Combining Mixed-Use Flight Operations Safely at Airports (2016)

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.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2016 www.TRB.org Research Sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration SubScriber categorieS Aviation • Security and Emergencies A I R P O R T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M ACRP SYNTHESIS 74 Combining Mixed-Use Flight Operations Safely at Airports A Synthesis of Airport Practice conSultant Stephen M. Quilty SMQ Airport Services Lutz, Florida

AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in transportation of people and goods and in regional, national, and international commerce. They are where the nation’s aviation sys- tem connects with other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is necessary to solve common oper- ating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agencies and not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. ACRP is modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). ACRP undertakes research and other technical activities in various airport subject areas, including design, construction, legal, mainte- nance, operations, safety, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can cooperatively address common operational problems. ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100—Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary par- ticipants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant indus- try organizations such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Association of Airport Execu- tives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport Consul- tants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academy of Sciences for- mally initiating the program. ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research organizations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for ACRP are solicited periodi- cally but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport professionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research prob- lem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP project panels serve voluntarily with- out compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the intended users of the research: airport operating agencies, service providers, and academic institutions. ACRP produces a series of research reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties; industry associations may arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, webinars, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by airport industry practitioners. ACRP SYNTHESIS 74 Project A11-03, Topic S04-13 ISSN 1935-9187 ISBN 978-0-309-38972-3 Library of Congress Control Number 2016933715 © 2016 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessari- ly those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Published reports of the AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America

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

TOPIC PANEL S04-13 DEBBIE K. ALKE, Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, MT HARDY BULLOCK, Truckee–Tahoe Airport, Truckee, CA RHONDA M. CHAMBERS, Fort Dodge Regional Airport, Fort Dodge, IA GENE CONRAD, Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, Lakeland, FL KEITH HOLT, New River Valley Airport, Dublin, VA JOHN M. SAWYER, JMS Airfield Safety Consulting LLC, Goodyear, AZ GARY SHAFER, Southern Illinois Airport, Carbondale, IL RENEE HENDRICKS, Federal Aviation Administration (Liaison) JOHN L. COLLINS, AOPA Air Safety Institute, Frederick, MD (Liaison) MACKENZIE T. DICKSON, EAA–Experimental Aircraft Association, Oshkosh, WI (Liaison) SYNTHESIS STUDIES STAFF STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs JON M. WILLIAMS, Program Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies JO ALLEN GAUSE, Senior Program Officer GAIL R. STABA, Senior Program Officer DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer TANYA M. ZWAHLEN, Consultant DON TIPPMAN, Senior Editor CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant DEMISHA WILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant DEBBIE IRVIN, Program Associate COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research Programs MICHAEL R. SALAMONE, Senior Program Officer JEFFREY OSER, Program Associate EILEEN P. DELANEY, Director of Publications ACRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 11-03 CHAIR JOSHUA D. ABRAMSON, Easterwood Airport, College Station, TX MEMBERS DEBBIE K. ALKE, Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, MT GLORIA G. BENDER, TransSolutions, Fort Worth, TX DAVID K. BYERS, Quadrex Aviation, LLC, Melbourne, FL DAVID N. EDWARDS, JR., Greenville–Spartanburg Airport District, Greer, SC BRENDA L. ENOS, Massachusetts Port Authority, East Boston, MA LINDA HOWARD, Independent Aviation Consultant, Bastrop, TX ARLYN PURCELL, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, New York, NY CHRISTOPHER J. WILLENBORG, Airport Solutions Group LLC, Burlington, MA FAA LIAISON PATRICK W. MAGNOTTA AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION ADAM WILLIAMS AIRPORTS CONSULTANTS COUNCIL MATTHEW J. GRIFFIN AIRPORTS COUNCIL INTERNATIONAL–NORTH AMERICA LIYING GU TRB LIAISON CHRISTINE GERENCHER Cover figure: Photo montage. Source: shutterstock http://www.shutterstock.com/s/airship/search. html?page=1&inline=245697997.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Appreciation is extended to all the individuals who participated in the survey or shared discussions about their opera- tions or activities. Their participation and involvement are important and necessary for the benefit of others in the industry. I am indebted to the time and effort they took to participate. Contributions from the various individuals from regional and national associations are also appreciated. Contributing as well were the following State Aviation Organizations: Alaska, California, Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oregon, Penn- sylvania, and Virginia. The individuals at the case example airports are especially recognized: Edward Mattern at Keene, New Hamp- shire; Bobbi Thompson at Minden, Nevada; Timothy Head at Boulder, Colorado; Eugene Conrad III and Sandra Walsh at Lakeland, Florida; Kevin Smith and Christopher Rozansky at Venice, Florida; Gerald Serres and Donald Ingraham at Faribault, Minnesota; David Ryan at Arlington, Washington; and Richard Lesniak at St. Petersburg, Florida. Other major contributors were Keith Holt at New River Valley Airport, Virginia; Adam Elchin at Ridgely Airpark, Maryland; and Tom and Jessica Warren at North Tampa AeroPark, Florida. I am very thankful for the strong support of the ACRP project panel members and for Kathleen S. O’Lenic for her report assistance.

