Impact of Regulatory Compliance Costs on Small Airports (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 43-52
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 43... ...
43 This chapter discusses the environmental actions with the greatest potential to result in cost-related impacts to small airports. A more detailed analysis of the cost data obtained for environmental requirements appears in Technical Appendix 3.
|
From page 44... ...
44 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Airports 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Aboveground Storage Tanks (AST) Animal Carcass Management Used Oil Generation/Recycling/Disposal Hazardous Material Generation/Storage/Disposal Drum Storage/Handling Universal Waste Generation/Disposal Underground Storage Tanks (UST)
|
From page 45... ...
45 also on links between airport operations like those listed in Figure 21 and documents listed in Figures 22 and 23. Particularly, rule amendments and regulatory guidance related to the SPCC rule, stormwater programs, NEPA documentation for airport actions, and environmental site assessments (ESAs)
|
From page 46... ...
46 In the Phase 1 survey, the following percentages of airports reported participating in the NEPA review process (Figure 22) : • Categorical Exclusion -- 65 percent • Environmental Assessment -- 69 percent • Environmental Impact Statement -- 37 percent As expected, a higher percentage of small airports report completing a CATEX and EA compared to an EIS.
|
From page 47... ...
47 Eighty-five percent of these airports had done so. Forty percent of responding airports reported acquiring real property with AIP funds for any purpose and were potentially affected by the revisions to Part 24 and the implementing guidance.
|
From page 48... ...
48 Appendix 3, the average cost of preparing and submitting a construction SWPP is only 12 percent of the total costs per airport reported for a construction NOI. However, the survey results are not consistent with airport field experience of preparing construction NOIs.
|
From page 49... ...
49 $26.6 million. The most costly individual requirement within this category relates to the operation of aboveground storage tanks at a cost of $16.4 million.
|
From page 50... ...
50 The primary use of the Noise Set-Aside is to fund development of NEMs and development and implementation of noise compatibility programs under 14 CFR Part 150. The Noise Set-Aside was potentially available to defray a portion of any increased costs associated with the modifications to Part 150 program requirements, subject to certain conditions.
|
From page 51... ...
51 An equal number of airports that conducted EAs received no third-party funding as received at least the full federal AIP share (six each)
|
From page 52... ...
52 Use of PFC Funds 0 Ai rp or ts 10 None Less Than Local Share Local Share Only More Than Local Share 4 1 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Figure 27. PFC funding levels for noise compatibility requirements.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.