1995-04-12 ARC PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
AGENDA
APRIL 12, 1995 - 8:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of March 8, 1995 Meeting Minutes.
4. Acknowledge Receipt of Various Reports/Correspondence:
a. MASAC Technical Advisor's Reports for January and
February, 1995.
b. MSP Monthly Complaint Summaries for January and February,
1995.
c. Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis Reports for January
and February, 1995.
d. NOISE Newsletters for February and March,
e. Airport Comparison Graph - March, 1995.
" l
f. Richfield Part 150 Buy -Out Updates for
March, 1995.
g.
1995.
February and
MAC Part 150 Community Monitor for February, 1995.
h. MnDOT Notice of Adequacy for Runway 4-22 Extension
Environmental Impact Statement and Related Article.
i. City of Bloomington Airport Policies.
J -
Denver Post and Wall St. Journal Articles Regarding New
Denver International Airport.
5. Unfinished and New Business:
a. Discuss Meeting of Northern Dakota County Aircraft Noise.
Impacted Communities.
b. Discuss Status of Adoption of MAC's New Noise Management
Methodology for MSP.
c. Discuss Resident Complaint Regarding Air Pollution Caused
by MSP Aircraft Operations.
d. Discuss Preparation for April 27, 1995 Joint Workshop
With the Mendota Heights City Council.
6. Verbal Updates:
a. Status of Non -Simultaneous (Crossing) Departure Procedure
Implementation.
7. Other Comments or Concerns.
8. Adjourn.
Auxiliary aids for disabled persons 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, however, this may not be possible
on short notice. Please contact City Administration at 452-
1850 with requests.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AIRPORT RELATIONS COMbMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 8, 1995
The regular -meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations
Commission was held on Wednesday, March 8, 1995, in the City Hall
Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called
to order at 8:05 o'clock P.M. The following members were present:
Beaty, Leuman, Olsen and Stein. Commissioners Fitzer, Olin and
Surrisi were excused. Also present were City Administrator Tom
Lawell and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Olsen moved
minutes with correction.
Commissioner Stein seconded the motion.
approval of the February
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF VARIOUS
REPORTS/CORRESPONDENCE
8, 1995
The Commission acknowledged receipt of the Noise Newsletter
for January, 1995. Chair Beaty inquired if the City has
completed the Noise Membership Survey. Administrator Lawell
responded yes and that the results of the survey will appear
in the next edition of the Noise Newsletter.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a resignation letter
from Mr. Charles F. Price, Executive Director of Noise.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a Star Tribune
Newspaper article regarding expanded NWA service to Canada.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a Pioneer Press
Newspaper article regarding the FAA's Aviation Capacity
Enhancement Plan. The Commission also acknowledged receipt of
a letter, written by Mayor Mertensotto, to United States
Senator Rod Grams requesting a copy of the Federal Aviation
Adminstration's Aviation Capacity Enhancement Plan. It was
noted that this report projects air traffic and flight delays
at 23 airports around the nation and states that major
expansion of U.S. Airports are urgently needed. j
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a Pioneer Press
Newspaper article regarding Northwest Airlines speeding up
their process for ordering 15 new Boeing aircraft.
r
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a City of Minneapolis
resolution which creates an MSP Airport Task Force.
Administrator Lawell explained that he will request John
Richter to keep the City of Mendota Heights informed on the
Task Force's progress. Chair Beaty stated that the Commission
should consider inviting Mr. Richter to attend an upcoming
Commission meeting.
The Commission acknowledged receipt of a MAC 1994 Annual
report to the Legislature on Dual Track Airport Planning
activities. In response to a question, Administrator Lawell
stated that the Remote Runway Study is included in this
document.
Regarding Runway 4-22 extensions, Administrator Lawell
explained that Northwest Airlines is concerned about the
relocation of the existing terminal. He also explained that
with the extension of Runway 4-22, the Cities of Richfield and
Bloomington will be very concerned in how noise mitigation
plans will be implemented. He stated that it is likely that
with the extension of Runway 4-22, a lawsuit will be filed by
the Cities of Richfield and Bloomington.
Lawell stated that an important consideration under the Dual
Track process is the cost and financial feasibility associated
with each alternative. He stated that the City of Mendota
Heights should be informed on this process and that he will
request to be placed on the MAC's mailing list regarding the
process of the Financial Analysis.
ELECTION OF AIRPORT RELATIONS
COMMISSION OFFICERS
Commissioner Leuman moved to nominate Commissioner Beaty as
Chair of the Airport Relations Commission
Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion.
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
Commissioner Olsen moved to nominate Commissioner Leuman as
Vice Chair of the Airport Relations Commission.
Chair Beaty seconded the motion.
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
DISCUSS MAC REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
REGARDING NEW NOISE MANAGEMENT
METHODOLOGY
Administrator Lawell explained that the MAC is requesting the
City's comments on their New Noise Management Methodology
proposal. He explained that this issue was recently discussed
ii
at the MASAC Operations Committee held on February 16th and
that itjwill be discussed again by the Committee on March
15th. He stated that the City's written comments regarding
the proposal are due no later than March 10.
The Commission reviewed how the Noise Management Methodology
proposes to track Stage 2 aircraft reduction. It was noted
that for Stage 2 reduction performance the Noise Management
Methodology proposes to compare average daily operations of
analogous calendar quarters from the current year to the past
year thus removing seasonal biases. Regarding aircraft noise
during nighttime hours, the Noise Management Methodology
proposes that Stage 2 aircraft performance will be tracked by
three discrete time periods in addition to; quarterly
comparisons. The discrete periods include 7 A.M. to 10 P.M.,
10 P.M. to 11 P.M. and 6 A.M. to 7 A.M., and 11 P.M. to 6 A.M.
The Commission reviewed an excerpt from the Federal Aviation
Administration's Federal Register regarding final compliance
and waivers from final compliance for air carriers converting
from Stage 2 to Stage 3 aircraft. Administrator Lawell stated
that not all of the information regarding this Federal Rule
was sent' and that he would obtain a copy for Commission review
in April'. Commissioner Olsen stated that there is a Federal
Register available at his place of employment and that he
would fax this information to Administrator Lawell.
Chair Beaty suggested that nighttime hours should be extended
to four 'periods instead of three. He further stated that
Northwest Airlines should be held to their pledge tb meet the
12-31-99 Stage 2 phase out date. Administrator Lawell
pointed out that according to the Federal Resister, NWA has
the ability to request a waiver from the 12-31-99 deadline.
He stated that NWA has indicated that they do not intend to
request a waiver.
Commissioner Olsen stated that the phase out of Stage II
aircraft should continue at a reasonable rate and not wait
until the deadline to phase out the aircraft. Administrator
Lawell responded that federal requirements provide for a
reasonable rate of phase out.
DISCUSS PLANNED MEETING OF NOISE
IMPACTED DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITIES
Administrator Lawell explained that at the Commission's last
meeting,' it was discussed that a get-together of
representatives from the various airport noise impacted
communities of Northern Dakota County to discuss; issues of
common purpose and concern. He stated that cities suggested
for inclusion were Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, Mendota and
Sunfish Lake. He explained that the Commission had suggested
that the initial meeting be attended by Chair ,Beaty and
himself and that if the other cities were interested, a future
meeting of all air noise commissioners could be arranged.
Lawell explained that he has contacted representatives from
each of the cities and all have expressed an interest in
discussing a more collective approach to the air noise
problem.
Lawell presented a copy of a draft letter which indicates a
meeting date as Tuesday, March 21, 1995 at 7:30 a.m.
It was the consensus of the Commission that Administrator
Lawell contact Mendakota Country Club to inquire about use of
their facility for the March 21st meeting. Administrator
Lawell stated that he would fax each city a letter informing
them of the date, time and place.
The Commissioner briefly reviewed topics of discussion for
this meeting including, common goals, use of corridor and
nighttime corridor usage.
A brief discussion ensued regarding MASAC representation and
what other cities have representation.
STATUS OF NON -SIMULTANEOUS (CROSSING)
DEPARTURE PROCEDURE IMPLEMENTATION
Administrator Lawell stated that he has not received any
information regarding this issue from Nigel Finney. He stated
that he will continue to pursue this matter further by phoning
Jeff Hamiel. He stated that he hopes to have information
available by Friday and that he would include any information
in the Commission's Friday News packet. Chair Beaty inquired
if Commission members should inquire with Mr. Hamiel.
MAC DECISIONS REGARDING MSP LTCP AND
RUNWAY 4-22 EXTENSION --
Administrator Lawell informed the Commission regarding the
MAC's decision regarding MSP LTCP and Runway 4-22 extension.
He stated that this formal action will be carried forward with
the dual track process.
MISCELLANEOUS
The Commission discussed upcoming Commission meetings . It was
suggested that Mr. Brian Addis be invited to speak at the
Commission's June 15 meeting. It was also suggested that Mr.
Kevin Howe be invited to speak at an upcoming meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Airport, Relations
Commission adjourned its meeting at 10:20 o'clock P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Kimberlee K. Blaeser
Senior Secretary
•
!l I
u..I..0
MI
MI NM MI
MI III
MASAC Technical Advisor's
For January, 1995
Report
ANOMS DATA
Provided By The
MAC Aviation
Noise Program
Or
114114.1131111.
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
MONTHLY MEETING - Metropolitan Airport Sound Abatement Council
Charman:
Robert P. Johnson
Vice Chairman:
Scott Bonin
Technical Advisor::
John Foggia
Secretary:
Jean Deighbm
Airborne Fapress:
Brian Bates
Air Transport Association:
Pail McGraw
ALPA:
Charles W. Curry Jr.
City afBloomington:
Petro= Les
Vern Wilcox
City of Burnsville:
Juan Rivas
City afEagan:
Mullin Miridc
City of Inver Grove Heights:
B emis Mold®
City cf Mendota Heights:
Jin Smith
Cly ofMinneapolir:
J ames B. Serrits
John Richter
Joe Lee
Judie' Dodge
City of Richfield:
George Kansas
Dom Priebe
City cf St. Louis Par*:
Robert Adresse
City of St. Pau(:
Scott Bonin
Craig C. Wruck
Carol Ann McGuire
Delta Air Lines Inc:
Rick Kldwdl
Federal Express:
Tom Rhdmeck
Federal Aviation Adminirutmtion:
Bruce Wagoner
Ronald Glamb
MAC Staff:
Dick Krim:
MBAA:
Robert P. Johnson
Mesaba Northwest Airlirnt:
Lawrence McCabe
Metropolitan Airports Conunissios
Coes miaioner Alton Gyne
MN Air National Guard:
Major Mark R. Nem
Northwest Airlines:
Mark Seamen
Jennifer Sayre
St. Paul Chamber of Camnerce:
Jack Barkley
Sun Country Airlines:
Luke A. Gomer
United Airlines Inc.:
Allan Tomlinson
United Parcel Service:
James D000ho
US. Air Face Reserve:
Captain Steven Chapman
US. Supplanenta( Carriers:
Robert A. MI:
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Declaration of Purposes
1.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve piublic interest, convenience,
and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, international, national, state,
and local, in and through this state; promote the efficient, safe, and economical
handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international
programs of air transportation; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the
metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all
aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and
effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that area;
2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum environmental impact
from air navigation and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement,
control of airport area land use, and other protective measures; and
3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental policies and Jninimi7e the
public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around airports.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Statement of Purpose
This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfare of the communities
adjoining Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport - Wold -Chamberlain Field. a
public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of
the problems created by the sound of aircraft rising the airport; through study and
evaluation on a continuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviation of
the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective
procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and
of aircraft using the same; and through dissemination of information to the affected
communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the
problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions
initiated and taken to alleviate the problem.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Representation
The membership Shall include representatives appointed by agencies, corporations,
associations and governmental bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and
responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users.
have a direct interest in the operation of the airport. Such members will be called User
Representatives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and
Public Representatives shall at all times be equal in number.
The Airport 24-hour Noise Hotline is 726-9411.
Complaints to the hotline do not result in changes
in Airport activity, but provides a public sounding
board and airport information outlet. The hotline
is staffed 24 -hours Monday - Friday
This report is prepared and printed in house by
Roy Fuhrmann and Traci Erickson
Questions or comments may be directed to:
MAC - Aviation Noise Program
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Tel: (612) 726-8108, Fax: (612) 726-5296
Metropolitan Airports Coral fission
Aviation Noise Programs
•
January Technical Advisor's Reort
January 1995
I. January 1995 Operations and Complaint Summary
II. January 1995 Complaint Summary
III. Runway Use Reports
January Tower Log Percent Hourly Use
January Tower Log - Nighttime Percent Hourly Use
January Runway Use Report - All Ops Percent of Ops
January Runway Use Report - Jet Ops Percent of Ops
January Runway Use Report Nighttime - All Ops Percent of Ops
January Runway Use Report Nighttime - Jet Ops ..Percent of Ops
IV. Jet Carrier Operations by Type
V. Aircraft Type Table
VI. January Runway Use For Day/Night Periods ... All Operations
VII. January Community Overflight Analysis
VIII. ANOMS Base Map - Remote Monitor Site Locations
IX. MSP - Airport Noise Monitoring System Locations
X. Jet Departure Related Noise Events For January, 1995
XI. Jet Arrival Related Noise Events For January, 1995
XII. Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events - RMT 1 through 24
XIII. ANOMS Flight Tracks
January 1 to 7, 1995 Jet Arrivals
January 1 to 7, 1995 Jet Departures
January 8 to 14, 1995 Jet Arrivals
January 8 to 14, 1995 Jet Departures
January 15 to 21, 1995 Jet Arrivals
January 15 to 21, 1995 Jet Departures
January 22 to 31, 1995 Jet Arrivals
January 22 to 31, 1995 Jet Departures
XIV. MSP Aircraft Ldn by Date and RMT - January 1995
Metropolitan AirportsCommission - Aviation Noise Program
Metropolitan Airports Commission
January 1995 Operations and Complaint Summary
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Arn
04
227
1.2%
43
0.2%
22
66
0.4%
774
4.4%
11
5649
30.6%
6032
34.0%
29
12477
67.8%
10901
61.4%
MSP January Fleet Mix Percentage
Stage 2
60.4
58.2
62.7
57.7
Stage 3
39.6.
41.8
37.3
42.3
Manch 7. 1995
Airport January Complaint Summary
MSP
533
758
Airlake
0
1
Anoka
0
0
Crystal
0
0
Flying Cloud
1
11
Lake Elmo
0
Ol
St. Paul
7
1
Misc.
2
1
January Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office
Air Carrier
Commuter
G.A.
Military
Air Freight
Charter
•
685
728
291
106
5
37
20
322
124
5
35
26
MSP JANUARY 1995 COMPLAINT SUMMARY
MSP COMPLAINTS BY CITY
. rfr
110.0gORP
Apple Valley
0
10 10 1 1.37%
Bloomington
1
7
8
1.10%
Burnsville
1
30
31
4.26%
Coon Rapids
0
1
1
1 0.14%
Eagan
88
201 289
39.70%
Edina
0
4 4
0.55%
Hastings
1
0 1
0.14%
Inver Grove Heights
6
87 93 I 12.77%
Lilydale
2
0 2
0.27%
Mendota Heights
30
34 '64
8.79%
Minneapolis
61
111 172
11 23.63%
Minnetonka
2
0 2
0.27%
Richfield
5
24 . 29
3.98%
Rosemount
0
0.14%
South St. Paul
0
12
12
1.65%
St. Anthony
2
1
3
0.41%
St. Lottiaark
3
0
3
0.41%
St. Paul.
2
1
3
0.41%
TIME OF DAY
00:00 - 05:59
06:00 - 06:59
07:00 - 11:59
12:00 - 15:59
16:00 - 19:59
20:00 - 21:59
22:00 - 22:59
23:00 - 23:59
ret.:
30
23
195
90
164
189
52
15
"'"" ' ::••••••••%.5.•
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
cOMILr
Excessive Noise
689
Early/Late '
21
Low Flying
9
Structural Disturbance
Helicopter
3
Ground Noise
30
Fngine Run-up
0
Frequency
2
E:K2.--.K.::111yr • • •
•••••••••
• - ,
mirearriAftkiairiin. 4ionifitS114,-f4tWfkskittnif01Wftatitki4,FAt.
-:"1:1#.0771RittliFtiF .
Page 2
. • •
• .„„.
• •
• ' • • • ••• • • ,
•-•
. • •
; • .• ; • • . ... . • .
. . •••• • , .. . •
. • ••. ' •
• •••••.•. .• ; •••••.• ;
••••••• •,,,•••••••••,,4,44, •, ••••••• :••••••:::••••• ;•
•••••••:-.:::::•;,••:•••••••,:,••••••.••••••• .•••••• ..•••••••••••:. • • •••., ,:•••• • • • • •••••,
• ''...::**...:•'•.:•••;,:::".•:••••.,!•••••'!:•'.....•i•:•;!.;•:::••••
....•
.n„
........................................................................................
•
.. • ,
• •....
•.
• •. .
a
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Runway Use Report - All Operations
For January, 1995
Runway
Arr/Dep
Count
Percentage
January
1994
Count
04
11L
11R
22
29L
29R
A
227
TOTAL ARR.
04
A
A
A
A
A
D
2741
2908
66
6643
5834
I 18419
43
11L
11R
22
29L
29R
D
D
D
D
2978
3054
774
5558
31
..........
TOTAL DEP.
..WEitin221,.7.122Jtar•V;4`..W.."
D
5343
17750
LWIL, XLVANIMINESIMMS=r--aar.44,MPly. 41Z
146
2407
2323
• • III III:
I :
4045
4011
12998
86
2500
2423
302
3643
3543
12497
I el
41+11.1•144.1144.1.1/11.1.11144+1+1+0
111:11 I
11!
1 .--iwarakm, • •••-tvarari., : 7:417as.r.lir.127.7,,,-4
Page
--
,1",,,,,fAgoi„:,,,
0,.
\tokaoligi,,,,
,
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Runway Use Report - Carrier Jet Operations
For January, 1995
Runway
04
11L
11R
22
29L
29R
TOTAL ARR.
04
11L
11R
22
29L
29R
TOTAL DEP.
Arr/Dep
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
D
D
D
D
D
Count
108
1677
1789
14
4145
3533
11266
0
1694
2014
535
3324
2888
10455
Percentage
January
1994
Count
54
1269
1382
34
2712
2334
7785
12
1220
1393
180
2298
1762
6865
January
1994
Percentage
...Marotta -44995
Page 8 "'
„.•......
•
• „...
....•• • ..•...
.•••• ••...... .
.• •
.•..• „,.. .
• ••„•....&s' 0perat10
..„............ •..„....„. ..... ........... •...... .
.. . ... .„............... ....„...... .......
......,..„.......„.......,...„ ,,-.„,.• ..„„,.......,.........,.... .... -
,.................„,...,..,..:,..,..., .,.....,...,„.„:„...,,,,,...,
.., ................. ......„,„. -
• , „.„„:„.. • . :.„,„..• .
......
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Runway Use Report Nighttime - All Operations
For January, 1995
. Runway
04
11L
11R
22
29L
29R
Arr/Dep
A
A
A
A
A
A
Count
27
34
88
2
520
129
Percentage
. . . . . .
r • :1131W.
]1*.••••1***:.liii
January
1994
Count
17
29
44
6
274
150
January
1994
Percentage
TOTAL ARR.
04
11L
11R
22
29L
29R
TOTAL DEP.
D
D
D
D
800
9
44
153
34
100%::•.5,.....*::*,:::,,,,•:•:•:::•:
•::.
i........,:i:i.:••::::::::::::,K*:i5..5,.....?:
10
520
19
57
94
12
D
D
69
15
324
March 7, 1295 *; , •-•
42
23
247
• •-,SF VAZZ71,111111.V,Vf
Page 10
.-,•,1,':''':...:::',.,,i,:"..,
..,:-.
'9#0tohop
..„....
' . ,•:.:".",'Y'.':IM:W.::::'•,.:.::„.!:;i::':'„.:':-..::.-..,.:.„.
..,.......„,......
".....,..
••....
‘1,,p, . Ne00.:,.-...!...iiii,
............„.„„....... „:„.........,.....,.........•.
.......,,,.......... ....
.................,.........„,.......„,.....„.....................
.......„,......„........,.......,........„,........................„„...
•---.......................„„...,....,......._.,.......„....._
.,.......„,..,......„.„...,.•:„..„„...........,•..................„,
•••.......„.„:„,,.„.„.,.....,...„,„:„:„„.„3,.:,3,..„,:„....•....„.„.....,„,„,„...
........ ......,.....,...............„,
••••• ........„.",.....„..............••,.....„..:..,
• .„5„.„.,:2,3„,..„„.......„
Metropo
itan Airports Commission
Runway Use Report Nighttime Carrier
For January, 1995
Jet
-Runway
.
Arr/Dep
Count
Percentage
January
1994
Count
January
1994
Percentage
04
A
12
10 `^:
4
11L
A
13.<:x:�
�� .,,.h....
16
11R
A
45
{rr >::.
13
22
29L
A
-333
:>:::::::
157
::.9:>:::?::::
29R
A84:
w v91
TOTAL ARR.
488
1
=>fh:::
.'••:•F.9y .::::??:ti {�'+,'.{:`}i;
.:{
{r fti:.,:r.�;;:i• r4:{ti�'iiJ Si: ti•�:...
<.`::'.>
-11L
D
18
11R
D
50
z>r<=
22
D
16
t::iiii:
29L
D
15
r.:
9
29R
D
3
o> r >:•:...
2
> .5 ''Ifo > .: ...
•
TOTAL DE P.
1 02
44
March 7, 1995
Page 1
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Operations By Type
January, 1995
Aircraft Type
Count
Percentage
B727H
183
0.8%
DC9H
287
1.3%
B707
0
0.0%
B733/4/5
1356
6.2%
B747
136
0.6%
B74F
8
0.0%
B757
-1786
8.2%
. B767
1
0.0%
DA10
4
0.0%
DC10
984
4.5%
DC87
114
0.5%
EA32
2159
10.0%
FK10
839
4.0%
L1011
71
0.3%
MD 11
6
0.0%
MD80
1271
,
5.9%
BA10
2
0.0%
BAll
12
0.1%
B727
4148
19.1%
B737
482
2.2%
DC8
83
0.4%
DC86
32
0.2%
DC9
7698
`i
35.4%
FK28
59
0.3%
Total:.:...::.,;::.,.:..::;?..;::..:..:...........
423% Stage 3
57.7% Stage 2
•
March 7, 1995 Page 13
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Aircraft Type Table
CODE
AIRCRAFT DESCRIPTION
B727
BOEING 727
B727H
BOEING 727 - HUSH KIT
B707
BOEING 707
B733
BOEING 737-300
B737
BOEING 737
B73S
BOEING 737 200 SERIES
B747
BOEING 747
B74F
BOEING 747 FREIGHTER
B757
BOEING 757
B767
. BOEING 767
BAH
•
BRITISH AEROSPACE 111 ,
BEC
•
BEFLECRAFT (ALL SERIES) 1
BEI
BEECTiCRAFT 1900
BE80
BEECHCRAFT KING AIR.
BE99
BEECHCRAFT QUEEN AIR
CNA
CESSNA (ALL SERIES)
DC10
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC10
DC8
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 1
DC8S
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 STRETCH
DC86
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 60 -SERIES
DC87
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 70 -SERIES RE
DC9
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 , ,
EA32
AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320
FK1O
FOKKER100
FK28
FOKKER F28 1 1
FK27
FOKKER F27 (PROP)
L1011
LOCKHEED TRISTAR L1011
MD11
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC11
MD80
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80 -SERIES
SW3
SWEARINGEN METROLINER 3
SW4
SWEARINGEN METROLINER 4
SF34
SAAB 340
March 7, 1995
Page 14
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Runway Use - Day/Night Periods
All Operations For January 1995
Runway
Name
04
Departures
Day
34
Percent
Use
0.2%
Arrivals
Day
200
Percent
Use
1.1%
11L
11R
2934
16.8%
2707
15.4%
2901
16.7%
2820
16.0%
22
740
4.2%
64
0.4%
29L
5489
31.5%
6123
34.8%
29R
5328
30.6%
5705
32.4%
Runway
Name
Departures Percent
Night Use
Arrivals
Night
Percent
Use
04
11L
11R
9
2.8%
27
3.3%
13.6%
34
4.3%
153
47.2%
88
11.0%
22
34
105%
2
0.3%
29L
29R
March 7, 1995
69
15
213%
4.6%
520
129
65.0/0
16.1%
rte:::.,
Page 15
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis -St. Paul
Community Overflight Analysis
January 1995
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours
Overflight
Area
Number
Arrivals
Number
Departures
Total Jet
ops
Percent Je
Ops '
# Ops per
24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/
No. Richfield
3466
6212
9678
44.6%
312.2
Over So. Richfield/
• Bloomington
108
535
643
2.9%
20.7
Over St Paul -
Highland Park
14
0
14
0.1%
0.5
• Over Eagan/
Mendota Heights
7678
3708
11386
52.4% '
:•""
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (11 P.M. - 6 A.M.)
3673
Overflight
Area
Number
Arrivals
Number
Departures
Total Night
ops
Percent
Night Ops,
# Ops per
Night
Over So. Minneapolis/
No. Richfield
59
18
77
2.5
Over So. Richfield/
Bloomington
12
16
28
4.7%
0.9
Over St. Paul -
Highland Park
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0
Over Eagan/
Mendota Heights
:•••••••••••....••,•••••••••••
•*i•••
417
68
485
82.2%
15.6
•
March 7, 1995
Page 1
er Grove Heights
,Apple Valley
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
Airport Noise Monitoring System Locations
Site
City
Approximate Street Location
1
Minneapolis
- Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
3
Minneapolis
W. Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue
1
4
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
7
Richfield
- - Wentworth Ave & 64th Street
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford:Avenue
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin�Street
i
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
14
Eagan
First Street $ McKee Street
15
Mendota Heights
Cullon Street & Lexington Avenue
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kendon Avenue
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
March 7, 1995
Page 18
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events For January, 1995.
Count Of Events For Each RMT
March 7, 1995
Page 19
.. • .;.
1 :::.::.:.:.:.......;:: ::::.:::........::.
:448..
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
3953
71
2
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
2614
347
1
0
3
Minneapolis
W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue
3114
• 1586
32
0
4
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
2852
1214
2
0
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
3681
2512
533
0
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
3693
2481
823
4
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave & 64th Street
187
., 38
4
0
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
263
34
8
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue
45
30
5
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street
35
21
12
0
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Schaeffer Avenue
12
5
3
0
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
10
8
2
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
26
18
4
0
14
Eagan
First Street & McKee Street
3271
163
8
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue
170
43
2
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
2714
1721
14
0
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
73
51
5
0
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
113
83
4
0
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
19
17
4
2
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
10
6
1
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
108
31
1
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
1250
31
2
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kendon Avenue
1313
83
15
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
851
71
5
0
March 7, 1995
Page 19
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events For January,
Count Of Events For Each RMT
1995
RMTU)
...
