APPENDIX E: 2012 Forecasting Report for RCA

Transcription

1 APPENDIX E: 2012 FORECASTING REPORT FOR RCA D 1 APPENDIX E: 2012 Forecasting Report for RCA RAVALLI COUNTY AIRPORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

2

3

4

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS i Table of Contents Table of Contents... i Acknowledgements... vii Abbreviations and Acronyms... ix Executive Summary... 1 ES.1. Issues and Areas of Concern... 2 ES.2. Needs and Objectives... 4 ES.3. Airport Improvement Option Alternatives... 5 ES.4. Conclusion Recommendations... 7 Chapter 1. Introduction Background Purpose Process Previous Forecasting Planning History of Recent Ravalli County Airport Planning Ravalli County Growth Policy Airport Affected Area FAA Aerospace Forecast (Years ) US Census Bureau FAA Terminal Area Forecast and FAA FAA Study of General Aviation Chapter 2. Existing Facilities and Operations Background Airport Location Climate Temperature Precipitation Wind Visibility and Ceiling Facilities Airside Pavements FAR Part 77 Airspace FAA Airspace Classification Instrument Procedures Fixed Based Operators Commercial Operations Fuel Hangars and Lease Areas Access and Parking Utilities Other Airport Operations FlightAware SEPTEMBER, 2012

6 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Fuel Sales User Survey Terminal Area Forecast Based Aircraft Commercial Activity Fixed-Wing Helicopter Government Activity Chapter 3. Forecasts FAA Aerospace Forecast Number of Aircraft Hours Flown FAA Forecast Implications FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) National Based Aircraft Inventory Program US Census Bureau Montana Department of Commerce Based Aircraft Recent Local Aircraft Growth (1.5%) Local Historic Population Growth (2%) Forecasted Population Growth (1.9%) FAA Aerospace Forecast Based Aircraft Forecast Summary Operations Ratio to Based Aircraft FAA Aerospace Forecast Operations Forecast Summary Design Group II and Larger Forecast Chapter 4. Facility Requirements Airport Reference Code Runway Design Standards Widths Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Minimum Separation Standards Runway Length Approach Departure Requirements Taxiway Standards Hangars Apron Calculation of Existing Apron Needs Calculation of Future Apron Needs Instrument Procedures Helipdads SEPTEMBER, 2012

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS iii Future Development Chapter 5. Improvement Options Daly Ditch Area Considerations Relocation Building Documentation Alternatives Considered Alternative 1 No Action Alternative 2 Relocate 95 East and 600 North Alternative 2A Relocate 93 East and 1000 North Alternative 3 Relocate 240 East and 600 North Alternative 3A Relocate 240 East and 1550 North Alternative 4 Relocate 400 East and 600 North Alternative 4A Relocate 400 East and 1000 North Alternative 4B Relocate 400 East and 1550 North Alternative comparison SEPTEMBER, 2012

8 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables Table ES.1: Improvements Alternatives Considered... 6 Table 2.1: Ravalli County Airport Fuel Flowage Summary Table 2.2: Survey Response Summary Tables Table 3.1: FAA Forecasted Annual Growth for General Aviation Fleet Table 3.2: FAA Forecasted Annual Growth for General Aviation Hours Flown Table 3.3: FAA Terminal Area Forecast Consolidated Operations Table 3.4: FAA Terminal Area Forecast - Based Aircraft Table 3.5: FAA 5010 Based Aircraft Summary Table 3.6: County Population Census Data Table 3.7: Hamilton Population Census Data Table 3.8: Ravalli County Population Projections Table 3.9: Based Aircraft Forecast - Based on 10-year 5010 Trend Table 3.10: Based Aircraft Forecast - Based on Historic Population Trends Table 3.11: Based Aircraft Forecast - Based on FAA Aerospace Forecast Table 3.12: Based Aircraft Forecast Summary Table 3.13: Forecast Operations by Based Aircraft Ratio Table 3.14: Forecast Operations by FAA Aerospace Forecast Hours Table 3.15: Forecast Operations Summary Table 3.16: Design Group II or Larger Operations by Based Aircraft Ratio Table 3.17: Design Group II or Larger Operations by Av. Operation per Aircraft Table 3.18: Design Group II Forecast Operations Table 4.1: Airport Reference Codes Table 4.2: Hangar Lease Needs Projections Table 5.1: Alternative 2 Cost Estimate Table 5.2: Alternative 2A Cost Estimate Table 5.3: Alternative 3 Cost Estimate Table 5.4: Alternative 3A Cost Estimate Table 5.5: Alternative 4 Cost Estimate Table 5.6: Alternative 4A Cost Estimate Table 5.7: Alternative 4B Cost Estimate SEPTEMBER, 2012

