Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach (2014)

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.

B-1 A P P E N D I X B IRIS User Guide Introduction Irregular operations (IROPS) present challenging planning problems for airports since they inherently include a large amount of unknown factors and have the potential to severely disrupt operations. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) has funded the development of a decision support tool to help airports prioritize funding decisions to mitigate IROPS impacts. The software is implemented as an Excel-based program titled the IROPS Investment Support tool, or IRIS for short. This User Guide gives you the basics to use IRIS. It will introduce you to the concepts underlying IRIS, explain how to navigate through the tool’s features, and show how results are presented and are to be interpreted. A checklist of information that should be compiled prior to running IRIS is provided in the section “Getting Started.” Background Investment planning for IROPS events is difficult due to their potentially significant impact and disruptive nature. They can also be quite rare and difficult to predict. Traditional business case analysis that estimates the costs of an initiative and compares those to monetized benefits is not well-suited to IROPS challenges. IRIS uses an integrated approach that merges decision analysis with traditional benefit-cost methodologies, in order to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the impact, effectiveness and costs of potential investments in IROPS mitigation initiatives. Note that the tool cannot capture all issues that affect an investment decision and does not attempt to replace an airport’s judgment of what strategy to pursue. However, the tool provides an analysis of potential benefits to airport stakeholders, including a broad spectrum of the financial, tactical, and strategic considerations related to the possible mitigation alternatives. IRIS allows the airport management team (the intended user of IRIS) to specify which IROPS events and potential impacts for which they would like to plan. IRIS provides decision support for evaluating the effectiveness of associated potential mitigation initiatives. The user defines the potential mitigations under consideration by creating a so-called “investment portfolio” of mitigation initiatives. The initiatives should match the IROPS events and the impacts they are designed to address. A sample investment portfolio is provided in Figure B.1.

B-2 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Diverted flights due to convective weather Purchase 2x mobile stairs Retrofit Concourse B ground-level space into overflow gate Extended tarmac delays due to ice on ramps Purchase 2x 4,000 gal. liquid deicing trucks Purchase 1x 20,000 lb. dry chemical spreader Power outage as a result of substation failure Develop plans to relocate passengers to location(s) supported by current backup generators Purchase 1x 2,000 kW back-up emergency generator IROPS events and their impacts IROPS mitigation alternatives Figure B.1. Sample investment portfolio for IROPS mitigation initiatives. The user then provides additional input to help evaluate the likelihood, impact, effectiveness, and cost associated with the IROPS events and the associated investment portfolio. IRIS processes the user input and uses a decision analysis methodology known as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to generate a ranking of the IROPS mitigations in the portfolio, which can be used as guidance on which options would be most effective to fund. AHP is an established, structured decision analysis technique. It merges the stakeholder’s objectives with their evaluation of the problem to provide insight on complex problems in a prescribed way. The process involves breaking the problem into manageable parts and arranging them in a logical hierarchy. Then, by making simple comparisons between the sub-elements of the hierarchy, one is able to prioritize potential outcomes. The comparisons can be executed with actual quantitative data or using human judgment. The utility of AHP is in its ability to synthesize human judgment with quantitative metrics in an organized method to prioritize choices across multi-dimensional, complex problems. The benefit of IRIS is that it takes a large number of decision parameters into account, capitalizing on the experience, expertise, and skills of the airport management team, and synthesizes them into a defensible ranking of options. These options are supported with numerical scores that can then be used in the capital planning process. They are also useful as support material when presenting funding recommendations to decision makers. Getting Started Before starting, the following is a list of information you should compile and have ready before running the IRIS tool: Descriptions of IROPS events to consider, for example: • Event 1: International widebody aircraft diverted to airport Event 2: Extended tarmac delays due to ice on aprons

