Okaloosa County BOCC — February 4, 2014 — Pre-application for Design, Construct and Equip Air Traffic Control Tower at DTS

OMB Approval No. 0348-0043 2. DATE SUBMITTED APPLICATION FOR Applicant Identifier FEDERAL ASSISTANCE Preapplication Construction 3. DATE RECEIVED BY STATE State Application Identifier [1] Non-Construction [] Non-Construction 4. DATE RECEIVED BY FEDERAL AGENCY Federal Identifier 5, APPLICANT INFORMATION Legal Name: Okaloosa County Board of County Commissioners DUNS 613277649 Organizational Unit: -Office of Contracts & Grants Address (give city, county, state, and zip code) 1804 Lewis Turner Blyd (Ste 206) Fort Walton Beach, FL 32547 Name and telephone number of the person to be contracted on matters involving this application (give area code) Marcella Eubanks(850)651-7200, Ext 4381 e-mail: grants@clerkofcourts.ce EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN): HO-GOoOOOMAGEA 8. TYPE OF APPLICATION: xX] New If Revision, enter appropriate letter(s) in box(es): im Continuation im Revision B Decrease Award C Increase Duration Other (specify) A Increase Award D Decrease Duration 7. TYPE OF APPLICANT: (enter appropriate letter in box) B A. State H. Interdependent School District B. County |, State Controlled Institution of Higher Learning C. Municipal J. Private University D. Township K. Indian Tribe E. Interstate L. Individual F, Intermunicipai M. Profit Organization G. Special District N. Other (Specify) 9. NAME OF FEDERAL AGENCY Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 10. CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE NUMBER 2 O|. TITLE: Airport Improvement Program (AIP) 12. AREAS AFFECTED BY PROJECT (cities, counties, states, etc.): Okaloosa County 11. DESCRIPTIVE TITLE OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT: Design, Construct and Equip Air Traffic Control Tower for Destin Airport 13. PROPOSED PROJECT 14. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF Start Date Ending Date a. Applicant b. Project June 2014 December | Ist Ist 2014 15. ESTIMATED FUNDING 16. IS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS a. Federal $ 2.000.000 -00 a. YES, XX THIS PREAPPLICATION/APPLICATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE anen STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON b. Applicant $ 00 PFC 1,000,000 c. State § 1,000,000 — -9 DATE: 12/19/2012 d. Local $ b. NO [_] PROGRAM IS NOT COVERED BY E. 0. 12372 e. Other $ [_] OR PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED BY STATE FOR REVIEW f. Program income $ 17, IS THE APPLICANT DELINQUENT ON ANY FEDERAL DEBT? g. TOTAL $ 4,000,000 -90 [] Yes if yes, attach an explanation No 18, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, ALL DATA IN THIS APPLICATION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT, THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DULY AUTHORIZED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT WILL COMPLY WITH THE ATTACHED ASSURANCES IF THE ASSISTANCE IS AWARDED a. Typed Name of Authorized Representative Charles K. Windes, Jr. b. Title Chairman, Okaloosa County Board of Commissioners c. Telephone number (850)651-7105 d. Signature of Authorized Representative e. Date Signed Previous Editions Not Usable Authorized for Local Reproduction Standard Form 424 (REV 4-88) Prescribed by OMB Circular A-102 U.S, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OMB NO, 80-RO184 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION PART I PROJECT APPROVAL INFORMATION SECTION A Item 4 Does this assistance request require State, local, Name of Governing Body regional, or other priority rating? Priority ["lYes ExJNo Item 2. Does this assistance request require State, local Name of Agency or Board advisory, educational or health clearances? (Attach Documentation) ’ ClyYes IX]No Item 3 Does this assistance request require clearinghouse review (Attach Comments)See Attached EA/FONS! in accordance with OMB Circular A-95? Elves [_]No Item 4 Does this assistance request require State, local, Name of Approving Agency Okaloosa Walton regional or other planning approval? Transportation Planning Organization Klyes CINo Date Jul 2013 Check One: State C] Item 5, Local C] Is the proposed project covered by an approved Regional [] comprehensive plan? ClYes KJNo Location of plan item 6. Will the assistance requested serve a Federal Name of Federal Installation installation? Federal Population benefiting from Project ClYes KINo Item 7 Will the assistance requested be on Federal land Name of Federal Installation or installation? Location of Federal Land ClYes RINo Percent of Project Item 8 Will the assistance requested have an impact or effect on the environment? [TYes X]No Number of: Item_9. Individuals Will the assistance requested cause the displacement of Families individuals, families, businesses, or farms? Businesses — iW ————— [lyes EXINo Farms Item 10. Is there other related Federal assistance on this project previous, pending, or anticipated? [_]Yes XINo Page 2 FAA Form 5100-100 (6-73} SUPERSEDES FAA FORM 5100-10 PAGES 1 THRU 7 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION OMB NO. 80-RO184 PART II - SECTION C The Sponsor hereby represents and certifies as follows: 1. Compatible Land Use. ~ The Sponsor has taken the following actions to assure compatible usage of land adjacent to or in the vicinity of the airport: N/A 2. Defaults. - The Sponsor is not in default on any obligation to the United States or any agency of the United States Government relative to the development, operation, or maintenance of any airport, except as stated herewith: N/A 3, Possible Disabilities. - There are no facts or circumstances (including the existence of effective or proposed leases, use agreements or other legal instruments affecting use of the Airport or the existence of pending litigation or other legal proceedings) which in reasonable probability might make it impossible for the Sponsor to carry out and complete the Project or carry out the provisions of Part V of this Application, either by limiting its legal or financial ability or otherwise, except as follows: N/A 4, Land. — (a) The sponsor holds the following property interest in the following areas of land* which are to be developed or used as part of or in connection with the Airport subject to the following exceptions, encumbrances, and adverse interests, all of which areas are identified on the aforementioned property map designated as Exhibit “A”: N/A *State character of property interest in each area and list and identify for each all exceptions, encumbrances, and adverse interests of every kind and nature, including liens, easements, leases, etc. The separate areas of land need only be identified here by the area numbers shown on the property map. Page 3a FAA Form 5100-100 (4-74) FAA AC 81-06913 OMB NO, 80-RO184 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION PART IL - SECTION C (Continued) The Sponsor further certifies that the above is based on a title examination by a qualified attorney or title company and that such attorney or title company has determined that the Sponsor holds the above property interests. (a)The Sponsor will acquire within a reasonable time, but in any event prior to the start of any construction work under the Project, the following property interest in the following areas of land* on which such construction work is to be performed, all of which areas are identified on the aforementioned property map designated as Exhibit “A”: N/A (c)The Sponsor will acquire within a reasonable time, and if feasible prior to the completion of all construction work under the Project, the following property interest in the following areas of land* which are to be developed or used as part of or in connection with the Airport as it will be upon completion of the Project, all of which areas are identified on the aforementioned property map designated as Exhibit “A”: N/A 5. Exclusive Rights. — There is no grant of an exclusive right for the conduct of any aeronautical activity at any airport owned or controlled by the Sponsor except as follows: N/A *State character of property interest in each area and list and identify for each all exceptions, encumbrances, and adverse interests of every kind and nature, including liens, easements, leases, etc. The separate areas of land need only be identified here by the area numbers shown on the property map. FAA Form 8100-100 (4-76) FAA AC AV ROS FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION OMB NO. 80-RO184 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PART Ill- BUDGET INFORMATION - CONSTRUCTION SECTION A - GENERAL . Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Now... . cece ee Functional or Other Breakout... 2... cece ee ees SECTION B - CALCULATION OF FEDERAL GRANT Use only for ravisions Cost Classification Latest Approved Amount Adjustment + or (-} Total Amount Required Administration Expense Preliminary Expense Land, structures, right-of-way Architectural engineering basic fees Soy BS} oO] pp Other architectural engineering fees Project inspection fees Land development Relocation Expenses sO, wel nt ao Relocation payments to individuals and businesses 10, Demolition and removal 11. Construction and project improvement 12. Equipment 13. Miscellaneous Pre-construction CM at Risk Phase | 14. Total (Lines 1 through 13) 15. Estimated Income (if applicable) 16. Net Project Amount (Line 14 minus 15) 17. Less: Ineligible Exclusions 18. Add: Contingencies 19. Total Project Amt. (Excluding Rehabilitation Grants) 4,000,000 20. Federal Share requested of Line 19 2,000,000 ai. Add Rehabilitation Grants Requested (100 percent) 22. Total Federal grant requested (Lines 20 & 21) 2,000,000 23. Grantee share 1,000,000 24, Other shares State of Florida 1,000,000 25. Total project (Lines 22, 23, & 24) 4,000,000 FAA Form 5100-100 (6-73) SUPERSEDES FAA FORM 5100-10 PAGES 1 THRU 7 Page 4 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION OMB NO. 80-RO184 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECTION C - EXCLUSIONS Classification ineligible for Excluded from Participation Contingency Provision 26. (1) (2) a. $ $ b.. c. d. e. f. g. Totals SECTION D - PROPOSED METHOD OF FINANCING NON-FEDERAL SHARE 27. Grantee Share $ 1,000,000 a. Securities b. Mortgages ¢. Appropriations (By Applicant) d, Bonds &. Tax Levies f. Non Cash g .Other (Explain) Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) 1,000,000 h .TOTAL — Grantee share 1,000,000 28. Other Shares a. State 1,000,000 b. Other c. Total Other Shares 1,000,000 29. TOTAL $ 2,000,000 SECTION E - REMARKS PART IV PROGRAM NARRATIVE (Attach - See Instructions) FAA AC 75-023 PAGES FAA Form §100-100 (6-73) SUPERSEDES FAA FORM 5100-10 PAGES 1 THRU 7 PART IV PROGRAM NARRATIVE | PROJECT: Design and Construct Air Traffic Control Tower | AIRPORT: Destin/Fort Walton Beach Airport 1. Objective: To provide safe and efficient control of aircraft in a high density area involving military and civilian aircraft. 2. Benefits Anticipated: Eliminate or significantly reduce incursions and potential or real accidents. 3. Approach: (See approved Scope of Work in final Application) Positive control of Destin inbound or outbound air traffic. Eliminate ground incursions. 4, Geographic Location: See attached sketch 5. Justification for Force Account Work: (if applicable) N/A 6: Sponsor's Representative: (incl. address & tel. no.) Mr. Sunil Harman, A.A.E., [AP Airports Director 1701 SR 85 North Eglin AFB, FL 32542 (850)651-7160 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION ORLANDO AIRPORTS DISTRICT OFFICE | SOUTHERN REGION AIRPORTS DIVISION FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD of DECISION DESTIN AIRPORT CONTRACT AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER PROJECT July 29, 2013 FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION BACKGROUND The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ‘requires Federal agencies to incorporate environmental considerations during the planning process of proposed actions. Pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA, Part 1502.13, Okaloosa County (County) prepared a Final Focused Environmental Assessment to analyze and disclose the potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Project at Destin Airport. The Proposed Project consists of the construction of an on- airport airside Contract Tower and access road (see attached Final Focused EA Exhibit 4-3). The Proposed Project would allow the Airport Sponsor to meet the existing and near-future demand for better contro! of aircraft flying in the Destin Airport and surrounding airspace in the Destin area. The attached Final Focused EA was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, and FAA Order 5050.48, National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions. The FAA is the lead Federal agency for compliance with NEPA for airport projects. FAA's approval of an airport project constitutes the Federal Action subject to NEPA. FAA's unconditional approval of the Proposed Project as depicted on the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for Destin Airport constitutes the Federal Action subject to NEPA. PROPOSED PROJECT The Destin Airport does not have an Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT), but its proximity to Northwest Florida Regional Airport/Eglin Air Force Base, increasing air traffic, and a diversified aircraft performance fleet mix in the Destin area has prompted Okaloosa County to propose the construction of a Visual Flight Rules (VFR) ATCT and seek participation in the FAA Contract Tower Program. Okaloosa County proposes to site, design, and construct the low activity, VFR ATCT to meet all applicable FAA guidelines and standards. The Proposed Project site would provide a close-in, direct view of the terminal apron where most aircraft ground movements occur. The control cab would have an eye height of 59.5-feet above ground level (AGL), while the overall height of the VFR ATCT, including antennas and lightning rods, would be 84 feet AGL. The cab would initially accommodate two Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCS) positions, but would have space for up to two more working or supervisory positions. Controllers in the proposed VFR ATCT would have unobstructed views of the Airports runways, taxiways, and aprons. The controllers would not clear aircraft to fly full instrument approach procedures. Instead they would control traffic visually via two-way, very high frequency (VHF) and ultrahigh frequency (UHF) communications. The Eglin Radar Control Facility (ERCF) would continue to control instrument flight rules (IFR) traffic. Operating hours for the proposed VFR ATCT have not yet been determined. However, the proposed VFR ATCT is expected to operate approximately 16 hours per day, potentially between 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM. Destin Airport Page | Develapment of Contract Air Traffic Cantrot Tower Sources: Bing, 2012; RS&H, 2012 | | Project Study Area | . | Proposed VFRATCT Site and Access Road ASH IMPROVING YOUR WORLD 0 250 500 7,000 N eee eee Feet Exhibit A-3 Proposed Project FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION The proposed VFR ATCT would penetrate the 7:1 transitional surface of Runway 14-32, the only runway at the Airport, by 39 feet. According to the FAA's December 2011 final determination letter, the FAA does not object to the penetration of the transitional surface given the proposed VFR ATCT would be a lighted obstruction, with red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting, In accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1K, Obstruction Marking and Lighting (see Final Focused EA Attachment B-2 for FAA's final determination letters. Due to the height of the cab, existing trees north of the proposed VFR ATCT would not obstruct the Controllers’ abilities to see aircraft flying downwind approaches as well as approach segments in the Airport’s traffic patterns. Approximately 0.25-acre of trees south/southwest of the VFR ATCT would be removed for line-of-sight purposes. The east side of the airfield does not currently have vehicular access to the proposed ATCT site. An approximately 3,670-foot-long, two-lane on-Airport access read would be constructed from Airport Road to the proposed VFR ATCT. The road would be restricted access, with primarily ATCS utilizing the road and Airport maintenance personnel as needed. The proposed on-Airport access road to the new ATCT is acceptable to the FAA Orlando ADO. The final FAA approval of the access road through the runway protection zone (RPZ) will not be issued until the project is coordinated and reviewed in the obstruction evaluation/airport airspace analysis (OE/AAA). Based on the above information and as shown in the attached Final Focused EA Exhibit A-3, the Proposed Project would invoive the following, connected project activities and components: clearing and: grubbing approximately 2.5 acres of Airport property containing vegetation and trees for a new VFR ATCT (including clearing and grubbing for VFR ATCT line-of-sight purposes); . construction of the VFR ATCT; ° extension of utilities by approximately 3,670 feet to the VFR ATCT, . construction of an approximately 3,670-foot-long, two-lane access road to the proposed ATCT; and . construction of a small parking lot (i.e., 3 vehicles), approximately 525 square feet. Okaloosa County is the Airport owner and is seeking entry into the FAA Contract Tower Program. The County would own and maintain the new ATCT under this program, while FAA-funded contract controllers would operate the facility. Funding - According to engineering estimates, constructing the Proposed Project wouid cost approximately $3.4 million. Funding from the FAA, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and Okaloosa County would finance the Proposed Project. Destin Airport Development of Contract Air Traffic Controt Tower Page 3 _FAA ORLANDO ADO ) FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Schedute - Construction is expected to occur over approximately an 8-month period, beginning in the Spring of 2014. FEDERAL ACTION FAA's unconditional approval of the Proposed Project as depicted on the ALP for Destin Airport constitutes the Federal Action subject to NEPA. FAA environmental! determinations