Recommendations for Northbound Aircraft Departure Concerns over South Minneapolis March 21, 2012 Noise Oversight Committee Agenda Item #4 Minneapolis Council Member John Quincy
Background Summer of 2011 saw an increase in flights and noise near Cedar Ave. due to departures off of 30R Initial hypothesis was safety change due to near miss in fall of 2010 Requested additional information from FAA Response from FAA at January 2012 NOC meeting indicated More flights off 30R due to 2010 change in departure (crossing on the ground) Fleet mix currently 54% Regional Jets (CRJ) Lower altitudes More similar tracks Shorter intervals
Minneapolis Requests COMMITTEE ACTION Request that the MAC Planning and Environment Committee endorse these action items: Move the approximately 32 daily departure operations flying to Duluth, International Falls, Winnipeg, etc. from Runway 30R to 30L. Implement the use of three divergent headings (360 o, 340 o, 320 o ) for north bound departure operations off Runway 30R. Continue adherence to the Runway Use System (RUS) at all times when traffic levels and prevailing winds allow. Further request that the MAC send a letter to the FAA requesting implementation of the above operational measures as soon as is possible. Additionally, we request that MAC staff conduct an analysis of NADP on 30R and 30L and report the effects of each NADP procedure at the next NOC meeting in May
Move Northerly Departures from 30R to 30L Departures to Duluth, International Falls and Winnipeg, etc., move to 30L 32 from a total of approximately 250 departures/day (13%) Near term implementation
Multiple divergent departure headings Similar to RNAV, but tracks not as precise A smaller portion of traffic would use a 360 o heading than current condition Other flights would use 340 o and/or 320 o departure heading 6 months before implementation
Reminder to use the Runway Use System (RUS) RUS has been in place for decades Updated most recently as part of the EA for Runway 17/35 Nothing new in this request - just a reminder to FAA Basis of mitigation around the airport
Return to 2003 Noise Abatement Departure Profile (NADP) Change from Distant to Close-in NADP Use planes power to gain altitude rather than speed Planes fly slightly higher Planes would be slower For an A320 basically no difference in altitude 4 miles from takeoff (approximately Lake St.) Request a staff report presented to NOC at the May meeting
NOC COMMITTEE ACTION Request that the MAC Planning and Environment Committee endorse these action items: Move the approximately 32 daily departure operations flying to Duluth, International Falls, Winnipeg, etc. from Runway 30R to 30L. Implement the use of three divergent headings (360 o, 340 o, 320 o ) for north bound departure operations off Runway 30R. Continue adherence to the Runway Use System (RUS) at all times when traffic levels and prevailing winds allow. Further request that the MAC send a letter to the FAA requesting implementation of the above operational measures as soon as is possible. Additionally, we request that MAC staff conduct an analysis of NADP on 30R and 30L and report the effects of each NADP procedure at the next NOC meeting in May Discussion
Technical Advisor s Report Summary MSP Complaints January February 2012 2,188 2,800 2011 1,174 2,564 Complaints 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Complaints Complainants Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 2009 2010 2011 2012 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Complainants
Technical Advisor s Report Summary Total Aircraft Operations January February 2012 32,902 31,787 2011 34,980 31,249 45,000 2011 Operations 40,000 35,000 30,000 37,507 34,980 32,902 31,787 31,249 38,686 35,492 36,252 40,106 39,852 2012 35,247 36,099 30,844 32,764 25,000
Technical Advisor s Report Summary Air Carrier Jet Operations January February 2012 30,775 29,550 2011 31,241 27,625 Air Carrier Jet Fleet Composition January February Regional Jet Modified Stage 3 Other Regional Jet Modified Stage 3 Other 2012 57.1% 0.8% 42.1% 56.5% 0.7% 42.8% 2011 54.2% 2.4% 43.4% 52.7% 2.2% 45.1%