, ,�ty.. . • :
•
.. :: .Aprn�tetreetLocaUon
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
223
54 ;
6
1
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
238
72 1
8
0
3
Minneapolis
W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue
943
228
24
1
4
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
1265
592 ;
81
10
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
2502
1173 1
600
61
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
3315
1627
820
545
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave & 64th Street
1331
454
68
4
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
693
257
38
1
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue
33
4
0
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street
31
10 r
1
0
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue
21
5
1
0
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
38
15
0
0
13
Mendota Heig,hts
Southeast end of Mohican Court
342
243. 1
16
3
14
Eagan
First Street & McKee Street
2718
843 I
91
2
15
Mendota Heights
Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue
2450
831
87
3
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
3891
1987 ;
483
12
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
142
43
9
0
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
323
191 '
58
15
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
271
131 ,
45
5
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
231
32 1
7
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
1012
152
4
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
1151
143
0
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kendon Avenue
3903
2103
1021
16 —
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
542
68 ;
21
0
March 7, 1995
Page 20
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events
RMT #1: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
Minneapolis
Date TimeA/C
ax
LevelType
A/D
01/14/95 11:10:35
B727
100.4
D
01/29/95 10:41:31
DC9
99.1
A
01/10/95 10:06:59
B727
98.1
D
01/29/95 10:57:18
B727
96.5
D
01/16/95 9:48:26
B727
96.1
D
01/16/95 9:49:23
B727
94.7
D,
01/01/95 12:56:04
DC9
94.5
A
01/01/95 11:09:59
• B727
93.2
D
01/10/95 9:12:08
B727
90.1
D
01/10/95 9:09:09
B727
89.3
D
RMT #3: W. Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
Minneapolis
Date Time
Type
Level
A/D
01/11/95 10:48:25
B727
100.4
D
01/14/95 11:26:44
DC9
99.3
D
01/10/95 9:28:35
B727
98.9
D
01/09/95 7:34:39
DC9
98.3
D
01/01/95 12:55:49
B727
97.6
A
01/16/95 9:20:48
DC9
97.1
D
01/10/95 10:06:47
B727
96.1
D
01/09/95 22:03:11
B727
95.3
D
01/24/95 9:48:31
B727
95.2
D
01/09/95 7:52:32
B727
94.8
D
March 7, 1995
RMT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Typ
Max
A/D
01/26/95 17:11:59
B727
96.3
D
01/01/9516:58:26
B727
95.8
D
01/26/95 17:06:38 "
DC9
916
A
01/01/95 8:18:53
B737
92.4
D
01/28/95 16:50:13
B727
92.3
D
01/27/95 16:50:57
B727
92.0
D
01/07/95 8:12:04
.B727
913
D
01/24/9516:46:48
B727
90.9
D
01/24/95 9:42:06
B727
90.7
D
01/27/95 19:52:05
DC9
90.0
D
RMT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/26/95 14:46:57
DC9
103.0
D
01/29/95 17:27:34
B737
102.9
D
01/26/95 18:03:02
B727
102.7
D
01/26/95 13:11:39
B727
102.2
D
01/18/95 9:45:04
B727
102.1
D
01/23/95 12:17:20
B727
101.9
D
01/28/95 16:5 8:03
B727
101.7
D
01/26/95 13:47:21
B727
101.6
D
01/08/95 13:28:35
B727
101.1
D
01/26/95 18: 51:41
B727
100.5
D
Page 21
Metropolitan Airports Commission
• Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events
•
RMT #5: 12th Ave. & 58th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
,type
Level Max
A/D
01/26/95 22:23:11
B727 .
1083
D
01/26/95 22:15:51
B727
107.1
D
01/26/95 22:44:39
B727
106.7
D
01/23/95 16:09:54
B737
106.0
-D
01/23/95 15:01:09
B727
.1.9A -:2-7.,__.:p...._,:
D
01/26/95 22:09:48-
- -DC9 -
• 104-3 ""
'
01/23/95 8:44:09
B727 -
-- :104,2- .
' D
01/23/95 15:47:06 .
-- _B.72,7::
7403.5'
- D -
01/26/95 22:13:04 •
DC9
103.3"-
D
01/23/95 16:16:3 4
B727
102.6
D
RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
Richfield
Date Time
C
,T
pe
Max
Level
A/D
01/27/95 21:57:56
B727
101.9
D
01/26/95 22:10:27
DC9
101.6
D
01/26/95 22:45:18
B727
100.8
D
01/23/95 16:10:34
B747
100.1
D
01/27/95 22:04:46
DC9
99.8
D
01/26/95 0:49:37
B727
99.5
D
01/22/95 22:54:47
B727
99.2
A
01/26/95 1:02:51
DC9
99.1
D
01/22/95 22:38:46
B727
98.8
D
01/18/95 8:48:23
B727
98.4
D
March 7, 1995
RMT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
`�
01/24/95 9:48:55
B.727
109.6
01/09/95 15:56:08
D
01/24/95 21:28:16
B727
109.2
B727
1
D
--;--01/09/95 22:03:37
1727
108.5
99.6
D
01/15/95 9:30:43
1727
108.1
D
D
01/10/95 9:49:21
DC9
107.5
01/10/95 6:08:30
D
-7 01/20/95 9:57:27
B727
106.4
B727
D
01/01/95 9:22:54
027
106.3
'
D
01/10/95 9:28:49
DC9
106.3
D
D
01/16/95 9:26:02
1727
106.1
D
01/09/95 20:53:36
B727
105.9
D
RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
AJC
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/09/95 7:53:33
B127
100.1
D
01/09/95 15:56:08
B727
100.0
D
01/10/95 7:55:10
B727
1
99.8
D
01/14/95 6:09:48
B727
99.6
D
01/10/95 9:10:28
B727
i
99.1
D
01/09/95 7:52:44
B727
98.6
D
01/10/95 6:08:30
DC9
98.2
D
01/09/95 9:39:57
B727
97.6
D
01/29/9515:00:57
B727
97.1
D
0129/9511:14:03
B727
96.2
D
Page 22
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events
RMT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
St. Paul
Date Time
-A/C Type
ax
Level
A/D
01/27/95 21:58:20
B727
95.1
A
01/05/'9512:26:34
B737
95.0
A
01/27/95 22:50:59
DC9
94.1
A
01/27/95 22:15:57
DC9
94.0
A
01/06/95 6:03:42
SW4
' 93.8
A .A -.
01/07/95 7:28:36
SW4
93.A--
D
01/23/95 6:54:44
SW4
92.r:-
:
01/01/95 20:48:41
DC9
-9113.7.7--
• --- A
01/30/95 8:32:37
SW4 .:,_
89.7 - _
•._:._A:
01/14/95 6:05:20
SW4
88.7
A
RMT #ll: Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
St. Paul
Date Time
C
,T
pe
Max
Level
A/D
01/26/95 1:03:12
FK27
94.3
D
01/05/95 11:04:12
SF34
94.2
D
01/27/95 22:05:01
SF34
94.0
D
0126/95 0:49:29
SW4
93.1
D
01/22/95 16:58:57
B727
92.7
A
01/12/95 7:13:57
SW4
91.6
D
01/07/95 12:03:10
B737
89.3
A
01/23/95 7:12:29
B73S
88.4
A
01/29/95 22:03:02
SW4
87.1
D
01/01/95 20:48:57
BE02
85.0
D
March 7, 1995
RMT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
St. Paul
Date Time
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/11/95 13:31:19
FK27
98.2
D
01/07/9519:57:22
B727
98.1
A
01/08/9519:38:51
DC9
97.6
A
-01/07/9513:20:09
SW4
972
D
-. -OW/95 P:24:29.
SW4
95.1
D
- • -01/36/95-6:13:29" -
B727
95.0
A
- - 01=5/9516:47:43
SW4
94.9
D
01/06/95:8:19:31
B727
942
A
01/22/95 13:18:10
B727
94.0
A
0127/95 20:28:53
B727
• 93.4
A
RMT #12: Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
St. Paul
^ 1
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/10/95 12:51:25
SW4
94.0
D
01/07/95 20:50:20
B727
93.8
A
01/08/95 15:24:56
B727
93.2
A
01/27/95 19:05:47
SW4
92.4
D
01/26/95 17:17:32
BE02
91.6
D
01/12/95 9:38:15
SF34
90.4
D
01/22/95 9:25:05
SF34
89.7
D
01/11/95 13:44:49
SW4
88.2
D
01/08/95 14:06:50
B727
86.1
A
01/07/95 16:10:30
FK27
85.6
D
Page 23
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events
RMT #13: Southeast End of Mohican Court
Mendota Heights
Date TimeA/C
TyPe
Max
Level
A/D
01/23/95 19:49:45
B727
101.6
D
01/24/95 8:19:36
B727
101.3
D
01/09/95 9:45:39
B727
100.4
D
01/13/95 19:57:08
B727
99.6
D
01/13/95 20:20:16
DC9
99.1
D
01/23/9516:40:33
B727
98.6
D
01/14/95 20:10:44
B727
98.2
D
01/29/95 13:48:31
B727
973
. D
01/13/95 9:48:13
B727
96.2
A
01/01/95 17:01:53
DC9
95.8
D
RMT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
Mendota Heights
Date TimeA/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/13/95 16:39:50
B727
101.8
D
01/01/95 17:02:13
DC9
1012
D
01/13/95 9:48:37
B727
100.4
D
01/01/95 11:36:31
B727
99.7
D
01/23/95 16:40:31
B737
99.2
D
01/09/95 16:53:48
B727
98.6
D
01/08/95 19:53:27
B727
98.2
D
01/14/95 9:47:26
B727
97.6
D
01/01/95 9:51:30
B727
97.1
D
01/15/95 9:48:26
B727
96.8
D
Manch 7, 1995
RMT #14: 1st St. & McKee St.
Eagan
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D _
01/23/95 16:59:56
11727
101.6
D
01/09/95 17:48:07
111727
101.2
D
01/20/95 18:31:46
B727
99.8
D
01/18/95 17:38:44
B727
99.2
D
01/28/95 19:54:13
DC9
99.1
D
01/06/95 18:15:45
B727
99.0
D
01/09/95 13:10:56
B727
98.2
•D
01/06/95 17:08:20
B727
97.1
D
01/27/95 13:26:21
B727
96.9
D
01/14/95 9:56:51
B737
96.8
D
RMT #16: Avalon lAve. & Vilas Lane
Eagan
Date Time
Type
A/C
Max
Level
A/D
01/23/95 13:07:33
11727
102.9
D
01/06/95 17:42:54
13727
102.8
D
01/25/95 8:03:19
13727
102.5
D
01/01/95 10:02:17
11737
101.9
D
01/26/95 6:20:54
B727
101.7
D
01/07/95 23:49:08
11i727
101.4
D
01/28/95 16:48:25
11727
101.3
D
01/25/95 8:01:16
DC9
101.2
D
01/23/95 17:00:23
B727
101.1
D
01/25/95 16:07:43
B727
101.0
D
Page 24
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events
RMT #17: 84th St. & 4th Ave.
Bloomington
Date limeA/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/15/95 14:18:28
B727
95.2
D
01/09/95 7:15:42
DC9
95.1
D
01/13/95 12:24:11
B727
94.3
D
01/05/95 7:54:33
B727
93.8
D
01/01/95 19:29:21
B727
92.7
D
01/27/95 8:28:18
B727
92.6
A
01/15/95 5:19:23
B737
91.8
A
01/16/95 9:52:49
B727
91.3
D
01/20/95 16:58:16
DC9
90.8
D
01/29/95 8:26:23
DC9
90.6
D
RMT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th St.
Bloomington
Date TimeA/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/28/95 19:52:20
B727
101.8
D
01/25/95 5:56:26
B727
101.0
D
01/07/95 16:09:58
DC9
100.8
D
01/15/95 12:00:48
B73S
100.7
A
01/08/95 23:15:53
B727
100.4
A
01/26/95 9:08:35
B727
100.1
D
01/06/95 11:12:30
B727
99.7
D
01/30/95 10:54:56
B727
99.3
D
01/11/95 13:44:17
B727
98.7
D
01/09/95 8:35:29
DC9
98.6
A
March 7, 1995
RMT #18: 75th St. & 17th Ave.
Richfield
Max
Date Time '
RMT #20: 75th St. & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
Date Time
A/C
Level
A/D
01/26/95 21:49:21
B727
103.1
D
01/24/95 21:51:23
DC9
102.4
D
01/26/95 17:22:46
B727
101.1
D
01/26/95 17:00:18
B737
101.0
D
01/28/95 16:58:01
DC9
100.8
D
01/26/95 21:04:47
DC9
100.6
D
01/26/95 20:58:38
B727
100.5
D
01/08/95 17:05:55
B727
100.1
D
01/26/9519:56:20
B727
99.8
D
01/26/95 18:51:41
DC9
99.4
D
RMT #20: 75th St. & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
01/13/95 17:18:25
B727
96.1
D
01/24/95 20:41:30
DC9
96.0
D
01/02/95 17:02:23
DC9
95.3
D
01/29/95 13:48:59
B727
93.1
D
01/06/95 18:56:04
B727
92.6
D
01/05/95 18:29:48
DC9
92.0
D
01/18/95 19:49:54
B727
91.4
A
01/20/95 17:13:06
B727
90.6
D
01/06/95 18:59:14
DC9
89.7
D
01/05/95 21:34:20
B727
88.2
A
Page 25
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events
RMT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
Inver Grove Heights
Date Time
�l
Level
A/D`
01/02/95 9:43:02
B727
912
D
01/08/9511:16:11
DC9
91.1
A
01/05/95 9:58:57
B727
90.8
D
01/08/95 10:15:27
B727
90.6
D
01/06/95 10:26:30
BE02
90.1
D
.01/27/9517:17:54
DC9
89.7
A
01/16,95 5:13:53
B727
89.2
D
01/25/9510:55:29
DC9
88.3
A
01/28/95 17:19:38
B737
87.9
A
01/05/95 11:57:43
DC9
87.8
D
RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave.
Mendota Heights
Date Time
Type
Duel
A/D
01/25/95 13:41:50
B727
103.8
D
01/26/95 17:12:22
B727
103.7
D
01/26/95 14:32:17
DC9
103.5
D
01/26/95 16:29:18
B727
103.2
D
01/24/95 16:06:45
B727 .
102.8
D
01/24/95 21:59:19
B737
102.7
D
01/28/9519:52:06
B727
102.5
D
01/23/95 7:24:13
B727
102.3
D
01/09/95 23:07:40
B727
102.2
D
0128/95 20:24:58
B727
102.1
D
March 7, 1995
RMT #22: Anne Marie Trail
Inver Grove Heights
Date timA/C
eTyp
Max
Level
A/D
01/26/95 21:05:09
B727
89.2
D
01/26/95 13:12:10
1727
89.0
D
• 01/08/95 9:34:30
DC9
88.9
D
01/12/95 9:33:10
DC9
88.7
D
01/27/95 16:57:37
13727
883
D
01/06/95 8:18:48
13727
883
D
01/07/95 13:49:06
DC9
88.1
D
.01/11/9518:58:45
B727
87.7
D
01/07/95 9:11:07
B727
872
D
01/08/95 12:14:11
DC9
86.8
D
RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
Eagan
Date Time//C
Max
Level
A/D
01/15/95 9:48:53
B727
962
D
01/01/95 13:47:43
B737
96.1
A
01/26/95 19:29:08
B727
95.4
D
01/16/95 11:30:16
DC9
952
D
01/07/9519:09:17
B737
94.7
A
01/25/95 10:50:40
DC9
94.3
A
01/29/95 19:50:31
DC9
93.5
D
01/02/95 9:48:04
DC9
1
92.8
D
01/25/95 21:31:23
B727
92.1
A
01/25/9513:15:46
B727
91.7
A
P 26
Metropolitan Airports Commission
January 1995 Operations
January 01 to 07, 1995
i 1 Itil\ 1111(11. i . „ ‘;?fr.‘44417r riki 191
104 Ii 40'ileii r.
•
�� 1•J .ail;. ,.4. � :.\4 �/ t�I
iimpla
.w 1%�..4114101...g; "v‘pwit_$: in,. 111
1,r►i,
rte \;k. ,Iii, v".-
•
= _��\
��w,
2305 Carrier Jet Arrivals
ssz
•
January 08 to 14, 1995
00
- s''\ --m4 rfrapi
,f��ijl�
�����
2476 Carrier_Jet Arrivals
w/o
•
2021 Carrier Jet Departures
Match 7, 1995
2269 Carrier Jet Departures
Page 27
Metropolitan Airports Commission
January 1995 Operations
January 15 to 21, 1995
•
-
, 41.'41:sr- •
-
1, AO V 1 P441„,
• 1 Viro.
• ,.
• 4.-tictig";%.
st\. ,...•
6-.41 I I Ili&
firele1411.17M;::*-i
Far '
•
2661 Carrier Jet Arrivals
• •••
. .'s • • • -4*.z.
2680 Carrier Jet Arrivals
2518 Carrier Jet Departures
March 7, 1995
2576 Carrier Jet Departures
Page 28
Metropolitan Airports Commission
January 1995 Operations
January 29 to 31, 1995
1144 Carrier Jet Arrivals
\\NWUllilPf !i
1071 Carrier Jet Departures
March 7, 1995
•
Page 29
Metropolitan Airports Commission
ANOMS Flight Track Base Map
March 7, 1995
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
Analysis of Noise Events with Time/Date
January 01 to January 31, 1995
Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
Noise Monitor Locations
DATE
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
#10
#11
#12
#13
#14
#15
#16
#17
#18
#19
#20
#21
#22
#23
#24
1
59.2
59.8
58.8
62.4
71.1
77.4
65.9
59.8 *
*
53.6
47.7
51.1
47.5
58.7
53.7
67.7
65.1
71.0
69.9
60.0
*
59.4
56.6
62.3
2
57.9
57.7
59.4
61.5
71.1
*
66.8
61.2
50.6
40.9
47.4
47.1
58.5'57.2
67.8
56.2
69.3
68.2
50.9
42.7
60.4
60.3
62.4
.. ,
3
58.2
64.5
65.2
65.1
74.3
73.2
59.9
62.8
51.9
56.0
42.8
55.8
59.4
64.9
59.7
71.2
62.9
64.5
50.3
55.0
50.1
60.9
69.1
67.2
4
58.7
57.5
60.9
65.1
72.4
78.2
67.0
62.0
52.6
57.0
57.0
57.0
43.8
62.1
58.7
70.2
54.8
63.5
64.6
50.1
*
57.0
*
63.1
5
56.2
58.4
65.1
67.2
76.9
80.8
67.5
65.0
60.0
63.9
55.8
62.1
57.6
59.4
64.6
69.0
57.8
62.3
58.8
59.1
49.3
62.3
*
64.5
6
58.1
58.4
63.9
67.6
77.1
78.5
69.6
61.6
53.5
51.6
50.4
51.2
50.5
63.9
54.9
70.0
47.9
55.8
47.4
75.8
49.1
61.2
*
65.0
7
55.9
57.3
59.0
63.3
72.3
76.3
61.9
59.5
45.3
55.8
51.9
57.2
55.1
65.0
60.2
67.8
62.5
70.4
66.6
513
57.6
*
61.6
8
57.8
57.3
59.1
60.1
67.9
75.7
62.5
58.4
27.5
4.4.6
52.1
41.7
57.5
52.9
67.4
623
73.4
68.1
*
37.4
52.3
59.3
59.9
9
59.0
61.6
66.5
63.6
70.0
70.2
56.7
61.1
48.2
54.0
57.1
53.9
61.5
64.7
63.6
69.2
49.9
57.3
50.2
*
61.1
63.4
72.3
67.2
10
62.2
64.5
69.1
66.2
69.7
72.1
53.8
57.0
42.9
60.5
55.0.
58.3
63.0
64.4
66.6
68.5
47.7
55.6
51.9
80.7
60.5
63.5
72.7
64.4
11
61.1
62.7
70.2
65.6
72.7
71.9
51.8
57.5
43.6
56.8
48.7
49.2
64.1
64.8
66.6
70.1
47.7
55.2
453
45.3
59.0
61.6
*
61.6
12
58.0
62.7
67.7
72.6
74.8
82.7
69.6
58:6
47.7
47.9
42.8
47.0
55.7
64.6
58.2
71.2
47.6
59.5
28.4
45.8
52.7
62.2
*
65.9
13
60.1
61.2
65.2
66.7
69.2
79.3
70.2
63.4
44.1
51.9
51.1
48.2
36.1
64.0
54.1
70.3
56.8
70.7
66.2
64.0
41.7
61.7
59.2
65.2
14
57.0
57.3
62.4
64.2
74.6
77.4
67.9
60.7
44.9
46.9
46.7
45.3
30.9
62.5
50.8
68.5
62.8
77.3
66.8
63.0
493
58.9
56.1
62.4
15
58.0
60.6
65.9
63.9
69.4
69.8
60.2
63.4
48.9
57.8
54.0
50.3
63.0
65.4
65.0
70.1
62.8
67.5
66.2
49.8
62.1
62.5
72.7
65.9
16
,62.5 .
64.6
70.7
68.2.
71.7
73.4
61.2
68.1
49.0
61.7
58.5
56.6
65.9
60.7
67.6
66.9
58.9
62.1
47.6
48.6
61.4
65.7
73.6
66.1
17
64.1
65.7
69.9
69.4
75.7
80.2
66.7
64,8
53.4
61.1
52.6
58.6
61.8
64.1
68.4
67.7
59.7
54.5
55.1
59.1
58.4
59.1
*
62.4
18
60.0
62.0
62.2
65.5
74.2
79.1
67.7
62.4
51.1
55.7
60.8
55.6
52.9
59.5
59.7
67.7
62.6
72.0
71.4
54.2
47.4
58.4
*
63.4
19
59.6
59.2
64.6
66.3
75.7
78.9
71.1
63.0
58.4
54.3
58.6
54.6
59.3
64.7
62.6
70.6
60.2
70.1
72.0
56.3
52.2
61.6
70.2
64.9
20
58.2
57.7
61.8
63.4
73.0
77.4
68.6
64.6
44.8
45.1
44.8
50.4
40.1
59.0
53.0
69.6
61.0
67.9
69.5
54.3
40.9
61.7
62.1
63.1
March 6, 1995
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport
Analysis of Noise Events with Time/Date
January 01 to January 31, 1995
Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
Noise Monitor Locations
DATE-
-#1--
- #2 -
-#3_•
-#4-
-#5 -#6-
-#7 -.
-#8-
-#9i
#10
#17
#18
#19
#20
#21
#22
#23
#24
#11
#12
#13
#14
#15
#16
21
60.4
56.6
60.7
62.2
72.6
76.5
69.3
60.5
44.6
48.6
413
435
*
62.7
53.4
69.3
60.5
74.4
70.0
61.4
44.9
58.6
58.5
62.7
22
62.0
62.4
62.5
68.1
72.1
78.1
67.6
62.9
51.6
48.4
49.4
*
*
58.2
51.5
68.7
53.6
65.4
64.7
53.9
35.1
59.2
57.7
63.4
23
57.0
56.6
56.9
61.9
68.8
76.9
64.3
59.8
• 50.1
49.8
47.1
51.7
473
57.6
, 57.0
67.9
57.0
69.2
70.1
52.2
493
56.7
60.7
61.8
24
53.3
56.7
603
60.3
68.6
713
59.9
56.2
50.6
/
58.6
53.2
53.9
59.4
61.0
63.4
70.1
56.2
58.7
52.9
48.3
60.0
61.9
72.8
64.6
25
55.5
56.8
60.4
62.7
69.4
74.4
63.3
57.8
49.2
52.0
46.3
49.7
57.0
60.5
61.0
69.1
60.0
67.9
69.4
51.4
55,9
59.4
71.5
62.4
26
56.6
593
67.3
65.1
72.1
71.1
62.8
66.1
483
63.2
58.6
58.2
64.0
64.5
66.7
7L4
47.8
55.1
46.1
453
61.6
63.4
75.8
66.1
27
56.8
612
65.2
64.5
68.7
70.5
61.8
64.6
*
60.1
56.6
55.0
61.3
66.1
64.3
72.4
58.8
61.8
45.0
*
59.4
63.4
72.0
66.1
28
57.4
61.2
64.6
62.0
67.4
68.8
54.4
53.4
48.4
51.1
48.6
47.8
612
67.4
64.5
72.4
58.8
60.7
43.4
49.9
61.1
64.3
72.9
673
29
57.0
57.3
58.8
62.0
70.3
76.6
65.3
59.2
48.0
50.6
50.3
39.7
50.0
63.4
52.5
69.0
64.9
733
71.3
62.8
45.5
61.5
58.6
64.5
30
57.0
59.6
61.9
65.8
733
78.9
64.6
61.6
423
61.6
57.4
63.7
56.8
64.2
65.5
69.9
61.8
723
72.0
55.7
44.7
60.8
65.6
64.1
31
58.9
59.7
59.8
65.1
70.6
78.1
65.0
62.4
45.6
54.2
46.5
56.9
54.6
68.2
61.1
72.5
60.0
69.6
71.2
55.7
49.5
62.9
66.3
66.9
Monthly
60.6
60.4
65.1
65.9
72.5
77.3
66.3
62.7
58.2
57.5
54.2
56.5
59.0
633
63.0
69.8
60.1
69.4
67.1
67.8
56.5
61.5
69.2
64.5
*Iess than twenty-four hours of data available
1
February, 1995
MASAC
Technical Advisor's Report
it
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
MONTHLY MEETING - Metropolitan Airport Sound Abatement Council
Chairman.
