1. Given the issues with our newest and longest runway, that runway that parallels Cedar Avenue, I would ask policy makers, please do not spend any more money expanding the Minneapolis- St. Paul International Airport. It is simply time to start planning for the future and build a new international airport midway between Minneapolis-St. Paul and Rochester, home of the Mayo Clinic. I m sure you re aware the state and the Mayo Clinic are spending billions to build the world s premiere facility. We will need a new regional, international airport to attract the largest, newest high capacity design airplanes. At this point given recent issues, Minneapolis- St. Paul has only limited ability to serve such designs, I would propose paying for this by raising the landing and takeoff fees currently charged. It makes no sense living in one of the highest income taxed states that we should insist on having the lowest landing and takeoff fee, instead it should be marked up half way with similar cities, and those funds should be used for a new facility. At this point, spending additional money on the airport we not be a prudent and good use of taxpayer money and would not be good public policy. The newest runway at MSP, Runway 17/35, is 8,000 feet long and is oriented roughly north to south. It was completed and opened for operation in 2005 and is the shortest runway at MSP. In 2013 the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a safety recommendation to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that said runways that converge but do not physically intersect need different separation standards than other runways. The FAA Air Traffic Control at MSP implemented new procedures in August 2015 to comply with these new rules and this runway is again fully operational. The runways at MSP are fully capable of handling any and all passenger aircraft currently in production. Furthermore, based on projected activity levels at MSP, the runways are more than capable of handling aircraft demand through the 2035 planning period. Our highest number of annual operations occurred in 2004. During that year, MSP saw 540,727 aircraft takeoffs and landings. Current forecasts show 511,000 takeoffs and landings by 2035. The current network of runways and taxiways at MSP will accommodate this level of traffic. The MAC has conservative landing fees and a conservative operating budget to match. This philosophy has allowed airlines that operate at MSP to be able to provide more service at a reasonable cost than they may otherwise would have. The money spent on this airport does not come from local tax dollars. Although the MAC does have the ability to levy taxes on the citizens, it has not exercised this power. The MAC has taken a fiscally conservative approach to operating the airport for the benefit of the community and all of the stakeholders of the airport. At this time all of the planned future development of this airport will be supported by airport and aviation user funds. Finally, the Metropolitan Airports Commission is not able to construct a new airport facility to replace MSP. After the Dual-Track process was undertaken in the late 1980s to consider the merit of a new facility away from the metro, the State Legislature approved legislation that the airport would not be moved. Because MSP is the biggest economic engine in the state of Minnesota, thereby making it an asset for the entire state, a majority of the state will need to agree that the airport should be moved. If that is the consensus, new laws will need to be enacted at the state level. For further information on this topic, please see Laws of Minnesota 1996, chapter 464, article 3.
2. I have lived in Minnetonka for 20 years and just this summer I ve been impacted by airplane noise and it s new to me. I previously inquired about what s gone on in the northwest suburbs and I got a letter from the MAC about the Nexgen system and there is no significant change in my neighborhood and I would offer the data is wrong. There has been a significant change to the northwest suburbs and to our homes. We are no longer able to use our outside backyards because the noise has gotten intolerable. I asked the FAA the same question and they responded with the same essential information so I m guessing they may be using the same information, which I m proposing is wrong. The noise and the airplane traffic in the northwest suburbs is intolerable. I like to enjoy my backyard and listen to the birds and I have not been able to do that. One day I decided to compile data using a decibel reader. The noise in my backyard with no airplanes was 50-60. On 2 different dates I picked some samples, the decibel reading when planes go over was 74, 77, 75. I did this for 20 minutes, planes come over every minute and they average 75.8. The peak one day was 82, and another day was 87. There was an ambulance on my street and I could not hear it over the sound of the airplane noise. Something has changed, the data is not right. Please review the data and find out what has gone wrong. Please setup a meeting, because I have a folder full of letters and I don t need another letter. We are contemplating moving because we can t live in this house anymore. Thank you for continuing the dialogue that began at the July Public Input Meeting. It is our intent to provide the public an explanation and investigation of our data whenever there is a need for further analysis. The MAC Noise Program Office is very confident in the integrity and reliability of our data. Our supplier of flight track data supplies surveillance data that is highly accurate as it uses data fused from multiple FAA surveillance sources that provides vertical and horizontal positional accuracy for each aircraft typically within 150 feet or less in the MSP terminal area. After the data is received, there are multiple measures in place to ensure the data is accurate. We have reviewed the remarks and analysis that you received from the summer meeting to search for inconsistencies that may exist. Further, I expanded the analysis to include both a wider geographic area as well as a larger time period to try and find any changes that may exist in your neighborhood. The chart below shows the amount of aircraft activity within 1 mile of your residence. It also shows data back to 2006. As with the data and analysis you received this summer, the larger dataset does little to indicate there may be a change in your area.
