AAAE Accreditation Study Guide

A comprehensive resource for Accredited Airport Executive program candidates

October 2012

AAAE Accreditation Study Guide Table of Contents

Introduction Overview of the Accreditation Program The Multiple-Choice Exam The Writing Requirement The Management Research Paper The Case Study The Proctored Essay The Final Interview Appendices Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix

1-2 3-6 7-9 10-11 12-14 15-17 18-21 22-29 30-102 31-32 33 34-42 43-75 76-102 103-104 104 Back Cover

A Formatting Guidelines B Documenting Sources of Reference C Sample Topic Outline D Sample Research Paper E Sample Case Study

Board of Examiners Information Geographic Regions Contact Information

Introduction
The American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) accreditation program commands respect in the aviation industry for the programs high standards of professionalism. The Accredited Airport Executive (A.A.E.) designation after ones name represents dedication and commitment to the airport management field, and signifies a unique level of accomplishment. It stands for initiativean individuals initiative to dedicate time and energy to obtain further knowledge and greater understanding of airport management, and, through self-improvement, to advance the aviation industry. Many employers recognize the value of individual achievement represented by the A.A.E. designation. The designation shows that you have devoted an extraordinary amount of time and effort to excel in your career.

The Accredited Airport Executive program is headed by the AAAE Board of Examiners (BOE). The BOE is comprised of six regional examiners, three at-large examiners and one chairman. AAAEs Executive Committee, with the approval of the Board of Directors, annually appoints a chair of the Board of Examiners to serve a three-year term. The Chair nominates, and the Executive Committee appoints members of the Board of Examiners. All members of the Board of Examiners must maintain active A.A.E. status throughout their term.

How can accreditation benefit you personally?

To earn the A.A.E. designation, you have to meet a number of challenges. The ability to meet them distinguishes you as an airport management professional. The research and writing necessary to complete the writing requirement, the study required to pass the multiple-choice examination, and the experience needed to pass the final interview will sharply increase your knowledge of airport management. In addition, new A.A.E.s are eligible for benefits such as:

Foundation Scholarships - Awards ranging from $900 to $4,000 are offered to Accredited Airport Executives (A.A.E.s), their spouses and their children. Scholarship recipients can be enrolled in any course of study, and all eligible applicants receive scholarships so long as funds are available. Accredited members are sent information on the program annually, and awards are made in July and December of each year. Additionally, the AAAE Foundation is offering scholarships that will be awarded to qualified college students who do not have to be a dependent of an Accredited Airport Executive (A.A.E.). The new "Competitive Non-A.A.E. Scholarships" are for $1,000 each. These additional grants were initiated as a way to broaden the eligibility of the scholarship program to a wider range of family members, such as grandchildren, and also provide opportunities for single active A.A.E.s who do not have dependents to recommend for scholarships. The following selection criteria are used to determine Competitive Non-A.A.E. Scholarship recipients:

1) The referring A.A.E. will earn points for the number of years he or she has been accredited;

2) Service to AAAE on behalf of the referring A.A.E., such as serving on an association committee; the number of previous scholarships awarded to candidates recommended by this individual;

3) The relationship of the scholarship applicant to the referring A.A.E.;

4) The student will earn points for his or her grade point average, school level and whether the student is enrolled in a bachelor degree or associate degree program.

Executive Emeritus, Honorary Life Members and dependents are eligible and will be evaluated based on the same criteria. The ceiling for these awards is $4,000, and is based on financial need.

Accredited Airport Executive Accolades All new A.A.E.s will receive an exclusive golf shirt, a plaque imprinted with their name and accreditation date, a voucher good for one AAAE meeting, conference or workshop registration within one year of accreditation, as well as recognition through press releases and e-mail broadcasts. Consulting Program for Unemployed A.A.E.s Active accredited members who are unemployed for longer than 90 days are eligible to receive consulting contracts worth up to $1,000 per month ($1,500 per month if they are also members of an AAAE Foundation Participating Chapter) for up to six months. However, this benefit is not available if a member is fired for cause, or if the member does not fulfill all requirements and duties of the AAAE Services Corp. Consulting Contract. More information is available from the AAAE office. Accreditation Incentives Program Newly Accredited Airport Executives can receive up to $1,500, provided that their airport employer participates in the Accreditation Incentive Program. **A signed agreement between the airport employer and AAAE is required; payments are not retroactive. For more information, please see visit the web site at www.aaae.org. Distinguished Service Award Later in an airport management career, an active accredited executive is eligible to receive AAAEs Distinguished Service Award. It is AAAEs highest award for accredited members who have spent long careers in aviation and airport management. To qualify for this award, an A.A.E. must have met the following requirements: 1) Be actively employed full time by a public-use airport for at least one year at the time the award is given

2) Have at least 25 years of aviation experience in an executive capacity

3) Have 12 years of experience as an accredited member of AAAE

4) Have active accredited member status; and

5) Have provided outstanding service to his or her community and profession

This award, which includes a cash honorarium, is truly a unique honor.

Achieving Accredited Airport Executive status involves serious intellectual challenges but if you understand the process, and you focus and persevere, accreditation can be an extremely rewarding experience for you. If you have questions about the accreditation process, please contact the accreditation department any time at accreditation@aaae.org.

Overview of the Accredited Airport Executive Program

Program Overview
AAAE is dedicated to helping members achieve advancement in the aviation industry through the professional accreditation process. Please take a moment to carefully review each section of this manual. Your attention to detail and adherence to the guidelines provided are very important. In addition to becoming familiar with the program guidelines, the accreditation process is designed to facilitate networking and business relationships throughout the aviation industry. As such, you are encouraged to seek other aviation professionals for knowledge and guidance throughout completion of the program. The accreditation program is available only to AAAE affiliate membersthose who have active responsibility for the management or staff functions at a public-use airport. An affiliate member becomes an executive candidate when his or her accreditation application has been accepted by the AAAE office. Prior to receiving this guide, you should have received a program acceptance letter via email, with information on how to access the following electronic study materials:

The AAAE Body of Knowledge Modules Online access to A Pocket Style Manual for candidates who choose to complete the Management Research Paper or Case Study via the following link: http://dianahacker.com/pocket/ An online version of the AAAE Accreditation Program Study Guide, available in the Program Study Materials section of the Professional Development site at www.aaae.org.

***The above study materials, with the exception of A Pocket Style Manual, are available for purchase in hard copy format on the AAAE website. In addition, candidates are encouraged to create a member account via the AAAE Web site in order to access the study materials. All study materials are available for access 24/7, provided that users are logged in to their AAAE Web account.

The Process
Earning the A.A.E. designation requires the successful completion of a three-part process. The three components are as follows: Phase 1 - a 180-item multiple-choice examination Phase 2 - a writing requirement Phase 3 - a final interview with a panel of A.A.E.s, organized in conjunction with your regional examiner

After five years of enrollment in the accreditation program, candidates will be assessed a $100 administrative fee every year until completion. It is hoped that this fee will encourage candidates to complete the three phases listed above in a timely manner. Failure to pay the $100 fee will discontinue the candidates enrollment in the program. Candidates will be required to pay the $250 entrance fee should they wish to resume program studies.

Maintaining the A.A.E. Designation

To maintain the A.A.E. designation, an accredited member must hold current membership in AAAE at the executive, or executive inactive level assume a full-time management role at a civil airport facility meet minimum Continuing Education requirements over a three-year cycle

Executive Membership v/s Executive Inactive Membership

As soon as a candidate completes the Accreditation program, they are recognized by AAAE as an Executive Member. Executive Members have the ability to vote on AAAE board matters, as well as serve on the Board of Examiners. Should an Executive Member discontinue their employment in a full-time management role at a civil airport facility, their status will be changed to the Executive Inactive level. An Executive Inactive member may still utilize the A.A.E. designation, however, they will be ineligible to vote on AAAE board matters, and/or serve on the Board of Examiners. It is important to inform AAAE of your new contact information whenever there are changes in your employment status. This is to ensure that our records remain up to date, as well as to keep an accurate record of your membership status.

Maintaining Continuing Education Requirements (CEUs)

Continuing Education programs are a common feature of many professional certification programs. It means that as an Accredited Airport Executive, you are constantly sharpening your skills and keeping up with changes in the industry. A robust CEU program ensures that your A.A.E. designation is respected and meaningful. That's why an overwhelming majority of executive members supported its creation on January 1, 1998. AAAE's CEU program is not administered on a yearly basis. Instead, Executive Members are required to accumulate 55 CEU credits over a three-year period, continually, as long as one wishes to retain the A.A.E. status. Each cycle ends three years from the date of accreditation. A wide variety of activities qualify for CEU credits: AAAE Meetings and Seminars As an executive member, it is possible to receive one CEU credit for each hour, and a maximum of six credits for each day of attendance at business sessions at the AAAE Annual Conference or other AAAE seminars and workshops. Other Industry Meetings and Seminars Accrual of CEU credits by attending instructional seminars and meetings presented by state AAAE chapters, state airport managers' associations, the Federal Aviation Administration, Airports Council International, the National Association of State Aviation Officials, or other appropriate aviation-related organizations. The rate of accrual is the same as it is for AAAE-sponsored events (above). Local Management Courses When attending a local instructional management seminar or meeting, it is possible to earn CEU credits at the rate of one per hour. This includes events presented by the American Management Association and American Marketing Association, computer classes, local organization seminars, and flight training.

On-site Airport Training On-site training, and other instruction provided by the local airport, is eligible for CEU credits. In lieu of registration documents, please obtain a memo from the airport director confirming that the training meets CEU standards. One hour of instructional time earns one credit. College Courses Full semester college courses which are relevant to an executive members profession and duties are worth 30 credits per course. Executive members also receive 30 credits for teaching a college course. Credits for Other CEU Programs Attendance at aviation-related meetings for other applicable CEU programs (such as CPA or PE designations) may be applied to the AAAE CEU program. Major Conference Presentations Accredited members who make a presentation at a conference requiring significant advance preparation will receive six credits. A copy of the meeting program and presentation must be retained for audit purposes. AAAE Leadership Members serving as chairman or vice chairman of a standing AAAE committee earn six credits per year of service. Members of the AAAE Board of Examiners earn 12 credits per year. Each panelist serving on a Final Interview panel receives one CEU for each hour of the Final Interview with a maximum of three CEU's for each Final Interview conducted. Members of the AAAE Board of Directors (including chapter presidents) receive 12 credits per year. ANTN Tapes Executive members may view Airport News and Training Network (ANTN) program tapes to earn CEU credits, at the rate of one CEU per hour of viewing. Miscellaneous CEU information to keep in mind CEUs will automatically be recorded for all AAAE sponsored events Executive members are responsible for submitting CEU credits for qualifying activities not sponsored by AAAE It is recommended that executive members keep a personal tally of accumulated CEUs as a backup against errors Executive members are required to retain documentation supporting non-sponsored CEU activities for five years

Accumulation of more than 55 CEUs during a three-year cycle cannot be rolled over into the next cycle, as all CEU totals are reset to zero at the beginning of the next cycle. However, should an executive member fail to accumulate 55 CEUs in any given three-year cycle, any overages in the current cycle may be used to fulfill CEUs in a previous three-year period. If an executive member is unable to fulfill 55 CEUs, they will be reclassified as an inactive member, and deemed unable to vote on AAAE matters. Once the necessary credits have been accrued, they will be returned to active status. The Board of Examiners, which has final authority, may require chronically inactive members to retake the multiple-choice examination. Executive members are required to sign an annual compliance ethics statement, containing information regarding the honor system. AAAE will audit 5% of the accredited membership annually.

The Multiple-Choice Exam

The purpose of the multiple-choice examination is to document that the executive candidate has mastered, to an acceptable degree, the body of knowledge essential to carrying out airport management responsibilities. You may take the multiple-choice examination, offered both on paper and on the Internet, through one of the following options: At a local college, university or testing center In the presence of an active Accredited Airport Executive At the AAAE Annual Conference or at the National Airports Conference At the conclusion of a weeklong review course at the Loretta Scott Accreditation Academy offered by AAAE, in partnership with its South Central Chapter At the AAAE office in Alexandria, Virginia

When you are ready to complete the multiple-choice exam, please choose an option above. The procedure for scheduling the exam is further explained below: At a local college, university or testing center or in the presence of an A.A.E. You may choose to test in your local area, provided that you make arrangements with a local university, a college or a testing center and have a proctor administer the examination. To ensure the security of the examination, proctors must request the examination through a formal, signed letter written on their own letterhead. The letter must contain: 1) the name(s) of the candidate(s) 2) the proctors street and e-mail address 3) the preferred testing format (Internet or paper) 4) the date and place of the examination 5) the candidates AAAE member ID The letter should arrive at the AAAE offices at least two weeks before the examination date. AAAE will send the Internet access code or paper version of the examination to arrive approximately one to two days before the examination date at the address provided in the proctors letter. At the AAAE Annual Conference or at the National Airports Conference You may take the multiple-choice exam at either the Annual or National Airports Conference by submitting a reservation form. Reservation forms will be e-mailed to all candidates eligible to sit for the multiple-choice exam one to two months before the conference date. *Space and availability limitations may apply. At the Loretta Scott Accreditation / Certification Academy AAAE offers candidates the option to sit for the multiple-choice exam at the conclusion of this week-long review course, provided that all fees (course, registration, re-take, and AAAE membership) are current. The review course is held three times a year; once in the spring, the summer and the fall. The spring and fall courses are held in the Dallas Fort Worth area, while the summer course is held in Alexandria, VA. All candidates who are eligible to attend will be contacted with registration and course information approximately two to three months before the start of the course. Candidates are encouraged to register as soon as possible as space for each course is limited.

At AAAE Headquarters You may take the multiple-choice exam at AAAE headquarters by contacting the accreditation department at accreditation@aaae.org. Please be sure to note the date and time that you wish to take the exam so that AAAE staff can schedule your exam accordingly.

