|
|
Type:
|
Communication
|
Status:
|
Placed on File
|
|
Intro date:
|
1/17/2018
|
Current Controlling Legislative Body:
|
|
|
Title:
|
Application to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) program at Midway International Airport
|
|
Topic:
|
AIRPORTS - Midway, - CITY DEPARTMENTS/AGENCIES - Aviation
|
|
Attachments:
|
1. F2018-7.pdf
|
Chicago Department of Aviation CITY OF CHICAGO December 15, 2017 The Honorable Anna Valencia City Clerk City Council Division c/o Peter Polacek City of Chicago City Hall Room 107 121 N. LaSalle Street Chicago, IL 60602 Dear Ms. Valencia: Pursuant to the ordinance passed on January 12,1993, enclosed hereto please find an application submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) dated December 1, 2017 regarding the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) program at Chicago Midway International Airport. If you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact me at (773) 686- 3579. Sincerely, Department of Aviation Attachment BOX 66142, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60666 Chicago Department of Aviation city of chicago December 1, 2017 Ms. Amy Hanson Chicago Airport District Office, CHI-ADO-600 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 2300 East Devon Avenue Des Plaines,IL60018 Dear Ms. Hanson: The City of Chicago (the City) is pleased to submit, for review and approval by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), an application to impose a passenger facility charge (PFC) at Chicago Midway International Airport (Midway) and to use PFC revenue for the projects included in this application. This application was prepared in accordance with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 158, Passenger Facility Charges, and includes the following sections: • Application form pertaining to the City's intent to: o impose a PFC at Midway and use PFC revenue for 16 projects at Midway: B Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure 0 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion - Rehabilitation of Runway 13 C-31C Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration B Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L 10510 WEST ZEMKE ROAD, P.O. BOX 66142. CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60666 Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation ¦ Taxiway Alpha Extension and Rehabilitation Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Yankee & Kilo Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration Replacement of Trunk Radio System Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover Attachment A: Airport Capital Improvement Plan Attachment B: Project Information Attachment C: Air Carrier Consultation and Public Notice Information Attachment D: Request to Exclude Class(es) of Carriers Attachment G: ALP/Airspace/Environment A notification letter detailing this proposed PFC action was sent on May 2, 2017 to all air carriers and foreign air carriers operating at Midway. A consultation meeting took place on June 1, 2017. Notice and opportunity for public comment pursuant to 14 CFR 158.24 occurred as detailed in Attachment C. Descriptions of the 17 projects, and other required information, are included in Attachment B. The net effect of this proposed application to impose a PFC and use PFC revenue is an increase in the total estimated net PFC authority of $312,657,824. The City's current approved total PFC authority is $2,206,572,985. The total effect of this proposed impose-and-use application is as follows: Estimated Charge Effective Date: September 1, 2054 Estimated Charge Expiration Date: October 1, 2061 Estimated Total PFC Authority: $2,528,230,809 (cumulative to date) The City appreciates the opportunity to submit this application with regards to the PFC program at Midway. We continue to be available if you require additional information during your review. Respectfully submitted, Ginger S. Evans Commissioner City of Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) Federal Aviation Administration U S. Department of Transportation 1. Application Type (Check all that apply) (X a. Impose PFC Charges !x b. Use PFC Revenue f- c. Amend PFC No. OMB Approved 2120-0557 Exn 8/31/2013 ' **S*C;!Z~* ~ ,.v,w>*r"
PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGE (PFC) APPLICATION
•¦-OSS' iiffjisn* .fsr-
PFC Number
.(^. s 'A? nFAA USE ONLY t:'
<* j£vjs$ , jf • ¦ :\^r t
\ Date Received
PART I
2. Public Agency Name, Address, and Contact Person
Agency Name City of Chicago, Department of Aviation 10510 W. ZemkeRd.
Address
City, State, ZIP Chicago, IL 60666 Contact Person Reshma Soni
4. Consultation Dates
a. Date of Written Notice to Air Carriers:
May 2, 2017
Carriers:
b. Date of Consultation Meeting with Air
June 1,2017
c. Date of Public Notice
June 1, 2017
PART II
b. Level c. Total Estimated PFC Revenue by Level
r$1.00 r$2.00 !X$3.00 Impose $8,414,598 Use SS.414,598
r~$4.00 (X$4.50 Impose $313,243,226 Use $313,243,226
PART III
d. Proposed Effective Date:
September 1,2054
e. Estimated Expiration Date:
October 1,2061
Attached
X 2< X X
6. Attachments (Check all that Apply)
a. b. c. d. e. f.
g-
h.
Submitted with Application Number
_ N7A
X
X U3-10-C-0U-MUW
IW7C
Document
Airport Capital Improvement Plan
Project Information (Attachment B)
Air Carrier Consultation and Public Notice Information
Request to Exclude Class(es) of Carriers
Alternative Uses/Projects
Competition Plan/Update
ALP/Airspace/Environmental
Notice of Intent Project Information
PART IV
With respect to this PFC application I hereby certify as follows:
To the best of my knowledge and belief, all data in this application are true and correct;
This application has been duty authorized by the governing body of the public agency;
The public agency will comply with the assurances (Appendix A to Part 158) if the application is approved;
For those projects for which approval to use PFC revenue is requested, all applicable ALP approvals, airspace determinations, and
environmental reviews required by the National Environmental Policy Act have been completed.
If required, the public agency has submitted a competition plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 47106(f); and
If required by 49 U.S.C. 40117(d)(4), adequate provision for financing the airside needs, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and gates, has been made by the public agency.
a. Typed Name of Authorized Representative Ginger S. Evans
Title
Commissioner; CDA
E-mail Address
ginger.evans@cityofchicago.org
c. Telephone Number 773-686-8060
e. Fax Number
FAA Form 5500-1 (8-10) Supersedes Previous Edition
Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Program Assurances
General.
These assurances shall be complied with in the conduct of a project funded with passenger facility charge (PFC) revenue.
These assurances are required to be submitted as part of the application for approval of authority to impose a PFC under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 40117.
Upon approval by the Administrator of an application, the public agency is responsible for compliance with these assurances.
Public agency certification. The public agency hereby assures and certifies, with respect to this project that:
Responsibility and authority of the public agency. It has legal authority to impose a PFC and to finance and carry out the proposed project; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been duly adopted or passed as an official act of the public agency's governing body authorizing the filing of the application, including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the public agency to act in connection with the application.
Compliance with regulation. It will comply with all provisions of 14 CFR part 158.
Compliance with state and local laws and regulations. It has complied, or will comply, with all applicable State and local laws and regulations.
Environmental, airspace and airport layout plan requirements. It will not use PFC revenue on a project until the FAA has notified the public agency that—
Any actions required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 have been completed;
The appropriate airspace finding has been made; and
The FAA Airport Layout Plan with respect to the project has been approved.
PFC Assurances (2007)
Nonexclusivity of contractual agreements. It will not enter into an exclusive long-term lease or use agreement with an air carrier or foreign air carrier for projects funded by PFC revenue. Such leases or use agreements will not preclude the public agency from funding, developing, or assigning new capacity at the airport with PFC revenue.
Carryover provisions. It will not enter into any lease or use agreement with any air carrier or foreign air carrier for any facility financed in whole or in part with revenue derived from a passenger facility charge if such agreement for such facility contains a carryover provision regarding a renewal option which, upon expiration of the original lease, would operate to automatically extend the term of such agreement with such carrier in preference to any potentially competing air carrier or foreign air carrier seeking to negotiate a lease or use agreement for such facilities.
