08/27/2019 - Airport Relations CommissionAIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION WORKSHOP
TUESDAY
AUGUST 27, 2019
6:30 P.M.
EAGAN CITY HALL—EAGAN ROOM (2ND FLOOR)
AGENDA
I.ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
II.VISITORS TO BE HEARD
III.DISCUSS OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FAA
IV.OTHER BUSINESS
V.ADJOURNMENT
1
Memo
To: The Airport Relations Commission
From: Dianne Miller, Assistant City Administrator
Date: August 19, 2019
Subject: August 27, 2019 ARC Workshop/Location: City Hall, Eagan Room
The Eagan Airport Relations Commission will meet on Tuesday, August 27 at 6:30pm at Eagan
City Hall (Eagan Room—2nd floor). Please park in the upper lot of City Hall due to construction.
Please contact Executive Assistant Cheryl Stevenson at (651) 675-5005 or
cstevenson@cityofeagan.com if you are unable to attend the meeting.
I.ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda, as presented or modified, is for adoption by the Commission.
II.VISITORS TO BE HEARD
The Eagan City Council and its Commissions set aside up to ten minutes at the beginning of
public meetings to permit visitors to address items of interest that are not addressed on the
regular agenda. Items that will take more than ten minutes or that require specific action can
be scheduled for a future meeting agenda.
III.DISCUSS OPERATIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE FAA
At the July 9, 2019 ARC meeting, the commission heard an update from FAA Regional
Administrator Rebecca MacPherson regarding the impacts of Converging Runway Operations
(CRO). The written summary of her comments is again included on pages 5 and 6. Likewise,
at the July 9 ARC meeting, the commission heard from Brad Juffer, MAC Manager of
Community Relations, with a comprehensive report on the recent Runway 17 Departure
Operations Report. That report is available for review online at:
https://macnoise.com/pdf/runway_17_departure_operations_final_report_july_2019.pdf.
2
In light of the findings of the study and the statement that CRO has reached a “steady
state,” interest was expressed by the ARC to prepare recommendations on possible
changes the FAA could consider that would reduce the noise impact over Eagan. Brad
Juffer and Dana Nelson of the MAC will be in attendance for the discussion to offer their
expertise. Several residents noted they plan to attend the meeting as well.
In anticipation of the Eagan ARC discussing operational changes for the FAA’s
consideration, Ms. MacPherson is preparing a document that will speak to how the FAA
reviews suggestions for operational changes. That document was not yet provided
when the packet was prepared. Once it is received, it will be shared with the
commission and posted as part of the packet on the City’s website.
The following are possible operational changes for the Commission to discuss. These
changes are ideas that surfaced at the July ARC meeting or by residents concerned
with the recent noise levels of Eagan.
•Shift some runway 17 departures to 12R
•Implement an eastbound turn restriction (e.g. westbound departures on 17 fly
runway-heading for 2.5 miles before turning over river).
•Increase use of the 095 heading instead of the 120 to allow greater use of the
Corridor
•Move nighttime Runway 12 westbound departures to 17 to prevent noisy,
sweeping turns over Eagan (and use river procedure)
o Or, as an alternative, could westbound Runway 12R departures turn
immediately after departure and follow the river valley to the southwest?
•Is a departure fix straight south an option? (to allow planes to fly along Cedar
Avenue for a longer period of time)
Once the ARC has reached consensus on the recommendations to be made to the
FAA, the next step would be to forward those recommendations to the City Council. The
Council could consider the recommendations at their September 3 City Council
meeting, and pending approval, would be forwarded to the Noise Oversight Committee
(NOC) for their consideration at their September 18 meeting. The recommendations
could coincide with the environmental review of CRO impacts anticipated to be
conducted by the FAA in the near future.
IV.ADJOURNMENT
Per the request of the Commission, the Eagan ARC meetings will go no later than 8:30
p.m. unless agreed upon by the Commission.
/s/Dianne E. Miller_______
Assistant City Administrator
3
ARC Purpose: To advise and make recommendations to the City Council on issues of aircraft
noise and airport policies that impact or have the potential to impact the community.
ARC Mission: The Airport Relations Commission (ARC) recognizes the burden of aircraft
noise is balanced by the economic benefits of being a neighbor to MSP Airport. The ARC,
under the direction of the City Council, will work in partnership with the Metropolitan Airports
Commission (MAC), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the residents of Eagan to
make recommendations on reducing the burden of aircraft noise in Eagan without jeopardizing
safety.