Technical Advisor s Report Summary Nighttime Operations (10:30 p.m. 6:00 a.m.) January 2012 January 2011 February 2012 February 2011 Total 1,095 1,532 1,163 1,379 Carrier Jet 1,008 1,423 1,077 1,262 Runway Use Percentages - Nighttime All Operations Runway January 2012 February 2012 Arrivals 4 0% 0% 12L 7.3% 8.2% 12R 23.9% 27.6% 17 0% 0% 22 0% 0.1% 30L 49.9% 42.5% 30R 18.6% 20.5% 35 0.2% 1.1% Runway January 2012 February 2012 Departures 4 0% 0% 12L 20.6% 17.3% 12R 27.9% 33.9% 17 11.7% 16.2% 22 0% 0.4% 30L 25.5% 19.6% 30R 14.2% 12.5% 35 0% 0%
Runway 17 Departure Analysis Summary Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departures Compliance with Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Procedure January 2012 February 2012 2,271 3,115 99.9% 99.8%
Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Summary Runways 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departures Carrier Jets Remaining in Corridor January 2012 February 2012 2,479 2,604 96.0% 94.9%
Crossing-in-the-Corridor Analysis Summary Carrier Jet Departures Crossing-in-the-Corridor Nighttime (23:00-06:00) Carrier Jet Departures Crossing-in-the-Corridor Daytime (06:00-23:00) January 2012 38 (68%) 640 (26%) February 2012 40 (57%) 622 (25%)
Annual MSP Noise Contour Report Noise Litigation Consent Decree: Consent Decree Section 8.1(d) pp. 38-39: (d) By March 1 of each year, MAC shall develop and make available to the public a noise contour report using the FAA s Integrated Noise Model to reflect noise conditions from the prior calendar year, using actual MSP operations data derived from the Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System or a functionally equivalent flight tracking and noise monitoring system ( Monitoring System ). This noise contour report shall contain, at a minimum: (1) the noise contour for the previous calendar year; (2) a grid point analysis of noise levels associated with the contour; (3) comparisons in grid points and graphic form of the difference in noise levels between the previous calendar year s contour and the 2007 DNL level; and (4) comparison to actual and monitored noise levels from MAC s Monitoring System, consistent with previous validation analyses. MAC shall consult with the Plaintiffs during the development of the previous year contour report. On February 29, 2012 MAC staff completed the fifth Annual Noise Contour Report consistent with the above provision.
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report Total Operations The 2011 actual total MSP operations number of 435,076 represents a 25.3 percent reduction from the 2007 forecast mitigated total operations number of 582,366. Scheduled passenger air carrier and cargo operations accounted for the majority of the reduction. However, it is notable that charter operations are 97.2 percent below the 2007 forecast mitigated number. The 2011 total operations number of 435,076 is down slightly from the 2010 number of 435,583 (0.1 percent decrease).
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report Fleet Mix and Day/Night Ops. Split The hushkitted Stage 3 average daily operations in the 2011 actual statistics were down 92.0 percent from the 2007 forecast mitigated number. Nighttime operations decreased by 16.5 average daily operations from the 2007 forecast mitigated to the 2011 actual operations statistics. The average daily number of hushkitted aircraft operations was down in 2011 to 21.9 from 64.7 in 2010. In 2011, the average daily number of total nighttime operations was 106.8, up from the 93.4 average daily nighttime operations in 2010.
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report Runway Use Use of Runway 17 for departure operations is well below the percentage use numbers forecasted in the 2007 mitigated scenario. The departure percentage on Runways 30L and 30R are notably higher, and the departure percentages on Runway 12R are notably lower, than what was forecasted in the 2007 forecast mitigated scenario. The nighttime departure percentage on Runway 17 is significantly lower, and the Runways 30L and 12L nighttime departure percentages are significantly higher, than the levels forecasted in the 2007 forecast mitigated scenario. The 2011 total arrival percentages correlated fairly well with the 2007 forecast mitigated scenario. Nighttime arrival percentages on Runways 12R and 30L are significantly higher, and significantly lower on Runway 35, than the levels forecasted in the 2007 forecast mitigated scenario.
