Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide (2023)

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.

14 Data Entry: Step-by-Step The PERC Tool was designed to be easy to use. Users will enter data in two formats, and some data will be calculated using data entered previously. The PERC Tool uses color­coded data entry fields to indicate what type of data entry is required (see Table 4). The following sections (Airport Information through Part 10) provide detailed instruc­ tions that correspond to specific sections of the PERC Tool. Each section addresses: • Data input, and • Corresponding KPIs/output or Report Card generated by the PERC Tool. Appendix A presents samples of the complete input form and Report Card. C H A P T E R 3 Manual Entry Blue fields require users to type/enter quantitative or qualitative data. Drop-down Menus Orange/pink fields provide drop-down menus. Selections will vary based on the question and type of data requested (e.g., yes, no, partial, N/A). Calculations or No Input Required Gray fields do not require input. Some gray fields will display calculations or reflect previously entered data. Table 4. PERC Tool data entry.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 15 Figure 1. Airport information input annual review vs. triggering event. Airport Information Airport Information Background The PERC Tool can be used by certificated (Part 139) airports or by GA airports. The Airport Information section at the top of the PERC Tool (Figure 1) asks users to provide airport­specific data that will be reflected at the top of the PERC output or Report Card (Figure 2). Item c is especially important, as it asks users to identify whether the subject airport holds an FAA Airport Operating Certificate (certificated airport) pursuant to 14 CFR Part 139. The response to Item 3c will be used to determine whether the PERC Tool calculates compliance with FAA regulations. The PERC Tool does not evaluate compliance for GA or noncertificated airports.

16 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Airport Information Input The airport information section provides eight fields for data entry identified as Items a through h. a. Airport Name ➢ Type the name of the airport associated with the WHMP/Program under evaluation. b. Airport Code ➢ Type the 3­character airport identifier code. c. Is This a Certificated Airport in Accordance with 14 CFR Part 139? ➢ Select Yes if the airport operator holds an FAA Airport Operating Permit/is certificated under Title 14 CFR, Part 139 (Part 139). ➢ Select No if the airport operator does not hold an Airport Operating Permit/is not certificated under Part 139. d. WHMP/Program Review Period The PERC Tool requires users to identify the 12­month review period/evaluation period for the WHMP/Program that is under evaluation. All subsequent questions and data entered in the remaining PERC Tool fields will refer to the WHMP/Program review period that is entered in this section. ➢ From: Type the beginning date for the review period in an MM/DD/YYYY format. ➢ To: Type the ending date for the 12­month review period in an MM/DD/YYYY format. e. Date of PERC Evaluation ➢ Enter the date the PERC form is completed (today’s date) using an MM/DD/YYYY format. f. Reason for Evaluation Using the drop­down menu, indicate why you are conducting the evaluation using the PERC Tool: ➢ Select Annual Review if you are conducting an evaluation at the prescribed interval of 12 con­ secutive months or if the evaluation is not associated with a triggering event (see below). Certificated and GA/ Noncertificated Airports Can Use the PERC Tool The PERC Tool will evaluate the data and present KPIs differently based on your answer to Item c, Is this a certificated airport in accordance with 14 CFR Part 139? Your response to Item c is critical, as it will identify which criteria and formulas will be used to evaluate the WHMP or wildlife management program. WHMP/Plan Review/ Evaluation Periods Can Vary The PERC Tool recognizes that WHMP/Plan review/ evaluation periods might not be exactly 12 months long and may not coincide with a calendar year. For example, the review period may begin on April 1, 2021, and conclude on March 25, 2022. Airport Information – Item C Part 139 (Certificated) Airports If a user responds by selecting “Yes” in the Airport Information section of the PERC Tool, the PERC Tool will evaluate WHMP compliance by considering whether the WHMP contains all component pieces identified in 14 CFR Part 139.337. Non-Part 139 (GA or noncertificated) Airports If a user responds by saying “No” in the Airport Information section, the PERC Tool will not consider compliance; it will evaluate the extent to which the airport operator has implemented the WHMP or similar program, such as a list of recommended BMPs.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 17 ➢ Select Triggering Event if you are conducting a review in response to a triggering event. – If you select this option, use the second drop­down menu to select the type of triggering event. ➢ Select Multiple wildlife strikes for triggering event 14 CFR Part139.337(b)(1): An air carrier aircraft experiences multiple wildlife strikes. Select Substantial damage results from a wildlife strike for triggering event 14 CFR § 139.337(b)(2): An air carrier aircraft experiences substantial damage from a wildlife strike. As used in this paragraph, substantial damage means damage or structural failure incurred by an aircraft that adversely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight character­ istics of the aircraft and that would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component. ➢ Select Engine ingests wildlife for triggering event 14 CFR § 139.337(b)(3): An air carrier aircraft experiences an engine ingestion. g. Annual Review Coordinator (Name) ➢ Type the name of the annual review coordinator responsible for the WHMP/Program at the airport. This field refers to the person having the authority and responsibility for implement­ ing the WHMP/Program, which may differ from the person completing the PERC form. h. Was a Wildlife Hazard Working Group (WHWG) Established? Using the drop­down menu, indicate whether the airport has identified and convened a WHWG to review the contents of the WHMP/Program during the 12­month period: ➢ Select Yes if WHWG members are identified in the WHMP/Plan and the group has convened. ➢ Select Partial if WHWG members are identified in your WHMP, but no meeting has occurred. ➢ Select No if members of the WHWG are not identified in the WHMP/Program. Airport Information Output Wildlife Hazard Working Group (WHWG) The WHWG can include members of the airport community and other stakeholders. During the annual WHMP review, the WHWG considers the WHMP/Program’s effectiveness in addressing the issues identified and considers whether any changes to the plan are needed. Figure 2. Airport information output.

