Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise ...Sep 19, 2012 · On November 30, 2010 the...

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise Oversight Committee (NOC)

Meeting Agenda September 19, 2012

1:30 P.M. Lindbergh Conference Room MAC General Office Building

6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450

(Jeff Hart, Delta Airlines & NOC Co-Chair, will be the acting Chairperson for the meeting)

*Note: 1:00 to 1:30 – Committee Agenda Review Session (NOC members only in the Coleman Conference Room)

1. 1:30 to 1:35 – Review and Approval of July 11, 2012 NOC Meeting Minutes

2. 1:35 to 1:40 – Review of Operations Report Summary

3. 1:40 to 2:10 – MSP Performance-Based Navigation Procedures and

Environmental/Noise Review 4. 2:10 to 2:25 – Review Residential Noise Mitigation Program

Implementation Status 5. 2:25 to 2:30 – Mobile Noise Monitoring Web Page and Request Form 6. 2:30 to 2:40 – WhisperTrack Implementation for MSP 7. 2:40 to 2:45 – Runway 17 Westbound RNAV River Departure

Procedure Implementation Update 8. 2:45 to 2:50 – Third Quarter 2012 Public Input Meeting Comments 9. 2:50 to 3:05 – Public Comment Period

10. 3:05 – Adjourn

MEMORANDUM TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager – Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: MSP PERFORMANCE-BASED NAVIGATION

PROCEDURES AND ENVIRONMENTAL/NOISE REVIEW DATE: September 5, 2012

BACKGROUND

Since 2007 the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) has been analyzing possible air traffic procedures to reduce aircraft noise impacts around MSP. Early in this effort it was established that a critical element of this initiative would be the use of Area Navigation (RNAV), a method of navigation that permits aircraft operation on any desired course within the coverage of station-referenced navigation signals or within the limits of a self-contained system capability, or a combination of these. In short, this navigation technology provides the capability for aircraft to fly a desired track in a manner that is reproducible and allows for more accurate concentration of aircraft overflights in a desired area. This approach also allows for more seamless transition to Required Navigation Performance (RNP) operations in the future.

As detailed in the May 11, 2007 edition of the Airport Noise Report former Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator Marion C. Blakey characterized RNP and RNAV as green technology, and stated:

“It flat out saves fuel. It relieves congestion, alleviates choke points, and reduces delay. It increases efficiency by providing smoother traffic flow. It’s clear that performance-based navigation is good for the environment. Flying straight down the middle of a flight path means that people on the ground perceive less jet noise and experience fewer jet emissions.”

The NOC determined that RNAV procedure implementation in the context of the Crossing-in-the-Corridor Procedure and the 215-degree departure heading off Runway 17 (down the Minnesota River Valley) represents the best initial RNAV application scenarios around MSP for consideration.

In 2009 the NOC and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) took action supporting the submittal of the Runway 17 and Runways 12L and 12R RNAV departure procedures, as developed by the NOC, to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for approval. These RNAV procedures were designed to focus departure operations over the Minnesota River Valley and commercial/industrial land uses around MSP.

Following submittal of the procedures, MAC staff coordinated numerous meetings with local FAA personnel and Delta Air Lines and Southwest Airlines representatives (referred to as the MSP Performance Based Navigation [PBN] Task Force) to continue discussions on PBN development at MSP, including Optimized Profile Descent (OPD)

ITEM 3

procedure development and implementation. The NOC played an important role in the procedure development and review process.

In May 2010 MAC staff met with representatives from FAA Headquarters regarding the NOC’s PBN efforts underway at MSP and possible future initiatives.

The FAA RNAV Project Office in Washington D.C. determined that MSP is an excellent airport for airspace-wide RNAV and RNP implementation given the present airspace design and the lack of conflicts with other airport airspaces. Subsequently, local FAA tower personnel moved forward with the airspace-wide RNAV and RNP implementation at MSP.

At the August 30, 2010 MSP PBN Task Force meeting it was determined that the most effective and efficient way to develop and implement the Runways 12L and 12R RNAV tracks, as well as OPD procedures, was through the airspace-wide RNAV procedures development and implementation initiative. This position is based on the interdependency that Runways 12L and 12R Corridor-compliant RNAV tracks could have with Crossing-in-the-Corridor RNAV tracks, and the OPD considerations that could flow from implementation on all runways at MSP.

In September and October 2010 the NOC and the MAC took actions endorsing deferral of the Runways 12L and 12R RNAV departure procedures so the procedures can be considered in the FAA’s airspace-wide RNAV procedure design and implementation effort.

