AECOM recently presented at the 2014 Airport Exchange conference, which was delivered in partnership by Airports Council International (ACI) Europe and ACI Asia-Pacific. The event was held in Paris and focused on the theme “Best in Class Airports: Learn from the best to be the best,” with AECOM participating as part of the “Airport Development and Environment” program.
AECOM was represented by Kevin Fuhr, senior project manager, who presented on the new Runway 10C-28C at Chicago O’Hare International Airport, which recently received a 2014 Engineering Excellence Award from the American Council of Engineering Companies.
Fuhr’s presentation and panel discussion, which was part of the “Best in Class Case Studies: Striking the balance between new development, sustainability and capacity demand — outside of Europe” session, described the challenges of the runway’s design, highlighted the runway’s sustainable project elements and detailed the complexities of phasing the construction to minimize the impact to the airport’s on-going operations.
“It was a great pleasure to share with so many esteemed colleagues how our team was able to achieve a successful project that not only met the client’s needs, but also developed designs that were both cost effective and environmentally conscious,” said Fuhr. “Runway 10C-28C incorporated sustainable elements throughout all aspects of the project, such as utilizing a balanced earthwork plan, use of recycled crushed concrete and installation of the first low-voltage Approach Lighting System in the United States.”
AECOM provided lead engineering services for the design and construction of the new Runway 10C-28C and associated taxiways as the managing partner of the O’Hare Airfield Engineers Joint Venture — which comprises fellow member firms Jacobs, Milhouse Engineering & Construction and Delta Engineering Group. With a total project budget of US$1.3 billion, the new Runway 10C-28C project permanently transformed O’Hare to a more-efficient, parallel runway system while reducing delays and increasing capacity. According to the Chicago Department of Aviation, the new runway’s opening created nearly a US$4-billion economic impact, generating over 1,000 construction and professional services jobs annually during its eight-year span, and establishing nearly 50,000 permanent jobs.
“It was an honor to be invited to participate in the 2014 Airport Exchange conference, which brought together many leading experts in the aviation industry from Europe and the Asia-Pacific region,” said AECOM’s Global Aviation Sector Leader Loren Smith. “The conference offered AECOM the opportunity to share our own project experiences as well as a global platform to have a discussion about best practices and emerging trends in aviation.”
With nearly 100,000 employees — including architects, engineers, designers, planners, scientists and management and construction services professionals — serving clients in more than 150 countries around the world following the acquisition of URS, AECOM is a premier, fully integrated infrastructure and support services firm. AECOM is ranked as the #1 engineering design firm by revenue in Engineering News-Record magazine’s annual industry rankings. The company is a leader in all of the key markets that it serves, including transportation, facilities, environmental, energy, oil and gas, water, high-rise buildings and government. AECOM provides a blend of global reach, local knowledge, innovation and technical excellence in delivering solutions that create, enhance and sustain the world’s built, natural and social environments. A Fortune 500 company, AECOM companies, including URS Corporation and Hunt Construction Group, had revenue of approximately $19.5 billion during …
Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
The case studies in this chapter have been prepared to illustrate stakeholder engagement activi-ties at airports that have experienced or hope to benefit from the implementation of new Next-Gen capabilities. For the most part, they describe engagement activities related to the imple- mentation of PBN procedures, which is the NextGen initiative that has and will continue to impact the most airports. Airports of varying sizes have been included to demonstrate differing challenges and various approaches to overcoming those challenges. Although not NextGen-specific, FAAâs brief- ings about Chicago OâHare International Airportâs modernization program are included because they illustrate a successful approach to community outreach about new flight procedures that will result from runway realignments. EUROCONTROLâs Specification for Collaborative Environmental Management also describes stakeholder engagement guidelines that have been successful in support of activities in Europe that are analogous to NextGen. These case studies highlight the following best practices for stakeholder engagement on NextGen implementation: â¢ Data collection, analysis, and relationship-building with interested stakeholders are recognized as important prerequisites to NextGen implementation. â¢ Airports and community representatives are notified as early as possible about proposed flight pro- cedure and airspace changes. â¢ Stakeholder engagement fosters two-way dialogue through which each party is informed of the otherâs objectives, questions, and concerns. â¢ Collaborative and trusting relationships among all relevant stakeholders are created and sustained as essential to efficiently achieving optimally balanced results. â¢ Stakeholder engagement is promoted by senior management as part of an airportâs culture. â¢ Individuals are empowered, enabled, and held accountable for learning about, communicating, and leading engagement activities concerning NextGen implementation. â¢ Airports contribute important information on local population centers, noise concerns, land use patterns, and abatement procedures that are factored into the flight procedure design process. â¢ Airports provide an important communications bridge between FAA, operators, and community stakeholders. â¢ Public outreach efforts are well-publicized, accessible, and clearly communicated. â¢ Face-to-face meetings are used effectively to establish two-way communication. â¢ The Internet, electronic media, and portable devices are incorporated as new and innovative ways of communicating and disseminating information. Case Studies | 41 Case Studies9