Results & Other Post-Exam Information

Once a paper version of the multiple-choice examination has been completed and returned to AAAE, AAAE staff grades it, and the results are sent directly to the candidate within two weeks. Once the multiple-choice examination taken on the Internet has been completed, the server will return immediate, preliminary results. Official results will be mailed directly to the candidate by the AAAE office within two weeks. If candidates fail the test, a $75.00 re-take fee will be imposed. Upon completion of the multiple-choice exam, candidates will be referred accordingly to complete the next phase: -Candidates who have completed the writing requirement and multiple-choice exam phases will be referred to their regional examiner to begin preparing for the final interview. -Candidates who have only completed the multiple-choice exam phase will be referred to begin working on the writing requirement; more information on this phase is available in page 11, with writing samples available in the appendix. Although candidates may choose to complete the multiple-choice exam or writing phase first, the final interview must be the third and final completed phase. AAAE requires that candidates spend 12 to 16 weeks studying the AAAE Body of Knowledge before taking or retaking the multiple-choice examination.

The Writing Requirement

10

The purpose of the writing requirement is to demonstrate to the Board of Examiners that the executive candidate can write effectively on a topic relevant and significant to the airport management field. Candidates may select one of the following options to fulfill the writing requirement: A management research paper A case study A proctored essay exam Advanced degree waiver

The Board of Examiners recommends that candidates carefully consider their respective experience levels and writing abilities before choosing one of these options. Management Research Paper or Case Study The management research paper or the case study allows you to fulfill the writing requirement at your own pace and has the added benefit of permitting your paper to be pre-screened for grammar, mechanics, punctuation, usage and style before it is submitted to the BOE for evaluation. Proctored Essay The proctored essay examination requires that you develop a well-defined response to two industryrelated questions in a four-hour time limit. To be successful, you will need to have a broad understanding of the aviation industry and must be able to organize and present a comprehensive written response, with a minimum of 600 characters per response to each question within the allotted time. Advanced Degree Waiver - (masters or doctorate) If you have received a masters or doctorate degree from an accredited college or university, you are exempt from the writing requirement. Those who are eligible for this exemption must request the degree-granting college or university to send the candidates official transcript to the accreditation department for verification. Transcripts may be sent to: AAAE Accreditation Department 601 Madison St., Ste. 400 Alexandria, VA 22314

11

The Management Research Paper

12

The management research paper requires you to demonstrate that you can write in a clear, organized, grammatically correct style on a topic of interest to professional airport executives. Independent research on the topic is required, and the paper should be presented in a formal, high quality research paper format. The text of the paper should be coherently and amply developed, with the conclusion clearly supported by the evidence presented in the body of the paper. Successful papers become a permanent part of the AAAE library and are available to other airport executives as resource materials. This option of the writing requirement is recommended for candidates with limited experience in publicuse airport management.

Procedure
1. Choose a Topic - Your topic should be an expression of your professional and personal interest. It is important to remember that a workable topic on airport management is neither too broad nor too narrow. It is not a description of an activity, an incident or a process at your airport that has little relative value for other airport managers. A good topic lends itself to a focused study that can be used by virtually anyone interested in airport management. 2. Develop a Paragraph Outline Once you have selected a topic, develop it into a paragraph outline that includes these three parts: introduction, body and conclusion. In the introduction, state the papers objective. In the body, make sure each heading and each subheading contains at least two to three descriptive or explanatory sentences. A sample paragraph outline is available in Appendix C. 3. Submit Management Research Paper Topic and Paragraph Outline - Send your completed paragraph outline electronically to accreditation@aaae.org. You must submit the outline for approval before writing the first draft of your paper. Please note that, if you do not complete and submit the first draft within a year of your outlines approval, you must submit your outline to the accreditation department for revalidation. 4. Prepare and Submit the First Draft of the Management Research Paper Thoroughly research your topic before writing the paper. Document the sources of your reference. See Appendix B for specific guidelines. Prepare one draft of the paper both electronically and by mail and submit it to the AAAE Accreditation Department to begin the pre-screening process. Follow the formatting guidelines specified in Appendix A on pages 32 and 33. An example of a management research paper is available starting on page 44. Once reviewed and approved for overall structure and style by the AAAE office, the final paper will then be sent to the Board of Examiners for evaluation.

13

Assessment of the Paper

Your paper will be reviewed according to the following criteria: 1. Topic: Topic is related to the airport management field, is broadly applicable and is of importance to professional airport management. Discusses topic and sources general applicability. The facts of the paper are relevant, accurate and correct.

2. Depth:

3. Quality: An excellent, well-organized essay that presents a focused, coherent and convincing interpretation of ideas.

The AAAE office will notify you after your paper has been reviewed. Unsuccessful papers will be returned to you with comments and suggestions for revising and resubmitting the paper. Only the papers that have been pre-screened by AAAE will be submitted to the Board of Examiners for approval. All approved papers will be held in the AAAE library and become available to AAAE members.

14

The Case Study

15

The case study requires you to demonstrate that you can effectively present your analysis of a unique situation or a solution to a problem or a project undertaken at a specific airport. The studys findings should be significant to public airport management. The Board of Examiners evaluates the study on its relevance to public airport management, depth and overall quality. Successful case studies become a permanent part of AAAEs comprehensive and expanding library and are available to other airport management professionals to use as resource materials.

Procedure
1. Choose a Topic Your topic should be focused and relevant to the public-use airport management field. The topic should lend itself to an in-depth analysis of a unique situation or an innovative solution to a problem or a project undertaken at a specific airport. The topic should not be about an ordinary usual business item, such as PFC applications, runway rehabs, budget preparation, etc. 2. Develop a Paragraph Outline Once you have selected a topic for your case study, develop it into a paragraph outline that includes these three parts: introduction, body and conclusion. In the introduction, state the studys subject and objective. In the body, make sure each heading and each subheading contains at least two to three descriptive or explanatory sentences. A sample paragraph outline is available in Appendix C. 3. Submit the Paragraph Outline Send the outline electronically to accreditation@aaae.org. Please note that, if you do not complete and submit the first draft of your case study within a year of your outlines approval, you must resubmit the outline to the accreditation department for revalidation. 4. Prepare and Submit the First Draft of the Case Study Follow the formatting guidelines specified in Appendix A (pages 32 and 33) of the AAAE Accreditation Program Study Guide. A sample case study is available starting on page 77. When complete, send your first draft to accreditation@aaae.org.

16

Assessment of the Case Study

Your case study will be reviewed according to the following criteria. 1. Topic: Topic is both related to and important to the airport management field. 2. Depth: An effective case study is an in-depth analysis of a situation or a solution to a problem or a project undertaken at a specific airport. The information and data presented are both relevant and accurate. The insights gained from the study contribute to knowledge about airport management. 3. Quality: An effective case study is well organized, focused, cohesive, clear and free from major errors in grammar, punctuation and usage. The AAAE office will notify you after your case study has been reviewed. Unsuccessful case studies will be returned to you with comments and suggestions for revising and resubmitting the paper. Only the case studies that have been pre-screened by AAAE will be submitted to the Board of Examiners for approval. All approved papers will be held in the AAAE library and become available to AAAE members.

17

 The Proctored Essay

18

Candidates are strongly encouraged to visit with their regional examiner regarding the suitability of the proctored essay given their background experience. The proctored essay examination requires you to demonstrate that you can provide an accurate, wellorganized and effectively written response to two (2) industry-related questions, within a four-hour time limit. The questions will be provided at the time of the scheduled essay examination. Each response will be evaluated on the basis of organization, depth and quality, and should be a minimum of 600 words. You will be expected to address each of the questions from the standpoint that you are the Executive Director of an airport, and that the response is an executive level memo or report to be provided to a board, council or other legislative body. Before your answers are submitted to AAAE, each response will be verified by the on-line proctored essay system, and indicate if a response contains less than 600 words. If the minimum number of characters have been met, clicking the submit button a second time will automatically send your responses to AAAE for evaluation. Or, you may return and continue to complete a response, provided that the four-hour time limit has not been exceeded. You will be permitted to have access to the Internet and may conduct research during the writing session. The on-line proctored essay system will feature text formatting capabilities, including spellcheck.

Procedure
Should you wish to complete this writing requirement, contact an eligible proctor and have them send a formal request on letterhead to the accreditation department, with the following information: (1) The candidate(s) name and AAAE member ID (2) The date, time and place of the essay examination Proctor letters should be sent to the following address: AAAE Accreditation Department 601 Madison St., Ste. 400 Alexandria, VA 22314 An eligible proctor is one of these professionals: a high school principal, a college professor, an active Accredited Airport Executive (A.A.E.), or an AAAE staff member who is not enrolled in the accreditation program. The candidate must be connected to the Internet to gain access to the on-line proctored essay system and for conducting research. The proctors request must reach the accreditation office two weeks before the scheduled writing session. Upon verification of the proctors eligibility, the user ID and password will be sent to the proctors e-mail address approximately one to two days before the examination date. At the outset of the essay examination, you will be prompted to enter the assigned user ID and password. The first step will require you to indicate your professional experience. Next, you will be prompted to choose two topics from the following categories: Airport Administration and Finance Legislative Affairs, Marketing and Communications, and Air Service Development Operations & Maintenance Planning, Construction and Environmental

19

After making your selection, one (1) question will be automatically generated per topic. Each question will appear on the page with a text box for you to complete a response. Responses will automatically be sent to the AAAE accreditation department upon completion, and will be evaluated according to the criteria on page 21. It will take approximately six to eight weeks to communicate the results to the candidate, depending on the number of proctored essays in the queue at that time. Should you fail the proctored essay, re-takes may be scheduled 90 days from the last exam date. A $75 re-take fee will be imposed.

20

Assessment of the Proctored Essay

Your proctored essay will be reviewed according to the following criteria: 1. Organization: An effective essay response has a logical structure or discernable pattern of organization. 2. Depth: An effective essay response presents ample accurate and relevant details, examples, facts or statistical data to support all generalizations. 3. Quality: An effective essay response is clear, concise, cohesive and free from major errors in grammar, punctuation and usage.

21

The Final Interview

22

Overview
The Final Interview is designed to test the limits of the candidates knowledge in four (4) subject areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. Finance and Administration Planning, Construction and Environmental Airport Operations, Security and Maintenance Legislative Affairs, Marketing and Communications, Development.

and

Air

Service

The Final Interview is conducted in a question and answer session, similar to a job interview.

Board of Examiners
When you are prepared to schedule your Final Interview, you must contact AAAE and complete the Final Interview form. Once your eligibility is established, you may contact your Regional Examiner to discuss your readiness. In the event your Regional Examiner cannot handle your needs at the time of your request, he or she may ask one of the three (3) At-Large Examiners to assist you. Be advised that you should give yourself at least ninety (90) days to study and prepare yourself for the Final Interview. In addition, your Examiner will need a minimum of ninety (90) days notice as he or she may be working with other candidates, and scheduling may become challenging. This is especially true for candidates who wish to schedule their Final Interview during a national or annual conference.

Preparation
The Final Interview requires a different set of skills from those required for the multiplechoice examination. Although a great deal of resource information is available in the Body of Knowledge (Modules), FAA Advisory Circulars and Federal Aviation Regulations, the candidate must also seek to learn practical knowledge in the subject matter areas. This includes, and is not limited to, meeting with your superiors, peers and colleagues and visiting other facilities to gather information. As you begin to plan for the Final Interview, it is highly recommended you understand and are able to fully discuss, in detail, the following topics: Finance and Administration Planning, Construction and Environmental Airport Operations, Security and Maintenance Legislative Affairs, Marketing and Communications and Air Service Development

To assist your focus on your studies, the following topics and categories are recommended. 23

Finance and Administration

Airport Ownership and Organization Non-Aviation Revenue Sources Lease Rate Valuation Rate-making Methodologies Development of Airline Leases / Negotiations Gate Use Agreements / Gate Utilization Methodologies Concession Management (various) Parking Operations Capital Funding Process Budget Development Accounting Methodologies Revenue Diversion / Politics Government Influences Capital Improvement Funding Bond Sale Passenger Facility Charges Aviation Taxes (Airport Airway Trust Fund) Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Outsourcing Employee Performance Disciplinary Procedures Training Programs Succession Planning Insurance / Liability

24

Planning, Construction, and Environmental

Federal Grants Grant Assurances Airport Master Planning Airport Layout Plan Practical and Throughput Capacity Capacity and Delay Demand Management Primary and Visual Navigation Aids Terminal Design / Remodel Parking Structure Design FAR Part 77 FAA Form 7460-1 FAR Part 150 Program Noise Mitigation Methodologies Federal Environmental Acts Environmental Requirements Acts Environmental Requirements / Liability Issues Air Emissions Construction Preparation / Communication Request for Proposal Process Consultant Services Selection Process Consultant Categories Basic Architect/Engineer Service Phases Alternative Delivery Methods Construction Safety

25

Operations, Security and Maintenance

FAA Advisory Circulars / Topics Airport Certification Manual FAR Part 139 Airport Operating Certificate Airfield Drivers Program Wildlife Hazard Management / Hazard Assessment Controlling Wildlife NOTAMs Runway Safety Areas Runway Protection Zones Snow Plans / Snow and Ice Control / Snow Removal Runway Incursions Airport Emergency Plan Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Fuel Inspections Safety Management System Aircraft Recovery NIMS / ICS Airport Security Programs Preventative Maintenance Energy Conservation Measures Pavement Management Programs Pavement Testing Methods / Life of Pavement Factors Asphalt and Concrete Rubber Accumulation / Rubber Removal Methods Friction Measurement / Testing

26

Legislative Affairs, Marketing and Communications, and Air Service Development

Aviation Advocacy Legislative Affairs / Government Relations Outreach to General Aviation Balancing Political Influences with Sound Business Practices Media Plan / Media Relations Public Relations / Public Relations Tools Aircraft Mishaps, Media Relations and Survivor Assistance Conflicts with the Media Freedom of Information Act - Requests Customer Complaints / Complaint Resolution Marketing Plans / Effectiveness Development of Air Service Development Plans FAA Competition Plan Attracting New Service Public Art Economic Impacts / Economic Impact Statements

27

Develop a Study Schedule / Work Plan

You should give yourself a minimum of three months to study and prepare for the Final Interview. It is highly recommended that you develop a study schedule or work plan to keep on task and track your progress. It is recommended that the candidate: Review the topic list from the study guide Assess the material needed Organize the material needed Estimate how much time is needed to master the material Study in 30 to 60 minute segments Make use of note cards, prompts, or use acronyms or mnemonics to help you remember the material Remain positive

In addition, you may want to conduct mock interviews with your peers.