Due to the nature of the Runway 17 RNAV departure procedure and the lack of interdependence with other possible RNAV tracks for westbound Runway 17 departure operations, it was determined that implementation of the procedure should move forward independent from the airspace-wide RNAV procedure development and implementation effort.

On November 30, 2010 the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Performance Based Navigation (PBN) integration effort began with a three-day kickoff meeting. Over 60 people attended the meeting with representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines, the Metropolitan Airports Commission and various support contractors in attendance. The meeting was productive, establishing lines of communication between the various entities, as well as providing an initial review of preliminary RNAV and RNP tracks that overlaid existing departure and arrival paths at MSP.

At the kickoff meeting staff emphasized the importance of making noise considerations part of this effort. Staff informed the group that the NOC would be providing general criteria that should be considered in the PBN development effort at MSP.

In 2011 the NOC began the process of establishing procedure design noise criteria to be forwarded to the FAA for consideration in the procedure development/implementation process at MSP. At the March 16, 2011 NOC meeting the Committee took unanimous action adopting the following criteria to be forwarded to the FAA for that purpose:

Provide a noise analysis using the MSP 2010 actual noise data analyzing the effects of the procedures on the noise contours and other noise metrics that evaluate the time above impact and single event noise impacts along a given RNAV track at MSP.

Provide a public information program to inform the public.

Reduce the number of sensitive land use overflights. (This could be done through increased Eagan-Mendota Heights Departure Corridor compliance, maximizing the concentration of westbound Runway 17 departures directly over the Minnesota River Valley, noise-sensitive departure tracks for operations east of runway heading off Runway 17, and evaluating the impacts of focusing operations to the northwest over major road corridors, where possible.)

Reduce aircraft arrival noise.

Maximize use of RNAV noise tracks as part of the Runway Use System. (An example would be, during southeast operational flows, focusing easterly-bound departure operations on Runways 12L and 12R on Corridor Compliant RNAV tracks, while focusing southbound and westbound departures on Runway 17 on the River RNAV track.)

Figure 1 provides the March 22, 2011 letter communicating the NOC-endorsed criteria to the FAA.

FAA PROCEDURE DESIGN: REDUCTION OF SENSITIVE LAND USE OVERFLIGHTS AND REDUCING ARRIVAL NOISE

The FAA has completed the RNAV procedure designs. In consideration of the last three bullet points above, the FAA included the reduction of sensitive land use overflights, reduction of arrival aircraft noise, and the maximization of RNAV noise tracks as part of the RUS in its criteria for procedure design. Where possible the FAA incorporated track designs that enhanced the concentration of aircraft over compatible areas and directed flights away from traditionally noise-sensitive areas. Additionally, the RNAV arrival tracks include design elements that allow for Optimized Profile Descent (OPD) operations. At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting the FAA will provide a presentation on the RNAV tracks and the specific considerations that went into the designs, including the specific design elements that are intended to address the NOC criteria.

Figures 2 through 11 provide the RNAV procedure fly-ability tracks for each RNAV departure procedure by runway end. The procedure fly-ability tracks were generated using the Terminal Area Route Generation, Evaluation, and Traffic Simulation (TARGETS) software and represent the anticipated flight tracks that will result from each procedure in the case of heavy, large and small aircraft operations. In addition to the respective RNAV departure procedure tracks, the maps provide the percentage of 2011 operations, and the average daily number of operations, per runway, that would have been on each track if the procedures had been in use in 2011.

Figures 12 through 16 provide the RNAV and RNP arrival procedure fly-ability tracks.

NOISE ANALYSIS USING MSP 2011 ACTUAL NOISE DATA

In compliance with the NOC’s noise analysis request included in the criteria sent to the FAA, MAC staff conducted a noise analysis of the proposed RNAV procedures in the context of the 2011 Actual Noise Contour. The goal was to analyze the effects of the procedures on the noise contours and other noise metrics that evaluate the time above impact and single event noise impacts at MSP.

Figure 1

Noise Contour and Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) Analysis

To conduct this analysis MAC staff re-ran the 2011 actual noise contours incorporating the RNAV departure fly-ability tracks and the usage statistics outline in Figures 2 through 11.1 The track usage assumptions were developed through close consultation with local FAA tower personnel to re-distribute 2011 vectored departure operations to the appropriate RNAV departure route. In the case of arrival operations, the INM arrival tracks used for the 2011 Actual Noise Contours were used in the 2011 RNAV Adjusted Noise Contours. This was done for two reasons: 1) the RNAV arrival tracks are overlays of existing arrival procedures; and 2) any possible benefit from OPD procedures occur when the aircraft is above 3,000 feet AGL, which is located well beyond the 60 DNL noise contour at MSP.