Competitive access. It agrees that any lease or use agreements between the public agency and any air carrier or foreign air carrier for any facility financed in whole or in part with revenue derived from a passenger facility charge will contain a provision that permits the public agency to terminate the lease or use agreement if—
The air carrier or foreign air carrier has an exclusive lease or use agreement for existing facilities at such airport; and
Any portion of its existing exclusive use facilities is not fully utilized and is not made available for use by potentially competing air carriers or foreign air carriers.
Rates, fees and charges.
It will not treat PFC revenue as airport revenue for the purpose of establishing a rate, fee or charge pursuant to a contract with an air carrier or foreign air carrier.
It will not include in its rate base by means of depreciation, amortization, or any other method, that portion of the capital costs of a project paid for by PFC revenue for the purpose of establishing a rate, fee or charge pursuant to a contract with an air carrier or foreign air carrier.
Notwithstanding the limitation provided in subparagraph (b), with respect to a project for terminal development, gates and related areas, or a facility occupied or used by one or more air carriers or foreign air carriers on an exclusive or preferential basis, the rates, fees, and charges payable by such carriers that use such facilities will be no less than the rates, fees, and charges paid by such carriers using similar facilities at the airport that were not financed by PFC revenue.
Standards and specifications. It will carry out the project in accordance with FAA airport design, construction and equipment standards and specifications contained in advisory circulars current on the date of project approval.
PFC Assurances (2007)
Recordkeeping and Audit. It will maintain an accounting record for audit purposes for 3 years after physical and financial completion of the project. All records must satisfy the requirements of 14 CFR part 158 and contain documentary evidence for all items of project costs.
Reports. It will submit reports in accordance with the requirements of 14 CFR part 158, subpart D, and as the Administrator may reasonably request.
Compliance with 49 U.S.C. 47523 through 47528. It understands 49 U.S.C. 47524 and 47526 require that the authority to impose a PFC be terminated if the Administrator determines the public agency has failed to comply with those sections of the United States Code or with the implementing regulations published under the Code.
[Doc. No. 26385, 56 FR 24278, May 29, 1991, as amended by Amdt. 158-2, 65 FR 34543, May 30, 2000; Amdt. 158-4, 72 FR 28851, May 23, 2007]
Source: Title 14: Aeronautics and Space, PART 158—PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES (PFC'S), Subpart F—Reduction in Airport Improvement Program Apportionment, Appendix A to Part 158—Assurances
PFC Assurances (2007)
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ATTACHMENT A. AIRPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
INFORMATION
The section contains the following information:
Page A -1 Chicago Midway International Airport - Comprehensive Capital Improvement Program 2016 - 2024
PFC Application No. 18-13-C-OO-MDW
3 3
3 5 3
3 3
3 3 3
a a a
5 3 3 3
s s
3 3 3 3 3
T
III
ill
II.
ill
H
in
a a
a a a
a a
a a a
a a
3.3.
a a a
il.
I
to
II!
il
d
Ik
Hi
ill
I
il
J
Mil
1!
ill.
¦Si ¦ &i ¦ i/l . (/) ¦ 1/1
a a a; a a
a a; a. a
i
a a a
3'3'3
a a a
! i
III
Ml
III
ill
li;
ill
d Hi
II.
1M
a a ;
a a
a a a
a a a
S3
S!
33
li
?! 1
1 I
J
s c 2
2 -
I!
i
111
11
II.
Hi
11!
ill
li.
ill
si ss ss
SI
Si
ss ss ss
in <
IS
ii
i
3 3
3 3 3
3 3 3
ii
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
II
Mj!
s si
11
inn
vs i'yy '/) «¦) in
a a
a a
a a
a a
I
a a a
i !
a a a a
Ms
Ih
ill
lit
ill
i;.
ill
d
Mi
f I
il
a a a a
a a a a
a a s
a a
13 3!
00
<
I
ii
d
11':
H.
lit
lb
ill
I
Hi
li!
.111
¦7i j '7>
IS
s s s a a
a a
!!
a a a a
S!
a a a a
IK
I
li
il
Ik
a a
a a a a
a a a a
II = 5
!!
ii
a a a a
11!
II.
ill
III
ill
3 3 5 3 5 5 5
3 3 3 3
3 3 3
¦y» i/i vj
I
I!
IS
II|1010|
3 3
n II
!
ii:
5*
f
IL
I
ll
il
ill
I!
ill
ole.sio ©
3 3 3
3 3
3 3. 3
3 3 3
IS
3 3
3 313
3 3
5 3
il
f
li
d
Mi
II.
Ml
li
Ml
IS
a a a
a a
a a a
a a a si
a a
1 I 11
i I
I
I
?!
d
Ih
il.
Ill
i
illi
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ATTACHMENT B. PROJECT
INFORMATION
The section contains the Attachment B project information for the following projects:
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway Alpha Extension and Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Yankee & Kilo
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Replacement of Trunk Radio System
Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
PFC Application No. 18-13-C-OO-MDW
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure iPFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Project Number: 01
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $5,001,186 Bond Financing & Interest $5,001,186
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $10,002,372
if amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary SO Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B-1
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $10,002,372 iFor FAA Use
I|9910|Does the project include a proposed LOI?i
[ ]YESr
I ] NO^ ,
If YES, does the Region support?! '[ ]YES[
'[ ] NO]
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?
I J yes "
'U_NOf
For any proposed ALP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's five year CIP?|
t. ] yes;
57 For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.507;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs.! [ ] YES
[ ] NO[
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
Je. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00| and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gatesJ '[ ] YES '[ ] NO,
[ ] N/Al
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding]
if. Reasonableness of cost J Project Total Cost Analysis,
|PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-2
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOl are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use1
i|99|. ,
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional
approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration
Jof collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any '
discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the
funding it proposes.,
8. Project Description:
This proposed project is for the rehabilitation of the airfield lighting infrastructure system and cabling at Chicago Midway International Airport (Midway or the Airport) (Exhibit 1). This project will install approximately 20,000 feet of new airfield electrical duct bank, associated hand holes and manholes for airfield lighting circuits and airport communications. This project will also replace approximately 150,000 feet of aging airfield lighting cable to provide a more efficient and reliable airfield electrical system. The alignment of the new duct bank will impact Runways 13R-31L, 13L-31R and Taxiways N and Y. The intention is to move as many manholes that exist within the Runway Safety Area (RSA) outside the RSA to allow for troubleshooting to occur without impacting flight operations. This project includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
The cost estimate for this project can be found in Exhibit 2.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-3
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
iFOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification1 information is not from PFC application.,
i ¦¦ ¦ ¦ j
ilf project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a1 likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters] gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been, jcompleted.P
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES '[ ] NO
'r i n/a
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will reduce congestion and improve air safety by providing structurally sound airfield lighting infrastructure and new cabling to ensure airfield visibility for nighttime operations and reduce the potential of down time due to failure of the lighting systems on the runways or taxiways. The existing airfield lighting system is over 30-years old and beyond its useful life. The continued use of cabling within damaged duct banks could result in unexpected lighting outages on the airfield, which could significantly disrupt operations and compromise airfield safety. The installation of new cabling, duct banks, and additional lighting infrastructure will ensure the airfield lighting will remain operational and in compliance with Part 139 regulations.
iFOR FAA USE
Air safety. Part 139 \ 1 Other (explain)!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-4
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 \ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ ] Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain)
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules!
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.'
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?!
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, .competition at the airport,
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to preserve capacity and safety with the rehabilitation and replacement of airfield lighting infrastructure and cabling to prevent unscheduled outages that could significantly impact Airport operations. Much of the airfield's lighting system is over 30 years old and has reached the end of its useful life. This project will improve the existing level of safety of the Airport by providing a more reliable lighting system and providing safer work conditions for airfield lighting maintenance personnel. This project will also relocate manholes and handholds out of the runway safety area to allow Airport maintenance staff access for repairs or modifications to the system with minimal impacts to airfield operations. The reliability of airfield lighting is critical to aviation safety.