9 TABLE OF CONTENTS v List of Figures Figure 1.1: Forecast Report Study Boundary Figure 2.1: Bitterroot Valley Vicinity Map Figure 2.2: Hamilton Historic Temperature and Precipitation Averages Figure 2.3: Ravalli County Airport Wind Rose Figure 2.4: Ravalli County Airport Apron Areas Figure 2.5: FAA Sectional Map Figure 4.1: Airport Reference Codes Illustration Figure 4.2: Existing Available Apron Figure 5.1: Interior of Northern Daly Ditch Building Figure 5.2 Northern Daly Ditch Building Column Detail Figure 5.3: Exterior - Northern Daly Ditch Building Figure 5.4: Exterior - Southern Daly Ditch Building Figure 5.5: No action Figure 5.6: Alternative Figure 5.7: Alternative 2A Figure 5.8: Alternative Figure 5.9: Alternative 3A Figure 5.10: Alternative Figure 5.11: Alternative 4A Figure 5.12: Alternative 4B SEPTEMBER, 2012

10 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Appendices Appendix A: Reference Material Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circular , Airport Design - Excerpts Advisory Circular B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design - Excerpts Ravalli County Airport Instrument Procedure Approaches and Departure Federal Aviation Regulations 14 CFR Part Civil Airport Imaginary Surfaces Montana Code Annotated MCA Title 67, Chapter 7 Appendix B: Data Based Aircraft Inventory Lease Inventory FlightAware Combined with Fuel Sales Summary Survey Response Summary Survey Response Hangar Comments Survey Response General Comments USDA Forest Service Letter Ravalli Republic News Article Appendix C: Population Forecast Sources FAA Aerospace Forecast FY Excerpts FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) Montana Department of Commerce Population Estimates and Projections US Census Bureau - Montana Population Projection Map US Census Bureau 2010 State and County Population Summary Appendix D: Miscellaneous Survey Post Card FAA 5010 SEPTEMBER, 2012

11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS REFERENCES vii Acknowledgements The successful completion of this study was made possible through the cooperation and assistance of many individuals. The following people provided guidance and support throughout the course of this study: FORECAST STUDY TEAM NAME TITLE AGENCY David Stelling, PE Manager Federal Aviation Administration, Helena District Office Steve Engebrecht, PE Project Manager Federal Aviation Administration, Helena District Office Diane Stilson, PE Engineer, Environmental Specialist Federal Aviation Administration, Helena District Office Janell Barrilleaux Environmental Program Manager Federal Aviation Administration, Northwest Mountain Region Debbie Alke Administrator Montana Department of Transportation Aeronautics Division Greg Chilcott Commissioner Ravalli County Commission Ron Stoltz Commissioner Ravalli County Commission Suzy Foss Chairperson Ravalli County Commission JR Iman Commissioner Ravalli County Commission Page Gough Manager Ravalli County Airport Scott Bell, PE Vice President Morrison Maierle, Inc. David Hedditch Chairman Ravalli County Airport Board SEPTEMBER, 2012

12 viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS REFERENCES LIST OF PREPARERS NAME TITLE AGENCY Rick Donaldson, PE Vice President & Project Manager Robert Peccia and Associates Dan Norderud, ACIP Environmental Specialist Certified Planner Robert Peccia and Associates Lance Bowser, PE Project Engineer Robert Peccia and Associates Nancy Geary Engineering Designer Robert Peccia and Associates Nicholas Ladas Graphics Designer Robert Peccia and Associates Kari Slyder Administrative Assistant Robert Peccia and Associates LIST OF PRIMARY REFERENCE DOCUMENTS Reference FAA Advisory Circular AC Airport Design FAA Advisory Circular AC B Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design FAA Advisory Circular AC B Airport Master Plans 14 CFR FAR Part 77 FAA Aerospace Forecast ( ) Source FAA Office of Airport Safety & Standards - Airport Engineering Division FAA Office of Airport Safety & Standards - Airport Engineering Division FAA Office of Airport Planning and Programming - Planning and Environmental Division US Code of Federal Regulations, TITLE 14-Aeronautics and Space, Part 77 - Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace FAA Office of Aviation Policy and Plans - Forecasts and Performance Analysis Division 2010 Census Statistics US Census Bureau Final Draft Environmental Assessment, Nov Morrison - Maierle, Inc. SEPTEMBER, 2012

13 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ix Abbreviations and Acronyms AAA Airport Affected Area AC ACA ADG AIA AIP ALP ARC CFR DNL EA FAA FAR FBO FOD GA GPS GQS HABS IFR MACo MCA MDT MMI MSL NEPA NPIAS OFA FAA Advisory Circular Airport Compatibility Act Airplane Design Group Airport Influence Area Airport Improvement Program (or Project) Airport Layout Plan Airport Reference Code Code of Federal Regulations Day-Night Sound Level Environmental Assessment Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Regulations Fixed Based Operator Foreign Object Debris General Aviation Global Positioning System Glide Slope Qualification Surface Historic American Building Survey Instrument Flight Rules Montana Association of Counties Montana Code Annotated Montana Department of Transportation Morrison - Maierle, Inc. Mean Sea Level National Environmental Policy Act National Plan of Integrated Airports Systems Object Free Area SEPTEMBER, 2012

