D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 03.10.2010 2:36 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS

BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER STATION

@ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NEW YORK, NY – USA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

[Author’s picture]

Risk Management Report 

Version R18_E18, 09/30/2010 

; Active copy 

Control of documents by ISO 9001:2008, Chapter 4.2.3 

See Document Control Appendix 5

 Copies to authorized recipients – See Appendix 4

 Info copy only

No control of documents by ISO 9001:2008, Chapter 4.2.3 

 Copies: Separate list [o/R, by REvalT PM’s decision] 

Location: New York, NY – USA 

Date: 09/30/2010 

Signature: 

Alfred Moergeli 

Certificated Swiss Civil Eng., EUR ING, Swiss Safety & Health Eng. EigV / BSV 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 2 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

0 Table of Contents 

0 TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................... 2

1 OVERVIEW OF FIGURES ........................................................ 4

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................... 5

3 SCOPE OF SERVICES .......................................................... 10

3.1 CONTRACT ................................................................................................. 10

3.2 TASKS ....................................................................................................... 10

4 FACTS & BASELINES ........................................................... 11

5 RISK MANAGEMENT APPROACH ....................................... 11

5.1 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................... 11

5.2 TEAM APPROACH ....................................................................................... 11

5.3 RISK MANAGEMENT WORKSHOPS ............................................................... 11

5.4 PROCEDURES ............................................................................................. 12

5.4.1 RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................... 12

5.4.2 GENERAL SYSTEM LIMITS ........................................................................... 12

5.4.3 PRELIMINARY HAZARD ANALYSIS ................................................................ 12

5.5 DOCUMENTATION ....................................................................................... 12

6 RESULTS ............................................................................... 13

6.1 PRELIMINARY HAZARD ANALYSIS ................................................................ 13

6.2 RESIDUAL RISK REGISTER .......................................................................... 14

6.3 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 16
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 3 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.1 FAA SYSTEM SAFETY APPROACH ............................................................... 16

6.3.2 JOINT FAA / USDA REPORT ...................................................................... 18

6.3.2.1 FAA’s “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation” ...................... 20

6.3.2.2 Transport ................................................................................................ 21

6.3.2.3 Site Security ........................................................................................... 22

6.3.2.4 Human Factors ....................................................................................... 24

6.3.3 INTERPRETATION ........................................................................................ 25

6.3.3.1 Benefits Versus Costs ........................................................................... 25

6.3.3.2 Further Work Required .......................................................................... 26

6.3.3.3 Apply Best Risk Management Practices .............................................. 27

7 OUTLOOK .............................................................................. 29

7.1 WHAT REMAINS TO BE DONE? ...................................................................... 29

8 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................... 30

9 DISCLAIMER ......................................................................... 31

10 APPENDIX ............................................................................. 33

10.1 APPENDIX1: TERMS & ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................ 33

10.2 APPENDIX 2: NORMATIVE REFERENCES ....................................................... 37

10.3 APPENDIX 3: REFERENCES.......................................................................... 38

10.4 APPENDIX 4: COPIES TO AUTHORIZED RECIPIENTS ....................................... 40

10.5 APPENDIX 5: DOCUMENT CONTROL ............................................................. 41

10.6 APPENDIX 6: SEPARATE DOCUMENTS .......................................................... 42
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 4 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

1 Overview of Figures 

Figure 1 Location of the new NS MTS opposite RWY 13/31 of LGA ..................... 5

Figure 2 Risk Summary Graph (Preliminary Hazard Analysis) ............................. 7

Figure 3 Risk Summary Graph (Preliminary Hazard Analysis) ........................... 13

Figure 4 Residual Risks remaining in the red zone ............................................. 14

Figure 5 “... graphic representation of the risk assessment conducted ...” (1) 19

Figure 6 Unrestricted access ...Site with unprotected waste container ... ........ 22

Figure 7 Parked compactors in front of the garage ... ......................................... 22

Figure 8 No comment ... ......................................................................................... 22

Figure 9 Small cause, huge impact - How long will we have to wait ... ?........... 23

Figure 10 Potential directions of (temporarily) dispersed birds & RWY 13/31 .. 28

Figure 11 What remains to be done? .................................................................... 29

Figure 12 Terms and abbreviations ....................................................................... 33

Figure 13 Normative References ........................................................................... 37

Figure 14 References .............................................................................................. 38

Figure 15 Copies to authorized recipients ............................................................ 40

Figure 16 Document control ................................................................................... 41

Figure 17 Separate documents .............................................................................. 42
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 5 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

2 Executive Summary1

The Department of Sanitation of the City of New York (DSNY) issued a 

Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP) to address the long-term 

exportation and disposal of municipal solid waste (MSW) from metropolitan New York 

City. This plan proposed refurbishing four closed marine transfer stations (MTS) 

previously operated by DSNY for the purpose of barging MSW out of NYC and 

reducing the associated truck traffic, which is estimated to be millions of miles per 

year. One of the four proposed facilities, the North Shore Marine Transfer Station 

(NS MTS), would be located at College Point in Queens, New York, about 2,200 feet 

southeast from the threshold of Runway 31 at LaGuardia Airport (LGA) (1). 

Figure 1 Location of the new NS MTS opposite RWY 13/31 of LGA 

[Picture, courtesy of DeTect/RM] 

Once the plan to locate a transfer station so close to a major airport became public, 

there was great concern regarding the rationality of placing an attractant to birds in 

the flight path of one of the world’s busiest airports. To allay these fears, the FAA 

assembled a panel of USDA and FAA experts, as well as others, to analyze the 

potential risk this facility posed. The initial report was distributed to the public for 

comment in April of 2010 (1). 

 

1 Please see our Disclaimer – Thank you. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 6 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Contracted and retained by Ken Paskar per 06/30/2010, the author (mcllc/am) was 

asked to perform an independent risk evaluation as a response to the joint FAA / 

USDA report’s (1) risk assessment findings, in order to investigate potential 

additional opportunities versus threats of the new North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station at LaGuardia Airport (NS MTS @ LGA). 

Specifically, the FAA/USDA’s report (1) provided a risk assessment matrix that 

showed that the airport would actually be safer from birds with the construction of the 

transfer station provided the proper wildlife mitigation was in place than if no such 

facility were constructed. 

Mr. Paskar found these results to be counterintuitive as did many other writers who 

responded to the USDA/FAA report during the comment period, including the Airline 

Pilots Association (ALPA) (1). 

In addition, the report left many unanswered questions on critical issues. 

As an example: 

• What mitigation techniques should be employed? 

• Who would review these mitigation measures? 

• What are the contingencies if mitigation is unsuccessful? 

• What assurances is there that monitoring and compliance will be enforced by 

regulatory agencies? 

In order to properly assess the risks associated with the new NS MTS, Mr. Paskar 

assembled a team of industry experts from a variety of backgrounds to discuss this 

facility and develop an independent report based on the facts. 

The Team was assigned several topics to assess: 

• Wildlife/bird attraction and potential mitigation at the MTS, 

• Transport & access of delivering vehicles to the new NS MTS, 

• Human behavior/failure in the implementation of a mitigation plan, 

• Overall impact of the NS MTS on LaGuardia operations, 

• Risk/Benefit analysis of the MTS goals 

within a risk management context. 

Based on facts & baselines (see Appendix 3 References), internationally 

acknowledged risk management standards and best practices (see Appendix 2 

Normative References), a qualitative risk evaluation was performed with participation 

of a team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) through a series of Risk Management 

Workshops (RMWS) between July and August 2010. 

The Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) used a Risk Item Shortlist (RISL) that was 

subsequently developed into a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA, see Appendix 6c) 

by the author. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 7 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Figure 2 Risk Summary Graph (Preliminary Hazard Analysis) 

The REvalT’s findings are explained in this Risk Management Report (RMR). 

They demonstrate that while the new North Shore Marine Transfer Station at 

LaGuardia Airport (NSMTS @ LGA) might create relatively minor benefits through 

reducing truck traffic within New York City, it will also create major risks to local 

aviation along with long term impacts to the functionality of LaGuardia Airport (LGA). 

Specifically, this Risk Management Report (RMR) concludes that the new NS MTS 

will result in: 

• Increasing the risk of Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) and therefore 

decreasing aviation safety, 

• Decreasing potential future access into Runway 31 @ LGA and therefore 

decreasing LGA’s future capacity, 

• Removing 100 trucks per day from local highways. 

However, this will reduce heavy truck traffic by a fraction and that will be 

imperceptible. 

• Increasing packer mileage by about 35,000 miles per month mostly on local 

streets through central Queens. 

On the basis of LGA’s known and undisputed, extraordinary exposure to previous 

BASH (see e.g. US Airways Flight 1549 on January 15, 2009) (16), the results of this 

risk based approach raise the question if the potential additional benefits of the new 

NS MTS really have the potential to outweigh the additional threats. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 8 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

“Given that aircraft pass 300’ above the top of the building and approximately 400’ 

above the water, pilots would not have adequate altitude and time to successfully 

mitigate a bird strike event similar to that of US Airways Flight 1549” (15). 

Risk Management (RM) is supposed to provide alternatives and options for sound 

and informed, preferably pro-active decision-making. 

The FAA / USDA report’s (1) risk assessment summary violates acknowledged 

industry standards and best risk management practices. 

Members of the REvalT have extensive knowledge of mitigation techniques typical to 

those that would be employed at the NS MTS. 

Their experience shows that mitigation techniques become less effective over time 

as birds learn to adapt to the techniques being used to discourage them. 

Additionally, the timeline over which the study was completed was not sufficient by 

FAA standards. 

The overriding sentiment of the REvalT is that nature is not a force to be controlled 

and, with the acknowledgement of the USDA/FAA panel, that the new NS MTS is a 

hazard to aviation, why would anyone think it is prudent to create a hazard and then 

attempt to mitigate it? 

Best practices, both for (aviation) safety as well as for managing risks, dictate to stay 

on the safe, conservative side as long as there remains the slightest reasonable 

doubt that the new NS MTS will increase the risk of bird strikes. 

 “A key element of risk decision-making is determining if the risk is justified” (6). 

This report provides evidence that the risk cannot be justified. 

Based on the 

• Risk Evaluation Team’s (REvalT) findings, 

• Author’s investigation, 

the residual risks2

 cannot be tolerated. 

In the interests of political goals, DSNY appears willing to put the safety of the flying 

public as a secondary concern. 

The REvalT concludes that as a minimum measure, the ongoing construction of the 

new NS MTS should be suspended until such time that a properly conducted and 

independent Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) has been completed and a new risk 

assessment evaluated. Once the new NS MTS is actually built, its $200M price tag 

will only increase if it has to be subsequently demolished. 

