Loading...
ARC Packet 01-18-2023CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION January 18, 2023  6:00 p.m. City Hall  1101 Victoria Curve 1.Call to Order 2.Approval of Agenda 3.Approval of Minutes a.Approve Minutes of the November 16, 2022 Regular Meeting 4.Public Comments 5.Unfinished and New Business a.ARC Work Plan Reviewb.ARC Rules of Orderc.Resident Question Regarding Airplane Fuel Dumping 6.Acknowledge Receipt of Reports and Correspondencea.Review of Airport Operational Statistics (link: https://www.macenvironment.org/reports/) i.Complaint Information ii.Runway Use Information iii.Turboprop Information iv.Noise Monitor Information b.MAC Reports i.2022 MSP Complaint Data Assessment ii.2022 Annual MSP Fleet Mix & Nighttime Operations Report c.News Articles 7.Commissioner Comments 8.Adjourn Meeting CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION November 16, 2022  6:00 p.m. City Hall  1101 Victoria Curve The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission was held on Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at Mendota Heights City Hall; 1101 Victoria Curve. 1.Call to Order Chair Norling called the meeting to order at 6:00pm. The following commissioners were present: Gina Norling, William Dunn, David Sloan, Arvind Sharma, and Jim Neuharth. Absent (excused): Kevin Byrnes and Jeff Hamiel. The following guests were present: Rose Agnew, Scott Norling, Michelle Ross, of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and Dana Nelson (MAC). Staff present: City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson and Office Support Assistant Sheila Robertson. 2.Approval of Agenda Motion by Neuharth/Second by Dunn to approve the agenda. Motion passed 5-0. 3.Approval of Minutes a.Approve of Minutes of the September 21, 2022 Regular Meeting Motion by Dunn/Second by Sloan to approve the minutes. Motion passed 4-0. Commissioner Sharma abstained. 4.Public Comments Scott Norling, Mendota Heights resident, asked the MAC representatives present if it was possible to add the Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor as an overlay on the MAC maps. 5.Unfinished and New Business a.MAC MSP Airport Updates – Michele Ross, Community Relations Manager Michele Ross, who had spent three years as the Assistant Manager and was newly promoted to Manager, shared MAC’s information on the following items: Operational and turbo prop trends, complaint data from Mendota Heights households, average passengers per flight data, Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) runway use, Bemidji Aviation departures over Mendota Heights, and COULT departures. i.Turbo Prop Operations Ms. Ross noted that the MSP operations have been steady over the past decade, and they’re starting to see an increase since the recent dip from the 2020 pandemic data. She also discussed the runway usage, noting that Mendota Heights arrivals at 30R have increased 11% this past year, and departures at 12L have decreased 17% this past year. ii.FAA Implementation of Eagan Request Ms. Ross noted that the MAC spent 400 hours moving needles and analyzing results, while needing to wait until January, 2022 to implement the request; post-pandemic. She noted the initial departure fix will be called COULT. Mendota Heights household complaints were down during the study period. The commission noted they’d like to see the complaint data points on a quarterly basis. iii.Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) Workplan Item 3a Ms. Ross shared the NOC’s 2023 workplan, noting there will be runway construction in 2023 and 2024. Commissioner Neuharth asked if there would be communication and notification of the closures. Ms. Ross noted there will be emails, news releases, etc. published. b.2023 Meeting Dates The Airport Relations Commission is scheduled to meet the third Wednesday of odd number months. Following this schedule, the 2023 meeting dates would be as follows: January 18, March 15, May 17, July 19, September 20, and November 15. c.Chair Norling added an item to discuss the commission’s 2023 workplan and strategic goals planning. Commissioners Sloan and Dunn suggested waiting until January, after the City Council has more direction. d.Chair Norling added an item to discuss the homeowner’s pamphlet previously produced by the commission. She wants to ensure that future homeowners are advised of the information, and asked what the best way to distribute it is. City Administrator Jacobson noted that the Community Development Director has access to the document and can distribute it in the planning phases of some city projects. She also mentioned that a “realtor day” could be a possible way to distribute the information but was uncertain whether or not the St. Paul Area Association of Realtors hosts those any longer. 6.Acknowledge Receipt of Reports and Correspondence a.Review of Airport Operational Statistics (link: https://www.macenvironment.org/reports/) i.Complaint Information City Administrator Jacobson noted that complaint information is compiled by city staff and has not been assigned to a commissioner. She added that when a new member is appointed assignments should be reconsidered. ii.Runway Use Information Commissioner Neuharth noted some potential errors on the 12L and 12 R total operations charts. Commissioner Neuharth agreed to take over the commission duties related to runway use information and data. iii.Turboprop Information Commissioner Neuharth stated he’ll work with Michele Ross (MAC) and Bemidji Aviation regarding turbo prop information. iv.Noise Monitor Information Commissioner Dunn noted there will was no significant change over the last six months. b.News Articles City Administrator Jacobson will send out to the commission. Chair Norling will take over the commission duties related to News Articles. 7.Commissioner Comments Commissioner Sharma suggested providing a thank you card or gift to Commissioner Byrnes before he leaves the commission. 