Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports (2015)

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

P A R T I V Applying the Adaptation Framework

59 The frameworks discussed in this chapter share a number of commonalities, including the assessment of vulnerabilities and/or opportunities present at the airport. The need to develop plans despite uncertainty concerning the future is typical in airport planning processes. Planning for adaptation to a range of potential climate futures is not entirely unlike demand forecasting, which examines airport needs given different future demand scenarios. In the case of adaptation planning, understanding the range of climate change projections and any associated attendant model uncertainty helps an airport determine what adaptation actions may be needed to meet a range of potential futures. Existing planning frameworks are an important communication tool for those who design and construct airport infrastructure. Consequently, thoroughly inte- grated and well-advocated adaptation guidelines streamline the achievement of climate change adaptation goals. Planners and designers who understand climate change adaptation objectives up front are better able to incorporate those goals in individual projects and leave room in their designs for planned adaptation upgrades in the future. While there are advantages to integrating or “mainstreaming” adaptation into existing frame- works, climate change adaptation planning may need to be integrated into multiple airport processes. Thoughtful integration into several planning processes, such as emergency response and master planning (i.e., short-term and long-term impacts of climate change) will probably be needed to fully account for climate change adaptations. Some of the most likely planning frameworks for incorporating climate change adaptation planning are discussed briefly below. 8.1 Safety Management Systems A Safety Management System (SMS) is a risk assessment protocol developed by the FAA and tested at airports to identify and manage risks to safe operation. The use of formal SMS tools allows users to identify the trade-offs between planning for relatively infrequent risks and the poten- tially significant consequences of those risks. The FAA’s Advisory Circular (AC) No. 150/5200-37 (Federal Aviation Administration, 2007) provides guidance for SMS development and includes a process for identifying potential hazards, assessing the potential severity and likelihood of those hazards, and developing measures to eliminate or control the risk. ACRP Report 1 (Ludwig, et al., 2007) also provides guidance for airports developing an SMS. Weather-related hazards pose risks that could be addressed in an airport SMS. For example, some climate impacts such as an increase in Hot Days (see Appendix D for more examples) may create hazardous operational conditions for an airport. An SMS provides a framework to sys- tematically identify, prepare for, and set in place procedures to respond to changing conditions, including environmental weather conditions. Through the execution of an SMS, an airport may strategically mitigate potentially hazardous conditions such as aircraft and ground vehicle colli- sions, aircraft overruns, and other types of accidents. C H A P T E R 8 Mainstreaming Adaptation Strategies

60 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports 8.2 Disaster, Business Recovery, and Emergency Response Planning Airports develop emergency response plans to deal with a variety of emergency conditions. AC No. 150/5200-31C (Federal Aviation Administration, 2010) provides guidance to airports on the development and implementation of an Airport Emergency Plan. Hazard/risk analysis for emergency planning for weather events is typically based on historical data and hazard analyses [such as those conducted by FEMA, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the National Weather Service (NWS)]. However, climate projections that estimate future conditions may also be use- ful inputs for resilience-focused hazard analysis. The weather-related hazards considered in an emergency response plan may be impacted by climate change, including increased likelihood of flooding and heat waves. Assessing these hazards based on the understanding that climate change may increase the number of extreme weather events an airport experiences can help airports plan appropriately for emergency response during future climate conditions. Emergency response plans address not only the recovery of the airport’s operations, but also the need to provide for the possibility that the airport will be used as a regional disaster recovery supply facility, thereby experiencing an increase in traffic volume. Airport infrastructure may also be needed during a regional disaster to support the community, and emergency response plans should address incorporation of potential disaster support operations not related to aviation that could take place at the airport. Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport provided a stark example of this during Hurricane Katrina. Although it was damaged and partially flooded, the airport served as a makeshift triage center for those injured or displaced by the hurricane and as a regional Gulf Coast staging center for relief and security operations. During Katrina, the air- port experienced a major shift in operation and function from commercial airport operation to disaster response, serving as a hub for humanitarian, rescue, and evacuation operations. ACRP Report 65: Guidebook for Airport Irregular Operations (IROPS) Contingency Planning (Nash, et al., 2012) may further assist airports in planning for weather-related emergency situ- ations. ACRP is also currently overseeing research to develop a guidebook for integrating com- munity emergency response teams at airports, and a separate guidebook for evaluating the airport emergency response operations simulation tool. These guidebooks may further assist airports in preparing emergency response plans, coordinating with local community emergency response teams, and incorporating climate adaptation in prepared plans. 8.3 Risk Management Processes Most airports engage in some form of risk management. Mid-size and large airports often have individuals or entire full-time staff devoted to minimizing airport risk through various risk management planning processes. Within smaller airports, risk management is less likely to be the sole responsibility of a particular staff member and may involve very limited planning processes. Risk management most often takes the form of procurement of insurance coverage for property, general liability, and business interruptions. Climate change risk assessment and adaptation may be approached in a similar way and/or integrated into an airport’s existing risk management processes. Risk management at airports currently includes assessing risks to infrastructure and opera- tions and developing ways to manage or mitigate those risks. This may include planning for changes to infrastructure and operating protocols, and/or procurement of insurance coverage for property and general liability. Airports conduct risk analyses to determine the appropriate level of insurance coverage to financially manage risk of loss or disruption of service. Loss expo- sure from environmental concerns is one risk that may be covered by airport insurance. ACRP

Mainstreaming Adaptation Strategies 61 Synthesis 30: Airport Insurance Coverage and Risk Management Practices (Rakich, et al., 2011) was developed to assist airports with risk financing and insurance purchasing decisions. Changes in climate may result in increased insurance claims for environmental-related incidents like wind damage, roof failures due to snow load, or flooding of structures from heavy rain events or frozen pipes. Considering how climate change may impact an airport’s loss exposure when conducting a risk assessment may better position airports to manage future risk and better plan investments in insurance, changes to facilities, and modifications in operating protocols. 8.4 Master Plans, Sustainable Planning, and Activities Airport master plans describe future service and infrastructure development over a 15- to 30-year period. The master plan development process includes a review of existing informa- tion and references as much information as is currently available. As a result, airport master plans provide a mechanism to strategically address infrastructure that could be affected by future changes in environmental conditions caused by climate change. In response to feedback from airports, the FAA developed a guided planning process to facilitate and incorporate cli- mate adaptation planning through an airport sustainability planning, grant-funded program. The FAA’s sustainability master/management planning process provides guidance to airports addressing economic viability, operational effectiveness, natural resources, and social aspects of an organization. Long-term infrastructure investments to facilitate the airport’s adaptation to more frequent and/or extreme environmental conditions resulting from climate change further promotes the airport’s long-term viability. One way an airport may incorporate climate adaptation measures as part of the master plan- ning process is by running possible future scenarios for the airport in the ACROS climate tool, as described in this guidebook. An airport may first identify existing infrastructure conditions and organizational response practices to establish a baseline of conditions to compare future level-of-service options. As a next step, an airport may prioritize infrastructure assets important to maintaining operations at the selected levels of service. In this step, an airport determines the minimal resources required to maintain each level of service. An airport may then evaluate the vulnerabilities of important infrastructure assets and organizational response procedures to changes in local and regional environmental conditions or other disruptive events (e.g., an air- port power outage, compromised airport security, maintenance employee shortage). The selec- tion of likely local and regional environmental conditions and the effect on select infrastructure assets are then assessed using the accompanying climate tool. Lastly, once the anticipated envi- ronmental conditions are identified and existing infrastructure and organizational response practices are assessed, the master plan is developed to allocate future resources, as needed. Although many of the likely near-term effects of climate change will be relatively small and appear incrementally over the lifetime of facilities, identifying the planning processes and analy- sis needs well in advance of impacts may provide significant value to airports. Advanced plan- ning for managing some impacts—such as the secondary impacts from higher than average temperatures on aircraft performance, including payload and flight range requirements that in turn affect airport runway length and fuel storage needs—may result in less resource intensive solutions than those implemented in reaction to an event. Another example is the increased risk of higher level storm surges that may result in the flooding of airport facilities. Identification of critical infrastructure assets and planned adaptation in advance of an extreme environmental event provides awareness of vulnerabilities and guidance for decision makers to take action when prioritizing limited resources. The master planning process is a particularly useful mechanism for the incorporation of climate change adaptation; for more on this topic, see Chapter 9, Master Plans and Climate

62 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Change Adaptation. For airports using the sustainability approach to address climate change adaptations, consider Los Angeles World Airports’ (LAWA) Sustainable Airport Planning, Design and Construction Guidelines, Version 5.0 (Los Angeles World Airports/CDM, 2010), as an example. For each climate impact, the Guidelines document provides a sheet with several sections: • Intent: The objective of the sheet, in terms of preparing for impacts to airport infrastructure and operations. • Point Allocation: Airport-defined scoring analogous to the Leadership in Energy and Envi- ronmental Design framework. • Actions & Targets: Instructions to attain appropriate climate models, use models to evaluate airport-specific impacts, and mitigate impacts through planning or infrastructure design. • Benefits: Savings or other improvements resulting from using appropriate planning or design strategies (e.g., reduction of IROPs and repair costs and improvement of airport safety). • Technical Approaches: Which impacts are tied to the change in question, potential plan- ning and design elements, and, if applicable, possible funding resources or coordination suggestions. • Acknowledgements: References to literature providing the scientific basis for the information on the sheet. For more on LAWA’s approach, see Appendix E: Resources. 8.5 Programming and Conceptual Design Processes Climate change effects on building design, such as increased HVAC loads due to longer or hotter cooling seasons, increased emergency generation capacity, placement of emergency gen- erators above higher flood levels, and increased emergency fuel storage, are issues that may be addressed in building design guidelines or incorporated in revised programming and conceptual design processes. Designs for routine upgrades to civil infrastructure may include consideration of the need for higher elevations on airfield utility vaults, perimeter roads, containment dikes, or other facili- ties within the flood zone related to climate change-induced higher storm surges. Incorporation of increased design standards needed for potential future climate changes in an airport design standards manual is one way to ensure new airport infrastructure will be more robust for future climate conditions and reduce the potential need for costly future upgrades. 8.6 Disaster and Business Recovery Planning Disruption to airport operations can result in lost revenue, lost confidence by customers and airlines, and insurance claim processing, if applicable, among other problems. Because airports are a service industry, maintaining operational performance is important to long-term viabil- ity. Setting in place contingencies for possible disruptions through the development of disaster and business recovery planning can assist the airport in limiting negative impacts and restoring timely operations. Using available tools such as the ACROS tool to identify and inform decision makers of exter- nal factors that may contribute to a disruption of operations may allow an airport to focus resources on strategic business vulnerabilities. Response action and recovery plans channel resources to systematically restore infrastructure and operational practices to minimize nega- tive impacts from disruptions.

