Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) MAC General Office Building Lindbergh Conference Room 6040 28 th Avenue South , MN 55450 NOC Committee Members Jeffrey Hart – Co-Chair () Tom Fitzhenry – Co-Chair (Richfield City Council) John Bergman, At-large Cities Representative (Apple Valley City Council) Karen Erazo, Charter/Scheduled Operator Representative () Cyndee Fields, City of Eagan Representative (Eagan City Council) Gordon Goss, Chief Pilot Representative (Delta Air Lines) Angie Moos, Cargo Carrier Representative (United Parcel Service) Doug Nelson, Business Aviation Association Representative Jon Olesen, City of Bloomington Representative (Bloomington City Council) Elizabeth Petschel – City of Mendota Heights Representative (Mendota Heights City Council) John Quincy, City of Minneapolis Representative (Minneapolis City Council) Paulajean Vick, At-large Airport User Representative (Delta Global Services)

MEETING AGENDA 18 May 2016 1:30 pm (Tom Fitzhenry, Richfield City Council, will be the acting Chairperson for the meeting) *Note: 1:00 – Committee Agenda Review Session (NOC members only in the Coleman Conference Room)

1. 1:30 – 1:35 Review and Approval of the January 20 and March 16, 2016 Meeting Minutes

2. 1:35 – 1:55 Review of Monthly Operations Reports: March and April, 2016

3. 1:55 – 2:05 Eagan-Mendota Heights Crossing-in-the-Corridor Procedure

4. 2:05 – 2:15 Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor Turboprop Analysis

5. 2:15 – 2:30 NextGen Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) Update

6. 2:30 – 2:35 Review of April 27, 2016 Public Input Meeting

7. 2:35 Public Comment Period

8. Adjourn

MSP NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE DRAFT MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, January 20, 2016, 1:30pm MAC General Offices Building – Lindbergh Conference Room

Call to Order

A regularly-scheduled meeting of the MSP Noise Oversight Committee, having been duly called, was held January 20, 2016, in the Lindbergh Conference Room at the MAC General Offices Building. Chair Petschel called the meeting to order at 1:36 p.m. The following were in attendance:

Representatives: E. Petschel; J. Hart; A. Moos; K. Erazo, G. Goss; D. Lowman; D. Miller; L. Olson; T. Fitzhenry; A. Salmela; J. Bergman

Staff: D. Nelson; B. Juffer; L. Peilen; C. Leqve; G. Warren; M. Scovronski; J. Lewis; J. Felger

Others: E. Buckner, M. Olson, Federal Aviation Administration; J. Aul, J. Oleson, City of Bloomington; S. Nienhaus, City of Burnsville; B. Hoffman, City of St. Louis Park; P. Dmytrenko, S. Devich, City of Richfield; T. Link, City of Inver Grove Heights; M. Park, City of Sunfish Lake; M. McNeill, City of Mendota Heights; A. Swenson, City of Edina; T. Harris, DGS; R. Owen, Met Council; L. Grotz

1. Review and Approval of the November 18, 2015 Meeting Minutes

IT WAS MOVED BY REPRESENTATIVE FITZHENRY AND SECONDED BY REPRESENTATIVE HART TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 18, 2015 MEETING. THE MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.

2. Review of Monthly Operations Reports: November and December 2015

Brad Juffer, Assistant Technical Advisor , reported the number of complaints for MSP in November 2015 was 6,955 from 445 households and 5,913 complaints from 374 households in December 2015. Complaints in November 2015 were up 11% compared to 2014 and December complaints were up 13% compared to 2014.

Juffer reported the operations totals for November and December 2015 were 31,896 and 32,356. Total 2015 operations decreased by 6,000 operations or 1.5% when compared to 2014. Air Carrier Jet Operations for November and December were 29,371 and 29,828 and Nighttime Operations were 1,632 and 1,840. Mr. Juffer also reviewed the Passenger Data for November noting over two million passengers flew on just over 16,000 flights which is a 16.7% gain from November 2014.

For November, there were 76 scheduled nighttime arrivals and 222 actual arrivals between 10:30 p.m. - 11:00 p.m., 388 scheduled and 430 actual arrivals during the 11:00 p.m. hour, and 177 scheduled and 285 actual arrivals during the 5:00 a.m. hour. There were 247 scheduled departures and 217 actual departures during the nighttime hours. For December, there were 114 scheduled arrivals with 205 actual arrivals during the 10:30 p.m. timeframe and 431 scheduled and 436 actual for the 11:00 p.m. hour.

Juffer reviewed the following noise abatement procedures at MSP: Runway 17 Departure Procedure, Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Procedure, and the Runway Use System (RUS). In November and December, 99.8% of operations complied with the Runway 17 Departure Procedure. The Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor had a 95.3% compliance rate in November and a 92.4% compliance rate in December. The Crossing-in-the-Corridor procedure was used 55% in November and 43% in December during the night time hours and 32% in November and 30% in December during day time hours. Over 16,000 operations (51.55%) utilized the RUS High-Priority Runways in November and over 17,000 operations (54.23%) utilized the RUS High-Priority Runways in December.

Representative Olson, Minneapolis , asked if the number of complaints and complainants seem typical for this time of year. Juffer responded that it fits the trends of complaints overall. Chair Petschel, Mendota Heights , commented on the uncharacteristically warm fall and winter and the impact that may have on noise complaints. Normally, once fall arrives, the people to the south get a break on departures and people to the north get a break from arrivals. However, due to the weather pattern we’ve been locked in since September, this has not happened. She would like to see if there is some correlation between the two. Representative Hart, Delta Air Lines , asked if it would be beneficial to track the ratio of complaints to complainants and how that changes over time. Chair Petschel commented that the more data that can be collected regarding the type of complaints will be helpful in assessing changes and levels of dissatisfaction.