8.Adjourn Meeting Motion by Neuharth/Second by Dunn to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed 5-0. Chair Norling adjourned the meeting at 7:18pm. 2021-2022  Airport Relations Commission Strategic Priorities Page 1 Vision Mendota Heights will be recognized as a high quality, family oriented residential community, with a spacious, natural feel and the amenities of a city. Mission To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Mendota Heights by providing quality public safety, infrastructure, and planning for orderly and sustainable growth. Powers & Duties Advise city council on matters pertaining to airport noise and operations. Make recommendations regarding strategies to mitigate city’s air noise exposure. Priority: Enhance City Governance and Services Strategy Action Item (Examples) Action Timing Action Status Contact/Assigned To Est. Budget/ Source Progress Notes/Outcomes 2021 2022 Parked Inform and engage Mendota Heights’ residents regarding airport related issues •Create and implement an ARC Education Program including military appreciation, history of Mendota Heights airport noise, and provide engagement opportunities such as informational stand at Parks celebration event, summer concert series, etc. X Jeff Hamiel Bill Dunn Booth/Table at Park Celebration (August 2021) Booth/Table at Fire Station Open House (October 2021; TBD 9/21) •Develop an ARC communications plan, using existing city channels (e.g., create a periodic Friday News ARC update) to provide ongoing information to residents about airport related information. X September 2021 ARC meeting invite city Communications Coordinator help inform and create comm plan. •Create a City Voice of Neighborhoods to engage residents of close-in neighborhoods X Neighborhood Post (like FB, Polco) •Identify contact points and messaging to help inform residents of noise mitigation options/best-practices when making home improvements or remodeling X Kevin Byrnes •Consider volunteer program to follow-up on resident noise complaints in partnership with MAC community engagement best practices X MAC’s responsibility is to address noise problem and engage with residents. ARC wants to be informed when calls to city are received Enhance partnerships with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), legislative leaders and other government bodies regarding airport issues •Post COVID-19 “new normal” MSP operations: COVID-19 changed MSP operations, learn of disaster operation procedures so in future, Mendota Heights only receives fair share of noise X •Work collaboratively with other communities on mutual concerns regarding airport development and operations X X July 2021 Joint Eagan Meeting at Eagan City Hall; future 2022 Joint Eagan Meeting Monitor airport operations, trends and advocate for the Mendota Heights community •Research and surveillance of MAC provided data to confirm or request additional data needed X X Continue monitoring for such things as turboprops; continue to look at relevant charts •Determine custom-made for Mendota Heights metrics to continue to monitor X X Re-evaluate metrics Item 5a 2021-2022  Airport Relations Commission Strategic Priorities Page 2 Priority: Create a Vision for City Development and Redevelopment Areas Strategy Action Item (Examples) Action Priority Action Status Assigned To Est. Budget/ Source Progress Notes/Outcomes 2021 2022 Parked Bourne Lane property (and any other properties designated for redevelopment) •Advise City Council of 65DNL location X X Approximately 14.8 net acres of redevelopment within the 65DNL Implement airport related items from the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan •Partner with other Mendota Heights advisory boards for awareness of focused airport information and considerations X X As development dictates •Review MAC 2040 Long Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP)X X Priority: Conserve, Protect and Enhance Natural Resources Strategy Action Item (Examples) Action Priority Action Status Assigned To Est. Budget/ Source Progress Notes/Outcomes 2021 2022 Parked Mitigate the city’s air noise exposure •Revisit 12L Modification Request with MAC and FAA X Gina Norling Follow-up with Dana Nelson and Brad Juffer this fall to determine if updated training procedures increased usage of cross-in-the-corridor operations Research MAC EPA studies •Review latest MAC EPA studies to determine if PM2.5 particles were identified in community X Gina Norling Future research Priority: Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure and Assets Strategy Action Item (Examples) Action Priority Action Status Assigned To Est. Budget/ Source Progress Notes/Outcomes 2021 2022 Parked Revisit ARC Operations •In conjunction with ARC Education Program, refresh ARC website with additional information and resources X Plan to address this in September 2021 meeting where city staff Communications Coordinator invited to help inform and create comm plan •Update ARC Rules of Order X Review at November 2021 meeting Determine future traffic congestion based on MAC 2040 Long Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) •Review MAC 2040 Long Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) to provide City awareness of airport passenger and operations forecast X X •Establish a working group focused on Mendota Heights future traffic that monitors growth trends and demand on the only high volume routes that provide service to eastern metro and Wisconsin Engage MNDOT study for projects _____________________________________________ Airport Relations Commission DATE: January 18, 2023 TO: Airport Relations Commission FROM: Cheryl Jacobson, City Administrator SUBJECT: Rules of Order BACKGROUND The Airport Relations Commission’s Rules of Order were created in April, 2010. A number of updates are needed to bring them to current Commission structure and practices. Attachment: ARC Rules of Order-2010 ACTION REQUIRED Staff will lead the Commission through an overview of the existing Rules of Order and proposed updates. Item 5b Rules of Order – Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission, April 14, 2010 MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION RULES OF ORDER In accordance with the City of Mendota Heights Ordinance No. 290, “Establishing An Airport Relations Commission,” the following rules of order are adopted by the Airport Relations Commission to facilitate the performance of its duties and the exercising of its functions as a Commission created by the City Council. SECTION 1. MEETING 1.1 – Time. Regular meetings of the Commission are held on the second Wednesday of each month at 7:00 P.M., unless otherwise agreed to and so stated in the agenda. When the regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, there is no meeting that month unless otherwise noted. 1.2 - Special Meetings. Special meetings may be called by the Chairperson or the Secretary. 1.3 – Place. Meetings are held in the City Hall Large Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. 1.4 – Public. All meetings and hearings, and all records and minutes are open to the public. 1.5 – Quorum. A majority of Commission members constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. When a quorum is not present, the Chairperson may adjourn the meeting for the purpose of hearing interested parties on items on the agenda. No final or official action is taken at such a meeting. However, the facts and information gathered at such a meeting may be taken as a basis for action at a subsequent meeting at which a quorum is present. 