Comments Submitted Electronically 

 May 24, 2010 

Dockets Management System 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Dockets Operations, M–30 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE. 

Washington, DC 20590–0001 

Subject: Docket No. DOT-OST-2010-0104, Evaluation of the North Shore Marine Transfer 

Station and its Compatibility with Respect to Bird Strikes and Safe Air Operations at 

LaGuardia Airport 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), represents the safety interests of 53,000 

professional airline pilots who fly passenger and cargo aircraft for 38 airlines in the United States 

and Canada. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft report of the Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) multi-agency wildlife hazards study concerning the planned construction 

of the North Shore Marine Transfer Station (MTS) and the MTS’s potential impact on the safe 

operations of departing and arriving aircraft on Runway 13/31 at the LaGuardia Airport and the 

airport’s general environment. 

ALPA applauds the DOT for undertaking this study and risk assessment in order to determine 

the wildlife (bird) hazard safety impact posed by the North Shore MTS. While we unequivocally 

support the general deployment of effective bird hazard mitigation strategies at the LaGuardia 

Airport, we respectfully disagree with the Evaluation’s conclusions. Specifically, we 

categorically oppose the construction and operation of the MTS at the planned site under the 

departure and arrival paths of LaGuardia Airport’s Runway 13/31, and question the wisdom of 

that effort and the proposed mitigation strategies intended to accompany it. 

The Evaluation’s “Determination of Findings” points out in risk assessment Alternative Three,

that the proposed facility, with modifications and an integrated operational wildlife hazard 

mitigation plan, would provide the safest, most acceptable alternative when considering the 

building of the North Shore MTS. We interpret this to mean that the FAA and DOT have 

concluded that in order to reduce hazardous bird activity and increase air safety at LaGuardia, it 

would actually be better to build the MTS than to maintain the present situation with no facility. 

We disagree; the Evaluation leads us to conclude that if additional wildlife hazard mitigation 

strategies were implemented for the existing conditions (i.e., no MTS and additional strategies), 

air safety would be significantly increased. 
Docket No. DOT-OST-2010-0104, Evaluation of the North Shore Marine Transfer Station 

Air Line Pilots Association, International 

May 24, 2010 

Page 2 

ALPA believes that the Evaluation team should not have used the experience of the Staten Island 

waste transfer station, a land-based facility, as a predictor of potential wildlife activity the marine 

transfer station may generate. According to the report, during six standardized bird surveys 

conducted of the 140 gulls observed, only less than one per hour was observed “using” the 

transfer station. The report then states, “Gulls commonly used the waterway adjacent to the 

transfer station property but appeared to show little interest in the facility and the waste 

management activities that occurred inside the building.” We believe that because gulls are more 

inclined to frequent a water environment, it is reasonable to conclude that they would be more 

likely to congregate at a marine facility than at a land facility. 

Regarding the Evaluation’s recommendations, keeping in mind that we oppose the construction 

of the MTS, our concerns as to their advisability, applicability and sustainability are articulated 

in italics, below: 

Planning and Construction Phases: 

• Develop an integrated wildlife hazards management plan for the MTS facility.

4 There is no mention of specific elements that should be included in the integrated 

wildlife hazards management plan. The Evaluation should highlight essential 

methodologies which must be included in the plan. 

• Eliminate ledges and other perching sites in the building design to the greatest extent

possible.  As an example, signage on the building should not use raised letters as this

provides perching and nesting sites for European starlings and house sparrows.

4 As a general mitigation strategy for any airport environment, we concur. 

• Install anti‐perching devices on the transfer station roof, pilings, and other surfaces

where birds might perch.

4 Such design elements would likely deter birds from using the MTS for perching or 

nesting. However, because the facility is not an isolated building, but rather, will 

stand among many others, we do not agree that these design modifications provide a 

valid mitigation. Adjacent buildings that do not incorporate similar design mitigation 

features will become perching or roosting locations for birds that are attracted to, 

and feeding from the contents of the vehicles entering and exiting the building, 

whether by land or water. 

• Strict enforcement of a “no feeding wildlife or feral animals” policy.