14 x ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS OFZ PAPI REIL RCA RNAV RPA RPZ RSA SHPO TAF TRB USC VFR VOR Obstacle Free Zone Precision Approach Path Indicator Runway End Identifier Light Ravalli County Airport Area Navigation Robert Peccia and Associates, Inc. Runway protection Zone Runway Safety Area State Historic Preservation Office Terminal Area Forecast Transportation Research Board United States Code Visual Flight Rules Very High Frequency Omni-Directional Range (Navigational Aid) SEPTEMBER, 2012

15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Executive Summary Ravalli County, Montana in cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) Aeronautics Division initiated an Environmental Assessment Revision with associated Forecasting Report, to assess and identify improvement options for the Ravalli County (Hamilton) Airport. The Environmental Assessment Revision and Forecasting Report were contracted to Robert Peccia and Associates (`) through a quality based selection process. The study area boundary includes the Ravalli County Airport (RCA) property as well as most properties immediately adjoining that property. The Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 airspace associated with the existing airport and airspace associated with alternatives considered were also included. The Forecasting Report, intended as a planning study and not a design project, was developed through a collaborative process with FAA, MDT- Aeronautics Division, and Ravalli County. It involved data collection from MDT, Ravalli County pilots and aircraft owners, North Star Aviation fuel sales, the airport manager, various FAA web-sites, other web-sites and FlightAware. Aside from pilot and aircraft owner surveys, there was community involvement in the form of public availability to review the Forecast Report and a public meeting held by the County Commissioners to review it. Resource agencies and the public will be included for participation during the Environment Assessment Revision. An evaluation of known and publically available resource information was conducted. Activities that were completed for the development of the Forecasting Report include the following: Process review meeting with Ravalli County Review existing 2010 Final EA forecasting section Purchase and analyze FlightAware data Survey post-card to Ravalli County pilots and aircraft owners Survey post-card to Ravalli County instrument procedure users Survey post-card to North Star jet fuel purchasers Inventory and review aircraft data Collect information on aviation activity Forecast future aviation activity by categories and by time frames Collect and review population forecasts for area Establish reasonable expectations of airport use including current and future critical aircraft Forecast based aircraft, local and itinerant operations, charterair-taxi operations, and aircraft use by type for 5, 10, and 20-year periods Working draft paper on forecasts SEPTEMBER, 2012

16 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Establish Airport Reference Code (ARC) TO BE COMPLETED FOLLOWING PUBLIC MEETING AND RAVALLI COUNTY COMMISSIONER Review FAA guidance INPUT. regarding runway length Review M-M cost estimate for proposed improvements and update based on current bid tabulations from other airports Produce draft forecasting narrative report & present results at a public meeting Summarize, and update if necessary, alternatives considered to meet the facility requirements, Presenting the information at one of the Commissioner s regular public meetings. Produce final planning narrative report ES.1. ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONCERN Based on the assessment of the existing based aircraft, documentable usage of the airport, existing geometry, forecast conditions for aviation and the community, and 2010 Final EA data, airport issues and areas of concern were identified. The major issues identified are presented below: Existing Pavement Conditions With the exception of the runway itself and Taxiway A5, all the other pavements at the airport are in very poor condition. Not only are these pavements to the point where preventative pavement is a waste of resources, but the conditions introduce risks to the aircraft using the facility. FOD could damage propellers or jet engines. Deteriorated thin pavement sections could result in aircraft sinking through or rutting the pavement section further damaging the pavement and possibly damaging the aircraft. Pavement rehabilitation at the airport is eligible for FAA funding, but only after there is a clear direction for future improvements, and for those pavements that conform to FAA design standards. If Ravalli County chooses not to improve the airport per applicable design standards, they risk the loss of FAA participation in future improvements. That decision should be carefully considered since the FAA participates in projects to the level of 90% of eligible project costs. Airport Geometrics Ravalli County Airport s geometric areas of concern primarily include runway length, runway taxiway separation, apron space availability and hangar space availability. Runway length is shorter than recommended by FAA methodologies. The shortest runway lengths recommended by the FAA for this facility is either the length required to support 95% or 100% of the small fleet (aircraft 12,500 pounds and less). These lengths are 4,800 feet and 5,200 feet respectively. The existing facility is only 4,200 feet long. Feasible alternatives evaluated are all SEPTEMBER, 2012