1.6 – Vote. Voting is by voice. Commission members voice votes on each issue are recorded. In the event that any member shall have a financial interest in a matter before the Commission, the member shall disclose the interest and refrain from voting upon the matter, and the secretary shall so record in the minutes that no vote was cast by such member. SECTION 2. ORGANIZATION 2.1 – Membership. The number of members of the Airports Relations Commission is established by the City Council. Appointments are made by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. Rules of Order – Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission, April 14, 2010 2.2 – Absenteeism. A Commission member with three unexcused absences per year is dropped from the Commission and the Secretary then informs the City Council so that another appointment is made. An absence is excused if the member notifies the Secretary or Chairperson before 4:00 P.M. of the day of the meeting that the member will be unable to attend. Minutes of the meetings will record whether the absent member was excused or not excused. In the event of excessive absenteeism, the commission may recommend to the Mayor and City Council that they seek replacement of a commission member. 2.3 – Election of Officers. At the February meeting each year, the Commission elects from its membership a Chairperson and a Vice-Chairperson. If the Chairperson retires from the Commission before the next organizational meeting, the Vice-Chairperson becomes Chairperson. If both Chairperson and Vice- Chairperson retire, new officers are elected at the next meeting. If both Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson are absent from a meeting, the Commission elects a temporary Chairperson by voice vote. The Secretary to the Airport Relations Commission is appointed by the City Administrator from the City Staff. 2.4 – Tenure of Officers. The Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson take office immediately following their election and hold office until their successors are elected and assume office. 2.5 – Duties of Officers. The Chairperson, or if absent, the Vice-Chairperson presides at meetings, appoints committees and performs other duties as may be ordered by the Commission. The Chairperson conducts meetings so as to keep them moving as rapidly and efficiently as possible and reminds members, witnesses and petitioners to discuss only the subject at hand. The Chairperson is a voting member of the Commission. The Secretary is responsible for recording the minutes, keeping records of Commission actions, conveying Commission recommendations to the City Council and providing general administrative and clerical service to the Commission. SECTION 3. MISCELLANEOUS 3.1 – Public Comment. The ARC does not hold public hearings, but may from time to time have public comment. Rules of Order – Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission, April 14, 2010 a. Items not previously scheduled on the agenda may be heard prior to business section of the meeting. 3.2 – Amendments or Suspension. These By-laws may be amended or suspended with the approval by voice vote by a majority of the members of the Commission. 3.3 – Adoption. These By-laws were duly adopted by the Airport Relations Commission of the City of Mendota Heights on this 14th day of April, 2010. _____________________________________________ Airport Relations Commission DATE: January 18, 2023 TO: Airport Relations Commission FROM: Gina Norling, ARC Chair SUBJECT: Resident Inquiry—Dumping of Airplane Fuel BACKGROUND A resident approached councilmember Sally Lorberbaum regarding airplane fuel dumping. The specific question was if airplanes are dropping fuel before they land. The resident said that she periodically smells the fumes and has for a couple of years. Questions Councilor Lorberbaum asked the ARC: 1.Does the ARC know if planes are dropping fuel recently or occasionally? 2.If not who can we ask? This specific concern and list of questions are consistent with the ARC’s 2021-2022 Strategic Priority to Conserve, Protect and Enhance Natural Resources: Research MAC EPA Studies. The specific strategy to determine if PM2.5 particles were identified in the community is not too far removed from the suspected fuel dumping, i.e. industrial pollution, the resident brought forth to Sally. ACTION REQUIRED Commissioners are asked to review a recent Star Tribune article regarding Purple Air monitors that measure fine particulate matter of industrial pollution. Johnson, Chloe. “Minneapolis expands network of air-testing devices.” Star Tribune, 1/8/2023, B1. Additionally, members should determine how to proceed. Item 5c MINNEAPOLIS Minneapolis expands its network of sensors sniffing for toxic air The city's air monitoring program is designed to bring data to residents, but some say more action is needed against industrial sites. By Chloe Johnson (https://www.startribune.com/chloe-johnson/9346094/) Star Tribune JANUARY 7, 2023 — 5:30PM Through the window of Circulo de Amigos Child Care Center in Minneapolis, Tania Rivera Perez pointed to the drifts of gray smoke in the air across Cedar Avenue. The daycare and preschool opened in 2015 in the East Phillips neighborhood, across the street from a foundry and asphalt plant. The center is certified as an outdoor classroom, and kids mostly learn and play outside in warmer months. Sometimes, though, parents ask during drop-off, "What's that smell?" "We know that there [are] industrial plants here, but we weren't really sure what exactly they were doing," Rivera Perez said. "We would see fumes, of course. And that definitely made us wonder what it was." Now, Circulo de Amigos is one of 70 sites around Minneapolis fitted with a PurpleAir monitor. The devices measure fine particulate matter, sometimes referred to as soot. The tiny particles are easily inhaled and burrow into the lungs, which can cause heart and asthma attacks and sometimes premature death. Readings from the monitor are available in real time, on PurpleAir's website (https://map.purpleair.com/1/mAQI/a1440/p604800/cC0#11.92/44.95311/-93.28037) . The monitor is part of a city-wide effort by Minneapolis to get a better picture of what, exactly, its residents are breathing in. After putting the PurpleAir sensors on homes and businesses throughout 2022, the city will add two other types of sensors this year. The new instruments are supported in part by a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-will-deploy-air-pollution-monitorswith- grant-from-biden-administration/600221732/) , which