Loading...
04/18/1985 - Airport Relations Commission MINUTES OF THE EAGAN AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE EAGAN, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 1985 The Eagan Airport Noise Committee met at the City Hall on April 18, 1985 at 4:30 p.m. Those present were Chairman Tom Baker, Members Carol DeZois, Joe Harrison and John Gustin. Also present were City Councilmember Tom Egan, and Guest Carolyn Braun; also Dr. David Braslau, Dave Kelso of the MPCA, City Administrator Hedges, Administrative Intern John Hohenstein, City Planner Dale Runkle, and City Attorney Paul Hauge. Chairman Tom Baker chaired the meeting. MINUTES John Gustin moved, Joe Harrison seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the previous meeting. All voted yes. DAVID BRASLAU - PRESENTATION Tom Hedges introduced Dr. David Braslau of David Braslau Associates, Inc., who was formerly a professor at the University of Minnesota in geophysics and has acted as an expert dealing with noise issues throughout the area, including the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Dr. Braslau reviewed several reports, including one that he was commissioned by the MAC to present in 1977. He showed some transparencies with aircraft noise impact facing specific directions relating to run -ups on the Wold Chamberlain site. Run -ups technically are permitted only at heading 290 ° , according to regulation. He stated that the reason for the location selected for run -ups was because it was the only place where there was runway clearance and there is clearly a need for sufficient clearance. He reviewed several types of suppressers used at different airport locations around the world and noted that a suppresser is a muffler at the rear portion of an aircraft. He mentioned that it was hard to determine which methods_worked, including the suppressers and mufflers because the users usually said no and the airport operators were favorable. He stated that berming would be required to be 30 to 40 feet high and the plane would have to be very close to the berm to be effective. He also thought that airlines are generally using the suppressers with mufflers and also there is a need to ° shield intake noise to be effective. More up -to -date aircraft have smaller noise impact areas and it was his opinion that mufflers or hush - houses are the most effective suppressants. Mufflers cost about $250,000.00 in 1977. JT -8 and JT -9 type engines, including the 729, require the most run -ups. New engines have built -in monitors. Wind direction including volicity, is important and these factors differ from one location to another, and change regularly. 1 Noise Committee Minutes April 18, 1985 The MAC has positioned microphones around the run -up pads at certain threshholds and noise triggers the microphones to computers, but he noted that other noises also trigger the microphones and felt that cameras are important to monitor the run -up noise. Dave Kelso who was also present, stated that it is possible to monitor run -ups that are recorded. In 1976 the Air Development Act required noise suppresser equipment. Mr. Kelso stated that there is noise suppression money available but local FAA and airport officials do not work together to acquire the funds. The MAC view is that the suppressers may not do much to reduce noise, but field rules or procedural methods have been adopted to reduce noise. Cost and the complications, however, deter purchase of necessary equipment. Also, different sized airplanes require different types of suppresser equipment. A Noise Suppresser Equipment Plan has not been submitted to the PCA by MAC, it was noted. The PCA has been asked to sue MAC many times and the PCA has turned the issue over to the office of the attorney general. The PCA has outlined the history of the suppresser legislation and has started informal enforcement, requesting what MAC's intentions are. If there is no action, it will be brought to the PCA Board and then on to the OAG office. Field rules require the airlines to report each run -up but there is some uncertainty as to compliance. The real issue is which agency has jurisdiction. The PCA now feels it may have to go to Court in order to force the run -up regulations according to Mr. Kelso. Dr. Braslau stated that if the field rules are developed and enforced properly, they could be effective. He mentioned that it may now cost $50,000,000.00 to build an adequate suppresser capable of servicing all aircraft. The PCA would like to jointly stipulate to enforcement of the field rules and then provide for enforcement through the OAG. Dave Kelso stated that the history of the suppreser legislation started in 1976 and the deadline for submitting the plans has been moved up by the Legislature several times. Representative Wes Skoglund did not accept MAC's reason for extension of time and Mr. Skoglund wasn't willing to compromise to extend the deadline date past March 1, 1985. He has indicated that possibly the only way to effectively do it is to get the area residents' support and become more aggressive. The PCA will conduct public hearings as a result of a Petition from the • south Minneapolis residents regarding noise guidelines. Dr. Braslau also felt that the MAC can