Figure 17 provides a map comparing the 2011 Actual Noise Contours to the 2011 RNAV Adjusted Noise Contours. Below is a table comparing the 2011 actual and RNAV adjusted noise contour acreages.

Comparison of 2011 Actual and RNAV Adjusted Noise Contour Acreages

60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total

2011 Actual 5,733.5 2,459.8 808.8 578.8 9,580.8

2011 RNAV Adj. 5,726.9 2,434.7 803.1 576.7 9,541.4

The area between the 60 – 64 DNL noise contours is 6.6 acres smaller when comparing the 2011 RNAV Adjusted Noise Contours to the 2011 Actual Noise Contours. The area in the 65+ DNL noise contours also decreases by 32.9 acres when comparing the 2011 RNAV Adjusted Contours to the 2011 Actual Contours. The total acreage for the 2011 RNAV Adjusted 60+ DNL Noise Contour is 39.4 acres smaller than the 2011 Actual 60+ DNL Noise Contour.

The tables below provide an analysis of the single- and multi-family (greater than one unit) dwelling and population counts for the 2011 actual and RNAV adjusted noise contours based on the parcel intersect methodology.

1 Staff used the newest version of the Integrated Noise Model (INM 7.0c) in this analysis. It is important to note that use of INM version 7.0c increases the size of the 2011 actual noise contour by approximately 3% when compared to the 2011 actual noise contour developed with INM version 7.0b in the Annual Noise Contour Report published in February 2012.

2011 Actual Noise Contour Units and Population

Parcel Intersect Single‐Family

60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total

Minneapolis Units 5447.0 855.0 2.0 0.0 6304.0

Population 13889.9 2180.3 5.1 0.0 16075.2

Bloomington Units 11.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 12.0

Population 28.1 2.6 0.0 0.0 30.6

Richfield Units 493.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 494.0

Population 1286.7 2.6 0.0 0.0 1289.3

Eagan Units 122.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 122.0

Population 342.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 342.8

Mendota Heights Units 8.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 9.0

Population 21.9 2.7 0.0 0.0 24.7

All Cities Units 6081.0 858.0 2.0 0.0 6941.0

Population 15569.4 2188.2 5.1 0.0 17762.6

2011 Actual Noise Contour Units and Population

Parcel Intersect Multi‐Family (>1 Units)

60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total


Population 2673.4 526.9 9.4 0.0 3209.6


Population 995.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 998.6

Richfield Units 54.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.0

Population 89.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 89.6

Eagan Units 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Population 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Population 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

All Cities Units 2014.0 302.0 4.0 0.0 2320.0

Population 3758.0 530.5 9.4 0.0 4297.9

2011 RNAV Adjusted Noise Contour Units and Population


60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total


Population 13859.3 1938.0 5.1 0.0 15802.4


Population 81.6 2.6 0.0 0.0 84.2

Richfield Units 561.0 31.0 0.0 0.0 592.0

Population 1464.2 80.9 0.0 0.0 1545.1

Eagan Units 116.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 116.0

Population 326.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 326.0


Population 76.7 2.7 0.0 0.0 79.5

All Cities Units 6172.0 793.0 2.0 0.0 6967.0

Population 15807.7 2024.2 5.1 0.0 17837.0

2011 RNAV Adjusted Noise Contour Units and Population

Parcel Intersect Multi‐Family

60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total


Population 2612.8 508.1 9.4 0.0 3130.2


Population 1130.2 3.6 0.0 0.0 1133.8

Richfield Units 65.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.0

Population 107.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 107.9

Eagan Units 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Population 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Population 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2

All Cities Units 2080.0 294.0 4.0 0.0 2378.0

Population 3855.1 511.7 9.4 0.0 4376.2

The following tables summarize the changes to the counts with use of RNAV.