will detect volatile gases that can also make people sick. While the city meets the EPA's air standards, "We've been hearing from residents in Minneapolis for a long time that they wanted more information about local air quality," said Jennifer Lansing, a senior environmental research analyst with the city's Department of Health. Tighter air standards could be coming. On Friday, the EPA proposed lowering the limits for fine particulate pollution. For Circulo de Amigos, the PurpleAir sensor has been a useful tool. Readings stayed relatively low after it was installed in the summer and into the fall. "I'm at ease, knowing that we're taking extra measures to make sure that the kids have clean air here, at least at the school," she said. "If not, we know we have a backup plan [to go inside]." Lansing said that 30 AQMesh monitors, which are on loan from the state, will be installed in the spring on lamp posts to measure aggregate levels of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, in outdoor air. Additional sensors will pinpoint which toxic gases make up these VOCs. Lansing said that the sensors are meant to give a broad picture of air quality, and could not be used for action against polluters. "We would never be able to collect data and say ... these particulates came from this facility," Lansing said. "There's so many different sources of pollution in the urban area," including from cars and trucks. In the case of East Phillips, one neighborhood leader said he hopes the new gas-detecting monitors will help to pin down releases from the two major sites — Smith Foundry and Bituminous Roadways — that he and his neighbors say have made the air smell acrid, intermittently, for years. "We've complained for decades" about pollution from local industry, said Steve Sandberg, a resident and board member of the East Phillips Neighborhood Institute. The neighborhood is also the site of a protracted battle over city plans for a yard for water system trucks at the former Roof Depot warehouse (https://www.startribune.com/lawsuits-between-minneapolis-environmental-activistsheat- up-as-roof-depot-demolition-nears/600236164/) . Activists oppose the project, in part, over air pollution concerns. Peter Ryan, quality manager and director of health, safety and environmental at Smith Foundry, said that "We are in compliance with all state and local requirements" for air quality. Bituminous Roadways did not respond to a request for comment. Hannah Sabroski, a spokeswoman for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, said the only enforcement action against either facility came in 2006. Smith Foundry was cited for a broken baghouse, which controls particulates, as well as "overdue performance testing and using equipment not in their permit," Sabroksi wrote. The company paid a fine and corrected the problems. Lansing said the city continues to field smell complaints to its 311 line and sends inspectors, if necessary, to measure odors near the foundry and asphalt plant. She also said the foundry has recently expressed interest in the city's voluntary cost-share program for pollution reduction (https://www.minneapolismn.gov/government/programs-initiatives/environmentalprograms/ green-cost-share/) . Sandberg said that in the past, city inspectors haven't come when the smells are strongest. Minneapolis' testing program focuses on its green zones, or neighborhoods with a history of pollution and racial segregation. Monitors have been put in other places as well. KJ Starr, who lives in the Seward neighborhood with her husband and four children, installed a PurpleAir monitor last summer. For years, she worried about emissions from a local landscaping business' diesel trucks. "If you live in these weird industrial areas, it's a burden on you to figure out yourself," Starr said. A city law passed last year has helped to cut down on truck idling. But looking at her air monitor readings during a December conversation with the Star Tribune, Starr found herself worried that particulate levels were high enough to affect medically sensitive people. She herself has asthma. "I was hoping that I would be like oh, 'I'm just worrying, and I shouldn't worry about it'" after getting the sensor, Starr said. "And then I look at this and I'm like, it's a bummer." Others have had a more pleasant surprise from the readings. Daniel Swenson-Klatt, the owner of Butter Bakery Cafe at 3700 Nicollet Av., started thinking more about the air around his business when the cafe expanded outdoor seating during the COVID-19 pandemic. Last summer, things mostly stayed clear on his PurpleAir monitor. He hopes, however, that the city will stay mindful of air pollution as it seeks to turn business corridors like Nicollet into denser, transit-oriented arteries. "If we want to have people living in these corridors, let's also be aware we want to give them some good air quality," he said. Chloe Johnson covers climate and other environmental issues for the Star Tribune and the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, a consortium of 10 news organizations. She is a corps member with Report for America, a national service program that places journalists into local newsrooms. chloe.johnson@startribune.com 1 Cheryl Jacobson From:Ross, Michele <Michele.Ross@mspmac.org> Sent:Thursday, January 12, 2023 2:06 PM To:Cheryl Jacobson Cc:Nelson, Dana Subject:RE: Resident Question -Fuel Cheryl,  Below please find some information that could be useful for the councilmember when speaking with the inquiring  resident. Please feel free to share my contact information with the council member and / or resident as a resource for  this or any other question regarding aircraft / airport activity and let me know if I can assist further in any way on this  matter.  Thank you!    Aircraft only dump fuel during extreme emergencies and only a few aircraft have the capability to do it. Aircraft regularly  using MSP do not have the capability to dump fuel. It comes down to the fact that certain airplanes are designed to be significantly lighter when landing than when taking off. This is because landing can put more stress on a plane. When a plane lands heavy, it’s very easy to hit the ground too hard and cause damage to the aircraft. This problem usually takes care of itself, because during the course of a flight, the fuel will be burned, shedding weight along the way. The manufacturers consider this in their design of an aircraft, so by the time a plane reaches its destination, it will be light enough to land safely. Aircraft will avoid dumping fuel due to the cost of wasting fuel and the negative impacts to people and environment.    