The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20243005.tiffMEMORANDUM TO: Diana Aungst, Planning Services FROM: Melissa J King, PE, CFM Development Review DATE: August 12, 2024 SUBJECT: USR24-0016 Sunset Industrial LLC The proposal has been reviewed on behalf of the Weld County Department of Public Works and the Department of Planning and Zoning. Staff comments made during this phase of the application process may not be all-inclusive, as other issues may arise during the remaining application process. COMMENTS GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION/LOCATION Project description: Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including the import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) Zone District.. This project is north of and adjacent to E. 8th Street — SH 263 and is east of Cherry Avenue. Parcel number: 096103300011 Lot B LLA23-0010. Access onto E 8th Street — SH 263. ACCESS Development Review has reviewed the application materials related to access. The application materials propose a new access point onto E 8th Street — SH 263. This portion of E 8th Street is under the jurisdiction of the City of Greeley. Please contact the City concerning access permitting. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has jurisdiction over all accesses to state highways. Please contact CDOT to verify the access permit or for any additional requirements that may be needed. (State Highway 263). Please include all three representatives in your request. CDOT Contacts: Mr. Tim Bilobran - timothy.bilobran©state.co.us Ms. Allyson Young - allyson.younq©state.co.us Mr. Mike Shepherd — mike.shepherd@state.co.us ROADS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY AND BRIDGES The property is bounded by State Highway 263. Contact the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to determine what right-of-way shall be shown on the submitted plat. Reference the documents creating the right-of-way. Please contact Tim Bilobran at the Greeley office, phone number: 970-350-2163. This portion of E 8th Street is maintained by the City of Greeley. The municipality has jurisdiction over access to the road. The applicant shall delineate on the plat the future and existing right-of-way and the physical location of the road. Pursuant to the definition of setback in the Weld County Code Sec. 23-1-90, the required setback is measured from the future right-of-way line. Be aware that physical roadways may not be centered in the right-of-way. Please contact the municipality to verify the access permit or for any additional requirements that may be needed to obtain or upgrade the permit. TRAFFIC A preliminary Traffic Impact Study has been submitted. A Final Traffic Impact Study, stamped and signed by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado is required. IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT FOR UP -FRONT IMPROVEMENTS Development Review is requesting an Improvements Agreement for up -front off -site improvements at the site access onto E 8th Street.SH-263. Additional improvements may be included depending on the Final Traffic Impact Study. Improvements/Road Maintenance Agreement: An example agreement is available at: https://www.weldgov.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 6/File/Departments/Public%20Works/DevelopmentR eview/USR-SPR-Permits%201mprovements%20Agreement%20Template.pdf. It will detail the approved haul routes and outline the required up -front off -site improvements. DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS This area IS within an Urbanizing Drainage Area: Urbanizing Drainage Areas typically require detention of runoff from the 1 -hour, 100 -year, storm falling on the developed site and release of the detained water at the historic runoff rate of the 1 -hour, 5 -year storm falling on the undeveloped site for URBANIZING areas. Drainage Narrative: The applicant has submitted a preliminary drainage narrative. A final drainage narrative citing an acceptable drainage detention exception, from Sec 8-11-40 of the Code, with adequate documentation shall be submitted. Historic Flows: The applicants will be required to maintain the historic drainage flows and run-off amounts that exist from the property. GRADING PERMIT A Weld County Grading Permit will be required if disturbing more than 1 acre. A Construction Stormwater Permit is also required with the State for disturbing more than 1 acre. Contact: Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Quality Control Division, 303-692-3575. If more than 1 acre is to be disturbed for construction of non -gravel pit items such as structures, parking lots, laydown yards etc, a Weld County grading permit will be required prior to the start of construction. Grading Permit applications are accepted after the planning process is complete (plan recorded). An Early Release Request Form may be entertained only after the applicant, Planning Department have reviewed the referral and surrounding property owner comments. The Early Release Request may or may not be granted depending on referral comments and surrounding property owner concerns. Contact an Engineering representative from the Development Review for more information. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. A Final Traffic Impact Study is required. (Del I i I 3. This portion of E 8th Street is under the jurisdiction of the City of Greeley. Please contact the municipality to verify the right-of-way. Show and label the right-of-way. Show the approved access(es) on the site plan and label with the approved access permit number if applicable. (Development Review) 4. Show and label the drainage flow arrows. (Development Review) PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION: A Weld County Grading Permit shall be acquired, if an acre of more is to be disturbed. (Development Review) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (NOTES ON THE SITE PLAN) 1. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for controlling noxious weeds on the site, pursuant to Chapter 15, Article I and II, of the Weld County Code. (Development Review) 2. The access to the site shall be maintained to mitigate any impacts to the public road, including damages and/or off -site tracking. (Development Review) 3. The historical flow patterns and runoff amounts on the site will be maintained. (Development Review) Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment Memorandum To: Diana Aungst From: Lauren Light, Environmental Health Services Date: August 2, 2024 Re: USR24-0016 Applicant: Sunset Industrial, LLC Environmental Health Services has reviewed this Site -Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including the import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) Zone District. As this is a temporary use, portable toilets and bottled water are acceptable for sanitary uses. The caretaker residence is serviced by North Weld County Water District and an on -site wastewater treatment system sized for 3 Bedrooms (SP -2400028). Noise is restricted to the level allowed in the industrial zone district and noise levels are measured 25 feet from the property line. The application contains a noise modeling report, conducted by Wave Engineering, which indicates the industrial level can be met at the property boundary. The report concludes: "As currently designed, the worst case predicted sound levels meet the Weld County Industrial limit at the USR Boundary. The Residential limit is not met at all points on the USR boundary but is met at the closest homes. As the pit is developed and the mining equipment moves below the surface, the sound levels will be reduced further." Adherence to the noise modeling report is required. Dust abatement will consist of utilizing a water truck with water provided from the dewatering of the pit. A well permit approved by the State is required prior to ground water being exposed. An Air emission permits (APEN) from the State is required and will address dust control for mining operations, haul roads, and any sand and gravel processing equipment. There will be 1,000 gallon fuel storage tanks which will have secondary containment. A spill prevention control (SPCC) and countermeasure plan will be provided. 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Phone: (970) 304-6410 weldhealth.org Public Health Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment We recommend that the following requirements be incorporated into the permit as development standards: 1. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S.) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination. 2. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include those wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S 3. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust, fugitive particulate emissions, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. The facility shall operate in accordance with Chapter 14, Article 1 of the Weld County Code. 4. Fugitive dust should attempt to be confined on the property. Uses on the property shall comply with the Colorado Air Quality Commission's air quality regulations. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the accepted "dust abatement plan", at all times. 5. The operation shall submit an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and Emissions Permit Application and obtain permits from the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health, and Environment, as applicable. 6. The facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Industrial Zone as delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S. The facility shall operate in accordance with the accepted noise modeling report. 7. The operation shall remove, handle, and stockpile overburden, sand, soil, and gravel from the facility area in a manner that prevents nuisance conditions. 8. Adequate drinking, handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees and patrons of the facility, at all times. Portable toilets and bottled water are acceptable. Records of maintenance and proper disposal for portable toilets shall be retained on a quarterly basis and available for review by the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. Portable toilets shall be serviced by a cleaner licensed in Weld County and shall contain hand sanitizers, contain hand sanitizers, and be screened from existing adjacent residential properties and public rights -of -way. 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Phone: (970) 304-6410 weldhealth.org Public Health Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment 9. Any On -Site Wastewater Treatment System located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to On -Site Wastewater Treatment Systems. 10. Any vehicle or equipment washing areas shall capture all effluent and prevent discharges in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Water Quality Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency. 12.A Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPH&E), Water Quality Control Division, shall be obtained as applicable. 13. The facility shall comply with all provisions of the State Underground and Above Ground Storage Tank Regulations, as applicable. 14. A current PE certified and signed copy Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan shall be available on site, at all times. 15.All chemicals must be handled in a safe manner in accordance with product labeling. All chemicals must be stored secure, on an impervious surface, and in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. 16. The facility shall be operated in a manner to prevent odors. Odors detected off site shall not equal or exceed the level of fifteen -to -one dilution threshold, as measured pursuant to Regulation 2 of the Colorado Air Pollution Control Regulations. Additional controls shall be implemented at the request of the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment in the event odor levels detected off site of the facility meet or exceed the level of fifteen -to -one dilution threshold, or in the judgment of the Weld County Health Officer, there exists an odor condition requiring abatement. 17. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety. 18.The operation shall comply with the Mine Safety and Health Act (MSHA). 19. The facility shall notify the County of any revocation and/or suspension of any State issued permit. 20. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of State and Federal 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Phone: (970) 304-6410 weldhealth.org Public Health Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment agencies and the Weld County Code. 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Phone: (970) 304-6410 weldhealth.org Public Health MEMORANDUM TO: Diana Aungst DATE: August 12, 2024 FROM: Melissa J King, PE, CFM SUBJECT: USR24-0016 Sunset Industrial, LLC PROJECT: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including the import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) Zone District. PARCEL: 096103300011 - Lot B LLA23-0010. FLOODPLAIN — CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER: Development associated with the proposed open mining and processing of sand and gravel, on the referenced parcel, is to be located on and/or in the 100 -year floodplain and floodway of the Cache la Poudre River, as depicted on FEMA Firm Panels 08123C -1542F, revised November 30, 2023. It is noted that the floodplain and floodway are located in the center of and in the southern portion of the parcel. Due to the likely significant change in the Base Flood Elevation (BFE), a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) may be required. The LOMR shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services — Development Review — Floodplain within six (6) months of reclamation. PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT (CONSTRUCTION AND/OR OPERATION): A floodplain hazard development permit is required for this project. DELINEATE ON THE USR MAP: Show the floodplain and floodway boundaries on the map. Label the floodplain boundaries with the FEMA Flood Zone and FEMA Map Panel Number or appropriate study. (Development Review - Floodplain) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 1. A Flood Hazard Development Permit is required for all construction or development occurring in the floodplain or floodway as delineated on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM Community Panel Map #08123C -1542F, revised November 30, 2023, (Cache la Poudre River). Any development shall comply with all applicable Weld County requirements, Colorado Water Conservation Board requirements as described in Rules and Regulations for Regulatory Floodplains in Colorado, and FEMA regulations and requirements as described in 44 CFR parts 59, 60, and 65. The FEMA definition of development is any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation, drilling operations, or storage of equipment and materials. (Development Review - Floodplain) 2. FEMA's floodplain boundaries may be updated at any time by FEMA. Prior to the start of any development activities, the owner should contact Weld County to determine if the floodplain boundaries have been modified. (Development Review - Floodplain) 3. The Property Owner shall comply with all requirements provided in the issued Flood Hazard Development Permit. (Development Review — Floodplain) EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT Memo To: From: Date: Subject: Diana Aungst Roy Rudisill August 10, 2024 USR24-0016 Office of Emergency Management (OEM) Director: Roy Rudisill 1150 "O" Street PO Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Phone 970-304-6540 Fax 970-336-7242 www.co.weld.co.us Diana, after review of USR24-0016 the OEM office has two requests; the first one is for the applicant to provide more information related to the number of fuel tanks they will have on site. If the quantity of fuel meets the requirements of the Community -Right -to -Know Act, then reporting will be required, and an Emergency Action Plan will be required. Please let me know if you have any questions. Roy Rudisill Director, Weld OEM. Submit by Email Weld County Referral July 10, 2024 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant: Sunset Industrial, LLC Case Number: USR24-0016 Please Reply By: August 7, 2024 Planner Diana Aungst Project: Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including the import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) Zone District Parcel Number: 096103300011-R8983615 Legal: LOT 1 RE524-0001; BEING PART OF THE W1/2 SECTION 3, T5N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location: North of and adjacent to E. 8th Street; approximately 670 -feet east of Cherry Avenue (County Road 43). The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. f We have reviewed the request and find that it does / does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan because: We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attached letter. Signature kebecca sears Date 7/16/2024 Agency Weld County Oil & Gas Energy Department Weld County Planning Dept. PO Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 Tel:(970)-400-6100 Fax:(970)-304-6498 Weld County Oil & Gas Energy Department Referral Comments Referring Agency: Weld County Department of Planning Services Reference Number: USR24-0016 Associated Parcel: 096103300011-R8983615 OGED Reviewer: Rebecca Sears Review Date: 7/16/2024 The Staff of the Weld County Oil and Gas Energy Department (OGED) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the captioned planning case. Staff has completed review of the proposal and have no conflicts with the proposed activity. We have included additional comments below: 1. There are no active or proposed 1041 WOGLA Permits on the associated parcel. There are several oil and gas well sites in the area surrounding the parcel. 2. The parcel includes zero (0) active oil and gas wells. 3. The parcel includes two (2) plugged and abandoned (PA) wells listed in Table 1 below. Additional information regarding these plugged and abandoned wells is available from the Energy & Carbon Management Commission (ECMC). OGED recommends that the Applicant review this information and contact the responsible operator regarding well infrastructure that may have been abandoned in place prior to conducting operations in proximity to the wells. API Operator Well Title Well Status 05-123-13585 Extraction Oil & Gas Inc. Fairmeadows #11-3 PA 05-123-13058 Kerr McGee Oil & Gas Onshore Fairmeadows #12-3 PA 4. The USR lands may include additional oil and gas related infrastructure, such as off -location flowlines or pipeline which are a use by right and not regulated by Weld County. OGED requests that the applicant reviews flowline data available from the ECMC map viewer and utilize Colorado 811 prior to any excavation activities. These comments and recommendations are based upon the review of the application materials submitted by the applicant and other relevant information available on the E -Permit site. Diana Aungst From: Cooper Anderson <canderson@gxy.net> Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 3:24 PM To: Diana Aungst Subject: Form Returned: US R24-0016 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Diana, My email provider is struggling to send emails with attachments lately. I wanted to try to respond to your request by yesterday but I'm still having issues. Can I submit the following for comment now until I can get a signed version to you? "The Greeley Weld County Airport has review the USR24-0016 application and has the following comments: 1. A concrete and asphalt batch plant is shown on the north end of the property. Any objects on site protruding vertically will require an aeronautical study. This is done to determine the impact those structures will have on the airspace and our approach and departure paths. Without a completed aeronautical study we cannot say if there will be a conflict or not. Until we receive an aeronautical study that finds no impact to our operations, we will have a conflict with the proposed use. 2. The location of this project would be within 1500ft of one of our runways. We are concerned with the dust emissions that could come from the site. While there are many gravel mining operations around the airport, the proximity of this project raises concerns for us. We would like to ensure strict compliance with the dust control plan submitted so as to not allow for obscured visibility for our operations. 3. Following on the last comment, we are concerned about the proximity of the site to the airport in regard to the lighting plan. The attached plan calls for only daytime activities on a regular basis with some occasional nighttime use utilizing portable lighting. We would like to ensure that lighting at the facility whether permanent or temporary has shielding to prevent any upward light contamination. Having unshielded lighting right along the approach and departure path of the airport could affect pilot's night vision and ability to safely operate the aircraft. 4. The proposal calls for and end use of the pit as water storage. As an airport, we work diligently to remove any wildlife hazards in and around our property. The introduction of a water source right next to our runway could increase the amount of birds, prey, and predator animals in the area. We would request that some type of wildlife mitigating measures are taken. This may include wires surrounding the water, regular harassment, or other methods as determined by a professional wildlife biologist. 5. We are also concerned with the increased traffic on East 8th Street, especially with the location being near another busy intersection along the roadway. Thank you, Cooper" 1 Diana Aungst From: Cooper Anderson <canderson@flygxy.com> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2024 12:00 PM To: JC York Cc: Diana Aungst; 'Chris Leone'; Will Perez Subject Re: Status of FAA Filing (DNE) Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. JC, I appreciate you getting those submitted. I reviewed both letters, and it appears that your operation will not have any adverse effects on our airspace. Thank you, Cooper From: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2024 8:28 AM To: Cooper Anderson <canderson@gxy.net> Cc: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov>; 'Chris Leone' <chrisleone@j2contracting.com> Subject: FW: Status of FAA Filing (DNE) Cooper We just received the attached letters for the aeronautical study for the future concrete and asphalt batch plants as a "Determination of No Hazard...". Regards, J.C. J.C. York, P.E. J&T Consulting, Inc. 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Fort Lupton, CO 80621 Office: (303) 857-6222 Mobile: (970) 222-9530 From: noreply@faa.gov <noreply@faa.gov> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2024 1:07 PM To: chrisleone@j2contracting.com; Todd Yee <toddyee@j-tconsulting.com> Subject: Status of FAA Filing (DNE) 1 Your filing is assigned Aeronautical Study Number 2024-ANM-5136-OE, 2024-ANM-5137-OE. An aeronautical study has been completed and the FAA issued a determination. To review your electronic record, go to our website oeaaa.faa.gov and select the Search Archives link to locate your case using the Aeronautical Study Number (ASN). Copies of your letter are available on the website for your convenience. Please review the letter and adhere to all conditions. After reviewing your determination if you require additional assistance, please contact Andrew Hollie via phone: (817) 222-5933 or email: andrew.hollie@faa.gov. Please refer to the assigned ASN on all future inquiries regarding this filing. To ensure e-mail notifications are delivered to your inbox please add noreply@faa. qov to your address book. Notifications sent from this address are system generated FAA e -mails and replies to this address will NOT be read or forwarded for review. Each system generated e-mail will contain specific FAA contact information in the text of the message. 2 Mail Processing Center Federal Aviation Administration Southwest Regional Office Obstruction Evaluation Group 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth, TX 76177 Issued Date: 10/21/2024 Chris Leone Sunset Industrial, LLC 105 Coronado Ct Unit 101-A Fort Collins, CO 80525 Aeronautical Study No. 2024-ANM-513 6 -OE ** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION ** The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning: Structure: Asphalt Batch Plant Location: Greeley, CO Latitude: 40-25-43.19N NAD 83 Longitude: 104-39-17.48W Heights: 4650 feet site elevation (SE) 95 feet above ground level (AGL) 4745 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s), if any, is(are) met: It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be e -filed any time the project is abandoned or: At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part 1) X_ Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Part 2) Based on this evaluation, marking and lighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking/ lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, we recommend it be installed in accordance with FAA Advisory circular 70/7460-1 M. This determination expires on 04/21/2026 unless: (a) the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, is received by this office. (b) extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office. (c) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within Page 1 of 5 6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application. NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST BE E -FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights, frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power, except those frequencies specified in the Colo Void Clause Coalition; Antenna System Co -Location; Voluntary Best Practices, will void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights, power, or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination includes all previously filed frequencies and power for this structure. If construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed, you must submit notice to the FAA within 5 days after the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed. This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at (817) 222-5933, or andrew.hollie@faa.gov. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2024- ANM-5136-OE. Signature Control No: 631598056-636625065 Andrew Hollie Specialist Attachment(s) Case Description Map(s) (DNE) Page 2 of 5 Case Description for ASN 2024-ANM-5136-OE Construction of asphalt and concrete batch plants Page 3 of 5 TOPO Map for ASN 2024-ANM-5136-OE � 5 -�Q CST of 1 -4. .,, ii— -+1r ti -1 r Lu z furl CSINJI DLI 7L -t .4 £ I, I 11 It 414 ft Ii s aTh� r�'S. relZ) tits& 4, 'I Greeley- ey- E - Ott* r it t • S a a E STHSi 0 a V 4 Page 4 of 5 Sectional Map for ASN 2024-ANM-5136-OE ins •505 (21 2) I h"raa. 5335 GRkLEY 2A° 4996 {229). �,�, (283)stacks x rj • SBIT b(Pt 0-25 as La Salle le W EI 0 aiNE GREELEYWELD COUNTY (GX Ayvps-aqTJ13CJ75 4897 *L riD0 1m228� RP28 4 s26- (228) elevator Ca a n out/ Mel O I Page 5 of 5 Mail Processing Center Federal Aviation Administration Southwest Regional Office Obstruction Evaluation Group 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth, TX 76177 Issued Date: 10/21/2024 Chris Leone Sunset Industrial, LLC 105 Coronado Ct Unit 101-A Fort Collins, CO 80525 Aeronautical Study No. 2024-ANM-513 7 -OE ** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION ** The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning: Structure: Concrete Batch Plant Location: Greeley, CO Latitude: 40-25-45.33N NAD 83 Longitude: 104-39-13.42W Heights: 4650 feet site elevation (SE) 60 feet above ground level (AGL) 4710 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation provided the following condition(s), if any, is(are) met: It is required that FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, be e -filed any time the project is abandoned or: At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part 1) X_ Within 5 days after the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Part 2) Based on this evaluation, marking and lighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking/ lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis, we recommend it be installed in accordance with FAA Advisory circular 70/7460-1 M. This determination expires on 04/21/2026 unless: (a) the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration, is received by this office. (b) extended, revised, or terminated by the issuing office. (c) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and an application for a construction permit has been filed, as required by the FCC, within Page 1 of 5 6 months of the date of this determination. In such case, the determination expires on the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of construction, or the date the FCC denies the application. NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST BE E -FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD. This determination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights, frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power, except those frequencies specified in the Colo Void Clause Coalition; Antenna System Co -Location; Voluntary Best Practices, will void this determination. Any future construction or alteration, including increase to heights, power, or the addition of other transmitters, requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination includes all previously filed frequencies and power for this structure. If construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed, you must submit notice to the FAA within 5 days after the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed. This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be used during actual construction of the structure. However, this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the FAA. This determination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body. If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at (817) 222-5933, or andrew.hollie@faa.gov. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2024- ANM-5137-OE. Signature Control No: 631598058-636625064 Andrew Hollie Specialist Attachment(s) Case Description Map(s) (DNE) Page 2 of 5 Case Description for ASN 2024-ANM-5137-OE Construction of asphalt and concrete batch plants Page 3 of 5 TOPO Map for ASN 2024-ANM-5137-OE r a 4 I ft gct E C ST 14.11 t.r z r 4- ••• MIDIS as -.14 rr1 y`-J� O U .ra —�e ti as 4 a t p IIMISN41:240•I AF. ea rtt- 094 otier %LI 00 a ksi Lu 4 Is Page 4 of 5 Sectional Map for ASN 2024-ANM-5137-OE n 52Q5 r(21 2) L I I 5335 4882 (3OO)1° 4996 {229) fLJ283), etas BBIT L(Pvt) f REELEY a alit La Salle uwel:on , KUT( GREELEYWELDiOUNTY (G)T rs AOSe3qTJ135Y175 4597 `L X100 i228 Q RP 28. Ade (PA) 9•• 25 #t82+6- (228) elevator Cage as Page 5 of 5 Submit by Email Weld County Referral July 10, 2024 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant: Sunset Industrial, LLC Case Number USR24-0016 Please Reply By: August 7, 2024 Planner Diana Aungst Project: Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including the import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) Zone District Parcel Number 096103300011-R8983615 Legal: LOT 1 RES24-0001; BEING PART OF THE W1/2 SECTION 3, T5N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location: North of and adjacent to E. 8th Street; approximately 670 -feet east of Cherry Avenue (County Road 43). The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. 1.1 We have reviewed the request and find that it does / does not comply with our omprehensive Plan because: We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attached letter. Signature Agency hi'Velst Greeley Conservation District Date August 12, 2024 Weld County Planning Dept. PO Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 Tel:(970)-400-6100 Fax:(970)-304-6498 West Greeley Conservation District (970) 356-8097 Below is a list of the soils and their limitations according to the USDA, Weld County Soil Survey. Septic Absorption Tank � Prime Land Farm ( if Additional . . CommentsS Map Soil Name Soil Texture Shallow Dwellings Dwellings with Small Symbol Excavations without basements Commercial 3 Aquolls Gravelly Substratum Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe No 10 Bankard Sandy Loam Severe Severe Severe Severe Severe No 4 21 Dacono Clay Loam Severe Moderatr' Slight Severe _Yes 68 Ustic Severe Moderate No r The West Greeley Conservation District recommends that the applicant does an on site soils test prior to any construction. For a more complete soils description consult the Weld County Soil Survey or contact our office at (970) 356-8097.1f you or the applicant have any questions please feel free to call our office. WEST GREELEY •. r4 CONS RVA I y I �II • . ill ' D sTrucT\ 1 Ylts I it - - . • a 4 4 Se DI ts004. i • 1r Aff `' 4 - I t :1- ry A . .. .aY ea ' .. • �' r 4 *fit =' '�FYI .� !!. I� > n .. _;: QQF . 1 I + Produced by the West Greeley Conservation District Submit by Email Weld County Referral July 10, 2024 The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant: Sunset Industrial, LLC Case Number: USR24-0016 Please Reply By: August 7, 2024 Planner Diana Aungst Project: Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review for Open Mining (sand and gravel) and processing of minerals, including the import and export of materials to/from other sites, recycle crushing area, dry and wet screens, crushers, conveyors and stacker, portable generators, mobile mining equipment parking and storage, employee and vendor parking, a mine office/scale house, and scale, in the 1-3 (Heavy Industrial) Zone District Parcel Number: 096103300011-R8983615 Legal: LOT 1 RE524-0001; BEING PART OF THE W1/2 SECTION 3, T5N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Location: North of and adjacent to E. 8th Street; approximately 670 -feet east of Cherry Avenue (County Road 43). The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. f We have reviewed the request and find that it does / does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan because: We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. See attached letter. Signature Meghan Oren Date 08/07/2024 Agency City of Greeley Weld County Planning Dept. PO Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 Tel:(970)-400-6100 Fax:(970)-304-6498 Greeley Project Review Comments Project: Name: Location: Reviewed By: Department: Submittal: Case #: Date: 08/07/2024 Sunset Industrial Pit - REFERRAL 1507 E 8TH ST Meg Oren Community Development / Planning 7/10/2024 Submittal #: 1 REF2024-0024 All code sections are from the Greeley Development Code and from the City of Greeley Design Criteria and Construction Specifications, Volumes I, II, & III (hereafter referred to as City Criteria Volumes I, II, &III). Sections of the Code or Construction Specifications are shown in brackets as part of the review comments below. All coordination with non -City of Greeley municipalities and/or agencies is assumed to be completed by the Developer's Project Manager. Proof offinal approval from said agencies will be required prior to City of Greeley acceptance. For additional information on the City Code or the Design Criteria, see the City of Greeley web site at the following location: Planning: https://ivww.municode.comilibrar /co/ eeley/codes/municipal. code Engineering: http: //greeleygov. com./services/design-criteria-and-construction-specifications ORIGIN Map: http: //greeleygov. com/government/gis Provide written responses to all comments below. All comments must be addressed or future submittals may not be accepted by the City of Greeley. A Word document is being provided for your convenience. Comments identified as Advisory are for the applicant's information only; they will not prolong the review and no response is required. Resubmittal needed for City of Greeley Review 1. Property is eligible for annexation to the City of Greeley. 2. Please provide more information pertaining to haul route proposed. 3. The Imagine Greeley Comprehensive Plan shows an enhanced roadway along 8th Street and development plans should include those enhancements. The Comprehensive Plan can be found online: https://greeleygov.com/services/lrp/long-range-planning 4. Per the Imagine Greeley Comprehensive Plan, the property is located within the Airport Area. A referral should be sent to Greeley -Weld County Airport. Please see Chapter 10, Special Districts & Areas. a. Sec. 24-1002 Airport Overlay District 5. Please see Chapter 6, Nonresidential Development Standards 6. Please see Chapter 7, Access & Parking a. Sec. 24-702 Access & Circulation Page 1 of 4 b. Sec. 24-703 Required Parking c. Sec. 24-705 Loading Areas 7. Please see Chapter 8, Landscape Standards a. Sec. 24-803 Perimeter Landscape and Screening 8. Property is within Area of Ecological Significance — High and Moderate. Please provide Ecological Report. Please see Chapter 10, Special Districts & Areas. a. Sec. 24-1004 Areas of Ecological Significance Page 2 of 4 Greeley Project Review Comments Date: 7/31/2024 Project: Name: Location: Reviewed By: Department: Submittal: Case #: Sunset Industrial Pit - REFERRAL 1507 E 8TH ST Brittany Hathaway Community Development / Engineering 7/10/2024 Submittal #: 1 REF2024-0024 All code sections are from the Greeley Development Code and from the City of Greeley Design Criteria and Construction Specifications, Volumes I, II, & III (hereafter referred to as City Criteria Volumes I, II, &III). Sections of the Code or Construction Specifications are shown in brackets as part of the review comments below. All coordination with non -City of Greeley municipalities and/or agencies is assumed to be completed by the Developer's Project Manager. Proof of final approval from said agencies will be required prior to City of Greeley acceptance. For additional information on the City Code or the Design Criteria, see the City of Greeley web site at the following location: Planning: https://www.municode.com/librar /co/ eele /codes/munici al code Engineering: http: //greeleygov. com/services %design -criteria -and -construction -specifications ORIGIN Map: http://greeleygov.com/governmentigis Provide written responses to all comments below. All comments must be addressed or future submittals may not be accepted by the City of Greeley. A Word document is being provided for your convenience. Comments identified as Advisory are for the applicant's information only; they will not prolong the review and no response is required. Resubmittal needed for City of Greeley Review 9. Please clarify if this mine is within the City of Greeley's MS4 permit or if the mine be operated under a separate MS4 permit. 10. Clarify if the proposed recharge pond area is a stormwater infiltration pond and subject to the requirements of Colorado Senate Bill 15-212. 11. If the proposed recharge pond is subject to Colorado Senate Bill 15-212, does it drain a 5 - year storm event in 72 hours and a 100 -year storm event in 120 hours? If not, water rights will need to be obtained in order to hold water for an extended period of time. 12. Clarify: Will slurry walls be installed prior to mining operations? Or will slurry walls only be installed when mining has finished, and the mine is being reclaimed as lined water storage reservoir cells? Page3 of 4 13. If the mine is to be unlined while digging and dewatering operations are occurring, there is worry that the groundwater table will sink. This could lead to the water from the Ogilvy irrigation ditch to the south of the site infiltrating into the ground and drying out thereby damaging the Ogilvy ditch's ability to supply irrigation water to its customers. 