IRIS User Guide B-3 Event 3: Power outage as result of a substation failure • • • • • Descriptions of mitigations to be considered for each IROPS event, for example: Event 3: Purchase 3x 2,000 kW emergency generator Estimated initial investment cost for each mitigation Estimated annual recurring cost for each mitigation Lifecycle duration of the IROPS investment business planning Cost escalation rate for each mitigation (or use default rate of 1.9%) IRIS requires no special software other than Microsoft Excel, version 2007 or later. To start IRIS, right click on the file that contains the model (e.g., ACRP 10-14 IRIS Tool.xlsm) and select “Open” (or double click on the file name to begin the program). IRIS is optimized to display on screens with a resolution of 1024x768 pixels or greater. IRIS requires an Excel function known as “macros” in order to function properly; ensure that macros are enabled when using IRIS. The process for enabling macros depends on the version of Excel in use, but usually involves a pop-up message with an “Enable Macros” or “Enable Content” button that should be selected (see Figure B.2, from Excel 2010). If no warning appears, macros are enabled. Figure B.2. Macro security warning (Excel 2010 shown). The main user interface that is displayed when IRIS is first opened is shown in Figure B.3. IRIS uses a series of five wizards to collect user input and perform its calculations. The main user interface is both a visual guide to the five wizards and a reminder showing the current step on which the user is working; an arrow points to the recommended next step. Items that are grayed out have been completed (if accompanied by a red check mark). If the step is grayed out but no red check mark is present, an intermediate step has not been completed and is required to move to the next step.

B-4 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Figure B.3. Main IRIS user interface. The five wizards must be completed in the order shown, but once a wizard has been completed, the user can return to it at any time in order to make changes. To return to a previously completed wizard, simply click on the appropriate step. The five wizards that make up IRIS are: 1. The portfolio wizard 2. The cost wizard 3. The comparisons wizard 4. The effectiveness wizard 5. The results wizard The image that illustrates each wizard will also launch it. Simply click on the image associated with the wizard and it will open. When IRIS is first run, only the portfolio wizard is active. You can only begin the next wizard when the previous wizard has been completed; wizards that cannot be selected have their images grayed out. The interface allows the user to go back and edit information entered into previously completed wizards. Note: Returning to edit a previously completed wizard may require you to make changes in successive wizards before continuing. For example, adding a new mitigation in the portfolio wizard would require that new cost information for that mitigation would need to be entered using the cost wizard. Pressing the “Quick Reference” button will display the quick reference guide as a PDF document. Pressing the “Start Over” button will clear out all the information that has already been recorded. Note that all user entries are lost when “Start Over” is pressed.

IRIS User Guide B-5 Each wizard contains a “Save” button that can be used to save any partial progress made within the wizard, by saving the Excel file. After pressing this button, you can cancel out of the wizard and any information that is already entered will remain when you return to the wizard again. Pressing the “Save” button will also allow you to move forward to the next tab in the wizard (where applicable) even if you have not completed all of the current tab. However, a wizard will not allow you to press the “Finish” button with an incomplete tab. Note that IRIS also supports the file-saving functions embedded in Microsoft Excel (under the “File” menu). These can be used, for example, for making copies of an IRIS workbook. Portfolio Wizard The first wizard is used to define the investment portfolio. Click on the “Portfolio” image to start the wizard; the IRIS software supports the consideration of up to five events in each run. The first window to pop up when the portfolio wizard is started contains the instructions for completing this wizard (see Figure B.4). Once you have read and understood the instructions, click the “Next” button to open the “Events” tab (see Figure B.5). Figure B.4. Instructions tab for portfolio wizard.

B-6 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Figure B.5. Events tab for portfolio wizard. The “Events” tab includes an optional field with a “Save File As” button to be used for specifying a file name. This saves the file under the name that is entered. This then becomes the file name that is used each time the “Save” button is activated in any wizard in order to save partial progress. Note that the file extension used for IRIS workbooks is “.xlsm”, where “.xls” indicates Excel and the “m” indicates that the file is an Excel application using macros. The default file name will be shown, but this can be changed by the user to any file name that is supported by Microsoft Excel. Note: If the file is not renamed when IRIS is first used, then if the “Save” button is used later anywhere else in IRIS, the original blank IRIS tool will be overwritten (if this occurs, the user can use the “Start Over” button on the main interface or, alternatively, reinstall a clean copy of IRIS). The “Events” tab is also where the lifecycle duration is specified. The lifecycle is usually tied to the expected duration of the initiation (e.g., 10 years for a vehicle). Note: Since the rankings are based on total lifecycle benefits and costs, IRIS forces this value to be the same for all mitigations for all events. This is to ensure that comparisons between mitigations are not biased by having different lifecycles for each one. The lifecycle should include recurring costs representing replacement or refurbishment costs for mitigation alternatives with service lives shorter than the investment planning lifecycle. This may occur if a mitigation alternative with a short lifecycle is compared to one with a longer lifecycle in the same portfolio of IROPS events and mitigations. This is important to ensure that the results for all mitigation alternatives in the portfolio are comparable.