3. Update on the FAA’s Survey to Re-Evaluate Noise Measurement Methods

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor , reported that in May 2015, the FAA announced it would begin evaluating its methods for measuring aircraft noise. The results will be used to determine whether an update to FAA policies regarding the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) metric is warranted, along with the parameters under which a home is eligible to receive federal funding for mitigation (65 decibel DNL).

This is a multi-year process which began in 2015 with a survey of public perceptions of aircraft noise. The survey will take place for a year’s time in communities situated around 20 airports nationwide. The FAA is not disclosing the airport communities in which it will conduct the survey.

Nelson reported that the City of St. Louis Park, viewing this as an opportunity to address the FAA about noise impacts beyond the 65 decibel DNL noise level, passed a city resolution titled “Resolution Regarding Federal Aviation Administration Recognition of Aircraft Noise Impacts outside the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) 65 Decibel Threshold”.

Representative Hoffman, St. Louis Park , reviewed the resolution stating that the City believes that it needs to expand the awareness of people impacted by aircraft noise. The resolution asks the FAA to consider the true impacts to areas beyond the 65 decibel DNL area. The City will hand deliver the resolution to the FAA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Commissioner Peilen, Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) , thanked the City for reaching out to the MAC to cooperatively prepare the resolution. Representative Park, Sunfish Lake , stated that the City of Sunfish Lake is also preparing a similar resolution with the emphasis on departure noise fatigue.

4. MSP Converging Runway Operations

Elaine Buckner, MSP Air Traffic Manager , provided an update on the status of the Converging Runway Operations (CRO) at MSP. Buckner reported that the FAA has determined that Runway 30R, in addition to Runway 30L, does not meet new converging runway separation requirements for Runway 35 aborted landings. The FAA will begin implementing procedures for Runway 30R similar to the procedures currently being used to separate arrivals on Runway 35 from departures on Runway 30L.

Buckner , also responded to a question from a previous meeting from Representative Quincy, Minneapolis , regarding the number of go arounds for Runway 35. She noted that within one mile of the approach end of Runway 35, unplanned go arounds rate is .02% per 1,000 operations. Since 2005, there have been 357,670 arrivals on 35 with 83 go arounds.

In response to a question from Representative Olson, Minneapolis, Buckner noted that the further out the aircraft is from the approach end of the runway, more options are available as to what to do with that aircraft. In response to a question from Representative Goss, Chief Pilot , Buckner stated that twice in the past five years additional mitigation has been implemented mainly due to winds.

5. Wind and Aircraft Noise Complaint Trend Analysis

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor , reviewed the trend analysis in wind and the relationship to aircraft noise complaints that is included in the 2016 NOC work plan. Nelson reviewed the analysis noting that winds in the summer are generally from the south and southeast with warmer temperatures, while autumn and winter trends favor winds from the north and northwest. The autumn and winter of 2015 produced higher than average temperatures and more south and southeast winds than previous years. As a result, south flow configurations lasted longer into the 3rd and 4 th quarter and areas to the northwest experienced more arrival flights than previous years, while areas to the south and southeast saw an increase in departure traffic.

Nelson stated that although some areas did see more aircraft traffic, the overall number of operations at MSP are down from 2014 but nighttime operations have increased. The continuous use of south flow operations and increased nighttime flights have contributed to increased noise complaints.

Nelson presented a graphic showing the changes in noise complaints from 2014 to 2015 by zip code. It was noted that the large increase in the 55427 zip code area is mainly due to one person. Nelson stated that her team is trying to find a better way to report complaints to make it more valuable to the NOC and the public. Representative Olson requested that the same map be provided based on number of complainants.

Chair Petschel noted that other factors may be contributing to the increased noise complaints in the area north of Highway 110 such as increased operations to the east, north and west as a result of the deconfliction. Representative Fitzhenry, Richfield , noted the impact publicity can have on increased sensitivity to the noise. Representative Lowman, Bloomington , suggested looking at it from a seasonal perspective by including wind and weather information.

6. Airbus Aircraft Vortex Generators

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor , reported that during approach, the Airbus A320 family of aircraft emit a high-pitched sound due to air flowing across vent openings under the wing. The high-pitched sound is perceived on the ground over 6 miles from the runway as the aircraft is approaching for landing, prior to land gear and flap extension. The 2016 NOC work plan includes an investigation into the noise reduction benefits of Vortex generators on Airbus A320 aircraft.

Nelson stated that the Vortex generator is a small piece of aluminum that is mounted upstream of air holes or vents on each wing and is reported to eliminate high pitched tones. All new Airbus aircraft delivered after 2014 will have these devices installed before delivery. Noise levels were recorded at six monitoring points near Frankfurt Airport and the Vortex generators provided 0.2 dB reduction up to 6 miles from the airport, 1.5 dB to 2.5 dB reduction from 6 to 9 miles from the airport and 3.0 dB up to 4.4 dB reduction over 9 miles from the airport.

Nelson reported that approximately 17% of the MSP arrivals in November 2015 consisted of Airbus A320 family aircraft and asked Representative Goss, Chief Pilot , to provide Delta’s perspective regarding the benefits and drawbacks of the Vortex generators. Representative Goss explained how the Vortex generators work. Delta currently operates 126 A319s and A320s that are not modified. Over the next three years, Delta will take delivery of 45 A321s that will have the modification.

In response to a question, Representative Goss stated that the cost to replace the assembly is proprietary to Airbus.

7. Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) Update

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor , provided an update on the Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT) noting that MAC’s noise consultant, HNTB, continues to evaluate the differences between the AEDT and INM noise contours to understand the differences between the contours produced by each model. The FAA has indicated that the INM model will be replaced by AEDT. MAC staff is in communication with the Consent Decree cities to establish a path forward for the 2015 Annual Contour Report.

8. Public Comment Period

There were no public comments.

