-
sph/at Pg 1/11
Summary Reagan National Airport Community Working Group
Regular Meeting (22) – April 26, 2018 Date: April 26, 2018 Time:
6:00 P.M. – 8:00 P.M. Location: Metropolitan Washington Airports
Authority (MWAA) Terminal A – Historic Lobby Conference Center
Agenda: March 22, 2018 Summary, FAA Update, Working Group
Discussion Working Group Members Present:
District of Columbia: Rick Murphy Primary District of Columbia –
Ward 2 Ken Buckley Alternate District of Columbia – Ward 3
Maryland: Ken Hartman Primary Montgomery County
Paul Janes Primary Montgomery County Susan Shipp Primary
Montgomery County John Mitchell Primary Prince George’s County –
Accokeek Edward Williams Primary Prince George’s County – Ft.
Washington William Noonan Alternate Montgomery County Janelle
Wright Alternate Montgomery County
Virginia: Steve Thayer Primary Alexandria (City of) Ron Montague
Primary Arlington County
Jim Phelps Primary Fairfax County – Dranesville Mike Rioux
Primary Fairfax County – Mount Vernon Carol Hawn Alternate Fairfax
County – At-Large Don Minnis Alternate Fairfax County – Mount
Vernon Airlines: Tracy Montross Primary American Airlines
Agenda Item 1 – Welcome and Updates: Margaret McKeough, MWAA
Chief Operating Officer:
Welcomed Working Group and announced new meeting format for FAA
presentation of Conceptual South Flow SIDs:
o MWAA COO served as the facilitator. o Primary members seated
at table, Alternates seated along the side, public observers
seated
in the rear. Alternates called to table if primary member was
absent. o Presentations delivered from podium. o Questions held
until the end of the FAA presentation.
-
sph/at Pg 2/11
Announced that Nardyne Jeffries has been appointed to represent
DC Ward 8, replacing Diane Fleming.
Facilitated the introduction of staff representing Montgomery
County Council President Roger Berliner.
1A) Approval of March 22, 2018 Meeting Summary:
Approved.
Agenda Item 2 – FAA Update: 2A) Presentation: FAA 7100.41 Design
Team Outcomes and Conceptual Procedures
Leslie Swann, FAA, Senior Advisor, Air Space Services Matthew
Cathcart, FAA, DC Capital Project, PBN Management Co-Lead Bill
Wise, FAA, DC Capital Project, PBN NATCA Co-Lead
Leslie Swann: o Acknowledged FAA colleagues in attendance
representing Eastern Region,
Environmental, Subject Matter Experts and DC Capital
Project.
-
sph/at Pg 3/11
Matthew Cathcart and Bill Wise:
-
sph/at Pg 4/11
-
sph/at Pg 5/11
-
sph/at Pg 6/11
Leslie Swann:
Discussion:
Margaret McKeough: o Requested FAA provide commentary and
context of challenges encountered while
developing conceptual procedures that addressed the Working
Group’s Recommendation #8.
Matt Fisher, FAA Potomac Consolidated TRACON Subject Matter
Expert o Biggest consideration for design work was the impact to
departure and arrival flows. o Currently, when South Flow
departures have a CAPPS arrival conflict, aircraft will climb
and level off at 5,000 ft then wait for instructions to climb. o
Under the conceptual design proposal, aircraft will climb to 7,000
ft once they’ve past
CAPVC_RC8 then continue to 11,000 ft. o Designers used 3 mile
range circles around arrival and departure tracks to ensure
proper
separation was maintained so aircraft could stay over the river
as long as possible to minimize the impact on residential
neighborhoods,.
o Ultimately, FAA had to build the airspace for the 2 sectors
involved in the change while building the procedures, which is
different than how FAA normally does procedure work.
John Mitchell: o Requested clarification of Slide 6 regarding
Recommendation #8. Stated that FAA only
presented the top half of the recommendation which addresses
South Flow departures and omitted the bottom half which addresses
North Flow arrivals. Asked if the omission of the bottom half was
an error or intentional.
o Working Group endorsed the entire Recommendation #8; Prince
George’s County was under the impression that FAA would also assess
arrivals and feels discredited by FAA’s decision to ignore North
Flow arrivals.
Margaret McKeough: o Explained that the Working Group’s initial
endorsement of Recommendation #8 focused
on South Flow departures. Recommendation #8 was amended the
following month to include North Flow arrivals.
o Conceptual design demonstrates that FAA had to conduct a
preliminary assessment of North Flow arrivals to address South Flow
departures.
-
sph/at Pg 7/11
John Mitchell: o Stated the record is very clear that FAA
committed to addressing arrivals and departures. o Recommendation
#8, in its entirety, was endorsed by the Working Group as a
compromise to address two issues simultaneously as a unified
position; it was not a 2-step process.
