ASE Improvements: Future Air Service Planning Study & Environmental Assessment Update

1. ASE Improvements: Future Air Service Planning Study &Environmental Assessment UpdateBOCC Regular MeetingSeptember 9, 2015

2. Agenda Review of historical efforts leading to an environmental assessment Project priorities and overview FAA directives with Environmental Assessment (EA) and Airport Layout Plan (ALP) concerning safety Next steps

3. Why are we here today? • Review new ALP/8a approval by the BOCC • Review changes since December 16th BOCC meeting • FAA funding • Project priorities • Project timing

4. ASE Improvements Historical review

5. Historical Efforts • Environmental Assessment process began in January 2015 • Originally two EAs planned, start dates staggered by 9 month separation • The updated process is reflective of safety, FAA funding levels, timing and community input • Decision and changes are guided by: full compliance with FAA Design Standards and safety • Resulting in: one EA encompassing a new terminal building, runway shift and widening • Note: the west side development (parallel taxiway and 2nd FBO) are beyond the EA planning horizon • ALP Update • BOCC approval sought by staff for submission to the FAA on September 9th

6. Historical Efforts • Airport Master Plan completed in 2012 • FAA Master Plan approval and supplemental FAA direction • ASE Master Plan approved by the FAA with two exceptions: • Preserve future air service through accommodating next generation of aircraft • Achieve full compliance with Group III Design Standards – separation between Runway and Taxiway of 400’ • Future Air Service Planning Study Phase I, II, III conducted with heavy community input • BOCC approval of option 8a – directed staff to prepare a new ALP packet with option 8a

7. Project Priorities Reasonable Foreseeable Project Priorities Have Shifted:

8. Resulting Outcomes to the Process Moving Forward Simplified the EA process combining two into one Aligned all projects with safety and FAA airfield design standards Incremental growth balanced with funding and the community

9. Timeline Comparison *December 16, 2014 BOCC Work Session - Future Air Service Planning Study Phase III presentation

10. ASE Improvements Future air service planning study

11. 2012 Master Plan Recommendations • Premised on the continuation of the 95 foot wingspan restriction and the Modification to Standards (MOD) for airfield development granted by the FAA • MOD allowed ASE to operate with a 320 ft. runway taxiway separation • 2012 Master Plan recommended development projects for both the east side and the west side • Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) developed for the Master Plan recommended projects were feasible and fundable • In August 2013 the FAA approved the Airport Layout Plan (ALP), for east side and west side development with the exception of the proposed future runway/taxiway separation of 320 feet on the west side due to the fact that it did not meet FAA separation standards

12. 2012 Master Plan – Continued The ALP approval does not apply to the proposed runway/taxiway separation distance of 320 feet on the west side of Runway 15/33 FAA determined that the MOD allowing the 320 foot separation on the west side was not acceptable and any development had to meet separation standards (400 feet) BOCC undertook a Future Air Service Study to determine the feasibility, consequences and costs to comply with the 400 foot runway to taxiway separation

13. Master Plan Recommendations

14. Future Air Service Study (2014) • ASE currently has a 95 ft. wingspan restriction in place based on runway to taxiway separation distance • Aircraft trends indicated that the Regional Jets with wingspans less than 95 ft. will be phased out, with half of the U.S. fleet retired by 2021 and substantial retirement estimated by 2025 • With wingspan restriction still in place, current air carriers would not be able to operate at ASE with future fleet • FAA will not allow another MOD to allow larger wingspan without ASE meeting FAA standards of 400 feet separation • In order to have future air service at ASE, the FAA is requiring the airfield to be brought into FAA compliance

15. Future Air Service Planning Study Overview • As a result of changing regional fleet design and FAA safety standards, the Study was undertaken to evaluate: • What is the changing technology of future commercial aircraft serving ASE? • What can ASE do to best sustain future commercial air service? • How would ASE accommodate these operations? • What are the impacts and benefits to the airport and community? • What is best for the future health of the community?

16. Phase I Future Fleet Mix Findings – 11/19/13 • Future regional jets will be entering into airline service beginning 2014-2018 • Next generation, although physically larger, offer • Reduced environmental impacts (noise, fuel burn/CO2, NOx) • Improved travel experience • Existing wingspan restriction precludes future regional aircraft from serving ASE • CRJ700 • Provides 95% of ASE commercial service today • Replacing retired 50 seat RJ fleet is placing the CRJ 700 in high demand • US deliveries were from 2001 to 2011 • Estimated operational lifespan 15-17 years • First retirements estimated to begin 2018 • Over half of US fleet anticipated to be retired by 2021 with remainder retired by 2025* * Substantial retirement anticipated by 2025

17. Phase I Future Fleet Mix Findings

18. Phase II Airfield/Airspace Configuration Findings – 6/24/14 • Airspace Analysis • The 80’ runway shift to the west (meets FAA 400’ RW/TW separation standard) had minimal impact to approach and departure procedures • Separation Standard • The remaining alternatives meet the FAA standards (excluding RW/TW separation on west side at the Airport Operations Center to the south) • Modification of Standards • The FAA is requiring ASE to meet standards and will not grant a Modification of Standards unless the standard cannot be met and an equivalent level of safety can be achieved • Wingspan Restriction • The remaining alternatives allow next generation regional commercial aircraft to operate with reasonable operating restrictions • Second Fixed Base Operator • The remaining alternatives can accommodate the development of a second FBO on the west side