18 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Part 1 - Title 14 CFR Part 139 Compliance/ Non-Part 139 Airport BMPs Figure 3. Part 1 – Title 14 CFR Part 139 Compliance, Non-Part 139 Airport BMPs input. Part 1 Input Part 1 (Items 1a through 1i) identifies the nine components of a WHMP required by 14 CFR Part 139.337. Noncertificated airports without a formal WHMP should answer the questions by considering the contents of their wildlife management program or BMPs, even if there is no formal WHMP in place (Figure 3). Each question in Part 1 is addressed using a drop­down menu. Drop­down menus will vary slightly depending on whether the evaluation is associated with a certificated or noncertificated airport. 1a. Responsibility. The WHMP/Program identifies individuals with authority/responsibility for implementation. ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs identify individuals with authority/responsibility. ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program or BMPs do not identify individuals with authority/ responsibility. ➢ Select N/A if the airport is a noncertificated airport and does not identify individuals with authority/responsibility. 1b. Recommendations. The WHMP/Program or BMPs identify prioritized actions, recommendations, and target dates for completion. ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs identify prioritized actions, recommendations, and target dates. Who Can Use the PERC Tool? All airports can use the PERC Tool, but the tool will calculate responses differently and display different output depending on whether the subject airport holds a certificate pursuant to 14 CFR Part 139 as identified in Airport Information, Item c.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 19 ➢ Select Partial if the airport is a certificated airport and the WHMP includes some prioritized actions, recommendations, and target dates, but the list or data is incomplete. ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program or BMPs do not identify prioritized actions, recommenda­ tions, or target dates. 1c. Permits. Copies of all relevant permits are included. ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs include copies of all relevant permits. ➢ Select Partial if the WHMP/Program or BMPs include copies of some relevant permits or if a permit or renewal application was submitted, but the permit or renewal was not received to date. ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program or BMPs do not include copies of all relevant and up­to­date permits. ➢ Select N/A if no permits are identified as necessary in the WHMP/Program or BMPs. 1d. Resources. The WHMP/Program identifies the resources needed for implementation. ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs identify resources needed for implementation. ➢ Select Partial if the WHMP/Program or BMPs identify some of the resources needed for implementation. ➢ Select No if the airport is a certificated airport and the WHMP/Program does not identify resources needed for implementation. ➢ Select N/A if the airport is a noncertificated airport and the WHMP/Program or BMPs do not identify resources needed for implementation. 1e. Operational Procedures. The WHMP/Program includes procedures to be followed during air carrier operations for inspection of aircraft movement areas, wildlife hazard control measures, and effective communication. (For non-Part 139 airports, base your response on procedures to be followed during GA operations.) ➢ Select Yes if the airport is a certificated airport and the WHMP/Program includes proce­ dures to be followed during air carrier operations for inspection of aircraft movement areas, wildlife hazard control measures, and effective communication. ➢ Select Yes if the airport is a noncertificated airport and includes these procedures for GA aircraft operations. ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program is for a certificated airport and does not include proce­ dures to be followed during air carrier operations for inspection of aircraft movement areas, wildlife hazard control measures, and effective communication. ➢ Select N/A if the WHMP/Program, or BMPs are for a noncertificated airport and does not include procedures to be followed during GA operations. 1f. Evaluation Procedures. The WHMP/Program includes procedures to review and evaluate the WHMP/Program every 12 months or when necessary. ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs include evaluation procedures to review and evaluate the WHMP. ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program is for a certificated airport and does not include evaluation procedures to review and evaluate the WHMP. ➢ Select N/A if the WHMP/Program or BMPs are for a noncertificated airport and do not include evaluation procedures. Recommendations The WHMP should provide a prioritized list of problem wildlife populations and attractants (food, cover, and water) identified in an assessment, proposed mitigation actions, and target starting and completion dates. (AC 150/5200-38). Permits When applicable, airports are encouraged to maintain federal, state, and possible local wildlife control permits. This includes permits required by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and user certifica- tion for pesticide application (AC 150/5200-38). Resources Resources include personnel, equipment (e.g., radios, vehicles, propane cannons), supplies (e.g., pyrotechnics), pesticides/application equipment, and sources for obtaining necessary supplies. Operational Procedures Procedures may include, but are not limited to: • Designation of personnel responsible for implement- ing the procedures; • Provisions to conduct physical inspections before air carrier operations begin; • Wildlife hazard control measures; and • Ways to communicate effectively between wildlife observers, control personnel, and the air traffic control tower (as applicable).