9. Announcements

Chair Petschel announced that due to other outside responsibilities, she will no longer be Co- Chair of the NOC, however, she will continue to participate on the Committee representing the City of Mendota Heights. A new Co-Chair will be elected at the March NOC meeting. Representative Olson thanked Chair Petschel for her time and efforts as Co-Chair of the NOC.

Representative Miller, Eagan , invited committee members to view the City of Eagan’s town hall video regarding “Airport 101” after the meeting.

IT WAS MOVED BY REPRESENTATIVE BERGMAN AND SECONDED BY REPRESENTATIVE OLSON TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. THE MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:44 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Jenn Felger, Acting Recording Secretary

MSP NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE DRAFT MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, 16 th of March 2016 at 1:30pm MAC General Offices Building – Lindbergh Conference Room

Call to Order A regularly-scheduled meeting of the MSP Noise Oversight Committee, having been duly called, was held Wednesday, 16 th of March 2016, in the Lindbergh Conference Room at the MAC General Offices Building. Chair Hart called the meeting to order at 1:37pm. The following were in attendance:

Representatives: P. Vick; K. Erazo; D. Miller; E. Petschel; T. Fitzhenry; J. Bergman; J. Oleson; L. Olson; J. Hart

Staff: D. Nelson; B. Juffer, L. Peilen; J. Lewis; C. Leqve; A. Kolesar

Others: D. Sloan – City of Mendota Heights ARC; S. Nienhaus – City of Burnsville; A. P – City of Apple Valley; S. Devich – City of Richfield; L. Moore – City of Bloomington; E. Buckner- FAA/ATC; A. Nemcek-City of Rosemount; G. Albjerg-HNTR; L. Grotz-City of Edina; A. Boettcher-City of St Louis Park; A. Swenson-City of Edina; M. Park-City of Sunfish Lake; P. Dmytrenko-City of Richfield; J. Kedrowski-MAC; M. McNeill- City of Mendota Heights; J. Smith-City of Mendota Heights; C. Neal-City of Minneapolis; C. Brownlte-City of Minneapolis

Chair Hart, Delta Airlines commented that the agenda was robust and made a few modifications to the agenda items, adding item number 1a as well as switching agenda items 4 and 5 as reflected here in the minutes.

1. Review and Approval of the 20 January 2016 Meeting Minutes

Because a quorum was not present this item will be addressed at the next meeting on May 18 th .

a) Mendota Heights Open House

Co-Chair Petschel, Mendota Heights reported that on March 9 th MAC staff , Elaine Buckner of the FAA and other FAA staff attended and presented at the Mendota Heights Airport Relation Commission Open House. There was a large residential turnout. Roughly 99% of the residential attendees went to the meeting to file complaints about the same issue, propeller-driven Bemidji Air Operations that occur between 4am- 6:30am. This cargo plane often starts operations as early as 4am. Co-Chair Petschel noted that Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor and Elaine Buckner, MSP Air Traffic Manager, expressed willingness to look into these flight patterns further. To understand when exactly these patterns are occurring, where and with what frequency. Co-Chair Petschel then asked that this issue be added to the NOC work plan in order and that the NOC Board work to follow along on the status of this issue. There was not a quorum to move forward but Hart explained that they can direct MAC staff on this process. Co- Chair Petschel agreed that at this moment they will direct MAC staff and address a formal resolution at a later date when more representatives are in attendance. With no objections Chair Hart directed Nelson and Brad Juffer, Assistant Technical Advisor to move forward as agreed.

2. Nomination and Election of NOC Co-Chair

Chair Hart, Delta Airlines shared with a heavy heart his co-chair of many years, Co-Chair Petschel announced her resignation at the last NOC meeting. Chair Hart asked if there were nominations for a new co-chair.

Co-Chair Petschel thanked the group and spoke to what a positive experience her time on the NOC has been. Co-Chair Petschel nominated Representative Fitzhenry . This nomination was seconded by Representative Oleson and passed by a unanimous vote by the NOC Community Representatives. Representative Fitzhenry accepted the vote and thanked everyone for electing him as the new co-chair.

3. A Resolution Honoring Liz Petschel

Chair Hart, Delta Airlines announced that the MSP airport and the NOC prepared a resolution for retiring Co-Chair Petschel and presented a plaque with the resolution. He read from the plaque and stated that the resolution was to honor Co-Chair Petschel for her dedication and service to the NOC. He also stated that Co-Chair Petschel served on the Mendota Heights Airport Relations Committee. Chair Hart thanked Co-Chair Petschel for her 19 plus years of dedicated service to the airport noise community and on behalf of the NOC wished her continued success, genuine happiness and good health in the years to come. Co-Chair Petschel thanked everyone and commented on her gratitude for guidance received from her mentors and colleagues.

4. MSP Converging Runway Operations: Elaine Buckner, FAA Air Traffic Manager

Elaine Buckner, MSP Air Traffic Manager, gave an update on the status of the converging runway operation since applying the rule to Runway 30R to the rule. Buckner reminded everyone that a converging runway is when runways do not physically intersect but do have flight paths that intersect within one mile of the departure end of a runway. Buckner stated in the case of MSP, Runway 35 and 30L as well as Runway 35 and 30R are considered converging runways.

Buckner reports that the potential concern is an arrival on Runway 35 concurrent with a departure off Runway 30L or 30R. If the Runway 35 arrival were to unexpectedly terminate their arrival and they would have to go around, those flights paths could intersect if there was no action taken. New rules for converging runways are based on providing extra safety if there was no action. Buckner stated action taken to mitigate that is to alternate departures off 30L or 30R with the arrivals to Runway 35 so there are not simultaneous departures on 30L or 30R with an arrival on 35. On February 29 th , 2016 30R was added to this procedure and since that time, based on weather and winds, there have been 2 complete days and a couple partial days when the air traffic was in a north-west configuration. Buckner reported the procedures are going well and the arrival rates have been maintained.

