Airside Snow Removal Practices for Small Airports with Limited Budgets (2015)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

19 This section addresses the procurement or acquisition of snow removal equipment, equipment cur- rently used and preferred, the type and age of SRE being used at the surveyed airports, and the need for storage shelters and weather protection. TYPE OF EQUIPMENT Guidance from the FAA is intended to have the airport operator maintain its runways and taxiways in a “no worse than wet” condition during inclement weather (AC150/5200-30C 2008) (Figure 5). The goal reflects the detrimental effect any contamination of the runway surfaces can have on safe aircraft operations. Planning to achieve the goal includes consideration of the types of SRE that can achieve the goal, given the expected weather conditions; aircraft activity levels; and other user demands at the airport. The FAA suggests the minimum equipment for non-commercial service airports, based upon the number of operations and the amount of snowfall (Table 15). This information can be used to justify the acquisition of SRE under AIP. AC 150/5200-30C provides guidance based on recommended performance requirements for clearing pavement on an airport. Factors include: • amount of pavement surface area to plow • length of time to remove snow per guidance material • maneuverability • multi-purpose capability • funding restrictions • purchase price • operating costs • storage size needed • speed of vehicle • safety design and functionality • visibility • compatibility with other equipment • ease of maintenance. Snow removal activity can be performed using different types of equipment. Basic to most airports is some type of displacement plow vehicle, whether the plow is mounted on the front of a truck chassis with a “bat wing” attachment, or a road grader with the blade underneath the chassis (Figure 6). A basic dump truck type of chassis with a plow has the ability to add a sanding, de-icing/anti-icing agent, or a high velocity air unit. Interchangeable blades can be used to address different snow conditions. Higher activity airports may choose to have a broom (sweeper) in their SRE arsenal. Brooms are most effective at tackling light and dry snow accumulations, and for cleaning up residual snow from plowing or blowing operations. Removing snow before it can accumulate can reduce the amount of sand or de-icing material needed (Figure 7). For airports routinely experiencing a heavy wet snow, a rotary snowblower is a necessary piece of SRE. As a plow pushes the snow to the side, the resulting snow banks create a hazard to aircraft. chapter three EQUIPMENT

20 The heavy wet snow is also difficult for the plow to move. A snowblower is better able to remove the heavy snow or snowbanks (Figure 8). A front-end loader with both bucket and blade attachments is useful for removing large or heavy accumulations of snow or, in the absence of a snowblower, removing hazardous snowbanks (Figure 9). A high velocity air blower can help to move snow residue off of paved surfaces and result in a clean dry surface. A material spreader (sand or de-icing/anti-icing material) can be loaded on the back of a chassis or be a separate vehicle. Some airports are creative, using a converted agricultural sprayer on a trailer or back of a pickup truck for spreading liquid de-icing/anti-icer, or a converted farm grain drill for chemical de-icer. FIGURE 5 Example of pavement being cleared to a “no worse than wet” condition with a sweeper assembly. Photo credit: C. Lawson, Romeoville, Illinois. Source: AC150/5220-20A 2007. TABLE 15 FAA RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MINIMUM TYPE AND NUMBER OF SRE AT NON-COMMERCIAL SERVICE AIRPORTS

21 FIGURE 6 Typical snowplow vehicle with front blade, bat wing plow, and sand spreader. Photo credit: G. Sussey, Watertown, New York. FIGURE 7 Typical multi-purpose tractor vehicle with sweeper attachment. Photo credit: R. Horn, Eagle River, Wisconsin. FIGURE 8 View of snowblower removing a plowed windrow. Photo credit: M. Moriarty, Keene, New Hampshire.