O P E R A T I O N S T H O U S A N D S J A N - 06 J U N - 06 N O V - 06 A P R - 07 S E P - 07 F E B - 08 J U L - 08 D E C - 08 M A Y - 09 O C T - 09 M A R - 10 A U G - 10 J A N - 11 J U N - 11 N O V - 11 A P R - 12 S E P - 12 F E B - 13 J U L - 13 D E C - 13 M A Y - 14 O C T - 14 M A R - 15 A U G - 15 O P E R A T I O N S PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WITHIN 1 MILE OF RESIDENCE 9, 0 0 0 8, 0 0 0 7, 0 0 0 6, 0 0 0 5, 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 2, 0 0 0 1, 0 0 0 0 A R R I V A L C O U N T D E P A R T U R E C O U N T Because of the large amount of information presented in the chart above, the next chart aggregates the data into annual blocks to make it easier to understand. To make valid comparisons, only months January through October were included in each year. AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WITHIN 1 MILE OF RESIDENCE 60 A R R I V A L S D E P A R T U R E S 50 40 30 20 10 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
O P E R A T I O N S T H O U S A N D S PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES The 2015 information is slightly higher than what we would expect. This anomaly is almost entirely the result of the weather in September 2015. According to the Minnesota DNR, September 2015 was the warmest September on record for the State of Minnesota for records going back to 1895. The preliminary statewide average temperature was 65.1 degrees or 5.8 degrees above the 1981-2010 normal. The old record was 63.0 degrees in September 1897. The warm September was mainly driven by warm overnight minimum temperatures. The overall weather pattern for September was summer-like with wind patterns favoring warm moist air from the south and few Canadian cold fronts. The important information from that excerpt for this discussion is the sentence about wind patterns. When wind patterns favor warm moist air from the south, MSP will be in a south flow configuration. In this configuration, aircraft will fly from the northwest and approach the airport facing southeast. This traffic will fly over the northwest suburbs and your neighborhood on their way to MSP. These wind patterns and unseasonably high temperatures led to the highest amount of arrivals within 1 mile of your area for any September back to 2006. 6 SEPTEMBER ARRIVALS 5 4 3 2 1 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 The Federal Aviation Administration has mandated that the MAC, and all airports, use the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) to produce noise exposure maps and contours. Simply, DNL is a 24-hour average noise level of all aircraft noise events with a 10 decibel penalty for nighttime flights. The MAC realizes that there may be maximum sound levels from flights that exceed the DNL level; therefore, we provide alternate noise metrics from our system of Remote Monitoring Towers, such as maximum sound levels, time above and number of events above on our website for the public to view. The Reports on the Fly section of our website has a report titled MSP Events Count Breakdown. In this area, users can view how many aircraft noise events reached 4 different decibel thresholds for the requested date range.
3. I would like to understand what has happened that planes are now routed right over St. Anthony Village area and the noise issues have moved our further into the suburbs. Incoming traffic to MSP seems to be continuously routed over the same path, over our neighborhood, causing an airplane highway over our area. The noise from the planes often starts at 5 AM and goes until 11 PM and is continuous throughout the day. We ve never had this problem before and we ve lived here for almost 20 years. It s affected our lives, our ability to enjoy our neighborhood and our property values. What is the plan to distribute this traffic more evenly throughout the metro so that one neighborhood doesn t get the total impact of this noise pollution? I would like to understand if this traffic is going to be distributed more evenly, and what the plan is to do that? I agree, we all have to take our fair share, but it seems something has changed recently that an unequal amount of traffic comes our way. Please review the flight volume and altitudes the aircraft are at as they pass near my residence. I believe the data will show the number of MSP arrivals flying near my home has increased after the RNAV approaches were implemented. Thank you for providing your information to the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) Noise Program Office so that we may provide to you an analysis of the data we collect as it relates to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) aircraft activity. Since 1992, the MAC Noise Office has operated a sophisticated and comprehensive computerized aircraft noise and flight track data collection and processing system. MACNOMS, as it was presented at the meeting on Tuesday, is our way to provide data to the community that they may use to stay informed about the aircraft activity in their neighborhood. The flight track data is highly accurate as the MAC uses data fused from multiple FAA surveillance sources that provides vertical and horizontal positional accuracy for each aircraft typically within 150 feet or less in the MSP terminal area. Using this data, the Noise Office conducted an analysis of your address. Although you specifically commented about arrival aircraft, we included data related to both arriving and departing aircraft near your residence. Activity back to January 2011 is shown below:
J A N - 11 M A R - 11 M A Y - 11 J U L - 11 S E P - 11 N O V - 11 J A N - 12 M A R - 12 M A Y - 12 J U L - 12 S E P - 12 N O V - 12 J A N - 13 M A R - 13 M A Y - 13 J U L - 13 S E P - 13 N O V - 13 J A N - 14 M A R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U L - 14 S E P - 14 N O V - 14 J A N - 15 M A R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U L - 15 S E P - 15 A L T I T U D E ( F E E T ) J A N - 11 M A R - 11 M A Y - 11 J U L - 11 S E P - 11 N O V - 11 J A N - 12 M A R - 12 M A Y - 12 J U L - 12 S E P - 12 N O V - 12 J A N - 13 M A R - 13 M A Y - 13 J U L - 13 S E P - 13 N O V - 13 J A N - 14 M A R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U L - 14 S E P - 14 N O V - 14 J A N - 15 M A R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U L - 15 S E P - 15 O P E R A T I O N S PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF RESIDENCE A R R I V A L C O U N T D E P A R T U R E C O U N T 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 You can see from the chart above, there are very few arrivals flying within ½ mile of your residence. Since 2011, the flights near your home are at an average altitude of about 5,100 feet for arrivals and 6,400 feet for departures. The aircraft that are arriving at MSP that first fly near you neighborhood have a considerable flight distance to travel before actually touching down at the airport. This allows aircraft time to descend at a more constant rate. AVERAGE ALTITUDE OF AIRCRAFT WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF RESIDENCE A R R I V A L A L T I T U D E D E P A R T U R E A L T I T U D E 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0
J A N - 14 F E B - 14 M A R - 14 A P R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U N - 14 J U L - 14 A U G - 14 S E P - 14 O C T - 14 N O V - 14 D E C - 14 J A N - 15 F E B - 15 M A R - 15 A P R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U N - 15 J U L - 15 A U G - 15 S E P - 15 O P E R A T I O N S / A L T I T U D E ( F E E T ) PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES Using the same data, similar research was conducted, extending the distance around your home to 1 mile and the results were very similar in nature. Next the area was increased to 1½ miles and found the change you have been witnessing. ARRIVALS WITHIN 1.5 MILES OF RESIDENCE 7, 0 0 0 C O U N T A L T I T U D E 6, 0 0 0 5, 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 2, 0 0 0 1, 0 0 0 0 You live approximately 1.3 miles away from a Standard Terminal Arrival Route (STAR). The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), as part of their transition from radar-based air traffic control to satellitebased control, implemented Area Navigation STARs at MSP beginning in March 2015. These routes reduce pilot and air traffic controller workload, provide more predictability in aircraft routing and are therefore safer than traditional arrival procedures. Additionally, they offer benefits in efficiency, fuel reduction and carbon emission reduction. Aircraft fly more direct routes between airports and utilize Optimized Profile Descents (OPD), which allow aircraft to descend from altitude to the airport at a more gradual, consistent rate, burning less fuel and reducing carbon emissions along the way. This is why the chart above shows altitude increases beginning in March 2015. The aircraft on the STAR procedures are higher as they pass more than 1 mile from your home. Since March 2015, the arriving aircraft are, on average, more than 5,500 feet above MSP airport field elevation. Prioritizing which runway an aircraft is assigned to use and ultimately where they fly over the metro and the nation is the job of the FAA Air Traffic Controllers (ATC). The MAC, in collaboration with the FAA, has developed a Runway Use System (RUS). This system prioritizes runways and airspace that will impact the fewest number of residential areas. When conditions allow, aircraft will fly over commercial and industrial zoned areas in Eagan and Mendota Heights, as well as the Minnesota River near Bloomington and Burnsville. Unfortunately, a number of factors that are out of the control of the MAC or ATC have to be taken into account, and conditions do not always allow the use of these areas. The MAC continually monitors the use of our runways to ensure that every attempt to utilize the RUS is being made.