20 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide 1g. Annual Review. The airport has completed, at a minimum, an annual WHMP/Program review and evaluation. ➢ Select Yes if the airport has completed an annual review and evaluation of the WHMP/ Program or BMPs. ➢ Select No if the airport has not completed, at a minimum, an annual review and evaluation of the WHMP/Program or BMPs. 1h. Training Program. A training program exists that is conducted by a QAWB. ➢ Select Yes if a training program exists. ➢ Select No if the airport is a certificated airport and no training program exists. ➢ Select N/A if the airport is a noncertificated airport and no training program exists. 1i. Annual Training. The airport has conducted an annual Wildlife Hazard Management Training program for airport personnel during the past 12 months. ➢ Select Yes if the airport (certificated or GA) has completed an annual Wildlife Hazard Management Training program for airport personnel during the last 12 months. ➢ Select No if the airport is a certificated airport and has not completed an annual Wildlife Hazard Management Training program for airport personnel during the last 12 months. ➢ Select N/A if the airport is a noncertificated airport and has not completed an annual Wild­ life Hazard Management Training program for airport personnel during the last 12 months. Part 1 Output The PERC Tool assigns a score to each response from Items 1a through 1i to create a com­ posite score. The score is represented by a KPI to indicate three levels of performance: Good (green), Improvement Needed (yellow), or Poor (red) (Figure 4). • Certificated Airports. The PERC Tool calculates compliance by determining the extent to which the WHMP/Program includes all nine items identified in 14 CFR Part 139.337 and displaces the compliance score as a KPI (see Figure 1). • Noncertificated Airports. The PERC Tool considers whether the WHMP/Program or BMPs include prioritized actions, recommendations, and target dates for completion, at a minimum, to be considered successful. If additional items are included in the WHMP/Program or BMPs, the KPI will display a higher level of achievement. Annual Review A WHMP must be fully reviewed once annually. This review must be documented and may be accomplished as a routinely scheduled event or following a triggering incident as defined in §139.337(b)(1)-(3). The airport should maintain documentation of all triggering incidents and corresponding reviews of the plan. The plan should include the review procedures. Training Program Initial and recurrent training conducted by a QAWB is required under §139.303 and described in AC 150/5200-36. Figure 4. Part 1 – Output.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 21 Part 2 - WHMP/Program Implementation Measures (Recommendations) Tool Tip Delete extra entries! Be sure to delete incomplete entries and extra lines! Incomplete recommendations or extra lines will be assigned a score of zero, which affects the evaluation score. Figure 5. Part 2 – WHMP/Program Implementation Measures (Recommendations) input. The number and type of wildlife management recommendations or BMPs included in a WHMP/Program are site specific. A two­part data entry process must be used for each manage­ ment measure (Figure 5). • Identify Measures in the WHMP/Program or BMPs. Type in or cut/paste brief titles or summaries of each recommendation included in the WHMP/Program. Up to 140 characters can be entered to identify each measure. • Identify Implementation Success. Use the drop­down menu to identify the extent to which the measure was implemented successfully during the evaluation period as a percentage. The PERC Tool offers increments of 10%. Part 2 Input Recording Measures/Recommendations To record specific measures: ➢ Identify the measure. – Click the [ADD LINE] button. A blue field will appear labeled Type measure here. – Type in a brief description or cut and paste a few words from your WHMP/Program or BMP documents. Up to 140 characters can be entered to identify each recommendation. ➢ Select an evaluation score. Move the cursor to the corresponding percentage (%) drop­ down menu. Select the percentage associated with implementation/completion. ➢ Add another measure. Click on [ADD LINE]. Repeat the first three steps above. Up to 42 measures can be entered. ➢ Delete extra/incorrect lines. Click on [DELETE LINE] to remove extra fields. Be sure to delete incomplete entries and extra lines because the recommendations will be assigned a score of zero and will affect the cumulative score displayed as a KPI. Consider the following examples: 1. Conduct daily runway inspections 100% 2. Maintain vegetation at a height of 6 to 12 inches 70% 3. Improve infield drainage facilities 50%

22 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide e rst two recommendations in the example, Conduct daily runway inspections and Maintain vegetation at a height of 6–12 inches, are ongoing measures conducted at prescribed intervals. If these measures are conducted as prescribed, select 100%. If runway inspections are overlooked occasionally or mowing varies occasionally based on weather conditions, a level of 70% to 80% may be appropriate. e same approach can be applied for Item 4, Disperse worms from pavements aer rain events, and Item 5, Disperse waterfowl from ineld basins. e third recommendation, Install a perimeter fence, represents a long-term goal that will require programming over multiple years. In this case, identify/rank the progress achieved to date in achieving/implementing this goal. • If the project has not been programmed, a score of 0% is appropriate. • If the project has been programmed for the next scal year, a score of 30% may be a reasonable estimate. • If environmental studies have been completed, but design and construction have not occurred, a score of 50% may be a reasonable estimate. • If nal design has been completed and the project has gone out to bid, a score of 70% may be a reasonable estimate. • If construction has started, a score of 90% may be a reasonable estimate. • If the improvements were completed during the evaluation period, a score of 100% is appro- priate. If this long-term measure is completed, the WHMP should be revised to identify the measure as complete. Part 2 Output As shown in Figure 6, the PERC Tool displays a KPI on page 1 of the Report Card to indicate overall success in implementing all recommendations included in the WHMP/Program. Page 2 of the Report Card identies success associated with the implementation of individual measures (see Figure 7). Figure 6. Part 2 – Output, composite score output (all measures).

