Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning (2018)

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.

8 Chapter 3 provides guidance on identifying and using performance metrics to evaluate focus areas where airports, the FAA, and airlines have shared interests. The chapter is organized as follows: Section 3.1 Relevant Aspects of NextGen—Includes metrics to evaluate proposed NextGen (Next Generation Air Transportation System) procedures, how the procedures would affect airport operations, and what environmental effects would be expected. Section 3.2 Overall System Issues and Their Variability—Includes metrics to evaluate the impacts of system issues, such as weather events and proposed changes in aircraft operations/ schedules. Section 3.3 Safety Issues in Surface Movement—Includes metrics to measure surface move- ment safety and collaborate with FAA and the airlines to enhance safety. Section 3.4 Benchmarking across Airports—Includes metrics that compare the operational efficiency of airports and metrics needed to attract new air service. Section 3.5 Airport Geometry Impact on Operations—Includes metrics to measure the potential operational effects of changes in airport geometry, including temporary closures for maintenance and proposed airfield improvements. Section 3.6 Gate Management and Ramp Tower Operations—Includes metrics related to gate management and ramp tower operations. Section 3.7 Regulations/Requirements—Includes performance metrics that airports are required to record or report per federal regulations and/or requirements including those administered by state and local agencies. Each section begins with a background subsection followed by a subsection about suggested performance metrics for the subject focus area. These sections in the PDF guide include hyper- links (underlined performance metric names) that take the user to the Performance Metrics Database in Appendix B. The user may click on these hyperlinks to access detailed information about the suggested performance metric. 3.1 Relevant Aspects of NextGen This section provides guidance on performance metrics that can be used to consider the effects of NextGen. C H A P T E R 3 Focus Area Performance Metrics

Focus Area Performance Metrics 9 3.1.1 Background “The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is the FAA-led moderniza- tion of America’s air transportation system to make flying even safer, more efficient, and more predictable.”10 NextGen includes innovative and transformative portfolios, capabilities, and technologies. The FAA is collaborating with the aviation industry via the NextGen Advisory Commit- tee (NAC) to implement NextGen. With the assistance of the NAC, the FAA is implementing NextGen capabilities in four high priority areas: Multiple Runway Operations, Performance Based Navigation, Surface Operations and Data Sharing, and Data Communications. According to the FAA, “The efficiency of parallel runways, particularly those that are closely spaced, has been limited by the interplay of wake vortices with nearby aircraft. Multiple Runway Operations (MRO) capabilities improve access to these runways and can increase basic run- way capacity and throughput by reducing the separation between aircraft based on improved wake categorization standards. Improved access will enable more arrivals and/or departures during instrument meteorological conditions, which will increase efficiency and reduce flight delays.”11 The degree of benefits from MRO can and will differ between individual airports based on air traffic control standards (refer to FAA Order JO 7110.65, Air Traffic Control) and the airport layout. Performance Based Navigation (PBN) capabilities capitalize on satellite-based navigation and advanced aircraft equipage that allow for more precise and accurate navigation.12 These capabilities include Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigational Performance (RNP) approach procedures. Surface Operations and Data Sharing capabilities link the airport surface to the en route air- space. These capabilities include Terminal Flight Data Management (TFDM), which integrates air traffic control (ATC) tower flight tracking and traffic management tools and serves as the plat- form for sharing information with airports via Surface Collaborative Decision Making (CDM).13 TFDM also allows flight operators and air traffic control to communicate about desired sched- ules and factors that affect the NAS. Data Communications capabilities replace traditional voice systems with digital communica- tions. These capabilities enable efficiencies and enhance safety by reducing communication time and errors between controllers and pilots.14 FAA’s NextGen Performance Metrics The FAA uses performance measurement systems to monitor and report performance of the NAS and at the Core Airports where NextGen improvements have been implemented. Some of 10 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “NextGen FAQ.” Accessed October 2, 2017. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/ faq/#q1. 11 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “NextGen Priorities—Multiple Runway Operations.” Accessed March 21, 2018. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/priorities/?area=mro. 12 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “NextGen Priorities.” Accessed October 17, 2017. https://www.faa.gov/ nextgen/snapshots/priorities/?area=pbn. 13 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM) Program Office, TFDM Core for ATCTs Concept of Operations ConOps-PMO-02-TFDM-13-001, Rev. 2.1. Washington, D.C., 2013. https://faaco.faa.gov/index.cfm/ attachment/download/52707. 14 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). NextGen Priorities Joint Implementation Plan Executive Report, Rolling Plan 2017–2019. Washington, D.C., 2016. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/media/NG_Priorities_Joint_Implementation_Plan.pdf. p. 31.

10 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning these performance metrics must be reported to Congress per Section 214 of the FAA Modern- ization and Reform Act of 2012. FAA performance metrics are provided on two websites: Operational Metrics—https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/operational_ metrics/. The NAS-wide FAA harmonized metrics described in Section 2.4 are provided on this website. NextGen Performance Snapshots—https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/. This web- site includes NAS-wide metrics as well as metrics for the Core Airports where NextGen improvements have been implemented. Table 2 shows these metrics. FAA and Industry NextGen Performance Metrics The FAA is also collaborating with the aviation industry through the NAC to evalu- ate NextGen performance improvements. In 2015, the NAC approved high-level perfor- mance metrics for the NextGen high priority areas. These performance metrics are shown in Figure 1. After NAC approved these metrics, they formed the Joint Analysis Team (JAT) to study the benefits from implemented NextGen capabilities. To capture performance benefits, JAT included analyses of other measures beyond the six high-level metrics. These rigorous analyses were conducted using data from pre- and post-implementation. Table 3 highlights the findings and performance metrics from selected JAT studies. 3.1.2 Suggested Metrics—NextGen As would be expected, the potential effects of NextGen on airports will vary. For example, large congested airports may benefit from increased throughput while smaller airports may benefit from increased accessibility. “Many of the benefits of NextGen are associated with retaining near Visual Meteorological Conditions operational capacity irrespective of meteorological constraints or nearby airspace Performance Area Performance Metrics NAS Fuel Burn Average Fuel Burn Average Gate Weight Average Great Circle Distance Departure Mix by Fleet Environment CO2 Emissions NAS-Wide Energy Efficiency Noise Exposure Access Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance & Localizer Performance Access at General Aviation Airports without Instrument Landing System (ILS) Percentage of Qualified General Aviation Airports with Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance or Localizer Performance Access Core Airports Efficiency Average Gate Arrival Delay Average Number of Level-offs per Flight Distance in Level Flight from Top of Descent to Runway Threshold Effective Gate-to-Gate Time Taxi-In Time Taxi-Out Time Capacity Average Daily Capacity Average Hourly Capacity During Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) Sources: FAA, NextGen Performance-National Airspace System, https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/nas/, and NextGen Airports Measuring the Performance of Airports, https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/airport/. Accessed 10/02/17. Table 2. FAA NextGen performance metrics.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 11 congestion.”15 Therefore, the following metrics could be useful in considering the potential for NextGen benefits: Percent visual meteorological conditions (VMC) and percent instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) are the percentages of time that airport visibility conditions are VMC and IMC, respectively. Airport arrival rate (AAR) and airport departure rate (ADR) are the ATC facility-determined arrival and departure rates that can be handled given the current weather conditions, traffic mix, and runway configuration. FAA reports AARs and ADRs by runway configuration for VMC, LOW VMC, and IMC. Therefore, AARs and ADRs during IMC could be compared to VMC or Low VMC AARs and ADRs to determine the potential for NextGen benefits. To identify additional performance metrics for the evaluation of NextGen capabilities, this Reference Guide builds on the findings of ACRP Report 150: NextGen for Airports Volume 5, Airport Planning and Development. ACRP Report 150 identified potential effects of NextGen by size of airport. Airports were divided into two groups: (1) medium and large and (2) small airports. The groups aligned with the National Plan of Integrated Airports Systems (NPIAS) classifications. The medium and large group generally included large hub primary commercial Source: NextGen Advisory Committee, NACSC Ad Hoc Group: Performance Metrics for Four Priority Areas, June 2016, p.7. Figure 1. NAC-approved high-level performance metrics. 15 ACRP Report 150: NextGen for Airports Volume 5, Airport Planning and Development, p. 49.

12 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning service and medium hub primary commercial service. The small airport group included small hub commercial service, nonhub primary commercial service, nonprimary commercial service, reliever, and general aviation. While recognizing that a NextGen impact will be unique for each airport, this grouping of airports allowed for a logical method to identify applicable NextGen technology/initiatives and effects. Operators of busy large and medium airports are likely to be the biggest beneficiaries of NextGen because of the focus on increased system efficiency.16 The largest benefit of NextGen NextGen Capability/ Airport Findings Relevant Metrics Wake ReCat at CLT, ORD, MDW Fleet mix and overall demand levels are critical drivers of ReCat impact. Busy airports with a higher presence of heavy/C, B757/D, and small/F aircraft are expected to see the greatest impacts. Operational data demonstrates that ReCat achieves changes in separation when expected. Before and after analysis of airborne/taxi times and throughput are inconclusive due to exogenous factors, such as changes in demand, weather, airport construction, etc. Airborne or taxi-out savings can be expected when ReCat- impacted flights operate to an individual runway that is experiencing pressure. As long as pressure remains, savings accrue for all subsequent aircraft. Throughput improvement can be expected when ReCat- impacted flights operate in peak demand. Modeled throughput based on actual separation changes indicates improvement. Throughput improvements are empirically observed at ORD for IMC peak periods when ReCat pairs exist, but these are not sustained enough to justify an increase in called rate. Percentage of eligible pairs of flights at the airport potentially impacted by Wake ReCat (percentage with decreased separation/percentage with increased separation) Modeled potential change in throughput during peak periods due to ReCat (Operations per hour—arrivals and departures) Estimated total savings ($) in airborne and taxi-out time due to ReCat Wake ReCat in IND/PHL Fleet mix and overall demand levels continue to be critical drivers of ReCat impact. Busy airports with a higher presence of heavy, 757, and small aircraft are expected to see the greatest impacts. Airborne or taxi-out savings can be expected when ReCat- impacted flights operate to an individual runway that is experiencing pressure. As long as pressure remains, savings accrue for all subsequent aircraft. Throughput improvement can be expected when ReCat- impacted flights operate in peak demand. Modeled throughput based on actual separation changes indicates improvement. Percentage of eligible pairs of flights at the airport potentially impacted by ReCat (percentage with decreased separation/percentage with increased separation) Estimated total savings ($) in airborne and taxi-out time due to ReCat Performance Assessment of Established on RNP (EoR) in Denver EoR increased utilization of RNP Authorized Required (AR) approaches from 5.8% of arrivals to 6.6% of arrivals into Denver, an increase of 0.8%. Time saved from efficient approaches increased from 211 to 282 hours annually. If an additional waiver is granted, EoR is expected to enable an increase of up to 7.1% of arrivals executing RNP AR approaches. Time saved expected to increase to 360 hours annually. EoR is an important enabler to further future growth of utilization of efficient PBN approaches. Utilization of RNP AR approaches Time saved Sources: Joint Analysis Team: Performance Assessment of Wake ReCat, June 2016, pp. 4,5. Joint Analysis Team: Performance Assessment of Wake ReCat in Indianapolis and Philadelphia and Fuel Analysis for North Texas Metroplex, February 2017, p. 4. Joint Analysis Team Performance Assessment of North Texas Metroplex and Established on RNP in Denver, October 2016, p. 4. Table 3. JAT findings and performance metrics. 16 Ibid, p. 61.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 13 for small airports is probably increased accessibility in IMC. Typically, small airports are not capacity constrained and therefore throughput is not an issue. Tables 4 and 5 summarize findings from ACRP Report 150 and provide related performance metrics for large and medium airports and small airports, respectively. Descriptions of the per- formance metrics follow Table 5. Airport Operator Equipage is the estimated percentage of the operations at an airport con- ducted by PBN equipped aircraft (by type) as found on the FAA’s PBN Dashboard. PBN equipage is important in considering the benefits of a new PBN approach and the mix of types of equipage that may affect airport operations and throughput. Note that the term “Airport Operator Equi- page” refers to the aircraft that are PBN equipped by the airlines and does not refer to airport operator equipment. Heavy Jets and B757s—Percent is the percentage of operations by heavy jets and B757s at an airport. This metric is useful to determine if an airport is likely to benefit from Wake ReCat. Lowest Minimums is the lowest visibility minimums available for approaches to an airport. Existing minimums may be compared to anticipated minimums with the proposed PBN proce- dure to determine the potential for benefit. PBN Procedures—Number of and Use is the number of PBN procedures and the usage of each PBN procedure at an airport. Airports may be interested in tracking the number of PBN procedures available and how often they are used. The [FAA’s] PBN Dashboard (www.faa.gov/ nextgen/pbn/dashboard) provides implementation and usage statistics for all major airports in the NAS with published PBN procedures. “The data is captured on a periodic basis and displayed in an easy to interpret format for interested parties.”17 The following metrics are derived and require detailed analysis: Maximum Sustainable Throughput is the number of aircraft operations that an airfield can reasonably accommodate in a given period of time when there is a continuous demand for service during that period. Modeling or simulation analysis is required to determine this metric. This metric could be used to determine if a NextGen technology or initiative would be beneficial in terms of increasing throughput at a large or medium airport. Refer to the Performance Metric Database for additional information. Noise Exposure is the number of people exposed to significant noise. Significant aircraft noise levels are defined as values greater than or equal to day-night average sound level (DNL) 65 decibels (dB). This metric is derived by using the FAA’s approved noise model, Avia- tion Environmental Design Tool. This metric could be used to determine if the number of people within the DNL 65 dB contour would change because of the NextGen technology or initiative. Refer to the Performance Metric Database for additional information. 3.2 Overall System Issues and Their Variability This section provides guidance on performance metrics that can be used to understand and characterize system issues and their variability. 3.2.1 Background Airport operations can be influenced by system issues caused by both unplanned and planned events, such as adverse weather and runway construction, respectively. The impacts of these 17 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Performance Based Navigation (PBN) Implementation and Usage.” Accessed August 5, 2017. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/pbn/dashboard/.

