La. Admin. Code tit. 70 § IX-315

Current through Register Vol. 50, No. 11, November 20, 2024

Section IX-315 - Project Support Documentation

A. Once it has been determined that a project is of the type and cost to be considered in the priority system, an evaluation of required supporting documentation will be made. The project application support documentation is a combination of documents and information necessary for DOTD to determine if the project is developed sufficiently for inclusion in the priority listing. Documentation shall include the following items.

1. Project Resolution. The initial document DOTD needs for consideration of any project is a resolution from the public body operating the airport requesting assistance in the development of the project. Generally, the assistance requested would be for both funding and technical assistance. Any commitment from the airport sponsor to participate in the cost of the project is also documented in the resolution. The resolution from the airport sponsor of the airport initiates an agreement between the two parties for joint sponsorship of the project and authorizes state participation in a local project pursuant to applicable provisions of state law. It is also considered a written commitment of support for the project by the airport sponsor. DOTD requires a resolution from the airport sponsor or owner before a project can receive state funds.

2. Funding Sources. Since available state funding historically falls far short of the requested airport needs, it is especially important to use every opportunity to take advantage of the FAA/AIP program, which provides funding grants for eligible projects at eligible airports. A request for 100 percent state funding may be processed for a project that is eligible for AIP funding. Those projects that are requested as FAA/state matching funds will remain on the program as FAA/state matching funds until the airport sponsor requests the project be converted or the airport sponsor submits a new project request with resolution prior to November 1 of each year to have the project prioritized as a 100 percent state funded project. An airport sponsor may request in writing to DOTD to have the project converted from an FAA matching funds project to a 100 percent state funded project.

B. Project Components. In the priority system, projects are prioritized on a generic basis. For example, projects that affect the primary runway are all considered under the heading "primary runway." This could include lengthening, widening, lighting, grooving, resurfacing, rehabilitating, or reconstruction of the primary runway. Projects are defined on a usable basis or unit. This means that if a runway is widened, the relocation of runway lighting and striping are all included in the project. Another example is a request to lengthen a runway and to extend the corresponding taxiway. The runway can be lengthened and usable without the extension of the taxiway, so these may be considered as two projects in the priority system. Development of projects as a usable unit prevents projects of a lower priority being tagged onto a high priority project and resulting in a higher rank. This focuses the priority system on those projects with the highest priority ranking, maximizing the effectiveness of aviation program funds. However, it is sometimes advantageous in terms of safety, operational effectiveness, and fiscal responsibility to include lower ranking projects and otherwise unrelated higher projects. For instance, if there is a high priority project to overlay a runway, it may be appropriate to include a stub taxiway leading from the runway to a parking apron, or the apron itself, if it is in poor condition. This can prevent damage to aircrafts, provide a safe operational area for the necessary movement of aircrafts, and provide significant cost reductions for the lesser priority projects. This blending of otherwise nonrelated projects, is an exception which will be authorized only in exceptional cases. The aviation director is responsible for the organization of projects into usable units when projects are developed, and for determining if special circumstances exist which would warrant combining unrelated projects.

C. Planning Data. The priority process depends heavily on planning data to evaluate the relative merits of a project. Usually the justification for a project is in the master plan or airport layout plan for the airport but there are exceptions. Engineering inspections may identify the need for reconstruction of a runway or a 5010 inspection may reveal a safety problem. Regardless of the means by which a project is identified, written documentation describing the need for the project and the justification for the action to be taken must be provided. The justification for the project should be brief and to the point. An airport shall have an approved airport layout plan on file with DOTD in order for projects to be eligible for funding using state aviation appropriations funding.

1. Submitting a master plan or airport layout plan document as sole justification is unacceptable. The pertinent section of the master plan or action plan should be submitted with a narrative to explain the project and demonstrate that it is consistent with the master plan or action plan recommendations.

2. The planning data for a project, at a minimum, must:

a. document the need for the project;

b. explain how the project meets the need;

c. give the estimated cost; and

d. identify the project on the airport's approved layout plan.

D. Project Scope, Costs, and Justification. The estimated cost and justification for the action to be taken is necessary for proper prioritization. The documentation for the justification need not be lengthy; but, it should focus on what has generated the need. For example, if an aircraft parking apron is to be expanded, the number of existing parking spaces versus the number of aircrafts that need to be parked on the apron would be adequate documentation. In this instance, a description of the size for the proposed apron expansion, and how many additional parking spaces the expansion would create should be submitted. The expansion should also be shown on the airport's approved layout plan to illustrate how it fits in the overall master plan or airport layout plan recommended for the airport. If the expansion of the apron is not consistent with the master plan or action plan, an explanation for the proposed deviation is necessary.

E. Environmental Requirements. Because of their potential environmental impact, some proposed projects may require environmental clearance before they can be constructed. During the preliminary evaluation of a project, there should be a determination whether or not environmental clearance is required. If the FAA Airports District Office or DOTD indicates environmental clearance is required, documents that show environmental requirements have been met should be provided. If some type of environmental document needs to be developed for the project, this should be completed before the project is placed in the priority system unless the environmental delineation and/or mitigation is part of or included in the project to be funded. Environmental clearance of projects can be a lengthy process, and allowing a project to be dormant in the priority system while waiting for clearance could preclude other projects from being implemented.

F. Two of the evaluation criteria in the "sponsor compliance" category are whether the airport sponsor has height limitation zoning and land use zoning in effect around the airport. If DOTD does not have a copy of the airport's zoning ordinances on file, the airport sponsor is required to provide this. The lack of zoning around the airport will cause a lower ranking of the proposed project.

1. The presence of zoning ordinances, an implemented pavement maintenance plan, compliance with the current airport specific operations manual, airport minimum standards, and adequate airport maintenance are evaluated in the preliminary evaluation of a project. If they are not being done at an airport, the local sponsor should be given an opportunity to rectify the situation before the project is prioritized. The airport owner will be advised of the corrective actions that can be taken to improve the project score. If the owner does not initiate and document corrective action that clearly shows action being taken to address these items and correct deficiencies in these areas, the project will not receive points in this category.

La. Admin. Code tit. 70, § IX-315

Promulgated by the Department of Transportation and Development, Division of Aviation, LR 16:538 (June 1990), amended LR 24:1508 (August 1998), amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Intermodal Transportation Division, LR 33:522 (March 2007), amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Aviation Section, LR 39:107 (January 2013), Amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Intermodal Transportation Division, Aviation Section, LR 42759 (5/1/2016), Amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Office of Multimodal Commerce, LR 491421 (8/1/2023).

AUTHORITY NOTE: Promulgated in accordance with USC 49:47101 through 49: 47107, USC 49:48103, SCR 67 (1997), R.S. 2:6, and R.S. 2:802.