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 23 Part 3 - Strike Data Figure 7. Part 2 – Output, individual measures output. Figure 8. Part 3 – Strike data input. (continued on next page)

24 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide The PERC Tool enables wildlife managers to consider and compare the total number of wild­ life strikes and the number of damaging strikes that occurred during the evaluation period/ evaluation year and up to five previous evaluation periods/evaluation years. Although data may be entered for up to five previous years, only strike data from the current evaluation year and the past evaluation year are required (Figure 8). Figure 8. (Continued). Definition of a Wildlife Strike A wildlife strike occurs when an aircraft and wildlife attempt to occupy the same location at the same time. In accordance with FAA AC 150/5200-32, a wildlife strike should be reported when the following occurs: 1. A strike or collision between wildlife and aircraft has been witnessed. 2. Evidence or damage from a strike has been identified on an aircraft. 3. Bird or other wildlife remains, whether in whole or in part, are found (a) within 250 feet of a runway centerline or within 1,000 feet of a runway end unless another reason for the animal’s death is identified or suspected or (b) on a taxiway or anywhere else on or off the airport that you have reason to believe was the result of a strike with an aircraft. 4. The presence of birds or other wildlife on or off the airport caused a significant negative effect on a flight, such as aborted takeoff, aborted landing, high-speed emergency stop, or the aircraft left the pavement area to avoid collision with wildlife. Part 3 Input Strike data and damaging strike data are considered through six multiple­part questions.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 25 3a. Data Source. Identify the source of strike data used in the WHMP/Program evaluation. The question refers to the strike data used in a formal WHMP/Program in BMPs. Some airport operators might not have strike data readily available, or data might be available only for the current year. In such cases, strike data from FAA’s NWSD can be used (https://wildlife.faa.gov/search). (See Table 2 for additional data about the NWSD.) In some cases, airport operators maintain airport­specific strike data for inclusion in/comparison with the NWSD. From the drop­down menu, identify the source of the strike (select one option): ➢ Select NWSD if the NWSD records are the only source of strike data. ➢ Select NWSD and airport-specific data if both the NWSD and airport-specific data are used to identify the number of strikes. The strike record may or may not include all NWSD records. ➢ Select airport-specific data if the records reflect only data maintained by the airport. 3b. Triggering Events/Significant Effect on Flight Some strikes that occurred during the evaluation period may have caused a trigging event (multiple individuals struck, substantial damage caused, or engine ingestion of wildlife) or caused a significant effect of flight, such as delayed takeoff or landing. ➢ 1. Enter the number of strikes that caused a triggering event and caused significant effect on flight during the evaluation period. ➢ 2. Enter the species responsible for the triggering event(s) or significant effect on flight. 3c. Total Strikes The PERC Tool allows you to compare the total number of strikes (damaging and non­damaging strikes) for the current evaluation period and up to five previous evaluation periods/years. A minimum of two evaluation periods is required to provide a comparison in the PERC Tool output. • Fields for which data are not available must be left blank. • All data must be for contiguous years. Type the total number of strikes for the current 12­month evaluation period and up to five previous periods. ➢ 1. Total strikes during the current evaluation period. ➢ 2. Total strikes during the previous evaluation period/previous year. ➢ 3. Total strikes 2 years ago. ➢ 4. Total strikes 3 years ago. ➢ 5. Total strikes 4 years ago. ➢ 6. Total strikes 5 years ago. 3d. Total Operations The PERC Tool will calculate the strike rate based on the number of strikes and number of operations during the same evaluation period. Item 3d allows you to select the range of aircraft operations used to calculate the strike rate. Strike Rate Calculations. The strike rate is calculated using the number of strikes and the number of operations. Select the metric that best suits your airport’s operations: ➢ Select 1,000 if the airport supports fewer than 10,000 operations each year. ➢ Select 10,000 if the airport supports more than 10,000 operations but fewer than 100,000 operations each year. ➢ Select 100,000 if the airport supports more than 100,000 operations each year. Operations Data Operations data for towered airports is available from the FAA’s OPSNET website, which enables users to query the number of operations for individual airports during specified timeframes. Operations data for nontowered airports may be obtained using the query feature from the FAA’s Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) data (see Table 2 for more information). Whenever possible, refer to airport records and site- specific data sources to identify the number of aircraft operations (operations logs, fuel logs, flight school data, etc.).

