations occurring to the northwest over South Minneapolis and 50 percent to the southeast over Mendota Heights and Eagan. As a result of the dense residential land uses to the northwest and the predominantly industrial/commercial land uses to the southeast of MSP, focusing arrival and 2020 2025 -Greo U P Air6raft Type Day Night Total Day Night Total CNA208 1.0 j 0.8 1.8 1.0 1 0.8 1.8 GASEPV M20J 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 I 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.7 1*7 PA31 PA34 SAMER4 2.7 0.9 1.7i 0.9 1 0.9 0.0 3.5 1.7 1.7 2.1 i 0.9 1.7 0.9 0.8 0.0j 3.5 1.7 1.7 Propeller SF340 34.0 0.0 I 34.0 1 23.7E 0.0 i '23.7 Total C130 87.1 3.4 7.1 1.6 94.2 5.0 78.2 3.4 i 7.4 i 1.6 85.5 5.0 Military Jet T -38A 1.7 0.0 j 1.7 1 1.7 i 0,0 1.7 Total 5.1 1.6 6.7 5.1 1.6 i 6.7 Total mnt=e- perations" 1223.9-' 104.4 1328.3 1327.1 i 114.0 j 1441.1 - Totals may differ from_sum due to rouncrin_q. Source: MAC, 2011. Run-up operations were projected to increase from the 2010 Base Case levels in a manner that considers overall operations growth and fleet mix out to 2020 and 2025. The aircraft stage length data were provided by the forecast analysis conducted for the EA. Aircraft types not contained in the INM were modeled with the INM's list of approved substitutions or with aircraft identified as appropriate substitutions through coordination with the FAA. INM Analysis 201_0 {Existing) Runwav Use FAA control of runway use throughout the year for arrival and departure operations at MSP has a notable effect on the noise impact around the airport. The number of people and dwellings impacted by noise is a direct result of the number of operations on a given runway and the land uses off the end of the runway. Historically, prior to the opening of Runway 17/35, arrival and departure operations occurred on the parallel runways at MSP (12L/30R and 12R/30L) in a manner that resulted in approximately 50 percent of the arrival and departure operations occurring to the northwest over South Minneapolis and 50 percent to the southeast over Mendota Heights and Eagan. As a result of the dense residential land uses to the northwest and the predominantly industrial/commercial land uses to the southeast of MSP, focusing arrival and departure operations to the southeast has long been the preferred configuration from a noise reduction perspective. Since the introduction of Runway 17/35 at MSP in 2005, another opportunity exists to route aircraft over an unpopulated area - the Minnesota River Valley. With use of the Runway 17 Departure Procedure, westbound departure operations off Runway -17 are routed such that they -avoid close -in residential areas southwest of the runway. Thus, use of Runway 17 for departure operations is the second preferred operational configuration (after Runways 12L and 12R) for noise reduction purposes. Table A9 provides the runway use percentages for 2010. Table A9 2010 Runwav Use Percentaqes Operation Type Runway_Day Night Total Arrivals 4 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 12L 19.9% 14.0% 19.4% 12R 19.1% 24.8% 19.6% 17 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.9% 0.4% 30L 17.9% 36.4% 19.4% 30R 22.2% 22.1% 22.2% 35 20.6% 1.8% 19.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Departures 4 12L 0.1% 12.6% 0.1% 17.4% 0.1% 12.9% 12R 6.5% 25.4% 8.0% 17 21.8% 14.2% 21.2% 22 0.4% 0.6% 0.4% 30L 26.2% 22.4% 25.9% 30R 32.5% 19.9% 31.6% 35 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Overall 4 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 12L 16.2% 15.6% 16.2% 12R 12.8% 25.1% 13.8% 17 10.9% 6.8% 10.6% 22 0.3% 0.7% 0.4% 30L 22.0% 29.7% 22.6% 30R 27.3% 21.1% 26.8% 35 10.3% 0.9% 9.6% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Note: Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Source: MACNOMS data was used to calculate runway use for 2010. INM Analysis Forecast Runway Use Tables A10, A11 and Al2 provide the 2020 and 2025 No Action, Airlines Remain Alternative and the Airlines Relocate Alternative runway use percentages. The SIMMOD use assumptions that resulted in the runways' use percentages included the consideration of the Runway Use System (RUS) at MSP, as well as the FAA's runway se-le-c'tion patterns 'related to various olY6ra'ti6n-al'flo-Ws, weather conditions, and aircraft destination and origin locations. Table A10 2020 and 2025 No Action Alternative Forecast Runwav Use Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding Source: MAC, 2011. 2020 2025 Operation Type Runway Day Night Total Day Night 1 Total Arrivals 4 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12L 19.3% 10.9% 18.6% 19.0% 12.1% 18.5% .12R 19.6% 1 28.2% 20.3% 19.8% 26.7% 20.4% 17 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 22 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 18.7% 39.1% 20.4% 19.1% 38.2% 20.6% 30R 21-1% 21.3% 21.1% 21.0% 22.6% 21.1% 35 20.9% 1 0.0% 19.2% 20.6% 0.0% 19.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% i 100.0% 100.0% Departures 4 0.1% OA% 0.1% 0.1% i 0.1% 1 0.1% 12L 12.8% 16.9% 13.1% 13.0% 19.8% 13.6% 12R 7.5% 26.6% 9.0% 6.8% 23.1% 8.1% 17 21.3% 14.4% 20.7% 21.9% 14.3% 1 21.3% 22 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 26.2% 21.9% 25.99/o 26.8% 22.8% 26.5% 30R 31.6% 19.6% 30.7% 30.9% I 19.5% 30.0% 35 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 10 0.0% 1_100.0% 100.0% Overall 4 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 1 0.1% 0.1% 12L 16.0% 13.9% 15.9% 16.1% 1 16.0% 16.0% 12R 13.5% 1 27.4% 14.6% 13.3% 24.9% 14.2% 17 10.7% 7.1% 10.4% 11.0% i 7.2% 10.7% 22 0.4% 0.4%: 0.4% A 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 22.5% 30.6% 23.1% 23.0% 3 30.4% 1 23.5% 30R 26.3% 20.5% 25.9% 25.9% 21.0% 25.5% 35 10.4% i 0.0% 9.6% 10.3%% 0.0% 9,5 Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.001, 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding Source: MAC, 2011. Table A11 2020 and 2025 Alternative I - Airlines Remain Forecast Runway Use Notes: - Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. 2020 2025 Operation Type Runway Day I Night Total Day Night Total Arrivals 4 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12L 19.2% 10.9% 18.5% 19.1% 11.4% 18.5% 12R 19.7% 28.3% 20.4% 19.8% 27.8% 20.4% 17 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 22 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% j 0.4% 30L 18.8% 39.3% 20.4% 19.4% 39.5% 21.0% 30R 21.1% 21.2% 21.1% 21.1% 20.9% 21.1% 35 20.7% 0.0% 19.1% 20.2% 0.0% 18.6% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100,0% 100.0% 100.0% Departures 4 0.1%- 0A%- 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 12L 12.8% 15.8% 13.1% 13.1% 1 19.8% 13.6% 12R 7.5% 27.4% 9.0% 6.8% 24.3% 8.2% 17 21.3% 14.4% 20.7% 21.9% 13.9% 21.2% 22 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 26.3% 1 21.2% 25.9% 26.9% 22.0% 26.5% 30R 31.5% i 20.6% 30.7% 30.8% 19.5% 29.9% 35 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Overall 4 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 12L 16.0% 13.3% 15.8% 16.1% 15.7% 16.0% 12R 13.6% 27.8% 14.7% 13.3% 26.0% 14.3% 17 10.7% 7.1% 10.4% 11.0% 7.1% 10.7% 22 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 22.6% 30.3% 23.2% 23.1% 30.6% 23.7% 30R 26.3% 20.9% 25.9% 26.0% 20.2% 25.5% 35 104% i 00% 9.6% 10.1% 0.0% 9.3% 7 Total 1 �OO - 0'/�21 0 0 - �0% 10 �00 -/2 Notes: - Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. Table Al2 2020 and 2025 Alternative 2 - Airlines Relocate Forecast Runway Use I Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. The RUS is a major factor in the nighttime runway use percentages. However, in the low demand time periods during the nighttime hours, the FAA will use the parallel runway that is closest to the airport arrival or departure gate of an aircraft. As a result, arrival percentages to the south parallel runway (Runway 12R/30L) during nighttime hours are notably higher than on the north parallel runway (Runway 12L/30R). This has an effect on the arrival noise contour lobes off the ends of the south parallel runway. 2020 2025 Operation Type- Runway Day Night- Total Pay Night Total - Arrival 4 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% i 0.0% 1 0.0% 12L 19.3% 9.0% 18.5% 19.2% I 10.3% 1 18.5% 12R 19.5% 1 30.2% 20.4% 19.6% 28.9% 20.4% 17 0.1% 1 0.0% 1 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 22. 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 18.4% 41.1% 20.2% 18.8% 41.2 % i 20.6% 30R 21.3% 19.4% 1 21.2% 21.2% 19.2% s 21.0% 35 21.0% 0.0% 19.3% 20.7% 1 0.0% 19.1% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100,0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Departure- 4 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0,1% 12L 12.8% 14.9% 13.0% 13.1% 19.0% 13.5% 12R 7.6% 1 27.1% '9.1% 6.8% 23.7% 81% 17 21.2% 16.0% 20.8% 21.9% 14.8% i 21.3% 22 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4%. 0.4% 0.4% 30L 26.5% 23.1% 26.3% 26.6% 21.4% 26.2% 30R 31.3% 18.3% 30.3% 31.1% 20.6% 30.2% 35 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.0% Total 100.0% 1 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 1 100.0% Overall 4 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 1 0.1% 12L 16.1 % 11.9% 15.7% 16.1% 14.7% 1 16.0% 12R 13.5% 28.6% 14.7% 13.2% 26.3% 1 14.3% 17 10.6% 7.9% 10.4% 11.0% 7.5% 1 10.7% 22 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 30L 22.5% 32.2% 23.2% 22.7% 31.2% 1 23.4% 30R 26.3% 18.9% 25.7% 26.1% 19.9% 25.6% 35 105% 00% j 9.7% 10.4% 00% 1 95% Total I Total may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Source: MAC, 2011. The RUS is a major factor in the nighttime runway use percentages. However, in the low demand time periods during the nighttime hours, the FAA will use the parallel runway that is closest to the airport arrival or departure gate of an aircraft. As a result, arrival percentages to the south parallel runway (Runway 12R/30L) during nighttime hours are notably higher than on the north parallel runway (Runway 12L/30R). This has an effect on the arrival noise contour lobes off the ends of the south parallel runway. - () - INIVII Analysis Exist 1ht Tracks and Usage The flight �tracks US�d @O� the US� Of iOdiVi�U�� �CkS iD 2010 (Existing " Conditions) GP� detailed in the Annual Noise C0Dt0U[ Report online at: The 2010 Base Case |NM backs were Used for the 2020 and 2025 INM forecast - n�tk/' H0VV Hl fnn���St�iF����tvpetrack -' ----�nniS���8�VSi�fn[8UOfth����[ �S. However, 8 '' use distribution was developed using actual Ope[8tOOS distributions OD those tracks at MSP from September 2010 to September 2011. As @ result of De8[ mid-air collision to the northwest of MSP in 88DteDlbe[ 2010, the FAA renewed efforts tOcross operations OOthe gnDUOd rather than in the @i[ This [�SU|t�� in @ higher concentration of northbound Dp9[@�oDs OD the ' north parallel [UDv@y (Runway 12L/30R) and SOUthbOUOd Op8[GtiOOs on the south parallel nUnvYGV /RUDVVay 12R/30L\. TOensure the forecast noise GD8lySi3 - Q�nfU[ed the effect that this had on the track US8ge. the 8D8|VSiS US8S the September 2010to September 2011 flight track distribution percentages for the forecast noise analysis. TO: K88P Noise OversightCommittee (N(}C) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager —Noise,EnvimnmentandPlanning SUBJECT: UPDATE ON N-O'y'S'E'&4EK0BER NOC COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVES' DISCUSSION WITH DENNIS &QCGRANN DATE: January 4.2O12 At the July 20, 2011 NOC meeting Mc J` Spensley, President Vfthe South Metro Airport Council (S�NAA[), addressed Committee regarding possible health effects related to aircraft noise. /n response to Mr. Gpeno|ey's comments, NDC Representative John Quincy and Co -Chair Vern Wilcox agreed to contact the National Organization to Ensure a Sound -Controlled Environment (N�0'/8Eto gather information on what efforts are underway at other U.G. airports` on h�'-) a '/pic It was agreed that they would repreportback to the Committee with their findin findings todetermine a possible path forward for the N(]C on this issue. On January 17' 2012 at Richfield City Hall at 12:00 P.M. the NDC Connnnun�v � ~ Representatives will be receiving a briefing � from Mr. Dennis K8oGnann N{}- | �-' ~ Executive Dioector, on the status of the topic of aircraft noise health effects from a —` '' ---^- national perspective. Mc McGrannwill be invited to attendthe January 18' 2812 NOC meeting to pa John R. Mazzitello ��q�[�d<[�d.