Loading...
09/09/2003 - Airport Relations Commission MINUTES OF THE EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2003 A regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Commission was held on Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. Those present were Michael Cook, Bruno DiNella, Steven Grooms, Clint Hooppaw, Nathan Krahn, Stephen Nierengarten, Mike Schlax, Lance Staricha and Charles Thorkildson. Absent was Jerry Thompson. Also present was Dianne Lord, Assistant to the City Administrator. AGENDA Upon motion by DiNella, seconded by Thorkildson, the agenda was approved as presented. All members voted in favor. MINUTES Nierengarten made a motion to approve the minutes of the August 12, 2003 meeting; Grooms seconded the motion. All members voted in favor. VISITORS TO BE HEARD Tim Zajic of 2885 Egan Avenue was present and questioned the relationship between entities such as Northwest Airlines, Metropolitan Airports Commission and the Federal Aviation Administration. He further asked why pilots deviate from the corridor and is this deviation from instructions given by the FAA Tower. He noted that aircraft operations occur every 40 seconds and 20 percent of flights fly off - course. Wayne Schmitt of 1851 Red Fox Lane asked questions pertaining to departures off the new 17/35 Runway. Cindy Greene, FAA Air Traffic Control Tower Operations Support Manager, stated that 37 percent of all departure operations annually will be off the new runway. DISCUSSION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF MAC AND THE FAA Chad Leqve, Manager of the Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs, and Cindy Greene, MSP FAA Air Traffic Control Tower Operations Support Manager, were introduced and in attendance to address noncompliance /deviation of operations within the corridor and to answer questions from Commission members and visitors. Cindy Greene, FAA Tower Operations Manager, gave a presentation entitled "Air Traffic Operations in the Corridor" and discussed how the corridor works. She gave details and examples of simultaneous departure operations from Runway 12L and 12R and stated aircraft must be separated by a minimum of 15 degrees. Greene discussed Air Traffic Control headings, noting they are issued in 5 degree increments, and factors that can affect an aircraft's track. The Commission asked for clarification between ground tracking and headings. Greene gave detailed information regarding an Air Traffic Control Tower evaluation she conducted of recent corridor operations stating that 15 days of ANOMS data from the month of July were used in the evaluation. Ms. Greene went step -by -step through the process that was used to study compliance and deviation in the corridor. She stated in her findings that wind played the most significant role in the 5 days Airport Relations Commission Minutes September 9, 2003/2 that were identified as most noncompliant. Greene further discussed the 15 degree divergence and adjustments that are made to mitigate the wind affect. Ms. Greene displayed a simulated radar screen of Runway 12. The representatives of MAC and FAA alternated questions compiled by the ARC Commission members. Questions are as follows: Eaean/Mendota Heights Corridor Question 1.) If the current corridor noncompliance is, at least in part, caused by too many planes or differing speeds trying to use the corridor at once, can the City expect the opening of the new N/S runway to reduce the need for noncompliance in the corridor? Answer: Ms. Green stated the headings off Runway 12L &R will not change with the new •- { Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" I runway. She further stated any plane departing off 12L or 12R will still follow within the 3 banks of 15 degree divergence headings; however, during the times the airport is extremely busy and the wind allows, departures will occur off 3 runways - Runways 17; 12L &R; and 30L &R. Ms. Green stated noncompliance within the corridor may be reduced, but the overall compliance likely will remain the same if the noncompliance is a result of wind patterns. Question 2.) Is there some way the tower could be more proactive in addressing overloading issues in the corridor? For instance, the Commission understands that at least part of the reason for the increased noncompliant flights is because of the switch of regional commuter flights from turboprops to small jets. Did the tower know this was happening ahead of time? Answer: Greene stated the CRJ's are a newer aircraft and the largest regional jet. She noted the tower sees approximately one per week, up to approximately 20 per year. She also stated they were surprised at how fast they were. Greene further stated they could not have done anything different if they had known ahead of time about the switch. Question 3.) Why do DC9 's account for so many of the noncompliant flights (i. e., 45 %) when they only comprise about 26% of the fleet as a whole? Answer: Legve stated the uses of runways differ during certain times of the day and that this was not a linear comparison. Leqve noted that generally DC9's depart from Runway 12R, due to destination and flight volume. Question 4.) As an aside, what does MAC know today, or currently, about NWA 's plans to decommission and/or replace DC9 's at MSP? Answer: Leqve stated that he is unaware of any plans by Northwest Airlines at this time to decommission DC9's. However, he noted that he could not speak for Northwest. Also, Leqve stated that the MAC may know more about the future of DC9's once the updated forecast is complete. He also noted that the DC9 provides an economic benefit to the industry. Question 5.) While the ultimate goal for corridor compliance should be 100 %, the City recognizes that weather and other factors might prevent that from being realized. Even if a practical goal of something less than 100% needs to be acknowledged, why would it not be in the upper 90's rather than the low to mid 90's, which simply matches what generally has been achieved? Airport Relations Commission Minutes September 9, 2003/3 Answer: Greene noted the 15 degree increments of separation and three sets of headings. She stated working with wind at various elevations makes the corridor very tight and further stated there is absolutely no "wiggle room" for departures. Greene explained that safety is of the utmost concern. Green noted that in the future, a GPS system may be used, which could improve corridor compliance. Question 6.) Has the FAA and/or MAC explored the