Matt Fisher: o As noted on Slide 7, FAA briefed the Working
Group in November 2017 that there aren’t
any PBN procedures that can be developed at this time that will
make a difference for North Flow arrivals.
o From an operational standpoint, south operations and north
operations have two completely different sets of Standard Operating
Procedures. While FAA may be able to do certain things in south
operations, it doesn’t mean we are always able to reciprocate in
north operations.
Mike Rioux: o Clarified the Working Group Recommendation
process. Recommendation #8 was
submitted with a request to evaluate arrivals and departures.
FAA responded that no operational changes could be made to North
Flow arrivals. Working Group responded by submitting Recommendation
#11 which doesn’t change any of the PBN procedures but does request
FAA raise the altitudes for North Flow arrivals that impact the
community. The altitude is the principle issue, not the flight
track.
Matthew Cathcart/Matt Fisher: o FAA reviewed/responded with
track data to a specific recommendation about turn
points.
Matt Fisher: o For a stabilized approach related to safety
procedures, especially at airports with short
runways, aircraft need to be established on final approach at 7
miles out. Higher altitudes are not necessarily in-line with that
objective. Distances from airport and optimum final approach
altitudes:
10 miles: altitude 2,500 – 3,000 ft 6 miles: altitude 1,800
ft
William Noonan: o Asked why the stabilized approach profile is
shallower than before. Previously, aircraft
had steeper descents and higher altitudes at a given DME; why
can’t aircraft do that anymore?
Matt Fisher: o Altitude arrival restrictions haven’t changed in
10 years. FERGI waypoint moved out 1
mile to help set up the RNP approach. o Air Traffic must deal
with improved aircraft performance and aerodynamics. Energy
management is critical to slow aircraft down and bleed altitude
to set them up for a stabilized approach.
Mike Rioux: o Requested copies of presentation and
latitudes/longitudes of conceptual waypoints.
Jeck / MWAA Noise Office:
MWAA will post FAA presentation: FAA 7100.41 Design Team
Outcomes and Conceptual Procedures.
-
sph/at Pg 8/11
Matthew Cathcart:
FAA will provide the latitudes/longitudes/distances of
conceptual waypoints depicted in presentation: FAA 7100.41 Design
Team Outcomes and Conceptual Procedures.
o Asked if current procedures will be discontinued if the
conceptual procedures are adopted in late 2019/early 2020.
Matt Fisher:
Yes, the 6 current SIDs will be discontinued; however, new
procedures will use the same name with an up-number update.
o Did FAA give any consideration to waypoints with block
altitude restrictions, e.g. – ‘At or Below 5000 ft’ BUT ‘Not Below
3000 ft’?
Matt Fisher:
Block altitude restrictions are not helpful for departures
because the onboard Flight Management System ignores the bottom
number.
o Slide 14: Is ESSZZ waypoint a combination of all the old
waypoints around Woodrow Wilson Bridge?
Matthew Cathcart:
Yes – Waypoint had to move the minimum amount to meet criteria.
Matt Fisher:
ESSZZ is primarily used to vector Runway 15 departures over the
river. o Will FIMBI waypoint still be used for Runway 19 departures
turning to the NE?
Matt Fisher:
Correct. There are no changes to Runway 15 & 19 transitions
to the eastside SIDs. FIMBI needs to stay in its location to setup
a turn to the next waypoint.
o Slide 29: Implementation timeline shifted from June 2019 to
Late 2019/Early 2020. What is involved in an environmental review
and what is the associated schedule?
Sean Doyle, FAA, Environmental Subject Matter Expert:
Since 1969, any federal action must undergo a National
Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process which is a tiered
process dependent on the proposed level of change. NEPA
Categories:
o Categorical Exclusion Includes a preliminary noise screening
assessment with
simplified assumptions for the worst case scenario. If proposed
change crosses a threshold of concern, the
process triggers a more in-depth assessment. o Environmental
Assessment (~1 year) o Environmental Impact Statement (Multiple
years)
Completion timeline is dependent on the initial screening and
the assigned NEPA category.
Community Outreach is part of the process.
-
sph/at Pg 9/11
o How will FAA determine the noise impact of the conceptual
arrival and departure procedures?
Sean Doyle:
Software utility (Aviation Environmental Design Tool) is used to
calculate/compare current and proposed conditions based on aircraft
type, thrust configurations, flight track position data etc.
o Noise assessment defines a study area using a set of grids
then calculates noise before and after the change for each
grid.
Grid size is variable based on conditions. o Along the 65 dB DNL
contour, NEPA defines a 1.5 dB increase or
higher, from all the flown conditions over the course of a year,
as a significant impact which triggers the next environmental
category.
o Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Statement
culminate in a fully documented report. Report includes maps with
color-coded changes of significant noise impacts (1.5 dB or
higher); maps may include the current/conceptual procedures.
Susan Shipp: o What noise data source is used to conduct the
noise assessment?