26 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide If the number of operations varies among metrics over different years, select the metric associated with most years. When entering the number of total operations, bear in mind: • Fields for which data are not available may be left blank. • All data must be for contiguous years. Type the number of total aircraft operations during the current and previous evaluation periods: ➢ 1. Total operations during the current evaluation period. ➢ 2. Total operations during the previous evaluation period/previous year. ➢ 3. Total operations 2 years ago. ➢ 4. Total operations 3 years ago. ➢ 5. Total operations 4 years ago. ➢ 6. Total operations 5 years ago. 3e. Total Strike Rate and Comparison Over Time Total Strike Rates The PERC Tool calculates the total strike rate in Item 3e based on the number of total strikes and total operations entered on Items 3c and 3d for each year that includes strike data and operations data. Strike rates will be calculated and displayed in Item 3e (1–6). ➢ No data entry is required in Item 3e. If data for previous years are not provided, the cell associated with the strike rate will remain empty. Comparison of Total Strike Rate Over Time The PERC Tool will display a comparison of the total strike rate over time. Two comparisons are provided using green (downward) or red (upward) arrows: • A comparison between the number of total strikes for the current evaluation year and the previous year; and • A comparison between the number of total strikes for the current year and the average number of strikes for all previous years. – A decreasing strike rate (positive result) is shown in parentheses with a downward green arrow to indicate fewer total strikes than in the previous year. – An increasing strike rate (negative result) is shown with an upward red arrow to indicate more total strikes now than in the past. 3f. Damaging Strikes The PERC Tool enables a comparison of damaging strikes for the current evaluation period and up to five previous evaluation periods/years. Damaging strikes include events that may not have resulted in an actual collision but resulted in a significant negative effect on flight, such as aborted takeoff, aborted landing, high­speed emergency stop, or the aircraft left the pavement area to avoid collision with wildlife. If the airport does not distinguish between total strikes and damaging strikes, data may be available from the strike records that are included in the NWSD (available at: https://wildlife. faa.gov/search). • Fields for which data are not available may be left blank. • All data must be for contiguous years. Strike Rate Over Time Red arrow – increasing strikes Green arrow – decreasing strikes

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 27 Type the number of total aircraft operations during the current and previous evaluation periods: ➢ 1. Damaging strikes during the current evaluation period. ➢ 2. Damaging strikes during the previous evaluation period/previous year. ➢ 3. Damaging strikes 2 years ago. ➢ 4. Damaging strikes 3 years ago. ➢ 5. Damaging strikes 4 years ago. ➢ 6. Damaging strikes 5 years ago. The output report will provide a comparison for each previous evaluation period for which data are provided. A minimum of two evaluation periods are required for the analysis. 3g. Damaging Strike Rate and Comparison Over Time Damaging Strike Rates The PERC Tool calculates the damaging strike rate in Item 3g based on the number of total strikes and total operations entered on Item 3d and 3g for each year that includes damaging strike data and operations data. Damaging strike rates will be calculated and displayed in Item 3g (1–6). ➢ No data entry is required in Item 3g. Comparison of Damaging Strike Rate Over Time The comparison of the damaging strike rate for the current evaluation period and previous evaluation period is displayed. No data entry is required. Two comparisons are provided: • A comparison between the number of damaging strikes for the current evaluation year and the previous year; and • A comparison between the number of damaging strikes for the current year and the average number of damaging strikes for all previous years. Part 3 Output The Report Card will display graphs to illustrate data pertaining to both the total strike rate, damaging strike rate, and a comparison of each rate over time. The graphs will display data for the current evaluation period and up to five previous evaluation periods (see Figure 9). Figure 9. Part 3 – Output.

28 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Part 4 - High-Risk/Priority Species and Risk Assessment Figure 10. Part 4 – High-Risk/Priority Species and Risk Assessment input.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 29 The PERC Tool helps to evaluate the airport’s overall progress in managing up to five highest­ risk priority species identified in the WHMP/Program or BMPs. The Tool uses the data provided to conduct a simplified risk analysis that considers: • A species­specific relative risk score as identified in FAA AC 150/200­38; • The strike record associated with the species (total strikes and damaging strikes); and • The frequency of observation during the evaluation period. Part 4 Input Hazardous species risk is considered through five multiple­part questions (Figure 10). 4a. Identify the species that poses the greatest risk at the airport. ➢ Species: Type the name of the species identified to pose the greatest risk at your airport (e.g., white­tailed deer, Canada goose, or a group of similar species such as “gulls”). ➢ 1. Select the relative hazard ranking score for the species. ➢ Select the relative hazard ranking score that corresponds to the species identified in Item 4a above. – If the species is identified in the drop­down menu: Continue to Step 2. No additional input is needed. – If the species is not identified in the drop­down menu: ➢ Select the species that is most similar to the species identified based on size, behavior, or other characteristics. ➢ Provide a sentence in the comment area beneath Step 1 to explain why you chose the species/hazard ranking. ➢ 2. Identify the number of total strikes with this species during the current evaluation period. ➢ Type the number of total strikes with the species identified in Item 4a during the current evaluation period (current 12­month period). ➢ 3. Identify the number of damaging strikes with this species during the current evalua- tion period, including strikes that have had a significant negative effect on flight. ➢ Type the number of damaging strikes associated with the species identified during the current evaluation period (current 12­month period), including strikes that may not have resulted in an actual collision but resulted in a significant negative effect. Figure 10. (Continued).

