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.
18 A P P E N D I X A Overview The project was divided into 16 tasks based on the Request for Proposal (RFP). The research phase of the project was executed through the following tasks: Task 1: Project Kickoff and Amplified Work Plan Task 2: Document Collection, Review, and Summary of Applicable Regulations/Guidance Task 3: Existing Stormwater Management Options Review and Summary Task 4: Checklist of Potential State and/or Local Environ mental Considerations for Stormwater Management that May Affect Wildlife Hazard Management Task 5: Math and Logic of Bird Strike Risk Analysis Tool Task 6: Factors to Be Considered in Stormwater Management Decision Tool Task 7: Airports Selected for Case Studies and ACRP Con ference Call Task 8: Update Work Plan and Budget Task 9: Prepare Interim Report Task 10: Meeting with ACRP Project Panel Task 11: Airport Case Studies Task 12: Draft Final Tool Development Task 13: Prepare Draft Final Report Task 14: ACRP Panel Conference Call Task 15: Final Tool Development Task 16: Final Report Tasks 1 through 13 are complete and are described in this appendix. Following Task 14 ACRP Panel Conference Call, the research team finalized the tool and this report, thus complet ing Tasks 14 through 16. Task 1 Project Kickoff and Amplified Research Plan As required by the research contract and as our first step, the research team submitted an electronic copy of an Ampli fied Research Plan (work plan) to the project panel. This plan provided an expansion of the approved Research Plan as out lined in our proposal. The project panel reviewed the work plan and provided comments to the research team. The research team responded to the project panel comments, revised the work plan, and provided the response to comments and final work plan to the Program Officer. Task 2 Document Collection, Review, and Summary of Applicable Regulations/Guidance The research team compiled available and applicable docu ments relevant to this project including: FAA Orders and Advisory Circulars Federal water resource regulations Water resource guidance documents Regulatory compliance guidance documents ACRP reports and syntheses USDA NWRC publications and research Bird Strike North America conference presentations Aviation and nonÂaviationÂrelated stormwater management literature Our research team members, as practitioners in the avia tion industry, already possessed or had ready access to most of these documents. ESIS and STAR personnel have been active in the FAA SMS testing and implementation efforts, partici pating with airports in each of the FAA pilot SMS studies, to include wildlife risk assessments. STAR also has the reputa tion for being an SMS expert, in general industry as well as airport operations. Additionally, GS&P recently completed ACRP Reports 43 and 53, which summarize water resources related regulatory requirements and wildlife management requirements. Through the completion of these projects for ACRP, a significant amount of research was already com Research Approach and Data Library
19 pleted and the effort to summarize critical information for evaluation, reference, and/or inclusion in the tools and asso ciated guidance was streamlined. A document library was maintained in electronic format utilizing Egnyte, a secure file sharing storage site, accessible by all of our team members, which currently contains over 80 documents or document links. A current listing of all docu ments contained in the data library is included in Appendix A. Other project documents, databases, and project manage ment tools obtained or developed during subsequent work plan tasks are maintained on this web site as well. Document control, data accessibility, and timely information sharing are critical to our ACRP team communication and coordination. Based on the review of regulatory documents, the research team prepared a comprehensive matrix of federal storm water and wildlife management regulations. The summary focused on those requirements that result in the need for an airport to implement a stormwater management option on or nearby an airport property. For those regulations with similar requirements for similar controls, the regulations were grouped to simplify the matrix. A copy of the