MEMORANDUM 

TO: Jan Matuszko. EPA

FROM: Brian D’Amico, EPA

DATE: February 27, 2012

SUBJECT: Methodology for Applicability of Determination of New Source Performance 

Standards 

Introduction 

The proposed rule defined the threshold for the new source ADF collection and 

associated discharge requirements as any new source with 10,000 or more annual departures. As 

was the case with existing sources, commenters explained that the number of departures is not a 

good analog for the amount of ADF usage, citing, for example, airports in the South that may 

have significant numbers of departures but typically need to deice their aircraft only once a year. 

Moreover, commenters indicated that not all applied ADF is equivalent; specifically ADF 

applied for defrosting. Commenters explained that defrost deicing evaporates and does not leave 

ADF available for collection. After reviewing these comments and the information in its record, 

EPA agrees that departures alone are not the most appropriate metric for NSPS applicability. 

After considering these comments, EPA agrees that defrost deicing is not available for 

collection and, as such, ADF collection technologies are infeasible at airports that predominantly 

perform defrost deicing. As detailed in DCN AD01335 (“Defrost Deicing and Feasibility of 

ADF Collection Technologies”), and based on information from the airport questionnaire for 

existing facilities, EPA determined an ADF usage cut-off of 30,000 gallons per year to exclude 

facilities that predominantly perform defrost deicing. 

In establishing the applicability for new source ADF collection and treatment 

requirements, EPA wanted to take into account that ADF collection technologies are infeasible at 

airports that predominantly perform defrost deicing. Unlike existing sources, however, new 

sources do not have past ADF usage data available for establishing a threshold for being subject 

to ADF collection requirements. 

Available Data 

For EPA’s final regulation, the definition of a new source has been revised to only 

include new airports. These new facilities will not have historical ADF application data upon 

which to base NSPS applicability, As such, EPA attempted to find historical and publicly 

available data to gauge probable ADF usage. In particular, EPA wanted to see if available data 

could be used to determine, based primarily on geographic location, if a new airport would likely 

have annual ADF usage in excess of 30,000 gallons. 

EPA evaluated several climatic elements to determine regional applicability for NSPS. 

The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), an organization affiliated with the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, develops maps of available data for climatic elements such as 

temperature, precipitation, snow, wind, pressure, etc. One of these elements is U.S. Mean Total 
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 

Page 2 

Heating Degree Days (HDD). EPA determined HDD as the most suitable means determining 

NSPS applicability. EPA selected the HDD measurement for NSPS applicability since NCDC 

temperature data are collected nationally, publicly available from NOAA’s website, and 

represent long-term climate data. HDD is a specific climatic element that has been calculated by 

NCDC. The following excerpt is a description of how HDD are derived: 

This element was computed using data from the National Climatic Data Center's (NCDC) U.S. 

National 1961-1990 Climate Normals1

 . The original data is in whole degrees Fahrenheit. This 

element is given to whole degree days. Heating degree day values were derived from a base of 65 

degrees Fahrenheit. Simple arithmetic procedures were not applied to obtain the heating degree 

day values. Instead, the rational conversion formulae developed by Thom2,3 were used. These 

formulae allow the adjusted mean temperature normals and their standard deviations to be 

converted to degree day normals with uniform consistency. In some cases this procedure will yield 

a small number of degree days for months when degree days may not otherwise be expected. This 

results from statistical considerations of the formulae. The annual degree day normals were 

calculated by adding the corresponding monthly degree day normals.4

The HDD maps used in EPA’s analysis can be downloaded in a high resolution Adobe 

PDF format, or as ESRI Shape Files. The data can be accessed on NCDC’s website using the 

following weblink: 

http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/climaps/climaps.pl?directive=welcome&subrnum= 

The entire data set of climate maps available on NCDC’s website is also available for 

purchase on NCDC’s Climate Atlas of The Contiguous United States CD-ROM.

Methodology 

In evaluating potential NSPS applicability thresholds, EPA compiled data on all existing 

airports that responded to the questionnaire, a statistical sample of all airports in the US. This 

data included location, HDD category of each airport, total annual departures, questionnaire 

responses on implemented collection technologies, and EPA estimated collection efficiencies. 

EPA used this data to attempt to determine a metric upon which it could be fairly confident that a 

new airport would likely have annual ADF usage in excess of 30,000 gallons (See Table 2) 

The first step EPA took in analyzing the data was grouping the airports by HDD 

Category (see Table 1). 