&� q��mo�> �� ( �--'' Sent: Wednesday, January 11,ZOI2I:26PK4 (Brien.Kuppert@de\tezom); 0dfrey.h rt@.de|ta. con0. Bill Underwood oU To: (wilUao.e.undenwood@de|ta.con), Council Member [yndeeFie|ds (cfie|ds@ckvofeaganzon��Counci|K4embe/]ohn8ergnnan ' nry (tomfitz99 0kbergnan@frnntiernet.net);[ounci| Member Quincy0ohn4uint Council Member Tom Fitzho y@min»eaPo|is n ov)^; @ao|.con);[ound\ Member Vern Wilcox (vFyi|cox@AOLcom);Darnen Docherty jdocherty@dedexzon);Dianne Miller (dniUer@citvofeagon.com); Elizabeth Petsche\ ` (esihuspgcomcast.neU;KaoenErozo(kanen.erazogsuncountryzon);TonyFoste/ (tonyfoster27@gn«ai|.com) ] h 4gfoagov)�]ustin Miller, Anderson, ��damKyan��negiona|e\\teznm); (Dawn ngra ann � ' �c� Tom; Bi''ne� David; Bnivin' Dan; Brandt Lindquist (b|indquist0�besdetsinticnm); Brian ' adesG/awe Hoffman (Brian Hoffman); CadRydeen (cod'n'deen@faagmv'; Ch Costello ([CoeUo hvofhchfie|dorg);Cindy (cgrave@ci.app|e-vaUeymnus);Christine Greene (cind nberDennisKadden(dmadden@o.inver- ~igreenegfaagov);[nund|M g/ove-heightsmn.us);Cbunci|4emberMory]eanneSchneeman ( �disno�A�comcast.neU; Council Member Steve Peterson" ' i b| i t mn us)� Council Member Ukan Duggan (speterson0�c. oom »g »n� � ' 8oberg (dbobe/g@ci.b|oom ingt on.mn.us), David ' (tosduggan@hotnai|-con); David Sloan (davidss|nan@'sn.com);Fe|~er,]enn;Foster, Gregory; Fuhrnenn'Roy; 6iesen, Jason; Gretchen Keenan (gekeenen/@mnn-con), gwen.qodfrev_faagmv;Hamie|, Uason.|indah|@ci.posemounLnn.us)']_eneUe Jeffrey; Hogan' Patrick; Jason U d h| Teppen0teppengdjnver-grove-hei hts.nn.us); Joe Lynch; John R .a_ziteUo' Ki|ion, / ) \ m�aveM�suncount��cnn��0ng Rick; Larry Lee Mitch; KimVVeaver(Wm ' ` ' - |' Tammy; Nelson, Lynn Moore; e»ce `Larry.Lee@db|ooming1on.mnus); Lewis, Jennifer, John; NvreqAmanda; Pam Unytrenko(pdnytrenko@cihchfie|d.mnus);Paul Kogush (pau).ogushVi.minneapo|is.mn.us);LebedofPei|en,Usa;ProbstDennis;Rehkanp, Sandie Thone; Scott Schaefer PauL Rick King (hckNng8�mindsphng.conn); an e on�� ' ' 5lnois Kron' [hhstene' Skip Nienhaus (scott.schaefer@de\ta.con);Scnvrnnski, Melissa; (ski poienhaus@cibu/nsviUe.mnus); Swanson, Dana; TLawe||@d.app\e-va}|ey.mn.us' TUGHTFO0T@ENVIR0LAWGKDUPIOM; Tom Hansen Hedges (Lhedges@cityofeaganzon); (tono.hansen@cibornsvi||�.rnnus);Tom Vandeh/oort, Shane; Will Eginton (oweginLon@yahoozonn) Subject: NOC PBN Update MSP Noise Oversight Committee Members, I 8Dlwriting tO provide you with an uDdateOOthe P8�nO0@nCC Based �J i 8tk}D P[OCRdU[e (PRN) update design effort UOdepw8V by the FAA. ASI indicated in the memorandum for agenda item *5 x / the j@DU8ry 18. 2012 K]| meeting packet, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conducted operational stakeholder (including FAA and Airlines) De8tiD�� OD jGDu8rV 4 and 5, 2012. At the meetings the operational stakeholders [8�Sed isSU89 and CODC8[nS regarding the draft procedures. \]OfO[fUDgt8lV. the iSSUeS remain UOPeSOV� and d @s such the draft procedure tracks will not he m presented fothe N(]CODJanuary 18 18� ��[)(� meeting ��t��{iD� the OUtSf@O�i�� { ' @F\ F!VdeeOwiUbe providing @h[��DgGtthe January -- �^3U9S and the plan for moving forward with this initiative. 1 VOL Miniieapoli-s-SaiTitPdu]T-ntom bbal Aitport + t 6040 - 28th Aw,,J)Ue,, South - Minneapolis, MN 5,5450-2799 Phone. (612) 726-8100 T 0 o S_ + 'V t lnpool� C, December 15, 2011 cip Affected Municipality Mailing List RE: 2012-2018 Capital Improvement Program Metropolitan Airports Commission December 5, 2011, Planning, Development, & Environment Meeting Minutes & December 19, 2011 Full Commission Agenda To Whom It'May Concern, The Planning, Development, and Environment (PD&E) Committee of the Metropolitan Airports Commission on Monday, December 5, 2011 recommended to the full Commission adoption of the 2012-2018 Capital Improvement Program with no modifications; therefore, the spreadsheet and project narratives previously sent to you remain unchanged. The PD&E meeting minutes from December can be found at www metroairports org/maG/meetings/pde.aspx and the agenda for the December 19, 2011 Commission meeting can be found atwww .rnetroairr)orts.orq/mac/meetinqslfc.as . Sincerel Robert J . Vorpahl, P_ Sr. Project Manager/Program Development RJV/Irk Enclosures Dennis Probst, MAC Gary Warren, MAC CIP File PD&E Packet The Metropolitan Airports Comwdssion is an affirmative action employer. www_m,q1)air1)Qrt.C,-,)m ROi.­rAirpurts: AIRLAKE . ANOICk COUNTY/BLAINE . CRYSTAL. FLYING CLOUD *LAKE ELMO -SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN John R. Mazzitello From: Justin Miller Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 2:02 PM To: John R. Mazzitello Subject: FW: Joint meeting with MH and IGH ARC Do you want me to forward this to David, or do you want to? - - - Justin Miller City Administrator City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 (651)255-1153 justinm@mendota-heights.com From: Dianne Miller fmailto•DMiller(&cityofeagan coml Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:16 AM To: Justin Miller; 'jteppen@invergroveheights.org' Subject: Joint -meeting with MH and IGH ARC - Good morning, - The Eagan Airport Relations Commission (ARC) would like to host a joint meeting with the Mendota Heights ARC and Inver Grove Heights ARC on Tuesday, May 8 at 7 p.m. in the Eagan City Council Chambers. We typically have a joint meeting between the Eagan and Mendota Heights ARCS every couple of years. It has been about two years since we last met at Mendota Heights City Hall. This year, Eagan's ARC thought it would be beneficial to include the Inver Grove Heights ARC as well. The purpose of the meeting would be to dialogue about airport issues facing each city, and determine if there are any issues that could be addressed cooperatively amongst the three cities. The Eagan ARC will be preparing an agenda for the meeting, and input from MH and IGH is certainly encouraged. The hope is for the meeting to be informal by nature, and be a conversation of sorts between the three respective commissions. Can you let me know if your airport commissions would be interested in this kind of meeting, and if so, will May 8 at 7 p.m. be an acceptable time? Thank you both! Dianne Miller I Assistant City Administrator I City of Eagan ,,. of Ea R Eagan Municipal Center 13830 Pilot Knob Road I Eagan, MN 55122 1651/675-5014 1 651/675-5012 (Fax) I dmillerPcityofeagan.com THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. r c 12L % OF NIGHT OPS JAN JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG NOV DEC 2009 2010 2.6% 4.3% 2009 13.1% 25.3% 36.0% 22.8% 27.6% 26.6% 16.1% 16.2% 16.2% 20.4% 1.6% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2.0% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2010 16.0% 28.6% 16.2% 21.7% 8.8% 19.0% 20.2% 20.7% 11.2% 21.6% 2011 27.1% 25.3% 19.2% 23.5% 28.1% 42.2% 31.0% 24.1% 16.7% MEAN 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% 21.6% UCL 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% 36.5% StDev 6.48% 6.48% - 6.48% 6.48% 6.48% 6.48% 6.48% 6.48% 6.48% .6.48% 12R % OF NIGHT OPS JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 2009 2010 2011 9.4% 25.4% 22.4% 12.3% 31.1% 20.2% 25.3% 40.2% 37.4% 15.2% 41.8% 32.5% 14.1% 51.1% 26.6% 14.3% 28.4% 21.3% 12.4% 29.7% 22.4% 23.0% 32.2% 29.4% 60.1% 31.4% 37.0% 23.1% 25.6% 39.3% 39.3% 23.1% 38.3% 16.2% 34.3% 12L % OF TOTAL OPS JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG OCT NOV DEC 2009 2010 7.6% 11.6% 10.4% 12.4% 16.7% 13.0% 10.8% 13.3% 11.6% 19.2% 10.5% 13.0% 8.3% 12.1% 7.1% 14.4% 10.0% 9.0% 13.6% 12.7% 11.1% 11.2% 2011 MEAN UCL StDev 10.2% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 9.9% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 14.2% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 14.2% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 16.1% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 21.7% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 14.7% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 10.3% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 13.8% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 11.95/. 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 12.4% 18.8% 3.20% 12R % OFTOTAL OPS JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 2009 2010 2011 4.6% 5.5% 6.4% 5.4% 8.9% 6.0% 11.7% 8.4% 8.7% 6.0% 7.9% 9.0% 6.6% 12.0% 8.3% 6.8% 8.7% 8.3% 5.0% 7.7% 6.4% 15.1% 8.8% 5.3% 15.1% 8.0% 4.3% 22.5% 4.6% 7.5% 6.9% 7.4% 7.5% 7.9% 7.7% North of Corridor JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT NOV DEC 2009 2010 2.6% 4.3% 3.5% 2.7% 3.4% 1.7% 2.9% 3.3% 2.0% 1.3% 2.7% 2.4% 0.9% 2.7% 0.6% 1.5% 0.2% 1.5% 1.29/. 3A% 2.7% 1.8% 2011 MEAN UCL StDev 1.6% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2.0% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2.6% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2.2% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 3.2% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 3.7% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2.7% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 3.4% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 1.9% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 1.4% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% 2.3% 4.3% 0.97% Axis Title O p tNn OR dl Ln Ln in > z 0) 00 Ln -n m 03 90 90 10 1-10 0 00 a) z > -n NO 00 00 Ot b. cz 11 OR � m 0 V m cn j Ln M z [Ln w 00 b. > G) a 00 :-j P, NJ �j 0 in 10 a) 0Ln C) Z in p io o < Ij (D m 1-0 0 U.) Ul i » p p 0 0 0 NO a�001 ol Lo t,j ul ON \:P. lz'� Pli OR U.) uj o m w t1i Ln 1.4 bo Un \ r,j Lrl NJ Lij Ili L'i GI toUj N Ln W U.) w r1i LU uj f -A bi 10 OR to �001 C.. IQ Ln p p p b N 20 Nj 0 0 10 OR ol 0,0, -0,0 P \ \1.4 I -A w cl) > 0�0 w 0 > W bo 0 on I- (3) tD Ln z L ui p bo a0 b) 0 Ln o 0 p .cWn O � 0 b o o o z a Z A r m m I-� � N O 'T1 D Yl m m m 000 C rt C Gl Z z O /0000 m n r I N NJ o D z o O O O O O T 7 T T T J,T TT 'rT ago 9 c FP 0 6� 9 �r z 09 T 7 4z -o9 ✓G 7109 ✓G/ �9 90,0 9 SP p� OHO 9 yC'(20 N 0PC p\ b9 p ✓d�T "n O z �PG't G) o = o 9p^T m 0 ?7ay170 ✓G,'TO ✓G/T0 m '11-1 O SPpT m OCT 4 0 207 Z OPC.T d�T P6Y 2ia^7 9p^T 'LJdyt G07 ✓G/T �4R S Pp O� � � z m 3 m 0 v O O O O O T 7 T T T J,T TT 'rT c 0 z T 7 C1 O Jan -09 Feb -09 LnQ VII N O o Un O c O � O Mar -09 c Apr -09 May -09 z Jun -09 Jul -09 Aug -09 < Sep -09 - Oct -09 Nov -09 Dec -09 Jan -10 Feb -10 I -a IV Mar -10 r Apr -10 c May -10 Jun -10 Tf Jul -10 Aug -10 Sep -10 r Oct -10 Nov -10 m Dec -10 Jan -11 Feb -11 Mar -11 Apr -11 May -11 Jun -11 Jul -11 Aug -11 Sep -11 Oct -11 Nov -11 I �v p o2 < z o 0 0 O O N 1" N N W W ;A A N Ln O N O O to l7 0 0 0 Jan -09 Feb -09 Mar -09 Apr -09 May -09 Jun -09 Jul -09 Aug -09 Sep -09 Oct -09 Nov -09 Dec -09 Jan -10 Feb -10 (DV Mar -10 Apr-10 May -10 Jun -10 ta z Jul -10 O R Aug -10 � Sep -10 0 efi Oct -10 =' m Nov -10 (') Dec -10 Jan -11 G Feb -11 Mar -11 Apr -11 May -11 Jun -11 Jul -11 Aug -11 Sep -11 Oct -11 Nov -11 I v z o Z o rt m O v m w rt O r: O O N N Lf IR N b " U, w w b O -P. to Lq F c rn 03 rF rn rn Table of Contents for November 2011 �- 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 Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL 36-38 A Product of the MAC Noise Program Office MSP Complaints by City - City Arrival Departure Other Numb,er of Complaints NumberoT Complainants % of Tota! Complaints: MINNEAPOLIS 2 41 r 5 771 82 515 1416 72 47.2% EAGAN 0 2 0 730 ` 17 160 909 17 30.3"/0 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 0 0 - 0 162 16 0 _,...::: 180 10 6% INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 0 p 0 7 .. 0 154 161 2 5.4% EDINA 0 0 0 86 ': 0 14'.':. 100 3 3.3% BLOOMINGTON 0 0' - ':: 1 5 450 ';', GO 10 2% APPLE VALLEY 0 9 0 7 0 32 '. 48 10 1.6"/0 EDEN PRAIRIE 0 0 0 0 0 45 45 1 1.5% RICHFIELD 0 a). 0 3 9 I9 ,', 31 3 1% SAINTLOUIS PARK 0 =:28 '. '. 