19. Alternative 8a - Layout No impact to east side Runway shifts 80’ west and 150’ wide 25’ of usable ramp 400’ Separation 320’ Separation and Operational Restriction Owl Creek Road Relocation (2,500’) 2nd FBO “Pinch point”

20. Phase III Public Outreach Findings – 12/16/14 • Outreach efforts were consistently offered throughout Phase III including: • Produced Press Releases, informational video and display ads, developed social media messaging, and utilized Pitkin County Connect to share project information • Created an easily identifiable project logo for the public recognition along with an revised project website for easier access to information • Conducted Coffee Chats andmade numerous community presentations • Held 2 community open house events

21. What We Heard… There is a cursory understanding of the issue with some confusion and misinformation Over the course of educational conversations, the public was generally supportive of proposed airfield improvements Citizens support continued viable commercial air service operations Citizens recognize the economic value to the community of continued commercial operations at ASE Meeting FAA safety standards was understood and generally supported Concerns focused on potential for increased air traffic, noise & air quality impacts, cost, and timing

22. Things have changed… • FAA funding availability was analyzed and determined that not all projects are fundable within reasonably foreseeable timeframe • Based on financial constraints, priorities of the FAA and the Airport were based on: • Safety • Meeting FAA required safety standards • Preservation of commercial service • Passenger experience and operational efficiency • Reasonable Foreseeable Project Priorities Have Shifted: • Based on estimated funding short-falls: • The timeline for the runway relocation project has been extended to 2027 • The west side taxiway and the 2nd FBO are not within the current planning horizon • The proposed ALP has been revised to reflect future and ultimate improvements phases

23. Capital Cost Comparison Note: All costs are reflected without assumed inflation rate ** Projects Outside of the Planning Period for the 2015 Capital Improvement Program

24. Airport Layout Plan – Existing, Future & Ultimate

25. Terminal Area Plan – Existing, Future & Ultimate

26. Airport Layout Plan – Existing & Future

27. ASE Improvements Environmental assessment

28. Purpose of this Environmental Assessment (EA) The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires consideration of the environmental consequences of a federal action before the action is taken An Environmental Assessment is prepared to determine if a significant environmental impact may occur Provides an in-depth review of the environmental impacts for the proposed action and alternatives to those actions Provides disclosure of the alternatives, impacts and mitigation to the public and decision makers

29. What this means for the EA Process • Both the runway shift and the terminal replacement will be considered in one EA • Separate purpose and needs, but in one document • EA will rely on Future Air Service Study Alternatives analysis • Benefits to the project include: • Greater ability to analyze updated existing and future conditions based on new information • Analysis of future fleet mix with runway shift that meets FAA standards • Take advantage of combined public outreach process • Minimizes confusion concerning link of terminal redevelopment to airfield redevelopment

30. What this means for the EA (cont.) The west side taxiway and 2nd FBO (west side) will not be part of the EA The west side taxiway and second FBO are not within the current planning horizon, but still considered on the ALP for future development when feasible and demand dictates Parking options will be analyzed to meet parking needs and will include on-site, off-site and multi-modal transit center alternatives

31. What additional elements will be analyzed? • The runway shift to meet FAA standards will allow for aircraft with a greater wingspan • Future fleet mix will be examined and used for the air quality, noise, terminal sizing and other analyses for the EA • While many newer aircraft are larger, they also offer improved efficiencies • Winglets or blended wings improve fuel efficiency and climb gradient • Reduced carbon footprint • Quieter • Improved range/comfort • Analysis will also examine “pillow count” • Removal of transit center will result development of single level parking options • Will examine cumulative impacts related to both projects, as well as other past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions

32. Updated EA Projects

33. Environmental Assessment Content • The Environmental Assessment will consist of the following key chapters: • Purpose and Need • Alternatives—Including the Proposed Action • Affected Environment – Environment as it exists today • Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Action and the Feasible and Prudent Alternatives • Mitigation Measures • Over 19 environmental categories will be evaluated per FAA Order 1050.1E

34. ASE Improvements Next steps

35. Proposed Project Schedule Note: Substantial CRJ retirement anticipated by 2025

36. Next Steps • Community Input Committee Meeting - September 10th • EA Public Meeting - September 10th • 4:30-6:30 pm at the Limelight Hotel • Coffee Chats over the next several weeks • Stakeholder meetings over the next several weeks • Submission of Airport Layout Plan to the FAA pending formal approval by the Board

37. Capital Cost Comparison Note: All costs are reflected without assumed inflation rate ** Projects Outside of the Planning Period for the 2015 Capital Improvement Program

38. Thank you John Kinney, Airport Director john.kinney@aspenairport.com JD Ingram, Jviation jd.ingram@jviation.com Ryk Dunkelberg, Mead & Hunt Ryk.Dunkelberg@meadhunt.com