MAC Staff, along with the Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) have observed a recent increase of flights between the hours of 10:30 PM and 6:00 AM. MSP has a voluntary agreement with the airlines to limit the number of flights that operate during these hours. Because the MAC is precluded by federal legislation on restricting the hours of the airport, there is no curfew. Instead the NOC is trying to work collaboratively with the airlines and recently sent them a letter asking that they be cognizant that scheduling flights during these hours is intrusive on the community. 4. How is the DNL number calculated, is it averaged or is it a straight decibel? Is there a comparable noise level that you can relate to it? I live in Northeast Minneapolis. We have had much more noise since midsummer. I have spoken to people at the MAC and have been told both that there is no difference and yes there is a difference. Day-Night Average Sound level (DNL) is the primary metric used to evaluate noise exposure. This is the metric the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandates that airports use when conducting noise analysis. Additionally, the United States Environmental Protection Agency has also identified DNL as the standard for noise exposure. DNL represents the total accumulation of all noise energy spread out uniformly over a 24-hour period. DNL is not a straight decibel value recorded on a noise monitor. Because the MAC records the flight tracks of all aircraft using MSP every year, we are able to model the actual DNL contours in the metropolitan area. Using this data and the FAA s Integrated Noise Model, a consultant develops an actual noise contour map annually. Based on the results of these contours, homes that are eligible will be included in the Residential Noise Mitigation program. This program is scheduled to resume in 2016 based on the results of the 2015 Actual Noise Contours. Please see the figure below. It provides a visual representation of typical DNL levels around an urban community.
Using the aforementioned flight track data, the Noise Program Office conducted an analysis of all MSP flights within ½ mile of your home. There has been an increase in the number of flights in your neighborhood. This increase did not begin mid-summer, however. The increase began in mid-march when the FAA introduced Area Navigation (RNAV) Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs). These routes reduce pilot and air traffic controller workload, provide more predictability in aircraft routing and are therefore safer than traditional arrival procedures. Additionally, they offer benefits in efficiency, fuel reduction and carbon emission reduction. Aircraft fly more direct routes between airports and utilize Optimized Profile Descents (OPD), which allow aircraft to descend from altitude to the airport at a more gradual, consistent rate, burning less fuel and reducing carbon emissions along the way.
J A N - 11 M A R - 11 M A Y - 11 J U L - 11 S E P - 11 N O V - 11 J A N - 12 M A R - 12 M A Y - 12 J U L - 12 S E P - 12 N O V - 12 J A N - 13 M A R - 13 M A Y - 13 J U L - 13 S E P - 13 N O V - 13 J A N - 14 M A R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U L - 14 S E P - 14 N O V - 14 J A N - 15 M A R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U L - 15 S E P - 15 O P E R A T I O N S PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF RESIDENCE A R R I V A L C O U N T D E P A R T U R E C O U N T 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 The traffic that is approaching MSP near your location is very high. On average, the flights are more than 5,500 feet above MSP field elevation. The aircraft are about 500 feet higher, on average, than they were prior to the implementation of STAR procedures.
J A N - 11 M A R - 11 M A Y - 11 J U L - 11 S E P - 11 N O V - 11 J A N - 12 M A R - 12 M A Y - 12 J U L - 12 S E P - 12 N O V - 12 J A N - 13 M A R - 13 M A Y - 13 J U L - 13 S E P - 13 N O V - 13 J A N - 14 M A R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U L - 14 S E P - 14 N O V - 14 J A N - 15 M A R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U L - 15 S E P - 15 A L T I T U D E ( F E E T ) PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES AVERAGE ALTITUDE OF AIRCRAFT WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF RESIDENCE A R R I V A L A L T I T U D E D E P A R T U R E A L T I T U D E 7, 0 0 0 6, 5 0 0 6, 0 0 0 5, 5 0 0 5, 0 0 0 4, 5 0 0 4, 0 0 0 5. When the RNAV arrival was proposed one of the benefits was supposed to be the noise would decrease because of the engine setting during approach. Has that been implemented, because it seems the noise has not decreased? What is the path in the air in width that they take because it seems the route is moving closer to our area? The Area Navigation (RNAV) Standard Terminal Arrival Route (STARs) were implemented by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in March 2015. These procedures are a component of the FAA s initiative, called NextGen, to update Air Traffic Control from ground-based radar to satellite-based technology. RNAV STAR routes reduce pilot and air traffic controller workload, provide more predictability in aircraft routing and are therefore safer than traditional arrival procedures. Additionally, they offer benefits in efficiency, fuel reduction and carbon emission reduction. Aircraft fly more direct routes between airports and utilize Optimized Profile Descents (OPD), which allow aircraft to descend from altitude to the airport at a more gradual, consistent rate, burning less fuel and reducing carbon emissions along the way. Since aircraft stay higher longer, OPDs provide some noise reduction benefit, however once an aircraft is established on its final path to the airport, its altitude and flight path are the same as they were with traditional arrival procedures. RNAV STAR arrivals and OPDs are only used by arriving aircraft. There are very few arriving aircraft that fly within 1 mile of your home; therefore, the benefits of the new arrival procedures in your area would be negligible.