Mainstreaming Adaptation Strategies 63 8.7 Transportation Planning Frameworks Airports are integral to regional transportation plans and often are involved with the regional planning commission to develop regional plans and policies. Sharing of information, such as local and regional climate data available through the use of the ACROS tool, provides an opportunity for a coordinated effort to address changing environmental conditions common to other regional transportation providers. Identifying how changing environmental conditions (flooding, more ice days, etc.) affect regional transportation networks may further assist the airport to identify additional vulnerabilities. For example, if employees are unable to get to the airport, are there accommodations airport management may consider for operationally criti- cal staff during extreme events? Separately, if during a snow or ice event, roads adjacent to the airport are not accessible due to a different response priority by the regional transportation authority, airport inbound passengers will be stranded at the airport and outbound passengers may not be able to reach it. Opportunities to leverage regional resources to respond to possible extreme environmental conditions, for instance, may lessen the economic impact for the airport while maintaining a timely and effective response. The output of the airport climate adaptation process should inform and be informed by regional planning commission activities, as applicable. Coordination with such entities in the area of adaptation will be critical to addressing the reality that the airport is one component within a regional transportation system and has numerous dependencies on the larger system to function. 8.7.1 Design and Construction When designing and building the infrastructure identified in an Airport Master Plan, archi- tects and engineers rely on standards and codes based on the local climate. Design standards and codes are primarily based on historic climate and weather patterns, and as an airport looks to future facilities, it should review the basis for the existing codes and standards and determine if different codes or standards may be more appropriate in the future climate. Airport architects and engineers should assess the cost of designing to potential future applicable codes and stan- dards for the facilities they are designing and constructing. Several airports have already established airport-specific design criteria to guide designers. Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport has a Design Criteria Manual that is regularly updated. Incorporation of likely local and regional environmental conditions expected from a changing climate during future manual updates will benefit planned airport designs. Use of airport design criteria that account for climate change also helps other parts of the organization, such as the capital improvement program, as the information has been standardized over time. Changing environmental conditions resulting from climate change may affect the timing of typical airport construction in unexpected ways. For example, Indianapolis International Air- port plans construction to avoid impacting the Indiana Bat, which is listed as an endangered species by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If changing environmental conditions result in warmer temperatures and an extended mating season for the Indiana Bat, the time available to complete construction projects may decrease. Changing climate conditions may mean that some building materials require more frequent maintenance or replacement. A lifecycle cost considers both the initial investment and mainte- nance costs, as well as the lifespan of the investment, to determine the lowest long-term cost to the airport. Incorporating lifecycle cost considerations in airport selection criteria may help an airport better understand the long-term investment requirements for each option.

64 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports 8.8 Business Continuity Planning Business continuity planning is a process for identifying an airport’s exposure to internal and external threats and synthesizing ways to increase resiliency. A business continuity plan provides a road map for maintaining critical infrastructure and continuing operations under adverse conditions, including natural disasters that may become more likely because of climate change. Identifying critical utility needs and planning for emergency power and water, developing back- up plans to support operations, coordinating with local emergency plans, and designing infra- structure that accounts for the potential consequences of climate change will enable an airport to maintain operations following a natural disaster.

65 As described in Chapter 8, many airport planning processes provide opportunities to incorpo- rate climate change adaptation. Addressing likely changes in climate and weather is an iterative process, and the approach an individual airport organization takes depends on available staff, political will, financial resources, risk tolerance, external drivers, and capital improvement plans. Leveraging those existing planning processes familiar to airport staff will facilitate a long-term, successful climate change adaptation program. The following sections describe how an airport could incorporate climate change adaptation into updates to the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) and Airport Master Plan. 9.1 ALP and Master Plan Development The FAA master plan development guidelines present two forms for updates that include multi-stakeholder collaboration and input. The first includes ALP updates, which are a pre- requisite to federal funding and often consist of an abbreviated review based on existing planning documents. The second is a comprehensive Airport Master Plan update that addresses facility infrastructure and operational requirements based on projections extending up to 20 years into the future. The ALP is included as one component of an Airport Master Plan. For reference, the following components are contained in an Airport Master Plan: 1. Pre-planning, 2. Public Involvement, 3. Environmental Considerations, 4. Existing Conditions, 5. Aviation Forecasts, 6. Facility Requirements, 7. Alternatives Development and Evaluation, 8. ALPs, 9. Facilities Implementation Plan, and 10. Financial Feasibility Analysis. 9.2 Aligning Climate Change Adaptation with Master Plan Development The Airport Master Plan development process incorporates a stepwise assessment of the airport’s infrastructure assets, operational capacity, and funding needs as determined by fore- casted enplanements and existing infrastructure condition (e.g., age). Expanding this assessment C H A P T E R 9 Master Plans and Climate Change Adaptation

66 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports to account for expected changes in climate during each planning step is an efficient method for determining how the airport may adapt. Addressing climate change adaptation consider- ations as part of the Airport Master Plan can provide overarching guidance and efficient use of resources during the earliest stages of a project. Philadelphia International Airport notes, “In theory, climate change could be considered early on as part of a visioning process and later in the development and evaluation of alternative improvement strategies to consider future services and their location.” Updates and revisions to the facilities implementation plan may provide the opportunity to revisit identified climate change risks on a short-term basis. As conditions at the airport change or a new project is initiated, consider revisiting the adaptation measures previously identified as part of the Airport Master Plan process to account for new climate, operational, or risk manage- ment information. To illustrate, Table 9-1 provides a stepwise overview of how a possible climate impact can be addressed following the Airport Master Plan development process. Consideration of when to incorporate the ACROS climate tool and any identified adaptation strategies may vary accord- ing to organizational preferences. For additional assessment, an Adaptation Implementation Worksheet, with an example, is provided in Appendix C. Master Plan Step Activity Evaluation Response Examples 1. Pre-planning Run the ACROS tool to identify likely risks to infrastructure assets and operations SLR to cause storm surge flooding more frequently and extensively (e.g., 500- year storm) 2. Public Involvement Participate in stakeholder meetings and communicate financial and staff time savings achieved by addressing likely climate change adaptation measures during this process Sea levels are rising within the vicinity of the airport and may cause damage to airport property during storm events The airport is evaluating the vulnerable assets to SLR flooding (e.g., water levels expected, salt corrosion risks) The airport is interested in collaborating with other local officials to develop a risk management strategy for SLR flooding The airport collaborates on level of service to provide disaster assistance desired by the community and the requirements for getting the airport back up and running following a storm surge Table 9-1. Overview of climate response activities.

Master Plans and Climate Change Adaptation 67 Master Plan Step Activity Evaluation Response Examples 3 hours during the flooding last spring Insurance deductibles for next year have doubled 75% of operational staff access the airport via the underground subway, previously prone to flooding The south end of Runway 10-28 was just 2 inches above the high-water mark during the flooding last spring 5. Aviation Forecasts Compile annual enplanement projections through 2030 Annual enplanements are projected to increase 10% over the next 20 years 6. Facility Requirements Determine infrastructure and staff operational requirements to maintain level of service Access Roads A and B need to remain open at all times Runway 10-28 is a priority to maintain operations Critical Operations and Maintenance staff are required to be at the airport to maintain operations and need means of access 7. Alternatives Development and Evaluation Run scenario analyses of at least two alternative development options as impacted by an 8- foot storm surge that floods the property Scenario 1 (no adaptive management actions) results in a five-day loss of service and an estimated $30 million in damages to assets 3. Environmental Considerations Identify the storage capacity of wetland buffer areas and compare to likely SLR estimates Natural flood storage options should be identified and protected from development on airport property 4. Existing Conditions Inventory existing infrastructure, staff, and financial resources Identify vulnerable assets Transformers in the north and west parking lots are elevated 12 inches above ground surface The only access road connecting the Maintenance Shop to the terminal was flooded and impassible for Table 9-1. (Continued). (continued on next page)

68 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Master Plan Step Activity Evaluation Response Examples infrastructure adaptive management actions) requires $200,000 in operations expenses and $10 million in capital expenses to implement, and results in a four-hour loss of service during the storm and no significant infrastructure damage 8. ALPs Develop a layout plan with infrastructure plans for the selected scenario Include planned adaptive management infrastructure improvements in the ALP over the next 10 years 9. Facilities Implementation Plan As part of the facilities implementation plan, create a climate change adaptation plan that lists the risks to assets and associated adaptation measures Elevate at-risk transformers above the 500-year flood elevation Elevate the maintenance driveway between the Maintenance Shop and the terminal Provide onsite accommodations for operationally critical staff during forecasted storm events with storm surge flooding, or work with local officials to prioritize a transportation option for staff during flood conditions Construct a flood wall to protect Runway 10-28 during flood conditions 10. Financial Feasibility Analysis Conduct a financial assessment of infrastructure and staff level- of-service requirements when impacted by an 8-foot storm surge; include review of insurance premiums Assess insurance premiums for airport property restoration due to SLR and storm surge flooding before adaptation measures are implemented, and compare them to premiums after measures are implemented Scenario 2 (operational adaptive management actions) requires $200,000 in operations expenses to implement, and results in a one-day loss of service and an estimated $30 million in damages to assets Scenario 3 (operational and Table 9-1. (Continued).

Master Plans and Climate Change Adaptation 69 9.3 Monitor and Update The Stakeholder Advisory Committee will continue to have a role in updating the adapta- tion plan as necessary. The recommended schedule for revision is three to five years or in response to important new data or conditions. Revise the plan as necessary in response to new information regarding climate change, the effectiveness of adaptation efforts, or other relevant factors (e.g., changes in regulations, technology, etc.) that may have major impacts on airport activities. In some cases, it may be desirable to pursue additional high-resolution climate modeling to inform engineering and design activities. For more guidance on this topic, please see Appendix E: Resources.

