sph/at Pg 1/16

Summary Reagan National Airport Community Working Group

Regular Meeting (11) – February 16, 2017 Date: February 16, 2017 Time: 6:00 P.M. – 8:00 P.M. Location: Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) Corporate Office Building, Conference Room 1C Agenda: December 15, 2016 Meeting Summary, FAA Update, Working Group Discussion Working Group Members Present:

Dick DeiTos Metropolitan Washington Airlines Committee Marcio Duffles District of Columbia - Ward 3 Ken Hartman Montgomery County Paul Janes Montgomery County Jim Phelps Fairfax County - Dranesville Mike Rioux Fairfax County - Mount Vernon Susan Shipp Montgomery County Brian Stout Arlington County Steve Thayer City of Alexandria

Alternates: Don Crockett District of Columbia - Ward 2 Carol Hawn Fairfax County - At-Large William Liebman Montgomery County

Don Minnis Fairfax County - Mount Vernon Dominic Patella District of Columbia - Ward 3 Richard Sternberg Montgomery County

Agenda Item 1 – New Member Update and December 15, 2016 Meeting Summary: Margaret McKeough, MWAA Chief Operating Officer

Announced MWAA Corporate Office Building relocation to Crystal City (Arlington, VA) in late March. Future Working Group meeting location to be determined.

1A) New Member Update: o Montgomery County: Welcomed Susan Shipp (Cabin John), Paul Janes (Bethesda) and

Richard Sternberg (Cabin John – Alternate). o Prince George’s County: Waiting to receive formal letters of designation.

1B) December 2016 Meeting Summary:

o Discussion: Steve Thayer:

Requested Page 4, South Flow SID edit: “Working Group’s recommendation is in the FAA’s procedure queue and is expected to take 12-18 months.”

sph/at Pg 2/16

Margaret McKeough:

Recommended Page 4, South Flow SID statement, with possible future corrections by the FAA: “Working Group’s recommendation is in the FAA’s procedure queue and is expected to take 18 months, which is sooner than the average four year process.”

Marcio Duffles:

Requested Page 11 edit: William Liebman and Don Crockett stated they could not find the noise impact analysis for the 9 north flow LAZIR SIDs.

o December 15, 2016 Summary Approved with noted edits.

Agenda Item 2 – FAA Updates: 2A) LAZIR-B Decision:

o Mack Alexander/FAA, Director of Airspace Services FAA discussed its decision to suspend LAZIR-B procedure development, at this time,

based on the volume of negative public comments. LAZIR-B was not wasted effort, and FAA will continue to evaluate the information

learned during the process to integrate a more holistic approach to future procedure development.

An executive summary of the approximate 1,100 LAZIR-B public comments should be available to MWAA within the next several weeks. Additionally, there is still much work to be done with the specific comments; once that work is complete FAA will work with MWAA to determine how best to share that information.

o Discussion: Gary Norek/FAA, Deputy Director of Airspace Services

FAA’s decision was based on the negative sentiment of public comments relating to: noise (83%); aircraft schedules for late night arrivals/departures and early morning departures; flight path concentration.

FAA will discuss the merit of evaluating procedures comprehensively versus reviewing independently.

Brian Stout:

How would FAA approach a comprehensive review of noise impacts on a community?

Gary Norek:

An environmental review of North Flow departures, combined with South Flow departures and arrivals will provide a more comprehensive impact.

2B) Recommendation 6 (Possible North Flow Departure Changes)

o Ken Hartman: Recommendation 6 Background:

Encouraged by FAA’s LAZIR-B decision and the desire to look at a holistic solution for the area, particularly with respect to North Flow departures.

At a minimum, hopeful that a holistic approach will include the spirit of this recommendation with the possibility of continuing flights farther along the river before turning.

sph/at Pg 3/16

2C) Recommendation 7 (Notional RNAV GPS South Flow Arrival to Runway 19) FAA Presentation: DCA South Flow Arrivals – Comparative Traffic Flow Analysis

John Belk/FAA, PBN Technical Lead, Bennie Hutto/FAA NACTA Representative o Ken Hartman:

Recommendation 7 Background:

Hopeful Montgomery County will have the opportunity to incorporate and address South Flow arrival concerns prior to a public meeting process.

