Update from the Office of Airports Prepared for: Presented by: Airports Council International (ACI-NA) Small Airports Committee Minneapolis, Minnesota Elliott Black Deputy Director Office of Airport Planning and Programming Date: Friday, July 9, 2010 1 1
Agenda Update from the Office of Safety and Standards Update from the Office of Planning and Programming Cross-cutting issues 2 2
Organization of the FAA Extracted from http://www.faa.gov/about/media/hq-org.doc Administrator Deputy Administrator Chief Operating Officer Air Traffic Organization Office of Civil Rights Office of Chief Counsel Office of Govt. & Industry Affairs Office of Communications Assistant Adm. for International Aviation Assistant Adm. for Human Resource Management Assistant Adm. for Financial Services Assist Adm. For Security & Hazardous Materials Assistant Adm. For Region and Center Operations Assistant Adm. For Aviation Policy, Planning & Environment Assistant Adm. For Information Services Safety Communications En Route & Oceanic Service Terminal Services Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation Associate Administrator for Airports Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety Operations Planning Finance Flight Services System Operations Service Acquisition & Business Services Technical Operations Service 3 3
Organization of the FAA Office of Airports Associate Administrator Office of Airports Vacant Deputy Associate Administrator Office of Airports Kate Lang Director Office of Airport Planning and Programming Ben DeLeon Deputy Director Office of Airport Planning and Programming Elliott Black Director Airport Compliance and Field Operations Randy Fiertz Director Office of Airport Safety and Standards Mike O Donnell Deputy Director Office of Airport Safety and Standards Jim White Manager Planning and Environmental Division Ralph Thompson Manager Airports Financial Assistance Division Frank San Martin Manager Airports Compliance Division Vacant Manager Airport Engineering Division Rick Marinelli Manager Airport Safety and Operations Division Vacant Manager Airport Improvement Program Matthew Thys Manager PFC and Financial Analysis Branch Joe Hebert 4 4
More Detailed Agenda Office of Airport Safety and Standards Airports Geographic Information System (AGIS) and Electronic Airport Layout Plans (ealp) Safety Management Systems (SMS) Wildlife Hazard Assessments LPV approaches ARFF (H.R. 915, Sec. 311) Part 139 inspection access at joint-use airports Runway incursions 5 5
More Detailed Agenda (cont d) Office of Airport Planning and Programming Airports Geographic Information System (AGIS) and Electronic Airport Layout Plans (ealp) Safety Management Systems (SMS) Wildlife Hazard Assessments LPV approaches Status of reauthorization Sustainability in airport planning 6 6
Safety Management Systems (SMS) A proactive, systematic, and integrated method of managing safety for airport operators. Requires a systematic approach to development of safety policies, procedures, and practices. Formal safety risk management procedures that provide risk analysis and assessment is essential. ICAO required certificated airports to have an operational SMS by November 24, 2005. 7 7
Safety Management Systems (SMS) (cont d) External requirements for airport operators: Have issued Advisory Circular to introduce airports to SMS. ACRP SMS publication provides additional information to airports. Have conducted SMS pilot at large and small airports. Will amend Part 139 to require certificated airports to implement SMS. Anticipate issuing a NPRM for comment by end of 2010. Internal requirements for FAA Office of Airports: Will issue internal FAA SMS Order. Will be incorporating safety risk management (SRM) analysis in projects that require Federal action and meet triggering criteria. Additional guidance will be provided. 8 8
Runway Incursions Surface Operations Risk Factors High-speed operations with minimal separation Complex airport surface environment Low visibility in poor weather 9 9
Runway Incursions Category A and B 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 31 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 61.13 0.507 24 61.15 0.392 25 58.56 0.427 Airport Operations (millions) 0.228 12 52.65 Rate est. 0.187 * as of 05/24/10 Performance Reference = 0.450 * 6 32.03 0.600 0.500 0.400 0.300 0.200 0.100 0.000 Runway Incursions per 1,000,000 Airport Operations * Rates are based on Estimated Tower Operations Category A&B Runway Incursion Rate 10 10
Runway Incursions All Categories 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 816 13.34 892 14.57 17.23 1009 18.08 951 Rate est. 17.39* as of 05/24/10 557 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 Runway Incursions per 1,000,000 Airport Operations Runway Incursion Rate 0 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 61.13 61.15 58.56 52.65 Airport Operations (millions) 32.03 * Rates are based on Estimated Tower Operations 11 11