70 Glossary of Terms Adaptation—Initiatives and measures to reduce the vulnerability of natural and human systems against actual or expected climate change effects. Various types of adaptation exist, e.g., anticipa- tory and reactive, private and public, and autonomous and planned. Adaptation increases resil- ience to future impacts. Adaptation puts an understanding of hazard and risk first and considers impacts, costs, and acceptance in addition to return on investment. Airport Layout Plan (ALP)—Depicts existing facilities and planned development [required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the grant application process]. Plans must be kept up-to-date at all times and should be updated as needed or requested by the FAA to meet airport design standards; accurately reflecting existing features, land-use changes, and airport operations; and to keep pace with future needs. Airport Sustainability Planning—See Sustainability Master Plans. ALP Updates—See Airport Layout Plan. Base Flood Elevation (BFE)—Estimates the height to which floodwater is anticipated to rise during a 100-year flood event. The BFE is measured in feet relative to the North American Verti- cal Datum of 1988 (NAVD88). Climate—The long-term pattern (i.e., expected frequency) of weather in a particular location, including the interactions between atmospheric, oceanic, and land states. Climate generally refers to a larger area than weather. Climate is comprised of average weather conditions or pat- terns over a period of time for a region. Standard averaging period is 30 years. Climate Change—A change in the state of the climate that can be identified (by using statistical tests, for example) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that per- sists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forces, or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use. Note that the United Nations Framework Convention on Cli- mate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1, defines climate changes as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.” The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between climate change attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric composition, and climate variability attributable to natural causes. Climate Change Risk—The potential losses associated with climate change and, defined in terms of expected probability and frequency, exposure and consequences (Federal Emergency Manage- ment Agency, 1997). C H A P T E R 1 0 Glossary of Terms and Acronym List

Glossary of Terms and Acronym List 71 Climate Projections—Model-derived estimates of future climate. Likelihood that something will happen several decades to centuries in the future for given developing conditions. Model projections typically include global temperature and precipitation, precipitation extremes and droughts, and snow and ice. Climate Stressor—Changes due to or directly related to changing climate. Examples include sea level rise, increased global and regional temperatures, and shifts in precipitation patterns. Climate Vector—Similar to climate stressor, but more specific and directly related to airport operations. Airport SMEs identified climate stressors that would impact airport operations and then worked with atmospheric scientists to identify specific climate metrics that could be ana- lyzed. For example, high temperatures were identified as a stressor to multiple assets and opera- tions. Specific climate vectors developed to assess this stressor included days per year where air temperature exceed 90°F and days per year where temperatures exceed 100°F. Confidence Level—A subjective measure of projection reliability, based on scientific literature and agreement among Global Climate Models, also known as General Circulation Models or GCMs. High confidence indicates less uncertainty than medium or low confidence; low- confidence vectors have the most uncertainty. Cooling Days (measured in days per year)—A day with an average temperature at or above 68°F. Cooling Degree Day (CDD) (measured in yearly accumulation)—A unit of measure that reflects the energy demand needed to cool a building. The daily CDD is calculated by subtract- ing 65 from the day’s average temperature. Daily CDDs are summed to obtain the accumulated CDDs per year. Dry Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a rainfall accumulation of less than 0.03 inch. Emergency Planning—A formal plan outlining essential emergency-related actions planned to ensure the safety of and emergency services for the airport populace and the community in which the airport is located. The plan also includes provisions for including local communities and state, and federal organizations as appropriate. Exposure—The number, types, qualities, and monetary values of various types of property or infrastructure and life that may be subject to an undesirable or injurious hazard event (FEMA Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, 1997). Extreme Weather Event—An event that is rare at a particular place and time of year. Definitions of “rare” vary, but an extreme weather event would normally be as rare as or rarer than the 10th or 90th percentile of the observed probability density function. By definition, the characteris- tics of what is called extreme weather may vary from place to place in an absolute sense. Single extreme events cannot be simply and directly attributed to anthropogenic climate change, as there is always a finite chance the event in questions might have occurred naturally. When a pat- tern of extreme weather persists for some time, such as a season, it may be classed as an extreme climate event, especially if it yields an average or total that is itself extreme (e.g., drought or heavy rainfall over a season). Flooding—When normally dry areas become wet due to episodic storm events (e.g., land in a floodplain, or land subjected to coastal storm surge or riverine flooding) Freezing Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a high temperature at or below 32°F. Frost Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a low temperature at or below 32°F. Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Naturally existing or human-produced and -emitted gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. Human emissions are considered to be the chief cause of potential man-made climate change. Greenhouse gases are gases in the atmosphere that absorb and emit

72 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports radiation, which is the cause of the greenhouse effect. Examples of primary greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane. Heating Day (measured in days per year)—A day with an average temperature at or below 62°F. Heating Degree Day (HDD) (measured in yearly accumulation)—A unit of measure that reflects the energy demand needed to heat a building. The daily HDD is calculated by subtract- ing the day’s average temperature from 65. Heavy Rain 5-Day—A measure of the maximum amount of rainfall that accumulates, in inches, over a five-day period. High- or Low-Emissions Scenarios—Alternative visions of how the future might unfold with respect to the emission of greenhouse gases. Scenarios are generated based on factors such as pop- ulation projections, economic development, technological changes, etc., and may contain both a narrative and qualitative component. The Special Report on Emissions Scenarios by the IPCC is an example of greenhouse gas emissions scenarios to make projections of possible future climate change. Emission scenarios are based on technological development and economic development. Hot Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a high temperature at or above 90°F. Hot Night (measured in nights per year)—A night with a low temperature at or above 68°F. Humid Day (measured in days per year)—A day with an average dew point temperature above 65°F. The dew point temperature is the temperature at which water vapor in the air condenses into dew. Infrastructure Lifecycle—The planned useful life of a building or other infrastructure. Inundation—When currently dry areas become permanently submerged or wetted on a daily basis by tidal action. Irregular Operations (IROPs)—Events that involve such impacts as unexpected, long-term passenger delays and require actions and capabilities beyond those considered typical. Mitigation Strategy—Sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards and their effects. Monitoring—Collecting necessary data, reviewing performance, and comparing performance to estimates for a given system or asset. Natural Climate Variability—Variations in climate (often short term) due to changes in the Earth system such as volcanic eruptions, El Niño, or La Niña. Natural climate variability is caused by natural factors and exists on all time scales. Changes include solar energy, volcanic eruptions, and natural changes in greenhouse gas concentrations. “No Regrets” Climate Adaptation Approach—Situation-specific measures that yield benefits (e.g., cost savings) even in the absence of climate change. This approach helps absorb some of the uncertainty in factors ranging from future economic conditions to climate projections. One-Day Heavy Rain Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a rainfall accumulation of more than 0.80 inch. Planned Adaptation Upgrades—Strategies that will be implemented at a later point due to considerations such as planning timelines, the onset of a given impact, and cost. Possible Climate Change Outcomes—See Climate Projections. Resilience—The ability of a system to bounce back after experiencing a shock or stress. Resilient systems are usually characterized by flexibility and persistence.

Glossary of Terms and Acronym List 73 Return on Investment—Financial returns resulting from expenditures. A high return on invest- ment results when the initial expenditure compares favorably to the return. Risk Assessment—A process or method for evaluating risk associated with a specific hazard and defined in terms of probability and frequency of occurrence, magnitude and severity, exposure, and consequences (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1997). Safety Management System (SMS)—An approach that systemizes safety risk management and safety assurance concepts for the purpose of managing safety. SMSs employ mechanisms such as communication and knowledge sharing, organizational structures, policies, and procedures for decision making. Scenario-Based Approach—See High- or Low-Emissions Scenarios. Sea Level Rise (SLR)—The change in global and relative (local) sea level trends. Global sea level changes are attributed to changes in ocean volume due to ice melt and thermal expansion. Relative sea level changes include global sea level changes as well as changes in land elevation caused by factors such as glacial rebound (readjustment of land elevations since the retreat of the last Ice Age) and subsidence (sinking land). SLR measures the number of days per year where the runway elevation is inundated by tidal flooding. In the ACROS tool, SLR is shown as the number of days per year where the runway elevation (provided in the FAA’s NFDC database) is inundated by tidal flooding. Snow Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a snowfall accumulation of more than two inches. Stakeholder Involvement—The meaningful, timely engagement of various groups, such as passengers, tenants, state and federal agencies, and the general public, who have an interest in airport activities. Storm Day (measured in days per year)—A day with a thunderstorm rainfall accumulation more than 0.15 inches. May include high wind events and hail. Storm Surge—A rise in ocean water generated by the winds of a storm. Storm surge combined with tides (storm tides) during events such as a hurricane causes severe coastal flooding, par- ticularly during high tides. Rise of water is associated with low-pressure weather systems. Surges are caused by high winds pushing the surface of ocean water, causing water to pile up higher than the mean sea level. The effects of storm surge rise of water is associated with the rise in water from storm, tide, and wave run-up. Storm surge is measured as the height of water above the predicted astronomical level. Sustainability Master Plans—An FAA initiative to incorporate sustainability into the master planning process. Sustainability Principles—Guidelines to assist planners and managers in meeting today’s needs without compromising future operations. Uncertainty—Captures knowledge of probability and consequence. In climate modeling, uncertainty refers to a way of specifying how precisely something is known. Vertical Land Movement—See SLR. Very Hot Days (measured in days per year)—A day with a high temperature at or above 100°F. Vulnerability—The degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. Vulnerability is a func- tion of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate change and variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity.

