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.
E-1Â Â Piloting the Implementation of the Guidebook This guidebook was developed in two phases: a pre-publication version and a final published version. The pre-publication draft version of this guidebook, ACRP Research Report 220: Guidebook for Developing a Zero- or Low-Emissions Roadmap at Airports, was written over an 18-month period. Once the original draft was complete, the guidebook was posted for public access on the ACRP website. This guidebook is intended to give airport staff best practices, tools, examples, and resources needed to develop a zero- or low-emissions roadmap for their own airports. To evaluate the effectiveness and utility of this guidebook, the research team helped two airports, Eugene Airport and Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport, in a pilot implementation of the guidebook. This collaboration allowed the research team to gain valuable insights to revise the guidebook and inform how ACRP could maximize the implementation of future products. The underlying objective of piloting airport utilization of the guidebook was to evaluate the ways that it could be improved so other airports can successfully craft and implement a zero- or low-emissions roadmap of their own. A P P E N D I X E Pilot Airports Eugene Airport (EUG) is a municipally owned, small hub airport in Eugene, Oregon. In 2014, the City of Eugene adopted the Climate Recovery Ordinance, which set a goal that all city-owned facilities and city operationsâincluding the airportâwould be carbon neutral by 2020. This goal was achieved this year using both carbon mitigation and offset strategies. Airport staff, however, were not closely involved. Eugene Airport has recently updated its environmental sustainability plan and, at the time of ACRP pilot solicitation requests, was looking for assistance in developing an airport-specific zero- or low-emissions roadmap, outside the cityâs carbon neutrality efforts. Detroit Metropolitan Airport (DTW) has shown a consistent commitment to reducing emissions. The airport entered the Airport Carbon Accreditation (ACA) program in 2016 and recently achieved ACA Level Three status. DTW is exploring how to advance to carbon neutrality and is evaluating how the airport can achieve this objective in an environment with cold winters and deep snow. A significant portion of Michiganâs electricity comes from natural gas- and coal-fired generation sources.
E-2 Guidebook for Developing a Zero- or Low-Emissions Roadmap at Airports Guidebook Implementation Process The research team led the pilot implementation project between NovemberÂ 2019 and NovemberÂ 2020. The initial months involved identifying candidates for the pilots. Once the airports were selected, the research team worked remotely with key airport staff and their inter- nal stakeholder teams to provide technical and logistical assistance to implement the guidebook and develop the airportâs own zero- or low-emissions roadmaps. The sections below describe the key steps of the project. Selection of Pilot Airports To identify the pilot airports, the research team conducted outreach to airports across the country to learn more about their current status regarding zero- or low-emissions planning and to gauge interest in participating in the pilot implementation effort. The research team sched- uled phone calls with airport staff to explain the pilot, the potential benefits for participating, and how the project could help ACRP improve its guidebook. The research team received letters of interest from four airports. Ultimately, the ACRP Project Panel selected Eugene Airport and Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport. Airport-Specific Plans An initial step was to develop an airport-specific plan that described the sequence of mile- stones between initiating and finalizing the pilot. To gain a baseline understanding about each airportâs unique needs, the research team conducted an online survey. The survey asked the airports about the larger emissions-related ecosystem at the airport, including legislative, regula- tory, and planning actions as well as recent goals. DTW noted it had many ideas about how to achieve its carbon goals from different divi- sions in the airportâs operations. DTW needed support facilitating the various goals and team members to develop a coherent plan and give some direction to the group. EUG noted its small size and limited resources were a barrier to pursuing expansive sustain- ability work. EUG needed the support of the pilot for educational and process guiding purposes to help navigate the GHG inventory and develop emissions reductions strategies. The research team followed the airport-specific plan over the course of the pilot implementa- tion efforts. Roadmap Implementation Timeline for EUG and DTW After developing the airport-specific plan, the research team initiated the pilots in separate formal kickoff meetings with EUG and DTW in March 2020. The research team provided remote techni- cal assistance to EUG and DTW airport staff beginning in March 2020 and continuing through October 2020 and November 2020, respectively. The research team facilitated over 15 individual meetings each with EUG staff and DTW staff. These included technical briefings on critical plan- ning topics, facilitation support to key meetings of internal airport implementation teams, and ad hoc calls and support to the primary airport contacts developing the roadmaps. Support Provided The research team provided technical guidance and assistance to DTW and EUG in the following ways: â¢ Assisted the airport in developing an agenda and presentation slides for each meeting; â¢ Assisted in the development of roadmap resources;
Piloting the Implementation of the Guidebook E-3Â Â â¢ Assisted in specifying roles for airport staff and other stakeholders in roadmap implementation; â¢ Contributed to research for roadmap development; â¢ Conducted emissions inventory in ACERT (EUG only); â¢ Presented on technical topics to inform airport staff and other stakeholders on available funding mechanisms, emissions tracking and metrics, electric aircraft, sustainable aviation fuels, GHG inventory strategies, future aviation developments, and options for emissions- reductions strategies; â¢ Connected the airport to peer airports and facilitated lessons-learned meetings; â¢ Supported developing the structure and layout of the roadmap; â¢ Provided a technical review of airport roadmap draft; â¢ Provided technical language and writing support for roadmap draft; and â¢ Assisted with editing and graphic design of roadmap. Pilot Outcomes Both DTW and EUG produced draft zero- or low-emissions roadmaps with specific, ready- to-use emissions-reductions implementation strategies and tracking metrics as a result of this pilot implementation. Both airports now have a step-by-step action plan with carbon reduction goals outlined that they can immediately implement and return to over time. The cover pages of the draft roadmaps developed by EUG and DTW are presented in Figure E-1. Interested parties may contact representatives from the sustainability departments of each airport for more information about the roadmaps. Feedback on and Revisions to the Guidebook The pilot airports, EUG and DTW, provided feedback on the content of the guidebook throughout the pilot effort and after its conclusion. The airports provided verbal feedback during the regular support calls and written feedback in various emails, documents, and surveys shared with the research team. The airport pilots helped validate the scope of the guidebook. Overall, the airports agreed with the chapter structure and topics covered in the guidebook. Both verbally and in writing, EUG and DTW indicated that the technical assis- tance provided in the guidebook and throughout the pilot process were of great value. In Figure E-1. Draft roadmaps developed by EUG and DTW.