30 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide ➢ 4. Identify the frequency that this species has been observed at the airport during the current evaluation period. Using the drop­down menu, identify how often the species was observed during the evaluation period (current 12­month period): ➢ Select Frequently if the species was observed weekly or multiple times each month. ➢ Select Somewhat Frequently if the species was observed each month. ➢ Select Seasonally Frequently if the species was observed multiple times each month but only during a particular season of the year. ➢ Select Seasonally Somewhat Frequently if the species was observed each month during a particular season. ➢ Select Infrequently to Never if the species was observed less than once each month. ➢ 5. Identify other data that confirms the presence of this species in the airport vicinity (e.g., eBird, Christmas bird counts, local birding reports, etc.). ➢ Type the name of any other data that was used to confirm the presence of the species listed in 4a in the airport vicinity. 4b. Relative Hazard Score for the second greatest risk species. ➢ Repeat the same procedures used to complete Item 4a (1–5) to conduct a risk assessment analysis for the species that poses the second greatest risk to your airport. 4c. Relative Hazard Score for the third greatest risk species. ➢ Repeat the same procedures used to complete Item 4a (1–5) to conduct a risk assessment analysis for the species that poses the third greatest risk to your airport. 4d. Relative Hazard Score for the fourth greatest risk species. ➢ Repeat the same procedures used to complete Item 4a (1–5) to conduct a risk assessment analysis for the species that poses the fourth greatest risk to your airport. 4e. Relative Hazard Score for the fifth greatest risk species. ➢ Repeat the same procedures used to complete Item 4a (1–5) to conduct a risk assessment analysis for the species that poses the fifth greatest risk to your airport. Part 4 Output Risk­assessment methodology was developed to consider published data and observation data: • Species-specific risk score: Determined by a published relative hazard scores (FAA AC 150/ 5200­32B, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes) and frequency of observation. The Risk Assessment Score is a leading indicator that reflects probability and severity of a strike. • Species-specific risk assessment score: Based on the number of total strikes and damaging strikes that occurred with the same species during the current evaluation period. The Risk Management Score is a lagging indicator based on strike history. The PERC Tool uses both scores to calculate a Composite Risk Score, which is displayed using a bar graph as shown in Figure 11. The graphic comparison among the species is also provided.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 31 Part 5 - Equipment and Resources Figure 12. Part 5 – Equipment and Resources input. Part 5 Input FAA regulations at 14 CFR Part 139.337(f)(4) require a WHMP to identify “resources that the certificate holder will provide to implement the plan.” Part 5 of the PERC Tool enables users to identify whether airport staff members have the necessary equipment and supplies necessary to implement the measures identified in the WHMP Plan/Program daily (Figure 12). It also provides an opportunity to determine whether additional resources are necessary to conduct ongoing wildlife management operations, complete long­ term improvement projects to address wildlife hazards, or address needs that were not specified in the WHMP/Program or BMPs. 5a. Equipment. Do airport staff have the supplies identified in the WHMP to implement the WHMP/Program? ➢ Select Yes if the supplies and equipment identified in the WHMP are available or accessible to staff. ➢ Select Partial if some but not all supplies and equipment are available/accessible. ➢ Select No if supplies and equipment are not available/accessible. Special Equipment and Services In some cases, an airport may not own equipment, such as mowers, tree removal equipment, etc., but it can borrow or obtain those services from other agencies or departments. • If the resource is available from others, select Yes. • If the airport cannot access the equipment or services when needed, select No. Figure 11. Part 4 – Output.