Schedule Final Interview

Before you schedule your Final Interview, you must contact AAAE and complete the Accredited Airport Executive Final Interview Request Form. Once this task is complete, you may contact your Regional Examiner. Be advised that you must provide your Examiner a minimum of ninety (90) days notice to schedule your Final Interview. He or she will work with your schedule and determine the best place and time to conduct the Final Interview, whether it is at a location of your choosing or during a national or annual conference.

Final Interview Format

The format for the Final Interview is similar to a high-level job interview, with a group of panelists asking questions from the four subject matter areas in a round-robin format, and assessing the candidates practical knowledge. The panel usually consists of a member of the Board of Examiners and a minimum of two Accredited Airport Executives, however, can also be three Accredited Airport Executives who have experience conducting Final Interviews. The session is conducted in a structured format, yet allowing for an informal interchange, so that the candidate can demonstrate the practical knowledge of all aspects of airport management that he or she has gained. In most instances, the Final Interview lasts approximately two hours.

28

Final Pre-Interview Recommendations

AAAE recommends the candidate follow these simple points: Get enough rest before the Final Interview Be prepared well in advance; do not cram Visit the meeting room before the Final Interview, if possible Learn the names of the panelists before the Final Interview, if possible

Final Interview Recommendations

AAAE recommends the candidate follow these simple points: Listen carefully to the question If you do not understand the question, ask that it repeated or clarified Look at the panelists when you speak If you do not know the answer to a question, feel free to admit it Maintain a comfortable posture Speak slowly and clearly Vary the intensity, intonation, etc., of your voice Remain positive

29

 Appendices
30

APPENDIX A
Formatting Guidelines
Candidates in the accreditation program must adhere to specific formatting guidelines for completing the management research paper and/or case study requirement. These guidelines are intended to provide candidates with clear instructions in formatting the writing sample in order to promote consistency in the appearance and to facilitate the grading process. All papers should be formatted in APA style. All material included in the management paper/or case study must be on 8 x 11, highquality white paper. All papers/or case studies must be prepared on a computer and the final product should be submitted electronically. The text of the writing sample must be double-spaced throughout the paper/or case study. The typeface used in the text should be 12-point size in Times New Roman or a comparable style. Paragraph indents must be five spaces. There should be only one space after a period. Long quotations should be indented five spaces or half an inch from the left margin. The length of the paper/or case study should be 20 to 30 pages, not including the cover sheet, the table of contents, the bibliography, or any attachments. The text should be justified to the left-hand margin, not the right. The margins on all sides must be one inchat the top, bottom, left- and right-hand sides. Number all pages consecutively throughout the paper/or case study in the upper right-hand corner, one-half inch from the top and flush with the right margin. Type your membership number five spaces to the left of the page number, as a precaution in case of misplaced pages. Do not use the abbreviation p. before a page number or add a period, hyphen, or any other mark or symbol. Position the first line of the text one inch from the top of the page. There should be no breaks in the text. In other words, if a section ends at the top of a page, the next section should begin immediately after it. Place tables, illustrations, figures, and charts at the end of the paper/or case study, unless it is essential to your discussion that they be placed in the text. Inserting them in the middle of the document is distracting to the reader and disrupts the flow of the text. Tables, etc., should be placed immediately after the notes and the bibliography. A table must be labeled Table, given an Arabic numeral and captioned. Type both label and caption on separate lines above the table, using 10-point size in standard Times New Roman type or a comparable typeface. Do not use all capital letters. Use the same typeface for tables, illustrations, etc. that is used in the paper/or case study to ensure consistency.

31

Review the formatting guidelines on the next few pages for the proper format of the bibliography and endnotes. Proofread your research paper/or case study carefully. Check your document manually for spelling and grammatical errors, since computerized programs that check for these errors are not always reliable. Solicit comments from others before submitting the paper to AAAE. A Pocket Style Manual provides useful information, with clear examples, on grammar, mechanics, punctuation, usage, research, and documentation style. Be sure to refer to this before writing your paper/or case study and again after you have finished writing the first draft. The manual is available on-line at: http://dianahacker.com/pocket/ The final draft of the management research paper/or case study must be submitted to AAAE electronically in Word (.doc) format on Microsoft Word 6.0 or higher. Additional resources, such as a sample topic outline, management paper and case study are available in Appendix C through E.

AAAE requires that all candidates have their management research papers / case study drafts to be pre-screened and edited for grammar, mechanics, punctuation, usage, and style. If necessary, the draft will be returned to the candidate with suggestions for revision. AAAE staff will not evaluate the content of the management research paper or the case study. After the candidate makes the necessary revisions, the final draft will be formally reviewed by the examiners, with a final result provided to the candidate within six to eight weeks. When approved, the management research paper or case study will serve as a professional contribution to AAAEs comprehensive and expanding library, which is a resource available to all AAAE members.

32

APPENDIX B
Documenting Sources of Reference
Document the sources of your references if they fall into one of these categories: (1) opinions, judgment, theories, and personal explanations; (2) facts that are open to dispute, and virtually all statistics; and (3) factual information gathered by a small number of observers, no matter how expert they may be (for example, the results of a recent scientific test).--Quoted from Stephen Weidenborner and Domenick Caruso, Writing Research Papers: A Guide to the Process, 5th edition (New York: St. Martins Press, 1997), 168. Integrate the references with your text so that they flow into each other smoothly. Simply dropping a reference into your text would give the impression of a cut-and-paste job. Be sure not to lean too heavily on a few sources, and avoid quoting too much from any source. Try to paraphrase or summarize some of your references. Put quotation marks around a word-for-word citation that is less than five lines long. Any reference longer than five lines should be presented as a block quotation set off from the text. Do not use quotation marks around a block quotation, but do remember to use a number to note the source. Whether you quoted the reference word for word or paraphrased the information or summarized it, you have to note the source. Use a raised number to note the source of your reference. Present the numbers consecutively, beginning with 1. Use each number only once in your text. Type each number as a superscript after the end punctuation mark, immediately following the reference. If the end punctuation mark is a dash, then place the number before the dash. And be sure to place reference numbers outside closing parentheses.

Use endnotes instead of footnotes. Place endnotes in a section titled Notes after any appendix material and before a bibliography. In addition to source notes, you may include any explanatory notes in this section as well. In the endnotes, present the reference numbers sequentially, corresponding to the order in which they appear in the text. The first time a source is cited, give the full citation. A full citation should contain these four units: (1) the name(s) of the author(s) presented in its natural order (first name first), (2) the title of the work, (3) the facts of publication (place, publisher, and year)--presented in parentheses, and (4) the page number or numbers that contain your reference. In a subsequent citation of the same source, simply give the last name of the author, followed by the page number (without the letter p). If the author is unknown, cite the name of the agency or the title of the work. See samples of citations in this exhibit. In addition to the AAAE Accreditation Program Study Guide and A Pocket Style Manual, there are online resources for you to consult with. Just visit the Candidate Resource Center under www.aaae.org/accreditation. In the section titled Helpful Links you will find several useful resources, including guides provided by the University of Alberta Libraries. The samples given in this exhibit are taken from the University of Albertas online guides mentioned above. Cite the source of the table and any footnotes immediately below the table, using 10-point-sized font in standard Times New roman type or a comparable typeface. To avoid confusion between endnotes to the text and footnotes to the table, designate footnotes to the table with lowercase letters rather than numerals (10 returns, single space).

33

APPENDIX C
SAMPLE TOPIC OUTLINE

AAAE ACCREDITATION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PAPER -or- CASE STUDY OUTLINE

TOPIC:

(5 returns, single space)

(Authors Member Number) Executive Candidate

(20 returns, single space)

PRESENTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE WRITING REQUIREMENT of the AMERCIAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES Date MM/YY

34

AAAE ACCREDITATION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PAPER OUTLINE

TOPIC:

A Focused Marketing Plan for General-Aviation Airports By Executive Candidate

PRESENTED IN FULILLMENT OF THE MANAGEMENT PAPER REQUIREMENT of the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES

35

I. Topic As an intended result of liability-limiting federal legislation enacted in the mid 1990s, the General-Aviation (GA) component of U.S. aviation has experienced significant growth. At the same time, GA only airports, especially GA airports that are not part of a larger airport authority or system, face increasing pressures to reduce or completely eliminate the tax burden they represent to their governmental sponsors. In order to both exploit the increase in GA traffic and generate increased revenue, many GA airports can benefit from a focused marketing plan. The primary reason I chose this topic is that I have been able to find virtually no literature specifically on GA airport marketing. A search of accreditation papers in the American Association of Airport Executives library yielded no selections for the term General Aviation Airport Marketing. An Internet search, using the Google search engine and the same search term, yielded a mere handful of relevant sources. These sources were mainly the marketing plans of specific airports, with very little detailed information on how the goals and objectives of the individual marketing plan were determined. This lack of detail makes the applicability and usefulness of these marketing plans to other airports tentative at best. The objective of this paper is to provide a detailed overview of the varied and distinct key components that can constitute the traffic mix at GA airports in order to apply methods to market, both individually and in combination, these specific components. The major focus of this paper is to identify the key elements that constitute a comprehensive, tailored GA airport marketing plan that, when executed, can generate increased traffic and thereby revenue for the airport. II. The Management Paper Introduction

36

Marketing a general-aviation (GA) or community airport is distinctly different from the more prevalent marketing techniques that apply to commercial-service airports. Whereas commercial-service marketing consists generally of attracting more and diverse scheduled airline service to an airport, marketing an airport to the general-aviation community requires recognition of the many facets of GA and development of multiple marketing programs to appeal to these diverse segments. In practice, it will be necessary to appeal to the very level of the individual consumer, be it corporate or recreational pilot, dispatcher or flight department head, or potential student pilot, to name a few. It is necessary for individuals concerned with marketing the GA airport to identify the airports position relative to the many distinct categories of the general aviation. As with the traditional commercial-service airports, the GA airport can fit into any number of roles such as origin and destination, reliever, or regional airport. Some GA airports may find themselves fulfilling unique functions that will radically dictate the way in which they market their airport. Examples of these niches might be GA airports that serve as a base for sightseeing flights to the Grand Canyon or Hawaii, or airports located in major convention or vacation destinations, such as Las Vegas or Orlando. Generalaviation airport marketing can also be applicable to airports that are primarily commercialservice airports that experience significant GA traffic, either through a management desire to be GA friendly, or simply by market demand. Given the turbulence in the U.S. airline industry in the beginning years of this new century, commercial-service airports that ignore compatible GA activity are declining an excellent opportunity for additional revenue, market diversity, and service to their community. Another marked difference between GA and commercial-service marketing is the ample opportunity, and in deed necessity, to involve individual airport businesses and businesses off the airport that will directly benefit from increased visitors flying into the community through 37

GA aircraft. Although the sheer diversity of general aviation will require many unique and innovative methods to develop an effective marketing effort, most of the traditional marketing fundamentals will play a significant role in developing an effective marketing program. The first step in developing the marketing plan, as with many other types of plans, is to complete a thorough inventory of current capabilities and assets. B. Body The body of the proposed paper will consist of seven parts: a review of current literature, overview of the general-aviation industry, developing a marketing plan, airport Web site and Internet marketing, developing synergy and alliances, and marketing as public relations. 1. Review of Current Literature As stated previously, there appears to be very little literature available on the specific subject of GA airport marketing. A review of what is available will introduce the subject to the reader. More specifically, a review of literature associated with the dimensions and trends in the various facets of GA will enable the reader to determine which facets are most apparent at their specific airport. Once a target market is established, a review of literature specific to that market, such as tourism trends or convention traffic, will be useful in developing and implementing a focused marketing plan. 2. Overview of the general-aviation industry General aviation is defined by the Federal Aviation Administration as all aviation activity except those of the military and commercial air transportation. Commercial air transportation is further defined as air carriers certificated by the FAA under 14 CFR Part 121. From an airport marketing perspective, there are two broad components of general aviation and several more specific components. The segments of GA that tend to have the most economic impact on GA airports are business and commercial aviation and flight schools. These two components 38

usually account for the most activity, generate revenue through fuel sales as well as fees for parking and servicing, and provide the customer base for many GA-related businesses, such as airframe and power plant repair, avionics, and hangar rental. Other unique categories in GA, such as parachute instruction, antique aircraft (war birds), float planes, etc., can have a significant economic impact on specific airports. Once an airport marketing team can identify why its primary customers use the airport, marketing strategies can be developed to increase traffic and enhance attractiveness from those market segments. At the same time, components of GA identified as under represented can be targeted for increased utilization of the airport, provided that there is sufficient revenue to be derived from that segment. 3. Developing the Marketing Plan A detailed marketing plan is necessary in order to concentrate the efforts of various entities, such as the marketing consultant staff, convention and visitors bureau, etc., on establishing an effective program. The parts of a focused GA marketing plan follow. a. Airport Description and Inventory b. Strategic Focus 1. Mission/Vision 2. Goals c. Identify Core Competencies and Sustainable Competitive Advantages d. Situation Analysis 1. Customer Analysis 2. SWOT Analysis 3. Competitor Analysis e. Capabilities/Market Focus 1. Objectives 39