14 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning NextGen Technology or Initiative Airport Effects Primary Performance Metrics to Consider RNAV Standard Instrument Departures and Standard Terminal Arrivals May enhance operational throughput if capacity is constrained by terminal airspace; could allow for additional independent arrival and departure routes and de-conflicting airspace. Airport Operator Equipage Maximum Sustainable Throughput RNAV and RNP Instrument Approach Procedures Could increase operational capacity and reduce minimums where ILS approaches are not possible or cause operational constraints; may require obstacle removal and installation or upgrade of approach lights. Airport Operator Equipage Maximum Sustainable Throughput Noise Exposure Lowest Minimums PBN Procedures - Number of and Use RNAV-Enabled Departure Separations Equivalent lateral spacing operations (less divergence off the runway) and established-on- departure operation and unified departure operational spacing (divergence point as nearest waypoint instead of the runway end) could increase departure throughput. Airport Operator Equipage Maximum Sustainable Throughput Noise Exposure Surface Operations and Data Sharing Improved surface operations, such as surface CDM, allow for sharing and responding to real- time movement data for aircraft and vehicles. Improvements to surface safety, efficiency, and flexibility are expected. Associated departure management could require increased apron area, gates, and/or hold pads at space-constrained airports. Metrics related to surface CDM continue to evolve. Wake Turbulence ReCat Could increase maximum arrival and departure throughput where there are a significant number of heavy jets and B757s; capacity increases could be 2–4% at many medium and large airports. Could reduce aircraft emissions due to reduced departure hold time on taxiways. Heavy Jets and B757 – Percent Maximum Sustainable Throughput Closely Spaced Parallel Runway Operations Airports with dual parallel runways and a lateral separation between 2,500 feet and 4,300 feet would have the best opportunity to improve arrival capacity during IMC. Capacity could increase and delay could decrease; potentially capital improvements for capacity could be deferred. Magnitude of capacity increase depends on the number and spacing of parallel runways and how the runways are operated, i.e., segregated operations, mixed operations, independent, or dependent. Maximum Sustainable Throughput Noise Exposure Wake Turbulence Avoidance Could increase capacity for intersecting or closely spaced lateral separations (less than 2,500 feet of separation) but only where there are substantial heavy jet and B757 operations. Heavy Jets and B757 – Percent Maximum Sustainable Throughput Reduced Minimum Separation Standard for Arrivals on Parallel Runways in IMC The NextGen Closely Spaced Parallel Operations program components affect the capacity of parallel runways in IMC. Changes in noise exposure and aircraft emissions could also occur. Maximum Sustainable Throughput Noise Exposure Multilateration Allows air traffic controllers to track aircraft where there is no radar coverage. Can increase throughput at airports subject to procedural separation because of lack of radar coverage. Can also support virtual control towers, surface movement surveillance, and noise monitoring. Multilateration data could prove useful for detailed capacity analysis Source: ACRP Report 150, NextGen for Airports Volume 5, Airport Planning and Development, 2017. Table 4. Suggested primary metrics for NextGen at large and medium airports.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 15 events are often complex and interconnected, involving airports, FAA, and airlines, thus creat- ing the need for a collection of relevant metrics that can be used by airport operators to under- stand and characterize these issues. This subsection describes how metrics in the Performance Metrics Database can address this need and enhance airport operator understanding of system issues and how they impact airport operations. 3.2.2 Suggested Metrics—Overall System Issues and their Variability Table 6 and Table 7 show the primary and secondary metrics, respectively, for system issues and their variability. The following subsections explain how the primary metrics and select second- ary metrics may be applied. Refer to the Performance Metrics Database to learn more about the remaining secondary metrics. Unplanned System Issues. Several types of unplanned system issues can disrupt not only airport operations but also FAA and airline operations. Weather is the largest cause of delay in the NAS.18 However, unanticipated system issues can result from emergencies, airline logistics, NextGen Technology or Initiative Airport Effects Primary Performance Metrics Improved Landing Systems RNAV approach procedures could increase access in IMC via reduced minimums where ILS approaches are not possible. May require obstruction mitigation even if minimums are higher than those for existing ground-based procedures. Except in special cases, RNP approaches are not typically applicable at small airports due to limited use and the high cost of deployment (obstacle clearing and airfield lighting requirements). Lowest Minimums Airport Operator Equipage Percent Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and Percent IMC PBN Procedures— Number of and Use Airspace Routing PBN May enhance operational throughput if capacity is constrained by terminal airspace; could allow for dedicated arrival and departure routes to and from small airports. None Wake Turbulence Recategorization Potential to enhance capacity where there are a significant number of heavy jets and B757s and the airport is congested. However, for small airports, increases in capacity are likely marginal and difficult to quantify. Heavy Jets and B757s—Percent Dependent Runway Operations Limited applicability for small airports. None Wake Turbulence Avoidance Could increase capacity for intersecting or closely spaced lateral separate (less than 2,500 feet of separation) but only where there are substantial heavy jet and B757 operations. Heavy Jets and B757s—Percent Reduced Minimum Separation Standard for Arrivals on Parallel Runways in IMC The NextGen Closely Spaced Parallel Operations program components affect the capacity of parallel runways in IMC; limited applicability to small airports. None Multilateration Allows air traffic controllers to track aircraft where there is no radar coverage (remote areas with mountainous terrain). Could enhance safety and increase IMC access and capacity. Can also support virtual control towers and noise monitoring. None Source: ACRP Report 150: NextGen for Airports Volume 5, Airport Planning and Development, 2017. Table 5. Suggested primary metrics for NextGen at small airports. 18 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “FAQ: Weather Delay.” Accessed October 15, 2017. https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/ programs/weather/faq/.

Primary Metrics Applicable Airports Diversions into Airport—Number of Annual All Delays with Passengers on Aircraft that Exceed Department of Transportation (DOT) Tarmac Delay Duration Standards Annually (Domestic) Commercial Service Delays with Passengers on Aircraft that Exceed DOT Tarmac Delay Duration Standards Annually (International) Commercial Service Cancellations All Number of Arrival and Departure Delays FAA’s Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) Airports Number of Late Departures FAA ASPM Airports Departure Delay per Flight FAA ASPM Airports Arrival Delay per Flight FAA ASPM Airports Delayed Gate Departures FAA ASPM Airports Average Gate Departure Delay FAA ASPM Airports Average Minutes of Delay per Delayed Gate Departure FAA ASPM Airports Average Gate Arrival Delay FAA ASPM Airports Delayed Gate Arrivals FAA ASPM Airports Average Minutes of Delay per Delayed Gate Arrival FAA ASPM Airports Number of Delays by Cause All Towered Airports Total Time Operations Suspended due to Adverse Weather— Annual All Operations Suspended for Adverse Weather—Number of Annual All Average Out-to-Off (Taxi-Out Delay) FAA ASPM Airports Airport Arrival Rate (AAR) All Towered Airports Peak Hour Operations Throughput in IMC FAA ASPM Airports Peak Hour Operations Throughput in Marginal Visual Meteorological Conditions FAA ASPM Airports Peak Hour Operations Throughput in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) FAA ASPM Airports Percent VMC All Percent IMC All Airport Operations Suspended for Snow/Ice Events—Number of Annual Airports in Cold Weather Climates Average Time Airport Operations are Suspended for Snow/Ice Events Airports in Cold Weather Climates Vehicle Runway Crossings Per Day All Hot Spots—Number All Runway Incursion Mitigation Locations All Runway Excursions All Primary Runway/Taxiway Clearing Time—Average for Snow/Ice Airports in Cold Weather Climates Deicing Throughput in Aircraft per Hour Airports in Cold Weather Climates Airport Departure Rate (ADR) Towered Airports Dedicated Deicing Positions—Number of Airports in Cold Weather Climates Average Time to Deice an Aircraft Airports in Cold Weather Climates Air Operations Area Violations All Annual Security Breaches that Force Rescreening Commercial Service Emergency Responses—Annual All Peak Period Commercial Service Maximum Sustainable Throughput All Contact Gate Utilization Commercial Service Table 6. Suggested primary metrics for system issues and their variability. Secondary Metrics Applicable Airports NAS On-Time Arrivals FAA System-wide Metric Diversions to Other Airports—Number of Annual Commercial Service Percentage of Arriving Flights Delayed Commercial Service Percentage of Departing Flights Delayed Commercial Service Late Arriving Aircraft Commercial Service Terminal Arrival Efficiency Rate (TAER) FAA ASPM Airports System Airport Efficiency Rate (SAER) FAA ASPM Airports Table 7. Suggested secondary metrics for system issues and their variability.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 17 and security events. Often, localized issues propagate throughout the system. For example, storms may cause an initial system disruption, which delays some flights as they alter their flight path to deviate around the weather or are delayed departing and arriving at an airport. If these initial delays become sufficiently significant as to impact FAA Air Traffic Management and ATC workload, the FAA may implement one of several traffic management initiatives, such as a Play- book Reroute or Ground Delay Program, to control and slow the flow of air traffic in the affected region. These traffic management initiatives add further delay and impacts to the system, which can impact airline operations through increased burn due to flying longer Playbook routes and missed connecting flights due to large delays. In response, airlines may tactically adjust their schedules and possibly cancel flights. Other examples of unplanned system issues include emergencies such as fires, internet outage, or system failure at an FAA facility. These may result in the inability to safely provide services within that airspace, known as ATC Zero. This condition is the most severe of the three designa- tions used by the FAA to describe degraded operations at a given facility. Under these conditions, normal flight operations are suspended and aircraft inbound to airports within the impacted airspace may be required to divert or reroute to another airport. Airports inside the impacted region would have a marked decrease or cessation in arrivals, and airports just outside the area may experience a significant increase in arrival traffic. Metrics may be used to characterize unplanned system issues and their potential impact on airport operations. One of the results of unplanned system issues is canceled/diverted flights. Therefore, metrics such as Diversions into Airport—Number of Annual, Delays with Pas- sengers on Aircraft that Exceed DOT Tarmac Delay Duration Standards Annually (Domes- tic), Delays with Passengers on Aircraft that Exceed DOT Tarmac Delay Duration Standards Annually (International), and Cancellations indicate the overall impacts at an airport, regard- less of specific system issue. These types of metrics are considered in planning for unanticipated system issues, such as Airport Irregular Operations Contingency Planning. Another result of unplanned system issues is delay. System disruptions of any kind can cause both arrival and departure delay at an airport due to the NAS propagation effects. Even in the absence of supporting information on the nature of the disruption(s), several metrics may be available for airport operators that reflect the impact of overall system delays at their airport. Three of these metrics may be obtained from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) On-Time Performance Data: Percent of Arriving Flights Delayed is the percentage of arriving flights delayed by 15 or more minutes. Percent of Departing Flights Delayed is the percentage of departing flights delayed by 15 or more minutes. Late Arriving Aircraft is the minutes of delay caused by previous flights arriving late, causing the next flights to depart late. This metric can be compared to the total delay to determine the percentage of airport delays due to the propagation of system disruptions in the NAS. For a select group of airports referred to as Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) Airports (Figure 2), additional FAA delay data/metrics are available. Refer to the Performance Metrics Database to find detailed information about these metrics. Number of Arrival and Departure Delays Average Minutes of Delay per Delayed Number of Late Departures Gate Departure Departure Delay per Flight Average Gate Arrival Delay Arrival Delay per Flight Delayed Gate Arrivals Delayed Gate Departures Average Minutes of Delay per Delayed Average Gate Departure Delay Gate Arrival