Representative Olsen , Minneapolis commented that she recalled Buckner saying she didn’t expect the arrival rates to be affected by applying the CRO procedures to 30R and she wanted to know if that was still the expectation. Buckner responded, yes that continues to be the expectation.

5. Review of Monthly Operations Reports: January and February, 2016

Brad Juffer, Assistant Technical Advisor reported the number of complaints in January 2016 was 5,547 from 295 unique locations and 7,586 complaints in February 2016 from 438 unique locations. Complaints in January 2016 were down 8.4% from 2015 and complaints in February 2016 were up 8.7%, YTD complaints are up 0.8%.

In response to suggestions from Representative Olson and Chair Hart during the January NOC meeting, Juffer displayed a chart with the ratios of complaints to household. The chart showed, on average, that the complaints have a higher ratio in the winter than in the summer as the number of complaints from different locations are greater. At this time, the ratios for this time of year are consistent with previous years.

Juffer displayed another chart showing the differences in complaints from 2014 and 2015 in order to illustrate the differences in complaint locations. There shows a trend of a decrease in complaint locations from the SW Minneapolis, Edina, and Eden Prairie areas. Most zip codes saw moderate changes in complaint locations, either an increase of 20 or a decrease of 20 complaint locations.

Juffer reported the operations totals YTD for 2016 are almost exactly the same as 2015. There were 31,597 flights in January 2016 and 30,020 in February 2016. Air carrier jet operations for January and February of 2016 were 29,322 and 27,762. 5.9% of all operations in January were nighttime operations and in February 6% of all operations were nighttime operations. The carrier fleet is made up of 45.7% and 44% regional jets. There were 10 Modified Stage 3 operations in February 2016 and thus the number is not quite 100%. Juffer reviewed the MSP passenger data for January 2016, reporting that 1.97 million travelers travelled through the facility, on 15,800 operations. 642,000 regional passengers were on 13,000 regional flights and that is 2.6 million passengers on just over 29,000 flights. The average load was 89.5 people on every aircraft from MSP.

For January’s scheduled versus actual data, there were 692 scheduled arrivals and 1,220 actual arrivals during the nighttime hours. There were 110 scheduled versus 188 actual during the hours of 10:30pm-11pm, 362 scheduled versus 428 actual during the 11pm hour, 171 scheduled versus 295 actual flights during the 5am hour. The cargo carriers start their arrivals between 4am-5am and there was one nighttime departure during the 10:30pm block. Overall for departures there were 260 scheduled versus 559 actual. During February, 821 scheduled versus 1,226 actual arrivals during the nighttime hours. 287 scheduled departures versus 488 actual departures in the nighttime hours. The cargo representation is very similar to what it was in January.

Juffer reviewed the following noise abatement procedures for MSP: Runway 17 Departure Procedure, Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Procedure and the Runway Use System (RUS). In January 99.9% of all operations complied with the Runway 17 Departure Procedures and February 99.5% of all operations complied with the Runway 17 Departure Procedure. In January there was a 97.9% compliance rate for the Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Procedure and in February there was a 93.9% compliance rate for the Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Procedure. The Crossing-in-the-Corridor procedure had 221 jets in the corridor at night utilizing this procedure in January and February which resulted in 35% and 55% crossing compliance. During the day the percentages were 34% and 29%. In regards to the RUS, MSP had 51.8% of flights in January and 52.4% in February use the high priority runways. Mixed A usage which sees arrivals on the 30s, departures on 17 and 30sin January was only used 4.2% of the time. In February that number increased 7.2% which results in more efficient use of the high priority runways. In January 46.4% of all departures used high priority runways while arrival use was in the low 20% range. In February departures on the south bound runways were only 38% but arrivals on the north bound runways were at 66.5%

Representative Olson thanked Juffer for the complaint map and commented on the flight patterns over Minneapolis not being a surprise. Representative Olson continued to comment on the nighttime operations and the high percentage of departures on 30L. The people living under the flight pattern of arrivals on 30L have that noise then in addition are subjected to the 30L departure noise. She would like to see more balance because this area of airspace is used frequently.

Representative Olson then asked for clarity on nighttime operation expectation. Juffer responded that month to date numbers are much more aligned with patterns of the same time in March 2015 than the January and February 2016 numbers. Representative Olson commented that it seems the number of nighttime operations continue to grow over time. Juffer responded that when looking at trends year after year there is a growing trend but as of March 2016 the numbers are more similar to the number of flights in 2015 whereas the January and February numbers of 2016 are much higher than those of the same months in 2015. Co-Chair Petschel commented on days with specific weather phenomenon that increased the nighttime flight patterns. Then went on to question if we went back to look at January and February and could attribute the increase in nighttime flights to weather.

Representative Oleson commented on the maps showing community noise complaints in addition to the maps showing flight pattern data and went on to ask how a trend analysis over time is done. Being unclear if there was a policy for that analysis Representative Oleson commented that it might be a good idea to start doing a trend analysis of that data over time. Chair Hart commented that it would be up to him and Co-Chair Tom Fitzhenry to figure out the best way to represent that data. Co-Chair Petschel commented that she too would be interested finding a way to represent the data in a way that can follow yearly trends.

6. MSP Draft 2035 Long-Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) Publication Update

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor, commented that in late August the FAA began implementing the converging runway operations and procedures for 30L and 35. On February 29 th , 2016 the FAA began the same procedures for 30R and 35. This implementation impacts the LTCP schedule. MSP is allowing a five to six month evaluation period from the FAA to implement procedures on 30R. When that is complete the noise office with collect that data and work with consultants to look at how those changes may affect the forecast runway use for the 2035 noise contours used in the LTCP. If changes need to be applied to the runway use, then the noise office will revise and re-run the forecast noise contours. There is a possibility the FAA’s evaluation time will be shorter than the six months but that depends on weather and other use circumstances. If that timeline is condensed the noise office will present the information to the NOC.

