[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27805-27808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12899]



[[Page 27805]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


Request for Comment and Information; Draft Report to Congress on 
Potential Hazards to Aircraft by Locating Waste Disposal Sites in 
Vicinity of Airports

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for comment regarding Report to Congress on the 
potential hazards to aircraft by locating waste disposal sites in the 
vicinity of airports.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice requests comment to help fulfill a requirement in 
Section 203 of the Airport and Airway Safety Capacity, Noise 
Improvement, and Intermodal Transportation Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-
581).
    Section 203(b)(2) directs the Secretary of Transportation to 
conduct a study to determine whether a municipal solid waste facility, 
located within a 5-mile radius of the end of a runway, has the 
potential for attracting or sustaining bird movements (from feeding, 
watering, or roosting in the area) and poses a hazard to runways or 
approach and departure patterns of aircraft. The Secretary of 
Transportation has directed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
to conduct this study.
    This notice solicits comments from the public on a draft report, as 
directed by Congress. The FAA believes a wide-range of public views 
will be beneficial in developing a comprehensive final Report to 
Congress.

DATES: Comments must be received by June 26, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send all comments in triplicate to: Airport Safety and 
Compliance Branch, AAS-310, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 
Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benedict D. Castellano, Manager, 
Airport Safety and Compliance Branch, AAS-310, Federal Aviation 
Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
maintains that there exists a potential safety hazard when a waste 
disposal site is located within 5,000 feet of a runway used by piston-
powered aircraft and within 10,000 feet of a runway used by turbo-
engine aircraft. Additionally, when a waste disposal site is located 
within a 5-mile radius of a runway, such site may be incompatible with 
aircraft operations when the site attracts or sustains hazardous bird 
movements from feeding, watering, or roosting areas into or across the 
runways and/or approach and departure paths of aircraft.
    In conducting the study mandated by Congress, the FAA examined the 
history of birds striking aircraft and reviewed several scientific 
papers published on the subject of landfills and birds. A draft report 
has been developed which outlines Federal regulations and policies on 
the subject, and discusses the basis of FAA criteria for siting of 
landfills. The report contains FAA's findings and future concerns. It 
includes a recommendation for continuing the current policy to object 
to the establishment of waste disposal sites within the criteria 
specified above.
    All comments received on this draft report will be fully considered 
in the development of the final report, to be submitted to Congress.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 19, 1995.
Ray Uhl,
Acting Director, Office of Airport Safety and Standards.
Draft Report on the Potential Hazards to Aircraft in Locating Waste 
Disposal Sites in the Vicinity of Airport

Purpose

    This report is submitted to Congress in response to Section 
203(b)(2) of the Airport and Airway Safety, Capacity, Noise 
Improvement, and Intermodal Transportation Act of 1992 which directs 
the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study to determine whether 
a municipal solid waste facility, located within a 5-mile radius of the 
end of a runway, has the potential for attracting or sustaining bird 
movements (from feeding, watering, or roosting in the area) and poses a 
hazard to runways or approach and departure patterns of aircraft.

Scope of Report

    Because most wildlife movements are seasonally influenced, a 
complete study of the issues presented would require that researchers 
document all wildlife activity for at least 1 year. In order to produce 
more credible information, at least 3 years of study data would be 
necessary to calculate valid statistical averages. Given the limited 
time frame specified in the Act for completing this study, it was not 
considered feasible to formulate and carry out a fully scientific 
research project to address the issue of siting landfills near 
airports. Instead, this report was developed from historical data, past 
studies, and research on the incidents and accidents involving bird 
strikes and aircraft, and on the potential of solid waste disposal 
sites to attract and sustain bird movements.