2. Target Markets f. Marketing Program 1. Promotion 2. Funding g. Implementation 4. Airport Web Site and Internet Marketing An airport Web site, designed as a marketing tool, is an essential asset for the airport and airport businesses. Except in cases where the airport also functions as a Fixed Based Operator (FBO) for fuel sales, airport marketing is not truly effective until a customer can select an airport business for services. Airport marketing can stimulate interest and generate a desire to use an airport in a specific location. This can be termed umbrella marketing. Establishing an airport Web site, with easy links to individual airport business Web sites, is one of the easiest ways to make the crucial connection of customer - airport (location) - service provider (airport business). Since many GA-related preflight activates, such as obtaining weather data and flight plan filing, have migrated to Internet- based applications, an airport or airport business without an attractive, well-configured and logical Web site is at a disadvantage in trying to attract business. Many corporate and fractional flight departments have specific airport requirements that they must meet when choosing a landing field. Some of the requirements include adequate runway length and strength, an air traffic control tower, precision instrument approaches, and FBOs with an acceptable standard of facilities and capabilities, such as catering. The easier it is for potential customers to determine whether or not a location can meet their needs, the easier they can make a decision. In addition to the obvious advantages of a Web site as a business tool, the airport Web site address can be added to promotional items and advertisements to

40

drive traffic to the Web site for further information. This capability enhances the benefit of advertising funds spent on these items. 5. Developing Synergy and Alliances Developing synergy and alliances between entities that stand to benefit from increased target market traffic at the airport will multiply the effectiveness and cost benefit of airport marketing efforts and funds. As discussed previously, likely alliances include off airport businesses that directly benefit from activity at the airport, the chamber of commerce, tourism and convention & visitors bureaus, and economic development councils. While an airport may be a department of a city or county, involving the personnel and elected officials of other government entities can not only help improve the business environment of the airport but also prove to be beneficial when multi-jurisdictional noise and planning issues come about. 6. Public Relations as Marketing An important ancillary benefit of a successful GA marketing program can be a positive boost to the airports image in the host community. GA airports are often challenged to prove their worth and benefit to the non-aviation literate segment of the general public. By involving off-airport businesses in airport marketing activities, an airport can create a buzz in the nonaviation business community. Once this buzz develops, often the news media, civic organizations, and local politicians will notice the airport in a new light. If the airport is poised to take advantage of the fleeting recognition given to the airport, it can maintain the continuous beneficial pubic-relations momentum by periodic presentations and press releases. C) Conclusion Airport umbrella marketing, combined with the marketing efforts of individual airport businesses and allied interests, can have a profound impact on airport traffic and revenue. 41

III.

Personal Involvement

When I accepted a position as a GA airport director four years ago, I embarked on the task of increasing the airports revenue by increasing corporate and business traffic. My MBA studies had made me aware of the absolute necessity of marketing and advertising to increase the sales of any product. I determined that our main product should be our location in the Orlando, Florida, metropolitan area, with its world-famous attractions and convention venues. Our brand would be a gateway airport for business and recreational traffic to what is the number one vacation destination in the world, and arguably the second largest convention destination in North America. We were able to assemble a marketing team consisting of airport staff, a marketing and communications consulting firm, area convention and visitors bureau (CVB) staff, and representatives from both airport business and related businesses, such as hotels and recreation venues. A plan was developed to market the airport through print and Internet advertising and trade show exhibits, as well as through the individual marketing efforts of allied businesses and the CVB. The results include an 82 percent increase in airport revenue from fuel sales, measured over a four-year period, as well as wide-spread recognition for the airport as a dynamic economic asset for the community.

42

APPENDIX D
SAMPLE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH PAPER

TITLE OF MANGEMENT PAPER CENTERED IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

By: (Authors Member Number) Executive Candidate

(20 returns, single space)

PRESENTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE WRITING REQUIREMENT of the AMERCIAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES Date MM/YY

43

AAAE ACCREDITATION PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PAPER

REFORMING THE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

PRESENTED IN FULLFILLMENT OF THE WRITING REQUIREMENT of the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES

44

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION HISTORY OF THE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM Pre-September 11, 2001 Post-September 11, 2001 FUNDING POLITICAL, COMMUNITY, AND AIRLINE PERSPECTIVE OF EAS PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO THE EAS PROGRAM FAA Reauthorization Act REFORMS TO THE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM Four Critical Air Service Issues Other Critical Issues ANALYSIS OF THE ADMINSTRATION OF THE EAS PROGRAM Office of Aviation Analysis Bidding Process EAS Awards ENHANCEMENT OF THE EAS PROGRAM CONCLUSION NOTES BIBLIOGRAPHY

3 6

10

12

13

21

26 29 30 31

45

INTRODUCTION The Essential Air Service (EAS) program as currently administered is seriously flawed and does disservice to the American tax payer, the businesses, and communities receiving EAS subsidies. In todays global economy moving people and goods is essential to economic development. In rural communities without interstate highways, air service with connections to the national air transportation system is even more critical. With a new administration in office and the possibility for change, rural airports and the communities they serve must offer their ideas to enhance the level of service and challenge their federal representatives to make the necessary changes and reforms to the EAS Program. The federal government, with the assistance of rural communities, needs to develop longterm strategies geared not just toward preserving current air service but also toward encouraging air service that meets the needs of the local community and provides incentives to ultimately reduce EAS subsidy levels. It is important to note that, without the assistance of the Essential Air Service program, there would be no air service for these rural communities. However, with reforms to the program, the communities could be much better served and, as a result, reliance on the EAS subsidy will decrease. The most critical challenges that small community airports face in developing air service are: Noncompetitive fares Unreliable air service Limited connectivity of planes flying into airports classified as hub airports Inadequate / limited frequency Limited number of airlines that are interested or able to service smaller airports

46

 Small aircraft with limited capacity EAS contracts re-bid every two years Shared flights with other EAS communities Fluctuating fuel costs These challenges have had a significant negative impact on both the small communities and the regional airlines. If the EAS program continues to operate as it has since 1978, the cost of the program will continue to increase and passenger traffic will continue to decrease. Each time an EAS contract is re-bid, the publics perception and confidence in the airport is questioned. In small communities where there is limited service to only one destination, the slightest changes in frequency or changes in hub destination can have a negative impact on the publics perception of the airport and enplanements typically decline. The Department of Transportations one-size-fits-all approach of providing a basic level of air service to rural communities through the lowest bidder process has done very little to enhance air service and provides no incentive for the communities to wean themselves from the EAS program. Without providing the capabilities or incentives for communities to increase enplanements, the program is a welfare system for rural communities. There is now a unique opportunity to reform and enhance a program that has remained fundamentally unchanged since its inception in 1978, while the aviation industry has changed significantly. Here, at a glance are some of the events, and trends that precipitated these changes: The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have dramatically changed the aviation industry.

47

The emergence of low-fare service by low-cost carriers, a trend that has forced major network carriers to cut fares and lower costs to be competitive.

Air travelers are willing to drive long distances to obtain low fares and frequent service with the result that the smallest communities have lost or are losing their local passenger base.

Lower fares charged by network carriers; make it almost impossible for those carriers to make a profit using the smallest aircraft those most suited for small communities.

The majority of turboprops have been replaced by regional jets, which many travelers prefer, although these jets are too large to operate economically in small communities.

The smallest turboprop aircraft, such as the Beech-1900 and Saab-340, are no longer manufactured and the cost of operating and maintaining these aircraft continues to climb.

High fuel prices have strained the program over the years. Airports that are designated as hub airports do not provide sufficient domestic and international connections. (1)

This paper will first analyze the Essential Air Service program, with respect to its history, the effects of the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, and the EAS Program pre-September 11, 2001, and post-September 11, 2001, and then make recommendations to reform the program for the 21st century. Since Alaska and the other U.S. territories present different challenges, this paper concentrates on the lower 48 states. To support the findings and recommendations for reforming the Essential Air Service Program, a survey was sent to 103 EAS Airports in the lower 48 states, a total of 48 airports responded to the survey for a 55% response rate. Additionally, 9 airlines which provide service to the majority of EAS airports were surveyed; 3 airlines responded for a 33% response rate. 48

HISTORY OF THE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM During the early years of air transportation under the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, Congress created the Civil Aeronautics Authority (CAA) with the responsibility for economic regulation of the airlines. The terms of this regulation were rather unclear with Congress stating that economic regulation of airlines should be in the public interest and in accordance with the public convenience and necessity but did not define these terms. The Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) regulated the airlines and controlled the routes that airlines could fly and the fares airlines could charge. Further, the CAB regulated airfares and decided how many and which airlines could fly between cities and regulated the number of flights and the capacity.
(6)

Airlines that served smaller markets were guaranteed a certain amount of revenue if passenger revenues did not generate enough to cover the cost of providing the service. During the 1970s, there was a strong movement to reduce economic regulation of the airline industry. Congress directed the CAB to do away with economic regulation and let the airlines and market dictate where to fly and how much to charge. On October 24, 1978, Congress passed the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (ADA). This Act ended the majority of regulations in a succession of steps over several years and phased out the government's control over routes and airfares. In so doing, the Act allowed competitive market forces to determine ticket prices, frequency of flights, routes, and the airports that airlines would service. During the Airline Deregulation debates, the prospect of allowing carriers to terminate scheduled service without prior government approval raised concerns that communities with relatively lower traffic levels would lose service entirely as carriers shifted their operations to

49

larger, potentially more lucrative markets. In response to this concern, Congress established the Essential Air Service program. This program is administered by the Department of Transportation to ensure that smaller communities continue to have air service connecting to the national air transportation system, with federal subsidy if required. (4) When the Airline Deregulation Act (ADA) was enacted, 746 communities in the United States and its territories were listed on air carrier certificates. (5) However 126 were suspended since they did not meet the eligibility requirements for essential air service (see EAS general requirements below) and only 620 were certified as having eligible points for Essential Air Service. Of the 620 having eligible points, 412 airports in the lower 48 states were declared to be eligible for subsidized air service. Before deregulation; air carrier operating certificates required air carriers to provide a minimum of two daily round trips. During the inception of the EAS program, certain criteria were established for a community to be listed as eligible for air service under the EAS. To be eligible for this subsidized service, communities must meet three general requirements: 1. Must have received scheduled commercial passenger service before October 1978. 2. May be no closer than 70 highway miles to a medium- or large-hub airport. 3. Must require a subsidy of less than $200 per person (unless the community is more than 210 highway miles from the nearest medium- or large-hub airport, in which case no average per-passenger dollar limit applies). The Department of Transportation determines the minimum level of service required at each eligible community by specifying a hub through which the community is connected to the national network, a minimum number of round trips and available seats that must be provided to a hub, certain characteristics of the aircraft to be used, and the maximum

50

permissible number of intermediate stops to the hub. Congress initially authorized the program for a ten-year period, through October 1988. In order to ensure that service at small communities remained strong, Congress in 1987 enacted the Airport and Airway Safety and Capacity Expansion Act, which extended the program for another ten years through 1998. (4) One of the main factors behind Congress' decision to maintain the EAS program was the importance of air service to local economies. With the events of September 11, 2001, maintaining a strong air travel infrastructure has never been more important. The original purpose of this program was to ensure that small communities receiving air service before the Airline Deregulation Act would continue to receive air service once the airlines were deregulated and open competition began. The history of the Essential Air Service Program can be divided into essentially two time periods: Pre-September 11, 2001, from 1978-2001 and Post-September 11, 2001, from 2001 to the present. Pre-September 11, 2001 In March of 2001 there were 83 airports receiving a total of $63 million annually in EAS subsidies. Before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, 34% of the rural airports now requiring subsidy were able to sustain commercial air service without the assistance of the Essential Air Service Program. Unsubsidized commercial air service to these airports typically included 5 or more direct flights a day to a large hub with domestic and international connections, on 19 or 34 passenger aircraft. Although air fares were often not competitive, annual passenger enplanements at 52% of these unsubsidized and EAS airports exceeded ten thousand (10,000) which allowed airlines to make a profit and kept subsidies balanced.

51

Post-September 11, 2001 While September 11, 2001, had a crippling effect on the aviation industry, as a whole the industry was able to recover in the years that followed. However, one component of the aviation industry and the hardest hitthe commuter industry and the rural airports it served is still struggling to regain the passengers and service they had years ago. The effects of September 11, 2001, coupled with many major airlines on the verge of bankruptcy, rising fuel cost, and the increasing influence of low-cost carriers (LCCs) such as Southwest and Air Tran, had a devastating impact on the commuter airlines. The number of commuter airlines filing notice of their intent to terminate service to rural communities had a domino effect. Communities where air service had been profitable for years were now faced with the need for EAS subsidy. In recent years the number of communities receiving EAS expanded from 95 communities in 1997 to 152 communities in 2006. Similarly, funding for EAS has risen more than four-fold over this ten year period, from $25.9 million in 1997 to $109.4 million in 2006. (3) Annual passenger enplanements are now reversed with only 14% of EAS airports exceeding 10,000 enplanements and 28% averaging less than 2,500 compared to 4% averaging less than 2,500 enplanements in the year 2000. FUNDING Funding for EAS program comes from a combination of permanent and annual appropriations. The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 permanently appropriated the first $50 million of funding for EAS at rural airports from the collection of over flight fees. Congress then appropriates additional funding from the general fund annually. (4) Without providing rural communities with the tools and opportunity for growth in passenger traffic, the program in its current state is essentially a welfare system for rural communities. The funding

52

levels for the program continue to increase, and passenger traffic and service at rural airports continue to decrease. The original purpose of this program was to ensure that small communities receiving air service before the Airline Deregulation Act would continue to receive air service once the airlines were de-regulated and open competition began. However, the necessary tools have not been put in place. Following 9/11 as more rural airports required EAS subsidies to continue air service, the EAS program has been intensely debated and come under increased scrutiny. Without the assistance of the EAS program many rural communities would lose air service. However, with reforms to the program addressing the air service needs of the community, passenger traffic will increase and EAS subsidies could be decreased.

POLITICAL, COMMUNITY, AND AIRLINE PERSPECTIVE OF EAS Most Congressional supporters generally represent rural areas and have one or more airports in their regions that benefit from the program. These proponents see it as a vital link for small communities to the national air transportation system. The availability of commercial air service, they believe, is critical to the economic success of the region. It contributes to the retention and expansion of existing businesses while supporting the attraction of new businesses. A key indicator of the viability of an airport and its contribution to the economy is the number of enplanements that are generated by the carrier and its hub connection. Without the subsidy and the EAS program, many fear that these communities will be at an economic disadvantage.