FOR FAA USB
i_ - - ¦ — - - — —¦ i
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the,
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-5
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
'Finding
| o _
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part ,of the PFC application,
Kddress adequacy of issues]
1 1. Project Justification:
Much of the Airport's current airfield electrical infrastructure and cabling is over 30-years old and well beyond its useful life. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for the minimum useful life for airfield lighting and infrastructure is 10 and 20 years respectively. As circuits have been added and modified over the years, the existing duct bank system has been fully utilized or slightly modified to accommodate these changes. As the duct bank system nears its capacity, maintenance operations and future modifications will be more labor intensive and costly. This project will also replace aging cabling and relocate much of the existing electrical infrastructure and manholes outside of the runway safety area to allow airfield maintainers access to the airfield lighting system with minimum disruption to airfield operations.
FOR FAA USE'
i >|910|Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s)
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s)
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the,_ project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition1 benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part; of this PFC application,
i— . .—. . ——¦ ,
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above]
Project Eligibility:]
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category below]
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38
1 PGL )J
Revised 8/31/2010
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 orPGLl
! )i '
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described ih 49 U.S.C. 47505;'
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.]
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility planj
[Title and Date of Part 150{^
[ ] Project included in a local study]
(Title and Date of local study:;
I ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);!
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier ~]
| percentage of annual boardings )_;'
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data1 and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding!
Sre any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated, Icosts.f
Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): April 2, 2016 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): August 14, 2018
For FAA Use'
i|99|¦ ¦|910|For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?i
[ ] Yes'
'U_NcT
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date 'or PFC application Due date, whichever is first?!
1 p—L|910|[ ] Yes'
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation orj 'completion. Explain.
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use
i i
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date,1
whichever is sooner J
[ ] Yes "
L_LNc!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-7
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
iWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the .estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ] YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement:
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use1
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public.1 Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orf by the FAA for its analysis!
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-8
B 01: Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
jADO/RO Recommendation:';
jDoes the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RC> use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.!
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
,
[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues, 'that lead to determination.!
^Application Reviewed by:'
Name
Item(s) reviewed.!
Name
Item(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SOURCE Crawford, Murphy, and Tilly (CMT), November 2011 (aerial photography - tor visual reference only, may not be to scale). Ricondo & Associates, Inc, June 2017 PREPARED BY Ricondo & Associates. Inc, June 2017
O --
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
NORTH 0 1.000 ft
Drawing Z\Cnir*i.;\:/r)W\F'n3n;;>d:iPFC\PFC Appl:.:,T:or, - 2C17 lV:).eMS^|)pli-.:a>jr ^ilfJS^UiK-hfei-l .S'.EsriibiS^A'JEoCAD'.MDW Airside fJ'CJiCt.> t-'A-?. Jyoul BO! A:r!ek! Lghlm.j Philip Jun 22 201' IfH^AN
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure Project ' PFC Application
B-10
EXHIBIT 2
ill
^s^=^v CHICAGO
((C >((C JJ(((*19|DEPARTMENT
\^^N^^/ V^= || of AVIATION
ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE M6105.15-00
AFIELD LIGHTING INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ISSUE FOR PROCUREMENT REVIEW SUBMITTAL - MAY 18, 2017
ITEM NO. PAY ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL COST |109|M-101-01 MOBILIZATION (NOT TO EXCEED 6% OF TOTAL BASE BID) LS|99|$ 283,086 00 $283,086 00 |109|N-110-01 ALLOWANCE FOR STANDBY TIME ALLOW|99|$ 50,000.00 S50.000 00 |109|L-100-01 LIGHTING SYSTEM - INSTALL CDA PROVIDED L861T(L) RED ELEVATED SERVICE ROAD EDGE LIGHT FIXTURE, COMPLETE EACH 33 S 2.500 00 S82.500 00 |109|L-100-02 ISOLATION TRANSFORMER EACH 179 S 200 00 S35.800 00 |109|L-100-03 L-867 SERVICE ROAD EDGE LIGHT BASE CAN EACH|99|S 450 00 $3,150 00 |109|L-100-04 LIGHTING SYSTEM - INSTALL CDA PROVIDED L852T(L) BLUEIN PAVEMENT TAXIWAY EDGE LIGHT FIXTURE, COMPLETE EACH 21 S 4.500 00 S94.500 00 |109|L-100-05 TYPE 1A MARKER LIGHT BASE WITH L-868 IN PAVEMENTLIGHT BASE CAN EACH 21 S 3.500 00 573,500 00 |109|L-108-01 COUNTERPOISE WIRE - 1/C, SIZE 6 AWG. 600V, BARE COPPER LF 5,000 $ 3 50 $17,500 00 |10 9|L-108-02 AIRFIELD LIGHTING CABLE, L-824, TYPE C, 5kV, SIZE 6 AWG, LIGHTING CIRCUIT LF 150.000 S 6 00 S900.000 00
10 L-110-01 CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS, 2-WAY. 3" PVC LF 3,100 S 145 00 S449.500 00
11 L-110-02 CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS. 6-WAY. 4" PVC LF 1,950 S 250 00 S487.500 00
12 L-110-03 DUCTBANK IN STEEL CASING JACKED IN PLACE. 12 75" CASING SIZE, 2-WAY, 3" PIPE LF 150 $ 650 00 $97,500 00
13 L-110-04 DUCTBANK IN STEEL CASING JACKED IN PLACE, 18" CASING SIZE, 6-WAY. 4" PIPE LF 965 $ 850 00 S820.250 00
14 L-110-05 HIGH EARLY STRENGTH CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS, 6-WAY , 4" PVC LF 165 $ 550 00 $90,750 00
15 L-110-06 CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS. 1-WAY. 3" PVC LF 1,200 S 50 00 S60.000 00
16 L-110-07 HIGH EARLY STRENGTH CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS, 2-WAY , 3" PVC LF 335 $ 450 00 $150.750 00
17 L-110-08 TWO (2) - 1" INNERDUCT LF 2.700 S 12 00 S32.400 00
18 L-110-09 DIRECTIONALLY BORED COMMON ELECTRICAL DUCTBANK, 3 PARALLEL. 2-WAY. 4" BUNDLED HDPE CONDUIT LF 1,400 S 300 00 S420.000 00
19 L-110-10 DIRECTIONALLY BORED COMMON ELECTRICAL DUCTBANK. SINGLE, 2-WAY. 3" BUNDLED HDPE CONDUIT LF 570 S 250 00 S142.500 00
20 L-115-01 ELECTRICAL HANDHOLE EACH 14 S 30,000 00 S420.000 00
21 L-115-02 ELECTRICAL HANDHOLE (AIRCRAFT RATED) EACH|99|$ 40,000 00 5120,000 00
22 L-125-01 ALLOWANCE FOR ALCS MODIFICATIONS. TUNING, AND TESTING OF EXISTING REGULATORS ALLOW|99|J 40,000.00 S40.000 00
23 L-125-02 MISCELLANEOUS WORK IN VAULT LS|99|$ 50.000 00 550,000 00
24 P-152-02 ALLOWANCE FOR UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION-CONTAMINATED MATERIAL DISPOSAL ALLOW|99|$ 20,000 00 $20,000 00
25 X-100-01 ALLOWANCES - UTILITY CONFLICTS & UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS ALLOW|99|% 60,000.00 560.000 00
Subtotal = $ 5,001,186 00
Contingency (5%) S 250,059.30
TOTAL COST = $ 5.251,245.30
Page 1 of 1
B-11
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER:! 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Project Number: 02
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $2.00
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ]$4.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
6. Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $2,709,346 Bond Financing & Interest: $2,709,346
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $5,418,692
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
. Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Other (please specify) $0 Subtotal Other Funds: $0 Total Project Cost: $5,418,692
For FAA Use
I |910|a. Does the project include a proposed LOI?i
'[ ] yes!
