National Transportation Safety Board Recommendation and FAA Air Traffic Orders

Similar documents
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP)

MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL PUBLIC INPUT MEETING 3 RD QUARTER 2016 INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MSP)

S p NA, illil MINNEAPOLIS- ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ( MSP) NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE ( NOC) RESOLUTION #

3rd Quarter 2015 Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Public Input Meeting

STUDY OF RUNWAY 12L AND 12R ARRIVAL OPERATIONS. September 2016

2013 Airport Noise Plan of Action

National Transportation Safety Board Washington, DC 20594

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Monthly Runway Use System Report. June 2015

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Monthly Runway Use System Report. June 2016

Turn before Runway End

2. 1:45 to 1:50 Review and Approval of November 18, 2009 NOC Meeting Minutes

PORT OF SEATTLE MEMORANDUM. COMMISSION AGENDA Item No. 4g ACTION ITEM Date of Meeting February 9, 2016

Staff: C. Leqve, S. Skramstad, J. Lewis, D. Bitner, A. Nyren, J. Felger, J. Nelson

Appendix B Ultimate Airport Capacity and Delay Simulation Modeling Analysis

Recommendations for Northbound Aircraft Departure Concerns over South Minneapolis

Noise Oversight Committee

2. 1:35 to 1:50 MSP Long-Term Comprehensive Plan Update. 3. 1:50 to 2:05 Update on Runway 17 RNAV Departure Procedure 24-Hour Trial

Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport (MSP) 2018 Annual Noise Contour Report

Study of Airport Winds and Aircraft Noise Complaints. January 2016

Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)

msp macnoise.com MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) November 17, 2010

Reliever Airports: NOISE ABATEMENT PLAN Flying Cloud Airport (FCM)

Wake Turbulence Evolution in the United States

Airport Safety Management Systems: Integrating Planning Into the Process

Appendix 6.1: Hazard Worksheet

MEETING LOCATION NOTICE The March 18, 2015 Noise Oversight Committee will be begin at 1:30 p.m. at the Richfield Municipal Building, 6700 Portland

Windmills & Airspace Can We Work Together?

AN-Conf/12-WP/162 TWELFTH THE CONFERENCE. The attached report

Noise Oversight Committee

MESA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Administration - Building - Engineering Road and Bridge Traffic - Planning - Solid Waste Management

PLUME RISE ASSESSMENTS

ACTION TRANSMITTAL

St. Paul Downtown Airport (STP)

Session Best Practices Amendments From Annex14, Volume I Annex 15. Runway Incursions Runway Excursions

Memorandum. Federal Aviation Administration. Date: June 19, Richard Doucette, Environmental Protection Specialist. From: To:

STAFF REPORT. Airport Land Use Consistency Determination Betteravia Plaza. MEETING DATE: January 21, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: 8D

SAN JOSE CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY

NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE January 16, Audio recordings are made of this meeting

Air Navigation Bureau ICAO Headquarters, Montreal

FAA FORM UAS COA Attachment FAA

Washington Dulles International Airport (IAD) Aircraft Noise Contour Map Update

5, , , , , , , , A U G J U N M A R M A Y S E P J U L A P R O C T

Summary of Committee Discussion/Questions Metropolitan Transportation Services Senior Planner Russ Owen presented this item.

STAFF REPORT. Airport Land Use Plan Consistency Review: Old Town Village Mixed Use Project City of Goleta. MEETING DATE: June 18, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: 5M

Toron Notio s e Pe M a a r n s a o g n e U me p n d t a at t e Toronto Pearson CENAC June 21, 2017

Environmental Assessment Las Vegas Area Airspace Optimization Project

Optimized Profile Descents A.K.A. CDA A New Concept RTCA Airspace Working Group

Saint Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport. Airspace & Instrument Approach Analysis

FASI(N) IoM/Antrim Systemisation Airspace Change Decision

RNP AR APCH Approvals: An Operator s Perspective

STAFF REPORT. Airport Land Use Plan Consistency Review: Santa Barbara Airport Master Plan. MEETING DATE: November 19, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: 7D