18 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Metrics specific to weather phenomena, emergencies, and security events are discussed in the following sections. Weather Phenomena. Adverse weather can be caused by several types of common weather phenomena, including low ceilings and visibility, convective storms, strong winds, and winter weather. These types of weather can disrupt airport operations locally and propagate through the NAS. Weather events cause delays and, in some cases, suspensions of airport operations. Airports can obtain weather-related delay information from the FAA’s Operations Network (OPSNET) 1. ABQ - Albuquerque International Sunport 2. ANC - Ted Stevens Anchorage International 3. ATL - Hartsfield–Jackson Atlanta International * 4. AUS - Austin–Bergstrom International 5. BDL - Bradley International 6. BHM - Birmingham International 7. BNA - Nashville International 8. BOS - Boston Logan International * 9. BUF - Buffalo Niagara International 10. BUR - Bob Hope (Burbank/Glendale/Pasadena) 11. BWI - Baltimore/Washington International* 12. CLE - Cleveland Hopkins International 13. CLT - Charlotte Douglas International * 14. CVG - Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International 15. DAL - Dallas Love Field 16. DAY - Dayton International 17. DCA - Ronald Reagan Washington National* 18. DEN - Denver International * 19. DFW - Dallas/Fort Worth International * 20. DTW - Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County* 21. EWR - Newark Liberty International* 22. FLL - Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International* 23. GYY - Gary Chicago International 24. HNL - Honolulu International* 25. HOU - Houston Hobby 26. HPN - Westchester County 27. IAD - Washington Dulles International* 28. IAH - George Bush Houston Intercontinental* 29. IND - Indianapolis International 30. ISP - Long Island Mac Arthur 31. JAX - Jacksonville International 32. JFK - New York John F. Kennedy International* 33. LAS - Las Vegas McCarran International* 34. LAX - Los Angeles International* 35. LGA - New York LaGuardia* 36. LGB - Long Beach 37. MCI - Kansas City International 38. MCO - Orlando International* 39. MDW - Chicago Midway* 40. MEM - Memphis International* 41. MHT - Manchester 42. MIA - Miami International* 43. MKE - Milwaukee Gnl Mitchell International 44. MSP - Minneapolis/St. Paul International* 45. MSY - Louis Armstrong New Orleans International 46. OAK - Oakland International 47. OGG - Kahului 48. OMA - Omaha Eppley Airfield 49. ONT - Ontario International 50. ORD - Chicago O’Hare International* 51. OXR - Oxnard 52. PBI - Palm Beach International 53. PDX - Portland International 54. PHL - Philadelphia International* 55. PHX - Phoenix Sky Harbor International* 56. PIT - Pittsburgh International 57. PSP - Palm Springs International 58. PVD - Providence Francis Green State 59. RDU - Raleigh/Durham International 60. RFD - Greater Rockford 61. RSW - Southwest Florida International 62. SAN - San Diego International* 63. SAT - San Antonio International 64. SDF - Louisville International 65. SEA - Seattle/Tacoma International* 66. SFO - San Francisco International* 67. SJC - Norman Mineta San Jose International 68. SJU - San Juan Luis Munoz International 69. SLC - Salt Lake City International* 70. SMF - Sacramento International Airport 71. SNA - John Wayne Airport-Orange County 72. STL - Lambert Saint Louis International 73. SWF - Stewart International 74. TEB - Teterboro 75. TPA - Tampa International* 76. TUS - Tucson International 77. VNY - Van Nuys * Denotes a Core 30 airport Source: FAA, ASPM Airports, http://aspmhelp.faa.gov/index.php/ASPM_Airports, accessed 10/15/17. Figure 2. ASPM airports.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 19 data, which is the source for the metric Number of Delays by Cause. In addition,Total Time Operations Suspended Due to Adverse Weather and Operations Suspended for Adverse Weather—Number of Annual provide airport operators a broad view of the time duration and annual number of occurrences, respectively, when airport operations were suspended due to any form of adverse weather. Long duration suspensions are most common for winter weather events where snow and ice constrain airport operations, but numerous suspensions can also occur during convective storms due to lightning at or near the airport as ramp operations are temporarily halted to ensure the safety of surface workers. It may be useful to track suspensions for runways, taxiways, and ramps separately. Low ceilings and reduced visibility due to adverse weather could result in a deterioration from VMC to Marginal VMC or IMC. Aircraft at busy commercial service and general aviation air- ports may experience delays if ATC reduces the AAR to accommodate the change in ceilings, vis- ibility, and wind direction/velocity. If available, these airports may consider the FAA metric AAR for the runway configuration in use and appropriate metrological conditions as an indication of the airport capacity. Also, arrival demand could be compared to the Peak Hour Operations Throughput in IMC or Peak Hour Operations Throughput in Marginal VMC. The Percent VMC and IMC can be considered in determining the percentage of time the airport is subject to VMC and IMC weather conditions. However, it cannot be assumed that the associated AARs will be used when these weather conditions exist. In practice, AARs do not necessarily align with these meteorological conditions because the AARs may be adjusted for other conditions. Strong or rapidly changing winds and turbulence at or near the airport can also disrupt airport operations. Winds that change speed or direction rapidly with height, known as wind shear, near the airport can create significant speed differentials near the ground and between sequenced arrival aircraft at different altitudes. This causes a challenge for the ATC and may require enforc- ing minimum separation requirements. Significant turbulence and wind shear may necessitate FAA initiatives such as Miles in Trail to space out air traffic and reduce ATC workload. These initiatives result primarily in arrival delay into the impacted airport, which could be measured using Arrival Delay per Flight. Changes in surface wind direction or speed at the airport may cause the FAA to change how the runways are used (runway reconfiguration) to better align aircraft for takeoff and landing. Runway reconfiguration may require requeuing of aircraft for takeoff, which would increase taxi-out delay (Average Out-to-Off). Winter weather events, characterized by frozen precipitation and cold temperatures, pose even more challenges to airports. These events tend to have a longer duration than other types of adverse weather, sometimes lasting several days. Significant delays can occur if snow and ice accumulate on the airfield. For the most disruptive winter weather events with heavy snowfall, such as a blizzard, the airport may be unable to safely maintain the surface and runways and may need to close. Airport Operations Suspended for Snow/Ice Events—Number of Annual and Average Time Airport Operations Are Suspended for Snow/Ice Events would provide airport operators with information on the annual frequency and duration of winter weather suspen- sions at their airport. Airlines often proactively cancel flights through airports predicted to be impacted by a significant winter weather event. Therefore, the Cancellations metric may be a useful metric for airport operators to track during winter weather events. Snowy or icy runway conditions could also cause runway excursions. Thus, airport operators may monitor Runway Excursions from pavement by aircraft during winter weather events to assess winter weather impacts. Winter weather events require the removal of snow and ice from pavement for aircraft to operate safely, closing airfield pavements while they are cleared or treated. Primary Runway/ Taxiway Clearing Time—Average for Snow/Ice is likely an important metric for airport opera- tors, airlines, and the FAA.

20 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Winter weather events also require aircraft deicing. Deicing Throughput in Aircraft per Hour is important to the entity conducting aircraft deicing (airport, airline, or consortium) using dedicated deicing aprons. Deicing throughput is also important to ATC because of its relation to Average Out-to-Off (the average departure taxi time) and ADR (the number of departures an airport can support) per unit of time. Other metrics of interest for deicing opera- tions using dedicated aprons include Dedicated Deicing Positions—Number of and Average Time to Deice an Aircraft. Emergency and Safety Issues. Airport operations can be disrupted by unanticipated safety and emergency issues that arise within and on the surface of an airport. The incorrect pres- ence of an aircraft, vehicle, or person on the protected runway area, or runway incursion, creates a safety risk and can significantly impact airport operations if sufficiently severe.19 A severe runway incursion or accident would likely result in the closure of the affected runway, leading to delays, surface congestion, and possibly diversions. Airport operators can assess the potential for incursions by considering metrics such as Vehicle Runway Crossings per Day, Hot Spots—Number, Runway Incursion Mitigation (RIM) Locations—Number. Vehicle Runway Crossings per Day is the number of times vehicles cross a runway in a given day. Hot Spot—Number is the number of locations on an airfield that the FAA identified as hot spots where heightened attention by pilots and drivers is necessary. RIM Locations—Number is the number of locations on an airfield that the FAA identified as locations that have a history of runway incursions. Runway excursions (undershoots, overruns, etc.) can also disrupt airport operations, espe- cially at smaller airports. Excursions could be associated with pavement conditions, but other factors may drive the occurrence such as aircraft weight exceeding the maximum for conditions, aircraft engine malfunction, inappropriate pilot technique, or change in decision to take off or land at excessive speed.20 The airport may need to dispatch emergency responders as a result of a runway excursion. Excursions may also result in damage to airport infrastructures, such as run- way lights and directional signs. Airport operators can track Runway Excursions and monitor trends and causes to assess potential mitigation and related risk for future events. A security breach in or around the airport could disrupt airport operations, potentially lead- ing to an airport closure. An airport may track Air Operations Area Violations to consider the risk for security issues. Unexpected disruption to the flow of passengers through an airport terminal can also influence airport operations. Security Breaches that Force Rescreening— Annual would reflect the contribution of unanticipated secondary security screening due to breaches to the overall wait times. Emergency responses may also temporarily disrupt airport operations. Thus, Emergency Responses—Annual may be a useful planning metric, particularly if types of emergency responses, hazardous materials, medical fires, and aircraft accidents/excursions are tracked separately. Metrics—Planned System Issues. Some system issues that impact airport operations are due to planned activities by FAA, airlines, or airports, such as implementing NextGen proce- dures, changing flight schedule, or constructing airport improvements. Performance metrics may be helpful in assessing potential impacts and planning to accommodate these issues. 19 Airbus. Flight Operations Briefing Note—Preventing Runway Incursions. France, 2004. http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/ Preventing_Runway_Incursions.pdf. 20 International Air Transport Association (IATA). Runway Safety Accident Analysis Report, 2010–2014, 1st ed. Montréal, Canada, 2015. https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/safety/runway-safety/Documents/RSAR-1st-2015-final-version.pdf.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 21 NextGen Implementation. FAA is implementing numerous NextGen procedures and tech- nologies. Refer to Section 3.1 Relevant Aspects of NextGen for metrics related to NextGen. Airline Schedule Change. Airlines regularly make planned schedule changes months in advance to account for seasonal demand and to increase profitability. While airport operators may be aware that these changes occur, they may not have access to the schedule change details until changes are implemented. For example, airlines may redistribute flights across the day to reduce or increase high volume time windows, or schedule peaks. The Peak Period metric would enable airport operators to evaluate changes in the time window during which they typically experience higher volume. Airlines may also change the number of flights scheduled through given airports based on profitability to their operation, including adding new service to an airport not previously oper- ated. Airport operators can use the Maximum Sustainable Throughput to evaluate changes in the number of flights through their airport due to airline schedule changes. Airlines adding new service to an airport would also increase these metrics, as well as influence gate utilization at the airport. Airport operators could use the Contact Gate Utilization metric for each airline to assess expanded gate usage by a given airline. Airport Construction. Infrastructure improvements such as runway and taxiway rehabili- tation or reconstruction can temporarily reduce capacity and increase delays and taxi times. This is particularly problematic at a busy airport where the demand is close to the capacity of the airport. Detailed capacity analysis to determine the Maximum Sustainable Throughput, particularly in IMC, may be warranted to understand the magnitude of potential problems and identify potential mitigation. 3.3 Safety Issues in Surface Movement This section provides guidance on performance metrics that can be used to consider surface movement safety. 3.3.1 Background Aviation stakeholders, including the FAA, airlines, and airports, are committed to enhancing aviation safety. Aviation safety is a broad topic that has many aspects, for example, regulating mini- mum aircraft standards, certifying airports and pilots, controlling aircraft, and providing emer- gency response. While all aspects of aviation safety are important, this section of the Reference Guide is focused on airfield and surface movement safety because of the inherent shared interest/ influence of airports, the FAA, and airlines. 3.3.2 Suggested Metrics—Safety Issues in Surface Movement Table 8 and Table 9 show the primary and secondary metrics, respectively, for airfield and sur- face movement safety. The following subsections explain how the primary metrics and selected secondary metrics may be applied. Refer to the Performance Metrics Database to learn more about the secondary metrics. Safety Risk Assessment and Safety Risk Management Systems Generally, performance metrics may be used to identify/measure airfield and surface move- ment safety trends, failures, and successes. As such, performance metrics are an integral compo- nent of Safety Risk Management and a Safety Management System (SMS). SMSs aid airports in