The heat map indicates an increase in air traffic over Montgomery County. o John Belk:

FAA analyzed two data sets of South Flow arrivals, January - March 2015 and January - March 2016.

The results presented provide an expanded analysis of work conducted in August 2016.

Additional analysis was conducted to investigate reasons for changes in air traffic. As background, in 2015, FAA modified two instrument approach procedures used

during south flow operations. The first modification was the RNP-AR procedure, which is used when weather prevents the use of the River Visual Runway 19 procedure. FAA modified the RNP-AR primarily to improve air traffic control efficiency by allowing controllers more options during south flow operations in bad weather. The modification also increased the amount of time aircraft spend flying over the Potomac River and reduced the amount of time they spend flying over land, in accordance with the long standing preference for maximizing aircraft time over water when approaching Reagan National Airport. The second modification pertained to the River Visual Runway 19 approach procedure. This is the preferred arrival procedure when the Airport is in south flow operations when the weather is good. The modification eliminated two over land flight path options, one over Maryland and D.C., the other over Virginia, which resulted in aircraft spending less time flying over densely populated land areas in Maryland, Virginia, and D.C., and more time spent over the Potomac River, in accordance with the long-standing preference for maximizing aircraft time over water when approaching Reagan National Airport.

o Tass Hudak/MITRE Corporation: Follow-on analysis was conducted with the hypothesis that traffic patterns had

changed over the Potomac River. Data analysis indicated two procedure changes resulted in a shift in approach traffic

arriving Runway 19, predominately, the RNAV (RNP) Approach:

Air traffic decreased over one ground track and increased over another ground track when the RNAV (RNP) Runway 19 Approach to DCA was changed in April 2015.

DCA was observed more often in South Flow during January – March 2016 as compared to the same observational period in 2015.

FAA normalized approach counts by randomly selecting 1,000 flights from all South Flow arrivals that occurred during each of the observation periods.

January – March 2015 (Before): Heat map depicts 1,000 randomly sampled South Flow arrivals out of 8,800 total South Flow operations.

January – March 2016 (After): Heat map depicts 1,000 randomly sampled South Flow arrivals out of 10,000 total South Flow operations.

sph/at Pg 4/16

o Tass Hudak, John Belk and Bennie Hutto: A shift was observed between 2015 and 2016 air traffic:

Decrease: Gold

Increase: Green

Analysis was conducted on the four primary approach procedures used by Potomac TRACON and DCA Tower for arriving aircraft on Runway 19 to determine if there was a change is usage independent of runway configuration.

Computer models determined which aircraft were on the LDA-Z.

RNAV (RNP) approaches are distinguished by path performance, however, they can be difficult to differentiate from River Visual approaches because they follow approximately the same path along the river.

o Aircraft are issued a visual approach clearance, those that are RNP equipped will sometimes use as backup supplementary guidance.

o Only included RNP approaches that had the Potomac TRACON data field designation identifying that the RNP approach procedure had been flown.

Analysis indicated no significant change in the character of approach operations:

sph/at Pg 5/16

Two key changes were identified in approach procedures:

December 2015 – River Visual: o River Visual supplemental course guidance removed along the 328°

outbound/148° inbound radial to the VOR (navigational aid on the airport) to promote visual tracking of Potomac River. See yellow Xs.

April 2015 – RNAV (RNP) Runway 19: o Original RNAV (RNP) ground track shifted over Potomac River. See

black arrows.

Analysis showed the traffic shift closely corresponded with changes to the RNP approach ground track.

o Greatest percent increase occurred over the river, south of FERGI waypoint which moved out 1.1 miles; not all approaches vector to FERGI when using the River Visual or RNAV (RNP).

sph/at Pg 6/16

o During January – March 2016, 16% of aircraft flew the RNP Approach in accordance with the approach analysis presented on Slide 7, DCA South Flow Arrivals Comparative Traffic Flow Analysis.

o Grid dimension is approximately 0.5 miles.

o Discussion: Ken Hartman:

Concerned communities now extend all along the river, Brookmont to Woodrock.