There are some emergencies, such as a mechanical malfunction or a medical issue onboard, where pilots need to cut their trip short. This could lead to a potential situation when the aircraft weight may be too heavy to land. During these situations, dumping fuel is not the only option. If it is not urgent that the aircraft land immediately, the pilot may choose to continue flying in a circular holding pattern to burn off the excess fuel. Pilots may also decide to land overweight. Also,  for some planes, landing and takeoff weight limits are the same, in which case it does not matter. In the case when an aircraft has the capability to dump fuel and in the rare event of an emergency requiring fuel to be dumped, aircraft operator instructions would likely specify that the pilot fly the aircraft to a specified altitude or to a designated fuel dumping area away from centers of population. Airlines must follow air traffic control/FAA procedures ‐ the MAC has no  oversight or regulatory authority related to fuel dumping.    In February 2002, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) conducted ambient air quality monitoring near the airport.  The MPCA also placed equipment on the Wenonah School in south Minneapolis and at the Richfield Intermediate School.  It is the MAC’s understanding that the MPCA placed the equipment in locations that would give the best possible chance of identifying the impact of emissions from airport operations, particularly aircraft, on ambient air quality and the impacts to surrounding communities. The MPCA has reported that the ambient data collected from the monitoring sites around MSP show air quality to be typical of an urbanized setting.  In addition, the MPCA has indicated that it is difficult to differentiate air pollution associated with airport activities from other sources of air pollution.      Lastly, weather conditions have a significant impact upon the dispersion of odorous compounds.  Because prevailing wind  conditions have an impact on an aircraft’s direction of takeoff and landing, the strength of the odor in the surrounding  areas are likely affected in a similar manner. Also, if there is only a light wind, odors will be prevalent longer.      MICHELE ROSS, C.M. Manager, Community Relations O: 612-467-0837 Complaints by Location—By Month (2021, 2022) Location = Complainants 2021 Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn January 65 32 3 6 3 February 57 27 4 4 2 March 112 49 16 8 4 April 84 48 16 10 11 May 115 62 13 14 10 June 111 67 12 10 8 July 102 90 8 8 11 August 90 74 10 10 11 September 124 55 15 11 6 October 135 55 11 14 5 November 50 45 7 6 3 December 43 41 6 4 3 2022 Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn January 39 33 6 2 2 February 39 29 7 2 3 March 68 45 21 5 3 April 54 37 6 6 3 May 92 55 10 10 6 June 132 63 8 12 8 July 109 67 14 10 11 August 123 83 19 16 16 September 114 41 13 9 9 October 74 45 12 10 6 November 56 34 9 7 7 December 32 23 7 4 2 Percent of All Departures by Location (2021, 2022) 2021 Mpls/ Richfield 30R Eagan 12R Edina 30L MH 12L Blmgtn 17 January 25% 26% 32% 16% 1% February 30% 17% 39% 11% 2% March 16% 27% 26% 20% 11% April 34% 13% 28% 11% 15% May 24% 15% 11% 21% 29% June 25% 7% 18% 14% 35% July 16% 9% 15% 19% 41% August 16% 8% 16% 19% 41% September 23% 7% 24% 13% 34% October 20% 21% 21% 20% 19% November 25% 7% 29% 11% 28% December 20% 11% 27% 14% 28% 2022 Mpls/ Richfield 30R Eagan 12R Edina 30L MH 12L Blmgtn 17 January 23% 8% 28% 12% 29% February 29% 6% 36% 8% 21% March 27% 7% 39% 9% 19% April 12% 14% 19% 18% 37% May 18% 11% 22% 15% 33% June 22% 9% 25% 12% 31% July 20% 9% 22% 15% 33% August 19% 7% 21% 16% 38% September 18% 28% 24% 22% 7% October 24% 15% 31% 14% 15% November 21% 8% 28% 12% 30% December 17% 12% 28% 15% 28% Item 5.a.i November Complaints November Night Departures 2020 2021 2022 2020 2021 2022 Minneapolis (30R) 2,916 1,944 893 19 96 54 Eagan (12R) 949 2,299 1,837 25 107 139 Edina (30L) 574 194 201 102 130 156 Mendota Heights (12L) 297 320 672 8 69 46 Bloomington (17) 4 103 96 2 7 25 Total 4,740 4,860 3,699 156 409 420 50 45 7 6 356349 7 7 25% 7% 29% 11% 28% 21% 8% 28% 12% 30% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn November Complaints by Location and Departures by Location Complaints 2021 Complaints 2022 Departures 2021 Departures 2022 43 41 6 4 3322374 2 20% 11% 27% 14% 28% 17% 12% 28% 15% 28% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Mpls Eagan Edina MH Blmgtn December Complaints by Location and Departures by Location Complaints by Location 2021 Complaints by Location 2022 Departures by Location 2021 Departures by Location 2022 December Complaints December Night Departures 2020 2021 2022 2020 2021 2022 Minneapolis (30R) 2,762 2,056 669 12 106 94 Eagan (12R) 1,072 2,120 1,621 53 146 178 Edina (30L) 629 252 186 90 192 235 Mendota Heights (12L) 108 474 323 39 85 57 Bloomington (17) 104 90 19 4 19 17 Total 4,675 4,992 2,818 116 548 581 2022 MSP COMPLAINT DATA ASSESSMENT JANUARY 202 3 COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICE 2020-2022 ANNUAL COMPLAINTS AND HOUSEHOLDS 2022 HOUSEHOLDS FILING COMPLAINTS 2020 2021 2022 COMPLAINTS 99,614 127,578 103,356 HOUSEHOLDS 761 996 881 - 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 - 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDSCOMPLAINTS 2022 TOP 10 HOUSEHOLDS FILING COMPLAINTS 2022 NEW HOUSEHOLDS FILING COMPLAINTS 2020-2022 TOTAL COMPLAINTS 2020 – 2022 TOTAL COMPLAINTS 2022 GROUND NOISE & RUN UP COMPLAINTS 2022 HOUSEHOLDS FILING COMPLAINTS BY HOME PURCHASE YEAR Note: single-family owner-occupied households only based on county parcel data (2022). 5% 2% 8% 15% 19% 37% 14% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% <1970 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2019 2020-2022PERCENTAGE OF COMPLAINT HOSEHOLDS BY DECADE SOLD 2022 COMPLAINTS FILED BY COMPLAINT REASON NOTE: BECAUSE MORE THAN ONE OPTION CAN BE SELECTED, THESE DO NOT ADD UP TO 100%. SELECTED ALL INDICATES EVERY COMPLAINT TYPE SELECTED. 