do much to collect information but is not doing an adequate job at the present time. MASAC MEETINGS It was noted the MASAC Operations Committee has acted in favor of the 180 degree turn and that MASAC will act at its regular meeting on April 23, 1985 on the Operation Committee's recommendation. There was also discussion as to whether the 180 degree turn would require an EIS and Mr. Kelso stated that because the FAA has jurisdiction over aircraft after leaving the ground, only the Federal EIS would come into play. The FAA, however, does not want liability regarding this type of issue and FAA has stated that it will not require an EIS on the 180 degree turn. 2 Noise Committee Minutes April 18, 1985 STATUS OF ANNUAL NOISE ABATEMENT PLAN The PCA has reacted to MAC's report but there has been no reply from MAC, and Mr. Kelso stated there has been no substantive change by MAC regarding the plan. AIRPORT FREQUENCIES The following frequencies are available for specific purposes: 126.7- - Control Tower; 121.9 -- Ground Control; 135.35 - - General Information. NOVEMBER 20, 1984 & MARCH 19, 1985 RESOLUTIONS John Hohenstein reported for Tom Hedges that Daryl Westlander had called in response to Tom Hedges' last letter of March 19, and indicated that MAC will submit an answer. NOISE COMMITTEE MEMBERS There was discussion concerning status of members of the Noise Committee and Mr. Harrison suggested that the City Council eliminate non - active members and elect new members that are willing to be active on the Committee. It was further suggested that the non - active members be dropped from the Committee if they are not interested and able to be present at the meetings. Harrison moved, Gustin seconded the motion to recommend Carolyn Braun be appointed by the Council as a member of the Noise Committee. All members voted yes. NEXT MEETING No specific date was set for the next meeting and the staff will contact the Noise Committee members regarding the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the motion was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. All voted in favor. PHH 3 .jr MINNEAPOLIS /ST. PAUL METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION Analysis of Runway 22 Departures at MSP With and Without use of 180 Heading Procedure May 8th, 1985 HOWARD NEEDLES TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF Rev. 1 1 Analysis of Runway 22 Departures at MSP With and Without Use of Procedurean Turn to 180 Heading A. General Runway 22 at MSP is used as a preferential runway for aircraft depar- tures when the capacity of parallel Runways 11L /29R and 11R/29L is not needed. During periods of heaviest use of the Runway, it acccam dates 40 departures in a one hour period. This volume typically includes 26 air carrier jets, 11 air carrier propeller aircraft (from April 1985 schedule) and 2 business jets. On an annual basis, records kept by MAC indicate that Runway 22 is used by approximately 18% of all departures. Prior to 1984, aircraft departing Runway 22 were generally assigned to a heading of either 200 °, 220 ° , 250° or 350 °. depending upon their route of flight. The distribution of flights to these headings was estimated by MAC as follows: Heading Percentage of Flights 200° 43% 220 34% 250 5% 350° 18% Starting in December of 1982, a "test" was conducted over a 24 month period of the effects of utilizing a 180° heading for Runway 22 depar- tures heading south and east. Air traffic control utilized the new heading in place of the 200 heading whenever it was possible to do so without restricting traffic flows. The resultant heading usage during the text period was as follows: Heading Percentage of Flights 180° 35% 220 42% 250° 5% 350° 18% 100% The principal difference in the two cases is that the use of the 200 heading (43 %) in the non -test situation is replaced by use of the 180 heading (35 %) under test conditions. There is an additional increase of 8% in use of the 220° heading. The analysis that follows quantified the noise effects of the test pro - cedure compared to non -test conditions. This comparison of aircraft noise levels in the two conditions uses two different indices of noise - Daily Ldn noise contours, and single event takeoff noise contours. B. Ldn Noise Analysis An Ldn contour for 1985 traffic without the test procedure was calcu- lated using FAA's Integrated Noise Model Version 3.8. The contour includes the non -test flight track usage described in Section A above, with the 18% annual use of Runway 22 for departures. A second Ldn contour set was then generated with the same assumptions as the base case contour, except that aircraft departing Runway 22 were assigned to flight tracks according to the "test" conditions cited above. The two Ldn contours were compared with respect to the population removed from or added to the Ldn 65 contour as a result of the procedural change. Under non -test conditions, there are 1532 persons affected by the Ldn 65 who are not within the test case Ldn 65. On the other hand, 432 persons are included in the test case Ldn 65 that are not within the base case Ldn 65. The differences in these two popula- tion figures, 1100, is the net number of people which benefit by the use of the 180° turn procedure. C. Single -Event