17 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 shown as 5,200 feet. The runway could be constructed shorter, initially, but the full length is shown to evaluate the impact of future proposed improvements to the airport s ultimate airspace and to completely evaluate possible environmental concerns for ultimate runway development. Existing runway-taxiway separation does not meet FAA design standards. The minimum separation between the runway and a parallel taxiway for the Ravalli County Airport is 225 feet for Design Group I aircraft and 240 feet for Design Group II aircraft. The existing separation is 200 feet. Feasible alternatives evaluated have at least 240 feet of separation. Apron space at the existing airport is so limited that it has been the focal point of lawsuits and a private company has even built apron space for their exclusive use with their own funds. Currently, it would be feasible to add apron space north of the existing parking, but it would be at the expense of available future hangar development areas. The Ravalli County airport is in the top three Montana general aviation (GA) airports for aircraft based at the airport. Consequently, they have many more hangars than compared to most GA airports. There are several inquiries regarding hangar development each year. As of the writing of this report, there are three new hangars being considered. All three face constraints. Noise 65 DNL Perimeter This report did not scrutinize the noise component of previous planning nor develop independent noise analysis. Noise will be addressed as an item for the alternatives reviewed in the Environmental Assessment Revision. However, the forecasts developed in this report result in operations that do not exceed those of the 2010 Final Environmental Assessment. FAR Part 77 Transitional Surface Clearance The 7:1 surface defined in 14 CFR Part 77 known as the transitional surface, and associated with any runway alternative, is a significant factor in the alternative selected by the airport owner. Judging from the current ALP, there are several buildings that penetrate this surface on the west side of the existing runway. Using the existing building that most obtrusively penetrates this surface, the previous planning documents indicate that the runway should be moved to the east a minimum of approximately 93 feet east. However, if the runway is to be relocated, it would make good business sense to consider optimal relocation now from an airspace perspective and possibly provide for future growth, as long as it is a financially and environmentally prudent decision. (This report does not evaluate the environmental aspects as they will be addressed later under an Environmental Assessment Revision.) Since apron space is already at a premium and hangar space availability is a foreseeable concern, future expansion potential needs to be strongly considered by the airport owner. SEPTEMBER, 2012

18 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There is also terrain to the north of the airport which will cause transitional surface penetrations in the alternatives evaluated. However, these should be mitigated during the design process and subsequent earthwork. FAR Part 77 Approach, Horizontal and Conical Surface Clearances Other 14 CFR Part 77 surfaces were also considered in this report. Any runway configuration considered will have some penetrations to both the horizontal and conical surfaces. Terrain, along with any vegetation, trees or structures southeast of the airport property in the area known as the Flat Iron Subdivision will penetrate a portion of the horizontal and conical surfaces. By western Montana standards, this is a fairly minor area of concern. Ravalli County does have an AIA in place that may provide some protection from development that could worsen the amount of penetrations. The approach surface into Runway 34 necessitates the relocation of the runway north by a minimum of approximately 650 feet just for the required 15-foot clearance over Tammany Lane. This amount of relocation also locates the RPZ completely north of Tammany Lane. For this same approach area, the trees and structures in the Daly Ditch complex area also needs to be considered for both approach surface and RPZ clearance. In other words, additional displacement to the north should be considered if the Daly Ditch complex is to remain intact. FAA Runway Approach, Departure, Siting and GQS Surface Clearances When considering a runway s location or evaluating problems with a runway, there are a number of surfaces to be depicted and analyzed on an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) separate from the FAR Part 77 surfaces. For the alternatives considered, the approach, departure and glide slope qualification (GQS) surfaces, defined in FAA Advisory Circular (Airport Design) were considered and discussed. However, like the FAR Part 77 surfaces, their evaluation is based on approximations from limited elevation data provided by others rather than topographic survey information. ES.2. NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES Based TO on BE the COMPLETED analyses of existing FOLLOWING and future conditions PUBLIC of MEETING the Ravalli County AND Airport, RAVALLI the following COUNTY needs COMMISSIONER and objectives were INPUT. established for use in the development of improvement options identified later in this study. These needs and objectives will be met to the extent practicable given financial, owner preference and environmental constraints within the area. NEED #1: Objectives: PROVIDE PROPER AIRPORT GEOMETRY - Establish runway dimensional criteria - Review runway taxiway separation alternatives - Identify areas of deficiency SEPTEMBER, 2012

19 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 NEED #2: Objectives: PROVIDE PROPER FAR PART 77 AIRSPACE CLEARANCES - Establish the acceptable ranges of distance to move the runway laterally (east) to clear existing and future transitional surface penetrations - Establish the acceptable ranges of distance to move the runway longitudinally (north) to clear approach, departure, siting and GQS surfaces or minimize their impacts Need #3: Objectives: PLAN FOR FUTURE APRON EXPANSIONS TO ACCOMODATE EXISTING AND FUTURE NEEDS - Establish amount of need for additional apron space NEED #4: Objectives: PROVIDE HANGAR DEVELOPMENT LOCATIONS - Establish amount of need for additional hangar development areas ES.3. AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT OPTION ALTERNATIVES Airport improvements alternatives were identified to address the current needs and objectives. Improvement options for the airport were evaluated by utilizing Federal Aviation Regulations and established FAA recommended and required design criteria. Input was also solicited from the airport user community. Table ES.1 provides a summary of the alternatives considered. Improvements were evaluated based on FAA recommended and required design criteria, proper airspace facilitation and future growth. Environmental data and resource agencies input will be considered during the following EA Update Revision process. Alternatives developed in a 2000 Master Plan were reviewed in the 2010 EA. The 2010 Final EA was reviewed and this report concurs in the elimination of those alternatives as being viable. Alternatives developed in a 2003 Airport Layout Plan Narrative Report were also evaluated in the 2010 Final EA. Two of the three alternatives were forwarded into the 2010 Final EA for consideration and the other eliminated. This report also concurs with that action. Since all new alternatives considered in the 2010 Final EA appear to meet the transitional surface clearance criteria, they were all continued into this Forecasting Report for further consideration. Two new alternatives were added for consideration. SEPTEMBER, 2012