 

2

 Residual Risks = Risks remaining after mitigation has been implemented 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 9 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Performing a new, comprehensive System Management Safety [7] approach, a 

complete risk assessment [3, 8], may lead to new chances in meeting DSNY’s needs 

without compromising aviation safety and public interests. 

“The REvalT panel determined that this issue is far more complicated than the 

relatively brief study performed by the USDA/FAA panel as an emollient to concerned 

politicians and local opposition. It is not enough to “believe” that one is correct when 

dealing with human lives and attempting to control nature in its natural habitat. 

The FAA has established Risk Management Procedures that seem not to be 

employed in this study. 

There are prescribed measures for performing a Wildlife Assessment that were not 

followed in the USDA/FAA study (1). 

Based on Best Management Practices and well acknowledged industry standards for 

risk management there is just only one acceptable solution for now: 

Suspend the construction until there is more solid evidence to support its 

continuation! 

This would allow all stakeholders a fair opportunity to (re-)evaluate and review the 

new, updated information in the context of a state-of-the-art risk management 

process. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 10 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

3 Scope of Services 

3.1 Contract 

Contracted by Aviation Team USA / Ken Paskar, retained per 06/30/2010. 

3.2 Tasks 

Perform an independent, risk based, qualitative evaluation of additional opportunities 

and threats by the operation of the new North Shore Marine Transfer Station at 

LaGuardia Airport, NY – NY (NS MTS @ LGA). 

Moderate 

• An interdisciplinary team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), 

• A series of Risk Management (RM) Workshops (WS) between July and August 

2010. 

Develop a risk evaluation based on a qualitative Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA). 

Explain, present and document key results. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 11 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

4 Facts & Baselines 

The independent, risk based investigation to evaluate additional opportunities and 

threats by the new North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuardia Airport, NY – 

NY (NS MTS @ LGA) and this report are based on facts and baselines 

(see Appendix 3 References). 

5 Risk Management Approach 

5.1 Methodology 

Based on internationally recognized standards (see Appendix 2 Normative 

References), tried-and-true Risk Management Methodology has been used. 

A qualitative evaluation of additional opportunities and threats by the new North 

Shore Marine Transfer Station @ LaGuardia Airport, NY – NY (NS MTS @ LGA) has 

been investigated in a moderated, interdisciplinary team of Subject Matter Experts 

(SME’s), using a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA).

A complete Risk Assessment may be performed in order to recess the PHA’s results. 

5.2 Team Approach 

An interdisciplinary team of Subject Matter Experts

(SMEs see General System Limits, GSL, Appendix 6 Separate Documents), 

moderated by the author, 

developed, reviewed and updated the 

• Risk Management Plan (RMP, see Appendix 6-A), 

• General System Limits (GSL, see Appendix 6-B), 

• Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA, see Appendix 6-C), 

(see Appendix 6 Separate Documents). 

5.3 Risk Management Workshops 

Three Risk Management Workshops (RM WS) 

• 1st RM WS: 07/14/2010 @ Gilbert, AZ, 

• 2nd RM WS: 08/20/2010, NY Conference Call, 

• 3rd RM WS: 08/30 – 09/01/2010 @ NY, NY, 

were performed with participation of a team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 12 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

5.4 Procedures 

5.4.1 Risk Management Plan 

The Risk Management Plan (RMP) sets the stage for the Risk Management Process 

and demonstrates how major risks3 should be identified and how they could be 

mitigated. The RMP defines personnel roles and responsibilities, documentation, risk 

management activities, schedules and timing, and risk management techniques 

(see Appendix 6 Separate Documents). 

5.4.2 General System Limits 

The General System Limits (GSL) Definition defines the boundaries (the context) of 

the risk management system (see Appendix 6 Separate Documents). 

. 

5.4.3 Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

A Risk Item Shortlist (RISL) has been developed and updated during interdisciplinary Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) workshops, moderated by the Risk 

Manager, and then developed by the author into a Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

(PHA, see Appendix 6 Separate Documents). 

. 

5.5 Documentation 

All results of the independent, risk based approach to evaluate additional 

opportunities and threats by the new North Shore Marine Transfer Station at 

LaGuardia Airport, NY (NS MTS @ LGA) are documented in this Risk Management 

Report (RMR), including 

• Risk Management Plan (RMP) in Appendix 6-A, 

• General System Limits (GSL) in Appendix 6-B, 

• Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) in Appendix 6-C,

(see Appendix 6 Separate Documents). 

 

3

 Risks = Opportunities or threats, evaluated against potential impact and probability of occurrence 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 13 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6 Results 

6.1 Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

Under three different scenarios 

1. Transport and access to the new NS MTS, 

2. Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH), 

3. Potential future access to LaGuardia Airport (LGA), 

a total number of 13 opportunities or hazards have been 

• Investigated, 

• Assessed, 

• Mitigated, 

• Re-assessed (assessed again, after mitigation => residual risks), 

through a series of moderated workshops. 

See Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA, Appendix 6-C, see Appendix 6 Separate 

Documents). 

Figure 3 Risk Summary Graph (Preliminary Hazard Analysis) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 14 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.2 Residual Risk Register 

Residual risks are, by definition, risks that remain after mitigation has been 

implemented in the red zone and are therefore not to be tolerated. 

After extensive evaluation, the Risk Evaluation Team determined that some residual 

risks could not be mitigated to a tolerable level. 

Figure 4 Residual Risks remaining in the red zone 

Risk Risk Description Residual Risk 

ID - S P Why ...? 

8. New North Shore Marine 

Transfer Station (New NS MTS) 

Risk: 

New NS MTS will attract additional 

bird activities 

Additional bird activities will 

increase the risk for additional Bird 

Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) 

H M There is no way to provide 

hard evidence 

• Of the effectiveness 

and/or limits of known 

wildlife control strategies 

and measures, 

• Until the new NS MTS 

will be operative ... and 

then it will be (probably 

too/very) late to go with a 

“build elsewhere” 

alternative 

Expected secondary 

(substitution) risks as a 

result of known, (in)effective 

wildlife control strategies 

and measures (vicious 

circle) 

10. New North Shore Marine 

Transfer Station (New NS MTS) 

Risk: 

Integrated Wildlife Hazard 

Management Plan (IWHMP) not 

executed as required 

(using incomplete or insufficient 

data, not executed according to 

industry standards and/or Best 

Management Practices) 

H M Human behavior-oriented 

(“administrative controls”) 

only 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 15 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Risk Risk Description Residual Risk 

ID - S P Why ...? 

11. New North Shore Marine 

Transfer Station (New NS MTS) 

Risk: 

Building Maintenance is a reactive 

not pro-active program as required 

by DSNY Part 360 Building 

Application 

H M No mitigation planned 

12. New North Shore Marine 

Transfer Station (New NS MTS) 

Risk: 

Birds will flock more together, stay 

more grounded, and move inland 

from coastal areas in inclement 

weather 

(that might favor LGA’s RWY 31) 

and will therefore increase the risk 

of BASH at low altitudes 

H M Human behavior-oriented 

(“administrative controls”) 

only 

13. New North Shore Marine 

Transfer Station (New NS MTS) 

Risk: 

• Height of new NS MTS might 

prevent a future Precision 

Instrument Approach Procedure 

(IAP) into LGA’s RWY 31 

• Failure to implement a future 

Precision Approach into LGA’s 

RWY 31 may prevent LGA from 

fully achieving its maximum 

landing capability 

• The new NS MTS might 

become located inside the 

Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) 

for a future Precision Approach 

into LGA’s RWY 31 

H M No mitigation known and 

available other than the “no 

build” (or “build elsewhere”) 

alternative 

A complete list of all evaluated risks assessed by the team can be found in the 

preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA, (see Appendix 6-C, Appendix 6 Separate 

Documents). 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 16 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3 Discussion 

6.3.1 FAA System Safety Approach 

Best Management Practices (BMP) in risk management always prefers value by 

avoiding a hazard in the first place rather than mitigate it later on. 

The FAA has initiated a 

• Safety Risk Management (SRM, by Order 8040.4, 06/26/1998), and 

• Safety Management System (SMS, by Order VS 8000.356, 05/14/2008), 

... “in order to use a formal, disciplined and documented decision-making process to 

address safety risks in relation to high-consequence decisions impacting the 

complete product life cycle” (Order 8040) [7]. 

While there might be slight differences between both Orders and generic risk 

management approaches, both Orders require a comprehensive analysis of the new 

NS MTS with regard to future aviation safety. 

Although formally (legally) outside LGA’s airport property, the new NS MTS fulfills the 

minimum set of criteria for application of a FAA Safety Risk Management approach 

(high consequence decision, substantial economic impacts). 

Although the new NS MTS may currently be located (just marginally) outside the 

Runway Protection Zone (PRZ) of Runway (RWY) 31, birds do not know that ... and 

they might not care. Just a few hundred feet is nothing to birds in terms of their 

habitats, behavior and known activities. 

Based on the Risk Evaluation Team’s findings and the author’s investigation top 

questions are 

1. Is there a measurable benefit to the City from the NS MTS? 

Can it be quantified in terms suitable for comparison against the risks associated 

with the NS MTS? 

2. Are there other impacts from the NS MTS that are not being considered? 

Runway 31 has no precision approach. 

Will the NS MTS preclude a future precision approach? 

3. When and how were the FAA’s Risk Management procedures and processes 

applied to the new NS MTS as this is a new facility relevant for future aviation 

safety (see e.g. Chapter 12 of the FAA’s System Safety Handbook 

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_management/ss_handbook/medi

a/Chap12_1200.pdf, especially chapter 12.2.2 Site Selection etc.) [7]? 

4. How has the FAA Risk Management procedures and processes prioritized 

System / Strategy / Substitution (1st priority) oriented mitigation over Engineering 

Controls (2nd priority)? 

And how has the FAA’s Risk Management procedures and processes prioritized 

Engineering Controls (2nd priority) over Administrative Controls (3rd priority)? 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 17 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

5. What approach was taken to control human behavior – and therefore frequent 

human errors (incomplete and/or failing Operational Risk Management during 

O&M of the new NS MTS)? 

6. What approach was taken to verify and validate the FAA’s Risk Management 

procedure & process results? 

7. What approach was taken to guarantee (and enhance) the effectiveness and 

efficiency of the implementation of suggested mitigation? 

8. How was the “no build” (or “build elsewhere”) alternative assessed? 

9. How were secondary risks (“substituting risks”, i. e. new risks that materialize due 

to mitigation of identified risks) identified and controlled? 