Contour Analysis A second technique utilized to measure the noise effects of the test procedure was the identification of residential population that would experience maximum noise levels of 75 or 85 dBA as a result of a single aircraft flying the non -test and test procedures. A 727 -200 aircraft flown according to the Northwest Airlines procedure (for a less than 1000 mile trip) was utilized as the single -event occurrence, being the most frequent operation at MSP. The first of the two single -event con- tour levels selected, 85 dBA, represents the area of higher noise levels, while 75 dBA represents the area of moderate noise levels but where aircraft noise could still interfere with normal conversational noise levels. An analysis of population within the contours reveals that 650 fewer persons are affected by high noise levels (85 dBA or more) under test conditions. The 75 dBA contour includes 2000 fewer residents under test conditions. ' � 11lis N yytti SO II■ E `jai = ' V. . 111 ; � ' ; = ' { : �/ • a a ap�e�aao. _ ° - Na (i _ 1' —.. • L ais . ,, l eMwY 3'�!� I � ��� ; t: - ima.1--549,,rei,--,.4 Uk ' I. ..' ,- 14 via, ri „, , Z � �i � a ti. his � � E e� a .'i • I�a.r��A a Pr .� i 1 � TWIIIIIPM: � � • � '�i;� � ©� - ; 1 ___ I1i"111 illii iill�A: � . me ( M V i : i�1111i1111111111 . - _ ; ® * II1 a ? IIEIImIIIIIIIIIIIifl1I11 1 §,1 : IIIIIIIIIf1iIm1i11 - Ir �1111111111b1�1 1111! of ��� \� < &i t .;- 'sue i- e !6111 @x'1111 E � �• 1111111 s ' ' ' 1111111111Y 1111C�111111_ t! II�� _ ' a \ ' 111 �o� ®� 1 • ; � — J 1: ® - �.i: ,x,11111111 11111 �1� _ -, - � ..1111111111i� � 111 111111 � , 11111 J - 11 , Ell: _ • ' a � . �IIilIIIIII 4 , - = I N 4 1 16 ® ®1111 a�llfli.�.� EpEEl . r j . - r 111111 iifi111 IE1111im —r• �- - , e / r. 111111111111 1 i MIMI • °I .'. s _' , tNi s c ''� . 1 Now.,0-N .3 I EAT ■-1 • '" ----7....4.7 -, -, :.;.,, -- 77, --:* A i_ -_ ®--� _— ® ®___ ®. HE ��� )p . , ._--- - - - EM� a � , C C II � ° o D - 4 t \ anumus...r.--...F.,...../ IMIIMINIMIMINI•117 MIMS JJJJ,JJw . ! LU mizsmomiciammum 0 ------ . r .„.. w ...assmis sr. ©IMii —_- - � ����_ \ 1 := 4® �® s• ;.;:. : .-`��® i l__ l•®___ _ / J i® • 11101=1111•111i11111=1•111= f e: . ��® J 1 O_® ® : AfEmmusa A 4 • • pil •:,..... E�_____p -. `A �'�i� -ice����,-.�_��.� �+i� �%i� /i. %�. �j IEl]8__— •imp- ___Id_ ®�_ 3 �1 ®_� fi /i///.! IN II ©___i____ _�'.S - aa____1aal1® ._ is i____ ®__i1�� — ! ®__`rte____ ���q,` ---_.ems —_ �i ill- ____�i___o N� � =' �� �� .... tqw ge — ' r ���___ I1l__ _E___® - �___ ®_______® 1 I ___®___ ®__ rte_ ®_ • ®� ��— ______ice rte" u .........61 6 1.- ___.ii_su_ i__ ®I -__i m_—sI>� _re _ �� ��r® - �i_-_� ILI A te.. , ®___M , ilE� A e � . mac . - irs i .: =NM _------ - - / 1i l� d; is -i-MI ■ � � *war= am � �® • - �_— r_i__IiQiili_®1__i� Y ® — I IN _ /r�� m - �_i �_ ® I l i -��— •• _--- -- --__�— �'�' 1__ � _ T ill I. ; 1. , it ,� ��_�_s .. • :IMMUNE ,_ .. • ® x11111111 ®1► � � :' / ` • . , 1 U , .o ■11111111 �` \ , �lI�1111 ®11 �E T � : -.„D 11111®4 d 11111111111ri1®ll®�®®ll k,osG i m ,.�f" '1111 Fr IIIII! 1!1 1 1111III 1 ®I®I ©1 5, ' 1111 r ` rn, , t ; 1 ® 1 ®111 _ e , _ 1 ee ' t11111 5 111111 ■ ■ � '� ' �. � .� \ � . =� . �' Mor ' , 1111111111111®11. o.r� � / A . x© 1 � �' �J -III m ' >r. 1 t an N. ` r' 0 0 ' o r' •o © / ,q rp -.• a� 1111 11111 ■ o • a • �' I ® ® Gukr O ? , `` r 11 1 . ® �� ! ! , ® 1 ® � , � o O I1111111I11111/ 1 ' O� - s „ 11 �,,.q 110111111111AIIII J . k 11 / ®®®I 411 A111111111 I _, ,�, �I�111/ / - _ . �I® ®III ®I ® ®1�' . i . / Q � ' eapOi.5 St Paul IIIIIIMUll IIIIIIIII! 1I1qI n,A/n• E TE. ` ' . v GI Y I ril iiiiIiiIi 1 � �� 11► I A11 , ( r 111 1111 N. IWI lIOhI mil ---.-- 1 . prAmixot A mi WO. _ . B 11: IMF " 111111\11 SG .t CEr < 7 i Gun CA.D - ApPIP . .:::: 0V. . • , /, , , , , MEWL • r i 11111111:11 *��l v ; ° , -% � q � I •� ...': BLOOMINGTON r.: A 1111111111" �S: /�yp . •: 1970 GOP Br.97p � % ' . Q . • ` . ,.- ill :'r•e : • � J ' _ G // i . , Q E�. 11111111r'40,.:1$,gace,,,,:..,.. � V / 1 . :,, .,, 4r, ,.. IMP' t :.::..::$ 1-=: (-----? s. / \ / 111 ' • � /, — UM Mt IIII ;e-:, / 1/ Or/ / 4 ' WWI §.WillkerAla • . ::%.* C/41/09-441 7 .... 3.striwiss .74,11m El • II iJ I ! ' b• l 1Twp g".. • E +• • ° . • 1' b • r a ''e ' MOk ' w ':"// _,1-- nialialtri La 7 r Am c : i /' - 2 .L E`4, i � t 7t Ti,.' ; f j , ",14 i ' ` . Y r L , , t _ .. . 9 t Er � t r r b c3 , r a ¢, J _ i�'` '�}3 3 .t. t 4 L .t .. ,_. t't k , ''� e �' <t ,r3. , ; A x , rti -f��r P va• _ .es1�s ,..��!Y 'f t A` �,Y a #�E. '�" _Y�.e' .e ''� � r a ¢ i..`_ � is � } " _ � ��}uw � i < � {� � i . T , [ .. }'` M [ i x t fix 7% , - � LM4 .,,,,,„. :�„ 16, � , yY. � -._.' 4+— 'A.r���S�..�Y.ltis�3w . K . 