0 0 ` 0 3 31 2 1% SAVAGE 0 0" 0 1- 1 0 7 `: 8 1 0.3% SAINT PAUL 0 0 0 0 1 2' '' 3 3 0.1% ROBBINSDALE 0 0 0 0 ': 1 1 ::. 2 2 0.1% ROSEMOUNT 0 0 ,' 0 1 0.__ 0 1 1 0% BURNSVILLE 0 ;0. 1 0 0 0 '. 1 1 0"/0 CHANHASSEN 0 i 0 0 0 0:' :. 1 t 0% PLYMOUTH0 .0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0% LAKEViLLE 0 1 0 0 :' 0 0>' 1 1 0% Total 84: ;.1780 a35 29`99' 741 Nature of MSP Complaints of Day Complaint Total Total Early/Late 35 843 Engine Run-up Z 124 Excessive Noise 134 .2610 Frequency 94 .2093 Ground Noise 2 157.: Helicopter 0 3 . Low Flying 20 .1617 Stnictural Disturbance 5 679 Other 4 187 . Total 8609 Note: Shaded Columns represent MSP complaints filed via the Internet. Sum of V. Total of Complaints may not equal 100;9 due to romtdine.. 'As of May 2005, the MSP Complaints by City report includes multiple complaint dneripuns; per individual complaint. Therefore, the number of --- complaint descriptors may be mare than the number of reported complaints. Time of Day Total Time Total Airlake 0000-0559 11 79 0600-0659 7 .121 0700-1159 36 777 1200-1559 20 413 1600-1959 40 842 2000-2159 6 333 2200-2259 17 270 2300-2359 3 24 Total 2999 Complaints by Airport Airport Total MSP 2999 Airlake 0 Anoka 45 Crystal 5 Flying Cloud 3326 Lake Elmo 0 St. Paul 3 Mise. 0 Total 6378 Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 - 1 - MSP International Airport Aviation Noise Complaints for November 2011 ry J�� .��,t ' (.�.'e,t"�.t''3 ` t s :j �`•'4' Br"ookl n Park Q;rth O.a'ks gran Maplet Grove Y r �, l N V dv �!7 T roo,kly�n ° r V `- � ''w' '. a -�, yd,.'"".�"yy-"" i t i � i � 4 ' • �'}� .;'l S� t t t x' y y r:1 n- r$" ��3IUI�(iinci 4' b 1CrjtSt_ " Ji� ,^ti'""r" "","-�"3 "`-•"�'`:'�> �y . �` _�i �-iy; ^m`` uth,turkk�} GQder naVr, F x, aovIt�7Le111 R- 14 �t# R , MaQni p dea1w/Ots, , ei lM; .; f : ely ( � a w— r s }meq i 1 b u i w Oreno�r�`iNayi&ata 'f + M E s Minneapalis� lz- StzLaui ParkI® , , ,t ,,,,1` Minnetonka s� Jy„✓�i t`5...7..�. 7d it, - � ��� , 9 �, J p cc� . F. � ¢E,. � H i x. . TAX ..,>�� c3 �''.,•= ti '� �; GD C� e.'1� � a"r,, :it r�,,, F ,C,7� %~ � J 3 % 7d ,� i 5 151PP) Rl ER t' Y M Chanhassen .rc. f'ra'ir.keF, 2F y 1 ,4 f ; J''ase• � d"t{�54 P' a � 3� �. Y f � Stif.-.. � jkb''k'r*�g � ft �-t 3. Bloornmg o�yn T _ ha � ka I 51 Jf 1 -` Burnsvillea rJacks:on Tp: r 'sir, Sarva e ' rt k Qu�sui,rylfalleY oserrounIle let �. Pnor 1 -D (; a .0 t Empire Twp. Spring Lake Twp Farming9r;j tqrt I.uJ. �^i ^.—.tee.—a-....w ....^'�^`*•,i........, i ..,_.,.........�. •.r,�... ........Y.. i3 -tv iia:^ .. ..,....... I Number of Complaints per Address 1-5 6-13 14-28 29-46 47-83 84-114 115-214 215-477 - 2 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Available Hours for Runway Use November 2011 (Source: FAA Aviation Systems rei jurrnance rvicuwa vcuc� All Hours y M AS t Maul i -n tiPl' 1'� F � Meld 1 jig , i kr F rd Rt!01111 t 17 1 BIo©I I Iii If Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 3 All Operations Runway Use Report November 2011` RVUY Arrival! Departure Overflight Area: Gount . ` Operafions; Percent Last Year Count Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 2 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2543 16.5% 3461 19.8% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 2505 16.2% 3406 19.5% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 1 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3252 21.1 % 3456 19.8% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3860 25% 3950 22.6% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 3262 21.2% 3176 18.2% To #a1 Arrivals 15422 1,7452 RWY Arrwal! Departurej Overflight Area Count OperationsPercent Last Year: ' Count Last Year Percent 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0%° 8 p% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 1838 11.9% 2214 12.7% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 1152 7.5% 1282 7.4% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 2801 18.2% 3742 21.5% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 3 0% 15 0.1% 30L --Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 5176 33.60/o 4445 25.5% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield ____44_52__28_.90/o 5704 32.80/6 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% Total Departures.,, 15422 17410 Total Operations 30844 34862 `"Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. -4- Carrier Jet Operations Runway Use Report November 2011 ` i- t .paul 1 p1 a iE�PrIPWE 55 » Rf�c#�field go E... 5 €i r `:E i ' l'Fi P W✓ � 222 i 2. i of ti e f of mEng�to Eagan:. �1i J ounts. Please refer to the interactive reports at www.macnoise.com for detailed information reg araing alraan qP... "Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Sum of R U S % may not equa1100% due to rounding. -5- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 November 2.1.1 M.S.P Carrier Jet Fleet Composition Type FAR Part 36 Take - Off Noise Level' •Aircraft Description Stage .. Count* Percent DC10 101.8 McDonnell Douglas DC10 3 89 0.3% DC9Q 98.1 McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3 3 290 1% B72Q 97.6 Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3 3 14 0.1 % 8777 96.2 Boeing 777 3 60 0.2% DC8Q 95.7 • _ ___ McDonnell Douglas DC8 Re -manufactured 3 40 0.1% A330 95.6 Airbus Industries A330 3' 62 0.2% A310 92.9 Airbus Industries A310 3 2 0% MD11 92.8 McDonnell Douglas MD11 3 134 0.5% 8767 92.1 Boeing 767-200 3 218 0.8% MD80 91.5 McDonnell Douglas MD80 3 1002 3.6% A300 91.5 Airbus Industries A300 3 6 0% 8757 91.4 Boeing 757-200 3 1456 5.2% A321 89.8 Airbus Industries A321 3 116 0.4% B734 88.9 Boeing 737-400 3 16 0.1% 8738 88.6 Boeing 737-800 3 1387 5% 8739 88.4 Boeing 737-900 3 62 0.2% A320 87.8 Airbus Industries A320 3 2941 10.5% B735 87.7 Boeing 737-500 3 64 0.2% 8733 87.5 Boeing 737-300 3 378 1.4% A319 87.4 Airbus Industries A319 3 1961 7% E190 86.9 Embraer 190 3 47 0.2% B7377 85.9 Boeing 737-700 3 794 2.8% CRJ9 84.6 Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-900 3 1994 7.1% MD90 84.2 McDonnell Douglas MD90 3 1441 5.2% 8717 84.1 Boeing 717 3 328 1.2% E170 83.7 Embraer 170 3 4027 14.4% E145 83.7 Embraer 145 3 500 1.8% CRJ7 83.2 Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-700 3 1122 4% F100 81.8 Fokker 100/Fokker 70 3 1 0% CRJ 79.8 Canadair Regional Jet CRJ 3 118 0.4% CRJ1 79.8 Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-100 3 259 0.9°/a CRJ2 78.7 Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-200 3 6965 25% E135 77.9 Embraer 135 3 3 0% J328 76.5 Fairchild Dornier 328 1 3 8 0% :Totals .27,905 , ....:.:.., ,,tea:::: - -,y-, u, cq- iuuw due to rounding. NOTE 1: 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. -The Provided Noise levels from FAR Part 36 are the loudest levels documented for the representative 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. NOTE 2: Due to flight tracking data enhancements, the air carrier operations counts for Last Year included in this report have been updated to reflect revised aircraft type counts. Please refer to the interactive reports at www.macnoise.com for detailed information regarding aircraft types. **Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. - 6 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Current Last Year Count.,' "Percent ' Percent' Stage 2 0 0% 0% Stage 3 304 1.1% 4% Stage 3 Manufactured 27601 98.9% 960/6 Total Stage 3,1* 27905 NOTE 1: 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. -The Provided Noise levels from FAR Part 36 are the loudest levels documented for the representative 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. NOTE 2: Due to flight tracking data enhancements, the air carrier operations counts for Last Year included in this report have been updated to reflect revised aircraft type counts. Please refer to the interactive reports at www.macnoise.com for detailed information regarding aircraft types. **Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. - 6 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. -7- Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.- Runway Use Report November 2011'* RWY IV Departure Overflight Areae. ...,..Count Operations Percent Last,.Yeart ,Cq6nt,er.ce.n.. Last Year 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington o 0% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 98 14.2% 128 16.8% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 186 27% 188 24.7% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% _-0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 0 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 269 39.1% 243 31.9% 30R Arr —Eagan/Mendota Heights 135 19.6% 201 26.4% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 0 0% 2 0.3% T 61 o a ArriVa s 688.762 RWY Departure 6' irin ght AreaOperations Count Te*rcent ,Cou'nt 7, P' erc' n t 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 0 00/. 0 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 29 16.8% 25 11.6% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 64 37% 48 22.3% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 31 17.9% 18 8.4% 22 Dep So Richfield/Bloomington 0 0% 1 0.5% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 40 23.1% 65 30.2% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 9 5.2% 58 27% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% T otall Departures 173 �'21 5: T ti Total Operations 977 Vote: Due to flight [racking data enhancements, the air carrier operations counts for Last Year included in this report have been updated to reflect revised aircraft tvae Irl **Note: Flight [racking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Sum ofRUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. -8- Report Geherated: 12/29/2011 11:40 unts. 90 so 70 �2 Ct 60 rD 50 ci 40 P 30 20 10 0 IL's LC Lc� <> W U--) W-, -R -H 'n -:t S 'n r. n M R LL, LC, W, k`j -,.j (�j C- C�j C, ) <> <> <> <> <> CJ SV C+1 <> Yi M- e December 2011 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. December 2011 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations in-qn n m to R -nn a m Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Manufactured q.Airline Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 3 Total Delta (DAL) 0 0 96 96 Sun Country,(SCX) 0 0 94 94 UPS (UPS) 0 0 89 8-9 FedEx (FDX) 0 18 49 67 American (AAL) 0 0 54 54 — US Airways (USA) 0 0 40 40 — Airtran (TRS) 0 0 31 31 Continental (COA) 0 0 22 22 Southwest (SWA) 0 0 22 22 Total 0 18 497 515 Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 -10- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 December 2011 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations 1215 22:35 A/D A Carver Sun Country Flight Number 246 Eqyipment:.' Stage 3. B738 M ..Da'ysof ,, rati.qnRouting MThFSu JFK I MSP 1215 22:35 A Sun country 284 —1234 B737 —M MWTh SEA MSP 426 B738 22:35 --2-2-39 A —A Southwest —Delta B 7-3 7 —M MTWThF TUS DEN MSP B737 M MTW LAX MSP 2034 B753 M MWThFSSu ATL MSP —M TWThFSu 22:39 A Delta 2034 B757 M T ATL MSP —F 22-42 1 A Sun Country 258 8737 M FSu BOS MSP SFO MSP 22:53 22:55 A 1 A Airtran Sun ('Wi—intry 869 F� 4n.4 8737 D-7':) -7 M MTVIJThFSSU ATL MSP -10- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 22:56 A —A Delta -Delta 1215 B738 M TVWVThFSu ,I, 1vior DTW MSP 22:56 —A 1215 738 - —M —M DTW MSP 0--57 — --0-57 Sun Country 426 B738 —M Th LAX MSP A Sun Country 426 -106 B737 M MTW LAX MSP 23:03 A —D Sun Country 8738 —M TWThFSu LAS MSP 23-11 —A UPS —Country 0495 B757 —M —F 23-30 --23:35 —A Sun 396 8737 M —MTTh SFO MSP Sun Country 384 B738M Ssu RSW MSP 23:35 —23:50 A American 1 284 M D80 M MTWThFSu DFW MSP A American— 1284 MD80 —M S — DFW MSP 23:57 A US Airways —Delta 984 A320 —M ThT—Su CLTMSP 23:57 A 300 MD90 —M MTWfh—FSSu ATLMSP23:57 A US Airways 984 A319 M S CLT MSP 23:59 A US Airways 55 A321 —M MTWThFSu PHX MSP 6-6--05 A American 3731 CRJ —M MTWWS­ ORDMSP00:34 A —A Delta 1568 B738 —M -Th LAX MSP 03:29 ---6-3.29 —A UPS --G—ps 0986 B757 M WThF 0552 8757 M T 03.58 —64-0-0 A —D UPS 0552 B757 M TWThF UPS 0986 9757 M WThF 04:20 A —A UPS 0556 B757 —M —TWThF 074-2-1 --64--29 —A FedEx 2737 B72Q H MFSSu UPS 0558 - 5757 M TWThF 04:40 --64--51 A —A UPS 0556 A300 M TWThF —D FedEx —FedEx 2737 B72Q —H FSSu 64,56 —05--00 —D 2737 B72Q H IVISSU UPS 9714 8757 M TV\fTh 65-0-1 A —A UPS 0552 8757 M TWThF 65--09 --El FedEx 1718 MD11 —M M fF S Su- 2 A —A Sun Country 430 B738 m —M LAX MSP 05-12 —05.14 —A UPS 0560 B747 —M TWThF —A UPS 0560 —MD1 1 —M TWThF 65-15 —65-2-1 —A UPS —FedEx 0560 A300 M S —D 1156 8757 M MTFSSu 05-2-5 —0525 Delta —Delta 2130 —8738 —M M Th—FSSu TSP —ATL D 2130 738 M T MSP ATL 05:37 --0-5-39 A —A UPS —FedEx 0554 8757 M TWThF 1718 MD1 1 —M M —FS S u 65-4-0 D —A Continental —FedEx 4255 E145 M MTWThF MSP EWR 05:40— 1407 iZI —1 —M MfF—SSu 05:53 A UPS 0496 B757 M S 05:54 A UPS 0552 A300 M S -10- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 December 2011 Nighttime Scheduled Carrier Jet Operations !:TF Flight, �; `. Days.'of Tirne AID CdCrie� P.