FOREWORD PREFACE By Gail R. Staba Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board The basic premise behind an airport being open to the public is that the airport will make reasonable accommodations for all types of aeronautical activities. Safety, of course, is paramount. Mixed-use aeronautical activity requires the public-use airport to accommodate all comers in compliance with FAA sponsor assurances. The different categories of aircraft can include gliders, helicopters, ultralight vehicles, balloons, airships, blimps, skydiving, aerial applications for agriculture and firefighting, banner towing, aerobatic practice, and similar flight operations. Unmanned aircraft systems and radio-controlled model aircraft activity that take place on an airport can become part of the mix of an airport’s opera- tion. Not included in this report are seaplane operations; a separate report is referenced. In accommodating mixed-use operations, an airport is challenged in two ways—with opera- tional accommodation in the local airspace and runway environment, and with ground operational and logistical accommodation on the airfield. This report is intended to serve as an informative document for those airport operators and policymakers who seek information about how other airports have safely accommo- dated mixed-use flight activity on their airport. Information used in this study was acquired through a review of the literature and interviews with airport operators and industry experts. Case examples are presented to illustrate the experiences of airport operators in accommo- dating users safely and efficiently. The information in this report helps an airport operator to understand better the operational characteristics and needs of the various mixed aeronauti- cal uses, especially for airports without air traffic control tower operation (i.e., uncontrolled airports). Stephen M. Quilty, SMQ Airport Services, Lutz, Florida, collected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on page iv. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its prepa- ration. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand. Airport administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor- mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac- tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviat- ing the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the airport industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire airport community, the Airport Coop- erative Research Program authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing project. This project, ACRP Project 11-03, “Synthesis of Information Related to Airport Practices,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an ACRP report series, Synthesis of Airport Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems.

CONTENTS xv ACRONYMS 1 SUMMARY 3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Objectives, 3 What Is Considered Aeronautical Activity?, 4 Limitations of This Synthesis Study, 4 Study Methodology, 5 Literature Review, 5 Airport/Facility Directory, 6 Related ACRP Reports, 7 Report Organization, 8 10 CHAPTER TWO ACCOMMODATING AERONAUTICAL ACTIVITY Sponsor Assurance Requirements, 10 Compliance Guidance, 11 Minimum Standards and Operating Rules, 13 Review of Minimum Standards, 14 FAA Role and Responsibility in Part 13 and Part 16 Complaint Resolution, 14 FAA Agency Decisions and Determinations, 15 18 CHAPTER THREE SAFETY AND RISK MANAGEMENT Risk Analysis Resources, 18 Insurance, 19 21 CHAPTER FOUR AIRFIELD AND AIRSPACE CONSIDERATION Airfield Design, 21 Runway Designation, 21 Airport Traffic Patterns, 22 Certificate of Waiver or Authorization, 25 26 CHAPTER FIVE AEROBATIC OPERATIONS Aerobatic Practice Area, 26 Certificate of Waiver or Authorization, 27 Safety Considerations, 28 Notices to Airmen, 29 Accidents and Incidents, 29 Noise and Environmental Review, 29