I ] NQ ; t
If YES, does the Region support?!
[ ]YES[
j ] NOJ
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:!
b. For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?i [ ] YESj"
jc. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's five year CIP?i '[ ]YES; Ll_NQ
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs] '[ ] YES
I ] noL_ ,
|What percentage of the total project cost is funded through ALP?| jList the source(s) of data used to make this finding,
je. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.6oj and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.' '[ ] YES '[ ] NO
[ ] N/Aj
|List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
if. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis,
i|910|jPFC Share of Total Cost Analysis,
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-13
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
iFor FAA Use1
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration-
of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any
discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the, jfunding it proposes.,
8. Project Description:
This project is to reimburse project costs for the rehabilitation of the airside service road at Midway completed in December 2011 (Exhibit 3). The airside service road is approximately 12,600 linear-feet and services the airside of the entire Airport. Prior to the rehabilitation of the airside service road the roadway was approximately 20-years old and showing significant signs of structural deficiencies due to repeated traffic loading, weathering, and age. Work included a three-inch mill and overlay throughout the roadway system, adjustments to the drainage structures, restriping of roadway markings and environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [X] YES [ ] NO
Revised 8/3 1/2010
B-14
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
[ ] N/A
iFOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification1 information is not from PFC application.,
i|910|If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there al likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.'
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters] 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been. jcompleted.H
jTerminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate1 provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES '[ ] NOT
'[ i n/a]
9. Significant Contribution:
The rehabilitation of the airside service road reduces airfield congestion and improves air safety. The loss or limited usage of the airside service road network could have a significant negative impact on day to day operations of the Airport. If the airside service road was closed vehicular traffic would be forced to use taxiways to traverse to the various ramps, offices, and hangars located throughout the Airport. The movement of vehicles on active runways and taxiways could potentially have a significant impact on the capacity of the airfield. In 2015 the Airport averaged approximately 700 operations per day. Minimizing runway crossings by vehicles increases the safety of the airfield environment by minimizing air traffic control tower interaction, which further decreases the chances for vehicle incursions.
The rehabilitation of the airside service road also improved air safety. The airside service road traverses through all the ramps at the Airport. When roadway pavements fall below the critical 70 Pavement Condition Index (PCI), the rate of deterioration of the pavement increases exponentially therefore creates more potential for Foreign Object Debris (FOD). The last major rehabilitation of the airside service road was completed over 20-years ago. The airside service road contains both asphalt concrete (AC) and portland cement concrete (PCC) surfaces. The useful life of AC and PCC surfaces in an Airport environment is typically between 15 and 30 years depending upon maintenance and loading factors. The
Revised 8/31/2010
B-15
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
pavement distresses identified in the Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) evaluation can be mostly attributed to loading factors based on the severity of surface distresses, which drastically reduced its useful life. The airside service road's overall PCI was 70 with many of the inspection samples listed as poor, which is below a PCI rating of 50. When surface conditions have these levels of surface distresses they produce more FOD. FOD is then tracked onto the ramps that have the potential to be ingested in aircraft engines or blown that could potentially injure ground support personnel.
Therefore, this project reduced airfield congestion by maintaining the airside service road which reduced the potential of midfield runway and taxiway crossings and incursions. This project also prevented the formation of FOD on the ramps and reduced the possibility of FOD being ingested by aircraft engines or injuring ground support personnel. Thus this project met the significant contribution requirements of reducing congestion and improving air safety.
FOR FAA USE;
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
. Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ ] Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]i
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan|
Mi
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN \ 1 Other (explain) '
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rulesJ
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) 'of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?i
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, competition at the airport.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-16
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
10. Project Objective:
The objective of the airside service road reconstruction was to preserve capacity and enhance safe vehicular operations around the airfield and maintain vehicular traffic outside of the movement area. The reconstruction and rehabilitation of the airside service road preserved capacity by maintaining a functional roadway network to prevent vehicles crossing active runways and taxiways and enhanced safety by providing new pavements surfaces that prevented the formation of FOD that could be tracked on ramps and taxiways.
FOR FAA USE'
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]:
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]|
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport;
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
[Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part of the PFC application.
jAddress adequacy of issues.!
11. Project Justification:
The airside service road is vital to airside service operations for both Airport and air carrier personnel. Prior to the rehabilitation, the road surface needed frequent patching, crack sealing and repairs to maintain its functionality. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for the useful life for airfield pavements is 10 to 20 years based on construction materials. The airside service road was last rehabilitated in 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in April 2013, by Jacobs, indicated that distresses on the airside service road were consistent with loading and water infiltration due to the presence of fatigue, longitudinal, and edge cracking and pot holes.
The airside service road had an overall weighted PCI rating of 70 or "Satisfactory", but the worst of inspected sections had a PCI of 57 or "Poor". Industry standards recommend that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable vehicle operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
Revised 8/3 1/2010
B-17
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
FOR FAA USE;
i i
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
'Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to! accomplish this objective(s)
r ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ i
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of thq__ project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition1 benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part of this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding^
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above]
[Project Eligibility:1
[Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 oq
| PGL );!
[ ] Planningeligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL1
! );!
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;!
[ ] Noise compatibility, measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;
[Title and Date of Part 150^
[ ] Project included in a local study]
[Title and Date of local study:!
J ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);
[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier '
| percentage of annual boardings )j
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter |
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.,
C\re any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated; jcosts.f
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): June 3, 2011 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): August 10, 2012
Revised 8/31/2010
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
'For FAA Use1
i i ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?j
[ ] Yes'
'UJNoT
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date pr PFC application Due date, whichever is first?i [ ] Yes"
i ~ ; ¦|910|Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation or; Icompletion. Explain.
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use1
i|9910|Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej
whichever is sooner.
[ ] Yesr""
'[_]_NQr
iWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the .estimated schedule for each action?i
Project requesting PFC funding levels of S4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-19
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement:
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
[For FAA Use1
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orf by the FAA for its analysis.
[If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)r
|ADO/RO Recommendation:1
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RQ use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects!
i—^ .. — — .|910|If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify jeligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.!
jls the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?!
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
i | - ¦—¦
[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-20
B 02 Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Application Reviewed byj
r Name Routing Symbol . Datej
iltem(s) reviewed.!
Name Routing Symbol Date,
Ttem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-21
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
B-22
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER:! 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Project Number: 03
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $5^108,600 Bond Financing & Interest $5,108,600
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $10,217,200
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B-23
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Local Funds: $0
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $10,217,200
For FAA Use'
I|910|Does the project include a proposed LOf?i
[ lYES1""
I ] NQ ; (
If YES, does the Region support?! '[ ]YES[~
[ ] NOl
If YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?! '[ ] YES| ~
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, Ifive year CIP?j '[ ]YES
LLNcj
[d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50?
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs] '[ ]-YEsT~
J ] NO[ i
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through A1P?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
LlnoT
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.0Q and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside; needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ,] YES
'[ ] no'
J ] N/A
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding]
If. Reasonableness of cost]
i "-|
Project Total Cost Analysis,
i|910|PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
Revised 8/31/2010
B-24
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Back-up Financing Plan:
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use1
i i
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional!
approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration
of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any
Jdiscussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the
funding it proposes.!