14. This project will require a City of Greeley Public Space permit. 15. Applicant will need to fill and return the provided Transportation Base Assumptions form (provided in eTrakit) and contact Brittany.Hathaway@greeleygov.com to schedule a meeting with Public Works. a. A Roadway Maintenance Agreement will be required as part of the Public Space and Referral approval. Page 4 of 4 City of ".""%N%3\ Greek,orado REF 2024-0024. Sunset Industrial Mining Site August 2, 1024 Natural Areas & Trails Review Comments Natural Areas & Trails is interested in securing a trail corridor in the vicinity of this project. The 2023 Trails Master Plan (Greeley Trails Master Plan Update (arcgis.com) identifies a general alignment for a trail extending north from the future extension of the Poudre River Trail in the vicinity of 8th Street and Cherry Avenue to skirt around the Greeley Airport and continue along Sand Creek. This corridor has been classified as a long-range priority, so the anticipated 12 -year mining period aligns well with development of a trail after mining is completed. This trail would serve future development in the NE portion of the Long Range Expected Growth Area. ci CIFTLa J ( D';tiJ LI ) ,dJ..I e& 1. .D I r i H. s P I,° I i ty►. NcAt 10 Years 2: 10 - 20 Years Out 3: Long Range Existing Off -Street Trail Natural Area Park SurfaceW'ater Stream Ditch Perennial and Intermittent Ditch Lake Field ijko. Park 'oln Park deli; Charlie & Laura Archibeque Pibrimille ark r Home Museum Linn Grove Cemetery Greeley -Weld County Airpod Culture, Parks, and Recreation • Natural Areas & Trails • 321 N 16th Avenue . Greeley, Co 80631 970-350-9205 • Trails':(iigreeleygov.com • GreeleyGov.corn./naturalareas The Trails Master Plan indicates general locations rather than specific alignments. Future studies are needed to determine specific alignments. Although many trail corridors appear along transportation corridors, following along natural features like ditches and waterways will be prioritized when determining actual alignments. The Sunset Industrial mining plan shows the existence of a 60' wide ROW along the eastern edge of the property that might provide a potential alignment for a trail. The purpose of that ROW is unclear at this point. As the opportunity to construct a trail comes closer, NAT would undertake a planning and design study to determine an exact alignment. Depending on the ownership of the lined pond after mining is complete, NAT may be interested in utilizing the pond for water -based recreation such as fishing, non -motorized boating and similar activities such as provided at the Poudre Ponds Recreational Fishery on N 35th Avenue. This would provide a new recreational opportunity closer to home for residents in eastern Greeley. Please let us know if there are any questions or comments or you need further information. Respectfully, Karen Scopel, Environmental Planner Natural Areas & Trails Division Culture, Parks and Recreation Department 321 N 16th Avenue, Greeley CO 80631 karen.scopel@greeeygov.com 970-301-0970 ROADWAY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered into this [ ] day of [ , ] by the City of Greeley, Colorado, a municipal corporation ("City") and Sunset Industrial LLC, concerning that certain land use application known as the Sunset Industrial Pit, REF2024-0024 ("Project"). WHEREAS, Sunset Industrial LLC desires to develop a sand and gravel pit, and, in accordance with City regulations, submitted a REF2024-0024 application, copies of which are on file with the City and incorporated herein and made a part hereof by reference, subject to certain requirements and conditions requiring the maintenance of a public roadway. NOW THEREFORE, FOR CONSIDERATION, THE RECEIPT AND ADEQUACY OF WHICH IS HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGED, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1.0 Required Maintenance/Repair of 8th Street: Sunset Industrial LLC shall be responsible for the maintenance and repair, as further described below, of 8th Street ("Roadway"), due to the substantial increase in traffic generated during the construction, drilling completion, etc. of the Project. Sunset Industrial LLC shall notify the City and schedule a joint inspection of the Roadway by Sunset Industrial LLC and the City prior to the initial construction phase of any portion of the Project. Sunset Industrial LLC shall also notify the City and schedule a joint inspection of the Roadway by Sunset Industrial LLC and the City after demobilization following the final Completions phase of the Project. Sunset Industrial LLC shall maintain the condition of the Roadway to a passable and safe condition, as determined by the City, during the construction, drilling completion, etc. of the Project. Sunset Industrial LLC is responsible for restoration to the initial inspected condition of the Roadway prior to the Production phase of the Project, or after any 60 -day period of project inactivity. 2.0 Construction Standards: All construction and materials shall conform to City design standards and construction specifications. 3.0 Public Works Permit and Traffic Control: Prior to construction within the 8th Street Right -Of -Way, Sunset Industrial LLC shall ensure that a permit is obtained from the City's Public Works Department. As a part of the Public Works permit application, a traffic control plan shall be submitted for City review. 4.0 Failure to Maintain the Roadway: 4.1 If the City determines the Roadway is not being maintained to a passable and safe condition, the City will provide written notification to Sunset Industrial LLC to return the Roadway to a passable and safe condition within 30 days. If Sunset Industrial LLC fails to return the Roadway to a passable and safe condition within 30 days, the City may cause the work 1 to be performed and invoice Sunset Industrial LLC for the cost of said work. 4.2 The City maintains the right, at its sole discretion, to require surety for restoration of the Roadway to its initial inspected condition if the City determines the Roadway is not being maintained to a passable and safe condition by Sunset Industrial LLC during the Construction, Drilling, and Completions phases of the Project. 5.0 Established Truck Traffic Routes: 5.1 All truck traffic shall enter or exit the Sunset Industrial Pit project sites ("Site") via the site accesses shown on the approved REF2024-0024 plans, directly onto or off 8th Street. 5.2 In unusual or rare occasions, if particular projects mandate deviation from the above -mentioned truck traffic route for a limited period of time (not more than thirty (30) days), Sunset Industrial LLC shall request permission from the City to allow such deviation. No other deviation shall be allowed. 5.3 No truck may exceed CDOT required specifications for pounds per axle. 6.0 Truck Traffic Route Signage: Sunset Industrial LLC shall install truck traffic route signs at all exit points of the Site, which can be clearly seen by drivers leaving the site and which clearly depict the Established routes described in Section 5.1, above. 7.0. Successors and Assigns: This Agreement may not be assigned in whole or in part by either party without the written consent of the other party and the written consent of the party to whom the obligations under this Agreement are assigned. Consent to an assignment shall not be unreasonably withheld. This Agreement shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors and assigns of Sunset Industrial LLC. 8.0 Recording of Agreement: Upon its execution, this Agreement shall be filed promptly with the Weld County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 9.0 Waivers: This Agreement is specific to the Project. Nothing herein contained shall be construed as a waiver of any requirements of the Greeley Municipal Code, and Sunset Industrial LLC shall comply with all requirements of same. In the event the City waives any breach of this Agreement, no such waiver shall be held or construed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach hereof 10.0 Terms and Conditions of the Agreement, Default: Each and every term and condition of this Agreement is deemed to be a material element thereof. In the event either party 2 fails or refuses to perform according to the terms of this Agreement, such party may be declared in default. In the event a party had been declared in default hereof, such defaulting party is allowed a period of thirty (30) days within which to cure said default. In the event the default remains uncorrected, the party declaring default may elect to: 1. Terminate the Agreement and seek damages; 2. Treat the Agreement as continuing and require specific performance; or 3. Avail itself of any other remedy at law or equity. In the event the default of any of the provisions hereof by either party which requires the party not in default to commence legal or equitable action against said defaulting party, the defaulting party is liable to the non -defaulting party for the costs incurred by reason of the default. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent or interfere with the City's rights and remedies specified in this Agreement. 11.0 Addresses for Notice: Any notice or communication required or permitted hereunder shall be given in writing and shall be personally delivered, or sent by United States mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed as follows: CITY: Sunset Industrial LLC: City of Greeley Public Works Director 1100 10th Street, Suite 402 Greeley, CO 80631 with a copy to: City of Greeley City Attorney 1100 10th Street, Suite 401 Greeley, CO 80631 [Company Name]. [Title] [Address] [Address] or to such other address or the attention of such other person(s) as hereafter designated in writing by the applicable parties in conformance with this procedure. Notices shall be effective upon mailing or personal delivery in compliance with this paragraph. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above. CITY OF GREELEY, COLORADO SUNSET INDUSTRIAL LLC APPROVED AS TO SUBSTANCE: By: By: Printed Name: Public Works Director APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: Title: By: City Attorney 4 Transportation Impact Study Base Assumption Form Project Information Project Name: Project Location: TIS Assumptions Type of Study Memo Intermediate Full Study Area Boundaries North h South West East Future Growth Rates Short term Long term S to dy Intersections All access drives 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Period for Study AM 7:00-9:00 PM4:00-6:00 Sat. Noon Time Generation Rates Trip Trip Adjustment Factors Passby: Captive Market: Mode Split Assumptions Other Traffic Studies Active Modes Analysis Other Study Areas Requiring Special Date:_ Traffic Engineer: Greeley Traffic Engineer _ Page 227 Diana Aungst From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Sunday, November 3, 2024 8:45 AM Diana Aungst Chris Leone FW: Signed BAF - Sunset Industrial Pit Development TIS needs Revisions TIS Base Assumption Form - Sunset Industrial Pit.SL Rev.8.16.2024.pdf Caution° This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Diana On page 2 is the location that Greeley staff recommended we change the access point to. I will also forward some other correspondence we have had with them in regards to their road maintenance agreement. Regards, J.C. J.C. York, P.E. J&T Consulting, Inc. 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Fort Lupton, CO 80621 Office: (303) 857-6222 Mobile: (970) 222-9530 FAX: (303) 857-6224 From: Brittany Hathaway <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.com> Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 1:04 PM To: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Subject: FW: Signed BAF - Sunset Industrial Pit Development TIS needs Revisions Hi, Attached and below is our follow-up for your TIS update as discussed on Tuesday, please review and modify for your resubmittal with the County. Bhooshan with City of Greeley Public Works may also be reaching out shortly to go over some general items pertaining to the airport proximity. 1 Gin' or 41 ee e Brittany Hathaway Development Review Manager Community Development 1100 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 P: 970-350-9823 I brittany.hathaway@greeleygov.com www.greeleygov.com LEER GREEN ASSOCIATE From: Scott Logan <Scott. Loga n @ G reel eygov.com> Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 11:39 AM To: Brittany Hathaway <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.com> Subject: RE: Signed BAF - Sunset Industrial Pit Development TIS needs Revisions Brittany, Attached is the signed BAF with the comment that Sunset Industrial Pit Development's TIS dated 4-5-2024 needs to be resubmitted with revisions. The speed limit along 8th Street is 55 mph along this section whereas the TIS states a 45 mph speed limit zone. The submitted TIS also does not properly address access control/existing conditions and shows an entrance that will pose issues with future development on the south side of 8th Street. Other TIS requirements shall be addressed. Scott 2 Sunset Industrial Pit Development Staffs .eCOMm ended Access Loca',iatit, Cm did �V ti i reeI ev Propose cc Location Scott Logan City Traffic Engineer Public Works I Traffic Services 2835 10th Street I Greeley, CO 80631 Desk 970-350-9555 I scott.logan@greeleygov.com www.greeleygov.com Sunset Ind' Pit Develop Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate & - Tot.4 e fay TN MR PISS Vaal I lii+ ek; ++ Ai let Ding iirad =.t' ;an Leta at Ins 2OD Sapp 4n TAJO 10flab '0 $ Taal Sob r't3 From: Scott Logan Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 11:11 AM To: Brittany Hathaway <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.cor> Subject: FW: Sunset Industrial Pit Development - Site Plan and Proximity Map Brittany, FYI —This Sunset Industrial Pit development was presented to the PW Planning meeting this morning. Discussion included whether this development would impact the Airport's future plans/current operations since it is adjacent 3 to the Airport Authority's parcel. Bhooshan will be sending this attached site plan to them. Let me know if you need to discuss this information and/or have concerns. Scott S Sunset Industrial Pit Development cil"freelest C a' Scott Logan City Traffic Engineer Public Works I Traffic Services 2835 10th Street I Greeley, CO 80631 Desk 970-350-9555 I scott.logan@greeleygov.com www.greeleygov.com From: Scott Logan Sent: Friday, August 16, 2024 9:21 AM To: Bhooshan Karnik <Bhooshan.Karnik@Greeleygov.com> Cc: Brittany Hathaway <BrittonHathaway@Greeleov.com> Subject: Sunset Industrial Pit Development - Site Plan and Proximity Map Bhooshan, Attached is the Sunset Industrial Pit Development's site plan and proximity maps (shown below). This development is proposed as a quarry site with the crushers, screeners, conveyors and other machinery/equipment located on the north end of the parcel next to the Airport Authorities parcel. Let me know if you need more information. Scott 4 Sunset Industrial Pit Devet.pment t Anderson Sa Les lags ri,,Ef: Tidal Other T1 I .. 5 X 0 200 y r riiiiineit 1 R Nark +y. � Sri 7 S I Tat Tit "wrla lin d' l i b tQ 5 275 Tat tab 'N 31'ttii ell 42.114.3k.' r • riy SS T +alY�1 t .sat fIi trier MU ON n MIMI PM .'t' via tirek ,Y .• mist niparral 1 _ f 7 -`� 1 �' amOlt Y. f �,.. It. I • j � R� s s..q a✓! i I ad -F F. 4 II avid: a 044/94' ALI. C 4SF .IC fT _. -. __:......-= r>c'I 1 _ — ii,,- La- _ten t .r - ,} `pr r N._4 _ .�., .1O21t edit.d "• .l z ' - • ' +r +ir� ¢�I .re ►. .r'..f — - dam airs' • 1 tLys PrlixtraliNcIf, or F ar- trztlit, Nor* r' Iere I ' l 0 _e 1 I Y S 6l.Iy IYY►i els tame* ac. Kviatki 'LS .Mural. Yon. a tald moo tuvarcom Afl. i r sMYIa?{ir yic1 try II•..�i- a!Gl t or- maw - r- u�f dry dr DICIP • isizat-ai3 4 r —• I r• _ I Gib I �r ' f �9 !' 1Rtu[witll r M s i . II �,`. i •5. Ste.x '• 1_ «%like .1 Wadig `l I t.'t".• -.16Thit emir lets :6 :n _ "441 At lima I r -L 95k dOsia 0. grattesein 14i as PO 'z KPO IIY"Y —: a based 1.n - I - 4ti.a^t I - _'>3*i fawn' mmtro e - t:eb IE;!IY5 I N ItY.l� Y: r M OretStar Irc II rlt -sir._ x rI!• MA CPIILINE } sb• �r' A 1 vat rata -r.�• r Afj twtraci ; . tic li 3a- nY1tt. '- " r' lin I I * ocr :Y =Eire' (an ..s I W't 4 ! i {IIr wow.' .twai� 3 a •'• Y tear Pi" i 1 l •'tii+il:C • MSi I iLLUCIt kg rp ti+l-na k Mkt 'IC Ie. af` L r 1 Ms.:.- te1)'4i' y—� _s••�m .iii '-' core i &iis:c4i+73 ar a' -a r- Yt 1 Ii Austria! Pit T I/ Cer Greel Scott Logan City Traffic Engineer Public Works I Traffic Services 2835 10th Street I Greeley, CO 80631 Desk 970-350-9555 Iscott.logan@greeleygov.com www.greeleygov.com 8 Transportation Impact Study Base Assumption Form Project Information Project Name: Sunset Industrial Pit Transporation Impact Study Project Location: North of 8th Street and east of Cherry Street TIS Assumptions Type of Study Memo Intermediate I Full 1 Study Area Boundaries North Project site h South 8th Street 8th Street West 8th Street East Future Growth Rates Short term 1.7% Long term 1.7% Study Intersections All access drives 1. 8th Street / site access 2. 3. 4. 5. Period for Study AM 7:00-9:00 IPM 4:00-6:00 I Sat. Noon Time Generation Rates Based on information provided by J2 Contracting Trip Trip Adjustment Factors Passby: None Captive None Market: Mode Split Assumptions None Other Traffic Studies None Active Modes Analysis No alternative modes are anticipated with this land use. Other Study Areas Requiring Special The Street submitted an Other TIS dated is 55 entrance TIS TIS requirements None mph that 4-5-2024 along also does will this pose needs section not issues shall properly be to with addressed. be whereas resubmitted address future the development with TIS access revisions. states a control/existing on 45 the mph The south speed speed conditions side limit limit of 8th along zone. and Street. 8th shows The Date:_ July 24, 2024 Traffic Engineer: Greeley Traffic Engineer Page 227 o Single Unit Truck (Deliveries) Semi Truck with Trailer Tandem Dump Truck IPassenger Vehicles (Employees) it i 1411 g4 c 8 § kt g r1 8hgt m 1 cil `" 8 a a Trip Generation Estimate luauadowaa �.id U) C r� C r CD a C "t • a•S• Le) m fat • Diana Aungst From: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2024 8:47 AM To: Diana Aungst Cc: Chris Leone Subject: FW: Sunset Industrial - Proposal Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Diana Here is the correspondence from Greeley regarding the improvements/road maintenance agreement and also the statement about not reducing the speed limit in this area of the access/property location on 8th Street. Regards, J.C. J.C. York, P.E. J&T Consulting, Inc. 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Fort Lupton, CO 80621 Office: (303) 857-6222 Mobile: (970) 222-9530 FAX: (303) 857-6224 From: Brittany Hathaway <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.com> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 3:30 PM To: Chris Leone <chrisleone@j2contracting.com> Cc: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Subject: RE: Sunset Industrial - Proposal Hi Chris, Please see below responses in bold. Thank you. reel ey Brittany Hathaway Development Review Manager 1 Community Development 1100 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 P: 970-350-9823 I brittany.hathaway@greeleygov.com www.greeleygov.com LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE From: Chris Leone <chrisleone@ j2contracting.com> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 9:42 AM To: Brittany Hathaway <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.com> Cc: JC York ( cyork@l-tconsulting.com) cjcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Subject: RE: Sunset Industrial - Proposal Hi Brittany, Were you able to review my email and questions below with your team? Thanks Chris Leone J-2 Contracting Co. 970-219-3916 From: Chris Leone Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2024 9:55 AM To: 'Brittany Hathaway' <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.com> Cc: JC York (jcyork@'-tconsulting.com) cjcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Subject: RE: Sunset Industrial - Proposal Thanks Brittany, A couple answers to your questions: An improvements agreement limited to the site construction timeframe makes sense. If you are OK with it I will work through redlining the dates and language of the agreement you sent to reflect this and return it to you for review. We are currently set to go before the Weld County Board on November 1St for approval so I believe we would need to get the agreement in place before then to address your referral comments. This works for us. I apologize for my error on the 45 mph signage, it was a failed attempt to use Google Earth. Please clarify that the City is not willing to keep the speed limit at 45mph through our proposed entrance and we will adjust the Traffic Study accordingly. At this time the city would not support the speed Limit change. In terms of the airport we are coordinating with Cooper Anderson with the Weld County Airport and are working through the required aeronautical study. Thanks! Chris Leone J-2 Contracting Co. 970-219-3916 2 From: Brittany Hathaway <Brittany.Hathaway@Greeleygov.com> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2024 8:48 AM To: Chris Leone <chrisleone@j2contracting.com> Subject: Sunset Industrial - Proposal Hi Chris, I met with our Public Works team and we agree that the Roadway Agreement is appropriate during the initial construction period when the Sunset Industrial Pit developer is hauling their equipment into the site. When you resubmit the application to the County we can review the language in detail to limit to the construction period. Also, the assertion about the change of speed limit to 45 mph along 8th Street a few hundred feet west of the proposed entrance is not correct. This speed limit change along 8th Street is 4,000 west of their site at the Balsom Avenue. The City also has some concerns about proximity to the airport. If you have not already, please ensure you complete FAA Form 7460 to determine if there are airspace impacts. We do not have assistance with this process but you may reach out to the County with any questions. Thank you, Brittany Hathaway Development Review Manager Community Development 1100 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 P: 970-350-9823 I brittany.hathaway@greeLeygov.com www.greeleygov.com LEER GREEN ASSOCIATE 3 Diana Aungst From: JC York <jcyork@j-tconsulting.com> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 11:48 AM To: Diana Aungst Cc: Chris Leone Subject: Responses to City of Greeley Comments/Concerns regarding USR24-0016 - Sunset Industrial Pit Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Diana Per our phone conversations and the comments/concerns provided by City of Greeley we have the following responses: Greeley Community Development - Planning 1. Sunset Industrial, LLC is not interested in annexation to the City of Greeley at this time. 2. We have provided haul route information and an updated TIS to Brittany Hathaway with the City of Greeley Community Development Engineering group. 3. We have provided an updated TIS to Brittany Hathaway with the City of Greeley Community Development Engineering group an also located the entrance for ingress/egress per their comments. 4. We have been working with the airport and received an aeronautical study back from the FAA providing an approval with no obstruction designation. We have also been working with Mr. Cooper Anderson to address their comments. 5. We are not in City of Greeley and we are providing these items per Weld County's standards and criteria. 6. We are not in City of Greeley and we are providing these items per Weld County's standards and criteria. 7. We are not in City of Greeley and we are providing these items per Weld County's standards and criteria. 8. A T&E Screening and Aquatic Resources/Wetlands screening was completed and provided to the DRMS (Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety) and Weld County. We also conducted an archeological survey as well and provided to the DRMS and Weld County. The DRMS has approved our State mining permit. Greeley Community Development - Engineering 9. The location is not within the City of Greeley MS4 permit as the property is in Weld County and not within the City of Greeley city limits. We confirmed this with the City's stormwater department staff. 10. The pond will potentially have stormwater that will infiltrate into the alluvium within the required times. There will also be the ability to pump out within the required times should the infiltration slow down. 11. Sunset Industrial, LLC will have a SWSP in place prior to exposing any groundwater to take care of any uses or depletions. Discharge will be pumped if needed if the infiltration slows down where the storm water requires removal to ensure it is removed within the required times. 1 12. Slurry walls will be installed prior to exposing groundwater within the mining limits. There are areas that will be mined prior to installation of the slurry wall because groundwater ranges from 18 feet to 40 feet below the ground surface (per our existing ground water monitoring wells) so they can be mined without exposing groundwater. 13. The slurry walls will be installed prior to dewatering so that there will be no impact to ground water. The mine site will begin mining above the existing groundwater level where dewatering will not be required. Once the mining progresses to a point where mining can no longer occur above the groundwater levels a slurry wall will be installed to seal off the proposed mine cell(s) where groundwater cannot enter into the pit so it is isolated from the alluvial aquifer and any dewatering inside the slurry wall will not impact anything outside the slurry wall. The slurry wall will also be certified and approved by the Division of Water Resources after a 90 day leak test has been passed to meet the States performance standard per the Division of Water Resources requirements. A groundwater model was also performed and accepted by the DRMS (Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety) showing the impacts of the slurry wall on the groundwater table. The area south of the proposed mine shows a decrease in the ground water table of one foot or less (shown on the impact map snapshot below) which will not impact the performance of any wells in the vicinity as the saturated thickness of the aquifer is greater than 40 feet (difference between the groundwater level and bedrock). ,LIAL-28174 4 62'0WCB 280641 f '68387-F•R 12678-R"°'SeePt "dr �S 71582 13884-R 2 14. Acknowledged that the Greeley Public Space Permit will be needed for doing roadway connection for entrance within the public ROW. 15. Currently working with Brittany on this and have provided both documents to her. Natural Areas and Trails Sunset Industrial, LLC is not interested in providing a trail corridor at this time but may be in the future after final reclamation and would entertain a discussion with NAT for a potential purchase for those uses. Let me know if you have any questions or if you need any additional information. Regards, J.C. J.C. York, P.E. J&T Consulting, Inc. 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Fort Lupton, CO 80621 Office: (303) 857-6222 Mobile: (970) 222-9530 FAX: (303) 857-6224 3 Diana Aungst From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Young - CDOT, Allyson <allyson.young@state.co.us> Monday, August 12, 2024 10:30 AM Diana Aungst Timothy Bilobran - CDOT; Robert (Mike) Shepherd - CDOT Re: FW: Referral Agency Email Flag for follow up Flagged Caution This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Diana, CDOT's comments on the TIS dated April 5th, 2024 are as follows. The study states that 67% of traffic will be traveling to the west toward US 85, but does not include any evaluation of the US 85 intersection or mention of the US 85 ACP. The study will need to be revised to include site generated and total long range traffic counts in passenger car equivalents per the definitions in the State Highway Access Code. Any existing auxiliary lane lengths should be evaluated to determine whether or not their lengths are sufficient for the storage required for the total traffic counts in the long range (the evaluation should be numerical and not completed using LOS). The study should also address whether or not any new auxiliary lanes are warranted at the intersection. Thanks, Ally On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 6:27 PM Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov>wrote: Hi all: Please provide comments on this case. It is adjacent to the airport and we have concerns from the airport and the property owner to the south about truck traffic generated by this gravel mine. Thanks, Diana Aungst AICP, CFM Principal Planner 1 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N. 17th Avenue, PO Box 758, Greeley, Colorado 80632 D: 970-400-3524 O: 970-400-6100 Fax: 970-304-6498 daungst@weld.gov www.weld.gov Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: noreply@weld.gov <noreply@weld.gov> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 11:54 AM To: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Subject: Referral Agency Email This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The Weld County Planning Department has received a Planning Use By Special Review application, case # USR24-0016, in which your agency may have an interest. Planning staff requests you review the application materials, and return the Referral Form to Diana Aungst by the date specified on the Referral Form attached in the online permitting center. To view application materials, visit https://aca-prod.accela.com/WELD/Default.aspx or navigate to weldgov.com > departments > planning and zoning > online e -permitting. Then, * Click on "Planning" tab on the menu bar * Under General Search, type case# USR24-0016, into the Record Number box and search * Click on the "Record Info" arrow drop -down menu * Click on "Attachments" to review the application materials If you have any questions, please contact your assigned planner: Diana Aungst at 970-400-6100 2 Thank you, Diana Aungst 1402 North 17th Ave Greeley, CO 80631 970-400-6100 daungst@weld.gov Thank you, Allyson Young Region 4 Access Manager - Traffic COLORADO Department of Transportation P 970 381 8995 10601 West 10th Street, Greeley, CO 80634 allyson.young@state.co.us I http://codot.gov/ I www.cotrip.orq Diana Aungst From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Joe Henderson<joe@sustainabletrafficsolutions.com> Thursday, October 31, 2024 2:29 PM Valdes - CDOT, Rose Melissa King; Young - CDOT, Allyson; Timothy Bilobran - CDOT; Robert (Mike) Shepherd - CDOT; JC York; Diana Aungst Re: FW: USR24-0016 Traffic Impact Study - Review Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Rose & Tim, Thanks for taking the time to meet today. My notes from the meeting are in red. Please let me know if you have any questions. Joe US -85 818th St (PEL US -85 Section 3) The PEL estimates that traffic volume along US -85 will double by 2035. The analysis performed in the study is acceptable. 1.4.1 Safety Problems. The PEL also sites safety concerns along the entirety of US -85, specifically noting truck related safety concerns. Although at the time of the PEL, crash data did not include 8th St, Section 3 has the highest concentration of accidents of any of the US -85 Sections. There are more than 100 crashes noted from 16th St to CR 13 all specifically noting truck related safety concerns. Due to this site generated truck traffic, it is important that a full analysis of US -85 and 8th St be done. The signalized intersection will be analyzed for the long-term scenario. Note that the mining will be completed in the quarry in approximately 13 years. Therefore, the long-term horizon year will be Year 2038. Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate PCE conversion is unclear. Please break down the types of vehicles and their individual conversion to PCE. The conversion to PCE will be included in the report. Hourly Trip Generation "Trip Generation estimate was provided by J&T Consulting. ' Inbound and outbound truck traffic is evenly distributed over each operating hour. r he Y r t Handbook Hourly Distribution of Entering and Exiting Vehicle Trips by Land Use provides hourly fluctuations in traffic for all land uses with virtually all types of land use having a Peak AM and Peak PM. Please revisit this. Chris Leone confirmed that inbound traffic and outbound traffic are roughly the same each hour. The exceptions are the first and last hours of the day. Therefore, Table 2 will be modified with this change. 3.0 Truck Traffic US -85 S of 8th St. Total Volume 20,404, trucks 2,784 (14%) 1 Were the 2,784 trucks part of the 20,404 without a PCE conversion? Please provide a table that more clearly illustrates the PCE conversion. Also, please advise which STS table this total corresponds to. The volumes in the table in Section 3.0 are total volumes on the roadway to calculate the percentage of trucks to u se in the analysis. They are not intended to be converted to POE. US -85 S of 8th St. Total Volume 21,948, trucks 2,581 (12%) Were the 2,581 trucks part of the 21,948 without a PCE conversion? Please provide a table that more clearly illustrates the PCE conversion. Also, please advise which STS table this total corresponds to. The volumes in the table in Section 3.0 are total volumes on the roadway to calculate the percentage of trucks to u se in the analysis. They are not intended to be converted to POE. Table 1. Indicates the Year 2024 total traffic as the highlighted numbers above. Please provide a revised table that includes passenger vehicles, trucks, PCE multiple, and Total. The volumes in Table 1 are background and total volumes for each horizon year. They are not intended to be converted to POE. 2045 Horizon Year -Auxiliary Lane Analyses The TIS indicates auxiliary lane analysis was done based upon 2030. Must be 2045. The auxiliary lane analysis will be updated to Year 2038. Possible future improvements including the PEL proposed Texas Turnaround also noted as Long Term Priority in the ACP with no known date of implementation should not be taken into consideration. A signalized intersection will be assumed in Year 2038. The TIS indicates no improvements are possible due to the bridge just before the intersection. White this may u ltimately be taken into consideration, CDOT still requires a full evaluation of traffic at the intersection. The auxiliary lane analysis will be performed regardless of constraints. The percentage increase in POE will be n oted for all of the movements impacted by the development. SHAG requires a 20 -year horizon. This was noted by Ally in CDOT's original comments. The revised study did not include Year 2045 analysis. The long-term horizon will be Year 2038 because the mining will be completed in approximately 13 years. Distribution The TIS indicates 70% of traffic traveling west to US -85, then 35% NB and 35% SB on US -85. The TIS indicates the intersection could not be analyzed as the final configuration is not known. Traffic should be analyzed based upon the current intersection configuration. A signalized intersection will be assumed in Year 2038. On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 3:59 PM Valdes - CDOT, Rose <rose.valdes@state.co.us>wrote: Good Afternoon Melissa, US -85 & 8t" St (PEL US -85 Section 3) The PEL estimates that traffic volume along US -85 will double by 2035. 1.4.1 Safety Problems. The PEL also sites safety concerns along the entirety of US -85, specifically noting truck related safety concerns. Although at the time of the PEL, crash data did not include 8th St, Section 3 has the 2 highest concentration of accidents of any of the US -85 Sections. There are more than 100 crashes noted from 16th St to CR 13 all specifically noting truck related safety concerns. Due to this site generated truck traffic, it is important that a full analysis of US -85 and 8th St be done. Table 2. Trip Generation Estimate PCE conversion is unclear. Please break down the types of vehicles and their individual conversion to PCE. Hourly Trip Generation "Trip Generation estimate was provided by J&T Consulting." Inbound and outbound truck traffic is evenly distributed over each operating hour. The ITE Handbook Hourly Distribution of Entering and Exiting Vehicle Trips by Land Use provides hourly fluctuations in traffic for all land uses with virtually all types of land use having a Peak AM and Peak PM. Please revisit this. 3.0 Truck Traffic US -85 S of 8th St. Total Volume 20,404, trucks 2,784 (14%) Were the 2,784 trucks part of the 20,404 without a PCE conversion? Please provide a table that more clearly illustrates the PCE conversion. Also, please advise which STS table this total corresponds to. US -85 S of 8th St. Total Volume 21,948, trucks 2,581 (12%) Were the 2,581 trucks part of the 21,948 without a PCE conversion? Please provide a table that more clearly illustrates the PCE conversion. Also, please advise which STS table this total corresponds to. Table 1. Indicates the Year 2024 total traffic as the highlighted numbers above. Please provide a revised table that includes passenger vehicles, trucks, PCE multiple, and Total. 2045 Horizon Year - Auxiliary Lane Analyses The TIS indicates auxiliary lane analysis was done based upon 2030. Must be 2045. Possible future improvements including the PEL proposed Texas Turnaround also noted as Long Term Priority in the ACP with no known date of implementation should not be taken into consideration. The TIS indicates no improvements are possible due to the bridge just before the intersection. While this may ultimately be taken into consideration, CDOT still requires a full evaluation of traffic at the intersection. SHAG requires a 20 -year horizon. This was noted by Ally in CDOT's original comments. The revised study did not include Year 2045 analysis. Distribution The TIS indicates 70% of traffic traveling west to US -85, then 35% NB and 35% SB on US -85. The TIS indicates the intersection could not be analyzed as the final configuration is not known. Traffic should be analyzed based upon the current intersection configuration. Should you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to ask. Kindest Regards, Rose Valdes 3 Assistant Access Manager COLORADO Department of Transportation 10601 West 10th Street, Greeley, CO 80634 Rose.Vaides@state.co.us I http://codot.gov/ I www.cotrip.or Office Phone (970) 939-2440 COLORADO Division of Water Resources Department of Natural Resources October 25, 2024 Diana Aungst Weld County Planning Department Transmission via email: daungst@weldgov.com Re: Sunset Industrial Pit (M-2023-001) Case Number USR24-0016 Pt. W 1/2, Section 3, Twp. 5N, Rng. 65W, 6th P.M. Water Division 1, Water District 3 Dear Ms. Aungst: We have reviewed the above referenced application for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review permit for open mining of sand and gravel. The submitted material does not appear to qualify as a "subdivision" as defined in section 30-28-101(10)(a), C.R.S. Therefore, pursuant to the State Engineer's March 4, 2005 and March 11, 2011 memorandums to county planning directors, this office will only perform a cursory review of the referral information and provide comments regarding the proposed water supply. The comments wilt not state an opinion on the adequacy of the water supply or the ability of the water supply plan to satisfy any County regulations or requirements, and cannot be used to guarantee the approval of the pending substitute water supply plan or well permit application. The application is in regards to a proposed sand and gravel mining operation known as the Sunset Industrial Pit, which will be operated under Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DBMS) permit no. M-2023-001. The reclaimed land uses upon completion of the mining operation are proposed to be lined water storage reservoirs. The deposit to be mined ranges from approximately 40 to 107 feet thick and is overlain by approximately 0 to 14 feet of sandy clays and clayey to silty sands. Before the operator may expose or use any groundwater at the site, the site must first be included in a water court approved plan for augmentation or a SWSP approved by this office. The applicant has not submitted a request for a substitute water supply plan to this office or an application for a gravel pit well permit. The final reclamation plan includes unlined ponds of exposed groundwater at the site. The ponds will be required to be included in a plan for augmentation decreed by the water court prior to final release of the site from their DRMS permit. 