22 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning proactively detecting and correcting safety problems via a systematic risk-based manner before they result in aircraft accidents or incidents.21 The FAA is in the process of requiring SMSs at some Part 139 certificated airports.22 Also, the FAA uses SMSs internally in decision making that may affect airports. Airports may find the metrics described in this section useful in developing and implementing an SMS. Runway Safety Runway safety is likely the primary concern when evaluating surface movement and airfield safety. The FAA identified runway incursions and excursions as one of the top airport risks based on a study of nearly 17,000 accidents and incidents.23 The FAA is working to increase airfield safety and reduce incursions, “[t]hrough infrastructure improvements—like lighting, signage, marking, and configuration changes—and new technologies—such as Runway Status Lights and Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X.”24 The FAA is also “committed to reducing RE [Runway Excursions] risk through analysis, awareness, and action.”25 Secondary Metrics Applicable Airports Runway Incursions All Runway Incursions Rate (A&B) FAA System-Wide Air Operations Area Violations All Runway Pavement Condition All Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) Index Part 139 Certificated Airports ARFF Equipment vs. ARFF Index Requirements Part 139 Certificated Airports ARFF Responses within Mandated Response Times (%) Part 139 Certificated Airports Snow Removal Resources Identified in FAA-Approved Snow and Ice Control Plan Airports in Cold Weather Climates Primary Runway/Taxiway Clearing Time—Average for Snow/Ice Airports in Cold Weather Climates Table 9. Suggested secondary metrics for airfield and surface movement safety. Primary Metrics Applicable Airports Runway Incursions Vehicle/Pedestrian All Hot Spots—Number All Runway Incursion Mitigation Locations—Number All Wildlife/Bird Strikes All Pavement Condition Index by Runway All Vehicle Runway Crossings per Day All Navigational Aid (NAVAID) Availability General Aviation Runway Excursions All Surface Incidents All Annual Part 139 Inspection Results Part 139 Certificated Airports Emergency Responses—Annual Part 139 Certificated Airports Table 8. Suggested primary metrics for airfield and surface movement safety. 21 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Safety Management Systems (SMS) for Airports.” Accessed October 14, 2017. https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/safety_management_systems/. 22 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Fact Sheet—Office of Airports Safety Management System Efforts.” July 12, 2016. https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=20554. p. 1. 23 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). National Runway Safety Plan (2015–2017). Washington, D.C. Accessed 2017. https://www.faa.gov/airports/runway_safety/publications/media/2015_ATO_Safety_National_Runway_Safety_Plan.pdf, p. 47. 24 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. “Reducing Runway Incursions: Guidance for Airports.” Last modified February 12, 2018. https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/call_to_action/. 25 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Runway Safety—Runway Excursions.” Last modified July 10, 2014. https:// www.faa.gov/airports/runway_safety/excursion/.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 23 The FAA tracks runway incursions and defines them as occurrences “at an aerodrome involv- ing the incorrect presence of an aircraft, vehicle or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and takeoff of aircraft.”26 Runway incursions are classified by severity: “a. Accident. An incursion that results in a collision. For the purposes of tracking incursion perfor- mance, an accident will be treated as a Category A runway incursion. b. Category A. A serious incident in which a collision was narrowly avoided. c. Category B. An incident in which separation decreases and there is a significant potential for col- lision, which may result in a time-critical corrective/evasive response to avoid a collision. d. Category C. An incident characterized by ample time and/or distance to avoid a collision. e. Category D. An incident that meets the definition of a runway incursion, such as the incorrect presence of a single vehicle/person/aircraft on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and takeoff of aircraft, but with no immediate safety consequences. f. Category E. An incident in which insufficient or conflicting evidence of the event precludes assigning another category.”27 Congress requires the FAA to report the Runway Incursions Rate (A&B), which is the total of the Category A and B incursions per million operations in the entire NAS in a fiscal year. Surface events including runway incursions and surface incidents are aggregated by cause: “a. Operational Incident. A runway incursion attributed to ATCT [Air Traffic Control Tower] action or inaction. b. Pilot Deviation. A runway incursion caused by a pilot or other person operating an aircraft under its own power (see FAA Order 8020.11, Aircraft Accident and Incident Notification, Investigation and Reporting, for the official definition). c. Vehicle or Pedestrian Deviation (VPD). A runway incursion caused by a vehicle driver or pedestrian. d. Other. Runway incursions which cannot clearly be attributed to a mistake or incorrect action by an air traffic controller, pilot, driver, or pedestrian will be classified as ‘other.’ These events would include incursions caused by equipment failure or other factors.”28 The VPD incursions may be particularly interesting to airports because airport and/or tenant- operated vehicles may be involved. Airports may find it useful to track the metric Runway Incur- sions Vehicle/Pedestrian, which is the number of annual VPD incursions. Runway incursion risk factors applicable to airports include airport geometry, wildlife/ bird strikes, and foreign object debris (FOD). Vehicle runway crossings and navigational aid (NAVAID) availability could be other factors that airports consider in identifying incursion risk. FAA analysis of aviation accidents and incidents revealed that airport geometry can be a run- way incursion risk factor.29 The FAA has identified airfield locations where airport geometry is a risk factor. These locations are referred to as hot spots and RIM locations. Hot spots are “location[s] on an airport movement area with a history of potential risk of collision or runway incursion, and where heightened attention by pilots and drivers is necessary.”30 Current hot spots descriptions are provided in the FAA Airport/Facility Directory. The metric Hot Spots— Number may be useful in evaluating the safety of airport geometry. The FAA’s RIM Program is focused “on reducing runway incursions by addressing risks at specific locations at the airport that have a history of runway incursions.”31 The current inventory 26 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Order 7050.1B: Runway Safety Program. Washington, D.C., 2013. https://www. faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/FAA_Order_7050.1B.pdf. p. 3. 27 Ibid, p. B-1. 28 Ibid, p. A-1. 29 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). National Runway Safety Plan (2015–2017), p. 47. 30 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Runway Safety: Hot Spots List.” Last modified May 2, 2016. https://www.faa. gov/airports/runway_safety/hotspots/hotspots_list/. 31 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “FAA Implements New Airport Safety Program.” Accessed October 14, 2017. https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=83046.

24 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning of RIM locations is based on 2007–2016 data and includes “airport locations where three or more peak annual runway incursions have occurred in a given calendar year or averaged at least one runway incursion per year when the location was added to the inventory.”32 The metric RIM Locations—Number is the number of RIM airport locations on the RIM inventory. The RIM inventory may be found on the FAA Office of Airports Runway Incursion Mitigation (RIM) Program web page. The presence of animals such as deer or birds on or near the airport surface can also con- tribute to runway incursions. The metric Wildlife/Bird Strikes, which involves the number of reported bird/wildlife strikes at the airport, may be useful in evaluating trends and risks associ- ated with wildlife and birds. Also, for Part 139 Certificated Airports, wildlife strikes may trigger a requirement to prepare a wildlife hazard assessment. Foreign object debris on movement areas is a safety risk. Pieces of concrete can break loose from distressed airfield pavement and become foreign object debris (e.g., spalling or fatigued cor- ners cracking off). The Pavement Condition Index (PCI), by Runway may be useful in analyzing risk for pavement to become foreign object debris. The PCI is a numerical rating of the surface condition of a pavement based on an objective measurement of the type, severity, and quantity of distress. Vehicle Runway Crossings per Day may be a useful metric when evaluating safety risks and the need for infrastructure improvements such as new service roads. Safety risk could increase if NAVAIDs are out of service. Airports are responsible for moni- toring and maintaining non-federal NAVAIDs at their airport. Therefore, airports, likely gen- eral aviation airports, would find the metric NAVAID availability, the percentage of operating hours that installed non-federal NAVAIDs are available, useful in identifying safety risks. Runway Excursions is the number of annual veer-offs or overruns off the runway surface.33 The FAA is developing a system to collect and classify runway excursions.34 Factors that can contribute to runway excursions include runway contamination, adverse weather conditions, mechanical failure, pilot error, and unstable approaches.35 Of these factors, airports have the most influence on runway contamination because they are responsible for snow and ice removal. Movement Area and Airfield Safety Metrics related to the safety of the entire movement area and airfield include Surface Inci- dents, Part 139 Inspection Results and Emergency Responses. Also, metrics related to ARFF requirements and winter operations are related to movement area and airfield safety. Airports could consider these metrics when evaluating safety throughout the movement area. Surface Incidents are the annual number “[u]nauthorized or unapproved movement within the designated movement area (excluding runway incursions) or an occurrence in that same area associated with the operation of an aircraft that affects or could affect the safety of flight.”36 Part 139 Certificated Airports are required to track and record any accidents or incidents in the movement areas and safety areas involving air carrier aircraft, a ground vehicle, or a pedestrian. An airport could track all potential deviations on the airport surface movement area by com- bining the Surface Incidents with Runway Incursions and Runway Excursions. 32 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Runway Incursion Mitigation (RIM) Program.” Last modified May 15, 2018. https://www.faa.gov/airports/special_programs/rim/. 33 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Order 7050.1B, Runway Safety Program, p. A-1. 34 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). National Runway Safety Plan, 2015–2017, p. 13. 35 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Runway Excursions Support Tool.” Accessed September 2017. https:// runwayexcursions.faa.gov/content.html?id=c 36 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Order 7050.1B, Runway Safety Program, p. 3.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 25 Annual Part 139 Inspection Results is the number of deficiencies identified in the FAA’s annual Part 139 inspection of the airport. This metric includes deficiencies related to the move- ment area, aircraft rescue and firefighting equipment and personnel preparedness, fueling facili- ties, and nighttime lighting and marking. Assessment of these deficiencies would enable airport operators to evaluate the types of safety issues at their airport and guide and prioritize mitigation strategies. Emergency Responses—Annual is the annual number of emergency responses. The annual number of emergency responses may be a useful measure of airport safety and safety trends. Airports may track the number of emergency responses by type: hazardous materials, medical emergencies, fires, and aircraft incidents and/or by location: airside and landside. ARFF Requirements ARFF (Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting) Index is an alphabet letter (A, B, C, D, or E) that is tied to federal requirements for ARFF equipment in terms of number and agent/water capaci- ties. It is determined by considering the length of the longest air carrier aircraft and its average daily departures. Part 139 Certificated Airports use the ARFF Index to determine equipment needs and plan ARFF facilities. ARFF Equipment versus ARFF Index Requirements is the number of ARFF equipment as compared to that required per the ARFF Index. Many airports possess equipment in excess of the number required by the ARFF Index to accommodate equipment downtime. ARFF Responses within Mandated Response Times (%) is the percentage of ARFF responses within the mandated response time for Part 139 Certificated Airports. The first ARFF vehicle must be able to reach the midpoint of the farthest runway used for Part 139 operations within three minutes, and all other vehicles necessary to deal with the emergency must arrive within four minutes. To maintain Part 139 Certification, airports must be able to demonstrate these can meet the mandated response times. There have been various proposals to shorten these times. Infrastructure changes at an airport could extend response distances, so it is useful for airports to track response times with existing facilities. Winter Operations Snow Removal Resources Identified in FAA-Approved Snow and Ice Control Plan is the number of pieces of snow removal equipment (by type) in an FAA-approved snow and ice control (removal) plan for a Part 139 Certificated Airport. Airports may use Advisory Circular (AC) No: 150/5200-30D, Airport Field Condition Assessments and Winter Operations Safety, in concert with AC No. 150/5220-20A, Airport Snow and Ice Control Equipment, to determine the minimum equipment requirements and clearing times for priority airport operations areas. Primary Runway/Taxiway Clearing Time—Average for Snow/Ice is the average time, in minutes, to clear primary runways and related taxiways of snow/ice accumulation. It may also be useful to measure clearing time for the “Priority 1” area defined in FAA AC 150/5200-30D. Priority 1 area is defined as “those that directly contribute to safety and the re-establishment of aircraft operations at a minimum acceptable level of service. Priority 1 will generally consist of the primary runway(s) with taxiway turnoffs and associated taxiways leading to the terminal, portions of the terminal ramp, portions of the cargo ramp, Airport Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) station ramps and access roads, mutual aid access points (including gates), emergency service roads, access to essential NAVAID, and centralized deicing facilities.”37 37 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Advisory Circular 150/5200-30D: Airport Field Condition Assessments and Winter Operations Safety Advisory Circular, Change 1. Washington, D.C., 2017. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/ Advisory_Circular/AC_150_5200-30D_with_chg1.pdf, pp. 1–3.