Aircraft Bird Strikes Historical Background

    It is generally agreed that birds and aircraft are not compatible 
even though they share the common thread of flight. Bird strikes with 
aircraft were recorded as early as 1912, when a Wright Flyer crashed 
after striking a bird off the Pacific coast. Calbraith Rodgers, the 
pilot who drowned in the crash, became the first aviation fatality 
attributed to a bird strike.
    Developments over the last 80 years have brought aviation to 
unprecedented levels of sophistication. However, this increased level 
of sophistication has not provided aircraft with an immunity to damages 
resulting from strikes with wildlife. Modern aircraft carry more 
passengers at greater speeds than ever before, thus increasing the 
potential for catastrophe. At high speed, even small animals become 
damaging projectiles to large aircraft. According to V.F.E. Soloman, a 
noted Canadian bird hazard specialist, a 4-pound bird struck at 260 
knots exerts a force of 14 tons; at 520 knots, the force becomes 57 
tons.
    Bird strikes have been responsible for more than 100 deaths in the 
United States. Some of the more notable accidents that were attributed 
to bird strikes included: On March 10, 1960, a Lockheed Electra 
departing Boston's Logan Airport struck starlings and crashed, 
resulting in 62 deaths. In 1973, a Learjet departing Dekalb-Peachtree 
Airport in Georgia struck a flock of cowbirds (small blackbirds) and 
ingested them into the engines. Both engines sustained compressor 
stalls, causing the aircraft to crash, killing all seven on board. On 
November 12, 1975, a DC-10 departing John F. Kennedy Airport ingested 
gulls on takeoff roll, aborted the takeoff, caught fire, and was 
completely destroyed. The accident resulted in a number of injuries, 
but no deaths. Fortunately, the 139 passengers, who were airline 
employees, were able to evacuate the burning craft quickly.
    Although it has been argued that these accidents are no longer 
relevant and that modern aircraft have become more resistant to damage 
and disaster from bird strikes, this is not the case, In 1988, in Bahar 
Dar, Ethiopia, a Boeing-737 on takeoff struck a flock of speckled 
pigeons and crashed, killing 35 passengers and injuring 21 others.
    The reports that followed the incidents mentioned above noted that 
birds had been attracted by either waste disposal operations or by 
trash on or about the vicinity of the airport. Following the 1973 
Learjet crash, the [[Page 27806]] National Transportation Safety Board 
recommended that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ``implement 
a procedure for more stringent and continued surveillance of all 
facilities subject to the provisions of the Airport and Airway 
Development Act and impose timely sanctions against operators of 
facilities, which receive federal aid and do not fully comply with the 
requirements imposed upon them by the provisions of this act.'' A 
provision in the Act specifies that grant recipients, to the extent 
reasonable, maintain compatible land uses around an airport.
    Whether or not a catastrophe results, bird hazards can be 
responsible for unnecessary risk and expense. The FAA receives an 
average of 2,000 bird strike reports each year. This reporting system 
is voluntary and does not reflect the total number of strikes or cost 
estimates of damage to aircraft or the aviation industry. It is 
generally accepted that more than half of all strikes go unreported. 
Far less information is received on cost estimates. Information 
regarding the amount of damage is seldom reported because pilots 
normally fill out the strike report before the actual extent of damage 
is determined.
    However, damage to aircraft from birds can be severe and costly. 
According to a recent Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for John F. 
Kennedy International Airport, after ingesting 1 bird, a Boeing-747 
aborted its takeoff, blew 10 tires, and damaged the brakes while 
stopping. The resulting damage from this one incident cost the airline 
$200,000. Additionally, the EIS reported that between 1979 and 1993, 
bird strikes caused 46 instances of engine damage, 22 instances of 
nonengine damage, and 51 aborted takeoffs (USDA 1994).\1\

    \1\ Final Environmental Impact Statement, Gull Hazard Reduction 
Program, John F. Kennedy International Airport, United States 
Department of Agriculture, May 1994, pp. 1-7, 1-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Landfills as Attractions to Birds

    A number of scientific papers have been published regarding the 
association of birds and waste disposal operations. It is generally 
accepted that large numbers of birds commonly frequent landfills in 
search of food. In a recent study conducted by the United States 
Department of Agriculture's Denver Wildlife Research Center (DWRC) for 
the FAA, 699,477 individual birds of 42 species were recorded at 3 
landfills in 958 observation periods (Belant et al. 1994).\2\ Although 
gulls may be found at inland landfills, they are one of the more common 
bird species associated with coastal landfills. Additionally, crows, 
starlings, blackbirds, pigeons, sparrows, and vultures have been 
documented as common visitors to most landfills regardless of the 
location (Lake 1984).\3\