and unconditional approval of the Proposed Project on the Destin Airport ALP does not signify an FAA commitment to provide a specific level of financial support. Federal funding is a separate future decision that will be made in accordance with other applicable Federal laws, FAA policies and procedures. PURPOSE AND NEED The Airport is currently non-towered, but has a need to establish a VFRATCT at this time due fo increasing traffic, a diversified aircraft mix, and its proximity to Northwest Florida Regional Airport/Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin AFB). Due to the proximity of the Airport to Eglin AFB, ERCF currently controls aircraft landing and departing at the Airport. PURPOSE For years, the ERCF has managed the mix of high-performance aircraft (e.g., commercial and military) operating at Northwest Florida Regional Airport/Eglin AFB and the general aviation aircraft operating to and from the Destin Airport. However, the AFB’s military operating areas (MOAs) have significantly constrained commercial and general aviation operations in the Destin area of northwest Florida. This has caused inefficient approach and departure procedures, operational delays, and safety concerns at Destin Airport. Okaloosa County proposes to construct the VFR ATCT at the Destin Airport to provide controllers at the Airport with unobstructed views of the Airport’s ground and air traffic. This would greatly improve the efficiency of the Airport's operations and enhance safety for all aircraft operations in the Destin area. NEBC iemaniewe on, The variety of civilian activity, when added to the Elgin AFB’s military activity, creates a challenging air traffic environment for ERCF controllers presently directing the areas diverse traffic mix. Airspace Conflicts - As shown in the Final Focused EA Exhibit A-4, the Destin area’s existing Part 77 and Approach Surfaces create complex airspace that a highly-diversified fleet mix uses. Destin Airport and the Northwest Florida Regional Airport/Eglin AFB are located in Class D airspace. Restricted airspace and MOAs are to the north, east and west of the Airport. Because of the unique operating environment and high traffic levels, the FAA has included the area in a Special Air Traffic Rule. The Rule requires aviation traffic in the vicinity of Destin Airport to obtain Destin Airport Devetopmant of Contract Air Traffic Cantrol Tower Page 3 FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION traffic advisories or clearances from Eglin AFB controllers, regardless of whether those aircraft plan to land or are simply overflying the area. The existing controlled airspace requires pilots to contact ERCF before approaching and departing the Destin Airport. Aircraft arriving, departing, and operating in the vicinity of Destin are required to be in radio contact with ERCF, ERCF manages this complex, restricted airspace with special traffic corridors defined for aircraft traveling north and south and for coastal traffic moving east and west. For air traffic heading east/west, the ERCF controllers give traffic advisories, (i.e., the positions, altitudes, and directions of other air traffic in the area that may cause air traffic conflicts). While providing advisory services, controllers are not required to ensure traffic remains separated; visual separation is the responsibility of the pilot or, in the case of ultra-lights and parasails, their operators. In addition, many general aviation pilots are uncomfortable flying over open water and try to fly as close to shore as possible. Further, the extensive military airspace to the north of Destin leads to increased congestion and safety concerns along the coastline for aircraft flying between Florida and areas to the east and west. As a result, ERCF’s management of the Destin area's airspace is difficult due to the “busy mix” of thousands of military and civilian aircraft having varying flight characteristics and operating at various speeds. Lack of Visual Identification - ERCF controllers use radar to detect and radios to issue instructions to arriving, departing, and transitioning air traffic using NW Florida Regional Airport/Eglin AFB and Destin Airport. One limitation of this contro! process is that the ERCF relies on radar to identify aerial traffic. Vehicles such as ultra-lights have small radar cross sections, no electronic radar signal transponders, and their detection by radar may be unreliable. In addition, parasails have few metal parts and fly at low altitudes, making them unobservable on radar. Visual separation is typically used to ensure these vehicles remain clear of each other and aircraft, but visual separation is unreliable given the distance between the Eglin tower and the coastline. To determine the effectiveness of visual separation of aerial traffic in the Gulf of Mexico by air traffic controllers at the ERCF, the FAA's Air Traffic Control Visibility Analysis Tool was utilized to calculate the likelihood of air traffic controllers accurately spotting aircraft based on atmospheric visibility and distance. Utilizing the height of the ERCF control tower, the closest distance between the ERCF and the shoreline, a 500-foot AGL air traffic altitude, and good weather visibility of 10 miles, the analysis tool calculated that controllers could see a single-engine Cessna 172 approximately 36.5 percent of the time and would correctly identify the type of alrplane approximately 0.3 percent of the time. This is far below the FAA’s 95.5-percent visibility and 11.5- percent recognition thresholds. Under the same conditions, an air traffic controller at the proposed Destin Airport VFR ATCT would be able to detect aircraft 100 percent of the time and accurately recognize them 96.3 percent of the time. In summary, the location of the ERCF and the air traffic along the heavily traversed shoreline area and Gulf of Mexico impede aircraft recognition, visual separation, and aircraft identification by air traffic controllers at ERCF. Oestin Airport Devatopmoant of Contract Air Traffic Cantral Tower Page FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Operational Delay — In 2009, the Airport Delay Study for the Air Traffic Control Tower Program was developed to quantify annual operational delays, the duration of delays, why the delays occurred, and the cost of the delays. The 2009 Study showed: ° 54,250 total operations; * the total duration of the delays was 3,517.2 hours, . average delay per operation was 3.89 minutes; a many delays lasted between 20 and 30 minutes; . total cost of annual operational delays was $1.44 million. This information supported the input from many airport users. They noted Airport delays resulted from the wide variety of aircraft operating in the airspace, pilots not following standard Airport procedures, and the safety procedures needed to manage the congested airspace. The 2009 Study estimated the total average cost to operate an aircraft at the Airport was $410.03 per hour (excluding crew). Based on this cost and the total number of hours of annual delay (3,517.2 hours), delays cost Airport users about $1.44 million annually (excluding crew costs). Operational delay costs to Airport users were estimated for the Focused EA using year 2012 operational data. As shown in the Final Focused EA Table 2, in 2012, 63,940 operations experienced a total annual delay of approximately 4,145 hours. Based on 2009 average operational costs per hour, the average cost of delay was approximately $1.7 million (see Final Focused EA Table 3). ALTERNATIVES In addition to the No-Action Alternative and the Proposed Project, two (2) other project alternatives — designated as Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 were identified for consideration in the Focused EA. These Alternatives are depicted in the attached Final Focused EA Figure 4-5. The following provides a brief summary of the alternatives analysis for each of these alternatives. Further explanation of the alternatives analysis is provided in Section 6 of the Final Focused EA. No-Action Alternative - The No-Action Alternative does not meet the stated Purpose and Need for the Proposed Project. As discussed in the Purpose and Need section of this Focused EA, ERCF's continued control of the Airport’s air traffic would not reduce congestion and inefficient use of local and regional airspace. In addition, the inability of ERCF controliers to meet FAA's visual and aircraft recognition thresholds requires procedures that further reduce the efficient use of that airspace. However, to satisfy the intent of NEPA, FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures; FAA Order 5050.48, NEPA [tmplementing instructions for Airport Actions; and other special purpose environmental laws, this focused EA retained the No-Action Alternative for analysis and comparative purposes. YEARS SLAP NASIR a UC any ne ecard HRNOUARS ISERIES Fs RNA ES aS TERR TORE ESAS Destin Airport Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower - Page 5 Sources: Bing, 2012; RS&H, 2012 Proposed Project aa Alternative #1 | ] Destin Airport Boundary Alternative #2 “< EEN’ / | IMPROVING YOUR WORLD fount 0 250 500 1,000 N eee ect Exhibit A-5 Reasonable Alternatives FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION This Alternative would avoid any potential environmental and social impacts associated with the implementation of the Proposed Project. However, the No-Action Alternative would not alleviate the current economic impacts associated with delays at the Airport (see Section 5, Tables Zand 3 of the Final Focused EA). As described in the above paragraph, the No-Action Alternative would not meet the Airport's need to improve the efficiency of approach and departure procedures and the safety of the aviation environment in the Destin area. Although the No-Action Alternative does not meet the Purpose and Need, this EA addresses its environmental consequences in Section 8 for baseline comparative purposes and to fulfill FAA's obligations under NEPA. Airport Sponsor’s Proposed Project - The Proposed Project consists of the projects discussed previously in this FONSI/ROD under the heading “Proposed Project”. Part 77 - The Proposed Project would penetrate the 7:1 transitional surface of Runway 14-32 by approximately 6 feet. According to the FAA's Final Decision letter (included in Final Focused EA Altachment 8-2), the FAA does not object to the penetration of the transitional surface given that the VFR ATCT would be lighted with red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting and be in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1K. Visual Impacts - The control cab for the Proposed Project would have an eye height of 59.5-feet above ground level (AGL), while the overall height of the VFR ATCT, including antennas and lightning rods, would be 84 feet AGL. This is less than both Alternatives 1 and 2 (125 feet) and given its location on Airport property, the VFR ATCT would be less visible to residents located around the Airport, particularly those located approximately 0.8-milé to the northwest. The undisturbed vegetation (primarily cypress trees) would provide a visual buffer between the Proposed Project and residential areas to the northeast. The red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting emitted from the top of the ATCT would be low emitting and the appearance of the VFR ATCT would coincide with existing Airport structures and the existing, operating airport. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not have a significant visual effect on surrounding residents. Wetlands - The Proposed Project would impact approximately 1.00 acre of wetlands (approximately 0.70-acre less than Alternatives 1 and 2). The area required for the VFR ATCT facility and parking area is approximately the same when compared to Alternatives { and 2. The location of the Proposed Project is not as deep within the existing wetland area as Alternatives 1 and 2. Therefore, the area required for clearing and construction of the access road would be shorter and would affect less wetlands than Alternatives 7 and 2. General Cost - The Proposed Project would cost approximately $3.4 million to construct. When compared to Alternatives 1 and 2 the lower height of the VFR ATCT and shorter length of the access road would decrease the time, material, and labor required for construction. Alternative 1 would cost approximately $5 million, and Alternative #2 approximately $4.8 million, Alternatives 1 and 2 also have the potential to impact more wetlands when compared to the Proposed Project (1.70 acres vs, 0.70 acre). The potential increase of wetland impacts associated with Alternatives pe RN tn NT PRN Fa EARNS Destin Airpart Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Rage fs FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISICN 1 and 2 would raise potential mitigation costs to Okaloosa County. Overall, due to the height of the VFR ATCT, length of the access road, and potential wetland mitigation, Alternative 1 would cost $1.6 million more than the Proposed Project and $200,000 more than Alternative 2. Summary — The Proposed Project meets the Purpose and Need of the Proposed Project. When compared to the environmental impacts and costs of Alternatives 1 and 2, the Proposed Project has less unavoidable wetland impacts. The lower costs of construction and minimized wetland impacts resulting from the Proposed Project makes it a practical and reasonable alternative. Therefore, the proposed project was further evaluated in the Environmental Consequences (Section 8) of the Final Focused EA. Project Alternative 1; Develop ATCT 1,478 feet from the Existing Approach End of Runway 14 — Alternative #1 is offset 1,056 feet east of the Runway 14-32 centerline and 1,478 feet from the existing approach end of Runway 14. Alternative #1 would have a clear line of sight of the entire airfield with a cab eye height of 100 feet AGL (see attached Final Focused EA Exhibit A- 5}. Part 77 - Alternative #1 would penetrate the 7:1 transitional surface of Runway 14-32 by approximately 6 feet. According to the FAA's Final Decision letter {included in Attachment B-2), the FAA does not object ta the penetration of the transitional surface given that the VFR ATCT would be lighted with red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting and be in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 70/7460-1K. Visual Impacts - Given the overall height of Alternative #1 (125 feet) and its location on Airport property, the VFR ATCT would be more visible to residents located around the Airport, particularly those located approximately 0.5-mile to the northwest. The undisturbed vegetation (primarily cypress trees) would provide a visual buffer between Alternative #1 and residences approximately 0.3-mile to the northeast. The red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting emitted from Alternative #1 would be low emitting and the appearance of the VFR ATCT would coincide with existing Airport structures and the existing, operating airport. Therefore, Alternative #1 would not have a significant visual effect on surrounding residents. Wetlands - Alternative #1 would impact approximately 1.70 acres of wetland (approximately 0.70- acre greater than the Proposed Project). The area required for the VFR ATCT facility and parking area is approximately the same when compared to the Proposed Project. However, the location of Alternative #1 is further within the existing wetland area. Therefore, the area required for clearing - and construction of the 6,300-foot-long access road would be longer and would affect 0.70-acre more wetland than the Proposed Project (1 acre). General Cost - When compared to the Proposed Project, the height of the VFR ATCT and length of the access road would Increase the time, material, and labor required for construction. These factors increase the cost of the facility to approximately $5 million , compared to the Proposed Project ($3.4 million) and Alternative #2 ($4.8 million), Alternative #1 also has the potential to impact more wetlands when compared to the Proposed Project (Proposed Project = approximately 1.00 acre), The potential increase of wetland impacts would raise potential mitigation costs to Fea ks ac lel bes a asi eanenee sata Destin Alrport Page 7 Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Okaloosa County. Overall, due to the height of the VFR ATCT, length of the access road, and potential wetland mitigation, Alternative #1 would cost $1.6 million more than the Proposed Project and $200,000 more than Alternative #2. Summary - Alternative #1 meets the Purpose and Need of the Proposed Project. When compared to the environmental effects and costs of the Proposed Project, Alternative #1 has greater unavoidable wetland impacts. The general costs of construction and potential wetland mitigation result in Alternative #1 being an impractical alternative. Therefore, Alternative #1 was not evaluated further in Section 8 of the Focused EA. Project Alternative 2: Develop ATCT 2,128 feet from the Existing Approach End of Runway 14 — Alternative #2 is offset 1,056 feet east of the Runway 14-32 centerline and is 2,128 feet from the existing approach end of Runway 14. Similar to Alternative #1, Alternative #2 would have a clear line of sight of the entire airfield with a cab eye height of 100 feet AGL. Part_77_- Alternative #2 would penetrate the 7:1 transitional surface of Runway 14-32 by approximately 6 feet and would be lighted with red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting (see Alternative #1, Part 77 discussion previously). Visual Impacts - The overall height of Alternative #2 is 125 feet AGL and it is located within the wetland and wooded area, south of Alternative #1 and north of the Proposed Project (see attached Final Focused EA Exhibit A-5). Alternative #2 would likely be seen by residences located approximately 0.5-mile to the southwest. Existing Airport structures along the northwest Airport boundary would make the Alternative #2 less visible than the Alternative #1. Similar to Alternative #1, the undisturbed vegetation would provide a visual buffer between Alternative #2 and residences approximately 0.25-mile to the northeast. Alternative #2 would also be lighted with red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting. As with Alternative #1, this lighting would be low emitting and the appearance of the VFR ATCT would coincide with existing Airport structures. Therefore, Alternative #2 would not have a significant visual effect on surrounding residents. Wetlands - Alternative #2 would impact approximately 1.70 acres of wetland (0.70-acre greater than the Proposed Project). The area required for the VFR ATCT facility and parking lot is approximately the same when compared to the Proposed Project. Alternative #2 would have the same acreage of wetland impacts as Alternative #1, but more wetland impacts than the Proposed Project. General Cost - When compared to the Proposed Project, the height of the VFR ATCT and length of the access road (approximately 5,650 feet) would increase the time, material, and labor required for construction. This would increase the cost of the facility compared to the Proposed Project. The general cost of Alternative #2, approximately $4.8 million , would be greater than the Proposed Project (approximately $3.4 million), and less than Alternative #1 (approximately $5 million), due to the length of the Alternative #2 access road. Alternative #2 would impact more wetlands and have greater potential mitigation costs than the Proposed Project (approximately 1 acre) and the same wetland impacts and potential mitigation costs as Alternative #1 (approximately 1.7 acres), Overall, due to the location, height, and potential mitigation, Alternative Ee osetia Ss acraniast ease csbal ee eho Dastin Airport Development of Contrast Air Traffic Controt Tower Page & FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION #2 would cost approximately $1.4 million more than the Proposed Project and approximately $200,000 less than Alternative #1. Summary - Alternative #2 meets the Purpose and Need of the Proposed Project. When compared to the environmental effects and costs of the Proposed Project, greater unavoidable wetland effects and the costs of construction and potential wetland mitigation result in Alternative #2 being an impractical alternative. Therefore, Alternative #2 was not evaluated further in Section 8 of the Final Focused EA. Alternatives Conclusion - Following consideration and evaluation of the above discussed alternatives, it was determined that two alternatives ~ the No-Action Alternative and the Proposed Project Alternative would be retained for detailed evaluation in the latter sections of the Final Focused EA. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The Final Focused EA describes only those environmental resources the Proposed Project and its reasonable alternatives, if any, are likely to affect (FAA Order 1050.1E, paragraph AQ5e). The amount of information on a potentially affected resource is based on the extent of the expected impact and is commensurate with the impact's importance. Section 7 of the Final Focused EA provides an overview of the resources found within the Proposed Project Study Area. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES The environmental consequences section of an EA provides analysis of environmental resources and categories that have the potential to be impacted by the Proposed Project and other reasonable alternatives that were retained after the alternatives evaluation process. The following is a summary of the environmental consequences analysis for each of the affected environment categories applicable to the Proposed Project. Further explanation of the environmental impact analysis is provided in Section 8 of the Final Focused EA. Air Quality - The No Action Alternative would not result in air quality impacts. The Proposed Project is located in an area that is designated as attainment for all of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Proposed Project’s operational levels are below those requiring an air quality analysis. According to FAA and EPA guidance in the Air Quality Procedures for Civilian Airports and Air Force Bases, a National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) assessment is only required when general aviation operations and air taxi activity levels exceed 180,000 operations, or there are more than 1.3 million enplanements per year. In 2012, the Airport totaled 63,940 operations and 0 enplanements. Since the number of annual aircraft operations at Destin Airport are forecast to be substantially below the threshold requiring an alr quality analysis, a detailed air quality analysis and emissions inventory was not required for the Focused EA. The purpose of the proposed VFR ATCT is to improve the efficiency of approach and departure procedures and the safety of the aviation environment in the Destin area. Implementation of Eienunrseastanegesininnin nthe Te PORN Smee ae eae en eee nee Destin Airport ” Davalopment of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Page 4 __ FAA ORLANDO. ADO [FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF | DECISION the Proposed Project would not Increase operations or enplanements at the Airport. Implementation of the Proposed Project would increase operational efficiency and reduce operational delay. Therefore, the Proposed Project would benefit local air quality conditions by reducing emissions associated with delayed and/or idling aircraft. The proposed new VER ATCT would initially accommodate two controllers, with the potential for a total of four positions. The emissions from the controllers traveling to and from the VFR ATCT would not significantly increase the amount of vehicle emissions in the area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not indirectly Increase emissions. Construction equipment used to clear and prepare the land for the Proposed Project would cause a temporary increase in emissions. The projected, 8-month perlod when the equipment would operate on approximately 6.5 acres of land would not significantly affect-air quality, See Section 8(4){b) of the Final Focused EA for further detalls on temporary construction-related emissions. Coastal Barriers - The No Action Alternative would not result in coastal barrier impacts. The Proposed Project would not impact any area or zone protected by the Coastal Barrier Resource Act. Coastal Zone Management - The No Action Alternative would not result in coastal zone management impacts. The entire State of Florida is located within a coastal zone. Destin is located in the Florida Panhandle and the Airport is located approximately 0.25-mile north of the Gulf of Mexico. The Proposed Project would be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the Florida Coastal Management Program (FCMP). The Proposed Project would not affect coastal resources, create plans to direct future agency actions, propose rulemaking that alters uses of a coastal zone that are inconsistent with the Program, or involve Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) leases. Early coordination with the FDEP indicated that, “Based on the information contained in the notice and comments provided by our reviewing agencies at this stage of the project, the state has no objections to the proposed federal activities. To ensure the project's consistency with the FCMP, the concerns identified by the state will be addressed prior to project implementation.” Compatible Land Use — The No Action Alternative would not result In compatible land use impacts. The Proposed Project would occur entirely on Airport property. The communities surrounding the Airport would not be disrupted, nor would any residences or businesses need to be relocated. The Proposed Project would have no effect on fleet mix or change in the number of operations at the Airport therefore it would not result in changes to noise contours and effects to off-airoort compatible or non-compatible land uses. The uplands area within the Proposed Project area is characterized by a mixture of ruderal grasses and forbs. Portions of the Proposed Project study area are located in a forested wetland system. These wetlands are considered to be wildlife attractants according to FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-33B. The Proposed Project would not enhance the wetland’s attraction to hazardous wildlife. While the 1 acre of wetland that would be removed | is not significant compared easton ewenenontonneremeeaerninnten tit ne ie Se 18 Destin Air port Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Page HI FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION to the overall area of wetlands in the vicinity, the Proposed Project area would become less attractive to wildlife with the removal of a small portion of the existing wetlands. Construction - The No Action Alternative would not result in construction-related impacts. Increases in ambient noise levels due to the construction to the Proposed Project are expected to be minor and temporary. Noise generated by construction equipment would vary depending on the equipment type, model, operational mode, duration of operation, and the specific type of work in progress. However, impacts resulting from construction noise would be localized and temporary. Areas immediately around the Airport currently do not support nolse sensitive land uses, The nearest nolse sensitive land uses (e.g., rural residential) are located approximately 4 mile to the north of the project study area. Daytime construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would be relatively minor and localized to the project study area. The construction of the Proposed Project would need to be compliant with the City of Jacksonville Environmental Protection Board, Rule 4, Noise Pollution Control (see Final Focused EA Attachment C), As a result, the Proposed Project would not result in a significant construction noise impact to noise sensitive land uses. Construction activities have the potential to cause short-term effects on ambient air quality. The emissions would occur due to disturbing land (particulate dust emissions), motor vehicles accessing the construction site and traversing disturbed grounds, and from direct emissions from construction equipment. Short-term emissions associated with the combustion of hydrocarbons, such as diese! fuel would be minor and would not cause significant air quality impacts in surrounding areas. Fugitive dust emissions would be temporary, and limited to a relatively small area on-Airport, The use of BMPs during construction activities would minimize air quality effects resulting from fugitive dust emissions. As a result, dust emissions, would not affect adjoining properties. Construction of the Proposed Project has the potential to cause temporary water quality impacts. Rain events could result in stormwater runoff that could contain pollutants associated with construction activities. These pollutants include sediments due to clearing and grubbing activities and fuels, lubricants, and solvents associated with the maintenance and operation of construction equipment. The use of BMPs, permitting requirements, and sustainable measures isee Final Focused EA Section &{12){b)) during construction activities would minimize temporary, construction-related water quality effects. Construction-related traffic would cause minor and temporary and would not permanently degrade Levels of Service (LOS) on roadways in the vicinity of the Proposed Project. Section 4(f) and 6(f) Resources - The No Action Alternative would not result in direct or indirect impacts to Section 4(f) or 6(f) resources. The Indian Bayou Golf Club bordering the Airport's southeastern boundary is a privately owned golf course. Although this recreation area is publicly accessible, it does not qualify as a Section A(f) resource, The City of Destin owns and operates the Morgan Sports Center which is located approximately 0.25-mile south of the Airport. The Morgan Sports Center is a local recreation area with a one-half basketball court, 4 baseball fields, stent at is ee OAR SAGEM ERY chalk oatiecah i ceiounauricabmieied seme eneenmeneontacetie ane nit Destin Airport Nevelopment of Contract Air Traffic Controt Towar Paye bd FAA ORLANDO ADO [FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION picnic tables, a playground, and public restrooms, amongst other amenities. Henderson Beach State Park is located approximately 1.5 miles southeast of the Airport and the Gulf islands National Seashore, a National Park, is located approximately 8 miles west of the Airport. The. Proposed Project would not directly or indirectly impact these resources. In terms of Section 6(f) resources, Fort Walton Landing Park, approximately 8 miles west of the Proposed Project, is the closest public park resource that received a grant from the LWCF. The Proposed Project would not directly or indirectly affect this Section 6(f) resource. Energy Supplies, Natural Resources and Sustainable Design ~ Neither the No Action nor the Proposed Project Alternatives would result in energy supply or natural resource impacts. Construction of the Proposed Project would consume common, readily-available construction materials. The only notable energy consumption that will occur is the consumption of fuel during construction and operation of the Proposed Project. No natural resources that are in limited supply will be utilized in association with the project. Socioeconomic Impacts, Environmental Justice, And Children’s Environmental Health And Safety Risks - Neither the No Action nor the Proposed Project Alternatives would result in environmental justice impacts. The project is located within existing Airport property and no businesses or residences will require relocation. The project study area is located in U.S. Census Tract 12091023305. According to the U.S. EPA’s Environmental Justice Viewer, approximately 5% of this U.S. Census Tract is a minority population and approximately 8% of this U.S. Census Tract is below poverty level. Direct impacts associated with the Proposed Project would occur on Airport Property. Therefore, potential impacts would not directly or indirectly affect low-income or minority populations within this census tract. In addition, the Proposed Project would not cause indirect impacts that would result in disproportionate adverse effects to the low-income or minority population within the census tract. It would not cause disproportionate adverse effects to any environmental resources important to any low-income and minority population. No alteration of surface traffic patterns or noticeable increase in surface traffic congestion will occur as a result of the Proposed Project. No alterations to the road network will be required. The Proposed Project would not alter surface traffic patterns or cause a noticeable increase in traffic congestion in the airport area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not permanently increase surface traffic congestion or decrease area roadways’ LOS. There are no schools, daycare centers, or other similar facilities within the project study area. Noah's Ark Pre-School is the closest school to the project study area. It is approximately 0.6-mile to the south east of the project study area. The Indian Bayou Golf Club golf course provides a buffer between the preschool and Airport praperty. The operation of the Proposed Project would occur in a secured and controlled environment. Children would not access the site. As a result, the Proposed Project would not have a substantial effect on products or substances that a child is likely to touch, digest, or be exposed to. irene ensreroncumeeennaaee tetany ermapererter ten Or aC a aren mrepamt ee ee tron TG NOE OPN REE HEARTS Destin Airport Development of Contract Air Traffic Cantrot Tower Page [2 FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would cause significant risks to the health and safety of children. Prime, Unique or State Significant Farmlands — Neither the No Action Alternative nor the Proposed Project would result in impacts to prime, unique or state significant farmlands. The Proposed Project is located in an area that is not used for agricultural purposes and it would not require the conversion of farmlands to non-agricultural uses. The project study area contains Dorovan muck, Mandarin sand, and Resota sand. According to the NRCS, Web Soil Survey, these soil types are not classified as prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance and this area is not currently used to cultivate crops. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not impact prime, unique, or state-significant farmland soil types. Early coordination initiated with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) confirmed that the Proposed Project site does not contain prime farmlands (see Final Focused EA Attachrnent B-2}, Floodplains - The No Action Alternative would not result in impacts to floodplains. The Proposed Project is not located in, and will not encroach upon any base/100-year floodplains as designated by FEMA (see Final Focused EA Exhibit A-7). Hazardous Materials - The No Action Alternative would not result in hazardous materiais impacts. The only existing hazardous materials site on the Airport is the fuel farm, which is located on the northwestern portion of the Airport, The Proposed Project would not affect the fuel farrn in any way, The construction of the Proposed Project would cause a temporary increase in municipal solid waste due to the removal and disposal of inorganic materials and vegetation that are removed during clearing and grubbing activities. As noted in Section 8(12)(b) of the Final Focused EA, some of the removed vegetation may be ground and used to mulch disturbed areas, sold as timber, or be reused. Okaloosa County does not have a municipal solid waste landfill. Municipal solid waste and commercial solid waste is transported to the Springhill Regional Landfill in Jackson County, approximately 70 miles northeast of Okaloosa. Currently, the Springhill Regional Landfill has 3,245,441 tons of waste in place and is predicted to close in 2055. The Proposed Project would not cause an increase in operations at the Airport. As noted above, the landfill in Jackson County has sufficient capacity to handle operationally-related municipal solid waste the Proposed Project would generate (i.e., 2-4 acres). As a result, the Proposed Project would not adversely affect the landfill capacities of Jackson County. There are no landfills within 10,000 feet of a runway serving turbo-powered aircraft, or 5,000 feet of a runway serving piston-powered aircraft. Okaloosa County currently transfers its waste to the Springhill Regional Landfill in Jackson County and does not have any landfills within the County. Destin Airport Development of Cantract Ar Traffic Control Tower Kaige 13 FAA ORLANDO ADO |FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources — The No Action Alternative would not result in impacts to historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural resources. Several structures in Okaloosa County exist on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The closest NRHP-listed resources are the Gulfview Hotel Historic District, Camp Pinchot Historic District, McKinley Climatic Laboratory, and Eglin Field Historic District. These historic resources are approximately 8 ~ 10 miles west of the Proposed Project. There are no buildings within the project study area. Given the distance of the Proposed Project from historical resources, and since the Proposed Project would not change operations at the Airport, project implementation would not directly or indirectly affect historical resources. There is no reason to believe that significant scientific, prehistoric, historic, archeological, or paleontological resources would be lost or destroyed as a result of the Proposed Project. According to the FLSHPO, "no historical properties will be affected as a result of the proposed undertaking” (see Attachment B-2). If paleontological resources are encountered during construction activities, all ground-disturbing activities within 25 feet of the discovered resources would stop immediately. The contractor would immediately contact Okaloosa County, the FLSHPO, the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), and FAA. Okaloosa County would ensure a qualified paleontologist is called as soon as possible to assess the situation. Consultation would be conducted to seek recommendations for the treatment of the discovery. See the Final Focused EA, Altachment 8-2, for coordination with the Florida State Historic Preservation Officer (FLSHPO) and the Seminole Nation, respectively. Induced Socioeconomic Impacts - The No Action Alternative would not result in induced socioeconomic impacts. The proposed project is located entirely within Airport property. The Proposed Project would not result in the relocation of homes or businesses, community disruption, population movement or growth, or changes in public service demands. The Proposed Project would result in positive economic effects due to employment opportunities during construction and operation of the proposed ATCT facilities that would be constructed under the Proposed Project. Light Emissions and Visual Effects - The No Action Alternative would not result in light or visual impacts. The Proposed Project would be constructed on Airport property. Operating hours for the proposed VFR ATCT have not yet been determined. However, the proposed VFR ATCT is expected to operate approximately 16 hours per day, potentially between 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM. The light emitted from the proposed VFR ATCT would be visible during dark hours (i.e., after 7:00 PM). The proposed VFR ATCT would have an overall height of 84.5 feet AGL and would be lighted with red FAA L-810 obstruction lighting. This light is low emitting and therefore would not impact local residential areas. Parking lot lighting and light emitted from the interior of the proposed VFR ATCT would not impact residential areas surrounding the Airport. Residential areas approximately 0.3-mile northwest of the proposed VFR ATCT site have a buffer of trees between the neighborhood and the proposed VFR ATCT. Residential areas approximately Soren murine enereumataemenmacams Destin Airpart Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Page 14 FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION 0.3-mile southwest would be able to see the proposed VFR ATCT. However, the proposed VFR ATCT is consistent with Airport operations and the overall appearance of the Airport (see Final Focused EA Exhibil A-8). Noise Impacts - The No Action Alternative would not result in significant noise impacts to non- compatible land uses. Implementation of the Proposed Project does not trigger the requirement to perform a nolse analysis per FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A. No changes to the airport’s existing or future noise contours would occur as a result of the Proposed Project (see Section 8(13) of the Final Focused EA). Construction-related noise would be temporary and be limited to the daylight hours. Water Quality - The No Action Alternative would not result in water quality impacts. Construction and operation of the Proposed Project may temporarily affect surface water quality. Construction would disturb land. Runoff from that disturbed area could flow into nearby streams and adversely affect water quality. An NPDES construction permit would need to be obtained and would include best management practices (BMP’s) to avoid and minimize the potential temporary effects, An approximately 525 square foot parking lot would create new impervious surface, slightly increasing the amount of stormwater runoff, However, as noted below, the Proposed Project includes the construction of stormwater management facilities to protect nearby waters. Proposed stormwater treatment and attenuation for the Proposed Project would be achieved through dry swale facilities. This meets requirements in the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Statewide Airport Stormwater Study Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual, dated December 2010, and FAA design criteria. As recommended in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-33B , the Proposed Project would remove all standing water it causes on or near the airfield within 48 hours of a design rainfall effect by using the dry swale treatment and under drains in retention ponds. Thus, the stormwater facilities associated with the Proposed Project would not be a wildlife hazard attractant. The Proposed Project would not affect any aquifers. The closest sole source aquifer is the Southern Hills Regional Aquifer System, located approximately 190 miles west of the Proposed Project. Okaloosa County would need to obtain applicable permits from the Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD) and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) due to the wetland impacts associated with construction of the Proposed Project. To obtain these permits, the project's design, mitigation, and BMPs would meet strict standards to protect all applicable water quality standards. Proposed on-site and off-site wetland mitigation have been discussed with USACE and NWFWMD. At this time, USACE and NWFWMD have found the proposed mitigation acceptable. The potential for on-site and off-site mitigation is further discussed in Sectien &{17}e) of the Final Focused GA, Destin Airport Bevelopmeart of Contract Air Traffic Cantral Tower Page 5 FAA ORLANDO ADO [FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Wetlands - The No Action Alternative will not result in wetland impacts. The Proposed Project would affect approximately 1 acre of state and federal jurisdictional wetlands (0.5-acre temporary and 0.5-acre direct). This wetland impact is unavoidable due to limited acreage of undeveloped land on the western side of the Airport needed! to support the safety and function of an ATCT. As described in Section &(4) af the Final Focused EA, construction of the Proposed Project would temporarily affect 0.5-acre of wetland as a result of clearing forested wetlands and filling areas to facilitate construction equipment access. The 0.5-acre of directly impacted wetlands is part of a much larger system approximately 130 acres in size. The impacts are located along the eastern edge of the wetland system which is less damaging to the integrity the remaining wetland resource. Due to the small size of the Proposed Project, no significant impact to the wetland habitat at the Airport or its functions is anticipated. In accordance with USACE, FDEP and NWEWMD permitting procedures, compensatory mitigation for wetland functional losses would be required in order to obtain a permit (see Final Focused EA Sections 10 and 11, respectively). As a result of the Proposed Project's potential for wetland impacts and to comply with Section 404 guidelines, the Focused EA evaluated Alternative #1 and Alternative #2 as alternatives to the Proposed Project. However, Alternatives #1 and #2 have the potential to impact a greater acreage of wetlands than the Proposed Project (see Section 6 of the Final Facused EA), Minimization of wetland impacts includes positioning the facility at the edge of the wetland while still maintaining the functional capability, reducing the size of the footprint as much as possible (Including the temporary impact areas), and relocation of the proposed access road from the original position to primarily uplands. The Proposed Project involves less than 5 acres of wetland impacts. According to the Operating Agreement between the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and NWFWMD, Okaloosa County would apply for the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) through the NWFWMD's Crestview Field Office (see Final Focused EA Attachment B-2), The USACE has authority for the potential impacts to the jurisdictional wetland. See Section 11 for a description of the conceptual wetland mitigation. The Proposed Project does not qualify fora USACE Nationwide General Permit. USACE and NWEWMD were contacted to discuss possible wetland mitigation options including _ an off-site plan utilizing the Nokuse Mitigation Bank, preservation of wetlands at the Airport and off-site site-specific mitigation. The Proposed Project is not situated within the Service Area of the Nokuse Mitigation Bank; however, the Service Area boundary is located approximately two miles from the Proposed Project. Additionally, drainage from both the Proposed Project and the Nokuse Mitigation Bank site discharge to Choctawhatchee Bay. The regulatory agencies, on occasion, authorize the use of a permitted mitigation bank even though a project is not in the Service Area. USACE indicated that, even though the preference of the agency was the use of a permitted mitigation bank, this was not a viable option since the Propased Project is too far removed from the Service Area and ia ap eng toot baste iat see RAPIER NA RRA TER TOES SRT ATA Toutes svg stain MARNE IE ES ee Destin Airport , Davalopment of Contract Air Traffic Contral Tower Page io Sources: Bing, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2012; RS&H, 2012 0 500 1,000 2,000 N ees Feet HME SCEstuarine and Marine Deepwater Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland [| Project Study Area Freshwater Pond ; Freshwater Emergent Wetland ; ' Destin Airport Boundary Exhibit A-9 Wetlands FAA ORLANDO ADO [FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION permit conditions of the Nokuse Mitigation Bank do not allow this variance. USACE indicated that on-site wetland preservation may be acceptable due to the size of the wetland system present on the Airport property. The viability of the mitigation plan would depend upon it providing enough of a wetland functional unit replacement value per the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Methodology (UMAM) evaluation. Wetland preservation on the Airport was also given cursory approval by the NWFWMD, but has not been authorized by the FAA. An off-site site-specific wetland mitigation plan would also be acceptable to USACE, provided that it Is located within the same drainage basin, involves the creation, enhancement or preservation of the same type of wetland system and a UMAM evaluation yields adequate wetland functional unit replacement for the impacted wetlands at the Airport. NWEWMD stated that the compensatory mitigation for impacts at the Destin Airport up to 0.5-acre in size could be permitted utilizing the Nokuse Mitigation Bank and that the secondary impacts as well as the direct impacts would be included in the calculation of the 0.5-acre threshold total. Since the Proposed Project would exceed the 0.5-acre threshold, NWFWMD indicated that a credit purchase from the mitigation bank could be used for compensation for the direct impacts with the temporary impacts being mitigated with a site specific plan at the Airport property or in the vicinity. NWEWMD indicated that an off-site site specific wetland mitigation plan would be acceptable with similar requirements to those voiced by USACE. Any type of mitigation plan would require a UMAM evaluation to determine the appropriateness of the proposal. Based on coordination with USACE and NWFWMD the proposed mitigation options are acceptable at this time to compensate for any unavoidable impacts to wetland resources. The County proposes conceptual on-site wetlands mitigation to compensate for the unavoidable 1-acre wetland impact (see Section 11 of the Final Focused EA). Okaloosa County will develop a detailed mitigation plan to the satisfaction of USACE, NWFWMD, and FAA during the permitting process. Wild and Scenic Rivers - Neither the No Action nor the Proposed Project Alternatives would result in impacts to Wild and Scenic Rivers. The Proposed Project would not affect any river segment on the National River Inventory. The closest Wild and Scenic River to the project, study area is the Black Creek in Mississippi, approximately 200 miles to the west. The closest river segment on the National River Inventory within Florida is the Wekiva River, located over 300 miles to the southeast of the Proposed Project. There are no National River inventory Segments within Okaloosa County. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS As described in Section 8 of the Final Focused EA, the Proposed Project would result in potential unavoidable environmental impacts, Meetings were held with Airport stakeholders during the VFR ATCT Comparative Safety Assessment (CSA). Attendees discussed the project, potential sites, ment. Okaloosa eR EAL OTA EEE RET ETE CORR eee Destin Airport Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Parte be FAA ORLANDO ADO | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION County has not received significant agency or public comments on the Proposed Project; therefore, the Proposed Project is not highly controversial on environmental grounds. The Proposed Project would not conflict with the objectives of Federal, regional, state, or local plans or policies of Okaloosa County/City of Destin. The Proposed Project is reasonably consistent with plans, goals, policies, or controls that have been adopted for the area in which Destin Airport is located. Cumulative Impacts — Section 12 of the Final Focused EA analyzed the cumulative impacts the Proposed Project would have on particular resources when added to the impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions undertaken or proposed by the Airport Sponsor. Based on the information contained in the Final Focused EA, the Proposed Project would not result in cumulative impacts to any of the resource categories evaluated. CONSISTENCY WITH APPROVED PLANS OR LAWS The Proposed Project is consistent with plans, goals, policies, and controls that have been adopted for the area in which Destin Airport is located. The Proposed Project is depicted on the Destin Airport's most current Airport Layout Plan (ALP). The Proposed Project would not require land use or zoning changes and thus would be consistent with all local land use and comprehensive plans. There has been no indication that any aspect of the Proposed Project is inconsistent with Federal, state, or local laws or administrative determinations related to the environment. The required permits (NWFWMD and USACE) will be obtained by the County prior to construction of the Proposed Project. MITIGATION MEASURES As described in Section 8(17) of the Final Focused EA, the Proposed Project would affect approximately 1-acre of state and federal jurisdictional wetlands (0.5-acre temporary and 0.5-acre direct), The temporary wetland impact area, as a result of construction, would be returned to pre- construction elevations and the vegetative community re-established by natural recruitment. The loss of wetland functions associated with the Proposed Project was evaluated utilizing the Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment (UMAM) methodology. This assessment methodology has been accepted by USACE, FDEP, and NWFWMD and is commonly used during the permitting process to determine that adequate compensatory mitigation is provided. The UMAM evaluation of the impacted wetlands yields a value expressed as functional loss units. Compensatory mitigation plans are also evaluated utilizing UMAM and the benefits provided by the implementation of these plans yield a value expressed as the functional lift units. An adequate compensatory mitigation plan must replace the functional unit loss experienced at the impact site. A preliminary UMAM evaluation of the direct wetland impact of the Proposed Project indicates a loss of 0.40 functional units. Nevelopment of Contract Air Traffic Cantral Tower FAA ORLANDO ADO }FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION Conceptual Mitigation - As described in Section 8(17){e) of ve Final Focused EA, the County has coordinated three mitigation options with the USACE and NWEWMD during the development of the EA for the Proposed Project’s 1-acre of wetland impact. These options include off-site site- specific wetlands creation and/or enhancement, purchasing credits from a permitted wetland mitigation bank, or on-site wetland preservation. The potential high cost associated with the off- site wetland creation effort, the five year monitoring of the mitigation site to confirm that the success criteria have been met and the required perpetual maintenance of the mitigation site are all factors which preclude this type of mitigation plan from being a viable option considering the County's budget. In addition, the preferred mitigation option of