E-4 Guidebook for Developing a Zero- or Low-Emissions Roadmap at Airports addition to the overall feedback on the guidebook, the reviewers provided chapter-specific suggestions for revisions. This feedback helped the research team to identify areas of the guidebook for improvement and has been incorporated in the final and published version of the guidebook. Other Key Takeaways from the Pilot Implementation The pilot implementation process for the guidebook was mutually beneficial. For both for the airports participating in the pilot and the research team, the process was instructive in improving the guidebook. While undertaking roadmap implementation, both pilot airports conducted thorough reviews of the guidebook and identified key chapters that were of unique focus to them. These areas of focusâsuch as conducting a GHG emissions inventory using the ACERT tool or identifying the ways that pursuing a zero-emissions roadmap benefits the airportâhelped illuminate the best ways for the research team to provide technical assistance. The research team planned technical presentations aimed at helping the pilot airports under- stand key aspects of zero emissions planning or technical concepts. Regularly held meetings were a critical aspect of the pilot. The research team held regular check-in meetings with the airports throughout the pilot implementation process, which proved essential for ensuring progress. These meetings provided consistent checkpoints for evaluating progress and introduced collaboration on important topics. The research team presented technical information on topics such as an outline for the roadmaps, considerations for airport GHG reduction strategies, carbon reduction-related language and terminology, goal setting, and funding mechanisms. For the research team, the input provided by the pilot airports was instrumental in refin- ing and finalizing the guidebook. During and after the pilot implementation phase, the airports pointed to specific chapters of the guidebook that could be made more digestible, accessible, applicable, and useful. In addition, assisting airports in the process of implementing the guide- book helped shed light on how other airports might use the guidebook, specifically the elements that could be of most and least value to other guidebook users. Both pilot airports provided help- ful feedback, written and verbal, which informed the entire roadmap implementation process and specified areas for guidebook revisions that may have otherwise been overlooked. One of the pilot airports suggested that ACRP could revisit this project in 5 to 10Â years to evaluate how airports have been able to apply the guidebook to their own roadmaps. The pilot implementa- tion process also revealed how different the needs can be for airports, depending on region, size, climate and weather conditions, amount of resources already devoted for environmental sustainability projects, and other characteristics. Level of Effort The research team collected data on the level of effort required from airport staff and from the supporting research team over the duration of the pilot implementation process (i.e., for an 8-month period). This information is intended to provide a rough order of magnitude estimate of the potential amount of work that might be required by other airports in developing a zero- or low-emissions roadmap of their own. The level of consultant support that may be needed to develop a zero- or low-emissions roadmap could be anticipated to be in the range of 150 to 400Â hours (depending on specific airport needs). One of the pilot airports estimated that their airport spent about 420 labor hours to conduct relevant research, coordinate with colleagues, attend meetings, and write and review the roadmap.
Piloting the Implementation of the Guidebook E-5Â Â Conclusions This ACRP pilot implementation effort resulted in benefits to both the participating airports and to ACRP. By working directly with two airports that were applying the guidebook to develop their own zero- or low-emissions roadmaps, the research team gained significant insight about ways to improve the guidebook. The takeaways from interacting with end users of ACRP products can be applied to other ACRP implementation products in the future. Addition- ally, the guidebook piloting process reinforced the need to directly involve stakeholders in the evaluation of ACRP implementation products as they are being developed. These airport stakeholders are effective communicators about how ACRP products can help address their needs and how these products can be improved before they are finalized. The research team proposes that ACRP continue to incorporate this model into its research processes. The feedback from Eugene Airport and Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport during the pilot process was instrumental in improving and finalizing this Guidebook for Developing a Zero- or Low-Emissions Roadmap at Airports and providing lessons that can be applied to other ACRP research projects.
Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACIâNA Airports Council InternationalâNorth America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing Americaâs Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GHSA Governors Highway Safety Association HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TDC Transit Development Corporation TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S. DOT United States Department of Transportation
Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ISBN 978-0-309-67419-5 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 6 7 4 1 9 5 9 0 0 0 0