22 Table 16 provides a list of the different vehicles and equipment in use at the surveyed airports. Interpretations were made of some of the descriptions used by the respondents to assist in grouping the responses. Large trucks with plows, pickups with plows, loaders, large blowers, blower attachments, and sweepers are the predominant SRE used. It is noteworthy that only one airport has a de-ice sprayer. FIGURE 9 Example of a frontend loader with ramp plow moving a large volume of snow. Photo credit: M. Daugherty, Mansfield, Ohio. Case Study: Steamboat Springs Airport, Colorado Steamboat Springs Airport has a particular problem with snow accumulation, as it routinely extends above the runway lights. Because of the limited airport property area, the additional accumulation of snow from the snowblower in the safety areas became a problem. The airport’s solution was to lease a tracked Snowcat from the local ski resort to groom the safety areas. The Snowcat has reduced from days to hours the time needed to address safety area accumulations. An added benefit is the compacted snow acts as an arresting system for aircraft that may (as some have) overrun the runway. Another challenge for Steamboat Springs is its use of personnel. As the airport operates the FBO, the employees engaged in snow removal are the same as those who provide FBO services. This results in a strain on scheduling and manpower. The airport manager reduces some of the pressure by supplementing his crew, hiring retired and experienced equipment operators from the local community. VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT NEEDS AND AGE Small airports with limited budgets and minimal ability to tap into FAA funding have a mix of new and old equipment. Table 17 provides an overview of the equipment used at the surveyed airports, which ranged in age from one to 66 years old. Commercial service airports had the newest equipment while local airports had the oldest fleets. Equipment funded through the AIP program is expected to last at least 10 years before a replacement can be funded through AIP. Table 17 includes all SRE on the airports. The effects of weather, use, and maintenance practices can lead to premature aging and depreciation of vehicles or equipment. The equipment in the following tables includes all pieces of major equipment and separate attachments. A survey question asked how many SREs are in need of replacement. Table 18 indicates reliever category airports have the greatest need to replace vehicles or equipment (41%), closely followed by local airports (39%). The figures indicating a need for replacement do not include any additional pieces of equipment, only for replacement of existing SRE. At some airports, vehicles or equipment are shared with others, such as with a public works depart- ment. If a vehicle or equipment is purchased with federal funds (and in some cases with state funds), the vehicle is required under the agreement to be dedicated for use only at the airport. Table 19 indicates regional, reliever, and NPCS airports in the survey are self-sufficient in their vehicle needs and use, while basic and local category airports rely on vehicles and equipment from other governmental departments.

23 Vehicle/Equipment Basic Local Regional Reliever NP COMM SVC TOTAL Large truck w/plow 2 12 6 8 43 Plow w/sander unit — 3 — — — 3 Plow attachment — 2 1 8 — 11 Pick-up w/plow 3 14 8 4 2 31 Ramp plow — 1 — — — 1 Large blower 1 13 1 — 2 17 Blower attachment 3 5 3 3 1 13 Tractor — 3 — — — 3 Tractor w/bucket — 2 — — — 2 Tractor w/plow 2 5 4 2 2 15 Tractor w/blower 1 1 1 2 2 7 Tractor w/broom — 1 — — — 1 Bulldozer — 2 1 2 — 5 Grader 1 1 1 1 — 4 Loader 2 16 6 7 1 32 Bucket attachment — 2 — — — 2 Loader w/plow — 1 — — — 3 Push box attachment — 3 — — — 1 Sweeper/broom 2 4 6 4 — 16 Large truck w/broom — 3 — — — 3 Broom w/air — — 2 — — 2 Snowcat w/tiller — 1 — — — 1 Sand truck — 1 — — 1 2 Dump truck — 4 — — — 4 Backhoe — — 2 — — 2 De-icer sprayer — — 1 — 1 Total 17 103 49 39 19 227 — = no data. Source: SMQ Airport Services. TABLE 16 LIST OF THE DIFFERENT VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT IN USE AT THE SURVEYED AIRPORTS Vehicle/Equipment Age Basic Local Regional Reliever NP COMM SVC Age range 1 to 41 years 1 to 66 years 1 to 36 years 1 to 34 years 1 to 22 years Average age (years) 13.4 18.8 15.7 14.4 11.3 Median age (years) 10 14 22 12 11 Total Number of Vehicles/Equipment 17 95 40 34 18 Source: SMQ Airport Services. TABLE 17 RANGE, AGE, NEED FOR REPLACEMENT, AND WHETHER EQUIPMENT IS A SHARED RESOURCE WITH OTHERS Replacement Need Basic Local Regional Reliever NP COMM SVC Vehicle/equipment should be replaced 3 (17.6%) 36 (37.9%) 12 (30.0%) 14 (41.2%) 4 (22.2%) Total Number of Vehicles/Equipment 17 95 40 34 18 Source: SMQ Airport Services. TABLE 18 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF VEHICLES THAT NEED REPLACEMENT AT SURVEYED AIRPORTS