the regulatory agencies is the use of a permitted wetland mitigation bank. In order to utilize a wetland mitigation bank, the project impacts must be located within the Service Area of a permitted bank. The Airport is not located within a mitigation bank service area. Therefore, these two options were not further considered by the County as feasible wetland mitigation. bsequent loss Based on the a, the County As a result of the Proposed Project’s potential fo impact an acre of wetland and a su of approximately 0.40 functional units, the County proposes on-site preservation. coordination with the USACE and NWFWMPD and the significant on-site wetland are proposes an on-site wetland preservation easement to mitigate for the potential 1-acre wetland impact of the Proposed Project. ion would be implemented with the minimum mitigation required. In order to off-set the loss of 0.40 functional units, approximately 20-30 acres of on-site wetland area would be placed into a perpetual easement between the County and the NWFWMD. This area includes a portion of the eastern edge of the on-site wetland area, away from the airport operating area. The wetland preservation area would be on average approximately 150 feet wide, between the eastern edge of the on-site wetland and the residents living southwest of Indian Trail Road, This area would be a vegetative buffer area for local residents from perceived aviation noise and visual impacts. Under a perpetual easement, the Airport would not develop this area in the future but, would continue to manage the area to reduce any potential wildlife hazards. The conceptual wetland mitigation would not affect the development of a perimeter access road (per the approved ALP). In addition, this conceptual mitigation plan would also continue to provide the County the flexibility to propose future development east of the runway continue to meet their FAA grant assurances to promote the growth and development of the Airport. The conceptual wetland preservat Based on the conceptual mitigation described above, the County will develop a specific mitigation plan to the satisfaction of the USACE, during the permitting processes, Coordination with the USACE, NWEMD, and the FAA will continue and the development and implementation of the final mitigation plan will provide sufficient wetland functional unit replacement value per the UMAM evaluation. ssn a ET eA ENE TA MA NR NY TE PAPE RE EEE TS nd mee Destin Alrport Development of Contract Ale Traffic Control Tower Paras DY FAA ORLANDO ADO J FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AGENCY COORDINATION The following provides a summary of the Public Involvement and Agency Coordination efforts that took place during the preparation of the Focused EA. FAA/Okaloosa_ County/Stakeholders Comparative Safety Assessment Panel — A meeting for the Comparative Safety Assessment portion of the ATCT Siting Study was held on September 22, 2011. The Safety Risk Management Panel included four SMS trained individuals, and representatives from FAA, Eglin AFB, Hulburt Air Force, Okaloosa County Airports, and Reynolds, Smith and Hills, (RS&H), The Safety Risk Management Panel used and validated the Preliminary Hazard List and discussed hazard identification. EA Early Coordination - On October 31, 2012, Okaloosa County Airports distributed an early coordination package to various Federal, state, and local agencies. The packet discussed the preparation of a Focused EA for the proposed ATCT, discussed a request for any relevant information that any agency may have regarding the project site and/or environs, and provided the opportunity for agencies to comment on the Proposed Project's potential environmental, social, and economic issues. ris considered and used appropriate information collected from the early chment B-1 for the dence received Okaloosa County Airpo coordination effort during the preparation of this Focused EA (see Atta coordination packet and distribution list), Attachment B-2 includes correspon regarding the Proposed Project. Draft EA Public Outreach — The Draft Focused EA was available for public review and comments between March 15, 2013 and April 16, 2013. Copies of the Draft Focused EA were on the Airport's website (www. flydts.com) and at the following locations: 1. Destin Library 150 Sibert Avenue Destin, FL 32541 2. Northwest Florida Regional Airport 1701 State Road 85 North Eglin Air Force Base, FL. 32542 ocused EA for the VFR ATCT at Destin Annex on April 4, 2013. Sixteen people n Log, Okaloosa Economic Development Airports, and RS&H. A public workshop was held with regard to the Draft F Airport. This meeting was held at the Destin City Hall attended the workshop. Attendees represented the Desti Committee, City of Destin, Eglin Air Force Base (AFB), Okaloosa County ‘ORDERS NETEREE TERME ANSTO OR SURE SR EE RN ENTREE eater RENT es Destin Airport Development of Contract Air Traffic Controi Tower Page 29 FAA ORLANDO ADO [FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION A brief presentation was given to attendees at the beginning of the workshop. Mr. Tracy Stage, Okaloosa County Airports Deputy Director, began the presentation with a brief overview of recent activities at the Destin Airport and the work done to-date for the proposed VFR ATCT. Mr, Stage also mentioned the potential closing of various Contract Towers throughout Florida and the potential implications for the proposed ATCT at Destin Airport. Mr. Ken Ibold and Mr. David Alberts of RS&H continued the presentation by providing further information to attendees on the Draft Focused EA. Attendees were also informed where they could review a hard copy of the Draft Focused EA, where to send comments, and the deadline for submitting their comments. There did not appear to be any conflict among attendees over this Proposed Project. Attendees were provided the opportunity to review exhibits, ask questions, and/or leave comments in an informal setting. Attendees were provided with handouts and comment forms to take home. One question was asked which dealt with the recent news articles about the closing of Contract Towers and what would happen to the money that Okaloosa County Airports has for the construction of the proposed VFR ATCT. Mr. Stage replied that based on recent events, the County would be discussing this issue. No other agency or public comments were recelved on the Draft EA. he Final Public Workshop materials for the Draft Focused EA are contained in Atlachmert C of Focused EA. STRESSED TIRY sep nae See 6 SST ATOR Se TN PETES SPE atin TARR NE Destin Airport Developmant of Contract Air Traffic Cantrol Tower Rage 21 FAA ORLANDO ADO {FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION FEDERAL FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT After careful consideration of the facts contained herein, and in the attached Final Focused EA, the undersigned finds that the proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national environmental policies and objectives as set forth in section 101 of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. §4331(a) and other applicable environmental requirements and will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise Include any condition requiring consultation pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of NEPA. As a result, the FAA issues this Finding of No Significant Impact determining that an Environmental Impact Statement for this action is not necessary. of APPROVED:__ /htAdu lif Myf DATE: 2/ a uf L2 DISAPPROVED: DATE: — Aton ae tie ss eras Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Towar Page 22 FAA ORLANDO ADO |FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT AND RECORD OF DECISION RECORD OF DECISION AND ORDER | have carefully considered the FAA's statutory mandate to ensure the safe and efficient use of the national airspace system as well as the other aeronautical goals and objectives discussed in the attached Final Focused EA. My review af the Focused EA and determination regarding issuance of the FONSI included evaluation of the purpose and need that the Proposed Project would serve, the alternate means of achieving the purpose and need, the environmental impacts associated with these alternatives, and any mitigation necessary to preserve and enhance the human, cultural, and natural environment. Under the authority delegated to me by the FAA Administrator, | find the Proposed Project described in the Final Focused EA is reasonably supported. |, therefore, direct that action be taken to carry forward the necessary agency actions discussed in the Final Focused EA and in the attached FONSI. This Record of Decision (ROD) represents the FAA's final decision and approval for the actions identified in the Final Focused EA and constitutes a final order of the FAA Administrator subject to review by the Courts of Appeal of the United States in accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. §46110. Any party seeking to stay implementation of the ROD must file an application with the FAA prior to seeking judicial relief, as provided in Rule 18(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. of ee wt « Grae ra = 4 we APPROVED: ff ELL — TN ecaget DATE: 7 /2 f (20 £3 Name: Bart Vernace, p. Title: Manager, FAA Orlando Airports District Office Address: 5950 Hazeltine National Drive, Suite 400, Orlando, FL 32822 Telephone: 407-812-6331 DISAPPROVED: DATE: Name: Title: Address: Telephone: sberepreancreeo tes penetra negra a eh ORS SN NEG UAE TIS RAN BEET eee UFR SET SIE RRL ENE Destin Airport Development of Contract Air Traffic Control Tower Pare 24 RICK SCOTT FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION JENNIFER CARROLL MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS BUILDING LT. GOVERNOR 3900 COMMONWEALTH BOULEVARD AERSCHELT VINVARDIR TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-3000 Fee ETARY: December 19, 2012 Mr. David Alberts Southeast Region Environmental Service Group Leader Reynolds, Smith and Hills 10748 Deerwood Park Boulevard South Jacksonville, FL 32256-0597 RE: Federal Aviation Administration — Scoping Notice — Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower at Destin Airport — Destin, Okaloosa County, Florida. SAI # FL201211066409 Dear Mr, Alberts: The Florida State Clearinghouse has coordinated a review of the subject public notice under the following authorities: Presidential Executive Order 12372; § 403.061(42), Florida Statutes; the Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1451-1464, as amended; and the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347, as amended. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) Northwest District Office staff in Pensacola indicates that the proposed project may impact wetlands on-site. If this is the case, the applicant would be required to apply for and obtain an environmental resource permit (ERP) under Chapter 62-346, Florida Administrative Code. This authorization will cover the requirements for both wetlands effects and stormwater management. According to the Operating Agreement between the DEP and Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD), the applicant would apply for the ERP permit through the NWFWMD’s Crestview Field Office if the project involves less than five acres of wetland impacts. Please apply to the DEP’s Northwest District Office if the wetland impacts are greater than five acres. For further information and assistance, please contact Mr. Scott Casey at (850) 595-0574 or Scott.CasevZden. state. flus. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) notes that, given the land cover in the proposed project area, a number of state-listed, federally listed and protected species may occur on-site. As such, staff recommends that the Environmental Assessment prepared for the project include wildlife surveys for state-listed species within the project area in the alternatives analysis, Please refer to the enclosed FWC letter and contact Mr. Ben Shepherd at (407) 858-6170 or Ben. Shepherd MvEWC.com for further information and guidance on conducting wildlife surveys in accordance with FWC and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocols. wh dep whet fd dts Mr. David Alberts Page 2 of 2 December 19, 2012 at, although no historic properties will be Florida Department of State (DOS) staff finds th; Destin Airport (aka the Northwest F lorida affected as a result of the proposed undertaking, Regional Airport) began operating in 1957, but has not been formally recorded and entered into the Florida Master Site File (FMSF). If historic, DOS requests that the airport, including associated runways, taxiways and all buildings or structures 50 years of age or older be recorded using a Resource Group form from the FMSF website. If buildings or structures in the project area are less than 50 years old, however, no additional information is required. Please refer to the enclosed DOS letter for additional information. Based on the information contained in the notice and comments provided by our reviewing agencies, at this stage, the state has no objections to the proposed federal activities. To ensure the project’s consistency with the Florida Coastal Management Program (FCMP), the concerns identified by the state must be addressed prior to project implementation. The state’s continued concurrence will be based on the activity’s compliance with FCMP authorities, including federal and state monitoring of the activity to ensure its continued conformance, and the adequate resolution of any issues identified during this and subsequent reviews. The state’s final concurrence of the project’s consistency with the FCMP will be determined during the environmental permitting process, in accordance with Section 373.428, Florida Statutes. Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed project. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Ms. Jillaine M. Owens at (850) 245-2187. Yours sincerely, Atty Po Cerne Sally B. Mann, Director Office of Intergovernmental Programs SBM/jmo Enclosures ce: Darryl Boudreau, DEP, Northwest District Scott Sanders, FWC Scott Edwards, DOS WOR” rap “ALE TL Florida Department of Environmental Protection "More Protection, Less Process” - a ; 210 P Home | Contact DEP | Search | DEP Site Map Peeled ante 42/19/2012” OS ‘FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION - SCOPING NOTICE - CONSTRUCT - ‘NEW AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER AT DESTIN AIRPORT - DESTIN, OKALOOSA COUNTY, FLORIDA. Ce AA . NEW AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER AT DESTIN AIRPORT - : OKALOOSA CO. - Le neers care cee ne emaeme sammie cetemian game nes saeco tot at Age ee ENVIRONMENT. - FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION The DEP's Northwest District Office staff in Pensacola indicates that the proposed project may impact wetlands onsite. If this is the case, the applicant would be required to apply for and obtain an environmental resource permit (ERP) under Chapter 62-346, Florida Administrative Code. This authorization will cover the requirements for both wetlands effects and stormwater . management. According to the Operating Agreement between the DEP and Northwest Florida Water Management District WFWMD's Crestview Field Office if the project (NWFWMD), the applicant would apply for the ERP permit through the N involves less than five acres of wetland impacts. Please apply to the DEP's Northwest District Office if the wetland impacts are greater than five acres. For further information and assistance, please contact Mr. Scott Casey at (850) 595-0574 or ‘Scott. Casey@dep. state. fl.us. eee ene STATE. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATED s—s—<CSs—i‘—SCS DOS staff finds that, although no historic properties will be a (aka the Northwest Florida Regional Airport) began operating in 1957, but has not been formally recorded and entered into the Florida Master Site File (FMSF). If historic, DOS requests that the airport, including associated runways, taxiways and all - buildings or structures 50 years of age or older be recorded using a Resource Group form from the FMSF website. If ‘buildings or structures in the project area are less than 50 years old, however, no additional information is required, SORTHWEST FLORIDA WMD NORTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT fected as a result of the proposed undertaking, Destin Airport No Comments coos es nan nein COMMUNITY PLANNING - FLORIDA DEPARTM iT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY oo — Lif COMMISSION - FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION oe a, a number of state-listed, federally listed and the Environmental Assessment prepared for the project The EWC notes that, given the land cover in the proposed project are protected species may occur on-site. As such, staff recommends that include wildlife surveys for state-listed species within the project area in the alternatives analysis. Please refer to the enclosed FWC letter and contact Mr. Ben Shepherd at (407) 858-6170 or Ben.Shepherd@MyFWC.com for further information and guidance on conducting wildlife surveys in accordance with FWC and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocols. TRANSPORTATION - FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The FDCT Aviation Office and District Three have no comments. WEST FLORIDA RPG - WEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL No Comments OKALOOSA - OKALOOSA COUNTY Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Cormission Commissioners Kenneth W. Wright Chairman Winter Park Kathy Barco Vice Chairman Jacksonville Ronald M. Bergeron Fort Lauderdale Richard A. Corbett Tampa Aliese P. “Llesa" Priddy Immokalee Charles W. Roberts I! Tallahassee Brian S, Yablonski Tallahassee Exotica Stall Nick Wiley Executive Director Greg Holder Assistant Executive Director Karen Ventimiglia Chief of Staff Olfice af the Executive Director Nick Wiley Executive Olrector (850) 487-3796 (850) 921-5786 FAX Managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of people. 