Robert P. Johnson
Vice Chairman:
Scott Bunko
Technical Advisor.:
John Foggia
Secretary:
Jean Detghloa
Airborne Express:
Brian Bates
Air Transport Association:
Paul McGraw
ALFA:
Chador W. Curry Jr:
City cfBloomington:
Peheaa Lee
Vern Wilcox
City of Burnsville:
Juan Rivas
City of Eagan:
Dustin Midck
City ojlnver Grove Heights:
Demo Madden
City cf Mendota Heights:
JW Smith
City of Minneapolis:
James B. Serdn
Jahn Richter
Joe Lee
Judith Dodge
City of Richfield:
George Kanoaa
Don Priebe
City cf S1. Lords Park:
Robert Adrews
City cjSt. Paul:
Scott Drain
Craig C. Wracks
Carol Ann McGuire
Delta Air Lines Inc.:
Rich Kidwell
Federal Express:
Tom Rbetncck
Federal Aviation Administration:
Bruce Wagoner
Ronald Glaub
MAC Staff:
Dick Kilns
MBAA:
Robert P. Johnson
Mesaba Northwest 'Uplink:
Lawrence McCabe
Metropolitan Airports Commission:
Commissioner Alton Gasper
MN Air National Guard:
Major Mark R. Ness
Northwest Airlines:
Mark Sahnen
Jennifer Sayre
St. Paul Clamber ojCc n nerre:
Jade Barkley
Sun Country Airliner:
Luke A. Gomes
United Airlines Inc.:
Allan Tomlirmon
United Parcel Service:
Janes Donde)
US. Air Force Reserve:
Captain Steven Chapman
US. Supplemental Carriers:
Robert A. Mix
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Declaration of Purposes
1.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interest, convenience,
and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, international, national, state,
and local, in and through this state; promote the efficient, safe, and economical
handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international
programs of air transportation; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the
metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all
aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and
effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that area;
2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum environmental impact
from air navigation and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement,
control of airport area land use, and other protective measures; and
3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental policies and minimize the
public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around airports.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Statement of Purpose
This corporation was famed in furtherance of the general welfare of the communities
adjoining Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport - Wold -Chamberlain Field, a
public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of
the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airport; through study and
evaluation on a continuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviation of
the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective
procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and
of aircraft using the same; and through dissemination of information to the affected
communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the
problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions
initiated and talon to alleviate the problem.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Representation
The membership shall include representatives appointed by agencies. corporations,
associations and governmental bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and
responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users,
have a direct interest in the operation of the airport. Such members will be called User
Representatives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and
Public Representatives shall at all times be equal in number.
The Airport 24-hour Noise Hotline is 726-9411.
Complaints to the hotline do not result in changes
in Airport activity, but provides a public sounding
board and airport information outlet. The hotline
is staffed 24 -hours Monday - Friday
This report is prepared and printed in house by
Roy Fuhrmann and Traci Erickson
Questions or comments may be directed to:
MAC - Aviation Noise Program
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Tel: (612) 726-8108, Fax: (612) 726-5296
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Aviation Noise Programs
Contents
Operations and Complaint Summary 1
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
MSP February Fleet Mix Percentage
Airport February Complaint Summary
February Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office
1
1
1
1
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary 2
Complaint Summary by City
Tower Log Reports 3
All Hours
Nighttime Hours
' I
All Operations 4
Runway Use Report February 1995
Carrier Jet Operations 5
Runway Use Report February 1995
Nighttime - All Operations 6
Runway Use Report February 1995 -�
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 7
Runway Use Report February 1995
Carrier Jet Operations by Type 8
Aircraft Identifier and DescriptionTable 9
Runway Use - Day/Night Periods - All Operations
1
Daytime Hours
Community Overflight Analysis 11
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (llpm - 6 am)
10
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
10
Aviation Noise Programs
Remote Monitoring Site Locations 12
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events 13
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT 13
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events 14
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT 14
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 15
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 16
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 17
• Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 18
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 19
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 20
Flight Track Base Map 21
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems Flight Tracks 22
Carrier Jet Operations - February 1995 22
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 23
Carrier Jet Operations - February 1995 23
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 24
Carrier Jet Operations - February 1995 24
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A) 25
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A) 26
Aviation Noise Programs
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Operations and Complaint Summary
February 1995
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
04
196
12
62
0.4
22
11 74
- . 0.5
601
3.9
11
4341
26.8
4722
30.3
29
11601
71.5
10176
65.4
MSP February Fleet Mix Percentage
Stage 2
61.5
56.8
61.1
57.4
Stage 3
38.5
43.2
38.9
42.6
Airport February Complaint Summary
MSP
532
749
Airlake
2
0
Anoka
0
4
Crystal
1
1
Flying Qoud
5
8
Lake Elmo
0
St. Paul
3
7
Nfisc.
1
1
544 1
February Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office
Air Carrier
703
731
Commuter
306
305
G.A.
129
146
Military
7
6
Air Freight
42
34
Charter
31
31
TOTAL 1
Aviation Noise Programs
1253
Page 1
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary
February 1995
Complaint Summary by City
Page 2
, • .
.. : ........
Eagan 36
85
Oat
.... .1
121 16:43%
Eden Prairie 0
1
1 0.14%
Edina 1
4
5 0.68%
Golden Valley 0
1
1 0.14%
Inver Grove Heights 40
110
150 20.37%
Mendota Heights 27
112
139 18.88%
Minneapolis 70
195
265 36.01%
Moundsview 0
1
1 0.14%
Plymouth 0
2
2 0.27%
Richfield6
9
15 2.04%
Rosemount 0
1
1 0.14%
South St. Paul
1
0
1
0.14% "
St. Louis Park
1
1
2
0.27%
St. Paul
10
20
30
4.08%
West St. Paul
1
1
2
0.27%
73 .....:.....,:.>::i:::::,:::::f.,:•.*:•:•i::::•:.:.:*:•:.r:•:•:•:•7,.:*:.:*:•:,..;.:...401,1
Time of Day
1,............,•:.• • • • • • • • • • • .......... • • • • • • • • • • • -• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ......... • • • • • .....
. . . ... .
.. .. ..
Time :' '• ::.• :.
.. .. • •
. i: :• ::. .. : .:: it11116. .. •....Lotal
.../............
,:•:•:•:-:•:•::•:,:•••:•:•:......:,:•:-......:•.:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::.,,,,K,•:•,K.:•i•••••:•:•:•:••.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:::•:•:•:, i:•:::•:••••:••••:•:••••:•:•:•:•:,•:::•:•:::•:::::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:,:•:•:::.: ,:•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• i.•:••,•:•:-:•:•:,,,,, •••:•••••.,,,,,,....,:,,,,,,,,,::::•::::••:•:„.•:•.-:•.•:•:•:•:::•• ::•:••••••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:,....,..:,:••••.•:••:•:•:...,...•
Nature of Complaint
••••••. .. .••••.
loot • . •• .
• • • • • • • • •
00:00 - 05:59
06:00 - 06:59
07:00 - 11:59
12:00 - 15:59
16:00 - 19:59
20:00 - 21:59
22:00 - 22:59
23:00 - 23:59
•
"fi• • :.•• ' :
31
43
179
108
109
194
55
30
Aviation Noise Programs
Excessive Noise 658
Early/Late 59
Low Flying 11
Structural Disturbance 6
Helicopter 0
Ground Noise 12
Engine Run-up
Frequency
1
2
•
Tower Log Reports -
February 1995
All Hours
1
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 3
Metropolitan Airports Commission
All Operations
Runway Use Report February 995
04
A
196
1.2%
230 1.5%
11L
A
2185
13.5%
11R
A 2156 13.3%
22 A 74 0.5%
29L
A
6152
37.9%
29R A 5449 33.6%
3087
2993
59
4406
4248
20.6%
19.9%
0.4%
29.3%
28.3%
04
D
62
0.4%
82
11L
D
2294
14.7%
11R
D 2428 15.6%
22 D 601 3.9%
29L
D
5316
34.2%
3415
3255
561
3628
29R
D
4860
31.2%
3614
0.6%
23.5%
22.4%
3.8%
24.9%
24.8%
•
Page 4 Aviation Noise Programs
Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report February 995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 5
Ava1fba
ti!ar
Att.tot..,::. .
.February
::.„ w••::::::--
11144
Percenlage
04
A
114
1.1%
-., 145
i
1.5%
11L
A
1302
13.0%
1748
17.7%
11R
A
1352
13.5%
1943
19.7%
22
A
33
0.3%
29
0.3%
29L
A
1
3835
38.3%
3238
1
32.8%
29R
A
,
3380
33.8%
2763
;
28.0%
04
D
6
0.0%
35
.
0.4%
11L
D
;
1291
13.8%
1726
19.3%
11R
D
1623
17.3%
2161
24.1%
22
D
346
3.7%
420
4.7%
29L
D
3401
36.3%
2595
i
29.0%
29R
D
1
2711
28.9%
2023
;
22.5%
ThtaI Dep.....
•
:.:::... --.•.::::::...
:...7:::77;iiil
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 5
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Nighttime - All Operations
Runway Use Report February 995
...,<>`';L�k1'#'�:Y'��••>:#<>.° � ��:gin>_:^>�z�•::
04
A
33
4.4%
-155
8.5%
11L
A
36
4.8%
52
8.0%
11R A
25 3.4%
82 12.7%
22 A 3 0.4%
8
1.2%
29L
A
528
71.1%
306
47.2%
29R
04
A
D
118
18
15.9%
5.5%
145
22.4%
16
6.3%
11L
D
87
26.4%
72
28.3%
11R D 143 43.5%
101 39.8%
22 D 27 8.2%
24 9.5%
29L
D
49
14.9%
28
11.0%
29R
D
5
1.5%
13
5.1%
Page 6 Aviation Noise Programs
•
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations
. Runway Use Report February 995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
04 A
20
4.1%
22
5.4%
11L
A
15
3.1%
31 7.6%
11R
A 10 2.1%
_ 54 13.2%
22 A 0 0.0%
4 i 1.0%
29L
A 362
75.1%
210 51.3%
29R
A
75
15.6%
88
21.5%
04
D
2
1.9%
2
2.1%
11L
D
33
32.0%
15 1 15.6%
11R D
44 42.7%
53 55.2%
22 D
10 10.4%
29L
D 11
10.7%
10 ' 10.4%
29R D
1
1.0%
Aviation Noise Programs
6
6.3%
Paste 7
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Operations by Type
February 1995
B727H
DC9H
B707
B733/4/5
B747
B74F
B757
B767
DA10
173
0.9%
519
2.7%
0
0.0%
1120
5.8%
103
0.5%
3
0.0%
1583
8.2%
0
0.0%
5
0.0%
DC10
916
4.7%
DC87
104
0.5%
EA32
1872
9.7%
FK10
715
3.7%
L1011
126
0.6%
MD 11
3
0.0%
MD80
1027
5.3%
BA10
4
0.0%
BAH
3
0.0%
B727
3576
18.5%
B737
395
2.0%
DC8
84
0.4%
DC86
38
0.2%
DC9
6977
36.0%
FK28
48
0.3%
Page 8 Aviation Noise Programs
42.6% Stage III
57.4% Stage II
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Aircraft Identifier and DescriptionTable
'}.:::::�:...j.J:::.:::..4v
:........................: ....
.Y:::::::::::: ;v:n.:_v,..::.i:.::i+::•i'1.;:;:•::ji C•iii{:•i:;;}•
B727
i
BOEING 727
B727H
!
BOEING 727 - HUSH KIT
i
B707
BOEING 707
B733
BOEING 737-300
B737
BOEING 737
B73S
BOEING 737 200 SERIES
B747
BOEING 747
B74F
BOEING 747 FREIGHTER
B757
BOEING 757
B767
l
BOEING 767
j
BAll
BRITISH AEROSPACE 111
BEC
BEECHCRAFT (ALL SERIES)
BE1
BEECHCRAFT 1900 •
BE80
BEECHCRAFF KING AIR
BE99
1
BEECHCRAFT QUEEN AIR
CNA
CFSSNA (ALL SERIES)
DC10
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC10
DC8
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8
DC8S
(
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 STRETCH
DC86
!
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 60 -SERIES
DC87
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 70 -SERIES RE
DC9
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9
EA32
AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320
FKIO
FOIsKER 100
FK28
FOKKER F28
FK27
FOKKER F27 (PROP)
LI011
LOCKHEED TRISTAR L1011
MD11
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DCII
MD80
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80 -SERIES
SW3
SWEARINGEN METROLINER 3
SW4
SWEARINGEN MEIROLINER 4
SF34
1
SAAB 340
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 9
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Runway Use - Day/Night Periods - All Operations
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport February 1995
Runway
Name
04
Departures
Day
44
Daytime Hours
Percentage
Use
0.3%
Arrivals Percentage
Day Use
163 1.0%
.........................
11L
2207
14.5%
2149 13.9%
11R
2285
15.0%
2131 13.8%
22
574
3.7%
71 0.5%
29L
5267
34.6%
5624 36.3%
29R
4855
31.9%
5331
Nighttime Hours
34.5%
Runway
Name
04
Departures
Night
18
Percentage
Use
5.5%
Arrivals
Night
33
Percentage
Use
4.4%
•
11L
87
26.4%
36
4.8%
11R
143
43.5%
25
3.4%
22
27
8.2%
3
0.4% 3€:t
29L
49
14.9%
528
71.1%
29R
5
1.5%
118
15.9%
Page 10 Aviation Noise Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Community Overflight Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport February 1995
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/
No. Richfield
2654
6112
8766
4572%
313.0
Over So. Richfield/
Bloomington
114
346
460
2.4%
16.4
Over St. Paul -
Highland Park
33
6 39
0.2% 1.4
Over Eagan/
Mendota Heights
7215
2914
10129
52.2% 361.8
...
...:"...i:.:i.:.......i!':-.11.....:.....i..........'.........:.....11.....1*..:i..i.....
Over So. Minneapolis/
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/
Bloomington
Over St. Paul -
Highland Park
Over Eagan/
Mendota Heights
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (llpm - 6 am)
•:•
25
20
0
437
12
12
37
32
2 2
77 514
Aviation Noise Programs
6.3%
5.5%
0.3%0
1.3
1.1
0.1
87.9%
4
18.4
Page 11
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Remote Monitoring Site Locations
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
Flight Track Base Map
Minneapolis
FS#4
•
0 •.
FS
Mendota Heigh
Ribhfield FS#18
Fin
•FS# 19 •
FS#17
• FS#13
C
FS#21
•
ger Gr ve Heights
10000 ft
Page 12 Aviation Noise Programs
e
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events
February 1995
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT
• ...:::.
>Events:.::
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
3972
70 1
1
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
2704
378
4
0
3
Minneapolis
W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue
3125
1593 I
29
0
4
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
2931
1278 !
4
0
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
3180
1891
106
0
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
2837
1613
288
1
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave & 64th Street
161
31
1
0
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
143
14
0
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue
31
14 '
0
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street
30
15 ,
5
0
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue
7
3
0
0
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
8
6
3
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
16
7 1
0
0
14
Eagan
First Street & McKee Street
3103
104
2
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue
143
31
0
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
2831
1803
37
0
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
61 ' "
40
0
0
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
97
61
1
0
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
14
12
0
0
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
7
4
0
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
91
23
0
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
1201
19 !
1
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kendon Avenue
1240
61
0
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
834
64
5
0
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 13
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events
February 1995
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT
RMT
...... ....... ... .
..
. ....
App Street Locaton
.
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
213
50
5
1
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
241
70
8
0
3
Minneapolis
W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue
940
233
23
0
4 •
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
1253
581
70
3
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
2507
1163
579
66
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
4271
2731
1601
471
7
Richfield
Wentworth Ave & 64th Street
1492
533
161
4
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
704
263
35
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue
30
5
0
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street
34
13
5
0
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue
22
6
3
0
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
37
15
3
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
335
223
11
0
14
Eagan
First Street & McKee Street
2942
1031
48
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue
2471
852
54
1
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
3705
1420
139
6
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
152 '
40
10
0
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
351
172
67
12
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
260
133
34
2
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
214
26
10
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
983
113
1
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
1434
178
6
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kendon Avenue
2971
1431
448
63
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
521
60
17
0
Page 14 Aviation Noise Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #1: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
Minneapolis
„ : : • : • : • :
0011.*His •.'""
02/09/95 13:14:48
DC10
105.1
mI
D
02/09/95 13:19:35.
DC9
96.6
D
02/23/95 17:44:31
B727
93.4
D
02/28/95 19:32:07
B727
91.2
D
02/23/95 9:59:00
B727
91b
D
02/03/95 19:48:03
DC9
90.4
D
02/24/95 20:39:37
B727
90.3
A
02/14/95 13:02:34
DC9
89.7
A
02/20/95 12:32:15
B727
894
D
02/07/95 12:45:20
B727
892
D
RMT #3: W. Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
Minneapolis j
02/17/95 11:21:23
B727
99.6
D
02/16/95 17:57:07
B727
99.1
D
02/14/95 13:03:28
DC9
989
A
02/23/95 17:44:00
B727
98.8
D
02/20/95 12:31:41
B727
97.8
D
02/28/95 9:37:51
B727
96.5
D
02/01/95 9:52:57
B727
96.1
D
02/27/959:44:36
B727
95.6
D
02/25/95 14:55:51
DC9
95.4
A
02/28/95 8:20:20
DC9
95.3
D
RMT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
02/11/95 7:45:34
B727
.ij
94.0
D
02/10/95 20:20:28
B727
93.7
D
02/11/95 15:21:09
B727
93.6
D
02/04/95 9:38:02
B727
93.4
D
02/14/95 12:51:15
B727
92.8
A
02/14/95 23:22:34
92.0
A
02/09/95 17:15:10
B727
91.7
D
02/25/95 13:10:14
B1/27
91.2
A
02/25,956:44:07
B727
91.0
A
02/01)9512:23:05
B7i7
90.6
D
RMT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St.
.
Minneapolis
02/09/95 17:14:41
Type
B727
102.8
D
02/13/95 9:39:39
B727
101.1
D
02/04/95 9:37:34
B727
100.1
D
02/17/95 12:14:53
B727
99.4
D
02/01/95 9:51:34
B727
98.8
D
02/01/95 8:11:23
B727
97.5
D
02/16/95 19:52:59
B7i7
97.4
D
02/08/95 20:23:13
B77
97.3
D
02/24/95 9:40:43
B727
97.2
D
02/19/95 11:56:33
B727
96.9
D
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 15
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #5: 12th Ave. & 58th St.
Minneapolis
RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
Richfield
.
tioei
}�y�,
02103/95 13:01:28
B727
105.6
D
02/03/95 11:00:40
B727
104.8
D
02/15/95 10:06:21
B727
104.7
D
02/25/95 14:55:44
DC9
104.6
D
02/17/95 15:45:35
B727
104.5
D
02/18/95 17:29:13
DC9
104.4
D
0220/95 10:14:28
DC9
103.3
D
02/20/95 11:17:43
B727
103.1
D
02/20/95 12:02:46
B727
103.0
D
02/25/95 19:51:23
B727
102.7
D
RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
Richfield
Page 16
Aviation Noise Programs
RMT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St.
Minneapolis
•l %:•:%:'i:iii �'t:� i:i:{%
•••••%: L.R. y
.
p
.•:i}TV.�Y.�i
}�y�,
02/20/95 10:34:46
B727
103.3
D
02/15/95 8:25:49
B727
100.8
D
02/03/95 8:50:05
B727
100.4
D
02/27/95 6:15:04
B727
100.2
D
02/11/95 15:49:55
B727
99.5
D
02/04/95 15:57:07
B727
99.4
D
02/11/95 12:22:15
DC9
98.9
D
02/09/95 13:03:06
B727
98.7
D
02/15/95 7:04:34
DC9
98.5
D
02/22/95 16:53:30
' B727
98.2
D
Page 16
Aviation Noise Programs
RMT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St.
Minneapolis
•l %:•:%:'i:iii �'t:� i:i:{%
•••••%: L.R. y
.
p
.•:i}TV.�Y.�i
}�y�,
02/09/9517:14:18
DC9
110.7
D
02/08/95 17:23:27
B727
109.9
D
02/09/95 18:59:46
B727
109.3
D
02/22/95 10:01:12
B727
109.2
D
02!08/95 9:44:31
B727
109.1
D
0222/95 9:58:00
B727
108.7
D
02/18/95 16:52:45
B727
108.0
D
02/16/95 17:29:28
B727
, •107.6
D
02/08/95 17:10:45
B727
107.5
D
02/13/95 12:10:59
B727
107.4
D
RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
02/01/95 10:05:36
B727
98.3
D
02/08/95 20:27:49
B727
96.7
D
02/27/95 6:12:01
B727
95.8
D
02/09/95 14:42:12
B727
95.1
D
02/11/95 6:14:08
B727
94.9
D
0223/9514:42:02
B727
94.8
D
02/09/9510:01:29
DC9
94.7
D
02/16/9517:29:53
B727
94.4
D
02/15/95 20:31:54
B727
94.3
D
02/03/95 12:25:04
B727
94.1
D
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave.
St. Paul
02/02/95 13:09:31 B727
88.5
A
0203/95 18:32:11 B727
88.2
A
02/18/95 11:05:21 B727
88.2
A
02/02/9513:09:15 DC10
88.1
D
02/08/95 9:57:38 DC9
87.7
A
02/22/95 9:56:02 DC9
87.4
D
02/17/95 17:59:12 B727
86.6
A
02/21/95 12:59:23 B727
86.5
A
02/04/95 6:04:04 SW4
86.3
A
02/24/95 14:27:46 SF34
85.8
A
RMT #11: Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
St. Paul
AID
02/07/95 12:45:33 B727
93.0
D
02/01/95 12:59:25 DC9
92.5
D
0222/95 4:56:29 B727
91.7
D
02/01/95 13:01:26 DC9
90.0
D
02/25/95 7:33:25 SW4
89.2
D
02/07/95 12:48:36 FK28
88.9
D
02/23/95 6:28:43 SW4
88.1
02/21/956:03:42D
SW4
87.4
D
02/02/95 5:49:20 SW4
86.3
D
02/07/95 9:14:04 SF34
85.4
D
RMT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
St. Paul
1
02/07/95 12:45:20
•
'1100.1
B727
97.4
D
02/18/95 11:06:07
B727
92.7
A
02/08/95 12:30:56
DC10
92.3
A
02/25/95 7:33:09
B727
92.2
D
02/17/95 17:59:53
B727
92.1
A
02/17/95 14:07:37
B727
91.4
D
02/17/95 17:51:04
DC9
90.9
A
0=1/95 22:42:03
90.8
D
02/22,954:56:11
SW4
90.7
D
02/21/95 13:00:03
SW4
90.5
A
RMT #12: Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
St. Paul
02/02/95 9:21:42
Lioi
97.7
D
02/20/95 11:51:55
DC9
94.7
D
02/07/95 9:29:18
DC9
94.1
A
02/13/95 11:33:58
DC9
93.1
D
02/07/95 10:37:47
EA32
92.9
A
02/20/95 9:22:44
SF42 •
92.8
A
02/04/95 12:43:20
LR45
89.5
D
02/14/95 15:10:36
89.1
D
02/06/95 19:58:53
SW4
88.7
D
02/06/95 20:52:11
B62
88.6
D
Aviation Noise Programs
Pane 17
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #13: Southeast End of Mohican Court
Mendota Heights
02/21/95 20:53:06
B727
96.6
D
02/09/95 20:22:31
B727
95.9
D
02/14/95 17:44:33
DC9
93.7
D
02/02/95 16:10:35
B727
91.6
D
02/26/95 12:29:42
B727
915
D
02/21/95 17:04:41
DC9
91.4
D
02/18/95 6:11:43
B727
91.3
D
02/24/95 20:16:40
B727
912
D
02/16/95 9:46:42'
B727
91.1
D
02/14/95 15:33:32
MD80
90.8
D
RMT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
Mendota Heights
02/14/95 17:44:11
B727
100.7
D
02/14/95 7:54:27
DC9
96.6
D
02/15/95 0:52:36
B727
965
D
02/25/95 18:51:19
B727
96.2
D
02/02/95 14:50:08
B727
95.8
D
02/16/95 14:40:06
B727
95.7
D
02/21/95 20:25:37
B727
95.3
D
02/25/95 20:00:27
B737
95.1
D
02/21/95 20:27:26
DC9
94.9
D
02/14/95 17:29:00
B727
94.8
D
Page 18
Aviation Noise Programs
RMT #14: 1st St. & McKee St.
Eagan
02/25/95 7:27:13
B727
97.8
D
02/25/95 15:16:16
B727
97.7
D
02/05/95 6:57:15
B727
96.9
D
02/26/95 7:31:11
B727
96.8
D
02/18/95 8:40:55
B727
96.6
D
02/14/95 22:43:34
B727
96.2
D
02/24/95 16:21:21
B727
96.0
D
02/17/95 16:08:54
B727
95.9
D
0225/9518:01:25
DC9
95.7
D
0225/95 6:09:28
B727
95.6
D
RMT #16: Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane
Eagan
02/18/95 9:49:00
B727
Level
101.6
D
02/17/95 20:15:59
B727
101.4
D
02/02/95 8:50:31
B727
100.8
D
0224/95 20:44:28
B727
100.5
D
02/21/95 10:14:40
B727
100.3
D
0225/95 17:13:15
B727
100.2
D
02/18/95 7:36:13
B727
99.9
D
02/01/95 16:53:56
B727
99.8
D
02/18/95 9:07:47
B727
99.5
D
0224/95 20:00:18
B727
99.0
D
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #17: 84th St. & 4th Ave.
Bloomington
Date Thne
02/18/95 16:47:41
B727
97.5
D
02/04/95 6:00:07
B727
96.3
D
02/05/95 15:58:33
B727
96.2
D
02/08/95 6:18:15
B727
96.0
D
02/28/95 11:17:42
DC9
950
D
02/08/95 7:09:47
B727
94.8
D
02/20/95 6:11:28
B727
94.5
D
02/21/95 6:15:18
B727
94.3
D
02/25/95 11:12:00
B727
94.0
D
02/09/95 7:34:21
DC9
93.7
D
RMT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th St.
Bloomington
02/05/95 7:49:00
B727
10076
D
1
02/23/95 23:15:50 B727
100.6
D
02/11/95 9:07:26 B727
100.0
D
02/11/95 8:43:55 B727
99.4
D
02/24/95 8:42:00 B727
99.2
02124)959:16:24D
DC9
98.2
02/20/9523:01:26D
B727
98.2
D
02/06/95 23:18:30 B727
97.8
D
02/20/95 22:01:44 B727
96.8
02120/956:11:16D
B727
96.8
D
RMT #18: 75th St. & 17th Ave.
Richfield
.::iiiioi
.....:iS........:ii:....,..,.....................:ki
02a4/95 8:41:47
02/18/95 12:36:05
02/05/95 9:35:54
02/18/95 21:23:29
02/28/95 11:17:18
B727
B727
DC9
B727
•1
B727
104.9
104.5
104.0
103.9
103.1
D
02/18/95 14:26:42
DC9
103.0
D
02/22/95 7:04:16
B727
102.7
D
02/09/95 7:14:49
B727
102.6
D
02125/955:08:10
B727
101.8
D
02/08/95 7:09:24
B727
101.7
D
RMT #20: 75th St. & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
. .
Vittetrxiiit'
02/13/95 21:45:26
B727
94.2
D
02/08/95 22:21:06
DC8
93.5
D
02/05/95 9:48:20
B747
•1
93.4
D
02/10/95 22:40:36
B747
93.1
D
02/13/95 11:27:18
B727
92.5
D
02/27/95 12:17:14
B7317
91.4
D
02/09/95 9:16:33
DC19
91.1
D
02/19/95 5:05:22
B727
90.9
D
02/18/95 14:32:19
DC9
• s
90.6
D
02/19/95 12:49:45
DC9
90.1
D
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 19
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
Inver Grove Heights
�p••,isl.:ill4in•••}:::'?;::::•:�•v:::ii•%:ti>i�:::•i:{:::ii::::i:::'•':{tii::(S:::-i:
i::i:.::.:... ;:+:::
i.:...'$,:..::in::.