possibility of a reward system for compliance within the corridor? Do other airports have incentive /penalty programs for compliance within corridors? If so, who are the rewards aimed at, i.e., pilots, tower controllers, airline companies, etc. Formatted: Font: Italk 3 Answer: Leqve stated he was not aware of incentive programs for compliance. Staricha stated an incentive program may be something to look at in the future. Question 7) Since Departure headings on runways 12R & L are suppose to take either a 90, 105, or 120 degree heading through the corridor until they reach the 5 -mile mark, why, for roughly the last five weeks, has departure control been turning outgoing traffic to anywhere from a 120 to 170 degree heading (but generally 140) once they take control from the tower (generally one to two miles off the departure end)? The early turning traffic appears to be of any and all types of aircraft. Can you please explain the standard regarding when planes in the corridor should be turning? Answer: Greene noted this question has already been covered, but stated they do not condone tuming earlier than the 5 -mile mark and further noted there are exceptions. Nierengarten noted his residential location and stated he listens to the ATC scanner and hears the controller handing off the aircraft and the pilot being asked to take certain headings. He further stated that runway 12L & 12R, during the months of May, June and July, were used heavily. Commissioner Nierengarten noted that he would continue to monitor the flight headings being provided to the aircraft pilots. Runway 17/35 Issues /Questions Question I.) Can you explain the differences between core INM tracks and sub INM tracks as it relates to proposed flight tracks off Runway 17/35? Answer: Leqve discussed the Integrated Noise Model (INM), stating the INM is used to consider and assess noise impacts from aircraft operations in modeling noise contours. A core flight track is an established flight track out of the airport, and a sub track is a model track for dispersion left and right of the core flight track. Question 2.) Will turbo props be used on Runway 17/35? If so, will taxi distance be an issue? Answer: Greene stated that 17 is the runway that will be used primarily for departures and 35 is the runway to be sued for arrivals. She stated the new runway will be able to accept all types of aircraft, except the heavy aircraft due to the length of the runway (8,000 feet). Also, Greene noted that runway use is often determined based on the destination of the aircraft. General Questions Question I.) Does MAC know why the number of departure operations in April 2003 was higher than any other month in the past 5 -1/2 years? Is the increased number of operations an anomaly or predictor offuture operation levels? Airport Relations Commission Minutes September 9, 2003/4 Answer: Leqve stated June was higher than April for a couple of reasons; 1.) wind, and 2.) jet operations increased because of the introduction of additional regional jet aircraft into the fleet mix. Question 2.) Is MAC and/or the FAA familiar with the penalties that are in place in Orange County, CA or LAX for nighttime operations? Can you remind us why these can or cannot be implemented at MSP? Answer: Leqve stated Orange County has policies in place that are more strict than most airports and these policies and restrictions, more than likely, were put into placed prior to 1990. Leqve stated that MSP no longer has the flexibility to implement restrictive noise abatement policies at an airport as was the case in the 1970's and 80's. He noted the Airport Noise and Capacity Act was passed in 1990, which restricts airports abilities to implement some noise measures. Leqve stated that recently the FAA has started to address airports that have grandfathered noise restrictions. He further discussed the onset of the Part 161 process, access and use restrictions, public use facilities and the use of federal monies. Question 3.) Is there a pattern within the top ten noisiest flights over Eagan in regards to whether they are arriving or departing at the same time each week? Answer: Leqve stated MAC makes the data available through their monthly technical reports so that everyone can make those types of determinations themselves relative to their communities. Krahn moved; DiNella seconded a motion to extend the ARC meeting by 15 minutes. All members voted in favor. Question 4.) Could Ms. Green respond as to why the crosswind runway (04/22) is not used during normal years? During the summer construction season, ATC seems able to make good use of the runway, but during non - construction years and shoulder months there seems to be almost no use of the taxiway "mike" departures. For the record, could Ms. Green bring a set of the present tower orders and other pertinent policies and procedures relative to the present runway use system? (If possible, please explain how the operation of Runway 17/35 will affect present use patterns) Answer: Ms. Greene stated the crosswind runway appears to run very smoothly, but in reality it is a very complex intersection and requires additional staffing when in use, while becoming a tremendous safety concern with the intersections and active runways. Greene noted that Runway 04/22 will not be used simply for noise mitigation reasons. Ms. Greene offered to send a copy of the present tower orders to Assistant to the City Administrator Lord. Question 5.) During the dual track process, the State, Dakota County, Metropolitan Council, MAC and NWA all pledged financing for noise mitigation if the airport stayed in its present location and expanded. To date, only MAC and NWA through landing fees have committed resources. The other entities now plead financial distress. 1 believe MAC has its own taxing authority. Could Mr. Legve please explain MSAC's taxing authority and why MAC does not use that authority to raise funds to complete the Part 150 Program? Answer: Mr. Leqve stated that MAC does have the ability to tax the seven county areas, but the MAC has elected not to utilize this taxing authority. Mr. Leqve noted that he is unable to speak for the MAC Commissioners as to why they have elected not to utilize their taxing authority. He further stated the MAC is working on completing the Part 150 Program. ADJOURNMENT Airport Relations Commission Minutes September 9, 2003/5 Upon motion by Grooms, seconded by Krahn, the Commission members adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. mis DATE SECRETARY