31 CHAPTER SIX BALLOONS Airspace Accommodation, 31 Airfield Accommodation, 32 Notices to Airmen, 34 Safety Considerations, 34 Accidents and Incidents, 34 Related Information, 35 36 CHAPTER SEVEN AIRSHIPS Airspace Accommodation, 36 Airport Accommodation, 36 Notices to Airmen, 37 Related Information, 38 39 CHAPTER EIGHT AERIAL APPLICATION: AGRICULTURAL AND FIREFIGHTING Aerial Application: Agriculture, 39 Airspace Accommodation, 39 Airfield Accommodation, 40 Notices to Airmen, 41 Environmental Considerations, 42 Security Considerations, 42 Related Information, 43 Aerial Application: Firefighting, 43 Airfield Accommodation, 44 Notices to Airmen, 45 Sponsor Assurances, 45 Related Information, 46 47 CHAPTER NINE AERIAL ADVERTISING Airspace Accommodation, 47 Airfield Accommodation, 47 Notices to Airmen, 48 Safety Considerations, 48 Related Information, 48 49 CHAPTER TEN GLIDER OPERATIONS Airspace Accommodation, 49 Airfield Accommodation, 50 Notices to Airmen, 52 Safety Considerations, 52 Related Information, 52 53 CHAPTER ELEVEN ROTORCRAFT OPERATIONS Helicopters, 53 Airspace Accommodation, 53 Airfield Accommodation, 55 Notices to Airmen, 56 Safety Considerations, 56 Helicopter Air Ambulance, 59 Helicopter Tour Operators, 59 Related Information, 59 Gyroplanes, 60

62 CHAPTER TWELVE PARACHUTE OPERATIONS Certificate of Waiver or Authorization, 62 Airspace Accommodation, 62 Airfield Accommodation, 66 Notices to Airmen, 68 Airport/Facility Directory, 68 Safety Considerations, 69 Accidents and Incidents, 70 Related Information, 70 Parasails, 72 73 CHAPTER THIRTEEN ULTRALIGHTS Self-Regulation, 73 Light Sport Aircraft, 74 Airspace Accommodation, 74 Hang Gliding, 76 Powered Parachutes and Gliders, 77 Powered Weight-Shift Control (Trike), 77 Airfield Accommodation, 78 Notices to Airmen, 78 80 CHAPTER FOURTEEN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS Radio-Controlled Model Aircraft, 83 Notices to Airmen, 85 86 CHAPTER FIFTEEN CASE EXAMPLES Case Example—Keene Dillant–Hopkins Airport (KEEN), 86 Case Example—Minden–Tahoe Airport (KMEV), 86 Minimum Standards, 86 Glider and Parachute Operations, 88 Aerial Firefighting Operations, 88 Case Example—Boulder Municipal Airport (KBDU), 88 Glider Operations, 88 Aerial Firefighting Operations, 91 Parachute Operations, 91 Case Example—Lakeland Linder Regional Airport (KLAL), 91 Glider and Ultralight Operations, 92 Balloon Operations, 93 Airship Operations, 93 Helicopter/Vertical Takeoff and Landing Operations, 93 Aerial Advertising Banner Tow Operations, 94 Aerobatic Operations, 94 Parachute Operations, 94 Radio-Controlled Model Operations, 94 Case Example—Truckee–Tahoe Airport (KTRK), 94 Case Example—Faribault Municipal Airport (KFBL), 97 Glider Winch Operations, 97 Ultralight Operations, 98 Aerial Agriculture Operations, 98 Case Example—Albert Whitted Airport (KSPG), 99 Case Example—Venice Municipal Airport (KVNC), 99 Case Example—Arlington Municipal Airport (KAWO), 101 Ultralight and Glider Operations, 101 Traffic Patterns, 101