32 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide 5b. Additional Resources. What type of additional resources are necessary for ongoing implementation of the program? Item 5b enables users to identify three categories of “additional resources”: Operational equipment/supplies, long­term projects/capital improvements, or additional staff. A drop­down menu is provided for each category. Category 1: Operational Equipment or Supplies Operational equipment or supplies refers to the items needed to implement the WHMP/ Program during airport operations. ➢ Select Yes if operational supplies and equipment are needed to implement the WHMP/Program (e.g., screamers, bangers, binoculars). ➢ Select No if operational supplies and equipment are not needed to implement the WHMP/ Program. Category 2: Long-Term Projects/Capital Improvements Long­term projects/capital projects may require help or funding that is beyond the scope of the Wildlife Hazard Coordinator and wildlife hazard management staff, such as fence design and construction, airport drainage improvements, etc. ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs identify long-term projects that will require funds from other departments, FAA grants, etc. ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program or BMPs do not include long-term projects; such projects are underway; or you do not need assistance from others to fund or undertake the projects. Category 3: Additional Staff (Airport Staff or Contract Services) Identify whether additional staff members or contractors are needed to carry out the recom­ mendations identified in your WHMP/Program or BMPs. For example, additional full­time staff may be required or contractor assistance may be required from USDA or others for specific activities (e.g., conduct annual training, remove or thin trees, etc.). ➢ Select Yes if additional staff/contract services are needed. ➢ Select No if no additional staff/contract services are needed. Part 5 Output The PERC Tool will generate a KPI to illustrate the degree to which necessary resources are available to implement the measures described in the WHMP/Program (see Figure 13). Figure 13. Part 5 – Output.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 33 Part 6 Input Part 6 of the PERC Tool enables users to evaluate the extent of training provided to the airport staff involved in wildlife management activities (Figure 14). 6a. Was wildlife hazard management training conducted at the airport in the last 12 months? ➢ No input necessary. This box reflects the answer to the training question asked on Item 1i. 6b. Have airport personnel involved in WHMP/Program activities obtained additional WHMP training in the past 12 months (e.g., attended a conference focused on wildlife hazard management or a course on wildlife identification, etc.)? ➢ Select Yes if most personnel (more than half of the wildlife management staff members) have obtained additional training. ➢ Select Partial if some personnel have obtained additional training. ➢ Select No if no personnel have obtained additional training. 6c. Has annual airport training been provided to staff involved in WHMP/Program activities at any time during the last three years? If you responded Yes to Item 1i, this box will reflect that answer. ➢ No input is necessary. If you responded No to Item 1i, input will be required. ➢ Select Yes if training has been provided to staff during the last three years. ➢ Select No if airport training has not been provided to staff during the last three years. Part 6 Output The PERC Tool will generate KPI to illustrate the airport’s progress in providing necessary training to those responsible for wildlife hazard management (see Figure 15). Part 6 - Staff Training Figure 14. Part 6 – Staff Training input.

34 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Part 7 - Managing Off-Site Wildlife Attractants Figure 15. Part 6 – Output. PART 7 - Managing Off-Site Wildlife Attractants Figure 16. Part 7 – Managing Off-Site Wildlife Attractants input. Part 7 Input Part 7 of the PERC Tool enables users to identify whether and to what extent that off­site wild­ life attractants are identified and managed as part of the WHMP/Program (Figure 16). 7a. Have off-site features or land uses within the airport vicinity been evaluated to identify potential hazardous wildlife attractants? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff have evaluated off­site features and land uses. ➢ Select No if airport staff have not evaluated off­site features and land uses. 7b. Were any off-site attractants identified? ➢ Select Yes if off­site wildlife attractants were identified. ➢ Select No if off­site wildlife attractants were not identified. 7c. For the potential hazardous wildlife attractants identified in Item 7b, has the airport conducted outreach to landowners, managers, or agencies responsible for the property or facilities identified? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff have conducted outreach to most landowners/managers (more than half). Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On and Near Airports Wildlife presence and behavior at the airport can be influenced by on-site and offsite features and conditions. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33C, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on and near Airports, provides guidance on certain land uses that have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife. The AC discusses airport development projects (including airport construction, expansion, and renovation) affecting aircraft movement near hazardous wildlife attractants.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 35 ➢ Select Partial if airport staff have conducted outreach to some landowners/managers. ➢ Select No if the airport staff have not conducted outreach to landowners/managers of identified off­site wildlife hazard attractants. ➢ Select N/A if you answered No to Item 7b or the off­site attractant cannot be managed (e.g., an ocean, wildlife conservation area, etc.). 7d. To prevent the development of potential wildlife attractants, have airport staff worked with local jurisdictions and/or regulatory agencies to address hazardous wildlife attractants that may be associated with proposed land use changes or development the airport vicinity? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff have worked with most local jurisdictions and/or regulatory agencies (50% or more). ➢ Select Partial if airport staff have worked with some local jurisdictions and/or regulatory agencies. ➢ Select No if airport staff has not worked with local jurisdictions and/or regulatory agencies. Part 7 Output Using the data provided for Part 7, the PERC Tool will display a KPI to illustrate the extent to which the airport has identified and managed off­site wildlife attractants (see Figure 17). Figure 17. Part 7 – Output.