26 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning 3.4 Benchmarking across Airports This section provides guidance on performance metrics that can be used to measure and benchmark airport performance. 3.4.1 Background Measuring and benchmarking airport performance is a key to successful and efficient man- agement of airports, as it involves understanding airport operations, identifying and adopting best practices to improve airport operational performance, and the ability to attract new air services. Typically, airport managers use benchmarking in two ways: Internal benchmarking—When they compare their own airport performance over time to identify trends and areas that require improvement, and External benchmarking—Benchmarking across different airports to measure their perfor- mance against comparable airports. There are different challenges with internal and external benchmarking. Since there are more data available for airport managers to conduct internal benchmarking, they may perform more comprehensive assessments of airport performance. However, internal benchmarking will pro- vide little help with identifying industry trends. External benchmarking, on the other hand, is more challenging due to limited data availability (only public data sources can be used) and difficulties with selecting comparable airports. This Reference Guide focuses on external bench- marking, although metrics that are more suitable for internal benchmarking are also discussed. “If you’ve seen one airport, you’ve seen one airport.” This popular airport industry saying speaks to the fact that airports operate in very different environments in terms of traffic patterns, commercial activities, location constraints, governance and ownership structure, etc. Conse- quently, individual airports will find different sets of performance metrics to be relevant and useful to their particular circumstances and data availability. For example, airports located in regions subject to the impacts of severe snow and ice are likely to be concerned about Average Time to Deice an Aircraft, whereas airports in the Sunshine State would not have any use for such metrics. Even among airports with similar characteristics, airport managers may not agree which met- rics are the most important and how many metrics the airport should track. A smaller but closely monitored set of metrics may be more effective than a larger set of metrics without a clear focus. Furthermore, airports operate in very dynamic environments, thus the relative importance of the metrics will likely evolve over time as new issues arise. For example, concession revenues were not as important to the airports twenty years ago as they are today. The following sections describe how to use the primary and secondary metrics listed in Table 10 and Table 11 to select peer airports and to benchmark performance against those peer airports. 3.4.2 Suggested Metrics—Airport Benchmarking Metrics to Select Comparable Airports The first step in conducting external benchmarking is to identify the proper metrics that can be used to select the appropriate group of peer airports. The observed performances of airports are often affected by their geographical locations, traffic volume and traffic mix (international versus domestic, origin and destination versus connecting), capacity and congestion level, tech- nical characteristics of airport infrastructure and facilities, as well as outsourcing, ownership,

Focus Area Performance Metrics 27 Escalators, Moving Walkways, Baggage Claim Equipment and Elevators—Percent of Time in Service Commercial Number of Operations Core Airports Secondary Metrics Applicable Airports Runway/Taxiway Maintenance Cost All Airline Cost per Terminal Square Foot Commercial Airline Costs per Gate Commercial Landed Weight (1000 Lbs.) Commercial Domestic Passenger Flights—Number of Commercial International Passenger Flights—Number of Commercial Domestic Flights—Number of All Cargo Commercial International Cargo Flights—Number of Commercial Domestic Landed Weight—All-Cargo Aircraft Commercial International Landed Weight—All-Cargo Aircraft Commercial International Arriving Passengers Commercial Connecting Passengers—Annual Commercial Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) Commercial Maintenance Cost per Square Foot of Terminal Commercial Number of Security Lanes Staffed at Peak Commercial Total Number of Security Lanes Available Commercial Federal Inspection Service (FIS) Lanes Staffed at Peak Commercial FIS Service Volumes/Throughput Commercial Total FIS Lanes Available Commercial Table 11. Suggested secondary metrics for airport benchmarking. Cargo Tons Commercial Enplaned Passengers—Annual Commercial Origination and Destination Passengers—Annual Commercial International Passengers to Total Passengers % Commercial Air Carrier Concentration Commercial Connecting Passengers—Annual Commercial Airport Concession Revenue per Enplaned Passenger Commercial Non-Aeronautical Operating Revenue as % of Total Operating Revenue Commercial Contact Gate Usage—Turns per Day Commercial Average Gate Departure Delay Commercial Baggage Delivery Time Commercial Wait Times at Security Checkpoints Commercial Average Number of Seats per Airline Departure Operation Commercial Minimum Flight Connecting Times Commercial Based Aircraft GA Critical Aircraft All NPIAS Classification All Instrument Approaches—Number of GA Average Annual T-Hangar Space Rental Cost GA Average Annual Tie-Down Space Rental Cost GA Average Cost per Gallon Paid by General Aviation for Jet Fuel GA Average Cost per Gallon Paid for Aviation Gasoline GA Primary Metrics Applicable Airports Annual Aircraft Operations All Average Taxi-Out Delay All Destinations—Nonstop—Annual Commercial Average Airfare Commercial Airline Cost per Enplanement Commercial Airline Cost per Operation Commercial Average Load Factor Commercial Airport Cost per Enplanement Commercial Table 10. Suggested primary metrics for airport benchmarking.

28 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning and governance structure. The metrics used to identify peer airports need to reflect these char- acteristics. The following metrics can be used to identify peer commercial airports: Enplaned Passengers—Annual reflects the traffic volume. International Passengers to Total Passengers % serves as an indicator for passenger traffic mix. Percentage of Connecting Passengers—Annual and Origination and Destination passengers—Annual are indicators for passenger traffic mix. Percentage of passenger and cargo operations of Annual Aircraft Operations indicates the extent of noncommercial operations at an airport. Cargo Tons—Annual reflects the importance of cargo operations. Air Carrier Concentration indicates the level of airline competition at an airport. Destinations—Nonstop—Annual indicates the connectivity of the airport. NPIAS Classification is the classification of the airport in the FAA NPIAS. Critical Aircraft is the most demanding aircraft type, or grouping of aircraft that make regular use of the airport. Average Number of Seats per Airline Departure Operation reflects the average size of air- craft that serves an airport. The following metrics can be used to identify peer general aviation airports: Based Aircraft indicates the extent of infrastructure at the airport. Critical Aircraft is the most demanding aircraft type, or grouping of aircraft, that makes regular use of the airport. Annual Aircraft Operations reflects the traffic volume. NPIAS Classification is the classification of the airport in the FAA NPIAS. Nonprimary air- ports are divided into categories based on existing activity measures: national, regional, local, basic, and unclassified.38 Instrument Approaches—Number of is the number of instrument approaches available at the airport. Most of these metrics are either directly available or can easily be calculated with the data from BTS and FAA. In addition, configuration of the runway(s), number of gates, weather condi- tions, and ownership form may also be used to select the peer airports. It should be noted that these are just examples. The most meaningful benchmarking would involve airports that are very similar across all of the dimensions of airport characteristics. Metrics to Benchmark against Peer Airports The metrics classified in the benchmarking focus area have two main purposes: (1) to measure and compare the operational efficiency of an airport against its peer airports and (2) to evalu- ate how attractive an airport is to airlines and other users compared to its peer airports. These metrics are not mutually exclusive; some of the metrics may be applicable to both. Metrics for Benchmarking Operational Efficiency. An efficient airport would be charac- terized by high utilization of its resources, including infrastructure, facilities, purchased materi- als, and human resources. Consequently, the airport would be expected to have lower operating expenses than comparable airports, fast turnaround, and competitive costs to airlines and other users on a per-unit basis. Primary metrics that can be used to measure and compare airport operational efficiency are included in the Performance Metrics Database. Secondary metrics 38 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) Report: 2017–2021 NPIAS Report.” Last modified October 21, 2016. http://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/npias/reports/index. cfm?sect=2007, p. 6.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 29 that can be used to help explain the observed efficiency performance are also included in the Performance Metrics Database. The selection of specific metrics will depend on the goals and objectives of a specific benchmarking program. The following are several examples of primary metrics for operational efficiency: Baggage Delivery Time depends on how efficiently the baggage handling system is designed and operated. It should be noted, however, that airlines are often responsible for operating the baggage handling systems, and there could be substantial differences in the baggage delivery distance from gates. Contact Gate Usage—Turns per Day is a commonly used indicator of gate utilization and efficiency, which includes the associated facilities, equipment, and personnel. Airlines are actively involved in gate/apron operations. Wait Time at Security Checkpoints depends on Number of Security Lanes Available and Number of Security Lanes Staffed during Peak. Both are secondary metrics that can be used to help explain the observed waiting time. Minimum Flight Connection Times reflects the combined efforts of the airline and airport in transferring both baggage and passengers from one flight to another. It depends on the terminal layout as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the escalators, moving walk- ways, elevators, baggage handling equipment, and operation in moving people and bag- gage within the airport. Escalators, Moving Walkways, Baggage Claim Equipment and Elevators—Percent of Time in Service is considered a secondary metric and can be used to identify the potential problem points. Airline Cost per Enplanement (or Airline Cost per Operation) is an indirect indicator of air- port operational efficiency. The more efficient an airport is, the lower its operating expenses on a unit basis are, and thus the lower its charges are to the airlines. Average Number of Seats per Airline Departure Operation could be used as a secondary metric to help explain the observed differences in airline cost per operation among peer airports. Airport Cost per Enplanement is a direct indicator of airport operational efficiency. An effi- cient airport is expected to have lower operating expenses. Metrics that Are Important for Attracting Air Services The ability to attract and retain air services is critical for the financial health of airports. Many factors affect the attractiveness of an airport to airlines; some are operational, and some are financial. The following are examples of primary metrics that are potentially important for evaluating and comparing the attractiveness of an airport to airlines: Airline Cost per Enplanement (or Airline Cost per Operation) is one of the most commonly used metrics when airlines compare costs of operating at different airports. Contact Gate Usage—Turns per Day serves as an indicator of average turnaround time at the airport, which is important to airlines, especially low-cost airlines. Average Airfare has dual implications. On the one hand, lower airfares would be attractive to passengers, thus higher demand. On the other hand, low airfares may indicate high com- petition among incumbent airlines, resulting in a low yield for airlines and, consequently, less attractive to new air services. Air Carrier Concentration indicates how competitive the market is among the incumbent airlines, which may deter or encourage new air services. Airport Concession Revenue per Enplaned Passenger provides an indication of how much an airport would rely on fees and charges imposed on airlines. It may also serve as an indi- cator for potential revenues for an airline through revenue sharing. Non-Aeronautical Operating Revenue as % of Total Operating Revenue is similar to Air- port Concession Revenue per Enplanement. It indicates how much an airport would rely