_$i:`v�?'•'}}�•��,�
:'i.:^�.....
is:.}:..::i:....::. •i:;
02/26/95 14:59:21
B727
90.3
D
02/14/95 13:12:06
DC9
89.9
D
02/14/9510:05:56
B727
89.4
D
02/14/95 19:56:11
DC9
89.1
D
02/21/95 20:54:01
DC9
88.9
D
02/24/95 18:42:20
B727
88.0
D
02/01/95 18:24:19
B727
87.7
D
02/18/95 7:03:45
B727
87.6
D
02/24/95 14:40:55
B727
87.5
D
02/26/95 15:01:55
DC9
87.5
D
RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave.
Mendota Heights
Page 20
Aviation Noise Programs
RMT #22: Anne Marie Trail
Inver Grove Heights
.�j� ::::Y��•;i�': iiiii'r:•i�:ri�`;:
...�Y•::j::::?:?;:titin:::4
,i::n.::v::: n:..::: ii:::v.::. •.::}iX i.: :.. :{•::;•i:: i::
is r,:t: •?ii: .i
�ifiv:{::::i �'::':'�{i
.••.:� :'::'.:. i:.::.i
•::iMISJf;:F:"::
:}:tii"�-•':,,::��li{{ v�}:'�i'y •. tii'::
.:. �::::.. .:
_$i:`v�?'•'}}�•��,�
:'i.:^�.....
is:.}:..::i:....::. •i:;
02/24/95 20:04:43
B727
104.5
D
02/17/95 19:53:30
B727
104.3
D
02/21/95 20:25:32
B727
104.0
D
a2/21/95 20:31:29
13727
103.9
D
02/02/95 17:09:33
B727
103.8
D
02/18/95 6:56:20
B727
103.8
D
02/09/95 20:32:40
B727
103,5
D
02/18/95 9:54:55
13727
103.4
D
02/02/95 11:55:39
B727
103.2
D
02/21/95 20:52:46
DC9
103.0
D
Page 20
Aviation Noise Programs
RMT #22: Anne Marie Trail
Inver Grove Heights
.�j� ::::Y��•;i�': iiiii'r:•i�:ri�`;:
...�Y•::j::::?:?;:titin:::4
,i::n.::v::: n:..::: ii:::v.::. •.::}iX i.: :.. :{•::;•i:: i::
is r,:t: •?ii: .i
�ifiv:{::::i �'::':'�{i
.••.:� :'::'.:. i:.::.i
•::iMISJf;:F:"::
:}:tii"�-•':,,::��li{{ v�}:'�i'y •. tii'::
.:. �::::.. .:
_$i:`v�?'•'}}�•��,�
:'i.:^�.....
is:.}:..::i:....::. •i:;
02/17/95 13:16:02
B737
96.9
A
02/14/95 9:42:36
B727
92.1
D
02/14/95 8:15:53
DC9
91.2
D.
02/24/95 20:45:38
B727
90.8
D
02/25/95 9:09:18
B727
90.5
D
02/26/95 7:46:18
B727
90.4
D
02/25/95 11:37:54
B727
90.1
D
02/25/95 7:28:08
B727
90.0
D
02/24/95 20:59:14
13727
89.9
D
02/24/95 15:01:37
B727
89.8
D
RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
Eagan
02/09/9514:13:01
DC9
99.7
A
02/09/95 14:18:37
13737
97.8
A
02/17/95 11:04:36
FK28
97.2
A
02/09/95 14:07:35
B737
96.8
A
02/25/95 15:45:08
B727
95.2
D
02/25/95 15:33:30
13727
95.0
D
02/01/95 15:38:27
B727
94.7
D
02/18/95 7:36:55
B727
94.6
D
02/01/95 16:54:36
B727
93.7
D
02/25/95 6:23:21
13727
93.4
D
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Flight Track Base Map
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
Aviation Noise Programs
Pane 21
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - February 1995
Page 22
February 01 to 04, 1994
. - ,,,41,:k,\ • %, :,‘ 4:awing
t,N.• \ -Niro/raw/
11111LW/F
1
• ---Milh341ir !I
• - \ >,V-44,-; .7410.,
1,1
bk\4 11,
• ‘‘*.‘ViA
• I r V *• A
N1415TAIIP
f1F;r0 111110
AVM"' •11i
',110e7:4
• - • - •
. p• ea% 'tr.itqc
.011
• - F:=1;;ZiS AliAlt,,4 4rfai
;•-• :
• t...„,..pistuLAWMAI
•••!4,51,11,A3.::
• • ve• i.1•7 •••tes;
... • !IIPAva.
if•'"
• "7.;:, • •
I'!"-•"--
111Z0-Q:rVie IKX‘
. • •.
'r• z. • , • •' • 0 ..
„mom, . • r ••
\ Aaik.'•
rriviirjall,,gettm11.1M-
e0-4.
1510 Carrier Jet Arrivals
February 05 to 11, 1994
-.
.".•'-4\
1"1\1111iirile It. 4‘• 4'
10.,-Ilkiiss 012-71 Eli ili
11 1,112,-.- • , .......,s ....,
•,- .44 ilqr41 Pi '
hiiiiii;1,INg4;.‘k,
:i.,,,c.74.7i.....74i.....,::::;:tr,...:,:,:::.-..;...!....:,- _,. -..•• , —Ni .i
... 1--, v- ''''.0°
-.,_.---....16„,„?. z ,C4riVio ,inve,..4p.,..„,....,;..,,z.,.,.., ,..,,,„•..omv1, ek
- -,:,- .,,,,-: -...r... -,,..,-. -_ •• .s. • - ' ' ''''s
4t -.VI 0004'
Y.4 „rs...........'llf.z..7.':,„.... 1. •• :
--.;..':;:it,4' .. • ,
'.1.1ze'll.,...-,/.....:.:-..---";--'------..0.ilitli:lig.
...t. ,,.....---,...,,z..-- 1.1"-1.- wi'ill 9., f 0 los \ - • . -.:
''•••:,'14,P.:::i1W,'1"..A°4 ' VI.% •
ri..?...Z....,,..,.....- ''',1,,.....,,,..'"%,
.- .....,...' .--:',...‘%?....1111,1111;i9p4A
T,,,„,,,, ...„„.....,....7::-- .!,... '' • Z.:Ziely7,7 .
ii...........4,,..„ ..,11_11.10.1.',.". -
:%•• -'4.'"'''..... ' ' •
wkr•erhOlki
• •
• allinkS,-- -•
• .
-
•
2722 Carrier Jet Arrivals
-1.441.ea .
."".....••••
•
•
1457 Carrier Jet Departures
Aviation Noise Programs
2506 Carrier Jet Departures
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - February 1995
February 12 to 18, 1994
wow
mama
INI191
February 19 to 25;1994
2244 Carrier Jet Arrivals
2385 Carrier Jet Arrivals
2018 Carrier Jet Departures
2266 Carrier Jet Depa
Aviation Noise Programs
ures
Page 23
• Metropolitan Airports Commission
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - February 1995
Page 24
February 26 to 28, 1994
sA,
401001P1‘ii,• •
'411, \Ns. • big
ila1111111
k
... • k „tog A A • • •••401
40% arl'.4%7•4 .
•••••N'
.•-•=imr...
• . •
• ••;111i,••••
:/•• Nik\,
• •
.57—: • •
10. Ark av
•••••. • ••
1'1'. •
6.0s‘:s •
• ."--;•,.;,-,,vonelliPpi
' • •
1,""‘''At•M %.•.% :•••-• - '
• •
vow_
• .
Witiiiktt‘,44.& \\,:twitisfi,k
1155 Carrier Jet Arrivals
*0 ..'N '''•'• NVZ.•\11W% j•*•4*.• qii.. .• rr. I.' itV
1,221101., ... -••••-•••••"411 'lilt • '4
.`,411.41\7•••••'•::"...11101V,.
•---,A--,,,.„-------, ,,,..........
. ...., ,..„,.........,„ __,
-••----....,-.1...,....,,,..„.
. ... ....... -,,.........,..„,,,_.....,
IfILI:.:VV.11111111W-T,
10111111111V---, „ •
1131 Carrier Jet Departures
Aviation Noise Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
February 01 to February 30, 1995
Noise Monitor Locations
* Less than twenty-four hours of data available
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 25
1
57.3
59.4
65.4
66.2
74.9
77.6
67.8
632
43.0
54.7
57.0
48.8
2
56.1
58.6
64.4
643
74.7
72.9
65.1
59.6
48.2
58.3
54.0
55.3
3
61.3
60.5
64.2
64.4
74.8
78.3
71.6
64.9
52.3
56.1
49.9
55.9
4
56.3
58.2
58.5
63.9
72.8
75.8
70.4
65.0
50.8
45.5
37.3
49.0
5
56.0
56.4
58.7
61.9
67.7
74.7
63.7
58.1
49.9
41.4
45.0
43.8
6
57.7
58.7
63.3
64.4
72.5
785
66.2
63.4
41.6
51.8
45.2
56.7
7
57.9
57.3
58.9
61.2
70.7
75.5
65.1
602
50.5
58.3
55.2
56.7
8
56.8
58.5
60.8
65.0
72.4
79.0
65.9
63.5
492
58.0
47.5
57.1
9
68.3
61.1
67.0
68.3
75.4
80.7
68.3
65.7
49.7
59.7
52.1
56.9
10
57.4
58.4
60.5
65.3
742
782
68.7
65.1
42.9
50.6
48.8
53.9
11
63.7
63.0
64.1
66.4
762
77.7
69.1
68.6
51.2
36.3
44.6
46.1
12
65.2
58.7
*
61.3
70.3
76.2
64.3
64.7
51.0
49.3
45.2
51.7
13
56.4
57.6
56.7
63.3
69.1
76.1
65.6
59.2
45.5
47.9
35.2
55.8
14
65.3
67.4
70.0
68.0
72.1
74.5
53.1
61.3
50.1
60.6
54.4
55.9
15
61.4
60.7
64.5
64.6
74.9
78.1
72.3
62.9
47.5
59.7
52.4
53.5
16
58.6
59.5
64.3
64.7
74.9
77.0
67.6
65.5
46.3
58.9
50.7
55.0
17 '
55.7
58.8
65.4
66.8
75.8
78.2
66.0
63.5
53.8
61.8
54.2
58.8
18
59.4
60.1
63.9
66.1
. 74.4
78.3
65.9
61.7.„52.7
63.0
53.2
582
19
56.2
58.9
682
64.3
75.2
78.0
66.0
64.3
50.3
54.3
47.9
582
20
60.1
59.2
62.3
63.5
73.9
78.9
70.6
65.6
4.6.1
52.1
45.5
63.1
21
56.8
59.5
63.8
63.5
70.7
75.4
60.0
62.5
55.3
63.4
57.0
56.9
22
58.1
58.3
62.4
67.9
75.6
80.1
68.2
62.4
45.7
60.4
60.0
55.6
23
63.5
62.2
65.4
65.6
74.0
78.6
69.4
66.7
52.9
58.0
56.6
52.8
24
59.0
60.5
67.2
66.5
74.7
77.7
66.9
65.9
54.8
61.1
56.3
54.5
25
62.8
65.3
68.2
64.8
*
70.6
58.8
57.7
46.8
56.0
47.8
46.7
26
58.9
60:9
64.7
61.9
67.2
68.4
50.1
49.6
40.7
52.3
46.9
47.8
27
58.6
59.7
64.3
68.0
76.9
795
73.9
68.5
50.3
47.0
42.4
523
28
60.0
59.2
60.6
62.9
73.0
78.2
67.5
66.5
51.4
56.4
54.9
56.1
Mo. Ldn
61.2
60.7
64.4
65.4
73.7
77.4
68.1
64.2
51.1
58.4
53.7
56.8
* Less than twenty-four hours of data available
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 25
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
February 01 to February 30, 1995.
Noise Monitor Locations
Page 26
* Less than twetuy-four hours of data available
Aviation Noise Programs
1
59.2
65.1
61.8
71.0
62.3
65.0
56.0
53.2
59.5
62.6
72.4
66.8
2
63.8
66.8
67.2
71.6
60.7
60.5
47.0
46.5
61.7
63.6
75.3
67.2
3
534
65.3
61.1
71.3
50.8
60.6
57.8
57.6
48.7
61.2
66.0
66.1
4
40.1
57.1
51.9
68.8
64.9
71.1
66.0
59.0
34.7
54.0
54.8
60.2
.5
44.6
70.8
48.9
72.0
64.2
71.9
64.3
61.7
58.0
58.7
58.4
67.0
6
542
59.6
58.8
70.5
61.9
66.5
67.0
60.6
53.8
59.8
67.4
632
7
38.7
56.9
*
69.2
57.9
65.8
66.2
56.4
38.7
57.7
55.5
62.1
8
53.6
62.4
61.2
69.7
66.2
72.0
69.4
63.1
54.6
61.0
615
64.8
9
62.9
672
67.0
71.1
57.1
653
60.8
52.3
58.1
64.0
75.6
72.1
10
53.8
63.7
54.6
72.4
572
59.8
61.3
62.8
51.1
64.1
60.9
66.7
11
42.6
65.1
54.2
71.4
54.9
64.9
64.4
52.7
522
60.8
58.5
64.8
12
43.6
52.3
41.9
60.9
552
68.7
53.8
57.7
*
50.3
40.4
54.5
13
40.7
52.6
53.1
65.1
58.7
69.3
67.9
58.0
43.2
532
54.7
57.4
14
65.9
67.6
70.0
71.6
49.5
50.5
46.4
50.1
622
65.1
77.3
65.9
15
65.2
672
71.0
70.5
48.9
57.0
46.9
53.5
62.3
633
77.6
65.6
16
61.3
66.1
653
70.0
59.7
55.4
48.4
51.9
58.8
60.5
73.0
64.0
17
61.3
65.6
65.8
71.6
52.4
57.9
54.8
52.8
59.5
68.5
74.1
*
18
65.7
67.1
68.0
72.3
59.4
67.4
61.8
572_
62.0
62.1
75.8
65.5
19
54.6
63.0
61.7
70.1
52.7
68.2
71.4
58.4
61.0
60.3
63.5
64.0
20
49.3
64.4
593
71.0
58.7
68.8
712
60.2
*
58.4
64.5
64.1
21
66.1
65.1
68.6
70.9
54.9
572
47.8
49.9
62.4
623
76.2
66.3
22
50.3
63.5
60.8
71.0
59.3
64.5
64.8
59.7
473
60.7
*
64.7
23
49.1
65.7
58.5
70.9
61.3
72.4
71.3
65.7
44.8
60.2
*
65.2
24
64.1
67.4
66.9
72.4
57.1
64.9
63.2
55.1
62.3
64.0
75.0
67.3
25
*
70.3
67.4
73.7
66.6
66.4
48.0
52.8
60.1
67.4
75.0
70.1
26
62.7
683
653
72.9
66.7
65.6
47.6
47.0
61.6
64.9
75.0
68.8
27
43.7
59.7
52.8
68.9
61.9
66.6
59.3
57.2
44.3
57.4
58.6
63.5
28
40.5
58.5
52.3
69.3
54.5
64.4
62.4
59.9
51.3
573
57.9
62.7
Mo. Ldn
61.0
65.8
64.4
71.2
62.7
68.8
653
59.6
58.2
62.6
72.3
66.8
Page 26
* Less than twetuy-four hours of data available
Aviation Noise Programs
ANOMS02 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
C:\123DATA ANOMS Aircraft Operations Data
January 1995 to June 1995
January Percent February Percent March Percent April Percent May Percent June Percent
1995 of Use 1995 of Use 1995 of Use 1995 of Use 1995 of Use 1995 of Use
ALL OPERATIONS
Departures
04 43 0.24% 62 0.40% 0 ERR
11L 2,978 16.78% 2,294 14.74% 0 ERR
11R 3,054 17.21% 2,428 15.60% 0 ERR
22 774 4.36% 601 3.86% 0 ERR
29L 5,558 31.31% 5,316 34.16% 0 ERR
29R 5,343 30.10% 4,860 31.23% 0 ERR
Subtotal (Departures) 17,750 100.00% 15,561 100.00% 0 ERR
Arrivals
04 227 1.23% 196 1.21%
11L 2,741 14.88% 2,185 13.48%
11R 2,908 15.79% 2,156 13.30%
22 66 0.36% 74 0.46%
29L 6,643 36.07% 6,152 37.95%
29R 5,834 31.67% 5,449 33.61%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 18,419 100.00% 16,212 100.00%
Total (All Operations) 36,169 31,773
JET OPERATIONS
Departures
04 0 0.00% 6 0.06%
11L 1,694 16.20% 1,291 13.77%
11R 2,014 19.26% 1,623 17.31%
22 535 5.12% 346 3.69%
29L 3,324 31.79% 3,401 36.27%
29R 2,888 27.62% 2,711 28.91%
Subtotal (Departures) 10,455 100.00% 9,378 100.00%
Arrivals
04 108 0.96% 114 1.14%
11L - 1,677_14.89% _1,302 =13.00% --
11R 1,789 15.88% 1,352 13.50%
22 14 0.12% 33 0.33%
29L 4,145 36.79% 3,835 38.29%
29R 3,533 31.36% 3,380 33.75%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 11,266 100.00% 10,016 100.00%
Total (Jet Only) 21,721 19,394
Mendota Heights
Air Noise Complaints
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
ERR 0 ERR
0
64 139 0 0 0 0
ERR
ERR --
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ERR
ANOMS02 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
C:\123DATA ANOMS Aircraft Operations Data
August 1993 to December 1994
January Percent February Percent March Percent April Percent May Percent
1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use
ALL OPERATIONS
Departures
04 86 0.69% 82 0.56% 173 1.09% 68 0.44% 65 0.43%
11L 2,500 20.00% 3,415 23.46% 2,033 12.81% 3,884 25.21% 4,391 28.71%
11R 2,423 19.39% 3,255 22.36% 3,171 19.98% 3,489 22.65% 4,124 28.97%
22 302 2.42% 561 3.85% 1,064 6.70% 863 5.60% 726 4.75%
29L 3,643 29.15% 3,628 24.93% 4,693 29.57% 3,474 22.55% 2,918 19.08%
29R 3,543 28.35% 3,614 24.83% 4,737 29.85% 3,629 23.55% 3,069 20.07%
Subtotal (Departures 12,497 100.00% 14,555 100.00% 15,871 100.00% 15,407 100.00% 15,293 100.00%
Arrivals
04 146 1.12% 230 1.53% 208 1.37% 316 2.01% 247 1.58%
11L 2,407 18.52% 3,087 20.55% 2,053 13.50% 3,430 21.78% 3,987 25.52%
11R 2,323 17.87% 2,993 19.92% 1,957 12.87% 3,299 20.95% 3,774 24.16%
22 66 0.51% 59 0.39% 80 0.53% 194 1.23% 242 1.55%
29L 4,045 31.12% 4,406 29.33% 5,504 38.19% 4,498 28.56% 3,892 24.92%
29R 4,011 30.86% 4,248 28.28% 5,406 35.55% 4,013 25.48% 3,478 22.27%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 12,998 100.00% 15,023 100.00% 15,208 100.00% 15,750 100.00% 15,620 100.00%
Total (All Operations 25,495 29,578 31,079 31,157 30,913
JET OPERATIONS
Departures
04 12 0.17% 35 0.39% 25 0.27% 17 0.18% 9 0.10%
11L 1,220 17.77% 1,726 19.26% 1,093 11.68% 2,222 23.42% 2,267 25.08%
11R 1,393 20.29% 2,161 24.12% 1,424 15.22% 2,400 25.30% 2,611 28.88%
22 180 2.62% 420 4.69% 805 8.61% 703 7.41% 587 6.49%
29L 2,298 33.47% 2,595 28.96% 3,372 38.04% 2,206 23.26% 1,893 20.94%
29R 1,762 25.67% 2,023 22.58% 2,638 28.18% 1,938 20.43% 1,673 18.51%
Subtotal (Departures 6,865 100.00% 8,960 100.00% 9,355 100.00% 9,486 100.00% 9,040 100.00%
Arrivals
04 54 0.69% 145 1.47% 114 1.15% 222 2.21% 148 1.56%
11L 1,269 16.30% 1,748 17.72% 1,137 11.45% 2,066 20.56% 2,143 22.62%
11R 1,382:17.75% 1,943 —19.69%-1,197 —12.06%— 2,276— 22.65%— 2,242 23.67%
22 34 0.44% 29 0.29% 36 0.36% 127 1.26% 122 1.29%
29L 2,712 34.84% 3,238 32.82% 3,983 40.12% 3,010 29.95% 2,697 28.47%
29R 2,334 29.98% 2,763 28.01% 3,460 34.85% 2,348 23.37% 2,121 22.39%
`,
Subtotal (Arrivals) 7,785 100.00% 9,866 100.00% 9,927 100.00% 10,049 100.00% 9,473 100.00%
Total (Jet Only) 14,650 18,826 19,282 19,535 18,513
Mendota Heights 13 25 54 43 112
Air Noise Complaints
ANOMS02 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
C:1123DATA ANOMS Aircraft Operations Data
August 1993 to October 1994
June Percent July Percent August Percent September Percent October Percent November Percent December Percent
1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use 1994 of Use
ALL OPERATIONS
Departures
04 24 0.15% 30 0.18% 22 0.12% 64 0.39% 43 0.27% 52 0.35% 46 0.26%
11L 5,298 32.95% 3,570 21.38% 5,529 30.90% 4,504 27.31% 5,547 34.54% 3,876 26.02% 5,057 28.45%
11R 5,349 33.27% 3,354 20.09% 5,194 29.02% 4,087 24.78% 5,111 31.82% 3,653 24.52% 4,839 27.23%
22 374 2.33% 528 3.16% 344 1.92% 352 2.13% 471 2.93% 747 5.01% 355 2.00%
29L 2,554 15.89% 4,573 27.39% 3,366 18.81% 3,622 21.96% 2,398 14.93% 3,177 21.33% 3,651 20.54%
29R 2,478 15.41% 4,639 27.79% 3,441 19.23% 3,865 23.43% 2,491 15.51% 3,392 22.77% 3,824 21.52%
Subtotal (Departures 16,077 100.00% 16,694 100.00% 17,896 100.00% 16,494 100.00% 16,061 100.00% 14,897 100.00% 17,772 100.00%
Arrivals
04 439 2.67% 282 1.63% 90 0.49% 224 1.35% 272 1.68% 215 1.43% 213 1.18%
11L 4,890 29.73% 3,172 18.38% 5,320 29.17% 4,013 24.20% 4,971 30.61% 3,360 22.42% 4,548 25.15%
11R 4,823 29.32% 2,983 17.29% 5,057 27.72% 3,853 23.23% 4,825 29.71% 3,362 22.43% 4,364 24.13%
22 158 0.96% 149 0.86% 66 0.36% 182 1.10% 337 2.08% 337 2.25% 292 1.61%
29L 3,213 19.53% 5,338 30.93% 4,002 21.94% 4,005 24.15% 2,840 17.49% 3,899 26.01% 4,583 25.35%
29R 2,927 17.79% 5,333 30.90% 3,706 20.32% 4,308 25.98% 2,993 18.43% 3,815 25.45% 4,082 22.57%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 16,450 100.00% 17,257 100.00% 18,241 100.00% 16,585 100.00% 16,238 100.00% 14,988 100.00% 18,082 100.00%
Total (All Operations) 32,527 33,951 36,137 33,079 32,299 29,885 35,854
JET OPERATIONS
Departures
04 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 16 0.15% 0 0.00% 7 0.07% 0 0.00%
11L 2,958 29.39% 1,941 19.95% 3,146 26.90% 2,625 24.36% 3,303 31.64% 2,326 24.56% 2,927 25.87%
11R 3,729 37.05% 2,299 23.64% 3,856 32.97% 3,031 28.13% 3,744 35.87% 2,634 27.81% 3,421 30.23%
22 260 2.58% 323 3.32% 265 2.27% 257 2.39% 295 2.83% 506 5.34% 254 2.24%
29L 1,747 17.36% 2,905 29.87% 2,473 2t14% 2,673 24.81% 1,711 16.39% 2,178 23.00% 2,521 22.28%
29R 1,371 13.62% 2,259 23.22% 1,956 16.72% 2,173 20.17% 1,385 13.27% 1,819 19.21% 2,192 19.37%
Subtotal (Departures 10,065 100.00% 9,727 100.00% 11,697 100.00% 10,775 100.00% 10,438 100.00% 9,470 100.00% 11,315 100.00%
Arrivals
04 328 --- - 3.06% - 208 1.97% 66 _ 0.53% 169 _. 1.51% 212 1.97% 150 1.50% 143 1.19%
11L 2,898 27.03% 1,836 17.38% 3,253 26.36% 2,470 22.00% 3,052 — 28.38%— 2,097 — 20.99% 2,743 22.88%
11R 3,238 30.20% 1,955 18.50% 3,640 29.50% 2,783 24.78% 3,455 32.12% 2,430 24.32% 3,009 25.10%
22 92 0.86% 95 0.90% 39 0.32% 137 1.22% 183 1.70% 221 2.21% 191 1.59%
29L 2,332 21.75% 3,529 33.40% 2,967 24.04% 2,908 25.90% 1,986 18.47% 2,771 27.73% 3,313 27.64%
29R 1,835 17.11% 2,943 27.85% 2,375 19.25% 2,762 24.60% 1,867 17.36% 2,323 23.25% 2,589 21.60%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 10,723 100.00% 10,566 100.00% 12,340 100.00% 11,229 100.00% 10,755 100.00% 9,992 100.00% 11,988 100.00%
Total (Jet Only) 20,788 20,293 24,037 22,004 21,193 19,462 23,303
Mendota Heights 194 221 575 486 139 90 72
ANOMS02 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
C:\123DATA ANOMS Aircraft Operations Data
August 1993 to December 1994
August Percent September Percent October Percent November Percent December Percent
1993 of Use 1993 of Use 1993 of Use 1993 of Use 1993 of Use
ALL OPERATIONS
Departures
04 133 0.85% 236 1.45% 785 4.98% 32 0.23% 82 0.54%
11L 3,682 23.59% 2,894 17.75% 1,707 10.84% 3,057 21.61% 3,894 25.49%
11R 3,828 24.53% 2,775 17.02% 2,146 13.62% 3,013 21.30% 3,710 24.29%
22 663 4.25% 248 1.52% 1,596 10.13% 1,172 8.29% 376 2.46%
29L 3,606 23.11% 5,322 32.65% 4,747 30.14% 3,373 23.85% 3,681 24.10%
29R 3,695 23.68% 4,826 29.61% 4,771 30.29% 3,496 24.72% 3,531 23.12%
Subtotal (Departures 15,607 100.00% 16,301 100.00% 15,752 100.00% 14,143 100.00% 15,274 100.00%
Arrivals
04 331 2.03% 51 0.33% 348 2.22% 115 0.77% 162 1.02%
11L 3,498 21.49% 3,099 20.04% 2,072 13.23% 3,040 20.30% 3,784 23.73%
11R 3,433 21.09% 3,033 19.62% 1,956 12.49% 2,922 19.52% 3,520 22.07%
22 318 1.95% 1,545 9.99% 267 1.71% 156 1.04% 74 0.46%
29L 4,569 28.07% 3,829 24.76% 5,485 35.03% 4,353 29.07% 4,224 26.49%
29R 4,130 25.37% 3,905 25.26% 5,529 35.31% 4,386 29.29% 4,182 26.23%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 16,279 100.00% 15,462 100.00% 15,657 100.00% 14,972 100.00% 15,946 100.00%
Total (Ail Operations 31,886 31,763 31,409 29,115 31,220
JET OPERATIONS
Departures
04 8 0.09% 0 0.00% 154 1.54% 7 0.08% 16 0.17%
11L 2,062 22.39% 1,897 19.03% 1,273 12.73% 1,808 19.72% 2,225 23.19%
11R 2,676 29.06% 2,261 22.68% 1,578 15.76% 2,115 23.06% 2,588 28.98%
22 386 4.19% 1,174 11.78% 958 9.58% 899 9.80% 243 2.53%
29L 2,354 25.56% 2,578 25.86% 3,425 34.25% 2,349 25.62% 2,552 26.60%
29R 1,724 18.72% 2,059 20.65% 2,615 26.15% 1,992 21.72% 1,969 20.53%
1. --
Subtotal (Departures 9,210 100.00% 9,969 100.00% 10,001 100.00% 9,170 100.00% 9,593 100.00%
Arrivals
04 203 2.01% 171 1.58% 173 1.64% 76 0.75% 104 1.01%
11L 2,036 20.20% 1,777 16.39% 1,348 12.79% 1,876 18.50% 2,190 21.34%
11R 2,269-22.51% 1,920-17.71%-1,335-12:66%--2;014=-19.86%-2,355--22.95%
22 170 1.69% 149 1.37% 83 0.79% 99 0.98% 42 0.41%
29L 3,043 30.19% 3,798 35.02% 4,019 38.12% 3,177 31.33% 2,981 29.05%
29R 2,359 23.40% 3,029 27.93% 3,584 34.00% 2,898 28.58% 2,591 25.25%
Subtotal (Arrivals) 10,080 100.00% 10,844 100.00% 10,542 100.00% 10,140 100.00% 10,263 100.00%
Total (Jet Only) 19,290 20,813 20,543 19,310 19,856
Mendota Heights
Air Noise Complaints
75 68 56 32
�a+y��►ts� vhctr
pamm.Aviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
MSP Monthly Complaint
Summary
Complaints
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
r
GT.