'S 1t= (u .i.1� k { q METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION . •"`' MINNEAPOLIS -SAINT PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT k k, WOLD- CHAMBERLAIN FIELD tr. OFFICE OF THE AIRPORT DIRECTOR July 15, 1983 - fit i NOTICE TO: ALL AIRCRAFT USERS 0,: FROM: Airport Director, Wold- Chamberlain Field ps- • SUBJECT: FIELD RULE - AIRCRAFT ENGINE RUN -UP PROCEDURE \ 4 , The Metropolitan Airports Comm in furthering its efforts to reduce , 4 • . aircraft noise i mpact i n neighboring communities has concluded its evalua- ,, .' tion of the proposed engine run -up suppressor, Conclu of this study "w show that the construction-of a noise suppressor unit would not be necessary y` K =,* for noise attenuation provided maintenance run -ups are properly managed. .4{ ,,; This FIELD RULE shall be strictly complied with to insure compliance with ".,s n_i `. , state noise standards. This FIELD RULE is effective July 15, 1983• s 1 . The Northwest Airlines (NWA) run -up area will be the only run -up site for all scheduled and supplemental air carrier jet aircraft.; 1LY4 , u� .:, 2. All engine run -ups will be conducted at a heading of 290 20 Under , ,,-,t no circumstances will a run -up be conducted between 140 thru 270 If the run -up is not feasible at this heading, notification of the required 44 h eading, duration of the run -up, time of the run -up, power settings and I3� * y reason for the run -up will be submitted to the Metropolitan Airports : # ' Commission Office of Noise Abatement and Environmental Affairs. n '; N o more than one run-up per hour will be conducted on the NWA run -up 3. PP .� -:. site. Users of this run -up site will coordinate scheduling of run -up ; 4 ; •.t requirements to adhere to this provision. ,oy, 4. The duration of maximum /take -off power settings will not exceed six (6) °v' minutes per hour. f 5. Run -ups during cur hours (11:00 P.M. - 6:00 A.M.) will be conducted ', ` ,� to fulfill emergency requirements only and must be thoroughly documented! 1 ;'-',$ ,. ' p ' �; 6. All corporate jet aircraft run -ups will be performed with the same 1 =/y restrictions except location. Corporate aircraft may run -up on the ,,'s, �. taxi -ramp system between Northern Airmotive and the NWA run -up area 4-' on a paved site east of the taxiway and as close to the NWA run -up x• ;�s site as possible. , s • ' 7. It is very important that all aircraft intending to use the NWA run -up .4 pad coordinate with NWA maintenance control at 726 -2941 prior to taxi. 0 _ s,.. N 9 1.,:r.: -:: ;t..« �r�,..s wgf ?c..: "' "-.' f 2 § r tdc , "; _.- 1 f ' 4 ,t e., a am.4.4 11.4§Yt rr f ' � • P t f w ` � t �. �' r' .' < t Bill tE�IrJ� s Y�: ss .�„�,s�.C4t�iiicri..�� .err -�.��L (tea•; T SI ! Vi i.,'. . - } FIELD RULE: AIRCRAFT ENGINE RUN -UP PROCEDURES 8. All Military run -ups will be conducted at the south end of the National Guard ramp. Run -ups will not be conducted between the hours of 11:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. 9. Any questions concerning the FIELD RULE should be directed to Manager, Noise Abatement - 726 -9411. ;_' "4.�_ r 4 .. Through proper -management and cooperation the disturbances caused by :,,- ,t, aircraft engine run -ups can be eliminated at Wold- Chamberlain Field. It is essential that each company or organization emphasize with main- -`� - P Y 9 P �; tenance employees the absolute need to comply with this FIELD RULE. • Failure to comply will necessitate the permanent installation of a suppressor unit with minimal benefit relative to cost. - { Y CLAUDE C. SCHMIDT, -' AIRPORT DIRECTOR `_ MINNEAPOLIS -SAINT PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT fy . i4t M ZF, NOTE: This FIELD RULE to supercede FIELD RULE dated November 15, 1978. ;.. . ti p, a .jc . 5 '^. LN i.., rf = f {! ?Q .. - . �. K+ -'N k '19%5 '47-9. '�i ° _ c x "t tl- + r� . : .r ''�4WI" »•'{' ' 741711f t f . • METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION P. O. BOX 11700 • TWIN CITY AIRPORT • MINNESOTA 55111 OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR • PHONE (612) 726 -1892 April 19, 1985 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Mr. Hedges: I received your City Council Resolutions and cover letters regarding aircraft noise. Thank you and the citizens of Eagan for your continued interest in this problem. Our staff is carefully considering each of the suggestions. As you recall, the number of flights at the airport has risen dramatically within the last several years. In 1982 there were 272,675 takeoffs and landings, but in 1984 the number increased to 337,838. The prediction for 1985 is for a further increase of about 10%. This means a big change in the number of noise events for people living near the airport, not just in Eagan but on all sides. For the past 16 years, the Metropolitan Airports Commission has worked with communities surrounding the airport by way of the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) to deal head -on with aircraft noise issues. Progress has been made. We have a published Noise Abatement Plan and there are 17 noise abatement steps in place. While these have not made the noise disappear, most people who are knowledgeable of the situation agree that they have helped. The City of Eagan resolutions were presented to MASAC, and the executive committee of MASAC met on April 8, 1985 to discuss the proposals. Their report will be pre- sented at the April 23 MASAC meeting. I apologize for the delay in my written response to the Council, but you and members of the MAC staff have talked directly about the noise problems. My staff is anxious to continue working with you, the Mayor and the Council. Sincerely, 4 120IMAJIAc Lawrence E. McCabe Executive Director LEM:v cc: Commissioner Viitala MASAC OFFICE LOCATION -6040 28th AVE. SO. -WEST TERMINAL AREA- MINNEAPOLIS -SAINT PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT M tititl�ipo&6 • 5oitiiit Pau MAC METROPOLITAN I R T S COMMISSION OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR • PHONE (612) 726 -1892 April 19, 1985 Hubert H. Humphrey III Minnesota State Attorney General 102 Capitol Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Mr. Humphrey: You received a letter dated April 8, 1985 from the Eagan City Council. With that correspondence was an attached Resolution passed by the Council on March 19, 1985. The letter and the Resolution you received expressed concern regarding two noise abatement procedures that have been used by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to reduce noise impact for Airport neighbors. I wish to briefly respond to these issues raised by the City of Eagan. The first issue discussed was the contention the Metropolitan Airports Commission failed to comply with Chapter 450 of the Laws of 1980 (M.S.A.) 473.608, Sub division 20. In this statute the Minnesota State Legislature required the Metropolitan Airports Commission to " install aircraft noise suppressing equipment at the ground runup operations site of the Minneapolis /St. Paul Inter- national Airport. All such aircraft noise suppressing equipment shall conform to specifications approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The deadline for design selection shall be no later than March 1, 1985." In a December 11, 1980 letter to Ms. Terry Hoffman, then Executive Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Metropolitan Airports Commission advised the Agency that the Commission's design selection was the Noise Pyramid, Tegel Airport, Berlin, Germany. At that time we stated that in our professiona4 opinion this facility provided the best available state -of- the-art technology for controlling aircraft noise during ground maintenance runups. We also pro- vided backup material which included aircraft noise measurement data. As a result, the Commission believes it complied with the intent of the law with the December 11, 1980 letter. Referring to the Resolution passed by the Eagan City Council on March 19, 1985, while several significant issues are presented, you must understand that as of January 1, 1985 the Metropolitan Airports Commission, in cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Air Traffic Control Tower, discontinued the 180 turn procedure. Hubert H. Humphrey III Page 2 April 19, 1985 At the present time, both the noise staff of the Metropolitan Airports Commission and the members of the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) are reviewing monitoring data, complaints, consultant studies, and additional perti- nent information in an attempt to assess this procedure. The data under study was collected during a two (2) year test period that started in December 1982 and was completed on December 31, 1984. The Metropolitan Airports Commission staff continuously searches for new ways to attenuate aircraft noise impact at the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport. We believe that we have shown good faith in an attempt to comply with the Minnesota Statute 473.608 Sub division 20 requiring the installation of ground runup facilities at the Airport. Additionally we believe that we are in compliance with the Resolution of the City of Eagan of March 19, 1985 and have terminated the 180 departure turn until some specific determination can be made regarding its future viability. It is our opinion that it would be mutually beneficial to both parties if repre- sentatives from the Attorney Generals office could meet with representatives of the Metropolitan Airports Commission to discuss these environmental issues. A thorough review of our environmental programs including the specific items addressed in this correspondence should be fully understood by representatives of your office. The Commission Staff is eager to provide any additional information you require to fairly and properly assess these issues. I wish to thank you for this opportunity to respond and I am looking forward to the opportunity to work with your office in developing a better understanding of all environmental issues. Sincerely, Lawrence E. McCabe Executive Director Metropolitan Airports Commission LEM:v cc: City of Eagan li ' city of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 Mayor PHONE: (612) 454 -8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER April 29, 19 8 5 Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE City Clerk MR. CLAUDE SCHMIDT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 11700 TWIN CITY AIRPORT MPLS., MN 55111 Re: Eagan City Council Resolutions Dear Mr. Schmidt: We are in receipt of a letter from former Director McCabe dated April 19 which is a response to resolutions submitted by our City in March, 1985. We appreciate the attention paid to this issue as we are eager to cooperate with the Commission and its staff in substantive efforts to abate airport- related noise. We understand that this is a metropolitan community issue involving numerous jurisdictions and we wish to be a good neighbor to the affected cities and the airport. Likewise, it is important that the Eagan City Council and staff protect the best interests of our citizens and address concerns to you accordingly. As