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600 Voice: (850) 488-4676 Hearing/speech-impaired: (800) 955-8774 (T) (800) 955-8770 (V) MyFWC.com December 4, 2012 Ms. Lauren Milligan Environmental Manager Florida State Clearinghouse Florida Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 47 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 Lauren. milligan@dep.state. fl.us RE: SAI#FL201211066409, Federal Aviation Administration — Scoping Notice - Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower at Destin Airport — Destin, Okaloosa County Dear Ms. Milligan: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission staff has reviewed the application for the above-mentioned scoping notice and provides the following comments for your consideration in accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Act/Florida Coastal Management Program. Project Description The Okaloosa County Airports System is proposing to build an Air Traffic Control Tower on the east side of the Airport property. The purpose of the proposed project is to improve airspace safety. This is necessary because of diversified aircraft fleet mixes and proximity to Eglin Air Force Base operations. In addition to construction of the control tower, the Airports System will evaluate the development of a 3,990-foot access road to the tower, development of utility service connections, and removal of visual obstructions. Potentially Affected Resources A Geographic Information System review indicates that land cover in the proposed project area is primarily transportation, freshwater marsh, and hydric pine flatwoods. Some of these areas, and their underlying soils, may support gopher tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus, State-Threatened) and commensal species, such as the gopher frog (Lithobates capito, State Species of Species Concern) and eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi, Federally-Threatened), often associated with gopher tortoise burrows. The Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) has been observed on the property adjacent to the project area. The Florida black bear is no longer state-listed; however, this species remains protected by the Florida Black Bear Conservation Rule (68A-4.009, Florida Administrative Code). Given its proximity to the coast, the project area may also support the Choctawhatchee beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus allophrys, Federally-Endangered). Lauren Milligan Page 2 December 4, 2012 Recommendations It is our understanding that an Environmental Assessment (EA) will be prepared to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. We recommend that, as part of the EA, wildlife surveys be conducted for state-listed species within the project area. These results should be included in the alternatives analysis so that FWC will be able to evaluate potential impacts on state-listed species. All wildlife surveys should be conducted by qualified individuals with recent documented experience for each potential species and should follow protocols established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the FWC. Information and guidance for conducting wildlife surveys can be obtained from the Florida Wildlife Conservation Guide (http://myfwe.com/conservation/value/fvcg/), Gopher tortoise survey protocol and permitting guidelines can be found in the Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines (http://mvfwe.com/media/1410274/GTPermittingGuidelines.pdf). We appreciate the opportunity to participate in the early coordination efforts for the Okaloosa County Airports System. If you need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Jane Chabre either by phone at (850) 410-5367 or at FWCConservationPlanningServices@MyFWC.com. If you have specific questions regarding the content of this letter, please contact Ben Shepherd at (407) 858-6170 or by email at Ben. Shepherd@MyFWC.com. Yoko D> Bonita Gorham Land Use Planning Program Administrator Office of Conservation Planning Services Sincerely, bg/bs ENV 1-3-2 Destin Air Traffic Control Tower _16919_ 120412 RICK SCOTT KEN DETZNER Governor Secretary of State Ms, Lauren Milligan December 10, 2012 Florida State Clearinghouse 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard MS #47 FDEP- #3700 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Re: SHPO Project #: 2012-5536/ SAI #: FL201211066409 Federal Aviation Administration- Scoping Notice- Construct New Air Traffic Control Tower at Destin Airport (Okaloosa County) Dear Ms. Milligan: The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the referenced project for possible Impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. The review was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended and 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. Based on the information provided, it is the opinion of this office that no historic properties will be affected as a result of the proposed undertaking. However, our review indicates that the Destin Airport (aka the Northwest Florida Regional Airport) began operating in 1957 but it has not been formally recorded and entered into the Florida Master Site File (FMSF). If historic, we request that the airport, including associated runways, taxiways, and all buildings or structures 50 years old or older be recorded using a Resource Group form. A copy of this form may be obtained at the FMSF website (http:/Avww. fiheritage.com/preservation/sitefile). However, if the buildings or structures in the project area are less than 50 years old, no additional information is required. For any questions, please contact Katherine Shelfer, Historic Preservationist, katherine.shelfer@dos.myflorida.com, or by phone, 850.245.6333, Sincerely, CirmcoAbug, A. Prraons, DSHPO fer Robert F. Bendus, Director Division of Historical Resources and State Historic Preservation Officer \ tt, DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES R. A. Gray Building * 500 South Bronough Street ° Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 \ 3 M Telephone: 850.245.6300 « www. flheritage.coimn Commemorating 500 years of Florida histor www.fla500.com VIVA FLORIOA500. g 500 years of ae!" VIVA FLORIDA SOD FAA Airports Grant Assurances Airport Sponsors A. General. 1. These assurances shall be complied with in the performance of grant agreements for airport development, airport planning, and noise compatibility program grants for airport sponsors. These assurances are required to be submitted as part of the project application by sponsors requesting funds under the provisions of Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended. As used herein, the term "public agency sponsor" means a public agency with control of a public-use airport; the term "private sponsor" means a private owner of a public-use airport; and the term "sponsor" includes both public agency sponsors and private sponsors. Upon acceptance of this grant offer by the sponsor, these assurances are incorporated in and become part of this grant agreement. B. Duration and Applicability. 1. Airport development or Noise Compatibility Program Projects Undertaken by a Public Agency Sponsor. The terms, conditions and assurances of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect throughout the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired for an airport development or noise compatibility program project, or throughout the useful life of the project items installed within a facility under a noise compatibility program project, but in any event not to exceed twenty (20) years from the date of acceptance of a grant offer of Federal funds for the project. However, there shall be no limit on the duration of the assurances regarding Exclusive Rights and Airport Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport. There shall be no limit on the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances with respect to real property acquired with federal funds. Furthermore, the duration of the Civil Rights assurance shall be specified in the assurances. Airport Development or Noise Compatibility Projects Undertaken by a Private Sponsor. The preceding paragraph 1 also applies to a private sponsor except that the useful life of project items installed within a facility or the useful life of the facilities developed or equipment acquired under an airport development or noise compatibility program project shall be no less than ten (10) years from the date of acceptance of Federal aid for the project. Alrport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP Page 1 of 17 3. Airport Planning Undertaken by a Sponsor. Unless otherwise specified in this grant agreement, only Assurances 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 13, 18, 30, 32, 33, and 34 in section C apply to planning projects. The terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect during the life of the project. C. grant that: 1. Sponsor Certification. The sponsor hereby assures and certifies, with respect to this General Federal Requirements. It will comply with all applicable F ederal laws, regulations, executive orders, policies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to the application, acceptance and use of Federal funds for this project including but not limited to the following: Federal Legislation es Ao Tf mh PODOB RS Ree ¥ t u. Vv. Ww, X. Title 49, U.S.C., subtitle VII, as amended, Davis-Bacon Act - 40 U.S.C. 276(a), et seq.’ Federal Fair Labor Standards Act - 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq. Hatch Act—5 U.S.C. 1501, et seq.” Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 Title 42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.” National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 - Section 106 - 16 U.S.C. 470(f).' Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 - 16 U.S.C. 469 through 469c.! Native Americans Grave Repatriation Act - 25 U.S.C. Section 3001, et seq. Clean Air Act, P.L. 90-148, as amended. Coastal Zone Management Act, P.L. 93-205, as amended. Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 - Section 102(a) - 42 U.S. Title 49, U.S.C., Section 303, (formerly known as Section 4(f)) Rehabilitation Act of 1973 - 29 U.S.C. 794. Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Title VI - 42 U.S.C. 2000d through d-4. Age Discrimination Act of 1975 - 42 U.S.C. 6101, et seq. American Indian Religious Freedom Act, P.L. 95-341, as amended. Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 -42 U.S.C, 4151, et seq.! Power plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978 - Section 403-2 U.S.C. 8373.| Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act - 40 U.S.C. 327, et seq. Copeland Anti kickback Act - 18 U.S.C. 874.1 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 - 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.’ Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, P.L. 90-542, as amended. Single Audit Act of 1984 - 31 U.S.C. 7501, et seq.” Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 - 41 U.S.C. 702 through 706. C. 4012a.' Executive Orders Paga 2 of 17 Alrport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP Executive Order 11246 - Equal Employment Opportunity’ Executive Order 11990 - Protection of Wetlands Executive Order 11998 — Flood Plain Management Executive Order 12372 - Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs Executive Order 12699 - Seismic Safety of Federal and Federally Assisted New Building Construction! Executive Order 12898 - Environmental Justice Federal Regulations 14 CFR Part 13 - Investigative and Enforcement Procedures. a. b. 14 CFR Part 16 - Rules of Practice For Federally Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings. C, 14 CFR Part 150 - Airport noise compatibility planning. d. 29 CFR Part | - Procedures for predetermination of wage rates, | e. 29 CFR Part 3 - Contractors and subcontractors on public building or public work financed in whole or part by loans or grants from the United States. f, 29 CFR Part 5 - Labor standards provisions applicable to contracts covering federally financed and assisted construction (also labor standards provisions applicable to non-construction contracts subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act). g. 41 CFR Part 60 - Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor (Federal and federally assisted contracting requirements). h, 49 CFR Part 18 - Uniform administrative requirements for grants and cooperative agreements to state and local governments.” 49 CFR Part 20 - New restrictions on lobbying. 49 CFR Part 21 - Nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation - effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. k. 49 CFR Part 23 - Participation by Disadvantage Business Enterprise in Airport Concessions. L 49 CFR Part 24 - Uniform relocation assistance and real property acquisition for Federal and federally assisted programs.' 49 CFR Part 26 — Participation By Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in m, Department of Transportation Programs. n, 49 CFR Part 27 - Nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap in programs and activities receiving or benefiting from Federal financial assistance. ' 0. 49 CFR Part 29 - Government wide debarment and suspension (nonprocurement) and government wide requirements for drug-free workplace (grants). p. 49 CFR Part 30 - Denial of public works contracts to suppliers of goods and services of countries that deny procurement market access to U.S. contractors, Page 3 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP 49 CFR Part 41 - Seismic safety of Federal and federally assisted or q. regulated new building construction, Office of Management and Budget Circulars A-87 - Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with State and Local Governments, b. A-133 - Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations | These laws do not apply to airport planning sponsors. 2 These laws do not apply to private sponsors. 3 49 CFR Part 18 and OMB Circular A-87 contain requirements for State and Local Governments receiving Federal assistance. Any requirement levied upon State and Local Governments by this regulation and circular shall also be applicable to private sponsors receiving Federal assistance under Title 49, United States Code. Specific assurances required to be included in grant agreements by any of the above laws, regulations or circulars are incorporated by reference in this grant a. agreement, 2. Responsibility and Authority of the Sponsor. Public Agency Sponsor: It has legal authority to apply for this grant, and to finance and carry out the proposed project; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the applicant's governing body authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to provide such additional information as may be required. b. Private Sponsor: It has legal authority to apply for this grant and to finance and carry out the proposed project and comply with all terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement. It shall designate an official representative and shall in writing direct and authorize that person to file this application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein; to act in connection with this application; and to provide such additional information as may be required. Sponsor Fund Availability. It has sufficient funds available for that portion of the project costs which are not to be paid by the United States. It has sufficient funds available to assure operation and maintenance of items funded under this grant agreement which it will own or control, 4, Good Title. It, a public agency or the Federal government, holds good title, satisfactory to the Secretary, to the landing area of the airport or site thereof, or will give assurance satisfactory to the Secretary that good title will be acquired. a. a. Page 4 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP b. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on the property of the sponsor, it holds good title satisfactory to the Secretary to that portion of the property upon which Federal funds will be expended or will give assurance to the Secretary that good title will be obtained. 5. Preserving Rights and Powers. It will not take or permit any action which would operate to deprive it of any of the rights and powers necessary to perform any or all of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this grant agreement without the written approval of the Secretary, and will act promptly to acquire, extinguish or modify any outstanding rights or claims of right of others which would interfere with such performance by the sponsor. This shal! be done in a manner acceptable to the Secretary. b, It will not sell, lease, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose of any part of its title or other interests in the property shown on Exhibit A to this application or, for a noise compatibility program project, that portion of the property upon which Federal funds have been expended, for the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances in this grant agreement without approval by the Secretary. If the transferee is found by the Secretary to be eligible under Title 49, United States Code, to assume the obligations of this grant agreement and to have the power, authority, and financial resources to carry out all such obligations, the sponsor shall insert in the contract or document transferring or disposing of the sponsor's interest, and make binding upon the transferee all of the terms, conditions, and assurances contained in this grant agreement. For all noise compatibility program projects which are to be carried out by another unit of local government or are on property owned by a unit of local government other than the sponsor, it will enter into an agreement with that government. Except as otherwise specified by the Secretary, that agreement shall obligate that government to the same terms, conditions, and assurances that would be applicable to it if it applied directly to the FAA for a grant to undertake the noise compatibility program project. That agreement and changes thereto must be satisfactory to the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the local government if there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. d. For noise compatibility program projects to be carried out on privately owned property, it will enter into an agreement with the owner of that property which includes provisions specified by the Secretary. It will take steps to enforce this agreement against the property owner whenever there is substantial non-compliance with the terms of the agreement. If the sponsor is a private sponsor, it will take steps satisfactory to the a. €. Secretary to ensure that the airport will continue to function as a public- use airport in accordance with these assurances for the duration of these assurances, f If an arrangement is made for management and operation of the airport by any agency or person other than the sponsor or an employee of the sponsor, the sponsor will reserve sufficient rights and authority to insure Page 5 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP that the airport will be operated and maintained in accordance Title 49, United States Code, the regulations and the terms, conditions and assurances in this grant agreement and shall insure that such arrangement also requires compliance therewith. Sponsors of commercial service airports will not permit or enter into any arrangement that results in permission for the owner or tenant of a property used as a residence, or zoned for residential use, to taxi an aircraft between that property and any location on airport. Sponsors of general aviation airports entering into any arrangement that results in permission for the owner of residential real property adjacent to or near the airport must comply with the requirements of Sec. 136 of Public Law 112-95 and the sponsor assurances. Consistency with Local Plans. The project is reasonably consistent with plans 6. (existing at the time of submission of this application) of public agencies that are authorized by the State in which the project is located to plan for the development of the area surrounding the airport. 