74 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Weather—Qualities such as the temperature, moisture, wind direction and speed, and barometric pressure of the atmosphere in a given time and location. Weather is day-to-day atmospheric properties (temperature, precipitation, humidity). Weather is the set of all phenomena in the atmosphere at a given time. Weather and Climate Disasters—A serious weather- or climate-related disruption resulting in a significant number of deaths, injuries, and/or economic damages. Examples include tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, and wildfires. Major event resulting from natural processes that can cause loss of life, etc., and could relate to resilience Acronym List AC Advisory Circular ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRM Airport Climate Risk Matrix ACROS Airport Climate Risk Operational Screening [Tool] ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ALP Airport Layout Plan AMS American Meteorological Society AR4 Fourth Assessment Report AR5 Fifth Assessment Report ASHRAE American Society of Heating and Air-Conditioning Engineers BAA British Airports Authority BFE Base Flood Elevation CDD Cooling Degree Day CMIP5 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project CSS-Wx Common Support Services—Weather DEFRA Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (U.K.) ERD Entity-Relationship Diagram FAA Federal Aviation Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map GCM Global Climate Model, also known as General Circulation Model GIS Geographic Information System GSE Ground Service Equipment GUI Graphical User Interface HDD Heating Degree Day HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning IATA International Air Transport Association IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IROP Irregular Operation LAWA Los Angeles World Airports LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LiMWA Limit of Moderate Wave Action MAG Manchester Airports Group MHHW Mean Higher High Water MSL Mean Sea Level NAS National Airspace System NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988

Glossary of Terms and Acronym List 75 NCA National Climate Assessment NFDC National Flight Data Center NFHL National Flood Hazard Layer NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NGS National Geodetic Survey NGVD29 National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRDC National Resources Defense Council NWS National Weather Service PHL Philadelphia International Airport QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control RCP Representative Concentration Pathway SLR Sea Level Rise SMART Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Timely SME Subject Matter Expert SMS Safety Management System SWEL Stillwater Elevation TRID Transport Research International Documentation TRB Transportation Research Board UKCIP United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation USGCRP United States Global Change Research Program USGS United States Geological Survey

76 ACI World Environment Standing Committee, Planning Adaptation to Climate Change (February 2011) p. 7. Baglin, C. ACRP Synthesis of Airport Practice 33: Airport Climate Adaptation and Resilience. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2012) 88 pp. Barnard Dunkelberg Company, Synergy Consultants, Sustainable Business Consulting and Burrst. Renton Municipal Airport Sustainability Management Plan. Renton Municipal Airport (2012) 43 pp. Berry, L. Development of a Methodology for the Assessment of Sea Level Rise Impacts on Florida’s Transportation Modes and Infrastructure. Florida Atlantic University (2012) 135 pp. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Research and Innovation Technology Administration, http://www.rita.dot .gov/bts/help_with_data/aviation/understanding.html, accessed February 19, 2013. Burkett, V. R., and M. A. Davidson, [Eds.]. Coastal Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: A Technical Input to the 2012 National Climate Assessment. Cooperative Report to the 2013 National Climate Assessment (2012) 150 pp. C&S Engineers, Inc. and Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. Sustainable Master Plan Final Report. Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport. Ithaca, NY (2011). C&S Engineers, Inc., ESA Airports, Synergy Consultants and Blair, Church & Flynn. Fresno Yosemite International Airport Sustainability Management Plan. Fresno Yosemite International Airport (2012) 37 pp. CDM. ACRP Report 56: Handbook for Considering Practical Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategies for Airports. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2011) 154 pp. Chicago Department of Aviation. Sustainable Airport Manual Version 2.0, City of Chicago (November 15, 2010) 690 pp. Council on Environmental Quality. Implementing Climate Change Adaptation Planning in Accordance with Executive Order 13514. Washington, D.C. (2011). Curry, J. Reasoning About Climate Uncertainty. Climatic Change, 108, (2011) pp. 723–732. Eljgelaar, E., P. Peeters, and K. de Brujin. “Coach Travel and Dutch Holiday Transport Emissions.” Environment and Climate Change Volume II (March 2012) pp. 10–12. Engineering the Future Group, Infrastructure, Engineering and Climate Change Adaptation—Ensuring Services in an Uncertain Future. The Royal Academy of Engineering, London, England (2011) 107 pp. European Environment Agency. Climate Change, Impacts and Vulnerability in Europe 2012: An Indicator-Based Report, Rosendahls-Schultz Grafisk, Copenhagen, Denmark (2012) 300 pp. Federal Aviation Administration. Advisory Circular 150/5200-37 (2007). http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary /media/advisory_circular/150-5200-37/150_5200_37.pdf (Accessed on May 10, 2013). Federal Aviation Administration. Advisory Circular 150/5200-31C (2010). http://www.faa.gov/document Library/media/150_5200_31c_chg1.pdf (Accessed on August 12, 2015). Federal Aviation Administration. “Notification: Airport Sustainable Master Plan Pilot Program.” Memo to Regional Airports Division Managers. Washington, D.C. (May 27, 2010). Federal Aviation Administration. Report on the Sustainable Master Plan Pilot Program and Lessons Learned (2012). http://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/sustainability/media/SustainableMasterPlanPilot ProgramLessonsLearned.pdf (Accessed on May 13, 2013). Federal Emergency Management Agency. Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy, Washington, D.C. (January 1997). GHD, Inc. ACRP Report 69: Asset and Infrastructure Management for Airports—Primer and Guidebook. Transpor- tation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2012) 131 pp. Grinsted, A., J. C. Moore, and S. Jevreheva et al., “Reconstructing Sea Level from Paleo and Projected Tempera- tures 200 to 2100 AD,” Springer-Verlag (2008). References and Resources

References and Resources 77 Heathrow Airport Limited, Heathrow Airport Climate Change Adaptation Reporting Power Report. London (2011) 131 pp. Access date: May 1, 2013. http://www.heathrow.com/file_source/Company/Static/PDF /Communityandenvironment/LHR-climate-change-adaptation-report.pdf Independent Evaluation Group. Adapting to Climate Change: Assessing the World Bank Group Experience Phase III, World Bank, Washington, D.C. (2013). p. 62. Infrastructure Canada. Adapting Infrastructure to Climate Change in Canada’s Cities and Communities, Research and Analysis Division (2006) p. 21. Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. Federal Actions for a Climate Resilient Nation. http://www .whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ceq/2011_adaptation_progress_report.pdf. (Accessed March 18, 2013). Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. Federal Agency Climate Change Adaptation Planning. Washington, D.C. (2011) p. 5. International Air Transport Association, “Hurricane Sandy Added to Industry Challenges in October,” Press Release No. 48, (November 29, 2012). International Air Transport Association. IATA Economic Briefing: The Impact of Hurricane Sandy. (2012). http:// www.iata.org/publications/economics/Documents/hurricane-sandy-impact-nov2012.pdf. IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Con- tribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C. B., V. R. Barros, D. J. Dokken, K. J. Mach, M. D. Mastrandrea, T. E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K. L. Ebi, Y. O. Estrada, R. C. Genova, B. Girma, E. S. Kissel, A. N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P. R. Mastrandrea, and L. L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA (2014a) 1132 pp. IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Barros, V. R., C. B. Field, D. J. Dokken, M. D. Mastrandrea, K. J. Mach, T. E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K. L. Ebi, Y. O. Estrada, R. C. Genova, B. Girma, E. S. Kissel, A. N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P. R. Mastrandrea, and L. L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA (2014b) 688 pp. IPCC. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C. B., V. Barros, T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, D. J. Dokken, K. L. Ebi, M. D. Mastrandrea, K. J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S. K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA (2012) 582 pp. IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T. F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA (2013) 22 pp. Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport Sustainable Master Plan, http://www.flyithaca.com/content/view/sustainable -airport-master-plan.html Jefferson, Andy. London Stansted Airport Climate Change Adaptation Plan. BAA Airports Limited, London, England (2011) 10 pp. Kincaid, I., M. Tretheway, S. Gros, and D. Lewis. ACRP Report 76: Addressing Uncertainty about Future Airport Activity Levels in Airport Decision Making. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2012) 144 pp. King County, 2012 Strategic Climate Action Plan, King County, Washington, (2012) 56 pp. Knutti, K. “Planning for Sea-Level Rise: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Policy.” Solution to Coastal Disasters ’02 Conference, ASCE, (2002). Lal, P. N., T. Mitchell, P. Aldunce, H. Auld, R. Mechler, A. Miyan, L. E. Romano, and S. Zakaria, “National Systems for Managing the Risks from Climate Extremes and Disasters,” Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation [Field, C. B., V. Barros, T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, D. J. Dokken, K. L. Ebi, M. D. Mastrandrea, K. J. Mach, G.-K. Plattner, S. K. Allen, M. Tignor, and P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, New York (2012) pp. 339–392. Landrum & Brown, Inc. ACRP Report 80: Guidebook for Incorporating Sustainability into Traditional Airport Projects. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012, 102 pp. Los Angeles World Airports/CDM. Sustainable Airport Planning, Design and Construction Guidelines V5.0 (February 2010) 223 pp. (http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LAXDev/News_for_LAXDev/Sustainable %20Airport%20PDC%20Guidelines%20Jan08.pdf) Lott, N., and Ross, T. Tracking and evaluating US billion dollar weather disaster, 1985–2005. NOAA National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina. (2006) 6 pp.

78 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Lott, N., A. Smith, T. Houston, K. Shein, and J. Crouch, J. Billion-Dollar U.S. Weather/Climate Disasters 1980–2012, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina (2012) 6 pp. Ludwig, D. A., C. R. Andrews, N. R. Jester-ten Veen, and C. Laqui. ACRP Report 1: Safety Management Systems for Airports. Volume 1: Overview. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2007) 135 pp. Major, D. C., R. Zimmerman, J. Falcocchio, K. Jacob, R. Horton, M. O’Grady, D. Bader, J. Gilbride, and T. Tomczyszyn. Mainstreaming Climate Change Adaptation Strategies into New York State Department of Transportation’s Operations: Final Report. The Earth Institute at Columbia University (2011) 116 pp. Manchester Airport Groups. Climate Change Adaptation Report for East Midlands Airport and Manchester Airport. Manchester, England (2011) 25 pp. McLaughlin, B. J., S. D. Murrell, and S. DesRoches. “Anticipating Climate Change.” Civil Engineering—ASCE, Vol. 81, No. 4 (April 2011) pp. 50–55. Melillo, Jerry M., T. Richmond, and G. W. Yohe [Eds.]. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program (2014) 841 pp. Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority. Nashville International Airport Sustainability Study Highlights (2012). http://www.flynashville.com/about/Documents/Nashville_IntlAirport_SustainabilityStudy_2012HR.pdf (Accessed May 14, 2013). Mills, B., and J. Andrey. The Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation, U.S.DOT Center for Climate Change and Environmental Forecasting Workshop 1002, Proceedings (2002) pp. 77–88. Nash, J. M., R. Agnew, S. A. D. Ward, R. A. Massey, T. Callister, R. McNeill, F. Barich, J. Phy, and E. Tolton. ACRP Report 65: Guidebook for Airport Irregular Operations (IROPS) Contingency Planning. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2012) 258 pp. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Climate Program Office, Global Sea Level Rise Scenarios for the United States National Climate Assessment, Silver Spring, Maryland, (2012) 29 pp. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry / Sea level rise—Products: Sea level time series. “ORAD Laboratory for Satellite Altimetry.” (2013a) http://ibis.grdl.noaa.gov/SAT /SeaLevelRise/LSA_SLR_timeseries.php (accessed June 5, 2013). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “Sea Level Trends.” NOAA Tides and Currents—Home. (2013b) http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.shtml (accessed June 5, 2013). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center, 1981–2010 Climate Normals (2014) http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/normals/usnormals.html. National Research Council, Responding to Changes in Sea Level: Engineering Applications, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., (1987) 160 pp. National Weather Service Weather Forecast St. Louis, “Office Good Friday Tornadoes April 22, 2011,” http://www .crh.noaa.gov/lsx/?n=04_22_2011; accessed April 16, 2013. Nelson, F. E. and L. W. Brigham [Eds.] Climate Change, Permafrost, and Impacts on Civil Infrastructure. U.S. Arctic Research Commission Permafrost Task Force, Arlington, Virginia (2003) 63 pp. Oberts, G. L. “Climate and Stormwater: Coping with Change.” Stormwater-The Journal for Surface Water Quality Professionals, Vol. 8, No. 6 (September 2007). http://www.stormh2o.com/SW/Articles/Climate_and _Stormwater_16513.aspx (Accessed February 19, 2013). Pejovic, T. Implication of Climate Change for the UK Aviation Sector (Doctoral Dissertation). Imperial College, London, England (2008). Pejovic, T., V. A. Williams, R. B. Noland, and R. Toumi. Factors Affecting the Frequency and Severity of Air- port Weather Delays and the Implications of Climate Change for Future Delays. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2139, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2009) pp. 97–106. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Newark Liberty International Airport Sustainable Management Plan. Newark Liberty International Airport (2012a) 60 pp. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Teterboro Airport Sustainable Management Plan. Teterboro Airport (2012b) 38 pp. Rahmstorf, S., “A Semi-Empirical Approach to Projecting Future Sea-Level Rise,” Science, Vol. 315 (2007) pp. 368–370. Rakich, R., C. Wells, and D. Wood. ACRP Synthesis of Airport Practice 30: Airport Insurance Coverage and Risk Management Practices. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2011) 121 pp. RS&H. Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport Master Plan Update. http://phfmasterplan.com /Documents.html (Accessed Tuesday, May 14, 2013). Schaefer, I., “Novel Ways to Incorporate Stakeholders into Adaptation Planning,” ICLEI (November 20, 2012) http://www.iclei.org/details/article/novel-ways-to-incorporate-stakeholders-into-adaptation-planning .html; accessed April 15, 2013.