Project Description:
This proposed project will rehabilitate or reconstruct approximately 8,000 linear feet of the acoustical metal sound wall system (Sound Wall) at Midway which is installed along the perimeter of most of the airport operations area (AOA) (Exhibit 4). This project will include selective replacement of acoustical metal panels, frangible steel columns, and structural wall components, painting of the entire system, and grading work at the base of the wall. This project will reconstruct approximately 50 percent of the Sound Wall. The Sound Wall has a height of approximately nine (9) feet with each section consisting of six (6) acoustical metal panels vertically stacked. Each panel is approximately six (6) feet wide and eighteen (18) inches in height. This project includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
The cost estimate for this project can be found in Exhibit 6.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-25
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
FOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification! information is not from PFC application.,
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing;
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.!
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been Icompleted.P
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate
provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways]
aprons, and aircraft gates]
'[ ] YES
I I NO'
'[_]_N7A
9. Significant Contribution:
This project supports the reduction of aviation noise on people living near the airport and to maintain compliance with the Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program. These walls are over 16 years old and exposure to the elements and proximity to the roadway has severely compromised their integrity. Rehabilitation and reconstruction of the Sound Walls will restore the integrity of these structures and extend their useful life. These walls are also a critical component of the Airport's "Fly Quiet Program" and necessary to maintain the relationship with the Airport and surrounding community.
FOR FAA USE
_ Air safety. Part 139 [1 Other (explain)'
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ 1 Nof ] Date
Revised 8/31/2010
B-26
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 \ ] Other (explain)
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ ] Other (explain)1
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ } •
LOl [ 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan1
[ 1'
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain) j
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rulesJ
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) 'of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?i
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to| 'competition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the Airport. The current wall is over 16 years old and sections are in need of replacement or rehabilitation in order to maintain the structural integrity of the structure and to maintain compliance with the FAA Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program.
iFOR FAA USE;
|910| Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport;
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
iFinding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part of the PFC application.,
Address adequacy of issues]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-27
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
11. Project Justification:
The Sound Wall is an important component in the Airport's "Fly Quiet Program". These walls are designed to reduce ground level noise associated with aircraft taxiing and takeoff thrust on the communities surrounding the Airport. The Sound Walls' were first installed in 2001 in conjunction with the construction of the new Midway Terminal program. Due to the age of the walls, exposure to the elements and proximity to the surrounding roads, have resulted in deterioration of the panels and structural components. This deterioration or damage includes rusted components, dented or punctured panels and deteriorating obstruction lighting (Exhibit 5). All these components are in need of rehabilitation or reconstruction to ensure continued aesthetic, reduce the impact of aviation noise on people living near the airport, and compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program.
FOR FAA USB
i i|910|Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s)
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to| accomplish this objective(s),
i|910|Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part: of this PFC application.,
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above.!
Project Eligibility:
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category below!
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 oij
| PGL );l
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL|
I ).;!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-28
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;:
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
I [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;
[Title and Date of Part 150:1
[ ] Project included in a local study]
[Title and Date of local study:;
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);!
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier
| percentage of annual boardings );!
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)j
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
[Are any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated,
icosts.r
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): March 1, 2017 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): December 30, 2018
For FAA Use
i i ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?!
[ ] Yes'
L_]_NcT
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, [or PFC application Due date, whichever is first?i [ ] Yes"
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation or] 'completion. Explain]
13. For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use'
i _i . .
•Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej
[whichever is sooner.,
[ ] Yes' '
Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the, .estimated schedule for each action?
Revised 8/31/2010
B-29
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ] YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use1
i i .
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or. the public.1
[Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orf
by the FAA for its analysis]
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.j
ADO/RO Recommendation]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-30
B 03 Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO| use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.!
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify, .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?!
ADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
' l '
[_] Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues mat lead to determination!
Application Reviewed byj
Name Routing Symbol Date
Item(s) reviewed
Name Routing Symbol Date
Item(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/20I0
B-31
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Rehabilitation of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
B-33
EXHIBIT 6
HNGiNfcfcRVS tSHMATED COST Or CONSTRUCTION MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPOHI" CHICAGO, ILLINIOS AOA Ponmctcr Sound Wall Improvements July 23, 2014
ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION OF WORK UNITS EST QTY CURRENT UNIT COST ITEM COST (TOTAL) |109|Replacement of Existing Damaged Metal Acoustical Panels - (5% of Existing) EA 600 S3.000 00 $1.000.000 00 |109|Replacement of Misc Existing Damaged Components LS|99|S300.000 00 $300,000 00 |109|Painting Of Existing Metal Acoustical Panel Sound Wall SF 322.500 S5 00 S1.612.500 00 |109|Replacement of Existing Obstruction Lights and Infrastructure w/New LED Obstruction Lcghts LF 15 050 S25 00 $376,250 00 |109|Concrete Sidewalk Replacement SF 7 500 $15 00 $112,500 00 |109|Concrete Pavement at Base ol Sound Wall SF 18 000 S20 00 S360.000 00
Notes Scope of work includes the rehabilitation of existing sound wall including selective replacement of components, painting, icplacofnonl of obstruction light system and concrete pavements TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $4,561,250 00
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY - 20% $912,250 00 SUB TOTAL S5.473.500 00 DESIGN FEES ¦ t0% $547,350 00
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $6,020,850 00
B-34
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Project Number: 04
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0
Bond Capital: $64,347,306
Bond Financing & Interest: $64,347,306
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $128,694,612
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds:
State Grants: $0
Local Funds: $24,821,694
Revised 8/31/2010
B-35
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Other (please specify) $0 Subtotal Other Funds: $0 Total Project Cost: $153,516,306
For FAA Use1
Does the project include a proposed L01?i '[ ]YESr
I ] NOL i
ilf YES, does the Region support?!
'[ ]YEsr
'[ ] NOJ
If YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support? '[ ] VEST
L]_NCf
c. For any proposed ALP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, five year CIP?j '[ ]YES|
Llnq
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50j
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs] '[ ] YES
'[ ] NQ (
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through A1P?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
je. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00' and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside; needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ] yes!
'[ ] NO
I ] N/A
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
If. Reasonableness of costJ
i >i
Project Total Cost Analysis, iPFC Share of Total Cost Analysis' 7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-36
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use
i _ i ,
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional
approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^
of collection required if PFC 's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any
discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the
funding it proposes.
8. Project Description:
This proposed project will expand the existing passenger security checkpoint bridge across South Cicero Avenue at Midway (Exhibit 8). The project will demolish portions of the existing passenger bridge and construct a new single-level, approximately 80,000 square-foot, bridge structure in its place. The existing passenger bridge traverses South Cicero Avenue, connecting the Landside Terminal (pre-security screening) on the east side of South Cicero Avenue to the Airside Terminal (post-security) on the west side (Exhibit 9). The western end of the existing bridge contains the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) security screening checkpoint that all passengers and airport employees must clear to enter the secure airside Terminal. The existing pedestrian bridge accommodates 19 TSA passenger and employee security screening lanes, as well as the airport's exit path for arriving passengers. The existing bridge is 50 feet wide and includes a queue area (11,499 square feet), an exit path (3,131 square-feet), TSA equipment area (11,834 square-feet), and a composure area (3,133 square-feet). The new bridge will have a width of approximately 400 feet, approximately 350 feet wider than the existing bridge, which will significantly reduce congestion (Exhibit 10).
The additional interior space will support passenger and employee circulation and centralize and consolidate the TSA screening checkpoint area. The existing security checkpoint will be relocated into the proposed new bridge space, creating approximately 18,000 square-feet of additional potential revenue-generating areas adjacent to the existing food court. Up to 27 fully-equipped TSA security lanes will be accommodated, including a separate employee lane, TSA pre-check lane(s), and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessible lanes. A letter from the TSA approving of the proposed revisions to their operating area can be found in Exhibit 7. Compared to the existing bridge, the proposed project will provide additional queue area (11,646 square-feet total), additional exit path space (10,769 square feet total), additional public corridors (25,689 square-feet total), additional TSA processing area space (16,600 square-feet total), additional composure space (11,180 square-feet total), and 18,526 square-feet of new retail space (Exhibit 11).