10. How has the FAA’s Risk Management approach been kept ongoing and 

periodically updated to include latest knowledge? 

11. Why build a new facility and therefore create additional threats to the public and 

NY area taxpayers that might outweigh potential benefits? 

12. Why build a new MTS and therefore create additional threats to the public and 

NY area taxpayers if the best mitigation might be the “no build” (or “build 

elsewhere”) alternative? 

As long as no substantial answers to the above questions are available for 

systematic public review, sound risk management best practices will dictate to stay 

on the conservative, safe side. 

Comprehensive answers to the above questions might clear the way to a new, 

unbiased evaluation of additional opportunities versus additional threats by the new 

NS MTS. 

“A key element of risk decision-making is determining if the risk is justified” (6). 

This report provides evidence that the risk is not justified. 

Residual risks4

 cannot be tolerated. 

 

4

 Residual Risks = Risks remaining after mitigation has been implemented 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 18 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.2 Joint FAA / USDA Report 

The joint FAA USDA report (1) demonstrates at least a misperception with regard to 

• Risk Assessments ...

... Chapter “3.6 Risk Assessments” neither describes a Risk Assessment (RA) 

nor summarizes one. 

• Figure 3.9 is neither a Risk Matrix nor a valid comparison of alternatives. 

According to its inherent logic, any airport might only be safe if a Transfer Station 

near-by allows for additional BASH mitigation ...

• Comprehensive hazard identification and risk evaluation ...

... are two different, however consecutive steps. 

• Only a risk evaluation before and after mitigation (= residual risk evaluation) 

provides auditable evidence of the effectiveness of suggested and planned risk 

mitigation. 

• The character and role of recommendations ...

... Recommendations never ever change reality by themselves. In order to have 

an effective impact, all sorts of studies, findings, recommendations etc. need to 

be transferred into action-plan items based on a systematic safety system 

approach. Compliance must be continuously monitored and enforced. 

• Barge traffic that will disturb natural currents and water surfaces is a bird 

attractant. And there is currently no known mitigation available. 

The report explicitly rejects to address this hazard. 

• The currently ongoing construction is already a potential bird attractant. 

And the author could not detect any wildlife mitigation implemented on his site 

check (per 09/07/2010). 

• Building a new MTS is not a required prerequisite for effective additional BASH 

mitigation. 

If the empty site is identified as a potential bird attractant (certainly for good 

reasons, see e.g. current operational procedures at the nearby DSNY garage), 

any state-of-the-art wildlife hazard management can and must be implemented, 

independent of any new facility or other site developments. 

What is an Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management Plan versus a Wildlife Hazard 

Management Plan (WHMP) as defined by AC 150/5200-33B? 

Do administrative controls, human behavior-oriented measures, subjected to human 

beings’ known high failure rate, become any more reliable just because they are now 

somehow “... integrated ...” (whatever “integrated” should stand for ([Italics by the 

author])? 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 19 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Figure 5 “... graphic representation of the risk assessment conducted ...” (1) 

“If the panel's diagram is simply a visual aid to supplement the text as suggested, it is 

extremely confusing and cannot be interpreted as presented. As presented, if one 

uses column 1 (no facility) for example, as the hazardous bird activity level rises in 

the Y axis, the risk level (not appropriately represented in the X axis) also rises from 

low, to medium, to high. But as the same hazardous bird activity rises in column 3 

(MTS with mitigation) the risk levels remains low. This makes absolutely no sense. If 

the hazardous bird activity level increases, in all cases the risk must also necessarily 

increase. Which block(s) of the model represent the anticipated conditions as 

determined by the panel? This diagram should have been replaced or discarded as it 

offers no interpretable information as presented” (17). 

Risk Management (RM) is supposed to provide alternatives and options for sound 

and informed, preferably pro-active decision-making. 

The joint FAA / USDA report’s (1) risk assessment summary violates acknowledged 

industry standards and best risk management practices. 

How reliably will recommended risk mitigation plans be implemented in today’s real 

world if they are based on incomplete, un-scientific and subjective decision-making 

as demonstrated by the joint FAA USDA report’s (1) approach? 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 20 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

“In conclusion, it is apparent that we have simply reached a point of professional 

disagreement on this issue. I stand by my previous assessments and do not believe 

that building this facility is worth the potential risks. The panel did agree that should 

this project go forward, monitoring and regulatory compliance with the 

recommendations as specified in the conditions of the operating permit are required. 

I believe such provisions are essential to minimize potential risks, but still would 

rather see this facility sited in a safer location outside the standard separation criteria 

used by FAA for other incompatible land uses” (17).

6.3.2.1 FAA’s “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation” 

“FAA’s “Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation”’ (10) related to the new NS 

MTS appears to have expired on 19 March 2010. 

The determination addresses obstruction hazards and their marking only. 

The “Determination” (10) does not appear to address birds and other wildlife 

activities. In the initial sentence of the “Determination” (10)’, the 49 USC Section 

44718 reference addresses bird hazards only at airports where smaller (less than 60 

passenger) aircraft operate, and that have received grants under Chapter 471. Does 

that not exempt LaGuardia from application of the above mentioned section? It also 

refers to birds being more of a hazard to smaller aircraft ...

The “Determination” (10) notes that any building height exceeding 100’ will result in a 

substantial adverse effect and would warrant a “Determination of Hazard to Air 

Navigation”. 

Does the new NS MTS therefore not produce a significant adverse effect at 100 feet 

but might become a hazard to aviation at 101 feet? 

When the building is at the hazard limit without considering the bird hazard, adding 

even a limited bird hazard seems inevitably to tip the scale toward the determination 

of a hazard. Yet there is no apparent consideration for the cumulative impact of these 

two potential hazards in the FAA’s determination. 

The new NS MTS is identified by the FAA as an obstruction under Part 77 Standards. 

It will penetrate the Section 77.25 (d) (Approach surface by 39 feet). Why is this not 

determined as a hazard? 

The “no hazard” conclusion refers only to the present situation and does not address 

the limitations that would be placed on attempts to install a precision approach” 

(Courtesy of HALL/KJ, reformatted by the author). 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 21 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.2.2 Transport 

It is DSNY’s stated position that the ultimate goal of the NS MTS is to reduce truck 

traffic. 

This is the benefit that must be weighed against the additional risks associated with 

the construction of the new North Shore Marine Transfer Station (NS MTS) within the 

flight path of LaGuardia. 

The new NS MTS will receive a daily average of about 2,200 tons of Municipal Solid 

Waste (MSW). To move the equivalent tonnage by truck would require about 100 

trucks per day carrying the legal limit of 22 tons per truck. 

Currently, these trucks originate from three different facilities, two in Jamaica, 

Queens and one in Flushing, Queens. 

The impact of these about 100 trailer trips per day over a 24 hour period should be 

assessed against the thousands of vehicles travelling along the same routes every 

day. The overall impact of these trailer trips is infinitesimal when compared to the 

overall traffic within the area. 

Currently, waste compactors travel to several private transfer stations to drop off their 

loads from various community districts throughout Queens. The new NS MTS will 

process waste from all New York City Department of Sanitation (DSNY) waste 

compactors, collecting Queens Districts 7 through 14. This will increase the number 

of miles travelled by DNSY collections vehicles by approximately 35,000 miles per 

month, based on TechniQuest’s analysis (14). 

The proposed barge operation scheme will eliminate outgoing trailer trips but will 

increase the truck-miles traveled associated with DSNY waste collection due to the 

re-routing of waste compactors through Queens. 

The advantage gained by the elimination of the trailer trips will be reduced by the 

addition of collection vehicle miles. 

In addition, outgoing trailer trips made in the current situation frequently serve a dual 

purpose. Trailers transport raw materials such as gravel and other commodities back 

to New York City on the return trip from the landfills. This advantage will be 

eliminated because additional truck trips into New York City would be required to 

supply these materials (14). 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 22 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.2.3 Site Security 

Unrestricted, uncontrolled access to the future new NS MTS will create as much an 

additional security risk to aviation and the public’s safety as the current lack of 

construction site security does during the ongoing construction process. 

Figure 6 Unrestricted access ...Site with unprotected waste container ...

[Author’s picture] 

At the time the author checked the construction site (09/07/2010) and the nearby 

garage, anyone could have accessed the construction site, and/or apprehended one 

or more of the parked, open and unsecured compactor trucks ... and/or littered 

anywhere and therefore, intentionally or not, attracted (additional) birds. 

Figure 7 Parked compactors in front of the garage ... Figure 8 No comment ...

[Author’s pictures]
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 23 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

It is the author’s best current understanding, that these facts 

• Constitute a documented violation of the FAA / USDA report’s (1) 

recommendations and attached confirmations by the FAA (1, Appendix D) and 

DSNY (1, Appendix E), both literally as per the recommendations’ intentions, 

• Demonstrate a sobering lack of awareness of the consequences of human failure, 

• Illustrate a careless and reckless attitude towards aviation and public safety. 

Figure 9 Small cause, huge impact - How long will we have to wait ... ? 

[Picture courtesy of DeTect/RM] 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 24 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.2.4 Human Factors 

According to the 

• Report on Human Factors by Roger Hughes (12), 

• Risk Evaluation Team’s (REvalT) findings, 

• Author’s investigation, 

the recommendations for mitigation of the Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) by the 

joint FAA / USDA risk assessment conclusions (1) rely heavily on administrative 

controls (STOP), human behavior only (e.g. an Integrated Wildlife Hazard 

Management Plan, IWHMP, wildlife biologist’s background, training and activities, 

operational procedures, etc.). 

The only engineering controls mentioned / planned are (certain) design changes and 

installation of additional anti-perching devices. 

The most effective system / strategy / substitution solution, as a “build elsewhere” 

alternative, combined with an effective wildlife control on site, is not even mentioned. 

The joint FAA / USDA risk assessment (1) demonstrates a misunderstanding of the 

• Effectiveness and efficiency of human-behavior oriented mitigation. 

• Proven high failure rate of human behavior oriented measures alone (e.g. 

Operations & Maintenance Plans, Contingency Plans, see (9)), 

• Requirement to address risk mitigation by a Safety System (e.g. by “TEAM” and / 

or “STOP”) in order to target System Safety, 

• Requirement to prioritize System / Strategy / Substitution focused mitigation in the 

first place (i.e. go with the “build elsewhere” alternative) over engineering controls 

(anti-perching design & devices) second over administrative controls 

(assessments, Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management Plans & Programs, 

procedures and processes, manuals, instructions, audits etc.) in the third place. 