1313 Sherman street, Room 821, Denver, co .80203 P 3.1 6.3581 hit t r : / .iii (Mr. color Aldo . o'5; .';4.red S_ Polls, Governor I Dan Gibbs, Executive director I Jason T U llrnei iiiil, slate Lr i ineer/ Uirec Lcr Sunset Industrial Pit (M-2023-001) October 25, 2024 Case No. USR24-001 6 Page 2 of 2 The applicant proposes that 60 employees will be on site, and there will be approximately 5 visitors per week to the site. Bottled water will be provided for their use. There is an existing well on the property with well permit no. 28964. Records available to this office indicate that the well with permit no. 28964 was decreed as the Davis Well No. 3 in Division 1 Water Court case no. W-5466 for stock watering, domestic uses, fire protection and lawn irrigation of less than one acre. The allowed use of the well is limited to those specific domestic uses (number of homes and/or area lawn and garden irrigation) served by the welt prior to May 8, 1972. If the property owner will have no use for this well, then it should be plugged and abandoned as evidenced by submittal of a Well Abandonment Report. Stormwater wilt be diverted into the open pit or to the sediment settling pounds. Water from the sediment settling ponds will be discharged to the recharge pond area. No additional stormwater detention facilities are proposed. All stormwater runoff intercepted by this operation must infiltrate into the ground or be released to the stream system within 72 hours, otherwise the operator wilt need to make replacements for evaporation from the surface area of the intercepted stormwater. Should you or the applicant have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at this office at 303-866-3581 x8245 or via email at kathleen.fuller@state.co.us. Sincerely, 74/aTictict, Kate Fuller, P.E. Water Resources Engineer Cc: Applicant Well permit file no. 28964 Referral file no. 32532 From: Krull, Kandice (FAA) <Kandice.Krull@faa.gov> Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 8:15 AM To: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Cc: Maxwell Nader <mnader@weld.gov> Subject: RE: USR24-0016 gravel pit adjacent to the Weld -County airport Caution This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning Diana, I discussed the information you provided with my coworkers and we determined that the proximity of the gravel pit should not prohibit the airport from obtaining their Part 139 certification. However, we concur with the concerns raised by the airport in their August 8, 2024 email. Ponds that result from mining activities often attract large numbers of potentially hazardous wildlife. Development of new open water facilities within 10,000 feet of an airport should be avoided to prevent wildlife attractants. If the water features are necessary, the gravel pit company should develop a wildlife hazard management plan, in coordination with the airport, to ensure a safe airport environment. The FAA recommends these plans be developed in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist , to minimize hazardous wildlife attractants. The USDA APHIS Wildlife Services has qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists that might be able to help assist the gravel pit in developing the plan. We would encourage the inclusion of stipulations to protect the airport in the permit, if possible. Such as strict adherence to the dust abatement plan, inclusion of wildlife hazard management plan and mitigation, and the ability to address any unforeseen negative impacts to the airport in the future. I am not sure what the future reclamation plans include, but the FAA has concerns with the area being filled with water at the end of operations. A water feature of this size within 10,000 feet of the airport could cause future wildlife hazards for the airport. I have attached two of FAA's wildlife hazard advisory circulars (ACs) that provides additional information. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any additional questions. Thanks so much for reaching out to the FAA. We appreciate the opportunity to comment. Kandice Kandice Krull Environmental Protection Specialist FAA - Denver Airports District Office 303-342-1261 From: Diana Aungst <daungst@weld.gov> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2024 8:07 AM To: Krull, Kandice (FAA) <Kandice.Krull@faa.gov> Cc: Maxwell Nader <mnader@weld.gov> Subject: USR24-0016 gravel pit adjacent to the Weld -County airport CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Kandice, Weld County has received a request to submit a permit (Use by Special Review) to allow a gravel pit to commence operation adjacent to the Weld -Greeley airport. The understanding is that the Weld -Greeley airport is under consideration to be `converted' to a commercial airport (Part 139 certification). Could you please let me know if the proximity of the gravel pit would prohibit this conversion. 600 Airport Rd. #A, Greeley, CO 80631 ECST 1/1 1,- r, / WV k_. r\ tat County Road 62 CR 62 Li 4- ..j 8TH ST !-a I 4. - — _ ttit LL si -' a' 441 .. 2 2J i v to' h az -Easc_$th.Street _ CR 6C _ — di. — .31. — — — - —u. _14 _- - IL. _ - _ — - - --_ .� - _. - - - - ..J1 1144 - Weld County GIS I © OpenStreetMap conl Thanks, Diana Aungst AICP, CFM Principal Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1402 N 17th Ave, Greeley, CO 80631 D: 970-400-3524 I O: 970-400-6100 daungst@weld.gov I www.weld.gov Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. 0 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Subject: Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports Advisory Circular Date: 02/21/2020 AC No: 150/5200-33C Initiated By: AAS-300 Change: 1 Purpose. This Advisory Circular (AC) provides guidance on certain land uses that have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports. It also discusses airport development projects (including airport construction, expansion, and renovation) affecting aircraft movement near hazardous wildlife attractants. Appendix 1 provides definitions of terms used in this AC. 2 Cancellation. This AC cancels AC 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports, dated August 28, 2007. 3 Application. The Federal Aviation Administration recommends the guidance in this AC for land uses that have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports. This AC does not constitute a regulation, is not mandatory, and is not legally binding in its own right. It will not be relied upon as a separate basis by the FAA for affirmative enforcement action or other administrative penalty. Conformity with this AC is voluntary, and nonconformity will not affect rights and obligations under existing statutes and regulations, except as follows: 1 Airports that hold Airport Operating Certificates issued under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 139, Certification of Airports, Subpart D, may use the standards, practices and recommendations contained in this AC as one, but not the only, acceptable means of compliance with the wildlife hazard management requirements of Part 139. 2. The FAA recommends the guidance in this AC for airports that receive funding under Federal grant assistance programs, including the Airport Improvement Program. See Grant Assurance #34. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 3. The FAA recommends the guidance in this AC for projects funded by the Passenger Facility Charge program. See PFC Assurance #9. 4. The FAA recommends the guidance in this AC for land -use planners and developers of projects, facilities, and activities on or near airports. 4 Principal Changes. Changes are marked with vertical bars in the margin. Change in this AC include: 1. Clarification by the FAA that non -certificated airports are recommended to conduct a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (Assessment) or a Wildlife Hazard Site Visit (Site Visit); 2. Table 1, Ranking of Hazardous Species, has been moved to Advisory Circular 150/5200-32, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft. Strikes (5/31/2013); 3. Consolidation and reorganization of discussion on land uses of concern; and updated procedures for evaluation and mitigation. Discussion addresses off -airport hazardous wildlife attractants, followed by discussion of on -airport attractants. It also clarifies language regarding the applicability of the AC. 5 Background. 1. Information about the risks posed to aircraft by certain wildlife species has increased a great deal in recent years. Improved reporting, studies, documentation, and statistics clearly show that aircraft collisions with birds and other wildlife are a serious economic and public safety problem. While many species of wildlife can pose a risk' to aircraft safety, they are not equally hazardous2. These hazard rankings can help focus hazardous wildlife management efforts on those species or groups that represent the greatest risk to safe air and ground operations in the airport environment. Used in conjunction with a site -specific Assessment that will determine the relative abundance and use patterns of wildlife species, these rankings combined with a systematic risk analysis can help airport operators better understand the general threat level (and consequences) of certain wildlife species. Also, the rankings can assist with the creation of a "high risk" list of hazardous species that warrant immediate attention. 2. Most public -use airports have large tracts of open, undeveloped land that provide added margins of safety and noise mitigation. These areas can also present potential hazards to aviation if they encourage wildlife to enter an airport's approach or departure airspace or aircraft operations area. Constructed or natural areas such as 1 Risk is the relationship between the severity and probability of a threat. It is the product of hazard level and abundance in the critical airspace, and is thus defined as the probability of a damaging strike with a given species. Hazardous wildlife are species of wildlife (birds, mammals, reptiles), including feral and domesticated animals, not under control that may pose a direct hazard to aviation (i.e., strike risk to aircraft) or an indirect hazard such as an attractant to other wildlife that pose a strike hazard or are causing structural damage to airport facilities (e.g., burrowing, nesting, perching). 11 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C poorly drained locations, detention/retention ponds, roosting habitats on buildings, landscaping, odor -causing rotting organic matter (putrescible waste) disposal operations, wastewater treatment plants, agricultural or aquaculture activities, surface mining, wetlands, or some conservation -based land uses can provide wildlife with ideal locations for feeding, loafing, reproduction, and escape. Even small facilities, such as fast food restaurants, taxicab staging areas, rental car facilities, aircraft viewing areas, and public parks, can produce substantial attractions for hazardous wildlife. 3. During the past century, wildlife -aircraft strikes have resulted in the loss of hundreds of lives worldwide, as well as billions of dollars in aircraft damage. Hazardous wildlife attractants on and near airports can jeopardize future airport expansion, making proper community land -use planning essential. This AC provides airport operators and those parties with whom they cooperate with the guidance they need to assess and address potentially hazardous wildlife attractants when locating new facilities and implementing certain land -use practices on or near public -use airports. 6 Memorandum of Agreement Between Federal Resource Agencies. The FAA, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Wildlife Services signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to acknowledge their respective missions in protecting aviation from wildlife hazards. Through the MOA, the agencies established procedures necessary to coordinate their missions to address more effectively existing and future environmental conditions contributing to collisions between wildlife and aircraft (wildlife strikes) throughout the United States. These efforts are intended to minimize wildlife risks to aviation and human safety while protecting the Nation's valuable environmental resources. 7 Feedback on this AC. If you have suggestions for improving this AC, you may use the Advisory Circular Feedback form at the end of this AC. 5hn R. Dermody Director of Airport Safety and Standards 111 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C CONTENTS Paragraph Page Chapter 1. General Separation Criteria for Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports 1-1 1.1 Introduction1-1 1.2 Airports Serving Piston -Powered Aircraft1-1 1.3 Airports Serving Turbine -Powered Aircraft1-2 1.4 Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace. 1-2 Chapter 2. Land -Use Practices on or Near Airports that Potentially Attract Hazardous Wildlife 2-1 2.1 General2-1 2.2 Waste Disposal Operations. 2-2 2.3 Water Management Facilities2-4 2.4 Wetlands. 2-8 2.5 Dredge Spoil Containment Areas. 2-10 2.6 Agricultural Activities. 2-10 2.7 Aquaculture2-12 2.8 Golf Courses, Landscaping, Structures and Other Land -Use Considerations2-14 2.9 Habitat for State and Federally -Listed Species on Airports2-16 2.10 Synergistic Effects of Surrounding Land Uses2-17 Chapter 3. Procedures for Wildlife Hazard Management by Operators of Public - Use Airports and Conditions for Non -Certificated Airports to Conduct Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Wildlife Hazard Site Visits 3-1 3.1 Introduction3-1 3.2 Coordination with Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists3-1 3.3 Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A Manual For Airport Personnel3-1 3.4 Wildlife Hazard Site Visits and Wildlife Hazard Assessments3-2 3.5 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan3-2 3.6 Local Coordination. 3-3 3.7 Operational Notifications of Wildlife Hazards3-3 3.8 Federal and State Depredation Permits3-4 lv 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Chapter 4. Recommended Procedures for the FAA, Airport Operators and Other Government Entities Regarding Off -Airport Attractants 4-1 4.1 FAA Notification and Review of Proposed Land -Use Practice Changes in the Vicinity of Public -Use Airports4-1 4.2 Waste Management Facilities. 4-2 4.3 Other Land -Use Practice Changes. 4-3 4.4 Coordination to Prevent Creation of New Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife Attractants. 4-4 4.5 Coordination on Existing Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife Attractants. 4-5 4.6 Prompt Remedial Action4-5 4.7 FAA Assistance4-5 Appendix A. Definitions of Terms Used in this Advisory Circular A-1 Appendix B. Additional Resources B-1 v 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Page Intentionally Blank vi 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C CHAPTER 1. GENERAL SEPARATION CRITERIA FOR HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE ATTRACTANTS ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS 1.1 Introduction. 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.4 Airport operators should maintain an appropriate environment for the safe and efficient operation of aircraft, which entails mitigating wildlife strike hazards by fencing, modifying the landscape in order to deter wildlife or by hazing or removing wildlife hazardous to aircraft from congregating on airports. When considering proposed land uses, operators and sponsors of airports certificated under Part 139, local planners, and developers must take into account whether the proposed land uses, including new development projects, will increase wildlife hazards. Land -use practices that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife populations on or near airports, specifically those listed in Chapter 2, can significantly increase the potential for wildlife strikes. The FAA urges regulatory agencies and planning and zoning agencies to evaluate proposed new land uses within the separation criteria and prevent the creation of land uses that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife within the separation distances. The FAA recommends the use of minimum separation criteria outlined below for land -use practices that attract hazardous wildlife to the vicinity of airports. Please note that FAA criteria include land uses that cause movement of hazardous wildlife onto, into, or across the airport's approach or departure airspace or aircraft operations area. (See the discussion of the synergistic effects of surrounding land uses in Paragraph 2.8 of this AC.). For the purpose of evaluating distance criteria, the delineation of the aircraft operations area may also consider future airport development plans depicted on the Airport Layout Plan (e.g., planned runway extension). The separation distances are based on (1) flight patterns and performance criteria of piston -powered aircraft and turbine -powered aircraft, (2) the altitude at which most strikes happen (78 percent occur under 1,000 feet and 90 percent occur under 3,000 feet above ground level), and (3) National Transportation Safety Board recommendations. 1.2 Airports Serving Piston -Powered Aircraft. Airports that do not sell Jet -A fuel normally serve piston -powered aircraft. Notwithstanding more stringent requirements for specific land uses, the FAA recommends a separation distance of 5,000 feet from these airports for any of the hazardous wildlife attractants discussed in Chapter 2 or for new airport development projects meant to accommodate aircraft movement. This distance is to be maintained between the closest point of the airport's aircraft operations area and the hazardous wildlife attractant. Figure 1 depicts an example of the 5,000 -foot separation distance measured from the nearest aircraft operations area. 1-1 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 1.3 Airports Serving Turbine -Powered Aircraft. For airports serving turbine -powered aircraft, the FAA recommends a separation distance of 10,000 feet from these airports for any of the hazardous wildlife attractants discussed in Chapter 2 or for new airport development projects meant to accommodate aircraft movement. This distance is to be maintained between the closest point of the airport's aircraft operations area and the hazardous wildlife attractant. Figure 1 depicts an example of the 10,000 -foot separation distance from the nearest aircraft movement areas. 1.4 Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace. For all airports, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 miles between the closest point of the airport's aircraft operations area and the hazardous wildlife attractant. Special attention should be given to hazardous wildlife attractants that could cause hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace. Figure 1 depicts an example of the 5 -mile separation distance measured from the nearest aircraft operations area. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Figure 1. Example of recommended separation distances described in Chapter 1 within which hazardous wildlife attractants should be avoided, eliminated, or mitigated. + w w w w W W W 4 4. 4 k 4 + + + + + + + + 4 4 4. w w w w w 4 4 4' 4 w w w W w W w W w W 4 w W W w w w W w W w W w w 4 4' 4 W W W w W w 4 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 4 4 4 W W W 4 W 4 W w W w W W w W w W w W 4 4 4' 4 W W W W W W W W 4 4' 4 W W W W e - W N W W 4 W W W W W - W W W W W , 4' W W 4 N4 4 W W W w w W w W 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4 4 L k * 4. 4. * * N. 4. * * 4. 4. • W w w w W W w+ W w w w W W 4 + 4 w w W W W W - �\ + + + + + + 4� r 4� 4. 4. + + 4. + +t_ + + ▪ M3•. + + 40 W w W w ` e'w W w W w W s# W w W 4 ▪ 4 4 40. W w r ee W W W W P4,".W W 4 4 4 4 W W W W W W' W W WN W W 4' W W W W W W W ▪ etw W W W W W { W 4 4 `,4 4 W W w w W w W 9 4 4 4 W W W//{.{{./*, W W w �kw w W W 4 W w W w .r4 "� w W w W w {{ {{ {f k 4 4 ▪ W w w { { { { { { { { { { { % { { { { { { { {{{{{{{{ W '40 1• W W W 4 M 4 {{ {{ {{ { { {{ {{ {{ {{ {{ {/ {///{{/{{/{{/{{/{{/{{/{`x. W W ▪ �4.. w Wk k b * * I * * * {{ {{ {{{{{{{{{{{ {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ { {{ {{ // {{ �x { { { { { { {ft{ { { { { { {{{{{{{{{{ k k4. . W w •Y w lit w W {: {{ {{{{{{{{{{ {{ {{{{{{ {{ {{ {{ {{ {{ ../.. {{ {{ {{ {{ {{ {�, { { { { { {/{{ ..0/{ //{ {{ {{ { { { {{ {{ {{ {{ {{ { W w W w w II w W l d w lit . I W W 41 W IlW W I w W I 41 . I. W I W w I, i I14. 4 4. W I W W WI W It W W I W W k W W W W W\4 W W 44 W 4\ W W W ▪ W . W \W W ▪ W W w \ W w 4W 4.....\. + 4. \ * * \* ';\ W w" W W 4. \ 4. 41\ W w r + + + 4 W W w W + W W W 4 4 4. 4 k w W + W w W 4- 4' \ W W W W 4\ W W w taw w W W W W 1{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ /{ f f f // / f v {{{{{{{{ {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{ {{ {{ {{ {{ {{ / 4 { {{{{{{ {{{{{{{{{ er {{{{{{{, {{, {{{{� 4. { { { { { { { { { { { { + + 4 4 4. 4. + + W W W w ., W 4 4 4' 4 ti x + +\ + + +N,_ + + C. W W N.4 4 4' ' 4 W w N W w W w w w 4- 4 4 4 W w W 4 4' 4 • NW 4 4 4 W W W W W W W W W W W W W 4. W •i' ,� W W W W W W W W 4 M ▪ 4i -Y- �3• -Tie W ir W 4 4 4 4 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w 4 4 4 4 w W l4 W W W W W W W W W 4 4 4 4 W W W W W W 4. W W \ 4 4 4 W W W W w W W W W W W W * Mr-- 4-Y-- - 4 4 W W W W W W W - W r r r.4.4 r 4 W W W W W W W r W W x4' W 4 �,4 4' 40 w w W •t•,� W W 11 W w w w I 4 1 4 4 W W lw W w W w * 4 •V k k 4. W IW W Il w W W 4. + 4 ;I 4.4. 4 W CC4. W l I W W W W I W 4 4I 4 4 W W I4, W I W W W W W I 4 4 lb 4 W W L W li W W W W W I 4 4 I 4 W W * W V W w t I 4 4 I 4' t + T + C. + + W W l 4 4 I 4 W 4 4 4' 4 W w w W w 4 W W W * * * 4 4 L L * * 4' 4' + * 4 4' 4' * 4, * * * + 4 4 L L W w w'• w le w W w W W PERIIYIETEIS 4 4 W w W w W w W -- w W 4 4. 4. + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4 4 4. 4. + W W W W W W W w W W W w w 4 4 4 4 w w w W w w W W W w w W W W 4 4 4 4 W w W w w w W w w w w w W w W 4 4 4 4 w w w w W W w w W w W w w W w 4 M 4 4 W W W •�• .y NY PERIMETER A: For airports serving piston -powered aircraft, it is recommended hazardous wildlife attractants be 5,000 feet from the nearest aircraft operations area. PERIMETER B: For airports serving turbine -powered aircraft, it is recommended hazardous wildlife attractants be 10,000 feet from the nearest aircraft operations area. PERIMETER C: Recommended for all airports, 5 -mile range to protect approach, departure and circling airspace. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Page Intentionally Blank 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C CHAPTER 2. LAND -USE PRACTICES ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS THAT POTENTIALLY ATTRACT HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE 2.1 General. 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 Many types of vegetation, habitats and land use practices can provide an attractant to animals that pose a risk to aviation safety. Hazardous wildlife use the natural or artificial habitats on or near an airport for food, water or cover. The wildlife species and the size of the populations attracted to the airport environment vary considerably, depending on several factors, including land -use practices on or near the airport. In addition to the specific considerations outlined below, airport operators should refer to Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports manual, prepared by FAA and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) staff. (This manual is available in English, Spanish, and French). This manual, as well as other helpful resources can be viewed and downloaded free of charge from the Wildlife Strike Resources section of the FAA's wildlife hazard mitigation web site: http://www.FAA.gov/airports/airpoft safety/wildlife). 2.1.1.1 2.1.1.2 The USDA / Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) / Wildlife Services developed a new publication series on wildlife damage management and is available online. The Wildlife Damage Management Technical Series highlights wildlife species or groups of wildlife species that cause damage to agriculture, property and natural resources, and/or impact aviation and human health and safety. The publications can be found at: https://www.aphis.usda. gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/sa_reports/ct_ wi 1 dl ife+dam age+management+technical+series. Additional resources have been provided by the USDA / APHIS / Wildlife Services National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) at: https://wvwv. aphis.usda. gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/programs/nwr c/sa_publications/ct_research_ gateway. The NWRC Research Gateway contains research articles, reports, factsheets, technical notes, data and other materials on wildlife hazard mitigation, risk reduction, animal ecology, habitats, and advanced technologies and methodologies. This section discusses land -use practices having the potential to attract hazardous wildlife and threaten aviation safety. The FAA has determined that the land uses listed below are generally not compatible with safe airport operations when they are located within the separation distances provided in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. As a reminder, these types of land uses or facilities often require permits from the appropriate permitting agency. The FAA may work with the permitting agency to include conditions for monitoring and mitigation measures, if necessary. Ultimately, the permtttee is responsible for compliance to these conditions and the permitting agency is responsible for tracking compliance. 2-1 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.2 Waste Disposal Operations. Municipal solid waste landfills (municipal landfills) are known to attract large numbers of hazardous wildlife, particularly birds. Because of this, these operations, when located within the separations identified in the siting criteria in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4, are considered incompatible with safe airport operations. 2.2.1 Siting for New Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Subject to AIR 21. 2.2.1.1 2.2.1.2 2.2.1.3 2.2.1.4 Section 503 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (P. L. 106-181) (AIR 21), 49 U.S.C. § 44718(d), prohibits the construction or establishment of a new municipal landfill within 6 miles of certain public -use airports. Before these prohibitions apply, both the airport and the landfill must meet the very specific conditions described below. These restrictions do not apply to airports or landfills located within the state of Alaska. The airport must (1) have received a Federal grant(s) under 49 U.S.C. § 47101, et. seq.; (2) be under control of a public agency; (3) serve some scheduled air carrier operations conducted in aircraft with less than 60 seats; and (4) have total annual enplanements consisting of at least 51 percent of scheduled air carrier enplanements conducted in aircraft with less than 60 passenger seats. The proposed municipal landfill must (1) be within 6 miles of the airport, as measured from airport property line to the landfill property line, and (2) have started construction or establishment on or after April 5, 2001. Section 44718(d) only limits the construction or establishment of some new landfills. It does not limit the expansion, either vertical or horizontal, of existing landfills. Regarding existing municipal landfills and lateral expansions of landfills, 40 CFR § 258.10 requires owners or operators of a landfill units located within the separation distances provided in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 to demonstrate that the unit is designed and operated so that it does not pose a bird hazard to aircraft. To accomplish this, follow the instructions provided in Paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3, document the wildlife monitoring and mitigation procedures that are cooperatively developed, and place this documentation in the operating permit of the facility. 2.2.2 Siting for New Munici al Landfills Not Sub' ect to AIR 21. If an airport and a municipal landfill do not meet the criteria of § 44718(d), then FAA recommends against locating the landfill within the separation distances identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. In determining this distance separation, measurements should be made from the closest point of the airport property boundary to the closest point of the landfill property boundary. 2-2 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.2.3 Considerations for Existing Waste Disposal Facilities Within the Limits of Separation Criteria. The FAA recommends against airport development projects that would increase the number of aircraft operations or accommodate larger or faster aircraft near landfill operations located within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. In addition, in accordance with 40 CFR § 258.10, owners or operators of existing landfill units that are located within the separations listed in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 must demonstrate that the unit is designed and operated so it does not pose a bird hazard to aircraft. (See Paragraph 4.3.2 of this AC for a discussion of this demonstration requirement.) 2.2.4 Enclosed Trash Transfer Stations. Enclosed waste -handling facilities that receive garbage behind closed doors; process it via compaction, incineration, or similar manner; and remove all residue by enclosed vehicles generally are compatible with safe airport operations, provided they are constructed and operated properly and are not located on airport property or within the Runway Protection Zone. These facilities should not handle or store putrescible waste outside or in a partially enclosed structure accessible to hazardous wildlife. Trash transfer facilities that are open on one or more sides; or store uncovered quantities of municipal solid waste outside, even if only for a short time; or use semi -trailers that leak or have trash clinging to the outside; or do not control odors by ventilation and filtration systems (odor masking is not acceptable) do not meet the FAA's definition of fully enclosed trash transfer stations. The FAA considers fully enclosed waste -handling facilities constructed or operated incorrectly incompatible with safe airport operations if they are located closer than the separation distances specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. 2.2.5 2.2.6 Composting Operations on or near Airport Property. Composting operations that accept only yard waste (e.g., leaves, lawn clippings, or branches) generally do not attract hazardous wildlife. Sewage sludge, woodchips, and similar material are not municipal solid wastes and may be used as compost bulking agents. The compost, however, must never include food or other municipal solid waste. Composting operations should not be located on airport property unless effective, risk - reducing mitigations are in place. Off -airport property composting operations should be located no closer than the greater of the following distances: 1,200 feet from any aircraft operations area or the distance called for by airport design requirements (see AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design). This spacing should prevent material, personnel, or equipment from penetrating any Object Free Area, Obstacle Free Zone, Threshold Siting Surface, or Clearway. Airport operators should monitor composting operations located in proximity to the airport to ensure that steam or thermal rise does not adversely affect air traffic. Underwater Waste Discharges. The FAA recommends against the underwater discharge of any food waste (e.g., fish processing offal) within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 because it could attract scavenging hazardous wildlife. 2-3 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.2.7 Recycling Centers. Recycling centers that accept previously sorted non-food items, such as glass, newspaper, cardboard, aluminum, electronic, and household wastes such as paint, batteries, and oil, are, in most cases, not attractive to hazardous wildlife and are acceptable. 2.2.8 Construction and Demolition Debris Facilities. 2.2.8.1 2.2.8.2 2.2.8.3 Construction and demolition landfills generally do not attract hazardous wildlife and are acceptable if maintained in an orderly manner, admit no putrescible waste, and are not co -located with other waste disposal operations. However, construction and demolition landfills have similar visual and operational characteristics to putrescible waste disposal sites. When co -located with putrescible waste disposal operations, construction and demolition landfills are more likely to attract hazardous wildlife because of the similarities between these disposal facilities. Therefore, a construction and demolition landfill co -located with another waste disposal operation should be located outside of the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Airport operators should be aware that on -site storage of construction and maintenance debris, as well as out -of -service aircraft or aircraft components, may provide an attractant for hazardous species (e.g., nesting or perching locations). The FAA recommends these on -site areas be monitored and/or mitigated, if necessary. 2.2.9 Fly Ash Disposal. 2.2.9.1 2.2.9.2 The incinerated residue from resource recovery power/heat-generating facilities that are fired by municipal solid waste, coal, or wood is generally not a wildlife attractant because it no longer contains putrescible matter. Landfills accepting only fly ash are generally not considered to be wildlife attractants and are acceptable as long as they admit no putrescible waste of any kind, and are not co -located with other disposal operations that attract hazardous wildlife. Since varying degrees of waste consumption are associated with general incineration (not resource recovery power/heat-generating facilities), the FAA considers the ash from general incinerators a regular waste disposal by-product and, therefore, a hazardous wildlife attractant if disposed of within the separation criteria outlined in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. 2.3 Water Management Facilities. Drinking water intake and treatment facilities, storm water and wastewater treatment facilities, associated retention and settling ponds, ponds built for recreational use, ponds 2-4 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C and fountains for ornamental purposes, and ponds that result from mining activities often attract large numbers of potentially hazardous wildlife. Development of new open water facilities within the separation criteria identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 should be avoided to prevent wildlife attractants. If necessary, land -use developers and airport operators may need to develop management plans, in compliance with local and state regulations, to support the operation of storm water management facilities on or near all public -use airports to ensure a safe airport environment. The FAA recommends these plans be developed in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist3, to minimize hazardous wildlife attractants. 2.3.1 Existing Stormwater Management Facilities. 2.3.1.1 2.3.1.2 On -airport stormwater management facilities allow the quick removal of surface water, including discharges related to aircraft deicing, from impervious surfaces, such as pavement and terminal/hangar building roofs. Existing on -airport detention ponds collect stormwater, protect water quality, and control runoff. Because they slowly release water after storms, they may create standing bodies of water that can attract hazardous wildlife. Where the airport has developed a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan, Part 139 regulations require the immediate correction of any wildlife hazards arising from existing stormwater facilities located on or near airports using appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Airport operators should develop measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Where possible, airport operators should modify stormwater detention ponds to allow a maximum 48 -hour detention period for the design storm. The combination of open water and vegetation is particularly attractive to waterfowl and other hazardous wildlife. Water management facilities holding water longer than 48 hours should be maintained in a manner that keeps them free of both emergent and submergent vegetation. The FAA recommends that airport operators avoid or remove retention ponds and detention ponds featuring dead storage to eliminate standing water. Detention basins should remain totally dry between rainfalls. Where constant flow of water is anticipated through the basin, or where any portion of the basin bottom may remain wet, the detention facility should include a concrete or paved pad and/or ditch/swale in the bottom to prevent vegetation that may provide nesting habitat. Drainage basins with a concrete or paved pad should be maintained to prevent or remove any sediment build-up to prevent vegetation growth. 2.3.1.3 When it is not possible to drain a large detention pond completely, airport operators may use physical barriers, such as bird balls, wire grids, pillows, 3 See Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculums for Airport. Personnel. Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports. 2-5 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C or netting, to deter birds and other hazardous wildlife. When physical barriers are proposed, airport operators must evaluate their use, effectiveness and maintenance requirements. Airport operators must also ensure physical barriers will not adversely affect water rescue. Before installing any physical barriers over detention ponds on Part 139 airports, airport operators must get approval from the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office. 2.3.1.4 The FAA recommends that airport operators encourage off -airport stormwater treatment facility operators to incorporate appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques into stormwater treatment facility operating practices when their facility is located within the separation criteria specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. 