John Belk:

Due to the proximity of that part of Montgomery County relative to the airport, Air Traffic Control and pilots are limited by the requirement to align aircraft with DCA runways.

Procedures are designed for instrument conditions when pilots have low/no visibility; instrument condition criteria restrict the angle and number of turns to reduce the risk of pilot spatial disorientation.

sph/at Pg 7/16

The analysis reflects that the traffic shift was primarily a result of the RNP AR Runway 19 revisions and not due to the changes to the River Visual Runway 19 procedures.

Bennie Hutto:

Air Traffic Control tries to abide by the voluntary DCA Part 150 noise abatement procedures and turn South Flow arrivals onto the Potomac River no closer than 10 DME from DCA.

Arrivals are on downwind to base to final, in order to line up on the Potomac River, or IAP around 10 DME, i.e. – similar to on-ramps to a road.

William Liebman:

What is the confidence level that the 1,000 random flights accurately represent the remainder of the year with varying weather, temperatures and seasons?

Tass Hudak:

Confidence level is not assigned to each grid.

Radar track data is very consistent.

A different arrival sample would not change results due to the statistical significance of the 1,000 out of 8,800 flights; departures may vary slightly more than arrivals.

FAA Presentation: Prototype RNAV GPS Runway 19 Instrument Flight Procedure John Belk/FAA, PBN Technical Lead, Bennie Hutto/FAA NACTA

o John Belk: FAA has 3 areas of concern related to procedure development:

Operations: DCA primarily operates a 1-runway airport.

Criteria (Safety): Turn/bank angle limits, distance between waypoints etc.

Community Outreach: Listening to communities, mitigating noise. o Bennie Hutto:

Montgomery County requested the approach procedure start at a location different than FERGI waypoint, possibly southwest. Analysis results:

Flyability criteria placed aircraft at highest possible altitude when crossing waypoints:

o STAND at 6,000 ft. o HIXIT at 3,000 ft.

STAND, NIPEE and MEGGS waypoints only help when air traffic volume is low, however, aircraft will be vectored to join the final approach course around 10 DME when sequencing is required to ensure safe and orderly traffic flow.

Although DCA is a slot controlled airport, more early morning and late night slots are being used by the airlines that own them.

During January – March 2016, DCA had a higher rate of South Flow arrivals than January – March 2015.

sph/at Pg 8/16

Working Group requested a review of arrival altitudes below 3,000 ft. (MSL) at FERGI.

Weather data reported in AGL (Above Ground Level), all other data reported in MSL (Mean Sea Level).

Analysis conducted for all South Flow approach traffic.

Data does not show aircraft descending below 3,000 ft. until after FERGI.

Procedure restrictions require aircraft cross FERGI at 3,000 ft. o RNAV (RNP): Cross at 3,000 ft. o Vectored: Maintain 3,000 ft. until established on the RNAV final or

maintain 3,000 until the river.

o Discussion: Carol Hawn:

IAD airspace proximity? Bennie Hutto:

DCA, IAD and BWI airspaces directly impact each other’s operational altitudes and flight corridors, which limits the development of operational alternatives.

Ken Hartman:

RNAV GPS procedure lines never presented; FAA only spoke conceptually.

FAA appears to be rushing to judgment instead of approaching holistically for an alternative South Flow solution.

John Belk:

Letter prepared outlining the DCA Runway 19 RNAV GPS Timeline; it will be posted on MWAA website.

sph/at Pg 9/16

Working Group requested the development of an RNAV GPS to provide relief from air traffic over the DC area.

Discussions and presentations provided for anecdotal, notional paths and procedure limitations.

FAA has exhausted its research; an RNAV GPS will need to originate in the areas presented.