the specific elements of the City Council resolutions were discussed in Mr. McCabe's attached letter to Minnesota State Attorney General Humphrey, I will refer to it briefly. With respect to our resolution concerning noise suppressor design selec- tion persuant to Minnesota Statutes annotated 473.608, Mr. McCabe contends that a design selection occurred on or about December 11, 1980, and was transmitted to Ms. Terri Hoffman of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. This is the first indication the City of Eagan has received from your office that a selection had been made and, if approved by the MPCA, we strongly encourage the design's expeditious construction. We find it unsettling, however, that the Commission lobbied for two (2) extensions of the deadline prescribed by this statute after the date of that letter. Moreover, if MAC were in compliance for five (5) years, it seems most unusual that MPCA staff has not recognized the selection and that construction has not been completed. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Page 2 As to the resolution requesting a moratorium on the institution of the 180 degree turn as a permanent procedure, we do not agree with the assertion that MAC is complying with the resolution simply because the procedure was discontinued during the period of ad- visory review. The intent of the resolution was to request that the Commission come into compliance with State Statutes for which deadlines have passed and conduct a full Environmental Impact Study before considering approval of a procedural change. The consideration of the procedure by various arms of the Commission while significant noise abatement work remains undone constitutes compliance with neither the letter nor the intent of the resolution. The City of Eagan already absorbs a significant amount of aircraft noise due to the use of the preferential runway system. In fact, more than half of all arrivals and departures routinely pass over or fly adjacent to the north end of our community. The approved orientation of aircraft conducting engine runup tests - heading 290 +- 25 - describes an arc encompassing residential neighbor- hoods within our City which overlook the river. For these reasons, our citizens, Council, and staff are acutely aware of the noise impacts of certain aircraft procedures. Due to the high volume of traffic which Mr. McCabe's letter described, any laxity in the observance of approved procedures significantly and adversely affects our residents. The proposed 180 degree turn will introduce regular and systematic aircraft noise in yet another sensitive residential area. The City of Eagan has zoned to absorb noise impacts on the north end of the City. If the approved air corridors are properly observed, the area serves its purpose. The State Legislature has passed legisla- tion with the clear intent of abating runup noise. Again, if a structure is constructed and, in the interim, a comprehensive field rule is strictly enforced, the adverse affect on our citizens will be minimized. Therefore, the most important issue to our community is the efficient and effective pursuit of these items currently on the noise abatement agenda, before the institution of any new procedure which would adversely affect additional areas of Eagan. Once again, we thank you for your attention to our concerns. We will remain in contact with your staff and look forward to your response in this matter. Sincerely, Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH /sl cc: Hubert H. Humphrey III, Minnesota State Attorney General Honorable Senator Howard Knutson Honorable Representative Art Seaberg Honorable Representative Wes Skoglund Dave Kelso, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Tom Baker, Chairman Airport Noise Committee Airport Noise Committee Members r' f M.titigkoctapotis • Swat Poit MAC _ METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR • PHONE (612) 726 -1892 April 19, 1985 Hubert H. Humphrey III Minnesota State Attorney General 102 Capitol Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Mr. Humphrey: You received a letter dated April 8, 1985 from the Eagan City Council. With that correspondence was an attached Resolution passed by the Council on March 19, 1985. The letter and the Resolution you received expressed concern regarding two noise abatement procedures that have been used by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to reduce noise impact for Airport neighbors. I wish to briefly respond to these issues raised by the City of Eagan. The first issue discussed was the contention the Metropolitan Airports Commission failed to comply with Chapter 450 of the Laws of 1980 (M.S.A.) 473.608, Sub division 20. In this statute the Minnesota State Legislature required the Metropolitan Airports Commission to " install aircraft noise suppressing equipment at the ground runup operations site of the Minneapolis /St. Paul Inter- national Airport. All such aircraft noise suppressing equipment shall conform to specifications approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The deadline for design selection shall be no later than March 1, 1985." In a December 11, 1980 letter to Ms. Terry Hoffman, then Executive Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Metropolitan