7. 2015 MSP Annual Noise Contour Analysis

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor, reported on the Annual Contour Analysis which was published on February 29, 2016. This is the first year that homes reached the 3 consecutive year eligibility requirement for the residential noise mitigation program under the First Amendment of the Consent Decree. The MAC Noise Office worked with HNTB to compile the noise contour inputs and run the contours. All homes that fall under the third year eligibility are in the city of Minneapolis. There are 483 single family homes met the first year of eligibility, 285 single-family homes met the second year and 137 single family homes and 88 multi-family units that met the third year of eligibility. The homes that met all three years are eligible for mitigation in 2017.

Nelson reported there were 404,374 total operations in 2016, which represents a 30.6% reduction from the 2007 forecast; compared to 2014, total operations were down 1.8%. The average daily number of Modified Stage 3 operations was down over 99.9% from the 2007 forecast. The total night time operations was down 16.6 average daily operations from the 2007 forecast. Overall there was a decrease of 37.8% in the 60 DNL contour, and 46.3% in the 65 DNL contour. The reduction is largely due to the decrease in operations and fleet mix changes. Nelson reported there was one small area in which the 2015 actual extended beyond the 2007 forecast noise contours and this was driven by night time operations and specifically due to arrivals on 12R during nighttime hours. The areas affected by the nighttime arrivals to Runway 12 are the areas of focus for the residential noise mitigation program. Nelson went on to explain a graphic visually representing the areas that had been previously mitigated as well as the areas that have achieved one, two and three years of eligibility.

Nelson reviewed the 2014 actual contour to the 2015 actual contour. There was some growth in the size of the 2015 contour, largely driven by the night time operations. All homes that met the first year of eligibility in 2014 have achieved the second year of eligibility per the 2015 actual contour. All homes that met the second year of eligibility in 2014 have achieved the third year of eligibility per the 2015 actual contour. Comparatively, there was an 11.6% growth in both the 60 DNL and 65 DNL contours from 2014 to 2015; 106.7 average daily nighttime operations in 2015 compared to the 95.3 daily nighttime operations in 2014. Specifically examining Runway 12R arrivals in 2015, there was a daily average of 123.6 daytime arrivals and 16.9 at night whereas in 2014 there were 99.2 daytime arrivals at 14.5 at night.

Nelson reported on the timeline notifications for the residential noise mitigation program per the First Amendment to the Consent Decree. The initial contact for homes eligible for mitigation will be before July 2016. At the May NOC Meeting, Pat Mosites, the project manager, will stand before the committee to give a briefing on the timeline and the communications plan for moving forward.

Representative Olson thanked MAC for how they are carrying out the program and their clear communication. She commented that as a community they would prefer to not have further mitigations because they would ultimately prefer the noise not increase. Representative Olson went on to state that as a committee she would like to continue work on reducing night time operations.

8. FAA Reauthorization Bill Update

Chad Leqve, Environment Department Director, reported an update on the FAA Reauthorization Bill. Congressional leaders proposed a reauthorization and one topic within this reauthorization relates to the privatization of Air Traffic Control (ATC) services. This would move the service from the government into a not for profit corporation. This issue has started a lot of conversation and has thus caused the temporary shelving of the initial reauthorization language. Since then, the focus is now on a short-term extension to continue the operation by the FAA as the current authorization will expire at the end of March 2016. Simultaneously the US Senate’s Commerce, Science and Transportation committee took up language to move forward a piece of the re-authorization. Leqve commented on conversations held at a national level focusing on aircraft noise and RNAV procedures and implementation. Related to MSP and the NOC it has been noted that they have been working on this process at a local level starting in 2007. Provisions that are in the draft authorization use language that MSP NOC has come up with to address issues that are now being addressed at a national level. Co-Chair Fitzhenry commented that there is concern about the privatization of the ATC and the user fees associated with that. How does this affect back-funding and who the FAA answers to? Without these fees there is concern about MAC funding options. Leqve commented that there isn’t a clear line on where or how that funding will change and how that will affect MAC. There are still use fees that need to be charged in order for space to be used but beyond that there isn’t clarity. Airline opinions vary on support for the ATC privatization. Representative Olson stated that members of the NOC know that The City of Minneapolis has taken a formal position opposing the privatization of ATC. Representative Olson went on to state that they support NextGen technology and think its implementation will be very efficient. The concern with privatization is that the FAA and ATC engagement with the public will decrease. Chair Petschel commented that there is tremendous agreement with Minneapolis’ formal position on the ATC privatization. The NextGen technology could be really beneficial but that its benefits depend on implementation. The things this technology can accomplish for air navigation and noise abatement are a lot of the things MSP has already addressed and completed.

9. Update on the FAA Stage 5 Noise Certification

Brad Juffer, Assistant Technical Advisor, reported that the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Stage 5 noise certification in January 2016 and the comment period associated with that is open until April. The NPRM is seeking to revise the regulation that deals with aircraft noise. The use standards would apply to aircraft over 55,000kg seeking certification after December 31, 2017 and smaller aircraft under 55,000kg seeking certification after December 31, 2020. The industry is moving in the correct direction but the ICAO driven regulations are written to avoid moving backwards and not written for technology. The FAA anticipates by the time this proposal becomes effective existing noise reduction technologies will allow the airplanes to comply with the regulation. In the NRPM the FAA specifically comments that this regulation does not seek to phase out stage three or stage four aircraft. There are no operational restrictions nor production cutoffs on the use of stage three or stage four aircraft. The ICAO Committee for Aviation Environmental Protection started studying this regulation in 2010. They studied reductions to stage four between 3,5,7,9 and 11 EPNdB reductions, ultimately choosing a 7 dB reduction from stage four for the Chapter 14 regulation. There have been a series of cost benefit analysis done which studied the environmental impacts including what the quantifiable physical and monetary effects of noise, fuel burn and emissions. The ICAO standard was issued in 2014 and was published and on the record by January 1, 2015.