2011 Actual Noise Contour v. RNAV Change


60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total

Minneapolis Units ‐12.0 ‐95.0 0.0 0.0 ‐107.0

Population ‐30.6 ‐242.3 0.0 0.0 ‐272.9


Population 53.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.6

Richfield Units 68.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 98.0

Population 177.5 78.3 0.0 0.0 255.8

Eagan Units ‐6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐6.0

Population ‐16.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 ‐16.9


Population 54.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.8

All Cities Units 91.0 ‐65.0 0.0 0.0 26.0

Population 238.4 ‐164.0 0.0 0.0 74.4

2011 Actual Noise Contour v. RNAV Change

Parcel Intersect Multi‐Family

60‐64 65‐69 70‐74 75+ Total

Minneapolis Units ‐32.0 ‐8.0 0.0 0.0 ‐40.0

Population ‐60.6 ‐18.8 0.0 0.0 ‐79.4


Population 135.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 135.2

Richfield Units 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0

Population 18.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.3

Eagan Units 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Population 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Population 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2

All Cities Units 66.0 ‐8.0 0.0 0.0 58.0

Population 97.1 ‐18.8 0.0 0.0 78.3

As shown above, when evaluating the 60 – 64 DNL noise contour area, there is an increase of 157 residential units (population increase of 335.5) when applying the RNAV adjustment to the 2011 Actual Noise Contours. However, the number of residential units decreases by 73 (population decrease of 182.8) in the 65+ DNL with the 2011 RNAV adjusted contours.

Figures 18 through 21 provide the DNL values for the 2011 actual and RNAV adjusted noise contours on a block-by-block basis for all of the properties included in the noise mitigation program around MSP.

Based on the parcel DNL analysis, the 2011 RNAV adjusted scenario provides slightly lower overall aircraft noise impact when compared to the 2011 Actual Noise Contour. This conclusion is based on the fact that of the 802 total residential blocks included in the current 60+ DNL noise mitigation program around MSP, 47.1% receive a noise reduction as a result of the 2011 RNAV adjustment, 42.5% receive an increase and 10.4% stay the same. Specifically, 378 residential blocks receive a benefit in the 2011 RNAV adjusted scenario. The level of decrease ranges from 1.5 dB to 0.1 dB with an average of 0.3 dB. For those parcels that receive an increase in the RNAV scenario the range of increase is from 1.2 dB to 0.1 dB with an average of 0.4 dB. The areas impacted at a 60+ DNL where the noise is slightly increased due to the RNAV adjustment have been provided noise mitigation. Moreover, all of the units within the 2011 RNAV Adjusted 63+ DNL Noise Contour have been provided the 5 dB noise mitigation package

The MACNOMS RMTs have been located to provide the best possible aircraft noise monitoring coverage around MSP. The towers were located relative to aircraft flight track locations and overflight areas around MSP. Given that the RNAV procedures are consistent with existing vectored operations at MSP, the RMT locations represent effective INM grid point analysis locations for evaluating aircraft noise impacts relative to the proposed RNAV procedures. Figure 22 provides the DNL levels at each of the MACNOMS RMTs for the 2011 actual and RNAV adjusted scenarios. On average the 2011 RNAV scenario was 0.2 DNL lower than the 2011 actual scenario with 21 of the 39 RMT locations having lower DNL levels as a result of the RNAV scenario.

Single-Event Noise Analysis

Additional INM grid point analysis (using the RMT locations) was conducted to evaluate single event noise impacts. For purposes of this analysis the Time Above (TA) metric and Sound Exposure Level (SEL) and Maximum A-Weighted Sound Level (Lmax) metrics were used.

Time Above Analysis

The TA metric is the amount of time in minutes that aircraft noise exceeds a specific sound level threshold. The TA values in this study were calculated using INM. At each RMT location a grid point analysis was conducted summarizing the amount of time aircraft noise levels were above 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, and 85 dB for the 2011 actual and RNAV adjusted scenarios. The following tables summarize the TA calculations for each scenario at the RMT locations.