References and Resources 79 Smith, A. B., and Katz, R. W. “US billion-dollar weather and climate disasters: data sources, trends, accuracy and biases.” Natural hazards 67, No. 2 (2013): 387–410. Transportation Research Board. Transportation Research Circular E-C152: Adapting Transportation to the Impacts of Climate Change: State of the Practice 2011. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2011) 64 pp. Urban Engineers, “Climate Change: Impacts and Adaptation Strategies for Philadelphia International Airport,” City of Philadelphia, Division of Aviation (2010) p. 34. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, “Sea-Level Change Considerations for Civil Works Programs,” Circular No. 1165-2-21 Washington, D.C. (2011) 32 pp. U.S. Department of Transportation, Climate Adaptation Plan, Washington, D.C. (2012) 24 pp. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Climate Change and Extreme Weather Vulnerability Assessment Framework. Washington, D.C. (2012) 52 pp. Watkiss, P., A. Hunt, and L. Horrocks. Scoping Study for a National Climate Change Risk Assessment and Cost- Benefit Analysis: Final Report. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2009). 80 pp. Webster, M., 2003: Communicating Climate Change Uncertainty to Policy Makers and the Public. Climatic Change, 61 (2003) pp. 1–8. Willows, R. I., N. Reynard, R. Connell, and I. Meadowcroft. Climate Adaptation: Risk, Uncertainty and Decision- Making (Review Draft). The UK Climate Impacts Programme, Oxford, England (2003). 233 pp.

A-1 Please see the Excel file that accompanies this guidebook, available on the accompanying CD, CRP-CD-175, and for download from the ACRP Project 02-40 description page: http://apps.trb .org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=3245. A P P E N D I X A Airport Asset Impacts

B-1 A P P E N D I X B Asset Inventory and Criticality Checklist Category Asset or Operaon Asset Cricality Exisng Vulnerabilies Aircra/GSE Aircra Performance Demand and Capacity Ground Service Equipment Navigaonal Aids - FAA Owned Navigaonal Aids - Airport Owned Runways, Taxiways, and Holding Areas Cargo Air Cargo Buildings Apron Loading and Unloading Equipment/Opera on Commercial Passenger Terminal Facili es Apron Commercial Passenger Terminal Facili es Curbside Amenies Gates Gates (Passenger Boarding Bridges) Environmental and Safety Bird and Wildlife Hazard Management Environmental (Noise, Air Quality, Water Quality and Quanty) Snow and Ice Control (Deicing) General Aviaon Facilies Aircra‚ Parking Aprons Flight Schools and Pilot Shops General Aviaon Terminal Facilies Hangars Loading and Unloading Equipment / Opera on Tie-Down Areas Transient Aircra Parking Apron Areas Ground Access, Circula on, and Parking Access Roads Parking Facili es Rail (Internal to the Airport, e.g., Monorail) Table B-1. Asset inventory and criticality checklist. (continued on next page)

B-2 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Category Asset or Operaon Asset Cricality Exisng Vulnerabilies Personnel and Passengers Parks Regional Infrastructure Support Facilies Aircra Fuel Storage/Fueling Aircra Rescue and Fire Fighng Airline Maintenance Facilies Airport Administrave Areas Airport Maintenance Facilies FAA Facilies (Air Traffic Control Tower) Flight Kitchens Weather Reporng Facilies Ulies Communicaons Onsite Electrical Infrastructure Sanitary Sewer Stormwater Drainage Water Distribuon Systems Other Finance and Insurance Table B-1. (Continued). Category Asset or Operaon Asset Cricality Exisng Vulnerabilies IT/Server Rooms Pump Staons Migaon Land Underground Fueling Systems Cell Phone Towers Military Facilies Airline Reservaon/Call Centers Tunnels Airline Glycol Storage Glycol Recovery Systems Ground Run-Up Enclosure On-Airport Underground Pipeline Chemical Support Facility (Runway Deice and Prevenon) *Airport advisory committees may wish to investigate adaptation options for the assets and operations listed above. The list above was generated by case study participants and other SMEs after the research and software development phase of the project. Addendum to Table B-1. Assets and operations not included in ACROS.*

Asset Inventory and Criticality Checklist B-3 Asset or Operaon Climate Impact Adaptaon Opon Priority Ownership Aircra Performance Reduced Li Lengthen Runway 1 Airline Demand and Capacity Change in Seasonality of Passenger Travel Account for in demand projecons 2 Airport Commercial Passenger Terminal Facilies Increased HVAC Demand Consider increasing capacity of HVAC systems 3 Airport FAA-owned NAVAIDS Electrical Damage Install transient voltage surge suppressor 4 FAA Table B-2a. An example worksheet for prioritizing adaptation options and noting ownership of the asset/operations. Asset or Operaon Climate Impact Adaptaon Opon Priority Ownership Table B-2b. Blank copy of adaptation priority worksheet.

C-1 A P P E N D I X C Adaptation Implementation Worksheets

Adaptaon Implementaon Worksheet Service Category Asset/Opera on Climate Impact Impact Severity Impact Timeline Aircra/GSE Aircra Change From Snow to Ice (Deicing) -More winter precipitaon -More winter precipitaon falling as rain, freezing rain, and sleet Over the next five years Airport Operaonal Needs: -Ice-free aircra -Compliance with environmental perming -Reasonable es mate of materials needed (deicing fluid) Adapta on Op on General Applicability Considera ons Planning Processes Cost and Funding Modify Ice Control and Removal Strategies x - Is appropriate for airport size and other constraints - Safety Management Systems x - Adaptaon opon is comparable to or lower in cost than tradional methods x - Meets or exceeds current and future operaonal needs - Disaster, Business Recovery, and Emergency Response Planning - Return on investment for adaptaon opon is relavely rapid x - Fits a wide range of scenarios - Risk Management Processes - Funding is available for implementaon x - Exisng operaon/asset does not meet current needs - Master Plans, Sustainable Planning and Iniaves - Project(s) affecng the operaon or asset are already planned/underway and facilitate inclusion of the adaptaon opon - Programming and Conceptual Design Processes - Implementaon does not require coordinaon with an external partner - Disaster and Business Recovery Planning - Transportaon Planning Frameworks - Design and Construcon - Business Connuity Planning Table C-1. Adaptation implementation worksheet example.

Adaptaon Implementaon Worksheet Service Category Asset/Opera on Climate Impact Impact Severity Impact Timeline Airport Operaonal Needs: Adapta on Op on General Applicability Considera ons Planning Processes Cost and Funding - Is appropriate for airport size and other constraints - Safety Management Systems - Adaptaon opon is comparable to or lower in cost than tradional methods - Meets or exceeds current and future operaonal needs - Disaster, Business Recovery, and Emergency Response Planning - Return on investment for adaptaon opon is relavely rapid - Fits a wide range of scenarios - Risk Management Processes - Funding is available for implementaon - Exisng operaon/asset does not meet current needs - Master Plans, Sustainable Planning and Iniaves - Project(s) affecng the operaon or asset are already planned/underway and facilitate inclusion of the adaptaon opon - Programming and Conceptual Design Processes - Implementaon does not require coordinaon with an external partner - Disaster and Business Recovery Planning - Transportaon Planning Frameworks - Design and Construcon - Business Connuity Planning Table C-2. Blank adaptation implementation worksheet. (continued on next page)

rapid - Fits a wide range of scenarios - Risk Management Processes - Funding is available for implementaon - Exisng operaon/asset does not meet current needs - Master Plans, Sustainable Planning and Iniaves - Project(s) affecng the operaon or asset are already planned/underway and facilitate inclusion of the adaptaon opon - Programming and Conceptual Design Processes - Implementaon does not require coordinaon with an external partner - Disaster and Business Recovery Planning - Transportaon Planning Frameworks - Design and Construcon - Business Connuity Planning - Is appropriate for airport size and other constraints - Safety Management Systems - Adaptaon opon is comparable to or lower in cost than tradional methods - Meets or exceeds current and future operaonal needs - Disaster, Business Recovery, and Emergency Response Planning - Return on investment for adaptaon opon is relavely Adaptaon Opon General Applicability Consideraons Planning Processes Cost and Funding - Is appropriate for airport size and other constraints - Safety Management Systems -Adaptaon opon is comparable to or lower in cost than tradional methods - Meets or exceeds current and future operaonal needs - Disaster, Business Recovery, and Emergency Response Planning - Return on investment for adaptaon opon is relavely rapid - Fits a wide range of scenarios - Risk Management Processes - Funding is available for implementaon - Exisng operaon/asset does not meet current needs - Master Plans, Sustainable Planning and Iniaves - Project(s) affecng the operaon or asset are already planned/underway and facilitate inclusion of the adaptaon opon - Programming and Conceptual Design Processes - Implementaon does not require coordinaon with an external partner - Disaster and Business Recovery Planning - Transportaon Planning Frameworks - Design and Construcon - Business Connuity Planning Table C-2. (Continued).

