Update Topics
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
FY 16 AIP
New Compliance Philosophy
SMS
Airports GIS
Competitive Consultant Selection
Federal Aviation
Administration
1
FY16 AIP Highlights
• What does the Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2015 (the Extension)
through March 31, 2016, and the Continuing Resolution through
December 11, 2015 mean for ARP?
 The Extension provides the authority to collect aviation taxes for deposit into
the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (Trust Fund), and to expend money from the
Trust Fund. Without these authorities, we could not operate.
 The Extension allows ARP to continue to pay our employees so they can
continue to provide oversight of all our ARP programs, in particular AIP.
 The Extension allows ARP to continue to make payments on our 5,407 open
grants. ARP averages payments on existing grants of over $3 billion per year.
During the 1st quarter of FY16 alone, ARP anticipates making payments on
existing grants of about $1 billion, mainly reimbursing airport sponsors for
costs incurred during the busy 2015 summer airport construction season.
Federal Aviation
Administration
2
FY16 AIP Highlights (Cont)
 The Extension also provides FAA contract authority to obligate new grants
from the $1.675 billion, or 50% of the $3.35 billion. ARP will be in a position to
issue our first grants at the beginning of the calendar year in January as airport
sponsors are now getting 2016 projects ready for grant applications.
 Our Regions and ADOs are working with the airport sponsors to complete the
many pre-grant requirements, such as updating their ALPs, gaining
environmental approval, and completing airspace reviews.
 The CR will keep the rest of the FAA offices open and running through
December 11.
Federal Aviation
Administration
3
FAA’s Compliance Philosophy
• When deviations from regulatory standards do occur, the
FAA’s goal is to use the most effective means to return an
individual or entity that holds a FAA certificate, approval,
authorization, or license to full compliance to prevent
reoccurrence.
• In 2015, FAA provided clarification to ensure all agency
compliance and enforcement programs follow the same
philosophy.
• This shared philosophy is one that FAA Airports Division has
embraced for many years which first focuses on education,
training and awareness to remediate deviations and instances
of non-compliance in most cases.
Federal Aviation
Administration
4
FAA’s Compliance Philosophy
• In situations of repeated, intentional or reckless
deviations from regulatory standards, FAA requires
and must take strong enforcement stance when those
deviations pose an unacceptable risk to safety.
• Examples where strong enforcement action is necessary include:
– Failing to ensure safety personnel (i.e. ARFF, Operations) are
properly trained.
– Failing to maintain airport surfaces in safe conditions.
– Failures to provide sufficient and qualified personnel to ensure
safety oversight.
– Falsification of safety training records.
Federal Aviation
Administration
5
Safety Management Systems (SMS)
•
June 1, 2016, all (7) Small Hub Airports (MLI, MSN, FNT, CAK, GRR, DAY,
FSD) are required to perform safety assessments for projects and
application actions:
–
–
–
–
–
Submittal of revised ALPs for approval
Airspace determinations
Part 150 Noise compatibility programs
FAA approval for a Modification of Standards (MOS)
Final FAA approval of new and updated airport planning, design or construction
standards.
•
Planned Outreach in January 2016
– Online Meeting / Webinars with each small hub airport, their consultants and
the State Aviation agencies to discuss the small hub SMS implementation for
June 1, 2016.
•
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rule Making (SNPRM) for SMS is
currently under review with the OMB. At this time we cannot comment on
release of the notice or what may be contained in the notice.
Federal Aviation
Administration
6
Airports GIS Update
•
AC 150/5300-18C Published on 9/30/15
– Updates Table 2-1, Survey Requirements Matrix
– Majority of Updates focus on aligning data format with the ATO NAVLean program
– Updates to Airports GIS
• System currently being updated to accept data in the -18C format
• eALP Module being updated to accommodate new data format
• Developing capability to download -18B data currently in Airports GIS in the -18C
format
•
AC 150/5300-19 “Airport Data and Information Program” Published on
9/30/15
– Was briefly published on the FAA Website then taken down
– Continue using existing 5010 guidance for now
•
Imagery
– Approximately 403 images are available for viewing in the Airports GIS System
– Continue to have goal to upload legacy ALPs
Federal Aviation
Administration
7
Airports GIS Update
•
As we enter FY 2016, AGIS data collection / submission is required by
the Airports Geographical Information System (Airports GIS) Transition
Policy for Non-Safety Critical Projects (8/23/12) for:
– All projects that include “safety-critical” data (as defined in Section 4.3 [page 4-4] of
the updated -18C);
– All projects at Part 139 airports and airports with an Airport Traffic Control Tower
(ATCT);
– Most Master Plan updates at the remaining NPIAS airports (outside of Part 139 and
Towered airports);
– Most projects that require an update to the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) at the
remaining NPIAS airports;
– Many projects containing non-“safety-critical” features at the remaining NPIAS
airports.