IRIS User Guide B-7 Next, enter the number of distinct IROPS events you would like to evaluate. Events refer to the situations that cause the IROPS-related problems that you would like to solve. Some examples might be Extended Tarmac Delay, Power Outage, Diverted International Flights, Disrupted Communications, etc. Press “OK” when done, which creates fields for collecting information about each event (see Figure B.6). Figure B.6. Adding events. The information that must be entered for each IROPS event under consideration includes: Description: The name or identifying characteristics of the event. Example: “International widebody aircraft diverted to airport.”

B-8 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Likelihood: Enter your best estimate of the probability that each event might occur at your airport. The options are: • Extremely Improbable • Extremely Remote • Remote • Probable • Frequent Severity: Enter your best estimate of the magnitude of the impact that the occurrence of each event would have on your airport operations. The options are: • Minimal • Minor • Major • Severe • Catastrophic Once this information has been input for each event, click on the “Create/Update Event Tab(s)” button. This opens the interface for entering the mitigation information for each event. A new tab will be created for each event (see Figure B.7). Select the tab for the first event and enter the required information, then move on to the next tab by clicking on the “Next” button. For each event, enter the number of mitigations for that event that you would like to evaluate using IRIS.

IRIS User Guide B-9 Figure B.7. Mitigation tabs for each IROPS event. Mitigations refer to the potential solutions for the problems identified within an event. Some examples are “Purchase additional mobile stairs” or “Construct a ground-level gate in Terminal B”. The combination of the specific IROPS events and associated mitigations make up the investment portfolio. For each event, a maximum number of five mitigations can be specified. This means IRIS can consider investment portfolios of up to 25 mitigations (a maximum of five mitigations for each of a maximum of five IROPS events). Press “OK” when done. At this point, fields appear for the purpose of collecting data for the mitigations under consideration (see Figure B.8).

B-10 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Figure B.8. Adding mitigation descriptions. In the new text boxes that are created, enter a description for each mitigation option to be considered. Press “Next” to continue to the tab for the next event. When descriptions have been completed for each event, press the “Finish” button to complete the portfolio wizard. Note that after the completion of each wizard, IRIS validates the data for errors. If there are no errors in the input data, IRIS will return to the main interface, where the next wizard can be selected. Otherwise a message will appear, describing the error in the input data. Correct the data and complete the wizard to move on to the main interface. Cost Wizard Clicking on the cost wizard button brings up a window that allows you to enter the estimated costs for each mitigation option in the portfolio (see Figure B.9). A tab is created for each event, starting with the first event created in the portfolio wizard. On each tab, there is a column for each mitigation entered when defining the portfolio in the portfolio wizard.

IRIS User Guide B-11 Figure B.9. Cost wizard. The cost wizard is used to enter the best estimates available of the initial and recurring costs associated with each mitigation option. The required entries are: Initial investment cost: Enter the estimated initial investment cost for each mitigation option. This could be construction costs (total costs, including design, permitting, etc.), acquisition costs, or, if the mitigation option is a staff effort such as preparation of a planning document, the cost of the associated labor hours. Depending on how the airport accounts for federal and other external funding, it is possible to take into account only the local share of project costs. Recurring cost: Enter the average estimated costs that recur each year. This typically includes recurring costs for operations and maintenance (O&M). It may also include replacement or major refurbishment costs for investments with service lives shorter than the lifecycle duration. For example, consider an investment portfolio with a 10-year lifecycle that includes an information technology (IT) system with a 5-year service life. In this case, a replacement or refurbishment cost should be entered as the annual recurring cost, which can be estimated by spreading out the associated costs over each year in the lifecycle. Lifecycle duration: This is the number of years to consider as the economic lifecycle of the investment analysis that was previously entered in the portfolio wizard. Escalation rate: Enter the cost escalation rate as an estimated annual percentage growth in cost. An escalation rate of 1.9% will be used by default unless changed by the user.