1.3
1993 year 1994 year
1.1.114.4.161111.116
1995 year;
1
i
Aug -93
Sep -93
Oct -9
Nov -93
Dec -9
Jan -94
Feb -94
Mar -9
3
3
N
N
1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111
ll
etetmmtkimil
DE(tteKuttemME
--
v
4
ummummi
Apr -94
May -94
Jun -94
Jul -94
Aug -94
Sep -94
Oct -9
Nov -94
Dec -94
Jan -95
4
Nonimimi
imissomi
I
1— -
—77
imummui
imsommi
waltz
• s;uaaaa,
(Z4
Agleam
P•
t�
t�
ttz
P1V *a*
A:
oa;
CFO o
26,
ci)
1v
ANOMS Monthly Review
Aviation Noise
Programs
MSP Arrivals -All Operations
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
M
ao
i
LLLu+;LLi .
e+1
ON
e+1
O
M
. Q
0
z
1111t1��� • ••••41 L���r. .....ms ..... ..• u..i_.
TTTTTTTTTTT7T�^tr..■
Q Q 7 'V e
ON O. ON O. O�
1 .
0 L ; .'
d m d eII
b
a
ti
Q
ON
ti
do
O
0
z
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
3
Aft.p.Aviation Noise
ANOMS Monthly Review
Programs
MSP Departures - All Operations
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
7.
_
,
.41.
Ahl.
,
.Ak.
•..
.
Nir
V
an
'.". ;'r
.L I
slid
. .0101 ..I.,.,.......
4•1 1 1 1
X1111
1..
..........
....,,,
, .•. n
. .V. .•, I.,„,.11
,,..,
1111.
en en en
O% O\ O.
= c;„.
v
d
yrs 44.
O% O\ O. O\ O% O�
1 L ` 1
d 07
pEU CO CO
=
z Q ti X d ,.,
O.
ela
R
0
z
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
.......01/1/1...
ANOMS Monthly Review
Aviation Noise
Programs
Carrier Jet Arrivals
Runway Use Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
�7�JJ�t77SSY1"Yrrrr.
Iii :—!!J I , I 11Jrrerrrr7]
M
eo
a
!rf
0%
0
e+7
ai
et e! er e! of
O� 0' 00 0% 0% 0'
O • a, • 0•6.5 gig 2 d •,
0%
O
ti
tt
0'
Oa
0
er e
ON 0%
N
0.
ui
INI
c# O
V)
0%
a
0
ti
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
5
ANOMS Monthly Review
Aviation Noise
Programs
Carrier Jet Departures
Runway Use Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
1
40
30
20
10
0
M
,11
dd
111°1.. 1 1 rrl 1 1
Rf
Ot
1y
0'
O
!+1
0
z
M
01
1
t 1 r1 1.1 U t 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U1 1 11 1111 1 1 1 1 1I88111 1 11.1 1'1 /
e
O1
O
0
ti
et
.a
NIP
ON
s.
COCO
C
7
ti
01
O
ti
1111111111 198811111118111111.11
e e e er h
01 ON ON ON 01 01
I 1 1 1 1 I
b6 O.41,3
• col 0 z • a ti
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
11..1.1...,.1.....
1'
1
C-bail...Aviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
Nighttime Arrivals - Runway Use
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
e•!
O`
u
O
Oa
O
Z
el et R
oa er oh .
▪ o as
.0 co
Q r, G4
O
ti
o1
O
ti
et
O\
HI
7
0.
O
.▪ %
O
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington
t £31
1 �
1Z
Over
u
Q
h
eT
0
ti
St. Paul
7
ANOMS Monthly Review
Aviation Noise
Programs
Nighttime Departures - Runway Use
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
=:\,/
ti
11
r
si.0
M
O
z
O
R Tr Q
Oa ON O1
o Z.
d • asas
ti
VA X
1,.
O.
ti
ti
O
et
O
z
e
O�
u
67
In
O'
C
03
ti
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
401111.11111111111
11...........11.
vF
1
.Uiup.Aviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
Nighttime Cagier Jet
Arrivals Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
aM
=4to y
vs 0
tic
01 en
ch
z
el.." • Tr *0 e Tr
Ch 8 C C a C a
d C A L 8 t.. a, C
ti , X al .t X ti
11
•r
a
a
188
u
O
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington
CIS
0
z
Over St. Paul
ANOMS Monthly Review
Aviation Noisy
Programs
Nighttime Carries Jet
Departures Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
J
f
VI enM 1+1 qtrQ e '0 '1t
O� O� O, 01 0% O, Oa O% O% O% 01 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1
1.
ea
au au co
e ti
O�
O
ti
bl
1
'11
u
O
0
z
O%
A
O\
ti
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
..1..1.A....M..1.....1
10
i11-1 L AfteimAviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review -
MSP Monthly Complaint
Summary
Complaints
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111
January
February
N. V
March
April
May,...•.....:., :...:.:
June
July....,..,..,.........., ..................................,.
August
J
September
October
November
December
1993 year 1994 year
1995 year
Sep -93
Oct -93
Nov -9
Dec -93
Jan -9
Feb -94
Mar -94
Apr -9
May -94
Jun -9
Jul -94
Aug -94
Sep -94
Oct -94
Nov -9
. Dec -94
Jan -95
Feb -95
Z•t
ktZ
co
k •
T k
'fAviatibn Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
MSP Arrivals - All Operations
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
M
LLLLLLLLLLI.•
O
e e ▪ e e e
0% oN a▪ % 0% O' o
• m▪ co
. 2 ti
e
e
e
01
e
0
z
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington
.......................1
IT in h
o O 0
ti
C w
Over St. Paul
.....................
r
Amigo...Aviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
IMSP Departures -All Operations
Su mmary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
01
d
an
ml
!
`l
.10,4
•
�n�+'''.r
,gyri,l1ll�t
,,,,,,,,,,,,•
,,,,,
e e e e e
cp. Oh eN O% O▪ %
Q 40
a
0
e
O%
O%
O
z
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
.410..1.1..11.001.1,01,,1 ......0101..........
ANOMS Monthly Review
Aviati�n Noise
Programs
Carrier Jet Arrivals
Runway Use Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
e•f
rr u 1 m.uu- 11 1. rr rt•■ alami31NIl r`.'" I-rrr'rTT x 1 1 1 1 1 1
!+1
01
0
Z
fel
e
ON
R
ON
1
d
rat
01
L
ON
0.
I
0
0
ti
ON
0
ti
ON
O
e
O1
0.
e
C.;
0
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington
e v h
O+ ON ON ON
I 1
O • d O • v
Z 0 rj w
Over St. Paul
,1rrilkimpbAviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
Carrier Jet Departures
Runway Use Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Cn
erl
O
e e e
ON Oh Ch
1
42
• cfs ▪ C. es
2 2
e
a
°
e e e e v v
O� Oh ON Oh O% O+
1 1 $ . 1 1
CL `• > uCn
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
6
.1
...,
.
--A-.
.
‘1
01111'400.0-
41101*
:
...
,''''
�����$•
�o,00
0000,�„
o..o
ill,,
llllll1111pg
IZ
�1j1/1
oo,,,,,,,00000000
,
erl
O
e e e
ON Oh Ch
1
42
• cfs ▪ C. es
2 2
e
a
°
e e e e v v
O� Oh ON Oh O% O+
1 1 $ . 1 1
CL `• > uCn
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
6
5LAviation Noise
ANOMS Monthly Review
Programs
Nighttime Arrivals -Runway Use
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
t.
O
erl
o%
O
Z
e
0
.0
e
1
0
e
CP,
1
gird
0.
CP,
O
2
Tr
0
0
ti
0
ti
1..•
Te
a
a
0
e
c
0
tw.
cr.
0
Z
.Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington''
........................
rreerre
,Q▪ .
O
O
.0
as
Over St. Paul
................
1 •Y
1 AMIN Aviation Noise
ANOMS Monthly Review
Programs
Nighttime Departures - Runway Use
Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2.
_-,
Ii
o"1
f'
,1'
•I'
1
'�
,
" ''''
11
''
(91
O
•
0
0
•
t,
0
Cro
2
O%
L
a
et
O.
0
0
ea
0
u
O
er h h
ON 01 O� O%
Z • G
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
1r\r'
.Aviati�n Noise
ANOMS Monthly Review Programs
Nighttime Carrier Jet
Arrivals Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
en
ciN
et.
ey
en
eh
O
CPI
0
z
en
1 (,
.111111
0a c' ON ONON
1 1 1 1 1 1
ti CLI 2 t X ti
er
' 1
rPr•••in 1 1 1 1 1 1
0
et
ON
a
O
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington
z
e! h h
ON ON 1T
I I 1
GI
ea ami
G ti
Over St. Paul
,
—T
Aft Aviation Noise
Programs
ANOMS Monthly Review
Nighttime Carrier Jet
Departures Summary
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
J
1
ti
1
tel • tel
a a a 01
e •' e e
a o, a a a a
.041
til t.. as O
▪ Cs, d ti
111,11/111
e e V Q e v ,n
Q Ch 0% a 0 a o,
= w 0. > u a
-,dA
44
• ' rid O z G -
h
.
v
w
Over Minneapolis Over Eagan/Mendota Heights Over Bloomington Over St. Paul
10.10.1010101010.1.
.1010......,.....
10
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis ;
January 1995
3708 Total Carrier Jet Departures from Runway 11L & Runway 11R
March 13, 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
Proposed North Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
January 1995
1
_ 0.7 % (26) Carrier Jet Departures North of Proposed 095° (M)
Corridor Policy Boundary
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
January 1995
3708 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
25 ... Carrier Jet Departures (0.7%)
North of Proposed 095° (M) Corridor Policy Boundary
25 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=1 (4.0%) RIGHT COUNT=24 (96.0%)
Manch 13, 1995
•Y
Metropolitan Airports Commission
4
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
January 1995
3708 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
1 ... Carrier Jet Departure - Early Turnout (0.0%)
(North Side Before Three Miles)
1 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=1 (100.0%) RIGHT COUNT=O
Manch 13, 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
Southern Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
January 1995
9.0% (333) Carrier Jet Departures South of Corridor (South of 29L Localizer)
Manch 13. 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
January 1995
3708 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
330, ... Carrier Jet Departures (8.9%)
South of Corridor (South of 29L Localizer)
O
O
0
O
O
O
330 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=O (0.0%) RIGHT COUNT=330 (100.0%)
r i
•
•
•
•
•
•
• 0
•• 1 •(0.0
•
•
•
• w•r+!
• 1e>
•1,�••
r �
"1
-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
DEVIATION FROM CENTER OF GATE (ft)
6000
March 13, 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
January 1995
3708 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
3 ... Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turnout (0.1%)
(South Side Before Three Miles)
3 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=3 (100.0%) RIGHT COUNT=O (0.0%)
0
0
Manch 13, 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
Southern Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
4
January 1995
Carrier Jet Departures 5° South of Corridor
(5° South of 29L Localizer)
March 13. 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
January 1995
3708 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
38 ••. Carrier Jet Departures (1.0%)
5° South of Corridor (5° South of 29L Localizer)
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
38 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=O (0.0%) RIGHT COUNT=38 (100.0%)
r
T
i
•
•. • •
••
•
•
• ••
+-•-
•
•
•
•
• •
•
1
-6 00 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
DEVIATION FROM CENTER OF GATE (ft)
6000
Manch 13, 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
January 1995
3708 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
3 ... Carrier Jet Departures - Early Turnout (0.1 %)
(South Side Before Three Miles)
3 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=3 (100.0%) RIGHT COUNT=O (0.0%)
Manch 13, 1995
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
2914 Total Carrier Jet Departures from Runway 11L & Runway 11R
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 1
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Proposed North Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
0.2% (7) Carrier Jet Departures North of Proposed 095° (M)
Corridor Policy Boundary
Page 2 Aviation Noise Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
2914 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
7 ... Carrier Jet Departures (0.2%)
North of Proposed 095° (M) Corridor Policy Boundary
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 3
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Southern Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
Page 4
9.7% (284) Carrier Jet Departures
South of Corridor (South of 29L Localizer)
Aviation Noise Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
2914 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
284 ... Carrier Jet Departures (9.7%)
South of Corridor (South of 29L Localizer)
2.84 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
LEFT COUNT=O (0.0%) RIGHT COUNT=284 (100.0%)
0
LC)
01
i 'r
• • •
• .
i �•o•
•
• .• •• �_•
•
,•
• •
• • `,•
, M• ' ••_-
•••• 44•
••
•• h ;s
.•• •8r
• •• ••,
•
•
•
•
-6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
DEVIATION FROM CENTER OF GATE (ft)
6000
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 5
I
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Southern Boundary Corridor Gate Penetration Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
1.7% (50) Carrier Jet Departures 5° South of Corridor
(5° South of 29L Localizer)
Page 6 Aviation Noise Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport
February 1995
2914 ... Total 11L and 11R Carrier Jet Departures
�4 ... Carrier Jet Departures (1.7%)
5° South of Corridor (5° South of 29L Localizer)
50 TRACKS CROSSED P -GATE
0 LEFT COUNT=0 (0.0%) RIGHT COUNT=50 (100.0%)
o 1
0
.•
0
.
•••••
•••
•
• -
• •
o•
r
• •i
W
•
I-
i- p
-JO
.
Q p
N
* i
,
r
O
O
-6000
-4000 -2000 0 2000 4000
i
6000
DEVIATION FROM CENTER OF GATE (ft)
Aviation Noise Programs
Page 7
THE NOISE NEWSLETTER FEBRUARY 1994
PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY THE
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION TO INSURE A SOUND -CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT
Volume V, No. 2
HOWARD HIGH -HATS NOISE CONCERNS
ABOUT LAND -USE PANEL PROCESS
A Commentary
by Charles F. Price
Executive Director
Nearly a month of resounding silence has greeted expressions
of concern by the National Organization to Insure a Sound -
controlled Environment (NOISE) about the Federal Aviation
Administration's management of its Study Group on Land -Use
Compatibility - enough time to suggest that the criticisms are
being slighted.
NOISE wrote letters January 25 to George Howard, Chairman
the FAA's Research, Engineering and Development Com-
.nittee, complaining that the agency had dominated the work of
the study group (See the January 1995 NOISE Newsletter). The
study group was a subset of Howard's committee. Howard is
President ofthe Airports Council Intemational-North America.
Enough time has now passed that it's appropriate to conclude
that Howard and his FAA committee staffers are as ungracious
as they are indifferent to the merits of the complaints NOISE
voiced. Under ordinarily civil circumstances it might be
expected that the letters deserved at least an acknowledgement,
if not a reply. While spirited in tone, they were respectful and
they addressed issues worthy of serious attention.
You can bet that a similar expression of concern from the Air
Transport Association, the Air Freight Association, or a major
airline would have drawn a prompt response from Mr. Howard.
Clearly he is more comfortable with industry heavy -hitters than
with the representatives of the general public, who after all play
no more significant role in the nation's aviation system than to
make it possible by paying for it and using it.
It is one thing to ignore a letter from the Executive Director of
NOISE, who after all can be dismissed as yet another Washing-
ton hired gun sounding off on behalf of his special-interest
constituency.
But it is quite another to ignore a letter from a local elected
official, which is what NOISE First Vice President Sharron
Spencer is. Council -Member Spencer legitimately represents
the people of Grapevine, TX and she deserves Mr. Howard's
respect. As of February 23, 1995 she doesn't have it.
MEMBERS' POLL SUPPORTS STRATEGIC PLANNING;
DIVIDES ON ENLARGING FOCUS
So far a survey of the municipal and other members of NOISE
shows support for the idea of re-examining the association's
goals by means of strategic planning, but reflects a division of
opinion over whether the group should focus its efforts exclu-
sively on matters related to aircraft noise.
ith only days remaining before the due date for returning
survey questionnaires, eleven responses had been received -
seven from municipal members and four from individual mem-
bers. The municipal responders included one airport operator.
Nine responders favored strategic planning and only two op-
posed it. The same number said they would take part in such an
exercise or declined to participate. But overall, six responders
said NOISE should confine itself exclusively to concerns about
aircraft noise and four felt the focus of the organization should
be expanded. The voting by municipal members was evenly
split, with three responders on each side of the question.
Individual members voted three to one to retain the present
concentration on noise.
(Continue on page 2.)
February 1995
Page two
MEMBERS' POLL
(Continued from page 1.)
The purpose of the survey, authorized by the NOISE Board at
its December meeting in Minneapolis, was to sound out the
membership on the question of strategic planning prior to the
next Board session on March 11 in Washington, where a
decision is to be made on whether and how to proceed with the
idea.
Most responders - eight of the eleven - felt all categories of
NOISEmembers should participate in strategic planning, rather
than Board members alone. The two votes in favor of restrict-
ing the exercise to the Board of Directors came from municipal
members.
One survey question asked what other concems NOISE should
address if it were to expand its focus. Land -use planning and
mass transit links to airports each drew four votes; air pollution
received three votes; and the high-density slot rule was men-
tioned twice. Hazardous waste disposal and water pollution
were each mentioned once. Three categories of concern not
mentioned in the questionnaire were added by responders: The
consequences of accidents on takeoff and landing; military
operations; and noise pollution caused by other sources than
aircraft.
Ironically, some who voted against expanding the NOISE
charter also mentioned additional issue areas the organization
should address.
Eight responders said their NOISE membership helps them
deal with their local noise problems more effectively. When
asked how NOISE had been helpful, responders offered a range
of replies. Municipal members mentioned, "Strength in num-
bers and national presence", "information provided in newslet-
ter and occasional phone calls", "understand technical issues
and put local issues into national perspective", "updates on
legislation; what other cities are encountering next to airports".
Individual members spoke of "Reporting federal legislative
and administrative developments about aircraft noise", "infor-
mation on U.S. and FAA policies and current noise negotia-
tions", and "provide information on request".
Only one responder suggested ways NOISE could be more
helpful than it now is. An individual member said NOISE could
provide "more technical (operational) information".
Seven members said they felt NOISE was an effective lobbying
force on the national scene, but four said they could not form an
opinion on the matter. Asked how the lobbying had been
effective, responders mentioned the importance of having a
national presence, dialogue with FICON and FICAN, "assis-
tance with national legislation, regulation, airport operation,
and technical improvements", facilitation of protective legisla-
tion, and "showing the way to similar European negotiations"
(from a Belgian member).
In answer to a question about how NOISE's national lobbying
could be improved, responders mentioned "acting as a conduit
for airports and communities to lobby for more noise grants and
to lobby to get PFC back bonds", and offering computer access
such as Internet or CompuServe. Most responders had no
opinion on the matter.
Suggestions for improving the newsletter included revising the
layout, having more news about local anti -noise campaigns,
and reducing the exposure of Executive Director Charles Price
with a corresponding increase in "other comments".
Asked to critique the annual NOISE conferences, responders
made a number of suggestions, including greater involvement
by members in conference planning activities "to engender
enthusiasm and a sense of ownership"; scheduling the meeting
of the Board of Directors in the middle of the conference
schedule rather than at the end, to maximize attendance; and
striking a better balance among operational, land use and
technology issues.
Municipal members were evenly divided - three to three - on
whether they made a special effort to attend NOISE Board
meetings. Those saying they did not make such an effort
mentioned travel cost, other priorities, and being too busy as
reasons for not coming.
Eight responders said -they were willing to be active in their
region to help recruit new municipal members of NOISE. One
municipal member declined to participate.
NOISE ANNUAL CONFERENCE
WILL BE JULY 26-29
The 1995 annual conference of NOISE will be held July 26-
29 at the Marriott Key Bridge Hotel in Rosslyn, VA under
the sponsorship of the Committee on Noise Abatement at
Dulles and National Airports (CONANDA), an ann of the
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, and the
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, one of the two
charter members of the new NOISE Airport Operators
Committee.
it
February 1995
Page three
DUES NOTICES
DISTRIBUTED
Invoices for 1995 annual dues were sent out to all categories of
NOISE members in February. Due date for payment is May 1.
In a letter accompanying the notices, NOISE Executive Direc-
tor Charles F. Price noted that the past year "has been a
challenging one forNOISE, and the coming year promiies to be
even more demanding, and since your dues dollars are our
principal source of funds, we need your continued help to keep
up the work we do here in Washington."
The letter said that 1995 could be a defining year for NOISE.
The organization is due to take "a close look at our organiza-
tionalmission and structure, withaneyetowardmakingchanges
that may be needed to keep us active and current." NOISE will
also be expanding and working with the new Airport Operators
Committee. "We will continue to maintain liaison with the
Federal Aviation Administration and with all aspects of the
aviation industry," Price said, as well as "staging our best -ever
annual conference in Washington, D.C."
"Much of our work in 1994 was taken up with participation in
the work of FAA's Land -Use Compatibility Study Group.
ile...this effort did not bear much fruit, valuable communi-
.,..don links were established between NOISE and the airlines,
airport operators, and other representatives of the industry. We
hope to capitalize on these contacts in 1995. Finally, NOISE
needs to grow. During the coming year we will be working hard
on expanding our membership by recruiting new communities
and individuals as well as members for our Airport Operators
Committee."
NOISE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
TO MEET MARCH 11
The Board of Directors of NOISE willmeeton Saturday, March
11, from noon to 3 p.m. in the Bancroft Room of the Washing-
ton Hilton Hotel and Towers in Washington, D.C., in conjunc-
tion with the National League of Cities' Annual Congressional
City Conference. A deli luncheon will be served. The principal
order of business will be a discussion of whether to undertake
strategic planning at the annual conference next July and the
prospects for future management of the association's affairs
(See related stories in this issue).
PRICE TELLS SEMINAR
AIRPORTS AND COMMUNITIES CAN
AGREE, BUT IT'S NOT EASY
It is possible for noise -impacted communities and airport
operators to find common ground onpccasion, but only when
certain factors are present, NOISE Executive Director Charles
F. Price told attendees at the 10th Airport Noise and Land Use
Compatibility Symposium in San Diego, CA February 28.
"One thing airports and communitiesihavein common," Price
said, "is a stake in the health of the local economy. The airport
is a vital economic engine for any region it serves. The ability
of the airport to expand capacity often determines whether
economic opportunities in the surrounding cities and towns can
expand also. When this relationship is clearly understood by
both the airportand its adjacentcommunities, real dialogue and
even ccoperation are possible."
Price said that another factor facilitating airport/community
dialogue is the existence of space around the airport. "Facilities
that are landlocked by urban development...must fight a losing
game trying to reconcile commercial aircraft operations cheek
by jowl with residential living and otherhigh-density uses, with
very few really effective remedies at hand."
The third factor, Price told the group, "is even harder to come
by than space, or an agreement about the contribution the
airport makes to regional prosperity; That's a willingness to
deal honestly with one another. By that I mean talking frankly
about the issues as they really are and not about the issues as the
constituencies of the vrious parties expect their advocates to
distort them."
Price concluded his address by emphasizing that NOISE is
committed to a legitimate airport/community dialogue. As
evidence of this commitment he cited the establishment of the
NOISE Airport Operators Committee. "I only hope," he said,
"that before too long the communities who belong to NOISE
and the airports who play such an important role in our national
economic life will find themselves agreeing more often than
they disagree, or at the very least, that when they disagree, they
do so not as adversaries but as partners in the business of solving
common problems."
ys,:.�::•o:i::.....: �., ...,:, r:•:: G.?'.:,. .i'<:�`::,:::�:<::AF:;:.c x:+i:;:a.+:.?'•.: i::>•:...,. .:.:.:.:.•.'..: `::•i:: •i...i i
February 1995
1!.
Page four
PRICE RESIGNS
NOISE POST
Charles F. Price has resigned as Executive Director of NOISE
effective March 31. His replacement has not been named. Price
has been the staff director and lobbyist for NOISE since
January, 1991 when Linton, Mields, Reisler & Cotton, Inc.