Wildlife Hazard Assessments Conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist. Identifies wildlife species and populations. Identifies wildlife attractants. Submitted to FAA. Determine level of risk and if development of a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan is required. WHAs are AIP-eligible. If contracted, must be competitive. Wildlife AC that has requirements for WHA applies to all Federally obligated airports not just Part 139 certificated airports. 12 12
Wildlife Hazard Management Plans Provide measures to alleviate or eliminate wildlife hazards. Identify persons who have authority for implementing the plan. Priorities for needed habitat modification. Identification of resources for the plan. Procedures to be followed during air carrier operations. Wildlife control measures. 13 13
ARFF Standards Legislative Provision HR 915, Section 311 (FAA Reauthorization of 2009) would require FAA to initiate rulemaking Mission of ARFF personnel Proper level of staffing Timeliness of response Consistent with voluntary consensus standards to the extent practicable 14 14
ARFF Standards Framework of the Debate Results of ACRP analysis of 476 Part 139 Class I, II, III airports Response Time Standard Vehicles Staffing CFR Part 139 Three (3) minutes to midpoint of farthest runway 1,080 10,137 NFPA Standard Two (2) minutes to any point on operational runway 2,098 (increase of 94%) 21,184 (increase of 109%) 15 15
ARFF Standards Financial Impacts Results of ACRP analysis of 476 Part 139 Class I, II, III airports Cost Category Additional annual investment for vehicles Additional annual fuel and maintenance Additional ARFF stations 592 Additional ARFF stations additional annual utility costs and maintenance Additional annual firefighter costs Total increase in annual costs Cost Impact $106.3 million (depreciated over 15 years) $88.5 million $172.1 million (depreciated over 30 years) $233.3 million $1,871.8 million $2,427 million 16 16
ARFF Standards FAA Position No case for rulemaking No demonstrable safety benefit from changing response time from three (3) minutes (under current Part 139) to two (2) minutes (proposed NFPA standard) NFPA exceeds ICAO standards as well as CFR Part 139 Significant cost increase Analysis of accidents does not show additional lives would be saved by faster response or increased staffing 17 17
Part 139 Inspection Access at Joint-use Airports DoD not currently allowing FAA to inspect DOD ARFF facilities DoD ARFF standards are equivalent to FAA standards Discussions are ongoing with FAA General Counsel and DoD to resolve issue. Until resolved: FAA inspectors will ask airport manager to allow FAA inspector to inspect DoD ARFF facility. If DoD has informed airport that DoD will not allow inspection, then inspector will neither request access nor contact DoD facility manager. FAA will issue guidance once situation is resolved 18 18
Reauthorization Legislative Issues Need three critical elements: Ticket tax revenue Appropriation Authorization Subtitle VII of Title 49, United States Code Relevant sections of the Internal Revenue Code Annual appropriations legislation 19 19
History of the current authorizing legislation Airport and Airway Improvement Act 1982 Aviation Safety and Capacity Expansion Act 1990 Federal Aviation Reauth. Act 1996 Vision 100 2003 You are here 2010 1987 Airport and Airway Safety and Capacity Expansion Act 1992 Airport and Airway Safety, Capacity, Noise Improvement and Intermodal Transportation Act 2000 AIR-21 2007 Authorization expired 9/30/2007 (followed by a series of shortterm extensions) 20 20
What does the authorizing statute do? Defines everything from DOT and FAA to airport size classifications, eligibility rules for sponsors and projects to structure of AIP funding categories and regulatory requirements for Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) program. Establishes what FAA has to consider before awarding AIP grants or approving PFCs. Provides authority to obligate funds (if and when funds are actually appropriated). Establishes target levels for appropriators to consider. 21 21
So what s taking so long? Why the hold-up? Several complex issues Single biggest issue is how to solve the problem of declining revenues flowing into the Airport & Airway Trust Fund. Ticket taxes based primarily on a percentage of airfares. Lower airfares mean less ticket-tax revenue. Several other issues as well. 22 22
Appropriated for FY-2010 Appropriated $3,515,000,000 23 23
Short-term extensions of authorization during FY-2010 Part A (through Mar. 31) $2,000,000,000 Part B (through Apr. 30) $333,333,333 Part D (through Aug. 7) $490,342,466 Part C (through Jul. 3) $691,324,201 24 24
Focus on FY-2010 Part A Through Mar. 31 Part B Through Apr. 30 Part C Through Jul. 3 Part D Through Aug. 1 You are here Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 25 25