Sean Doyle: o TARGETS is a software program used in procedure
designs that simulates flight tracks. It
compares original flight tracks with TARGETS simulated flight
tracks. Modelled data is used instead of measured data (WebTrak)
because the noise assessment process uses thousands of modelled
grid locations to determine the noise impact; it isn’t practical or
feasible to measure noise levels at all the required locations.
Steve Thayer: o Asked for clarification of waypoint near Woodrow
Wilson Bridge. Original discussion was
to adjust Waypoint 17 so South Flow westbound departures would
fly the center of the Potomac River instead of flying over Old
Town, VA. Why didn’t that waypoint move?
Matt Fisher: o During the procedure design phase, ESSZZ was
placed to help center aircraft over the
Potomac River using a 1-2 degree turn away from Old Town. o By
nature of how aircraft will fly ESSZZ and CAPVC_RC8, aircraft
should be slightly east,
centered more over the Potomac River. o FAA will provide
conceptual South Flow westbound departure data to demonstrate
effectiveness of ESSZZ waypoint to center flight tracks over the
Potomac River.
Ron Montague: o Concerned about introducing aircraft over new
areas. o Slide 17: Will all aircraft (orange flow) follow the
magenta line? o Will FAA brief the communities potentially impacted
by the change in procedures?
Matthew Cathcart: o Yes, width of South Flow departures (orange
flow) will move to magenta line. o Conceptual procedures designed
with flyby waypoints with the intent to keep tracks
inside the waypoint and over the river.
-
sph/at Pg 10/11
Carol Hawn: o Emphasized that it’s imperative FAA explain
conceptual design advantages/disadvantage
in community layman’s terms to avoid a similar negative outcome
experienced with LAZIR-B North Flow departures where communities
rejected conceptual designs that moved flight tracks over their
neighborhoods.
Margaret McKeough: o Assuming the Working Group endorses the
conceptual design and FAA begins the
environmental review, when does FAA conduct public
outreach/comment period? o What’s the level of noise analysis that
will be available at the very first community
meeting?
Sean Doyle: o FAA has made a concerted effort to conduct public
outreach sooner. o NEPA is not a static process. FAA will start an
environmental review assessment and
share preliminary noise screenings results with the public prior
to completing the review process.
Ryan Almassy, FAA, Operations Support Group Manager for Eastern
Service Center o FAA’s presentation to the Working Group is the
beginning of the environmental review
process and community outreach. o As part of the NEPA process,
FAA will conduct a preliminary noise screening and present
findings to the community for feedback. An additional month may
be added to the timeline if the Working Group would
like to review the preliminary noise screening prior to
presenting to the public. o FAA will provide a NEPA milestone
flowchart.
Tracy Montross: o What is the next step for industry
involvement?
Matt Fisher: o Industry was involved in the design process and
has committed to continue with the
process.
Susan Shipp: o What percentage of South Flow departures will use
the new SIDs?
Matt Fisher: o Eastbound (35%): No change. o Westbound (65%):
100% of South Flow departures would follow new procedures.
Mike Rioux: o South of the Airport Sub-Committee will
discuss/compile/distribute a recommendation to
the Full Working Group within next 7-10 days in response to
FAA’s presentation: FAA 7100.41 Design Team Outcomes and Conceptual
Procedures.
Ryan Almassy: o FAA committed to providing additional data
before asking for a Working Group’s
endorsement of the conceptual design.
Agenda Item 3 – General Working Group Discussion: 3A) Standard
Operating Procedures
David Mould, MWAA VP of Communications: o Deferred to the May
24, 2018 meeting to incorporate additional changes.
-
sph/at Pg 11/11
Agenda Item 4 – Other Business/Next Meeting Agenda: 4A) May
Tower Tour:
Mike Jeck: o FAA responded that a May Tower Tour is not
possible. o MWAA will coordinate with FAA/Hilary King to determine
the availability of a June Tower
Tour. 4B) Complaint Dashboard:
Susan Shipp: o When will MWAA release the Complaint
Dashboard?
David Mould: o MWAA/Bruel & Kjaer are in final stages of
development and hope to have a release date soon.
4C) Next Meeting:
May 24, 2018 Action Items – Prior to Next Meeting or Future
Meeting:
FAA:
FAA will provide the latitudes/longitudes/distances of
conceptual waypoints depicted in presentation: FAA 7100.41 Design
Team Outcomes and Conceptual Procedures.
FAA will provide conceptual South Flow westbound departure data
to demonstrate effectiveness of ESSZZ waypoint to center flight
tracks over the Potomac River.
FAA will provide a NEPA milestone flowchart. MWAA:
MWAA will post FAA presentation: FAA 7100.41 Design Team
Outcomes and Conceptual Procedures.
MWAA will coordinate with FAA/Hilary King to determine the
availability of a June Tower Tour.
Working Group:
South of the Airport Sub-Committee will
discuss/compile/distribute a recommendation to the Full Working
Group within next 7-10 days in response to FAA’s presentation: FAA
7100.41 Design Team Outcomes and Conceptual Procedures.