J A N - 11 M A R - 11 M A Y - 11 J U L - 11 S E P - 11 N O V - 11 J A N - 12 M A R - 12 M A Y - 12 J U L - 12 S E P - 12 N O V - 12 J A N - 13 M A R - 13 M A Y - 13 J U L - 13 S E P - 13 N O V - 13 J A N - 14 M A R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U L - 14 S E P - 14 N O V - 14 J A N - 15 M A R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U L - 15 S E P - 15 O P E R A T I O N S PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WITHIN 1 MILE OF RESIDENCE 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 A R R I V A L C O U N T D E P A R T U R E C O U N T This chart shows a downward trend in the amount of MSP traffic near your neighborhood. This has been a trend for MSP overall. The number of operations at MSP this year is down compared to last year and the level is similar to the level MSP was experiencing in the early 1990 s. The path that an arriving aircraft flies when it is near your area is very compact, and has not deviated due to RNAV implementation. The aircraft will always line up with the extended centerline of a runway upon arrival. This is the safest operation for an aircraft during the landing phase of flight, which is one of the most critical for safety. The graphic below shows the concentration of arrival paths for September 2015. The red lines show the highest concentration of arrivals, while the blue, pink, and white areas represent the least amount of arrivals. The area depicted in red to the north of your home is the runway centerlines extended. The red lines in the north metro and south metro represent aircraft flying the opposite way of landing traffic. These are two of the sections of the RNAV STAR approach routes. The aircraft will fly these routes and then based on instructions from the FAA Air Traffic Controllers will turn the aircraft back to the airport and line up with the runway as they approach MSP.
6. Related to the Long Term Plan, can we and how do we take a very long term approach so that we will not be here ten years from now? The MAC is currently engaged in the planning process for the purpose of developing the MSP 2035 Long Term Comprehensive Plan. Due to changes to FAA runway procedures, the planning process has been delayed to 2016. What has been determined thus far is that there will be no further airfield capacity upgrades necessary to meet the projected demand of the airport in the year 2035. The existing runway configuration and airfield geometry will be more than capable of handling the future traffic. Additionally, the FAA has embarked on a research initiative aimed at reducing the environmental footprint on aviation. The Continuous Lower Energy Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) has already led to new technology that will lower the noise and environmental impact of aircraft of the surrounding area. One of the goals of the CLEEN initiative is to reduce noise levels by 32 decibels below Stage 4 noise standards by the mid-2020s.
7. It appears that there have been decisions by the MAC and the FAA about runway use that have contributed to increased density to the number of flights over our neighborhood. We have also found that days with wind out of the south we will see departures on Runway 30L. I was distressed to hear about the disconnect between the FAA monitoring devices and the MAC monitoring devices. It s not clear to me which ones will impact decision making. Approaches that could help resolve this issue include technological advancements on aircraft, requiring the FAA to comply with environmental regulations, a distributed pattern of departures that treat neighborhoods equitably, require that aircraft gain more altitude before fanning out. The irony is that we didn t move to the noise, the noise has moved to us. We value that we have a relationship with the MAC and look forward to collaborating to resolve some of the issues we are facing. All aircraft that enter the airspace around the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) are communicating with and ultimately being directed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Controllers. The MAC does not choose which runways are being utilized. Traffic patterns vary depending on many factors, including weather, airport traffic, and airfield conditions. Ultimately, the decision as to which runways are being used are primarily chosen due to meteorological conditions. To ensure the highest level of safety, airplanes need to land and takeoff into the wind. Therefore, due to runway geometry and prevailing winds, the FAA will choose the most appropriate direction for the safest operation. Furthermore, there may be times when the airport is in a North configuration when surface winds are light and variable. Winds aloft, developing severe weather patterns, and overall traffic levels may dictate that the airport cannot be switched from a North configuration to a South configuration immediately. The Runway Use System at MSP does prefer aircraft to fly to the south and from the south but often a myriad of conditions may exist that does not allow for this operation to occur. The FAA does not have aircraft noise monitoring devices. The FAA requires airports to use a noise metric when conducting noise exposure analyses. The Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) has been the standard of the FAA and the United States Environmental Protection Agency for many years. The MAC has a collection of 39 remote monitoring towers to provide a more thorough investigation and understanding of aircraft noise around the community. Thank you for your suggestions on how to lessen the impact on our neighbors. The MAC fully supports technological advancements in aircraft technology. The FAA has awarded over $200 million dollars in research funds to aircraft manufacturing companies in the past five years to reduce the impact airplanes have on the environment, both through lower emissions and noise reductions. Additionally, as a part of the 2016 Work Plan the MSP Noise Oversight Committee will be studying the effectiveness of Vortex Generators on Airbus aircraft. Small improvements in technology are encouraged and if it is deemed effective will not be overlooked. The departures out of MSP do fan out after they leave the runway. FAA Air Traffic Controllers first direct aircraft to the appropriate runway based on their location and final destination. After takeoff, aircraft will begin their turns at different points and the natural outcome is a dispersion of departing flights.
J A N - 11 A P R - 11 J U L - 11 O C T - 11 J A N - 12 A P R - 12 J U L - 12 O C T - 12 J A N - 13 A P R - 13 J U L - 13 O C T - 13 J A N - 14 A P R - 14 J U L - 14 O C T - 14 J A N - 15 A P R - 15 J U L - 15 O C T - 15 D E P A R T U R E S PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES Finally, data was collected for an area within 1 mile of your residence. Due to unseasonably warm weather and south winds, September had the lowest activity in your neighborhood in the past 5 years. October showed a return to more normal conditions. DEPARTURES WITHIN 1 MILE OF RESIDENCE 6, 0 0 0 5, 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 2, 0 0 0 1, 0 0 0 0
8. Thank you for the public outreach meetings. Please share how Day-Night Average Sound Level is calculated. Please supply sample data that bifurcates the data into daytime and nighttime groups. My assertion is that there is big difference in the carriers that do the daytime flights and nighttime flights. The Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) is a calculated noise level, developed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to correlate with peoples attitudes about the noise environment over a 24-hour period. Case history information about neighborhood reaction to aircraft noise was used to formulate a relationship between the numbers of noise events people would accept versus the sound exposure level of these events. The DNL metric sums individual Sound Exposure Levels (SEL) over the day. One additional consideration is the treatment of nighttime noise events (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The DNL calculation weights these noise events by adding an additional 10 decibels to the SEL. Since sound is measured on a logarithmic scale (decibels), the sound levels are then converted to sound energy by taking the antilog (i.e. 10 (sound level / 10) ). The sum of the weighted sound energy is divided by the number of seconds in a day, then converted back to decibels. Conceptually, the DNL represents the total accumulation of all noise energy spread out uniformly over a 24-hour period (the division by the number of seconds in a day performs this function in the calculation). For a detailed view of the actual calculation, please refer to CFR Title 14 Part 150, Appendix A, Subpart 205, which is available from the domain www.ecfr.gov. The figure below is a fictional graphical example of how the nighttime penalty is calculated. Because the nighttime penalty is assessed, the DNL level (sometimes referred to as Ldn) is higher than it would be without the penalty. Source: HMMH, 2011
The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) produces a noise exposure map annually that depicts the noise contours using actual aircraft operations from the previous year. All aircraft and time of operation are recorded. Using this data, the MAC has committed to provide residential noise mitigation to any residential unit located in the 60-64 DNL noise contour and within a higher noise impact area when compared to previous mitigation programs for three consecutive years. This program will sunset in 2023. The MAC Noise Program Office would be happy to supply data to you with whatever criteria you request. Please contact us in person, so that we may discuss this request. For the purpose of a written document, we have included the information below. This table shows all the aircraft that flew within 1 mile of your residence during the month of September. It groups the data by airline and time of day, with day being defined at 7:00 AM 10:00 PM and night defined as 10:00 PM 7:00 AM.