20 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ALTERNATIVE Runway Centerline Lateral (east) shift Runway 34 Threshold Longitudinal (north) shift STATUS 1 No Action Eliminated by Airport Owner as not financially sound and does not meet FAA design standards However it must be evaluated in any EA Master Plan 1A Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan 1B Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur 2000 Master Plan Master Plan 2A 40 0 Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan 2B 0 0 Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan 3A Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan 3B Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan 4 Reorientation Reorientation Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan 5 >400 Unknown Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur Master Plan Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur 2003 ALP 2003 ALP # Eliminated by 2010 EA - Concur 2003 ALP #2 240 Forwarded into 2010 EA as Alt ALP #3 400 Forwarded into 2010 EA as Alt Forwarded into 2012 Forecast Report 2012 Forecast Report New 2010 EA 2A Forwarded into 2012 Forecast Report Forwarded into 2012 Forecast Report 3A Forwarded into 2012 Forecast Report Forwarded into 2012 Forecast Report 4A New Alternative 4B New Alternative Table ES.0.1: Improvements Alternatives Considered SEPTEMBER, 2012

21 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 ES.4. CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATIONS Although many of the alternatives evaluated will technically meet the FAA s recommended and required design criteria and have similar airspace evaluations, other factors such as growth potential and project cost were considered. However, the element that drives the decision for the preferred alternative for this Forecast Report is the consideration of future development area for apron and hangar space. The Airport Owner is in the fairly uncommon position of needing to shift their only runway to meet FAA required separation between run runway and parallel taxiway. Since this is such a major undertaking, serious consideration needs to be made about moving it enough and purchasing enough land to accommodate future development. This Forecasting Report recommends updating the EA for a runway that is 75 feet wide and 5,200 feet long as Ravalli County s preferred alternative. If staged development is necessary, 4,800 feet should be the minimum length initially considered with follow-up extension when practical. A runway of these dimensions should be shifted 400 east of the existing runway. The southern threshold should be shifted approximately 1,550 feet north. Other improvements that need to be completed, some possibly prior to runway relocation, include apron expansion and existing apron taxiway rehabilitation reconstruction. The results of the study conclude that, provided funding can be secured and an environmental determination made; there are no major impediments to developing the preferred alternative. This study evaluated a range of improvement options and strategies that may be considered as funding becomes available. The ability to develop projects based on the County s preferred alternative for the Ravalli County Airport is a function of the availability of existing and future federal, state, local, and private funding sources. At the current time there is no funding identified to complete any of the improvement options recommended in this study. FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds are the most logical source of funding for the major improvement options for the airport. Other funding sources may also be available such as the Montana Department of Transportation s Aeronautics Division grant loan program. SEPTEMBER, 2012

22 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY To continue with the development of a project (or projects) the following steps are needed: Airport owner, Ravalli County, concurs with or revises this Forecasting Report; Submit Forecasting Report to the FAA for their concurrence or revision; Following any revisions, forward preferred alternative(s) for a Revised Environmental Assessment process including the public involvement process; After completion of the Revised EA process and an environmental determination, follow FAA guidelines for project nomination and development including completion of a detailed Airport Layout Plan for the preferred alternative; Identify and secure a funding source or sources for projects. SEPTEMBER, 2012

23 RAVALLI COUNTY AIRPORT - Hamilton, Montana Forecasting Report Chapter 1. Introduction

24

25 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-1 Chapter 1. Introduction 1.1. BACKGROUND Ravalli County Airport (RCA) is located in Ravalli County Montana on the eastern edge of the City of Hamilton. It is just over one mile east of highway 93 and adjacent to State Highway 269 which is also known as the East Side Highway. It is bounded on the south by Tammany Lane although airport property goes further south to Golf Course Road. On the north, the first feature encountered is Stock Farm Road. However the current northern airport property line is about a quarter mile south of that. Undeveloped land lies to the east. The Airport is owned and operated by Ravalli County. The Ravalli County Airport Board serves at the County Commissioner s pleasure and they serve voluntarily. They serve the Commissioners in an advisory role only. The County also employs an airport manager to take care of the day-to-day duties required at the airport PURPOSE The Ravalli County and the Federal Aviation Administration initiated this Forecasting Report in an effort to assess needs and identify improvement options at the Ravalli County Airport that meet aviation demand and safety requirements. The County encourages aviation as they see the facility as a critical piece of public infrastructure which provides related economic activity in the region. In order to determine facility improvements required to accommodate projected future activity, it is necessary to understand the types and extent of current aviation activity. Therefore, the primary purpose the forecast effort is to assess the existing aviation activity and apply reasonable future projections to document justification for any airport improvements. As stated above, the purpose of the study is to determine feasible facility improvement options to address the existing and future needs and objectives of the airport. Concerns within the study area for this report will focus on the aeronautical sufficiency of the options considered. Concerns within the study area based on community input, the environment, and resource agencies will be addressed by an Environmental Assessment (EA) Revision following this Forecast Report. The Forecast Report examines geometric and operational characteristics of the airport facility. Based on this, alternative evaluations will be presented to the airport owner for consideration. Recommended alternative(s) resulting from that will be forwarded into the NEPA process. Reasons for revising the 2010 Final EA are discussed in detail in History of Recent Ravalli County Airport Planning SEPTEMBER, 2012