�r�k�er : Er�GiN���.4 Stag Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 2 3 'R„r�±;;�g 05:55 A UPS 0560 MD11 M S Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 November 2011 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.** - -Airline ID:.; Stage Type Count Airtran TRS 3 87377 20 Airtran TRS 3 B717 31 America West _ AWE 3_ A320 .24 America West AWE 3 A321 34 American AAL 3 CRJ 1 American AAL 3 B738 2 American AAL 3 MD80 26 American Eagle EGF 3 CRJ7 34 Atlantic Southeast ASQ 3 CRJ9 1 Atlantic Southeast ASQ 3 CRJ7 4 Atlantic Southeast ASQ 3 E145 8 Compass CPZ 3 E170 23 Continental Exp. BTA 3 E145 14 Delta DAL 3 E170 1 Delta DAL 3 A330 1 Delta DAL 3 DC9Q 1 Delta DAL - - 3 B777 3 Delta DAL 3 MD80 7 Delta DAL 3 B767 9 Delta DAL 3 A319 24 Delta DAL 3 B757 26 Delta DAL 3 MD90 31 Delta DAL 3 A320 51 Delta DAL 3 B738 94 FedEx FDX 3 A310 1 FedEx FDX 3 A300 1 FedEx FDX 3 B757 1 FedEx FDX 3 B72Q 3 FedEx FDX 3 MD11 16 FedEx FDX 3 DC10 17 Mesaba MES 3 CRJ2 12 Mesaba MES 3 CRJ9 15 Pinnacle FLG 3 CRJ 1 Pinnacle FLG 3 CRJ2 15 Southwest SWA 3 8735 2 Southwest SWA 3 B733 5 Southwest SWA 3 B7377 11 Sun Country SCX 3 87377 48 Sun Country SCX 3 8738 99 UPS UPS 3 A300 1 UPS UPS 3 MD11 16 UPS UPS 3 B757 44 United UAL 3 8757 1 United UAL 3 A319 6 United UAL 3 A320 24 TOTAL 809 Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 94% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations. **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11!7/2011. -12- November 2011 Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations Mix for Top 15 Ai -dines 1.0':30'p.m' to 6:0 - 0 a.m.** 141) 120 �2 :100 z 40 20 0 C> w) C> in > U-) <> to C> LO C> in 'C> . in o Ir, <> W-1 S <-- � �� — V o =4 Z75 %;i� Z5 :74 CQ (n -it IR 7i "n T! j,; -�; -Y 4; 4; CQ 1-1 CQ N CJ M C- M M <> <> <> 8 15 <> <> <> <> <1 <1 <> C> <> Ij <> -C> Time November 2011 Nighttime Carrier Jet Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines -in 12n +- r, -nn !n m Airline Stage 2 Stage 3 manufactured Stage 3 Total Delta (DAL) 0 1 247 248 Sun Country (SCX) 0 0 147 147 UPS (UPS) 0 0 61 61 America West (AWE) U 0 58 5 Airtran (TRS) 0 0 51 51 FedEx (FDX) 0 3 36 39 American Eagle (EGF) 0 0 34 34 United (UAL) 0 031 31 American (AAL) 0 0 29 29 Mesaba (MES) 0 0 27 27 Compass (CPZ) 0 0 -0 23 23 Southwest (SWA) 0 18 18 Pinnacle (FLG) 0 0 16 16 Continental Exp. (BTA) 0 0 14 - 14 Atlantic Southeast (ASQ) 0 0 13 13 - Other 0 5 47 52 Total 0 9. 852 **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. -13- Airport Noise and Operations -Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - November 2011 Nov 1 thru 8, 2011 - 3091 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 1 thru 8, 2011 - 3113 Carrier Jet Departures Nov I thru 8, 2011 - 152 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 1 thru 8, 2011 - 34 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures - 14 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - November 2011 Nov 9 thru 16, 2011 - 4114 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 9 thru 16, 2011 - 4136 Carrier Jet Departures Nov 9 thru 16, 2011 - 215 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 9 thru 16, 2011 - 46 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 -15- Nov 15 - . Airport Noise and -Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks.-... - Carrier Jet Operations - November 2011 Nov 17 thru 24, 2011 - 3784 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 17 thru 24, 2011 - 3788 Carrier Jet Departures Nov 17 thru 24, 2011 - 189 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 17 thru 24, 2011 - 64 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures - 16 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations - November 2011 Nov 25 thru 30, 2011 - 2929 Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 25 thru 30, 2011 - 2950 Carrier Jet Departures Nov 25 thru 30, 2011 - 132 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals Nov 25 thru 30, 2011 - 29 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 -17- Nov 17 - MSP International Airport Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations s Remote Monitoring Tower -18- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Time Above dB Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events November 2011 RMT Time >= Time >= Time > Time >_ jp City , Address 65dB 80dB 90dB , 1,OOdB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. 09:43:51 00:00:44 00:00:00 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 11:02:25 00.02:15 00:00:00 00:00:00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 12:57:33 00:17:22 00:00:26 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th S#. 11:26:15 00:03:18 00:0000 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 12:18:56 01:59:33 00:00:20 00:00:00 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 13:20:30 01:2833 00:0032 00:00:00 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 00:2715 00:00:04 0000:00 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 00:1128 00:00:11 00:00:00 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:00:32 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 10 S#. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:02:30 00:00:04 00:00:00 00:00:00 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:01.08 00:00.05 00:00:00 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 00:10:35 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 14 Eagan 1 st St. & McKee St. 16:07:47 00:00:19 00:00:00 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 00:15.04 00:00:03 00:00:00 00:00:00 ---16 - Eagan Avalon Ave. &-VIas..Ln.. 15:00:01_ . 0.0-20:16. 00:00:21 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00 :0019 00:0000 00:00:00 00:00:00 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 00:23:42 00:00:03 00:0000 000000 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 00:21:36 00:00:11 00:00:00 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:00:06 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 00:0708 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 09:32:40 00:00:16 00:00:00 00:00:00--- 0:00:0023 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 01:08:09 00:00:32 00:00:00 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 17:38:08 00:00:41 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 00:46:47 00:00:05 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 01:20:01 00:00:04 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 00:06:48 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 01:16:16 00:00:07 00:00:00 00:00:00 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S. 00:00:37 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 03:27:25 00:00:19 00:00:00 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 00:01:46 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:00:39 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 00:01:02 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 00:03:14 00:00:00 00 00::00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 07:25:49 00:00:21 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 13:19:13 —6-0-05 00:00:39 00:00:00 00:00:00 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 00:00:20 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 Total Time for Arrival Noise Events 160:12:39 04:16:05, 0001:39 00:00:00'_ `Note: These time values and levels are based upon 1 -second leq levels. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 -19- Time Above Threshold dB for Departure Related Nose- Events.. *Note: These time values and levels are based upon 1 -second leq levels. - 20 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 ty Address.,- Ti 8d8 �4ime'.>'= Time 100dB.: Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. 02:23:01 00:00:02 00:00:00 0+0:00:00 E'2-- - Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 03:34:19 00:00-.-30- 00:00:00 00:00:00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 08:17:56 00:03:48 00:00:00 00:00:0-0 4 —Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 10:58:03 0611.26 00:00:04 00:00:00 5 — Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 34:54:40 01:39:18 --00:07:18 00:00:04 6 —Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. _759:42-46 . 04:05:23 00:20:49 00:00:11 7 —Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 22:58:36 00:23:25 —00:00:13 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 12:48:15 00:24:45 00:00:18 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:02:14 00:00:04 00:00:00 00:00:00 10 St. Paul -----Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:02:56 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:03:15 00:00:03 00:00:00 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. —Southeast 00:01:25 00:00—:00 -60.00.00 00:00:00- 13 Mendota Heights end of Mohican Court 05:35:30 00:02:15 00:00:00 —00':'-00:00 14 Eagan 1 st St. & McKee St. 06:40:45 00:09:44 00:00:00 —00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 07:40:49 00:07:43 00:00:00 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln. 06:26:36 00:18:51 — --- 00.00-24 60—:0000 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:10:30 00:00:04 00:00:00 00:00:0-0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 07:39:23 00:02:48 00:00:03 00:00:00 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 03:12:24 00:00:35 00:00:00 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:29:45 00:00—:02 —00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 01:21:24 00:00:13 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 01:16:29 00:00:09 00:00:00 oo:oo:oo 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 12:32:38 00:25:47 00:00:54 00:00:00 24 — Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 04:20:48 00:03:29 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan -in—ver Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 06:48:47 00:00:07 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 03:09:55 00:00:42 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 ---TI Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. -35-40 00:09:08 00:00:00 00:00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 15:30:27 00:05:50 00:00:02 00:00:0-0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S. 06:53:53 1 00:03:31 00:00:00 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 12:23:55 0-0:18:18 00:00:17 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 01:09:00 00:00:20 00:00:00 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:19:14 00:00:00 00:00:00 oo:oo:oo 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 01:13-.24 00:00:06 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnssvivi lle Red Oak Park 00:21:10 00:00:00 00:00:00 — 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 02:00:16 00:01:06 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 00:42:44 00:00:10 00:00:00 00:00:00 - 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 01:21:46 00:00:37 00:00:00 00:00:00 - 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 02:35:51 00:02:53 00:00:00 00:00:00 - 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles Pl. 03:54-.06 i 00:04:31 00:00:00 00:00:00 Jotal.Ti­ for r D'epartu ,e.Nois6 Eve'nis, 203.14:35 1 08:47:43: 00:30:22. 