42 | ENGAGING AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS â¢ General information is provided and common terminology is employed to establish a common ground for communication, but specific implementation schedules, maps showing areas of impact, and statistics that quantify the degree of change also are shared as required. â¢ In-house communications, marketing, and GIS staff can help keep the costs of developing engage- ment material down. Consultants may be required to collect data and conduct analyses. Proactive Engagement at Dallas/ Fort Worth International Airport Background Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFW) was established by a contract between the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas, in 1968. In 2014 DFW had 679,820 operations, making it the fourth busiest airport in the United States. DFW benefits from a great deal of land that is owned by the airport (over 17,000 acres). Use of sur- rounding land also has been planned with airport compatibility in mind. This foresight was partially enabled in 1971 when the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) developed noise exposure maps of then-forecast 1985 operations. NCTCOG provided the noise contour map and a model land use ordinance to surrounding cities to aid in compatible land zoning around DFW. Many surrounding jurisdictions subsequently enacted ordinances to control land development within these areas. The noise contours and contours from the 1992 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) also were incorporated into land use planning for surrounding cities. With the advance of quieter jets, these conservative policy contours continue to serve the airport and surrounding communities well, providing stable elements of city master plans and zoning ordinances. In the late 1980s DFW foresaw the need for two additional north/south runways and the need to expand the number of departures from a single departure heading to multiple, divergent headings to increase departure throughput and accommodate growing capacity needs while maintaining safe separation. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared under the National Environmen- tal Policy Act (NEPA). The EIS evaluated the environmental effects of constructing and operating two additional runways as well as the necessary redesign of the Metroplex airspace, which included these divergent âfannedâ departure headings. Concern about noise from operation of the new runways was the dominant issue during the EIS development, leading to lawsuits that went to the Supreme Court. FAA approved the FEIS in 1992, giving the airport the authority to build two new runways and redesign its airspace including expanding the number of departure headings available to air traffic control (ATC). One runway was constructed and the airspace redesign was implemented; however, the planned expansion in the number of headings was not implemented. A subsequent NEPA study in 1998 again included the additional approved departure headings. During the intervening years, the need for the expansion of optional headings had become more significant in order to alleviate depar- ture throughput issues attributed to growth in air traffic and the conversion of turboprops to regional jets. (During this time, turboprops shifted from 30% of DFWâs fleet to < 5%.) Implementation of the expanded departure procedures was not technically feasible for FAA until FAAâs NextGen program. Area navigation (RNAV) technologies used in performance-based navigation (PBN) procedures have provided FAA the means to enable multiple departure headings within the existing airspace structure. A significant number of airlines equipped their aircraft to take advantage of the new performance-based capabilities. Local FAA air traffic management (ATM) designed RNAV procedures
Case Studies | 43 to provide two RNAV courses from each departure runway, explored lessons learned at other airports, and worked with multiple stakeholders during development and testing from the start. FAA and DFW staff worked collaboratively in the development of RNAV flight tracks (see Figure 9-1). The airlines, be- ing important beneficiaries, were also active stakeholders in the development of the new procedures. To engage them, FAA conducted meetings that involved airline and airport representatives. American Airlines, a significant carrier at DFW, also offered the use of their simulators so that the new procedures could be flown virtually before they were implemented. FAA and DFW worked together to develop a noise study of the proposed RNAV departure procedures; the study indicated that no significant impact would occur with RNAV and overall noise would be reduced. An independent environmental review of the implementation of these RNAV procedures was not required, however, because given the findings of the earlier NEPA studies a formal community engagement effort was not required. Nevertheless, DFW and FAAâs Airports District Office (ADO) concurred that it was important to engage local communities on the proposed change in advance. The ATO agreed and participated in a public outreach campaign that the airport initiated. Source: DFW Airport Figure 9-1. Maps showing the difference between traditional flight tracks (left) and RNAV flight tracks (right). Stakeholder Engagement Methods Used Aviation planners at DFW initiated a public outreach campaign to inform the surrounding municipali- ties of the upcoming implementation of RNAV procedures well in advance of implementation. The air- port allowed each city to determine the audience for the joint airport/FAA presentations which varied from small meetings with city leaders and elected officials to briefings before local city councils. During these meetings, airport representatives explained the drivers behind the need for change, why these procedures were important to air service at DFW, and the careful consideration that was being given to where the new flight tracks would go. FAA representatives provided information on what RNAV is and why it is important on a national scale. To complement this general information, the airport also developed a grid point analysis showing noise impacts at day-night average sound levels (DNLs) of