    \2\ Jerrold L. Bellant et al., ``Gull and Other Bird Abundance 
at Three Mixed Solid Waste Landfills in Northern Ohio,'' DOT Interim 
Report, DTFA01-91-Z-02004, (1992), p. 23.
    \3\ David W. Lake, ``Airport Bird Hazards Associated With Solid 
Waste Disposal Facilities,'' Proceedings: Wildlife Hazards to 
Aircraft Conference and Training Workshop, (1984), p. 221.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bird populations that impact human health and safety have been less 
understood and documented. However, in 1971 the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) released a report that surveyed land disposal 
sites reporting bird aircraft hazards. In the discussion section on 
page 26 it stated, ``there is little doubt that improper solid waste 
disposal sites in many areas of the country contribute to the bird/
aircraft strike hazard at airports.'' Furthermore, it was stated in the 
summary and conclusions that, ``analysis of judgments following two 
lawsuits resulting from aircraft/bird strike accidents indicated a 
strong possibility that both government and a disposal site owner could 
be liable for an accident attributed to birds if the disposal site was 
knowingly attracting birds and contributing to the risk of bird/
aircraft collisions'' (Davidson et al. 1971).\4\ Considering the 
reports referenced above, FAA believes there is enough information 
available to support the conclusion that landfills are attractive to 
birds and that a potential hazard will exist whenever numbers of birds 
are drawn into or across air traffic corridors.

    \4\ George R. Davidson, Jr. et al., ``Land Disposal Sites Near 
Airports Reporting Bird/Aircraft Hazards,'' Open-File Report, (TSR 
1.6.004/0), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971, p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has initiated research to understand, identify, and manage 
potentially hazardous wildlife populations better on or near airports. 
Actual research is being completed under a contract with DWRC. DWRC is 
recognized as one of the most experienced organizations in the field of 
nuisance wildlife management. Although wildlife hazard research is 
currently underway, it remains in preliminary stages. This preliminary 
research will establish a solid data base that will be used for later 
comparisons.
    More research is also needed to assess the effectiveness of 
wildlife control techniques. It is common for operators of waste 
disposal facilities to include wildlife control techniques in proposals 
to locate or expand operations in the vicinity of airports. These 
techniques include the use of pyrotechnic devices, broadcast bird 
distress calls, and as a last resort, lethal control. Although these 
controls are often presented as being sufficient to offset any wildlife 
attraction caused by the landfill activity, there is little 
documentation that these controls will significantly mitigate the 
attractiveness of a landfill to birds over an extended period. Thus, 
there is no assurance that such efforts would actually alleviate a bird 
hazard near an airport should one arise after the landfill is 
constructed. There exists ample information regarding bird dependence 
on landfills. Conversely, there is little information documenting 
successful long-term mitigation of the problem.

Landfill Siting Near Airports

    Locating a waste disposal site, particularly in and around urban 
areas, has become a very serious problem for most communities, from 
both physical and political viewpoints. As a result, there has been an 
increasing need to expand existing sites and establish new waste 
disposal facilities and landfills. A proposal to establish such a 
facility close to a populated or recreational area will, in most cases, 
result in considerable controversy and public opposition. Landfill 
proponents often consider or select sites located at the end of runways 
or in the vicinity of airports as solutions to these issues. These 
locations are often near, but outside, population centers; are noise 
impacted or otherwise unattractive for building development; provide 
readily available and inexpensive land; and generally provide a 
location with good road access. As a result, these sites stand a much 
greater chance of being accepted by the public for landfill use. 
Because of its concern that the attractiveness of these landfills to 
bird populations has a potential to impact the safety of aircraft 
operating to and from airports, the FAA has taken a number of actions 
and established policies and procedures to evaluate the impact of 
potential landfill sites adjacent to airports.