00:00:15 *Note: These time values and levels are based upon 1 -second leq levels. - 20 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 ` Arrival F7e|ofed yJC)'se Events - November 2011 / \ ' Total Arriv *Note: These counts are based upon Lmax. U''j.�,- 4323, /[.1� O D � O ____ O 0 O O O O 0 U O O D O O O 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail ___'��4_04 U 23 Mendota Heights End of Kerindon Ave. 325 ___d_O 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 4134 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 188 ____ 340 O 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 29 O 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. O 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 316 O ___6_0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 106 U 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 9 U 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 4 O 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park O 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 20 O 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 2029 2702 D 36 Apple Valfey Briar Oaks & SCOUt Pond ____ O 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. 14 0 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 0 ____ 3477 St. Charles Pl. 1 0 -----�� -21- Arrival Ai Rot, Evelfits>= Ve Cij� Address 2550 2 Minne apQlis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 2435 -2532 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 2581 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 2659 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 86 - 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 4Trd St. 28 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 2 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 5 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 3 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 40 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 52 16 Eagan -Avalon Ave. &Vilas Ln. 3273 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 2 18 Richfiel�_ e. 115 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 86 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. /21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 37 Total Arriv *Note: These counts are based upon Lmax. U''j.�,- 4323, /[.1� O D � O ____ O 0 O O O O 0 U O O D O O O 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail ___'��4_04 U 23 Mendota Heights End of Kerindon Ave. 325 ___d_O 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 4134 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 188 ____ 340 O 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 29 O 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. O 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 316 O ___6_0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 106 U 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 9 U 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 4 O 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park O 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 20 O 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 2029 2702 D 36 Apple Valfey Briar Oaks & SCOUt Pond ____ O 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. 14 0 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 0 ____ 3477 St. Charles Pl. 1 0 -----�� -21- Departure Related Noise Events November 2011 < RMT: City Address Departure Events > 65dB Departure EventsEvents 80dB !: Departure? 90dB : ; Departure' > OUB:.'. 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41 st St. 545 1 0 0 2 Minneapolis-7-7Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.758' 11 0 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 1645 52 0 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 2057 130 1 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 5587 892 93 1 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 6690 2135 212 6 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 3799 211 5 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 2295 164 5 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 7 1 0 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 8 0 0 0 11 St. Paul Finn St. & 5cheffer Ave. 9 1 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. &Rockwood Ave. 5 0 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 1169 27 0 0 14 Eagan 1 st St. & McKee St. 1196. 94 0 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. &Lexington Ave. 1481. 102 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln. 109D 167 9 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 31 1 0 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 1718 47 1 0 19 Bloomington .16th Ave. & 84th St. 727 11 0 0 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 106 2 0 0 1 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 338 4 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 285 3 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 2123 295 14 0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 849 53 --6--o 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 885 4 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave.W. 739 10 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 2391 100 0 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 3088 85 1 0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S. 1293 42 0 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 2001 141 4 0 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 254 4 0 0 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 83 0 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 282 2 0 0 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 86 0 0 0 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 408 12 0 0 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 154 4 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 270 _9_0 0 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 513 33 0 0 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 788 44 0 D 'c'_ Totai Departure Noise Events _ .: 47753..:. x:':4894 345 7 ; 'Note: These counts are based upon Lmax. -22- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 Date/Time 11/23/2011 18:43 11/18/2011 11:31 11/20/2011 22:17 11/0512011 11:29 11/22/2011 6:11 11/05/2011 18:18 T1/12/2011 9.58 ---11/05/2011 12.14 11 /23/2011 16.26 11/25/2011 19:06 (RMT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave., Minneapolis Flight Number AircraftType 'ArrivaU` Runvvay Departure. Lmax(dB) (RMT Site#1) B757 A 12R 99 Xerxes Ave. & 41st St., Minneapolis B757 A 12R DatelTime Flighf Number. . Aircraft Type Arrival/ Runway Lmax(dB) ;. ;'. •'_ Departure.`. 93.7 FDX1156 _ 11/04/2011 10:31 _ UAL784 _ B757 A 12R 84 83.3 11/18/2011 10:28 DAL1301 A320 A 12R 83.2 11/20/201122:16 DAL2034 B757 A 12R 82.6 11/22/201112:56 DAL2393 DC9Q A 12R 82.5 11/12/201118:46 DAL2235 MD90 A 12R 81.6 11/24/20118:52 DAL340 8738 A 12L 81.5 11/22/201110:14 DAL1535 A319 A 12L 81.1 11/05/201120:14 AAL1344 MD80 A R 80.8 ffl01/201112:02 DAL2105 MD90 D 30R 30R 80.3 11/04/201116:22 DAL2037 MD80 A 12R Date/Time 11/23/2011 18:43 11/18/2011 11:31 11/20/2011 22:17 11/0512011 11:29 11/22/2011 6:11 11/05/2011 18:18 T1/12/2011 9.58 ---11/05/2011 12.14 11 /23/2011 16.26 11/25/2011 19:06 (RMT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave., Minneapolis Flight Number AircraftType 'ArrivaU` Runvvay Departure. Lmax(dB) (RMT Site#2) B757 A 12R 99 Fremont Ave. & 43rd St., Minneapolis B757 A 12R 'Date/Time Hi ht Number g„ Aircraft'Type . ' /arrival/ Runway Lmax(dB}. ;. B757 A Departurwb e. . 93.7 FDX1156 11/12/201118:05 HTL973 GLF3 A 12L 83.4 83.1 11/22/201115:17 Unknown UKN A 12L 82.7 11/04/201119:31 Unknown UKN A 12L 12L 82.7 11105/201117.55 SWA2131 8733 A 12L 82.4 11/05/201110:28 DAL1632 DC9Q A 12L 82.4 11/22/201116:33 DAL964 MD80 A 12L 82.4 11/08/201112:35 Unknown UKN A 12L 82.2 11/23/201110:04 DAL1246 DC9Q A 12L 82.1 11/22/201115:21 Unknown UKN q 30R 82.1 11/15/201121:39 DAL1247 DC9Q D Date/Time 11/23/2011 18:43 11/18/2011 11:31 11/20/2011 22:17 11/0512011 11:29 11/22/2011 6:11 11/05/2011 18:18 T1/12/2011 9.58 ---11/05/2011 12.14 11 /23/2011 16.26 11/25/2011 19:06 (RMT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave., Minneapolis Flight Number AircraftType 'ArrivaU` Runvvay Departure. Lmax(dB) DAL2044 B757 A 12R 99 DAL1212 B757 A 12R 98 DAL2034 8757 A 12R 94.7 DAL1212 B757 A 12R 93.7 FDX1156 B72Q A 12R 6AL41 8767 A 12R . 9 899. DAL2119 AAL450 MD80 A MD80 A 12R 12R 89.2 89.1 UPS2560 MD11 12R 87.5 FDX728 MD11 ��A 12R 87.3 -23- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft -,Noise- Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#4) Park Ave. & 48th St., Minneapolis Date/Time Flight Number'. Aircraft a. A; rriva D Oartd �pp Runway d 11/08/20118:47 DAL2198 MD80 D 30L 92.2 11/13/201114:06 DAL883 DC9Q D 30L 89.8 11/30/201114:05 DAL883 DC9Q D 30L 89.7 11/08/201116:55 DAL907 DC9Q D 30L --89.6 96.7 11/21/201116:11 DAL907 DC9Q D 30L 88.4 11/29/201110:30 DAL818 MD80 D 30R 88.3 11/09/20118:46 DAL2198 MD80 D 30L 87.5 11/01/20118:45 DAL340 MD80 A 12L 86.7 11/17/201117:54 DAL2296 MD80 D 30R 86.7 11/04/2011 16-27 DA9964—A320 DC9Q A 12L 86.6 (RMT Site#5) 12th Ave & 58th St RAinnpqnnfiq Date/Time Flight Nbmber AircraftType Areivall::-W Departure Run ay, d 11/20/201113:19 Unknown UKN D 30L 102.8 11/15/201110:59 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30L 96.9 11/03/201111:15 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30L 96.8 11/13/201111:00 DAL2330 DC9Q —5— 30L 96.7 11/14/201111:01 DAL2330 DC9Q D 36L— 96.6 11/29/201111:05 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30L 96.6 11/29/20119:11 DAL2206 DC9Q D 30L 96.4 11/26/201116:34 DAL907 DC9Q D 30L 96.3 11/13/201117:34 DAL887 DC9Q D 30L 96.2 11/27/201111:15 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30L 95.6 (Vivi i 6iteiptj) 25th Ave. & 57th St., Minneapolis Qat /Ti Flight bei. r Aircraft Type A' Departure Run ay (d 8) 11/11/201114:28 DAL883 DC9Q D 30R 102 11/03/201114:06 DAL883 DC9Q D 30R 101 11/16/201111:04 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30R 101 11/18/201117:22 DAL907 DC9Q D 308 100.3 11/10/201117:56 DAL887 DC9Q D 30R 100.3 11/14/20117:14 DAL2206 DC9Q D 30R 100 11/28/201117:33 DAL887 DC9Q D 30R 99.8 11/28/201122:03 DAL1247 DC9Q D 30R 99.7 1 11/03/201119:35 DAL907 DC9Q D 30R 99.5 11/28/201117:01 DAL907 DC9Q D 308- 99.5 - 24 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Eloise Events for MSP November 2011 -25- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 (RMT Site#8) (RMT Site#7) Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St., Wentworth Ave & 64th St., Richfield pafelTme Flighf Number Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ ' . Runway Departure Departure. . 11/11/201114:28 DAL883 11/19/20111101 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30L 30L 93.1 90.5 11/18/201117:37 11/03/20118:29 AAL511 MD80 D 30L 90.3 11/02/2011 7:17 DAL1571 QC9Q D 30L 90.3 90.4 11/30/2011 7:48 FDX800 B72Q D 30L 90 2 30R 11/19/201112:27 DAL2108 MD80 p 30L 89.9 p 11/09/201111:14 DAL2330 DC9Q D 30L 89.6 MD80 11/19/201117:47 DAL787 MD80 D 30L 89.4 AAL1115 11/01/201113:44 DAL785 MD80 D 30L 89.1 11/ 18!201117:23 11/19/2011 -11:49 DAL66 MD80 D 30L 88.8 11/26/20119:56 DAL1329 MD80 D D 30P. -25- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 (RMT Site#8) Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St., Minneapolis pafelTme Flighf Number n .Aircraft Type Arrival/ .? Ru way - Lmax Departure 11/11/201114:28 DAL883 DC9Q D 30R 30R 94 92.2 11/18/201117:37 DAL887 DC9Q p 30R 91.3 11/10/201111:08 DAL1996 MD80 D 30R 90.4 11/13/201110:11 DAL2096 MD80 p 30R 90.4 11/28/201115:34 DAL1588 MD80 p 30R 89.9 11/22/201118:02 DAL2207 MD80 p 30R 89.8 11/03/201111:35 AAL1115 MD80 p 30R 89.8 11/ 18!201117:23 DAL907 DC9Q p 30R 89.7 11/13/201115:41 DAL1588 MD80 D 30P. 89.6 11/09/201112:34 DAL2096 MD80 p (RMT Site#9) Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave., St. Paul Flight Number Aircraft.Type':' Arrival/ Runway Lrr�ax(dB) Date/Time: Departure 11/10/20117:06 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 30R 81.9 7/.2 11/15/201116:01 DAL2275 A 30R 74.3 11/16/20117:21 BMJ48 BE65 BE65 D 12L 70.8 11/25/201110:08 DAL819 8738 A 12L 70.4 MES2533 SF34 p 30L 67.5 !01/201118:57 DAL887 DC9Q p 30R 67.1 F11/22/201111:33 1/02(20116:50BMJ48 BE65p30R D 67.1 /01/201119:14 CPZ5791 E170 30L 66.8 11/28/201122:47 BSK395 8734 p -25- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten ..Loudest_ Ai.rcra.ft..Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#1 0) Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St., St. Paul Wi fir..,ie Flight Nurnbet.. Aircraft'Type. YP Arrival/ unwa Lmax (dB). 11/25/201110:07 DAL819 8738 A 12L 81.3 11/23/201120:12 BMJ17 BE65 D 12L 79.7 11/14/201114:46 UAL296 A319 A 30R —79—.5 11/15/201116:00 DAL2275 MD80 A 30R 79.3 11/10/2011 7:05 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 77.7 11/16/20117:20 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 76.7 11/23/20117:30 BMJ72 BE65 D UL 76.2 11/23/201120:01 BMJ88 BE80 D 12L 75.8 11/26/201 CPZ5720 E170 D 30L 7-2.1 11/02/2011..6:50 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 71.9 (RMT Site#1 1) Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.. St. Paul Date/Tirane ,fl.i Flight Type Depprture_:1:, Runway- Lmax (dB). 11/15/201116:01 DAL2275 MD80 A 30R 81.6 11/16/20117:20 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 80 11/10/20117:05 BMJ48 BE65 D 30R 78.4 11/23/201120:02 BMJ88 BE80 D 12L 77.3 11/25/201110:08 DAL819 —BMJ B738 A 12L 76.9 11/23/201120:12 17 BE65 D 12L 76.4 11/28/201122:47 BSK395 —BMJ48 B734 D 30L 72.6 11/02/20116:50 BE65 D -3 0 —R 72.5 11/28/201117:45 ASA38 8738 A 30R 72 11/27/201111:00 CPZ5800 E170 D 30L 71.7 (Nivi i 6iteitu) Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.. St. Paul Date/Time Flight um er AkdraftTvne. �.Afrlva/ R..unw ay mA)(dB).,!: Departure ': .`J: i. 11/05/2011 13:32 MES2653 SF34 D 12L 77. .. 2 11/23/20117:30 BMJ72 BE65 D 12L 76.8 11/22/201111:33 MES2533 SF34 D 12L 73.7 11/21/20117:27 N665MW BE20 D 12L 72.9 11/11/20112:16 1 BMJ66 I BE80 D 12L 72.2 - 26 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 14:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#13) �...+11 + A of Unhir-nn ('.n1 in RAPnrinta Heiahts DaielTime Flight. Number Aircraft Type .` Arrival/ Departure' Runway, Lmax(dB)` 11/11/201110:28 DAL818 MD86 D 12L 86.5 11/28/201110:20 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 86.2 11/05/201110:31 DAL160 MD80 D 12L 85.8 11/22/201110:28 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 85.5 11/12/201119:43 DAL2336 MD80 D 12L 85.3 11/18/201110:24 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 84.7 11/23/201110:24 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 84.6 11/24/201110:14 DAL2096 MD80 D 12L 83.9 11/24/20117:15 DAL1996 MD80, D 12L 83.6 11/05/201110:10 DAL2096 MD80 D 12L 83.4 (RMT Site#14) ,f,+ c+ .2. NA WenpP -qt F;;nan Date/Time - Flight Number AircrafEType,: Arrival/ ;' Departure, Runway Lmax(dB) 11/24/201113:45 DAL785 MD80 D 12R 89.7 11/18/20116:30 DAL783 MD80 D 12R 87.2 11/28/20117:52 DAL1464 MD80 D 12R 87.1 11/28/20118:46 DAL2198 MD80 D 12R 87:1 11/23/201113:45 DAL785 MD80 D 12R 87 11/24/201110:40 DAL2175 MD80 D 12R 86.6. 11/19/201119:23 CPZ5711 E170 A 30R 86.2 11/21/20118:46 AAL1125 MD80 D 12R 86.1 11/12/20116:29 DAL783 MD80 D 12R 85.9 11/23/201122:09 1 UPS559 MD11 D 12R 85.7 kMIVI 1 01LCtt 1 J) c+ k 1 ovinntnn AVP nnPncinta Heiahts DatelTme Flight Number Aircraft Type` Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/05/201110:35 DAL1126 MD80 D 12L 89.8 11/22/201110:28 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 88.9 11/22/201122:13 DAL1247 DC9Q D 12L 88.4 11/30/201110:24 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 88.3 11/05/201110:09 DAL923 MD80 D 12L 88 11/05/201110:10 DAL2096 MD80 D 12L 87.9 11/05/201110:11 DAL2362 DC9Q D 12L 87.7 11/05/201112:08 AAL1447 MD80 D 12L 87.2 11/04/201110:27 DAL1126 MD80 D 12L 87 11/24/20117:27 DAL2206 DC9Q D 12L 86.8 Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Z7 ToP.Ten. Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#16) Avalon Ave. & Vilas Ln., Eaqan :'Date/Time * Flight Wurb er Aircraft Type A i/ rriva ure. � Departure Runway L 11/09/201113:48 DAL2214 B757 A 30L 97.5 11/09/201122:42 DAL2034 B757 A 30L 96.8 11/17/20119:56 DAL784 8757 A 30L 93 11/23/20117:23 DAL2206 DC9Q D 12R 92.6 11/20/201113:42 DAL2214 B757 A 30L 92.5 11/08/201111:34 DAL2330 DC9Q D 12R 92 11/05/201110:44 DAU 975 MD80 D 12R 92 11/05/201111:41 DAL66 MD80 D 12R 90.9 11/24/201110:40 DAL2175 MD80 D 12R 90.6 11/23/201113:45 DAL785 j MD80 I D 12R 90.4 (RMT Site#1 7) 84th St. & 4th Ave-. Bloominaton Date/T Flight Nufii6er' Aircraft Type ArrivaU ure Departure Runwa 11/08/20116:52 BMJ64 BE65 D 17 83.4 11/15/20116:27 BMJ72 BE65 D 17 77.5 11/22/201112:40 N282EA BE58 D 22 77.2 11/18/20117:17 BMJ64 _120 BE65 D 17 76.7 11/03/20116:57 DALl A319 D 30L 74.3 11/11/201116:51 DAL1727 A320 D 30L 74.2 11/15/20116:24 BMJ66 BE80 D 17 73.5 11/22/201116:58 DAL1727 _324 A320 D 30L 73 11/25/20118:08 DR_T1 C402 D 17 72.2 11/15/20116:34 DAL783 MD80 D 30L 72.2 (Kiva j -5itevi b) 75th St. & 17th Ave., Richfield Da.W/Tirne 'f.H6fit'N6rribe_'r. q A '11 T Ar'riva 1/* Departure RuhwAV.*.;-�.'.:,�: 11/18/201114:03 DAL621 8777 D 22 90.5 11/11/20117:15 DAL2206 DC9Q D 17 86.1 11 /21 /2011 7:46 DAL2106 MD80 D 17 84.7 11/04/201115:52 DAL907 DC9Q D 17 84.3 11/20/201119:41 DAL2164 MD80 D 17 84.2 11/28/201113:49 DAL2330 DC9Q D 17 84 11/03/20119:05 MES2436 CRJ9 A 35 84 11/05/201117:22 DALI 799 MD80 D 17 83.6 11/08/201113:00 DAL9932 MD80 D 17 83.5 11/28/201112:14 ASQ4355 E145 D 17 83.2 -28- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#1 9) 16th Ave- & 84th St.. Bloominaton Date/Time fliqmber .PtNu ir pe: Craft Ty W's Arrival/. Pepa—ure R unway Lmax(dB) 11/18/201114:03 DAL621 B717 D 22 84.4 11/18/201112:16 DAL66 MD80 D 17 82.4 11/22/201111:09 DAL2330 DC9Q D 17 82.3 11/28/20119:42 MES2439 CRJ9 D 17 82.3 11/08/20118:54 SKW4643 CRJ2 A 35 82.1 11/15/20116:27 BMJ72 BE65 D 17 81.8 11/15/20116:23 DAU 120 BE80 D- 17 81.6 11/22/201110:10 -BMJ66 DAL2096 MD80 D 17 81.4 11/28/201111:43 DALl 734 MD80 D 17 81 11/23/201110:45 DAL2175 MD80 D 17 80.8 (RMT Site#20) 75th St & 3rd Ave.. Richfield -,,Date/,Time . . ... e Tlig.ot� .br, Num Ai�cra Aircraft Type Arri"I[ Departure Rum -.,,.Lmax(dB) 11/16/20117:09 BMJ64 BE65 D 30L 81.4 11/28/201122:28 FDX2106 A310 D 30L 80 11/15/20116:27 BMJ72 BE65 D 17 79.5 11/01/201118:23 AA11 853 MD80 D 30L 76 11/14/201115:47 UAL755 A319 D 30L 75.6 11/10/20116:30 DAL783 MD80 D 30L 75.5 11/03/20116:56 DAU 120 A319 D 30L 75.5 11/09/201118:19 AAL1 853 MD80 D 30L 75.4 11/16/20117:15 AAL457 MD80 D 30L 75.3 11/15/201110:14 CPZ5793 E170 D 30L 75 (mvi j bitegz-i) Parh,:ir::i Awin A R7th ':;t Inver Grove Heiahts Date/TimeI Flight Number Aiicra I ypp:, ArrivalF, Departure Ruriway Lrriax(dB) 11/24/201110:14 DAL2096 MD80 D 12L 82.2 11/24/20117:16 DAL1996 MD F— 12L 81.1 11/05/201111:43 DAL1734 -80 DC9Q D 12L 80.7 11/24/20117:28 DAL2206 DC9Q D 12L 80.1 11/23/201110:25 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 79 11/18/201110:25 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 78.9 11/05/201114:38 DA1621 8777 D 12R 78.7 11/12/201119:44 DAL2336 MD80 D 12L 78.5 11/05/201110:32 DAU 60 MD80 D 12L 78 11/05/201122:46 DAL40 B767 D 12R 77-8 Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 -29- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#22) Anne Marie Trail. Inver Grove Heiahts bateffiine.�:--..� Flight Nuaiber,:, AircraftT Departurel:q: ia ku*wV L wj rpax(d B) 11/10/201115:55 CPZ5686 E170 A 30L 83.6 11/19/201117:53 DAL2305 MD90 A 30R 82.6 11/24/201111:44 DAL66 MD80 D 12R 82.4 11/03/2011 15:50 6AL1897 MD90 A 30L 82.2 11/24/201110:41 DAL2175 MD80 D 12P, 82.1 11/23/201113:46 DAL785 MD80 D 12R 82 11/19/201115:49 CPZ5686 E170 A 30R 81.8 11/26/201123:22 1 AAL1 284 MD80 A 30L 81 11/24/20117:25 AAU 391 MD80 D 12R 79.9 11/24/201110:40 AAL1 683 MD80 D 12R 79.6 (RMT Site#23) End of Kenndon Ave- MPndnt2 Hpi(iht.-, Date - I -:: ., Pikilit Number , . : 7 Aircraft Type - , ... . D e0afture R , Unway L xtdBV-';; ma w: 11/24/2011 7:27 DAL2206 DC9Q D 12L 94.7 11/28/201110:20 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 92.3 11/18/201121:42 DAL1247 DC9Q D 12L 92.3 11/22/201122:13 DAL1247 DC9Q D 12L 91.9 11/22/201110:28 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 91.7 11/24/201110:13 DAL2096 MD80 D 12L 91.7 11/18/201110:24 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 91.5 11/27/201121:54 DAL1247 DC9Q D 12L 91.3 11/11/201110:28 DAL818 MD80 D 12L 91 11/24/20117:16 DAL921 DC9Q D 12L_ 90.6 (NMI 6ite#24) Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln., Eagan ::.Date/TiMe F, Flight Number Aircraft Type'' e' Arrival/ 4. Departure kunwa Y . L L�.{.".:..,. 11/23/201113:45 DAL785 MD80 D 12R 86 11/18/20116:58 UAL697 A320 D 12R 85.8 11/24/201110:41 DAL2175 MD80 D 12R 85.1 11/22/201122:11 UPS559 MD11 D 12R 84.7 11/19/201120:34 SWA3573 87377 A 30L 84.4 11/03/20118:12 DALI 919 MD80 A 30L 84.3 11/05/20117:10 AAL457 MD80 D 12R 84 11/24/201111:35 DAL1734 DC9Q D 12R 84 11/18/201111:36 DAL2175 MD80 D 12R 83.9 - 11/16/201110:34 DAL797 B738 A 30R 83.8 - 30 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#25) Date/Time Fli ht Number a " Aircraft,Type ,: ' Arnval/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 11/19/201118:41 DAL957 MD90 A 30L 83.1 11/21/20119:18 FLG3892 CRJ2 D 17 82.6 11/21/2011 7:15 N751 GM C750 D 17 82'6 11/25/20116:58 BMJ14 BE80 D 12R 80.5 11/23/201121:29 6HL192 DCBQ D 17 80.1 11/18!201110:09 DAL2096 MD80 D 17 79.5 11/11/201110:31 DAL2096 MD80 D 12R 78.9 11/26/201119:05 DAL958 B738 A 3 0L 30L 78.9 11/05/201110:44 DAL1975 MD80 D 12R 78.5 11/15/201116:24 SWA2978 B733 A 30L 78.5 (RMT Site#26) o-7nc A L. Ao W Invar (-,rn\/P Heights Date/T,ime Flight Number Aircraftype `: ArnvaU `' Departure Runway Lmax(dB). 11/24/20118:43 DAL2198 MD80 D. 12L 85.4 11/24/20118:36 AAL1125 MD80 D 12R 84.6 11/01/20116:39 DAL783 MD80 D 12R 82.9 11/03/201110:06 MES2576 UKN A 30R 82.1 11/24/20117:17 DAL921 DC9Q D 12L 82'1 11/19/20114:55 Unknown UKN D 12L 81'2 11/23/2011 8:43 DA 22198 MD80 D 12R 81.1 11/22/201122:58 FDX1106 B72Q D 12R 80.9 11/05/20115:56 Unknown UKN D 12L 80.8 11/05/20116:12 Unknown UKN D 12L 80.1 krCIVI I DILCtY,GI j A r.t- . ,, C h.,.,I ti7r,7 Irwinn AvP q Minnp2DOIIS Date/Time Flight,Number AtrcrafE;Type_ Arnval/ Departure, Runway Lmax(dB) 11/27/20117:54 DAL2106 MD80 D 30L 88.7 11/27/201110:37 DAL2175 MD80 D 30L 88'1 11/29/201111:50 DAL66 MD80 D 30L 87.7 11/19/20118:38 AAL1125 MD80 D 30L 87.5 11/30/201111:39 DAL66 MD80 D 30L 87'4 11/13/201113:38 DAL785 MD80 D 30L 87.1 11/09/201117:28 DAL2207 MD80 D 30L 86•9 11/02/20116:45 DAL783 MD80 D 30L 86.9 11/08/20119:18 DAL1815 MD80 D 30L 86.9 11/20/201113:20 Unknown UKN D 30L 86.8 -31- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#28) 6645 16th Ave. S.. Richfield bla'ie"ifti ffie Ffidofku'rnbe`e .7 'Ali6raft TyP6 Arrival/ " . I Departure eP4pre11/10/2011 Runway un Lmdk(dB) 11/10/20117:15 DAL2206 DC9Q D 30L 90.6 11/26/201116:50 DAL1727 DC9Q D 30L 88.5 11/11/201118:22 AAL1853 MD80 D 30L 87.3 11/08/20117:49 DAL2106 MD80 D 30L 87.2 11/16/201118:35 AAL1853 MD80 D 30L 86.2 11/09/201118:19 AAL1853 MD80 D 30L 85.9 11/02/201119:34 DAL1992 8757 D 30L 85.7 11/05/201117:22 DAL1799 MD80 D 17 85.5 11/01/201118:23 AAL1853 MD80 D 30L 85.4 11/01/20117:14 DALI 571 DC9Q D 17 85.1 (RMT Site#29) Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31 st Ave. S.. Minneapolis Date/Time FlIghtAumber. . Aitdriaft Type Arrival/ ­ Departure Runway Lmax(d 11/09/20118:12 AAL2463 MD80 D 30R 87.2 11/28/201115:24 DAL883 DC9Q D 30R 87 11/09/201117:49 AAL1235 MD80 D 30R 86 11/15/201112:54 Unknown UKN D 30R 85.4 11/13/201117:44 AAL1235 MD80 D 30R 85.4 11/15/201116:11 DAL907 DC9Q D 30R 85.1 11/15/201114:00 AAL2337 MD80 D 30R 85 11/17/201110:25 DAL2096 MD80 D 30R j 84.9 11/10/20117:32 AAL2463 MD80 D 30R 84.5 11/26/201117:24 DAL2296 MD80 D 30R 84.3 (HM I 6ite#30) 8715 River Ridge Rd., Bloomington `Date/Time Flight Number jrdraft Type 'Ar:hfad/ Departure Runwa 11/22/201114:17 DAL883 DC9Q D 17 94.7 11/01/201111:11 DAL2330 DC9Q D 17 91.6 11/28/201111:45 DAL66 MD80 D 17 90.8 11/09/20116:42 DAL783 MD80 D 17 90.2 11/03/20116:55 DAL783 MD80 D 17 89.7 11/08/20116:37 DAL783 MD80 D 17 89.7 11/05/201114:03 DAL883 MD80 D 17 89.4 11/16/20116:35 DAL783 MD80 D 17 89.4 11/08/201113:37 AALI 763 MD80 D 17 89.1 11/11/201113:56 AAL1 763 MD80 D 17 89.1 - 32 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#31) Ql;nl 19th Ave q Rinnminaton Date/'Time FlightNumbe . lric,�ra , vpe,, ;. ft! A Arrival/ Departure Runway LOX(d%Departure: 11/28/2011 DAL1708 A320 D 17 85 - 11/14/201110:43 SRW4740 CRJ2 D 17 83.9 11/11/201113:56 AAL1763 MD80 D 17 82.2 11/03/20116:45 BMJ64 BE6517 D 17 81.1 11/11/20117:29 BMJ88 BE65 D 17 79.7 11/09/20116:44 BMJ64 BE65 D 17 78.5 11/05/201117:41 DALI 787 A320 D 17 77.9 11/21/201114:09 SWA1629 B733 D 17 77.7 11/05/2011 14:32 N911 DE MD80 D 17 77.7 11/18/20117:04 BMJ78 BE65 D 17 77.2 (RMT Site#32) 10325 Pleasant Ave. S., Bloominqton Dateffime FlightNumbe . -Aircraft Type :Arrival/, unway 7 LOX(d%Departure: 11/17/2011625 UAL697 A320 D 17 78.4 --- 11/11/201114:30 DAL1609 A320 D 17 75.4 11/11/20117:30 BMJ88 BE65 D 17 74.7 11/05/201117:42 DAL1787 A320 D 17 74.5 11/22/201111:32 DAL2134 B757 [T- 17 74.1 11/11/201113:57 AAL1 763 MD80 D 17 74.1 11/18/201114:53 SCX415 8738 D 17 73.8 11/18/201116:10 DAL789 MD80 D 30L 73.7 11/18/201114:33 DAL1 609 B738 D 17 73.6 11/18/201114:40 CPZ5747 E170 D 17 72-6 (F<m i -3ite*6,j) Nlr%rth Ri\ipr Hill-, Park Burnsville a . e ... Flight Number .icraft: T iype Arrival/Runway -... 