2.3.2 New Stormwater Management Facilities. The FAA recommends that storm water management systems located within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 be designed and operated so as not to create above -ground standing water. Stormwater detention ponds should be designed, engineered, constructed, and maintained for a maximum 48 —hour detention period after the design storm and to remain completely dry between storms. To facilitate the control of hazardous wildlife, the FAA recommends the use of steep - sided, rip -rap or concrete lined, narrow, linear -shaped water detention basins. When it is not possible to place these ponds away from an airport's aircraft operations area (but still on airport property), airport operators may use physical barriers, such as bird balls, wire grids, floating covers, vegetation barriers (bottom liners), or netting, to prevent access of hazardous wildlife to open water and minimize aircraft -wildlife interactions. Caution is advised when nets or wire grids are used for deterring birds from attractants. Mesh size should be < 5 cm (2") to avoid entangling and killing birds and should not be made of a monofilament material. Grids installed above and across water to deter hazardous birds (e.g., waterfowl, cormorants, etc.) are different than using a small mesh covering but also provides an effective deterrent. Grid material, size, pattern and height above water may differ on a case -by -case basis. When physical barriers are used, airport operators must evaluate their use and ensure they will not adversely affect water rescue. Before installing any physical barriers over detention ponds on Part 139 airports, a review by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should be conducted, prior to approval from the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office. All vegetation in or around detention basins that provide food or cover for hazardous wildlife should be eliminated. If soil conditions and other requirements allow, the FAA encourages the use of underground storm water infiltration systems because they are less attractive to wildlife. 2.3.3 Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities. 2.3.3.1 The FAA recommends that airport operators immediately correct any wildlife hazards arising from existing wastewater treatment facilities located on or near the airport. 2-6 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.3.3.2 Where required, a wildlife management plan will outline appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Accordingly, airport operators should encourage wastewater treatment facility operators to incorporate measures, developed in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist, to minimize hazardous wildlife attractants. Airport operators should also encourage those wastewater treatment facility operators to incorporate these mitigation techniques into their standard operating practices. In addition, airport operators should consider the existence of wastewater treatment facilities when evaluating proposed sites for new airport development projects and avoid such sites when practicable. 2.3.4 New Wastewater Treatment Facilities. The FAA recommends against the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or associated settling ponds within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Appendix 1 defines wastewater treatment facility as "any devices and/or systems used to store, treat, recycle, or reclaim municipal sewage or liquid industrial wastes." The definition includes any pretreatment involving the reduction or elimination of pollutants prior to introducing such pollutants into a treatment facility. When a wastewater treatment facility is proposed within the separation criteria, the airport operator, project proponent, and local jurisdiction should discuss the proposed project location with regard to its location near the airport and the separation distances identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. If possible, a more suitable location for the proposed facility should be identified. If no other suitable location exists, FAA recommends that the proposed facility plans be reviewed by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist to identify measures to avoid or reduce the facility's potential to attract hazardous wildlife. If appropriate measures cannot be incorporated to reduce potential wildlife hazards, airport operators should document their opposition in a letter to the local jurisdiction. 2.3.5 Artificial Marshes. In warmer climates, wastewater treatment facilities sometimes employ artificial marshes and use submergent and emergent aquatic vegetation as natural filters. These artificial marshes may be used by some species of flocking birds, such as blackbirds and waterfowl, for breeding or roosting activities. The FAA recommends against establishing artificial marshes within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. 2.3.6 Wastewater Discharge and Sludge Disposal. The FAA recommends careful consideration regarding the discharge of wastewater or biosolids (i.e., secondarily treated sewage sludge) on airport property. Such discharges might improve soil moisture and quality on unpaved areas and lead to improved turf growth. Depending on the airfield plant communities and habitats present, this can be an attractive food source for many species of animals or, conversely, could result in limited attractiveness to hazardous wildlife. Also, improved turf requires more frequent mowing and could attract geese. Airports should improve their turf with the goal of a monoculture of turf that is least attractive to wildlife. Wastewater or biosolids 2-7 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C applications might assist in achieving this goal. Caution should be exercised when discharges saturate airfield areas adjacent to paved surfaces. The resultant soft, muddy conditions could restrict or prevent emergency vehicles from reaching accident sites in a timely manner. 2.4 Wetlands. Wetlands provide a variety of functions and can be regulated by local, state, and Federal laws. Wetlands can be attractive to many types of wildlife, including many which rank high on the list of hazardous wildlife species (Table 1 - AC 150/5200-32). Some types of wetlands are not as attractive to wildlife as others and they should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis to determine the likelihood of proposed wetlands increasing the numbers of hazardous wildlife at the airport. Factors such as size, shape, location, canopy cover and vegetative composition among other things should be considered when determining compatibility. Note: If questions exist as to whether an area qualifies as a wetland, contact the District Office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, or a wetland consultant qualified to delineate wetlands. 2.4.1 Existing Wetlands on or near Airport Property. If wetlands are located on or near airport property, airport operators should be alert to any wildlife use or habitat changes in these areas that could affect safe aircraft operations. At public -use airports, the FAA recommends immediately correcting, in cooperation with local, state, and Federal regulatory agencies, any wildlife hazards arising from existing wetlands located on or near airports within 5 miles of the aircraft operations area. Where required, a wildlife management plan will outline appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Accordingly, airport operators should develop measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in consultation with a FAA Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. 2.4.2 New Airport Development. Whenever possible, the FAA recommends locating new airports using the separations from wetlands identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Where alternative sites are not practicable, or when airport operators are expanding an existing airport into or near wetlands, a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist, in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the state wildlife management agency should evaluate the wildlife hazards and prepare a wildlife management plan that indicates methods of minimizing the hazards. 2.4.3 Mitigation for Wetland Impacts from Airport Projects. Wetland mitigation may be necessary when unavoidable wetland disturbances result from new airport development projects or projects required to correct wildlife hazards from wetlands. Wetland mitigation must be designed so it does not create a wildlife hazard. The FAA recommends that wetland mitigation projects that may attract hazardous wildlife be sited outside of the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. 2-8 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.4.3.1 Onsite Mitigation of Wetland Functions. Wetland mitigation/conservation easements must not inhibit the airport operator's ability to effectively control hazardous wildlife on or near the mitigation site or effectively maintain other aspects of safe airport operations. Enhancing such mitigation areas to attract hazardous wildlife must be avoided. The FAA will review any onsite mitigation proposals to determine compatibility with safe airport operations and grant assurance compliance. Early coordination with the FAA is encouraged for any proposal to use airport land for wetland mitigation. A Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should evaluate any wetland mitigation projects that are needed to protect unique wetland functions and that must be located in the separation criteria in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 before the mitigation is implemented. A wildlife management plan should be developed to reduce the wildlife hazards. 2.4.3.2 Offsite Mitigation of Wetland Functions. 2.4.3.2.1 2.4.3.2.2 2.4.3.2.3 2.4.3.2.4 The FAA recommends that wetland mitigation projects that may attract hazardous wildlife be sited outside of the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 unless they provide unique functions that must remain onsite (see 2.4.3.1). Agencies that regulate impacts to or around wetlands recognize that it may be necessary to split wetland functions in mitigation schemes. Therefore, regulatory agencies may, under certain circumstances, allow portions of mitigation to take place in different locations. The FAA encourages landowners or communities supporting the restoration or enhancement of wetlands to do so only after critically analyzing how those activities would affect aviation safety. To do so, landowners or communities should contact the affected airport sponsor, FAA, and/or a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Those parties should work cooperatively to develop restoration or enhancement plans that would not worsen existing wildlife hazards or create such hazards. See Paragraphs 4.1.1 — 4.1.3 for land -use modifications evaluation criteria. If parties develop a mutually acceptable restoration or enhancement plan, the landowner or community proposing the restoration or enhancement must monitor the restored or enhanced site. This monitoring must verify that efforts have not worsened or created hazardous wildlife attraction or activity. If such attraction or activity occurs, the landowner or community should work with the airport sponsor, or a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist to reduce the hazard to aviation. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.4.3.3 Mitigation Banking. Wetland mitigation banking is the creation or restoration of wetlands in order to provide mitigation credits that can be used to offset permitted wetland losses. Mitigation banking benefits wetland resources by providing advance replacement for permitted wetland losses; consolidating small projects into larger, better -designed and managed units; and encouraging integration of wetland mitigation projects with watershed planning. This last benefit is most helpful for airport projects, as wetland impacts mitigated outside of the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 can still be located within the same watershed. Wetland mitigation banks meeting the separation criteria offer an ecologically sound approach to mitigation in these situations. Airport operators should work with local watershed management agencies or organizations to develop mitigation banking for wetland impacts on airport property. 2.5 Dredge Spoil Containment Areas. The FAA recommends against locating dredge spoil containment areas (also known as Confined Disposal Facilities) within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 if the containment area or the spoils contain material that would attract hazardous wildlife. Proposals for new dredge spoil containment areas located within the separation distances should be reviewed on a case -by -case basis to determine the likelihood of resulting in an increase in hazardous wildlife. The FAA recommends that airport sponsors work with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist and/or the FAA to review proposals for dredge spoil containment areas located within separation criteria. 2.6 Agricultural Activities. Many agricultural crops can attract hazardous wildlife and should not be planted within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Corn, wheat, and other small grains in particular should be avoided. If the airport has no financial alternative to agricultural crops to produce the income necessary to maintain the viability of the airport, then the airport should consider growing crops that hold little food value for hazardous wildlife, such as grass hay. Attractiveness to hazardous wildlife species during all phases of production, from planting through harvest and fallow periods, should be considered when contemplating the use of airport property for agricultural production. Where agriculture is present, crop residue (e.g., waste grain) should not be left in the field following harvest. Also, airports should consult AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, to ensure that agricultural crops do not create airfield obstructions or other safety hazards. Before planning or initiating any agricultural practices on airport property, operators should get approval from the appropriate FAA regional Airports Division Office and demonstrate that the additional cost of wildlife control and potential accidents is offset by revenue generated by agricultural leases. Annual review of the Airport Certification Manual by the Certification Inspector does not constitute approval and is insufficient to meet this requirement. 2-10 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.6.1 Livestock Production. Confined livestock operations (i.e., feedlots, dairy operations, hog or chicken production facilities, or egg laying operations) often attract flocking birds, such as blackbirds, starlings, or pigeons that pose a hazard to aviation. Therefore, the FAA recommends against such facilities within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. The airport operator should be aware of any wildlife hazards that appear to be attracted to off -site livestock operations and consider working with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist to identify reasonable and feasible measures that may be proposed to landowners to reduce the attractiveness of the site to the potentially hazardous wildlife species. 2.6.1.1 In exceptional circumstances, and following FAA review and approval, livestock may be grazed on airport property as long as they are off the airfield and separated behind fencing where they cannot pose a hazard to aircraft. The livestock should be fed and watered as far away from the airfield and approach/departure space as possible because the feed and water may attract birds. The wildlife management plan should include monitoring and wildlife mitigation for any areas where the livestock and their feed/water is located in case a wildlife hazard is detected. Airports without wildlife management plans should equally consider monitoring and mitigation protocols to identify and address any wildlife hazards associated with livestock and their feeding operations. 2.6.2 Alternative Uses of Agricultural Land. 2.6.2.1 2.6.2.2 Habitat modification both on and surrounding an airfield is one of the best and most economical long term mitigation strategies to decrease risk that wildlife pose to flight safety. Alternative land uses (e.g., solar and biofuel) at airports could help mitigate many of the challenges for the airport operator, developers, and conservationists. However, careful planning must first determine that proposed alternative energy production at airports does not create wildlife attractants or other hazards. Some airports are surrounded by vast areas of farmed land within the distances specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Seasonal uses of agricultural land for activities such as hunting can create a hazardous wildlife situation. In some areas, farmers will rent their land for hunting purposes. Rice farmers, among others, flood their land to attract waterfowl or for conservation efforts. This is often done during waterfowl hunting season to obtain additional revenue by renting out duck blinds. 2.6.2.3 The waterfowl hunters then use decoys and call in hundreds, if not thousands, of birds, creating a threat to aircraft safety. It is recommended that a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist review, in coordination with local farmers and producers, these types of seasonal land uses and incorporate mitigating measures into the wildlife management plan, when possible. 2-11 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.7 Aquaculture. Aquaculture is the breeding, rearing, and harvesting of fish, shellfish, and plants in all types of water environments including ponds, rivers, lakes, and the ocean. Aquaculture is used to produce food fish, sport fish, bait fish, ornamental fish, and to support restoration activities. Aquacultured species are grown in a range of facilities including tanks, cages, ponds, and raceways. When an aquaculture facility is proposed within the separation criteria, the airport operator, project proponent, and local jurisdiction should discuss the proposed project location with regard to its attraction to hazardous species, location near the airport and the separation distances identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. If a facility is identified as a possible significant attraction, a more suitable location for the proposed facility should be identified. If no other suitable location exists, it is recommended that the proposed facility plans be reviewed by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist to identify measures to avoid or reduce the facility's potential to attract hazardous wildlife. 2.7.1 Freshwater Aquaculture. 2.7.2 2.7.1.1 Freshwater aquaculture activities (e.g., catfish, tilapia, trout or bass production) are typically conducted outside of fully enclosed buildings in constructed ponds or tanks and are inherently attractive to a wide variety of birds and therefore pose a significant risk to airport safety when within the separation distances specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Freshwater aquaculture should only be considered if extensive mitigation measures have been incorporated to eliminate attraction to hazardous birds. Examples of such mitigation include: 1. Netting or other material to exclude hazardous birds (e.g., eagles, osprey, gulls, cormorants); 2. Acoustic hazing including pyrotechnics, propane cannons, directional sonic/hailing devices and other similar technologies; 3. Feeding procedure cleanliness, exclusion techniques prohibiting birds from perching or accessing food; efficiency of feeding operation procedures that reduce fish food attraction to hazardous birds; 4. Operation procedure efficiency transferring live fish to and from enclosures or removal of dead fish; maintenance and upkeep of facility; 5. Monitoring, mitigation and communication protocols with nearby airports as a proactive safety feature in response to specific hazardous species in the event they are identified at the facility in unacceptable numbers. Marine Aquaculture. Marine aquaculture (Mariculture) refers to the culturing of species that live in the ocean. When appropriately managed and mitigated as necessary, mariculture facilities do not pose a significant risk to airport safety. 2-12 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.7.2.1 2.7.2.1.1 2.7.2.1.2 2.7.2.2 2.7.2.3 2.7.2.3.1 Finfish Mariculture. U.S. finfish mariculture primarily produces salmon and steelhead trout as well as lesser amounts of cod, moi, yellowtail, barramundi, seabass, and seabream. Maricultures use rigid and non -rigid enclosures (e.g., cages) at the surface or submerged in the water column. These enclosures may be fully enclosed, or be open at the top or covered with netted material to negate losses from depredation by birds or other predators. Different facilities employ different designs and operational protocols. While mariculture operations typically do not pose a significant attractant to hazardous birds, design and operational features can be incorporated as permit conditions to mitigate attraction and effectively reduce this risk. Examples of such mitigation include: 1. Fully enclosed cages using netting or other material to exclude hazardous birds (e.g., gulls, cormorants, pelicans) and to insure retention of fish; 2. Submerged enclosures to reduce attraction to hazardous birds; 3. Feed barge cleanliness, exclusion techniques prohibiting birds from perching or accessing food; efficiency of feeding operation procedures that reduce fish food attraction to hazardous birds; 4. Operation procedure efficiency transferring live fish to and from enclosures or removal of dead fish; maintenance and upkeep of facility; 5. Monitoring, mitigation and communication protocols with nearby airports as a proactive safety feature in response to specific hazardous species in the event they are identified at the facility in unacceptable numbers. Shellfish Mariculture. U.S. shellfish mariculture primarily produces oysters, clams, mussels, lobster and shrimp. Shellfish may be grown directly on the bottom, in submerged cages or bags, or on suspended lines. These types of mariculture operations do not typically present a significant attractant to hazardous birds. For those operations that are found to pose a significant risk, design and operation features that diminish possible attraction to hazardous bird species (e.g., reducing areas for perching or feeding) can effectively reduce this risk. Plant Mariculture. Microalgae, also referred to as phytoplankton, microphytes, or planktonic algae constitute the majority of cultivated algae. Macroalgae, commonly known as seaweed, also have many commercial and industrial uses. 2-13 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.7.2.3.2 While few commercial seaweed farms exist, the sector is growing. These types of mariculture operations do not typically present an attractant to hazardous birds. 2.8 Golf Courses, Landscaping, Structures and Other Land -Use Considerations. 2.8.1 Golf Courses. The large grassy areas and open water found on most golf courses are attractive to hazardous wildlife, particularly Canada geese and some species of gulls. These species can pose a threat to aviation safety. If golf courses are located on or near airport property, airport operators should be alert to any wildlife use or habitat changes in these areas that could affect safe aircraft operations. Accordingly, airport operators should develop, at a minimum, onsite measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in consultation with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Existing golf courses located within these separations that have been documented to attract hazardous wildlife are encouraged to develop a program to reduce the attractiveness of the sites to species that are hazardous to aviation safety. The FAA recommends against construction of new golf courses within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 if determined that the new facility would create a significant wildlife hazard attractant by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Airport operators should ensure these golf courses are monitored on a continuing basis for the presence of hazardous wildlife. If hazardous wildlife is detected, corrective actions should be immediately implemented. 2.8.2 Landscaping and Landscape Maintenance. 2.8.2.1 2.8.2.2 Depending on its geographic location, landscaping can attract hazardous wildlife. The FAA recommends that airport operators approach landscaping with caution and confine it to airport areas not associated with aircraft movements. Vegetation that produces seeds, fruits, or berries, or that provides dense roosting or nesting cover should not be used. Airports should develop a landscape plan to include approved and prohibited plants. The landscape plan should consider the watering needs of mature plants. A Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should review all landscaping plans. Airport operators should also monitor all landscaped areas on a continuing basis for the presence of hazardous wildlife. If hazardous wildlife is detected, corrective actions should be immediately implemented. Turf grass areas on airports have the potential to be highly attractive to a variety of hazardous wildlife species. Research conducted by the USDA Wildlife Services' National Wildlife Research Center has shown that no one airfield vegetation management regimen will deter all species of hazardous wildlife in all situations. The composition and height of airfield grasslands should be properly managed to reduce their attractiveness to hazardous wildlife. In many situations, an intermediate height, monoculture turf grass might be most favorable. In cooperation with a 2-14 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist, airport operators should develop airport turf grass management plans on a prescription basis, including cultivar selection during reseeding efforts, that is specific to the airport's geographic location, climatic conditions, and the type of hazardous wildlife likely to frequent the airport. 2.8.2.3 2.8.3 Structures. 2.8.3.1 2.8.3.2 Airport operators should ensure that plant varieties attractive to hazardous wildlife are not used on the airport. Disturbed areas or areas in need of re - vegetating should not be planted with seed mixtures containing millet or any other large -seed producing grass. For airport property already planted with seed mixtures containing millet, rye grass, or other large -seed producing grasses, the FAA recommends disking, plowing, or another suitable agricultural practice to prevent plant maturation and seed head production. Plantings should follow the specific recommendations for grass management and seed and plant selection made by the State University Cooperative Extension Service, the local office of Wildlife Services, or a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist. Airport operators should also consider developing and implementing a preferred/prohibited plant species list, reviewed by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist, which has been designed for the geographic location to reduce the attractiveness to hazardous wildlife for landscaping airport property. Certain structures attract birds for loafing and nesting. Flat rooftops can be attractive to many species of gulls for nesting, hangars provide roosting / nesting opportunities for rock doves, towers, light posts and navigation aids can provide loafing / hunting perches for raptors and aircraft can provide loafing / nesting sites for European starlings, blackbirds and other species. These structures should be monitored and mitigated, if located on - site. Off -site structural attractions may require additional coordination to effectively mitigate their use by hazardous species. Cellular communications towers are becoming increasingly more attractive to large birds (e.g., osprey, eagles, herons, vultures) for nesting and rearing their young. This problem is a growing concern because once the young fledge from nests built on manmade structures they are more likely to return to these kinds of sites to reproduce in future years. 2.8.4 Other Hazardous Wildlife Attractants. Other land uses (e.g., conservation easements, parks, wildlife management areas) or activities not addressed in this AC may have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife. Regardless of the source of the attraction, when hazardous wildlife is noted on a public - use airport, each certificate holder must take prompt remedial action(s) to protect aviation safety and all non -certificated airports should take prompt remedial action(s) to protect aviation safety. 2-15 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 2.9 Habitat for State and Federally Listed Species on Airports. An airport's air operations area is an artificial environment that has been created and maintained for aircraft operations. Because an aircraft operations area can be markedly different from the surrounding native landscapes, it may attract wildlife species that do not normally occur, or that occur only in low numbers in the area. Some of the grassland species attracted to an airport's aircraft operations area are at the edge of their natural ranges, but are attracted to habitat features found in the airport environment. Also, some wildlife species may occur on the airport in higher numbers than occur naturally in the region because the airport offers habitat features the species prefer. Some of these wildlife species are Federal or state -listed threatened and endangered species or have been designated by state resource agencies as species of special concern. 2.9.1 State -Listed Species Habitat Concerns. 2.9.1.1 2.9.1.2 Many state wildlife agencies have requested that airport operators facilitate and encourage habitat on airports for state -listed threatened and endangered species or species of special concern. Airport operators should exercise caution in adopting new management techniques because they may increase wildlife hazards and be inconsistent with safe airport operations. Managing the on -airport environment to facilitate or encourage the presence of hazardous wildlife species can create conditions that are incompatible with, or pose a threat to, aviation safety. Not all state -listed threatened and endangered species or species of concern pose a direct threat to aviation safety. However, these species may pose an indirect threat and be hazardous because they attract other wildlife species or support prey species attractive to other species that are directly hazardous. Also, the habitat management practices that benefit these state - listed threatened and endangered species and species of special concern may attract other hazardous wildlife species. On -airport habitat and wildlife management practices designed to benefit wildlife that directly or indirectly create safety hazard where none existed before are incompatible with safe airport operations. 2.9.2 Federally Listed Species Habitat Concerns. 2.9.2.1 The FAA supports efforts to protect threatened and endangered species, as a matter of principle and consistent with the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The FAA must balance these requirements with our requirements and mission to maintain a safe and efficient airport system. Requests to enhance or create habitat for threatened and endangered species often conflict with the safety of the traveling public and may place the protected species at risk of mortality by aircraft collisions. The FAA does not support the creation, conservation or enhancement of habitat or refuges to attract endangered species on airports. If endangered species are present on an airport, specific obligations may apply under the Endangered 2-16 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq. and the airport operator should contact the Airports District Office Environmental Protection Specialist. 2.9.2.2 The designation of critical habitat for listed species under the Endangered Species Act on airport lands may be an incompatible land use in conflict with the intended and dedicated purpose of airport lands and may limit or preclude the ability of the airport to develop new infrastructure and growth capacity to meet future air carrier service demand. In addition, depending on the listed species (primarily but not limited to avian species), the designation of critical habitat within the separation distances provided in paragraphs 1.2 - 1.4 can represent a hazardous wildlife attractant in conflict with 14 CFR Part 139.337. 2.10 Synergistic Effects of Surrounding Land Uses. There may be circumstances where two or more different land uses would not, by themselves, be considered hazardous wildlife attractants or are located outside of the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 but collectively may create a wildlife corridor directly through the airport and/or surrounding airspace. An example involves a lake located outside of the separation criteria on the east side of an airport and a large hayfield on the west side of an airport. These two land uses, taken together, could create a flyway for Canada geese directly across the airspace of the airport. Airport operators must consider the entire surrounding landscape and community when developing the wildlife management plan. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Page Intentionally Blank 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C CHAPTER 3. PROCEDURES FOR WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT BY OPERATORS OF PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS AND CONDITIONS FOR NON -CERTIFICATED AIRPORTS TO CONDUCT WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENTS AND WILDLIFE HAZARD SITE VISITS 3.1 Introduction. In recognition of the increased risk of serious aircraft damage or the loss of human life that can result from a wildlife strike, the FAA recommends all airports conduct a Wildlife Hazard Site Visit or Wildlife Hazard Assessment unless otherwise mandated after an initial triggering events defined in Part 139 Section 139.337. After the airport has completed the site visit or assessment and implemented a wildlife management plan, investigations should be conducted following subsequent triggering events to determine if the original assessment and plan adequately address the situation or if conditions have changed that would warrant an update to the plan. In this section, airports that are certificated under 14 C.F.R. § 139.337 are referred to as "certificated airports" and all others are referred to as "non -certificated airports." When a statement refers to both certificated and non -certificated airports, "airport" or "all airports" is used. 3.2 Coordination with Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists. Hazardous wildlife management is a complex discipline and conditions vary widely across the United States. Therefore, only airport wildlife biologists meeting the qualification requirements in Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports, can conduct Site Visits and Assessments. Airports must maintain documentation that the Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist meets the qualification requirements in Advisory Circular 150/5200-36. 3.3 Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports: A Manual For Airport Personnel. 3.3.1 The Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports manual, prepared by FAA and USDA Wildlife Services staff, contains a compilation of information to assist airport personnel in the development, implementation, and evaluation of wildlife management plans at airports. The manual includes specific information on the nature of wildlife strikes, legal authority, regulations, wildlife management techniques, Assessments, Plans, and sources of help and information. The manual is available in three languages: English, Spanish, and French. It can be viewed and downloaded free of charge from the FAA's wildlife hazard mitigation web site: https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_ safety/wildlife. This manual only provides a starting point for addressing wildlife hazard issues at airports. FAA recommends that airports consult with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists to assist with development of a wildlife management plan and the implementation of management actions by airport personnel. 3-1 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 3.3.2 There are many other resources complementary to this manual for use in developing and implementing wildlife management plans. Several are listed in the manual's bibliography or on the FAA Wildlife Mitigation website: https://www.faa. gov/airports/airport_ safety/wildlife 3.4 Wildlife Hazard Site Visits and Wildlife Hazard Assessments. 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3 Operators of certificated airports are encouraged to conduct an initial assessment regardless of whether the airport has experienced one of the triggering events. Doing so would allow the airport to take proactive action and mitigate the wildlife risk before experiencing an incident. All other airports are encouraged to conduct an assessment or site visit (as defined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-38) conducted by a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist (as defined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-36). Part 139 certificated airports are currently required to ensure that an assessment is conducted consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 139.337. The intent of a site visit is to provide an abbreviated analysis of an airport's wildlife hazards and to provide timely information that allows the airport to expedite the mitigation of these hazards. The FAA also recommends that airports conduct an assessment or site visit as soon as practicable in order to identify any immediate wildlife hazards and/or mitigation measures. Non -certificated airports should submit the results of the site visit or assessment to the FAA for review. The FAA will review the submitted site visit or assessment and make a recommendation regarding the development of a wildlife management plan. A wildlife management plan can be developed based on a site visit and will be required if the non -certificated airport is going to request federal grants for the purpose of mitigating wildlife hazards. 3.5 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan. 3.5.1 The FAA will consider the results of the assessment, along with the aeronautical activity at the airport and the views of the airport operator and airport users, in determining whether a wildlife management plan is needed for certificated airports, or recommended for non -certificated airports. 3.5.2 If the FAA determines that a wildlife management plan is needed for a certificated airport, the airport operator must formulate a plan, using the assessment as its basis and submit to the FAA for approval. If the FAA recommends that a non -certificated airport develop a plan, either an assessment or a site visit can be used as the basis for the wildlife management plan. Airports should consult AC 150/5200-3 8, Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans, for further information on preparation and implementation requirements for their wildlife management plan. :3-2 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 3.5.3 3.5.4 The goal of an airport's wildlife management plan is to minimize the risk to aviation safety, airport structures or equipment, or human health posed by populations of hazardous wildlife on and around the airport. For wildlife management plans to effectively reduce wildlife hazards on and near airports, accurate and consistent wildlife strike reporting is essential. Airports should consult AC 150/5200-32, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes, for further information on responsibilities and recommendations concerning wildlife strikes. The wildlife management plan must identify hazardous wildlife attractants on or near the airport and the appropriate wildlife management techniques to minimize the wildlife hazard. It must also prioritize the management measures. 