30 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning on fees and charges imposed on airlines, which would determine the cost for an airline to operate at the airport. Average Gate Departure Delay and Average Taxi-Out Delay reflect the congestion levels and efficiency levels at the airport. Longer delays would cost airlines both financially and in terms of goodwill. Average Load Factor serves as an indicator of the performance of flights at an airport, although it is more a performance metric for airlines rather than for airports. Metrics that Are Important for General Aviation Airports The ability for general aviation airports to generate revenues typically is limited to fuel flowage fees, hangar rentals, tie-down space rentals, and leased office space. In light of that, the following selected primary metrics are important for general aviation airports: Based Aircraft provides an estimate of operational demands and potential revenue-generated opportunities. More based aircraft means more demand for hangar rental, refueling, etc. It is important to track based aircraft by type. Average Annual T-Hangar Space Rental Cost indicates how competitive an airport with its T-hangar rental rates. Lower T-hangar rental rates than the rates at other general aviation airports in the same area may attract aircraft owners. However, lower rates may mean lower potential revenues for the airport. Average Annual Tie-Down Space Rental Cost is similar to T-Hangar Space Rental Cost. It indicates how competitive an airport is with its tie-down rental costs by comparing them with other airports in the area. Average Cost per Gallon Paid by General Aviation for Jet Fuel indicates how attractive an airport is as a refueling stop for business jets and other turbine powered aircraft. Attractive jet fuel prices may bring new business and more revenues. Average Cost per Gallon Paid for Aviation Gasoline is similar to the jet fuel metrics. It indi- cates how competitive an airport is with its AvGas prices. Practical Considerations for External Benchmarking. When considering benchmarking against an airport located in a geographical area with different weather patterns, it is important to understand that the quantitative assessment of the differences in the performance metrics may not be possible. It is difficult to normalize the airport performance metrics by weather pat- terns that can be extremely dissimilar. In that case, a qualitative analysis of selected metrics will allow for an understanding of the differences and/or similarities in airport performance. Also, benchmarking an airport against a group of airports using metrics aggregated for all airports in the group will smooth the weather differences out and may allow meaningful quantitative benchmarking. When considering benchmarking against an airport that is larger or smaller, before compar- ing the performance metrics, the metrics should be normalized by the number of departures, number of arrivals, number of enplanements, or any other meaningful way. Properly normal- ized metrics will indicate true differences in airport performance metrics. Finally, benchmarking against different airports for different metrics may be appropriate. Select Internal Benchmarking Metrics Airports sometimes select internal benchmarking metrics based on what another airport is measuring. Some of these internal benchmarking performance metrics are particularly impor- tant in airport planning. The performance metrics provided in Table 12 are a sampling of these types of internal benchmarking performance metrics.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 31 3.5 Airport Geometry Impact on Operations This section provides guidance on performance metrics that can be used to consider the impacts of airport geometry on airport operations. 3.5.1 Background Airport geometry is designed to promote safe and efficient aircraft operations. The FAA rec- ommends that civil airports be designed in accordance with AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. “In general, use of this AC [AC 150/5300-13A] is not mandatory. The standards and rec- ommendations contained in this AC may be used by certificated airports to satisfy specific requirements of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 139, Certification of Airports, subparts C (Airport Certification Manual) and D (Operations). Use of this AC is mandatory for all projects funded with federal grant monies through the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) and/or with revenue from the Passenger Facility Charges (PFC) Program.”39 These standards and recommendations for airport geometry prescribe pavement dimen- sions and separations based on aircraft characteristics and visibility minimums. Thus, when designing the geometry of airfield components, airport planners identify the existing and future design aircraft and visibility minimums. The design aircraft is also referred to as the critical aircraft. Critical aircraft is defined in FAA AC 150/5700-17, Critical Aircraft and Regular Use Determination. The critical aircraft is the most demanding aircraft type, or grouping of aircraft with simi- lar characteristics, that makes regular use of the airport. Regular use is 500 annual operations, including both itinerant and local operations but excluding touch-and-go operations. An opera- tion is either a takeoff or landing.40 Different types of aircraft may be the critical aircraft for different aspects of airport design.41 For example, the critical aircraft for the Aircraft Approach Category, which is based on aircraft approach speed, may be different than the critical aircraft for the Airplane Design Group (ADG), which is based on the aircraft physical characteristics (wingspan and tail height), and the critical aircraft for the Taxiway Design Group, which is based on the aircraft undercarriage dimensions. Also, when an airport has multiple runways, critical aircraft are identified for each runway.42 Metrics Applicable Airports Inter-Terminal Transportation—Wait Times at Peak Periods Commercial Baggage Claim Utilization Commercial Baggage Claim Availability Commercial Originating Passengers/Square Foot Ticketing Check-in Space Commercial Number of Days Jet Fuel Supply On Site GA Number of Days Avgas Supply On Site GA Average Daily Jet Fuel Pumped GA Average Daily Avgas Pumped GA Table 12. Selected internal benchmarking performance metrics. 39 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). AC 150/5300-13A: Airport Design. 2012, p. i. 40 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). AC 150/5000-17: Critical Aircraft and Regular Use Determination, Washington, D.C., p. 1-1. 41 Ibid, p. 3-1. 42 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). AC 150/5300-13A: Airport Design, p. 12.

32 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Visibility minimums are also considered in designing airport geometry. For example, runway design standards are based on the Runway Design Code. The runway design code is made up of three components: the Aircraft Approach Category, ADG, and a component that relates to vis- ibility minimums. The visibility minimum component of the runway design code indicates the visibility as lower than ¼ mile, lower than ½ mile but not lower than ¼ mile, lower than ¾ mile but not lower than ½ mile, lower than 1 mile but not lower than ¾ mile, or not lower than 1 mile. 3.5.2 Suggested Metrics—Airport Geometry Impact on Operations Given the importance of critical aircraft and visibility minimum in designing airfield geom- etry, the metrics Critical Aircraft and Lowest Minimums are two of the primary metrics in the Performance Metrics Database. Additional metrics apply to airfield geometry and associated complexities that influence oper- ations. Table 13 and Table 14 show the primary and secondary metrics, respectively, for airport geometry impacts on operations. The following subsections explain how the primary metrics may be applied. Refer to the Performance Metrics Database to learn more about the secondary metrics. Performance metrics related to airfield geometry can be obtained through modeling airfield operations or by analyzing available data. Maximum Sustainable Throughput Airports with Sustained Periods of High Demand Annual Service Volume All Practical Hourly Capacity All Runway Occupancy Time All Taxi-In Time ASPM Airports Taxi-Out Time ASPM Airports Taxi Time—Deicing Pad to Departure Runway Airports in Cold Weather Climates Average Time to Deice an Aircraft Airports in Cold Weather Climates Taxi Time—Gate to Deicing Pad Airports in Cold Weather Climates Hot Spots—Number All Runway Incursion Mitigation Locations—Number All Taxi Time—Gate to Runway End, Peak vs. Unimpeded ASPM Airports Average Taxi-Out Delay ASPM Airports Average Taxi-In Delay ASPM Airports Airfield Throughput during Peak Periods within Hour ASPM Airports Modifications to Standards for Group VI Aircraft All Primary Metrics Applicable Airports Critical Aircraft All Lowest Minimums All Table 13. Suggested primary metrics for airport geometry impact on operations. Secondary Metrics Applicable Airports Average Annual Delay All Runway Configuration Use All Runway Queue for Maximum Throughput Conditions Busy Airports Pavement Usage (number of passes over segments) All Operations—Traffic Counts per FAA ATCT Towered Airports Annual Aircraft Operations All Average On-to-In (taxi time for arrivals) ASPM Airports Average Out-to-Off (taxi time for departures) ASPM Airports Total Number of Runway Crossing by Aircraft to Access Runway Ends All Table 14. Suggested secondary metrics for airport geometry impact on operations.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 33 Modeling Airfield Geometry Airport geometry can affect airfield operations and airport capacity and delay. Parallel run- way separation can influence capacity in instrument metrological conditions. The location and orientation of taxiway exits from the runway and the taxiway system to and from the runway can influence the runway occupancy time and taxi time. The size, layout, and location of a dedicated deicing pad can restrict aircraft flow to a level lower than the ADR and cause depar- ture delay. Analysis can be conducted to determine the impacts of airfield geometry on capacity and delay. For example, the FAA conducted high-level assessments of airport runway capacity at the nation’s busiest airports to communicate essential airport system capacity information.43 For this assessment, capacity was defined as “the hourly throughput that an airport’s runways are able to sustain during periods of high demand, represented as the range between the ATC Facility Reported Rate and a model-estimated rate.”44 Future improvements, including planned runway improvements, were assessed using MITRE’s runwaySimulator model. Non-runway constraints, such as taxiway and gate congestion, were not assessed. The Airport Capacity Pro- files for the studied airports include current ATC Facility Reported Hourly Rates and cur- rent and future Model-Estimated Hourly Rates for visual, marginal, and instrument weather conditions. In 2015, the FAA published the results of another capacity assessment, FACT 3: Airport Capac- ity Needs in the National Airspace System. Planned improvement that would affect runway capac- ity, including NextGen techniques, technologies, and procedures, were assessed. FACT 3 used two modeling techniques to conduct the analysis: annual service volume and NAS-wide model- ing tools. The annual service volume analysis was conducted using the Runway Delay Simulation Model and resulted in demand–delay curves. The curves were used to estimate delay at a given level of annual demand.45 For the NAS-wide analysis, the MITRE’s runwaySimulator model was used to generate airport capacity curves. These curves along with airspace, taxiway performance, and airport gate use data were input into MITRE’s systemwideModeler. The results from both models were used to estimate delay and the percentage of hours when a given level of delay would occur. This information was then used to identify airports that would be considered capacity constrained.46 As can be seen from these examples, in metrics such as Maximum Sustainable Throughput, Annual Service Volume, and Practical Hourly Capacity, analysis of proposed changes to air- port geometry can be conducted to determine the impact on airport capacity and delay. Vari- ous levels of methods, ranging from table lookups to airfield simulation models are available to evaluate capacity and delay. Detailed simulation is likely required to evaluate taxi times (Taxi Time—Deicing Pad to Departure Runway, Taxi Time—Gate to Deicing Pad), Runway Occu- pancy Times, runway departure queues, and the effects of runway crossing, bypass taxiways hold pads, and remote deicing on capacity and delay. Metrics such as Average Time to Deice an Aircraft may be useful input data for modeling. Guidance on conducting capacity and delay analysis is provided ACRP Report 79: Evaluating Airfield Capacity and ACRP Report 104: Defining and Measuring Aircraft Delay. 43 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Airport Capacity Profiles.” July 2014. https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_ capacity/profiles/, p.1. 44 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Airport Capacity Profiles, July 2014, p. 1. 45 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). FACT 3: Airport Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System. Washington, D.C., 2015. https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/media/FACT3-Airport-Capacity-Needs-in-the-NAS.pdf, p. 10. 46 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). FACT 3: Airport Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System. January 2015, pp. B-4—B-6.