• Need to balance the high human failure rate (in the range of about 10exp-2 to 

10exp-3) with initial and periodically updated / recurrent awareness training. 

A (i.e. “one”) wildlife biologist, expected to inspect the new NS MTS on a weekly 

basis just for the first two years of operation, then only performing a yearly check 

illustrates a drastic underestimation of the need for implementation of thorough plans, 

procedures and protocols. This is a proven recipe for failure. 

Risk mitigation, based mainly on human behavior, is in violation of Best Risk 

Management Practices if there is an imminent threat to human lives or system 

integrity (see US MIL-STD 882D [8], Appendix A, I, explicitly stating “Do not use 

warning, caution, or other written advisory as the only risk reduction method for 

hazards assigned to catastrophic or critical mishap severity categories”). 

And risk mitigation, based mainly on human behavior, will - sooner or later - fail. 

Unfortunately, there is no doubt about that. The only question that remains is ... 

when ... 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 25 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.3 Interpretation 

6.3.3.1 Benefits Versus Costs 

A comprehensive system risk assessment should consider cost versus benefit (risk 

versus reward) including risk of serious injury and property damage on the cost side, 

as well as the higher risk associated with a precision versus a non-precision 

approach to LGA 31 and the inability to maximize the navigation benefits of full airspace re-design and Next-Gen navigation; the cost of reduced LGA capacity and 

reductions in potential, local employment and economic gain from future LGA 

development, as well as the impact upon air traffic across the country resulting from 

limits on the growth in efficiency and capacity of LGA. 

The cost to the DSNY can be measured in construction and operational dollars. The 

NS MTS is the first of its kind to be constructed at a cost approaching $ 200 M. Once 

complete, industry experts estimate that the cost to operate this facility and dispose 

of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) via barge could increase the City’s current cost of 

disposal by as much as 75%. While private disposal costs to the City have decreased 

in recent years, the long term plan will guarantee an increased cost to the City for the 

next 20 years. So there is no economic incentive for the City to proceed with the 

construction of the NS MTS versus the risk associated with it. 

The risk associated with the construction of the NS MTS must be measured against 

the net gain in truck traffic in and around Queens. As stated previously, while the 

development of the NS MTS does eliminate truck trailer miles out of the City (about 

70,000 per month), it also simultaneously increases the miles travelled by compactor 

trucks by about over 35,000 miles per month. The net gain on the face of this 

analysis is about 35,000 miles per month. This is just a fraction of the millions of 

miles previously estimated by DSNY. 

A future precision approach might provide a higher degree of safety as well as 

increased accessibility to the airport. 

At LGA, poor weather requires planes to be re-routed to use alternate runways. 

This reduces the efficiency of the airport; it causes a back up in the system that might 

potentially affect the entire airspace of the NY area, if not the country. 

The new NS MTS is being constructed to remove a total of about 100 (one hundred) 

trucks from the road daily. 

There are over 170,000 flights into LGA annually, or roughly 465 flights a day. 

The NYDS is spending USD 200 M to construct a new facility when a fraction of that 

amount may be used to eliminate existing obstructions. 

Cost does not support benefit. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 26 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

The author’s understanding is that the FAA has a Standard Operating Procedure 

(SOP) in place and normally performs a Cost to Benefit Analysis (CBA), at least 

above a certain project threshold USD amount. 

Has the FAA (or any other potentially involved stakeholder) already executed a CBA 

for the new NS MTS? 

Can the USDA/FAA or NYDS justify the benefit received from the NS MTS over the 

documented risks associated with its construction? 

6.3.3.2 Further Work Required 

The USDA/FAA has completed its initial report (1) and consolidated its findings. 

However, this report is far from a final solution to the issue that the USDA/FAA 

concludes itself. The NS MTS as currently proposed is a wildlife hazard for planes 

arriving and departing from LaGuardia. 

The FAA/USDA report (1) states that the transfer station is a hazard unless mitigation 

measures are put into play. 

However, it does not outline 

1. What these measures should be, 

2. How they are to be implemented, 

3. How or if they are going to be enforced, 

4. How effective they can or will be over time. 

Risks associated with the new NS MTS should be determined through a comparison 

of build versus a no-build scenario. 

Is it within the USDA’s scope to make subjective judgments regarding mitigation 

measures? 

Does the USDA / FAA have jurisdiction to study and recommend risk mitigation? 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 27 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

6.3.3.3 Apply Best Risk Management Practices 

Industry-wide acknowledged, undisputed Best Risk Management Practices require all 

stakeholders to stay on the safe, conservative side as long as there is no proven 

evidence beyond any reasonable doubt and public’s safety is at risk. 

It is certainly fair to state, that any good common sense will not prioritize a “green” 

waste treatment/disposal solution over aviation and public safety? 

Are the avoided outbound trailer-miles worth the additional risk of losing an airliner? 

If such an undesired event materializes in the future, will anyone then still stand up 

and defend the decision to build the new NS MTS at the currently proposed location? 

Do not gamble with safety! 

Just because the previous MTS might not have resulted in additional BASH (do we 

really have hard facts to underline such an understanding ... ?), just because it might 

not have happened so far, there is no basis that will preclude it from happening 

tomorrow. Or at any time in the future (the new NS MTS has an expected design life 

of 50 years). 

If physics allow for it to happen, then one thing is for sure – it will happen. This is not 

a matter of if, just a matter of when – and to whom! 

Already ongoing construction violates, if not literally, so at least in spirit and stated 

intention, of some recommended mitigation by the FAA / USDA report (1). 

How much can the public rely on the full and comprehensive implementation of so 

many human behavior-oriented mitigation measures, if the very basic steps are 

addressed at the very beginning (e.g. author’s pictures site of his recent site visit: 

complete lack of security, unrestricted access, compactors acting as active bird 

attractions in front of the nearby garage etc.)? 

How reliable are promises to shut down the new NS MTS if in violation of the 

(amended) permit as per the 

• Ongoing construction is not shut down due to obvious violations? 

• Known background of NY’s bottleneck with waste disposal? 

The new NS MTS is not on airport property and may be located currently just outside 

the RPZ. 

However, birds do not know this ...

Birds are not talking or listening to ATC. 

Birds are neither reading, nor understanding or complying with legal qualifications 

and aviation airspace. Some hundred feet of (legal, formal) distance do not matter to 

potentially hazardous bird activities! 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 28 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Figure 10 Potential directions of (temporarily) dispersed birds & RWY 13/31 

[Picture, courtesy of DeTect/RM] 

Based on Best Management Practices and well acknowledged industry standards for 

risk management there is just one acceptable solution for now: 

Stop the ongoing construction - immediately! 

Therefore, give all stakeholders a fair opportunity to (re-)evaluate and review the 

new, updated information in the context of a state of the art risk management 

process. 

Why not apply FAA’s Risk Management procedures and processes (e.g. as per 

Chapter 12 of the FAA’s System Safety Handbook 

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_management/ss_handbook/media/C

hap12_1200.pdf) to the new NS MTS in a new, joint activity bringing all stakeholders 

around the same table at the same time? 

In order to create a window of opportunity for a (updated) comprehensive Wildlife 

Hazard Assessment (WHA) and a new, joint risk management approach, there is just 

the one and only solution for the time being ...

... Stop the ongoing construction for the new NS MTS – Now!
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 29 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

7 Outlook 

7.1 What remains to be done? 

Figure 11 What remains to be done? 

# Task I/C Target ok [≡ done + effective]? 

[Date] [Date] [Sign/Initials5]

1. Review FAA’s / USDA’s 

final report 

REvalT asap ... ... 

2. Review FAA’s NS MTS 

System Risk 

Management Results 

REvalT asap ... ... 

3. Review FAA’s NS MTS 

Cost to Benefit Analysis 

(CBA) 

REvalT asap ... ... 

4. Address investigation’s 

results to all 

stakeholders 

PM In due time ... ... 

5. Perform additional Risk 

Assessment 

REvalT o/R ... ... 

 

5

 Without signature for digital transmissions. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 30 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

8 Acknowledgements 

The author thanks and acknowledges the mandate and kind confidence in our 

performance by 

• Mr. Ken Paskar, 

• Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT). 

The author thanks and acknowledges the very competent support, professional 

feedback, kind provision of product information, plans, schemes and/or pictures by 

• Mr. Ken Paskar, 

• Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT), 

• Mrs. Susi Tschupp for her always competent proof-reading, 

• Many others not expressly stated. 

Without their big help this investigation and document would not have been possible. 

The author’s apologies go to all readers for any inconvenience dealing with overseen 

mistakes and original names, terms, abbreviations, expressions and quotations not 

always (fully/correctly) included. 

As always, any feedback is highly appreciated at any time. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 31 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

9 Disclaimer 

1. The material presented in this report has been prepared in accordance with 

generally recognized engineering principles and practices, and is intended for 

background information only. 

2. The contents of this report are not intended for use as a reference in purchase 

specifications, contracts, regulations, statutes, or any other legal document or to 

interfere with any legal or regulatory procedure, process or activity. 

3. All statements and comments in this report are based on the author’s personal 

investigation and best understanding of what he was told at the time of this 

investigation. 

Wherever possible the author double-checked verbal information against existing 

original documents/sources. However, some substantial information could not be 

independently verified in an economic way. 

4. The author makes no representation or warranty of any kind, whether express or 

implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or utility of any 

information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this report, and assumes 

no liability therefore. 

Anyone utilizing this information assumes all liability arising from such use, 

including but not limited to infringement of any patent or patents. 

5. Substantial new information might request adequate updates. This report is a 

living document. 

6. All rights reserved. The material presented above and the author’s data, 

documents, contents and/or referred materials (excluding links) are part of the 

author’s intellectual property. However, every authorized recipient may print out, 

copy and/or use exclusively for him/herself and his/her organization the above 

presented material at his/her full own risk any time. 

7. Every copy, duplication, distribution and/or handout (including of parts, and in 

whatever format) to organizations and/or persons other than to authorized 

recipients is prohibited. Every sale and/or resale (including of parts, and in 

whatever format) of the material presented above and the author’s data, 

documents, contents and/or referred materials (excluding links) is prohibited. 

8. Any data, documents, contents and/or referred materials (excluding links) 

presented are processed with best care and attention. 

All data, documents, contents and/or referred materials (excluding links) are 

checked at the time they are created with the latest available version of the 

author’s security protection software and are recognized and available as virusfree. However, the author is never and in no context responsible and/or liable for 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 32 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

any damage resulting from the download and/or use of the data, documents, 

contents and/or referred materials (including links) made available by the material 

presented. 