B-12 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach After entering data for one event, press “Next” to go to the next tab. When the cost information has been input for all mitigations and all events, press the “Finish” button to complete the cost wizard. If there are no errors in the input data, IRIS will return to the main interface. Otherwise a message will appear describing any errors in the input data. Comparisons Wizard The purpose of the comparisons wizard is to elicit stakeholder preferences. For example, some airports may place more emphasis on funding availability as a criterion than other airports. The criteria are predefined (see Table B.1), but by conducting the pairwise comparisons, IRIS can quantify the relative importance of each criterion. Criteria that matter a great deal to the airport operator and its stakeholders will carry more weight in ranking the portfolio than criteria judged to be less important. The criteria take into account strategic and tactical challenges to implementing a specific IROPS mitigation initiative. The comparisons are also used to estimate the relative importance of potential benefits to airlines, passengers, and airport and tenant employees. The user interface for the pairwise comparisons process is shown in Figure B.10. Figure B.10. Comparisons wizard.

IRIS User Guide B-13 Table B.1. Definitions of IROPS mitigation effectiveness criteria. Evaluation Criteria Description Strategic Challenges Airport Master Plan Alignment How well does the mitigation initiative align with the current airport master plan? Was it already considered in the capital plan? Is it a completely new concept? Funding Availability How accessible will funding be for this initiative? Does it qualify for a federal grant, PFC funding, PFC-backed bonds or other public funding? Airport-generated funds? Does this create a significant ongoing operational expense to the airport? Stakeholder Coordination How many stakeholders must be involved for this initiative? What level of coordination is required across different interested parties? What are the potential related complications? Impact on rates and charges? Airline use agreement? Implementation Timeline How long will the initiative take to procure/implement? User Benefits Reduction in Airline Impact How will this mitigation initiative reduce disruption to airlines in terms of time? Consider flights delayed, missed connections, crew scheduling, and extended tarmac delays. Reduction in Traveler Delay How will this mitigation initiative reduce delay experienced by travelers? Consider the value of the travelers’ time, missed connections, and baggage lost. Traveler Comfort An evaluation of the level of comfort that can be provided to travelers during the IROPS event. Consider access to food, water, bathrooms, cots, telephone, Internet, airport/airline information, onsite overnight accommodations. Consider impacts on special needs travelers and the mobility impaired. Improvement in Airport Operations How does the mitigation strategy impact the work conditions for airport staff during IROPS events? Tactical Complexity Disruption Level During Implementation What level of disruption will this mitigation initiative cause to normal airport operations when it is in effect? [Note: This should not include disruption associated with the acquisition/construction of the alternative, for example temporary disruptions due to construction activity.] Execution Response Time How quickly can this contingency initiative be executed in order to address the IROPS event? Policy & Regulatory Compliance Difficulty How difficult will it be to maintain policy and regulatory compliance during the execution of the contingency initiative? Consider security, Federal Aviation Regulations Part 139, safety, etc.