Federal Regulations, Policies, and Procedures

    A. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 139. Airports which serve any 
scheduled or unscheduled passenger operation of an air carrier that is 
conducted with an aircraft having a seating capacity of more than 30 
passengers are required by Federal Aviation Regulations Part 139 to 
have an airport operating certificate from the FAA. This certificate is 
only granted after the airport is inspected by an FAA airport 
certification inspector to ensure [[Page 27807]] that all minimum 
safety standards of Part 139 have been met. Under Section 139.337, all 
operators of certificated airports shall provide for ``the conduct of 
an ecological study, acceptable to the Administrator, when any of the 
following events occurs on or near the airport: (1) An air carrier 
aircraft experiences a multiple bird strike or engine ingestion. (2) An 
air carrier experiences a damaging collision with wildlife other than 
birds. (3) WIldlife of a size or in numbers capable of causing an event 
described in paragraph (a) (1) or (2) of this section is observed to 
have access to any airport flight pattern or movement area.'' Based in 
part on this study, FAA may require the airport operator to formulate 
and implement a wildlife hazard management plan.
    B. Order 5200.5A, Waste Disposal Sites On Or Near Airports. FAA 
issued Order 5200.5 on October 16, 1974, to provide internal guidance 
regarding FAA's official position on siting landfills near airports in 
an effort to reduce potential airport/wildlife hazards. The current 
Order 5200.5A, ``Waste Disposal Sites On or Near Airports,'' and the 
original Order 5200.5, contain criteria concerning the establishment, 
elimination, or monitoring of landfills, open dumps, waste disposal 
sites, or other similar facilities on or in the vicinity of airports. 
Orders, such as 5200.5A, are internal directives that provides guidance 
to FAA employees. Advisory circulars are public information and may be 
instructive to those who receive grants from the FAA. These orders and 
advisory circulars have no authority over facilities located off 
airport property. Also, FAA has no authority to approve or redirect 
land use outside of the airport perimeter. For airports that receive 
Federal funds, the owner, operator, or grant recipient must comply with 
terms of the grant obligation to the extent reasonable to restrict the 
use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to 
activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations. 
However, in most cases landfills are located outside the airport 
property and are often beyond the airport owner's jurisdictional 
control.
    Order 5200.5A sets forth the policy that waste disposal sites are 
incompatible with aircraft operations when located within those areas 
adjacent to an airport that are defined through the application of the 
following three criteria: (1) when located within 10,000 feet of any 
runway end used or planned to be used by turbine-powered aircraft; (2) 
within 5,000 feet of any runway end used by piston-powered aircraft; 
and (3) when located within a 5-mile radius of a runway end, such that 
it attracts or sustains hazardous bird movements from feeding, 
watering, or roosting areas into or across the runways and/or approach 
and departure paths of aircraft. Although frequent movements of birds 
across aircraft approach and departure paths could be a safety concern 
beyond the 5-mile radius, this distance was considered a reasonable 
limit for application of the FAA criteria. The earlier version of the 
FAA order had no such limit.
    C. FAA Notification Requirements. To assist FAA in its ability to 
monitor the siting of landfills near airports, the Congress in 1992 
enacted legislation to amend the Federal Aviation Act to allow the 
Secretary of Transportation to require that persons proposing to 
establish sanitary landfills notify the Secretary when such notice will 
promote safety and the efficient use or preservation of navigable 
airspace. A proposed FAA regulatory amendment will establish an area 
within a 5-mile radius from an airport for requiring such a 
notification.
    D. EPA Notification Requirements. Because of safety concerns and a 
lack of jurisdiction, FAA actively sought the assistance of the EPA to 
consider airport safety concerns when processing landfill siting 
permits. FAA suggested that the criteria in Order 5200.5A be 
incorporated into EPA's revision of its solid waste disposal 
regulations. As a result of FAA comments, the EPA adopted a regulatory 
requirement in the Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria, 40 Code of 
Federal Regulations Section 258.10, that landfill owners or operators 
notify the affected airport and appropriate FAA office whenever they 
intend to expand or propose a new landfill within 5 miles of an 
airport. However, EPA chose not to prohibit landfill operations within 
the 5,000 and 10,000 foot distance criteria identified by FAA. Instead, 
it required operators within these areas to demonstrate to the State 
agency having the authority to issue the permit that the operation does 
not pose a bird hazard to aircraft.
Basis of FAA Criteria for Siting of Landfills

    FAA believes that any open household or putrescible waste disposal 
activity within 5,000 feet of a runway serving piston-powered aircraft 
and 10,000 feet from a runway serving turbine-powered aircraft is 
incompatible with safe aircraft operations. Outside this criteria but 
within 5 miles of the runway edge, FAA will review proposed landfill 
locations on a case-by-case basis. Under these circumstances, if the 
site falls directly under the approach or departure path or has the 
potential to increase birds in the active airspace, FAA will generally 
consider the site as being incompatible with the airport. If the site 
were located between the 10,000-foot limit and the 5-mile limit away 
from the approach or departure path and would not likely attract birds 
across the active airspace, FAA will not consider the site 
incompatible. During this case-by-case evaluation, factors such as the 
native bird populations, local geography, and the airport traffic 
patters are considered.
    The distance used in FAA's guidance is based on several factors. 
Bird strikes are voluntarily reported to FAA from ground level to 
several thousand feet above ground level (AGL). Most bird strikes occur 
below 500 feet with numbers diminishing to insignificant levels above 
3,000 feet. Based on normal performance characteristics, departing 
aircraft should be at approximately 500 feet AGL after traveling 10,000 
feet from the runway end and approaching 3,000 feet AGL at 5 miles. 
These distances and altitudes form the basis for the minimum criteria 
designated for a turbine-powered aircraft.
    Criteria for piston-powered aircraft specifies a lesser distance of 
5,000 feet due to different performance characteristics. These aircraft 
are slower and make more noise relative to a bird's ability to respond. 
The engine noise and slower airspeed allow the operator and bird more 
time to react and avoid striking each other. Additionally, piston-
powered aircraft do not have engine intakes that can ingest birds.
    The 5-mile area is specified in Order 5200.5A to allow FAA the 
opportunity to review the traffic patterns, geography, and 
juxtaposition of the proposed landfill site and airport. As birds do 
not respect minimum distances, this review provides FAA an early 
opportunity to comment on proposed disposal sites in critical air 
traffic areas immediately outside the 5,000 and 10,000 foot zones. The 
review also takes into account existing numbers of birds in the area 
and other natural, man-made, or geographical features such as refuges, 
water reservoirs, or coastlines that may be located across air traffic 
paths from the proposed disposal site. As a note of reference, the 5-
mile radius is also used in other countries, such as Canada, which 
restricts landfill development within 8 kilometers, or 4.8 miles of an 
airport reference point.