Impacts of short-term extensions Impact Categories State aeronautical agencies Airport sponsors Consulting community Contracting community FAA Difficulty planning Impacts to bid cycles Uncertainty about entitlements and carryover Increased phasing Protracted construction More potential construction impacts Phased projects can drive increased mobilization costs Delayed bidding can erode competitive bid environment Increased costs means less infrastructure built Problems with material suppliers and subcontractors More grants to administer 26 26
What can airport sponsors and consultants do? Continue to plan. Plan for flexibility. Be ready: Get the design work done Take care of all administrative and legal requirements Secure all required permits (environmental and others) Get bids early in the construction season when competition is strong Consider asking for bids to be honored longer than in the past Structure bids for flexibility (e.g., add-alternates) Stay in touch with the ADO (especially if circumstances change) 27 27
Here s what we re up against Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Jul 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Aug 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 28 28
Didn t the Recovery Act solve this problem? No. American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) simply provided an additional amount of appropriated funds for airport grants, to be administered consistent with AIP rules. Some differences: Funds came from General Fund (rather than the Airport & Airway Trust Fund) Federal share was 100% (no local match required) All other existing rules retained and strengthened, with an even greater degree of oversight required No bearing on FAA s reauthorization 29 29
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act In $ millions for airport grants, compared to FY-2008 AIP $4,000.0 $3,500.0 $3,000.0 $2,500.0 $2,000.0 $1,500.0 $1,000.0 $500.0 $0.0 ARRA Regular AIP Discretionary $1,100.00 $2,015.30 Nonprimary $338.60 State Apportionment $291.30 Cargo $93.50 Passenger $786.40 Note: Total AIP Discretionary in FY-2008 included an unprecedented level of funds (about $622 million) converted because with the uncertainty of the split-year program, many sponsors elected to carry over their Entitlements. 30 30
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (cont d) a.k.a Stimulus Program or Economic Recovery. Enacted February 17, 2009. FAA awarded first ARRA grant March 23, 2009. Fully obligated 100% of funds available for airport grants by December 2009. FAA awarded 326 grants supporting 362 projects, representing approximately $1.097 billion in obligated funds. Sponsors have drawn down $733.8 million (67%) as of July 1, 2010. Of the 362 projects, 240 (66%) are already substantially complete. 31 31
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (cont d) While ARRA projects represent only a fraction of funded projects, they are receiving the greatest amount of visibility ever. Multiple audits currently underway by DOT Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Government Accountability Office (GAO) and others. Significant media attention. Focus on transparency, job reporting, compliance with all Federal laws, audit and reporting compliance. 32 32
Emerging AIP Issues Demand for increased transparency and accountability. Increasing scrutiny of Federal investment decisions. Increasing expectations for oversight on Federally funded projects. Increasing attention to preventing and detecting improper payments. Potential changes in reporting requirements. 33 33
How can airport sponsors and consultants help? Re-familiarize yourself and your staff with all Federal grant requirements. Ensure airport staff and consultant personnel understand the importance of complete, clear and timely documentation. Be prepared to be held accountable in every regard when requesting and accepting Federal funds. 34 34
WAAS/LPV Approaches AC 150/5300-18B identifies the survey deliverables in support of instrument procedure development (IPD). Templates configured to an IPD SOW and the geographic submission formats (Autodesk, ESRI, MicroStation ) are available from Airports GIS website A joint FAA-NGS tiger team was established to expedite the AGIS steps for survey preparation, data acquisition, and deliverable verification. The WAAS office is contracting for surveys in support of WAAS approaches separately from the Office of Airports. Selected airports will be contacted for approval and to coordinate access. As of June 2010, the FAA has published over 2,100 WAAS approaches with vertical guidance. 35 35
Airports GIS and ealp Overview INPUT Survey Data Collection Aerial Photos Airport Planning NASR Data Remote Sensing Ground Surveys NGA* Data/Imagery GIS Other Agencies* Handheld GPS* Airports GIS Data Standards Collection Input AC150/ 5300-16,- 17,-18 Airports Airports GIS GIS https://airports-gis.faa.gov/ OUTPUT NFDC enasr/5010 data Natl Flt Procedures data ioe/aaa data electronic ALP Module enotams Module* NAVAIDS records/data* Airport Design Module* 139 Inspections Module* FAA SOAR Module* Compatible Land Use Module* Misc Engineering Modules* Misc Environmental Modules* 36 36