Airports Commission advised the Agency that the Commission's design selection was the Noise Pyramid, Tegel Airport, Berlin, Germany. At that time we stated that in our professional opinion this facility provided the best available state -of- the -art technology for controlling aircraft noise during ground maintenance runups. We also pro- vided backup material which included aircraft noise measurement data. As a result, the Commission believes it complied with the intent of the law with the December 11, 1980 letter. Referring to the Resolution passed by the Eagan City Council on March 19, 1985, while several significant issues are presented, you must understand that as of January 1, 1985 the Metropolitan Airports Commission, in cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Air Traffic Control Tower, discontinued the 180 turn procedure. , Hubert H. Humphrey III Page 2 April 19, 1985 At the present time, both the noise staff of the Metropolitan Airports Commission and the members of the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) are reviewing monitoring data, complaints, consultant studies, and additional perti- nent information in an attempt to assess this procedure. The data under study was collected during a two (2) year test period that started in December 1982 and was completed on December 31, 1984. The Metropolitan Airports Commission staff continuously searches for new ways to attenuate aircraft noise impact at the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport. We believe that we have shown good faith in an attempt to comply with the Minnesota Statute 473.608 Sub division 20 requiring the installation of ground runup facilities at the Airport. Additionally we believe that we are in compliance with the Resolution of the City of Eagan of March 19, 1985 and have terminated the 180 departure turn until some specific determination can be made regarding its future viability. It is our opinion that it would be mutually beneficial to both parties if repre- sentatives from the Attorney Generals office could meet with representatives of the Metropolitan Airports Commission to discuss these environmental issues. A thorough review of our environmental programs including the specific items addressed in this correspondence should be fully understood by representatives of your office. The Commission Staff is eager to provide any additional information you require to fairly and properly assess these issues. I wish to thank you for this opportunity to respond and I am looking forward to the opportunity to work with your office in developing a better understanding of all environmental issues. Sincerely, kd Lawrence E. McCabe Executive Director Metropolitan Airports Commission LEM:v cc: •: Ci tj gf.tfaT rt ( -) ))) Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Chairman: Walter Rockenstein, II 6040 28th Avenue South Past Chairs: Jan Del Calzo, 1979 -1982 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 Stanley W. Olson, 1969 -1979 (612) 726 -9411 Technical Advisor: Darrell Weslander April 23, 1985 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Mr. Hedges: Mr. Lawrence McCabe, Executive Director for the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), received your letters with the Eagan City Council Resolutions regarding air traffic noise, and has asked the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) to respond. I am the manager of noise abatement at MAC and the technical advisor to MASAC. As you know, MASAC is an advisory group to the MAC on issues involving noise. A copy of the Eagan resolutions was presented to MASAC at the January 22, 1985 meeting and all members reviewed the document. An airport commissioner and the director or oper- ations for MAC are members of MASAC, therefore, individuals directly involved in airport operations have read and reviewed the resolutions. Further, they were studied by the MASAC Executive Committee at its April meeting. Based upon the discussion, I will attempt to respond to the recommendations of the Eagan Noise Committee. First the suggestion to formulate an air traffic noise task force. At least two such organizations now exist. The sole purpose of MASAC is to deal with airport related noise issues. MASAC has been in existence since 1969 and is regarded as an excellent forum. The group is comprised of airline and business representatives (airport users) and representatives of communities surrounding the airport, and voting is equally split between the two groups. Also, the Metropolitan Council has an Aviation Task Force charged with overseeing the aviation planning and land use within the seven county area. Currently MAC and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have a three mile "departure corridor" for aircraft departing on Runways 11L and 11R toward Mendota Heights and Eagan. During the summer of 1984, we spent much effort and time getting the air traffic controllers to restrict aircraft to the proper headings on take -off and to not allow aircraft to turn too soon. Excellent progress was made although some residents still believe the "corridor" is not being used. The FAA control tower is still using the procedure and they have stated they will make it