9. In the case of any wording of our data, documents, contents and/or referred 

materials (for whatever reason) being partly contradictory, not applicable and/or 

invalid, the rest of the author’s data, documents, contents and/or referred 

materials would remain in any case applicable and valid. 

The part of the author’s data, documents, contents and/or referred materials 

which could possibly be regarded as contradictory and/or not applicable and/or 

invalid, would be replaced in any case by a new, un-contradicted, applicable, valid 

wording based on the applicable law and according to the author’s true intentions. 

10. In any case and always, only and exclusively US Louisiana Law applies.

11. Place of jurisdiction is in any case and always only and exclusively 

St. Francisville, LA 70775 – USA.
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 33 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

10 Appendix 

10.1 Appendix1: Terms & Abbreviations 

Figure 12 Terms and abbreviations 

# Term/Abbreviation Definition/Explanation

1. # Number [NR or No] 

2. $ US Dollar [USD] 

3. % Percent 

4. ≈ About, circa 

5. ≡ Identical [or] defined 

6. ≠ Unequal, conflict, not identical 

7. Σ Sum 

8. (...) Option or issue date 

9. / Or 

10. [...] Dimension and/or directions/instructions 

11. + And 

12. & And 

13. => [Consequence/goal/target] 

14. @ At 

15. AC Advisory Circular 

16. AHJ Authority Having Jurisdiction 

17. ALARP As low as reasonably possible 

18. am Alfred Moergeli, Author 

19. AOA Air Operations Area 

20. asap As soon as possible 

21. ATC Air Traffic Control 

22. BASH Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard 

23. BMP Best Management Practices 

24. CAN Canada/Canadian 

25. CBA Cost to Benefit Analysis 

26. CC Code Compliance 

27. CFR Code of Federal Regulations (www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/) 

28. CIP Continuous Improvement Process / of Performance

29. Controlled Managed/guided/secure & safe/monitored 

30. Controlling Management/monitoring/ensuring/guidance

31. Doc(u) Document 

32. DOT Department of Transportation (www.dot.gov) 

33. DSNY New York City Department of Department of Sanitation 

(www.nyc.gov/sanitation) 

34. E Emergency 

35. e.g. For example [Latin: exempli gratia] 

36. excl Exclusive/excluded 

37. FAA Federal Aviation Administration (www.faa.gov) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 34 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

# Term/Abbreviation Definition/Explanation

38. FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement 

39. GSL General System Limits (“Define the context”) 

40. H High 

41. i.e. That is [Latin: id est] 

42. I/C In charge, responsible staff for a task/activity 

43. IAP Instrument Approach Procedure 

44. IBR Program Level Integrated Baseline Review 

45. ID Identification/Identity 

46. IMS Integrated Management System 

47. incl inclusive/included 

48. Info Information 

49. IS Industry Standards 

50. ISO International Standardization Organization (www.iso.org) 

51. IT Information Technology 

52. IWHA Integrated Wildlife Hazard Assessment 

53. IWHM Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management 

54. IWHMP Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management Plan 

55. L Low 

56. LC Legal Compliance 

57. LGA LaGuardia Airport 

(http://www.panynj.gov/airports/laguardia.html) 

58. LL Lessons Learned 

59. Loc Location 

60. LOI Letter of Intent 

61. lt Latin 

62. LT Local Time (always, if not noted otherwise) 

63. M Maintenance 

64. M Medium/moderate 

65. M Million 

66. Manual User Instructions 

67. MB Megabyte 

68. mcllc moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (www.moergeli.com) 

69. Mgt Management 

70. MIL Military 

71. MOA Memorandum of Agreement 

72. MS Management System 

73. MSW Municipal Solid Waste 

74. MTS Marine Transfer Station 

75. N Normal Operations 

76. N/A Not applicable 

77. Next-Gen Next Generation 

78. Nil None/zero [intentionally left blank] 

79. NJ New Jersey 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 35 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

# Term/Abbreviation Definition/Explanation

80. NR Number [also # or No] 

81. NS North Shore 

82. NTSB National Transportation Safety Board 

(http://www.ntsb.gov/) 

83. NY New York 

84. NYC New York City 

85. O&M Operations & Maintenance 

86. o/R On request 

87. ORM Operational Risk Management 

88. P Probability 

89. PANYNJ Port Authority of New York & New Jersey 

(www.panynj.gov) 

90. PDCA Plan – Do – Check – Act 

91. PHA Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

92. PIA Precision Instrument Approach 

93. PM Project Manager 

94. PMIS Project Management Information System 

95. PO Purchase Order 

96. PQM Project-specific Quality Management 

97. PQM Plan Project-specific Quality Management Plan 

98. Pr Defined, documented, completed & maintained process 

99. PRM Project Risk Management 

100. PRMB Project Risk Management Binder 

101. PRMPr Project Risk Management Process 

102. PRMT Project Risk Management Team 

103. QM Quality Management 

104. RA Risk Assessment 

105. resp Respective, respectively 

106. REvalT Risk Evaluation Team 

107. RISL Risk Item Shortlist 

108. RM Risk Management/Risk Manager 

109. RMP Risk Management Plan 

110. RMR Risk Management Report 

111. RMS Risk Management System 

112. RO Risk Owner 

113. ROW Right of Way 

114. RPZ Runway Protection Zone 

115. RR Residual Risk 

116. RR Risk Register 

117. RRA Risk Response Audit 

118. RRP Risk Response Plan 

119. RRR Residual Risk Register 

120. RWY Runway 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 36 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

# Term/Abbreviation Definition/Explanation

121. S Severity 

122. S Special Operations 

123. S&H Safety & Health 

124. SEP Surveillance Evaluation Program 

125. SMART Specific – Measurable – Attainable – Realistic – Timely 

126. SME Subject Matter Expert 

127. SMS Safety Management System 

(http://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/safety_manag

ement_systems/) 

128. SOP Standard Operating Procedure 

129. SRM Safety Risk Management 

(http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_manage

ment/) 

130. SSH System Safety Handbook 

(http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_manage

ment/ss_handbook/) 

131. STD Standard 

132. STOP System/Strategy/Substitution – Technology – 

Organization – Personel/Personal compliance 

[Risk Mitigation Strategy] 

133. SWMP Solid Waste Management Plan 

134. TEAM Transfer – Eliminate – Accept – Mitigate 

[Risk Mitigation Strategy] 

135. TM Task Manager 

136. TSB Transportation Safety Board (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/) 

137. US United States 

138. USD US Dollar [or $] 

139. USDA US Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection (www.aphis.usda.gov) 

140. USDA WL US Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection, Wildlife Services 

(http://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/index.shtml)

141. VH Very high 

142. VL Very low 

143. vs Versus 

144. WAC Williams Aviation Consultants, Inc. (www.wacaz.com) 

145. WBS Work Breakdown Structure 

146. WiP Work in Progress 

147. WS Workshop 

All enlisted terms, abbreviations and acronyms may be used in singular or plural, with 

or without capital letters and with or without a period when abbreviated. Similar 

terms, abbreviations and acronyms are self-explaining in the context. All terms, 

abbreviations and acronyms are explained in the text upon first use. 

Author’s last check of Internet links per 09/07/2010. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 37 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

10.2 Appendix 2: Normative References 

Figure 13 Normative References 

# Normative References

1. ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management Systems – Requirements (www.iso.org) 

2. ISO 9000:2005 Quality Management Systems – Fundamentals and 

Vocabulary 

3. ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines 

4. ISO 31010:2009 Risk Management – Risk Assessment Techniques 

5. ISO Guide 73:2009 Risk Management – Vocabulary 

6. Risk Management Handbook, FAA-H-8083-22009 

www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/media/FAA-H-8083-2.pdf [about 13 MB] 

7. System Safety Handbook, FAA, on-line, 

www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/risk_management/ss_handbook/

8. US Mil-STD Military 882D, February 2000 

www.everyspec.com/MIL-STD/MIL-STD+(0800+-+0899)/MIL_STD_882D_934/

All normative references are marked and numbered when used in the text and 

documents, e.g. [3]. 

Author’s last check of Internet links per 09/07/2010. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 38 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

10.3 Appendix 3: References 

Figure 14 References 

# References

1. EVALUATION OF THE NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER STATION AND 

ITS COMPATIBILITY WITH RESPECT TO BIRD STRIKE AND SAFE AIR 

OPERATIONS AT LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, August 2010, US DOT, FAA, 

USDA & WLS 

2. Preliminary Assessment and Recommendations Regarding Potential Bird 

Hazards to Aviation from the Proposed North Shore Marine Transfer Station, 

Queens, New York, May 14, 2010, Russell P. DeFusco, PhD, USAF (ret), Vice 

President, BASH Incorporated 

3. Supplemental Report on the Proposed North Shore Marine Transfer Station, 

Queens, New York, July 30, 2010, Russell P. DeFusco, PhD, USAF (ret), Vice 

President, BASH Incorporated 

4. Risk Assessment Of The Proposed North Shore Marine Transfer Station 

Summary Report of Findings, July 15, 2010, Williams Aviation Consultants, 

Inc. (www.wacaz.com) 

5. Evaluation of Trash-Transfer Facilities as Bird Attractants, 

DOT/FAA/AR-09/62, February 2010 

6. Proposed North Shore Marine Transfer Station Adjacent to La Guardia Airport 

Is a Wildlife Attractant And a Bird Magnet That Will Substantially Add to BirdRelated Hazards & Risks at the Airport, March 11, 2009, 

Steven D. Garber, PhD, Worldwide Ecology 

7. RESPONSE TO: 

Evaluation Of The North Shore Marine Transfer Station And Its Compatibility 

With Respect To Bird Strikes And Safe Air Operations At LaGuardia Airport 

(Draft), April 2010 Report, Kenneth D. Paskar, New York, NY, 

May 24, 2010 

8. Wildlife Hazard Assessment La Guardia Airport, USDA & WLS, 2000 

9. NYC DOS Final Part 360 Permit Application, January 30, 2007 

10. DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION, 

FAA, 09/19/2008 

11. Report on Bird Strike Hazards Associated with the Proposed North 

Shore Marine Transfer Station, Queens, New York, 08/02/2010, Ronald L. 

Merritt, DeTect Inc. (www.detect-inc.com) 

12. Report on Human Factors, July 30, 2010, Roger Hughes, Human Factors 

Practitioner, President, Decoding Human Factors, Inc. 