Table 1. HDD Category Ranges 

HDD Category HDD Range 

A <1001 

B 1001-2000 

C 2001-3000 

 

 Monthly Normals of Temperature, Precipitation, and Degree Days for the U.S., National Climatic Data Center, Federal Building, 151 Patton 

Ave., Asheville, NC, 28801-5001. 

rational relationship between heating degree days and temperature," Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 82, pp. 1-6. 

 "Normal degree days above any base by the universal truncation coefficient," Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 94, pp. 461-465. 

 
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 

Page 3 

D 3001-4000 

E 4001-5000 

F 5001-6000 

G 6001-7000 

H 7001-9000 

I >9000 

The grouping demonstrated that, in almost all cases, airports in HDD categories A-C used 

less than 30,000 gallons of ADF annually. Therefore, EPA could be confident that new airports 

in HDD categories A-C would likely use less than 30,000 gallons of ADF annually. As such, 

HDD category was an appropriate basis to exclude new airports in these zones from the NSPS 

ADF collection and treatment requirements. 

However, the data also demonstrated that a portion of airports in HDD categories D-I 

also used less than 30,000 gallons of ADF annually. A review of the data for airports in HDD 

categories D-I demonstrated that, with few exceptions, applying the departure cut-off originally 

proposed as the basis for ADF collection and treatment NSPS applicability, 10,000 annual 

departures, would exclude airports in these categories that use less than 30,000 gallons of ADF 

annually. Therefore, EPA determined that airports in HDD categories D-I with planned annual 

departures of at least 10,000 would likely use in excess of 30,000 gallons of ADF, making this an 

appropriate criteria for determining NSPS applicability. 

The following discusses EPA’s evaluation of feasibility of deicing pads for airports in 

HDD zones D-I for airports with annual departures in excess of 10,000. 

Category D 

EPA’s questionnaire identified a total of 11 airports (after applying statistical weights) 

located in HDD Category D. Six (6) of these airports identified collection technologies that they 

had implemented to capture spent ADF. Additionally, two of these six airports had implemented 

deicing pads including; Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport, the airport with the fewest 

departures and lowest amount of ADF applied annually. The presence of deicing pads, 

particularly at Northwest Arkansas clearly indicates that deicing pads are feasible in this HDD 

category. 

Category E 

EPA’s questionnaire identified a total of 14 airports (after applying statistical weights) 

located in HDD Category E. Nine (9) of those airports have implemented collection 

technologies to capture spent ADF including centralized deicing pads and plug and pump 

systems. The frequent presence of these collection technologies and especially the presence of 

deicing pads, clearly indicates that deicing pads are feasible in this HDD category. 

 

Category F 

EPA’s questionnaire identified a total of 17 airports (after applying statistical weights) 

located in HDD Category F. Seven (7) of the 17 airports have implemented collection 

technologies to capture spent ADF including centralized deicing pads and plug and pump 

systems. The frequent presence of these collection technologies and especially the presence of 

deicing pads, clearly indicate that deicing pads are feasible in this HDD category. 
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 

Page 4 

Category G 

EPA’s questionnaire identified a total of 23 airports (after applying statistical weights) 

located in HDD Category G. Thirteen (13) of those airports have implemented collection 

technologies to capture spent ADF including centralized deicing pads and plug and pump 

systems. The frequent presence of these collection technologies and especially the presence of 

deicing pads, clearly indicates that deicing pads are feasible in this HDD category. 

Category H5

EPA’s questionnaire identified a total of eight (8) airports (after applying statistical 

weights) located in HDD Category H. Four (4) of those airports have implemented collection 

technologies to capture spent ADF including centralized deicing pads and plug and pump 

systems. The frequent presence of these collection technologies and especially the presence of 

deicing pads, clearly indicates that deicing pads are feasible in this HDD category. 

Alaska 

EPA surveyed a total of six (6) Alaskan airports that meet the NSPS departure thresholds. 

Five of these airports are located in HDD Category I and one is located in HDD Category H. 

Based on this data, the correlation between HDD Category, ADF usage, and departures found in 

the lower 48 states does not hold true to Alaskan airports. As such, EPA finds that neither 

geography nor, departures, (or a combination of the two) is an appropriate metric to determine 

NSPS collection and treatment applicability for Alaskan airports. 