B-14 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach At the top of the window, there are four tabs: “Main Categories,” “Strategic Challenges,” “User Benefits,” and “Tactical Complexity.” The first tab, labeled “Main Categories,” is used to establish a high-level comparison of the three main categories against each other (i.e., strategic challenges vs. user benefits vs. tactical complexity). Each of the last three tabs represents a category of stakeholder considerations. Within each, several criteria are compared against each other. Each pair of comparisons is represented by a row as shown in Figure B.10. For each pairing in the comparisons wizard, select the criterion that is more important to the airport and its stakeholders, by clicking on that criterion’s radio button. If both criteria are judged to be of equal importance, select “They are equally important.” After making the selection, a text box will appear asking “How much more?” Enter a number between 2 and 9, with the higher indicating greater relative importance. The values do not need to be integers; fractional values such as “2.5” and “5.75” are also supported. Table B.2 provides a scale that can be used to interpret these numerical scores. Table B.2. Rating scale for pairwise comparisons. Intensity of Importance Definition Explanation 1 Equal importance Two elements contribute equally to the objective 3 Moderate importance Experience and judgment moderately favor one element over another 5 Strong importance Experience and judgment strongly favor one element over another 7 Very strong importance One element is favored very strongly over another; its dominance is demonstrated in practice 9 Extreme importance The evidence favoring one element over another is of the highest possible order of affirmation Note: Intensities of 2, 4, 6, and 8 can be used to express intermediate values. Intensities of 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., can be used for elements that are very close in importance. For the comparisons to be meaningful, they must be internally consistent. Stated preferences must be transitive (that is, if you indicate that you prefer A to B and also indicate that you prefer B to C, then it must be true that you prefer A to C). Also, the relative importance given to the criteria should not be contradictory (for example, saying A is extremely more important than B and that B is of equal importance to C, but also saying that A is only moderately more important than C). Since the criteria comparisons rely on human judgment, it is possible that the user could provide input that violates these principles. Once all inputs have been entered, the comparisons wizard checks for transitivity violations and makes sure the relative importance measures are consistent up to a certain threshold. If a problem is detected, a dialog box will pop up identifying the issue and the tab where the issue occurs. An example of such a message is shown in Figure B.11.

IRIS User Guide B-15 Figure B.11. Message box indicating an error in comparison input. To fix the error, it is recommended that you review the relevant tab to locate the inconsistency and then adjust the comparisons and numerical scores manually as needed. However, IRIS does include a “Suggest Values” feature that automatically adjusts the current scores to make them logically consistent. Although this process will return consistent values, the result may not accurately capture user preferences so it is suggested that this feature only be used as a last resort. At any stage the “Show Comparison Scale” button on the right side of the window can be pressed to display the numerical scale used to judge relative importance. Clicking on the “Show Criteria Descriptions” button will display the criteria definitions. Clicking on the “Clear All Values” button will erase all of the information you have already input into the comparisons wizard. This is used as an option to start over. After the comparisons have been entered for one category, click the “Next” button to move onto the next category. Once all pairs have been evaluated, press the “Finish” button to complete the comparisons wizard. If there are no errors in the input data, IRIS will return to the main interface. Otherwise a message will appear, describing any errors in the input data. Effectiveness Wizard The effectiveness wizard displays a window for estimating the relative effectiveness of each mitigation initiative (see Figure B.12). The first tab displayed shows the mitigation alternatives entered for the first event created in the portfolio wizard. Each column is associated with a specific mitigation. The rows correspond to the criteria arranged under four main categories used in the comparisons wizard. For each criterion, IRIS asks a question that polls the user for a best estimate of the effectiveness of the mitigation initiative. For example, the first question under “Strategic Challenges” is “How well does this mitigation initiative align with the current Airport Master Plan?” For each question, select the response that you judge to be most accurate for the mitigation initiative in question, using the drop-down menu. Note that the choices in the menu vary from question to question, to ensure that the possible answers match the question being asked. When completing these subjective evaluations, it is important to consider the full spectrum of choices in the scale. One approach is to consider the scores as being relative to the solutions being evaluated. In this scenario, the best solution should get the highest score and the worst should get the lowest score. If the subjective evaluations are all near the “average” score then there is a risk that cost becomes the only real driver in ranking the IROPS mitigation alternatives.