3.6 Local Coordination. The FAA recommends establishing a Wildlife Hazards Working Group to facilitate the communication, cooperation, and coordination of the airport and its surrounding community necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the wildlife management plan. The cooperation of the airport community is essential to prevent incompatible development in the airport vicinity. Whether on or off the airport, input from all involved parties must be considered when a potentially hazardous wildlife attractant is being proposed. Based on available resources, airport operators should undertake public education activities with the local planning agencies because some activities in the vicinity of an airport, while harmless under normal conditions, can attract wildlife and present a danger to aircraft (see Paragraphs 4.5 to 4.8). For example, if public trails are planned near wetlands or in parks adjoining airport property, the public should know that feeding birds and other wildlife in the area may pose a risk to aircraft. 3.7 Operational Notifications of Wildlife Hazards. 3.7.1 3.7.2 Operational notifications include active correspondence addressing wildlife issues on or near an airport, notifications and alerts. If an existing land -use practice creates a wildlife hazard and the land -use practice or wildlife hazard cannot be immediately eliminated, airport operators must issue a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) and encourage the land owner or manager to take steps to control the wildlife hazard and minimize further attraction. Permanent attractions that cannot be eliminated or mitigated may be noted in the Airport/Facility Directory. NOTAMS and Airport/Facility Directory notifications are not appropriate for short-term or immediate advisories that can be relayed via Pilot Reports, direct air traffic control voice communications, or temporary Automated Terminal Advisory System alerts. Care should be given to avoid the continual broadcast of general warnings for extended periods of time. General warnings such as "birds in the vicinity of the aerodrome" offer little timely information to aid pilots and eventually may be ignored if not updated. The Automated Terminal Advisory System (ATIS) is a continuous broadcast of recorded aeronautical information for aerodromes and their immediate surroundings. ATIS broadcasts contain essential information, such as current weather information, 3-J 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C active runways, available approaches, wildlife hazards and any other information required by the pilots. They indicate significant (moderate or severe) wildlife activity, as reported by an approved agency that presents temporary hazards on the ATIS broadcast. Pilots take notice of available ATIS broadcasts before contacting the local control unit, which reduces the controllers' workload and relieves frequency congestion. The recording is updated in fixed intervals or when there is a significant change in the information. Although ATIS broadcasts involving wildlife should be timely and specific, pilots do not need to know species -specific information. General descriptive information detailing size and number of animals, locations and timing of occurrence provides useful, actionable information for pilots. 3.7.3 A pilot report (PIREP) is reported by a pilot to indicate encounters of hazardous weather (e.g., icing or turbulence) and hazardous wildlife. Pilot reports are short-lived warnings providing immediate information on pilot observations that are transmitted in real-time to air traffic control. Large animals near active surfaces, soaring vultures and raptors within approach/ departure corridors and waterfowl such as geese feeding in grassy areas next to runways are all examples of pilot reports generated by pilots. 3.8 Federal and State Depredation Permits. The FAA recommends that airports maintain federal and state depredation permits to allow mitigation and/ or removal of hazardous species. All protected species require special permits for lethal mitigation or capture and relocation procedures. Similarly, endangered or threatened species mitigation also requires special permits. The FAA recommends that airports work closely with a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist during the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service consultation and permitting process. The following Orders can help airports reduce risks from hazardous species by allowing private citizens to control hazardous species off airport properties without the need for a Federal depredation permit. 3.8.1 Standing Depredation Orders. 3.8.1.1 3.8.1.2 Federal law allows people to protect themselves and their property from damage caused by migratory birds. Provided no effort is made to kill or capture the birds, a depredation permit is not required to merely scare or herd depredating migratory birds other than endangered or threatened species or bald or golden eagles (50 CFR 21.41). In addition, certain species of migratory birds may be mitigated without a federal permit under specific circumstances, many of which relate to agricultural situations. The following Standing Depredation Orders have applicability near airports: • 50 CFR § 21.49- Control Order for Resident Canada Geese at Airports and Military Airfields. • 50 CFR § 21.50- Depredation Order for Resident Canada Geese Nests and Eggs. :3-4 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C • 50 CFR § 21.43 - Depredation Order for Blackbirds, Cowbirds, Crows, Grackles, and Magpies. • 50 CFR § 21.54 - Control Order for Muscovy Ducks in the United States. • 50 CFR § 21.55 - Control Order for Invasive Migratory Birds in Hawaii. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C Page Intentionally Blank 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C CHAPTER 4. RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR THE FAA, AIRPORT OPERATORS AND OTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITIES REGARDING OFF -AIRPORT ATTRACTANTS 4.1 FAA Notification and Review of Proposed Land -Use Practice Changes in the Vicinity of Public -Use Airports. 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 For projects that are located within 5 miles of the airport's aircraft operations area, the FAA may review development plans, proposed land -use changes, operational changes, major federal actions or wetland mitigation plans to determine if such changes increase risk to airport safety by attracting hazardous wildlife on and around airports. The FAA is not a permitting agency for land use modifications that occur off airport properties, therefore, such reviews are typically initiated by state or federal permitting agencies seeking FAA input on new or revised permits. Each of the land uses listed in Chapter 2 of this AC has the potential to pose a risk to airport operations when they are located within the separation distances provided in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Off -site land use modifications near airports may include an assessment of risk for facilities and land -use changes and, if necessary, mitigation strategies that may reduce risk to an acceptable level. However, the FAA recognizes that individual facilities or land -use modifications may present a range of attractants to different species, resulting in varying levels of risk. Therefore, the FAA considers each proposal on a case -by -case basis. The FAA analyzes each land -use modification or new facility proposal prior to its establishment or any significant planned changes to design or operations that may increase the risk level. As part of a review, the FAA considers several factors that include, but are not limited to: 1. Type of attractant; 2. Size of attractant; 3. Location/distance of attractant from airport; 4. Design (e.g., construction, material, mitigation techniques employed into design); 5. Operation (e.g., cleanliness, constancy/ volume of use, seasonality, time of day); 6. Monitoring protocols (e.g., frequency, documentation, evaluation, species identification and number thresholds that trigger actions of communication or mitigation, baseline wildlife data); 7. Mitigation protocols (e.g., responsibilities, methods, intensity, pre -determined objectives, documentation, evaluation); and 8. Communication protocols to airport and/ or air traffic control tower; The review of these factors may result in FAA recommended additions or modifications to a conditional use permit that allows the permitting agency to track compliance with the permittee obligations. Such conditions placed within a permit 4-1 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C may involve a comprehensive outline and recognition of individuals responsible for monitoring, communication, and mitigation measures if certain action thresholds are met. Action thresholds are defined in this instance as those pre -determined parameters (e.g., number, location, behavior, time of day) of specific hazardous species that would trigger a mitigation response. Additionally, baseline data should be used to determine the effect, if any, on wildlife populations at the proposed off -site location and/or at the airport. 4.1.5 4.1.6 4.1.7 Baseline data may need to be collected, depending on the existence of useful data and timeline for site modification. If, after taking into account the factors above, FAA determines that a facility poses a significant risk to airport safety, FAA will object to its establishment or renewal. For projects that are located within 5 miles of the airport's aircraft operations area, the FAA Airport District Office may review development plans, proposed land -use changes, operational changes, major federal actions or wetland mitigation plans to determine if such changes present potential wildlife hazards to aircraft operations. The FAA considers sensitive airport areas as those that lie under or next to approach or departure airspace. This brief examination should indicate if further investigation is warranted. Where a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist has conducted a further study to evaluate a site's compatibility with airport operations, the FAA may use the study results to make a determination. 4.2 Waste Management Facilities. 4.2.1 Notification of New/Expanded Project Proposal. 4.2.1.1 4.2.1.2 49 U.S.C. § 44718(d), prohibits the construction or establishment of new municipal landfills within 6 miles of certain public -use airports, when both the airport and the landfill meet specific conditions. See Paragraph 2.2 of this guidance for a more detailed discussion of these restrictions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires any landfill operator proposing a new or expanded waste disposal operation within 5 miles of a runway end to notify the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office and the airport operator of the proposal. See 40 CFR § 258, Criteria for Municipal. Solid Waste Landfills, Section 258.10, Airport Safety. The EPA also requires owners or operators of new landfill units, or lateral expansions of existing MSWLF landfill units, that are located within 10,000 feet of any airport runway end used by turbine -powered aircraft, or within 5,000 feet of any airport runway end used only by piston -type aircraft, to demonstrate successfully that such units are not hazards to aircraft. (See 4.3.2 below.) 4-2 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 4.2.1.3 4.2.1.4 When new or expanded municipal landfills are being proposed near airports, landfill operators must notify the airport operator and the FAA of the proposal as early as possible pursuant to 40 CFR § 258. The FAA discourages the development of waste disposal and other facilities, discussed in Chapter 2, located within the separation criteria specified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. To show that a waste -handling facility sited within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4 does not attract hazardous wildlife and does not threaten aviation, the developer must establish the facility will not handle putrescible material other than that as outlined in 2.2.4. The FAA recommends against any facility other than those outlined in 2.2.4 (enclosed transfer stations). The FAA will use this information to determine if the facility will be a hazard to aviation. 4.3 Other Land -Use Practice Changes. 4.3.1 The FAA encourages operators of public -use airports who become aware of proposed land use practice changes that may attract hazardous wildlife within 5 miles of their airports to notify their assigned Airport Certification Safety Inspector or Airports District Office Program Manager. The FAA also encourages proponents of such land use changes to notify the FAA as early in the planning process as possible. Advanced notice affords the FAA an opportunity (1) to evaluate the effect of a particular land - use change on aviation safety and (2) to support efforts by the airport sponsor to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses that are compatible with the airport. 4.3.2 4.3.3 The airport operator, project proponent, or land -use operator may use FAA Form 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, or other suitable documents similar to FAA Form 7460-1 to notify the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office. Project proponents can contact the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office for assistance with the notification process prior to submitting Form 7460-1. It is helpful if the notification includes a 15 -minute quadrangle map of the area identifying the location of the proposed activity. The land -use operator or project proponent should also forward specific details of the proposed land -use change or operational change or expansion. In the case of solid waste landfills, the information should include the type of waste to be handled, how the waste will be processed, and final disposal methods. 4.3.4 Airports that have Received Federal Assistance. Airports that have received Federal assistance are required under their grant assurances to take appropriate actions to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses that are compatible with normal airport operations. See Grant Assurance 21. The FAA recommends that airport operators oppose off -airport land -use changes or practices, to 4-3 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C the extent practicable, within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4, which may attract hazardous wildlife. Failure to do so may lead to noncompliance with applicable grant assurances. The FAA will not approve the placement of airport development projects pertaining to aircraft movement in the vicinity of hazardous wildlife attractants without appropriate mitigating measures. Increasing the intensity of wildlife control efforts is not a substitute for preventing, eliminating or reducing a proposed wildlife hazard. Airport operators should identify hazardous wildlife attractants and any associated wildlife hazards during any planning process for airport development projects. 4.4 Coordination to Prevent Creation of New Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife Attractants. Airport operators should work with local and regional planning and zoning boards to be aware of proposed land -use changes, or modification of existing land uses, that could create hazardous wildlife attractants within the separations identified in Paragraphs 1.2 through 1.4. Pay particular attention to proposed land uses involving creation or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities, development of wetland mitigation sites, or development or expansion of dredge spoil containment areas. At the very least, it is recommended that airport operators are on the notification list of the local planning board or equivalent review entity for all communities located within 5 miles of the airport, so they will receive notification of any proposed project and have the opportunity to review it for attractiveness to hazardous wildlife. This may be accomplished through one or more of the following: 4.4.1 Site -specific Criteria. The airport should establish site -specific criteria for assessment of land uses attractive to hazardous wildlife and locations that would be of concern based on wildlife strikes and on wildlife abundance and activity at the airport and in the local area. These criteria may be more selective, but should not be less restrictive than this guidance. 4.4.2 Outreach. Airports should actively seek to provide educational information and/ or provide input regarding local development, natural resource modification or wildlife -related concerns that affect wildlife hazards and safe air travel. 4.4.2.1 External Outreach. Airport operators and a Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist should consider outreach to local planning and zoning organizations on land uses of concern or to local organizations responsible for natural resource management (including wildlife, wetlands, and parks.) Airports should also consider developing and distributing position letters and educational materials on airport -specific concerns regarding wildlife hazards, wildlife activity and attraction. Finally, airports should provide formal comments on local procedures, laws, ordinances, plans, and regulatory actions such as permits related to land uses of concern. 4-4 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 4.4.2.2 Internal Outreach. Airports should consider developing and distributing position letters and educational materials on airport -specific concerns regarding species identification and mitigation procedures, wildlife hazards, wildlife activity and attraction to employees and personnel with access to the aircraft operations area. 4.5 Coordination on Existing Off -Airport Hazardous Wildlife Attractants. Airports are encouraged to work with landowners and managers to cooperatively develop procedures to monitor and manage hazardous wildlife attraction. If applicable, these procedures may include: 1. Conducting a wildlife hazard site visit by a wildlife biologist meeting the qualification requirements of Advisory Circular 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports 2. Conducting regular, standardized, wildlife monitoring surveys;4 3. Establishing threshold numbers of wildlife which would trigger certain actions and/or communications; 4. Establishment of procedures to deter or remove hazardous wildlife. 4.6 Prompt Remedial Action. For attractants found on and off airport property, and with landowner or manager cooperation, Part 139 certificated airports must take immediate action in accordance with their Airport Certification Manual and the requirements of Part 139.337, to alleviate wildlife hazards whenever they are detected. It is also recommended that non - certificated airports take immediate action to alleviate wildlife hazards whenever they are detected. In addition, airports should take prompt action to identify the source of attraction and cooperatively develop procedures to mitigate and monitor the attractant. For Part 139 Certificated airports, immediate actions are required in accordance with 139.337(a). 4.7 FAA Assistance. If there is a question on the implementation of any of the guidance in this section, contact the FAA Regional Airports Division for assistance. Recoimnended survey protocols can be found in AC 150/5200-38, Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site T isits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans, and DeVault, T.L., B.F. Blackwell, and J.L. Belant, eds. 2013. Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing Animal —Aircraft Collisions through Science -Based Management. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA. 181 pp. 4-5 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 4.7.1 Airport Documentation Procedures. Airports should document on -site and off -site wildlife attractants as part of their "Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Annual Review," "Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Review Following a Triggering Event," and the airport's Continual Monitoring Annual Report (as outlined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-38). As a best management practice, airports may choose to keep a log to track contacts from landowners or managers, permitting agencies, or other entities concerning land uses near the airport. 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C APPENDIX A. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THIS ADVISORY CIRCULAR A.1 General. This appendix provides definitions of terms used throughout this AC. 1. Air operations area. Any area of an airport used or intended to be used for landing, takeoff, or surface maneuvering of aircraft. An air operations area includes such paved areas or unpaved areas that are used or intended to be used for the unobstructed movement of aircraft in addition to its associated runway, taxiways, or apron. 2. Airport operator. The operator (private or public) or sponsor of a public -use airport. 3. Approach or departure airspace. The airspace, within 5 statute miles of an airport, through which aircraft move during landing or takeoff. 4. Bird balls. High -density plastic floating balls that can be used to cover ponds and prevent birds from using the sites. 5. Certificate holder. The holder of an Airport Operating Certificate issued under 14 C.F.R. Part 139. 6. Construct a new municipal landfill. To begin to excavate, grade land, or raise structures to prepare a municipal solid waste landfill as permitted by the appropriate regulatory or permitting agency. 7. Detention ponds. Storm water management ponds that hold storm water for short periods of time, a few hours to a few days. 8. Establish a new municipal landfill. When the first load of putrescible waste is received on -site for placement in a prepared municipal solid waste landfill. 9. Fly ash. The fine, sand -like residue resulting from the complete incineration of an organic fuel source. Fly ash typically results from the combustion of coal or waste used to operate a power generating plant. 10. General aviation aircraft. Any civil aviation aircraft operating under 14 CFR Part 91 11 Hazardous wildlife. Species of wildlife (birds, mammals, reptiles), including feral and domesticated animals, not under control that may pose a direct hazard to aviation (i.e., strike risk to aircraft) or an indirect hazard such as an attractant to other wildlife that pose a strike hazard or are causing structural damage to airport facilities (e.g., burrowing, nesting, perching). 12 Municipal Landfill. A publicly or privately owned discrete area of land or an excavation that receives household waste and that is not a land application unit, surface impoundment, injection well, or waste pile, as those terms are defined under 40 CFR § 257.2. A municipal landfill may receive other types wastes, such as commercial solid waste, non -hazardous sludge, small -quantity generator waste, and A-1 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C industrial solid waste, as defined under 40 CFR § 258.2. A municipal landfill can consist of either a stand-alone unit or several cells that receive household waste. 13. New municipal landfill. A municipal solid waste landfill that was established or constructed after April 5, 2001. 14. Piston -powered aircraft. Fixed -wing aircraft powered by piston engines. 15. Piston -use airport. Any airport that does not sell Jet -A fuel for fixed -wing turbine - powered aircraft, and primarily serves fixed -wing, piston -powered aircraft. Incidental use of the airport by turbine -powered, fixed -wing aircraft would not affect this designation. However, such aircraft should not be based at the airport. 16. Public agency. A state or political subdivision of a state, a tax -supported organization, or an Indian tribe or pueblo (49 U.S.C. § 47102(19)). 17. Public airport. An airport used or intended to be used for public purposes that is under the control of a public agency; and of which the area used or intended to be used for landing, taking off, or surface maneuvering of aircraft is publicly owned (49 U.S.C. § 47102(20)). 18. Public -use airport. An airport used or intended to be used for public purposes where the area used or intended to be used for landing, taking off, or surface maneuvering of aircraft may be under the control of a public agency or privately owned and used for public purposes (49 U.S.C. § 47102(21)). 19. Putrescible waste. Solid waste that contains organic matter capable of being decomposed by micro-organisms and of such a character and proportion as to be capable of attracting or providing food for birds (40 CFR §257.3-8). 20. Putrescible-waste disposal operation. Landfills, garbage dumps, underwater waste discharges, or similar facilities where activities include processing, burying, storing, or otherwise disposing of putrescible material, trash, and refuse. 21. Retention ponds. Storm water management ponds that hold water for more than 48 hours. 22. Risk. Risk is the relationship between the severity and probability of a threat. It is the product of hazard level and abundance in the critical airspace, and is thus defined as the probability of a damaging strike with a given species. 23. Runway protection zone. An area off the runway end to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground (see AC 150/5300-13). The dimensions of this zone vary with the airport design, aircraft, type of operation, and visibility minimum. 24. Scheduled air carrier operation. Any common carriage passenger -carrying operation for compensation or hire conducted by an air carrier or commercial operator for which the air carrier, commercial operator, or their representative offers in advance the departure location, departure time, and arrival location. It does not include any operation that is conducted as a supplemental operation under 14 CFR Part 119 or as a public charter operation under 14 CFR Part 380 (14 CFR § 119.3). A-2 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 25 Sewage sludge. Any solid, semi -solid, or liquid residue generated during the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. Sewage sludge includes, but is not limited to, domestic septage; scum or solids removed in primary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment process; and a material derived from sewage sludge. Sewage does not include ash generated during the firing of sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator or grit and screenings generated during preliminary treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. (40 CFR § 257.2) 26 Sludge. Any solid, semi -solid, or liquid waste generated form a municipal, commercial or industrial wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility or any other such waste having similar characteristics and effect. (40 CFR § 257.2). 27 Solid waste. Any garbage, refuse, sludge, from a waste treatment plant, water supply treatment plant or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including, solid liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities, but does not include solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage, or solid or dissolved material in irrigation return flows or industrial discharges which are point sources subject to permits under section 402 of the Clean Water Act, or source, special nuclear, or by product material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.(40 CFR § 257.2). 28. Turbine -powered aircraft. Aircraft powered by turbine engines including turbojets and turboprops but excluding turbo -shaft rotary -wing aircraft. 29. Turbine -use airport. Any airport that sells fuel for fixed -wing turbine -powered aircraft. 30. Wastewater treatment facility. Any devices and/or systems used to store, treat, recycle, or reclaim municipal sewage or liquid industrial wastes, including publicly owned treatment works, as defined by Section 212 of the Clean Water Act. This definition includes any pretreatment involving the reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants into a publicly owned treatment system. (See 40 CFR § 403.3 (q), (r), & (s)). 31 Wildlife. Any wild animal, including without limitation any wild mammal, bird, reptile, fish, amphibian, mollusk, crustacean, arthropod, coelenterate, or other invertebrate, including any part, product, egg, or offspring thereof 50 CFR § 10.12 As used in this AC, wildlife includes feral animals and domestic animals out of the control of their owners (14 CFR Part 139, Certification of Airports). 32 Wildlife attractants. Any human -made structure, land -use practice, or human - made or natural geographic feature that can attract or sustain hazardous wildlife within the landing or departure airspace or the airport's aircraft operations area. These attractants can include architectural features, landscaping, waste disposal sites, wastewater treatment facilities, agricultural or aquaculture activities, surface mining, or wetlands. A-3 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C 33. Wildlife hazard. A potential for a damaging aircraft collision with wildlife on or near an airport. 34. Wildlife strike. A wildlife strike is deemed to have occurred when: a. A strike between wildlife and aircraft has been witnessed; b. Evidence or damage from a strike has been identified on an aircraft; c. Bird or other wildlife remains, whether in whole or in part, are found: i. Within 250 feet of a runway centerline or within 1,000 feet of a runway end unless another reason for the animal's death is identified or suspected, unless another reason for the animal's death is identified or; ii. On a taxiway or anywhere else on or off airport that there is reason to believe was the result of a strike with an aircraft. d. The presence of birds or other wildlife on or off the airport had a significant negative effect on a flight (i.e., aborted takeoff, aborted landing, high-speed emergency stop, aircraft left pavement area to avoid collision with animal). 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C APPENDIX B. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES B.1 Regulations • 14 CFR § 139.337, Wildlife Hazard Management • 40 CFR § 258, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills B.2 Advisory Circulars • AC 150/5200-32, Reporting Wildlife Aircraft Strikes • AC 150/5200-33, Hazard Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports • AC 150/5200-34, Construction or Establishment of New Landfills Near Public Airports • AC 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports • AC 150/5200-38, Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans • AC 150/5220-25, Airport Avian Radar Systems • AC 150/5210-24, Airport Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Management B.3 Certification Alerts • Certalert No. 97-09, Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Outline (11/17/1997) • Certalert No. 98-05, Grasses Attractive To Hazardous Wildlife (9/21/1998) • Certalert No. 06-07, Requests by State Wildlife Agencies to Facilitate and Encourage Habitat for State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and Species of Special Concern on Airports (11/21/2006) • Certalert No. 13-01, Federal and State Depredation Permit Assistance (1/30/2013) • Certalert No.14-O 1, Seasonal Mitigation of Hazardous Species at Airports: Attention to Snowy Owls (2/26/2014) • Certalert No. 16-03, Recommended Wildlife Exclusion Fencing (8/2016) 2/21/2020 AC 150/5200-33C B.4 Airport Cooperative Research Program Reports These, and other wildlife / aviation reports, are available from the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies (TRB) at http://www.trb.org/Publications/Publications.aspx. • ACRP Research Report 198: Wetland Mitigation, Volume 2, A Guidebook for Airports (2019) • ACRP Synthesis 92: Airport Waste Management and Recycling Practices (2018) • ACRP Research Report 174: Guidebook and Primer (2018) • ACRP Report 122: Innovative Airport Responses to Threatened / Endangered Species (2015) • ACRP Report 125: Balancing Airport Stormwater and Bird Hazard Management (2015) • ACRP Report 145: Applying an SMS Approach to Wildlife Hazard Management (2015) • ACRP Synthesis 39 Report: Airport Wildlife Population Management (2013) • ACRP Synthesis 52 Report: Habitat Management to Deter Wildlife at Airports (2014) • ACRP Synthesis 23 Report: Bird Harassment, Repellent, and Deterrent Techniques for Use on and Near Airports (2011) • ACRP Report 32: Guidebook for Addressing Aircraft/Wildlife Hazards at General Aviation Airports (2010) B.5 Manuals • Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports - A Manual for Airport Personnel (2005) B.6 Orders • 50 CFR § 21.49, Control Order for Resident Canada Geese at Airports and Military Airfields • 50 CFR § 21.50, Depredation Order for Resident Canada Geese Nests and Eggs • 50 CFR § 21.43, Depredation Order for Blackbirds, Cowbirds, Crows, Grackles, and Magpies • 50 CFR § 21.54, Control Order for Muscovy Ducks in the United States • 50 CFR § 21.55, Control Order for Invasive Migratory Birds in Hawaii Advisory Circular Feedback If you find an error in this AC, have recommendations for improving it, or have suggestions for new items/subjects to be added, you may let us know by (1) mailing this form to Manager, Airport Safety and Operations Division, Federal Aviation Administration ATTN: AAS-300, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington DC 20591 or (2) faxing it to the attention of AAS-300 at (202) 267-5257. Subject: AC 150/5200-33C Date: Please check all appropriate line items: ❑ An error (procedural or typographical) has been noted in paragraph on page Recommend paragraph on page be changed as follows: In a future change to this AC, please cover the following subject: (Briefly describe what you want added) Other comments: I would like to discuss the above. Please contact me at (phone number, email address). Submitted by: Date: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular Subject: Protocol for the Conduct and Review of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits, Wildlife Hazard Assessments, and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans Date: 8/20/2018 AC No: 150/5200-38 Initiated By: AAS-300 Change: 1 Purpose. For certificated airports, this Advisory Circular (AC) defines the minimum acceptable standards for the conduct and preparation of Wildlife Hazard Site Visits (Site Visit), Wildlife Hazard Assessments (Assessments) and Wildlife Hazard Management Plans (Plans). This AC provides guidelines that discuss whether a Site Visit can be conducted or whether an Assessment must be conducted under Part 139. In the case of airports that are not Part 139 certificated, this AC provides guidelines as to when a Site Visit or Assessment is recommended. The AC further defines and explains continual monitoring programs. This AC also provides checklists to help people evaluate Site Visits, Assessments and Plans. 2 Applicability. This AC describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, for airports that hold Airport Operating Certificates issued under 14 CFR part 139 subpart D ("Certificated Airports"), to comply with the wildlife hazard management requirements in 14 CFR § 139.337. For non -certificated airports, the standards, practices, and recommendations contained in this AC are recommended during the conduct and preparation of Site Visits, Assessments and Plans. The FAA also recommends this guidance for all Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologists (QAWBs)1, land -use planners, and developers of projects, facilities, and activities on or near airports. Finally, in accordance with AIP Grant Assurance 34 and PFC Program Assurance B(9), if an airport uses Federal funds or Passenger Facility Charge revenue for Site Visits or Assessments, then the protocols 1 The term "wildlife damage management biologist" is used in 14 CFR § 139.337. That term is outdated, and "qualified airport wildlife biologist," which is used in this AC, has the same meaning for purposes of complying with part 139. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 in Chapter 1 (applicable to Site Visits) or Chapter 2 (for Assessments) must be used in conducting those projects. 3 Background. 1. 14 CFR § 139.337, Wildlife Hazard Management, prescribes the specific reasons why an Assessment must be conducted and what subject matter is minimally required. While minimum standards for Assessments and Plans have existed in the past, there have not previously been standards on preferred methodologies that assess wildlife populations and wildlife hazard attractants. As a result, there have been non standardized, wide ranging methodologies to obtain wildlife and habitat data. 2. An Assessment is defined in § 139.337(c) as an ecological study, conducted by a QAWB. The Assessment analyzes local and transient wildlife populations, habitat, airport operations and strike data (if available) to establish a scientific basis for the development, implementation, and refinement of a Plan. Section 139.337(e) provides in part that a Plan must provide measures to alleviate or eliminate wildlife hazards to air carrier operations and, as authorized by the Administrator, must become a part of the Airport Certification Manual (ACM). While the Assessment ultimately provides a risk analysis of wildlife hazards and gives suggestions on how to mitigate wildlife attractants, the Plan details the agreed upon comprehensive mitigation efforts the airport actually will take. 3. Though parts of the Assessment may be incorporated directly in the Plan, they are two separate documents. Part of the Plan can be prepared by the QAWB who conducts the Assessment. However, some parts can be prepared only by the airport. For example, airport management assigns airport personnel responsibilities, commits airport funds, and purchases equipment and supplies. 4. The intent of a Site Visit is to provide an abbreviated analysis of an airport's wildlife hazards, determine if an Assessment is warranted, and if necessary, and provide actionable information that allows the airport to expedite the mitigation of these hazards. Accordingly, Site Visits should be conducted by a QAWB. 5. Available information about the risks posed to aircraft by certain wildlife species has increased in recent years. Improved reporting, studies, documentation, and statistics show that aircraft collisions with birds and other wildlife are a serious economic and public safety problem. While many species of wildlife can pose a threat to aircraft safety, they are not all equally hazardous. Appendix A provides a composite ranking (1 = most hazardous, 50 = least hazardous) and relative hazard score of 50 wildlife species with at least 100 reported strikes of civil aircraft.2 We based this ranking on three criteria: damage, major damage, and effect -on -flight. Noticeably missing from this table are several hazardous species that had not been struck with the minimum frequency to allow their inclusion within the analyses. 2 The data in this Appendix is taken from Table 19, Federal Aviation Administration National Wildlife Strike Database Serial Report No. 19, Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the United States, 1990 2012 (September 2013) 11 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Brown and white pelicans, black vultures, great egrets and other waders as well as several species of waterfowl, raptors, gulls, and shorebirds present a significant hazard to aircraft. Although these hazard rankings can help focus hazardous wildlife management efforts on those species or groups that represent the greatest threats to safe air operations in the airport environment, care should be given to consider any hazardous species of significant mass, flocking or flight behavior, or habitat preferences. Used with a site -specific Assessment to determine the relative abundance and movements of wildlife species, these rankings can help airport operators better understand the general threat level (and consequences) of certain wildlife species and can assist with the creation of a "zero-tolerance"3 list of hazardous species that warrant immediate attention. 