May 29,2008

Mr. Robert Alexander

Obstruction Analysis Specialist

Federal Aviation Administration

I Aviation Plaza

Jamaica, NY I1490

Dear Mr- Alexander:

Attached for your review are analyses ofseven different flight proc€dure altematives to

achieve reduced landing minimums at Lacuardia Airpoi on Rurway 13-31. As you

know the City of New York has proposed construction ofa Marine Transfer Station,

south oflacuardia Airport, which will preclude installation ofa CAT II ILS. The FAA

aod the PA have been studying this building (OE case 2007-AEA-l 163-OE) for the past

few months. In an effort to mitigate the impact that construction of this much-needed

Waste Transfer Station will have on Lacuardia Airport arrivals, the Pon Authority of

New York & New Jersey has been working collaboratively with th€ City ofNew York to

develop alt€mate procedures to gain some improvement in landing minimums. These

ne\v procedures were an effort to reduce delays during inclement veather and poor

visibility conditions, while allowing the City to meet its solid waste management

objectives. Our goal was to develop an tLS approach installcd on Runway 3l in the shont€rm and protect for the potential for a CAT Il approach h the longer-term.

To assure that our analysis was accurate, we enlisted the assistadce ofth€ FAA Flight

Procedures OIfice in Atlanta (A\tl,J). AVN developed procedures based on several

assumptions that wc provided. All these procedures were developed to the lowest

possible landing minimums that could be attaitrcd. In totd ihere were five main

altematives and two addilional altematives requested by FAA Airports Division. We

have attached these analyses for your review, as well as additional studies performed by

the City ofNew York- In summary, FAA analyses revealed that a CAT Il approach to

LGA Runway 31 is impractical based on the myriod ofobstructions that plague the

Northem Queens landscape. Therefore we are rescinding our request for the

cstablishment of a CAT ll approach for Runway 3 I .

Based orl the rcsults oft]ese FAA studies and the studies performed by the City of

New York, it is the plan ofthe Port Authority to continue to pursue an ILS approach to

Runway 31 at LGA. Howevet our best course ofaction is ro utilizc an offset localizer

and develop a glideslope angle of 3.I degrces to obtain a Decision Height of280 HAT

with an RVR of5,000. This will allow operations on Runway 3l at lower minimums

tha]I we have today and also increase safety within the existing obstacle enviroffnent. lt

will also allow for the immediate constuction ofthe Miuine Transfcr Station to the

dimensions proposed in the Department ofSanitation's submittal (2007-AEA-1163-OE).

Tle Port Authority believes this is a win for all parties.

225 Potk Avenue Sauth

,tt-'

" ilE PORf,AUnIORITy oF NV & NJ

Wllion R. Decato
.t i> f.3 / tt a 

"onroun 

onrr oF NY & NJ

In addition to the safety benefits, this plan also allows for future technological

enharcements that may lower landing minimums, provide environmentsl benefits and

reduce delays. We rcquest that the FAA review this anallsis and provide a determination

to the Department of Sanitation as soon as pmctical. We also request that the FAA

continue to pusue the installation ofa glideslope on Runway 31 to meet long established

congressional rcquests.

Sincerely,

/*"n

Tom Bock

General Manager of Airspace

Modemization, Technology & Operational Enhancements

Anachments