Juffer reported that the evolution of Part 36 in the United States started in 1969. It was amended in 1976 which required operators to bring their fleet to a stage two or stage three regulation. In 1977 it was modified so stage three was the maximum level. The Airport Noise Capacity Act of 1990 phased out large stage two aircraft after 2000. Stage four was introduced in 2005 for any certified aircraft after 2006; stage four is 10dB below stage three. Now stage five is being introduced which is 17DB below stage three.

Stage three is defined by Part 36 as being measured in three different locations; fly over location at 6.5 km from the break release point at takeoff, sideline reference at 450 meters from the side of the runway, approach point is 2 km from the runway threshold under the approach path. Stage three specifies a maximum level based on max takeoff weight and number of engines at each specific point. Stage four and stage five sum all those points up and assume that the stage four aircraft is cumulatively 10dB below stage three and that stage five is 17dB below. It also stipulates that you can’t be higher than any of those categories but it focuses on the cumulative output of the aircraft. The FAA is analyzing approach and departure noise categories and those numbers show the noise levels in departures are decreasing faster than in the approach categories. Juffer went on to explain the changes in engine design and how over the years the designs have reduced the noise emitted. Moving forward another design with high bypass ratios will be on new aircraft that will reduce the noise impact even more. The higher the air bypass ratio, the more fuel efficient the engine is and the quieter the engine is. Juffer went on to describe a few aircraft that are in the process of having these changes implemented as well as aircraft that could qualify for the stage five changes.

Representative Loren Olson asked for clarification on stage five being 17dB below which stage. Juffer responded that stage five is 17dB below stage three.

Representative Miller inquired if there was a better way to describe or compare the dB drop to a layperson. Juffer responded that it would be challenging as the regulation numbers are very specific to the metrics in place to make sure a proper test is undertaken.

Co-Chair Fitzhenry asked if there was a consensus on what constitutes the perception of sound. Juffer responded that the noise perception in this case is determined by the metrics of Effective Perceived Noise Level (EPNL) and the associated measurable dB to certify what level an aircraft is. EPNL is the sound equivalent level as modified by tone correction and duration. In short the measurement isn’t done by straight decibels but by a calculated metric.

10. Review of January 27, 2016 Public Input Meeting

Dana Nelson, Technical Advisor, reported that on January 27 th MAC held its first quarter Public Input Meeting, eight people were in attendance and two people made comments. Responses were provided to the comments and are also available on the MAC website. The comments focused on tips to insulate a home against airplane noise, this information is also already available on the website. The other comment was related to how MSP noise relates to other airports within in the United States. The next meeting is April 27 th , it will be at the Saint Louis Park City Hall at 7pm.

11. Public Comment Period

There were no public comments.

The next meeting of the NOC is scheduled for Wednesday, 18 May 2016.

Co-Chair Fitzhenry made a motion to adjourn the meeting and it was seconded by Co- Chair Petschel . The meeting adjourned at 2:54 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Amie Kolesar, Recording Secretary

ITEM 2 MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)

FROM: Bradley Juffer, Assistant Manager—Noise, Environment & Planning

SUBJECT: REVIEW OF MONTHLY OPERATIONS REPORTS

DATE: May 4, 2016

Each month the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) produces a Technical Advisor’s Report for the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC). This report provides information on the Minneapolis- St. Paul International Airport (MSP), such as aircraft noise complaints, aircraft operations and noise levels associated with MSP aircraft operations.

Additionally, the MAC produces four monthly reports assessing the compliance with established noise abatement procedures: the Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report, the Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor Report, the Crossing-in-the-Corridor Analysis and the MSP Runway Use System (RUS) Report.

At the May 18, 2016 NOC meeting, MAC staff will provide a summary on these five monthly operations reports for the months of March and April, 2016.

ITEM 3 MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)

FROM: Bradley Juffer, Assistant Manager—Noise, Environment & Planning

SUBJECT: EAGAN-MENDOTA HEIGHTS CROSSING-IN-THE-CORRIDOR PROCEDURE

DATE: May 4, 2016

The 2016 Work Plan for the Noise Oversight Committee includes an analysis to evaluate and advocate for enhanced use of the Crossing-in-the-Corridor Procedure. Staff has been directed to examine the procedure usage during periods of low demand and further meet and confer with MSP Air Traffic Control regarding increased usage at night.

The Crossing-in-the-Corridor Procedure was studied and implemented at MSP in 1995. The procedure attempts to contain operations as much as possible in the center of the corridor when aircraft are departing in a non-simultaneous manner form runways 12L and 12R. The MSP Tower Order states that whenever possible, under non-simultaneous departure conditions aircraft departing Runway 12R will be assigned a heading to maintain an approximate ground track of 105° and aircraft departing Runway 12L will be assigned a heading to maintain a ground track of 118°. Due to a variety of operational factors, the Crossing procedure usage is limited. The main variables that are considered before the procedure is used are: runway use, aircraft performance, weather, separation criteria, pilot discretion, and FAA staffing.

The use of this procedure has been studied in the past. In 1998 a report was filed with the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC). In 1999, a follow up document analyzed if there had been any gains made in the procedure over the previous report. To provide reference, the results from those time periods have been included in this memo.

The original study, and subsequent follow up analysis provided data for a six month period between autumn and spring 1997 to 1998 and again 1998 to 1999. For consistency, data from September 2015 through February 2016 were analyzed. Further, only two particular time periods were included. All night time hours from 23:00 through 6:00 and weekend hours from Saturday 15:00 through Sunday at 13:00.

Below are tables that delineate the difference between previously conducted analysis and the current analysis for night time operations.