D-1 Climate Versus Weather The term climate is defined by very long-term processes over many years to decades, whereas the term weather deals with day-to-day weather variations that we experience. Despite the fact that climate is simply a long-term average of many weather events, it is often the impact of the latter (e.g., Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Superstorm Sandy in 2012, California drought of 2013–2014) that is more vividly remembered. The research team has attempted to convey this message by choosing climate vectors that are weather centric (e.g., days with a high temperature above 90°F) as opposed to climate centric (e.g., average annual temperature). Physical Basis The concept of a “greenhouse effect,” by which an accumulation of critical gases such as carbon dioxide can affect the global temperature, was introduced in the early 1800s. Those early arguments have stood the test of time and their physical basis is now fully incorporated in three dimensional earth system models known as Global Climate Models (GCMs). For a GCM to accu- rately simulate earth’s climate, it must be forced with the concentration of carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases). The interplay among the feedbacks between the carbon dioxide concen- tration and global temperature can crudely be called the science of climate change. Meanwhile, estimating how future CO2 concentrations will be affected by a suite of factors such as population and energy usage is the backbone of climate change projection experiments such as those con- ducted by the IPCC. Model Components A GCM is an interconnected series of computer code that, based on the known physical equa- tions of the earth system (atmosphere, land, ocean, etc.), attempts to forecast the evolution of the weather. The typical GCM has a time step of about 30 minutes and a horizontal resolution of about 100 miles implying that, while it may be able to directly simulate a process such as a cold front moving across the Northeast United States, it will have a difficult time simulating one small thunderstorm over the Arizona desert. To account for the processes that cannot be directly simulated, GCMs must employ “parameterization schemes” in which a small process such as a lone thunderstorm is described by other known variables such as the combination of tempera- ture and dew point. These kinds of approximations maintain the necessary energy balance that the GCM must adhere to, but are also responsible for the inability to resolve small-scale features. Despite these features, the GCM data can be used to approximate the climate for any location in the world. Furthermore, due to rapidly increasing computing power, GCM horizontal resolution A P P E N D I X D Overview of Climate Change Science

D-2 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports will continue to increase in the near future, allowing for a more realistic simulation of small-scale processes that are crucial for day-to-day weather variability. Data Output GCM output of important climate stressors such as air temperature, relative humidity, and precipitation are commonly available at six-hour, daily, and monthly frequencies. The choice of frequency depends strongly on the problem, and for this study, the research team elected to use daily data. The horizontal resolution of the data depends on the GCM, and ranges from about 60 miles to about 140 miles. The research team strongly considered using post-processed “sta- tistically downscaled” data, which is available with resolution as high as 8 miles. However, this was not readily available for the timeline of the project. Climate Change in the U.S. There is a wide range of extreme weather events that can impact an airport, including tor- nadoes, severe thunderstorms, hurricanes, derechos, droughts, extreme heat waves, coastal flooding, storm surge, and extreme snowfall and rainfall. Figure D-1 shows record-breaking weather events that affected the United States during the single year of 2011. Most of the country experienced at least one extreme weather event during the year, and many areas were impacted by several events. This appendix summarizes the mounting evidence showing that extreme weather events are already responding to climate change across the United States. The main sources are the IPCC AR5 report, the 2013 National Climate Assess- ment (Melillo et al., 2014), and research by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Figure D-1. Extreme weather event in the United States during 2011. Source: NRDC.

Overview of Climate Change Science D-3 According to the IPCC report, there is substantially higher confidence in the projections of increasing temperature compared to precipitation. This is also conveyed in the climate vector confidence, as determined by the research team. In fact, this can also already be seen when analyz- ing the past 50+ years of data at observation stations across the country. For example, Figure D-2 shows the observed increase in yearly average temperature since 1900, on a regional level. For all regions of the country except for isolated portions of Southeast, temperatures have increased. Some places, especially across the North, have warmed by more than 2°F. These changes are also consistent in other, more impactful climate measures such as frost-free days (increase) and days with high temperatures above 90°F (increase). In contrast to temperature that shows nearly nationwide increases, Figure D-3 shows that the changes in yearly average precipitation have been much more variable. For example, most of the Midwest has seen a modest increase, up to 15%, while other parts of the country such as the Southeast and arid Southwest have actually slight decreases. Despite the somewhat incon- sistent signal in the yearly average precipitation, Figure D-4 clearly shows that there has been a marked increase in heavy precipitation nationwide, with the Northeast seeing a 71% increase in the amount of very heavy daily rainfall. The fact that heavy daily rainfall is clearly more relevant to airport operations than yearly average precipitation highlights the importance the research team placed in building impactful climate vectors for the climate change adaptation analysis. Figure D-2. Observed changes in air temperature on a regional level across the United States from 1900 through the present. Source: Melillo et al., 2014.

D-4 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Figure D-3. Observed changes in precipitation on a regional level across the United States from 1900 through the present. Source: Melillo et al., 2014. Figure D-4. Observed change in extreme daily precipitation events across the United States from 1958–2012. Source: Melillo et al., 2014.

Overview of Climate Change Science D-5 Not all aspects of extreme weather have responded to climate change. For example, despite an increase in the number of tornado reports since 1950, Figure D-5 shows that the number of strong and violent tornadoes has remained steady or actually decreased. This suggests that the increase in all tornado reports may have simply occurred due to better detection and awareness. In fact, peer-reviewed literature suggests similar findings for tropical cyclone (tropical storms and hurricanes, collectively) activity in the Atlantic Ocean: the number of all tropical cyclones has increased, but the number of major hurricanes (category 3 or stronger) has remained constant. The IPCC has addressed these issues by assigning a low confidence on projections of both hur- ricanes and tornadoes. Nonetheless, it is likely that future climate change projections will greatly benefit from higher resolution models that will be able to better simulate extreme weather events. One robust metric of a warming climate is SLR, impacted largely by expansion of the water and melting, or transfer of land-based glaciers and ice sheets to the oceans. A trend of SLR has been observed and well documented, at local water level recording stations and more recently by satellite (Figure D-6). For example, the amount of SLR in Norfolk, VA, is about twice that of Boston, MA. The primary driver of differences is vertical land movement (such as subsidence or post-glacial rebound). Other factors such as ocean currents contribute to the variability. Collectively, the global trend of SLR is expected to continue, and potentially accelerate through this century in response to the projected increases in global temperatures due to climate change (Figure D-7). The range of future sea level is uncertain as a result of the varying projections of temperature increase, rate of thermal expansion, and anticipated melting of land-bound ice. Due to these uncertainties, scenario analysis is frequently used for assessing future sea level con- ditions. Based on IPCC projections, recently compiled scenarios for the range of potential global SLR by 2100 are estimated from one to four feet (Figure D-7). This range is a direct reflection of the uncertainty in atmospheric warming, transfer of atmospheric warming to the oceans, and glacier and ice sheet loss. Figure D-5. Number of EF-3 to EF-5 tornadoes from 1950 to 2010 in the U.S. Source: NOAA.

D-6 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports Figure D-6. Sea level trends around the continental United States, Alaska, and Hawaii from 1960–2013. Source: NOAA. Figure D-7. Observed and projected global sea level since 1800. Source: Melillo et al., 2014.

E-1 This appendix contains links to supplementary information on climate change, adaptation planning, as well as U.S. and international experiences performing climate change risk assess- ments and considering adaptations. Climate Background Listed below are key sources of information regarding climate change projections and adapta- tion that are especially relevant for airport personnel and stakeholders. ➢ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) The most comprehensive source of climate change information is available through the IPCC, which was established in 1988 by the United Nations. The latest IPCC report was the Fifth Assess- ment Report, released in 2014. Though the chief goal of the IPCC is to advance the knowledge of climate change, recent efforts have broadened the subject matter to include specific consider- ation of impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Particularly relevant literature includes: • Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (Summary for Policymakers) This report contains a summary of the technical report that describes the evidence for climate change in the atmosphere, land, and oceans. It also explains the global climate models that were used in the IPCC AR5. (IPCC, 2013) • Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Provides an overview of considering climate change in context relative to decision makers. Particularly relevant chapters include 14–17 that discuss adaptation, and 18–20 that highlight resilience. (IPCC, 2014a) • Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. An extension of Part A, this report shows regional scale evidence for climate change, as well as sector specific adaptation and vulnerability examples. Chapter 26 deals with North America. (IPCC, 2014b) ➢ National Climate Assessment (NCA) The third NCA was released in 2014, and focuses on communicating the latest climate change findings to decision makers across the United States. The full report can be accessed online: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads Particularly relevant sections include Chapter 5 on the Transportation sector, Chapters 16–25 that show the observed climatic change and projections on a regional level, and Chapters 26 and 28 that describe how to direct climate change projections to inform decision support and adaptation needs. A P P E N D I X E Resources

E-2 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports ➢ Additional reports and peer-reviewed literature • Curry, J., 2011: Reasoning about climate uncertainty. Climatic Change, 108, 723–732. • Webster, M., 2003: Communicating climate change uncertainty to policy makers and the public. Climatic Change, 61, 1–8. Adaptation Planning While stand-alone climate adaptation plans are rare in the U.S., a number of airports have included climate adaptation considerations in their sustainability master plans or similar docu- ments. The cases of sustainability plans in the U.S. are also instructive in providing some under- standing of how climate change adaptation fits into existing sustainability initiatives. The FAA proposed the use of sustainable master plans to incorporate sustainability principles in the master planning process, or separately as a sustainable management plan, to enhance environmentally sound decision making in the design, project implementation, and financial arenas (FAA, 2010). Examples Many of the documents in the following list are described in greater detail in the U.S. Climate Change Adaptation Planning Efforts section below. The links provided below are not exhaustive; online documents are not accessible for all airports engaging with climate change. United States • Chicago Department of Aviation’s Sustainable Airport Manual: http://www.airportsgoing green.org/documents/2013/CDA%20SAM%20v3.1%20-%20November%2012,%20 2013%20-%20FINAL.pdf • Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport’s Sustainable Airport Master Plan: http://flyithaca.com /content/view/sustainable-airport-master-plan.html • Los Angeles World Airports’ Sustainable Airport Planning, Design and Construction Guide- lines (see the section on climate change adaptation planning): http://www.lawa.org/uploaded Files/LAWA/pdf/LSAG%20Version%205.0%20021510.pdf Internationally • Heathrow Climate Change Adaptation Reporting Power Report (2011): http://archive.defra .gov.uk/environment/climate/documents/adapt-reports/08aviation/heathrow-airport.pdf • Manchester Airports Group Climate Change Adaptation Report (2011): http://archive.defra .gov.uk/environment/climate/documents/adapt-reports/08aviation/manc-airport.pdf Other Advanced Airports in the Community of Practice While the airports listed below have limited documents available for climate adaptation plan- ning online as of the date of this guidebook’s publication, their work in the climate adaptation and risk assessment field is considered advanced among U.S. airports. It is recommended that airports just beginning the adaptation process who also have contacts at the airports below con- sider reaching out to learn from fellow practitioners. • Boston Logan International Airport • Philadelphia International Airport • Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Airports