summary matrix is included as Appendix B. Task 3 Existing Stormwater Management Options Review and Summary Task 3 included establishing a list of stormwater manage ment BMPs that are typically required or recommended by stormwater management professionals to manage the quality or quantity of stormwater discharged from an airport prop erty. These stormwater management BMPs typically provide for temporary onÂsite detention to facilitate treatment or the attenuation of peak flows, in an effort to minimize the effects of new or redevelopment and mimic preÂdevelopment dis charge conditions. Utilizing information from the document library, estab lished in Task 2, the research team established a matrix of potential stormwater BMPs and characteristics that should be considered when determining the most appropriate BMP, included as Appendix C. The research team also reviewed the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) SELECT tool and the Washington Department of Transportation (WashDOT) Aviation Stormwater Design Manual: Manag- ing Wildlife Hazards Near Airports to help develop the list of stormwater management options that were integrated into the tool. Based on our knowledge about the attractiveness of storm water management facilities to birds, the influence storm water management options can have on bird behavior, various stormwater mitigation options, and published research, the research team developed a matrix that considered strike likelihood risk factors of BMP characteristics. The matrix is included as Appendix D. Task 4 Checklist of Potential State and/or Local Environmental Considerations for Stormwater Management that May Affect Wildlife Hazard Management The research team recognizes that environmental regula tions driving stormwater management vary greatly among states and cities. To characterize the range of these diverse conditions while maintaining a realistic data collection ini tiative, we performed a review of stormwater management requirements in five states (Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Min nesota, Washington, and Floridaâs Southwestern Water Man agement District) and five local municipalities (Columbus, Ohio; Portland, Oregon; Dallas, Texas; Roanoke, Virginia; and Memphis, Tennessee) in different FAA regions. We estab lished a local environmental considerations matrix composed of regulated stormwater features and the potential effect on wildlife management, included as Appendix E. Task 5 Math and Logic of Bird Strike Risk Analysis Tool A risk assessment is the qualitative and/or quantitative value of a risk (a specific activity with an undesirable out come) based on a specific situation or event and a recognized hazard. To quantify the risk associated with construction of potential wildlife attractants (stormwater management facili ties on airport property), two parameters were evaluated: The severity (or magnitude) of the potential loss The likelihood (or probability) of the negative outcome In October 2010, a proposed rule was published in the Fed eral Register that would require each Part 139 certificate holder to establish a SMS for the entire airfield environment (includ ing movement and nonÂmovement areas) to improve safety at airports hosting air carrier operations. The FAA describes SMS in AC 150/5200Â37 as âThe formal, businessÂlike approach to managing safety risk. It includes systematic procedures, prac tices, and policies for the management of safety (including safety policy, safety risk management, safety assurance, and safety promotion).â Therefore, the research team took an SMS approach to quantifying the risk of a bird strike associated with the design of a stormwater management system on airports. A common tool for risk decision making and acceptance in SMS is a risk matrix. The risk matrix forms the basis of the risk assessment. See Appendix F for the risk matrix developed for this project. Table A-1 lists the nine risk fac tors included under either severity or likelihood in the risk matrix. Information pertaining to the probability of a bird strike was incorporated as likelihood factors and informa tion pertaining to the magnitude of the potential strike was incorporated as severity factors. In an SMS, the risk matrix forms the basis of the risk assessment.