13. MY POSITION ON THE NSMTS REPORT, 

Joseph P. Brady, 2010 

14. Comparison of Build and No Build Conditions for North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station – Analysis of Impact on Local Traffic, 

TechniQuest Corporation, 08/30/2010, 

TechniQuest Corporation, Consulting Engineers, Planners and Construction 

Inspectors, NJ (www.tquestsystems.com) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 39 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

# References

15. Letter to Mr. Warren D. Kroeppel, General Manager LaGuardia Airport, The 

Port Authority of NY & NJ, by Airline Pilots Association, International, April 17, 

2009 

16. Federal panel OKs trash site by LaGuardia, USA Today, 08/09/201, Page 3 

(http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2010-09-08-birds08_ST_N.htm) 

17. Evaluation of the Final FAA/USDA Report on the Proposed North Shore 

Marine Transfer Station, September 8, 2010, Russell P. DeFusco, PhD, USAF 

(ret), Vice President, BASH Incorporated 

All references are marked and numbered when used in the text & documents, e.g. 

(3). 

Author’s last check of Internet links per 09/07/2010. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 40 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

10.4 Appendix 4: Copies to Authorized Recipients 

Figure 15 Copies to authorized recipients 

# Copies # Format Remarks

1. Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 1 Original & 

pdf 

Nil 

2. All stakeholders ... pdf only o/R, by REvalT 

PM’s decision 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 41 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

10.5 Appendix 5: Document Control 

All future changes/updates of the Final Report are marked with a black line along the 

right page margin for a fast overview and better understanding. 

Exceptions could e.g. be 

• Headers and footers, document name, release/version ID 

• Pure layout-, language-changes/corrections 

• Tables/brand names/hyperlinks 

• Index/directories/definitions/abbreviations 

• Figures. 

Figure 16 Document control 

# Version Release Status

1. R01_E01 - Draft – Internal use only 

2. R02_E02 - Draft – Internal use only 

3. R03_E03 - Draft – Internal use only 

4. R04_E04 - Draft – Internal use only 

5. R05_E05 - Draft – Internal use only 

6. R06_E06 - Draft – Internal use only 

7. R07_E07 - Draft – Internal use only 

8. R08_E08 08/31/2010 Draft – Internal use only 

9. R09_E09 09/07/2010 Preliminary Report 

10. R10_E10 09/08/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

11. R11_E11 09/12/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

12. R12_E12 09/16/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

13. R13_E13 09/18/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

14. R14_E14 09/19/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

15. R15_R15 09/22/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

16. R16_R16 09/23/2010 Updated Preliminary Report 

17. R17_R17 09/26/2010 Final Report 

18. R18_R18 09/30/2010 Updated Final Report 

Page 7 Additional argument/bullet point 

Page 9 Quote (1) deleted 

Page 18 Quote (17) deleted 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH Page 42 of 42

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R18_E18_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 5:58 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

10.6 Appendix 6: Separate Documents 

Figure 17 Separate documents 

# Separate Documents Appendix

1. Risk Management Plan (RMP) Appendix 6-A 

2. General System Limits (GSL) Appendix 6-B 

3. Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) Appendix 6-C 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT)RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R17_E17_20100926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:57 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Appendix 6-A 

Risk Management Plan (RMP) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 1 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Risk Management Plan (RMP) 

1 Scope 

This document describes the Risk Management Plan (RMP) and demonstrates how major 

risks1 are identified and mitigated based on a qualitative risk management process 

(comparable to FAA’s Safety Management System, SMS [7], approach). The RMP defines 

personnel roles and responsibilities, documentation, risk management activities, schedules 

and timing, and risk management techniques. 

The RMP has been reviewed and updated by the Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT). 

Risks are tracked by developing, maintaining, and updating the following items: 

§ General System Limits (GSL) 

§ Risk Item Shortlist (RISL) / Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA), 

§ Risk Register (RR), 

§ Risk Assessments (RA), 

§ Risk Mitigation (RMit) trough Risk Response Plans (RRP), 

§ Risk Control & Monitoring with Response Audits (RRA), 

§ Continuous Improvement Process (CIP) based on Lessons Learned (LL). 

Objectives of the Risk Management Plan include: 

§ Promote Safety & Health Management during construction, 

§ Identify major risks ahead of time to better mitigate impacts to cost, schedule, quality, 

safety, environment, 

§ Provide a framework for making risk focused decisions and lessons learned, 

§ Allocate project reserves in order to control risks, 

§ Maintain public trust in a highly visible project with federal funding, 

§ Facilitate effective communication, thereby reducing response time, 

§ Promote teamwork while maintaining personnel responsibility, 

§ Provide strategic reporting. 

Through pro-active and systematic risk management practices, these objectives will be 

attained. Risk Management is a primary integral part of project management, a Standard 

Operating Procedure (SOP). 

On the next two pages, 

- Figure 1 – Project Risk Management Process, and 

- Figure 2 – Risk Management (= Steps No. 10 & 11 of Project Risk Management Process) 

explain the workflow of this risk management approach. 

 

1

 Risks = Opportunities or threats, evaluated against potential impact and probability of occurrence 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 2 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

2 Risk Management Procedure & Process 

2.1 Overview of Project Risk Management Process 

Figure 1 Project Risk Management Process
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 3 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

2.2 Process Steps No. 10 & 11 of Project Risk Management Process (see Figure 1) 

Figure 2 Risk Management Process = Risk Assessment & Risk Mitigation 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 4 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

2.3 Risk Management Modules 

2.3.1 General System Limits 

The General System Limits (GSL) define the boundaries (the context) of the risk 

management system by describing 

1. Task(s) 

2. Client(s) 

3. Stakeholders 

4. Deliverables of the Risk Manager and the team 

5. Deliverables of the Client(s) 

6. Project boundaries (spatial limits) 

7. Project schedules (time limits) 

8. Methods 

9. Team(s) 

10. Intended Use 

11. Reasonably foreseeable end user(s) 

12. Reasonably foreseeable impacts 

13. Reasonably foreseeable unintended use 

14. Reasonably foreseeable involved third parties 

15. Exclusions 

16. Mode of Operations. 

2.3.2 Risk Item Shortlist / Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

A Risk Item Shortlist (RISL), applied and updated during inter-disciplinary Risk Evaluation 

Team (REvalT) workshops, moderated and developed into a Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

(PHA) by the Risk Manager, serves as a preparation for a Risk Register (RR). 

Figure 3 Formats, terminology & definitions used for the Risk Item Shortlist / Preliminary Hazard Analysis 

No. Identified Risk Items (1) Risk (1) Risk Mitigation(2) RR (3)

S

(4) P(5) S P

 # Description of unmitigated 

opportunity / threat (risk) 

VL / L / M /

 H / VH 

Description of mitigation 

measures 

VL / L / M 

/ H / VH 

(1) Identified, unmitigated Risk (1); (2) Risk Mitigation; 

(3) Residual Risk (= Remaining risk after mitigation); (4) Severity; (5) Probability; 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 5 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Figure 4 Formats, terminology & definitions used for the Risk Matrix 

2.3.3 Risk Register 

The Risk Register (RR) is the primary risk management tool to identify, mitigate, and track 

all major project risks throughout the project’s life. The RR helps the project’s key 

participants to make informed and risk based decisions well ahead of time. 

For all high risk items identified, the RR serves as an identification and transfer tool. All 

high risks go into Risk Assessments (RA). 

2.3.4 Risk Assessments 

In order to focus the limited resources on the critical success factors (“Key Issues”) of the 

project, Risk Assessments (RA) are performed for risks identified as high risks prior to 

mitigation. 

Qualitative Risk Assessments (RA) are based on: 

§ ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines 

§ ISO 31010:2009 Risk Management – Risk Assessment Techniques 

§ ISO Guide 73:2009 Risk Management – Vocabulary 

§ US Mil-STD Military 882D, February 2000 

Risk Assessments are performed in an inter-disciplinary and inter-hierarchical team 

comprised of the key individuals involved in the design / construction / manufacturing / 

implementation process. The Project Risk Management Team (PRMT) will be moderated 

by the Risk Manager. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 6 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Interviewing techniques with technical experts will be used to determine the probability of 

occurrence and the impact of the assessed risk item on the project and introduce state of 

the art in risk mitigation, design, and/or construction technology. 

Risk Assessments are based on a qualitative approach. Whenever high probability of 

occurrence and/or a potentially severe impact of an identified risk require (red zone), and 

availability of sound quantitative data allows for, quantitative risk assessment techniques 

may be used additionally. 

2.3.5 Risk Mitigation 

Systematic Risk Mitigation (RMit) follows one of the following strategies: 

Use a “TEAM” strategy by 

1. Transfer (T)

2. Eliminate (E)

3. Accept (A)

4. Mitigate (M) to reduce all risks (as low as reasonably possible, ALARP) 

and / or a Safety System (“STOP”) by 

1. System / Strategy / Substitution (S) 

2. Technology (engineering controls) (T) 

3. Organization / Instructions (behavior oriented, administrative controls) (O) 

4. Personal compliance (behavior oriented, administrative controls) (P) 

to reach System Safety (SS). 

2.3.6 Risk Response Plans 

Risks will be assigned to individual team members to own. All risks that are identified as 

“high” (red zone) will have a response plan prepared by the respective Risk Owners (RO). 

All Risk Response Plans (RRP) identify the conditions that may lead to the risk, the impact 

if it occurs, contain recommended actions that will reduce either the probability of the risk 

materializing into a problem and/or the severity of the exposure if it does (as low as 

reasonable possible, ALARP), or justification for accepting the risk. The Risk Manager will 

disseminate Risk Response Plans for identified Risk Owners to substantiate. 

Risk Response Plans are reviewed for completeness. Information from the Risk Response 

Plans will be used to update the Risk Register (RR). The individual Risk Response Plans 

are to be kept in the Project Risk Management Binder (PRMB). 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 7 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Each Risk Owner takes responsibility for executing all necessary activities to manage 

(control) the risk assigned to him. Any risk for which response actions are not being 

effectively carried out, or whose exposure rating is increasing, shall be escalated to 

appropriate management levels for action. 

2.3.7 Residual Risk Register 

Residual Risk Registers will summarize all risks remaining in the “high risk” (red zone) zone 

after risk mitigation has been implemented. A comprehensive explanation, as to why no 

further action may be feasible / required and why the risk may be tolerated, is delivered. 

The Residual Risk Register shall be signed off by everyone sharing responsibility within the 

project. 

2.3.8 Allocation of Project Reserves 

Project reserves may be allocated in accordance with the qualitative and quantitative risk 

assessments and the Residual Risk Register. Required cost buffers and schedule 

contingencies will be forecasted. 