Airline Day / Night Count Alaska Airlines Day 2 American Airlines Day 9 Atlantic Southeast Airlines Day 2 Atlas Air Day 1 Bemidji Airlines Day 20 Bombardier Business Jet Solutions Day 1 Business Aviation Courier Day 1 Compass Airlines Day 9 Delta Air Lines Day 113 Endeavor Air (formerly Pinnacle) Day 21 Executive Jet Management Day 1 FINFO Flight Inspection Aircraft Day 2 Flightcraft Day 1 Great Lakes Aviation Day 10 Jj Trans LLC Day 3 Mountain Air Cargo Day 1 Netjets Aviation Day 1 Us Airways Express/Shuttle America Day 3 Delta Connection/United Express/Skywest Airlines Day 24 Southwest Airlines Day 28 Spirit Airlines Day 6 Suburban Air Freight Day 1 Sun Country Airlines Day 20 United Airlines Day 6 Day Total 286 Alaska Airlines Night 3 American Airlines Night 2 Atlantic Southeast Airlines Night 2 Bemidji Airlines Night 2 Compass Airlines Night 1 Delta Air Lines Night 9 Fedex Express/Federal Express Night 1 FINFO Flight Inspection Aircraft Night 2 IFL Group Night 2 Midwest Aviation Division Night 1 Netjets Aviation Night 1 Republic Airlines Night 1 Delta Connection/United Express/Skywest Airlines Night 6 Southwest Airlines Night 4 Sun Country Airlines Night 7 United Parcel Service Night 1 Night Total 45 Grand Total 331
9. Thank you for having the meeting at 7 PM. It was an optimal time for people that work. Something is different. Every morning I m up at 5 AM, not by choice. I m going to give you comments from our neighbors. This is affecting us like nothing I ve ever experienced. a. I wasn t able to make it to the rally. I really appreciate the work FairSkies is doing. The noise is really bad and seems to be getting worse. I heard a plane at 3 AM last night. The Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) and Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) staff have identified an increase in nighttime operations and acknowledge that this is a concern for the community. As such, the community representatives of the NOC have sent a letter to the airlines requesting that they limit scheduling aircraft during these hours. Additionally, MAC has a voluntary agreement with these carriers to limit operations during these times. With that said, the MAC is unable to mandate a curfew at the airport because federal grant provisions require a public-use facility, such as the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) to be open and available without restrictions that would unreasonably burden interstate or foreign commerce. b. The flights have been constantly over me the last several days. Why aren t they using the other runways? I live between 2 runways, it s unrelenting. Comment noted. Please see response to Question 2 below. c. I m new to the neighborhood and interested in what can be done and whether there is precedence in other cities for real action. I assume the only way to address this is a noise restriction, but I don t think that is possible. Aircraft noise can be managed at 4 levels. The most effective way to manage aircraft noise is to reduce it at the source. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), through matching grants, is promoting quieter aircraft as a part of the Continuous Lower Energy Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) programs. Stage 2 aircraft have been phased out of the national fleet. The quietest aircraft operating today are under Stage 4 noise standards. The FAA s CLEEN program aims to reduce noise levels by 32 decibels under Stage 4 standards. Aircraft noise can be managed through land use planning. MSP has an industry-leading residential noise mitigation program. This airport is one of a handful of airports in the country that provides residential noise mitigation to homes in the 60-65 DNL threshold. To date, MSP has spent $480 million in residential noise mitigation and other land use planning efforts. The third way noise can be managed is through noise abatement procedures. MSP has many flight procedures that are designed to keep aircraft away from residential areas. The Runway Use System prioritizes flight operations over commercial areas in Eagan and Mendota Heights as well as south over the Minnesota River. Both of these areas have specific procedures designed to further route traffic away from neighborhoods. Compliance of these procedures is measured on a monthly basis. There are times, however when the FAA is unable to utilize these procedures due to weather conditions, traffic congestion construction, emergencies and other factors beyond the MAC s control. The final way to manage noise is through operating restrictions. Unfortunately, due to the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (1990), this method is only allowed with FAA approval of a Part 161 process. To date, 39
Part 161 packages have been submitted to the FAA nationwide and none have been approved. Airports that had a restriction, such as a nighttime curfew, prior to the 1990 Act were grandfathered in and continue to have these restrictions today. d. The issues are more than it had been and have gotten worse. If it had been gradual there might not be this uproar. Flights used to be limited hours now there are more flights, flights closer together, less reprieve, noisier, flights are lower, not as spread out, specific areas are more affected and a runway closure caused more dramatic uptick. Comment noted. Please see response to Question 2 below. e. I attended the meeting feeling discouraged. They tried to present information about more flights and breezed through information about noise contours, no presentation about what it means to the residents. This comment is in reference to the MSP 2035 Long Term Comprehensive Plan meeting conducted in late August. Due to changes in FAA procedures, the MAC Commission voted to delay this planning process until enough time has passed to conduct a more thorough analysis of the effects of these changed procedures. When the process resumes, numerous public outreach meetings will be scheduled to allow for appropriate review and comments by the community. f. One concern, the noise battle is a battle. People need to be aware about what is pumped out into the air. If you read the article about particle concentration levels you d be frightened. You see the particles in your house. Fallout over our kids, our lakes, our rivers, elderly residents and all us outdoor enthusiasts. How can you claim health conscious, bike oriented when your skies are making people sick with your noise and pollutants. Comment noted. The MAC and the MSP Noise Oversight Committee continue to support research efforts by the FAA and others to evaluate the effects of aircraft noise and to examine alternate ways to quantify noise impacts. As an example, on March 19, 2012, the MAC sent letters to the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) and the Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) offering MSP as a willing participant in ongoing studies of methods for understanding health effects, aircraft annoyance and sleep disturbance. g. With noise comes pollution. Pollution comes from jet fumes. Forget fireplaces and backyard fire pits, the airplanes do not check air quality before they send airplanes over our homes every 30 seconds. They have schedules. Our lungs, ears and health are not a concern. The MAC has implemented a number of programs and projects that have lowered Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and provided air quality enhancements directly related to operations at MSP. These efforts have included focusing on evaluating existing emissions trends and implementing programs to reduce emission impacts.