In addition, EPA received comments questioning the feasibility of ADF collection 

technologies for airports located in Alaska. These commenters stated that deicing wastewater 

generation at Alaskan airports is substantially different from airports in the lower 48 states. 

First, often airports in Alaska will suspend air traffic as opposed to conducting deicing 

operations. Second, commenters stated that long periods of below freezing temperatures result 

in runoff characteristics that are substantially different from those is the lower 48 states and, as 

such, deicing materials are not available for collection (due to lack of runoff) making collection 

technologies infeasible. Based on this data, EPA is unable to conclude that Alaskan airports 

conduct significant deicing, rather than defrosting, and as such, it is appropriate to exclude new 

airports in Alaska from the NSPS ADF collection and treatment requirements. The new source 

performance standards for Alaskan airports will therefore continue to be determined on a caseby-case, site-specific basis. 

 

5

 EPA also identified one Alaskan airport in Category H, Juneau International Airport. This airport is not counted as 

part of this analysis and is analyzed under the Alaska Airports. 
Table 2. Airport Geographic and Collection Data 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

1006 

Chicago O'Hare Intl Airport IL 1 1,516,626 G 467,721 40 

All deicing drainage to POTW 

PluPum

1011 

Lambert-St. Louis Intl Airport MO 1 325,122 E 129,414 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1020 

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Intl Airport GA 1 362,235 D 459,765 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1023 

Seattle-Tacoma Intl Airport WA 1 157,464 E 166,788 0 

Some stormwater drainage, pond collection 

Deiplutech

1026 

Dallas/Fort Worth Intl Airport TX 1 166,790 C 360,933 60 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

Dei

1028 Denver Intl Airport CO 1 1,053,570 G 264,051 99 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Deiplutech

1029 La Guardia Airport NY 1 485,158 E 192,127 0 

Drainage system No

1033 

McCarran Intl Airport NV 1 10,644 C 188,972 40 

GCVs Plu

Pum

1034 

Metropolitan Oakland Intl Airport CA 1 N/A C 87,308 100 

None Zer

Dis

1035 

San Diego Intl Airport CA 1 N/A B 93,885 100 

None Zer

Dis

1036 

Baltimore - Washington Intl Airport MD 1 323,623 E 124,033 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

6 Departures based on data reported in 2006 to Bureau of Transportation Statistics 7 See DCN AD01270 for EPA’s assessment 8 Ibid 
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 6 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

1037 

George Bush Intercontinental Airport TX 1 10,243 B 248,339 40 

GCVs Plu

Pum

1042 Orlando Intl Airport FL 1 N/A A 155,272 

No

1053 Logan Intl Airport MA 1 985,296 F 186,253 0 

Drainage system No

1055 Miami Intl Airport FL 1 N/A A 153,684 

No

1066 

Salt Lake City Intl Airport UT 1 570,540 F 160,472 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1073 Honolulu Intl HI 1 N/A <3,000 No1083 Tampa Intl Airport FL 1 N/A A 100,756 100 

None Zer

Dis

1089 

John F Kennedy Intl Airport NY 1 560,031 F 154,606 0 

Drainage system No

1093 

Los Angeles Intl Airport CA 1 N/A B 296,032 

No

1095 

Chicago Midway Intl Airport IL 1 293,834 G 108,385 100 

Drainage to POTW All 

aprarePOdis

1106 

Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood Intl Airport FL 1 N/A A 111,196 

No

1107 

Pittsburgh Intl Airport PA 1 943,982 F 125,143 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1113 

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Intl Airport KY 1 722,995 F 247,165 93 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

Deiand tech
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 7 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

1126 

Minneapolis-St. Paul Intl/Wold - Chamberlain Airport MN 1 1,456,538 H 246,286 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1128 

Charlotte/Douglas Intl Airport NC 1 143,572 D 214,396 0 

Drainage system No

1133 

Sky Harbor Intl Airport AZ 1 N/A B 230,886 20 

GCVs GC

1138 

Detroit Metropolitan Airport Wayne County MI 1 2,152,292 G 250,629 100 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

DeiplutechEPA sam

1139 

Philadelphia Intl Airport PA 1 979,983 E 227,749 85 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

CenDei

1141 

Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport DC 1 219,533 E 134,346 40 