Time Above dB Threshold (minutes) ‐ 2011 Actual

RMT Site 60 dB 65 dB 70 dB 75 dB 80 dB 85 dB

1 59.4 21.2 1.0 0.1 0.0 0.0

2 54.5 28.5 9.0 0.4 0.0 0.0

3 88.2 42.7 21.9 8.3 0.7 0.0

4 83.2 43.9 20.5 5.7 0.2 0.0

5 155.7 89.9 51.3 25.1 8.8 2.2

6 187.4 104.3 56.5 26.8 7.6 1.1

7 64.2 32.2 11.8 1.8 0.3 0.0

8 46.2 21.9 6.9 1.3 0.4 0.0

9 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

10 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0

11 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

12 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

13 24.6 10.0 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.0

14 95.3 40.1 6.2 0.7 0.1 0.0

15 26.9 12.2 4.2 0.8 0.1 0.0

16 66.8 41.0 20.4 6.6 0.5 0.0

17 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0

18 53.4 25.9 7.7 0.8 0.1 0.0

19 23.5 4.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0

20 2.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

21 9.2 2.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

22 47.6 14.6 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0

23 50.8 22.3 10.8 3.4 0.4 0.1

24 75.7 28.9 5.7 0.4 0.0 0.0

25 25.9 4.8 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.0

26 13.9 3.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0

27 48.1 19.7 5.2 0.8 0.1 0.0

28 136.6 42.0 7.3 0.4 0.0 0.0

29 24.1 7.6 1.6 0.2 0.0 0.0

30 79.7 36.8 11.0 2.5 0.3 0.0

31 7.9 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

32 3.8 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

33 9.8 2.9 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0

34 5.4 1.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0

35 40.1 15.3 1.6 0.2 0.0 0.0

36 36.6 14.3 2.0 0.1 0.0 0.0

37 8.3 2.6 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0

38 13.9 5.2 1.3 0.2 0.0 0.0

39 19.9 8.3 2.2 0.5 0.1 0.0

Total 1692.7 755.6 274.4 88.3 19.8 3.4

Time Above dB Threshold (minutes) – 2011 with RNAV


1 53.2 17.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

2 53.5 27.0 8.5 0.4 0.0 0.0

3 89.7 40.2 20.3 8.0 0.6 0.0

4 78.7 42.0 20.2 5.8 0.2 0.0

5 150.5 85.7 46.7 21.6 8.2 2.0

6 180.8 100.8 54.8 25.5 6.8 0.9

7 61.5 29.8 11.3 2.0 0.3 0.0

8 46.8 22.9 7.1 1.1 0.3 0.0

9 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

10 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0

11 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

12 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

13 25.1 10.5 3.2 0.4 0.0 0.0

14 92.2 38.5 5.2 0.5 0.1 0.0

15 28.3 14.1 5.9 1.4 0.1 0.0

16 65.5 40.8 20.5 6.9 0.5 0.1

17 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0

18 56.3 27.2 8.1 0.8 0.1 0.0

19 27.1 6.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

20 1.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

21 6.0 1.6 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

22 40.7 12.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0

23 51.2 23.5 12.4 4.0 0.4 0.1

24 69.8 26.0 4.8 0.3 0.0 0.0

25 18.2 2.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

26 9.4 2.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

27 61.7 27.7 8.0 1.1 0.3 0.0

28 141.0 49.5 10.8 0.9 0.0 0.0

29 20.5 6.6 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0

30 88.0 44.1 15.8 4.3 0.6 0.0

31 9.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

32 3.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

33 9.6 1.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

34 6.3 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

35 50.9 19.7 1.9 0.3 0.0 0.0

36 41.1 15.9 2.2 0.1 0.0 0.0

37 14.4 4.7 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.0

38 18.4 7.4 1.6 0.3 0.1 0.0

39 4.5 1.3 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0

Total 1678.4 755.3 275.7 86.6 18.7 3.1

Time Above dB Threshold (minutes) 2011 Actual Change with RNAV


1 ‐6.2 ‐3.6 ‐0.4 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

2 ‐1.0 ‐1.5 ‐0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0

3 1.5 ‐2.5 ‐1.6 ‐0.3 ‐0.1 0.0

4 ‐4.5 ‐1.9 ‐0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

5 ‐5.2 ‐4.2 ‐4.6 ‐3.5 ‐0.6 ‐0.2

6 ‐6.6 ‐3.5 ‐1.7 ‐1.3 ‐0.8 ‐0.2

7 ‐2.7 ‐2.4 ‐0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0

8 0.6 1.0 0.2 ‐0.2 ‐0.1 0.0

9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

12 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

13 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.0

14 ‐3.1 ‐1.6 ‐1.0 ‐0.2 0.0 0.0

15 1.4 1.9 1.7 0.6 0.0 0.0

16 ‐1.3 ‐0.2 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1

17 ‐0.4 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

18 2.9 1.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

19 3.6 1.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

20 ‐0.5 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

21 ‐3.2 ‐0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

22 ‐6.9 ‐1.7 ‐0.3 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

23 0.4 1.2 1.6 0.6 0.0 0.0

24 ‐5.9 ‐2.9 ‐0.9 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

25 ‐7.7 ‐2.8 ‐0.5 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

26 ‐4.5 ‐1.4 ‐0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0

27 13.6 8.0 2.8 0.3 0.2 0.0

28 4.4 7.5 3.5 0.5 0.0 0.0

29 ‐3.6 ‐1.0 ‐0.5 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

30 8.3 7.3 4.8 1.8 0.3 0.0

31 1.1 0.0 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

32 ‐0.4 ‐0.4 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

33 ‐0.2 ‐1.4 ‐0.5 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

34 0.9 0.0 0.0 ‐0.1 0.0 0.0

35 10.8 4.4 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

36 4.5 1.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

37 6.1 2.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0

38 4.5 2.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0

39 ‐15.4 ‐7.0 ‐1.8 ‐0.4 ‐0.1 0.0

Total ‐14.3 ‐0.3 1.3 ‐1.7 ‐1.1 ‐0.3

Figures 23 and 24 provide maps of the RMT locations and their respective TA values for each scenario.