2.3.9 Risk Response Audits 

Project Risk Response Audits (RRA) will be performed periodically during the project’s 

execution to examine and document the effectiveness of the risk responses chosen and the 

Risk Owner’s effectiveness. 

2.3.10 Lessons Learned 

Upon the resolution of a risk, a review of the item shall be performed addressing the 

planned versus actual of any measurable impacts, non-identified triggers, etc. The review 

shall be submitted to the Risk Manager and filed in the Risk Management Binder (RMB). 

Presentations will be held periodically to discuss Lessons Learned (LL) with the risk 

management team members present. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 8 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

2.3.11 Continuous Improvement Process 

Risk Management provides a continuous learning environment for all personnel involved in 

the project and sets the stage for a systematic and documented learning process as a joint 

team in order to deliver a successful project. 

2.3.12 Periodic Updates 

The RMP and its elements are living documents; updates are required periodically for: 

§ Final Design and Construction (as approved Risk Management Plan, if applicable), and 

§ Throughout the project until final handover to the Owner, whenever 

§ New risks materialize, and/or 

§ Existing risks may be re-classified, and/or 

§ Risk Mitigation needs additional inputs or corrections, and/or 

§ Undesired events occur (critical incidents, accidents), and/or 

§ Lessons Learned suggest so. 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 9 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

3 Compliance 

3.1 Legal and Code Compliance 

The Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) is fully committed to maintain Legal Compliance (LC) 

with all relevant laws, ordinances, regulations and codes through all stages of the project. 

A Legal Compliance (LC) and Code Compliance (CC) Procedure is implemented and 

maintained to achieve and provide auditable evidence of legal and code compliance. 

Figure 5 Legal Compliance Process 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-A OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR) Page 10 of 10

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMP\NSMTS@LGA_RMP_mcllc_R12_E12_2010926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:26 AM 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

4 Tasks & Responsibilities 

4.1 Project Manager 

The Project Manager (PM) is the owner of the Project Risk Management (PRM). The 

Project Manager and other members of the Project Risk Management Team (PRMT) will 

meet periodically to review the status of risk response efforts, review exposure to any new 

risk items, re-assess the project's risks and keep adequate records for documentation. 

4.2 Risk Manager 

The Risk Manager (RM) will: 

§ Be the owner of the Project Risk Management Plan (RMP), 

§ Moderate all Risk Identification (RI), 

§ Maintain the project’s list of identified risks, the project’s Risk Register (RR), 

§ Moderate Risk Assessments (RA) when and where required, 

§ Set up and disseminate the Risk Response Plans (RRP) to the Risk Owners (RO), 

§ Perform all Risk Monitoring and Control (RM&C) by Risk Response Audits (RRA), 

§ Report on the risk management process to the Project Manager (PM), 

§ Accumulate and present Lessons Learned in the area of risk management. 

The designated Risk Manager for the Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) is: 

Alfred Moergeli, 

Certificated Swiss Civil Engineer FH, Risk Manager,

alfred.moergeli@moergeli.com, 

Tel. +41-55-282-50-01 (Office); 

Tel. +41-79-635-27-40 (Cell) 

4.3 Risk Owners 

Each risk will be associated with one individual, preferably a competent and experienced 

project risk management team member. Risk Owners (RO) assess the impact and 

probability of their risks, and report the results of that analysis to the Risk Manager (RM). 

Risk Owners are responsible for setting up and implementing individual Risk Response 

Plans (RRP) and reporting progress to the RM as dictated by the risk needs. 

4.4 Task Managers 

Specific risks might be mitigated by a (group of) competent and experienced Task 

Manager(s, TM), assisting and reporting to the Risk Owner (RO). 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT)RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R17_E17_20100926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:57 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Appendix 6-B 

General System Limits (GSL) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) GENERAL SYSTEM LIMITS („DEFINE THE CONTEXT“)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-B OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)Page 1 of 3

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\GSL\NSMTS@LGA_GSL_mcllc_R14_E14_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 6:21 

General System Limits (GSL, “Context”) 

Task Evaluation of additional opportunities and threats by the new North 

Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuardia Airport, NY 

(NSMTS@LGA) 

Client Aviation Team USA/Kenneth D. Paskar 

Stakeholders • Department of Sanitation New York (DSNY) 

• Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (LaGuardia Airport, LGA, 

Operator) 

• LGA Authorities 

• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

• Airlines, passengers & other LGA users 

Deliverables of 

Risk 

Evaluation 

Team (REvalT) 

Risk Management Report (RMR) with 

• Risk Management Plan (RMP, Appendix 6-A of RMR) 

• General System Limits (GSL, Appendix 6-B of RMR) 

• Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA, Appendix 6-C of RMR) 

Deliverables of 

Client 

• Project Management 

• Select, assign & support the Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Project 

Boundaries 

(Spatial Limits) 

• <= 5 statute miles horizontal range from LGA’s Air Operations Area 

(based on Advisory Circular, AC 150/5200-33B) 

• <= 1,000 feet Above Ground Level (ft AGL) vertically 

[Picture courtesy of WAC/JK]

Project 

Schedules 

(Time Limits) 

• July 2010 - ... [ongoing] 

• <= System Life Cycle Time of 50 years (Part 360 Permit Application 

– Volume 1) (9) 

Methodology Risk Management, based on 

• ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines 

• ISO 31010:2009 Risk Management – Risk Assessment Techniques 

• ISO Guide 73:2009 Risk Management – Vocabulary 

• US Mil-STD Military 882D, February 2000 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) GENERAL SYSTEM LIMITS („DEFINE THE CONTEXT“)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-B OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)Page 2 of 3

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\GSL\NSMTS@LGA_GSL_mcllc_R14_E14_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 6:21 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Risk 

Evaluation 

Core Team 

; Ken PASKAR, Aviation Team USA AT/KP 

; Barry YURTIS, Williams Aviation Consultants, Inc. WAC/BY 

; Jeremy KNAGGS, Williams Aviation Consultants, Inc. WAC/JK 

; Joe BRADY, Retired – Previously “FAA Program 

Manager” 

JB 

; Ron L. MERRITT, DeTect, Inc. DT/RM 

; Roger HUGHES, Decoding Human Factors, Inc., Aviation 

Consulting Firm 

DHF/RH 

; Russell P. DEFUSCO, PhD., USAF (retired), Vice 

President, BASH Inc. 

BASH/RD 

; Jim HALL, Hall & Associates, LLC – Previously US NTSB HALL/JH 

; Ken JOHNSON, Hall & Associates, LLC/ – Previously 

CAN TSB 

HALL/KJ 

; Alfred MOERGELI, moergeli consulting, l.l.c. mcllc/am 

Intended use of client’s 

deliverables 

• Prevent a decrease in aviation safety @ LGA 

• Prevent decrease of future access to LGA 

Reasonably foreseeable 

end user of client’s 

deliverables 

All Stakeholders 

Reasonably foreseeable 

other impacts 

New inputs for a thorough (re-)evaluation of additional 

opportunities and threats by the new NSMTS@LGA 

through a System Safety / Risk Management approach 

Reasonably foreseeable 

unintended use of client’s 

deliverables 

None foreseeable at this time 

Reasonably foreseeable 

involved third parties 

• Adjacent property owners 

• Adjacent businesses 

• Other third parties 

• Public (using LGA or relying on effective/efficient LGA 

use) 

What is excluded so far? Force Majeure (e.g. Hurricanes, major fires, earthquakes, 

flooding, etc.) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT) GENERAL SYSTEM LIMITS („DEFINE THE CONTEXT“)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

APPENDIX 6-B OF RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)Page 3 of 3

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\GSL\NSMTS@LGA_GSL_mcllc_R14_E14_20100930.doc; 01.10.2010 6:21 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. (mcllc) 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Mode of operations1 Definition Comment 

Normal Operations 

(N) 

System is working as 

intended and free of trouble 

Standard crew (incl. supervision, 

visitors, etc.) 

Safety features are 

operative 

Special Operations 

(S) 

System is working as 

intended but not free of 

trouble 

Standard crew (incl. supervision, 

visitors, etc.) 

Erection & commissioning, trouble 

shooting, teaching, training, etc. 

Safety features are partly or 

totally inoperative 

Maintenance 

(M) 

System does not work Specialized maintenance crew 

Safety features are partly or (incl. supervision, visitors, etc.) 

totally inoperative 

Emergency 

(E) 

Substantial threat to system 

and/or people’s life requires 

immediate response. 

System operates outside 

intended use 

Standard or specialized 

maintenance crew (incl. 

supervision, visitors, etc.) 

May occur out of any (previous, 

other) mode of operations at any 

time 

 

1

 To be covered by Risk Management (RM) 
RISK EVALUATION TEAM (REVALT)RISK MANAGEMENT REPORT (RMR)

ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES & THREATS BY THE NEW NORTH SHORE MARINE TRANSFER

STATION @ LAGUARDIA AIRPORT, NY (NSMTS@LGA)

A RISK MANAGEMENT BASED APPROACH

D:\Kopie_i\Kunden\NSMTS@LGA\RM\RMR\NSMTS@LGA_RMR_mcllc_R17_E17_20100926.doc; 26.09.2010 11:57 

moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 11921 Ferdinand Street P.O. Box 2852 St. Francisville LA 70775, USA

website: http://www.moergeli.com mailto:info@moergeli.com Cell Phone + 41 79 635 2740

Appendix 6-C 

Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPEND

1st RM WS Introduction, Start General System Limits (GSL) & Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) 2nd RM WS Update / review GSL, PHA 3rd RM WS Review & finalize Risk Management approach Participants / Core Team First Name Family Name Function / Task Affiliation Ken PASKAR Project Manager Aviation Team USA Barry YURTIS REvalT Member Williams Aviation Consultants, IJeremy KNAGGS REvalT Member Williams Aviation Consultants, IJoe BRADY REvalT Member Retired – Previously “FAA ProgRon L. MERRITT REvalT Member DeTect, Inc. Roger HUGHES REvalT Member Decoding Human Factors, Inc., Russell P. DEFUSCO REvalT Member PhD., USAF (retired), Vice PresJim HALL REvalT Member Hall & Associates, LLC – PrevioKen JOHNSON REvalT Member Hall & Associates, LLC – PrevioAlfred MOERGELI Risk Manager moergeli consulting, l.l.c. 