(LMRC), the association management firm that employed him,
began handling the association's affairs. Price succeeded long-
time NOISE Executive Director Tom Duffy.
In a memo to the NOISE Board of Directors on February 3,
Price cited health and personal reasons for his resignation.
Portions of his memo are quoted below:
"During the...period between now and my departure I will be
working part-time as I make arrangements to move from
Washington to my home state of North Carolina. I have
pledged to President Tom Egan that before leaving I will do all
in my power to complete plans for the summer NOISE confer-
ence. I will of course also discharge my normal responsibilities
in connection with the upcoming Board meeting..."
Price said he expected LMRC to designate an individual to
succeed him but that this had not yet occurred. He expects the
nominee to have been named by the March 11 Board
Directors meeting in Washington.
"As you know," he went on, "we are in the midst of a process
leading toward a decision about whether to undertake strategic
planning at the July conference inWashington. If the Board
decides inMarchto pursue strategic planning, I am surethatmy
successor will be able to act as facilitator for this exercise in my
stead...
"As far as I know, LMRC...is as committed as ever to serving
NOISE and advancing the cause of aircraft noise abatement. I
trust that NOISE will grow and prosper under the stewardship
of a new executive director...
"I have enjoyed my work with NOISE and the relationships I
have fomied over the years with the members of the Board. I
am sorry that the work must now end for. me. I hope it will go
on for you even more successfully than in the past. Thank you
for giving me the privilege of working for you."
NOISE
National Organization to Insure a Sound -controlled Environment
1225 Eye Street • NW • Suite 300 • Washington, DC 20005
Charles E. Mertensotto
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota NV 55118
THE NOISE NEWSLETTER
MARCH 1995
PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY -THE
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION TO INSURE A SOUND -CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT
Volume V, No. 3
FAA SEEKS COMMENT
ON PROPOSED PART 150 POLICY CHANGE
TO REDUCE NONCOMPATIBLE USES
The Federal Aviation Administration is seeking public com-
ment on a proposed change in policy that would distinguish
between existing and new noncompatible development around
airports.
If adopted, the new policy would confine federal Part 150
remedial funding, normally used for land acquisition or noise
insulation, to existing noncompatible uses. Funding for pre-
ventive measures would be limited to potential new
noncompatible development. Preventive measures usually
include comprehensive planning, zoning, subdivision regula-
tions, easement acquisition, revised building codes for noise
lation, and real estate disclosure.
Under current policy, airport operators participating in the
voluntary Part 150 program may recommend remedial mea-
sures addressing both new and existing noncompatible land
uses, and this has been considered approvable by the FAA for
funding.
The Part 150 program is the only planning and funding tool the
FAA has to encourage airports and communities to reduce
noncompatible uses around airports. Itis generally conceded to
have been more effective at remediationthan at preventing new
concompatible uses.
The FAA published the proposed change in the March 20, 1995
Federal Register and offered a 30 -day period during which
comments will be received.
"Atissue," says the Federal Registerannouncement,"is whether
the FAA should revise its Part 150 approval policy and its AIP
noise setaside funding policy so as to approve and fund only
preventative noise mitigation measures fornew noncompatible
land use development. The FAA's goal is to have a policy in
that provides airport operators with the maximum pos-
siore incentive ... under the Part 150 program, and the FAA with
the maximum possible leverage to prevent the introduction of
additional noncompatible development within an airport's noise
contours. The FAA also seeks to make the most cost-effective
use of limited federal dollars that have been set aside for
projects to implementPart 150programs. Itis theFAA's intent
to revise its policy within the parameters of the (existing law),
but future legislative initiatives should not be ruled out."
The FAA says it gave thought in 1989-1990 to the possibility
of disallowing federal assistance fornew noncompatible devel-
opment, but finally decided to continue to allow funding to
mitigate both new and existing noncompatible uses if the
airport operator so chose. "Several factors supported this
decision," the Federal Register notice says. "One factor was
lack of authority by airport operators to prevent new
noncompatible development in nonairport sponsor jurisdic-
tions, although airport sponsors bear the brunt ofnoise lawsuits.
Intense local opposition to an airport can be detrimental to its
capacity, especially if any expansion of airport facilities is
needed."
The agency said it also considered "the plight of local citizens
living with a noise impact that they may not have fully under-
stood at the time of home purchase. Land use noise mitigation
measures, funded by an airport either with or without federal
assistance, may be the only practical tool an airport operatorhas
to mitigate noise impacts in a community." The FAA was
"hesitant to deny airport operators and the affected public
federal help in this regard. In addition, the FAA gave deference
to the local initiative, the flexibility, and the broad eligibility for
project funding" under the current law.
More recently, the FAA revisited the issue by convening the
Study Group on Land Use Compatibility, of which NOISE was
a part. The conclusions of that body (reported in the January
1994 NOISENewsletter) included a recommendation for a new
grant program for nonairport sponsors who agree to plan
cooperatively with airports, and proposals to strengthen the
Part 150 program.
(Continue on page 2.)
March 1995 Pade two'
FAA
(Continued from page 1.)
Pending agency review of the Study Group report, the FAA
says the present proposal represents a "more measured and
multi -faceted approach than the 1989-1990 thinking. The
agency is "considering whether immediate modest changes
in Part 150 policy and funding, within the parameters of
existing legislation, would be an appropriate interim step."
Left unexplained was the question of why the Study Group
was not consulted during the time the proposed new policy
was under consideration. Inexplicably, the FAA seems to
have run the two processes on parallel but unconnected
tracks, although they are clearly related.
"The impact of revising the FAA's policy on Part 150 land
use determinations and AIP funding," the March 20 an-
nouncement says, "would be to preclude the use of Part 150
program and AIP funds to remediate new noncompatible
development within the noise contours of an airport after the
effective date of such a policy revision. By precluding this
option while at the same time emphasizing the array of
preventive land use measures that may be applied to poten-
tial new noncompatible development, the FAA seeks to
focus airport operators and local governments more clearly
on using these federal programs to the maximum extent to
prevent noncompatible development around airports, rather
than attempting to mitigate noise in such development after
the fact. The FAA has determined that such a policy will
better serve the public interest."
Unlike the options the agency considered in 1989-1990,
federal funding "would be available to assist airport opera-
tors
perators in dealing with new noncompatible development rather
than mitigating it after development has occurred. This
should be a more cost effective use of limited federal dollars
since remedial measures generally cost more for a given unit
than preventive measures."
In considering when to implement such a policy, the FAA
said it seeks to "balance a desire to implement a perceived
beneficial program change as rapidly as possible with prac-
ticaltransition considerations of ongoing Part 150programs.
The agency seems to prefer selecting one effective date
nationwide rather than phase it in on an airport -by -airport
basis. This date could be either "the date of issuance of afinal
policy revision following evaluation of comments received"
on the March 20 notice, or "a date, 180 days to a year after
publication of the revised policy, allowing some amount of
transition time for airport operators to accommodate previ-
ously approved Part 150 programs, recent Part 150 subr
sions, or those programs or submissions under deve,.
ment "
The FAA lists five alternatives to the proposed policy as
worthy of consideration, but asks commenters to suggest
others. The five are:
1) Retain the present policy of approving and funding under
Part 150 remedial land use measures without regard to the
date the noncompatible development occurs.
2) Retain the present policy of approving and funding under
Part 150 remedial land use measures for those areas not
under the control of either the airport or the airport's sponsor
and for which the airport operator has taken earnest but
unsuccessful steps to persuade the controlling jurisdiction to
prevent the addition of new noncompatible development.
New noncompatible development in areas under the land use
control jurisdiction of either the airport or the airport opera-
tor would not be approved under Part 150 nor be eligible for
funding under the AFP.
3) Retain the present policy only with respect
noncompatible land uses that will remain within the DNL 65
dB contour after the transition to an all Stage 3 fleet.
4) Retain the present policy with respect to Part 150 ap-
proval, but eliminate federal funding eligibility for remedial
measures for new noncompatible dcevelopment.
5) Implement the proposed policy on an airport -by -airport
basis, selecting either the date of the FAA's acceptance of
an airport's noise exposure maps or the date of the FAA's
approval of an airport's noise compatibility program
under Part 150. This includes consideration of whether
implementation should be retroactive or prospective.
Comments must be received on or before April 20, 1995.
Comments should be mailed in triplicate to the FAA,
Office of the Chief Counsel, Attn: Rules Docker (AGC -
10), Docket No. 28149, 800 Independence Avenue, SW,
Room 915G, Washington, DC 20591. For further infor-
mation call William W. Albee, Policy and Regulatory
Division (AEE -300), Office of Environment and Energy,
800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591,
telephone 202/267-3553; fax 202/267-5594.
March 1995
L 4161v 4111
PENA SPOKESMAN ACKNOWLEDGES
BUT DOES NOT ADDRESS NOISE'S CRITICISM OF LAND- SE PANEL
.esponding on behalf of Transportation Secretary Federico
Pena to a letter from NOISE First Vice President Sharron
Spencer complaining of "heavy handedness" by the FAA in
managing the Study Group on Land Use Compatibility,
Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning, and Interna-
tional Aviation Barry L. Valentine expressed "regret that
you were not satisfied with your role as a respresentative of
local government, or with the process of the study group."
But other than insisting that the FAA's intent was "to have
all views aired", Valentine had nothing to say about the
specifics of Spencer's criticisms.
Spencer had forwarded to Penaacopy of her letter ofJanuary
25 to George Howard, Chairman of the FAA's Research,
Engineering and Development Committee (See the Febru-
ary 1994 NOISE Newsletter) detailing her "frustration and
disgust" at the FAA's "strong-arm tactics" in steering the
land -use body to alargely predetermined conclusion. Howard
has yet to reply.
In her covering letter to Pena, Spencer said, "What I ob-
;erved and learned during the past year and a half has
shocked and disgusted me unlike few otherevents haveinthe
15 years Ihave been inpublic service." Spencer said she was
"appalled to learn firsthand of the lack of importance the
NOISE BOARD AGREES TO DEFER
STRATEGIC PLAN EFFORT PENDING
DECISION ON MANAGEMENT
At its meeting March 11 in Washington, DC the NOISE
Board of Directors agreed to postpone a strategic planning
exercise tentatively slated for the July conference, pending
clarification of the association's management arrangements
subsequent to the departure of Executive Director Charles F.
Price.
Price has been retained as a part-time consultant by NOISE 's
management firm, Linton, Mields, Reisler & Cottone,
Inc.(LMRC), to work with the association through next July.
His chief responsbility will be to plan the summer confer-
ence. The management agreement with LMRC expires in
July.
The NOISE Executive Council will issue a Request for
Qualifications to consider its management options afterJuly.
FAA gave to community concerns - ordinary Americans -
when contrasted with the interests of airlines and aircraft
manufacturers." •
Valentine did not address Spencer's concerns directly. In-
stead he noted that the study group effort "represented an
initiative to include non -aviation input in an area where such
input is vital" and said he regretted "that this seemed coun-
terproductive." He went on to say that he believed that the
FAA "must continue to expand the input that the FAA
receives and (I) am pleased that despite your experience you,
too, support continued dialogue."
Valentine also pointed out that the FAA had broadened the
study group's membership to include "local representation"
because of arecognition that this was "essential to achieve a
comprehensive review of compatible land use initiatives."
"Judging from the final report that the Committee has now
approved and forwarded to the FAA, the study group iden-
tified a number of specific recommendations which they
universally supported," wrote Valentine. "They were also
provided a `Divergent Issues' section, which clearly identi-
fied those issues and positions on which strong differences
of opinion continue. Given the diversity of the group, this
outcome was not surprising."
NOISE ANNUAL CONFERENCE
SET FOR JULY 26-29
The 1995 annual conference of NOISE will be held
July 26-29 at the Marriott Key Bridge Hotel in Rosslyn,
VA under the sponsorship of the Committee on Noise
Abatement at Dulles and National Airports
(CONANDA), an arm of the Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments, and the Metropolitan Wash-
ington Airports Authority.
March 1995
t
Page four
FAA BARS AIRCRAFT -SHARING
IN PHASEOUT COMPLIANCE
The FAA has prohibited aircraft operators from continuing
to use a paper device that allowed double counting of the
same Stage 3 airplane in recording theircompliance with the
federal fleet mix transition rules. The policy was made
effective March 14 but comments will still be accepted until
September 11.
Had the procedure been allowed to continue, FAA said, it
might have resulted in lower levels of actual compliance and
large numbers of waiver applications.
The FAA said it has "only very recently become aware of
these arrangements and their use for compliance". Experi-
ence with the fust interim compliance date (at the end of last
December) "raised a serious concern involving airplane
interchange agreements and other arrangements that result in
an individual airplane being enumerated on the operations
specifications of more than one operator."
NOISE
National Organization to Insure a Sound -controlled Environment
1225 Eye Street • NW • Suite 300 • Washington, DC 20005
Charles E. Mertensotto
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Mi' 55118
Airport Comparison, March 1995
312 686-3553
312 686-2219
it�
farita�i�
214 574-3197
Judith
Goetzells
14 miles
150 ft
Karen Dallas -
Robertson Fort Worth
Angela
Cobb
303 342-2200
ext 2361
303 342-2200
ext 2361
702 261-5743
Brian
Ryks
Brian
Ryks
Jacob
Snow
602 273-3475
602 273-8874
313 942-3792
Shawn
Arena
Sean
Brosnan
�rlatlonax
314 731-5707
Jamie
Tasker
3,850 7,700 14 883,000 2,420 66,500,000 1,385,
17 miles N/A 18,000 12 841,000 2,300 52,400,000 800,000
Atlanta 11 miles 14'x. 7,800 8 716,000 1,970 54,100,000 590,000 UNK
2,�#
Denver 25 miles 150 34,000 10 531,000 1,460 33,135,000 421,000 66
Denver 10 miles 15,000 4,700 12 531,000 1,460 33,135,000 421,000 66
Las Vegas 5 miles 17,100 2,200 8 510,000 1,400 26,800,000 51,000 80
Phoenix 5 miles 14,000 2,032 4 491,000 1,350 25,500,000 261,000 72
Detroit 27 miles 10,400 6,700 10 486,000 1,330 26,100,000 123,000 38
44,300 2,100 10 480,000 1,320 23,250,000 64,000 32
Boston 3 miles 90-41,000 4,500 10 471,000 1,290 25,200,000 390,000 69
'93-9,200
Minneapolis 6 miles 32,000 3,200 6 455,000 1,250 22,000,000 350,000 42
St. Louis
Bridgeton
12 miles
.25 miles
617 561-1636
617 561-1886
Betty
Derosiers
erna
612 725-8338
Traci
Erickson
14,000 Homes Sound Insulated to Date
$ 2,000 Homes Purchased within 75 Ldn
F.
Airport Comparison, March 1995
4..x.,,•,,.,,,,„,,,„,..,,, 4:NA,.,.‘ x.;\\NN:„,:..s,:k:-.:Ni:
1,•, k‘4•1k,..., \ s\i...„„:„..'sft \ \ -% • "'s.,;,••,,,.\•••\
''''.4 ': ....''''''' ' ''''. ' \ \ . ....'
' ks• •-,. at, .".\\*,
\, ',,'\''',.. '\• t',.'`, s
. '.,
,,,,N‘.1,- . --NN,
\ . , • •\kk..,,,,..k, \Is.
• '''''' •• 1 i':3 c..
,,,,.. \ .\.\\ - ..
%\ "'"'\ ' \
.'s,i,',,X\\„ N, \
'w•7's\xl.,,,,,,,,,,,,,-!.,,,,..i.:NN\\,,,K,kt
\ \
,3 .1 . 21 \ -
14.k ,,•••k
s.`a*, \N \
.\Sk,.\ \.0\-
s. W, ,
„,` „ c•s'ss•• s
. '''' \\\\. '
. \ .,i'-'.*
\\\
s W 1 \ ks, • P '
%%", k. \\t
\ Vitk :**-4's,
,..N:',1` \vz..Z.-
,.,) \';',.$%,
• , -,1 ,. •
•,.\\
t • -,1'
- `,:&\\.
\V 3-:,''s s
,
- k •,
'S"‘\•
„:„....
\‘'.$\ -
' "..%%.`
'.7? • i'
\i'. 4
s ..,,,, ,
V.'t
' \ .' %-*N7V\s'
\\.' N....
,
,4, „.. \
:4;1'.
,..
v , ,
•.'!. ^3...,
§.: 1 i'
,,':\.*:'*,i.',.----''''''''.4
• E 1 ..
\•'\ • ..•
. 1 ,. , . \
s 1. 's N..
:7„; , ..
••‘';;.,:\V's•::.:IrvIm-
\ I ..* •s::
- `• - •
. . \ s
v • , *
• • te. , ,. .- ...,„
• .. , .• :„: 0::.::,.:••
lltniiiiiiti.il
......,,•:?!...,....i:.iom:Kiti:m0::::faiiitiiiii!:§.,:i.T.:.:,...
412 472-3542
Rick
Pittsburgh -8
miles -UNK
-
-12,200-
-8-
443,000
1,220
UNK
UNK
UNK
- Holmes
......g:..
. . ..
....Mk...."V
/
606 283-3151
606 767-7800
Barb
Schenpf
Cincinnati
3 Communities
25 miles
2 miles
2,700
180 (Buy)
6 500
,
.. 6
370000
,
1,010
14,800,000
291,000
67
905 676-4537
Katherine
Toronto
15 miles
38,500
4,200
6
310,000
850
20,400,000
353,000
60
;;;Wgi;:.;:.''''
SaltLahe
1iternationa1
801 575-2991
Steve
Domino
Salt Lake
City
7 miles
100
7,500
6
343,000
940
17,000,000
150,000
50
, . .. .
...,::: -....i-...:....i.,„.. ,
..rn4
.. .......„.",xf...mift.:•:,,i:I.,:.:x.,.„......„...
410 859-7770
410 859-7029
Tony
Storck
Baltimore
Glen Burny
10 miles
OS miles
5100
3160
8
296,000
810
12,300,000
160,000
50
,....-„,„::•:::„:„.,:„i:im,,,,,i:::.*:::vg:m...:::§,:imi---:::,..i...,
, . . 11 " 0
.. , .,
. .:,....„:, *:-...:::,i...:0:::::„:::::„&,
•
•
.
615 399-0585
Martha
Bradley
Nashville
8 miles4,000
4,00
8
295,000
810
8,600,000
77,000
68
919 840-2110
ArmandoRaliegh
Tovar
15 miles
UNK
5,000
6
277,000
760
9,000,000
11,000
54
, . 10:114 .
901 922-8789
Solomon
Garrett
Memphis
9 miles
10,000
5,000
6
264,000
730
7,960,000
914,000
38
-...i..mi:if::::••:::::,,,I:ipt,*::,4i;;;;;,:::!:iii:i:K:i...p,:-..
8effleThcoma
•n ,
206 433-5216
206 248-7452
Dianne
Surnmerhays
Seattle
10 miles
64,000
2,000
4
253,000
640
20,972,000
410,000
83
.... iim.iii..i;iimi*,, ",.••::::i,..„:„
.fgrigiiiiii:0.•
,..titermitiq
816 274-2300
Denise
Wilmsmeyer
Kansas City
20 miles
58
10,000
6
204,000
560
8,800,000
108,000
50
. ,,, ''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
: . ,....: . . ..
WlllowRun
....
•
•
313 942-3792
Sean
Brosnan
Detroit
7 miles
N/A
2,360
10
161,000
•
440
N/A
64,000
32
..,:i-:•:.•:::R...K::-:,-,-iii:E:::0'...
•::::,„:„.„.„:„,„„„„„,.,.
-1nernatiorud.:.-
,
513 454-8215
513 454-8216
Jim
Davis
Dayton
Vandalia *
15 miles
1 miles
250
4500
6
160,000
440
2,600,000
720,000
UNK
111111111f1.11'1'11111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111
FEBRUARY.1995 ISSUE 15
PART 150
BUYOUT
UPDATE
(20%) Phase II
On-going
(Funded)
1111111111111111111111111111111.1111111111
PHASE I: ACQUISITION &
RELOCATION NEARS COMPLETION
Due to the near completion of Phase
I, this February issue of the Buyout
Update will be the final issue to
report Phase I status. WDSCO would
like to thank all homeowners and
tenants for their help in the smooth
completion of this first phase of
the project.
As of February 17, 1995, there have
been a total of 141 acquisition
closings conducted in Phase I. In
addition to the acquisition
closings, a total of 123 homeowners
have closed on their relocation
homes. To date, 130 properties in
Phase I have now been vacated.
PHASE II: INITIAL INTERVIEW
PROGRESS
To date, 63 homeowners have been
contacted and 63 initial interviews
for Phase II have been conducted.
There are still 4 homeowners
remaining whom WDSCO has not been
able to contact to schedule an
initial interview. Now that the
initial interview process is nearly
completed for those homeowners and
approved hardships in Phase II,
WDSCO will begin reporting the
acquisition and relocation offer
status beginning with the March
issue of the Buyout Update.
TITLE COMPANY COMMITMENTS
WDSCO has received the preliminary
title commitments from First
Security Title and North Star Title
for the apprdved hardships and the
homeowners within Phase II. Your
WDSCO consultant will review the
title commitment at the offer
meeting. Please remember all
curative title work is the
homeowner's responsibility.
Curative work may be required to
correct defects in the title to the
Buyout Status
Houses and Duplexes
(41%) Phase I (Completed)
(39.0%) Remaining Phases (Unfunded)
111111111111111111111111111111111111
property. The most common problems
occur when liens are placed on the
title due to mortgage, judgment,
special assessment(s), or delinquent
taxes or water bills. Problems may
also occur ;when title -related
documents have been improperly
recorded. The assigned title
company closer will be available to
assist each homeowner with questions
or concerns + regarding his/her title.
PHASE II APPRAISAL PROGRESS
We are receiving phone calls from
the homeowners; who chose to have
second appraisals completed on their
properties. We:appreciate the phone
calls and would like to thank you
for keeping your WDSCO consultant
informed. Your consultant will
arrange to have both the MAC
appraisal and your appraisal sent to
the review appraiser, Lyle Nagell &
Co., for simultaneous review. This
will help tollexpedite the offer
process for each homeowner.
The homeowner or his appraiser will
need to deliver three (3) copies of
the second appraisal to WDSCO. Any
remaining copies can be retained by.
the homeowner. A copy of the
appraiser's bill or a paid receipt
will also needlto be included when
the appraisal is delivered to our
office.
As of February 22, 1995, 63
appraisals and environmental
inspections have
been ordered.
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
Because of some confusion, the WDSCO
Property Management team would like
both to clarify and to review the
vacating procedures for all
homeowners and tenants. Once the
homeowner/tenant is ready to turn
the house over to WDSCO, he/she MUST
contact Chris Lambert, WDSCO's
Property Management Supervisor. An
The Part 150 Buyout Update is a newsletter by the Metropolitan
Airports Commission and W.D. Schock Company, Inc., containing
information on the MSP Land Acquisition and Relocation Projects.
walk-through inspection to be
completed. This inspection will be
conducted to ensure that no garbage,
furniture, or other debris is left
inside the house or outside in the
yard. Once the keys have been
turned over to Chris Lambert, the
homeowner/tenant should then contact
all utility companies to do the
final readings and have service shut
off. Please remember that the house
is the homeowner's/tenant's full
responsibility, until the house has
been turned over to WDSCO's Property
Management team. If you move out of
the house and do not contact WDSCO,
you will be responsible for
maintaining utilities, as well as
maintaining the dwelling, until the
keys have been turned over. If
utilities are shut off prior to a
walk-through inspection, any damages
caused by the lack of heat will be
the financial responsibility of that
homeowner/tenant.
If a homeowner does not contact
WDSCO to schedule a walk-through
inspection after the 90 -day rent-
free period, WDSCO/MAC will be
required to begin charging rent.
Rent will need to be charged even if
the homeowner is no longer living in
the home. This is why it is
imperative to schedule this walk-
through inspection.
Just a reminder: The dumpster
winter hours are Saturdays, from
9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The
dumpsters will be monitored, so
please bring your ID and come early.
Q•
•
BUYOUT FEEDBACK
Once I have closed and moved to
my relocation home, will WDSCO
reimburse me for any of my
utility charges?
If the homeowner chose the
actual moving expense payment
and had a moving company
perform the actual move, there
are certain one-time utility
company reconnection fees that
may be reimbursable. These are
the "one-time" fees charged for
W.D. SMOCK COMPANY, INC.
5844 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, IST 55417
Phone: (612)724-8898
new service connection. Please note
these fees must be non-refundable.
Homeowners should forward copies of
their paid utility bills to their
WDSCO consultant for reimbursement.
It will take approximately thirty
(30) days to receive the
reimbursement check from MAC, which
will then be mailed to the
homeowner. Gas, electric, telephone
and cable are the most common
companies to charge one-time
connection fees. IT a homeowner
must incur special charges due to
reconnection of a stove or dryer,
please contact your WDSCO
consultant to discuss possible
reimbursement for those charges.
Please note that any repairs such as
carpets, windows or door locks need
to be discussed with your real
estate agent and the seller of your
replacement home prior to the
relocation closing. These fees are
associated with the real estate
property and unfortunately cannot be
reimbursed by MAC as part of your
actual moving expense payment.
Q. I am a renter in the buyout
area. Will I be eligible for
any benefits?
Depending on the length of time
you have lived and rented in
the buyout area, you may be
eligible for moving expense
benefits and relocation
benefits to assist you in
either renting or purchasing
another dwelling. Al consultant
from WDSCO will contact you
once the owner of the house
your are renting has accepted
the written offer. Your
consultant will meet with you
to determine what benefits you
may be eligible for. Please
call WDSCO if you have any
specific questions.
Tom Lawell
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Hghts, MN 55118
•
•
•
•
•
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111,111111111111111111111111111111
PART 150
BUYOUT
UPDATE
MARCH
1995
ISSUE 16
QUARTERLY PROJECT STATUS
(end of March 1995)
NUMBER OF HOUSES & DUPLEXES
PROJECT STEPS 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Completed Acquisitions 1.11.1111
Completed Relocations
Vacated Properties
Houses Moved
Houses Demolished
III IIl111111111111IIIIII111111IIIIIII III IIIIIII111111111111111111111111111111
THIRD AUCTION CONDUCTED
MAC, WDSCO, and Kloster Auctioneers
conducted the third public auction
on March 3, 1995. Out of fifty (50)
homes available for auction, forty-
three (43) were sold. •
All houses and detached garages were
once again sold as one unit. The
highest bid for a home was
$16,750.00. The lowest bid at this
auction for a home was $5.00, with
an average price calculated at
$5,024.77 for all homes purchased.
As stated in previous issues of the
Buyout Update, there will be
increased activity in the area with
house movers beginning preparation
for a July 1, 1995 deadline to move
these homes and garages.