When comparing the 2011 RNAV adjusted scenario to the 2011 actual the overall time decreases by 14.3 minutes above 60 dB, decreases by 0.3 minutes above 65 dB, increases 1.3 minutes above 70 dB, decreases by 1.7 minutes above 75 dB, decreases by 1.1 minutes above 80 dB, and decreases by 0.3 minutes above 85 dB.

SEL and Lmax Analysis

The SEL metric is used to describe the noise exposure of a single event in decibels. The metric represents the duration and the magnitude of a time-varying noise event by normalizing the total noise energy in an event to one second. It measures how loud the noise is, and how long the noise lasts. The SEL metric measures the entire event and, therefore, does not directly represent the sound level heard at any given time.

The Lmax metric measures the highest sound level that occurs during a single event. The Lmax metric can be used to describe a single aircraft noise event and is measured in decibels. The metric provides some measure of how intrusive the noise event is. It is also one of the few metrics that people can actually experience and measure.

The following tables provide the average SEL and Lmax for the 2011 actual and RNAV scenarios at the RMT locations.

Sound Exposure Level (SEL) ‐ 2011 Actual Change with

RNAV Sound Exposure

Level (SEL) – RNAV Sound Exposure Level (SEL) ‐ 2011 Actual

RMT Site SEL RMT Site SEL RMT Site SEL Change

1 101.5 1 101.9 1 ‐0.4

2 103.6 2 103.7 2 ‐0.1

3 107.8 3 108.0 3 ‐0.2

4 107.0 4 107.1 4 ‐0.1

5 113.5 5 113.9 5 ‐0.4

6 113.5 6 113.8 6 ‐0.3

7 105.2 7 105.1 7 0.1

8 103.5 8 103.7 8 ‐0.2

9 91.0 9 91.0 9 0.0

10 96.3 10 96.3 10 0.0

11 90.5 11 90.8 11 ‐0.3

12 92.3 12 92.4 12 ‐0.1

13 99.9 13 99.6 13 0.3

14 104.3 14 104.7 14 ‐0.4

15 101.8 15 100.9 15 0.9

16 107.2 16 107.1 16 0.1

17 93.1 17 93.2 17 ‐0.1

18 104.1 18 103.9 18 0.2

19 99.0 19 98.5 19 0.5

20 94.7 20 95.1 20 ‐0.4

21 93.5 21 94.8 21 ‐1.3

22 100.4 22 101.0 22 ‐0.6

23 105.6 23 105.2 23 0.4

24 103.2 24 103.7 24 ‐0.5

25 97.3 25 98.9 25 ‐1.6

26 95.5 26 97.0 26 ‐1.5

27 104.1 27 102.8 27 1.3

28 106.4 28 105.8 28 0.6

29 98.8 29 99.5 29 ‐0.7

30 106.7 30 105.5 30 1.2

31 95.1 31 94.8 31 0.3

32 91.5 32 91.5 32 0.0

33 95.0 33 95.6 33 ‐0.6

34 93.9 34 93.7 34 0.2

35 101.5 35 100.6 35 0.9

36 100.6 36 100.1 36 0.5

37 97.0 37 95.1 37 1.9

38 98.6 38 97.5 38 1.1

39 94.7 39 99.3 39 ‐4.6

Maximum Sound Level (LMAX) ‐

RNAV Maximum Sound Level (LMAX) ‐ 2011 Actual

Maximum Sound Level (LMAX) ‐ 2011 Actual Change with

RNAV

RMT SITE LMAX RMT SITE LMAX RMT SITE LMAX Change

1 87.3 1 89.0 1 ‐1.7

2 86.8 2 87.7 2 ‐0.9

3 97.8 3 97.8 3 0.0

4 87.0 4 86.8 4 0.2

5 105.0 5 105.0 5 0.0

6 97.6 6 99.7 6 ‐2.1

7 93.2 7 90.1 7 3.1

8 88.7 8 88.7 8 0.0

9 85.9 9 85.9 9 0.0

10 91.9 10 91.9 10 0.0

11 84.9 11 84.9 11 0.0

12 85.5 12 85.5 12 0.0

13 87.1 13 87.8 13 ‐0.7

14 90.3 14 90.3 14 0.0

15 93.4 15 93.5 15 ‐0.1

16 94.9 16 96.1 16 ‐1.2

17 84.4 17 84.4 17 0.0

18 91.1 18 91.1 18 0.0

19 86.4 19 86.4 19 0.0

20 82.4 20 82.4 20 0.0

21 87.1 21 85.9 21 1.2

22 84.4 22 84.7 22 ‐0.3

23 95.8 23 95.2 23 0.6

24 87.5 24 88.3 24 ‐0.8

25 85.5 25 88.5 25 ‐3.0

26 83.3 26 87.7 26 ‐4.4

27 86.9 27 90.4 27 ‐3.5

28 86.5 28 86.0 28 0.5

29 87.9 29 87.8 29 0.1

30 93.3 30 89.6 30 3.7

31 84.3 31 85.4 31 ‐1.1

32 79.2 32 83.8 32 ‐4.6

33 88.3 33 89.1 33 ‐0.8

34 86.3 34 86.3 34 0.0

35 84.5 35 87.4 35 ‐2.9

36 86.9 36 86.5 36 0.4

37 86.7 37 88.3 37 ‐1.6

38 86.3 38 86.9 38 ‐0.6

39 82.4 39 85.9 39 ‐3.5

Figures 25 and 26 provide maps of the RMT locations and their respective average SEL and Lmax levels for each scenario.