'Depe!ttufe 0 11/01/20118:28 AAL511 MD80 D 17 81.6 11/22/20117:23 AAL1 391 MD80 D 17 80.7 - 11/11/20117:18 AAL457 MD80 D 17 7-9 11/09/20116:43 DAL783 MD80 D 17 78.4 11/18/20118:37 AAL1 125 MD80 D 17 78.3 11/14/20118:46 AAL511 MD80 D 17 77.8 11/11/201116:06 DAL789 MD80 D 17 - 77.7706 - 11/23/201114:14 AAL1 355 MD80 D 17 77.7 11/08/201113:38 AAL1 763 MD80 D 17 763 11/21/20117:31 AAL1391 MD80 D 17 76.2 Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 - 33 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#34) Red Oak Park. Burnsville ate'.lTinie' ficRunwayt Ninj6*i � . Aircraft ft I I j,i Departure z i ' , [max 11/09/20116:43 DAL783 MD80 D 17 79.3 11/03/2011 6-56 DAL783 MD80 D, 17 79 11/11/201116:07 DAL789 MD80 D 17 79 11/16/2011 6:36 DAL783 MD80 D 17 77.6 11/08/20116:38 DAL783 MD80 D 17 77.4 11/18/201115:12 DAL1219 B757 D 17 75.8 11/11/20117:18 AAL457 MD80 D— 17 75.1 11/03/201116:04 SK44513CRJ9 MD80 A 35 74.8 11/01/20119:36 DALI 708 A320 D 17 74.4 11/21/201111:05 Unknown UKN D 12L 74.3 (RMT Site#35) 4— 1 VU Vcv I Jt;L L-1 I., cclydf I DatelTime Flight umber 'Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure unway Lmax(d3) 11/18/201118:19 FDX728 MD1 1 A 35 87.3 11/14/20116:42 DAL783 MD80 D 17 85 11/28/201113:41 DAL785 MD80 D 17 84.3 11/28/201111:45 DAL66 MD80 D --1-7 84.3 11/16/201115:52 FLG4097 -783 CRJ2 A 35 84.2 11/16/20116:35 DAL MD80 D 17 84.2 11/11/20119:24 DAL1815 MD80 D 17- 83.8 11/14/20119:29 DALI 815 MD80 D 17 83.5 11/17/2011 12:53 FLG3995 CRJ2 A 35 82.7 11/04/201111:41 5AL66 MD80 D 17 -- 82.4 (NIVI I 6ite#:36) Di larGaKs 6, Jcoui t-ona, Apple valley - 34 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 NumberDate/Time Flight Aircraft Type., A' Departure ure, R �n a: 11/09/20118:02 DAL981 A319 A 35 88.5 11/16/20117:46 FL33892CRJ2 A 35 86 11/02/201 MES2609 CRJ2 A 35 85.2 11/02/20118:01 MES2615 CRJ2 A 35 -84.1 11/03/201116:43 UAL418 A320 A 35 83.6 11/27/201118:20 FDX728 MD1 1 -A 35 83 11/16/20116:36 DAL783 MD80 -D 17 82.4 11/01/2011 10:45 DAL1 975 MD80 D 17 81.6 11/18/201114:18 DAL883 DC9Q D 17 81.3 11/16/20118:00 MES2625 CRJ2 A 35 81.3 - 34 - Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP November 2011 (RMT Site#37) Bonn IAi,,,, 4-. +o l n N Farnan Date/Time :: Aircraft Type =DAL785 Arrival/ Departure :Runway -Runway 11/22/2011 13:44 11/23/201110:46 MD80 _ D 17 82'8 11/21/201111:48 DAL66 MD80 D 17 82'4 11/18/201111:03 DAL2330 DC 90 D 17 82.1-- 2.111/21/201113:46 11/21/2011 13:46 DAL785 MD80 D 17 81.9 11/23/201110:46 DAL2175 MD80 D 17 81.7 11/04/201111:52 SWA1069 87377 D 17 81.7 11/23/201115:46 DAL789 MD80 D 17 81'7 11/23/2011 9:13 5AL18 55 MD80 D 17 80'5 11/22/201114:18 DAL883 DC9Q D 17 80 11/18/20117:25 DAL2206 MD80 D 17 79.4 (RMT Site#38) onC-7 Trryif,ico i Analysis of.Aircraft.Noise Events DNL November 2011 Remote Monitoring Towers **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. "NX indicates there were no aircraft noise events at the specified RMT. -36- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 43.. *4. #5 #6 *13. W14, #15 11/01/2011 56.9 58.6 63.2 60 67.5 68 58.8 56.4 31.6 29.4 25.5 NA 53.7 61.2 57.9 11/02/2011 50.6 52.9 56.5 58.2- 68.2 69.1 65.6 60.2 37.5 41.2 45-.8 NA 35.3 57.3 NA 11/03/2011 51.1 54.9 59.9 59.5 69.8 69.6 61.4 60.7 NA NA NA NA 43.2 57.3 46.2 11/04/2011 56.3 59.1 63.8 60.2 69.3 69.4 56 61.8 NA NA NA NA 50.9 56.6 55.1 11/05/2011 58.5 60.7 65.1 60.7 67.9 66.2 41.4 50.8 NA NA NA 33.4 57.9 63.5 60.6 11/06/2011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA N NA NA NA NA 11/07/2011 NA NA NA NA NA T59.666.5 NA NA NA NA . NA NA NA NA NA NA 11/08/2011 53.1 56 59.7 68.3 59.7 59.4 NA NA NA NA 50.5 57.8 53.3 11/09/2011 48.3 53.1 55.9 58.5 66.1 67.7 62.1 59.3 NA NA NA NA 41.4 59.2 29 11/10/2011 52.8 53.1 58.5 57.3 65.9 68.5162.5 59.1 41.3 39 37.8 NA 52.6 61 54.7 11/11/2011 52.5 55.2 60.9 57.6 65.3 67.4 52.5 56.8 NA NA NA 32.8 56.4 60 57.4 11/12/2011 56.6 57.1 62.6 57.5 65.8 63.3 43.3 30.9 NA NA NA NA 54.2 58.8 56.6 11/13/2011 48.4 52.3 56.8 59.5 66.2 68.4 59.6 59 37.2 NA NA NA 42.1 56.9 43.4 11/14/2011 50.4 55.6 58.2 58.1 65.1 68.5 59 57.7 NA 38.9 NA NA 55.5 60.9 54.3 11/15/2011 49.4 53.1 56.6 57.6 65.7 67.3 62.2 58.8 37.4 38.6 41.7 NA 30 58.4 42.1 11116/2011 50.4 53.3 56.9 57 64.4 68 60.3 58.1 35.2 36.6 39.9 NA 36.5 58.9 25.3 11/17/2011 52.1 54 60.8 57.7 67.2 67.5 59 56.1 NA NA NA NA 52.1 57.9 56 11/18/2011 56.1 57.6 63.7 58.5 67.3 67.5 52.1 58.6 NA NA NA NA 56.7 61.1 57.8 11/19/2011 51.9 54.1 57.4 58.2 67.5 67.5 63.3 58.9 NA NA NA NA 48.5 57.9 46.2 11/20/2011 55.7 54.6 62.9 56.4 68.4 66.8 58.7 57.1 NA NA NA NA 52.7 56.9 55.1 11/2112011 54.6 58.6 61.5 59.2 65.9 66.4 54.5 52.9 NA NA NA 30.4 54.5 61.6 58.8 11/22/2011 58.2 60.3 J60.9 65 60.4 67.9 67.3 53.4 55.7 29 NA NA 31.5 58.4 63.1 62.5 11/23/2011 58.2 0 65 60.1 67.9 65.9 46.5 33.8 NA 42.6 39.9 35 58.9 60.9 60.2 11/24/2011 55.4 56.6 60.1 56.2 63.9 62 33.6 37.2 NA NA NA NA 56.8 60 57.3 11/25/2011 56.1 57.5 61.2 56.9 64.4 62.6 35.2 32.9 27:9 41.1 37.1 NA 54.6 61.8 59.7 11/26/2011 50.6 52.9 57.8 55.9 64.6 69 60.3 55.9 N A 29.7 NA NA 33.5 59.9 33.2 11/27/2011 53.9 55.9 61.1 58.5 67.3 68.2 61.8 58.5 NA NA 31 NA 51.3 58.7 52.7 11/28/2011 53.8 57 59.2 59.4 64.8 69.8 59.7 56.2 35.3 34.7 42.8 NA 52.4 58.9 55.4 11/29/2011 46 50.8 56 56.3 65.7 66.7 58.6 56 NA NA NA NA 50 59.3 50.3 11/30/2011 52.7 55.5 58.1 58.8 66.7 67.3 -:5:9:T357 61.4 55.5 NA NA NA NA 48.1 56.9 50.8 Mo.DNL'%: 514.1 56.3 60.8 58.3 66.5 67.3 1 31-2:r34.1 :3��5. **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. "NX indicates there were no aircraft noise events at the specified RMT. -36- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL November 2011 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #.16 #17 #18 #19 .#20 421 k2 #23 #24: #2..6 #27 �#28 #29 11 /01 /2011 62.9 37.5 58.5 52.7 38.4 50.3 54.6 60.5 58.9 54.8 55.9 53.6 59 51.6 11/02/2011 62.9 36.3 42.1 29.1 42.7 29.1 55.8 43.5 58 41.6 41.8 60.5 60.4 59.3 11/03/2011 62.3 45.8 58 55.7 47.1 NA 54.7 51.7 59.5 50.4 45.4 61 59.5 52.2 11/04/2011 60.9 42.8 59 52.4 41.6 41.9 51.9 58.6 58.1 53.2 46.9 56.9 61.9 53 11/05/2011 63.9 27.1 53.4 48.6 NA 52 53.9 63.7 60 56 59.4 27.5 51.6 35.7 11/06/2011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 11/07/2011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA-- 11/08/2011 62.5 51 57.1 52.7 37.4 42.1 53 57.6 56.4 49.8 47.3 56.6 58.8 49.9 11/09/2011 66.9 44.4 56.4 53.6 48.1 35.5 56.2 41.9 59.3 43.4 49.5 57.1 58.3 55.2 11/1012011 65.4 40.6 39.4 29 48 40 56,9 59.1 60.4 51.8 44.8 55.5 59.3 55 11/11/2011 62.3 35.9 52.9 48.4 38.6 51 54.3 62 58.4 53.2 54.2 48.5 53.4 48.4 11/12/2011 - 56.9 NA -- 53.8 47.9 NA 49.1 48.1 59,8 54.9 52.5 52.5 NA 53.5 NA 11/13/2011 61.2 37.3 51 47.3 30.3 29.7 54.3 47-.3 57.6 37.2 41.9 57.2 54:3 53.8. 11/14/2011 63.9 NA 51.9 48.2 42.4 49.6 54.4 60.4 59 52.3 51.6 55.6 55 55 11/15/2011 62,7 51.9 56.3 56.2 52.7 37.6 55.4 50.3 58.7 39.5 49.6 57.9 59.2 55.7 11/16/2011 63.3 29.8 45.3 48.3 42.7 25.3 54.3 43.3 58.4 40.2 42.9 56.2 56.4 55.6 11/17/2011 62.2 NA 50.3 46 25.9 43.5 53.7 57.8 56.9 45.4 49 57.3 53.9 52.6 11/18/2011 63.4 40.2 55.2 51.4 30.7 50.1 53.6 62.4 60.4 54.6 55.1 51 50.7 48 11/19/2011 63.3 NA 38.7 NA 46.1 NA 56.2 56.6 58.1 43.7 50.3 57.8 58.8 52.8 11/20/2011 60.2 NA 50.4 48.8 41.1 42.1 48.3 58.8 53.8 44.8 46.1 56.1 55.2 49.2 11/21/2011 --- 63.9 NA 53.8 48.7 29.5 46.8 50.7 62.4 58 53.5 54.1 52.8 54.6 45 11/22/2011 64.4 39.8 55 52.5 31.6 48.8 53.1 65.8 60.4 53.4 57.5 51.2 55.7 45.5 11/23/2011 61.9 NA 57.7 52 NA 52.6 52.7 64.5 58.2 54.7 58.4 45.1 53.5 30.6 11/24/2011 61.9 NA NA NA 27.8 54 53 63.2 57.5 50.9 57 27.4 38.4 NA 11/25/2011 63.6 36.8 48.2 51.3 32.6 46 53.4 62.8 59 55.2 56 NA 47 NA 11/26/2011 63.6 NA 35.3 37.3 35 NA 56.4 52 60 35.2 49.7 53.1 56.4 53.6 11/27/2011 62.2 32.3 36.1 31.6 37.4 45.7 54.3 58.9 57.6 43.9 50.6 56.3 55.8 53.5 11/2812011 62.8 43.6 - 56.8 53.9 50.9 42.2 54.5 58.3 58.4 51.8 44.2 55 60.1 53.7 11/29/2011 64.9 NA 38.3 35.4 31.6 40 51.6 59 58.3 47.8 46.5 53.2 53.6 50.8 11/30/2011 62.5 43.8 49.5 44.4 44.7 38.1 54.5 53.7 57.4 50.4 45.1 58.7 56.4 49.2 M. 0. DNL': 62*.*'8, 411.91 53.6 50:1 43.5 46.8 53.8 59.7 58.2 51 52.6 515A ] 56.7 52.2 1 **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. "NX indicates there were no aircraft noise events at the specified RMT. Report Generated: 12/2912011 11:40 37 � Analysis of Aircraft.Noise Events DNL November 2011'��` Remote Monitoring Towers At #30 #31,' #32. #33 #34 #35 #36:.#37 438 439 11/01/2011 62.7 47.4 38.7 50.7 41.5 50.7 53.5 46.5 52.3 58.8 11/02/2011 51.2 33.9 28.1 29.9 31.2 54.1 58.5 29.4 28.7 31.4 11/03/2011 64.3 51.4 40.6 49.4 50.9 56.6 58.6 35.4 38.1 42.7 11/04/2011 62.5 49.7 43 40.8 35.8 54.1 53.9 47.6 49.8 52.2 11/05/2011 56.4 43.9 34.7 35.8 30.5 41.4 NA 38.2 48.2 47.1 11/06/2011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 11/0712011 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 11/08/2011 62.2 44 39.5 49.9 50.4 52.9 55.2 43.8 47.8 49 11/09/2011 63.4 51.5 45.1 50.5 51.4 54.7 57.2 38.8 NA NA 11/10/2011 49.8 NA 43.7 47 NA 51.8 55.8 42.4 NA 36.2 11/11/2011 58.3 j 47 43.2 46 43.7 50.9 50.3 46 48.8 52 11/12/2011 56.3 43.5 NA 40 25.3 39.6 33.3 39.4 47.5 52.1 11/13/2011 60.3 47.2 44.8 42.5 41 56.1 55.8 44.5 NA NA 11/14/2011 59.4 42.9 38.3 45.2 41.4 57.5 55.9 50.1 46.1 27.6 11/15/2011 58.1 35.9 41.8 NA NA 55.4 56.1 42.3 41.3 NA 11/16/2011 61 27.4 NA 44.3 46 57.7 57.1 44.3 NA NA 11/17/2011 58.5 43 45.7 41.6 32.4 53.9 53.5 46.2 42.1 45.1 11/18/2011 59.6 45.5 41.6 46.9 41.6 51.6 50.7 50.9 52.6 53.8 11/19/2011 40.3 NA 37.8 NA NA 43.3 48.3 27.1 1 NA NA 11/20/2011 50.5 36.4 39 48.5 43.9 46.7 50.6 34.3 40.4 43.9 11/21/2011 58.1 42 34.1 43.5 37.3 49.7 51 47.5 52 51.3 11/22/2011 61.6 44.4 36.2 47.1 38.5 51.2 50.7 52.9 53.4 54.1 11/23/2011 61.4 47.5 34 48.5 43.5 50.9 39.4 50.4 54.5 56.2 11/24/2011 NA NA 38 NA NA NA NA 32 NA NA 11/25/2011 55.1 43 35.3 32.8 30.9 40.9 NA 42.6 44.8 46.5 11/26/2011 48.1 NA NA NA NA 50.9 54.2 37.4 NA NA 11/27/2011 47.9 NA 28.7 NA NA 51.8 55.5 32.3 NA NA 11/28/2011 62.3 46.4 34.9 46.7 41.4 54.9 52.9 50.3 53.4 54.4 11/2b/2011 43.7 NA 34.5 NA 28.7 47.8 52.1 35.4 NA NA 11/30/2011 55.8 44.3 41.1 39.3 25 52.4 53.8 47.4 47.6 48.1 Mo.