Greenhouse Gas Reporting The MAC publishes an annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report that examines the annual CO 2e emissions from MAC-owned and controlled sources at MSP. The analysis determines the GHG emissions footprint for MSP as a whole, including emissions from other sources located at MSP. These other emission sources are not directly under MAC control, but may be influenced by MAC projects and jurisdictional responsibilities. The 2013 report found that: 2013 MSP emissions were down 22% from the 2005 baseline MAC-controlled sources contribute 1% to the total MSP emissions footprint Aircraft emissions at MSP accounted for 95% of the total MSP CO 2e emissions To access the latest Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report, go to http://mspairport.com/docs/aboutmsp/sustainability/final-msp-2013-ghg-report-rev01.aspx Reducing Vehicle, GSE and Aircraft Emissions The MAC continues to pursue emissions reductions through its vehicle procurement and management programs, aircraft servicing infrastructure strategies, and cooperation with new Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) aircraft procedure advancements. The MAC: is working with the FAA on its efforts to implement PBN at MSP. As a result, in March 2015, the FAA implemented Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) at MSP. These procedures will support more efficient use of the airspace and provide for the integration of Optimized Profile Descents (OPD), which will reduce aircraft emissions at MSP significantly. Fuel consumption could be reduced by as much as 353 pounds and CO 2 emissions by 500 kg per arrival operation. This is a significant advancement given that aircraft emissions at MSP account for approximately 95% of the total MSP CO 2e emissions. owns and utilizes 98 flex-fuel and three electric vehicles. The MAC s on-road vehicle fleet consumption of unleaded fuel was reduced by 46% in 2014 compared to 2005. The MAC continues to expand the purchase of alternative fuel vehicles. installed a charging station in 2014 (providing eight ports) for electric Ground Support Equipment (GSE). This fast, energy-efficient charging station allows for simultaneous charging, adjustable charging rates, and automatic shut-off when the GSE are fully charged or when overheating occurs. The charging station was installed at Terminal 1-Lindbergh for use by Delta GSE. (Currently, Delta has five pieces of electric GSE equipment at MSP using the station). This project fits into the proposed long-term goal of converting all Delta GSE to electric power, thereby reducing overall air emissions from fossil fuel-burning GSE. installed 14 electric vehicle charging stations in the parking ramps (5 on Level 8 of each the Blue and Red Ramps at Terminal 1 and 4 on level 7 of the Orange Ramp at Terminal 2.) installed 400 Hz ground power to all gates at both Terminal 1-Lindbergh and Terminal 2- Humphrey and offers pre-conditioned air at all 114 Terminal 1-Lindbergh gates. One hundred percent of the gates at MSP are equipped with Ground Power Units. As a result, airlines can connect aircraft to terminal power and air supply systems and shut down all aircraft engines or auxiliary power units (APU) while aircraft are at the gate. Airlines at MSP estimate using these systems instead of APUs has saved up to 3,500,000 gallons of jet fuel. Even though there is an
associated increase in electricity consumption, the net CO 2 emissions at MSP are reduced by more than 27,171 metric tons per year as a result of this project. installed an underground hydrant system that delivers fuel to the gates and virtually eliminates the need for tanker fuel trucks in the ramp area. Motorless fueling carts at each gate transfer fuel from the underground system to aircraft fuel tanks. Fueling trucks would consume approximately 72,000 gallons of fuel annually while ferrying between gates. Eliminating such trips lessens vehicle fuel consumption significantly and reduces CO 2 emissions by approximately 732 metric tons annually. Transportation Infrastructure Efficiencies Through major development initiatives, the MAC has maintained a focus on efficient access to air transportation services, while considering environmental impacts in the creative design and construction of supporting infrastructure. The following provides some examples of the associated accomplishments. To more efficiently transport passengers and airport employees between MSP s terminal buildings, the MAC teamed with the Metropolitan Council to construct a light rail line that replaces conventional buses previously used for such transportation. The free-of-charge rail between the terminal complexes runs on electricity, eliminating an estimated 350 metric tons of CO 2 emissions annually on the MSP campus. The MAC reconstructed inbound and outbound roadways at MSP to ease traffic flow. These roadway enhancements have reduced congestion, traffic delays, and idling time at the terminals, thereby reducing CO 2 emissions from automobile traffic. Over the last 14 years, the MAC added over 18,000 new parking spaces at MSP, helping eliminate vehicular traffic congestion at the airport and reducing the need for curbside drop-offs and pickups. When local passengers park at the airport, CO 2 emissions are cut in half because the vehicle they arrive in isn t making a round-trip to and from the airport. This is a significant overall reduction in the off-airport CO 2 footprint associated with MSP operations. In 2015 the MAC will be repurposing a former Delta Air Lines employee parking ramp to provide an additional 1,300 parking spaces for travelers at MSP. The new Quick Ride Ramp will include 15 motorcycle/scooter parking spaces. The MAC has implemented epark, an electronic payment method that helps speed customers through the parking exit plaza, virtually eliminating vehicle idling time caused by waiting for attendants to process each vehicle s parking fee. This has reduced exit plaza processing time by more than 80 percent and eliminates over 138 metric tons of CO 2. To eliminate the amount of vehicle traffic crossing the airfield runways and taxiways, and to make on-airport traffic flow more efficient, the MAC constructed several vehicle tunnels throughout MSP. The increased efficiency of traffic flow, with shortened distances traveled, and reduced idling time at runways and taxiways reduces CO 2 emissions by approximately 153 tons per year. Runway 17/35 opened for service on October 27, 2005, increasing MSP s airfield capacity by as much as 25 percent. This increased capacity reduced CO 2 emissions at MSP by reducing the potential for aircraft needing to enter into airborne holding patterns or ground holds while congestion clears, and by reducing the length of taxiing time by increasing the number of operating runways and taxiways. Reducing the number of aircraft delays also reduced idling time for those vehicles waiting for arriving passengers.