20 The research team developed a standard 5 à 5 risk matrix (recommended by the FAA in AC 150/5200Â37) that includes five levels for severity and five levels for likelihood as illus trated in Table A-2 below. For each identified severity and likelihood risk factor, five possible input options were identi fied, correlating to each of the five banding levels. These input options are presented to the user in the form of dropdown menus. A numeric score (1 to 5) is assigned to the input based on the significance level (as shown in Table AÂ2). An overall likelihood score is calculated as the average of the likelihood scores for all likelihood factor inputs. An overall severity score is calculated in a similar manner, as described further in Chapter 2. When these overall severity and likelihood scores are combined, they result in an overall risk: Overall Risk Overall Severity Overall Likelihood Overall Risk is categorized into three levels, which are rep resented by color banding in the risk matrix. These levels are described in Table A-3. In addition to the nine severity and likelihood risk factors shown in Table 2Â1, the tool incorporates âpriority impacts.â Severity and likelihood risk factors are used to directly calculate risk levels. Priority impacts are questions that modify the risk levels, either decreasing or increasing risk, depending on user response. The priority impact questions do not have five band ing levels, like the risk factors. All of the questions require a âyes or noâ response, where a ânoâ response correlates to an increase in risk and results in an increase in overall severity by 0.1, and a âyesâ response correlates to a decrease in risk and results in a decrease in overall severity by 0.1. While there is no one indus try standard for risk factors, their definitions, or impacts, risk assessment techniques are defined both in FAA practices and advisory circulars as well as safety industry best practices. Prior ity impacts are one method safety professionals use to balance factors that influence risk (Bullock and Ignacio, 2006). We understand that the ACRP vision is for an electronic standÂalone application. This tool must be useful to airport personnel with varying degrees of background in wildlife haz ards and risk analysis. Due to the fiscal and labor constraints Table A-1. Severity and likelihood risk factors. Severity Risk Factors Relative Hazard Score by Species* Stormwater BMP â Perimeter Irregularity Stormwater BMP â Apparent Slope to Waterâs Edge BMP â Proximity of Water Bodies (from each other) BMP â Percentage of Stormwater Vegetation Coverage Likelihood Risk Factors History of Observations Proximity of Bird Sightings Percentage of Total Airport Bird Strikes Associated with Species History of Total Bird Strikes per Operations Compared to National Average Proximity of BMP to Airport Movement Areas *See Appendix G for a complete list of species used in the tool. Table A-2. Risk factor levels. Numeric Score Severity Likelihood 1 Negligible Improbable 2 Minor Extremely Remote 3 Major Remote 4 Hazardous Probable 5 Catastrophic Frequent Table A-3. Overall risk ratings. Risk Rating Score Low (green) Risk ⤠5 Moderate (yellow) 5 < Risk < 15 High (red) Risk ⥠15
21 of developing a dynamic, webÂbased application, the research team developed a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet model. The model establishes the necessary mathematical relationships and logic outlined above. The research team used the research collected in preceding tasks to draw upon information that was incorporated into the tool. Our team did not duplicate existing academic studies or embark on a new statistical research project, but rather utilized the information and statistical analyses that have already been developed to create an SMSÂstyle, userÂfriendly tool that quantifies bird strike risk to aid airport operators in their stormwater management planning and design. The tool is designed so that airport users will be able to evaluate their existing or proposed stormwater management system and determine the potential bird strike risk associated with an alternative. Task 6 Factors to Be Considered in Stormwater Management Decision Tool Task 6 was originally predicted to be the development of a separate Stormwater Management Decision Tool, but after consultation within the research team and with the Program Officer and project panel, it was decided that wildlife and BMP characteristics were both required inputs to assess the bird strike risk associated with stormwater BMPs. In addi tion to the BMP inputs to the risk analysis, the research team decided to add an additional feature to the tool to facilitate stormwater management decision making about potential BMP design modifications, which would take into account both the anticipated bird strike risk as well as typical BMP selection factors that are not associated with bird strike risk. This BMP alternatives analysis feature is outside of the risk analysis portion of the tool and