4 Feedback on this AC. If you have suggestions for improving this AC, you may use the Advisory Circular Feedback form at the end of this AC. n R. Dermsdy Director of Airport Safety and Standards Zero -tolerance designation in the airport environment means wildlife species that represent an unacceptable high risk to safe aircraft operations. Their presence in the airport environment cannot be tolerated and warrants immediate and reasonable management action to remove them from the Air Operations Area (AOA) using appropriate techniques (i.e., harassment, lethal take, capture and relocate, etc.). 111 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 CONTENTS Paragraph Page Chapter 1. Protocol for the Conduct of a Wildlife Hazard Site Visit (Site Visit) 1-1 1.1 Introduction1-1 1.2 Applicable Airport Information. 1-1 1.3 Observations. 1-3 1.4 Site Visit Report 1-3 Chapter 2. Protocol for the Conduct of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (Assessment) 2-5 2.1 Introduction2-5 2.2 Requirements for Wildlife Hazard Assessments. 2-6 2.3 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment. 2-7 2.4 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment Report. 2-8 2.5 Minimum Number of Wildlife Surveys Required and Duration of Wildlife Hazard Assessment 2-9 2.6 Basic Wildlife Survey Techniques for Wildlife Hazard Assessments 2-10 2.7 Basic Habitat Surveys for Wildlife Hazard Assessments. 2-16 2.8 Evaluation of Airport and Aircraft Operations. 2-19 Chapter 3. Protocol for the Preparation of a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (Plan) ..3-21 3.1 Introduction3-21 3.2 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Regulatory Requirements and Methodology. 3-21 3.3 Pertinent Laws and Regulations 3-28 Chapter 4. Protocol for Continual Monitoring 4-34 4.1 Introduction4-34 4.2 Continual Monitoring Protocol. 4-34 4.3 Continual Monitoring Annual Report. 4-35 Appendix A. Composite Ranking of Hazardous Wildlife Species A-1 Appendix B. Airport Wildlife Hazard Site Visit and Report Checklists B-1 Appendix C. Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment and Report Checklists C-1 Appendix D. Wildlife Survey Data Sheet Example D-1 lv 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Appendix E. Airport Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Checklist E-1 Appendix F. Airport Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Review F-1 Appendix G. Letter of Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for Airports G-1 Appendix H. Letter of Mixed Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for Airports H-1 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 CHAPTER 1. PROTOCOL FOR THE CONDUCT OF A WILDLIFE HAZARD SITE VISIT (SITE VISIT) 1.1 Introduction. Wildlife Hazard Site Visits can be beneficial for any airport. A Site Visit has three parts: (1) gathering airport information; (2) field observations; and (3) a final report with recommendations. Airports can use a Site Visit to quickly evaluate and mitigate potential hazards on and near airports. An airport can also use a Site Visit to determine whether an Assessment is necessary. An exception to this occurs if the airport is certificated and has had one of the events listed in § 139.337(b). Then the airport must conduct an Assessment4. 1 1.2 If an airport already has a Plan, airport management can use a Site Visit to investigate wildlife strikes to aircraft or see if the Plan needs to be updated. Airports can also use a Site Visit to decide if a proposed land use in the vicinity of an airport will increase the potential for wildlife hazards at the airport. For non -certificated airports that do not have a Plan, a Site Visit can provide a suitable basis to develop a basic Plan. 1 1.3 During the Site Visit, the QAWB collects and compiles information on the airport's wildlife hazard history, documented and suspected wildlife hazards, habitat attractants, control activities, airport operations and maintenance procedures, communications of hazards through ATC and pilots, aircraft operations and scheduling. A Site Visit is typically conducted over a period of one to three days. A QAWB evaluates the habitat on and surrounding the airport, and records direct or indirect wildlife observations. The QAWB also reviews the current Plan, current wildlife management activities, and airport wildlife strike data. Appendix B has a checklist that airports can use to ensure a complete and detailed Site Visit. The checklist can also be used to review the Site Visit protocol and report. 1 1.4 It is recommended that a QAWB conduct Site Visits. Standards for becoming a QAWB are found in AC 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculum for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports. 1.2 Applicable Airport Information. 1.2.1 A QAWB may request the following information, if available, from the airport operator to prepare for a site visit: 1. Personnel and departments responsible for airport operations 2. Number of aircraft operations per year 4 If a certificated airport has already had an Assessment conducted and a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (Plan) developed based on that Assessment, then the airport must evaluate the Plan following an event described in § 139.337(b)(1) -(3). 1-1 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 3. Type of operations (i.e., % private, civil, and military) 4. Recent airport construction or airfield changes 5. Past and present land management practices 6. Records of strikes and damage, flight delays, injuries, and fatalities due to strikes. Wildlife strike data may help determine hazardous species on an airport. Data on reported wildlife strikes are available through the FAA National Wildlife Strike Database (available at http://wildlife.faa.gov). Airports may maintain their own local database which can be compared with the National Database. It is recommended that a Site Visit include an analysis of wildlife strike records. If possible, include summaries of strike data by species, time of day, on and off -site airport locations, and weather conditions. At minimum, it is recommended that a wildlife strike analysis include, if available: a. Bird and mammal species involved b. Frequency distribution by month and year c. Number per 10,000 aircraft movements d. Location on the airfield 7. Any existing wildlife hazard management efforts and related maintenance procedures, if applicable — Records of past management efforts may be helpful during this initial consultation. It is recommended that attempts to exclude, deter, or remove wildlife from the airport be noted. If not already in place, it is recommended that a wildlife log be created and maintained by airport operations to document all wildlife activity observed on the airport. 8. Description of current wildlife hazard threats or concerns 9. Presence / absence of perimeter fence, condition of fence and its effectiveness5 10. Any current Federal and State depredation/ wildlife control permits and annual permit reports 11. Current U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, airport maps, and/ or aerial photographs 12. Other pertinent information present in airport records 1.2.2 Airport records may be incomplete or may not exist. Interviews with airport personnel often yield useful information that is missing from written records. It is recommended that the QAWB discuss the history of wildlife hazard problems at the airport with the 5 If an airport is non -certificated and does not have an effective or complete perimeter fence to exclude hazardous wildlife, then the Site Visit report should include this recommendation. If the airport desires fencing it must follow FAA procurement protocols and develop a condensed or short plan to mitigate wildlife hazards. This outline demonstrates an airport's commitment to maintain the fence as part of a comprehensive wildlife mitigation program; it is not required to incorporate all of the components of a full Wildlife Hazard Management Plan under 14 CFR § 139.337. 1-2 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 airport manager and staff. The control tower supervisor and chief of operations may also give useful background information on the severity and frequency of the problem. 1.3 Observations. FAA recommends that the QAWB make observations from a variety of locations to ensure complete visual coverage of the airport. Minimum coverage shall include observations of the airport's Air Operations Area (AOA).6 These observations maybe brief; they are not as rigorous as a full Assessment. At a minimum, it is recommended that the observations include: 1. Birds — Record bird species present and note abundance, activity, and location, type of habitat used, time and date of observations. Note evidence of bird activity such as fecal material and regurgitated pellets (boluses) under structures used for perching. 2. Mammals — Document mammals observed and evidence of mammal activity such as scats, tracks, runs, and burrows and include time and date of observations, activity, location, and type of habitat used. Estimate relative abundance, activity, and habitat use 3. Habitat Attractants — Assess habitats and man-made attractants on and around airport property. Note potential wildlife attractants. Review maps and aerial photographs, noting waste management facilities, wildlife refuges, water bodies, agriculture, stock yards, picnic areas, restaurants, and other features or habitats that may attract wildlife within a five -mile radius around the airport. As noted in AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, Section 1.4, Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 statute miles between the farthest edge of the airport's AOA and the hazardous wildlife attractant if the attractant could cause hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace. 4. Wildlife/Habitat Relationship — Observe and record how the wildlife observed is using the habitat on the airport. 5. Wildlife Interactions with Aircraft Operations — Assess the potential for wildlife interactions with aircraft operations in the AOA, traffic patterns, approach and departure airspace, and surrounding areas. Evaluate aircraft movements to see if these operations increase the risk of wildlife strikes. Review airport hazard advisories to see if they are specific to the hazards at the airport. 1.4 Site Visit Report. It is recommended that the QAWB provide the airport manager with a letter report summarizing field data and any management recommendations following the Site Visit. 6 Any area of an airport used or intended to be used for landing, takeoff, or surface maneuvering of aircraft. An air operations area includes such paved areas or unpaved areas that are used or intended to be used for the unobstructed movement of aircraft in addition to its associated runway, taxiways, or apron. 1-3 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 It is recommended the FAA Regional office receive a copy of this report from the Airport Manager. The findings in a Site Visit report could lead the FAA to require an Assessment. See § 139.337(b)(4) ("wildlife of a size, or in numbers, capable of causing an event" like a multiple wildlife strike, substantial damage from a strike, or engine ingestion). The airport is advised to retain copies of the report. FAA recommends that the Site Visit report contain: 1. List of wildlife species or wildlife signs, such as deer tracks observed during the visit or identified as wildlife hazards by other sources 2. Federal and State status of the species observed 3. Habitat features that may encourage wildlife to use the airport 4. Natural and artificial wildlife attractants on or near the airport 5. Strike data analysis 6. Recommendations to: a. Reduce wildlife hazards identified (if data is available to substantiate conclusions) 7 b. Conduct an Assessment, if needed c. Modify an existing Plan, if needed d. Improve communications and hazard advisories between Air Traffic Control, pilots, airlines, airport operations, and other airport users e. Consider potential short-term alteration of aircraft operations, if feasible, to avoid identified hazardous wildlife concentrations f. No action required, if applicable ' Reduce wildlife hazards through the use of habitat management, exclusion/repulsion techniques, active harassment, population control, and operational considerations. 1-4 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 CHAPTER 2. PROTOCOL FOR THE CONDUCT OF A WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENT (ASSESSMENT) 2.1 Introduction. 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 The first step in preparing an airport Plan is to conduct an Assessment. A QAWB conducts the Assessment, which gives the scientific basis for developing, implementing, and refining a Plan. Though parts of the Assessment may be incorporated directly into the Plan, they are two separate documents. The objective of an Assessment is to provide a baseline of data and understanding of wildlife species considered hazardous on or near an airport, and of attractants that provide food, water, and shelter8. An Assessment typically takes a year to complete. FAA recommends that assessment methodologies be reproducible. It is also recommended that data collection procedures such as point counts, trapping indices and vehicle routes be set up and used to allow future repetition for consistent, continued monitoring or comparison to previous findings. The Assessment identifies wildlife populations and trends at the airport, such as the location and seasonality of wildlife hazards. It also identifies how these fluctuations in behavior and abundance may affect aviation safety, with particular emphasis on wildlife strikes to aircraft. Assessments promote an integrated approach for wildlife mitigation to effectively: 1. Modify the environment (e.g., changes in mowing and drainage clearance procedures) 2. Exclude wildlife (e.g., installation of fences, netting and perch excluders) 3. Implement harassment procedures (e.g., pyrotechnics and propane cannons) 4. Remove wildlife (e.g., lethal and capture/relocate methodologies) 5. Communicate wildlife hazard advisories through Air Traffic Control voice communications, Automatic Terminal Information Service (ATIS), Pilot Report (PIREPS), Notices to Airmen (NOTAMS) 6. Direct pilot responses to identified hazards 7. Report strikes or hazardous situations 8. Potentially alter flight routes, traffic patterns, or schedules to avoid locations and times of identified wildlife hazards. A properly conducted Assessment can help a QAWB quantify wildlife hazards to aviation and understand the risk presented by each species for a particular airport. In this context, the most hazardous wildlife species are those which are most likely to cause aircraft damage when struck. Risk is the product of hazard level and abundance 8 An Assessment identifies and describes wildlife hazards and attractants, whether known, suspected or otherwise unknown, on and near an airport within the separation criteria recommended in Section 1-2 through 1-4 of AC 150/5200-3 3, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, to an extent that allows for the creation of a sufficient basis for mitigation measures. 2-5 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 in the critical airspace, and is thus defined as the probability of a damaging strike with a given species. 2.1.4 The Assessment provides baseline data for an airport to prepare a Plan, and evaluate the efficacy of its existing wildlife hazard management program. For example, an Assessment could help an airport with an existing Plan determine the recurrence of species -specific wildlife hazards, monitor reduction of onsite damaging strikes, monitor wildlife program communication and response efficiency, and improve the overall wildlife program through annual review. Better information regarding wildlife hazards and their attractants should result in better use of resources. Appendix C has a checklist that QAWBs and airports can use to ensure the Assessment and report meet the requirements within 14 CFR § 139.337. 2.2 Requirements for Wildlife Hazard Assessments. Section 139.337(b) requires that, in a manner authorized by the Administrator, each certificate holder must ensure that an Assessment is conducted when any of the following events occurs on or near the airport: 1. An air carrier aircraft experiences multiple wildlife strikes 2. An air carrier aircraft experiences substantial damage from striking wildlife 3. An air carrier aircraft experiences an engine ingestion of wildlife 4. Wildlife of a size, or in numbers, capable of causing an event described in paragraph (b)(1), (2), or (3) of 14 CFR § 139.337 is observed to have access to any airport flight pattern or aircraft movement area. Table 1: Additional guidance for 14 CFR § 139.337(b) The following table provides additional guidance in complying with § 139.337(b). 14 1 Guidance I CFR § 139.337 (b) each Hazard following In a manner authorized by holder shall ensure is conducted occurs on or the Administrator, when near the Wildlife of the certificate Assessment events that a any airport. (b)(1) wildlife An air carrier aircraft experiences a multiple Aircraft strikes (i.e., multiple flock animals during a single of birds). • strike incident (b)(2) An air carrier aircraft damage from striking paragraph, substantial structural failure incurred adversely affects the structural performance, or flight experiences wildlife. damage by characteristics As used in means damage an aircraft that strength, of the substantial this aircraft or 2-6 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 114 CFR 139.337 I Guidance § and that would normally replacement of the affected require major component; repair or (b) (3) ingestion An air carrier aircraft experiences wildlife; or an engine damage does not have to result from the Engine of ingestion. (b) (4) causing or (3) any airport Wildlife an event of this section flight of a described pattern size, or in numbers, in paragraph is observed to have or aircraft movement capable of (b)(1), (2), access to area. Airports with Information in pilots announcements this a standing Airport/Facility of Notice Service wildlife condition. should actionable hazards not on (ATIS), Directory Permanent be mitigation their to Airmen Automatic on or issued or (A/FD) near or blanket without measures. the the (NOTAM), Terminal comments warning airport generic airport meet advisories conducting 2.3 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment. Section 139.337(c) sets forth the minimum content in a Wildlife Hazard Assessment. Table 2: Guidance on 14 CFR § 139.337 (c)(1) - (5). The following provides guidance on the required elements in a Wildlife Hazard Assessment. 14 CFR 139.337 (c) The Wildlife Hazard Assessment ... shall be conducted by a wildlife damage management biologist... having training or experience in wildlife hazard management at airports or an individual working under the direct supervision of such an individual. Guidance An Assessment must be conducted by a QAWB. Additional guidance on the training and experience for a QAWB can be found in the most recent version of AC 150/5200-36, Qualifications for Wildlife Biologist Conducting Wildlife Hazard Assessments and Training Curriculums for Airport Personnel Involved in Controlling Wildlife Hazards on Airports. (c) (cont.) ... the Wildlife Hazard Assessment shall contain: (c)(1) Analysis of the event or circumstances that Who, what, when, where, and why of the prompted the assessment. situation prompting the Assessment. (c)(2) Identification of the wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences. What wildlife species have access to the airport? What are their movement and seasonal patterns? Data should cover 12 consecutive months. What is the Federal and State protective status of notable wildlife? 2-7 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 114 139.337 1 Guidance CFR (c)(3) Identification and near the airport that and location attract of features on wildlife. Wildlife something desire. areas feeding vary seasonally and others, corridors, are attracted exists Wood provide locations. such should lots relatively on or as near Food temporarily. easily be to an airport or near the the AOA safe loafing, and water accessible analyzed. airport and because sources that large nesting travel attractants they can open and These (c)(4) A description of wildlife hazards to air carrier operations. Consider consider database the wildlife and types of wildlife documented the severity of damage observed. in the strike they Also caused. (c)(5) identified operations. Recommended actions for reducing wildlife hazards to air carrier Prioritize hazardous recommend changes airport (ATC), recommendations wildlife and operational in response to operations personnel, air carriers, and their and wildlife pilots). for attractants. mitigating maintenance hazards Also (e.g., Control Air Traffic 2.4 Necessary Elements of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment Report. 2.4.1 The final Assessment report must discuss elements within § 139.337(c). If there was no triggering event or circumstance that prompted the Assessment, then the discussion of triggering event (required under § 139.337(c)(1)) may be omitted. Although there are many acceptable formats to present the findings of an Assessment, it must include those key components listed in § 139.337(c). The required components include sections summarizing methodologies, results, and any recommendations. The report should be submitted to the FAA regional office within 90 days following completion of field work and must contain the name of the QAWB who conducted the Assessment. 2.4.2 It is recommended that Assessment procedures such as point counts, trapping indices, vehicle routes, and avian radar be described to allow duplication of procedures for consistent, continued monitoring or comparison to previous findings. FAA recommends that the report include any maps, imagery and/or detailed descriptions whenever location information is necessary, such as assessment techniques, wildlife hazard attractants, or airport layout. It is recommended the report cite the presence or absence of Federal or State listed species identified during the Assessment. If enough data is available, it is recommended that the discussion include whether the species is resident on or near the airport or is considered transient to the location observed. The FAA recommends the report contain an evaluation of all available wildlife strike data for the airport. The National Wildlife Strike Database (http://wildlife.faa.gov) is available to the public and is the primary repository for wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the U.S., although strike records may be available from other sources such as the airport, airlines and engine manufacturers. FAA 2-8 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 recommends that when available, key strike data such as species, number struck, phase of flight, altitude, time of day, time of year, and damage (if any) be summarized in the report. 2.4.3 The analysis of strike data may include different methodologies that can provide a key component for a comprehensive risk analysis and assessment. Beyond descriptive statistics that summarize strike characteristics at an airport it is recommended that a QAWB determine the number of overall strikes and damaging strikes per number of operations. 9 Another useful alternative for analysis may include determining the amount of biomass struck equated to number of operations or strikes. These analyses can provide a better understanding of risk and as a metric to evaluate the effectiveness of an airport's wildlife program. 2.4.4 Recommended actions for reducing identified wildlife hazards may include detailed, task -specific objectives or general measures. Pay attention to both proactive mitigation such as habitat modification and exclusion techniques, and reactive measures that involve harassment, dispersal and removal procedures. When applicable, airports are encouraged to maintain Federal and State depredation permits. Guidance for acquiring these permits is provided in FAA Certalert ert No. 13-01, Federal. and State Depredation Permit Assistance (January 30, 2013). 2.5 Minimum Number of Wildlife Surveys Required and Duration of Wildlife Hazard Assessment. 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 Conducting an Assessment under § 139.337(c)(2) requires the "identification of the wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences. " The following protocols meet the requirements of § 139.337(c)(2). Alternative protocols may be proposed to the FAA and accepted if they are comparable. In most cases, conducting a 12 -month Assessment would meet this requirement so the seasonal patterns of birds and other wildlife using the airport and surrounding area can be documented. Most regions of the USA have dramatic seasonal differences in numbers and species of migratory birds. Even for non -migratory wildlife, such as deer and resident Canada geese, behavior and movement patterns can change significantly throughout the seasons. To adequately identify wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences, the QAWB may choose from several objective standardized procedures. These standardized survey procedures ensure that QAWBs consistently collect quality, representative data for hazardous wildlife species in the airport environment. These procedures can then be repeated in future years for comparison. Appendix D is an example of a Wildlife Survey Data Sheet. 9 Strikes per number of operations typically use a ratio of 10,000 or 100,000 operations. 2-9 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 2.5.4 Various wildlife species are active throughout all hours of the day and night. Inventory and monitoring techniques should account for these movement dynamics. Daytime surveys in the morning, midday, and evening should account for the daily patterns for most birds, and nocturnal surveys or tracking indices should account for the daily patterns of mammals. 2.5.4.1 Avian Surveys. 1. Minimum of twelve months data collection 2. Minimum of two data collection trips/month 3. Minimum of two survey samples/month for each of the survey points during the diurnal periods of morning, midday and evening 4. Minimum of one sampling trip/quarter (four total sampling trips) for off -site survey points to sample avian use of significant attractants out to five miles, including general observations of sign (tracks, scat, nests, etc.)'° 2.5.4.2 Mammalian Surveys. 1. Minimum of one sampling trip per quarter (four total over twelve months), including general observations of sign such as tracks, scat, etc. 2.5.4.3 Data from Other Sources. 1. Published data 2. University studies 3. Federal and State studies 4. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents 5. Radar studies 6. ATC and airport "event logs" or wildlife management, patrol, monitoring logs 7. Other acceptable data sources 2.6 Basic Wildlife Survey Techniques for Wildlife Hazard Assessments. Not all species are equally detectable. However, an Assessment should assess the presence or absence of known or suspected hazardous species on or near the airport. This is especially important for those species documented within the facility's strike 10 See AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, Section 1-4, Protection of Approach, Departure, and Circling Airspace. For all airports, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 statute miles between the farthest edge of the airport's AOA and the hazardous wildlife attractant if the attractant could cause hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace. 2-10 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 data. Hazardous avian species on or near airports are typically medium to large birds or small birds that congregate in large flocks. 2.6.1 Avian Survey. 2.6.1.1 2.6.1.2 2.6.1.3 2.6.1.4 2.6.1.5 Any standardized survey may be used provided it is designed to comprehensively identify wildlife on or near the airport. One objective procedure for assessing bird populations, based on the North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) methodology, is creating standardized survey points about half a mile apart throughout the airport. The number of observation points required to obtain adequate coverage of the sample area will depend on the size, complexity, and physical features of the airport. This is one example of a specific type of survey, however, and this particular survey is not required. Using a standardized survey methodology gives a baseline estimate of bird species and numbers on the airport that can be compared with other airports and the same airport in the future. Data on species and numbers are collected from established observation points along a survey route. A survey is defined as one visit to all observation points along a survey route. A survey -day consists of one or more independent surveys conducted during one day (i.e., morning, midday, evening). Although forested areas can provide attractive perching or roosting locations for hazardous avian species such as raptors and blackbirds, woodland interior birds are usually of limited concern unless they frequent open habitats which will be surveyed. In many cases, observation points in forested areas are more important for the systematic or ancillary identification of animals and less critical for identifying hazardous avian species. Data relating to forested areas may also be collected by general observations. In addition, it is recommended that observation points also be considered at selected areas within five miles of the airport's AOA if the attractant could cause hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace. Examples of such attractants include, but are not limited to large water impoundments, reservoirs, roosting sites, feedlots, landfills, and agriculture such as sunflowers. The observation points at these areas within the five miles do not need to be surveyed during every data collection trip, but it is recommended that they be surveyed at least quarterly. One method used to conduct a survey would be to start at one end of the survey route and stop the vehicle at each observation point. Record the numbers and species of all birds heard at any distance and all birds detected visually (with or without binoculars) within a quarter -mile radius for 3-5 minutes. During the survey, significant birds (e.g., a flock of 2-11 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 geese; an endangered species) observed outside the quarter -mile radii around observation points or outside the 3-5 minute periods (e.g., while driving between stops) should be noted on a separate data form and reported under general observations. 2.6.1.6 2.6.1.7 2.6.1.8 QAWBs may choose to develop a coding procedure to record birds observed actually on or over a runway during the 3-5 minute observation periods. By knowing the percent of total airport runway area covered by the observation points, you can estimate the number of birds on or crossing the runways per hour. For example, if ten observation points on an airport survey route cover 25% of the runway area, and you recorded an average of 1.5 birds per 3-5 minute observation on or over a runway, then you would estimate that the airport averaged 120 birds on or crossing runways per hour. Assigning each bird or bird flock observed during a point count to a grid location can be useful in further refining spatial distributions of birds on the airport. For the area within a 1/4 mi. radius of each avian observation point, make a visual estimate of the proportion of each major habitat type [e.g., pavement, short (< 8 in.) grass, tall grass (>8 in.), water, shrub] . It may be useful to analyze data for certain species by observation point to associate that species with a certain habitat type or location on the airport. For example, if waterfowl are consistently observed at one observation point that has aquatic habitat, this should be stated in the analysis and presentation of results. Ultimately, the overall survey design (i.e., number and location of survey points, frequency of survey counts per month, time between visits to airport) and analysis of data will vary between airports and depend on the individual airport's wishes. The focus of this AC is to provide minimum standards for data collection and identify limited examples of acceptable data collection techniques. Airports and QAWBs may choose to collect additional data or use more rigorous data collection techniques." 2.6.2 General Observations. 2.6.2.1 In addition to the standardized survey, it is important to make general wildlife observations in areas outside the survey points. These observations can provide important information on significant bird hazards and/or zero tolerance species (e.g., Canada geese) and issues (e.g., endangered species) not fully covered by a standardized survey. Record observations of wildlife use and movements around and within structures 11 For further information on avian survey methodologies and analyses specific to airport environments can be found in Wildlife in Airport Environments: Preventing Animal. Aircraft Collisions through Science -Based Management, (Del cult et at, 2013). 2-12 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 and other unique areas of the airport environment not covered in the standardized bird survey. 2.6.2.2 QAWBs may choose to perform additional analysis. Each airport is different and may require special analysis to document bird activity. For example, if a certain flocking species is present in large numbers, the QAWB may want to present an analysis of mean flock size. If a large number of birds migrate through the airport area over a two-week period, a graphic presentation showing numbers at two-week intervals instead of monthly or seasonal intervals might be appropriate. In addition, the general bird observations made outside of the standardized survey should be incorporated in the report. For example, tables might list the number of goose flocks recorded on the airport by month, the mean number of gulls seen per observation by month at a trash transfer facility within two miles from the airport, or the mean number of pigeons seen in a hangar per observation by season. The report may include descriptive summaries of general observations about flight patterns of a certain species over the airport or the habitat use by another species on the airport. 2.6.3 Data Recording. Encoding data helps data analysis and database entry. Using bird species codes is recommended. The American Ornithologists' Union (AOU) has established a standard four letter alphabetic code for most bird species (http://www.birdpop.org/alphacodes.htm). Bird codes may need to be developed for special situations. For example, in some situations a code for an unknown gull may be "UNGU". Appendix D has an example of a form that QAWBs may use to record survey data. This sample data form also has standardized codes for weather and time. 2.6.4 Data Analysis and Descriptive Statistics. 2.6.4.1 Appropriate data analysis and interpretation helps accurately assess hazards and make management recommendations. Data also serves as a baseline from which the effectiveness of management actions can be measured. 2.6.4.2 For each survey, calculate the total and average number of birds observed per species and the number of observation points recording the species (frequency of sightings on the airport). The number of birds observed gives a measure of species density on the airport. The frequency of sightings at each location shows the distribution of the species on the airport. Surveys can then be grouped to calculate mean number and frequency of birds by species seen per survey by time of day, month, and season. 2.6.4.3 If desired, statistical tests used to identify significant differences among months or seasons can be conducted using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-square calculations. 2-13 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 2.6.5 Seasonal Patterns. Seasonal patterns or trends for species can be represented by graphing the mean number of birds and mean frequency of sightings per month or season. The graph gives a visual representation of obvious seasonal trends or patterns for each bird species observed in all habitat types (i.e., the entire airport). In many cases it will be useful to simplify presentations by combining species into groups/guilds (e.g., birds of prey, gulls, waterfowl) in these summary graphs, presenting the detailed data for individual species in a table or appendix. 2.6.6 Mammal Surveys. 