53

Because the availability of airline transportation is an important ingredient in the economic development of small communities, without it some towns might lose a sizable portion of their economic base. Congressional opponents of the EAS program generally represent urban areas. They argue that the market, rather than governmental subsidies, should determine air service to rural communities. These opponents are skeptical of the program and view it as a pork-barrel program that has out- lived its time and is a misuse of taxpayers dollars. They contend that the EAS subsidies are excessive and provide air transportation at a higher cost per passenger. They also maintain that the program was intended to be transitional and that the time has come to phase it out. If states or communities derive benefits from service to small communities, the states or communities could provide the subsidies themselves. Commuter airlines that serve the rural communities tend to provide minimal service. They have not been proactive in enhancing air service or taking other steps to increase passenger enplanements. Advocates for small community air serviceairports, carriers, businesses, and passengers need to be proactive in reforming and stabilizing the EAS program. On the basis of the surveys from 48 EAS airports, the following are cited as essential to improve the EAS program and increasing passenger traffic: 66 % rated airline reliability as most important 64 % rated competitive fares as most important 32 % rated number of flights per day and frequency as most important 56% rated hub destinations and connections as very important

54

45% rated airline marketing as very important 44% rated aircraft size and capacity as somewhat important 33% rated direct service to the hub airport with no shared flights as somewhat important.

PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO THE EAS PROGRAM FAA Reauthorization Act One of first priorities for the new administration needs to be the stabilization of the nations aviation network and funding of the program at a level that ensures that communities continue to receive air service. By passing the FAA Reauthorization Act, which failed to pass during the 110th Session of Congress, and recently passed on May 21, 2009, Congress can immediately address the issue of stabilization of the EAS program. The Bill includes language to assist in strengthening the program through the following reforms: Repeals the Essential Air Service Local Participation program; Increases Airport and Airway Trust Fund appropriations to $150 million for EAS; Adjust the $200 per passenger subsidy cap. The cap will be increased if there was an increase in the cost of jet fuel in the previous 24 months before the date of enactment; Communities previously ineligible for subsidy as a result of exceeding the subsidy cap before the enactment of H.R. 915 will be eligible for the increased subsidy cap; Allows the Secretary to increase rates of compensation to compensate carriers for increased aviation fuel costs; Allows the Secretary to execute long-term EAS contracts;

55

Allows the Secretary to encourage an air carrier to improve service by incorporating financial incentives in the EAS contract on the basis of performance goals, which include improving on time performance, reducing flight cancellations, establishing reasonable fares (also joint fares beyond hub), establishing convenient connections at hubs and increasing marketing efforts;

Restores EAS subsidy eligibility for a community if air service can be provided under the passenger subsidy cap;

Avoids termination of subsidy eligibility for a community exceeding subsidy cap if air carrier can provide service under the per passenger subsidy cap;

Establishes the Office of Rural Aviation, which will monitor status of air service to small communities; develop proposals to improve air service to small communities; and carry out any other functions determined by the Secretary;

Extends the Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) through FY 2012. (7)

Although passing the FAA Reauthorization Bill is a tremendous start and lays a foundation for change and enhancement of the EAS Program, it does not do enough to provide a level of service that the local community requires nor does it provide rural airports with the tools to reduce subsidies. The recommendations of all small communities and EAS air carriers found throughout this paper must be taken into account to further enhance the EAS program.

REFORMS TO THE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM In additions to the passing the FAA Reauthorization Bill, the following are recommendations for reforming the EAS program.

56

The Four Critical Air Service Issues As with the legs of a chair, if three legs are fixed and one leg is not, the chair will collapse and fail. The same holds true with providing air service that a community needs. The four most critical air service issues that need to be addressed and resolved at rural airport are as follows: Uncompetitive fares Unreliable air service Limited connectivity of planes flying into airports classified as hub airports Unreliable air service Inadequate frequency

1. Uncompetitive Fares Air fares at rural airports are typically not competitive with fares at larger airports, which have several different carriers providing air service. A study completed by the Secretary of Transportation on rural air fares in April of 1998 shows the following on Small Community Fares vs. Large Hub Fares: Travelers to and from small communities, as a group, pay higher fares than travelers between large hubs do when compared with all hub-to-hub fares. When fares in city-pair markets involving small communities are compared with fares in large- hub markets that do not have low-fare service, they are comparable.

When fares in city-pair markets involving small communities are compared with fares in large- hub markets that have low-fare service, the small communities average fares are substantially higher. City-pair markets involving small communities do not receive any significant amount of low-fare competition. (8)

57

Typically, in an EAS bid / contract, an air carrier will impose add on fare, which is paired to a nearby medium- or large-hub airport. The add on fare is typically $70--$150 one way. Further, the add on fare is matched only to the legacy carrier with which the EASsubsidized air carrier is in a code-share partnership. For example, if the air fare from a nearby medium- or large-hub airport to a certain destination is $300 round trip, the add on fare round trip could be as much as $300, doubling the total price of the air fare to $600 to fly out of the rural EAS- subsidized airport. This example is comparable only to code-share partnership carriers, such as US Airways and US Airways Express. In a medium- or large-hub airport with service provided by a low-cost carrier (LCC), the LCC may offer a lower fare and direct service to the final destination, thus making the rural airport and air fare even more uncompetitive. Given these considerations, leveling the playing field among all airports in the National Air Transportation System must be investigated. Uncompetitive air fares were cited as one of the most critical issues all small community airports face. Fares need to be competitive with those at airports within a 150-mile radius. If not, potential passengers in the EAS community will simply drive to another airport, thus making the local EAS airport non-competitive for most passengers. To ensure that air fares to rural communities are competitive, the following are recommended: The DOT - Office of Aviation Analysis partnering with EAS airports periodically review air fares. If air fares are found to be extremely uncompetitive in certain markets, the Office of Aviation Analysis and the airport will work with the air carrier to address the discrepancy.

58

DOT - Office of Aviation Analysis must hold airlines accountable for inadequacies in air fares.

2. Unreliable Air Service Overwhelmingly, 77% of EAS airport respondents believed the airlines should be held to a certain reliability / completion standard if receiving EAS subsidies. Because EAS communities are totally dependent on the carrier selected to provide all of their commercial service, it is particularly important that the carrier and service be reliable. In many cases, start-up air carriers and established air carriers have failed to start EAS service in a timely manner, further deteriorating the air service and publics perception of the local airport and its service. If the air service is unreliable, potential passengers will not fly out of their regional airport. In the EAS markets, completion factors are typically in the 80% range. Currently there are no requirements in the EAS program that address completion factor. To ensure rural airports are provided reliable air service, the following are recommended: The Office of Aviation Analysis partnering with the EAS airport will continually monitor completion factors. Air carriers must strive for completion factors above 90% and, if they fall below this threshold, they must be held accountable and their service contract investigated. 3. Limited Connectivity Flying Into Airports Classified As Hub Airports A widespread concern among EAS communities is that the service that is provided to many hub airports offers limited connecting service to a number of destinations. Rural communities do not generate enough passengers to support the operation of point-to-point air service. These

59

communities, therefore, must rely on the large hubs to offer numerous and frequent connection opportunities to both international and domestic destinations. DOT requires Essential Air Service air carriers to provide service to an airport classified by the FAA as a medium or large hub. The designation of what constitutes a large-hub airport must be defined. Additionally, many airports that qualify as medium hubs under the FAA definition offer relatively little connecting service and should be eliminated as connecting hubs for EAS airports. Hub airports that have limited domestic and international connections are not a viable destination for travelers who must travel from smaller airports. It is essential that gate space and entry to large hub airports be provided for EAS carriers. Service to hub airports that offer a limited number of international and domestic connections will make it difficult for the air carrier to be economically viable and will result in service with little practical value to the community. Additionally, a communitys request for a certain hub must be taken into consideration. For example, if a community has a significant international traffic, a hub with international destinations is required. A hub that could possibly serve a destination for a small community airport must also be considered. For example, if a communitys industry is based in the automotive industry, Detroit may serve as a destination hub. If a communitys industry is based in defense contracts, Washington may serve as a destination hub. Only when a communitys needs are considered will passenger traffic increase and subsidies be reduced. EAS will be successful only when the airline provides connecting service to a wide range of destinations.

60

To ensure that rural airports have access to specified hub airports, the following are recommended: DOT must ensure that connecting hubs allow for numerous connections and frequency to both international and domestic destinations. A hub that may also service as a destination for a community must be given additional merit in the selection process. A communitys request for a certain hub must be taken into consideration. Gate space and entrance to large-hub airports for EAS carriers must be provided.

4. Inadequate Frequency Since 2000, flight frequencies have decreased significantly at rural airports. This lack of capacity and frequency has dampened demand of potential traffic. EAS Airlines often schedule flights that do not permit a business traveler to depart in the morning and return in the evening. Flights are also routinely scheduled so the passengers miss a majority of connecting fights at the hub. Such practices are not unusual because the structure of EAS does not provide the financial incentives that guide most airline commercial decisions. EAS schedule planning appears to rely much more heavily on maximizing the number of flight block-hours for each aircraft rather than on coordinating the schedule of EAS flights with that of hub flights. Federal regulations require that EAS flight times meet certain criteria. For example, to qualify for EAS subsidies, flights must depart at reasonable times, considering the needs of passengers with connecting flights at hubs. If travel is primarily to connect to other flights at the hub, local flight times should be designed to link with those flights. However, DOT appears to give relatively little weight to these criteria in making EAS awards.

61

Before September 11, 2001, rural airports that did not require EAS subsidy typically had 5 or more direct round-trip flights a day to a hub airport. Under the EAS program flights are reduced to an average of 3 round-trip flights (some shared flights with another EAS community) a day to a hub airport. In some cases a community may have only two round-trip flights (some shared flights with another EAS community) a day to a hub airport. This lack of frequency and shared flights will not allow for passenger growth and reduction of EAS subsidies in the future. To guarantee that rural airports receive adequate frequency, the following is recommended: Minimally 4-5 direct round trip flights a day is required to develop passenger growth. Other Critical Issues Although not as critical as the first four critical items, the following issues must also be addressed to enhance the EAS program: EAS contracts re-bid every two years Fluctuating fuel cost Aircraft size / limited capacity Shared flights with other EAS communities

1. EAS Contracts Re-bid Every Two Years The practice of bidding the service every two years, with no apples to apples comparisons, awarding the bids to the lowest bidders and airlines with no proven track records, makes it difficult for rural airports receiving the service to market, develop, and grow.

62

With increases in fuel cost, an airline currently serving a market on the basis of an original bid to service at a lower fuel cost must terminate service and re-bid the service to be subsidized at a higher fuel cost. Every time an airline terminates and re-bids the service, the airport faces a public relations nightmare. The flying public questions whether or not the service will remain and looks at other airports for their flying needs. Each time there is a change in service or an EAS contract is re-bid, the publics perception of and confidence in the airport are questioned. To ensure continuity in air service to rural airports, the following are recommended: Preference shall be given to the incumbent air carrier, and the contract automatically extended for an additional two years if (1) at the end of the contract the community is satisfied with the current level of service, (2) an air carrier is increasing passenger traffic, and (3) subsidy rate remains the same or has an acceptable increase. 2. Fluctuating Fuel Cost With increases in fuel cost, an airline currently serving a market on the basis of an original bid to service at a lower fuel cost must terminate service and re-bid the service to be subsidized at a higher fuel cost. Although there is language built in to the AIR-21 authorization for airlines to be subsidized at a higher rate on the basis of fuel cost, there is no funding available. The EAS program needs to have a mechanism in place whereby, if fuel costs are increased by a certain percentage than originally bid, airlines will be provided additional funds. At present, there is language built into Vision 100 for cost adjustment according to fuel increases, although it has yet to be funded. Additionally, the FAA Reauthorization Act has language for fuel increases.

63

To make certain continuity in air service to rural airports during fluctuation / increase in fuel price and that air carriers do not have to terminate service in order to receive a higher subsidy rate, the following is recommended: Funding for fluctuating fuel cost need to be addressed and made available immediately, so that an EAS carrier does not have to terminate service in order to receive a higher subsidy rate for increase in fuel cost. 3. Aircraft Size / Limited Capacity The typical aircraft in the EAS markets is the 19-passenger aircraft; this aircraft, if coupled with limited frequency, creates limited capacity, thus causing an ill effect of and loss of passengers. Frequency needs to be increased and shared flights eliminated. One of the primary objectives of every rural airport is to reach the 10,000 passenger enplanement mark so that they may receive $1 million in Airport Improvement Program (AIP) entitlement funds for capital improvement projects. If the frequency is reduced to 2-3 round trip flights per day and flights are shared with another EAS community, it is mathematically impossible to achieve the 10,000 mark. Without obtainable goals and objectives, air service remains stagnant. 4. Shared Flights with Other EAS communities It is difficult to market air service when two EAS communities share service and offer onestop service on flights to the hub airport. The added time and inconvenience to passengers dampens demand in both communities. Additionally, one-stop service has a more unreliable completion rate, further dampening demand.

64

To ensure adequate capacity and improve air service, eliminating shared flights with other EAS communities is highly recommended.