B-16 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Figure B.12. Effectiveness wizard. When the evaluations for the first event are complete, press “Next” to continue to the next event. When the estimated effectiveness has been entered for all mitigation initiatives, press the “Finish” button to complete the effectiveness wizard. If there are no errors in the input data, IRIS will return to the main interface. Otherwise a message will appear, describing any errors in the input data. Results Wizard Once the first four wizards have been completed and all necessary inputs have been entered, the results wizard becomes available. When selecting this wizard, a pop-up window appears prompting for a name and description for the report that will be generated once this wizard has been completed (see Figure B.13). Note: The report name can be a maximum of 17 characters and must conform to Microsoft Excel naming conventions. The description of the report is optional, but can be useful if, for example, the tool is run several times in succession to evaluate a number of “what if” scenarios. Pressing the “OK” button will generate the reports. This can take a couple of seconds, during which a number of reports are created.

IRIS User Guide B-17 Figure B.13. Running the results wizard. IRIS generates five reports summarizing information from the user-defined portfolio. The tab that is active after the wizard has completed the results is a cover sheet that allows you to navigate through these five reports (see Figure B.14). You can also navigate the reports using the spreadsheet tabs for each report worksheet. The following reports are produced by IRIS: Cover: Provides a cover sheet for the report. Logos and headers can be added. Summary: Ranks mitigation efforts for all events weighted by impact, effectiveness, benefit, and cost. This report is discussed in more detail below. Portfolio: Report containing information about events and the available mitigations along with their description, likelihood and severity of each mitigation. Cost: Cost information related to investment cost, recurring cost, lifecycle (years), rate, and total cost for each mitigation option. Criteria: User-defined priorities derived from comparisons done for strategic challenges, tactical complexity and user benefits. Effect: User-defined input related to questions posed to the user in the effectiveness portion of the tool.

B-18 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Figure B.14. Cover sheet to navigate IRIS reports. The cover sheet also contains buttons for printing, saving, and modifying inputs. Pressing the “Print Report” button will print only the six tabs associated with the six reports produced by IRIS referenced above. Blank tables in the spreadsheet, which are generated when fewer than five IROPS events are defined in the portfolio, are not printed. The “Modify Inputs…” button will return you to the IRIS tool so that you can make any revisions or updates to the input data. Note: pressing the “Modify Inputs…” button will delete the IRIS-generated report tabs and any tabs added by the user, so it is important to save any data you want to keep before proceeding. A warning message to this effect is displayed when selecting the “Modify Inputs…” feature. This functionality is useful for producing “what if” scenarios. By saving the current output and then returning to IRIS to modify one or more inputs, results across several different scenarios can be compared. The summary report is the most relevant report for most users, and is the only one described in detail in this User Guide. An example generated from a fictional case is presented in Figure B.15. The summary report presents the mitigation portfolio with the alternatives ranked from most cost beneficial to least cost beneficial, based on the recommendations computed by IRIS. Note: The IROPS mitigations are ranked based on the Combined score, which is the ratio of the Benefit score to the Cost score. The higher this ratio, the more value, in terms of benefits, is expected for the funds invested in the mitigation in question. Note: Unlike a true benefit-cost ratio, the Combined score computed by IRIS can only be used to make relative comparisons across mitigation alternatives. While a benefit-cost ratio that is greater than one indicates that the economic value of the benefits outweigh total costs, this is not the case for the Combined score computed by IRIS. The Combined score can be used to rank alternatives to determine which provides the most value. It can also be used to judge how close alternatives are to each other. It cannot, however, be used to judge whether the benefits of an IROPS mitigation alternative outweigh the costs, since IRIS does not attempt to monetize benefits in dollar terms.