36 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Part 8 - Outreach and Education Figure 18. Part 8 – Outreach and Education input. Part 8 Input Part 8 of the PERC Tool enables users to identify the extent to which outreach and education activities related to wildlife hazard management have been undertaken (Figure 18). 8a. Do airport staff provide outreach and education to elected officials, airport management boards/authorities, and decision makers? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff provided outreach and education to most (50% or more) of the officials, airport boards/authorities, and decision makers. ➢ Select Partial if airport staff provided outreach and education to some officials, airport boards/authorities, and decision makers. ➢ Select No if airport staff did not provide outreach and education. 8b. Do airport staff provide outreach and education to airport stakeholders and users (other airport departments, tenants, neighbors, etc.)? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff provided outreach and education to most (50% or more) airport stakeholders and users. ➢ Select Partial if airport staff provided outreach and education to some airport stakeholders and users. ➢ Select No if airport staff did not provide outreach and education. 8c. Does the WHMP/Program include the preparation of education and outreach materials for the media or include the preparation of media releases? ➢ Select Yes if the WHMP/Program or BMPs include the preparation of materials for use by the media. ➢ Select Partial if the WHMP/Program or BMPs address the preparation of materials for media outreach when necessary (e.g., following a strike, for special events, etc.). ➢ Select No if the WHMP/Program or BMPs do not address media outreach/education.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 37 8d. Do airport staff coordinate with resource management agencies (e.g., state departments of natural resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and applicable regional/local agencies)? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff coordinate with most (more than 50%) applicable resource manage­ ment agencies. ➢ Select Partial if airport staff coordinate with some agencies. ➢ Select No if airport staff do not coordinate with agencies. ➢ Select N/A if regulated resources are not present on or near the airport. 8e. Do airport staff provide outreach to the public and special-interest groups/non-government organizations (e.g., the Audubon Society or state or local conservation groups, etc.)? ➢ Select Yes if airport staff provided outreach to most public and special­interest groups/ non­government organizations (more than 50% of those identified). ➢ Select Partial if airport staff provided outreach to some (1 to 3) public and special­interest groups/non­government organizations. ➢ Select No if airport staff do not provide outreach. ➢ Select N/A if there are no public special-interest groups/non-government organizations who have expressed interest in airport resources or management activities. 8f. Was a WHWG established? ➢ No response is necessary. This box reflects the answer to the WHWG question asked in Airport Information, Item g. Part 8 Output Using the data provided in Part 8, the PERC Tool will display a KPI to illustrate the airport’s progress in providing outreach and education to stakeholders about wildlife hazard management (see Figure 19). Figure 19. Part 8 – Output.

38 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Part 9 - Observations, Events, and Conditions Figure 20. Part 9 – Observations, Events, and Conditions input. Part 9 of the PERC Tool enables you to identify observations, conditions, or events that may have affected wildlife presence or abundance at the airport, influenced wildlife hazard management efforts, or could have affected the evaluation results (Figure 20). Wildlife presence and management practices may vary based on many influences including, but not limited to: • Facility changes or construction, • Operational changes, • Changes in on­site or off­site conditions and land uses, • Unusual or extreme weather events, and/or • Available resources. Part 9 Input 9a. Using the space below, identify observations, conditions, or events that may have affected wildlife presence or abundance on or near the airport, influenced wildlife hazard management efforts, or could affect the evaluation results (e.g., unusual weather events, construction projects, changes in nearby land use, etc.). ➢ Type observations events, or conditions that may have affected wildlife hazard management efforts or evaluation results during the evaluation period. No character limit applies. Part 9 Output The PERC Tool will display the observations and concerns on Page 2 of the Report Card (see Figure 21). Figure 21. Part 9 – Output.

Data Entry: Step-by-Step 39 Output Summary The PERC Tool automatically generates a summary at the end of the Report Card (Figure 22). The summary provides two lists: • Items that require some improvement, and • Items that require significant improvement. The purpose of the summary is to identify areas where airport operators and staff mem­ bers can focus their resources to provide continuous improvement prior to the next evaluation period. Chapter 4, “Additional Resources for Program Improvement,” provides a list of resources and available research to help airport operators enhance the effectiveness of their program. Communicating Evaluation Results The Report Card was developed to communicate the results of WHMP/Program Evaluation in a manner that is concise and easily understood and to help airport staff members communicate those results and identified program needs among diverse stakeholders. Table 5 identifies poten­ tial stakeholders who may be interested in or benefit from the evaluation results. Communication Among Airports The PERC Tool does not share data, but users can choose to print and share the Report Card. In some cases, airport staff may wish to share the results with other airports in the region to iden­ tify common observations and changes over time. Doing so can allow airports to share recent observation data, such as species observed and current and anticipated migration, and compare programs to identify which measures are most effective to manage local wildlife. Figure 22. Report Card summary.

40 Program Evaluation Report Card Tool for Wildlife Hazard Management Plans: User Guide Stakeholder Interests Airport Leadership • Demonstrate compliance with Part 14 CFR Part 139. • Communicate wildlife hazards management efforts to other departments, airlines, and the community. • Support requests for additional resources or funding for wildlife management efforts. Airport Operations and Risk Managers • Identify successes and ongoing challenges. • Identify resource needs for communication with leadership. Safety/Risk Teams • Identify changes and trends in strike record and risk over time. • Consider inclusion of wildlife management in other airport management plans and safety management plans. Airlines • Demonstrate airport operator’s efforts to enhance safety and reduce strikes. • Consider direct/indirect costs of wildlife strikes. FAA Certification Inspectors and State Safety Inspectors • Demonstrate ongoing efforts by airport staff during Part 139 compliance inspections. • Demonstrate ongoing efforts by airport staff during safety inspections. Tenants and Airport Users • Provide education about the relationship between site operations and wildlife risks. • Gain support and buy-in from airport tenants and users and encourage participation in wildlife hazard management measures. Elected Officials/ Decision Makers • Provide education about wildlife hazards to aircraft operations. • Promote discussion and education about the relationship between nearby land uses and wildlife hazards and the potential effects of land use changes nearby. Table 5. Potential stakeholders and interest in PERC evaluation results.