4
1
Converging Runway Operations
At Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport
July 1, 2019
Background
On January 27, 2006, a near midair collision occurred at the Las Vegas-McCarran International
Airport when a landing Airbus executed a “go around”, as directed by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Control (ATC), to avoid a conflict with another aircraft that
was crossing the runway in front of it. The go around took the Airbus directly into the flight path
of a Boeing 757 that had just taken off from a crossing runway. While the two aircraft did not
collide, the subsequent investigation by the National Traffic Safety Administration (NTSB)
revealed that the near collision due to converging runway operations (CRO) was not an isolated
incident. The NTSB conducted a broader investigation of existing ATC procedures, and in July
2013, the NTSB made a safety recommendation to the FAA urging a change to existing
procedures and standards covering these types of events in ATC’s rulebook (FAA Order
7110.65), which it determined were inadequate..
In January and July 2014, the FAA issued changes to the ATC rulebook establishing new
separation standards and procedures where airport geometry presents the possibility of CRO, to
ensure that a landing aircraft executing a last minute go-around does not conflict with a departing
aircraft climbing away from a non-intersecting, but converging runway. As part of the new CRO
mitigation requirements, the FAA identified a limited number of tools that could assist in
developing local procedures to meet the new requirements.
In December 2015, the NTSB accepted the FAA’s actions and closed the safety recommendation
as acceptable.
CRO at Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport
Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport (MSP) has a runway geometry that creates a risk of
collision due to CRO under certain conditions: i.e., when the prevailing winds are from a
northerly direction, favoring takeoffs and landings on runway 30 Right (30R) and/or runway 30
Left (30L), and landings on runway 35. (Generally, aircraft depart into the wind because it
allows pilots to achieve a higher altitude in less time and with less speed, and aircraft land into
the wind since it allows for a shorter stopping distance and a reduced speed upon landing.)
Absent mitigation, this configuration presents a risk of a mid-air collision due to CRO. Prior to
the ATC rulebook changes, aircraft departing runway 30R and/or runway 30L could conflict
with an airplane needing to go around from an aborted approach while trying to land on runway
35.The FAA implements CRO procedures at MSP only when runway 35 is used for arrivals and
the prevailing winds are from the North.
One of the new mitigation tools specified by the changes to the ATC rulebook when there is a
risk of a CRO-related collision is use of the Arrival/Departure Window (ADW). This tool uses
radar to show an aircraft’s position relative to a software generated “window” or box displayed
5
2
on the air traffic control screen at the extended final centerline of a runway. At MSP, Air Traffic
tower controllers use the ADW displayed for runway 35 to determine when a departing aircraft
can start its takeoff roll from runway 30L and/or runway 30R. An aircraft cannot start its takeoff
roll on runway 30L and/or 30R when an aircraft is inside the runway 35 ADW. A takeoff roll
can begin after the aircraft landing on runway 35 has exited the ADW.
While the CRO process has worked well from a safety perspective, it has adversely effected
efficiency of the MSP runways 30L, 30R and 35 configuration at the higher traffic levels. Prior
to FAA implementation of CRO mitigations, runway 30R and runway 35 configuration was the
most efficient for MSP when the winds were from the North. Under those conditions, the FAA
was able to achieve landing rates of 75-90 aircraft per hour. Since implementation of CRO
requirements in 2014, the efficiency of the runway landings using the runways 30L, 30R and 35
configuration at MSP has decreased to 75-84 aircraft per hour. This is because of the increased
spacing between aircraft required to meet the constraints of the ADW. This increased separation
has also led to ATC distributing additional arrival traffic that would have landed on runway 35
prior to the CRO mitigations to runway 30L and runway 30R.
The FAA has worked with the MAC to identify possible mitigations that would improve the
landing efficiency rates while ensuring the safety of the airspace around MSP. We believe we
have achieved optimal utilization given the existing state of technology. In January 2019, the
FAA completed a 180-day testing period of a new standardized process to support demand-based
CRO. Under the new process, MSP air traffic will only use runway 35 for arrivals (and
implement the CRO mitigations) when demand at the airport justifies the use of the runway.
Currently there are three, well-defined arrival/departure “banks” at MSP when traffic demand is
at its highest points (Monday through Friday at 7AM, 4PM and 6PM), when such a need has
been demonstrated.
The results of the 180-day test have been incorporated into Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
in all three of the MSP District ATC facilities (ATCT, TRACON and ARTCC) that control air
traffic into and out of the MSP airport. Because the criteria for implementing CRO is demand-
based, the times that CRO may be implemented under the SOP can shift as arrival/departure
banks shift. Likewise, new periods of CRO may be implemented as demand requires. Many
internal processes and controls are in place to ensure that the new CRO mitigation process
supports safety, real demand, and arrival and departure efficiency.
The FAA is in the process of evaluating the appropriate level of environmental review to assess
and disclose potential adverse impacts of changes in runway use because of the implementation
of CRO procedures at MSP. The agency hopes to provide the MSP Noise Oversight Committee
(NOC) with an update at the September 2019 NOC meeting.
6