NIGHT TIME (23:00-06:00) CROSSING PROCEDURE USAGE Time Period 12L/R Departures 12L/R Departures Percentage of that Crossed Flights that Crossed Oct 1997 – Mar 1998 990 357 36.1% Sep 1998 – Feb 1999 843 481 57.1% Sep 2015 – Feb 2016 871 440 50.5%

It was identified in the previous analysis, and it holds today, that one of the single biggest impediments to the procedure during the analyzed weekend periods was time separation between departure operations. FAA separation requirements would limit the use of this procedure when multiple aircraft are departing. The procedure is only used when non-simultaneous departure conditions exist. To determine how often these conditions were present, the 871 operations were further categorized by the length of time between departure and the following departure.

Time Between Ops Count Percent 0-2 min 173 27.2% 2-4 min 122 19.2% 4-6 min 84 13.2% > 6 min 256 40.3%

Below are tables that delineate the difference between previously conducted analysis and the current analysis for all weekend hours between Saturdays at 3:00 PM through Sundays at 1:00 PM. WEEKEND (SA 15:00 – SU 13:00) CROSSING PROCEDURE USAGE Time Period 12L/R Departures 12L/R Departures Percentage of that Crossed Flights that Crossed Oct 1997 – Mar 1998 3,734 643 17.2 % Sep 1998 – Feb 1999 4,172 1,133 27.2 % Sep 2015 – Feb 2016 2,688 912 33.9 %

Time separation between departures is far more restrictive for the weekend time period than the night time period.

Time Between Ops Count Percent 0-2 min 1,409 52.9 % 2-4 min 484 18.2 % 4-6 min 221 8.3 % > 6 min 549 20.6 %

ITEM 4 MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)

FROM: Bradley Juffer, Assistant Manager—Noise, Environment & Planning

SUBJECT: EAGAN-MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR TURBOPROP ANALYSIS

DATE: May 4, 2016

During a Mendota Heights Airport Relations Commission meeting held on March 9, 2016, residents nearly uniformly expressed dissatisfaction that smaller, propeller driven aircraft were not fully subject to the requirements of the Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor Procedure. In response to this issue, the members of the Noise Oversight Committee, at their regularly scheduled March meeting, directed staff to analyze the issue to gain more information.

The Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor Departure Procedure has been an effective tool utilized at MSP to concentrate aircraft overflights above commercial and industrial areas when departing Runways 12L and 12R. This significantly diminishes the flights over residential areas to the southeast of the airport, resulting in lower noise impacts.

While this procedure has been an effective method to keep the turbojet category of aircraft over commercial and industrially zoned property, propeller and turboprop aircraft do not fly in this airspace on a regular basis. The operational capability of smaller, propeller driven aircraft would reduce the departure capacity at MSP if each of these aircraft were forced to remain in the corridor.

The Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor Procedure is being used in much the same way today as it was when it was originally implemented. However, over time the number of operations, the fleet mix and runway configuration at MSP have all changed. Total operations at MSP peaked in 2004 at just over 540,000 operations. The number of operations has decreased significantly in the last decade—only 404,374 operations occurred in 2015.

MSP OPERATIONS 540,727 531,947 522,253 510,420 508,162 507,322 501,252 491,273 485,480 482,872 475,633 469,040 459,405 453,566 449,972 444,202 435,583 435,076 432,604 431,573 424,928 418,486 411,760 404,374 385,476 382,960 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Source: FAA OPSNET

After the peak in 2004, the airport opened Runway 17/35. This new runway allows more departures to the south while alleviating some of the operational load from Runways 12L and 12R, and away from the corridor.

Over time, the types of aircraft using this facility have also changed significantly. MSP has been a northern hub for Delta Airlines and its predecessor, Northwest Airlines, for many years. Delta Airlines, and much of the airline industry, has made a strategic decision to move its customers more efficiently on bigger aircraft. Regionally, short haul flights to points in Wisconsin, northern Minnesota and the Dakotas had previously been flown by 50 seat regional jets or 34 seat turbo prop aircraft. The turbo prop Saab 340 has been phased out of the Delta fleet, and the 50 seat Canadair Regional Jet operations are down significantly. Many of the flights are now occurring on bigger, jets. Upgauging, as it has become known, has been good financially for airlines as they are able to move more people with fewer resources. It is also a benefit to communities surrounding airports as the increased demand for air travel has not resulted in an increase in operations. The resulting fleet mix at MSP has become heavily dominated by carrier jets, with 95.9% of all operations in 2015 being attributed to this category of aircraft. MSP OPERATIONS BY AIRCRAFT TYPE JET PISTON / TURBO-PROP 93% 94% 94% 96% 96% 100% 87% 87% 89% 91% 83% 84% 86% 86% 87% 77% 80% 75%

50%

22% 20% 25% 17% 16% 14% 14% 13% 13% 13% 11% 9% 6% 6% 6% 4% 4% 0%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Source: FAA TFMSC Data

Using MACNOMS data, staff analyzed the small number of turboprop operations occurring— currently 4% of the total operations at MSP. For the 12 months ending March 31, 2016, MSP recorded 16,323 turboprop or piston driven aircraft operations. Nearly 40% of these operations were not operating with an airline code and are considered General Aviation. The following table represents 99% of all of the turboprop and piston aircraft operations.

Airline Count General Aviation 6,036 5,608 Great Lakes 2,519 Suburban Air Freight 538 515 Business Aviation Courier 502 Iron Air 243 North Country Aviation Inc. 69 Midwest Aviation Division 63 Flight Check 52 Source: MACNOMS

The only company on this list that is operating as a traditional airline is Great Lakes Airlines. This operation flies scheduled service between MSP and Huron, SD; Pierre, SD; and Thief River Falls, MN. Many of the companies listed fly cargo as a subsidiary for the bigger cargo companies at MSP. Contrary to the typical expectation that cargo companies fly at night, the bulk of these 16,323 operations are occurring during daytime hours. Only 1.8% of all turboprop and piston operations occurred during the MSP nighttime hours from 10:30 PM through 6:00 AM.