98.5% 71.8% 50.7% 29.4%27.0% 11.2%11.0% 3.4% 0.1%0.0% EXCESSIVE NOISE FREQUENCY ALTITUDE TOO LOW STRUCTURAL DISTURBANCE EARLY / LATE OTHER AIRCRAFT NOISE-RELATED ISSUES NOISES FROM AIRCRAFT ON THE GROUND RUN-UP (ENGINE TESTING) HELICOPTER OVERFLIGHT / NOISE SELECTED ALL 2020-2022 COMPLAINTS FILED BY TOP 10 CITIES MINNEAPOLIS EAGAN RICHFIELD INVER GROVE HEIGHTS BURNSVILLE MENDOTA HEIGHTS EDINA SAINT PAUL GOLDEN VALLEY BLOOMINGTON 2020 36,979 16,700 11,370 10,776 1,231 3,781 4,500 1,285 4,948 766 2021 35,650 29,117 18,911 13,365 2,504 4,928 4,763 3,631 3,533 1,271 2022 22,593 25,575 15,599 12,205 5,027 3,965 3,800 3,694 2,399 2,271 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 2020-2022 HOUSEHOLDS FILING COMPLAINTS BY TOP 10 CITIES MINNEAPOLIS EAGAN RICHFIELD EDINA SAINT PAUL BURNSVILLE MENDOTA HEIGHTS BLOOMINGTON INVER GROVE HEIGHTS SAINT LOUIS PARK 2020 382 96 48 34 27 9 36 12 20 25 2021 400 157 68 43 48 43 31 30 21 37 2022 368 142 53 50 49 39 26 25 22 18 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 2021 TO 2022 COMPARISON - COMPLAINTS BY CITY 2021 TO 2022 COMPARISON - HOUSEHOLDS FILING COMPLAINTS BY CITY 2020-2022 COMPLAINTS AND OPERATIONS BY TIME OF DAY Note: Morning: 6:00 AM – 7:30 AM Day: 7:30 AM – 9:00 PM Evening: 9:00 PM – 10:30 PM Night: 10:30 PM – 6:00 AM 6.6%6.0%6.0% 83.5%82.7%81.4% 4.8%6.3%6.1% 5.1%5.0%6.4% 2020 2021 2022 OPERATIONS BY TIME PERIOD MORNING DAY EVENING NIGHT 8.7%7.6%10.8% 75.1%74.6%67.7% 10.0%11.2%12.8% 6.3%6.5%8.6% 2020 2021 2022 COMPLAINTS BY TIME PERIOD MORNING DAY EVENING NIGHT 2022 COMPLAINTS AND OPERATION RATIO BY HOUR -6.0 -5.0 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 0:001:002:003:004:005:006:007:008:009:0010:0011:0012:0013:0014:0015:0016:0017:0018:0019:0020:0021:0022:0023:00OPERATION:COMPLAINT RATIOMSP COMPLAINTSCOMPLAINTS RECEIVED OPERATIONS:COMPLAINT RATIO 2022 OPERATION:COMPLAINTS MONTHLY RATIO 5.26 1.63 2018 2.90 2019 2.27 2020 2.44 2021 2.35 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 6,000 12,000 18,000 24,000 30,000 36,000 42,000 48,000 54,000 60,000 66,000 72,000 JAN-18MAR-18MAY-18JUL-18SEP-18NOV-18JAN-19MAR-19MAY-19JUL-19SEP-19NOV-19JAN-20MAR-20MAY-20JUL-20SEP-20NOV-20JAN-21MAR-21MAY-21JUL-21SEP-21NOV-21JAN-22MAR-22MAY-22JUL-22SEP-22NOV-22OPERATIONS:COMPLAINTSRATIOMSP OPERATIONSANDCOMPLAINTSOPERATIONS COMPLAINTS OPS:COMPLAINTS MONTHLY RATIO OPS:COMPLAINTS ANNUAL RATIO 2022 3.0 2022 COMPLAINTS BY AIRCRAFT CATEGORY - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 - 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 C J T P M U H OPERATIONSCOMPLAINTSTOTAL COMPLAINTS TOTAL OPERATIONS Operation Type Total Operations Total Complaints Ratio Commercial Jet (C) 284,965 99,330 2.9 Jet (J) 11,786 1,257 9.4 Turboprop (T) 5,371 882 6.1 Propeller (P) 2,830 696 4.1 Military (M) 138 106 1.3 Unknown (U) 1,091 45 24.2 Helicopter (H) 31 10 2.5 2022 COMPLAINTS BY AIRCRAFT TYPE 2022 TOP 10 FLIGHTS THAT GENERATED COMPLAINTS Operation Number Aircraft Type Flight ID Date and Time Number of Complaints Number of Households 27918240 F35 NAVY 6/2/2022 12:07 48 47 27688893 B738 SCX745 3/20/2022 8:15 11 8 27931990 B763 FDX1618 6/6/2022 21:57 9 8 27683054 A320 NKS772 3/18/2022 6:51 11 7 28219819 B738 AAL1578 8/1/2022 21:47 15 7 28530536 MD11 UPS559 10/31/2022 21:48 8 7 28017434 A321 DAL2326 6/29/2022 21:24 7 7 28446551 B734 ASH185 10/5/2022 22:07 7 7 28229927 MD11 UPS559 8/12/2022 21:43 7 7 28528440 B738 AAL1325 10/31/2022 6:16 7 7 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 NUMBER OF OPERATIONSNUMBER OF COMPLAINTSTOTAL COMPLAINTS TOTAL OPERATIONS 2020-2022 COMPLAINTS BY FLOW 2020-2022 TOTAL FLOW 4% 5% 8% 2% 0% 0% 39% 32% 41% 20% 37% 37% 31% 21% 10% 4% 4% 3% 2020 2021 2022 MIXED A MIXED B NORTH STRAIGHT NORTH SOUTH STRAIGHT SOUTH OPPOSITE UNLABELED UNUSUAL 3% 6% 7% 1.7% 1.1% 0.5% 38% 35% 37% 7% 19% 23% 30% 23% 17% 7% 7% 7% 12% 9% 8% 2020 2021 2022 MIXED A MIXED B NORTH STRAIGHT NORTH SOUTH STRAIGHT SOUTH OPPOSITE UNLABELED UNUSUAL 2022 COMPLAINTS BY TEMPERATURE 2022 COMPLAINTS BY WEATHER 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 -20--11 -10--1 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100-109COMPLAINTS OBSERVED TEMPERATURE (°F) 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 MOSTLY CLOUDY OVERCAST A FEW CLOUDS PARTLY CLOUDY FAIR LIGHT SNOW LIGHT RAIN OVERCAST AND BREEZY FOG/MIST LIGHT SNOW FOG/MIST HOURLY WEATHER OBSERVATIONSCOMPLAINTSCOMPLAINTS FREQUENCY WEATHER OBSERVED Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 metroairports.org This report is for informational purposes only. 2022 ANNUAL MSP FLEET MIX AND NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT JANUARY 202 3 COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICE 2022 ANNUAL MSP FLEET MIX AND NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS MSP FLEET MIX REPORT Monthly Carrier Jet Counts by Type 2 Widebody Jet Activity 3 Narrowbody Jet Activity 4 Regional Jet Activity 5 Average Passengers per Flight 6 MSP Carrier Jet Usage with Cumulative Certificated Noise Levels 7 Average Altitude for Aircraft Arriving to MSP by Category 8 Average Altitude for Aircraft Departing from MSP by Category 9 MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT Average Daily Nighttime Operations 10 Nighttime Operations by Runway 11 Nighttime Operations by Runway Map 12 Nighttime Operations by Airline 13 Nighttime Operations by Aircraft 14 Nighttime Operations by Origin and Destination 15 Nighttime Operations by Hour 16 Scheduled Versus Actual Operations 17 MSP FLEET MIX REPORT 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 JAN-18MAR-18MAY-18JUL-18SEP-18NOV-18JAN-19MAR-19MAY-19JUL-19SEP-19NOV-19JAN-20MAR-20MAY-20JUL-20SEP-20NOV-20JAN-21MAR-21MAY-21JUL-21SEP-21NOV-21JAN-22MAR-22MAY-22JUL-22SEP-22NOV-22MSP OPERATIONSTHOUSANDSMONTHLY CARRIER JET COUNTS BY TYPE NARROWBODY WIDEBODY RJ HUSHKIT BY YEAR: 2018 -32, 2019 -18, 2020 -8, 2021 -68, 2022 -10 MSP FLEET MIX REPORT WIDEBODY JET ACTIVITY WIDEBODY TYPE 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 A124 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% A300 0.1% 0.2% 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% A310 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% A330 0.7% 0.6% 0.3% 1.0% 1.2% A340 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% A350 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% B742 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B744 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% B748 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% B762 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B763 0.8% 1.1% 1.1% 1.8% 1.5% B764 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 0.1% B767 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B777 0.4% 0.5% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% B7878 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% DC10 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% MD11 0.3% 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% Total 2.8% 3.0% 2.6% 3.6% 3.3% MSP FLEET MIX REPORT NARROWBODY JET ACTIVITY NARROWBODY TYPE 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 A220 0.0% 0.3% 0.9% 2.0% 1.9% A319 6.4% 6.7% 7.0% 6.6% 9.2% A20N 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.5% 0.6% A320 6.9% 8.1% 5.7% 6.0% 6.2% A21N 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% A321 