26 1-2 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION The study area boundary includes the outside perimeter of the conical surfaces defined in FAR Part 77 for the alternatives considered. The study area is shown in Figure 1.1: Forecast Report Study Boundary. Figure 1.1: Forecast Report Study Boundary 1 SEPTEMBER, 2012

27 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-3 The conical surface perimeter was chosen because any substantive revisions to the airport geometry will likely cause Ravalli County to revisit their Airport Influence Area (AIA) document and possibly convert it to an Airport Affected Area (AAA) to comply with current Montana statutes. This is discussed in Airport Affected Area. Aside from this factor, the study area will be limited approximately to the 65DNL line perimeters of each alternative considered which includes the existing airport property and portions of most adjoining properties PROCESS The forecasting process was developed primarily by RPA working with Ravalli County with input from the FAA. The scope of the planning effort was developed based on the need to review and update forecasting information previously generated for the 2010 Final EA by Morrison Maierle, Inc. (MMI) see History of Recent Ravalli County Airport Planning. A number of public comments were received that challenged the validity of the forecasts of aviation activity at the airport. Therefore, it was decided to update the forecast using current information and applying national trends and forecasts for aviation activity. Another objective of the Forecasting Report was to evaluate the alternatives considered in the 2010 Final EA in light of the revised forecast and establish if they should be revised or others considered. Cost estimates by MMI are to be updated and new ones generated for any new alternatives. This Forecasting Report is developed as a planning study to determine the feasibility of various improvements options to the airport and does not include design effort or Airport Layout Plan development. The Forecast Report provides another opportunity to coordinate establish the proposed airport improvements with the airport owner, facility users, and public. The results of the planning effort will be used to justify the recommended project improvements forwarded by Ravalli County PREVIOUS FORECASTING PLANNING History of Recent Ravalli County Airport Planning In July 2003, Ravalli County initiated work on a NEPA EA to evaluate the potential environmental effects associated with implementing improvements to meet FAA design standards for runway to taxiway separation. A Preliminary Draft of the EA was presented to the Ravalli County Airport Board at a special meeting on March 25, 2004 in the Ravalli County Courthouse. Airport Board members instructed their consultant to revise the Preliminary Draft EA based on comments and discussion at the meeting. The Board expressed their desire to present a revised version of the EA to the Board of County Commissioners after appropriate changes had been made to the document. SEPTEMBER, 2012

28 1-4 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION A public information meeting was held in the Ravalli County Courthouse on November 16, 2004 to present the Preliminary Draft EA to the County Commissioners and to receive public comment. A public hearing scheduled for May 2005 was cancelled to allow for further work on the EA. In February 2008 a revised Draft Environmental Assessment was submitted to Ravalli County. A public hearing was scheduled for October 2008 but was cancelled to examine issues arising from public comment. After many revisions, a Final Draft EA was released in November A public hearing was scheduled for January 7, 2009, but was postponed by Ravalli County for further review of the document and additional public input. In August 2009, Ravalli County determined that additional analysis was needed of the 2008 Draft EA including an update to the aviation forecasts, an evaluation of additional alternatives from the 1996 Master Plan and 2002 Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Narrative Report, review of the potential to relocate the airport, and study of two additional development alternatives (identified as Alternatives 2A and 3A) requested by Ravalli County. An analysis of Draft Alternatives 2A and 3A was presented to the Ravalli County Commission on November 16, Following discussion and public comment, the Commission requested Alternatives 2A and 3A be modified. Modified Alternatives 2A and 3A were presented to the Commission April 7, After discussion and public comment, the Commission voted to adopt modified Alternative 2A as the preferred alternative in the Final Draft EA. Alternative 2A called for the construction of Runway 1634 to a width of 75 feet and a length of 4,200 feet. Under Phase 1 of the preferred alternative, the runway would be built parallel to the existing runway but moved 93 feet to the east and the 34 end of the existing runway shifted 1,000 feet to the north. Phase 2 development activities included a 1,000-foot long extension to Runway In June 2010, the Final Draft EA was released. A public hearing on the document was held on August 31, Responses to comments received were incorporated into a Final EA in November The Final EA was accepted by Ravalli County on November 17, 2010 with the passage of Resolution 2610, and the Final EA was submitted to the FAA for a final environmental determination shortly thereafter. During March 2011, the FAA prepared a draft Finding of No Significant Impact and Record of Decision (FONSIROD) for relocating Runway 1634 and the document was made available for public review beginning April 6, The Board of County Commissioners held a meeting on May 5, 2011 to discuss and take action regarding the draft FONSIROD for the Final EA and whether another alternative should be identified as the County s preferred alternative. Through discussion, the following issues were generally identified as reasons for no longer favoring Alternative 2A: Closure of Runway 1634 for a significant period of time during construction of Alternative 2A; SEPTEMBER, 2012