R I S K M A T R I X Definitions 

Probability (P) Severity 

VH Very High 

Likely to occur often (to be expected)

VH Very High 

Death / system loss / severe environmental damage / severe delay (> 12 months) / severe financial loss (>$ 5

H High

Several times in the system’s life cycle 

H High

Irrecoverable severe injury / irrecoverable illness / mamajor delay (> 6 months, <= 12 months) / major financ

M Medium / Moderate 

At least once in the system’s life cycle 

M Medium / Moderate 

Irrecoverable light injury / irrecoverable light illness / i

environmental damage / irrecoverable light delay (> 3 months, <= 6 months) / irr

L Low 

Unlikely but may possibly occur

L Low

Recoverable light injury / recoverable light illness / recenvironmental damage / recoverable light delay (> 1 month, <= 3 months) / reco

VL Very Low 

Practically impossible (not to be expected)

VL Very Low 

Will not result in injury / illness / irrelevant system damirrelevant delay (<= 1 month) / irrelevant financial loss (

Red: Unacceptable => Must be reduced Yellow: Reduce if feasible, proceed with care (ALARP2) Green: G

1 For opportunities use upside risk / positive definition respectively 2 ALARP = As Low As Reasonably Possibly 

NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc 

On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDRisk Summary Graph (Preliminary Hazard Analysis) NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc 

Probability (P) 

Risk Matrix Before Mitigation 

Probability (P) 

Risk 

VH VH

H 5 6 3 9 1 2 4 8 

10 12 

H 

On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

M 11 13 7 M 5 

L L 

VL VL 

VL L M H VH VL 

Severity (S) 

13 Risks before mitigation 11 Ris

11 Red Zone Risks 5 Red Zone Risks 

2 Yellow Zone Risks 8 Yellow Zone Risk0 Green Zone Risks 0 Green Zone Risks 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDScenario 1 – Transport & Access to the new NS MTS NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety System (“STOP6” / “

(First selection of known, true & tried mitigation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

1. No operational MTS 

(as current status) Risk: Might increase local truck traffic on busy NY streets 

H H Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated Traffic Management Plan (STOP5) to m

• Traffic congestion • Emissions (noise, exhausts etc.) • Undesired events (critical incidents, accidents) 

2. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Centralization of Transfer Station location Opportunity: Will reduce hazards due to less truck transportation (barges replace outbound trailer trucks, may therefore reduce about 70,000 truck miles per month) 

H H Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated Traffic Management Plan (STOP5) to m

• Traffic congestion • Emissions (noise, exhausts etc.) • Undesired events (critical incidents, accidents) 

3 Risks = Opportunities or threats, evaluated against potential impact and probability of occurrence 4 Risk before mitigation 5 Risk Mitigation = Opportunity exploitation or threat control 6 STOP = System/Strategy/Substitution – Technology – Organization/Personal compliance 7 TEAM = Transfer – Eliminate – Accept – Mitigate 8 Residual Risk = By definition risk after risk mitigation has been implemented 9 Severity of potential impact – Moderated team evaluation and decision, based on qualitative Risk Matrix (see page 1) 10 Probability/Frequency of occurrence – Moderated team evaluation and decision, based on qualitative Risk Matrix (see p
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDScenario 1 – Transport & Access to the new NS MTS NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety System (“STOP6” / “

(First selection of known, true & tried mitigation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

3. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Change in curbside pickup routing Risk: Will increase local truck traffic on busy NY streets 

M H Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated Traffic Management Plan (STOP5) to m

• Traffic congestion • Emissions (noise, exhausts etc.) • Undesired events (critical incidents, accidents) 

4. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Centralization of Transfer Station location Risk: Will increase number of truck miles by 

about 25,000 per month (14) 

H H Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated Traffic Management Plan (STOP5) to m

• Emissions (noise, exhausts etc.) • Undesired events (critical incidents, accidents) 

5. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Centralization of Transfer Station location Risk: Will increase number of trucks having to wait / hold (up to at least 20 trucks at the same time, (9)) before being processed 

L H Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated NSMTS Operations Plan (STOP5) to ma

• Emissions (noise, exhausts etc.) • Undesired events (critical incidents, accidents) • Attracting birds (see Scenario 2) 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGua

A Risk Management Based Approach APPEND

Scenario 1 – Transport & Access to the new NS MTS NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety System (“STOP6” / “

(First selection of known, true & tried mitigation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

6. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: Centralization of Transfer Station location Will lead to barges having to wait / hold before being processed 

L H Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated NSMTS Operations Plan (STOP5) to ma

• Emissions (noise, exhausts etc.) • Undesired events (critical incidents, accidents) • Barge traffic that will disturb natural currents and water 

Scenario 2) and there is currently no known mitigation 

The FAA / USDA report (1) explicitly rejects to address 

7. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: Security – Unauthorized access 

VH M Additional management inputs required by 

Specific / updated NSMTS Operations & Maintenance Plan 

access at all times that might lead to 

• Unauthorized waste disposal, attracting additional bird 

• Terrorists targeting departing / approaching airplanes to 

Airport (LGA) 

• Terrorists sabotaging the NS MTS facilities. 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDScenario 2 – Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety System (“STOP6” / “

(First selection of known, true & tried mitigation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

8. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: New NS MTS will attract additional bird activities Additional bird activities will increase the risk for additional Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) 

H H Risk Mitigation according to (1) 

• Develop an Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management Pl

• Eliminate ledges and other perching sites (STOP5) 

• Install anti-perching devices on roof, pilings and other s

(STOP5) 

• Strict enforcement of a “no feeding wildlife or feral anim

• Ensure landscaping plants and materials are selected t

(STOP5) 

• Implement an Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management 

• Provide a11 dedicated (i.e. only duties) wildlife control p

to mitigate bird use of the MTS as issues develop (i.e., 

• Monitor trash containers to ensure no trash is extruding 

MTS building (STOP5) 

• Monitor barge activity for birds that might be attracted t

and/or the refuse containers) and mitigate accordingly 

See comparable other facilities for Lessons Learned / Valid

However, every Transfer Station will have to be specifically / design / operational differences might create different attrThere is no to way to provide hard evidence 

• Of the effectiveness and/or limits of known wildlife cont

the new NS MTS will be operative ... and then it will be a “build elsewhere” alternative (STOP5) 

Expected secondary (Substitution) risks as a result of know

strategies and measures (vicious circle) 

11 = “... a ...” = One = 1... (24/7 for 365 days/year ...?) 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDScenario 2 – Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety System (“STOP6” / “

(First selection of known, true & tried mitigation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

9. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risks: 

• Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) 

has not been performed as required (using incomplete or insufficient data, covered some – winter - months only) 

• Last known, completed Wildlife 

Hazard Assessment for LGA dates back to 2000 and did not cover NS MTS 

• Future aviation safety for about fifty 

years (= Expected life cycle time of the new NS MTS) will be based on a outdated and/or incomplete WHA that did not address NS MTS 

M H Start with a new Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) (STO

• To be performed over at least a one-year-period initially • To be periodically updated • Include LGA’s wildlife monitoring data accordingly 

Stop temporarily (at least for the duration that a new WHA of the NS MTS (STOP5) 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDScenario 2 – Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety Sy 

(First selection of known, true & tried miti 

stem (“STOP6” / “

gation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

10. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: Integrated Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (IWHMP) not executed as required (using incomplete or insufficient data, not executed according to industry standards and/or Best Management Practices) 

H H Will increase risk of additional BASH 

• Parts of existing bird population @ LGA might be temp

(STOP5) 

=> However, this may slow down LGA performance (as requirements with ATC) => Will increase risk of additional BASH if dispersed bitheir way out ... as on their way back ... 

• Human behavior-oriented (“Administrative Controls”) on

(see US MIL-STD 882D [8], Appendix A, I, explicitly staor other written advisory as the only risk reduction methCatastrophic or Critical mishap severity categories”) (S

• Missing Human Factors Awareness Training for all emp

• Absence of a robust Continual Analysis and Surveillanc

360 Building Application (Paragraph 3.91. “Record Keethe NS MTS will occur on a routine basis only) (STOP5

11. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: Building Maintenance is a reactive not pro-active program as required by DSNY Part 360 Building Application 

H M Will increase risk of additional BASH 

• There is no mention of a preventative maintenance pro

technicians present on-site on a 24/7 basis to address breakdowns immediately (STOP5) 

• There is no time to wait for the Bureau of Building Main

to resolve a quick roll up entry or exit door anomaly whfrom accessing portions of the waste transfer operation 
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGua

A Risk Management Based Approach APPEND

Scenario 2 – Bird Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk3 Items Risk4 Risk Mitigation5 – Apply a Safety Sy 

(First selection of known, true & tried miti 

stem (“STOP6” / “

gation => Assign to com

S9 P10 

12. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: Birds will flock more together, stay more grounded, and move inland from coastal areas in inclement weather (that might favor LGA’s RWY 31) and will therefore increase the risk of BASH at low altitudes 

H H Will increase risk of additional BASH 

• Parts of existing bird population @ LGA might be temp

(STOP5) 

=> However, this may slow down LGA performance (as requirements with ATC) => Will increase risk of additional BASH if dispersed bitheir way out ... as on their way back ... 

• Human behavior-oriented (“Administrative Controls”) on

(see US MIL-STD 882D [8], Appendix A, I, explicitly staor other written advisory as the only risk reduction methCatastrophic or Critical mishap severity categories”) (S

• Missing Human Factors Awareness Training for all emp

• Absence of a robust Continual Analysis and Surveillanc

360 Building Application (Paragraph 3.91. “Record Keethe NS MTS will occur on a routine basis only) (STOP5
Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) 

Additional Opportunities and Threats by the New North Shore Marine Transfer Station at LaGuaA Risk Management Based Approach APPENDScenario 3 – Potential Future Access to LGA NSMTS@LGA_PHA_mcllc_R18_E18_20100926.doc On behalf of Risk Evaluation Team (REvalT) m o e r g el i c o n s u l t i n g, l.l.c. (mcllc) Alfred Moergeli 

No. Identified Risk2 Items Risk3 Risk Mitigation4 – Apply a Safety System (“STOP5” / “

(First selection of known, true & tried mitigation => Assign to com

S8 P9 

13. New North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station (New NS MTS) Risk: 

• Height of new NS MTS might 

prevent a future Precision Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP) into LGA’s RWY 31 

• Failure to implement a future 

Precision Approach into LGA’s RWY 31 may prevent LGA from fully achieving its maximum landing capability 

• The new NS MTS might become 

located inside the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) for a future Precision Approach into LGA’s RWY 31 

H M Lower and/or displace existing obstructions potentially inte

Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP) into LGA’s RWY 31 progress) There is currently no mitigation available ... other than the alternative