Benefit–Cost Analyses Guidebook for Airport Stormwater (2019)

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.

A I R P O R T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M ACRP RESEARCH REPORT 208 2019 Research sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration Subscriber Categories Aviation • Environment • Finance Benefit–Cost Analyses Guidebook for Airport Stormwater Richard A. Krop Mary Ellen Tuccillo Jaime Rooke Michelle L. Young Martha Walters The Cadmus Group, LLC Waltham, MA Joshua Proudfoot Justin Overdevest Good Company Eugene, OR Robert Furey Karen Frink hoyLe, Tanner & assoCiaTes Manchester, NH Amy Malick Nancy Gardiner haLey & aLdriCh Burlington, MA

AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in trans- portation of people and goods and in regional, national, and interna- tional commerce. They are where the nation’s aviation system connects with other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study spon- sored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agen- cies and not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. ACRP is modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). ACRP undertakes research and other technical activi- ties in various airport subject areas, including design, construction, legal, maintenance, operations, safety, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can cooperatively address common operational problems. ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100— Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary participants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Associa- tion of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport Consultants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academy of Sciences formally initiating the program. ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research organi- zations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibili- ties, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for ACRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport professionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing coop- erative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the intended users of the research: airport operating agencies, service pro- viders, and academic institutions. ACRP produces a series of research reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties; industry associations may arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, webinars, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by airport industry practitioners. ACRP RESEARCH REPORT 208 Project 02-75 ISSN 2572-3731 (Print) ISSN 2572-374X (Online) ISBN 978-0-309-48076-5 Library of Congress Control Number 2019950169 © 2019 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The research report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Published research reports of the AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR ACRP RESEARCH REPORT 208 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Marci A. Greenberger, Manager, Airport Cooperative Research Program Joseph D. Navarrete, Senior Program Officer Hana Vagnerova, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Doug English, Senior Editor ACRP PROJECT 02-75 PANEL Field of Environment Casey W. Ries, Gerald R. Ford International Airport, Grand Rapids, MI (Chair) Kevin R. Carlson, Minnesota DOT, St. Paul, MN Stephen P. Gordon, Oakland International Airport (retired), Moraga, CA Thomas F. Mahoney, Massachusetts DOT, East Boston, MA Sam A. Mehta, Gresham Smith, Fremont, CA Pramen P. Shrestha, University of Nevada–Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV Michael Lamprecht, FAA Liaison Christine Gerencher, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research on which this report is based was performed under ACRP Project 02-75 by the Cadmus Group, LLC. Cadmus was supported by Good Company, Haley & Aldrich, and Hoyle, Tanner & Associ- ates. Richard A. Krop, Ph.D., of the Cadmus Group, was the principal investigator. Mary Ellen Tuccillo, Ph.D., was the deputy principal investigator. Damon Fordham was the principal in charge of the project. The other authors of the report were Jaime Rooke, Michelle L. Young, and Martha Walters of Cadmus; Joshua Proudfoot and Justin Overdevest of Good Company; Robert Furey and Karen Frink of Hoyle, Tanner & Associates; and Amy Malick and Nancy Gardiner of Haley & Aldrich. Anna Epstein, Cian Fields, Ava Lazor, Geoffrey Morrison, and Mia Stevens of the Cadmus Group contributed to the report. The research team would like to thank the airports that participated in the study: Bangor International Airport, Bangor, Maine Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, Dallas/ Fort Worth, Texas Dayton International Airport, Dayton, Ohio Denver International Airport, Denver, Colorado Kissimmee Gateway Airport, Orlando, Florida Los Angeles World Airports, Los Angeles, California Minneapolis–St. Paul International Airport, Minneapolis, Minnesota Naples Municipal Airport, Naples, Florida Newark Liberty International Airport, Newark, New Jersey Portland International Airport, Portland, Oregon San Diego International Airport, San Diego, California Southwest Florida International Airport, Fort Meyers, Florida

ACRP Research Report 208 provides guidance on using benefit–cost analyses (BCAs) to identify, evaluate, and select airport stormwater management projects. The guidance focuses on a triple bottom line approach that considers an airport’s finances and environ- mental and societal impacts. The guidance will be particularly helpful for small airports that may not have BCA expertise or experience with innovative stormwater projects. Many airports undertake stormwater projects to accommodate facility expansion, address obsolescence, and respond to evolving regulatory requirements. Often, stormwater infrastructure is installed or upgraded on a project-by-project and piecemeal basis, resulting in mismatches of sizes, material types, ages, and conditions. When airports are considering expanding or improving their stormwater facilities, the immediate need for stormwater infrastructure modification may not be clear, and a BCA is needed. Recently, BCAs have begun incorporating risk assessment and the triple bottom line, consisting of financial, environmental, and social considerations. Yet there has been limited guidance for address- ing these factors in a BCA for airport stormwater infrastructure projects, and research was needed to address this gap. The research used to develop the guidebook was led by the Cadmus Group, LLC. The team began its research with an extensive literature review. The team then conducted inter- views with stakeholders associated with stormwater projects at airports of various sizes and in differing climates and regions. Because it was difficult to identify airports that had used a BCA to select stormwater projects, the research team instead performed tabletop exercises for two airport cases of how a BCA could be employed. The research team used its findings and expertise to prepare the guidebook. The guidebook’s introduction offers an overview of the steps for conducting a BCA and common drivers for airport stormwater projects. This is followed by guidance for setting up a BCA, including framing the analysis and identifying data needs. Next, guidance is provided for incorporating a triple bottom line approach that considers capital, operations and maintenance, and financing, as well as more difficult to quantify factors such as climate resilience and regulations. A unique feature of the guidebook is the inclusion of a hypotheti- cal example of Bayside Airport: As concepts and guidance are introduced, the guidebook demonstrates how they can be applied using the Bayside Airport example. The guidebook also features numerous checklists, flowcharts, and decision trees to help practitioners navi- gate the process. Lastly, the guidebook offers suggestions on how to use the BCA results, including how to make a case for the recommended alternative with stakeholders. F O R E W O R D By Joseph D. Navarrete Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