2.6.6.1 2.6.6.2 2.6.6.3 2.6.6.3.1 The collection of data pertaining to mammal populations is often time consuming and labor intensive. However, these data are an important and necessary part of an Assessment and wildlife hazard analysis, and should be collected to determine the presence or absence of large mammals and predators. Whether to collect data for all or for selected mammal species found on an airport depends on past and present wildlife hazards and the initial observations of the QAWB. The QAWB should collect data related to identified and suspected hazardous mammal species, including ungulates (i.e., deer, elk), canids (i.e., coyotes, domestic dogs), lagomorphs (i.e., rabbits, hares), and if necessary, rodents. A number of survey designs developed for mammal species rely upon trapping and marking animals (e.g., mark -recapture studies). Mark - recapture studies are usually time consuming, labor intensive, and costly. FAA recommends that the QAWB consider a combination of data collection procedures that best identify a specific airport's hazardous species. Systematic vehicle surveys, tracking indices, catch -per -unit -effort survey, and spot mapping are commonly used techniques. Vehicle surveys should provide adequate data on large mammals such as ungulates, canids, and lagomorphs. Various tracking methods can be used to assess relative abundance or to help identify mammals beyond the scope of vehicle surveys which have varying degrees of success dependent on method (e.g., spotlight, night vision or Forward -Looking Infra -Red [FLIR]). Relative abundance data for small mammals are collected by catch -per -unit -effort sampling (snap traps). Data related to miscellaneous mammals can also be collected by spot mapping. Vehicle Surveys. Vehicle surveys at night using a spotlight, night vision equipment, or a FLIR unit are performed along predetermined routes. The survey can be one continuous route around the airport or several routes covering different areas. FAA recommends that survey routes include areas near runways, if feasible, and habitat types where ungulates, predators, or other target species are suspected or known to occur. Satellite imagery, aerial photographs, topographic maps, and maps that contain airport roadway 2-14 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 2.6.6.3.2 2.6.6.4 2.6.6.4.1 2.6.6.4.2 2.6.6.5 systems can help in establishing survey routes. Preliminary examinations will be helpful to establish appropriate night time survey routes without excessive obstructions that limit viewing. It is recommended that survey routes be established carefully and remain constant throughout the study. Coordination with Air Traffic Control is essential during spotlight surveys to ensure no aircraft are in the AOA or traffic pattern in the line of spotlight beams. Additionally, FAA recommends spotlight surveys ideally be scheduled at times when aircraft operations are limited or not present. Spotlights must not be pointed at aircraft, other vehicles, or the airport tower. It is recommended that the survey be conducted at least quarterly for the duration of the study. Observations may be performed starting one half hour after sunset and ending after two to three hours, or delayed, dependent on times of limited scheduled aircraft operations. In general, the survey route(s) should be run once per night, but multiple runs may be made if time permits. All mammals and birds observed should be recorded by species and location. It is recommended that the start and end time of each survey and total distance driven be recorded so that numbers seen per hour and distance can be calculated. FAA recommends that wildlife surveys be conducted in most types of weather according to schedule, but it may sometimes be necessary to postpone survey periods during severe weather. FAA further recommends that surveys not be conducted in excessive wind or heavy rain as mammal activity may be significantly affected by weather. Catch -Per -Unit -Effort (small mammals). Small mammal populations may be measured if birds of prey or mammalian predators occur in the strike record or if direct observations or alternative data suggest high predator densities. The number of transects and traps will depend on the size of the habitat being surveyed. Traps are generally set in daylight hours and checked within 24 hours. FAA recommends that transects be run for two to four consecutive nights in spring and again in autumn. When checking traps, it is recommended that the following data be collected for each trap: status of trap (sprung or unsprung) and species, if any, captured. Trapping results are recorded, by species, as the number of animals caught per 100 adjusted trap nights. Small mammal trapping is not required. It is optional depending on the hazardous wildlife present at the airport. Spot Mapping. Spot mapping consists of plotting on a grid map the location, date, and time of mammal observations and provides a general overview of mammal activity on the airport. Often airport operations officers, who are required to perform runway sweeps, can assist in collection of this data, as can 2-15 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 pilots or other airport personnel. Additionally, mammal observations made while performing designated bird and mammal surveys can be mapped and used to augment spot observations. Spot mapping is not required. However, any general observations of mammals and/or their sign should be reported and described in the Assessment report. 2.7 Basic Habitat Surveys for Wildlife Hazard Assessments. 2.7.1 Habitat evaluation is an essential part of an Assessment and is required under § 139.337(c)(3). Many natural and artificial habitats are attractive to wildlife, and evaluation of these should provide the QAWB with information about the quantity, quality, and seasonal nature of their use. Wildlife exploit these habitats for food, water or cover, which may vary seasonally and/or throughout an animal's life cycle. Although they may be considered either a direct or indirect attractant,12 it remains essential for safe air traffic operations to fully understand their influence. 2.7.2 2.7.3 Land -use practices that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife populations on or near airports, specifically those listed in AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, Section 2, can significantly increase the potential for wildlife strikes. FAA criteria include land uses that cause movement of hazardous wildlife onto, into, or across the airport's approach or departure airspace or AOA. The FAA recommends the minimum separation criteria defined in AC 150/5200-33 Section 1 for land -use practices that attract hazardous wildlife to the vicinity of airports. This separation criterion provides predetermined boundaries of concern around airports to be considered while conducting comprehensive, detailed studies and evaluations of wildlife populations and attractants. 2.7.3.1 Pre-existing Habitat Data. Pre-existing habitat inventory and geospatial information can prove useful regarding soils, vegetative species, topography, geography, habitat type, location and size. This data may be found in various locations or with various agencies such as: 1. Airport Layout Plan 2. Airport Master Plan 3. Airport Environmental Assessment 4. Airport Environmental Impact Statement 5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 12 Direct attractants (i.e., favorable vegetation for foraging) or indirect attractants (e.g., brushy vegetation may result in increased rodent populations which attracts hazardous raptors) can create equally hazardous environment for safe air operations. 2-16 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 6. U.S. Geological Survey 7. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 8. USDA — Natural Resources Conservation Service 9. State Departments of Natural Resources 10. State Departments of Transportation 2.7.3.2 2.7.3.2.1 Descriptive Habitat Data. The Assessment should include a general description of the study area and describe natural and artificial attractants both on -site and off -site within the separation criteria recommended in AC 150/5200-33 Section 1. Natural Habitat Data.13 This may include characteristics such as geographic location, topography, soils, climate, vegetation, agriculture, and wetlands/water features, such as drainages, ponds, lakes, rivers, and water impoundments. 2.7.3.2.2 Artificial Environment Data.14 This may include items such as airport buildings, jet bridges, towers, antennas, runways, taxiways, ramp, hangars, waste disposal operations and waste containers. 2.7.3.3 Food. 2.7.3.3.1 2.7.3.3.2 Naturally occurring wildlife foods such as insect and other invertebrate populations should be noted with descriptions, time of year, weather conditions, and environmental factors such as soil type, vegetative cover, and drainage conditions. In addition, FAA recommends that management practices that enhance the production of these natural foods be documented. An evaluation of small mammal populations as a food source for predators can be addressed in the sampling strategy discussed previously. Plant seeds, fruits, and berries are other food attractants on airports for birds and mammals. Seasonal wildlife hazards may develop when seeds or fruits are abundant. Documentation of these food sources is an important component of the habitat analysis. 2.7.3.3.3 Review environments within five miles from the airport's AOA and record food sources that attract wildlife. Agricultural fields, grain elevators, food 13 Natural habitat is defined for this purpose as biotic habitats including vegetation (e.g., grass, forest, shrub scrub, wetland, agriculture, or desert) and water features (e.g., ponds, rivers, lakes, marine, retention/detention ponds, or drainages). 14 Artificial environment is defined for this purpose as man-made features (e.g., buildings, structures, towers, paved/hard surfaces, waste disposal operations, or waste containers). 2-17 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 product industries, fast food restaurants, livestock operations, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries, and waste handling facilities may attract significant numbers of birds and/or mammals, increasing the hazard to human safety and aircraft. It is recommended that a Wildlife Hazard Assessment contain information relative to identified notable sites such as the names and locations, and a description of the attractant and the potential hazard. 2.7.3.4 Vegetation. Vegetation and cover requirements vary by species and time of year. Relationships between wildlife species and cover types provide information necessary to develop appropriate wildlife management strategies. In reviewing vegetative areas on an airport, it is important to record observations of species, management practices, seasonal growth, density, percent cover, and any noted wildlife associations. Use of specific areas by animals in the airport environment may assist the observer in identifying vegetative attractants. 2.7.3.5 Water. Water sources are wildlife attractants, especially fresh water sources in coastal areas. Reservoirs, streams, ponds, drainage basins, seep areas, and ephemeral water sources should be identified and mapped. Gulls, waterfowl, shorebirds, and marsh birds may be attracted to the airport because of abundant food or drinking and resting sites available in existing water resources. 2.7.3.6 Structures. 2.7.3.6.1 2.7.3.6.2 Buildings, areas adjacent to buildings, and equipment on airports are readily used by some wildlife species, such as European starlings, pigeons, gulls, sparrows, crows, raptors, mice, rats, skunks, and woodchucks. Wildlife use of structures can present threats to human safety and aircraft, and may cause unsanitary working conditions or damage to structures. The reasons for use of most structural features by wildlife are usually easily determined, while others are less obvious. For example, feral pigeons may loaf on just one ledge of a particular building because it provides shelter from the wind or protection from predators. The QAWB should determine what features are attractive to problem species, and why. A strategy can then be developed to reduce or eliminate the problem. 2.7.3.7 Soil. 2.7.3.7.1 The type(s) and fertility of soils present on an airport is a general indicator of biological productivity. Habitat quality is directly related to soil fertility and other soil conditions. The nutritive value, quantity, and attractiveness of plant and animal food organisms varies widely with soil 2-18 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 types and conditions. For example, sandy, well -drained soils that dry quickly after rainfall generally produce less biomass and are less likely to harbor an abundant population of earthworms and other invertebrates. 2.7.3.7.2 It is recommended that identification and documentation of soil types and conditions on the airport and vicinity be an integral part of an overall assessment or study. In most states, information on soil types and conditions can be acquired from soil survey publications available from the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) or the Cooperative Extension Service. These publications contain soil maps and descriptions, formations, morphology and soil classifications. However, on airports where large scale soil disturbance, such as grading, leveling, and filling, have been conducted, soil maps may be of limited value. 2.7.3.8 Spot Mapping. Because attractants may vary seasonally and following precipitation, spot mapping the location and date of features such as fruit and seed bearing vegetation, ephemeral pools and temporary ponding of water or puddles throughout the AOA will help identify food sources, drainage problems and grade deficiencies. 2.8 Evaluation of Airport and Aircraft Operations. 2.8.1 The assessment of airport and aircraft operational procedures is an essential part of an Assessment. Hazardous wildlife only present a risk to aviation if aircraft and wildlife occupy the airspace or movement areas at the same time and location. Persons conducting Assessments should gather general observation data and other information related to airport and aircraft operations regarding wildlife hazards. FAA recommends that QAWBs monitor NOTAMs, ATIS advisories, and published Airport/Facilities Directory information to ensure that specific information and not blanket advisories are issued. It is recommended that QAWBs assess ATC's involvement in identifying potential hazards or hazards relayed by pilots or airport operations personnel. FAA recommends that the Assessment also include a determination that wildlife dispersal is coordinated with ATC to insure hazards are not inadvertently increased by dispersing wildlife into the path of aircraft movements. ATC permits wildlife control teams access to movement areas of the airfield and communicates with them during the implementation of mitigation measures to ensure dispersal paths are observed and de - conflicted with aircraft movements. 2.8.2 QAWBs may also query users of the airport for their inputs on wildlife observed on and around the airport. For example, pilots may be interviewed about their experience in the local area as they have a perspective not available to ground -based personnel. Congregations of towering raptors or gulls over off -airport facilities such as landfills and food -processing plants are often detected this way as are major roost sites of blackbirds, starlings, vultures, or crows. Fixed -base operators (FBOs) may also be visited and personnel interviewed for their experience with hazardous wildlife in the 2-19 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 local area. Pilots, especially those operating non-commercial or private aircraft, must be aware that they have the discretion to delay takeoffs or departures, ask for wildlife dispersal action, or requests alternate runways, departure or approach paths to avoid identified hazards. 2.8.3 2.8.4 Airline and private maintenance personnel may be interviewed for their perspective on local hazardous wildlife and their reporting procedures when strikes are detected on post -or pre-flight inspections of aircraft. Other airport users may be interviewed and included in the Assessment process. Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) and Airport Security Personnel are always present on airports during operations and have a unique view of the airfield. It is recommended that they also be notified should major dispersal operations be conducted, such as with pyrotechnics, where the slight chance for grass fires or security concerns are present. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 CHAPTER 3. PROTOCOL FOR THE PREPARATION OF A WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN (PLAN) 3.1 Introduction. 3.1.1 3.1.2 When complete, the Assessment is submitted by the airport to the FAA for review and approval. The FAA will also use it to determine if the airport must prepare and implement a Plan. In reaching this decision, the FAA considers the Assessment, the aeronautical activity at the airport, the views of the certificate holder and airport users, and any other pertinent information. See § 139.337(d)(1)-(6). The goal of an airport's Plan is to minimize the risk to aviation safety, airport structures or equipment, or human health posed by populations of hazardous wildlife on and around the airport. The Plan accomplishes this through the identification of hazardous wildlife and their attractants, suitable proactive and reactive management techniques, necessary resources and supplies to successfully implement a wildlife hazard management program and personnel responsibilities and training requirements. The Plan includes appropriate federal, state and possible local wildlife control permits and describes a schedule and methodology to evaluate and update the Plan. If the FAA determines that a Plan is needed to alleviate or eliminate wildlife hazards to air carrier operations under § 139.337(e), the FAA will notify the airport to develop a Plan using the Assessment as a basis. The FAA recommends that airports developing an initial Plan submit the document to the FAA regional office within six months of this notification, and that airports updating an existing Plan submit the modified document to the FAA regional office within 60 days of notification. 3.2 Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Regulatory Requirements and Methodology. Section 139.337(f) provides specific guidance as to what must be addressed in a Plan. A checklist is provided for clarification in Appendix E. 3.2.1 14 CFR 139.337 1 . "A list of the individuals havin L authorit and res s onsibili for implementing each aspect of the plan." This list assigns or delegates specific responsibilities for various sections of the Plan to airport departments and other interested federal, state or local agencies, such as: 1. Airport Director 2. Operations Department 3. Maintenance Department 4. Security Department 5. Planning Department 6. Finance Department 7. Wildlife Coordinator 8. Wildlife Hazards Working Group 3-21 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 9. Air Traffic Control 10. Airlines 11. Pilots 12. Fixed -base operators 13. Air -side tenants 14. Land -side tenants 15. State wildlife agency 16. Local law enforcement authorities 17. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 3.2.2 14 CFR 139.3370(2). "A list prioritizing the following actions identified in the wildlife hazard assessment and target dates for their initiation and completion." 3.2.2.1 3.2.2.2 The Plan should provide a prioritized list of problem wildlife populations and wildlife attractants (food, cover, and water) identified in the Assessment, proposed mitigation actions, and target starting and completion dates. A list of completed wildlife population management projects and habitat modification projects designed to reduce the wildlife strike potential can be included to provide a history of work already accomplished. It is helpful to group attractants by areas and ownership. NON AIRPORT PROPERTY -AIRPORT PROPERTY Air Operations Area (AOA) Within 2 miles of AOA Within 2 miles of AOA Within 5 miles of AOA Airport structures Wildlife mitigation techniques at commercial airports involve integrated and systematic methodologies that typically progress (based on necessity) from proactive measures to reactive measures. The reduction of wildlife threats at an airport is often the unintended or secondary consequence of ongoing habitat management such as mowing, tree removal, drainage reparations, out -of -grade surface restoration and the establishment or maintenance of perimeter fencing. 3.2.2.3 14 CFR 139.337(f)(2)(i). "Wildlife population management." 3.2.2.3.1 This section includes species -specific population management plans (e.g., deer, gulls, geese, and coyotes). The progression of techniques employed to mitigate hazardous species include: 1. Habitat Management (habitat modification and resource protection) 2. Exclusion (fencing, netting, anti -perch/ nesting devices) 3-22 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 3. Repellents (chemical, audio, visual) 4. Harassment (pyrotechnics, falconry, dogs, radio -controlled 5. models, etc.) 6. Capture (chemical, live traps, lethal traps) 7. Toxicants (oral and contact); Fumigants 8. Shooting 3.2.2.3.2 When applicable, it is recommended that airports identify resident or seasonal "zero -tolerance" hazardous species based on historical strike records or recognized threat posed by such species at the facility. It is recommended that the ranking of hazard level for birds and terrestrial mammals in Appendix A also be considered when an airport determines zero -tolerance species and subsequent management protocols. The FAA encourages airports to consider any hazardous species of significant mass, flocking or flight behavior that were not included in the table because of low strike frequency. Brown and white pelicans, black vultures, great egrets and other waders as well as several species of waterfowl, raptors, gulls, and shorebirds can represent a significant hazard to aircraft although not found in Appendix A. Ungulates (e.g., deer or elk), canids (e.g., coyotes or domestic dogs) and certain avian species (e.g., Canada geese or snow geese) are universal candidates for zero -tolerance management protocols. Flocking birds such as European starlings and gulls pose a significant and increasing hazard to aircraft as flock size increases. Therefore, an airport may choose to require zero -tolerance management protocol for these (or similar) species only after an unacceptable flock size has been reached. Determination of action based on flock size is often difficult and requires experienced consideration of variables such as hazard relative to species, airport operation type, and current aircraft activity. 3.2.2.4 14 CFR 139.337(f)(2)(ii). "Habitat modification." This section addresses natural and artificial habitats that may provide a food, water or cover source to hazardous species to reduce their attractiveness. Advisory Circular 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near the Airports, provides in-depth discussion on acceptable/unacceptable habitats and land -use practices on and near airports. Management of the vegetative/prey food items for hazardous species is often season or weather related and may include rodent control, garbage storage, landscaping, and management of standing water. This section should clearly identify the existing management and maintenance techniques used, as background information. Only new techniques (or changes to existing management and maintenance operations) should be included in recommended actions. 1. Vegetative/prey food items for hazardous species 3-23 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 a. Prey items (rodents, earthworms, insects) b. Vegetative food items (grain/seeds, fruit, desirable grasses) c. Garbage (handling, storage) d. Handouts (feeding wildlife) 2. Vegetation management may include: a. AOA vegetation b. Drainage ditch vegetation c. Landscaping d. Agriculture 3. Water management may include: a. Permanent Water b. Wetlands c. Canals / ditches / streams d. Holding ponds e. Sewage (glycol) treatment ponds f. Ephemeral water g. Runways, taxiways, aprons h. Other wet areas 4. Airport buildings may include: a. Airfield structures b. Abandoned structures c. Terminal d. Airport construction e. Leased facilities 3.2.2.5 14 CFR 139.337(f)(2)(iii). "Land use changes." When feasible, the FAA recommends that off -site attractants within the defined separation criteria such as agricultural activities, waste handling facilities that are not fully enclosed, surface mining, urban development, wildlife refuges and storm water management systems be eliminated or modified to reduce the attractiveness to wildlife. Advisory Circular 150/5200-33 includes an in-depth discussion on acceptable and unacceptable land use practices on and near airports. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 3.2.3 14 CFR 139.337(0(3). "Requirements for and, where applicable, copies of local, State, and Federal wildlife control permits." 3.2.4 3.2.3.1 Certain species of wildlife are protected at all levels of government local, state, and federal. This section addresses the specific species involved and their legal status in this section. It also describes the wildlife management permitting requirements and procedures for all levels of government having jurisdiction. 1. Federal (50 CFR parts 1-199) 2. State (Fish and Game Code, or its equivalent) 3. City and County ordinances 4. If pesticides are to be used, the following are also needed: a. Pesticide use regulations and licensing requirements b. Federal regulations and licensing: Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) c. State regulations and licensing (varies by State) 3.2.3.2 For the purpose of the Plan, summaries are generally adequate. It is not necessary to quote federal, state, and local laws and regulations. 14 CFR 139.337(0(4). "Identification of resources that the certificate holder will provide to implement the plan." This section provides information identifying what resources the airport will supply in terms of personnel, time, equipment (e.g., radios, vehicles, guns, traps, or propane cannons), supplies (e.g., pyrotechnics), pesticides (restricted and non -restricted use) and application equipment, and supply sources for equipment and supplies. 3.2.5 14 CFR 139.337(f)(5). "Procedures to be followed during air carrier operations that at a minimum includes—" 3.2.5.1 14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(i). "Designation of personnel responsible for implementing the procedures." This section complements the list of individuals required under § 139.337(0(1) and describes the personnel and duties for successful mitigation of wildlife hazards in the airport environment. 1. Wildlife Control Personnel 2. Wildlife Coordinator 3. Operations Dept. 4. Maintenance Dept. 5. Security Dept. 6. Air Traffic Control 3-25 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 7. Pilots 8. Airlines 9. Fixed -base Operators 10. Airside/landside tenants 3.2.5.2 3.2.5.3 3.2.5.4 14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(ii). "Provisions to conduct physical inspections of the aircraft movement areas and other areas critical to successfully manage known wildlife hazards before air carrier operations begin." This section provides a description of known or anticipated locations that should be monitored for successful mitigation of wildlife hazards in the airport environment. 1. Runway, taxiway 2. AOA 3. Perimeter fence 4. Other areas attractive to wildlife 14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(iii). "Wildlife hazard control measures." This section complements the list of prioritized actions required under § 139.337(�(2)(i) and details current or anticipated techniques that may be implemented for successful mitigation of wildlife hazards in the airport environment. It should clearly identify and explain how current techniques already in use at the airport help alleviate some of the hazards, and how anticipated techniques may complement those already in use. Techniques discussed in this section typically represent an integrated approach and include exclusion, repellent, harassment, capture, lethal control or even relocation measures in specific instances. In addition, operational control measures (such as scheduling of flights, air traffic control advisories, Pilot Reports (PIREPS), LTNICOM advisories, avoidance procedures, delayed takeoffs and approaches and use of alternate runways or traffic direction) must be considered. 14 CFR 139.337(f)(5)(iv). "Ways to communicate effectively between personnel conducting wildlife control or observing wildlife hazards and the air traffic control tower." This section provides a description of regulated and site -specific protocols for the communication and/or notification of wildlife control activities, identified and current wildlife hazards on or near the airport environment or imminent wildlife threats to aircraft operations on or near the airport. Protocols may include training in airport communication and the development of notification procedures for airport personnel and Air Traffic Control when wildlife control procedures are implemented or in response to immediate wildlife threats to safe air operations to ensure dispersal activities do not inadvertently increase wildlife hazards. 3-26 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Communication and/or notification procedures within the Plan should recognize pilot reports, ATC advisories and NOTAMS and establish responsibilities for reporting wildlife strikes. This section may also provide equipment requirements that include radios, cellular phones, and lights and an official call list with numbers. 3.2.6 14 CFR 139.337(f)(6). "Procedures to review and evaluate the wildlife hazard management plan every 12 consecutive months or following an event described in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section, including:" At a minimum, the Plan must be fully reviewed once annually. This review must be documented and may be accomplished as a routinely scheduled event or following a triggering incident as defined in § 139.337(b)(1)-(3). The airport should maintain documentation of all triggering incidents and corresponding reviews of the Plan to ensure its effectiveness mitigating the hazardous species involved in the triggering incident. It is often helpful for the airport manager to appoint a Wildlife Hazards Working Group to periodically review the Plan and the Plan's implementation to recommend further refinements or modifications. Appendix F is an example of a Plan review form. 3.2.6.1 3.2.6.2 3.2.6.2.1 3.2.6.2.2 14 CFR 139.337(f)(6)(i). "The plans effectiveness in dealing with known wildlife hazards on and in the airport's vicinity and:" Input should be provided from all airport departments, Air Traffic Control, and the QAWB as to the effectiveness of the Plan. Good records are necessary to properly evaluate the effectiveness of a program. 14 CFR 139.337(f)(6)(ii). "Aspects of the wildlife hazards described in the wildlife hazard assessment that should be reevaluated." The reevaluation, for example, should consider: 1. Number of times wildlife is seen on the AOA 2. Requests for wildlife dispersal from air traffic control, pilots, or others 3. Increased number of strikes Section 139.337(0(6) cannot be effectively implemented or evaluated without documentation of wildlife strikes. The effectiveness of a Plan to reduce wildlife hazards both on and near an airport and the reevaluation of all facets of damaging/nondamaging strikes from year to year require accurate and consistent reporting. Therefore, every Plan should include a commitment to document all wildlife strikes that occur within the separation distances described in sections 1-2 and 1-3 of Advisory Circular 150/5200-33 to better identify, understand and reduce threats to safe aviation. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 3.2.7 14 CFR 139.3370(7) "A training program conducted by a wildlife damage management biologist to provide airport personnel with the knowledge and skills needed to successfully carry out the wildlife hazard management plan required by paragraph (d) of this section." Initial and recurrent training conducted by a QAWB required under § 139.303 and described in AC 150/5200-36 should equip personnel actively involved in an airport's wildlife hazard management program with sufficient resources needed to comply with the requirements in the Airport Certification Manual and the requirements of § 139.337. Personnel identified in § 139.337(�(5)(i) should be considered for inclusion within this recurrent training. Pesticide user training and certification requires its own regulated training and certification schedule and should be monitored. 3.3 Pertinent Laws and Regulations. Under § 139.337(e), the FAA may direct an airport operator to develop a Plan or to update an existing Plan. The FAA's action in approving a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan submitted by an airport operator under part 139 is considered a Federal action, as defined in the Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions, and Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. However, that Order also stipulates that "A grant to fund the preparation of a WHMP or the approval of that plan normally qualifies for categorical exclusion...". The FAA may also have to delineate which specific measures within the plan may be implemented without further review, versus other measures that may require further interagency coordination and permitting. Such delineation would normally involve measures that have independent utility from one another. Below are some of the more common laws that may require coordination and/or consultation. Note that violations of some of these laws can result in significant fines and/or imprisonment, even for a first offense. Penalties increase substantially for additional offenses, and in some cases violations will be classified as felony criminal offenses. 3.3.1 The Endangered Species Act (Federal and similar State laws). 3.3.1.1 This paragraph generally outlines procedures for complying with Section 7 of the ESA, the Magnuson -Stevens Act, and state laws protecting wildlife. It also describes procedures for responding to requests by state wildlife agencies to facilitate and encourage habitats for State -listed threatened and endangered species or species of special concern that may occur on airports and pose a threat to aviation safety. It is the FAA's responsibility as the action agency to determine whether the proposed Plan may affect federally protected species or habitat for such species on or near the airport. To make this determination, the FAA should first consult the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC) website (https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/). This webpage will help FAA determine if a particular measure within a Plan may affect any federally listed species or critical habitat. If the FAA cannot determine the presence of federally listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat 3-28 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 occurring on or near the airport, the FAA representative may contact the local USFWS Ecological Services Field Office for additional assistance. In cases of doubt, contact APP -400 and the FAA Environmental Protection Specialists for further guidance about whether to seek assistance from the USFWS, National Marine Fisheries Service (NTMFS), or relevant state and local wildlife agencies. 3.3.1.2 3.3.1.3 3.3.1.4 However, the airport's AOA is an artificial environment that has been created and maintained for aircraft operations. Because an AOA can be markedly different from the surrounding native landscapes, it may attract wildlife species that do not normally occur, or that occur only in low numbers in the area. Some of the grassland species attracted to an airport's AOA are at the edge of their natural ranges, but are attracted to habitat features found in the airport environment. Also, some wildlife species may occur on the airport in higher numbers than occur naturally in the region because the airport offers habitat features the species prefer. Some of these wildlife species may be Federal or State -listed threatened and endangered species or have been designated by State resource agencies as species of special concern. Many agencies have requested that airport operators facilitate and encourage habitat on airports for state -listed threatened and endangered species or species of special concern. State -Listed threatened and endangered species and species of special interest are not afforded the level of protection of federally listed species. These species, or the habitat needed to support them should not be allowed on airport property if direct or associated hazards are caused by their promotion in the airfield environment. Managing the on -airport environment to facilitate or encourage the presence of hazardous wildlife species can create conditions that are incompatible with, or pose a threat to, aviation safety. Airport sponsors should reevaluate existing and evaluate future agreements with Federal, State, or local wildlife agencies where the terms of the agreements are or may be contrary to federal obligations concerning hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports and aviation safety. Whenever practicable, wetland mitigation for Federal or State -listed threatened and endangered species or species of special concern should be sited off -airport and outside separation distances recommended in AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, Section 1. 3.3.1.4.1 Procedures for Federal Threatened and Endangered Species on Airports. 1. The ESA directs all Federal agencies to work to conserve endangered and threatened species, and to use their authorities to further the purposes of the Act. Section 7 of the Act, called "Interagency Cooperation," is the mechanism by which Federal agencies ensure the actions they take, including those they fund or authorize, do not 3-29 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species. Section 7 of the ESA, as amended, sets forth requirements for consultation that a federal agency shall use if that agency believes a listed species or critical habitat for such a species may be in the area affected by the project. If the FAA determines that an action "may affect" a threatened or endangered species, then Section 7(a)(2) requires the FAA to consult with the USFWS or the NMF S, as appropriate, to ensure that any action the agency authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any Federally listed endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. (The effects on fish, wildlife, and plants include the destruction or alteration of habitat and the disturbance or elimination of fish, wildlife, or plant populations). If the Secretary of the Interior has developed a recovery plan for an affected species pursuant to section 4(f) of the ESA, that plan should be reviewed by FAA environmental protection specialists to ensure that assessments of impacts from FAA actions consider the management actions and criteria for measuring recovery identified in the plan. If a species has been proposed for Federal listing as threatened or endangered, or a critical habitat has been proposed, section 7(a)(4) states that each agency shall confer with the Services. Refer to the FWS and NMF S "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook: Procedures for Conducting Consultation and Conference Activities Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, " March 1998. 2. Section 9 of the ESA prohibits a Federal agency from taking, without an incidental take permit, any listed species. Where a conservation plan has been developed pursuant to a permit under ESA section 10 (incidental take permit), the FAA environmental protection specialists should ensure that the impact analysis for the affected species contained in the NEPA document is consistent with the predicted impacts described in the conservation plan. Under the Magnuson - Stevens Act, Federal agencies must consult with the NMFS with regard to any action authorized, funded, or undertaken that may adversely affect any essential fish habitat identified under the Act. The consultation procedures are generally similar to ESA consultation requirements. a. No Consultation Required. If there are no federally listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat occurring on or near the airport and the FAA has determined there is no effect to a listed species, no further action is required to fulfill the ESA. b. Consultation May Be Required. If federally listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat occur on or near the airport, the following additional actions may need to be taken. 3-30 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 i If the FAA determines that a particular measure proposed within the Plan may affect Federally listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat, then the FAA Regional Coordinator must contact the local USFWS Ecological Services Field Office/and or the NMFS Office responsible for section 7 consultations and coordinate to determine next steps. Depending on the nature of the effects, the FAA may informally or formally consult with the Services. Formal consultation occurs when the Federal agency makes a determination of "may affect, likely to adversely affect" a species. Informal consultation occurs if a Federal agency determines, and the service supports, a determination of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect." 1. The airport operator may need to prepare a Biological Assessment (50 CFR 402.13) assessing the effects of the particular measure in the Plan on the federally listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat. The airport operator would submit the Biological Assessment to the FAA along with the draft Plan. Under the ESA, it is FAA's obligation to consult with the USFWS or lCNIFS. Therefore, the FAA must review the Biological Assessment and determine if it is accurate and adequate for use in Section 7 consultation with the appropriate Service. ii. FAA must complete the Section 7 consultation before the FAA tells the airport sponsor they may implement the particular measure(s) and the sponsor implements any actions in the Plan that may affect federally listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat. 3.3.1.4.2 Procedures for State Listed Species and Species of Special Concern on Airports If State -listed or proposed species or designated or proposed critical habitat occur on or near the airport, the airport operator shall take this information into consideration when developing its Plan. Because each State maintains requirements specific to its natural resources, it is recommended the airport operator: (1) coordinate with the State Department of Natural Resources to determine whether a Biological Assessment or monitoring program is required; (2) determine whether special permits are required to allow routine maintenance operations, harassment or other management alternatives involving the species. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 3.3.2 The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c), is another law that must be considered when evaluating the potential impacts of a proposed Plan. This law was enacted in 1940, and amended several times since then, prohibits anyone, without a permit issued by the Secretary of the Interior, from "taking" bald eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs. The Act provides criminal penalties for persons who "take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, at any time or any manner, any bald eagle ... [or any golden eagle], alive or dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof." The Act defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." For purposes of these guidelines, "disturb" means: "to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior." In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also covers impacts that result from human -induced alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present, if, upon the eagle's return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that interferes with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits, and causes injury, death or nest abandonment. 3.3.2.1 3.3.2.2 50 CFR § 22.26. The regulation set forth in 50 CFR § 22.26 provides for issuance of permits to take bald eagles and golden eagles where the taking is associated with but not the purpose of the activity and cannot practicably be avoided. Most take authorized under this section will be in the form of disturbance; however, permits may authorize non -purposeful take that may result in mortality. 50 CFR § 22.27. The regulation at 50 CFR § 22.27 establishes permits for removing eagle nests where: (1) necessary to alleviate a safety emergency to people or eagles; (2) necessary to ensure public health and safety; (3) the nest prevents the use of a human -engineered structure; or (4) the activity or mitigation for the activity will provide a net benefit to eagles. Only inactive nests may be taken, except in the case of safety emergencies. Inactive nests are defined by the continuous absence of any adult, egg, or dependent young at the nest for at least 10 consecutive days leading up to the time of take. 3.3.3 The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). 3.3.3.1 The MBTA (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712) implements the convention for the protection of migratory birds between the United States and Great Britain (acting on behalf of Canada). The statute makes it unlawful without a waiver to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill or sell birds listed therein 3-32 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 ("migratory birds"). The statute does not discriminate between live or dead birds and also grants full protection to any bird parts including feathers, eggs and nests. 3.3.3.2 The USFWS issues permits for otherwise prohibited activities under the MBTA. These include permits for taxidermy, falconry, propagation, scientific and educational use, and depredation 15, an example of the latter being the killing of geese near an airport, where they pose a danger to aircraft. 3.3.4 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Review. 3.3.4.1 3.3.4.2 The FAA's approval of a Plan normally falls within the scope of a categorical exclusion under NEPA, as implemented by FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures (July 16, 2015), paragraph 5-6.2.e, and FAA Order 5050.4B, National. Environmental. Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Projects (April 28, 2006), paragraph 209b. To determine whether approval of the Plan qualifies for categorical exclusion, the FAA must determine whether the measures in the Plan involve extraordinary circumstances (see FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraphs 5-2 a and b, and FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 209b). Extraordinary circumstances include significant impacts on federally protected species, species of state concern, or habitat for such species. 1. The FAA may categorically exclude approval of the Plan itself under FAA Order 1050.1F. 2. In addition, however, the specific measures within the Plan must be examined for extraordinary circumstances. 3. If specific measures within the Plan involve extraordinary circumstances, the FAA may still approve the Plan as a whole, but must clearly delineate which specific measures may be implemented without further coordination or permitting from those that may need additional review. Once a draft Plan is approved, the Plan is returned to the airport sponsor for inclusion in the airport's Airport Certification Manual and is enforceable. Appendix G is a template for a Letter of Approval. Appendix H is a template for a Letter of Mixed Approval. 15 For further information, see CertAlert No. 13-01, Federal and State Depredation Permit Assistance (01/30/2013). This CertAlert assists airport operators with the acquisition of Federal or State depredation permits. 3-3J 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 CHAPTER 4. PROTOCOL FOR CONTINUAL MONITORING 4.1 Introduction. 4.1.1 4.1.2 When an airport completes an Assessment and Plan, it should consider implementing a continual monitoring program for wildlife hazards. A continual monitoring program is a best management practice and not a requirement. Recurrent wildlife monitoring would be outlined in the Plan. The goal of systematic, long-term wildlife hazard monitoring in an airport environment is to identify changes to wildlife composition, numbers, attractants, travel corridors and the general airport environment in a timely manner that can affect the presence or behavior of wildlife. Continual monitoring enhances safety because it allows the airport operator to regularly determine trends in wildlife, and target mitigation practices to reduce the possibility of strikes. The airport can use this information to quickly and efficiently implement mitigation techniques and evaluate the efficacy of its mitigation program. Ultimately, the frequent hazard identification and adaptable mitigation will reduce the likelihood of wildlife strikes. Additionally, continual monitoring should decrease the time, effort, personnel hours, and money spent on mitigation because hazards will be identified before they pose a high risk. In contrast to an assessment or inventory of wildlife hazards in an airport environment, a monitoring program over time assesses changes and trends of the resources. It is recommended that consideration be given to data points and techniques tested and incorporated into an airport's Assessment for use in its long term monitoring protocol. Ultimately, the techniques used for long term monitoring may change over time dependent on the airports goals or management objectives, personnel changes, availability of improved methodologies or equipment, and recommendations based on systematic evaluation of the monitoring program. 4.2 Continual Monitoring Protocol. It is recommended that the monitoring consist of monthly wildlife surveys and identification of significant changes to natural/ artificial habitats and other attractants. 4.2.1 Avian Surveys. 1. Twelve months data collection 2. Minimum one survey per month for each of the survey points during the diurnal periods of morning, midday and evening; unless the Assessment, strike records or monitoring data justifies the elimination of a survey time period (e.g., elimination of midday surveys). 4.2.2 Mammalian Surveys. 1. It is recommended that airports that have documented hazardous terrestrial mammals (e.g., deer or canids) conduct a minimum of one survey per quarter, and that airports without recognized terrestrial mammal hazards consider a minimum of 2 to 4 surveys throughout the year. 4-34 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 4.2.3 Monitoring of Airport Procedures. It is recommended that monitoring airport procedures include: 1. ATC and airport "event logs" or wildlife management, patrol, monitoring logs 2. Wildlife/aircraft strike reports 3. Federal/State Depredation Permit use or Special Permit use (e.g., Eagle Disturbance or Nest Removal Permits) 4.3 Continual Monitoring Annual Report. As part of a continual monitoring program, an airport should consider preparing an annual report to best evaluate the efficacy of its wildlife mitigation program summarizing: 1. Identification of the wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences 2. Identification and location of features on and near the airport that attract wildlife 3. Description of wildlife hazards to air carrier operations 4. Description of wildlife strikes during the year 5. Discussion of any significant modifications on or near the airport property 6. Summary of ATC and airport "event logs" or wildlife management, patrol, monitoring logs 7. Summary of Federal/State Depredation Permit use; Special Permit use (e.g., Eagle Disturbance or Nest Removal Permits) 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX A. COMPOSITE RANKING OF HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE SPECIES Composite ranking (1 = most hazardous, 50 = least hazardous) and relative hazard score of 50 wildlife species with at least 100 reported strikes with civil aircraft based on three criteria (damage, major damage, and effect -on -flight). Data were derived from the FAA National Wildlife Strike Database, 1990-2012.1 Wildlife species % of Mean hazard levels Composite ranking Relative hazard score6 strikes with: Damage2 damage3 Major Effect on flight4 White-tailed deer 84 36 46 55 1 100 Snow goose 77 41 39 53 2 95 vulture 51 19 35 35 3 63 Turkey Canada goose 50 17 28 31 4 57 Sandhill crane 41 13 27 27 5 48 Bald eagle 41 12 28 27 6 48 D. -crested cormorant 34 15 24 24 7 44 Mallard 23 9 13 15 8 27 Osprey 22 7 15 15 9 26 Great blue heron 21 6 16 15 10 26 American coot 24 7 11 14 11 25 Coyote 9 2 21 11 12 19 Red-tailed hawk 15 5 11 10 13 19 Cattle egret 10 3 15 9 14 17 Great horned owl 15 3 6 8 15 14 Herring gull 10 5 9 8 16 14 Rock pigeon 10 4 10 8 17 14 Ring -billed gull 8 3 8 6 18 11 American crow 8 3 8 6 18 11 A-1 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Wildlife species % of strikes with: Mean hazard levels Composite ranking Relative hazard score6 Damage2 Major damage3 Effect on flight4 Peregrine falcon 8 2 5 5 20 9 Laughing gull 5 2 7 5 21 8 American robin 7 1 4 4 22 7 Snow bunting 1 1 9 4 23 7 Red fox 3 0 8 4 23 7 starling 4 1 5 3 25 6 European Amer. golden -plover 4 2 4 3 26 6 Barn owl 4 2 3 3 27 5 Upland sandpiper 4 1 4 3 27 5 Purple martin 5 1 2 3 29 5 Mourning dove 3 1 4 3 30 5 Red -winged blackbird 3 0 5 3 31 5 Woodchuck 2 0 4 2 32 4 Northern harrier 2 1 2 2 33 3 Chimney swift 2 0 2 1 34 2 Killdeer 1 0 2 1 35 2 House sparrow 2 0 1 1 35 2 Black -tailed ,jackrabbit 1 1 1 1 37 2 American kestrel 1 <1 2 1 38 2 meadowlark 1 <1 2 1 38 2 Eastern S. -tailed flycatcher 0 0 2 1 40 1 Horned lark 1 <1 1 1 41 1 Pacific golden -plover 1 0 1 1 41 1 A-2 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Wildlife species % of strikes with: Mean hazard levels Composite ranking Relative hazard score6 Damage2 Major damage3 Effect on flight4 Barn swallow 1 0 1 1 43 1 Savannah sparrow 1 0 <1 1 43 1 Common nighthawk 1 0 1 1 45 1 0 0 1 <1 46 1 Tree swallow Burrowing owl 1 0 0 <1 46 1 Western kingbird 0 0 1 <1 48 0 Virginia opossum 1 0 0 <1 48 0 Striped skunk 0 0 0 0 50 0 Notes: 1 3 4 5 6 Excerpted from Table 19 of Serial Report No. 19, "Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States, 1990- 2012. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Safety and Standards, Washington, DC., USA. Refer to this report for additional explanations of criteria and method of ranking. Aircraft incurred at least some damage (destroyed, substantial, minor, or unknown) from strike. Aircraft incurred damage or structural failure, which adversely affected the structure strength, performance, or flight characteristics, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component, or the damage sustained made it inadvisable to restore aircraft to airworthy condition. Aborted takeoff, engine shutdown, precautionary landing, or other negative effect on flight. Based on the mean value for percent of strikes with damage, major damage (substantial damage or destroyed), and negative effect -on -flight. Mean hazard level (see footnote 5) was scaled down from 100, with 100 as the score for the species with the maximum mean hazard level and thus the greatest potential hazard to aircraft. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX B. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD SITE VISIT AND REPORT CHECKLISTS Airport Wildlife Hazard Site Visit Checklist Airport Name: Date of Site Visit: Time: Airport Representative: Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist: FAA Reviewer: YorNA Comments 1.2 Applicable Airport Information Personnel and departments responsible for airport ops Type of airport/annual operations Recent construction or upgrades Strike records (in database and/or airport records) Wildlife hazard management efforts Description of current wildlife concerns Depredation permits Airport maps/aerial photographs 1.3 Observations Birds (species, activity, location, type of habitat used, time and date of observations, status if listed species, and evidence of activity, i.e., fecal material, nests, tracks, etc.) Mammals (species, activity, location, type of habitat used, time and date of observations, status if listed species, and evidence of activity, i.e., scat, tracks, burrows, etc.) Habitat attractants on movement and non -movement areas (assess both natural and man-made attractants) Habitat attractants within the separation distances 5,000ft, 10,000 ft., 5 miles as described in AC 33 (assess both natural and man-made attractants) B-1 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Airport Wildlife Hazard Site Visit Report Checklist 1.4 Site Visit Report Y or NA Comments General airport information Strike data analysis List of bird/mammal species observed and times of observations State and federal status of species Description of habitat features (natural and man- made) that may attract wildlife within movement and non -movement areas Description made) that of may habitat attract features (natural wildlife within and man- the separation distances 5,000ft, 10,00011 and 5 miles Map within of airport with location of wildlife attractants the movement and non -movement areas Map of airport with location of wildlife attractants within the separation distances 5,00011, 10,00011. and 5 miles with the separation distances depicted Recommended actions for reducing identified wildlife hazards to air carrier operations Recommendation regarding whether a 12 -month wildlife hazards assessment should be conducted or if an existing Wildlife Hazard Management Plan should be modified 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX C. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENT AND REPORT CHECKLISTS Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment Checklist Airport Name: Airport Representative: Qualified Airport Wildlife Biologist: Assessment Dates (Initiation/Completion): Assessment Report — Date Completed: Assessment Report — Date Approved by FAA: FAA -Reviewer: Y or NA Comments the Analysis of assessment the event or circumstances that prompted Personnel ops and departments responsible for airport Type of airport/annual operations Recent construction or upgrades Strike records) data analysis (in database and/or airport Depredation permits Wildlife hazard management plan (if applicable) Review of current habitat management activities Review of current wildlife management activities Identification numbers, seasonal occurrences of wildlife species observed locations, local movements, and their and daily and Assessment = Minimum of 12 consecutive months Locate (observation adequately standardized observation points off observe wildlife airport and are points optional) their on airport to movements C-1 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Y or NA Comments Point count evening surveys conducted morning, midday and Avian surveys conducted monthly a minimum of twice Mammal quarter (4 surveys conducted a minimum of once per total) Record wildlife individuals, movement. results observations. specific of point location, count Include surveys and number direction all general of of species, activity, Record presence of state species and/or federally listed Small mammal trapping (optional) Identification attract wildlife and location of features on airport that Identification (within and miles) that location attract of features wildlife near airport 5 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Airport Wildlife Hazard Assessment Report Checklist Y or NA Comments Description and qualifications of biologist(s) who conducted the WHA. Analysis of the event or circumstances that prompted the study Personnel and departments responsible for airport operations Type of airport/annual operations Description of recent construction or upgrades, if any Strike data analysis (in database and/or airport records) Depredation permits (do they have valid permit) Wildlife hazard management plan (if applicable) Description of current habitat management activities Description of current wildlife management activities Identification of wildlife species observed and their numbers, locations, local movements, and daily and seasonal occurrences: • Description of methodologies used to collect data • Results wildlife individuals, of movement of Federal of observations. point specific or and State count location, discuss listed surveys Include the species and species, activity, all identified general number direction / absence during of presence Assessment • Results number direction of of individuals, of mammal movement surveys. Include specific location, species, activity, • Map of observation airport points with location and description of Identification and location of features on and near the airport that attract wildlife: • Description made) and that non -movement of habitat may attract areas features wildlife (natural on the and man- movement C-.3 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Y or NA Comments • Description made) 10,000ft, described that of may and habitat attract 5mile AC 33 features wildlife separation (natural within distances and the man- 5,000ft, as in • Map of airport on movement with location of wildlife attractants and non -movement areas • Map of near airport separation separation airport within distances distances with location 5,000 (include relative of wildlife ft, 10,000 ft, the location to the airport attractants and 5mile of the Description of the wildlife hazards to air carrier operations at the subject airport Recommended actions for reducing identified wildlife hazards to air carrier operations: • List of prioritized to based this airport on recommendations (is these recommendations?) a Section that are Consultation unique 7 required 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX D. WILDLIFE SURVEY DATA SHEET EXAMPLE AIRPORT NAME OBSERVER TIME TEMPERATURE WIND DIR / SPEED Airport Observation Sheet SURVEY PERIOD WEATHER SUNRISE DATE SUNSET LOC SPP # COV DIR COMMENTS TIME PT ACT SU - sunny PS - partly sunny CL - cloudy RN - rain SN - snow/sleet FD - feeding LF - loafing RS- roosting NS - nesting VO - vocalizing RN — running BD - bedded P — perched ST — standing TW- towering FG - fog FL - flying local HW - hawking PC - partly cloudy FP - flying passing SW- swimming RWY - runway TWY - taxiway RMP - ramp ASP - asphalt UNP - unpaved road STR - structure DTC - ditch PND - pond RES - reservoir RIV - river GSH grass, short GLG - grass, long SHB - shrubs WDL — woodland GRV - gravel MAR - marsh/wetland AGF - ag field CRK - creek/stream SHR - shoreline TSW - temp standing water IR - single/sm group of trees PAGE of 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX E. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST Airport Name: Airport Representative: Plan Preparation Date: Plan FAA Review Date: FAA Reviewer: Y or NA Comments/Observations BRIEF describing hazards identified introduction in the Assessment and the wildlife attractants on and near the airport A list of individuals having authority and responsibility for implementing each aspect of the plan: • Decision making roles and responsibilities including: Airport Director, Operations Wildlife Coordinator, Supervisor, Maintenance Supervisor, Security Dept., Planning Dept., Finance Dept., Wildlife Hazard Working Group • Other A list prioritizing the following actions identified in the Assessment and target dates for their initiation and completion: • (i) of mitigation Wildlife problem population wildlife actions/target populations management and (list dates) • (ii) attractants dates) Habitat modification and mitigation (list of wildlife actions/target • (iii) and Land near use actions/target changes that attract (list dates) of land use on wildlife and airport mitigation • Ongoing data collection and analysis • Recordkeeping • Do any proposed review or Section activities 7 Consultation require NEPA with USFWS? 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Y or NA Comments/Observations Requirements local, State, (Copies of Plan) for and, where and Federal wildlife all valid permits applicable, must copies of control permits be included in Identification holder will • • • • • • • provide Personnel Field Pyrotechnics Vehicles Pesticide Other etc.) Sources of resources to identification and (binoculars, of implement application supplies that the certificate the plan equipment guns, radios, guides traps, Procedures operations to be that at followed a minimum during includes: air carrier (i) Designation implementing staffing and primary availability, etc.) the of personnel procedures responsibilities, responsible for patrol hours of (Wildlife (ii) Provisions the aircraft movement to successfully before air carrier • Routine • Documentation observations • Runway/taxiway inspections to manage conduct operations inspection physical areas known of inspections sweeps, and wildlife begin procedures, other inspections areas hazards and of critical fence perimeter (iii) Wildlife • • • • times hazard Monitoring Recordkeeping Dispersal/harassment Procedures different control for wildlife seasons and measures procedures control air during traffic heavy (iv) Ways personnel to conducting communicate effectively wildlife and the air traffic control control between or observing tower wildlife hazards E-2 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Y or NA Comments/Observations • Training in communication procedures • Procedures and response for or observations immediate to pilot coordination -reported wildlife strikes Other Procedures to review and evaluate the wildlife hazard management plan every 12 consecutive months or following a triggering event Include a log at the beginning of the plan to record dates plan is reviewed and reason for review (i) The plan's effectiveness in dealing with known wildlife hazards on and in the airport's vicinity and (ii) Aspects of the wildlife hazards described in the wildlife hazard assessment that should be reevaluated • One or more meetings with Wildlife Hazard Working Group to review Plan • Procedures observations activities for documentation and wildlife control of wildlife • Protocol to meet training requirements A training program conducted by a qualified airport wildlife biologist to provide airport personnel with the knowledge and skills needed to successfully carry out the wildlife hazard management plan • Certification requirements that training meets in AC 150/5200-36 • Training participation documentation 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX F. AIRPORT WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW Once a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan is in place, it must be evaluated every 12 consecutive months or following a triggering event as per 14 CFR part 139.337(0(6). Those triggering events are: • An air carrier aircraft experiences multiple wildlife strikes • An air carrier aircraft experiences substantial damage from striking wildlife • An air carrier aircraft experiences an engine ingestion of wildlife The foundation for these evaluations is not only the documentation of wildlife strikes but the maintenance of consistent records of wildlife surveys and wildlife control activities. Based on the annual evaluation the WHIVIP should be updated as needed to ensure the information adequately addresses known wildlife hazards. As these changes are adopted, approved, and implemented at the airport, it is of the utmost importance that all documentation is well prepared and available during FAA inspections. To assist airport operators in documenting this review, the following sample review forms are provided. One form is for the "annual" review (every 12 consecutive months), and one for a review following a triggering event. These forms represent examples and may be used as provided or modified to suit specific needs to review a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Subject: Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Annual Review Date: Airport: Airport ID: On we conducted the annual review of the Wildlife Hazard Management Plan, as per the requirements of 139.337(f) (6). General Information/ Significant findings: • Name of review coordinator- (Person facilitating discussions and writing plan updates; usually the Wildlife Coordinator, Wildlife Biologist, or Airport Manager) & participating airport personnel and representatives of other organizations (As listed in 139.337(f)(1); may include members of airport management, the wildlife coordinator, airport operations/ wildlife staff, wildlife Biologist who conducted Wildlife Hazard Assessment, members of the wildlife hazard working group*). Attach a sign - in sheet. • Summary of results of annual data analysis- Example: ranking of highest priority species based on the analysis. (Per standardized continual monitoring procedures of 139.337(f)(6); data for analysis may include logs of wildlife strikes, wildlife observations and control measures, standardized wildlife monitoring surveys, and wildlife data from off -airport sites of concern.) • Summary of progress and challenges in management of the most significant wildlife attractants and/or habitats on or near the airport - (Review of habitat management priorities listed in 139.337(0(2)) • Summary of progress and challenges in direct wildlife hazard management (i.e., dispersals, strike response) on the airfield - (Review of procedures to be followed during air carrier operations as listed in 139.337(0(5)) • Changes to management strategies identified • Changes to documentation identified • Changes to Wildlife Hazard Working Group membership or objectives identified • Changes to airport training program identified • Changes/ updates to Wildlife Hazard Management Plan identified (Submit any changes to the WHMP to the assigned FAA Airport Certification Safety Inspector) Airport Manager/Director *The wildlife hazard working group is made up of representatives that own and/or manage properties, attractants, and habitats for wildlife (both on - and off -airport property) that impact airport safety. The function of the wildlife hazard working group, or the airport's relationships with such representatives, is to cooperatively address the airport's specific wildlife hazard issues. During the annual review of the Plan, the effectiveness in addressing the issues should be evaluated, with any needed changes documented. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 Subject: Wildlife Hazard Management Plan Review Following a Triggering Event Date: Airport: Airport ID. On we conducted a review of the Wildlife Hazard Management Plan, as per the requirements of 139.337(0 (6) . Description of Triggering Event: • Date/Time - Provide details of the event which triggered the review. Attach strike report, if available and any pertinent information; runway used, airline, take -off, landing, species, damage, etc. General Information/ Significant findings: • Name of review coordinator- (Person facilitating discussions and writing plan updates; usually the Wildlife Coordinator, Wildlife Biologist, or Airport Manager) & participating airport personnel and representatives of other organizations (As listed in 139.337(0(1); may include members of airport management, the wildlife coordinator, airport operations/ wildlife staff, wildlife Biologist who conducted Wildlife Hazard Assessment, members of the wildlife hazard working group*). Attach a sign -in sheet. • The plan's effectiveness in dealing with known wildlife hazards on and in the airport's vicinity- Example: Review the current wildlife control log and evaluate recent strike reports or events. Make a determination as to whether the current program is working and what can be improved. • Aspects of the wildlife hazards described in the wildlife hazard assessment that should be reevaluated — Review assessment to determine if everything is being addressed that was previously identified as a hazard or if other species are now present. Note: If other/additional new species are now present on or in the vicinity of the airport, another Wildlife Hazard Assessment may be needed. • Summary of progress and challenges in direct wildlife hazard management (i.e., dispersals, strike response) on the airfield - (Review of procedures to be followed during air carrier operations as listed in 139.337(0(5)) • Changes to management strategies identified • Changes to airport training program identified • Changes/ updates to Wildlife Hazard Management Plan identified (Submit any changes to the WHMP to the assigned FAA Airport Certification Safety Inspector) Airport Manager/Director The wildlife hazard working group is made up of representatives that own and/or manage properties, attractants, and habitats for wildlife (both on -and off- airport property) that impact airport safety. The function of the wildlife hazard working group, or of the airport's relationships with such representatives, is to cooperatively address the airport's specific wildlife hazard issues. During the annual review of the Plan, the effectiveness in addressing the issues should be evaluated, with any needed changes documented. 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX G. LETTER OF APPROVAL OF WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN (WHMP) FOR AIRPORTS 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Date Name Title Airport Address City/State/Zip Federal Aviation Administration Address Regional Office City, State, Zip Subject: Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for [Insert name of airport] Dear The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has completed its review and approved the above - referenced Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP), as submitted to the FAA on [insert date]. The FAA based this approval on the adequacy of the WHMP to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR §139.337(f). The WHMP is a required element of the Airport Certification Manual (ACM) for your airport. Please insert this letter of approval and the attached plan to the ACM. We will retain one copy of this plan for our official file copy of your ACM. The specific actions identified in the WHMP are categorically excluded from further National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F ("Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures"). The FAA's review included verification that there was no evidence of extraordinary circumstances in connection with any of the specific measures. The FAA may have to reevaluate this environmental determination if environmental circumstances change or if new information becomes available that could bear upon particular actions. It is also important to note that the FAA has not evaluated the WHMP (or the specific actions it identifies) with respect to state, county or local requirements. Any additions or modifications to the WHMP may require additional documentation and interagency coordination, particularly if resource categories of special concern (such as wetlands, floodplains, threatened/endangered species, cultural resources, etc.) are likely to be impacted. Such resources usually require permits or approvals from a Federal or State environmental resource agency. G-2 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 It is the airport's responsibility to initiate and complete required environmental coordination with the appropriate FAA Airports District Office (or Regional Office), as well as any other relevant Federal and State agencies prior to implementation of these actions. However, nothing in this letter shall limit the legal authority or responsibility of the certificate holder to undertake operational safety measures that would not, on their own, trigger a Federal action for review and approval. Approval of the WHMP does not constitute a commitment of Federal funds from the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) for any capital development projects. AIP funding requires evidence of eligibility and justification when a funding request is ripe for consideration. Please identify any such requests well in advance, typically as part of the periodic Capital Improvement Plan process, in order to ensure that you address all statutory and regulatory requirements, and technical and operational issues, in a timely manner. Please include a copy of this letter when coordinating with FAA on any ALP changes or funding requests. If you have questions or need more information, please contact me at ( ) Sincerely, Airport Certification/Safety Inspector Enclosures cc: , Manager, [insert] Airports District Office , Environmental Protection Specialist , Planning/Programming Specialist 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 APPENDIX H. LETTER OF MIXED APPROVAL OF WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN (WHMP) FOR AIRPORTS U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Date Name Title Airport Address City/State/Zip Federal Aviation Administration Address Regional Office City, State, Zip Subject: Mixed Approval of Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) for [insert name of airport] Dear • The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has completed its review and approved the above - referenced Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMLP), as submitted to the FAA on [insert date]. The FAA based this approval on the adequacy of the WHMP to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR §139.337(0. The WHMP is a required element of the Airport Certification Manual (ACM) for your airport. Please insert this letter of approval and the attached plan to the ACM. We will retain one copy of this plan for our official file copy of your ACM. Please note, however, that not all of the specific actions identified in the WHMP have full clearance to proceed into implementation. Certain action items and components (identified below) may require further review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and/or other special purpose environmental laws or regulations. Future consideration of these action items and components, and any additions or modifications to the WEIlVIl', may require additional documentation and interagency coordination, particularly if resource categories of special concern (such as wetlands, floodplains, threatened/endangered species, cultural resources, etc.) are likely to be impacted. Such resources usually require permits or approvals from a Federal or State environmental resource agency. The following items and components are categorically excluded from further NEPA review in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F ("Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures"). The actions that may proceed to implementation without further environmental review are: 1. [insert] 2. [insert] 3. [insert] H-2 8/20/2018 AC 150/5200-38 The FAA may have to reevaluate this environmental determination if environmental circumstances change or if new information becomes available that could bear upon particular actions. It is also important to note that the FAA has not evaluated the WHMP (or the specific actions it identifies) with respect to state, county or local requirements. Although the following actions are included in the approved WHMP, they may require further review under NEPA and/or other special purpose environmental laws or regulations as discussed above: 1. [insert] 2. [insert] 3. [insert] It is the airport's responsibility to initiate and complete required environmental coordination with the appropriate FAA Airports District Office (or Regional Office), as well as any other relevant Federal and State agencies prior to implementation of these actions. However, nothing in this letter shall limit the legal authority or responsibility of the certificate holder to undertake operational safety measures that would not, on their own, trigger a Federal action for review and approval. Approval of the WHMP does not constitute a commitment of Federal funds from the Airport Improvement Program (AlP) for any capital development projects. MP funding requires evidence of eligibility and justification when a funding request is ripe for consideration. Please identify any such requests well in advance, typically as part of the periodic Capital Improvement Plan process, in order to ensure that you address all statutory and regulatory requirements, and technical and operational issues, in a timely manner. Please include a copy of this letter when coordinating with FAA on any ALP changes or funding requests. If you have questions or need more information, please contact me at ( ) Sincerely, Airport Certification/Safety Inspector Enclosures cc: , Manager, [insert] Airports District Office , Environmental Protection Specialist , Planner Advisory Circular Feedback If you find an error in this AC, have recommendations for improving it, or have suggestions for new items/subjects to be added, you may let us know by (1) mailing this form to Manager, Airport Safety and Operations Division, Federal Aviation Administration ATTN: AAS-300, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington DC 20591 or (2) faxing it to the attention of AAS-3 00 at (202) 267-8663. Subject: AC 150/5200-38 Date: Please check all appropriate line items: ❑ An error (procedural or typographical) has been noted in paragraph on page Recommend paragraph on page be changed as follows: In a future change to this AC, please cover the following subject: (Briefly describe what you want added) Other comments: I would like to discuss the above. Please contact me at (phone number, email address). Submitted by: Date: Hello