Revised 8/31/2010
B-37
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
This project also includes the installation of building foundations, erection of structural concrete and steel, installation of a building roof, HVAC systems, communications and security systems along with a facade to complement the existing building finishes both north and south. The building shell and core elements such as mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection will be extended to service the building expansion and new space will receive tenant interior finishes. The tie-in to the existing bridge will include demolition of the existing facade and miscellaneous items to facilitate tie-ins to the pedestrian bridge. In addition to the widening of the pedestrian bridge, there will be a 10,000 square-foot build out to the south of the bridge which ties to the Terminal.
Table 4-1 shows the calculation of the estimated PFC-eligible costs associated with the Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion. The eligible proration percentage calculation is 72.9 percent, which is applied to the $87,469,000 in passenger security checkpoint expansion total construction costs', less the high-cost 100 percent eligible items (i.e. elevators and escalators). Including the 100 percent eligibility, it is estimated that approximately 73.6 percent of the total construction cost is PFC-eligible, or $64,347,306.
|109|The total project cost estimate for the Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project is
589,169,000, which includes $87,469,000 in construction costs, in addition to $800,000 in utility conflicts & unforeseen conditions allowance, $500,000 in commissioner directed maintenance of traffic and supplemental signage, $100,000 in community outreach allowance and $300,000 in art work removal and reinstallation allowance. All utility conflicts & unforeseen conditions, commissioner directed maintenance of traffic and supplemental signage, community outreach and art work removal and reinstallation allowances are not included in this application. If costs increase, the City of Chicago would amend this PFC application in the future to include additional PFC-eligible costs; any remaining costs that are not PFC eligible would be paid for with airport discretionary funds.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-38
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Table 4-1: Passenger Security Expansion - Construction Space and PFC Eligibility
Square Feet
11,646 36,458 11,180
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project Space (by Type) PFC Eligible Areas:
Queue area
Public Corridors
59,284
18.526.00 3,240.00 285
Composure space PFC Eligible Area Square Footage Total |A| PFC Ineligible Areas:
Retail
Non-Public Spaces
22,051
16,600 925
TSA Non-Public Spaces PFC Ineligible Area Square Footage Total |B| PFC Prorated Areas:
17,525
TSA Processing Space Utilities
98,860
PFC Prorated Areas Square Footage Total |C|
Total Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project Space
PFC Eligible Proration % [A/(A+B)|
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project PFC Eligibility High Cost 100% PFC Eligible Items:
Elevators/Escalators High Cost 100% PFC Eligible Items Total |D|
Costs
S2.184,750 $2,184,750
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project Construction Cost
Less High Cost 100% PFC Eligible Items [D]
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project Construction Cost Less High Cost PFC Eligible Items and High Cost PFC Ineligible Items
x PFC Eligible Proration % PFC Eligible Expansion Construction Cost (Excluding High Cost PFC Eligible Items and High Cost PFC Ineligible Items) Plus High Cost 100% PFC Eligible Items
PFC Eligible Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project Construction Cost
$87,469,000
(2,184,750)
$85,284,250
72.9%
$62,162,556
2,184,750 $64,347,306
PFC Eligibility Percentage of Total Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Project Construction Cost
This project includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts. The cost estimate for this project is located in Exhibit 12.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: 74 Number of gates: 43
Number of baggage facilities: There are 8 Bag Claim Carousels for the Inbounds, 4 Makeup Units for the Outbound, and 1 Bag claim in the FIS.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-39
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: 74 Number of gates: 43
Number of baggage facilities: There will be 8 Bag Claim Carousels for the Inbounds, 4 Makeup Units for the Outbound, and 1 Bag claim in the F1S.
Net change due to this project: 0 Number of ticket counters: 0 Number of gates: 0 Number of baggage facilities: 0
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
FOR FAA USB
jComment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing1 runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a 'likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.!
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters] 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been completed.P
jTerminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways] aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES '[ ] NO
) i N/A
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will reduce congestion and enhance security at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. Midway is one of the fastest growing airports in the nation and serves as Southwest Airline's busiest hub airport. Since 2000 enplanements have increased over 52 percent. Also during this time, the demand during peak times has increased creating more congestion at the checkpoints and
Revised 8/31/2010
B-40
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
creating longer lines. This project will reduce congestion by widening the existing pedestrian bridge from 60-feet to 300-feet to create an 80,000 square-foot security hall.
The purpose of the proposed project is to alleviate passenger congestion in the security checkpoint area and to provide a centralized and more efficient TSA security screening process. Midway passengers and employees regularly experience congestion at the entrance to the Airside Terminal during peak travel periods. As passenger volume and security screening requirements have increased, the existing space within the passenger bridge has become increasingly constrained. On occasion, the security queue extends beyond the existing bridge into the landside Terminal, which complicates circulation and results in conflicting passenger traffic patterns. Additionally, due to space limitations, the existing security screening area is separated into multiple screening sections. The southernmost screening area is disconnected from the main screening area by the exit lane that arriving passengers take to exit the Airside Terminal; this contributes to circulation problems, poor visibility, inadequate queueing space, and additional TSA staffing requirements. The existing layout also does not allow for a dedicated employee entrance. Furthermore, the passenger composure space immediately beyond the security checkpoint is often congested, which negatively impacts passenger comfort and further contributes to congestion in the mezzanine level of the Airside Terminal.
This project will also enhance security by providing 10 additional security lines. This 70 percent increase will provide capacity to handle over 5,000 passengers per hour. Currently during peak periods, passenger security screen lines can extend beyond the existing bridge and into the terminal parking garage.
Therefore, this project reduces congestion and enhances security with the widening of the existing bridge to create an 80,000 square-foot security hall and the addition of 10 new security lines. Thus, this project meets the significant contribution requirements of reducing congestion and improving security.
FOR FAA USE
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 f 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]j
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA \ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan'
1 ~
Other (explain)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-41
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Noise. 65 LDN \ ] Other (explain) "_ .__
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules]
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) pf data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
i|910|How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
i —
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers tp .competition at the airport,
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to preserve capacity and enhance security at the Airport. This project will widening the pedestrian bridge over Cicero Avenue to create an 80,000 square-foot pavilion or "security hall" that will provide additional passenger queuing and screening capability in order to more efficiently process passengers at the security checkpoints during peak periods.
FOR FAA USEj _
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
~i
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]:
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the;
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport;
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
jFinding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part of the PFC application-Address adequacy of issues]
11. Project Justification:
The existing Terminal facility opened in 2001 and has been in continuous full-time use without any significant upgrades or expansion. The existing passenger bridge and associated security screening checkpoint do not adequately support the daily flow of passengers through the Airport. During peak periods, passenger lines have
Revised 8/31/2010
B-42
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
extended beyond the bridge and into the terminal parking garage; further impacting passengers arriving at the Airport. In addition, passenger enplanements at the Airport have increased by 52 percent over this period of time.
The expansion of the passenger security checkpoint is needed to increase public circulation in the Terminal to more efficiently accommodate the increasing passenger growth at the Airport. This project will add 10 additional checkpoint lanes to handle over 5,000 passengers per hour. Currently during peak hours, passenger security screen lines extend beyond the existing bridge and into the terminal parking garage. Existing passenger demand and forecast activity increase both support the expansion of the security checkpoint area.