2.2% 6.6% 9.6% 10.4% 12.5% B717 5.9% 7.8% 2.4% 0.4% 2.4% B72Q 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B733 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B734 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% B735 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B7377 4.7% 3.8% 2.6% 2.1% 2.5% B738 10.1% 11.3% 10.8% 11.1% 12.6% B739 7.5% 8.1% 8.0% 8.7% 9.4% B38M 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 0.5% B73Q 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B757 6.1% 5.1% 5.0% 4.6% 3.8% DC9Q 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% MD80 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% MD90 6.8% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% TOTAL 57.0% 58.7% 52.4% 52.7% 61.9% MSP FLEET MIX REPORT REGIONAL JET ACTIVITY REGIONAL JET TYPE 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 CRJ 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CRJ1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% CRJ2 14.3% 12.9% 10.8% 11.9% 8.5% CRJ7 7.0% 3.9% 2.9% 2.3% 1.7% CRJ9 13.0% 13.8% 20.2% 21.3% 12.4% E135 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% E145 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.2% 0.3% E170 5.5% 7.3% 10.6% 7.3% 10.7% E190 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.3% 0.4% J328 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.5% TOTAL 40.2% 38.3% 45.0% 43.7% 34.7% MSP FLEET MIX REPORT JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2019 93.3 99.1 105.1 100.7 103.3 108.6 108.3 106.7 102.4 102.8 99.6 103.7 2020 96.7 100.1 63.4 14.1 36.6 57.7 57.1 56.0 56.7 58.3 50.5 53.3 2021 56.5 63.8 78.2 78.0 92.3 96.7 105.8 100.5 93.4 99.2 100.1 98.9 2022 89.6 99.4 112.5 109.0 112.6 116.3 114.9 112.7 111.9 114.4 113.1 10 30 50 70 90 110 AVERAGE PASSENGERS PER FLIGHT SOURCE:MSP MONTHLY OPERATIONS REPORTS MSP FLEET MIX REPORT CRJ2CRJ7CRJ9E135E145E170E190J328A20NA21NA221A223A319A320A321B38MB717B733B734B735B7377B738B739B757MD80A300A330A340A350B744B748B762B763B764B777B7878MD118.5%1.7%12.4%0.1%0.3%10.7%0.4%0.5%0.6%0.1%0.9%1.0%9.2%6.2%12.5%0.5%2.4%0.0%0.3%0.0%2.5%12.6%9.4%3.8%0.0%0.0%1.2%0.0%0.1%0.1%0.1%0.0%1.5%0.1%0.1%0.0%0.1%STAGE 4 STAGE 5 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 CUMULATIVE CERTIFICATED NOISE LEVEL BELOW STAGE 3 (EPNDB)REGIONAL JET NARROW BODY WIDE BODY SOURCE:USAGE DATA: MACNOMS; NOISE CERTIFICATION DATA: EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY CUMULATIVE CERTIFICATED NOISE LEVELS REPRESENTED AS A RANGE TO ACCOUNT FOR MULTIPLE CERTIFICATION VARIABLES (WEIGHT, MODEL, ENGINE TYPE, AIRFRAME CONFIGURATION, ETC) CUMULATIVE CERTIFICATED NOISE LEVEL RANGE 2022 MSP CARRIER JET USAGE WITH CUMULATIVE CERTIFICATED NOISE LEVELS STAGE 3 MSP FLEET MIX REPORT MEASUREMENT GATE IS FIVE NAUTICAL MILES FROM THE THRESHOLD OF THE ARRIVAL RUNWAY 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 JANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCT2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022FEET ABOVE MSP FIELD ELEVATIONAVERAGE ALTITUDE FOR AIRCRAFT ARRIVING TO MSP NARROWBODY REGIONAL JET WIDEBODY MSP FLEET MIX REPORT MEASUREMENT GATE IS A N ARC FIVE NAUTICAL MILES FROM THE START OF TAKEOFF ROLL 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 JANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCTJANAPRJULOCT2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022FEET ABOVE MSP FIELD ELEVATIONAVERAGE ALTITUDE FOR AIRCRAFT DEPARTING FROM MSP NARROWBODY REGIONAL JET WIDEBODY MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT 46 51 59 69 66 70 80 34 41 54 98 95 106 118 119 120 119 58 83 92 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022AVERAGE DAILY OPERATIONSAVERAGE DAILY NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS 10:30 PM -6:00 AM 10:00 PM -7:00 AM MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS BY RUNWAY (10:30 PM – 6:00 AM) 2022 2019 - 2021 AVERAGE RWY ARR / DEP OVERFLIGHT AREA TOTAL NIGHT OPS AVERAGE DAILY NIGHT OPS % TOTAL NIGHT OPS AVERAGE DAILY NIGHT OPS % 04 ARR SO. RICHFIELD/BLOOMINGTON 5 0.0 0.0% 1 0.0 0.0% 12L ARR SO. MINNEAPOLIS/NO. RICHFIELD 1,238 3.4 9.2% 1,577 4.3 12.2% 12R ARR SO. MINNEAPOLIS/NO. RICHFIELD 4,454 12.2 33.1% 3,703 10.1 28.7% 17 ARR SO. MINNEAPOLIS 18 0.0 0.1% 120 0.3 0.9% 22 ARR ST. PAUL/HIGHLAND PARK 24 0.1 0.2% 5 0.0 0.0% 30L ARR EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS 5,788 15.9 43.0% 4,906 13.4 38.0% 30R ARR EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS 1,663 4.6 12.4% 1,914 5.2 14.8% 35 ARR BLOOMINGTON/EAGAN 268 0.7 2.0% 686 1.9 5.3% TOTAL NIGHTTIME ARRIVALS 13,458 36.9 12,912 35.2 04 DEP ST. PAUL/HIGHLAND PARK 0 0.0 0.0% 4 0.0 0.1% 12L DEP EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS 959 2.6 15.5% 1,245 3.4 20.9% 12R DEP EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS 1,607 4.4 26.0% 1,437 3.9 24.1% 17 DEP BLOOMINGTON/EAGAN 236 0.6 3.8% 224 0.6 3.8% 22 DEP SO. RICHFIELD/BLOOMINGTON 5 0.0 0.1% 1 0.0 0.0% 30L DEP SO. MINNEAPOLIS/NO. RICHFIELD 2,043 5.6 33.1% 1,668 4.6 28.0% 30R DEP SO. MINNEAPOLIS/NO. RICHFIELD 1,320 3.6 21.4% 1,365 3.7 22.9% 35 DEP SO. MINNEAPOLIS 3 0.0 0.0% 20 0.1 0.3% TOTAL NIGHTTIME DEPARTURES 6,173 16.8 5,964 16.2 TOTAL NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS 19,631 53.7 18,876 51.4 MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS BY RUNWAY MAP (10:30 PM – 6:00 AM) MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS BY AIRLINE (TOP 15 BY COUNT) 2022 AIRLINE ID COUNT PERCENT OF AIRLINE OPERATIONS OCCURRING AT NIGHT PERCENT OF CONTRIBUTION TO NIGHTTIME TOTAL DELTA DAL 5,824 4.9% 31.0% SUN COUNTRY SCX 3,591 15.3% 19.1% SKYWEST AIRLINES SKW 2,149 3.1% 11.4% SOUTHWEST SWA 1,679 15.9% 8.9% AMERICAN AAL 1,239 17.6% 6.6% UPS UPS 1,119 33.6% 6.0% UNITED UAL 781 9.7% 4.2% FEDEX FDX 693 22.6% 3.7% GULF & CARIBBEAN CARGO TSU 356 96.0% 1.9% JETBLUE AIRWAYS JBU 350 18.4% 1.9% ALASKA ASA 284 18.0% 1.5% FRONTIER AIRLINES FFT 232 19.2% 1.2% SPIRIT NKS 230 7.9% 1.2% ENDEAVOR AIR EDV 163 0.9% 0.9% SWIFT AIR (USA) SWQ 85 16.4% 0.5% 2021 AIRLINE ID COUNT PERCENT OF AIRLINE OPERATIONS OCCURRING AT NIGHT PERCENT OF CONTRIBUTION TO NIGHTTIME TOTAL DELTA DAL 3,597 3.6% 25.1% SUN COUNTRY SCX 3,214 15.6% 22.4% SKYWEST AIRLINES SKW 1,632 2.3% 11.4% UPS UPS 1,271 33.2% 8.9% AMERICAN AAL 1,219 15.9% 8.5% SOUTHWEST SWA 957 10.3% 6.7% FEDEX FDX 679 19.6% 4.7% GULF & CARIBBEAN CARGO TSU 367 96.8% 2.6% ALASKA ASA 283 21.8% 2.0% ENDEAVOR AIR EDV 281 0.7% 2.0% ENVOY AIR ENY 201 12.6% 1.4% UNITED UAL 194 4.0% 1.4% SPIRIT NKS 179 5.2% 1.2% FRONTIER AIRLINES FFT 129 11.1% 0.9% MESA AIRLINES ASH 119 7.0% 0.8% *AIRLINE OPERATIONS OCCURRING AT NIGHT REPRSENTS THE PERCENTAGE OF