Legal Considerations in the Funding and Development of Intermodal Facilities at Airports (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 18-30
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 18... ...
18 station and then connects with the NYC subway's A line at the Howard Beach Station.155 Bus transfers to local capillary stops are available at both stations. Jamaica Station, however, offers a shuttle bus to LaGuardia Airport.
|
From page 19... ...
19 certification that it would obtain a right-of-way for the Jamaica Station component of the system was sufficient for it to conclude that the facility would be located on airport property.168 2. The ATA Challenge to ROD 3 The Air Transport Association (ATA)
|
From page 20... ...
20 parking lots and RACs.175 The FAA analyzed the first argument in the context of the AirTrain's effect on enhancing the capacity of the air transportation system (14 C.F.R.
|
From page 21... ...
21 commissions.187 Perhaps most significantly, though, the Court cited the agency's analysis that demonstrated that, over a 10-year period, 3.35 MAAP each year would be able to reach JFK on the AirTrain than would if the system were not constructed.188 Conclusion and Rules The JFK AirTrain project was the FAA's first approval of a PFC request for the funding of an intermodal facility at an airport. It was also the largest PFC request the agency had ever received and set several precedents for intermodal PFC requests that would follow.
|
From page 22... ...
22 SFO with a line from San Francisco (on the north) terminating at a new airport station constructed by SFO at its planned international terminal.
|
From page 23... ...
23 patrons. Thus, the track could not be funded with AIP or PFC funds and, in order to comply with the revenue diversion prohibition, only a pro rata portion of those expenses could be funded by airport revenue.195 Finally, the FAA informed SFO that neither facilities located off-airport nor BART vehicles could be funded with airport revenue.
|
From page 24... ...
24 costs among the operating system's expenses.205 Specifically, the audit found $2.6 million spent for operating costs were ineligible because the equipment was either installed off airport property or because the equipment was not owned by the airport as required by the FAA/Kurland guidance letter. Thus, two supply stations, their power supplies and related spare parts that were located off airport property were ineligible for funding with airport revenue.206 Although the audit did not characterize SFO's funding of ineligible operations equipment as revenue diversion, the OIG recommended that the FAA advise the airport that they were not "eligible uses of airport revenue."207 Conclusion and Rules Although the planning, construction and approvals for the SFO BART extension took place during the same time frame that the FAA had under consideration the JFK AirTrain request for PFC funding, the two projects are quite different.
|
From page 25... ...
25 PFC funds were to be used for any of the segments of the project. Because they would be used by airport passengers exclusively, the airport proposed to fund the entire cost of the on-airport stations.
|
From page 26... ...
26 inseparable part of the primary structure."219 Although the agency did not object to the off-airport portion of the tunnel, it did not identify its length and the agency did not specifically reference the roadway overpass analogy used to justify the offairport portion of the bridge at SFO. Despite the fact that the MSP LRS represented the second use of airport revenue to fund an on-airport intermodal project, Delta Airlines objected to the FAA ADO's letter of guidance.
|
From page 27... ...
27 depending on the airport's percentage of use. • Continued, but made more explicit, the FAA's policy statement made to SFO that "small," off-airport sections of an airport intermodal facility may be funded with airport revenue if the project is: 1)
|
From page 28... ...
28 commercial development. Accordingly, airport revenue could be used to fund this segment, but only for the pro rata share of the facility used by airport patrons.
|
From page 29... ...
29 • When a transaction requires the exchange of an airport property interest for services, the airport property interest will be quantified by some formulation of its fair market value.
|
From page 30... ...
30 Several months later the FAA addressed the issue of the prorated funding with PFCs of intermodal facilities not used exclusively by airport patrons by proposing a revision of its PFC policy. The FAA's proposed 2016 Notice offers three possible solutions, all of which would permit prorated funding with PFCs of the IAD through-track outside the station.238 First, IAD would be allowed to use PFC funding under the rules that currently exist for the use of airport revenue by applying a pro-rata formula based on airport use.239 Second, the "incremental cost" comparison method compares the cost of a system that bypasses the airport with the cost of a system that deviates from the bypass in order to serve the airport.
|
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.