34 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Analyzing Historical Data Reviewing historical data can reveal important information on the impact of airfield geom- etry complexity on operations. For example, based on the history of the potential risk of col- lision or runway incursion on an airport movement area, the FAA identified hot spots where heightened attention by pilots and drivers is necessary. Thus, the Hot Spot—Number metric is included in the Performance Metrics Database. Similarly, the FAA reviewed national runway incursion data and identified locations that have a history of runway incursions. The associ- ated metric RIM Locations—Number is also included in the Performance Metrics Database. Analysis of historical data allows airport planners to identify capacity limitations due to air- port geometry. Increased data and metric availability have facilitated the ability to analyze his- torical data. For example, ASDE-X data can be used to obtain Runway Occupancy Time. The runway occupancy time is considered when contemplating taxiway improvements, including high-speed taxiways. Also, metrics and data available through ASPM can be useful in evaluating the efficiency of airfield geometry. Metrics such as Taxi-In Time, Taxi-Out Time, Average Taxi- Out Delay, Average Taxi-In Delay, Taxi Time—Gate to Runway End, Peak vs. Unimpeded, and Airfield Throughput during Peak Periods can be useful in evaluating the impact of airfield geometry on taxi times. For airports for which ADSE-X or multilateral systems are available, data on Pavement Usage may be available for collection and analysis. Group VI Aircraft and Airfield Geometry Group VI aircraft operations add complexity to airfield operations primarily because of Modification of Standards for Group VI Aircraft and increased wake vortex-related separation requirements. At the beginning of the 21st century, FAA Airplane Design Group VI (ADG VI) aircraft, such as the Airbus 380 and Boeing 747-8, entered airline passenger fleets, joining the relatively few oversized cargo aircraft then operating. These ADG VI aircraft have tail heights from 66 feet up to (but not including) 80 feet and wingspans from 214 feet up to (but not including) 262 feet. Their introduction required the application of the “critical aircraft” classification used by FAA and ICAO airfield design geometric standards to be addressed at several airports. These stan- dards included substantial increases in geometric separations between runways, taxiways, taxi- lanes, and holding aprons, along with obstacle-free areas and pavement widths. Due to the longer wheelbases and landing gear width, new Taxiway Design Group standards for taxiway turn radii and shoulder fillets have been established by FAA. To reduce the impact of these standards on existing facilities, the FAA allows for the develop- ment of aircraft-specific FAA-approved operations plans using Modifications of Standards for Group VI Aircraft for A380s/B747-8s/New Large Aircraft. Several dozen airports have thus far formulated these approved plans which use the process defined in FAA Order 5300.1F. These often limit speeds or use of certain taxiways/taxilanes when an ADG VI aircraft is operating and require the use of expanded paved shoulder in lieu of full-strength pavement widths. Beyond the airfield geometric standards, these ADG VI aircraft can reduce runway capac- ity and increase occupancy times due to the increased ATC wake vortex-related separations between arriving and departing aircraft in this ATC category. Future types of aircraft may “straddle” the ADG V and ADG VI criteria and reduce the impacts on airfield operations. The first, planned to enter service by 2020, is the Boeing 777X series (777-8/777-9) of aircraft that will have folding wings. These aircraft that will require ADG VI stan- dards on the runway, but meet ADG V criteria on the taxiway system and at gates/aircraft stands.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 35 3.6 Gate Management and Ramp Tower Operations This section provides guidance on performance metrics that can be used to evaluate gate management and ramp tower operations. 3.6.1 Background Gate management includes the actions taken by some entity at the airport responsible for assigning gate space to an aircraft. Ramp tower operations include gate management and those activities assigned to a ramp control facility. Ramp control is best defined using the definition contained in ACRP Research Report 167: “Ramp control can be defined as the activities undertaken by a non-FAA entity at an airport that: Provides guidance and direction to all aircraft moving within the control entity’s area of jurisdiction: • For departing aircraft, typical instructions include providing pushback and disconnect point, and coordination with air traffic control (ATC). • For arriving aircraft, instructions include providing gate and ramp entrance information, if appropriate. Sequences departing aircraft to the designated transition point (spot) on the ground and issuing traffic advisories, as necessary. Coordinates arriving and departing aircraft hand-offs with ATC, including situations when aircraft enter the ramp but are unable to clear active taxiways. Resolves conflicts with aircraft that are arriving, departing, or under tow within their area of jurisdiction.” At airports with formal gate management and/or ramp tower operations, activities are cur- rently managed by either the airport or airline personnel or by personnel contracted by the airport or airline to provide those services. Although formal ramp control facilities are currently in operation at less than 30 airports in the U.S., the need for ramp management and/or a ramp tower operation could change at any time. Some of the events that can affect the decision to engage in ramp control include the following: • Need to mitigate a current safety issue or one that may be created with growth. • Increases in airport demand or the addition of new flight operators. • Short-term or long-term construction projects. These can include temporary runway or taxiway closures for maintenance or construction of new terminals, deicing facilities, gates, runways, or taxiways. • Administrative decisions that affect operations at the airport (e.g., changes to or expansion of common-use gates). • Changes in airfield operations due to the implementation of evolving FAA NextGen technolo- gies (e.g., surface management or TFDM).47 3.6.2 Suggested Metrics—Gate Management and Ramp Control Metrics may provide a basis for a cost and benefit analysis for either establishing ramp control or expanding the number of gates. Additionally, metrics are essential in conducting safety man- agement analysis. Metrics may also be useful when developing internal ramp control procedures as well as coordinating letters of agreement with the local air traffic control tower. Each airport faces different challenges managing movement of aircraft and vehicles on the ramp. Ramp accidents and incidents can indicate a need for ramp control. Ramp congestion can be a function of a variety of factors from demand/capacity imbalances, terminal complexity, 47 ACRP Research Report 167: Guidebook for Developing Ramp Control Facilities. Washington, D.C., 2017.

36 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning the presence of large aircraft affecting adjacent gates, or a high number of irregular operations. The metrics discussed in this database can be used to assess the severity of ramp control issues and provide benchmarking for mitigating these issues, including assessing the performance of active ramp control. Table 15 and Table 16 show the primary and secondary metrics, respectively, for gate manage- ment and ramp tower operations. The following subsections explain how the primary metrics may be applied. Refer to the Performance Metrics Database to learn more about the secondary metrics. Number of Accidents/Incidents per Ramp—Annual is a useful metric in considering the need for ramp control. This metric could be tracked by who is involved or lead to a better under- standing of the safety problems, including the following: • Number of aircraft-and-aircraft accidents/incidents per ramp area per year • Number of aircraft-and-vehicle accidents/incidents per ramp area per year • Number of aircraft-and-ground personnel accidents/incidents per ramp area per year • Number of aircraft-and-equipment accidents/incidents per ramp area per year • Number of accidents/incidents where gate adjacency was a causal factor • Number of accidents/incidents where wingtip clearance was a causal factor • Number of accidents/incidents where insufficient coordination was a causal factor • Number of accidents/incidents where infringement on the movement area was a causal factor Primary Metrics Applicable Airports Number of Accidents/Incidents per Ramp—Annual Commercial Service Serious Number Injuries/Fatalities of Employees and Passengers on Aircraft Aprons Commercial Service Airport Arrival Rate (AAR) Commercial Service Airport Departure Rate (ADR) Commercial Service Average Daily Capacity (ADC) Commercial Service Peak Hour Operations Throughput in IMC Commercial Service Peak Hour Operations Throughput in Marginal VMC Commercial Service Peak Hour Operations Throughput in VMC Commercial Service Peak Period Commercial Service Maximum Sustainable Throughput Commercial Service Airfield Throughput during Peak Periods within Hour Commercial Service Average Gate Arrival Delay Commercial Service Average Gate Departure Delay Commercial Service Average Minutes of Delay per Delayed Gate Arrival Commercial Service Average Minutes of Delay per Delayed Gate Departure Commercial Service Average Taxi-In Delay Commercial Service Average Taxi-Out Delay Commercial Service Taxi Time—Gate to Runway End, Peak vs. Unimpeded Commercial Service Contact Gates—Number of Commercial Service Air Carrier Concentration Commercial Service Usable Contact Gate in Service Commercial Service Number of Jet Bridges on Airport Commercial Service Aircraft Remote Parking—Remain Overnight Positions Commercial Service Enplanements per Gate Commercial Service Contact Gate Usage—Turns per Day Commercial Service Contact Gate Utilization Commercial Service Dedicated Deicing Positions—Number of Commercial Service Deicing Throughput in Aircraft per Hour Commercial Service Table 15. Suggested primary metrics for gate management and ramp tower operations.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 37 Serious Number Injuries/Fatalities of Employees and Passengers on Aircraft Aprons would be another metric to consider in determining the need for ramp control. Analyzing demand, capacity, and delay metrics can assist in identifying challenges or con- straints related to ramp operations and strategies at a given airport. Evaluation of the metrics can also give airport operators and stakeholders insight into the need for assistance with ramp operations to meet current and future demand levels. Additionally, analysis of metrics in these categories can assist the user in the development of irregular operations plans, in stakeholder communications efforts, and in assessment of airport performance. Metrics such as Airport Arrival Rate, Airport Departure Rate, and Average Daily Capacity provide a measure of demand for the movement of aircraft in a given time period, be it hourly or daily. These metrics can also help reveal temporary arrival or departure imbalances. Peak hour metrics including Peak Hour Operations Throughput in IMC, Peak Hour Oper- ations Throughput in Marginal VMC, Peak Hour Operations Throughput in VMC, Peak Period, Maximum Sustainable Throughput, and Airfield Throughput During Peak Periods can be used to assess the volume of traffic that must be addressed at the most congested times. When considered in concert with the delay metrics, the threshold in which congestion becomes a problem can be revealed. Delay metrics can be useful in identifying inefficiencies within the current ramp operation procedures and protocols. These inefficiencies could be related to peak operational periods which require additional staffing or mitigated protocols to meet the demand during these peak times. Delay metrics could potentially identify certain locations on the ramp surface area that continually contribute to delay in aircraft entering and navigating through the ramp area and/or exiting the ramp area. Key delay metrics include Average Gate Arrival Delay, Average Gate Departure Delay, Average Gate Arrival Delay per Delayed Flight, Average Gate Departure Delay per Delayed Flight, Average Taxi-In Delay, Average Taxi-Out Delay, and Taxi Time— Gate to Runway End, Peak vs. Unimpeded. Gate related facilities and use may also be considered when evaluating the need for ramp con- trol or additional gates. Related metrics include Contact Gates—Number of (broken down by common use, preferential use, and exclusive use), Air Carrier Concentration, Usable Contact Gate in Service, Number of Jet Bridges on Airport, Aircraft Remote Parking—Remain Over- night Positions, Enplanements per Gate, Contact Gate Usage, Turns per Day, and Contact Gate Utilization. Secondary Metrics Applicable Airports Delays with Passengers on Aircraft that Exceed DOT Tarmac Delay Duration Standards Annually (Domestic) Commercial Service Delays with Passengers on Aircraft that Exceed DOT Tarmac Delay Duration Standards Annually (International) Commercial Service Carbon Footprint Commercial Service Emissions Exposure (CO2 Emissions) Commercial Service Average Daily Operations Commercial Service Average Daily Operations—Military Commercial Service Charter Flights—Number of Annual Commercial Service Cancellations Commercial Service Runway Queue for Maximum Throughput Conditions Commercial Service Diversions into Airport—Number of Annual Commercial Service Table 16. Suggested secondary metrics for gate management and ramp tower operations.