FOR FAA USE;
i|9910|Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objectivefs)
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the,
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition1 benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part of this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding-Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured aboveJ
Project Eligibility:;
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 oij
| PGL );l ~"
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL!
| )i
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505}
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.|
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;
(Title and Date of Part 150:,
[ ] Project included in a local study]
[Title and Date of local study:;
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);
f 1 Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)( 3)(F) (air carrier
Revised 8/31/2010
B-43
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
| percentage of annual boardings );'
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data, and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.,
Rre any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated 'costs/"
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): January 1, 2013 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): June 30, 2019
For FAA Use
i i ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?]
j ] Yes"
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date;
or PFC application Due date, whichever is first? [ ] Yes
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation ori 'completion. Explain.
13. For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use
i i
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date,1
whichever is sooner.!
[ ] Yes1 '
jWhich actions, are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the! estimated schedule tor each action?
14. Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
a. Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding. [ ] YES [X] NO
Revised 8/31/2010
B-44
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public-agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
FoTFAAlJsej
I i , ,
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public] Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orf by the FAA for its analysis]
[If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.f
lADO/RO Recommendation:!
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RQ use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects]^
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify, .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-45
B 04 Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Is the duration of collection adequate For the amount requested?i ADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing 'issues that lead to determination.
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues 'that lead to determination.'
Application Reviewed by:;
Name Routing Symbol Date,
Item(s) reviewed.,
Name Routing Symbol Date
Item(s) reviewed;
Revised 8/31/2010
B-46
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Chicago Midway International Airport
^ffljj^ Transportation
W&fc) Security
MEMORANDUM
Michael Cosentino Director - Capital Finance Chicago Department of Aviation
Kevin G. McCarthy
Federal Security Director ( Chicago Midway International Airport
November 17, 2017
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
The City of Chicago Department of Aviation is pursuing utilizing Passenger Facility Charges (PFC) funding via the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to expand the passenger security checkpoint, install a Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover and replace the Explosive Detection System (EDS) equipment at Chicago Midway International Airport. The TSA understands that the FAA is seeking TSA approval and concurrence with these proposed projects. The TSA supports these projects and expects to the staff the expanded checkpoint facilities. The TSA support for these initiatives is provided with the full understanding from all interested parties that TSA bears no financial obligation, either implicitly or explicitly, to fund these projects. The TSA will further review and approve the design plans for the passenger checkpoint expansion and Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover to ensure both projects meet operational requirements.
5561 S. Archer Avenue, Suite 2A
www.tsa.gov Chicago, Illinois 60638 Phone: (773) 498-1329 Fax: (773) 948-6153
B-47
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SEPTEMBER 2017
.ago\.MD: \:;n^n::ar.p.:or-CApri1'
300 ft
¦nn; 2C17 p.-oe: : ;n.(i:esi/,nd ;.i
I'lls'AuloCAD'.llPOA'!D:'
TcZSiZ.Passenger Security checkpoint Ex™ Pro^
B-48
EXHIBIT 12 - Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Costs
October 24, 2017
FHP-CM-L-012
CARE Plus, LLC Midway Central Field Office 5642 S. Central Avenue Chicago, IL 60638 Attn: Mike Beverly
Resident Engineer
Re: Chicago Midway International Airport
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion CDA Project No.: M9185.12.00 Contract No.: 63738, Specification No.: 461340 FHP Job No.: 2105
Subject: Contract Lump Sum Breakdown
Dear Mr. Beverly;
In accordance with Article IX of the General Conditions, F.H. Paschen is requesting the approval of the attached contract lump sum breakdown for the above referenced project.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at the number below.
Sincerely,
201 MOM 11:41:05-O5'Off
Josh Curran Project Manager
cc: M. Holborn, M. Madden - CARE Plus
T. Harper, J. Kleiman, M. Rickert, A. Ricordati, B. Sarkauskas, A. Spizzirri - FHP
end.: Lump Sum Breakdown
F.H. PASCHEN, S.N. NIELSEN & ASSOCIATES LLC
5515 N. East River Road, Chicago, IL 60656 p. 773.444.3474 f. 773.444.5900 | www.fhpaschen.com
B-52
AIA DOCUMENT G70I
AIA Document G702. APPLICATION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT, containing
Contractors signed Certification is attached.
In tabulation below, amounts are stated to the nearest dollar.
Use Column I on Contracts where variable relamage lor line items may apply
APPUCATION NUM.: APPLICATION DATE PERIOD TO CONTRACT 0
N/A N/A N/A N/A
ITEM
NO.
0001 0002 0003 0004 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010 0011 0012 O01J 0014 0015 0016 0017 0018 0019 0020 0021 0022
0023 0024
0025 0026 0027
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Insurance
General Conditions / Traffic Control Setednre Demolition Concrete
Arduectural Finishes Structural Steel Fftl Misc. Metals Wan Panels I Gtazng
Moisture Barren I Joint Sealants / Roofing / Fireproofing Carpentry
Elevalois f Escalators File Suppression Plumbing HVAC Electrical Earthwork
Caissons / MicropBes Site Utilities / Dnunage BuDding Pernut Allowance Temporary Chilled Water Plant Allowance
Secunty Command Center. Tomporaiy Security Camera and Data Cabling Retocauons Allowance
Utaty ConfEcts & Unforeseen Condilwis Allowance Commissioner Directed Maintenance of Traffic and Supplemental Signage Allowance
Community Outreach Allowance Art Wort; Removal and Reinstallation Allowance
TOTALS/SUBTOTALS
SCHEDULED VALUE
5.345,000.00 433.308.00 837.039.00 1.577.223 00 2.386.000 00 8.406.953 00 4,893.627 00 11.940.074 00 2.769.895 00 8.287.365 00 2.922.811 00 6.618.250 00 2.184,750 00 659.297 00 1.502.500 00 5.075.465 00 8.583.40000 1.867.01600 7.678.48900 2.368.538.00 100.000.00 200.000.00
825.000.00 800.000.00
500.000 00 100.000.00 300.000 00
89.169.000 00
WORK COMPLETED
FROM PREV. APPLICATION E)
000 000 000 000 000 0 00 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000
000 000
000 0.00 0.00
000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000
ooo
0 00 000 000 000
000 000
000 000 000
MATERIALS PRESENTLY STORED (NOT IN DOS El
ooo ooo
000 000 000
ooo
000 000
ooo
000 000 000 000 0 00 000 000 000 0 00 000 000 000 0 00
000 000
000 000 000
TOTAL COMPLETED AND STORED TO DATE tD"E-»FI
0 00 000 000 0.00 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ooo
0.00 0.00 0.00
ooo
000 000 000 000 000 000 000
ooo
000
000 0 00 0 00
% (G/C)
BALANCE TO FINISH (C-G>
5345000 00 433308 00 837039.00 1577223 00 2386000 00 6406953 00 4893627.O0 11940074.00 276989500 8287366.O0 2922811.00 6618250.00 2184750 00 659297.00 1502500.00 5075465.00 8588400.00 1867016 00 7878489 00 2368536 00 100000 00 200000 00
825000 00 800000 00
500000 00 100000 00 300000 00
89.169.000 00
000 000 000 000 0 00
ooo
000 000 000 000
ooo
000 000 000 0.00 0.00 000 000 000 0.00
ooo ooo
000 000
000 000 000
B-53
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31Cand Replacement of EMAS
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
Project Number: 05
Use Aii-port of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] S4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go $0
Bond Capital: $32,078,641
Bond Financing & Interest: $32,078,641
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $64,157,282'
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # 3-17-0025-82-2014 Grant Funds in Project $3,116,597
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $3,116,597
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
1 The AIP contribution was a funding source specifically for rehabilitation of the pavement of Runway 13C-31C. While this entire PFC project is AIP eligible, AIP funds are only a portion of the plan of finance for this project. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation maximized the amount of AIP funds available to them.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-54
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-3 1C and Replacement of EMAS
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $3,421,348 Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $70,695,226
For FAA Use
I |910|a. Does the project include a proposed LOI?i
'[ jYEsr-
'[ ] NO, ; i
If YES, does the Region support?! '[ ]YES[~
I ] NOJ
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
tb. For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support? [ ] YEST
Llnq
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's five year CIP? '[ ]YES "LJ-NOf
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that ALP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ '[ ] YES
I ] NQ i
|What percentage of the total project cost is funded through A IP? List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
p. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of S4.0Q and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside; needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES '[ ] NO,
[ ] N/Al
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
If. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis
Revised 8/31/2010
B-55
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis 7. Back-up Financing Plan:
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
iFor FAA Use1
I|99|:|910|If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^ 'of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any ~ discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the funding it proposes.,
8. Project Description:
This project funded the planning2, design and rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and the replacement of the Engineering Material Arresting Systems (EMAS) at Midway (Exhibit 13). Runway 13C-31C is one of the primary runways at the Airport. The runway is 6,522-feet long by 150-feet wide and comprised of 6,405 linear-feet of bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) pavement and 120-linear feet of Portland cement concrete (PCC) on the Runway 31C end.