does not feed into the bird strike risk, but uses the risk analysis results as one of several factors affecting the comparison of the BMPs. The BMP characteristics input tabs in the risk analysis portion of the tool allow the user to define existing or pro posed stormwater BMPs for which to evaluate the risk of bird strikes, as well as changes to the stormwater BMP or mitiga tion options to manage the risk. The intent is for the tool to be used when evaluating and comparing the risk of several alternatives for stormwater BMP design or modifications. Instead of allowing users to define the BMP by type (e.g., detention basin, infiltration trench, etc.), the research team recognized that the BMPs would need to be defined in the form of characteristics that may be attractive to birds, which may be common between types of BMPs. The definition of BMPs based on these characteristics in the tool would allow comparison to FAA guidance and industry recommendations for BMP design. The selected BMP characteristic severity and likelihood factors are listed in Table A-1. Beyond these char acteristics, additional BMP characteristics were incorporated into the tool as priority impacts (nonÂbanded, yes/no inputs). For the BMP alternatives analysis, the research team con sidered factors other than bird strike risk that may affect the selection of a particular BMP design alternative, depending on airportÂspecific priorities. The nonÂavian decision fac tors were identified based on the research teamâs experi ence in airport stormwater management planning, design, and decision making at airports as well as input from the project panel. Task 7 Airports Selected for Case Studies The research team used various available resources to assemble data on two airports (one commercial service and one general aviation) featuring unique and diverse storm water management systems or open water sources. The data collected from these airports was used to test the accuracy and effectiveness of the Bird Strike Risk Analysis/Stormwater Management Decision Tool in different scenarios. Members of the research team conducted site visits to the selected air ports to gain additional insight into the toolsâ function and instruct airport personnel on how to properly apply the tool at their airport. A complete summary of the case studies can be found in Appendix H. The research team selected two case study airports based on the following selection criteria: FAA wildlife strike data Completed Wildlife Hazard Assessment/Environmental Assessment Master Stormwater Management Plan Stormwater management features and/or water resources on or adjacent to the airport Previously utilized wildlife hazard management techniques in regards to stormwater systems ClevelandÂHopkins International Airport (CLE) was selected as the representative Part 139 certificated case study airport. CLE is located in Cuyahoga County, Ohio and is included in the Great Lakes FAA Region. It is approximately seven miles south of Lake Erie and adjacent to Rocky River, part of regional Metro Park. CLE is moving forward with redevelop ment activities that will require them to meet more stringent stormwater management requirements and is challenged with how to incorporate the required BMPs, most of which would necessitate surface detention. CLE has ample wildlife strike data (1,277 total reported strikes) and has experienced at least 15 sig nificant strikes since 1990, involving gulls, swans, geese, and ducks. In 2003, they contracted with the U.S. Department of
22 Agriculture (USDA) to complete a wildlife hazard assessment (WHA), which has been supplemented with continued data collection and annual reports. Pompano Beach Airpark (PMP) was selected as the repre sentative general aviation case study airport. PMP is located in Broward County, Florida, approximately 12 miles north of downtown Ft. Lauderdale and is included in the Southeast FAA Region. It is approximately 1 mile west of the Atlantic Ocean and contains several stormwater ponds on site. PMP has limited wildlife strike data (14 total reported strikes), however the majority of speciesÂidentified strikes involved waterÂdependent species (6), including gulls and egrets. In addition, PMP recently finalized a master stormwater management plan. Prior to conducting the case studies, the research team preÂtested our proposed tool with data readily available from Jacksonville International Airport (JAX). They have ample strike data as well as 5 years of wildlife data collection com piled and maintained by ERS. Revisions to the tool were made based on the results of the preÂtest to ensure the accuracy of the tool prior to initiating the case studies. Task 8 Updated Work Plan and Budget Following the teleconference with the project panel, the research team prepared a revised work plan schedule to reflect the decision to conduct the case studies and receive and incorporate feedback from the participants into the draft tool before developing the Interim Report and meeting