29 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-5 Potential negative effects on airport based businesses during the time when the runway is closed; Costs there may be some options that are less expensive than Alternative 2A; and The potential benefits of initially building a 5,200-foot long runway rather than stage constructing the new runway to an ultimate length of 5,200 feet over an extended period. The Board of County Commissioners heard comments from the public and addressed questions prior to taking action. Ultimately, the Commissioners passed Resolution 2766 rescinding their approval of the November 2010 Ravalli County Airport Final EA (Resolution 2610). The resolution indicated the Commissioners no longer favored Alternative 2A and intended to undertake a public process to identify a new preferred airport improvement action. Further, the resolution requested the FAA take no further action regarding the draft FONSIROD offered for public review and comment in April In late May 2011, Ravalli County solicited statements of qualifications and experience (SOQ) to be used in selecting a Principal Consultant to provide Airport Planning Services for the Ravalli County Airport. The services requested by the county included planning, coordination, contract administration, accounting, and incidental services for updating the EA. One of the major tasks identified was the need to address previously unanswered concerns related to the November 2010 Environmental Assessment for the Ravalli County Airport. Robert Peccia & Associates, Inc. (RPA) was selected by Ravalli County on July 20, 2011 to provide the desired airport planning and environmental services needed for the EA. RPA coordinated with both the County and FAA representatives to develop an appropriate scope of services for updating and completing the EA process. A contract with the RPA was executed on October 27, RPA held an introductory meeting with the County Commissioners on November 30, The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the scope of work and proposed approach to completing the EA. The meeting was duly advertised and public comment was accepted at the meeting. The reasons for issuing a Revised Draft EA are as follows: Since the FONSIROD on the November 2010 Ravalli County Airport Final EA was never finalized, the project reverts back to the Draft EA stage. The County believes that the Preferred Action presented in the November 2010 Ravalli County Airport Final EA is not the best alternative. The FAA requires that a newrevised Draft EA be produced and made available for public review and comment for any different Preferred Alternative. The agency (FAA) must prepare supplements to an EA if the agency makes substantial changes in the proposed action that are relevant to environmental concerns, or there are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts. (Significant information is information that SEPTEMBER, 2012

30 1-6 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION paints a dramatically different picture of impacts compared to the description of impacts in the EA.) Ravalli County Growth Policy The Ravalli County Growth Policy, adopted December 2002 was developed as a guiding document for growth and development within the County. The Growth Policy was a decision making tool to help achieve the vision of Ravalli County citizens and to provide guidance to developers and investors in the area. The Policy was approved by voters in November of 2004 and amended in November of However the Policy was repealed in November 2008 following a voter based initiative driven by their concerns over county wide zoning efforts. Citizen-initiated zoning districts are still enforceable as they are developed as a result of at least 60% of the freeholders within the proposed district signing a petition for implementation. 2 The vision of the Growth Policy was as follows: The Ravalli County Growth Policy is designed to establish a comprehensive set of longrange goals and goal-related policies to guide future growth and development. It seeks to provide an increased level of predictability to land owners, neighbors and developers about where and how growth can be accommodated in ways that are compatible with fiscal and environmental concerns. - pg. 1, Ravalli County Growth Policy Airport Affected Area On April 19, 2005, the Montana State Legislature approved the "Airport Compatibility Act" (ACA), Title 67, Chapter 7, Montana Code Annotated. Pursuant to the ACA, local governing bodies who own or control an airport included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) were to: 1. Designate an airport affected area (AAA); 2. Concurrently adopt regulations for the AAA that comply with MCA ; and 3. Administer and enforce the regulations that are adopted. Ravalli County owns the airport east of the City of Hamilton, and is therefore the local governing body with the authority to designate an AAA. Ravalli County's airport is included in the NPIAS. The designation of the AAA and associated regulations were to be adopted by April 19, 2006, but Ravalli County failed to adopt the AAA or regulations. The County is currently in the process of identifying the AAA and generating appropriate land use regulations. 4 The Ravalli County Planning Department s web-site summarizes existing statute in MCA regarding the AAA and MACo developed model regulations. SEPTEMBER, 2012