ANALYSIS OF THE ADMINSTRATION OF THE EAS PROGRAM In recent years, the number of communities relying on EAS and critical funding has

drastically increased. Legislative mechanisms and adjustments have been introduced and are currently in place; however, for many reasons they have not been implemented. The Essential Air Service program, although a necessity for connecting small

communities to the air-service network, has changed little since its inception in 1978 and has become increasingly ineffective. The EAS program should be designed to encourage marketorientated airline operations and increase enplanements thereby reducing the level of subsidies. Under the EAS program, Public Law 100-223 requires the following elements of basic essential air service: (a) Service to a hub airport, defined as an FAA-designated medium- or large-hub airport, (b) Service with no more than one intermediate stop to the hub, (c) Service with aircraft having at least 15 passenger seats at communities that averaged more than 11 passenger enplanements a day in any calendar year from 1976-1986, (d) Under certain circumstances, service with pressurized aircraft, and (e) "Flights at reasonable times taking into account the needs of passengers with connecting flights." (6) Under the current system, it almost becomes a self fulfilling prophecy for continued reliance on the program. The difficulty in designing a program to provide a basic essential air service is that frequency is reduced, that shared flights between two EAS communities are sometimes

65

instituted, and that hub destinations are changed. When service is reduced, the communitys perception of their local airport changes and travelers begin to look for other alternative options: driving longer distances to other airports or driving, instead of flying, to their destinations. The first item that requires immediate change is the philosophy and purpose of the EAS program. The purpose of EAS should not be to provide a minimum level of service to a community, but to ensure that communities receive commercially useful air service in terms of flight times, reliability, appropriate hub connections, etc. Recommendation: The mission statement of the Essential Air Service Program needs to be changed from providing a minimum level of service to a community to providing a level of service that a community requires and that allows for future growth. Office of Aviation Analysis The Office of Aviation Analysis, which administers the EAS program under the Department of Transportation, handles over a hundred airports including those in Alaska, with a very limited staff. Significant increases in operating costs, inflation, and other financial concerns faced by rural air service providers have had an adverse effect. During the fuel crisis of 2008, a lack of direction re-bids the service; the airport faces a public relations nightmare. The flying public questions if the service will remain and looks at other airports for their flying needs. Recommendations: Allow more flexibility with the EAS program Provide additional EAS staff to monitor the status of what is working and not working with the program.

66

Establish Regional EAS District Offices similar to the Airports District Offices (ADOs) to monitor and assist EAS airports in a particular region.

The Regional EAS Regional Districts Office would be tasked with: Monitoring and communicating with EAS airports and air carriers Monitoring what is working with the program Developing initiatives to reduce EAS subsidies Promoting development of commuter airlines / aircraft Overseeing the Small Community Air Service Development Program

Bidding Process The practice of bidding the service every two years and awarding the bids on the basis of the lowest costs and to airlines with no proven track records makes promoting the service difficult for rural airport and subsequently limits growth. In evaluation proposal the DOTs Office of Aviation Analysis must ensure: Standardized cost categories and units of activity to make allocations (per block hour, per departure, etc.) Require uniform and credible cost information for submitting proposals to serve EAS communities Use uniform standards in evaluating air carrier EAS cost and revenue projections Solicit airport / community involvement in the air carrier selection and negotiations Favor bids the community supports and desires Favor bids with the incumbent air carrier

EAS Awards Code-Sharing Agreements In some cases air carriers have indicated that a code-share agreement is in place with the hubs mainline carrier, but they have not entered a formal written agreement. 67

Mainline carriers are not always willing to enter into new code-share agreements, and, as part of every carriers EAS application the carrier should include an executed code-share agreement that is in place at the time of proposed service initiation. Ability to provide service Air carriers selected and awarded an EAS contract must be reliable and ready to operate on the scheduled date. DOTs direction of selecting the lowest bidder often involves the risk that the carrier selected may not provide the most effective or reliable service. In the past, air carriers selected either delayed starting service for several months or were never able to begin the service as promised. Subsidies paid only for flights completed Air carriers are paid a fixed amount of subsidy for each flight they operate. However, under the current EAS program, air carriers are paid for flights that they over fly the airport and never land to board the passenger. Additionally, air carriers are fully compensated for flights that have significant delays. Recommendations: Air carriers selected must have executed a code-share agreement in place before being awarded EAS contract. Air carriers awarded an EAS contract must be ready to operate on the scheduled date, if they are not, the contract should be terminated and the incumbent air carrier awarded the contract Air carriers should be paid subsidies only for flights completed, and flights that are over flown should not receive compensation

68

Current EAS Program Issues Owing to the lack of funding, DOT has not fully implemented existing legislation which includes provisions of the Vision 100 legislation enacted in December 2003 to enhance and address problems with the EAS program. A common theme echoed by many communities is that DOT has authority to address problems with the EAS program but is not using that authority. Vision 100 amendments made specific provisions to compensate air carriers that incurred unanticipated increases in fuel costs. Since DOT has not implemented these provisions, numerous EAS air carriers were forced to provide notice that their service had become uneconomical and had no other choice than to terminate the service before their originallyscheduled contract termination date and then re-bid the service with consideration of increased fuel cost. Rural airports suffer not only as a result of the early termination of service that the airport was helping to build, but also from the subsequent DOT decision to award the EAS contract to the carriers submitting the lowest bid, which many times offer fewer connecting opportunities and at times are unable to start service as promised. These issues would not have arisen if DOT had applied the legislative tools that it already has. Another example of an existing legislative tool that DOT is not using is the market incentive program provided under Vision 100. The program provides up to $50,000 in grant funding for EAS communities to use to develop and implement marketing plans to increase passenger boarding. With the fuel cost increase provisions, communities report that DOT has not implemented the marketing incentive program because of concerns about funding.

69

Recommendations: Fund the EAS Program to a level of $200 million Implement provisions of Vision 100 for unanticipated increases in fuel costs Provide $50,000 annually in grant funding for EAS communities to develop and implement marketing plans to increase passenger traffic ENHANCMENT OF THE EAS PROGRAM The EAS system includes the Department of Transportation; Office of Aviation Analysis which directs the program; airlines which provide the air service; airports; the communities that rely on commercial air service to support its regional economy and the businesses and personal travelers who use the service. By establishing partnerships and working with the Office of Aviation Analysis, we can discuss innovative ideas and find solutions. If a community is proactive in its air-service issue, its recommendations warrant merit. This new philosophy is consistent with the legislative intent of the EAS program. 1. Establish Community / Airline Partnerships with the Office of Aviation Analysis The purpose of reforming the EAS program is that it should put communities in charge of their air service. It is crucial to establish an Airline, Business, and Community (ABC) partnership with the following goals and objectives: Business and the local community will take an active role in their air service issues ABC partnerships will develop long-term business plans to address the local businesses travel needs Business and community leaders will serve on the ABC boards

70

Periodically conduct business surveys to determine travel patterns and air service needs

Define community / airline goals and objectives that, when reached, can lead to additional service, larger aircraft, other destinations, etc.

Regional EAS District Offices will monitor the progress and success of the ABC partnership through periodic visits, conference calls and meetings with airline personnel

Regional EAS District Offices and the ABC partnership will monitor and address flight cancellations, delays, winter operations, and passenger traffic

If the ABC partnership is successful, in the future a community may investigate a communityadministered EAS pilot program that: Re-structures EAS / airline payments Directs funding sources to airports Negotiates and establishes community/airport air service contracts Establishes travel banks with local businesses for a percentage of travel through local airport to show their support for the air service 2. Providing Air Charter Service If it were possible for EAS air carriers to provide air charter service as an option for a community, providing this option may be an innovative way to increase passenger traffic and revenue for the air carrier. An example of how this may work would be if an EAS contract is to provide four flights a day, a community may elect to have a particular segment of schedule temporarily rescheduled as an air charter to provide a local business a direct connection to a particular destination.

71

This idea may be possible through the EAS air carrier and the ability to provide air charter service through its operating certificate. Benefits to the air carrier and the community that has significant passenger traffic to certain destinations that cannot be served through the connecting hub airport would include: Additional revenue for EAS air carrier Community-based service providing additional air service options

3. Offering Incentives In order to entice airline performance measures (reliability, passenger growth, etc.) and more airlines to bid on EAS contracts, the Department of Transportation should consider offering some type of an incentive package. The incentive could be financial incentives in the way of a bonus or an incentive of an increase in subsidy to add flights or destinations, which would then benefit both the airline and airport. CONCLUSION At one time airline service was a profitable venture in most rural communities. Instead of subsidizing air service to these communities, the federal government through the EAS Program needs to assist these airports in building back the passenger traffic. After September 11, 2001, as more rural airports required EAS subsidies to continue air service, the EAS program became intensely debated and has come under increased scrutiny on its performance and continuation. Without providing rural communities the tools and opportunity for growth in passenger traffic, the program in its current state is a welfare system for rural communities. The original purpose of this program was to ensure that small communities receiving air service before the

72

Airline Deregulation Act would continue to receive air service once the airlines were deregulated and open competition began. In todays global economy, a rural communitys economic viability depends on transportation. The Obama Administration must recognize transportation as an important infrastructure to be preserved. Without the assistance of the Essential Air Service program, air service would cease to serve these rural communities. With reforms and enhancements to the Essential Air Service Program rural air service can once again become an asset to the local communitys growth and economic vitality, providing service that meets a communitys needs. As a result, dependence on the EAS subsidy can and will decrease.

73

NOTES (1) Eclat Consultants. Strengthening the Essential Air Service Program A Pennsylvania Perspective. Prepared for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (February 2007): 2 (2) Gerald L. Dillingham, Director Physical Infrastructure Issues. COMMERCIAL AVIATION Programs and Options for the Federal Approach to providing and Improving Air Service to Small Communities. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate. United States Government Accountability Office (September 14, 2006): 3 (3) Gerald L. Dillingham, Director Physical Infrastructure Issues. COMMERCIAL AVIATION Programs and Options for the Federal Approach to providing and Improving Air Service to Small Communities. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate. United States Government Accountability Office (September 14, 2006): 5 (4) Gerald L. Dillingham, Director Physical Infrastructure Issues. COMMERCIAL AVIATION Programs and Options for the Providing and Air Service to Small Communities. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate. United States Government Accountability Office (April 25, 2007): 5 (5) Office of Aviation Analysis, U.S. DOT . WHAT IS ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE? (Revised April 1, 2009). (6) Roger Mola Economic Regulation of Airlines. U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission Centennialofflight.gov http://www.centinnialofflight.gov/essay/Government_Role /Econ_Reg/POL16.htm (accessed May 29, 2009). (7) REGIONAL AVIATION PARTNERS. House Passes H.R. 915 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009. Legislative Update (May 22, 2009). (8) Report of the Secretary of Transportation. Rural Air Fare Study. To The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives (April 1998).

74

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dillingham, Gerald L., Director Physical Infrastructure Issues. COMMERCIAL AVIATION Programs and Options for the Federal Approach to providing and Improving Air Service to Small Communities. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate. United States Government Accountability Office, (September 14, 2006): 3-5. Dillingham, Gerald L., Director Physical Infrastructure Issues. COMMERCIAL AVIATION Programs and Options for the Providing and Air Service to Small Communities. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate. United States Government Accountability Office, (April 25, 2007): 5. Eclat Consultants. Strengthening the Essential Air Service Program A Pennsylvania Perspective. Prepared for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (February 2007): 2 Mola, Roger Economic Regulation of Airlines. U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission Centennialofflight.gov http://www.centinnialofflight.gov/essay/Government_Role /Econ_Reg/POL16.htm (accessed May 29, 2009). Office of Aviation Analysis, U.S. DOT. WHAT IS ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE? (Revised April 1, 2009). REGIONAL AVIATION PARTNERS. House Passes H.R. 915 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009. Legislative Update, (May 22, 2009). Report of the Secretary of Transportation. Rural Air Fare Study. To The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, (April 1998).

75

APPENDIX E
SAMPLE CASE STUDY

TITLE OF CASE STUDY CENTERED IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

By: (Authors Member Number) Executive Candidate

(20 returns, single space)

PRESENTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE WRITING REQUIREMENT of the AMERCIAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES Date MM/YY

76

DEVELOPING A HISTORIC PRESERVATION AGREEMENT FOR SAN DIEGO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORTS RESIDENTIAL SOUND INSULATION PROGRAM: A CASE STUDY

Executive Candidate

PRESENTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE WRITING REQUIRMENT OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES JULY 2009

77

CONTENTS

Introduction Background Overview Historical Preservation Challenge Development of the Historic Preservation Agreement Step 1 - Identify All Agencies Affected Step 2 Identify Eligibility Boundaries and Historic Eligibility Step 3 Develop Historic Treatment Guidelines Step 4 Establish Dispute Resolution Processes Step 5 Establish Staff Contacts and Execute Agreement Lessons Learned Due Diligence Realistic Deadlines Historical Treatment Costs Affecting Pace of Program Homes with local Historic Significance Conclusion Notes Bibliography

1 1 2 5 5 6 7 10 17 18 18 18 19 19 20 20 22 24

78

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND Over the years, passenger travel and air cargo shipments have grown dramatically, increasing demand on airports and the nearby communities. Homes that surround airport property are subject to high levels of aircraft noise, often disrupting everyday activities for the families who live there. Studies show that excessive noise can cause health problems in both children and adults. However, the most common complaint about aircraft noise is its negative effect on quality of life.

A residential sound insulation program is one of the most effective ways to mitigate the harmful effects of excess noise and to foster a positive relationship between the community and the owners/operators of the airport. Sound insulation programs enhance peoples living environments and improve economic vitality by increasing property values and real estate desirability.

The homes located in the communities affected by noise from San Diego International Airport (SDIA) are examples of some of the most elegant architectural achievement located near a major international airport in the country. Furthermore, many of the residents of the homes surrounding SDIA over the last several decades have had a historically significant role in the development of the United States military industrial complex or contributed to the World War II effort with their involvement in the war or development of the former Naval Training Center, which is located adjacent to SDIA.

79

The purpose of this study is to detail the process in which SDIA, operated by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (Airport Authority) developed a historic preservation agreement to protect the architectural integrity of homes eligible for sound insulation while providing the necessary sound insulation treatment to improve the quality of life for homeowners. At present, there are thousands of eligible homes surrounding airports across the country still waiting to be treated with sound attenuation materials. The Federal Aviation Administrations (FAA) Airport Improvement Program, which offers grant funding for these programs, is federally funded. Therefore, if a national historic district is discovered among these homes or if a stand-alone national register site is located among them, federal law calls for a Historic Preservation Agreement (HPA) among local, state, and federal agencies that will need to be developed for other airports throughout the country to protect these potential historic homes.