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report Additional Considerations INM Version 6.1 v. INM Version 7.0a - New lateral attenuation capabilities incorporated into INM 7.0a have the effect of increasing the size of the 2011 actual noise contour by as much as 3% to 10% over what INM 6.1 would have modeled. New Flight Analysis Methodology - The radar-to-inm flight track correlation process that the MAC used to develop the 2011 actual noise contour employs a best-fit analysis of the radar flight track data based on linear trends. This approach provides the ability to directly match each radar flight track to the appropriate INM track. The enhanced ability to interpret similarities along a track, rather than solely at a gate location, provides the ability to analyze all INM tracks as core tracks.
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report 2007 Forecast v. 2011 Actual Contours The 2011 actual noise contour is smaller than the 2007 forecast mitigated contour by 6,397.5 acres (40.7 percent reduction) in the 60 DNL contour and by 3,342.2 acres (46.2 percent reduction) in the 65 DNL contour. The small area where the 2011 actual noise contour extends beyond the 2007 forecast mitigated noise contour can largely be attributed to runway use variances between what was forecasted and what was occurring in 2011. There is an overall decrease of 2,961 residential units in the 65 DNL contour and 3,877 residential units in the 60 to 64 DNL noise contours around MSP when comparing the 2007 forecast mitigated contour with the 2011 actual contour that the MAC developed under the requirements of the Consent Decree.
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report 2011 Actual v. Monitored DNL Levels
2011 Annual MSP Noise Contour Report Conclusions Primary Areas of Insight: INM and Flight Track Modeling Enhancements Total Operations Fleet mix Runway Use Nighttime Operations *Note: The 2011 count of residential units within the actual 60 DNL noise contour that have not received noise mitigation around MSP is 633, a reduction of 53.4 percent from the total of 1,359 based on the 2010 actual noise contours. There are no unmitigated homes in the 2011 actual 65 DNL noise contour around MSP. All homes within the 2011 actual 60+ DNL contours will be mitigated by 2014 by virtue of the noise litigation Consent Decree. This significant reduction is due in large part to a 66.2 percent reduction in hushkitted aircraft operations from 2010 to 2011.
Nighttime Operations Assessment As is outlined in the 2012 NOC Work Plan, staff has prepared an assessment of nighttime operations at MSP Resident concerns and comments made at Input Meetings are one of the primary catalysts for the continuing evaluation of nighttime operations at MSP Analysis focuses on the following: Average daily nighttime operations at MSP from 2002 to 2011 Annual average daily INM nighttime operations from 2002 to 2011 compared to the 2007 forecast annual average daily nighttime operations MSP all nighttime and carrier jet nighttime operations runway use summary for 2011 and 2010 MSP INM nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) operations runway use summary for 2011 and 2010 A breakdown of the top 15 nighttime carrier jet operators for 2011 and 2010 A breakdown of the fleet mix for the top 15 nighttime airlines for 2011 and 2010 Average daily MSP nighttime operations by hour for 2011 and 2010 A comparison and breakdown of scheduled nighttime operations and the fleet mix of the scheduled operations for 2011 and 2010 A comparison of the scheduled nighttime operations vs. actual nighttime operations for 2011 and 2010 Federal policy (grant provisions/part 161) virtually prohibits mandatory nighttime restrictions Part 150 measure: NA-3 Voluntary Nighttime Limit on Flights
MSP Nighttime Runway Usage Summary of All Operations (10:30 p.m. to 6 a.m.) 0.0 0.0 2011 2010 0.0% 0.0% 2011 2010 Average Daily Nighttime Operations Count by Runway Total Nighttime Operations Count by Runway 2011 ARR = 35.2 DEP = 13.4 TOTAL = 48.6 2010 ARR = 34.2 DEP = 10.5 TOTAL = 44.7 2011 ARR = 12,746 DEP =4,852 TOTAL = 17,598 2010 ARR = 12,479 DEP = 3,842 TOTAL = 16,321