RESPECTIVE AIRLINE SCHEDULE THAT OCCURS AT NIGHT *CONTRIBUTION TO TOTAL IS RESPECTIVE AIRLINE CONTRIBUTIONS TO OVERALL MSP NIGHT OPERATIONS MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT 2022 N IGHTTIME OPERATIONS BY AIRCRAFT (TOP 15 BY COUNT) AIRCRAFT CODE DESCRIPTION COUNT NOISE LEVEL CERTIFICATION (EPNdB BELOW STAGE 3) B738 BOEING 737-800 5,532 11.3 - 17.1 A321 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A321 2,487 6.4 - 17 B739 BOEING 737-900 1,773 10.9 - 16.1 B757 BOEING 757-200 1,482 11.1 - 22.1 CRJ9 CANADAIR REGIONAL JET CRJ-900 1,259 14.5 - 17.6 A320 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320 1,156 12.1 - 21.2 A319 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A319 872 12.9 - 22.2 B7377 BOEING 737-700 851 11.6 - 19.8 B763 BOEING 767-300 807 4.4 - 22.6 CRJ2 CANADAIR REGIONAL JET CRJ-200 707 26.5 - 30.6 E170 EMBRAER 170 676 9.2 - 16.8 B38M BOEING 737-8 MAX 259 24.3 - 27.4 E190 EMBRAER 190 233 12.2 - 17.9 CRJ7 CANADAIR REGIONAL JET CRJ-700 209 14.5 - 17.6 A330 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A330 164 11.7 - 21.1 NOISE CERTIFICATION DATA SOURCE: EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY CUMULATIVE CERTIFICATED NOISE LEVELS REPRESENTED AS A RANGE BELOW STAGE 3 NOISE LEVELS TO ACCOUNT FOR MULTIPLE CERTIFICATION VARIABLES (WEIGHT, MODEL, ENGINE TYPE, AIRFRAME CONFIGURATION, ETC) MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT 2022 N IGHTTIME OPERATIONS BY ORIGIN AND DESTINATION (TOP 15 BY COUNT) AIRPORT CODE DESTINATION AIRPORT COUNT ATL ATLANTA 342 DEN DENVER 334 FAR FARGO 327 FSD SIOUX FALLS 318 RST ROCHESTER MN 301 GFK GRAND FORKS 286 DLH DULUTH 267 BIS BISMARCK 260 MDW CHICAGO MIDWAY 238 LAS LAS VEGAS 230 RAP RAPID CITY 220 PHX PHOENIX 203 TVF THEIF RIVER FALLS REGIONAL 169 IAH HOUSTON 164 MKE MILWAUKEE 163 MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS BY HOUR 2,470 707270467 1,319 4,537 3,429 6,435 2022 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 22:30 23:00 1,909 605 343 536 1,548 4,373 4,279 5,284 3 -YEAR HISTORICAL AVERAGE 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 22:30 23:00 MSP NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS REPORT SCHEDULED VERSUS ACTUAL OPERATIONS (AVERAGE BY HOUR) GENERAL AVIATION AND CHARTER AIRCRAFT OPERATORS DO NOT REPORT SCHEDULED OPERATIONS 3.20.41.70.91.0 9.1 9.1 11.9 DAILY SCHEDULED NIGHT OPERATIONS 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 22:30 23:00 6.8 1.9 0.7 1 3.6 12.4 9.4 17.6 DAILY ACTUAL NIGHT OPERATIONS 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 22:30 23:00 ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 30L DISTANCE MEASUREMENT RINGS ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 30L AEDT MODEL DEPARTURE TRACKS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 30L AEDT MODEL TRACKS ASSIGNED HEADINGS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING 2022 AVERAGE MSP RUNWAY 30L DEPARTURE ALTITUDE BY HEADING - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 7,500 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ALTITUDE ABOVE MSP (FEET)DISTANCE FROM RUNWAY 30L THRESHOLD (STATUTE MILES) 210 230 260 300 320 340 360 Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks used for analysis and heading assignment, not representative of ATC heading assignments. Headings with more than 300 assigned operations shown. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 30R DISTANCE MEASUREMENT RINGS ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 30R AEDT MODEL DEPARTURE TRACKS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 30R AEDT MODEL TRACKS ASSIGNED HEADINGS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING 2022 AVERAGE MSP RUNWAY 30R DEPARTURE ALTITUDE BY HEADING - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 7,500 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ALTITUDE ABOVE MSP (FEET)DISTANCE FROM RUNWAY 30R THRESHOLD (STATUTE MILES) 260 280 300 320 340 360 Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks used for analysis and heading assignment, not representative of ATC heading assignments. Headings with more than 300 assigned operations shown. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 12L DISTANCE MEASUREMENT RINGS ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 12L AEDT MODEL DEPARTURE TRACKS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 12L AEDT MODEL TRACKS ASSIGNED HEADINGS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING 2022 AVERAGE MSP RUNWAY 12L DEPARTURE ALTITUDE BY HEADING - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ALTITUDE ABOVE MSP (FEET)DISTANCE FROM RUNWAY 12L THRESHOLD (STATUTE MILES) 105 120 Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks used for analysis and heading assignment, not representative of ATC heading assignments. Headings with more than 300 assigned operations shown. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 12R DISTANCE MEASUREMENT RINGS ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 12R AEDT MODEL DEPARTURE TRACKS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 12R AEDT MODEL TRACKS ASSIGNED HEADINGS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING 2022 AVERAGE MSP RUNWAY 12R DEPARTURE ALTITUDE BY HEADING - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 7,000 7,500 8,000 8,500 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ALTITUDE ABOVE MSP (FEET)DISTANCE FROM RUNWAY 12R THRESHOLD (STATUTE MILES) 105 120 140 155 210 220 Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks used for analysis and heading assignment, not representative of ATC heading assignments. Headings with more than 300 assigned operations shown. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 17 DISTANCE MEASUREMENT RINGS ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 17 AEDT MODEL DEPARTURE TRACKS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING RUNWAY 17 AEDT MODEL TRACKS ASSIGNED HEADINGS Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks shown, flight paths from actual operations have greater dispersion. ADDENDUM: AVERAGE ALTITUDE BY HEADING 2022 AVERAGE MSP RUNWAY 17 DEPARTURE ALTITUDE BY HEADING - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 5,500 6,000 6,500 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10ALTITUDE ABOVE MSP (FEET)DISTANCE FROM RUNWAY 17 THRESHOLD (STATUTE MILES) 120 140 155 170 185 210 220 Note: AEDT modeled flight tracks used for analysis and heading assignment, not representative of ATC heading assignments. Headings with more than 300 assigned operations shown. Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450 metroairports.org This report is for informational purposes only.