with the project panel. Task 9 Interim Report In October 2013, the research team submitted the Interim Report which presented the research and activities conducted under Tasks 1 through 11 (excluding Task 10). It included the research teamâs recommended uses for the tool along with an outline of tasks completed to date. At the request of the ACRP panel, the Interim Report also presented the results of the research teamâs case studies, which involved testing the tool in realÂworld settings and collecting feedback from airport personnel. Therefore, Task 11 was completed prior to Tasks 9 and 10. Task 10 Meeting with ACRP Project Panel The research team met with the panel in Washington, D.C. on 19 November 2013. The research team presented and dis cussed the tool along with the results of the research sum marized in the Interim Report and obtained direction from the panel on how to proceed with the development of the Draft Final Tool. Task 11 Airport Case Studies The research team used various available resources (e.g., published research, wildlife strike data, and wildlife survey data from WHAs) to assemble data on CLE and PMP. The research team also reviewed design drawings and specifications for the BMPs at CLE. Members of the research team conducted site visits at the selected airports to gain additional insight into the toolsâ function and instruct airport personnel on how to properly apply the tool at their airport. The data collected from these airports was used to test the accuracy and effectiveness of the Bird Strike Risk Analysis and Stormwater Management Deci sion Tool in different scenarios. Lessons learned from the case studies are incorporated into the findings in Chapter 2. A complete summary of the case studies can be found in Appendix H. Task 12 Draft Final Tool Development The research team assembled the information collected and summarized in Tasks 2 through 11, including Task 10 (above), into the Draft Final Bird Strike Risk Analysis and Stormwater Management Decision Tool. The tool allows users to review the bird strike risk associated with an existing or planned BMP and identify preferred BMP design characteristics or bird strike mitigation measures to reduce risk. In addition, the research team developed a brochure explaining use of the tool and why the tool is necessary in the stormwater planning process. Task 13 Prepare Draft Final Report The research team prepared a Draft Final Report, docu menting the background information and processes used to develop the tool. The Draft Final Report represents an update to the Interim Report (Task 9) and was provided to ACRP for review in March 2014. Task 14 ACRP Panel Conference Call The research team was provided written comments from the project panel in June 2014. In lieu of a webÂenabled teleconference with project panel, the research team was instructed to provide a written response to the comments. Task 15 Final Tool Development Our research team prepared the Final Bird Strike Risk Anal ysis and Stormwater Management Decision Tool and Stake holder Outreach Materials including revisions suggested by the project panel.
23 Task 16 Prepare Final Report The research team revised the Draft Final Report to address review comments and submitted the Final Report to ACRP in August 2014. Data Library Wildlife-related Documents Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 Fish & Wildlife Conservation Act Migratory Bird Treaty Act Endangered Species Act Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act SO CFR 21.49 Control of Canada Geese on Airports SO CFR 22.27 Removal of Eagles FAA Website: Airport Wildlife Hazard Mitigation Research & Development (http://www.airporttech.tc.faa.gov/safety/ wildlife.asp) International Birdstrike Committee Recommended Practices No 1: Standards for Aerodrome Bird/Wildlife Control Bird Strike Risk Assessment for Athens International Airport by Anastasios Anagnostopoulos The development of birdstrike risk assessment procedures, their use on airports, and the potential benefits to the aviation industry J. Allan et. al. (2003) Developing bird-strike risk assessment models for open-water restorations J. Hart et. al. (2009) Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk Assessment at Commercial Airports Jinfeng Wang (2012) Bird Strike Committee USA Website (http://www.birdstrike. org/) FAA Certalert 06Â07: Requests by State Wildlife Agencies to Facilitate and Encourage Habitat for StateÂListed Threat ened and Endangered Species and Species of Special Con cern on Airports FAA Website: Current Hazard Assessment Systems (http:// www.faa.gov/airports/airport safety/wildlife/current/) Interspecific Variation in Wildlife Hazards to Aircraft: Implications for Airport Wildlife Management T. DeVault et. al. (2011) FAA Draft AC 1SO/S200Â33C Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports FAA Draft AC 150/5200Â38 Protocol for the conduct and review of wildlife hazard site visits, wildlife hazard assess ments, and wildlife hazard