Resources E-3 • Portland International Airport • Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Experiences and Lessons Learned: U.S. Climate Change Adaptation Planning Efforts The dominant location for most climate adaptation documentation at U.S. airports is the sustainable master plan or sustainable management plan. • The master plan format was proposed for airports looking to update their master plans, and contains traditional master plan elements as well as sustainability considerations. • The sustainable management plan format was proposed for airport personnel who were not updating their master plan at the time, but were interested in examining sustainability at their airports. Sustainable master plans were found to have the advantage of ease-of-use compared to a stand-alone sustainable management plan, particularly when sustainability considerations are included in each section rather than isolated to a single chapter on the subject (FAA, 2012). Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport, one of the pilot airports to initiate a sustainable master plan, quickly saw the value of using the master plan as a vehicle through which to communicate their sustainability goals to engineers and architects, who were then able to accommodate future goals for sustainable infrastructure improvements in their designs. One example in the FAA’s sustainability master plan pilot program report noted an apron rehabilitation project that left room for future implementation of electric ground power for aircraft (FAA, 2012). This example indicates that thoroughly integrated and well-advocated sustainability guidelines may have a substantial impact on achieving climate change adaptation goals, because designers who understood the sustainability objectives up front were better able to incorporate sustainability goals in individual projects and to leave room in their designs for sustainability upgrades in the future. The FAA report also notes that it is sensible to plan for initiatives that can be incorporated as airports expand (FAA, 2012), and potential changes to climate could fit in here, too. Such a planning process directly intersects with the need of adap- tation planners in an airport setting to work with long-term planning horizons. Indeed, the underlying principle of applying sustainability master plan guidelines to climate change is to leave room, wherever possible, in the planning and design process for projected contingencies. To date, many airports that have completed FAA sustainable master plans or management plan engaged principally with the aspects of climate change through the following topics: green- house gas emissions, water conservation, and energy efficiency (e.g., C&S Engineers, et al., 2012; Barnard Dunkelberg Company, et al., 2012). While these topics are of critical importance with respect to sustainability and climate change, there is also ample room for sustainability plans to include climate change adaptation options. Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) provides a good deal of insight into how one might accomplish this task. LAWA outlines a comprehensive approach that instructs airport staff involved in airport projects to conduct climate change risk assessments and provides considerations for adaptive planning and design. LAWA’s Sustainable Airport Planning, Design and Construction Guidelines (Los Angeles World Airports/CDM, 2010) includes a climate change adaptation plan in the section on sustainable construction standards. The design guidelines offer recommendations for incorporating adaptation into design for future projects for four changes to local climate: increased temperature, severe weather, SLR and storm surge, and ecosystem changes. The LAWA document lists actions to address each potential impact. Technical approaches to implement each adaptation action are detailed and a list of the benefits the actions are likely to

E-4 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports achieve is provided. The LAWA guidelines also make recommendations on inter-departmental coordination. For each climate impact, the guidelines provide a sheet with several sections: • Intent: The objective of the sheet, in terms of preparing for impacts to airport infrastructure and operations. • Point Allocation: Airport-defined scoring analogous to the Leadership in Energy and Envi- ronmental Design scoring. • Actions & Targets: Instructions to attain appropriate climate models, to use models to evaluate airport-specific impacts, and to mitigate impacts through planning or infrastructure design. • Benefits: Savings or other improvements resulting from using appropriate planning or design strategies (e.g., reduction of IROPs and repair costs and improvement of airport safety). • Technical Approaches: Which impacts are tied to the change in question, potential planning and design elements, and, if applicable, possible funding resources or coordination suggestions. • Acknowledgements: Reference to literature providing the scientific basis for the information on the sheet. A similar format may be helpful for other airports wishing to map out the process for bringing planned adaptations to fruition. Although Philadelphia International Airport’s (PHL) climate adaptation report (Urban Engi- neers, 2010) was developed for the City of Philadelphia, outside the sustainable master plan framework, their efforts are also significant. The PHL report provides insight into some overall practices that may be useful when generalized to other airports developing adaptation strategies. In addition to the points discussed above, the report recommends: • Examining existing airport infrastructure for climate vulnerabilities and screening currently planned projects; • Examining where vulnerabilities in the above exist and considering changes in design and materials; • Communicating climate initiatives, including building relationships with regulatory agencies involved in climate change issues and learning from other airports; and • “Mainstreaming” climate change adaptation into existing planning processes (discussed throughout the guidebook—please see Chapters 8 and 9). Climate Change Adaptation at Airports in the United Kingdom Several U.K. examples provide particularly detailed insight into possible approaches to cli- mate change adaptation for airports. U.K. airports have already been compelled to examine potential climate change impacts by the U.K. Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) as a result of the United Kingdom’s Climate Change Act of 2008. Consequently, airport groups have already made significant progress in assessing their climate risks and devel- oping options to adapt. The following framework provided some guidance for risk assessment. Originally detailed in a technical report (Willows et al., 2003) released in 2003, the UKCIP, DEFRA, and the U.K. Environment Agency provide an example of a step-by-step climate change risk assessment framework. Figure E-1 shows the eight steps of the iterative framework, which was designed to enable decision makers to evaluate risks posed by climate change to assets, poli- cies, and projects. Like the examples mentioned previously, it involves a risk assessment com- ponent as well as developing, evaluating, and implementing options for adapting. Monitoring of climate change science and changes to risk that may impact already implemented or future adaptation options is emphasized.

Resources E-5 The risk assessment component of the framework can be approached at varying levels of complexity. Manchester Airport in the U.K. used a simple list format to develop a register of risks related to climate change and probable adaptation actions, which often involved both short-term actions and “investigation” items, requiring more work to understand the risk and potential adaptation options. The risk assessment component falls within the airport’s “standard corporate risk methodology,” and fits neatly into its existing risk documentation. The London Heathrow Airport report assessed climate change risk to their airport in four parts: a literature review, use of best available modeled climate data, Heathrow’s existing risk registers and contingency plan, and interviews with key staff and its partner organizations. The assessment, led by Heathrow’s Corporate Responsibility and Environment Department, relied on a risk assessment methodology developed by the airport’s owner British Airports Authority (BAA). Part of its overall risk management process, the methodology is used to assess a broad array of risk types that range from human-caused to natural hazards. The airport’s existing risk assessment methodology required modification when assessing climate change risk. Heathrow’s methodology typically did not include projections in risk assessment calculations. Its eight basic steps are included in Figure E-2. Once the key stakeholders were identified and included in the planning process, the method directed personnel to catalogue present climate conditions, including extreme events and the airports’ responses to them. Future climate was considered by using short- and medium-range projections under a medium greenhouse gas emissions scenario from U.K. Climate Projections 2009, a data program funded by the British Government and other stakeholder organizations, as well as peer-reviewed science. A literature review supplemented climate projections and model- ing in determining potential future climate impacts. Figure E-1. U.K. Environment Agency, UKCIP, and DEFRA climate change risk decision-making framework.

E-6 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports The airport’s key stakeholder groups were then interviewed to gain on-the-ground knowledge of the full range of current airport responses to current climate. Airport assets were classified according to types, values, priority, and weather-related critical thresholds. Stakeholders also characterized and prioritized risk. Next, Step 6—Risk identification and prioritization—was further broken down into a step-by- step process (Figure E-3). Risk Assessment Methodology 1. Inclusion of key stakeholders in the risk assessment/planning process 2. Determination of current climate and its impacts (as a baseline) 3. Model future climate 4. Literature review 5. Interview of key stakeholder groups 6. Risk identification and prioritization 7. Prioritization of adaptation options 8. Reporting of results and monitoring of plan Figure E-2. London Heathrow Airport’s pre- existing risk assessment methodology, adapted to address climate change. Risk Identification and Prioritization 1. Identify risks and consequences from climate change 2. Evaluate likelihood of consequences (short-, medium-, long-term) 3. Evaluate severity of consequences (short-, medium-, long-term) 4. Establish risk priority based on likelihood and severity (short-, medium-, long-term) 5. Rate risk control measures currently in place (excessive, optimal, adequate, inadequate) 6. Consider the uncertainty/confidence with the projections (low, moderate, significant uncertainty) 7. Define adaptation response required Figure E-3. London Heathrow Airport elaborates on the components of risk identification and prioritization in their 2011 Climate Change Adaptation Reporting Power Report (Heathrow Airport Limited, 2011).