ix About This Guidebook ix Intended Audience x Bayside Airport – A Hypothetical Example 1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Basics of Benefit–Cost Analysis 6 1.2 Drivers for Airport Stormwater Projects 6 1.3 Guidebook Organization 8 1.4 Introduction to Bayside Airport 9 Chapter 2 Plan the Analysis and Identify Data Needs 9 2.1 Framing the Analysis 10 2.2 Data Needs and Considerations 13 2.3 Bayside Airport’s Planning 17 Chapter 3 Introduction to the Triple Bottom Line 17 3.1 Applications of BCA Using TBL for Airports 18 3.2 Financial Benefits and Costs 19 3.3 Social Benefits and Costs 20 3.4 Environmental Benefits and Costs 21 3.5 Bayside Airport and the TBL 23 Chapter 4 Benefits 23 4.1 Drivers for Airport Stormwater Projects 26 4.2 Considerations for Valuation of Benefits 28 4.3 Resources for Information on Benefits 30 4.4 Financial, Environmental, and Social Benefits and Approaches to Assigning Value 32 4.5 Bayside Airport’s Benefits 37 Chapter 5 Costs 37 5.1 Factors Affecting Costs of Stormwater Infrastructure Projects at Airports 38 5.2 Resources for Estimating Costs 42 5.3 Financial, Environmental, and Social Costs and Approaches to Assigning Value 42 5.4 Bayside Airport’s Costs 46 Chapter 6 Compare Benefits and Costs 46 6.1 Preparing for the Analysis 48 6.2 Measures of Value 54 6.3 Addressing Risk and Uncertainty 57 6.4 Bayside Airport’s BCA C O N T E N T S

64 Chapter 7 Using the BCA 64 7.1 Winning Over the Stakeholders 64 7.2 Put the BCA to Work 69 7.3 Using Bayside’s Analysis 73 Appendix A BCA Primer 81 Appendix B FAA BCA Requirements 83 Appendix C Stormwater Regulations and FAA Guidance Documents 85 Appendix D Stormwater BMPs 89 Appendix E Factors Affecting Costs of Stormwater Infrastructure Projects at Airports 95 Appendix F Stormwater and BCA Tools for Airports 98 References and Additional Resources 106 Acronyms and Abbreviations Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.

The goal of this guidebook is to demonstrate the process of conducting a benefit–cost analysis (BCA) of the impact of stormwater infrastructure projects on an airport’s finances, the environment, and society—the triple bottom line (TBL). The stormwater project could be a stand-alone project or part of a larger airport project. The guidebook emphasizes deci- sions made at airports and considerations at each stage of the process to provide airport personnel with a starting point for: 1. Identifying the stormwater project’s benefits and costs, 2. Collecting relevant data, 3. Using the TBL approach, and 4. Communicating the results of the analysis. The overall approach of a BCA applies to every project analysis, but the details of each analysis will differ significantly depending on many factors, including: 1. The specifics of the project being evaluated; 2. The airport’s location, governance structure, and surrounding environment; 3. The airport’s priorities; and 4. Any regulatory restrictions. This guidebook walks through each stage of the analysis. Although the guidebook cannot provide a full compendium of specific values for benefits and costs, it does direct the reader to strategies and resources for identifying and estimating values for benefits and costs. The guidebook is not intended to support the development of a required BCA for airport projects funded by the FAA, but it is consistent with the FAA’s requirements. Intended Audience The guidebook is intended to support airports of all sizes, but it is likely to be most use- ful to smaller airports, including general aviation (GA) airports, that do not have experi- ence with BCAs or innovative stormwater projects. An example of an airport that could benefit from this guidebook is one that does not have significant financial resources to hire consultants or engineers to conduct a BCA. This guidebook can provide the information and tools necessary for airport personnel to conduct a basic BCA themselves, helping them to evaluate alternative project options, make decisions about alternative projects, and demonstrate the value of the projects selected. This basic comparison of benefits and costs can then be used as the first step in an analysis to support final investment decisions. Additionally, airports with smaller-scale projects that may not be a high priority for FAA About This Guidebook

funding but could still benefit from an analysis can use the guidebook to determine and present the value of alternative infrastructure options. Larger airports may also benefit from this guidebook to help them consider new aspects of their projects and benefits that they may not have previously evaluated, including a project’s potential effect on the TBL. This may help them approach project evaluations as part of the planning process as holistically as possible. Airports of all sizes may rely on consultants to provide the benefit and cost data needed for the analysis. The consultants may also conduct the analysis. This guidebook can help airports ensure that their consultants’ data and analyses meet their objectives. Bayside Airport – A Hypothetical Example Incorporated at the end of each chapter of this guidebook is a hypothetical project at a fictitious airport called Bayside Airport (BAY). BAY is undertaking a construction project and needs to decide how it will manage stormwater as part of the larger construction proj- ect. This example is used to demonstrate how any airport could address the concepts and issues covered in the chapter.