4 The demolition of the current structure on the MTS site is taking place without the 

implementation of this recommendation, likely resulting in a feeding area having 

been already established. 

• Ensure landscaping plants and materials are selected to be non‐attractive to wildlife

(such as minimizing grassy areas which might attract Canada geese).  

4 Because this recommendation is consistent with acceptable wildlife mitigation 

strategies in any airport environment, we concur. 
Docket No. DOT-OST-2010-0104, Evaluation of the North Shore Marine Transfer Station 

Air Line Pilots Association, International 

May 24, 2010 

Page 3 

Fully Operational Transfer Station: 

• Implement an integrated wildlife hazards management program for the MTS facility.

4 There is no mention of definitive elements to be included in the integrated wildlife 

hazards management program that are specific to this facility. The Evaluation should 

delineate areas that are essential to be addressed and included in the program. 

• Provide a dedicated (i.e., only duties) wildlife control professional trained and equipped

to mitigate bird use of the transfer station as issues develop (i.e., proactive approach).

4 This dedicated position should be mandatory in the development and implementation 

of the program. 

• Strict enforcement of a “no feeding wildlife or feral animals” policy.

4 It is highly doubtful that the enforcement effort, beyond the initial commencement of 

operations, would be either effective or sustainable. 

• Monitor trash containers to ensure no trash is extruding from them prior to leaving the

transfer station building.

4 It isn’t clear what action, if any, is required to be taken to repair or replace trash 

containers that are no longer fit to serve their intended purpose. This concern also 

applies to monitoring and ensuring the good working condition of the truck 

containment modules. 

• Monitor barge activity for birds that might be attracted to them (due to water disturbance 

and/or the refuse containers) and mitigate accordingly. 

4 It is unclear what “mitigate accordingly” means. For example, what mitigation 

technique(s) would be used in a downtown, river neighborhood environment? Would 

the mitigation specify the elimination of the birds flying in the areas around the 

building and barges? 

Recommendations

Based on our considerable aviation experience and analysis of the impact of the planned North 

Shore MTS on flight operations at the LaGuardia Airport, we recommend the following: 

1. The FAA/DOT should find against the proposed construction and operation of the North 

Shore Marine Transfer Station on the basis that it poses a significant bird strike hazard 

for all aircraft operating at the LaGuardia Airport. 

2. Effective bird strike hazard mitigation strategies should continue to be researched and 

utilized to mitigate the existing wildlife hazard situation at LaGuardia. 
Docket No. DOT-OST-2010-0104, Evaluation of the North Shore Marine Transfer Station 

Air Line Pilots Association, International 

May 24, 2010 

Page 4 

Conclusion

Because the planned North Shore Marine Transfer Station represents a bird strike hazard that 

will negatively impact the safe operation of aircraft utilizing the LaGuardia Airport, it should not 

be built. Our position is based upon consideration of conditions that will inevitably exist when 

operational mitigations are no longer effective due to aging of the building, wear and tear on 

equipment which is likely to result in poor containment, bird acclimatization, and the potential 

loss of funding to support a dedicated wildlife professional and other mitigation strategies. 

In addition to the fact that the North Shore MTS only meets the FAA’s runway obstacle 

clearance criteria by a few feet, it introduces a potentially unending food source for birds directly 

under the approach and departure path of a major airport’s active runway. Although the proposed 

mitigation strategies may have some positive effect during initial operations, they will eventually 

prove to be ineffective in the long term. 

The significant threat posed to aviation posed by bird activity in an airport environment was 

never more clearly demonstrated than in the “Miracle on the Hudson” event in January, 2009. In 

order to effectively mitigate that threat and ensure the safety of air operations in the LaGuardia 

environment, the MTS must not be constructed. 

If we can offer further clarification or assistance on this issue, please contact me directly at 

steve.jangelis@alpa.org or ALPA Senior Staff Engineer Rick Kessel (703/689-4202, 

rick.kessel@alpa.org). 

Thank you for providing ALPA the opportunity to comment on this extremely important issue. 

 Sincerely, 

Captain Rory Kay 

Executive Air Safety Chairman 

RK:rk 

Cc: Steve Jangelis