[?NL 59: 44:7 39.8 45:' 42.8 52.6 53..6 45.7 47.7 49.8 **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailable for 11/6/2011 and 1117/2011. "NA" indicates there were no aircraft noise events at the specified RMT. -38- Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 1111/ 11 11 /'� 11 Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport P WS PIP r �r 3.. i �i. it{. ub hSF?It t Metropolitan Airports Commission 2650** Carrier Jets -Departed- Runways 12L and 12R in November 201-1 2565 (96.8%) of those operations remained in the Corridor 2650 Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations It e31b Ao6m to�� tz� 2565 (96.8%) Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations in the Corridor **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailble for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Page 1 Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for In Corridor Gate 11/1/2011 00:00:00 - 11/30/2011 23:59:59 2565 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left 1353 (52.7%), Right = 1212 (47.3 0 A da ,IM_ 14E - 59 ng g� ayx H-W RION-VAKAR W, I W v, A NO 0 "RA **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailble for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission 37 (1.4%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were northof the 090° Corridor Bou ndary A u ring- -November 2011. Of those, 3(®) returned to corridor before reaching SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park 'a ff IL . . . . . . . . . . . ---- yI� . Rtrr. N 'k, wd _V__ITI f�r�t� ?; ./`?Q _ til._ '� �i `'i 52 14 L kGfl "!i In5e'rGr "ei* hiV 11 'J -4 U Greyer( 3 II I PPIIIIIIII =Irose mo Int Page 2 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 g*'j Minneapolis St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for North Corridor Gate 11/1/2011 00:00:00 - 11/30/2011 23:59:59 37 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 7 (18.9%), Right = 3 %) "N. t Tlx't.'� '11' q fl f ........... ... . . .. . . . . . ... . ....iy Page 2 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Metropolitan Airports Commission 48 JlRunwayl 2L. and .1 2R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were south of the Corridor (south of 30L Localizer) during November 2011. Of those, 8(—) returned to Corridor before reaching SE border of Ft. Snelling State Park M1 ii 51 55 2M 'plycl U T9 '.n ✓ VVb0.'0bL 77 estSf,Pa Richfield N port j j Vv 7 L tf,.lt laoT t,)q, B r Graf joudijisla d wp "Y" Ros int Monthly Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Page 3 Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for South Corridor Gate 11/1/2011 00:00:00 - 11/30/2011 23:59:59 C 48 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 29 (60.4%), Right = 19(39.6%) Z' 10 5001 RV 4 ­ . . . .......,.: xIn Cases:. wY,rre altitutlr inFormati0 ! una al labl that aper tion is not r prey tM in 5tll�e o ap{t Monthly Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission 1 (0%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations was 5' C '-r) during November 2011 south'of the Corridors s ----t 0 30U'Loca i2e p. U(lyd—" rl I: obm oomm ton fa:- lf JAL I g2jr Burps Mile )4 1i C valley"', W M Page 4 Monthly Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Minneapolis -St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for 5' South Corridor Gate 11/1/2011 00:00:00 - 11/30/2011 23:59:59 1 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left 1 (100%), Right 0 (0%) fl Y . "V; OR q 0 J6: iv 2v. Page 4 Monthly Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Metropolitan Airports Commission -Top 15 Runway 12L/1 2R Departure Destinations for -November ' ' 201 -1. - Heading Percent of A CI Jps.jotaI'00— - .. Monthly Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Page 5 SEA SEATTLE 2780 90 3.4% ORD CHICAGO (O -HARE) 124- -86 1 - .3.2% CYYZ TORONTO 950 68 2.6% FAR FARGO 3120 65 2.5% DEN DENVER 2370 62 2.3% GFK GRAND FORKS 3160 61 2.3% CYWG WINNIPEG 3300 61 2.3% BIS BISMARCK 2910 60 2.3% ATL ATLANTA 1490 59 2.2% MOT MINOT 3040 58 2.2% DLH DULUTH 190 50 1.9% DTW DETROIT 1050 50 1.9% BOS BOSTON 970 47 1.8% PH PHOENIX 2310 47 1.8%- GRB GREEN BAY 900 46 1.7% .. Monthly Eagan -Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 Page 5 17i1i2vi 1 11/30i2011 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport This report is for informational purposes only and cannot be used for enforcement purposes 2613** Carrier Jets Departed Runway 17 - 11/1/2011 - 11/30/2011 Runway 17 Departure Overflight Grid Analysis Big mmm�====Mm NI ME @Fin .............. A -t�QIMII yll - M **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailble for 111612011 and 111712011 - 1 - Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 11/1/2011-11/30/2011- -2610 1/1/2011-11/30/2011 X2610 (99.9%) Westbound Carrier Jet 3 (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 turn Runway 17 2.5 NM turn point. This is 0.3% of 948 point) and Runway 17 eastbound Carrier Jet westbound departures Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 11/1/2011-11/30/2011. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 - 2 - a p Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 11/1/2011-11/30/2011. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 - 2 - Runway 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 11/1/2011 - 11/30/2011 3{ 1t 51 t 1 f t �+aa+l .ki�i�f:.w•3 JS t(�(-1 • ,rM 1 J 3 J Y . • 3 �'^ +. ( r J�4 }i1& tao i"I lii - i t 7 i� IffE �'.., . � Elt ,.,• 9 1 �) �`t t I '"ci 1 W " i�cF :1.. �jj �/�! rA,l _ f L`'. � Ltl�7. 1J �'i.l_ 749 Pr$t Jt P����--.� hYS1'�:1t 3t"2.1°.5. C 110 AUtI St 2�U�'C�,`,�. � -S iz �L:` _ ik.�v },tn SIE ..:.rE ;� ".,•-� _ t5 {� 't �..�!#�,f?.. r i ii � .�, it (I,�„' 9 ', 1� t' i f �•j�- /� y Y 4� f #� -" z r^`- 71 S I j � � { r. {"'.sumYw. � i 7 .:%• t}fk'j_ �i �� �5 Err 9 a� �.'1 i hj r E ..Pkt�w Ey 1 il li i iy :t Melo tyA t n Y ``i. ✓,� r _:'.L 44.9 }-...;r irk'1 4Y�t'�'IS�W^�,_S.._. J, J :+ i;i .. _. �J'i@ ^� tt,+ ( E� 1 ti i�.>. 5,` i' �f .�'r(� i p t5i. s• r� SiF izx SiY{ t}il ..� ;��ag... ie `: E€ tiµ e . ^ -rr `�a.se''tt. "' 4�i -' :,'�•,....+r �{ —, �" o+!i AppyValle�`� , �;:Rose1.7 mni,n# �: 31 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of Runway 17 in 11/1/2011 - 11/30/2011 (10:30 p.m. - 6:00 a.m.) 0 0 (0%) Westbound Carrier Jet 1 (3.2%) 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 8 (25.8%) Remaining westbound Carrier west before passing over the Runway 17 2.5 NM Jet Departures flew the Runway 17 Jet Departure turn point Procedure (passing over the 2.5 NM turn point), and with an enroute heading to the destination airport 0 22 (71%) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 11/1/2011-11/30/2011. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 - 3 - Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations o r 17 r -1 km_ SMU 3 1 i rTYS-P V, r, 7 P 'fl6hp, ;0 . .... . A figh ff?,—j, i Of �N nn - U ai, 'N 14.1 '�: t. 4(` tt i � j� � f fiildl�t naRl C� /... {��� ¢ I1��'}' - �:•�� 1'�1�9( � j .') }t` ]j ���u�. . ........ rns, 4le- f j k lew. !�Y 1 =411= R o E MT o w n 1,71 rl LEGE Existing RMTs, Punwav 17-35 RNIT's Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 111112011-1113012011. Report Generated., 1212912011 11:40 - 4 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise Levels - DNL dBA 11/l/2011-11/30/2011** �.Ij.ate. #30 #31, #32#33 '#35 . #36 : #31 438-1 1 62.7 47.4 38.7 50.7 41.5 50.7 53.5 46.5 52.3 58.8 2 51.2 33.9 28.1 29.9 31.2 54.1 58.5 29.4 28.7 31.4 3 64.3 51.4 40.6 49.4 50.9 56.6 58.6 35.4 38.1 42.7 4 62.5 49.7 43 40.8 35.8 54.1 53.9 47.6 49.8 52.2 5 56.4 43.9 34.7 35.8 30.5 41.4 NA 38.2 48.2 47.1 6 NA NA NA NA NA NA -NA NA NA NA 7 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8 62.2 44 39.5 49.9 50.4 52.9 55.2 43.8 47.8 49 9 63.4 51.5 45.1 50.5 51.4 54.7 57.2 38,8 NA NA 10 49.8 NA 43.7 47 NA 51.8 55.8 42.4 NA 36.2 11 58.3 47 43.2 46 43.7 50.9 50.3 46 48.8 52 12 56.3 43.5 NA 40 25.3 39.6 33.3 39.4 47.5 52.1 13 60.3 47.2 44.8 42.5 41 56.1 55.8 44.5 NA NA 14 59.4 42.9 38.3 45.2 41.4 57.5 55.9 50.1 46.1 27.6 15 58.1 35.9 41.8 NA NA 55.4 56.1 42.3 41.3 NA 16 61 27.4 NA 44.3 46 57.7 57.1 44.3 NA NA 17 58.5 43 45.7 41.6 32.4 53.9 53.5 46.2 42.1 45.1 18 59.6 45.5 41.6 46.9 41.6 51.6 50.7 50.9 52.6 53.8 19 40.3 NA 37.8 NA NA 43.3 48.3 27.1 NA NA 20 50.5 36.4 39 48.5 43.9 46.7 50.6 34.3 40.4 43.9 21 58.1 42 34.1 43.5 37.3 49.7 51 47.5 52 51.3 22 61.6 44.4 36.2 47.1 38.5 51.2 50.7 52.9 53.4 54.1 23 61.4 47.5 34 48.5 43.5 50.9 39.4 50.4 54.5 56.2 24 NA NA 38 NA NA NA NA 32 NA NA 25 55.1 43 35.3 32.8 30.9 40.9 NA 42.6 44.8 46.5 26. 48.1 NA NA NA NA 50.9 54.2 37.4 NA NA 27 47.9 NA 28.7 NA NA 51.8 55.5 32.3 NA NA 28 62.3 46.4 34.9 46.7 41.4 54.9 52.9 50.3 53.4 54.4 29 43.7 NA 34.5 NA 28.7 47.8 52.1 35.4 NA NA 30 55.8 44.3 41.1 39.3 25 52.4 1 53.8 474 '; 47.6 48.1 Avo bNL 59, 44 7. �?-�9�8 45',�� d 4218 5 8�.6 � 4 ��7.7 .491-, -Note: Flight tracking data were unavailble for 111612011 and 111712011 - 5 - Aircraft Noise Levels DNL dBA 11/l/2011-11/30/2011 km -r Aircraft DNL' Aircraft DNL �,''Aircraft DNL ..`:Aircraftl)NL , ORD 11/01/08-11/30/08 11/01/09-11/30/09 11 /01 /10-11 /30/10 11/01/11-11/30/11 30 62.5 62 60.7 59 31 47.4 47.8 46.7 44.7 32 45.2 42.3 41.5 39.8 33 46.2 47.4 46.9 45 34 43.8 45.9 43.2 42.8 35 54.7 54.3 53.4 52.6 36 54 54.4 52.8 53.6 37 46.9 48.4 45.8 45.7 38 48.7 51.1 48.5 47.7 39 50.8 53.4 50.9 49.8 Top 15 Runway 17 Departure Destination Report irport He6din" (a 9 (deg) #Op's*�:.� Oerc f ent. fT I Ops ORD CHICAGO (O'HARE) 124' 148 5.7% NDE N DENVER 237* 141 5.4% ATL ATLANTA 149' 119 4.6% MDW CHICAGO (MIDWAY) 124* 109 4.2% DFW DALLAS/ FORT WORTH 193' 76 2.9% EWR NEW YORK 106* 74 2.8% PHX PHOENIX 231' 74 2.8% NIKE MILWAUKEE 114' 69 2.6% LGA NEW YORK (LA GUARDIA) 105' 64 IAH HOUSTON 185* 61 -2.4% 2.3% CLE CLEVELAND 109, 55 2.1% STL ST LOUIS 160' 54 2.1% DTW DETROIT 105' 53 2% OMA OMAHA 205' 52 2% CVG CINCINNATI 127* 52 2% Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report- 11/1/2011-11/30/2011. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:40 - 6 - M 1�1 4 4 1NUvt: b -r 'Li I I Crossing -in -the -Corridor Analysis Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport This report is for informational purposes only and cannot be used for enforcement purposes Metropolitan Airports Commission November 2011 Carrier Jet Departure Operations Runways 12L & 12R (23:00 - 06:00) 59** Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L & 12R between the hours of 23:00 and 06:00 P�r� 8, t a Iit jj S=&-, 0"le, P `' �4 _I� I ..,.-. 1,,.,~Mi&Si SI4ri"I rt. �...� •.:I.,,s..i�� �{�i� iii ��, ` {I �S�' rF u f J � _� t$�. fi t I Y `v i �.,,"'•�,,,�JOO�dbu St. **Note: Flight tracking data were unavailble for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011. Page 1 Metropolitan Airports Commission -,..--,,-,No-ve.mber2011 Carrier Jet Departure Operations Performing the Crossing Procedure off Runways 12L & 12R (23:00 - 06-00) 39 (66%) Carrier Jets Crossed After Departing Runways 12L & 12R between the hours of 23:00 and 06:00 111-1,1-1 A, d Waplew _j Wes,W. I 7 • rq por n E Page 2 Crossing in the Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:39 gn vil C91 ppip�j Waplew _j Wes,W. I 7 • rq por n E Page 2 Crossing in the Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:39 Metropolitan Airports Commission I MUM -Win, Carrier Jet Departure Operations Runways 12L & 12R (06:00 - 2100) 2591** Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L & 12R between the hours of 06:00 and 23:00 Z4, SRI SIMMS n OS -3; N, e. &,� !"!a '04 4- E ILL P IWMIE ttZ1-*4!-;z OR M,4 �WR 4R b a-1 ;-�.!:q 77 —11 ����1``'t,.E` O A 4 tTT rPTD, U 1—NO 7 .7 —;7Z NOW R tMMNE�NNW 21 --IN 9;F M= ag Ir t I'RiNfie IL 8- R IN 1 ej� W -T S I 4t 7 zu K �g VA S� 11.1 " geg 4 47-4 v I j�f B100TI, POP r M 11 qj E E -gh rg� - A W R — 1 NEW RER SONY 0 - gpg _g g mm 1� ON MINE,- gTO 'A It -0� TWW agg Rl rS, TIRE V x M 1 1, ON R- e 14 W, E , • ........... "Note: Flight tracking data were unavailble for 11/6/2011 and 11/7/2011 Page 3 Metropolitan Airports Commission November 2011 Carrier Jet Departure Operations Performing the Crossing Procedure off Runways 12L & 12R (06:00 - 23:00) 733 (28%) Carrier Jets Crossed After Departing Runways 12L & 12R between the hours of 06:00 and 23:00 v, RUB INS , wa z's g IN, lam - ®r 4L I 13 WX -4? pr L I N' �es . 31 mn ov ir..�".��,,�!".��,�,',"�',�":i�.- MEN, I'AA gggz ayn JIM ;a8tajI ED T gj; g -g 5 4 'it 01 Z Will 'BY YN W N!2 T -ir -ifd-4w, IRNI A�511 R.5, i'RE 4N- WE - ON MEN �ry HIM% I, OWN ou QmmANN�=O- g) N ,A37WER"'i 3 OR -0 B16 .18 -,L�J� - MIN aiffiWA, E; I LCII - V M1�SM0 5 -iv PUN AM W ;ft .. ,�,,..•1,,, , --� ii � , �' -;•~•• �, d �'./�„'�' / ��4�'�J H� 9 1 f ' � S �.�a,'��;��}y'G' , MIN 1W t. J A Page 4 Crossing in the Corridor Analysis. Report Generated: 12/29/2011 11:39