Planning, Development and Environment Committee

PLAN Anoka County - Blaine Airport

Noise Oversight Committee

SUBJECT: 2016 ANNUAL NOISE REPORT DATE: April 18, 2017 INFORMATION

Runway Length Analysis Prescott Municipal Airport

Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport Annual Noise Report

USE OF RADAR IN THE APPROACH CONTROL SERVICE

Technical Report. Aircraft Overflight and Noise Analysis. Brisbane, California. December Prepared by:

Martin County Airport / Witham Field Noise Abatement Departure Profile (NADP) Demonstration Technical Report March 2010

ATM Network Performance Report

Airport Obstruction Standards

Executive Summary. MASTER PLAN UPDATE Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport

This section sets forth all Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) noise abatement procedures, restrictions, and regulations involving aircraft operations.

Federal Aviation Administration DCA. By: Terry Biggio, Vice President Air Traffic Services Date: June 18, Federal Aviation Administration

NextGen: New Technology for Improved Noise Mitigation Efforts: DFW RNAV Departure Procedures

March 2016 Safety Meeting

APPENDIX D MSP Airfield Simulation Analysis

at: Accessed May 4, 2011.

DP-7 The need for QMS controlled processes in AIS/AIM. Presentation to QMS for AIS/MAP Service Implementation Workshop Dakar, Senegal, May 2011

Statement of Policy for Authorizations to Operators of Aircraft that are Not Equipped with

UAS in Canada Stewart Baillie Chairman Unmanned Systems Canada Sept 2015

Community Noise Consortium Meeting (CNC)

FAA Requirements for Engine-out Procedures and Obstacle Clearance

SUMMARY: The FAA is establishing a Special Flight Rules Area in the vicinity of Pearson

MONTEREY REGIONAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN TOPICAL QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND TOPICAL RESPONSES

QUIETER OPERATIONS A GUIDE FOR PILOTS AND CONTROLLERS

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATILIBILTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILIITY

EXHIBIT K TERMINAL PROJECT PROCEDURES PHASE I - DEVELOPMENT OF TERMINAL PROGRAM & ALTERNATIVES

Intro to Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems & Recreational Drones

Appendix A. Meeting Coordination. Appendix A

Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). SUMMARY: Under this notice, the FAA announces the submission deadline of

Draft Concept Alternatives Analysis for the Inaugural Airport Program September 2005

Safety Enhancement RNAV Safe Operating and Design Practices for STARs and RNAV Departures

TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD. Metropolitan Council, 390 Robert Street North, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101

Community Noise Consortium Meeting (CNC)

MID-Region. Standard Operating Procedures Effectiveness and Adherence

ROLLS-ROYCE PLC

Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport 2017 Annual Noise Report

SFAR 93 and Minimum Altitudes

The pilot and airline operator s perspective on runway incursion hazards and mitigation options. Session 2 Presentation 2

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

Flying Cloud Airport (FCM) Zoning Process: Informing a Mn/DOT Path Forward

The purpose of this Demand/Capacity. The airfield configuration for SPG. Methods for determining airport AIRPORT DEMAND CAPACITY. Runway Configuration

CHAPTER 6 NOISE EXPOSURE

TWELFTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT (F70) Sky Canyon Dr. Murrieta, CA. Phone: Riverside FAA FSDO Complaint Line: (951)

According to FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay, the elements that affect airfield capacity include:

Christchurch PBN Flight Paths Trial. Interim Report

Transcription:

Page 1 of 8 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning, Development and Environment Committee FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Director Environment (725.6326) 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)

Page 2 of 8 The NTSB Report recommended that the FAA: Amend Federal Aviation Administration Order 7110.65, Air Traffic Control, to establish separation standards similar to the provisions of paragraph 3-9-8 between an arriving aircraft that goes around and any combination of arriving or departing aircraft operating on runways where flightpaths may intersect. (A-13-024) On January 15, 2014, the FAA issued Notice JO 7110.652 amending FAA Order JO 7110.65, 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 7210.860 amending FAA Order JO 7210.3, 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 2016. 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 72-75 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:

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.

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 7110.65 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

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 02-2016 AND COMMUNICATE THE COMMISSION S POSITION ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE NOC RESOLUTION TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION.

Page 6 of 8

Page 7 of 8

Page 8 of 8