Overall the average SEL level is reduced by 0.1 dB with the 2011 RNAV adjusted scenario. Specifically, the average SEL level is reduced at 20 RMT locations with reduction values ranging from 0.1 dB to 4.6 dB with an average reduction of 0.7 dB. The average SEL level increases at 16 RMT locations with increase values ranging from 0.1 dB to 1.9 dB with an average increase of 0.7 dB. Three RMT locations registered no change in average SEL levels.

Overall the average Lmax level is reduced by 0.6 dB with the 2011 RNAV adjusted scenario. Specifically, the average Lmax level is reduced at 18 RMT locations with reduction values ranging from 0.1 dB to 4.6 dB with an average reduction of 1.9 dB. The average Lmax level increases at 8 RMT locations with increase values ranging from 0.1 dB to 3.7 dB with an average increase of 1.2 dB. Thirteen RMT locations registered no change in average Lmax levels.

Next Steps

Following the briefing at the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting, Committee members are asked to take this information and share it with their respective constituencies.

At the November 21, 2012 NOC meeting Committee members will be asked to share their input relative to the feedback received from their respective constituencies. The FAA will be on hand to address the comments and concerns. Staff will seek approval to proceed with public open houses in December 2012 and will discuss the specific information to be provided at the open houses.

The process would conclude at the January 2013 NOC meeting when the results of the open houses will be discussed with the FAA and a formal position will be sought from the Committee as to whether or not the FAA has successfully complied with the NOC’s procedure design noise criteria that were forwarded to the FAA on March 22, 2011.

The above dates and related actions are subject to change if circumstances dictate.

At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting a briefing will be provided on this topic.

MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager – Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: REVIEW RESIDENTIAL NOISE MITIGATION PROGRAM

IMPLEMENTATION STATUS DATE: September 5, 2012

At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting, Mr. John Nelson, MAC Noise Mitigation Program Manager, will provide a detailed update on the progress of the implementation of the Residential Noise Mitigation Program as required per the provisions of the Noise Litigation Consent Decree. The briefing will include information on homeowners’ satisfaction with the program.

ITEM 4

MEMORANDUM TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager – Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: MOBILE NOISE MONITORING WEB PAGE AND REQUEST

FORM DATE: September 5, 2012 In response to a mobile noise monitoring request from the City of Minneapolis on behalf of Mr. Bob Freidman at the March 21, 2012 NOC meeting, the Committee directed staff to develop criteria for the Committee to follow when considering mobile noise monitoring requests. At the July 11, 2012 NOC meeting the Committee adopted the following criteria that must be met for mobile noise monitoring to be granted by the Committee.

• Mobile noise monitoring requests must come from the requester’s NOC representative.

• Mobile noise monitoring will not be done to benefit a single resident or building.

• Mobile noise monitoring will not be done where there is already the presence of a monitoring tower that can provide the data being sought.

• Mobile noise monitoring should be conducted only to the benefit of a large section of the community that is suffering the effects of unusual airport noise events that are difficult to monitor otherwise.