7. Consideration of Local Interest. It has given fair consideration to the interest of communities in or near where the project may be located. 8. Consultation with Users. In making a decision to undertake any airport development project under Title 49, United States Code, it has undertaken reasonable consultations with affected parties using the airport at which project is proposed. 9, Public Hearings. In projects involving the location of an airport, an airport runway, or a major runway extension, it has afforded the opportunity for public hearings for the purpose of considering the economic, social, and environmental effects of the airport or runway location and its consistency with goals and objectives of such planning as has been carried out by the community and it shall, when requested by the Secretary, submit a copy of the transcript of such hearings to the Secretary. Further, for such projects, it has on its management board either voting representation from the communities where the project is located or has advised the communities that they have the right to petition the Secretary concerning a proposed project. 10. Air and Water Quality Standards. In projects involving airport location, a major runway extension, or runway location it will provide for the Governor of the state in which the project is located to certify in writing to the Secretary that the project will be located, designed, constructed, and operated so as to comply with applicable air and water quality standards. In any case where such standards have not been approved and where applicable air and water quality standards have been promulgated by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, certification shall be obtained from such Administrator. Notice of certification or refusal to certify shall be provided within sixty days after the project application has been received by the Secretary. Pavement Preventive Maintenance. With respect to a project approved after 11. January 1, 1995, for the replacement or reconstruction of pavement at the airport, Page 6 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP it assures or certifies that it has implemented an effective airport pavement maintenance-management program and it assures that it will use such program for the useful life of any pavement constructed, reconstructed or repaired with Federal financial assistance at the airport. It will provide such reports on pavement condition and pavement management programs as the Secretary determines may be useful. 12, Terminal Development Prerequisites. For projects which include terminal development at a public use airport, as defined in Title 49, it has, on the date of submittal of the project grant application, all the safety equipment required for certification of such airport under section 44706 of Title 49, United States Code, and all the security equipment required by rule or regulation, and has provided for access to the passenger enplaning and deplaning area of such airport to passengers enplaning and deplaning from aircraft other than air cartier aircraft. 13. Accounting System, Audit, and Record Keeping Requirements. It shall keep all project accounts and records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by the recipient of the proceeds of this grant, the total cost of the project in connection with which this grant is given or used, and the amount or nature of that portion of the cost of the project supplied by other sources, and such other financial records pertinent to the project. The accounts and records shall be kept in accordance with an accounting system that will facilitate an effective audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984. b, It shall make available to the Secretary and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, for the purpose of audit and examination, any books, documents, papers, and records of the recipient that are pertinent to this grant. The Secretary may require that an appropriate audit be conducted by a recipient. In any case in which an independent audit is made of the accounts of a sponsor relating to the disposition of the proceeds of a grant or relating to the project in connection with which this grant was given or used, it shall file a certified copy of such audit with the Comptroller General of the United States not later than six (6) months following the close of the fiscal year for which the audit was made. Minimum Wage Rates. It shall include, in all contracts in excess of $2,000 for work on any projects funded under this grant agreement which involve labor, provisions establishing minimum rates of wages, to be predetermined by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C, 276a-276a-5), which contractors shall pay to skilled and unskilled labor, and such minimum rates shal! be stated in the invitation for bids and shall be included in proposals or bids for the work. Veteran's Preference, It shall include in all contracts for work on any project funded under this grant agreement which involve labor, such provisions as are necessary to insure that, in the employment of labor (except in executive, administrative, and supervisory positions), preference shall be given to Vietnam a. 14, 15. Page 7 of 17 Alrport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP era veterans, Persian Gulf veterans, Afghanistan-Iraq war veterans, disabled veterans, and small business concerns owned and controlled by disabled veterans as defined in Section 47112 of Title 49, United States Code. However, this preference shall apply only where the individuals are available and qualified to perform the work to which the employment relates. Conformity to Plans and Specifications. It will execute the project subject to plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary. Such plans, specifications, and schedules shall be submitted to the Secretary prior to commencement of site preparation, construction, or other performance under this grant agreement, and, upon approval of the Secretary, shall be incorporated into this grant agreement. Any modification to the approved plans, specifications, and schedules shall also be subject to approval of the Secretary, and incorporated into this grant agreement. Construction Inspection and Approval. It will provide and maintain competent technical supervision at the construction site throughout the project to assure that the work conforms to the plans, specifications, and schedules approved by the Secretary for the project. It shall subject the construction work on any project contained in an approved project application to inspection and approval by the Secretary and such work shall be in accordance with regulations and procedures prescribed by the Secretary. Such regulations and procedures shall require such cost and progress reporting by the sponsor or sponsors of such project as the Secretary shall deem necessary, 18. Planning Projects. In carrying out planning projects: It will execute the project in accordance with the approved program 16, 17. a. narrative contained in the project application or with the modifications similarly approved. b. It will furnish the Secretary with such periodic reports as required pertaining to the planning project and planning work activities, om It will include in all published material prepared in connection with the planning project a notice that the material was prepared under a grant provided by the United States. d. It will make such material available for examination by the public, and agrees that no material prepared with funds under this project shall be subject to copyright in the United States or any other country. It will give the Secretary unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute, and otherwise use any of the material prepared in connection with this grant. f, It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the sponsor's employment of specific consultants and their subcontractors to do all or any part of this project as well as the right to disapprove the proposed scope and cost of professional services. It will grant the Secretary the right to disapprove the use of the sponsor's employees to do all or any part of the project. h, It understands and agrees that the Secretary's approval of this project grant or the Secretary's approval of any planning material developed as part of Page 8 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP this grant does not constitute or imply any assurance or commitment on the part of the Secretary to approve any pending or future application for a Federal airport grant. 19. Operation and Maintenance. The airport and all facilities which are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of the airport, other than facilities owned or controlled by the United States, shall be operated at all times in a safe and serviceable condition and in accordance with the minimum standards as may be required or prescribed by applicable Federal, state and local agencies for maintenance and operation. It will not cause or permit any activity or action thereon which would interfere with its use for airport purposes, It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities thereon or connected therewith, with due regard to climatic and flood conditions. Any proposal to temporarily close the airport for non-aeronautical purposes must first be approved by the Secretary. In furtherance of this assurance, the sponsor will have in effect arrangements for- 1) Operating the airport's aeronautical facilities whenever required; 2) Promptly marking and lighting hazards resulting from airport conditions, including temporary conditions; and 3) Promptly notifying airmen of any condition affecting aeronautical use of the airport. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require that the airport be operated for aeronautical use during temporary periods when snow, flood or other climatic conditions interfere with such operation and maintenance. Further, nothing herein shall be construed as requiring the maintenance, repair, restoration, or replacement of any structure or facility which is substantially damaged or destroyed due to an act of God or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the sponsor. b. It will suitably operate and maintain noise compatibility program items that it owns or controls upon which Federal funds have been expended, a. 20, | Hazard Removal and Mitigation. It will take appropriate action to assure that such terminal airspace as is required to protect instrument and visual operations to the airport (including established minimum flight altitudes) will be adequately cleared and protected by removing, lowering, relocating, marking, or lighting or otherwise mitigating existing airport hazards and by preventing the establishment or creation of future airport hazards. 21. Compatible Land Use. It will take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable, including the adoption of zoning laws, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft. In addition, if the project is for noise compatibility program implementation, it will not cause or permit any change in land use, within its jurisdiction, that will reduce its compatibility, with respect to the airport, of the noise compatibility program measures upon which Federal funds have been expended. Page 9 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP 22, Economic Nondiscrimination. It will make the airport available as an airport for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public at the airport. b, In any agreement, contract, lease, or other arrangement under which a right or privilege at the airport is granted to any person, firm, or corporation to conduct or to engage in any aeronautical activity for furnishing services to the public at the airport, the sponsor will insert and enforce provisions requiring the contractor to- a. 1) furnish said services on a reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, basis to all users thereof, and 2) charge reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, prices for each unit or service, provided that the contractor may be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates, or other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers. Each fixed-based operator at the airport shall be subject to the same rates, fees, rentals, and other charges as are uniformly applicable to all other fixed-based operators making the same or similar uses of such airport and utilizing the same or similar facilities. Each air carrier using such airport shall have the right to service itself or to use any fixed-based operator that is authorized or permitted by the airport to serve any air carrier at such airport. Each air carrier using such airport (whether as a tenant, non tenant, or subtenant of another air carrier tenant) shall be subject to such nondiscriminatory and substantially comparable rules, regulations, conditions, rates, fees, rentals, and other charges with respect to facilities directly and substantially related to providing air transportation as are applicable to all such air carriers which make similar use of such airport and utilize similar facilities, subject to reasonable classifications such as tenants or non tenants and signatory carriers and non signatory carriers. Classification or status as tenant or signatory shall not be unreasonably withheld by any airport provided an air carrier assumes obligations substantially similar to those already imposed on air carriers in such classification or status. f. It will not exercise or grant any right or privilege which operates to prevent any person, firm, or corporation operating aircraft on the airport from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own employees [including, but not limited to maintenance, repair, and fueling] that it may choose to perform. In the event the sponsor itself exercises any of the rights and privileges referred to in this assurance, the services involved will be provided on the same conditions as would apply to the furnishing of such services by commercial aeronautical service providers authorized by the sponsor under these provisions. Page 10 of 17 Alrport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP h. The sponsor may establish such reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory, conditions to be met by all users of the airport as may be necessary for the safe and efficient operation of the airport. The sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kind or class of aeronautical use of the airport if such action is necessary for the safe operation of the airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public, 23, Exclusive Rights. It will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any person providing, or intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public. For purposes of this paragraph, the providing of the services at an airport by a single fixed-based operator shall not be construed as an exclusive right if both of the following apply: It would be unreasonably costly, burdensome, or impractical for more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services, and b, If allowing more than one fixed-based operator to provide such services would require the reduction of space leased pursuant to an existing agreement between such single fixed-based operator and such airport. It further agrees that it will not, either directly or indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or corporation, the exclusive right at the airport to conduct any aeronautical activities, including, but not limited to charter flights, pilot training, aircraft rental and sightseeing, aerial photography, crop dusting, aerial advertising and surveying, air carrier operations, aircraft sales and services, sale of aviation petroleum products whether or not conducted in conjunction with other aeronautical activity, repair and maintenance of aircraft, sale of aircraft parts, and any other activities which because of their direct relationship to the operation of aircraft can be regarded as an aeronautical activity, and that it will terminate any exclusive right to conduct an aeronautical activity now existing at such an airport before the grant of any assistance under Title 49, United States Code. 24, Fee and Rental Structure. It will maintain a fee and rental structure for the facilities and services at the airport which will make the airport as self-sustaining as possible under the circumstances existing at the particular airport, taking into account such factors as the volume of traffic and economy of collection. No part of the Federal share of an airport development, airport planning or noise compatibility project for which a grant is made under Title 49, United States Code, the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, the Federal Airport Act or the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 shall be included in the rate basis in establishing fees, rates, and charges for users of that airport. a. 25. Airport Revenues. All revenues generated by the airport and any local taxes on aviation fuel established after December 30, 1987, will be expended by it for the capital or operating costs of the airport; the local airport system; or other local facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the a. Page 11 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP airport and which are directly and substantially related to the actual air transportation of passengers or property; or for noise mitigation purposes on or off the airport. The following exceptions apply to this paragraph: I) If covenants or assurances in debt obligations issued before September 3, 1982, by the owner or operator of the airport, or provisions enacted before September 3, 1982, in governing statutes controlling the owner or operator's financing, provide for the use of the revenues from any of the airport owner or operator's facilities, including the airport, to support not only the airport but also the airport owner or operator's general debt obligations or other facilities, then this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the airport (and, in the case of a public airport, local taxes on aviation fuel) shall not apply. 