Navigate – FAA Priorities and Grants Western-Pacific Region Association of California Airports 2018 FAA September 14, 2018

Presentation Overview Environmental Considerations Gail Campos Environmental Protection Specialist, LAX-ADO Navigate – FAA Priorities and Grants Al Richardson, Assistant Manager LAX-ADO Laurie Suttmeier, Assistant Manager SFO-ADO

Environmental Considerations

Presentation Overview The Importance of Proper Planning Purpose and Need and the Proposed Action Common Trouble Spots

Appropriate Planning is Critical for the Environmental Process Master Plan ALP Feasibility Studies Noise Studies Environmental Determination CatEx EA EIS Project Implementation Construction

Can’t I just get the EA over first? Planning and environmental tasks are related and similar (See Chapter 5 in in FAA Order 5050.4B. It is important for planners and environmental specialists to begin collaboration earlier than has been the case in the past. An action on the categorically excluded list is not automatically a categorical exclusion, the FAA has to review whether any potential extraordinary circumstances exist. A project with impacts may not require and EA or EIS because they do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the environment.

Why Consider Environmental Factors During Planning? Helps airport sponsors make informed decisions. To avoid a previously unforeseen problem. Environmental issues may cause you to adjust your proposed project. Ensures efficient, timely, and effective NEPA review. Determining what level of environmental documentation is required Considerations of Extraordinary Circumstances It assists you to put a shovel in the ground faster.

Project Development & NEPA Process Pre-NEPA activities: Planning studies (e.g. master plan, feasibility), $, Fed action? To determine the level of NEPA review, FAA needs sufficient project information/data Engineering Design and NEPA Sufficient design to support NEPA activities (Preliminary engineering ~ 25% design limitation) Final design activities, property acquisition… project construction shall not proceed until CATEX, FONSI, or ROD have been issued (40 CFR 1506.1).

Proper planning includes FAA review/approval of: Aviation Activity Forecast and Critical Aircraft Obstruction Mitigation Plans Site selection studies Review the adequacy of the planning alternative analysis ALP set and associated airspace case study Planning study and associated capital improvement program Proper planning includes FAA review/approval of: Aviation Activity Forecast and Critical Aircraft. Obstruction Mitigation Plans. Site selection studies. Review the adequacy of the planning alternative analysis. Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Drawing Set and associated airspace case study. Planning study and associated capital improvement program. Airport Master Plan Study should identify and justify the airport facility’s True Needs for the planning horizon.

Planning and NEPA Purpose and Need “Purpose & Need” = what is the problem and how do we fix it Airport planning study provides the justification and basis of a proposed action Consideration of environmental factors as a task Airport planning process Related baseline environmental consideration How does planning set the groundwork for NEPA? One of the first things that NEPA looks at is a clear Purpose and Need, which is a NEPA term that refers to a section of an environmental document the describes the purpose of, and need for, the proposed action. An airport planning study provides the justification and basis for a project’s Purpose & Need in subsequent environmental evaluation and NEPA analysis of Alternatives. Consideration of environmental factors as a Task within the airport planning study is appropriate for the planning large complex projects, as well as smaller scope planning projects. The Airport Sponsor should always complete the airport planning process and any related baseline environmental consideration prior to commencing preparation of an EA or EIS.

Define the Proposed Action / Project Description Clearly describe the details of the proposed project: what are you building, repairing, etc.; what are connected actions; what equipment is needed; where is the staging area; what is the timeline Maps/drawings/photos to show the project footprint and surroundings are important This allows us to determine the extent of potential impacts

Planning Environmental Baseline Preliminary identification of potential, or known, environmental features Air quality impacts Noise impacts Wetlands Flood Zones Historic or Cultural features DOT Section 4(f) features Biological Resources Water resources Compatible land use Surface traffic issues Not part of NEPA Planning Environmental Baseline - As a Task, the Airport Master Planning study can include a preliminary identification of potential, or known, environmental features. This Environmental Baseline can include preliminary identification of potential or known environmental features can include: Major airport drainage ditches Wetlands Flood Zones Historic or Cultural features DOT Section 4(f) features Flora/Fauna This Environmental Baseline is not intended to be part of the NEPA process. It is to ensure that supportable and consistent planning data is provided. It can be used to avoid any sensitive or protected resources during your planning efforts.

Common Trouble Spots Using a CEQA document for NEPA Purpose and Need Project Description Alternatives Federal Resources Compliance with Special Purpose Laws While most issues may be addressed in a similar manner under both NEPA and CEQA documentation, there are differences that must be noted:  A primary difference is the way significance is determined and discussed in environmental documents Under NEPA, significance is used to determine whether an EIS, or some lower level of documentation, will be required Don’t use a CEQA document and label it “NEPA” FAA recommends separate documents NEPA - “less than significance” is not used. Alternative impacts are compared to the “no action” alternative to determine impacts. NEPA requires an EIS when the proposed project “as a whole” has the potential to “significantly affect the quality of the human environment”   Some impacts determined to be significant under CEQA guidelines may not be of sufficient magnitude to be determined significant under NEPA

Common Trouble Spots Cumulative Effects Responses to Public Comments Response to Resource Agency Concerns Accounting for New Information Insufficient Administrative Record Relying on FAA to edit the document

Who can help me with this? Airport Staff members An airport consultant with experience in both planning and federal environmental documentation The FAA Airports District or Regional Office Environmental Protection Specialists

Navigate – FAA Priorities and Grants FAA Management Panel Al Richardson, P.E., Assistant Manager, Los Angeles Airports District Office Laurie Suttmeier, Assistant Manager, San Francisco Airports District Office

Presentation Overview AWP AIP Program Runway Incursion Mitigation Program Pavement Project Justification Supplemental Funding ADO Contact Info and References

AWP AIP Program Corporate Approach AWP is always striving to invest AIP funds most strategically and efficiently We don’t lack important, good projects in AWP! AWP looked at best practices across the Country Our funds are limited: $459 M. Average grant: $2.4 M

AWP AIP Program How AWP worked before. Entitlement is predetermined by each airport site, and is attached to that site, unless sponsors transfer. State Apportionment is by state, of course.* Each Airports District Office works from prescribed ceilings for Discretionary funds. *Except for California which has So and No. ceilings. Some Pacific sites have no apportionment funds.