As with the two previous auctions,
the $216,065.00 generated from this
third auction will go back into the
funding for the Part 150 Land
Acquisition and Relocation program.
This creates additional funds for
the buyout area, while reducing
property management fees and
demolition costs.
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
New Dumpster Hours
Since most (approximately 96%) of
the Phase I relocations have been
completed, there has been a decline
in dumpster usage by homeowners
living in the project area. The
property management company, Pham
Express, who monitors the weekly use
of the dumpster, confirmed the usage
slow down. Tlllerefore, MAC and WDSCO
is changing the weekly Saturday
dumpster availability hours, to
twice a month. The dumpster will
now be available only on the first
and third Saturdays of each month,
beginning April 1, 1995. If the
need increases later in Phase II,
additional hours will be provided.
House Recycling Program
The ongoing project of recycling
homes, combined with the warmer
weather, rain,i;and melting snow, has
created a great deal of mud in some
of the streets and lots. To correct
this problem the City of Richfield
has and will continue to send their
street -cleaning crew through on an
increased basis. MAC and WDSCO
would like to' thank the City of
Richfield for their assistance in
this matter.
Also, WDSCO would like to convey a
sincere thank -you to all homeowners
for their patience and understanding
with this situation. If you have a
problem or a suggestion pertaining
to the house recycling program,
please feel free to give WDSCO a
call. In addition, the warmer
spring weather will allow our
property management company, Pham
Express, the opportunity to do some
needed yard work and clean-up on
many of the vacant properties.
Vandalism
Another important issue that is
being addressed is the sudden
increase in vandalism of vacant
homes in the neighborhood, mainly
broken windows as a result of rocks
being thrown. 'If a homeowner should
see anything suspicious or a direct
act of vandalism, we ask that you
call 911 immediately. If this
vandalism continues, the property
management company could be forced
to board up the outside windows on
all vacant homes. This is not a
desirable remedy as it is unsightly
and attracts unwanted elements into
the area. Continual involvement and
vigilance are needed from all
homeowners remaining in the
neighborhood. 1 S please remember:
this is still, your neighborhood;
please help us keep• it• safe and
looking well-maintained.
The Part 150 Buyout Update is a newsletter by the Metropolitan
Airports Commission and W.D. Schock Company, Inc., containing
information on the MSP Land Acquisition and Relocation Projects.
ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION
PHASE II
Appraisal Update:
Herman Appraisal Service, the MAC
appraisal firm, has completed 65
field appraisal studies as of March
22, 1995. WDSCO has received 41
appraisal reports, and 64.
environmental reports from PSI.
Once the appraisal report is
received at the office of WDSCO, one
original copy is immediately
forwarded to the review appraiser.
WDSCO has received certification for
24 of the appraisals forwarded to
Lyle Nagell Company, the MAC review
appraisal firm.
Offer Update:
WDSCO began Phase II offer meetings
for homeowners within the hardship
program. on February 22, 1995. As of
March 22, 1995, 8 offer meetings
have been held, with 5 homeowners
accepting their offers. The offer
itself consists of two separate
packages. The first package is the
acquisition price for the purchase
of your home by MAC, which is based
solely on the appraisal's certified
value. The second package includes
the amount of relocation benefits,
which consists of the Replacement
Housing Payment (RHP) and the moving
expense allowance for eligible
homeowners. Once the offer has been
presented, the homeowner has 60 days
to accept the offer.
Closing Update:
As of this issue of the Buyout
Update, WDSCO will begin reporting
the number of acquisition and
-relocation closings for Phase II
only. As of March 22, 1995, there
has been one (1) acquisition
closing. In addition, one (1)
homeowner has closed on their
relocation home, as of that same
date.
BUYOUT FEEDBACK
Q. How are
determined?
moving costs
W.D. SCHOCK COMPANY, INC.
C35844 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55417
Phone: (612)724-8898
(800)260-7062
A. There are two ways you may have
your moving expenses paid:
Actual (when a moving company
is paid to conduct your move);
and Fixed (when the homeowners
are paid to move their
belongings themselves). The
actual moving expense payment
is based on the lower of two
binding bids from two moving
companies. The fixed moving
expense payment is based on the
Minnesota Department of
Transportation ('MnDOT) chart,
for the number' of rooms of
furniture in your home
(excluding bathrooms and
closets).
Q. It is true that I cannot
purchase my replacement home
near the airport area?
A. You may purchase your
replacement home in any area
you wish, including another
state. However, if your
replacement home is located
within the 65 LDN 1996 noise
contour, that home MUST be
sound -insulated, or it may not
be eligible for relocation
replacement housing benefits.
Your WDSCO consultant can
assist you in determining
whether or not your replacement
home of choice is located
within the 65 LDN noise
contour.
Q If I need to payoff some of my
existing debts to qualify for a
new mortgage on my replacement
home, can I use part of my
relocation payment (RHP) to do
so?
A. It is not uncommon for a
mortgage company to require
certain debts to be paid off to
qualify for a mortgage. Please
be aware that the entire
differential amount of your
relocation benefits MUST be
used as the downpayment on your
replacement home. Any debts
you may be required to pay off
would need to come from your
acquisition net proceeds or
personal. savings,
tn.
Tom Lawell
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Hghts, MN 55118
FEBRUARY 1995
', i/ r
munit
onit
.;fes
A newsletter by the Metropolitan Alrports Cominlsslon eontalning MIT onnaHon on
the Sound Insulation and Land Acqulsitlon Programs
. ' n
SOUND INSULATION PROCEEDING BLOCK -BY -BLOCK IN EACH CITY
Effective with the 1995 grant projects, the
Metropolitan Airports Commission is sound
insulating houses "block -by -block" in each city
based only on aircraft noise exposure levels.
Eligible blocks are now prioritized within the
cities of Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloomington,
Eagan and Mendota Heights using both the
certified 1996 DNL (day -night level) Noise
Contour and the Airport Noise and Operations
Monitoring System (ANOMS) arrival and
departure flight track data.
"We developed this approach to the MSP
Part 150 Sound Insulation Program based on
recommendations from the FAA," says Steve
Vecchi, MAC manager of Part 150 Programs.
Noise contour ranges for eligible blocks include
the DNL 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66 and
65 zones.
"Eligible blocks in all cities were assigned a
DNL zone based on the geographical location of
the block within the certified 1996 DNL noise
contour," says Vecchi. "Then, blocks within the
same DNL zone were
further prioritized
using ANOMS actual
air carrier arrival and
departure flight track
data."
This two-step
process produced a
city -specific master
list of blocks
prioritized by noise
exposure, with homes
located within the DNL
75 in each city receiving
first priority for sound
insulation, followed by DNL 74, 73, 72 and soon.
Residents interested in seeing where their
homes fall within the noise contours can now take
a look at the MAC Part 150 Program Prioritization
Map. A draft version of the color -coded map will
be available for viewing at city offices or at the
Sound Insulation House, located at 6314 Standish
This block of homes in Richfield was being sound insulated duringJanuary.
Ave. So., Richfield. The prioritization process
includes blocks containing both single and multi-
family housing.
"The map gives people a better idea of the
priority placed on their location," says Vecchi.
"The color coding starts from the noisiest areas in
each city."
MAC APPROVES $14.5 MILLION BUDGET TO SOUND INSULATE
840 HOMES DURING 1995
The Metropolitan Airports Commission has
approved funding for a $14.5 million budget for
the MSP Part 150 Sound Insulation Program.
During 1995, approximately 840 homes will be
sound insulated, with the majority of the funding
coming from MAC and the remainder from the
7ederal Aviation Administration (FAA).
"It is evident by the high level of dedicated
funds - $14.5 million for 1995 - that the MAC is
committed to the Part 150 Sound Insulation
Program on a long-term basis," says Steve Vecchi,
MAC manager of Part 150 Programs.
The multi-year project, which began in
1992, is expected to soundproof as many as 8,900
homes near MSP Airport during the lifetime of the
program. To date, more than 1,100 homes have
been sound insulated, with 840 homes on target
for 1995.
The Part 150 program was designed by the
FAA to make neighborhoods near airports more
compatible with aircraft noise. The homes that
will receive sound insulation during this grant
year include 495 in Minneapolis, 169 in Richfield,
62 in Bloomington 55 in Eagan, and 59 in
Mendota Heights.
The eligible homes receive a standard
modification package that includes reconditioning
of existing windows, addition of exterior acoustic
storm windows, storm door replacements, wall
and attic insulation baffling of room and attic
vents, and air conditioning, if the home does not
have it.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q: How is the sound insulation
program funded?
A: Funding for the MSP Part 150 Sound
Insulation Program comes from both national
(FAA) and local (MAC) funding sources.
National funding is provided by the FAA Part
150 fund, based on contributions from all U.S.
airlines. Local funding is provided by MAC
through the Passenger Facility Charges (PFC),
based on a $3 user fee on each passenger
ticket. No federal, state or city tax dollars are
appropriated to fund this program.
Q: What modifications are done to
sound insulate a home?
A: Each home is truly unique and has
different existing conditions. A house visit is
conducted to determine the acoustical
modifications best suited for each home.
Homes are treated as a whole package. Typical
modifications include reconditioning of
windows and doors, acoustical storm windows
and doors, wall and attic insulation, baffling of
roof vents, and central air conditioning if it
does not exist.
Q: What is the Sound Insulation
Workshop?
A: On the first Wednesday of each
month, a one -and -a -half hour workshop is held
to provide an overview of the sound insulation
program. This includes a discussion of the
noise reduction package and how it was
developed, as well as an explanation of the
construction process. Approximately 90
residents on prioritized blocks scheduled for
sound insulation are invited to each workshop.
This is the official start of the sound insulation
process for
workshop, the h ip for the
house inspection Vb.. .,ppointment is
scheduled: Once a person has been to the
workshop, the construction will occur within
the next eight months. The construction itself
only takes 30 days.
Q: Does the Part 150 Program
have a Construction Manager?
A: E(fctive Feb. 1, MAC hired Tom
Brown as the Part 150 Construction Manager to
further ensure quality control as more homes
are sound insulated each year. This new
position will enable MAC to become more
involved in the overall management of the
program.
Q: How many homes have been
sound insulated?
A: The Part 150 Program began in
March 1992. As of Feb. 1, 1995, 832 homes
located in the cities adjacent to the MSP Airport
have received sound insulation. The homes
include 533 in Minneapolis, 169 in Richfield,
78 in Bloomington, 18 in Eagan, and 34 in
Mendota Heights. Another 519 homes in these
five cities are in the design and construction
phases.
The pace of sound insulation has
increased over the years. In the pilot year of
.1992, 139 homes were completed. In 1993,
243 homes were insulated. By the end of grant
year 1994, 600 additional homes will be
complete (of which 450 are now complete.) Of
the 840 homes scheduled for 1995, 369 are
currently in the process.
Part 150 Community Monitor is published by the
Metropolitan Airports Commission to provide
information on the Sound Insulation Program.
An informational manual, "Part 150 Sound
Insulation Program Manual," is available to
interested homeowners. To request a copy of
the manual or for additional information on the
Part 150 Program, please call the Center for
Energy and Environment at 348-9337.
1' 1"111 I I"I I'"' 1111'"I"I"I"111"' I l""I' I"I' 1' 1
90Th—BTTSS NW S1H9I3H tiIOQN3W
3Adf13 kINOIOIA TOTT
113Md1 WOl 814
SIH9I3H tIOQN3W .AO Alla
.b61 -1;'0N 11Wa3d-
NW `Sll0dd3NNIW
0IVd:r' - -,
'-39visod;'s n ':
JNIl111N1 wino'
4'jwti Minnesota Department of Transportation
Office of Environmental Services
3485 Hadley Avenue North
o , o Oakdale, MN 55128
(612) 779-5072 FAX (612) 779-5109
March 29, 1995
To Whom It May Concern:
On July 15, 1994, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)
circulated a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for a proposed
Project to. extend Runway 4/22 at Minneapolis -St. Paul International
Airport. The publication notice appeared in• the Monitor of the
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on July 18, 1994. Comments
on the FEIS were accepted until August 15, 1994. Comments were received
from a number of parties including the Cities of Bloomington,
Minneapolis, and Richfield, the Minnesota Department' of Natural
Resources, the Metropolitan Council, and the Minnesota River Valley
Audubon Chapter.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation, as Responsible Governmental
Unit for the above referenced Project, has determined that the FEIS is
adequate. In reaching this decision Mn/DOT considered the following
factors: 47
1. Mn/DOT considered all the issues associated with this Project which
were raised during the scoping process. All issues- for which
information could reasonably be obtained have been analyzed.
2. The FEIS provided responses to all substantive comments which were
received during the Draft, Supplemental, and Revised Draft EIS review
and public comment period.
3. Comments received on the FEIS
making the Adequacy Determination.
Administration (FAA) have jointly
Mn/DOT/FAA joint responses are a part
have been duly considered before
Mn/DOT and the Federal Aviation
addressed these comments. The
of the Federal Recorddfof Decision.
4. The FEIS was prepared in compliance with the procedureslof Minnesota
Statutes 116D, and with the Mn/DOT Alternate Environmental Review
Process, which was approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
on August 18, 1983.
The Federal Aviation Administration has issued a Record of Decision in
this matter which was reviewed by Mn/DOT in reaching this Adequacy
Decision. The federal Record of Decision is consistentlwith and is
hereby incorporated as part of this Adequacy Determination.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mn/DOT Adequacy Decision
Runway 4/22 Extension Project
March 29, 1995
Page 2
This Determination of Adequacy concludes the State Environmental Review
Process for this project. The Metropolitan Airports Commission may now
make a decision on whether to proceed with the proposed project,
Yours Truly,
Lawrence E. Foote, Ph.D.
Chief Environmental Officer
Director, Office of Environmental Services
is
only Aragon! -.Plods Is
n the loltowing products.
50% Off*
ONI.
O.
VISA
•
ST. PAUL
3136 Century Ave.
777-3563
Experts
VISIT l?I!
orf fad: R ate
1•� Ilii'.,.,
P BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP
ee Service
ler From
co
C
cns
m
o
m
ca
Aar Company
t business and personal use. m
Ige at NO Extra Charge.
m
as your personal
special new customer
e:tree! tree! free!
for a new model. Anything is possible
:rice dealing with the 'BEST" can make.
612-32161100
-ry call will be responded to.
m
-a
cnm
w
m
s
m
00
cn
P BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP
tucnzieia attorney has lawsuit ready
Bloomington joins
effort to block 4-22
By Mike Westholder
Staff Writer
.The dispute over extending
Minneapolis/St. Paul Interna-
tional Airport's Runway 4-22
may be headed for court depend-
ing on an upcoming ruling by the
Federal Aviation Administra-
tion.
That ruling will be on the pro-
ject's environmental impact
statement [EIS] and is expected
to give the expansion the re-
quired federal blessing.
If that happens, Richfield and
Bloomington officials are pre-
pared to sue over the legality of
the EIS.
Those officials contend the
EIS process was incomplete.
A lawsuit would be a last re-
sort if negotiations or mediation
over the use of the runway to re-
distribute airplane noise around
the airport aren't fruitful, said
City Manager Jim Prosser.
If MAC and the FAA will
agree not to use an extended 4-
22 to send more planes over
south Richfield and Blooming-
ton and fewer over Minneapolis
simply for noise redistribution,
the City Council would drop its
opposition, Prosser said.
If 4-22 is used solely for long-
haul and international flights
and during reconstruction of the
south -parallel runway, the issue
would be resolved, he added.
The preliminary EIS included
effects of using the longer run-
way for noise redistribution.
City officials also plan to ad-
dress the Metropolitan Council
before its required vote to pay for
the project, Prosser said.
Likewise, Northwest Airline
officials have approached Pross-
er to discuss mediation with the
city and MAC to avoid the ex-
pense and time of a trial, he said.
Northwest wants the exten-
sion completed as soon as possi-
ble for use on international
flights and seeks to avoid any de-
lays.
In the event that such a set-
tlement can't be reached, Rich-
field City Council has ear-
marked about $250,000 for court
costs. Attorney Steve Phlaum of
Chicago was first hired by the
Council in 1991 and will repre-
sent the city.
Phlaum has represented nu-
merous cities in similar airport
disputes from Newport Beach,
Calif., to Oak Creek, Wis., near
Milwaukee.
Richfield officials contend
that the Metropolitan Airports
Commission [MAC] did not ad-
here to the Minnesota or Na-
tional Environmental Protection
acts in its preparation of the
EIS.
"The bottom line is we think
that this project cannot be ap-
proved in compliance with state
and federal law . . " Phlaum
said.
The law requires that the EIS
disclose all information dealing
with the project, which MAC has
not done, said Prosser.
Originally, the extension was
said to be a $10 million project
that would provide eight to 10
hours of noise relief for north
Richfield and southern Min-
neapolis.
Further analysis showed it
was a $52 million project that
provides no more than two hours
or noise relief, Prosser said.
"That information is not
clearly stated," he added. The
EIS glosses over those facts.
"It's a classic bait and switch."
As flights continiie., to in-
crease, the airport will have to
use the parallel runways more,
and the extension less, Prosser
explained. Noise relief for south
Minneapolis would last a only
few years at the most before re-
turning to current noise levels,
he said.
The law also requires that the
EIS be conducted without a pre-
conceived notion of which alter-
native should be chosen, Prosser
said. "That is clearly not the case
here."
One of the parallel runways
could be extended or more
money put into noise mitigation
for insulating homes already af-
fected, Prosser said.
The EIS also lacks a clear
{
noise mitigation plan as re-
quired by law, he said.
1 It sets aside about $25 million
for noise mitigation for the 4,000
homes in south Richfield and
north Bloomington that would
be affected by the extension.
'According to Prosser, more
than $50 million will be needed
to !mitigate noise in Richfield
and another $28 million for
Bloomington if 4-22 is used as
much as MAC says it will.
In the event that such a
settlement can't be
reached, Richfield City
Council has earmarekd
about $250, 000 for
court costs. Attorney
Steve Phlaum of
Chicago was first hired
by the council in 1991
aitd will represent the
city.
MAC officials aren't sure why
the two figures are far apart,
said Commissioner John Himle.
i Noise mitigation money could
bei better spent on insulating
southern Minneapolis and
northern Richfield homes in-
stead of insulating homes to the
south that will only see a tempo-
rUry increase in noise, Phlaum
said.
',By labeling south Richfield as
a noise -blighted area would be a
"psychological blow" to the area
and may result in divestment,
Pnlaum said.
Prosser also criticized earlier
drafts of the EIS for not includ-
ing noise projections beyond
1996.
Those projections weren't
added because after 1996, noise
levels will be reduced due to fed-
eral jet engine noise require-
ments for commercial carriers,
said Dick Tyson, EIS project
manager for MnDOT.
City of Bloomington
Airport Policies
On March 6, 1995, the Bloomington City Council unanimously adopted the following 11 airport
_ policies. These policies are based on an extensive review and public comment process conducted
over a 10 -month period
Airport Location and Improvements
In 1989 the Legislature directed the Metropolitan Airports Commission and Metropolitan Council
to study the capacity and expansion potential of MSP airport compared to a new airport located
south of Hastings. The study will result in a comparative cost and impact report to the legislature
in July 1996. All studies indicate that the MSP airport can be improved to handle even the largest
year 2020 passenger and aircraft operation forecasts.
The airport is responsible for substantial economic benefits for Bloomington residents and
businesses. Analysis by several agencies and consultants agree that passenger emplanements and
aircraft operations at MSP will increase so that MSP will require both runway and terminal
enhancements in the near future.
Location
Improvements
4-22 Extension
1Poli
Policy 2:
Policy 3a:
Policy 3b:
Policy 4a:
Policy 4b:
Policy 4c:
MSP should continue as the region's passenger and cargo airport.
Improvements should be made to keep MSP operating safely and
efficiently. Noise mitigation should proceed in conjunction with
operational changes.
Bloomington encourages prompt implementation of the north -
south runway both as a means for igcreasing airport capacity and
as a reasonable measure for mitigating noise in cities surrounding
the airport.
Bloomington has no preference for alternative locations to add
terminal space at MSP.
Bloomington supports extension of Runway 4-22 by 2,750 feet if
MAC demonstrates that the extension is essential for economic
growth and that noise mitigation has been adequately addressed.
Bloomington supports use of extended Runway 4-22 for heavy
aircraft or emergency situations where a long runway is needed
and to allow two runway operation and adequate runway length
while 11R29L is being reconstructed.
Bloomington opposes changing the Runway Use System to
simultaneously use runways 4-22 and 11L29R to redistribute
aircraft flights and noise.
o run afoul of global investors,
id, but unless the world faces up
risks of its changing financial
m, others are likely to follow.
:o days after Zedillo's predeces-
Carlos Salinas de Gortari, left
co for what senior officials de-
ed as virtual exile in the United
.s, the shadow of the former
er seemed at times to dart
nd the office he gave up Dec. 1.
:dillo denied having sent an inter-
iary to ask Salinas to leave. But
s to the president did not hesitate
)ntradict him. They also said that
e Salinas had sought repeatedly
neet with his handpicked succes-
Zedillo had declined.
edillo suggested that Salinas's
lic criticism of the government
a strange, two-day hunger strike
began after the arrest on murder
.rges of his elder brother, Raul,
1 broken the unwritten rule that
Is on retired Mexican leaders to
:p silent on political affairs.
'I think there was .some sense in
country that he was getting in-
ved not only in things that .were
ictly private but that his com-•
:nts were having some political ef-
:ts," Zedillo said. "The sense that I
d was that he was perhaps sad
out Raul's situation and that made
n put forward other issues."
Zedillo may have said as much
out his differences with his prede-
ssor simply by the way he conduct -
one of the few lengthy interviews
has given since taking office.
The meeting was intended as a
ef, private conversation. But in the
ddle of the encounter, Zedillo
reed to put his remarks on the re-
-d.
Salinas had seemed to revel in the
ercise of power from a position
downstairs to baggage ':makeup -
rooms on the third level of DIA's
parking garage.
crews uzeu t, _
bags downstairs to be loaded on tug -
and -cart trains for the underground
About 1 p.m., a curb -sloe lett tor
Northwest Airlines' and American
FAA praises DIA for smooth opening week
By Patrick O'Driscoll
Denver Post Staff Writer
The Federal Aviation Administra-
tion heaped praise yesterday on Den-
ver International Airport's almost de-
lay -free performance during its
opening week.
Later,, consultant Michael Boyd,
DIA's most vocal critic, blasted the
FAA's glowing news release as politi-
cal pap and lies from a branch of the
same U.S. Department of Transpor-
tation headed by Federico Pefia, who
boosted DIA as Denver mayor.
FAA Administrator David Hinson
lauded the new airfield as "the best
designed airport in the world." He
said only six airplanes were delayed
in DIA's first week despite snows that
would have delayed 1,400 flights at
now -closed Stapleton Airport.
"In just one week, this airport has
established a new worldwide stan-
dard of performance and demonstrat-
ed clearly that it is a tremendous as-
set to U.S. aviation," said Hinson. He
claimed DIA's $4.2 billion cost and 33
million annual passengers will add up
to far lower per -capita costs than at
new airports in Germany, Hong Kong
and South Korea.
—But Boyd, of Aviation Systems Re_
,search Corp., said extra expenses —
higher fares for plane tickets, cab
rides, rental cars, parking and the
like — will cost travelers $400 mil-
lion more annually.
Boyd also dismissed as hogwash
the FAA's description of DIA as "a
key east -west hub for many airlines"
and Hinson's claim that it boosts na-
tional aviation efficiency.
"What we're stuck with here is
something that has some benefit in
additional capacity for (DIA hub car-
rier) United Airlines, but not for the
rest of the nation," said Boyd. "And
1 ,iiimer�9
N
remember, passengers in other mar-
kets are having to pay more for air-
line tickets because of this."
Boyd said DIA's vaunted "triple -si-
multaneous" landing capability "isn't
the issue. The question is whether we
needed (DIA) at this cost."
9 5
d
Ler wu emu �.......,...o --•
Crews had to replace links in a hoist -
EXECUTIVE SERIES
Iryou clunk pull sage money I y.not owiung
'a luxury car utn,4tc you to take a look at tkc
t, 7995 Infiniti p(,) irssedatt
J S
G20,luxury includes power vindows
a , doom.^K
•
Iocks,nd outstdc mirrors a leather- nipped
staring ssiioel, non-CFlw air auditioning, a
• 'mium 6.spcaker audio system ssith CD phyer
standard anti-lock t,taking system (ALIS) dual sir s'
bagsandaliuiltmani-the&systtm: '.
find's Iiatent'esin ntcnttoned tTM (nfnut.
Total Owneislup Erpcncncc a unique pmgtani
NDMARK
PRICE
MSRP $37,240
ae aOM ,ISl I r11 OSnutmu
5290
9200 W. COLFAX
LINCOLN -MERCURY .•,
• LAKEWOOD - DENVER
ACTION PHONE .,
238-0551 •
Jp
r,
tg
ie
t -
More Good Reasons Not to Fly Into Denver
By BOIS °R'g°"A Guide to Denver International Airport V'/Q�,l' 5 � urnj
Stat/ Reporter eJ TinW,w.Bi'ReCTJOUI1l,AL
Denver International Airport, now
open a month, can finally put behind It 18
months of delay. But the waits for travel-
ers have Just begun;
"1'm really ripped at this place." says
Sarah Collins, who Is waiting for a de-
layed United Airlines flight to Chicago.
"Unitd's parking was full up. I wind up
In this paved field a 25 -minute walk
away. There's no transport. And the
wind—It's like a dust bowl out there, my
luggage flying everywhere, and I
couldn't see a thing."
On hls first taxi ride from the airport,
Jack Morris, a via president at a Denver-
KEME
based mining company, was astonished to
see that taxis were limited to two of 21
airport toll -booth lanes, creating a backup
that seemed miles long. "By the time we
got to the tollgate, I'd already tacked up
an 511 fare, " he recalls.
And he was still miles from anywhere.
The airport terminal, which looks like a
circus tent draped over a big hedgehog,
sits on a parcel of land twice the size of
Manhattan and is .'visible for miles be-
cause nothing else Is around. The nearest
hotel is 14 miles away, by the old Staple-
ton Airport, which Is now closed. No air-
port
irport hotel will open for at least two years.
Downtown Is 25 miles away. Theaver-
age fare to get there is about 538, com-
pared with 512 from Stapleton. Not that
cabbies are rubbing their hands together
with glee: Too many people are finding It
cheaper to rent a car than pay the $76
round trip by cab: "We've been here
three hours straight right now, waiting
for a fare," complains Hossein Tasiiml,
as fellow cab driver Mike Awobi gri-
maces 1n agreemen
But renting a car has Its own complica-
tions. Months before the opening, airport
officials decided they hadn't budgeted
enough parking spaces. So they booted car -
rental operators from the parldng garages
flanking the terminal to a spot five miles
away, out among the prairie dogs.