GCV + Drain Blockers Deicing at gates, deicing pads and other locations 

PluPum

1142 

Washington Dulles Intl Airport VA 1 1,076,083 E 238,635 40 

GCV + Drain Blockers Deicing at gates, deicing pads and other locations 

PluPum

1143 

San Francisco Intl Airport CA 1 105 C 150,832 100 

Vacuum scrubber collection 

ZerDis

1145 

Newark Liberty Intl Airport NJ 1 1,123,057 F 203,082 0 

None No

1004 Norfolk Intl Airport VA 1 30,875 D 38,747 20 

GCVs GC

1008 Tucson Intl Airport AZ 

2.9997038

12 2,342 B 26,695 20 

GCVs GC

1012 

Ted Stevens Anchorage AK 1 420,735 88,126 40 

GCV + Plug and Pump 

PluPum
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 8 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

International 

1014 

Albuquerque Intl Airport NM 1 64,460 E 47,569 20 

GCVs GC

1019 Ontario Intl Airport CA 1 34 B 48,899 0 

Drainage system No

1021 

Buffalo Niagara Intl Airport NY 1 284,654 G 41,916 40 

GCV + Plug and Pump 

PluPum

1024 

Indianapolis Intl Airport IN 1 452,155 F 83,769 40 

Deicing at gates, deicing pads and other locations 

PluPum

1032 

Austin - Bergstrom Intl Airport TX 1 24,044 B 50,418 40 

Drainage system Plu

Pum

1038 

Luis Munoz Marin Intl PR 1 N/A <3,000 

No

1039 Kahului HI 1 N/A <3,000 No1040 

Louis Armstrong New Orleans Intl Airport LA 1 N/A B 58,928 100 

None Zer

Dis

1045 

Norman Y. Mineta San Jose Intl Airport CA 1 N/A C 65,601 10 

GCVs GC

1057 

Will Rogers World Airport OK 1 49,504 D 30,001 0 

None No

1061 

William P Hobby Airport TX 1 14,168 B 57,369 100 

None Zer

Dis

1068 Eppley Airfield NE 1 110,986 G 33,022 0 

None No

1069 

Cleveland Hopkins Intl Airport OH 1 582,321 G 116,569 40 

GCV + Plug and Pump 

PluPum

1078 

Nashville Intl Airport TN 1 91,543 D 76,706 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1079 Manchester Airport NH 1 177,307 G 34,860 0 

Drainage system No
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 9 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

1081 Bob Hope Airport CA 1 N/A B 30,446 100 

Absorbed and disposed 

ZerDis

1086 

Palm Beach Intl Airport FL 1 1,023 A 34,507 100 

None Zer

Dis

1099 

Sacramento Intl Airport CA 1 N/A C 55,732 20 

GCVs GC

1101 Portland Intl Airport OR 1 112,086 E 96,475 20 

GCVs GC

1102 

John Wayne Airport - Orange County CA 1 N/A B 51,860 100 

None Zer

Dis

1108 

Louisville Intl Airport - Standiford Field KY 1 128,409 E 65,586 60 

POTW Diversion Dei

1111 

Port Columbus Intl Airport OH 1 288,374 F 59,938 0 

None No

1115 

Jacksonville Intl Airport FL 1 1,001 B 40,383 100 

None Zer

Dis

1116 

Reno/Tahoe Intl Airport NV 1 74,632 F 32,714 20 

GCVs GC

1121 

Theodore Francis Green State Airport RI 1 150,127 F 43,671 60 

GCVs with Catch Basin Inserts 

Dei

1122 

Southwest Florida Intl Airport FL 1 950 A 36,484 100 

None Zer

Dis

1129 Bradley Intl Airport CT 1 427,068 G 51,389 60 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Dei

1130 

San Antonio Intl Airport TX 1 12,749 B 46,389 0 

Drainage system No

1136 

General Mitchell Intl Airport WI 1 152,944 H 85,128 44 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

Deiwittech

1137 

Dallas Love Field Airport TX 1 37,219 C 44,018 40 

Plug and Pump Plu

Pum

1140 Memphis Intl TN 1 D 0 None No
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 10 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

Airport 199,174 166,910 

1147 

Raleigh-Durham Intl Airport NC 1 102,451 D 86,302 0 

Drainage system No

1148 

Kansas City Intl Airport MO 1 203,725 F 76,016 40 

Drainage system Plu

Pum

1001 

Montgomery Regional Airport (Dannelly Field) AL 6.7012688 232 C 5,349 0 

Drainage system No

1002 Bert Mooney MT 6.37 13,592 I 2,136 100 

Vegetated drainage swale to detention basin 

ZerDis

1005 Roberts Field OR 

3.0369891

13 14,987 G 6,331 100 

Drainage to surface impoundment 

ZerDis

1007 Yeager Airport WV 

2.1507875

35 49,561 E 13,606 40 

Deicing drainage at gates, deicing pads and other locations diverted to detention basin 