J A N - 11 M A R - 11 M A Y - 11 J U L - 11 S E P - 11 N O V - 11 J A N - 12 M A R - 12 M A Y - 12 J U L - 12 S E P - 12 N O V - 12 J A N - 13 M A R - 13 M A Y - 13 J U L - 13 S E P - 13 N O V - 13 J A N - 14 M A R - 14 M A Y - 14 J U L - 14 S E P - 14 N O V - 14 J A N - 15 M A R - 15 M A Y - 15 J U L - 15 S E P - 15 PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES h. Studies in Britain show more hypertension, cardiovascular disease in areas with heavy plane noise. I also saw a Harvard article with airplane noise affecting cognitive abilities in kids. Comment noted. Please see response to Question 1-f above. Comment noted Comment noted i. Sick of planes every 2 minutes. Sunday they were 1 to 2 minutes all day. j. Window replacements do nothing to address our outdoor life. 10. I don t want noise mitigation. I want quality of life. I want to be able to enjoy my neighborhood. I want to be able to talk to my family. Ultimately we are going to have to move. We need to do something. Something is different. The chart below shows the flight activity within ½ mile of your residence to help determine if anything has changed in your area. AIRCRAFT ACTIVITY WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF RESIDENCE A R R I V A L C O U N T D E P A R T U R E C O U N T 7, 0 0 0 6, 0 0 0 5, 0 0 0 4, 0 0 0 3, 0 0 0 2, 0 0 0 1, 0 0 0 0 September 2015 saw the highest monthly total going back five years. This was almost entirely the result of the meteorological conditions. According to the Minnesota DNR,
September 2015 was the warmest September on record for the State of Minnesota for records going back to 1895. The preliminary statewide average temperature was 65.1 degrees or 5.8 degrees above the 1981-2010 normal. The old record was 63.0 degrees in September 1897. The warm September was mainly driven by warm overnight minimum temperatures. The overall weather pattern for September was summer-like with wind patterns favoring warm moist air from the south and few Canadian cold fronts. These warm temperatures and south wind patterns resulted in 68% of the arrival traffic at MSP using Runway 12L and 12R. Use of these runways have a direct relationship with the amount of traffic over your neighborhood. For comparison sake, those same runways were only used for 47.5% of arrivals during September 2014. This trend continued into October affecting those numbers and has had some effect on early numbers in November. 11. Who can influence the FAA? We want to know. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is a federal agency of the Department of Transportation. As a part of the federal government, major changes to the way they operate would need to occur on a congressional level through legislation or presidential level through Executive Order. The MAC has developed a positive collaborative working relationship with local FAA Air Traffic Management. The local facility is acutely aware of the factors that influence noise exposure in this community and have taken steps that are in their control to attempt to lessen the impact. All noise abatement flight procedures in existence today at MSP were developed with FAA collaboration and approval. The Monthly Operations Report section of our website highlights many of these noise abatement procedures and tracks how often they are being used. These reports are regularly reviewed by MSP Air Traffic Management. 12. What are the penalties to the airlines that exceed the acceptable decibel levels and how often are they enforced? There is no such penalty to an aircraft operator that uses MSP. The United States Congress prohibited such penalties as a part of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. As the airport operator, the MAC is unable to impose fines, curfews, restrictions or any other measure that places an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce. Some airports do have these measures in place, and were allowed to do so because they were imposed prior to the 1990 Act. 13. What do you do with noise complaints? All noise complaints that are filed with the MAC Noise Program Office are stored, and matched, as reasonably as is possible, with flight track data. Complaint data is aggregated and reported to the MSP Noise Oversight Committee, the MAC Planning, Development, and Environment Committee, the MAC Commission, the FAA, and to the communities through the Monthly Technical Advisor s Report. Staff will respond to individuals that specifically request a response and research changes in operational trends. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has sole authority over determining where aircraft will fly and how the airspace around airports is used. Operational factors such as wind and weather, the number of arrivals and departures, the time of day, construction activity and airspace safety considerations all play
a part in how an airport operates at any given time. Runway use decisions are made solely upon standard air traffic control procedures (including several noise abatement procedures). Noise complaints are not considered when making these decisions. 14. How can I be a representative on this Noise Oversight Committee? The Noise Oversight Committee is comprised of community representatives from the cities of Bloomington, Eagan, Mendota Heights, Minneapolis, and Richfield. Additionally, the cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville, Sunfish Lake and Edina are represented through one at-large representative. The community representatives to the NOC serve two year terms and are appointed by the community they represent. More information about the NOC and its membership can be found on our website under the For Our Neighbors section. 15. Are there any studies about prolonged exposure on health and well-being? There is numerous research and literature around the subject matter of community noise and health effects. One of the items that is consistently on the NOC Work Plan is to review research projects conducted by the Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise Emissions Reduction (PARTNER), the Transportation Research Board (TRB), and the Federal Interagency Committee on Aircraft Noise (FICAN) and other relevant sources. For additional information, see response to comment 1-f above. 16. Will the MAC/NOC officially consider a position on the FAA Reauthorization Bill? And if so, can you publish a statement that residents could comment on? The MAC supports a long-term FAA Reauthorization Bill that provides a stable and steady funding source for Airport Capital Improvements. The MAC s priorities for the FAA s Reauthorization are listed below: Modernize the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) program by: o Increasing the cap to $8.50 and indexing it to inflation so it can be automatically adjusted moving forward; o Streamlining the application process; and o Eliminating program requirements that are applicable only to medium and large hub airports. Reauthorize the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) at the current funding levels. In exchange for raising the PFC cap to $8.50, eliminate program entitlements (apportionments) for large hub airports and redirect the resulting savings to find projects at small airports (airports designated as small hubs and smaller). Maintain the tax-exempt status of Municipal Bonds and exclude airport private activity bonds (PABs) from the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) burden. Reauthorize the Federal Contract Tower and ensure that FAA does not change the requirements for participating in the program in a way that would close existing towers, prevent new towers, or force local communities to pay onerous portions of the required program costs. Reauthorize and fully fund the Essential Air Service (EAS) and the Small Community Air Service Development (SCASD) programs.