"Il took an hour and a half from the.
Mee tomtits!
Paid(( Airport *Mace bending
FO dad-, Ileo' 3la
19x5
Csnoeaww
(Accessible only
by subway)
United
Caburse A
Cenlinental, Meakin,
America Weal and Frontier
Minimizer hassles at Denver International Airport:
• Allow extra time. Ten to 45 minutes wafting for bags, plus 10 to 20 minutes for
the rental -car or hotel shuttle and a longer ride into town add up. As always, sticking
to any -on bags eliminates one wait.
• On the trains to the concourses, the middle sections are less crowded, so at peak
limes, walking past the closest cars may save you a waft for tiro next train.
• The east parkinggarage is less crowded. Flying United, which uses the west garage? Park on the east side anyway 11 you already have your
ticket and aren't checking bags. The walk to the concourse trains Is exactly the same from either garage.
• Ask your rental -car company whether it charges to top oft the tank even it you fill up. The nearest gas station to DIA is at 1-70 and Cham-
bers Road.
Centaurs C
(Accessible only bysubwry)
American, Mart Jr, Northwest, Vanguard,
USAk, Midwest Eupreu,IWA and Delta
time we touched down to the time I drove
out of here In a rental car," says Morris
Wilson, a training consultant from Pitts-
burgh: he says most of the time was spent
waiting for a shuttle bus and riding to his
car. Hertz tells returning passengers to
drop off cars at least 90 minutes before
night time.
The nearest gas station Is 15 miles
away. Some rental companies charge top-
ping -off fees even to drivers who fill their
tanks at the nearest possible place. Oth-
ers demand proof. "H you bring us a re-
ceipt from that gas station, we don't top It
off," says Karen Schwalln, manager of
the Dollar Rent A Car. "U you don't, It's
$2.29 a gallon." An airport spokeswoman
I plane or to but "It ain't cfli .
says a gas station near the toll gates
should open this summer.
Locals can always drive their own
cars. That's what Mr. Morris decided to
do after his taxi experience. "Here we
were congratulating ourselves on how
smooth the drive out had been," he says,
"when we got to United's parking area—
and then we had to circle for at least half
an hour looking for a place to park."
United Airlines, which uses Denver as
a principal hub, accounts for two-thirds of
the airport's passenger volume, so the
west parking garage, which is on Unitd's
tide of the terminal, gets two-thirds of the
ars. One recent day, while lines of frus-
trated drivers prowled round and round
the west garage, tumbleweeds blew
across the empty spaces in the east
• garage. A tall electronic sign that was
supposed to direct cars to the empty lot
sald only, "Welcome to DIA."
As at the Atlanta airport, travelers
ride by underground train from the main
terminal to various concourses, but here,
at peak times, the trains are packed more
tightly than any New York subway. John
Feldman, a Chicago traveler, Jokes,
"They're going to have to hire people to
Jam you on the subway ars, like In
Tokyo." Jim Dunlap, deputy director of
aviation, concedes that the airport under-
estimated the number of cars needed.
Please Tarn toPaneB13, Column 4
More Good Reasons Not to Fly Into Denver
add up to delays that now force him to fly in tem. BAE Automated Systems Inc.. the
the night before. "It costs me a night a designer of Unitd's system, didn't return
week home with my kids," he says. calls. United spokesman John Philp says
There are other problems. When It the airline hopes to use the system for all
rains, water pours off the vast Teflon- its bags by August.
coatedfabric roof of the main terminal- , To make matters worse, passengers
right onto the passenger loading and un- lamenting the closing of Stapleton had
loading area. Mr. Dunlap says the roof little recent experience with Its biggest
will be modified; he isn't sure when. defect: snowstorm -Induced delays. This
Only United now uses the 5232 million year, a balmy winter spared Stapleton
automated t
fame for grinding bags up like he system amburger n
urgerr prompt d the 55billl n shutdownsd travelers the kinds of construction of
on a videotaped test run. And United re- DIA, which has three more runways
Iles on the system only for outbound and than Stapleton.
oversized bags. It's unclear when, if ever, "Why couldn't we have had a horrible
other airlines will use the system, which few days of weather out at Stapleton this
they would have to pay to have extended winter, to remind people why we built this
to their fashioned gates.$67 millionntug-aenlnd-cart sys- deuse an old- puty directorort?" woners Diane oller. DIA's
o marketing.
Continued From Page BI
Four additional cars are being ordered but
won't be delivered for more than a year.
Because of mechanical problems, Tim
Stenberg, a sales manager for a foodser-
vice company in Minneapolis, has been
stuck on the subway several times for as
long as 12 minutes. In such cases, travel-
ers are truly stranded because, unlike At-
lanta's airport, DIA has no walkways to
concourses B or C.
Mr. Feldman, the Chicagoan, hates the
new airport. He used to catch a 6 a.m. flight
from Chicago, arrive at Stapleton at 7:15,
and make it to his company's headquarters
In Boulder In time for a weekly 8:30 a.m.
he
meeting. "Now, that's Impossible,"
says. Extra driving time, slower car rental,
even walking time through the airport, all
•
•
1
Z.
7i
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
April 5, 1995
Airport Relations Commission Me
Tom Lawell, City Administra
ers
Discuss Meeting of Northern Dakota County Aircraft Noise
Impacted Communities
DISCUSSION
You will recall that at our last meeting we discussed the idea
of getting together with other aircraft noise impacted cities
within northern Dakota County to explore common aircraft noise
related issues. It was hoped that out of such a meeting there
would emerge a collective voice concerned with MSP Runway 11L/R
operations which might prove to be more effective in lobbying the
MAC for certain operational changes.
The joint meeting was held on March 21, 1995 at Mendakota
County. Club with the following individuals present:
EAGAN Pat Todd, Chair of Noise Abatement Commission
John Hohenstein, Assistant to the City Administrator
INVER Steve Hughes, Member of Noise Abatement Commission
GROVE Pete Amish, Member of Noise Abatement Commission
HEIGHTS Linda Cummings, Administrative Assistant
SUNFISH Frank Tiffany, Mayor
LAKE Glenda Spiotta, City Administrator
MENDOTA Scott Beaty, Chair of Noise Abatement Commission
HEIGHTS Tom Lawell, City Administrator
A copy of the agenda packet used at the meeting is attached
for your information. The tone of the meeting was extremely
positive with each city expressing their appreciation to Mendota
Heights for hosting such a get-together. At the meeting we
reviewed a list of possible topics for multi -city collaboration and
solicited each city's position relative to each topic (see
attached).
All present agreed to continue meeting as a group to hopefully
focus our efforts on a select number of the identified topics.
More specifically, the following three actions arose out of the
meeting:
1. Cities were to consider possible additional topics for
inclusion on the list. As of today, the added topics
include the future expansion of the ANOMS system, and
concerns related to airport ground noise and engine run-
up noise. The attached list of possible topics has been
updated to reflect these additions.
2. Cities were asked to select and rank the top five issues
for multi -city collaboration they would like to see the
group pursue.
• The next meeting of the group will be held on Wednesday,
April 19, 1995 from 7:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. The City of
Sunfish Lake agreed to host the meeting which will be
held at St. Anne's Episcopal Church located on Highway
110.
ACTION REQUIRED
The Airport Relations Commission should review the attached
list of possible topics for multi -city collaboration and select, in
order, the top five issues we would like to collectively work on in
concert with other northern Dakota County cities. The
recommendation of the Airport Relations Commission will then be
forwarded to the City Council on April 18th for their action in
time for the next joint city meeting scheduled for April 19th.
NORTHERN DAKOTA COUNTY CITIES
IMPACTED BY MSP AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS -
OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATION?
TENTATIVE -AGENDA
MARCH 21, 1995
MENDAKOTA COUNTRY CLUB
MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MN
1. Welcome and Introductions.
2. Discussion of Need for Unified Approach Towards Air Noise
Issues.
• Survey of City Positions Relative to Current Air Noise
Issues,
4. Discussion of Need/Desirability to Continue Joint
• Selection of Next Meeting Date/Time/Place.
6. Adj ourn
Effort.
MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
POSSIBLE TOPICS FOR MULTI -CITY COLLABORATION
-k 1. Phase -Out of Noisy Stage II Aircraft.
N
I '7I -I2. Nighttime Restrictions on Aircraft Operations.
\II)`(/ 3. Composition of MAC Body - Accountability Issues.
4. MSP Long -Term Comprehensive Planning Issues - Expansion of
Existing Airport.
5. Dual Track Airport Relocation to Hastings Site.
6. Remote Runway Development Option.
7. FAA Airspace Usage Study.
111 8. FAA "Close -In" vs. "Distant" Departure Procedures.
9. Corridor Definition/Compliance Issues.
////10. Non -Simultaneous Departure Procedures.-ex0 ng Pod--C61--1-7r- 1115
11. Runway 4-22 Extension Issue.
12. Metropolitan Council "Noise Zone Map" Update and Related
Land Use Controls.
/13. Noise Measurement Issues - Usefulness of Ldn65 Contour.
V //// 14. Equity of Current Runway Use System.
15. Sound Insulation of Air Noise Impacted Homes - FAA Part 150
Program.
16. Expansion of MAC Aircraft Noise Operations Monitoring System
(ANOMS)
17. Aircraft Ground Noise During Periods of Departure Over
Minneapolis.
18. Aircraft Engine Run-up Noise.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
April 5, 1995 !
TO: Airport Relations Commission M,mbers
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administ
SUBJECT: Discuss Preparation for April 27, 1995
With the Mendota Heights City Council
DISCUSSION
I
Joint Workshop
As you are aware, the Mendota Heights City Council has
scheduled a joint workshop meeting with the Airport Relations
Commission for Thursday, April 27, 1995 beginning at 7:00 p.m. at
City Hall. It was suggested at our last regular meeting that we
spend some time on April 12th discussing possible topics for the
workshop.
One idea which has previously been identified for discussion
with the City Council is the City's position relative t9 the Dual -
Track process. We should also spend some time discussing with the
Council the multi -city collaborative effort currently being
organized in northern Dakota County. For other possible ideas to
discuss, you may want to refer to the list of airport related
topics included with agenda item 5a, and our adopted "Airport Noise
Plan of Action".
ACTION REQUIRED
The Commission should discuss and select possible; topics of
discussion for the joint City Council workshop scheduled for April
27th.
r -
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEBIO
April 5, 1995
TO: Airport Relations Commission M- +ers
FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administr
SUBJECT: Discuss Status of Adoption of MAC's New Noise
Methodology for MSP
DISCUSSION
Management
At our last meeting we discussed the MAC's plans to adopt a
New Noise Management Methodology (NNMM) for MSP and their request
for comments regarding the proposed action. Based on input
provided at our March 8th meeting, the attached letter was prepared
and submitted to the MASAC Operations. Committee.
the letter, we strongly suggested that the
in bringing about the conversion to an all
specifically, we requested more precise
aircraft phaseout, targeted efforts in the
hour" time periods, stricter enforcement of
aggressive interim compliance goals.
As you can see in
NNMM be more aggressive
Stage 3, fleet. More
measurement of Stage 2
nighttime and "shoulder
NNMM requirements, and
Our comments, along with others,•were discussed by the MASAC
Operations Committee on March 15th and 24th. At their,March 24th
meeting, over the objections of Mendota Heights, ;the MASAC
Operations Committee voted to recommend the adoption of the NNMM to
the full MASAC. At the MASAC meeting held on March 28th, over the
objections of Mendota Heights and Minneapolis, the full MASAC voted
to recommend adoption of the NNMM to the MAC.
ANALYSIS
While the adoption of a "watered-down" NNMM is disappointing,
its negative impact on surrounding communities will be slight. The
adoption of the NNMM represents not a defeat, but rather a "lost
opportunity" for the MAC to more aggressively work toward noise
mitigation. The NNMM is now basically only a requirement for the
airlines to provide the MAC with periodic reports on the progress
of their Stage 2 phaseout. While the reports will be interesting
to monitor, the ability of the MAC to enforce and/or persuade
airline compliance is absent.
ACTION REQUIRED
None. This item is intended only to keep Commission members
up-to-date on the status of this issue.
1
City of
Mendota Heights
March 9, 1995
VIA FACSIMILE
ORIGINAL TO FOLLOW
Ms. Jean Deighton, Committee Secretary
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Jean:
As discussed at the last MASAC Operations Committee meeting,
the MAC is attempting to establish a new Noise Management
Methodology (NMM) for MSP. Members of the MASAC Operations
Committee have been asked to make written comments regarding the
NMN! prior to our next meeting on March 15th. On behalf of the
City of Mendota Heights, the following comments are offered.
The City believes strongly that a more meaningful and
aggressive NMM is needed at MSP. The previously distributed
draft NMM represents a reasonable start, but needs to be
strengthened in several areas:
1) Measurement of Stage 2 Phaseout
All noise impacted communities eagerly await the
complete phase out of noisy Stage 2 j -et aircraft, and
clearly we need a systematic approach by which to
measure the airlines' progress towards this Federally
mandated goal. The draft NMM describes an approach
which would simply count the number of Stage 2
operations occurring at MSP over a given time period --
an approach which is certainly intuitive and
understandable.
Not surprisingly, the Federal Regulation controlling
the nationwide phase out of Stage 2 aircraft (FAR Part
91) uses a more complex and confusing measure of Stage
2 use. For example, the regulation attempts to
establish a base level of Stage 2 use, subject to
revisions caused by transfers, carry -forward credits,
etc. We pose the question, will it be possible to
correlate an airline's compliance with FAR Part 91
against their compliance with the new NMM? Without
such linkage, the usefulness of the NMM is clearly
lessened.
1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850
+' 1
3
Ms. Jean Deighton
March 9, 1995
Page 2
2) Nighttime and Shoulder Time Periods
Item #5 in the draft NMM describes three time periods
which would be tracked by the NMM. This language lumps
both "shoulder" hours (6 a.m. to 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. to
11 p.m.) together in a single measurement. It seems
more logical to keep the two shoulder time periods
discrete so that data is readily available to address
either morning or night time periods.
3) Enforceability of NMM Requirements
Item #6in the draft NMM discusses the year 2000 Stage
3 compliance goal set forth in FAR Part 91 and notes
that the NMM "establishes a tangible airport'
restriction in the event that the Airport Noise and
Capacity Act is amended in the future". How would this
restriction be enforced? Would it take the form of an
Ordinance with described penalties? Would our
residents be able to rely on this Stage 2 phase out
deadline? Without such assurance, the NMM becomes only
a measurement device, not a noise management tool.
4) Interim Compliance Goals
The establishment of interim compliance goals is
perhaps the most important aspect of the NMM. Carrier
commitments to achieve aggressive Stage 3 usage goals
will be seen by noise impacted neighbors as an
essential piece of the NMM.
Due to the importance of this aspect of the NMM, it
would be helpful to have additional information upon
which to base these interim goals. How many,
operations, by carrier, are currently Stage 2 at MSP?
How does this compare, by carrier, to their current
Stage 2 fleet mix at MSP? Assuming it is possible to
correlate the two, how would the interim compliance
goals set forth in FAR Part 91.865 translate Ito Stage 2
usage at MSP. How can the data presented in Table 4.1
of FAR Part 91 (Federal Register, Wednesday, September
25, 1991, page 48655) be tracked by carrier,ifleet, and
usage at MSP? It would be very helpful if carriers
came prepared to our March 15th meeting with specific
information regarding their planned Stage 2 phase out
schedules. Perhaps from there we could devise goals in
line with the language contained within the draft NMM.
Ms. Jean Deighton
March 9, 1995
Page 3
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft NMM in
advance of the next MASAC Operations Committee meeting. We_look
forward to receiving copies of the material submitted by the
other members of the Committee prior to the 15th. The ability to
review all of the submissions in advance will allow us all to be
much more productive when we meet.
Should you have questions or comments regarding any of the
above, please let me know.
Sincerely,
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Tom Lawell
City Administrator
1
.t
MINUTES
MASAC OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
MARCH 24, 1995
The meeting was held at the Metropolitan Airports Commission General Office Boardroom, and
called to order by Chairman Mark Salmen at 1:10 p.m.
The following members were in attendance:
Mark Salmen, NWA - Chairman
Bob Johnson, MBAA
Craig Wruck, St. Paul (Tom Hueg, St. Paul Alternate)
John Nelson, Bloomington
Dick Keinz, MAC
Ron Johnson, ALPA
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan
Tom Lawell, Mendota Heights
Advisory:
John Foggia, Technical Advisor
The committee met to finalize the New Noise Management Methodology (NNMM) which was
drafted at the previous meeting [3-15-94), and make a recommendation to MASAC.
Ron Johnson relayed for the record, that the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) is not in favor of
a NNMM because the Aircraft Noise & Capacity Act (federal) is already in place. Further, ALPA
disapproves of a quarterly reporting period. John Foggia responded that reporting will be done on
an annual comparison basis. Mr. Johnson retracted his disapproval of the reporting period.
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan, stated that after the end date [12-31-99] the NNMM will be over....but there
will still be noise. Mark Salmen, NWA, responded that MAC has noise goals and the issues will
continue to be taken care of in 1996 and thereafter. Our work at MASAC will continue beyond the
sunset of the NNMM.
Removal of the "shoulder hours" from the document as agreed at the March 15th meeting was
again discussed. Staff reiterated that the New Noise Management Methodology is only a
monitoring tool, not an enforcement document. Working together on a voluntary basis is the whole
concept of this agreement. "Shoulder hours" and nighttime operations are important enough to
warrant separate discussion as soon as the NNMM is in place.
A number of wording changes were made to the VOLUNTARY AIRLINE AGREEMENT TO
MANAGE STAGE 2 OPERATIONS AT MSP, and approved by the committee. ,The document
already contains verbiage approved by MAC, legal counsel, and air carriers.
The words Carrier and Airline were changed to Air Carrier throughout the document.
John Nelson. Bloomington. moved. and Jon Hohenstein. Eagan. seconded. to approve the Draft
New Noise Management Methodology as revised at this meeting and forward to MASAC.
Tom Lawell, City of Mendota Heights, objected to approval the document. The City wants a more
meaningful and aggressive NNMM in the areas of: (1) measurement of Stage 2 phaseout, (2)
nighttime and shoulder hour time periods, (3) enforceability of NNMM requirements, and (4). interim
compliance goals.
A vote was taken and passed. 7 yes. 1 no.
The document will be stamped "DRAFT" and forwarded to MASAC 3-25-95, and then to the MAC
Planning & Environment Committee.
Chairman Salmen requested that an "information package" be sent in mid-April to all Operations
Committee members in order to keep on schedule with the 1995 MASAC timeline. The package
will contain material on noise curfews, RUS practices, nighttime shoulder hours, and nighttime SID.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Jean Deighton, Secretary
2
•
Revised 3-24-95 - MASAC Operations Committee
RE: VOLUNTARY AIRLINE AGREEMENT TO MANAGE OPERATIONS AT MSP
Dear (Air Carrier Representativ i ):
AIR CARRIER AND MAC VOLUNTARILY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. In consideration of the execution and compliance with this voluntary agreement by all air
carriers operating aircraft greater than 75,000 pounds, MAC will not adopt a
regulation/ordinance limiting activity of Stage 2 aircraft.
2. Air Carrier agrees to use its best efforts from the effective date of this agreement to
schedule all aircraft operations so that departures and arrivals at MSP will not occur during
the Nighttime Period (11 p.m. - 6 a.m. local time).
3. Subject to provision number 4 below, Air Carrier agrees to use best efforts to limit its
utilization of Stage 2 aircraft at MSP (measured as Annual Average Daily Stage 2
Operations) to meet the following Annual Objective: not to exceed the previous year's
Annual Average Daily Stage 2 Operations. Given a valid adjustment to an air carrier's
federally established Stage 2 Base Level [as specified in FAR Part 91.861], an air carrier's
MSP Annual Average Daily Stage 2 Operations Objective will be adjusted accordingly.
4: MAC agrees to permit Air Carrier the following exceptions for operating Stage 2 aircraft at
MSP under circumstances that are beyond the control of the Air Carrier: (a) landings
necessitated by in-flight mechanical problems, fuel shortage, or other emergency flight
conditions; (b) delays or aircraft substitution due to mechanical emergencies; (c) air traffic
control (ATC) delays at MSP, at the proceeding departure airport, or within the ATC system
between these airports; or (d) weather conditions (enroute or at MSP).
5. MAC and the Air Carrier further agree that except as provided in FAR Part 91.873 [valid
federal waiver provisions], after December 31, 1999, no person shall operate to or from the
Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP) any airplane subject to FAR Part 91.801(c)
[civil subsonic turbojet greater than 75,000 pounds], unless that airplane has been shown
to comply with Stage 3 noise levels.
6. Air Carrier agrees to cooperate with the FAA in maximizing use of MSP's runway use
system, consistent with safe operating procedures. Air Carrier agrees to conduct flight crew
training programs designed to reduce noise impacts. Such operational training procedures
should include:
a. Use of approved, noise abatement takeoff procedures. !,
b. Utilization of minimum landing flap settings, consistent with' safe operating
procedures.
c. Minimizing use of reverse thrust on landing during nighttime hours,, consistent with
safe operating procedures. j
d. Training operations will not be carried out at the Airport except for the initial
departure and final arrival.
3
04)
7. Air Carrier agrees to provide MAC, on a quarterly basis, its actual utilization of aircraft, by
�4
aircraft type and specifying whether aircraft operations are Stage 2 or Stage 3. Air Carrier
agrees to list in each quarterly report the circumstances surrounding operation of Stage 2
aircraft relative to the exceptions listed in provision 4 of this agreement, and to provide such
additional explanation as MAC may reasonably require.
8. - Calendar Quarter Progress Monitoring and Annual Objective Monitoring (Not To Exceed
The Previous Year's Annual Average Daily Stage 2 Operations) will be reported by air
carrier and total airport performance for the time periods of 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., 11 p.m. to
6 a.m., and total overall performance.
9. MAC and Air Carrier shall mutually establish an agreement to form 1994 Annual Average
Daily Stage 2 operations Baseline, and calendar year 1995 will be the first annual objective
monitoring year.
10. MAC agrees to request all air carriers operating turbojet aircraft greater than 75,000 pounds
currently serving MSP to execute this Voluntary Agreement.
11. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to negate or replace any pre-existing agreements
between the parties.
12. While both parties agree to use their best efforts to comply with the requirements of this
Voluntary Agreement, both MAC and Air Carrier reserve the right to withdraw from this
agreement by providing the other party ninety days advance written notice.
Authorized Air Carrier Official
ACCEPTED AND AGREED BY THE
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
By
DATE
4
' 191453 Final cornpftat,ee: Civil subaonie
sirptanse.
Except as provided in 1 91.873, after
December 31. 1999. no person shall
operate to or from any airport in the
contiguous United States any airplane
subject to 1 91.801(c) of this subpart.
unless that airplane has been shown to
comply with Stage 3 noise levels.
—C111.2 Waivers tram tbiU oorepaanos.
(a) A U.S. air carrier may apply for a
waiver from the prohibition contained In
1 91.853 for its remaining Stage 2
airplanes. provided that. by July 1. 1989.
et least 85 percent of the airplanes used
by the carrier to provide service to or
from an airport in the ccntiguous United
States will comply with the Stage3
noise levels.
(b) An application for the waiver
described in paragraph (a) of this
section must be filed with the Secretary
of Transportation no later than January
1. 2999. Such application must include a
plan with firm orders for replacing or
modifying all airplanes to comely with
Stage 3 noise levels at the earliest
practicable time.
(c) To be eligible to apply for the
waiver under this section. a new entrant
U.S. air carrier must initiate service no
later than January 1.1999. and must
comply fully with all provisions of that
section.
(d) The Secretary may grant a waiver
under this section if the Secretary finds
that granting such waiver is in the public
interest. In making such a finding. the
Secretary shall include consideration of
the effect of granting such waiver on
competition in the air carrier industry
and the effect on small community air
service. and any other information
submitted by the applicant that the
Secretary considers relevant.
(e) The term of any waiver granted
under this section shall be determined
by the circumstances presented in the
application. but in no use will the
waiver permit the operation of any
Stage 2 airplane covered by this
subchapter in the contiguous United
States after December' pi. 2003.
(1) A summary of any request for a
waiver under this section will be
published in the Federal Register. and
public comment will be invited. Unless
the secretary finds that circumstances
require otherwise. the public comment
period will be at least I4 days.
191.175 Annual prover reports.
(a) Each operator subject to 191.885
or ¢ 91.887 of this chapter shall submit
an annual report to the'FAA. Office of
Environment and Energy. on the
progress it has nude toward complying
with the requirements of that section.
Such reports shall be submitted no later
than 45 days after the end of a calendar
year. All progress reports must provide
the information through the end of the
calendar year. be certified by the carrier
u true and complete (under penalty of
18 U.S.C. 1001). and include the
following information:
(1) The name and address of the
operator.
(2) The name. title. and telephone
number of the person designated by the
operator to be responsible for ensuring
the accuracy of the information in the
report
(3) The operator's progress dunng the
reporting period toward compliance
with the requirements of 1 91.883.
1 91.865 or 1 91.887. For airplanes on
U.S. operations specifications. each
operator shall identify the airplanes by
type. model. series. and serial number.
(i) Each Stage 2 airplane added or
removed from operation or U.S.
operations specifications (grouped
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
MEMO
April 5, 1995
TO: Airport Relations Commission M- •ers
FROM:
SUBJECT: Discuss Resident Complaint Regarding Air Pollution Caused
Tom Lawell, City Administra
by MSP Aircraft Operations
INTRODUCTION
On March 30, 1995 I received a telephone call from a resident
in the Curley Addition complaining about not only aircraft noise
pollution, but also air pollution caused by aircraft operations.
He reported the accumulation of a petroleum based "film" on his
home and property which he attributes to aircraft operations. He
inquired as to what we as a City might be able to do oto address
this issue. I noted that I would bring the matter to the attention
of the Airport Relations Commission on April 12th for further
discussion.
DISCUSSION
Certainly this is not the first time a concern regarding air
pollution caused by aircraft operations has been raised relative to
MSP. You may recall we discussed a similar complaint from a
resident of the Lexington Heights Apartments some months ago. At
that time we learned that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) has in the past taken air quality samples and has analyzed
residue samples based on similar past complaints.
This information was shared with the Curley complainant and he
inquired as to whetherlor not such testing has ever been done
within Mendota Heights. To my knowledge, it has not He then
inquired as to whether or not we could make such a request to the
MPCA on his behalf. I indicated we would discuss the matter at our
April 12th meeting.
ACTION REQUIRED
Commission members should discuss the air pollution complaint
which has been raised and should decide whether or not to request
that the MPCA and/or MAC address this matter. A representative of
the MPCA could be invited to attend an upcoming meeting, should the
Commission so desire.