Resources E-7 Using climate change projections and data collected through the other steps of the methodol- ogy, the risks and potential consequences were identified and likelihood and severity determined through judgments of the airport’s SMEs. Likelihood, considered probability of occurrence, and consequence were considered across five potential areas of impact: safety, security, environment, financial, and reputational and legal. The likelihood and consequence of a particular climate change impact were scored on a scale from 1 to 5, then overall risk due to the impact (Red = Significant; Yellow = Moderate; Green = Low) was determined as shown in Figure E-4. The airport then assessed existing risk control measures for each anticipated impact to deter- mine the measures’ adequacy for mitigating the risk associated with the impact. Airports then developed adaptation responses based on the severity of each risk, the uncertainty in either the climate change projections or response needed, and the urgency of response required. The responses fell into one of three categories: • Action: a specific response required in the short term. • Prepare: identifies need for additional research or information before specific actions can be taken. • Watching brief: applies to longer-term risks that should be monitored based on new scientific data or on-the-ground climate effects observed. The airport estimates that the level of effort for conducting the climate change assessment was approximately 580 person hours. The same methodology was applied to develop the London Stansted Airport Climate Change Adaptation Plan in May 2011. Both Heathrow and Stansted are owned and operated by BAA. General Climate Adaptation Resources A number of climate risk assessment and adaptation models or frameworks exist and with some modifications can be easily applied to airports. The frameworks share a number of com- monalities, including the assessment of climate risk in the face of uncertainty in future climate projections and impacts. Below is a summary of current practices. The U.S. Transportation Sector The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed a framework for assessing vul- nerability and developing prioritized adaptation actions based on the assessment’s findings.1 The framework has been tested through a series of pilot studies for several locations across the country. The key steps of the framework are shown in the Figure E-5. The FHWA identifies defining the objectives and scope of a study as important first steps to determine the level of detail of analysis required and the data that might be needed. Determin- ing the climate change study’s target audience, the products they need, and how the assess- ment’s products will be used will help in setting the objectives and scope. When putting together the team that will participate in the study, inclusion of cross-disciplinary members is recom- mended. At minimum, team composition should include knowledgeable representatives from staff involved in planning, engineering, and assessment management. Assessing vulnerability using the FHWA framework involves selecting which assets to evalu- ate and then determining the relevant characteristics. Asset characteristics should include (but 1 The Federal Highway Administration’s Climate Change & Extreme Weather Vulnerability Assessment Framework; December 2012 (U.S.DOT, 2012). Figure E-4. Heathrow’s existing risk scoring system. (Heathrow Airport Limited, 2011)

E-8 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports are not limited to) location, useful life, and value of critical assets. It is helpful to determine the criticality of the asset as a way of prioritizing the most important. Vulnerability of individual assets and the system as a whole is a function of sensitivity and exposure to climate effects as well as the ability to adjust to changing climate. The team will also need to decide which climate vari- ables to consider. These may vary by region and by study objective and might include things like temperature, extreme precipitation, permafrost thaw, SLR, storm surge, and snow melt. Data sources for future climate projections may include the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), other federal or state agencies, or projections coming from an increasing number of local and regional climate change studies. In assessing risk, a determination must be made of the potential severity or consequence of a climate impact along with the probability or likelihood that an asset will experience that impact. The criticality of the asset, along with its value, might be used in determining potential conse- quences of a climate impact. Determining probability of occurrence (likelihood) of a climate impact can be difficult. Certainty of climate change projections varies. Looking at projections from several models and averaging is one way to overcome the uncertainty. Projections avail- able from various sources have already accomplished this task. Assigning a higher likelihood to those projections for which several models agree is another way to approach the determination of future probability. Once vulnerability and risk are assessed, the next step of the FHWA framework focuses on integrating the results into practice. Part of this process involves identifying, analyzing, and pri- oritizing options for adapting to climate change. A higher priority might be assigned to address- ing those assets that have been assessed as high likelihood and high consequences. Adaptation options might involve relocating or developing climate-resistant new assets, or retrofitting exist- ing assets. Results might also be integrated into existing and updated planning processes such as asset, risk, or emergency management as well as environmental planning. FHWA Vulnerability Assessment Framework 1. Define Study Objectives and Scope 2. Assess Vulnerability 3. Incorporate Results into Decision Making Figure E-5. FHWA vulnerability assessment framework.

F-1 A P P E N D I X F National Heat Maps with Ranges AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-1. Cooling Degree Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

F-2 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports AK AK AK AKAK AK AK Figure F-2. Consecutive Dry Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time. AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-3. Freezing Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

National Heat Maps with Ranges F-3 AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-4. Frost Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time. AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-5. Heating Degree Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

F-4 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-6. Heavy Rain Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time. AK AK AK Figure F-7. Max 5d Rainfall. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

National Heat Maps with Ranges F-5 AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-8. Hot Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time. AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-9. Hot Nights. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

F-6 Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Risk Assessment for Airports AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-10. Humid Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time. AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-11. Snow Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

National Heat Maps with Ranges F-7 AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-12. Storm Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time. AK AK AK AK AK AK AK Figure F-13. Very Hot Days. Hawaii was considered, but omitted from this analysis as GCM grid size is too large to produce reliable atmospheric projections for Hawaii at this time.

G-1 A P P E N D I X G ACRP Climate Model Uncertainty Table

Cause of Uncertainty What Are They? Specific Examples How Climate Modelers Deal with This Boundary condions Boundary condions are typically fixed parameters describing exisng characteriscs such as the planet’s radius, period of rotaon, land cover type, topography, and bathymetry. Human-produced and naturally occurring CO2 emissions across the globe are also considered a boundary condion. High- resoluon data sets for many boundary condions are now available through satellites. Land cover examples include desert sand, grassland, forest and tundra. The extent of land cover as well as the proximity to other land cover types creates different local, regional and global weather and long-term climate condions. For example, desert sand has large expanses of flat land surface, which contributes to high and frequent wind, few clouds due to limited local vegetaon releasing water vapor through transpiraon and extreme temperature changes between day and night. The model forecast will differ depending on how the boundary condions are changed. Where unpredictable external influences are concerned, such as the future emission of greenhouse gases, modelers typically examine a range of scenarios, producing a range of possible futures. Given that scenarios examined for this project do not appreciably diverge unl a…er 2060 (the final point examined here), the tool only presents one scenario. Climate feedbacks The interacon between climate processes o…en influence, or feedback on, one another. For example, Process A may trigger a change in Process B, which as a result may either intensify or reduce the original Process A. A warmer climate will tend to have a smaller area of polar sea ice. Less sea ice will decrease the planet’s reflectance and tend to reinforce the original warming. The accuracy of climate models improves as more feedback interacons are included. Capturing as many feedbacks as possible, while potenally increasing uncertainty, provides for a more realisc projecon. For example, including aerosol parcles adds an element of realism, but because the physics are sll being developed, their inclusion into models has actually led to a slight increase in the range of possible future global temperatures. In the longer term, as our understanding of the influence of aerosols improves, forecast accuracy will also improve.

Emissions scenario Emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases vary based on natural processes and human acvies such as burning of fossil fuels, decreasing tree canopy, and increasing release of methane from landfills and agriculture. As a result, changes in the global human populaon, associated lifestyles, and prevailing government greenhouse gas emission policies impact resulng emissions. In the most recent IPCC report, four emissions scenarios are discussed. The low emission RCP 2.6 scenario assumes greenhouse gas emissions peak in about 2035 due to aggressive reducon of human-produced emissions, while the high emission RCP 8.5 scenario assumes an indefinite increase. Differences in climate outcomes due to these scenarios are most pronounced a†er 2060. Instead of picking one greenhouse gas emission scenario over another, modelers consider the range of climate change outcomes among each previously defined scenario. The IPCC sets out numerous guidelines on how to do so, accounng for future emissions, socio-economic characteriscs, and other characteriscs. Future human acvity is difficult to model and as a result, it is recommended that decision makers engage in planning acvies that are suitable for a variety of possible futures. Horizontal scale Models can provide global, regional, or local average values for climate characteriscs. The scale of model outputs can be as low as 1 mile (for downscaled data) to as high as 140 miles. Both observaon-based and climate model data products are becoming available at increasingly higher resoluons. The range of GCM output ranges from about 60 to 140 miles, and different resoluons will somemes produce different outputs. Though higher resoluon may be more realisc, it does not necessarily improve the model accuracy. Where possible, it is desirable to choose models that produce outputs suitable for the desired applicaon. Regional models are o†en useful local- scale complements to GCMs. For this naonal-scale screening study, semi-local-scale data was acceptable, but the research team strongly suggests the use of higher resoluon data for engineering and design applicaons. Inial condions Inial condions are the selected baseline atmosphere, ocean, and/or land condions, o†en averaged over decades of recorded data. Specifically, inial condions are supposed to represent the natural variability of the global atmosphere. Inial condions can influence the forecast produced by the model from as li™le as a day to as long as 10 years. Inial condions with a severe cold wave over the United States only impacts the forecast for a week or two. However, an inial condion with a strong El Niño in the Pacific Ocean may affect the model forecasts for several years. Modelers o†en compare a set of randomly chosen inial condions. These sets of inial condions vary widely in order to reflect numerous possible atmospheric states. Also, inial condions such as volcanic erupons or extreme cold snaps may result in limited periods of reduced warming that do not contradict the overall trend toward rising global temperatures. The inial condions usually only affect the short-term output of the model and are essenally irrelevant to long-term climate studies such as the ones performed for this project.

Cause of Uncertainty What Are They? Specific Examples How Climate Modelers Deal with This Atmospheric physics Models work by simula ng atmospheric processes, such as extent of cloud cover, precipita on, or even land-atmosphere interac ons. This simula on involves the use of many parameters describing atmospheric processes. Please see two example parameters in the next column. Increasing the amount of mixing in clouds tends to suppress thunderstorm ac vity. Decreasing the amount of fric on of wind over the land surface increases the wind speed. For example, large expanses of deserts oen have higher observed wind speeds than forested areas. Climate scien sts work to improve understanding of the physics governing the atmosphere. As understanding improves, the range of physical processes represented and accounted for in models expands. Scien sts then verify outputs against observed climate. Span of study Modelers may choose to examine projec ons over varying me scales depending on the intended applica on of the modeling outputs. The longer the meframe being examined, the greater the uncertainty, because it is difficult to precisely understand future condi ons. For this project, the research team used daily data to produce outputs for the years 2030 and 2060, which are compa ble with airport master planning me scales. Shorter-term projec ons (in the 10–20 year range) are inherently less uncertain than longer-term projec ons. For this reason, climate adapta on ac vi es are oen organized according to an “act, plan, watch” framework, with highest priority given to imminent, high-risk, low-uncertainty impacts. Temporal resolu on Models can provide results at me spans ranging from minutes to years, depending on which climate processes are being studied. Detec ng a cold front passage requires hourly data. Detec ng how El Niño may influence California precipita on requires It is important to choose me scales that are appropriate for the intended applica on of the informa on. Daily data was needed to generate relevant temperature vectors (Freezing Days, Hot Days, monthly or even seasonal data. etc.) rather than more generic vectors, such as annual average temperature, which was insufficiently detailed to address relevant airport-specific concerns. The me steps used in the models (e.g., daily) do not necessarily have any rela onship to the span of the study.

Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TDC Transit Development Corporation TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation

TRA N SPO RTATIO N RESEA RCH BO A RD 500 Fifth Street, N W W ashington, D C 20001 A D D RESS SERV ICE REQ U ESTED Clim ate Change A daptation Planning: Risk A ssessm ent for A irports A CRP Report 147 TRB ISBN 978-0-309-37487-3 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 3 7 4 8 7 3 9 0 0 0 0