17. I d like to know more about the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (1990). Does it prohibit restrictions of nighttime flights? Why/How do other airports have these restrictions if they are prohibited? Since MSP is a public-use airport, the MAC cannot restrict access to aircraft operations. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prohibits public-use airports from requiring access restrictions, such as a mandatory curfew, without going through a Part 161 Study and approval process with the FAA. Under a Part 161 Study, the FAA requires that the proposer adequately qualify six statutory conditions with substantial evidence. The six statutory conditions are: (1) the restriction is reasonable, nonarbitrary, and nondiscriminatory; (2) the restriction does not create an undue burden on interstate or foreign commerce; (3) the restriction is not inconsistent with maintaining the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace; (4) the restriction does not conflict with a law or regulation of the United States; (5) an adequate opportunity has been provided for public comment on the restriction; and (6) the restriction does not create an undue burden on the national aviation system. The 1990 Airport Noise and Capacity Act was created, in part, to standardize aircraft noise planning efforts. Many local communities and states had begun imposing restrictions on aircraft and managing noise planning without federal guidance, leading to a patchwork of restrictions at airports across the United States. This act established a federal framework for airports to manage noise exposure, but also eliminated an airport operator s ability to impose new restrictions without receiving approval as a part of a Part 161 submission. Airports that had restrictions in place prior to the 1990 legislation were allowed to maintain them. To date 39 different Part 161 applications have been submitted with the FAA and none have been approved. 18. The planes are bigger and that is added to the frustration that they are not as high and contribute to why we are hearing more noise. Comment noted. The airlines schedule flights based on passenger demand. The airlines have been providing more appropriate aircraft sizes for the demand. The aircraft are bigger and more people are on them than in the past. The benefit to the community is that although the enplaned passenger level at MSP is at all-time highs, the number of operations continues to decline. Overall traffic at MSP is down to early 1990 levels. A contributing factor to lower altitudes is temperature. Aircraft perform best in cold temperatures. The following chart shows the average altitude of departures within ½ mile of your residence juxtaposed against the average temperature for the same month. September 2015 was the warmest September on record for the State of Minnesota. Additionally, winter 2014/2015 had warmer temperatures than previous years.
A L T I T U D E ( F E E T ) A V E R A G E T E M P E R A T U R E ( F ) PUBLIC INPUT MEETING COMMENTS/RESPONSES AVERAGE ALTITUDE OF AIRCRAFT WITHIN 1/2 MILE OF RESIDENCE D E P A R T U R E A L T I T U D E A V E R A G E T E M P 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 19. The noise followed me to Edina. The noise is getting worse. A comparison of 55 and 65 DNL may add more understanding and some ideas may come out of that. Comment noted. 20. I used to live in St. Anthony and I just moved to Minnetonka. I m right underneath the flight path. Which happens when the winds are South / southeast. It s not all the time, but when it is, it s incessant. You don t have noise measuring devices past Lake Calhoun. How do you know that noise level? What is the DNL you need to get noise abatement? The Metropolitan Airports Commission s (MAC) collection of 39 Remote Monitoring towers are not used to determine eligibility in the residential noise mitigation program. There are many more neighborhoods that are subject to aircraft noise that do not have a noise meter than the ones that do. To determine the noise level in all areas of the metro and to determine which residential units will receive noise mitigation, the MAC uses the Federal Aviation Administration s (FAA) mandated Integrated Noise Model (INM). To produce noise contours, the model takes all of MSP s actual flight track data from the previous year and computes the noise level all around the airport.
To be eligible for future noise mitigation, a residential unit must in the 60-64 DNL threshold and within a higher noise impact mitigation area than previous mitigation programs for 3 consecutive years. Every year, the MAC develops an Annual Noise Contour Report. This report is available on our website under the Tools & Reports section and Annual Reports subsection. Parcels included in the 2014 Annual Contour report only extend northwest of the airport to the Lake Harriet area. Based on actual aircraft operations, your area does not meet the 60-64 DNL criteria. 21. When you call the 726 number to voice concerns, it asks for an ID of the plane. FedEx is easy to identify. They seem to come in low and loud. We are supposed to ID the planes to identify them, but there are no numbers on the plane. Thank you for contacting our Noise Complaint and Information Line. While we request that you provide details of the aircraft that is the source for the noise complaint, it is not required. The minimum information that is required for a noise complaint to be filed is your address and the date and time. The Noise Program staff will use their judgement based on your description to accurately assess the source airport and aircraft of the event. The better the information that you provide in your description, the better will be the quality of our data. 22. You say 30L and 30R has seen a 50% increase in the inbound flights. What is the reason for that? Runways 30L and 30R have not seen a 50% increase in inbound flights. The following graphics supplied during the meeting only show how these two runways are being used. During the first seven months of the year, Runway 30L was being used more than Runway 30R. After the FAA s implementation of a new procedure in late August to comply with new rules for Converging Runway Operations, the departure activity on these runways has been more balanced. The 50% number for departures on these two runways simply means that there was an even 50/50 split for departures on 30L and departures on 30R. This is not taking into account the departures on the other MSP runways. The overall flight activity at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) is down from last year and is now at levels that were experienced in the early 1990s.