Federal Aviation
Administration
8
Title 49 CFR Part 18.36
2 CFR Part 200
Establishes uniform
administrative rules
for Federal grants.
https://cfo.gov/cofar/
Federal Aviation
Administration
9
• AC provides guidance to
assist Sponsor to be
compliance with the
procurement
requirements of
§200.317-§200.326.
• Conformance with the
standards of AC
150/5100-14 is a
condition of AIP eligibility.
Federal Aviation
Administration
10
AC 150/5100-14E
Competition
An unfair competitive advantage may exist when
one firm has access to source selection
information (project information) that competing
firms do not have similar access to.
Federal Aviation
Administration
11
AC 150/5100-14E
Update on Competition
• Restrictions: Entities that develop or draft
specifications, requirements, statements of work,
invitations for bids, or requests for proposals must be
excluded from competing for such procurements.
• Exceptions: There are select situations where an
unfair competitive advantage can be mitigated or
neutralized.
Federal Aviation
Administration
12
AC 150/5100-14E
Update on Competition
• A firm under contract for both planning and follow-on
design services is in a position to unduly influence the
establishment of development objectives to their
benefit. (i.e. loss of objectivity and transparency)
• Conducting separately for Planning (Section 1.4.1) and
design efforts (1.4.2) is a way to mitigate the perceived
“unfair competitive advantage” that the firm completing
the planning may have when competing the follow on
implementation.
Federal Aviation
Administration
13
AC 150/5100-14E
Update on Competition
• Can a engineering firm complete the Cat-EX
documentation for a design project? Yes, in most
situations
– Preparation of Cat-Ex documentation is a project
formulation action that does not put the firm in a position
to unduly influence the development objective to their
benefit
– This assumes project is well defined at the time of the
RFQ such that project specifics would be known to
competing parties.
Federal Aviation
Administration
14
AC 150/5100-14E
Update on Competition
• Does development of the ACIP exclude a firm from
proposing on work? Not in all cases. Refer to Section
2.2.5 for examples on when a unfair competitive
advantage could occur.
• Do sponsors need to reselect for all AIP funded
projects in FY 2016? Not in all cases. However, the
sponsor needs to make a determination that the AIP
funded work being completed does not have the
potential for an “unfair competitive advantage”.
Federal Aviation
Administration
15
AC 150/5100-14E
Update on Competition
Questions to Ask on Current Selections
• Were the professional services for AIP funded project
procured in accordance with AC 150/5100-14E?
(Competitively selected for the specific project, within
the term of the original selection timeframe?) If No,
reselection is necessary.
• Did the firm providing professional services prepare,
develop or draft specifications, requirements,
statements of work, invitations for bids, or requests for
proposals? If Yes, reselection is necessary.
Federal Aviation
Administration
16
AC 150/5100-14E
Update on Competition
Questions to Ask on Current Selections
• Are the professional services being provided the result
of a planning effort that the same firm prepared under
the same contract? If contract is not executed, reselection
may be necessary if the follow-on design results in a unfair
competitive advantage. For example, if a firm completing
design work established the project objectives in the
planning and environmental stage under the same contract,
there is a perceived lack of objectivity and transparency that
adversely affects the full and open competition aspect.
Federal Aviation
Administration
17
Next Steps
 Internal Desk Guide – Early Nov 2015
The desk reference will serve as a valuable resource
for FAA ADOs when responding to questions and
requests for clarification from external stakeholders.
The guide will also foster uniform and consistent
implementation of 2 CFR Part 200 across FAA regions.
 2 CFR 200 Contact: Carlton Lambiasi/Richard
Kula – AGL Regional Office
Federal Aviation
Administration
18