24 When asked what pieces of snow removal equipment, changes in policies or procedures, or other action would help improve snow removal operations, airports in the basic category focused on the need for equipment, in particular snowblowers (three of six airports). For the local category airports, new or additional equipment was also the focus, though more so for sweepers, plows and loaders. One manager pointed to the need for airport-owned equipment so he would not have to rely on the city to provide the equipment. Multi-purpose vehicles were more commonly mentioned at the local level than at other levels. For the regional and NPCS airports, two airport operators in each category mentioned the addition of multi-purpose vehicles as being their preferred means to improve operation. At the reliever level, more specialized equipment was cited, such as a sweeper, front-end loader, de-icing unit or a snow- melter. Two airports commented that a typical large-scale plow would be too big for their operation; they preferred a mid-sized plow vehicle that had greater maneuverability to work on the ramp and taxiways and paved narrow areas of the airport. One operator commented on the AIP restriction of only one vehicle purchase every 10 years, when the need exists at his airport for additional equipment. He is restricted to purchasing older or surplus equipment if he cannot justify the need to the local ADO. The older equipment breaks down more often and parts availability makes it difficult for the manager to properly perform snow removal and keep the equipment operating. Three operators mentioned a need to replace equipment on a regularly scheduled basis, but the availability of local funds had been delayed. Tables 20 through 24 provide a graphic com- parison of the number and age of vehicles and equipment at the different categories of airports. Local category airports have the largest spread and age of SRE while commercial service airports have the lowest spread and newest SRE. Gaps in SRE purchases between 1996 to 2000 (14 to 16 years of age) for the regional, reliever, and NPCS category airports may be partially explained by lapses in AIP authorization. A spike in purchases of SRE equipment from 2000 to 2003 (14 to 11 years of age) may be partially explained by passage of the Wendall H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century of 2000 (49 U.S.C. 40101). The Vision 100: Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act of 2003 continued investment and AIP authorization. Both acts authorized federal grant shares of 93.75%, meaning the required local contribution was 6.25% of costs rather than the previous AIP share. The local share cost reverted back to a 10% in 2012. For airports that provide essential air service and are located in economically depressed areas, which primarily applies to Alaska, the FAA policy is for eligible funding at the 95% level. Although the design life of a SRE is expected to be at least 10 years, the tables show that more than 66% (140 of 213) of the total number of SRE for all airport categories is older than 10 years of age. Twenty-seven percent (27%, or 57 of 213) are older than 20 years. As SRE ages, replacement part availability and continued maintenance can become difficult. EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE An important component of any winter maintenance operation is to have fully operational vehicles and equipment. However, limited budgets were found to cause issues for maintenance and repairs at the surveyed airports. An example of the effects of a limited budget is shown in Figure 10. The steel blade Number of SRE Shared Basic (6) Local (21) Regional (7) Reliever (6) NP COMM SVC (6) Shared Vehicle/ Equipment 7 (41.2%) 13 (13.7%) 0 (0%) 1 (3.0%) 1 (5.6%) Total Number of Vehicles/Equipment 17 95 40 34 18 Source: SMQ Airport Services. TABLE 19 NUMBER OF SRE SHARED WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS

25 Note: SRE total is 17. Source: SMQ Airport Services. 02 4 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41Numb er o f Eq ui pm en t Equipment Age in Years TABLE 20 NUMBER AND AGE OF EQUIPMENT FOR BASIC AIRPORTS IN THE SURVEY Note: SRE total is 93. Source: SMQ Airport Services. 0 5 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66Nu m be r o f Eq ui pm en t Equipment Age in Years TABLE 21 NUMBER AND AGE OF EQUIPMENT FOR LOCAL AIRPORTS IN THE SURVEY Note: SRE total is 45. Source: SMQ Airport Services. 05 10 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36Numb er o f Eq ui pm en t Equipment Age in Years TABLE 22 NUMBER AND AGE OF EQUIPMENT FOR REGIONAL AIRPORTS IN THE SURVEY Note: SRE total is 40. Source: SMQ Airport Services. 05 10 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36Numb er o f Eq ui pm en t Equipment Age in Years TABLE 23 NUMBER AND AGE OF EQUIPMENT FOR RELIEVER AIRPORTS IN THE SURVEY Note: SRE total is18. Source: SMQ Airport Services. 02 4 1 6 11 16 21 26Numv er o f Eq ui pm en t Equipment Age in Years TABLE 24 NUMBER AND AGE OF EQUIPMENT FOR NONPRIMARY COMMERCIAL SERVICE AIRPORTS IN THE SURVEY