Future Concerns

    There are indications that bird species with the greatest potential 
to create wildlife hazards on airports are [[Page 27808]] increasing 
and that future resolutions to these hazards may become more complex. 
Certain species that frequent landfills, such as ring-billed gulls, are 
increasing in unprecedented numbers. At the same time, the public is 
becoming more involved in wildlife management issues. The National 
Environmental Policy Act may require public involvement in the solution 
of a wildlife-related airport safety problem. The public's involvement 
may be costly and time consuming, resulting in a trade-off of accepting 
potential hazards while possible solutions are debated.
    The likelihood of bird strikes may be further exacerbated by design 
changes to modern aircraft, which incorporate larger inlet engines to 
achieve reduced noise levels. These larger, quieter engines give birds 
less warning and require them to avoid a larger surface area.

Findings

    1. FAA believes that current data is insufficient to permit an 
accurate and consistent quantification of the risk created by locating 
landfills within 5 miles of an airport. Although a quantified risk 
assessment is not available, the potential hazard of bird strikes has 
been established in reports following aircraft accidents.
    2. FAA believes that landfills constitute a potential hazard to 
aviation if located within 5 miles from a runway end for the following 
reasons:
    a. Bird strikes in the vicinity of waste disposal activities 
located within 5 miles of an airport have been a factor in numerous 
accidents, some involving loss of human life.
    b. Bird activity is generally recognized to occur at altitudes that 
brings it into the path of aircraft during approach and departure 
operations, the most critical time for aircraft performance.
    c. Modern aircraft, with quieter engines and larger engine inlets, 
increase the potential for bird strikes due to the reduced warning 
resulting from quieter engines with greater frontal areas which combine 
to increase the chances of birds being struck or ingested.
    d. Bird mitigation techniques, although offered as a solution, have 
not been proven effective over extended periods of time. In addition, 
future mitigation programs will become more complicated and require 
more time to implement, resulting in a trade-off of potential hazards.
    e. Landfills are intense attractants to birds. When located in or 
adjacent to airspace used by aircraft, a potential hazard will result.
    3. As total bird control is not possible, the best solution is to 
restrict actions on or in the vicinity of an active airport to reduce 
bird attractions.
    4. The distance criteria contained in FAA Order 52.005A serve as a 
reasonable basis for determining the incompatibility of a landfill site 
with airport operations.

Recommendations

    Although not a solution to all airport-related bird hazards, 
locating intense attractions to wildlife, such as landfills, outside 
the areas specified by the FAA reduces the risk of a potentially 
hazardous collision between aircraft and birds. Progress has been made 
toward this goal by the EPA. Although EPA stops short of prohibiting 
landfills within the 5,000 and 10,000 foot areas designated by the FAA, 
it does require that operators of existing municipal solid waste 
landfills within those areas demonstrate to the State agency that 
issues municipal solid waste permits that such units do not pose a bird 
hazard to aircraft. Additionally, proponents of new or expanded 
landfill sites within 5 miles of an airport must notify the affected 
airport and the FAA of their intentions.
    In an effort to enhance aviation safety. FAA recommends that no new 
or expanded municipal solid waste or putrescible landfill be located 
within the FAA specified 5,000 and 10,000 foot criteria or in the 
approach/departure areas within 5 miles of an airport if deemed 
incompatible with safe aircraft operations.

[FR Doc. 95-12899 Filed 5-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M