104 CHAPTER SIXTEEN CONCLUSIONS 107 REFERENCES 115 BIBLIOGRAPHY 116 APPENDIX A SURVEY INSTRUMENT 118 APPENDIX B LIST OF PARTICIPANTS AND TYPES OF ACTIVITIES 120 APPENDIX C SAMPLE INFORMATIONAL SUMMARY FROM ACRP LEGAL RESEARCH DIGEST 121 APPENDIX D RULES AND REGULATIONS—ARLINGTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, WASHINGTON 125 APPENDIX E RULES AND REGULATIONS—DELAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, FLORIDA 127 APPENDIX F SAMPLE ULTRALIGHT RULES AND REGULATIONS— BREMERTON NATIONAL AIRPORT, WASHINGTON 128 APPENDIX G SAMPLE AIRPORT/FACILITY DIRECTORY NOTAM REMARKS 133 APPENDIX H SAMPLE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR AEROBATIC ACTIVITY— KEENE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, NEW HAMPSHIRE 135 APPENDIX I SAMPLE CERTIFICATE OF WAIVER FOR AEROBATIC BOX— LAKELAND LINDER REGIONAL AIRPORT, FLORIDA 139 APPENDIX J EXAMPLES OF HOT AIR BALLOON HAZARDS 140 APPENDIX K SAMPLE AERIAL AGRICULTURAL OPERATOR AGREEMENT 141 APPENDIX L SAMPLE AGRICULTURAL RECORD REQUIREMENTS— STATE OF IOWA 142 APPENDIX M SAMPLE AIRPORT INCIDENT REPORT FORM FOR SPILL REPORTING 144 APPENDIX N SAMPLE TOWPLANE OPERATING POLICY—BOULDER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, COLORADO 146 APPENDIX O SAMPLE GLIDER OPERATING AGREEMENT

148 APPENDIX P SAMPLE TRAINING DEPICTION FOR PARACHUTE LANDING AREAS—B&B AIRPARK, TEXAS 149 APPENDIX Q SAMPLE MIXED-USE TRAFFIC PATTERN—MEADOW LAKE AIRPORT, COLORADO 150 APPENDIX R RC MODEL AND UAS BROCHURES 152 APPENDIX S RADIO-CONTROLLED MODEL AIRCRAFT SAFETY CODE 154 APPENDIX T EXAMPLE OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS BRIEFING—LAKELAND LINDER REGIONAL AIRPORT, FLORIDA 155 APPENDIX U EXAMPLE OF TENANT AND USER NOTIFICATION FORM— LAKELAND LINDER REGIONAL AIRPORT, FLORIDA Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.

ACRONYMS AC Advisory Circular ADO Airport district office AFD Airport/facility directory AGL Above ground level AIM Aeronautical Information Manual AIP Airport Improvement Program ALP Airport layout plan AMA Academy of Model Aeronautics APA Aerobatic practice area ATCT Air traffic control towers ATO Air Traffic Organization BSR Basic Safety Requirements CBO Community-based organization CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGL Compliance Guidance Letter COA Certificate of Authorization CTAF Common traffic advisory frequencies DD Director’s Determination FAD Final Agency Decision FBO Fixed-base operator FSDO Flight Standard District Office FSS Flight service station GA General aviation HAA Helicopter air ambulance HAI Helicopter Association International HLZ Helicopter landing zone IAC International Aerobatic Club JZ Jump zone LOA Letter of Agreement LRD Legal Research Digest LSA Light sport aircraft LTA Lighter-than-air LZ Landing zone NAAA National Agricultural Aviation Association NATA National Air Transportation Association NOTAM Notice to Airmen NPIAS National Plan of Integrated Airport System NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking PDZ Parachute drop zone PJA Parachute jumping area RC Radio-controlled RDO Regional district office ROFA Runway obstacle free area SMS Safety management system SOP Standard operating procedures SSA Soaring Society of America s-UAS Small Unmanned Aerial Systems UAS Unmanned aircraft systems USC United States Code USFS United States Forest Service USPA United States Parachuting Association VFR Visual flight rules VTOL Vertical takeoff and landing WSC Weight-shift control