PluPum

1016 

Tri-State/Milton J. Ferguson Field WV 

8.0891175

26 12,945 E 3,794 0 

GCVs to deicing stormwater tank which is discharged to the airport’s outfall 

No

1022 

Fort Wayne Intl Airport IN 

1.9682313

9 50,412 G 16,247 0 

GCVs No

1025 Tupelo Regional 

14.183753

47 821 D 1,357 0 

None No

1027 

Craven County Regional NC 

9.0114411

89 878 C 2,597 0 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

No

1030 

Williamsport Regional PA 

5.2656236

5 10,071 G 1,998 60 

Deicing Pads Dei

1041 

Glacier Park Intl Airport MT 

3.1408876

71 38,555 H 6,380 0 

Drainage system No

1043 Ralph Wien AK 1 0 Drainage system No
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 11 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

Memorial 2,500 15,305 

1044 

Roanoke Regional Airport VA 

2.1920994

4 32,927 E 13,098 0 

 None No

1048 Redding Municipal CA 

8.4301438

89 692 C 3,216 0 

None No

1049 Lanai HI 

9.2325749

76 N/A <3,000 

1050 

Aspen - Pitkin County/Sardy Field CO 4.75 15,018 H 3,904 40 

Deicing at gates, deicing pads and other locations 

PluPum

1051 

Barnstable MuniBoardman/Polando Field MA 

1.8305931

21 46,147 G 16,496 0 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

No

1052 

Wilmington Intl Airport NC 

6.0387841

41 2,175 C 6,587 0 

Drainage system No

1054 Jackson Hole Airport WY 4.35 34,131 I 4,660 100 

None Zer

Dis

1056 

Santa Maria Pub/Capt G Allan Hancock Fld CA 

9.2490001

36 N/A C 100 

None Zer

Dis

1060 

Williamson County Regional IL 

6.9209396

38 149 E 1,211 100 

None Zer

Dis

1063 

Evansville Regional Airport IN 

5.1042022

78 20,149 E 9,220 0 

Drainage system No

1067 

Helena Regional Airport MT 4.2 18,381 H 5,006 100 

None Zer

Dis

1071 Tweed-New Haven CT 

5.0286371

08 4,926 F 1,602 0 

None No

1072 

Gillette-Campbell County WY 7.61 880 H 1,782 100 

None Zer

Dis

1082 Trenton Mercer NJ 

6.1575606

77 5,393 F 1,809 0 

Drainage system No

1084 

Bismarck Municipal Airport ND 

3.8679111

39 20,997 H 4,207 0 

Drainage system No

1085 Waterloo Municipal IA 5.5958326 H 1,857 0 Drainage system No
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 12 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

18 7,821 

1088 

Outagamie County Regional Airport WI 

2.4840632

98 57,845 H 10,200 0 

None No

1091 

Rochester Intl Airport MN 

3.1749091

09 34,556 H 6,244 40 

GCVs Plu

Pum

1092 

Lewiston-Nez Perce County ID 4.84 24,859 F 3,643 100 

None Zer

Dis

1094 

Boeing Field/King County Intl Airport WA 

5.8985185

04 5,156 E 6,904 40 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

PluPum

1096 Santa Fe Municipal NM 

6.4949876

94 1,108 F 1,663 100 

None Zer

Dis

1097 Lovell Field TN 

4.9995583

77 4,150 D 9,610 0 

Drainage system No

1098 Aberdeen Regional SD 5.1 13,976 H 3,157 100 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

Deiplu

1100 

Toledo Express Airport OH 

2.0917405

28 46,449 G 14,385 20 

GCVs GC

1104 Nome AK 1 3,047 >3,000 13,405 0 

Drainage system No

1114 Stewart Intl Airport NY 

2.8661021

86 32,276 G 7,662 40 

Drainage to storage and POTW 

PluPum

1117 

Cherry Capital Airport MI 3.54 11,524 H 7,038 100 

None Zer

Dis

1118 Bethel AK 1 4,897 >3,000 40,336 0 

None No

1119 

Rickenbacker Intl Airport OH 

4.3659042

78 10,711 F 3,302 0 

None No

1120 

Rapid City Regional Airport SD 

3.1081755

09 25,423 H 6,515 0 

None No

1131 

Wilkes - Barre/Scranton Intl Airport PA 

2.6815400

02 42,537 G 8,753 0 

Drainage system No

1132 

Chippewa Valley Regional WI 11.82 13,262 H 2,259 100 

None Zer

Dis
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 13 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