44 | ENGAGING AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS 60 and 65 decibels (dB). Slide presentations were used to convey this information. The presentations were adapted to the specifics of each community and in most cases one meeting per community was sufficient. The reaction to these briefings was largely positive. One municipality had their outside noise expert study the noise impacts further. Some concern was expressed about the portion of aircraft that were equipped with the avionics necessary to use the RNAV procedures, thus eliminating drift and the pos- sibility of aircraft spreading noise impacts more broadly than the specified routes. Fortunately, it was determined that 85% of the aircraft would be RNAV capable and therefore the projected noise impacts being communicated were fairly accurate. RNAV procedures were planned to be initiated in October 2004. The proposed date had been com- municated during the public outreach campaign; however, the date had to be adjusted to November due to charting dates. Ironically, residents began complaining on the earlier, initially published, date. RNAV officially began in September 2005 with few complaints from east-side residents where the RNAV tracks were moved closer to residential areas. Some residents living just outside the boundar- ies of the previous noise mitigation areas (mitigated for impacts from the new east-side runway as required by the 1992 FEIS) were interested in whether they would be now eligible for noise mitiga- tion measures (which they were not). The airport also received, recorded, and responded to noise complaints. Supportive Map Data Mapping data were an important element of the information used to communicate the impact of the new procedures among FAA, airport, airline, and community stakeholders. Of the graphics used in one NextGen-related community outreach presentations, not counting logos and a few general photos of aircraft, 90% were maps. Flight tracks from DFWâs Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System (ANOMS) helped illustrate existing conditions. Recognizing the importance of showing both the âbeforeâ and âafterâ conditions, the airport created its own graphics to show proposed conditions. An example of these maps is shown in Figure 9-2. These comparisons helped illustrate that, even though the implementation of the RNAV procedures brought aircraft closer to city centers, the tighter flight tracks that resulted reduced the area of land impacted. Noise contours that had been developed by airport consultants were shared with communities upon request. Statistics showing fleet mix changes over time complemented this map information. Complementary Environmental Analyses In 2008 DFW initiated an airport-wide sustainability program. An important objective of this program was to complement and support sustained aviation growth through the development of a NextGen Environmental Management System (EMS). Analysis of four criteriaâair quality, climate, energy, and noiseâhelped DFW evaluate the environmental and energy related impacts of NextGen capabilities. â¢ With regard to air quality, emissions were anticipated to increase; however, DFW had already sig- nificantly reduced emissions through changes to its central utility plant and replacement of airport ground support vehicles. â¢ With regard to climate, analysis suggested that technology, alternative fuel, operational improve- ment, and policy solutions could help mitigate the expected increase of CO2 emissions. â¢ With regard to energy, increased efficiencies were expected to result in a net decrease in energy consumption.
Case Studies | 45 Source: DFW Airport Figure 9-2. Map showing 30% authorized deviations (in green) from normal flight paths (in blue).
46 | ENGAGING AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS â¢ With regard to noise, NextGen would provide aircraft noise-reduction improvements via the Con- tinuous Lower Energy, Emissions, and Noise (CLEEN) program and operational procedures such as RNAV and those outlined in the North Texas Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metro- plex (OAPM) study. During the development of the EMS, stakeholder outreach was required to be responsive to the needs of numerous stakeholders at various levels including: â¢ Federal â¢ FAA (headquarters, region, district, and ATC offices) â¢ EPA â¢ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) â¢ U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) â¢ State â¢ Departments of transportation (DOTs), environmental agencies â¢ Regional/Local â¢ Airlines â¢ Environmental agencies â¢ Community interest groups â¢ Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) â¢ Financial institutions â¢ Contractors â¢ Airport Departments â¢ Airport management â¢ Communications â¢ Environmental affairs â¢ Real estate â¢ Energy â¢ GIS â¢ Operations â¢ Engineering â¢ Planning Successes DFWâs proactive approach toward stakeholder engagement was and continues to be a key factor in achieving the following results: â¢ Stakeholder engagement has become engrained in DFWâs culture. It is âjust something they do.â â¢ DFWâs community outreach program for RNAV was positive in that it met each communityâs unique needs, requirements, and desires. As a result, communities accepted the planned changes without resistance once they understood them. DFW educated, engaged, and gained advocacy for the final outcomeâcommunities owned the outcome. Even though some residents received in-