National Transportation Safety Board Recommendation and FAA Air Traffic Orders

Transcription

1 Page 1 of 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning, Development and Environment Committee FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Director Environment ( ) SUBJECT: NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (NOC) CONVERGING RUNWAY OPERATION (CRO) RESOLUTION DATE: September 26, 2016 At the September 21, 2016, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) meeting the attached resolution was passed by a unanimous vote calling for the Metropolitan Airports Commission to support a request that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conduct an analysis of the noise and capacity impacts associated with its CRO mitigation activities at MSP. The following provides background on the FAA s activities related to CRO and the associated community concerns leading up to the NOC resolution and the requested MAC action. National Transportation Safety Board Recommendation and FAA Air Traffic Orders On July 1, 2013, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a safety recommendation based on incidents where departing and arriving aircraft on non-intersecting converging runways came within hazardous proximity of each other at Las Vegas McCarran International Airport, John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Charlotte Douglas International Airport. A non-intersecting converging runway operation exists when runways that do not physically intersect have flight paths (runway heading) that could intersect in the case of a departure operation on one runway and a missed approach occurring on the other. (See following graphic)

2 Page 2 of 8 The NTSB Report recommended that the FAA: Amend Federal Aviation Administration Order , Air Traffic Control, to establish separation standards similar to the provisions of paragraph between an arriving aircraft that goes around and any combination of arriving or departing aircraft operating on runways where flightpaths may intersect. (A ) On January 15, 2014, the FAA issued Notice JO amending FAA Order JO , Air Traffic Control, providing new guidance that defined non-intersecting converging runway operations to exist if the extended centerline of a runway crosses a converging runway, or the extended centerline of a converging runway, within 1 nautical mile (6,076 ) of either departure end, requiring such operations to comply with specific separation requirements. Also on January 15, 2014, FAA issued Notice JO amending FAA Order JO , Facility Operation and Administration, relative to the display of virtual intersections (within one mile of runway ends) on display map data, and specific go-around/missed approach mitigation procedures that could be used to provide the needed separation for non-intersecting converging runway operations, which includes the use of an Arrival Departure Window (ADW). FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) Actions at MSP In late July 2015, the FAA announced the temporary suspension of aircraft arrivals on Runway 35 (over Apple Valley, Burnsville and Bloomington) while aircraft were departing simultaneously to the northwest and west (over Minneapolis and Richfield) off Runway 30L. On September 8, 2015, the FAA announced that a 60-day evaluation had started of revised runway use procedures alternating arrivals on Runway 35 with departures on Runway 30L. The FAA s expectation was that upon completion of the Runway 35 and Runway 30L CRO test at the end of October 2015, a determination would be made on the long-term implementation of the procedures. However, due to southerly winds and training schedules, FAA extended the evaluation period to February On January 21, 2016, the FAA announced its determination that the new CRO requirements for Runway 35 applied to Runway 30R as well. The FAA s Runway 35/Runway 30R CRO ruling created a scenario in which departure operations from both parallel runways are dependent on Runway 35 arrival operations. To comply with the CRO requirements, FAA ATC at MSP has developed two ADWs off the end of Runway 35 one ADW is tied to Runway 30L departure operations and the other to Runway 30R departure operations. When arrival operations to Runway 35 are within the geographic extent of the respective parallel runway s ADW, departure operations cannot be rolling/occurring on that runway. As a result of these actions, MSP is currently in compliance with the new FAA CRO requirements. Prior to the implementation of CRO at MSP, the airport operated at its optimal arrival capacity in a northwest flow with an hourly arrival capacity of 90. That has been reduced to arrivals per hour with the new CRO requirements (this is still above the southeast operation flow of 66 arrival operations per hour). Current Runway Operations and Community Concerns Simultaneous use of the ADWs on the parallel runways (30L and 30R) is currently not allowed. As such, when arrival operations are occurring on Runway 35 the airport is reduced to one departure runway. This results in differing runway use tactics to accommodate arrival and departure demand throughout the day during northwest operational flows. The FAA s current arrival demand runway use tactics during northwest flows are as follows:

3 Page 3 of 8 Arrival operations to Runways 35, 30L and 30R Four mile arrival operation spacing on Runways 35 and 30L Eight mile arrival operation spacing on Runway 30R Single departure runway with ADW-compliant departure operations on Runway 30R The FAA s current departure demand runway use tactics during northwest flows are as follows: Departure operations on Runways 30L and 30R No arrival operations to Runway 35 Increased mixed-flow usage departures on Runways 30L and 30R with departures on Runway 17 (requires an initial east-bound heading restriction of 170-degrees for departures off Runway 17 to de-conflict those operations from arrivals to Runway 30L) The above runway use practices have resulted in: Increased southeast operational flows at MSP this appears to be the preferred flow when discretion exists for FAA ATC as it removes the CRO complexity from their airspace management activities. Increased use of the straight northwest configuration (30L and 30R departures, no operations on Runway 35) allowing for south bound departure turns off Runway 30L closer into the airport (these operations do not need to clear the airspace that is typically protected for Runway 35 arrival operations before turning west/south). Increased arrival operations on Runways 12L, 12R, and 30L. Decreased Runway 35 arrival operations. Increased departure operations on Runways 17, 12L and 12R. Decreased departure operations on Runway 30L. The flowing charts depict the associated runway use trends.

4 Page 4 of 8 Based on these current operational trends, the following concerns have been raised by the communities around MSP: Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, and Minnetonka increasing Runway 12L and 12R arrival operations Richfield early Runway 30L departure turns Eagan increasing Runway 17 departure operations and use of the 120-degree departure heading Burnsville increasing Runway 17 departure operations and use of the 170-degree departure heading Mendota Heights and Sunfish Lake increasing Runway 12L departure operations. FAA MSP ATC Efforts Underway to Develop a Long-Term CRO Solution The goal of the FAA s current effort to develop a long-term operational solution to CRO at MSP is to maintain compliance with FAA Order ensuring the highest degree of safety, while minimizing capacity and environmental impacts. In short, getting as close to the previous operational state as is possible. There are two major components that are required for local FAA ATC to achieve its goals during this critical phase 1. approval of simultaneous ADW operations on Runways 30L and 30R, and 2. approval of procedurally de-conflicting Runway 30R northbound departures from the Runway 35 ADW requirement. FAA has convened a Safety Risk Management Panel to evaluate the possibility of simultaneous ADW operations. The FAA anticipates a six week internal review and approval process to allow for the use of simultaneous ADW operations. The FAA Air Traffic Organization - Central Service Center is in the process of assisting the FAA MSP ATC in developing an application for approval of the procedural de-confliction to be submitted to FAA

5 Page 5 of 8 Headquarters to allow for northbound departure operations off of Runway 30L to occur independent of the CRO/ADW requirement relative to Runway 35 arrival operations. Based on the timing required for these processes, and the associated integration that would be required to make them a reality at MSP, the FAA is currently estimating a minimum of one year before a long-term CRO solution and the related long-term runway use/operational patterns are occurring at MSP. Ongoing Community Involvement and the Path Forward The MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) has been facilitating the dialogue between the communities, FAA and the MAC on the CRO noise issue. Between September 2015 and September 2016, Ms. Elaine Buckner, FAA MSP Air Traffic Control Tower Manager, addressed the NOC at six of its seven meetings during this period on the CRO issue and provided updates on related FAA activities at MSP. In response to the community concerns expressed to-date related to CRO, the NOC has: Commissioned a Runway 12L and 12R Aircraft Arrival Study that was scoped in collaboration with the Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, and Minnetonka residents that have expressed concern with these CRO related impacts, and Reviewed the Eagan and Richfield concerns related to current impacts in their communities related to CRO operations and is facilitating a dialogue with, and response from, the FAA on these questions. Additionally, MAC and FAA staff have meet with representatives and elected officials from the cities of Burnsville, Eagan, and Richfield to discuss the status of the FAA s CRO activities and offered to conduct community briefings on the topic if helpful. At the September 21, 2016, NOC meeting the FAA explained that the current transitional state focusing on the development of the long-term CRO solution makes it extremely difficult for it to address the community concerns at this time. In consideration of the circumstances, and the community and airline concerns regarding the possible noise and capacity impacts from the FAA s CRO activities at MSP, the NOC unanimously passed the attached resolution requesting that the MAC support and communicate a request to the FAA for environmental review and documentation of existing and future impacts to noise and airport capacity from non-intersecting converging runway operations at MSP. At the September 21, 2016, NOC meeting the FAA committed that community concerns will be addressed in the environmental review process once the FAA s long-term CRO solution is in place and again offered to provide community briefings on the topic. Based on the FAA s current estimates, it will likely be one year before a long-term CRO solution, and the related long-term operational patterns, will be in place at MSP. Once this occurs the FAA will determine the nature of the associated environmental review process, begin collecting data, and then conduct the analysis. COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED RECOMMEND TO THE FULL COMMISSION TO ENDORSE THE PROVISIONS OF THE NOC RESOLUTION AND COMMUNICATE THE COMMISSION S POSITION ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE NOC RESOLUTION TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION.

6 Page 6 of 8

7 Page 7 of 8

8 Page 8 of 8