1134 St George Municipal UT 

8.7283339

09 13,950 D 2,985 100 

None Zer

Dis

1135 

Lafayette Regional Airport LA 

6.6425415

44 1,489 B 5,444 0 

Drainage system No

1144 

Central Wisconsin Airport WI 

3.0156318

36 43,624 H 6,921 0 

None No

1010 

Fairbanks International AK 1 83,335 24,919 60 

Drainage system Dei

1015 

Gulfport - Biloxi Intl Airport MS 

5.8412663

28 1,551 B 7,040 100 

None Zer

Dis

1017 

Austin Straubel Intl Airport WI 

2.3269387

05 62,133 H 11,624 40 

Drainage system Plu

Pum

1018 

Piedmont Triad Intl Airport NC 1 68,741 D 38,257 0 

Drainage system No

1031 

Richmond Intl Airport VA 1 59,337 D 35,386 40 

Drainage system and plug and pump system. 

PluPum

1046 

Long Island MacArthur Airport NY 

1.9984736

04 43,528 F 15,759 60 

Stormwater drainage to retention basin. 

Dei

1058 

Gerald R. Ford Intl Airport MI 1.5862166 97,174 H 25,015 40 

GCV + Plug and Pump 

PluPum

1059 

Greater Rochester Intl Airport NY 1 229,158 G 35,726 50 

Deicing at gates, deicing pads and other locations 

Deiplutech

1062 

Birmingham Intl Airport AL 

2.8409891

66 5,002 C 29,761 0 

Drainage system No

1065 Albany Intl Airport NY 1 125,775 G 39,324 98 

GCV + Plug and Pump 

PluPumtreatechEPA dat

1070 

Colorado Springs Airport CO 

1.7413694

18 75,817 G 20,756 40 

GCVs Plu

Pum
Memorandum 

February 27, 2012 Page 14 

Airport 

ID Airport Name 

Airport 

State 

Airport 

Weighting 

Factor 

ADF Usage 

(normalized 

gallons/yr) 

HDD 

Category 

Total 

Departures6

Percent 

Capture7

Facility Reported 

Collection 

Technology 

C

Te

1074 

South Bend Regional Airport IN 

2.1416773

15 29,585 G 13,722 100 

None Zer

Dis

1075 

Pensacola Regional Airport FL 

3.9341188

79 828 B 15,520 100 

None Zer

Dis

1077 Kona Intl at Keahole HI 

3.8440275

56 N/A <3,000 

No

1080 

Syracuse Hancock Intl Airport NY 1 186,351 G 30,840 60 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

Dei

1087 

City of El Paso Intl Airport TX 

3.0456877

73 16,228 C 25,895 100 

None Zer

Dis

1090 Boise Airport ID 

1.5042880

97 71,421 F 27,814 60 

None Dei

1103 Juneau International AK 1 48,014 >3,000 23,079 0 

Drainage system No

1105 Spokane Intl Airport WA 

1.5192461

28 67,984 G 27,269 100 

None Zer

Dis

1123 

James M Cox Dayton Intl Airport OH 1 90,580 F 35,709 60 

Deicing only at deicing pads 

Dei

1124 

Des Moines Intl Airport IA 

1.6210668

28 80,455 G 23,951 40 

Drainage system Plu

Pum

1125 

Sarasota/Bradenton Intl Airport FL 

5.1849677

46 N/A A 8,935 

No

1146 

Northwest Arkansas Regional AR 

1.8781962

82 30,775 <3,000 15,891 0 

Deicing at deicing pads and other locations 

No
ESRI ArcExplorer 1.1

STATES

13 MEAN TOTAL HDD (HDD)

- ANNUAL -

A < 1001

B 1001 - 2000

C 2001 - 3000

D 3001 - 4000

E 4001 - 5000

F 5001 - 6000

G 6001 - 7000

H 7001 - 9000

I > 9000

TITLE