OVERVIEW The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) was signed into a law by President Lyndon Johnson on October 15, 1966.1 This act established several institutions: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), National Register of Historic Places (National Register), and the Section 106 review process. The Councils role is to advise the President and Congress on historic preservation issues, to develop policies and guidelines handling any conflicts of federal agencies, and to participate in the Section 106 review process. The National Register, overseen by the National Park Service, is the nations official list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects worthy of preservation.2 To be eligible for listing, a property must meet one of four criteria and have sufficient integrity.

80

The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and its officer coordinates statewide inventory of historic properties, nominates properties to the National Register, maintains a statewide preservation plan, assists others, and advises and educates locals.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) mandates a review process for all federally funded and permitted projects that will affect sites listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic Places. It provides interested parties an opportunity to comment on projects. The main purpose for the establishment of the Section 106 review process is to minimize potential harm and damage to historic properties. Enforced by the NHPA, any federal agency that may damage historic property, especially those listed on the National Register, must consider alternative plans for its project. If the project is believed to have no adverse effect on eligible historic resources, the applicable agency is required to document this claim. Alternatively, if an adverse effect is expected, the agency is required to work with the SHPO to ensure that all interested parties are given an opportunity to review the proposed work and provide comments. Ideally, some form of a Memorandum of Agreement is reached between all consulting parties. Without this process historical properties would lose a significant protection. This process helps decide different approaches and solutions to the project, but does not prevent any site from alteration.

SDIA is one of the busiest single-runway airports in North America, accommodating approximately 8.0 million passenger enplanements and approximately 220,000 aircraft operations in 2008.3 The 661-acre airport is located conveniently within minutes of downtown San Diego. This convenient location to the nearby communities also means that there are thousands of residential areas subjected to incompatible aircraft noise levels. According to

81

state and federal aircraft exposure standards, the 65 decibel Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contour defines the level of incompatible noise exposure to aircraft noise. Incompatible land uses within this contour include single family and multi-family dwellings, as well as schools and churches. The calendar year 2008 65 decibel CNEL encompasses approximately eleven-thousand (11,000) dwellings with approximately twenty-four thousand people living within this contour, making the communities around SDIA one of the highest noise-affected communities in the nation.4 The SDIA Quieter Home Program (QHP), sponsored by the Airport Authority, is designed to reduce noise from aircraft operations at SDIA. Began in 1999, the program has been designed from the ground up to be consistent with FAA goals for sound insulation, to be responsive to the needs of the community, and to protect the architectural integrity of the unique housing stock in the communities surrounding SDIA. In the advent of the program, a number of challenges were successfully met as the Authority facilitated the development of a HPA, which defined the approach for sound attenuation treatments of homes in a potential National Register Historic District in the Loma Portal and Plumosa Park communities just west of SDIA. Approved by the San Diego Unified Port Districts Board of Commissioners, which up until 2003 was the operator of SDIA, and the City of San Diego City Council in 1999, the HPA has also been accepted by the SHPO, the FAA and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The Airport Authority and the City of San Diego Historic Resources Board (HRB), an advisory board to the mayor and city council of San Diego, invested significant effort in the creation of the HPA to develop a set of treatments for homes in Loma Portal and Plumosa Park to simultaneously reduce the interior noise levels of aircraft-generated noise and maintain the

82

historical fabric of the structures. The treatments typically included the replacement of existing windows and doors with new acoustically rated products, placing insulation in attic spaces and installing a new heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system. In 1998, the Authority completed an update to the airports Federal Aviation Regulation Part 150 Noise Compatibility Study (Part 150 Study) that recommended the sound insulation of residential structures located within the 65 decibel CNEL noise contour. The FAAs approval of the Part 150 Study established the eligibility of the program for FAA Airport Improvement Program grant funding. HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHALLENGE Acoustic reduction in most residential sound attenuation programs is achieved by replacing existing windows with vinyl or aluminum windows (which in some cases include a storm window) and replacing exterior doors with new solid core doors and storm doors. As the Loma Portal and Plumosa Park neighborhoods were closely examined for the project, it became apparent that the typical sound attenuation treatments would not be applicable. Early in the development of the pilot phase of the QHP, the HRB mandated that the airport consider the potential effects of the program on the unique architecture of homes in Loma Portal and Plumosa Park. Most of the homes eligible for the program in this potential National Register Historic District were constructed between 1900 and 1940. It was agreed by the Authority, the FAA, and the HRB that it would be appropriate for a HPA to be prepared to clearly communicate the permissible treatments for these unique architectural resources.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION AGREEMENT According to 36 CFR 800 Federal Agency Program Alternatives, the ACHP and FAA may negotiate a programmatic agreement to govern the implementation of a particular 83

program or the resolution of adverse effects from certain complex situations or multiple undertakings similar to the impact of the QHP.5 Once the potential National Register Historic District was identified, the HPA was formulated by the airport, the FAA, the HRB, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and SHPO with specific stipulations for the treatment of QHP-eligible homes in the Loma Portal and Plumosa Park neighborhoods and to define the terms, conditions, and procedures under which the signatory parties will implement the QHP consistent with the FAAs Section 106 responsibilities. Of particular concern were irreversible treatments, such as exterior storm windows. The following are the five steps that the airport established to develop the HPA:

STEP 1- IDENTIFY ALL AGENCIES AFFECTED The first task the Airport Authority embarked upon in developing the HPA for the QHP was identifying all affected federal, state and local agencies. Subsequent research found that projects like the QHP, which receive federal grant funds from the FAA through the Airport Improvement Program, must comply with Section 106. This review process is administered by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation under the Code of Federal Regulations Part 800 and requires agencies to take into account the effects of their project on historic properties. According to the regulations, an undertaking has an effect on a historic property when the undertaking can potentially alter characteristics of the property that may qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register. When airport operators like the Airport Authority accept grant funds from FAAadministered programs, they must agree to certain obligations. The first grant obligation listed

84

under the FAAs Airport Sponsor Assurances states that airport sponsors will comply with all applicable [f]ederal laws as they relate to the application, acceptance, and use of [f]ederal funds.6 The National Historic Preservation Act is listed as one of the federal laws included in this provision. In identifying local agency and state partners, the Airport Authority first reached out to the HRB. The HRB has been awarded the status of a Certified Local Government by the State of California, which enables city staff and the HRB through the building permit process to evaluate the historical value of resources and the potential impact of development on those resources.7 The SHPO, an individual appointed by the governor of California, was also contacted. This individual is responsible for the operation of the Office of Historic Preservation, administering a program of public information, education, training, and technical assistance on historic preservation throughout the state. The Airport Authority also reached out to local planning boards and non-profit historical preservation organizations for the historical preservation of eligible homes in the QHP. Garnering support of local community groups like the Peninsula Planning Board and Save Our Heritage Organization was a powerful catalyst for raising awareness and appreciation for the Airport Authoritys efforts to make the QHP part of the community fabric.

STEP 2 IDENTIFY ELIGIBILITY BOUNDARIES AND HISTORIC ELIGIBILITY As stated earlier, the QHP eligibility area is defined as the area within the 65-decibel CNEL contour. Through negotiations with the HRB, this area became the Area of Potential Effect (APE) as defined in Section 106. The rationale for this requirement was that it not only captured potential historic districts like the Loma Portal and Plumosa Park neighborhoods but

85

would also allow for stand-alone national register homes to be discovered through historical research. In terms of identifying historic resource eligibility, a review of all available information, including the National Register and California Register of Historical Resources listings, locally adopted inventories, surveys, and registers of historic and potentially historic structures in the APE, needs to be performed. The Airport Authority, as the sponsor of the QHP, conducts all historical research and documentation in connection with the QHP, using third-party historic preservation consultants. In California, the SHPO determined that the Airport Authority shall provide California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Form 523 to identify potentially historic properties. Given the immense scope of the APE, inventories are performed as new phases of the QHP are initiated. Section 106 mandates that National Register Bulletin #15 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Bulletin 15) be used so that any QHP-eligible historic properties within the APE may be identified for historic sound insulation treatments in connection with the program. Bulletin 15 establishes the following four criteria for determination of historical significance: Criterion A: Be associated with an event, or series of events, that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of history Criterion B: Criterion C: Have unequivocal association with lives of people significant in the past Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possess high artistic values, or represents a significant, distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction 86

Criterion D:

Have yielded or may be likely to yield information important in local, state, or national prehistory or history8

A potential historical resource must not only meet at least one of the above criteria, but also possess integrity, the various aspects of which include location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Integrity is inherently related to a resources ability to represent its period of significance and is an important qualification for National Register eligibility. Not only must a historical resource resemble its original appearance; the resources physical materials, design features, and construction materials must also remain intact. For purposes of categorization levels of integrity, the QHP-HPA established four types: 1. Unaltered The resource appears to be in its original condition, or minor alterations have occurred so as to be consistent with the resources design intent. 2. Minimally Altered The resource appears to be close to its original configuration or minor reversible alterations have occurred. 3. Heavily Altered The resource no longer appears to be close to its original configuration, or alterations have occurred that are not easily reversible and obscure the resource beyond its original intent. 4. Altered Beyond Recognition The resource appears to no longer be close to its original configuration and the original design is no longer discernable.9 The HPA also established ranges of definitions for the historic fabric of a property. Fabric is defined as the elements and materials of which a building is constructed, such as unreinforced masonry, wood features, windows, doors, and finishes. The HPA established three ranges to categorize the historic fabric of a resource:

87

1. Good Fabric is stable and not immediately threatened by environmental or external elements. 2. Fair The fabric has lost some of its integrity but can be restored with moderate effort. An example would be flaking paint with cracks in the wood, requiring removal of portions of the paint, repair of the wood, and repainting. 3. Poor The fabric may be deteriorated beyond repair and may need to be reconstructed to return the element to its original state. An example would be severe dry rot in a wood window requiring total replacement of original wood with new wood.10

STEP 3 DEVELOP HISTORIC TREATMENT GUIDELINES

When developing historic sound insulation treatment guidelines for QHP-eligible homes, the Airport Authority scheduled a series of workshops with the four historic preservation stakeholders to draft treatment options. The purpose of these workshops was to establish a balance between the needs and requirements of the QHP while maintaining the architectural integrity of historic resources, using Section 106 standards. The objective of these guidelines is to provide sound attenuation and avoid precluding future historic designation of the treated properties by using sensitive design practices and enabling the potential reversibility of construction treatments. The Advisory Council for Historic Preservation has identified seven criteria of adverse effects on proposed projects as it relates to historic properties. Of the seven, the parties decided that only 36 CFR 800.5(a)(2)(ii) applies to the QHP: Alteration of a property, including restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, hazardous material remediation and provision of handicapped access, that is not consistent with the Secretarys Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR part 68) and applicable guidelines.11 As the criteria example states, the effect would not be adverse if it is consistent with the Section 106 standards and applicable guidelines.

88

The National Register is an authoritative guide to be used by federal, state, and local governments, private groups, and citizens to identify the Nations cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment.12 However, the federal regulations explicitly provide that a National Register listing of private property does not prohibit, under federal law or regulation, any actions which may otherwise be taken by the property owner with respect to the property. 13 The National Register is considered to be an advisory document with review by the National Park Service. The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards for all programs under departmental authority and for advising federal agencies on the preservation of historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register. In partial fulfillment of this responsibility, the Section 106 standards have been developed to guide work undertaken on historic buildings. There are separate standards for preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The Section 106 standards, codified in 36 CFR 67, comprise the section of the overall preservation project standards and addresses the most prevalent treatment for the QHPs attenuation treatments. The three levels of treatment for potentially historic homes in Section 106 are outlined below:

Protect and maintain Protection generally involves the least degree of intervention and is preparatory to other work. For example, protection includes the maintenance of historic materials through treatments such as rust removal, caulking, limited paint removal, and reapplication of protective coatings.

Repairing When the physical condition of character-defining materials and features warrant additional work, repairing is recommended. Rehabilitation guidance for the repair of historic materials begins with the least degree of intervention possible such as patching, piecing-in, splicing, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing or upgrading

89

them according to recognized preservation methods. Repairing also includes the limited replacement like-for-like or with compatible substitute material of extensively deteriorated or missing parts of features when there are surviving prototypes Although using the same kind of material is always the preferred option, substitute material is acceptable if the form and design as well as the substitute material itself convey the visual appearance of the remaining parts of the feature and finish.

Replacing Rehabilitation guidance is provided for replacing an entire character-defining feature with new material because the level of deterioration or damage of materials precludes repair. Like the guidance for repair, the preferred option is always replacement of the entire feature like-for-like with the same material. Because this approach may not always be technically or economically feasible, provisions are made to consider the use of a
14

compatible substitute material. Rehabilitation is further defined as the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural values. 15 Rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic homes will be needed in order to provide for an efficient contemporary use. The ten rehabilitation provisions of the Section 106 standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility: 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall be avoided.

90

3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, shall not be permitted. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources
must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.

8. Archaeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must
be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be taken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy the historic
materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a
manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.16

The historic treatment guidelines in the QHP-HPA are categorized by the standard types of replacement treatment options for sound insulation windows, doors, and HVAC systems: 91

Windows In general, the parties agreed that acoustical window replacements shall take a like-forlike approach. For example, a wood window would be replaced with a wood window, and a casement or out-swing window would be replaced with a casement window. The window shape and grid patterns would be replicated to match the original windows as closely as possible. Three priorities, in order of importance, were established when determining window treatments for the program: 1. Maintain and upgrade existing window fabric If the effort does not produce the required noise attenuation, interior storm windows may be considered to provide additional noise reduction and preserve original window fabric, provided the improvement is reversible. 2. Replace Windows to Match Existing Conditions Where windows must be replaced in order to meet acoustical requirements, to the extent feasible, all existing or known original fabric will be replaced with compatible materials, sizes and design. Known original fabric could be established through old photos, remaining physical evidence, or historical architectural style. For example, original wood windows, or historic evidence of wood windows, would be replaced by wood windows. 3. Meet Noise Attenuation and Code Requirements Where aircraft noise conditions require more than can be provided with the above treatments, additional sound insulation measures will be implemented. Exterior or interior storm windows may be considered in cases where existing windows are unique, and if there are no other products available that provide the required attenuation, provided the improvement is reversible. Storm window design and colors need to match existing or original colors.17

92

In addition to meeting the acoustical goals of the program, the HPA had to comply with life-safety code requirements set forth by the State of California. Some existing windows in eligible homes did not meet egress, or emergency exiting, code requirements and the parties had to develop plans for egress modifications to the existing windows openings. In consultation with the HRB, two architectural details were developed to meet code requirements. The first detail modifies the function of the window while maintaining the window opening size. This option may include changing a sliding window to a casement window to allow for the required egress dimensions. Enlarging openings for egress windows would not occur on the front facade, or any facades visible from the public right-of-way, unless an alternative location does not exist. The second detail enlarges the existing window size to meet the egress size or windowsill height required to meet current code. This option may include lowering the windowsill heights but maintaining the existing window style. Occasionally, different types of windows are found in the same home. Some original windows may have been replaced because of damage or improvement of the function or use of the window. In this situation, the guidelines dictate that replacement windows receive the same treatment as determined for the entire home. For example, if there is evidence that two wood windows have been replaced with vinyl windows, but the rest of the wood windows remain, the vinyl windows may be replaced with new wood windows. Doors Generally, the parties determined that existing doors are replaced with an acoustically rated door. When existing doors are of sound construction and provide adequate attenuation, the doors and frames may remain. Three priorities, in order of importance, were considered when determining door treatments for the QHP:

93

1. Maintain and Upgrade Existing or Known Original Doors Original doors on original building facades are retained and weather-stripped whenever possible. Door colors

should reflect the historic period or existing colors. No glass with tinted or reflective qualities shall be used. If there is evidence that the existing door is not the original, a door with a compatible style to the original will be installed. 2. Enlarging door openings for egress code compliance shall not occur on the front facade, or any facades visible from the public right-of-way, unless an alternative location does not exist. 3. Meeting Sound Attenuation Requirements Storm doors (secondary doors) shall be used if no other solution exists, provided they are reversible.18 HVAC The parties determined that exterior HVAC equipment, such as condensing units, should be in the same location as the existing equipment, wherever feasible. New condensing units may be installed on side elevations, if unseen when viewed from the public right-of-way. New interior ductwork is located in unobtrusive spaces, such as closets, or will be enclosed with a soffit or chase. New roof vents may be required for certain HVAC systems. Low profile roof vents are preferred. Ideally, all roof vents will be installed on rear roof slopes that are not visible from the public right-of-way. New roof vents will be painted to match the roof color as closely as possible to reduce visibility from the public right-of-way.

94

STEP 4 ESTABLISH DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESSES In order to maintain program efficiency, the HPA established that if the HRB has not commented within thirty days of receipt of historical research and documentation for each QHP eligible property within the APE, the Airport Authority determination of National Register eligibility shall be deemed acceptable to the HRB. If the Airport Authority, in consultation with the HRB, determines that an eligible property within the APE does not meet the National Register Criteria, the structure shall not be considered a historic property for purposes of the HPA. The parties also decided that, should any signatory to the HPA object at any time to the manner in which the terms of the agreement are implemented and, if such objection has not been resolved pursuant to another stipulation of this agreement, the FAA will immediately notify the other signatories of the objection, request their comments on the objection within fourteen days following receipt of the FAAs notification, and then proceed to consult with the objecting party for no more than thirty days to resolve the objection. The FAA will honor the request of any other signatory to participate in the consultation and will take any comments provided by the other signatories into account. If at the end of the thirty-day consultation period, the FAA determines that the objection cannot be resolved through such consultation, the FAA will forward all documentation relevant to the objection to the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation for a final determination. If any signatory believes that the HPA should be amended, that signatory shall immediately consult with the other signatories for no more than twenty-one days to consider
amendments to the HPA. The signatories may agree to a longer consultation period if there is consensus among all of the signatories. The HPA may be amended only upon the written concurrence of all signatories. Any signatory may terminate the HPA if that signatory believes that

95

the terms of the agreement are not being met. The signatory proposing termination shall notify the other signatories in writing explaining the reasons for proposing termination. Before termination, the signatories shall consult for not more than twenty-one days to consider alternatives that would avoid termination. The signatories may agree to a longer

consultation period if there is consensus among all of the signatories. Should such consultation fail, the signatory proposing termination may terminate the HPA by notifying the other signatories in writing. If the HPA is terminated, and the FAA determines that the program will proceed, the FAA shall comply with 36 CFR 800 Federal Agency Program Alternatives.

STEP 5 ESTABLISH STAFF CONTACTS AND EXECUTE AGREEMENT In order to facilitate their joint and cooperative efforts in implementing this agreement, the parties agreed to designate a single staff contact for each party to route all HPA communications between those persons. This action has assisted in streamlining historic determination processing for QHP-eligible homes. The negotiating parties also determined that signatories of the HPA should be as high up on the organizational structure as possible and that the policy bodies of these organizations should approve the execution of the HPA by resolution to make it a binding document.

LESSONS LEARNED As of this writing, after ten years of use, the QHP HPA is being renegotiated among the five original signatory agencies. Looking back at the effectiveness of the HPA, the following are my observations of the lessons learned through the process of development and implementation:

96

DUE DILLIGENCE Admittedly, when preparing for program implementation, the Airport Authority and consultants did only cursory research on the potential for historic homes in the eligibility mix. The development of the HPA caused program implementation delays but ultimately made for a more successful program. Offering historical sound attenuation treatments has greatly increased program participation as evidenced by current participation rates of approximately 95%.19

REALISTIC DEADLINES According to the HPA, the HRBs initial historic review period is thirty days.20 They are currently averaging approximately sixty days for review owing to a combination of work overload and staff turnover. Homeowners would often complain about delays associated with historic review. The HPA that is currently under negotiation has extended review times to more accurately reflect timelines associated with the review process.21

HISTORICAL TREATMENT COSTS AFFECTING PACE OF PROGRAM At SDIA, providing historical treatment options doubled the unit cost per dwelling for historic homes, which currently averages approximately $70,000 in construction costs per dwelling versus approximately $40,000 for non-historic homes.22 This increase in costs reduced the anticipated construction pace of the program in half. With approximately ten-thousand eligible dwellings remaining to be potentially treated in the QHP even after a decade of construction work and full federal funding, the Airport Authority now speaks of completing the program in decades, not years. Some of the cost reduction measures that are being contemplated include installing historical wood windows only on the front elevation of homes

97

and installing cheaper vinyl or aluminum windows on the sides and back of the homes where the windows are not visible from the street. In addition, because of the temperate San Diego climate, the HPA stakeholders are considering removing HVAC in homes and the associated electrical upgrades both of which are optional mitigation measures per FAA guidelines.

HOMES WITH LOCAL HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE At various times during the first decade of the HPA, City of San Diego staff assigned to the HRB or HRB Board members would try to influence the program to treat homes that have only local historical significance. Examples of local historical significance included homes where former mayors of San Diego grew up or where prominent local architects designed the home. As stated earlier, if sound insulation programs are funded through the FAAs Airport Improvement Program, which offers federal grant funding for these programs, historical sound insulation treatments are allowed only if a potential national historic district is discovered or if a stand-alone national register site exists. The Airport Authority was consistently challenged on this stipulation, and, at one point, a letter from the FAA was needed to set the record straight.

CONCLUSION The cooperative efforts of the five agencies involved in crafting the HPA has enabled the QHP to successfully develop a package of improvements for the architecturally unique homes in Loma Portal and Plumosa Park. As of June 2009, about five-hundred historical homes and eight-hundred non-historic homes have been treated under the guidance of the HPA.23 The Airport Authority, as the sponsor of the QHP, has also received a number of

98

historic preservation awards from the City of San Diego, the State of California, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for being the lead agency in developing the QHP HPA. With two potential national historical districts identified as part of the QHP and an unknown amount of embedded historical homes and historic districts to be discovered, the HPA is well suited to continue to strike a balance between the primary environmental goal of interior aircraft noise reduction and the expectations of the community to preserve the historic fabric of the noise-affected neighborhoods near SDIA.

99

Notes
1.
1

Robert Stipe, A Richer Heritage: Historic Preservation in the 21st Century (Chapel Hill: University of Chapel Hill Press, 2003), 35.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Thomas F. King, Cultural Resource: Law and Practice, 2nd Edition (New York: Almira Press, 2004), 19.
3 4 5 6

San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. www.san.org. Garret Hollarn, e-mail message to author, May 14, 2009. 36 CFR Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties Final Rule, 77727.

Federal Aviation Administration, Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Handbook (June 28, 2005), 201.

City of San Diego Historical Resources Board. www.sandiego.gov/planning/programs/historical

8

U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (2002), 2.

Programmatic Agreement Among the San Diego Unified Port District, Federal Aviation Administration, State Historic Preservation Office, City of San Diego and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation for the Quieter Home Program (1999). 5.

10. 10 Ibid., 20. 11. 11 36 CFR Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties Final Rule, 77730. 12. 12 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (2002), 15. 13. 13 Ibid., 25. 14. 14 Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, Working With section 106 of the NHPA (2005), 16. 15. 15 Ibid., 27. 16. 16 Ibid., 36. 17. 17 Programmatic Agreement Among the San Diego Unified Port District, Federal Aviation Administration, State Historic Preservation Office, City of San Diego and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation for the Quieter Home Program (1999). 7. 18. 18 Ibid., 14. 19. 19 Sjohnna Knack, Interview, May 15, 2009. 100

20. 20 Programmatic Agreement Among the San Diego Unified Port District, Federal Aviation Administration, State Historic Preservation Office, City of San Diego and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation for the Quieter Home Program (1999). 20. 21. 21 Sjohnna Knack, Interview, May 15, 2009. 22. 22 Ibid. 23. 23 Ibid.

101

Bibliography Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, Working With Section 106 of the NHPA (2005). City of San Diego Historical Resources Board. www.sandiego.gov/planning/programs/historical Federal Aviation Administration, Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Handbook (June 28, 2005). Federal Register (36 CFR Part 800), Protection of Historic Properties Final Rule. Hollarn, Garret. E-mail message to author, May 14, 2009. King, Thomas. Cultural Resource: Law and Practice, 2nd Edition (New York: Almira Press, 2004). Knack, Sjohnna. Interview, May 15, 2009. Programmatic Agreement Among the San Diego Unified Port District, Federal Aviation Administration, State Historic Preservation Office, City of San Diego and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation for the Quieter Home Program (1999). San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. www.san.org Stipe, Robert. A Richer Heritage: Historic Preservation in the 21st Century (Chapel Hill: University of Chapel Hill Press, 2003). U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (2002).

102

Board of Examiners Information

103

GeographicRegionsExaminers
Northeast Edwards
Pennsylvania Vermont Canadian provinces of Quebec, Maryland Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, European countries Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Maine New Jersey Massachusetts Rhode Island New Hampshire Massachusetts Maryland

Southeast
Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana

Smighelschi
Puerto Rico Virgin Islands Caribbean South American countries

Tennessee Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Virginia West Virginia

NorthCentral
Ohio Illinois Indiana Iowa

Williams
North Dakota South Dakota Wisconsin Canadian provinces of Ontario & Manitoba

Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska

SouthCentral
Kansas New Mexico Oklahoma

Medici
Texas Countries of Central America

Northwest
Alaska Colorado Idaho Montana

Goetz
Canadian provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Yukon and Northwest Territory; and the countries of Asia

Oregon Utah Washington Wyoming

Southwest
Arizona California Hawaii Nevada

Maples
Baja California Norte Baja California Sur Sonora of the Republic of Mexico Countries of Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific Countries

104

AAAE Accreditation Board of Examiners Chairman:

Scott A. Brockman, A.A.E. Phone: (901) 922-8075 E-mail: scottb@mscaa.com

Regional Examiners
Northeast Timothy J. Edwards, A.A.E. Phone: (717) 948-3900 Email: tedwards@saraa.org Southeast Mihai Smighelschi, A.A.E. Phone: (865) 342-3011 E-mail: mihai@tys.org North Central Craig A. Williams, A.A.E. Phone: (260) 747-4146, X. 427 E-mail: williams@fwairport.com South Central Joseph J. Medici, A.A.E. Phone: (512) 530-6563 E-mail: Joseph.Medici@austintexas.gov Northwest Bruce J. Goetz, A.A.E. Phone: (425) 388-5110 E-mail: bruce.goetz@snoco.org Southwest Jennifer L. Maples, A.A.E. Phone: (602) 273-4014 Email: jennifer.maples@phoenix.gov

At-Large Examiners
Cyrus T. Callum, A.A.E. Phone: (407) 825-2674 Email: ccallum@goaa.org Chuck Farina, A.A.E. Phone: (281) 233-7351 Email: chuck.farina@houstontx.gov James R. Gill, A.A.E., CPA Phone: (412) 472-3512 Email: jgill@pitairport.com Sara A. Freese, A.A.E. Phone: (319) 731-5716 Email: s.freese@crairport.org

AAAE Accreditation Staff Contacts

Registrar Charles M. Barclay, A.A.E. Phone: (703) 824-0500, Ext. 129 E-mail: chip.barclay@aaae.org Cindy Gunderson Director, Membership/Accreditation & Certification Programs Phone: (703) 824-0500, Ext. 148 E-mail: cindy.gunderson@aaae.org Tyra Harpster Senior VP, Finance & Administration Phone: (703) 824-0500, Ext. 143 E-mail: tyra.harpster@aaae.org Amy Calliari Coordinator, Membership/Accreditation & Certification Programs Phone: (703) 824-0500, Ext. 123 E-mail: amy.calliari@aaae.org

105