26 struck a stormwater grate on the apron and broke two feet of the steel blade and moldboard attachment. The airport budget was not able to accommodate repairs or a new moldboard, thus making snow removal more difficult. Table 25 provides an outline of who conducts maintenance on airport SRE. The majority of airports that maintain their own vehicles report constraints. Respondents indi- cated they often have to contract out heavy (meaning a lift is necessary) or major maintenance and repairs beyond their in-house capabilities. Difficulties in having immediate maintenance work performed arose when airport vehicles or equipment were not included in a municipality’s fleet main- tenance program; scheduling of work had low priority compared with other PWD work; or qualified and readily available outside maintenance assistance was not available during a winter snow event. SNOWPLOW BLADES Four types of cutting edge blades on snowplow moldboards are common: steel, carbon-tipped, ure- thane, and rubber. Poly or urethane blades are common because of their lower cost and reduced pave- ment wear characteristics. Carbon-tipped and steel blades are well suited for heavy snow or where a bond has started to form between the snow and pavement. In-pavement lights would preclude the use of steel or carbon blades. If highway department plows are to be used, the type of blade used is restricted to what the PWD uses. A common maintenance expense is blade replacement. Airport maintenance personnel routinely extend the useful life of a blade by flipping it over as wear progresses. Blade life is also extended by preventing the blade from resting on the pavement surface. One airport suggests adding adjustable pads or caster wheels to raise the moldboard to a set level to relieve pressure on the blade, resulting in better vehicle maneuverability and extending the life of painted and thermoplastic pavement mark- ings. However, it also results residual snow left on the surface that might freeze or obscure markings. A sweeper or high velocity air fan may be able to remove what remains on the surface, depending on the type of snow present. For ice conditions on the runway, the full pressure from a cutting blade is desirable to scarify and cut the ice. FIGURE 10 Example of plow damage not repaired due to budget issues. Photo credit: S. Quilty, SMQ Airport Services. Maintenance Basic Local Regional Reliever NP COMM SVC In-house 3 6 1 5 1 City/County Fleet 1 7 4 1 3 Outside Contractor 2 8 2 — 2 — = no data. Source: SMQ Airport Services. TABLE 25 IDENTIFICATION OF WHO HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OF SRE

27 In Alaska, where gravel runways prevail at rural airports, the practice is to compact the snow using a drag plate, roller, or vehicle. The snow removal operator is then instructed to raise the blade 1 to 1.5 inches above the gravel surface. This practice reduces the possibility of eliminating the slope or crown of the runway and the removal of a protective gravel surface coating. SNOW REMOVAL EQUIPMENT BUILDINGS Cold and inclement weather can accelerate the deterioration of SRE, affecting their operation and life span. Materials such as sand or de-icing/anti-icing chemicals require storage to maintain their effectiveness. Buildings for Storage and Maintenance of Airport Snow and Ice Control Equipment and Materials (AC 150/5220-18A 2007) provides guidelines and recommendations for suitable facilities. In the AC, the FAA recommends all airport equipment and material be protected from the elements. For Part 139 airports, it is a requirement. The FAA will provide funding assistance, as will most states, for the construction of SREBs and facilities to house the equipment. In Alaska, the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) will not place SRE on an airport unless it is sheltered. Shelters for sand or chemical agents are also an AIP eligible item. For AIP eligible facilities, there are restrictions on the size of the building covered by the grant. Costs beyond basic needs can be deemed ineligible for federal assistance and would be borne solely by the airport sponsor. Specifically, space for personnel quarters, training, or other non-equipment storage functions is not an eligible item (FAA Order 5800.38D 2014). An airport will need to have a SICP to be eligible for SREB funding, as the SICP identifies the total Priority 1 paved area to be maintained. The Priority 1 paved area determines what eligible equipment the FAA deems appropriate for an airport and, therefore, is to be sheltered. Appendix J provides an excerpt from the FAA AIP Handbook that provides guidance to the ADOs and to airports on the eligibility and requirements for acquiring SREB under AIP. Airports with limited budgets or low activity, especially the basic category airports, are less likely to have shelter available for their snow vehicles or equipment. Reliever and NPCS airports are able to shelter 100% of their equipment (Table 26). The survey did not ask if the available shelter was built using AIP or other grant money. SUMMARY This chapter discusses the types of SRE airports need to achieve a pavement condition goal of “no worse than wet.” Although the FAA recommends a snowblower as the primary acquisition, few smaller airports have them because they are not able to use AIP funding. A table is provided for an airport to calculate the number and type of equipment to be used given the number of operations, type of airport, and typical annual snowfall amounts. Equipment funded through the AIP program is expected to last at least 10 years. However, the average age of SRE at surveyed airports ranges from 11 to 18 years, with some older than 40 years still in service. Several airports expressed a desire for multi-purpose vehicles and for mid-sized plow vehicles that could maneuver on smaller service areas. In addition, most airports have to rely on larger public works departments or outside facilities to help maintain SRE. Equipment/Vehicle Sheltering Basic Local Regional Reliever NP COMM SVC Shelter Provided 9 (52.9%) 85 (91.4%) 39 (97.5%) 34 (100%) 18 (100%) Number of Vehicles 17 93 39 34 18 Source: SMQ Airport Services. TABLE 26 NUMBER AND PERCENT OF VEHICLES OR EQUIPMENT SHELTERED AT AIRPORTS