MSP Nighttime Runway Usage Summary of Carrier Jet Operations (10:30 p.m. to 6 a.m.) 0.0 0.0 2011 2010 0.0% 0.0% 2011 2010 Average Daily Nighttime Operations Count by Runway Total Nighttime Operations Count by Runway 2011 ARR =32.5 DEP = 11.9 TOTAL = 44.4 2010 ARR = 30.3 DEP = 8.9 TOTAL = 39.2 2011 ARR = 11,772 DEP = 4,296 TOTAL = 16,068 2010 ARR = 11,075 DEP = 3,250 TOTAL = 14,325
MSP Nighttime Runway Usage Summary of All Operations INM Hours (10:00 p.m. to 7 a.m.) 0.0 0.0 2011 2010 0.0% 0.0% 2011 2010 Average Daily Nighttime Operations Count by Runway Total Nighttime Operations Count by Runway 2011 ARR =50.1 DEP = 57.1 TOTAL = 107.2 2010 ARR = 49.0 DEP = 45.5 TOTAL = 94.5 2011 ARR = 18,131 DEP = 20,682 TOTAL = 38,813 2010 ARR = 17,880 DEP = 16,600 TOTAL = 34,480
Nighttime Operations Summary In 2011 nighttime operations increased 7.8% from 2010 (carrier jet nighttime ops have increased 12.2% over the same time period) MSP had a total of 17,598 nighttime operations in 2011 (48.6 average daily nighttime ops) in 2010 there were 16,321 nighttime operations (44.7 average daily nighttime ops) MSP had a total of 16,068 nighttime carrier jet operations in 2011 (44.4 average daily nighttime ops) in 2010 there were 14,325 nighttime carrier jet operations (39.2 average daily nighttime ops) The top 15 nighttime jet operators represent 92.6% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations in 2011 (Top three carriers: DAL, SCX, MES). In 2010 the top 15 represented 89.9%. (Top three carriers: DAL, SCX, UPS). Of the 2011 top 15 nighttime jet operators, 99.1% of the operations were flown with stage-3 manufactured aircraft 97.5% in 2010 The most prevalent time period for nighttime operations in 2011 was 22:30 to 23:00 (13.4 average daily night ops 27.5%) and 23:00 to 00:00 (13.7 average daily night ops 28.3%)
Nighttime Scheduled Flights Summary 7,710 scheduled nighttime flights for 2011 vs. 8,885 scheduled nighttime flights for 2010 (13.2% decrease) Average daily scheduled nighttime flights for 2011 was 21.1 vs. 24.3 for 2010 (13.2% decrease) 2011 scheduled nighttime flights 11:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. 2,467 (6.8 avg. daily, 32.0%); 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. 2,330 (6.4 avg. daily, 30.2%) Top three carrier scheduled night ops for 2011 DAL 2,047 (5.6 avg. daily, 26.6%), SCX 1,275 (3.5 avg. daily, 16.5%), AAL 730 (2.0 avg. daily, 9.5%) Actual nighttime carrier ops for 2011 (MACNOMS) 16,068 vs. scheduled nighttime ops for 2011 (OAG) 7,710
First Quarter 2012 Public Input Meeting On January 24, 2012 the First Quarter 2012 Noise Public Input Meeting was held 32 people attended the meeting 13 people commented at the meeting staff has provided written responses that are available at www.macnoise.com A summary memo of the input was provided in the meeting mailing to all NOC members Comments focused largely on the northbound departure turn issue in Minneapolis in addition to the following points: The use of noise complaints Increased noise causing substantial economic displacement, substantial impact to home values and impact on quality of life, physical and mental health MAC not taking responsibility/ownership for problem and pushing it off on FAA MAC should be proactive on this issue MAC is favoring the airlines on this issue; can't MAC ask airlines to slow down departure rates to provide relief to impacted areas
First Quarter 2011 Public Input Meeting (cont.) Questions about who controls the number of operations per hour at the airport, who controls the number of operations per hour off of the runways, who has oversight of airlines' fleet mix and if airlines are giving forethought to how changes to fleet mix will impact the noise footprint when they decide which aircraft to use Question about whether or not the MAC and/or the NOC can make requirements of the FAA in relation to ground operations and takeoff procedures Questions about whether or not the MAC believes DNL contours are still accurate and request to redraw the contour maps to reflect the current situation, questions about how the RMTs work (re: not recording the first 8 seconds of an event) and questions about installing new RMTs in affected neighborhoods Vibration/low frequency as an issue The next quarterly public input meeting is planned for April 24, 2012.