• The goal of the mobile noise monitoring effort must be well-defined and realistically achievable.

• The mobile noise monitoring request must identify why current monitoring/data are inadequate for analysis.

MAC staff has since developed a web page on the macnoise.com website dedicated to the topic of mobile noise monitoring. Additionally, a request form has been developed that can be downloaded from the web page. The web page can be accessed on the Internet at: www.macnoise.com/our-neighbors/mobile-noise-monitoring. A copy of the request form is attached to this memorandum.

At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting staff will present the web page and review the request form with the Committee.

ITEM 5

MEMORANDUM

TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager – Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: WHISPERTRACK IMPLEMENTATION FOR MSP DATE: September 5, 2012 WhisperTrack is a new Internet tool that provides on-line access to aircraft noise abatement procedures for any airport in the world. This tool is the first of its kind and helps standardize noise abatement information for pilots and flight dispatchers to assist them in their flight planning efforts. Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) staff has recently developed an informational page for Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) on the WhisperTrack web site to store and supplement published MSP airfield and noise abatement information. The WhisperTrack information is linked to the MAC Noise Program website MSP pilot information page located at the following address: www.macnoise.com/pilots/minneapolis-st-paul-international-airport-msp—-pilots This new Internet resource is another simple method that keeps the pilot community and the surrounding neighborhoods informed about MSP noise abatement efforts and procedures. Pilots and community members may also access the MSP information directly on the WhisperTrack web site at the following ink: https://whispertrack.com/airports/KMSP. At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting staff will provide a brief demonstration of this new Internet resource.

ITEM 6

MEMORANDUM TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager – Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: RUNWAY 17 WESTBOUND RNAV RIVER DEPARTURE

PROCEDURE IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE DATE: September 5, 2012 On August 14th FAA Headquarters announced a delay in deployment of FAA Notice JO 7110.584 due to concerns raised by pilot and controller organizations. This Notice provided regulatory guidance for "Climb Via and Descend Via" operations which is a main part of the HESTN and SLAYR RNAV Departure SIDs designed and tested to guide aircraft down the Minnesota River Valley after departing Runway 17 and scheduled to be effective on August 15th. The main concern was unfamiliarity and lack of training of pilots and controllers which could result in aircraft performing climbs and descents that were unplanned and/or unanticipated. Notice JO 7110.584 not only applied to local MSP operations but also other locations in the National Airspace System using RNAV procedures. The local FAA facility and pilots responded that they had conducted training and were ready to begin operations but agreed due to systemic safety concerns to delay the use of the HESTN and SLAYR procedures until the national familiarity and training issues were addressed. Local FAA officials are anticipating a new deployment date of November 15, 2012 for the HESTN SLAYR procedures. At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting a briefing will be provided on this topic.

ITEM 7

MEMORANDUM TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager – Noise, Environment and Planning SUBJECT: THIRD QUARTER 2012 PUBLIC INPUT MEETING

COMMENTS DATE: September 5, 2012

One of the elements of the Metropolitan Airports Commission’s (MAC) approved framework for the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) requires MAC staff to conduct quarterly public input meetings. The intent is to ensure residents’ concerns are considered as part of the ongoing effort by the MAC and the NOC to address noise issues around MSP. This memorandum provides a summary of the comments received at the most recent public input meeting. The NOC will also review these topics as possible future action items if the members so desire. On July 24, 2012 MAC Noise Program staff conducted the third quarter 2012 Public Input Meeting; four people attended the meeting and three individuals made comments. MAC staff responded to questions at the meeting and is also providing a written response to the questions. The comments and associated responses can be found on the MAC Noise Program’s website accessible on the Internet at www.macnoise.com when they are completed. In summary, the comments focused on the following:

Improved conditions in residential areas located under 360-degree departure heading off Runway 30R

A desire to conduct regular analysis of flight track trends in the area of the 360-degree departure heading off Runway 30R

Further evaluation of health impacts from aircraft noise

Disappointment that no NOC members were in attendance and a feeling that this displayed a lack of interest in the input

Implementation of the northbound divergent departure headings off Runway 30R is arbitrary and unacceptable

MAC officials should conscientiously re-balance the needs of airlines, travelers and communities surrounding the airport

The next quarterly public input meeting is planned for October 23, 2012. At the September 19, 2012 NOC meeting a briefing will be provided on this topic.

ITEM 8

Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise ...Sep 19, 2012 · On November 30, 2010 the...

Documents

Transcript of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) Noise ...Sep 19, 2012 · On November 30, 2010 the...