Airports GIS and ealp Benefits to airport operators Efficiency gains Improved analysis of airport geometry changes Shortened ALP review and approval cycle Promotes real-time collaborative decisions Used for Emergency planning, operations, airfield inspections, and maintenance Electronic notifications - enotams, enras Simpler and faster grant and environmental coordination and approvals Faster updates 5010/NASR changes reflected in FAA documents New capabilities Automated checking of airfield design conflicts early in the planning process 3D-visualization of airfield layout and operations Improves training and situational awareness 37 37
Airports GIS and ealp Benefits to airport operators Environmental benefits No hard-copy ALPs to print or ship Web access by various users at multiple locations Airport access Potentially improved approach minima through higher accuracy code assigned to obstacle data Reduced life-cycle cost Use of data in AGIS for planning and design rather than re-creating (e.g. contour data). ALP updates will start with existing, validated data Foundation for broader GIS applications Basis for local GIS systems to manage non-faa related items (e.g., more detailed facility and utility information, facility management tools, real estate and leasing functions, etc.) 38 38
Airports GIS and ealp Benefits to airport operators Additional linkages Airport Airspace Analysis Signage and marking plans Pavement management capability Safety Management Systems (SMS) Line-of-sight tools Access to imaginary surfaces 39 39
AGIS and ealp Preliminary Benefit-Cost Analysis Estimate payback of initial investment in 4 years Benefit-cost ratio between 2.0 and 5.1 to 1 Cumulative net benefit of $1.8B over 14 years Most of the cost is in data collection Most of the benefits are realized by the airports 40 40
AGIS and ealp Preliminary Benefit-Cost Analysis Estimated costs $0.9B (rough estimate based on preliminary analysis) 41 41
AGIS and ealp Preliminary Benefit-Cost Analysis Estimated benefits $2.75B (rough estimate based on preliminary analysis) 42 42
Airports GIS and ealp Pilot Program Objectives Phase I FY09 Southwest Region six (6) airports of varying size plus Hartsfield Atlanta FY10 Remaining Regions 30 airports of varying size Phase II Incrementally increase the number of Airports, consultants, and FAA staff knowledgeable with AGIS requirements and processes Integrate planning efforts with the Airports GIS data collection activities Determine best practices Collect and analyze detailed cost information for better long-term funding estimates Identify and utilize resources to conduct independent fee analysis Create ealps for FAA review and approval [initially generating PDF files for FAA coordination] Identify opportunities to create legacy ALPs using AGIS data, until ealp is ready for production 43 43
Airports GIS and ealp Historical perspective Personal computers Fax machines Email Internet Cell phones Smart phones Google Earth 44 44
Sustainability in airport planning Wide variety of practices applicable to planning, design, building and operating airport facilities. Core principles Protecting the environment; Maintaining high and stable levels of economic growth; and Social progress that recognizes all stakeholders' needs. Paradigm shift Traditionally looked at how to accommodate projected demand and the associated environmental impacts. Now looking at sustainability issues during the planning process (core objective rather than secondary consideration). 45 45
Sustainability in airport planning (cont d) Benefits Reduced energy consumption Reduced noise impacts Reduced hazardous and solid waste generation Reduced greenhouse gas emissions Improved water quality Improved community relations Cost savings 46 46
Sustainability in airport planning (cont d) Core elements of a sustainability plan Written sustainability policy or mission statement and a description of how it is communicated to airport employees, tenants, and the community. Define sustainability categories at the airport. Conduct a baseline inventory or assessment of each defined sustainability category. Measurable goals to minimize impacts or consumption to reduce the airport s overall environmental footprint. Range of specific sustainability initiatives. Public participation and community outreach. 47 47
Sustainability in airport planning (cont d) Timeframe for completing pilot projects: Airport Size Category General Aviation Relievers Nonhub primary Small, Medium and Large hubs Timeframe for completion 12 months 12 months 12-18 months 18-24 months 48 48
Challenges of a Thank you! Growing Aviation System Questions? Presentation to: Name: Date: Elliott Black Deputy Director Office of Airport Planning and Programming (202) 267-8775 elliott.black@faa.gov