Susan Shipp:

Why can’t FERGI move farther at a higher altitude to minimize noise? Bennie Hutto:

Farther out lacks the airspace needed; aircraft must still descend to 3,000 ft. by 10 DME in order to maintain a 3°glideslope necessary to safely align with the runway.

FAA Flight Standards sets the design criteria and accommodates a broad range of aircraft types for safety.

John Belk:

As requested by the Working Group, FAA has developed a prototype for the RNAV GPS procedure; FAA requests an endorsement, or some level of commitment, from the Working Group to advance to the procedure.

Ken Hartman:

FAA has not presented sufficient analysis; hoped analysis would accommodate Montgomery County’s concerns of channelization.

Margaret McKeough:

Prototype (green) is the FAA’s professional conclusion for an RNAV GPS Runway 19 procedure.

John Belk:

We believe we can start the procedure at DARIC vs FERGI, however, there will still be aircraft over the same area due to volume and sequencing.

Marcio Duffles:

DC appreciates having the flights over the river.

Is there any malleability with regard to airspace boundaries? Bennie Hutto:

Potomac TRACON owns all the airspace: o Mount Vernon = DCA o Shenandoah = IAD o Chesapeake = BWI

sph/at Pg 10/16

Based on current traffic situations, DARIC would be the primary waypoint used to start the procedure based on spacing and sequencing.

John Belk:

When the weather ceiling is low, communities under the LDA (purple) are getting every South Flow arrival.

Prototype (green) puts flights over the Potomac River. William Liebman:

Based on the Charter, the purpose of the Working Group is to evaluate strategies and mitigate impacts of airplane noise.

RNAV GPS procedure does not mitigate noise for all of the communities, including Montgomery County, consequently, it is outside the Working Group’s scope of responsibilities.

Margaret McKeough:

Biggest challenge of Working Group is to address what is best for the region.

Progress will be difficult if we’re only addressing it from the vantage point of the community we represent.

Dominic Patella:

NextGen is an exercise in picking the loser due to precise navigation and channelization of aircraft.

Need to look holistically at a combination of procedures such that each community experiences a benefit and compromise.

Any time we evaluate a procedure, we need to see the noise analysis before any action is taken by the Working Group.

2D) South Flow SID

o John Belk: Working Group has a South Flow SID in a March/April queue with a formal PBN

working group. Although LAZIR-B (9 SIDS) will not be published, FAA has ideas to help mitigate

departures over COVTO. Would like the Working Group’s endorsement to combine the North Flow departure

project with the South Flow SID to save resources, time and money since they are under the same environmental umbrella.

While working on North and South Flow departures, the team may have an opportunity to review South Flow arrivals.

South Flow SID can start and eventually combine with North Flow.

2E) DCA Aircraft Fleet Mix Comparison, Jan – Mar 2015/2016 o John Belk:

Working Group requested fleet mix data; it will be posted on the MWAA website. 2F) Notional North Flow SID design

o Bennie Hutto: Briefed a “potential” solution to departing aircraft overflying Montgomery County

when turning west at the COVTO Waypoint. The notional North Flow SID’s would have aircraft turning and fly west bound over the river versus flying over Montgomery County.

sph/at Pg 11/16

Agenda Item 3 – General Working Group Discussion: 3A) MWAA comment on 6-Point Plan

o Margaret McKeough: In December, the majority of the Working Group members presented a 6-Point Plan

to the Airports Authority for consideration:

1) Noise Assessment / Footprints: o Airports Authority agrees that data is useful and needed. o Working Group is interested in receiving aircraft single event data

versus DNL. o Airports Authority exercised an existing contract with Ricondo &

Associates to review noise data collected by Authority noise monitors. o Random sample was defined for four weeks in 2016, which was after

the implementation of NextGen. o Currently, do not have comparative noise data but this helps establish

the next step. o Presentation to follow.