How the AIP Board works now. AWP AIP Program How the AIP Board works now. AWP AIP Board AWP-610 Arlene Draper (Chair) LAX-ADO David Cushing PHX-ADO Mike Williams HNL-ADO Gordon Wong SFO-ADO Manager AWP-620 Brian Armstrong

How the AIP Board works now. AWP AIP Program How the AIP Board works now. Board will determine AIP Projects receiving Discretionary Funding and will review some CA State Apportionment, in the prior year. (Now we’re looking at FY2019) Board will both ‘prioritize’ and ‘sequence’ AIP discretionary grants. (more on this later) Will review near and mid-term ACIP to predict big-ticket items and discuss discretionary candidates in advance.

How the Board will work, over time. AWP AIP Program How the Board will work, over time. Board will review ACIP formulation to predict big-ticket items further and further into the future. Board will examine trends in spending, including grant performance, and ACIP work codes to aid in guidance and focus in the future. Board will review success of past grants and grant performance. (Learning Lessons and Incorporating)

What does this mean for sponsors? AWP AIP Program What does this mean for sponsors? To be in the best position, be early, ready and certain. High Priority and First Sequence. Only delay bids or hold open alternative bid options at the counsel of the ADO, barring unusual circumstances. Keep to our deadlines and calendar with which you are all so familiar.

AWP AIP Program FAA Regional and National Priorities will impact decisions. Runway Incursion Mitigation Program (RIM) Pavement Management and Preservation. Your past grant performance will likely impact your ADO Manager’s ability to argue for Discretionary Funding.

Runway Incursion Mitigation Program (RIM) Inventory based on National Runway Safety Report and the FAA Aviation Safety Analysis Information Sharing System Website http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/apex/f?p=100:1:0::NO FAA staff tracks RIM locations and works with sponsors to include needed studies and potential projects for mitigation in their ACIP programs if appropriate 25

Runway Incursion Mitigation Program (RIM) Inventory of incursion locations National prioritized plan for study and mitigation Aim is improved safety AIP funding may be used for study and for correction of geometry For More Explanation, Watch the RIM Program video: https://www.faa.gov/airports/special_programs/rim/ Airfield geometry has been identified as a primary contributing factor for runway incursions. After analyzing more than six years of national runway incursion data between 2007 and 2013, we developed a preliminary inventory of locations (initial version released in July 2015) at airports where risk factors might contribute to a runway incursion. To address these existing issues, we have initiated a new comprehensive multi-year Runway Incursion Management (RIM) program to identify, prioritize, and develop strategies to help airport sponsors mitigate risk at these locations. Learn more about the RIM program. 26

Pavement Project Justification For all paving and pavement maintenance projects: The sponsor has satisfactorily complied with assurances on pavement maintenance. The length and width of the pavement work must be based on critical aircraft justification per Paragraph 3-11. For Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Projects: The work must be supported (by) a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) or planning study. The pavement must not have been reconstructed within the last 20 years, rehabilitated within the last 10 years or resealed within the last 3 years without further justification acceptable to the ADO. 27

Supplemental Funding Program Supplemental $1 billion funding – what it is, and what it is not: It’s all discretionary funding Projects must be AIP eligible. For non-primary airports, it’s 100% funding (no local match); primary airport projects are funded at the regular AIP percentage. Statutory direction to give “Priority Consideration” to smaller and rural airports. All NPIAS airports can compete for future distributions of supplemental funding. Funding doesn’t expire at the end of FY-2018—FAA has until the end of FY-2020 to expend the $1B. ADO Advice: Sell your project; Be very clear, concise and thorough in your justifications!

Contact Us – David Cushing – Manager, Los Angeles ADO dave.cushing@faa.gov (424-405-7266) Al Richardson– Asst. Manager, Los Angeles ADO al.richardson@faa.gov (424-405-7267) Mike Williams– Manager, Phoenix ADO mike.n.williams@faa.gov (602-792-1064) Holly L. Dixon, P.E. – Asst. Manager, Phoenix ADO holly.l.dixon@faa.gov (602-792-1053) Laurie Suttmeier – Asst. Manager, San Francisco ADO laurie.suttmeier@faa.gov (650-827-7602) Gordon Wong –Manager, Honolulu ADO gordon.wong@faa.gov (808-312-6029)

References AIP Handbook – Order 5100.38D https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/aip_handbook/ FAA Airport Compliance Manual - Order 5190.6B https://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/orders/compliance_5190_6/ FAA Grant Assurances https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant_assurances/ Guidelines and Procedures for Maintenance of Airport Pavements (10-10-2014) https://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentNumber/150_5380-6C Pavement Maintenance Management Program (10-10-2014) https://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentNumber/150_5380-7B

Questions?

Thank You! Gail Campos Al Richardson Laurie J. Suttmeier Environmental Protection Specialist, LAX-ADO, El Segundo, CA (424) 405-7269 | gail.compos@faa.gov Al Richardson Assistant Manager LAX-ADO, El Segundo, CA (424) 405-7267 | Al.Richardson@faa.gov Laurie J. Suttmeier Assistant Manager SFO-ADO, Brisbane CA (650) 827-7602 | laurie.suttmeier@faa.gov