2) If the Secretary approves the sale of a privately owned airport to a public sponsor and provides funding for any portion of the public sponsor’s acquisition of land, this limitation on the use of all revenues generated by the sale shall not apply to certain proceeds from the sale. This is conditioned on repayment to the Secretary by the private owner of an amount equal to the remaining unamortized portion (amortized over a 20-year period) of any airport improvement grant made to the private owner for any purpose other than land acquisition on or after October 1, 1996, plus an amount equal to the federal share of the current fair market value of any land acquired with an airport improvement grant made to that airport on or after October 1, 1996. 3) Certain revenue derived from or generated by mineral extraction, production, lease, or other means at a general aviation airport (as defined at Section 47102 of title 49 United States Code), ifthe FAA determines the airport sponsor meets the requirements set forth in Sec. 813 of Public Law 112-95. b. As part of the annual audit required under the Single Audit Act of 1984, the sponsor will direct that the audit will review, and the resulting audit report will provide an opinion concerning, the use of airport revenue and taxes in paragraph (a), and indicating whether funds paid or transferred to the owner or operator are paid or transferred in a manner consistent with Title 49, United States Code and any other applicable provision of law, including any regulation promulgated by the Secretary or Administrator. Any civil penalties or other sanctions will be imposed for violation of this assurance in accordance with the provisions of Section 47107 of Title 49, United States Code. 26. Reports and Inspections. It will: submit to the Secretary such annual or special financial and operations a, reports as the Secretary may reasonably request and make such reports Page 12 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP available to the public; make available to the public at reasonable times and places a report of the airport budget in a format prescribed by the Secretary; b. for airport development projects, make the airport and all airport records and documents affecting the airport, including deeds, leases, operation and use agreements, regulations and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; for noise compatibility program projects, make records and documents relating to the project and continued compliance with the terms, conditions, and assurances of this grant agreement including deeds, leases, agreements, regulations, and other instruments, available for inspection by any duly authorized agent of the Secretary upon reasonable request; and d. in a format and time prescribed by the Secretary, provide to the Secretary and make available to the public following each of its fiscal years, an annual report listing in detail: 1) all amounts paid by the airport to any other unit of government and the purposes for which each such payment was made; and 2) all services and property provided by the airport to other units of government and the amount of compensation received for provision of each such service and property. 27. Use by Government Aireraft. It will make available all of the facilities of the airport developed with Federal financial assistance and all those usable for landing and takeoff of aircraft to the United States for use by Government aircraft in common with other aircraft at all times without charge, except, if the use by Government aircraft is substantial, charge may be made for a reasonable share, proportional to such use, for the cost of operating and maintaining the facilities used. Unless otherwise determined by the Secretary, or otherwise agreed to by the sponsor and the using agency, substantial use of an airport by Government aircraft will be considered to exist when operations of such aircraft are in excess of those which, in the opinion of the Secretary, would unduly interfere with use of the landing areas by other authorized aircraft, or during any calendar month that - Five (5) or more Government aircraft are regularly based at the airport or on land adjacent thereto; or b. The total number of movements (counting each landing as a movement) of Government aircraft is 300 or more, or the gross accumulative weight of Government aircraft using the airport (the total movement of Government aircraft multiplied by gross weights of such aircraft) is in excess of five million pounds. 28. Land for Federal Facilities. It will furnish without cost to the Federal Government for use in connection with any air traffic control or air navigation activities, or weather-reporting and communication activities related to air traffic control, any areas of land or water, or estate therein, or rights in buildings of the sponsor as the Secretary considers necessary or desirable for construction, operation, and maintenance at Federal expense of space or facilities for such a. Page 13 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP purposes. Such areas or any portion thereof will be made available as provided herein within four months after receipt of a written request from the Secretary. 29, Airport Layout Plan. It will keep up to date at all times an airport layout plan of the airport showing (1) boundaries of the airport and all proposed additions thereto, together with the boundaries of all offsite areas owned or controlled by the sponsor for airport purposes and proposed additions thereto; (2) the location and nature of all existing and proposed airport facilities and structures (such as runways, taxiways, aprons, terminal buildings, hangars and roads), including all proposed extensions and reductions of existing airport facilities; (3) the location of all existing and proposed nonaviation areas and of all existing improvements thereon; and (4) all proposed and existing access points used to taxi aircraft across the airport’s property boundary. Such airport layout plans and each amendment, revision, or modification thereof, shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized representative of the Secretary on the face of the airport layout plan. The sponsor will not make or permit any changes or alterations in the airport or any of its facilities which are not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary and which might, in the opinion of the Secretary, adversely affect the safety, utility or efficiency of the airport. b If a change or alteration in the airport or the facilities is made which the Secretary determines adversely affects the safety, utility, or efficiency of any federally owned, leased, or funded property on or off the airport and which is not in conformity with the airport layout plan as approved by the Secretary, the owner or operator will, if requested, by the Secretary (i) eliminate such adverse effect in a manner approved by the Secretary, or (2) bear all costs of relocating such property (or replacement thereof) to a site acceptable to the Secretary and all costs of restoring such property (or replacement thereof) to the level of safety, utility, efficiency, and cost of operation existing before the unapproved change in the airport or its facilities except in the case of a relocation or replacement of an existing airport facility due to a change in the Secretary’s design standards beyond the control of the airport sponsor. 30. Civil Rights. It will comply with such rules as are promulgated to assure that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, SeX, age, Or handicap be excluded from participating in any activity conducted with or benefiting from funds received from this grant. This assurance obligates the sponsor for the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended to the program, except where Federal financial assistance is to provide, or is in the form of personal property or real property or interest therein or structures or improvements thereon in which case the assurance obligates the sponsor or any transferee for the longer of the following periods: (a) the period during which the property is used for a purpose for which Federal financial assistance is extended, or for another purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits, or a. Page 14 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP (b) the period during which the sponsor retains ownership or possession of the property, 31. Disposal of Land. For land purchased under a grant for airport noise compatibility purposes, including land serving as a noise buffer, it will dispose of the land, when the land is no longer needed for such purposes, at fair market value, at the earliest practicable time. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of acquisition of such land will be, at the discretion of the Secretary, (1) reinvested in another project at the airport, or (2) transferred to another eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order, (1) reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project, (2) reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under Section 47117(e) of title 49 United States Code, (3) reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under Sections 47114, 47115, or 47117 of title 49 United States Code, (4) transferred to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport, and (5) paid to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. If land acquired under a grant for noise compatibility purposes is leased at fair market value and consistent with noise buffering purposes, the lease will not be considered a disposal of the land. Revenues derived from such a lease may be used for an approved airport development project that would otherwise be eligible for grant funding or any perniitted use of airport revenue. b. For land purchased under a grant for airport development purposes (other than noise compatibility), it will, when the land is no longer needed for airport purposes, dispose of such land at fair market value or make available to the Secretary an amount equal to the United States' proportionate share of the fair market value of the land. That portion of the proceeds of such disposition which is proportionate to the United States' share of the cost of acquisition of such land will, (1) upon application to the Secretary, be reinvested or transferred to another eligible airport as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary shall give preference to the following, in descending order: (1) reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility project, (2) reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible for grant funding under Section 47117(e) of title 49 United States Code, (3) reinvestment in an approved airport development project that is eligible for grant funding under Sections 47114, 47115, or 471 17 of title 49 United States Code, (4) transferred to an eligible sponsor of another public airport to be reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at that airport, and (5) paid to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. Land shall be considered to be needed for airport purposes under this assurance if (1) it may be needed for aeronautical purposes (including runway protection zones) or serve as noise buffer land, and (2) the revenue a. Page 15 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP 32, 33. 34. 35. 36, from interim uses of such land contributes to the financial self-sufficiency of the airport. Further, land purchased with a grant received by an airport operator or owner before December 31, 1987, will be considered to be needed for airport purposes if the Secretary or Federal agency making such grant before December 31, 1987, was notified by the operator or owner of the uses of such land, did not object to such use, and the land continues to be used for that purpose, such use having commenced no later than December 15, 1989. d. Disposition of such land under (a) (b) or (c) will be subject to the retention or reservation of any interest or right therein necessary to ensure that such land will only be used for purposes which are compatible with noise levels associated with operation of the airport. Engineering and Design Services. It will award each contract, or sub-contract for program management, construction management, planning studies, feasibility studies, architectural services, preliminary engineering, design, en gineering, surveying, mapping or related services with respect to the project in the same manner as a contract for architectural and engineering services is negotiated under Title IX of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 or an equivalent qualifications-based requirement prescribed for or by the sponsor of the airport. Foreign Market Restrictions. It wil! not allow funds provided under this grant to be used to fund any project which uses any product or service of a foreign country during the period in which such foreign country is listed by the United States Trade Representative as denying fair and equitable market opportunities for products and suppliers of the United States in procurement and construction. Policies, Standards, and Specifications. It will carry out the project in accordance with policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary including but not limited to the advisory circulars listed in the Current FAA Advisory Circulars for AIP projects, dated (the latest approved version as of this grant offer) and included in this grant, and in accordance with applicable state policies, standards, and specifications approved by the Secretary. Relocation and Real Property Acquisition. (1) It will be guided in acquiring real property, to the greatest extent practicable under State law, by the land acquisition policies in Subpart B of 49 CFR Part 24 and will pay or reimburse property owners for necessary expenses as specified in Subpart B. (2) It will provide a relocation assistance program offering the services described in Subpart C and fair and reasonable relocation payments and assistance to displaced persons as required in Subpart D and E of 49 CFR Part 24, (3) It will make available within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, comparable replacement dwellings to displaced persons in accordance with Subpart E of 49 CFR Part 24. Access By Intercity Buses, The airport owner or operator will permit, to the maximum extent practicable, intercity buses or other modes of transportation to Page 16 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP have access to the airport; however, it has no obligation to fund special facilities for intercity buses or for other modes of transportation. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises. The recipient shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the award and performance of any DOT-assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE program or the nts of 49 CFR Part 26. The Recipient shall take all necessary and imination in the award 37, requireme reasonable steps under 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure non diser and administration of DOT-assisted contracts, The recipient’s DBE program, as required by 49 CFR Part 26, and as approved by DOT, is incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the recipient of its failure to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 31 U.S.C. 3801). 38, Hangar Construction. If the airport owner or operator and a person who owns an aircraft agree that a hangar is to be constructed at the airport for the aircraft at the aircraft owner’s expense, the airport owner or operator will grant to the aircraft owner for the hangar a long term lease that is subject to such terms and conditions on the hangar as the airport owner or operator may impose. 39, Competitive Access. If the airport owner or operator of a medium or large hub airport (as defined in section 47102 of title 49, U.S.C.) has been unable to accommodate one or more requests by an air carrier for access to gates or other facilities at that airport in order to allow the air carrier to provide service to the airport or to expand service at the airport, the airport owner or operator shall transmit a report to the Secretary that- 1) Describes the requests; 2) Provides an explanation as to why the requests could not be accommodated; and 3) Provides a time frame within which, if any, the airport will be able to accommodate the requests. b. Such report shall be due on either February 1 or August 1 of each year if the airport has been unable to accommodate the request(s) in the six month period prior to the applicable due date. a, Page 17 of 17 Airport Sponsor Assurances (4/2012) ARP