31 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-7 In November 2002, Ravalli County adopted regulations governing the Airport Influence Area (AIA) under MCA Title 67, Chapter 4, 5 and 6. The area is an irregularly defined area generally following roads and topographical features around the airport. Although Chapters 4, 5 and 6 have been repealed and replaced with Title 67, Chapter 7 Airport Affected Areas, the AIA regulations likely meet the legal requirements of the ACA. However any revisions to the airport configuration or proposed revisions to the AIA may require the adoption of an AAA and associated regulations under current MCA statutes. Ravalli County will need to determine if revisions to the existing AIA, if required due to airport configuration changes, comply with current MCA statues. MCA Title 67, Chapter 7 is included for reference in Appendix A FAA Aerospace Forecast (Years ) The FAA updates yearly their aviation forecast projections. The 2012 update is now available for reference, and is available for review at asts According to the FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years , The general aviation forecasts rely heavily on discussions with industry experts conducted at a workshop co-hosted by FAA and the Transportation Research Board (TRB) in July 2011 along with the results of the 2010 General Aviation and Part 135 Activity Survey. The assumptions have been updated by FAA analysts to reflect more recent data and developing trends, as well as further information from industry experts. Although the slow growth and expectations of a European recession has dampened the near term prospects for general aviation, the long-term outlook remains favorable. We see growth in business aviation demand over the long term driven by a growing U.S. and world economy especially in the turbo jet and turbine rotorcraft markets. As the fleet grows, the number of general aviation hours flown is projected to increase an average of 1.7 percent a year through In this FAA Aerospace Forecast, aviation traffic and activity forecasts are broken out separately by commercial aviation activity and general aviation activity. This Forecast Report for Ravalli County Airport will draw information from the FAA s report in an attempt to project existing numbers into the future. Applicable excerpts are included in Appendix C US Census Bureau The US Census Bureau is an agency that has a wealth of data from information they collect and periodically update. This report will primarily make use of the historical population growth for Ravalli County and City of Hamilton. They will be considered with the FAA Aerospace Forecast to establish airport forecasts. SEPTEMBER, 2012

32 1-8 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION FAA Terminal Area Forecast and FAA 5010 The Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) system is the official forecast of aviation activity at FAA facilities. These forecasts are prepared to meet the budget and planning needs of FAA and provide information for use by state and local authorities, the aviation industry, and the public. 7 The TAF includes forecasts for active airports in the National Plan of Integrated Airport System (NPIAS). 7 The web-site associated with the TAF allows any user to query their data base in many ways. For this report, a query was made for the Ravalli County Airport only. The resulting detailed report was based on their forecast issued in January This query tool is available at The TAF summary report is available for review at The content of the TAF report was reviewed and used for comparison of aircraft operations established and estimated in this Forecast Report. The FAA must consider the TAF in their evaluation approval of any airport forecasts. The TAF also has based aircraft data which was also used for comparison to this report s findings. In fact, the airport manager is tasked with updating these figures periodically on the FAA s National Based Aircraft Inventory Program. This web-based program has a process to verify and eventually confirm the aircraft list. Users are to follow certain steps to eliminate N-Number duplicates from their airport's list, verify N-Numbers reported by other airports, verify N-Numbers not found in FAA Aircraft Registration data and finally verify that all aircraft in the list are based at the facility FAA Study of General Aviation The FAA is taking a top-down look at the current general aviation airport system in the U.S. to better describe and explain the many roles and functions these airports serve in their respective communities. The review, which began in the fall of 2010, is focusing on infrastructure needs, based on the roles and functions of the airports. 8 The FAA worked closely with aviation industry stakeholders including associations, state aeronautical agencies, airport directors, airport authorities, airport planners, local councils of governments, and aviation user groups to classify general aviation airports based on the roles they support. These stakeholders agree that more descriptive categories are needed in order to help the general public understand the importance of these airports and their capital investment needs. 8 With input from aviation industry stakeholders, the FAA has developed a list of classifications for general aviation airports. The report was published in May of 2012, and is available to the public at The report SEPTEMBER, 2012

33 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-9 also discusses how general aviation serves important societal needs and aeronautical functions serving the public interest. Of the 2,952 general aviation airports studied, the report further classifies general aviation airports as National, Regional, Local or Basic. The number of airports in the US in these new categories are 84, 467, 1236 and 668 respectively. 497 have not been classified yet and require further study. Ravalli County Airport was categorized as a Local airport. The report entitled General Aviation Airports: A National Asset says, Local airports (1,236) are the backbone of our general aviation system with at least one local airport in virtually every state. They are typically located near larger population centers, but not necessarily in metropolitan or micropolitan areas. Local airports account for 42 percent of the general aviation airports eligible for Federal funding. They also account for approximately 38 percent of the total flying at the studied general aviation airports and 17 percent of flying with flight plans. Most of the flying is by piston aircraft in support of business and personal needs. In addition, these airports also typically accommodate flight training, emergency services, and charter passenger service. The flying tends to be within a state or immediate region. There are no heliports, but there are four seaplane bases in this category. 9 Local airports supplement communities by providing access to primarily intrastate and some interstate markets. These airports accommodate small businesses, flight training, emergency service, charter passenger service, cargo operations, and personal flying activities. They typically accommodate smaller general aviation aircraft, mostly single-engine propeller and some multiengine aircraft. Some 1,236 general aviation airports meet the following criteria and have been designated local airports: The airport has at least 10 annual IFR operations and at least 15 based aircraft; or the airport has at least 2,500 annual passenger enplanements. 9 Appendix B of that report summarizes that Montana has 120 public use airports, 70 of which are in the NPIAS. Seven of those are Primary Airports like Missoula. Of the remaining 63 Nonprimary Airports, none were National, one was Regional, 25 were Local and 33 were Basic. Four were not classified. SEPTEMBER, 2012