2) Procedures: o MWAA, FAA and Working Group have already committed to working

on this issue. 3) Fly-Quiet Program:

o Airports Authority is happy to discuss an appropriate framework for a Fly Quiet Program.

o Airports Authority advocates substantive items that effect change. 4) Permanent Advisory Group:

o Working Group’s Charter was revised in December to continue our work together.

5) Residential Sound Insulation Program (RSIP): o RSIP only relevant to homes inside the 65 DNL contour. o Do not see the relevance of prioritizing a discussion on RSIP until we

have a noise issue inside the 65 DNL contour. 6) Dulles Matters:

o Airports Authority is fully committed to growing air service in this region at Washington Dulles International Airport, not at Reagan National Airport.

sph/at Pg 12/16

o We’ve engaged local municipalities and congressional delegation to oppose any slot increases or perimeter expansion at Reagan National.

3B) Ricondo NMT Data Review

o John Williams, VP, Ricondo & Associates: Methodology:

Evaluated single events: o Collected Lmax, operation type, runway utilization, aircraft type.

Data sample parameters:

sph/at Pg 13/16

Only looked at Lmax which is the peak single event level at a specific point in time versus DNL which is a 24-hour average.

As a reference, A-weighted decibel levels dB(A) of common sounds were used for comparison; A-weighted decibel scale is used for aircraft noise monitoring because it represents frequencies perceived by the human ear.

o Example: Busy street 80 dB(A), car 50 dB(A) o Most listeners cannot detect changes of 2 dBs or less.

For each of the 15 DCA noise monitors, data was analyzed for: o Highest and lowest Lmax o Number of noise events

There isn’t a 1-to-1 correlation between number of noise events and number of operations; each operation can cause noise events at multiple noise monitor locations.

o High level review indicates a fairly good correlation in terms of noise levels on both sides of the Potomac River.

o Some monitors experience a higher concentration of noise events due to their proximity and alignment to runways, specifically Old Town.

sph/at Pg 14/16

o Presented data for 7 monitors more closely aligned along the river. Observations while operations were primarily in North Flow:

Noise levels affected by aircraft type:

Departures: o Early morning departures tended to be louder

main line operations (B737, A320, MD-90) o Late night departures tended to be smaller,

quieter regional jets.

Arrivals: o Early morning arrivals tended to be smaller,

quieter regional jets. o Late night arrivals tended to be louder main line

aircraft.

Summary of General Findings:

Lmax high-low ranges are similar between east and west sides of the Potomac River.

Number of operations are similar between east and west sides of the Potomac River.

However, the noise levels on the west side of the Potomac River tended to be approximately 3 dB(A) louder than the noise levels on the east side.

sph/at Pg 15/16

o Discussion: Margaret McKeough:

Airports Authority thought this analysis would be helpful in terms of how the noise monitoring data can be assessed.

Data snapshot happened to be predominately North Flow. Marcio Duffles:

For future studies, location of the monitors is important; Georgetown monitor is well inland.

Although dB(A) is the industry standard, why not look at dB(C) since dB(A) filters out low frequency noise generated by jets?

John Williams:

Noise monitoring system provides access to A-weighted data.

sph/at Pg 16/16

Margaret McKeough:

We recognize the Working Group is interested in receiving Pre- and Post-NextGen noise data.

In 2014, the Airports Authority went through a public procurement process for a new noise and flight track monitoring system to support our noise monitors.

New system uses a different methodology to calculate noise levels, which means we do not have noise data to compare Pre- Post-NextGen.

Don Crockett:

Can the new system calculate DNL consistent with historical Annual Aircraft Noise Reports 2010 – 2014?

Mike Jeck/Manager, MWAA Noise Information Office:

New system does not calculate a comparable DNL value that is consistent with the 2010-2014 Annual Aircraft Noise Reports.

New system methodology provides better noise source classification for quieter aircraft and louder background noise levels. New metrics are:

o Aircraft DNL o Total Leq, Aircraft Leq, Community Leq, Mixed Leq, Background Leq

A consultant would be able to calculate a comparable DNL value using the noise data hosted thru MWAA’s Noise Office webpage.