IRIS User Guide B-19 Figure B.15. Summary report output from fictional example. The table produced in the summary report has five main column groups, some of which have sub-columns to break down the information further. The main column groups are: Rank: This is the overall rank for the mitigation after the scores for benefit and cost have been combined. The mitigation that is ranked number one is the one determined to be the most cost beneficial by IRIS, given the inputs provided by the user. Portfolio: This set of columns describes each entry in the mitigation portfolio, showing the associated IROPS event and the proposed mitigations. Benefit: This set of columns lists the Benefit score for the mitigation alternative. The higher this score, the more benefit the mitigation alternative is expected to bring to the airport stakeholders. However, the Benefit score alone does not take into account the cost of the mitigation. Therefore, the mitigation alternative with the highest Benefit score does not necessarily have the highest overall rank. The Benefit score combines the Impact and Effectiveness scores, by multiplying the two. These two scores, in turn are defined as follows: Impact: The Impact score determines how disruptive the IROPS event would be. It is computed based on the severity of the event, as well as the likelihood of the event occurring. Note: If only one IROPS event is defined in the portfolio, this score will be 1.000 for all mitigation alternatives. Rank: Overall rank for the migaon a er the scores for benefit and cost have been combined Porolio: Descripon of each entry in the migaon porolio, showing the associated IROPS event and the proposed migaons Benefit: Combinaon of the Impact and Effecveness scores; the higher this score, the more benefit the migaon alternave is expected to bring to the airport stakeholders Cost: Two views of the migaon costs: A relave Cost score and the dollar value of the lifecycle costs of each migaon iniave Combined: A computed score that takes into account both the Cost score and the Benefit score to create an esmate of the overall benefit-cost value

B-20 Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach Effectiveness: The Effectiveness score measures how effective the mitigation alternative is in providing user benefits while addressing tactical and strategic challenges. It is computed based on the evaluations entered in the effectiveness wizard. The effectiveness score is weighted by the results of the comparisons wizard, in order to take into account stakeholder preferences and priorities. Cost: This set of columns presents two views of the mitigation costs: A relative Cost score and the dollar value of the lifecycle costs of each mitigation initiative. The higher the Cost score, the more expensive the mitigation initiative is over the course of the planning lifecycle. Combined: These columns show a computed score that takes into account both the Cost score and the Benefit score to create an estimate of the overall benefit- cost value. The score is calculated as the ratio between combined strategic, user and tactical benefits derived from a particular mitigation to its relative cost. The Combined score determines the ranking of the mitigations. This is represented both as a numerical score (in the “Score” column) and the relative magnitude of that score, expressed as a percentage of the combined score across all initiatives (in the “Percent” column). The percentage score can be useful to quickly evaluate whether certain alternatives rank closely to each other or not. The remaining reports present the user-input data underlying these score calculations. They document the user inputs entered in each of the four input wizards (i.e., the portfolio, cost, comparisons, and effectiveness wizards). Each report is given a unique identifier, which is created by combining the report name provided by the user and a one-word descriptor. For example, if the user names the report “CIP2013”, then the Portfolio report will be identified as “CIP2013_Portfolio.” The remaining reports are: Portfolio report: Includes the input from the portfolio wizard. Includes the IROPS events and each mitigation alternative in the portfolio. For each mitigation alternative, the specified likelihood and severity are shown. Cost report: Includes the initial investment cost for each mitigation alternative, as well as the annual recurring cost, lifecycle duration in years, and annual cost escalation (expressed as a percentage rate). Note that the lifecycle duration is specified for the entire portfolio and is therefore always the same for all mitigation alternatives. The final column shows the total lifecycle cost, which is computed from the other cost inputs. Criteria report: Includes the pairwise comparison for each criterion in the three categories “Strategic Challenges,” “User Benefits,” and “Tactical Complexity.” The comparison scale is shown for reference. For each pair, the criterion judged to be more important is indicated by a score greater than 1, as specified by the user. Criteria judged to be equally important are both shown with a score of 1.

IRIS User Guide B-21 Effectiveness report: Includes the level of effectiveness of each mitigation alternative, for each criterion evaluated by the user in the effectiveness wizard. The Effectiveness ratings are arranged in separate tables for each IROPS event in the portfolio. Printing, Exporting, and Saving IRIS uses macros and therefore uses the “.xlsm” file extension, but is in all other respects a normal Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The output tables described above can be copied into other spreadsheets, Microsoft Word, or other documents, in order to create reports, using the copy and paste functionality in all Microsoft Office applications. The output and input tables can be printed or converted into the PDF file format, as long as a PDF driver is available on the system (Microsoft Office 2010 and later versions include a PDF driver). In other words, the full copy and paste, file manipulation, and input/output services supported by Microsoft Office and the Windows operating system are also supported by IRIS. The file can also be saved to be opened at a later time or in order to be forwarded by e-mail message, or otherwise distributed and copied.