an item to discuss again with each controller at regular briefings. Mr. Thomas Hedges -2- April 23, 1985 Measures are being taken to restrict run -ups during nighttime hours. MAC is now rewriting the Field Rule regarding run -ups which will contain more restrictive language regarding the hours run -ups can occur. We are attempting to eliminate all run -ups during nighttime hours. While the committee suggests penalties be imposed, MAC has had a policy of open communication and cooperation with the airline industry and the FAA. To impose penalties or fines, or even to attempt to do so, would, we believe, be counter- productive. Most individuals are law abiding and will honor a request or an operating restriction without threat of fine. There is more positive progress to be made in a continued spirit of cooperation rather than imposed confrontation. Regarding steeper ascent and descent of aircraft and the suggestion that the depar- ture corridor be extended to five miles from three miles, both are not operationally feasible. Presently the aircraft depart at the best angle of climb until reaching the thrust cut -back altitude (usually 1000 feet). To gain a greater climb gradient, the aircraft would need either larger engines, a lighter weight on takeoff, or sub zero weather in order to get more thrust and lift. In other words, the aircraft do not purposely fly lower than they should. On arrival, the instrument approaches use a 3° glide path which is currently the steepest that safety and operational techniques allow. The best hope for reducing take -off and arrival noise is the new Stage III aircraft such as the Boeing 757 and the MD80. The percentage of these quiet aircraft at MSP will grow from the current level of 12% to about 44; in 1989. MASAC appreciates the input of the Eagan City Council and the Eagan Noise Committee. We trust that we can continue working together on this admittedly very difficult issue. Sincerely, Darrell Weslander Technical Advisor DW: jv 1L* "(" city of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 Mayor PHONE: (612) 454 -8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS April 29, 19 8 5 THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH HANFORD DOLE City Clerk SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION 400 7TH ST SW WASHINGTON DC 20593 Dear Madam Secretary: I write on behalf of the citizens and City Council of the City of Eagan, Minnesota. As a neighbor of the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport, our community is significantly and adversely affected by aircraft generated noise. In fact, as a second -tier suburb, we absorb the bulk of the noise from both departures and arrivals under the preferential runway system administered by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Briefly described, the system routes most planes over the north end of our City when weather and traffic conditions permit and during nighttime hours. Eagan is less densely populated than areas closer to the downtowns, but we do have a large and growing population which is highly sensitive to aircraft noise. We frequently deal with the Metro- politan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission on a variety of issues and we are particularly pleased with their efforts to reduce the number and affect of stage one aircraft using the airport. Nonetheless, Buffalo Airways and other carriers have been exempted from the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act's January 1, 1985, deadline. These types of air carriers typically use night and off peak schedules which place them over our community. Therefore, our citizens are required to absorb not only late night noise, but noise generated by the loudest commercial jets still flying. Those of us in local governments understand the importance of the uniform application of standards. We also understand the occasional need for exceptions to those standards, but we are acutely aware of the need for consistently applied criteria for those exceptions. Over time, inconsistency results in precedents at less than the optimum standards. We strongly urge the return to and consistent application of the rigorous standards of carrier size, availability of technology for modifications, good faith efforts toward compliance, financial havoc and loss of valuable service. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY April 29, 1985 Page 2 Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. We look forward to your agency's renewed efforts in this regard. Respectfully, Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator cc: President Ronald Reagan The Honorable Rudy Boschwitz, United States Senate The Honorable Dave Durenberger, United States Senate Bill Frenzel, United States Congressman Senator Nancy Kassebaum, Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation Congressman Norman Mineta, Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation N.O.I.S.E. David Engen, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration Wes Skoglund, Mn Representative Claude Schmidt, Metropolitan Airports Commission Honorable Bea Blomquist, Mayor of Eagan Eagan City Councilmembers Tom Baker, Chairman, Aiport Noise Committee All Members of the Airport Noise Committee TLH/jj