38 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Finally, for airports in cold weather climates, metrics related to deicing facilities, Dedicated Deicing Positions—Number of, and throughput, Deicing Throughput, may influence the per- formance of an existing ramp control. 3.7 Regulations/Requirements This section provides guidance on performance metrics that airports are required to track/ report per federal laws and regulations. 3.7.1 Background A number of metrics are tracked by the FAA, airlines, and airports to comply with federal, state, and local regulations/requirements. Many of these metrics, such as departure and arrival delays, are reported by airlines or are tracked by the FAA’s own data tracking systems. However, there are some metrics that primarily concern airport operators. This section highlights planning and operational metrics that airports are required to track/ report per federal laws and regulations. Examples of applicable federal laws and regulations include the Clean Water Act; 49 U.S.C. § 47107—Project Grant Application Approval Conditioned on Assurances about Airport Operations; Title 14 CFR Part 139—Certification of Airports; Title 14 CFR Part 158—PFCs; and FAA Order 1050.1—Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. By no means is this a comprehensive, all-inclusive list of required metrics, and users should be aware that there may be additional requirements per federal regulations/requirements. Also, this Reference Guide does not attempt to address all the metric requirements per state and local laws and regulations due to the large number and variability of such laws and regulations and their applicability to only those airports in the associated jurisdictions. 3.7.2 Suggested Metrics—Regulations/Requirements Table 17 shows the primary metrics related to federal regulations and requirements. The fol- lowing subsections explain how the primary metrics may be applied. Environmental Airports may be subject to numerous environmental-related laws and regulations. Exam- ples include the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean Water Act, and the Clean Air Act. Related metrics in the Performance Metrics Database include the following: Noise Exposure is the number of people exposed to significant noise. Significant aircraft noise levels are defined as values greater than or equal to DNL 65 dB. In accordance with NEPA, proposed changes in airspace design or airport infrastructure may require analysis of environ- mental impacts including noise exposure. Noise impacts are measured in part by determining the number of people that will be exposed to significant aircraft noise. Also, airports that par- ticipate in the 14 CFR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Planning Program must develop noise exposure maps and “provide estimates of the number of people residing within the Ldn [DNL] 65, 70, and 75 dB contours.”48 Therefore, the Noise Exposure metric should be consid- ered in planning for airport improvements, operational changes, and NextGen procedures and when participating in the 14 CFR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 48 “Part 150: Airport Noise Compatibility Planning.” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, title 14 (2004). Part B(f)(4).

Focus Area Performance Metrics 39 Amount of Deicing or Anti-Icing Agent (by type) Applied to Aircraft—per Season, Amount of Deicing or Anti-Icing Agent Applied to Airfield (by type)—per Season and Deicing % Fluid Recovered are metrics related to water quality and stormwater regulations. Airports are required to obtain stormwater discharge permits, which may include requirements relating to the amount of deicing agents used and collected. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated the Airport Deicing Effluent Guidelines (40 CFR Part 449). “The requirements generally apply to wastewater associated with the deicing of airfield pavement at commercial airports. The rule also established New Source Performance Standards for wastewater discharges associated with aircraft deicing for a subset of new airports. These requirements are incorporated into NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits.”49 “New airports with 10,000 annual departures located in cold climate zones are required to collect 60 percent of aircraft deicing fluid after deicing. Airports that discharge the collected aircraft deicing fluid directly to waters of the U.S. must also meet numeric discharge requirements for chemical oxygen demand. The rule does not establish uniform, national requirements for aircraft deicing discharges at existing airports. Such requirements will continue to be established in general permits, or for individual permits on a site-specific, best professional judgment basis.”50 Airports may also be required to notify state/local agencies of discharges and/or disposal of collected deicing agents. Primary Metrics Applicable Airports Noise Exposure All Amount of Deicing or Anti-Icing Agent (by type) Applied to Aircraft—per Season Airports in Cold Climates Amount of Deicing or Anti-Icing Agent Applied to Airfield (by type)—per Season Airports in Cold Climates Deicing % Fluid Recovered Airports in Cold Climates Criteria Pollutant Emissions All ARFF Index Part 139 Certified ARFF Equipment vs. ARFF Index Requirements Part 139 Certified ARFF Responses within Mandated Response Times (%) Part 139 Certified Annual Part 139 Inspection Results Part 139 Certified Pavement Classification Number—by Runway Part 139 Certified Snow Removal Resources Identified in FAA- Approved Snow and Ice Control Plan Part 139 Certified Runway Incursions Part 139 Certified Runway Incursions Vehicle/Pedestrian Part 139 Certified Surface Incidents Part 139 Certified Pavement Condition Index—by Runway AIP/PFC Funding Debt Service Coverage Ratio AIP/PFC Funding Airport Concession Revenue per Enplaned Passenger AIP/PFC Funding Non-Aeronautical Operating Revenue as % of Total Operating Revenue AIP/PFC Funding Enplaned Passengers—Annual AIP/PFC Funding—more than 25,000 enplanements Landed Weight AIP/PFC Funding—more than 25,000 enplanements Annual Aircraft Operations AIP/PFC Funding—more than 25,000 enplanements Airline Cost per Enplanement AIP/PFC Funding—more than 25,000 enplanements Contact Gates—Number of AIP/PFC Funding—medium or large hub airports where one or two air carriers control more than 50 percent of the passenger boardings Contact Gate Utilization AIP/PFC Funding—medium or large hub airports where one or two air carriers control more than 50 percent of the passenger boardings Table 17. Suggested primary metrics federal regulations/requirements. 49 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “Airport Deicing Effluent Guidelines.” Washington, D.C., Accessed 2017. https://www.epa.gov/eg/airport-deicing-effluent-guidelines. 50 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Fact Sheet: Effluent Guidelines for Airport Deicing Discharges. Washington, D.C., 2012. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/airport-deicing-fact-sheet_final-rule_april-2012.pdf, p.1.

40 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Criteria Pollutant Emissions are the quantities of criteria pollutants [carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb)] that would be emitted due to a proposed project. The EPA regulates these pollutants under the Clean Air Act, and aircraft criteria pollutant emissions are inputs to state and regional state implementation plans that are required under the Clean Air Act. In addition, under NEPA, an analysis of a proposed project’s impact on attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for criteria air pollutants is included in environmental assessments, envi- ronmental impact statements, and if appropriate, categorical exclusions. Therefore, particularly for airport improvement projects, it is important to consider how emissions of criteria pollutants may be affected. Part 139 Certified Airports The FAA is required to issue airport operating certificates to airports that • “Serve scheduled and unscheduled air carrier aircraft with more than 30 seats; • Serve scheduled air carrier operations in aircraft with more than 9 seats but less than 31 seats; and • The FAA Administrator requires to have a certificate.”51 Airports must agree to operational and safety standards to obtain a Part 139 Certificate. These include requirements for providing aircraft rescue and firefighting services and snow and ice control and for allowing the FAA to conduct inspections and reporting incidents. Some require- ments vary by size of airport and the type of aircraft operations. Related operation and planning metrics in the Performance Metric Database include the following: ARFF Index is an alphabet letter (A, B, C, D, or E) that is tied to federal requirements for ARFF equipment in terms of number and agent/water capacities. It is determined by considering the length of the longest air carrier aircraft and its average daily departures. Part 139 Certificated Airports use the ARFF Index to determine equipment needs and plan ARFF facilities. ARFF Equipment versus ARFF Index Requirements is the number of ARFF equipment as compared to that required per the ARFF Index. Many airports possess equipment in excess of the number required by the ARFF Index to accommodate equipment downtime. ARFF Responses within Mandated Response Times (%) is the percentage of ARFF responses within the mandated response time for Part 139 Certificated Airports. The first ARFF vehi- cle must be able to reach the midpoint of the farthest runway used for Part 139 operations within three minutes, and all other vehicles necessary to deal with the emergency must arrive within four minutes. To maintain Part 139 Certification, airports must be able to demonstrate these can meet the mandated response times. There have been various pro- posals to shorten these times. Also, airports may be considering infrastructure changes that could extend response distances, and so it is useful for airports to track response times with existing facilities. Annual Part 139 Inspection Results is the number of deficiencies identified by the FAA dur- ing the annual Part 139 inspection of the airport. Airports, of course, focus on correcting any identified deficiencies. Pavement Classification Number, by Runway “is a number that expresses the load-carrying capacity of a pavement for unrestricted operations.”52 Pavement classification number data must be reported for all public-use paved runways at Part 14 CFR 139 Certificated Airports. 51 “Part 139: Certification of Airports, Subpart D: Operations.” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, title 14 (2018). 52 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Advisory Circular 150/5335-5C: Standardized Method of Reporting Airport Pavement Strength—PNC. Washington, D.C., 2014. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/ 150-5335-5c.pdf, p. i.

Focus Area Performance Metrics 41 Snow Removal Resources Identified in FAA-Approved Snow and Ice Control Plan is the number of pieces of snow removal equipment (by type) in FAA-approved snow and ice control (removal) plan for a Part 139 Certificated Airport. Airports may use AC No: 150/5200-30D—Airport Field Condition Assessments and Winter Operations Safety, in concert with AC No. 150/5220-20A—Airport Snow and Ice Control Equipment, to determine the minimum equipment requirements and clearing times for priority air- port operations areas. Runway Incursions, Runway Incursions Vehicle/Pedestrian, and Surface Incidents are related to the Part 139 requirement to record any accidents or incidents in the movement areas and safety areas involving air carrier aircraft, a ground vehicle, or a pedestrian. Airport Improvement Program and Passenger Facility Charges Airports that receive federal funds through the AIP or use funds generated through PFC must comply with associated assurances and requirements.53 There are several metrics in the Perfor- mance Metrics Database that are related to airport obligations under the AIP and PFC programs. Pavement Maintenance Plan. Pavement Condition Index (PCI)—by Runway is a numeri- cal rating of the surface condition of pavement based on an objective measurement of the type, severity, and quantity of distress. “PCI values range from 100 for a pavement with no defects to 0 for a pavement with no remaining functional life.”54 The PCI rating system may be used to track pavement conditions as part of a pavement management plan. A pavement management plan is required under assurances for both AIP and PFC funding. Financial and Operational Activity Reporting. Commercial service airports that have received AIP funding must file annual financial statements in accordance with Section 111 of the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994. Airports provide the required data on FAA Form 5100-127 through the Certification Activity Tracking System. FAA Form 5100-127— Operating and Financial Summary includes airport revenues and expenses. Airports with more than 25,000 enplanements in the preceding calendar year must also report information about operations, such as the number of annual operations, enplanements, and total landing weight. FAA Form 5100-127 information is publicly available and thus useful for external bench- marking. The following financial and operational metrics in the Performance Metrics Database are related to the data reported on Form 5100-127: Debt Service Coverage Ratio is typically defined as net operating income (earnings before interest and taxes) divided by total debt service. Using that definition, data from the Form 5100-127 may be used to calculate the debt service coverage ratio. Airport Concession Revenue per Enplaned Passenger is the gross revenue to the airport per enplanement for spending on terminal retail. Non-Aeronautical Operating Revenue as % of Total Operating Revenue is the total annual non-aeronautical operating revenue as a percentage of total annual operating revenue. Enplaned Passengers, Annual is the annual number of passengers boarding a plane at the airport. Landed Weight is the total of maximum gross landing weight of aircraft landings at the air- port for domestic, international, and cargo carriers in pounds. 53 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Grant Assurances.” Washington, D.C., Accessed 2017. https://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant_assurances/, and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). “Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Program.” Last modified March 22, 2018. https://www.faa.gov/airports/pfc/. 54 U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Advisory Circular 150/5320-6F: Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation. Wash- ington, D.C., 2016. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/150-5320-6F.pdf, p. 5-1.

42 Common Performance Metrics for Airport Infrastructure and Operational Planning Annual Aircraft Operations is the total number of annual takeoffs and landings by passenger, cargo, and noncommercial (general aviation and military) aircraft. Airline Cost per Enplanement is the average of the amount airlines pay per enplanement to the airport for use of the airfield. Competition Plan. The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Cen- tury (Public Law 106-181), Section 155, required the submission of a competition plan by covered airports for an AIP grant to be issued. Covered airports are medium or large hub airports where one or two air carriers control more than 50 percent of the passenger boardings. Once the plan and initial two updates are approved by FAA, updates are only required when certain trigger- ing events occur. The following metrics in the Performance Metrics Database are related to data that must be included in the competition plan. Note that some competition plans are publicly available. Contact Gates—Number of is the number of gates directly adjacent to the terminal or con- course building and accessible from the building. When a competition plan is required, the plan must identify the number of contact gates available at the airport by lease arrangement (exclusive, preferential, or common-use) and how those gates are allocated. Contact Gate Utilization is the number of departures per contact gate. For competition plans, gate utilization is reported (departures/gate) per week and month for each gate.