management plans FAA Wildlife Strike Database Website (wildlife.faa.gov) Memorandum of Agreement between FAA, US Air Force, US Army, EPA, USFWS, and USDA to address aircraftÂwildlife strikes Office of Inspector General Audit Report: FAA has not effec tively implemented its wildlife hazard mitigation program (2012) USDA National Wildlife Research CenterâAnimal Damage Aviation Safety Publications Website (http://www.aphis.usda. gov/wps/portal/banner/help?1dmy&urile=wcm%3apath% 3a%2Fap his content library%2Fsa our focus%2Fsa wildlife damage%2Fsa programs%2Fsa nwrc%2Fsa research%2Fsa aviation%2Fct aviation publications) Risk Assessment FAQs from Bird Strike Committee USA Website Understanding and Reducing Bird Hazards to Aircraft: North American Fatal Accident Risk (BSCÂUSA Website) Integrating Wildlife Hazard Management into SMS (Wayne Clifton & Amy Johnson)âProceedings from BSC Confer ence 2011 Regional Memorandum of Understanding between the FAA, Southern Region and U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, US Air Force, EPA, USFWS, and USDA. Bird use of stormwater-management ponds: Decreasing avian attractants on airports B. Blackwell, et. al. (2008) Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the US R. Dolbeer et. al. (2013) Stormwater-related Documents Department of Transportation (DOT) Order 5660.1a Preser vation of the Nationâs Wetlands FAA AC 150/5300Â13A Airport Design FAA AC 150/5320ÂSC Surface Drainage Design ACRP Report 53: A Handbook for Addressing Water Resource Issues Affecting Airport Development Planning FAA AC 150/5210Â22 Airport Certification Manual Federal Water Pollution Control Act (aka Clean Water Act) Coastal Barriers Resources Act Coastal Zone Management Act Executive Order 13089 Coral Reef Protection (1998) Guidance for Presidential Memorandum on Environmen tally and Economically Beneficial Landscape Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds ACRP Report 14: Deicing Planning Guidelines and Practices for Stormwater Management Systems ACRP Report 32: Guidebook for Addressing Aircraft/Wildlife Hazards at General Aviation Airports ACRP Report 43: Guidebook of Practices for Improving Environmental Performance at Small Airports ACRP Report 49: Collaborative Airport Capitol Planning Handbook Parameters Affecting Bird Use of Stormwater Impoundments in the Southeastern United States: Implications for Bird-Aircraft Collisions B. J. Fox (2011) Designing for Water Quality and Wildlife Hazards at Airports D. J. Kiker & H. W. Marotti (2011) Stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) Selection and Implementation (Florida Department of Environmental Protection)
24 ACRP Report 74 Application of Enterprise Risk Management at Airports ACRP Synthesis 37 Lessons Learned from Airport Safety Management Systems Pilot Studies American National Standard for Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems (American Industrial Hygiene Association) FAA Order 5200.11FAA Airports (ARP) Safety Management System Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Fact Sheet International Standard ISO 31000 Risk Managementâ Principles and Guidelines (2009) SMS Implementation Study for Jacksonville Aviation Authority (JAA) Completed by ESIS (2011) Risk Assessment Principles for the Industrial Hygienist M. A. Jayjock et. al. Example blank risk assessment model Example risk assessment model using Canada Geese Example risk management matrix ICAO Safety Management Manual (2009) ACRP Report 1 Safety Management Systems for Airports Volume 1: Overview ACRP Report 2 Safety Management Systems for Airports Volume 2: Guidebook A systematic review of the effectiveness of safety management systems M. Thomas (2012); Australian Transport Safety Bureau Wildlife Risk Management. J. Ostrom; BSCÂUSA Conference Proceedings (2013) Technical Memorandum: Guidance for Developing a Storm water Management Manual for Washington State: Miti gating Hazards Due to Wildlife Attractants at Airports (Washington State Department of Transportation) Wildlife Collisions with Aircraft: A missing component of land-use planning at airports B. Blackwell et. al. (2009) Airport Stormwater Guidance Manual: Briefing Paper (Wash ington State Department of Transportation) Aviation Stormwater Design Manual Task Force: Meet ing Summary (2008); Washington State Department of Transportation Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A Manual for Airport Personnel R. Dolbeer and E. Cleary (2005) The Airport Runoff Manual: Stormwater Design to Avoid Wildlife Attractants (PresentationâWashington State Department of Transportation) Aviation Stormwater Design Manual: Managing Wildlife Hazards Near Airports. Technical Manual. Washington State Department of Transportation (2008) SMS and Risk Assessment-related Documents FAA AC 150/5200Â37 Introduction to Safety Management Systems (SMS) for Airport Operators ACRP Legal Research Digest 19 Legal Issues Related to Develop ing Safety Management Systems and Safety Risk Management at US Airports