12L/12R 12L/12R 12L/12R Hour Total Ops Dep Hour Total Ops Dep Hour Total Ops Dep 0:00 39 13 8:00 889 201 16:00 718 70 1:00 16 1 9:00 971 119 17:00 887 251 2:00 11 3 10:00 640 148 18:00 453 102 3:00 9 2 11:00 578 181 19:00 1,467 34 4:00 16 3 12:00 563 66 20:00 2,516 17 5:00 35 9 13:00 893 126 21:00 328 33 6:00 775 232 14:00 804 69 22:00 179* 43* 7:00 2,877 1,089 15:00 588 68 23:00 71 13 *89 of 179 operations and 18 of 43 12L/12R departures during the 22:00 hour occurred after 22:30 and is counted as a night time operation Source: MACNOMS

Operations at MSP are currently at 1990s levels. The proportion of turboprop and piston operations have fallen dramatically. More southbound departures are using Runway 17 to disperse the traffic. As a result of these changes the number of turboprop and piston aircraft that departed Runways 12L or 12R in the year ending March 31, 2016 was only 2,893 aircraft.

Using MACNOMS again, these operations were grouped into categories based on the duration of time between the turboprop or piston operation and the following departure. The lower the time between a turboprop departure and the next departure, the greater the impact that operation has on capacity. The table below lists the results.

Next Operation Count Turboprop or Piston Operation 828 Jet Operation less than 1 minute 224 Jet Operation between 1 and 2 minutes 450 Jet Operation between 2 and 3 minutes 271 Jet Operation between 3 and 4 minutes 150 Jet Operation between 4 and 5 minutes 101 Jet Operation more than 5 minutes 784 *Count does not add up to 2,893 as some operation types were not known Source: MACNOMS

Of the 2,893 departures from Runways 12L or 12R, it was found that 1,460 of these operations crossed either the northern or southern boundary during their departure. Similar to the carrier jet violations, some of these flight tracks were simply pushed out of the corridor by winds, which is more of a factor for a turboprop given their smaller size compared to a jet aircraft. In other cases, these aircraft were assigned a turn to clear the corridor airspace for jets waiting to depart behind. In every case, the pilots in charge of these aircraft are taking the direction on where to fly from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Control Tower. The FAA mandates that aircraft maintain at least 3 miles of separation between the tail of the lead airplane and the nose of the following aircraft. To maintain an efficient flow of traffic, the ATC personnel may also separate the aircraft by assigning diverging turns of at least 15 degrees. These turns are typically given to turboprop aircraft as the method for separation allowing a quicker departure clearance for the jet aircraft departing behind a turboprop. The image below shows the location of all 1,460 operations that crossed one of the corridor boundaries during their departure from Runway 12L or 12R.

Source: MACNOMS

The 1,460 operations outside of the corridor illustrated above were also were grouped into categories based on the duration of time between the turboprop or piston operation and the following departure.

Next Operation Count Turboprop or Piston Operation 528 Jet Operation less than 1 minute 146 Jet Operation between 1 and 2 minutes 263 Jet Operation between 2 and 3 minutes 127 Jet Operation between 3 and 4 minutes 59 Jet Operation between 4 and 5 minutes 39 Operation more than 5 minutes 290 *Count does not add up to 1,460 as some operation types were not known Source: MACNOMS

ITEM 5 MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)

FROM: Bradley Juffer, Assistant Manager—Noise, Environment & Planning

SUBJECT: NEXTGEN STANDARD TERMINAL ARRIVAL ROUTES (STARS) UPDATE

DATE: May 4, 2016

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) NextGen Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Area Navigation (RNAV) Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STAR) were implemented by the FAA in March 2015. The FAA will provide an update on the use of PBN procedures at MSP to the NOC at the May 18, 2016 meeting. ITEM 6 MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)

FROM: Bradley Juffer, Assistant Manager—Noise, Environment & Planning

SUBJECT: REVIEW OF APRIL 27, 2016 PUBLIC INPUT MEETING

DATE: May 4, 2016

One of the elements of the Metropolitan Airports Commission’s (MAC) approved framework for the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Airport Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) requires MAC staff to conduct quarterly public input meetings. The intent is to ensure residents’ concerns are considered as part of the ongoing effort by the MAC and the NOC to address noise issues around MSP. The NOC may also review these topics as possible future action items if the members so desire.

On April 27, 2016 at 7:00 P.M., MAC Noise Program Office staff conducted the 2 nd Quarter 2016 Public Input Meeting at the City of St. Louis Park City Hall.

• 31 residents attended the meeting. • 13 individuals made comments at the meeting. • 3 individuals submitted comments via the Public Input Meeting Form on the Noise Program website

MAC staff is in the process of preparing written responses to the questions. The comments and associated responses can be found on the MAC Noise Program’s website, accessible at www.macnoise.com, when they are completed.

Specifically, comments/questions by those that attended focused on: • Increased aircraft activity over St. Louis Park • The effect of Converging Runway Operations (CRO) on St. Louis Park • Aircraft flight track dispersal • Increase in night time operations and differing definitions of the night time period at MSP • Changes in flight tracks due to Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Area Navigation (RNAV) implementation • Changes in aircraft altitudes • Location of noise monitors • Residential noise mitigation program • Possible use of differential fees to encourage quieter aircraft and less operations • Bigger aircraft due to upgauging by the airlines • Optimized Profile Descents (OPD) • What benefits have been derived previously from public involvement • Possible forecasting of aircraft activity over neighborhoods • Runway Use System (RUS)

The next quarterly public input meeting is planned for July 27, 2016, 7:00 p.m., at the MAC General Offices, 6040 28 th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55450.