Prior to the rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31 the pavements were approximately 22-years old and showing signs of fatigue cracking due to structural deficiencies and repeated traffic loading. The rehabilitation of the runway and shoulder included variable depth PCC and AC milling with an overlay of three to nine-inches of bituminous base course and AC surface course. This project also included the installation of new centerline and edge lighting, replacement of signage, installation of new electrical infrastructure, drainage improvements, placement of sodding/seeding for the surrounding runway area, and pavement markings.
The new pavements were designed in accordance with FAA Advisory Circulars (AC) 150/5300-13A Airport Design, AC 150/5320-6E Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation, and AC 150/5370-14A Hot Mix Asphalt Paving Handbook. This project will also restripe the full length of Runway 13C-31C in accordance to AC 150/5340-1L, Standards for Airport Markings.
This project also funded for the design and construction of the replacement of the Runway 13C-31C EMAS systems on the north (EMAS #1) and south (EMAS #2) of the runway. EMAS arrestor beds are composed of lightweight, crushable cement
2 This includes environmental and PFC planning.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-56
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
material designed to stop aircraft that overshoot runways. It is a FAA acceptable alternative for preventing overrun catastrophes at airports where runway safety areas are not in compliance with FAA regulations.
EMAS#1 and EMAS#2 were installed in 2006. EMAS #1 on Runway End 13C was approximately 215-feet in length and 170-feet in width; and EMAS #2 on Runway End 31C was approximately 200-feet in length and 170-feet in width. This project replaced both EMAS systems with "third generation" EMAS blocks designed to be more durable to weather conditions. The new beds were designed and installed to meet the requirements established in AC 150-5220-22A Engineered Materials Arresting Systems for Aircraft Overruns. The cost estimate for this project is located in Exhibit 14.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
|FOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification; information is not from PFC application.!
, .
jlf project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there aj [likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-57
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been1" bompleted.!~
jTerminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate1 provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YEST~ '[ ] NOT
'[ i n/a!
9. Significant Contribution:
This project reduced congestion and increased safety at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. The Airport's ongoing pavement management program serves to maintain all pavements with a minimum condition of "Satisfactory/Fair" to avoid a costlier reconstruction of the pavement sections and to avoid foreign object debris (FOD) that can have an adverse effect on the safety of aircraft operations at the Airport.
Deteriorating pavement can significantly impact the capacity of the airfield due to unanticipated airfield closures and would therefore lead to increased congestion. The closure of Runway 13C-31C would have a significant impact on the capacity of the airfield since this is one of the primary runways at the Airport with EMAS support.
Therefore, this project prevented the formation of FOD on the runway and reduced the likelihood of unanticipated closures for emergency repairs. Thus, this project met the significant contribution requirements of improving air safety and reducing anticipated congestion.
The replacement of the EMAS also enhanced safety of the Airport. The Airport is in a densely populated area on the southwest side of Chicago, IL. Midway is confined by W. 55th St to the north, S. Cicero Ave to the east, W. 63nl St to the south, and S. Central Ave. to the west. The distances between Runway ends to W. 63rd St and S. Central Ave are both less than 425-feet, significantly less than the established standard of 1,000-foot runway safety area. The installation of EMAS #1 and #2 will stop aircraft that overshoot runways and prevent catastrophes where runway safety areas are not in compliance with FAA regulations.
FOR FAA USE'
Air safety. Part 139 [ 1 Other (explain)!
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ 1 No [" 1 Date
Revised 8/31/2010
B-58
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS Air security. Part 107 T 1 Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)!
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
_ Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ J
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA \ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan1
[ 1 '. "
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN \ 1 Other (explain)
I Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules.!
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) 'of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, 'competition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project was to preserve capacity and enhance safety on Runway 13C-31C to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. The rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C improved the existing level of safety and efficiency of the airport by improving the structural integrity of the runway and complying with FAA Title 14 CFR Part 139 Airport Certifications. The structural integrity of airfield pavements is critical to aviation safety. Airfield pavements that are rated near or below the minimum PCI rating of 70 could result in aircraft safety incidents.
This project also replaced the runways EMAS which provided a safe and reliable arresting system at the Airport without further reducing the runway length and impacting capacity. EMAS is proven technology that has saved numerous of lives and significantly minimized damage to aircraft and infrastructure.
iFOR FAA USE1|10910| Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]|
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport
Revised 8/31/2010
B-59
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
I e> ,|910|Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part pf the PFC application.!
^Address adequacy of issues]
11. Project Justification:
Runway 13C-31C is one of the primary runways at the Airport. The last major pavement rehabilitation occurred in 1992. Since that time some significant operational changes have occurred resulting in increased utilization and greater aircraft activity. The most notable changes were the decrease in General Aviation (GA) and Air Taxi operations and the significant increase in air carrier operations. From 1992 to 2014, operations increased by 42 percent; air carrier operations increased by nearly 200 percent. The additional air carrier operations and heavier weight of these aircraft have significantly reduced the useful of these pavements.
According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the minimum criterion for runway rehabilitation is 10 years. Runway 13C-31C was last rehabilitated in 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by Edwards & Kelcey Design Services Inc. (E&K), indicated that distresses on Runway 13C-31C were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, rutting, and slippage cracking on the AC sections of the runway and presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking on the PCC sections of the runway. Runway 13C-31C had an overall PCI rating of 70 or "Satisfactory". Industry standards recommend that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
The replacement of Runway 13C-31C EMAS preserved and enhanced safety by replacing an existing end-of-life-cycle EMAS bed with the latest arresting system technology to prevent aircraft from overrunning the runway. Midway is located in a densely populated area on the southwest side of Chicago, IL. Midway is confined by W. 55th St to the north, S. Cicero Ave to the east, W. 63rd St to the south, and S. Central Ave. to the west. The distances between Runway ends to W. 63rd St and S. Central Ave are both less than 425-feet, significantly less than the established standard of 1,000-foot Runway Safety Area (RSA).
According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the rehabilitation of an EMAS system is eligible if the EMAS bed was installed with
Revised 8/31/2010
B-60
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds prior to fiscal year 2007. This is because EMAS systems installed prior to 2007 did not have the plastic lids. After fiscal year 2007, the manufacturer began fully encasing the blocks, which has significantly improved moisture protection and joint seals.
FOR FAA USD
i i
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s)
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s)
i ¦ ¦ ¦—¦ —-—¦ ¦|910|jBased on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the, project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or-competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part pf this PFC application.
jlf analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the spurce(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above.!
Project Eligibility:;
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 oi]
| PGL );l "
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5 100.38 or PGL
! )i
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;:
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504J
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;'
[Title and Date of Part 150.!
[ ] Project included in a local study]
[Title and Date of local study:]
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);1
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier ~1
| percentage of annual boardings )_;'
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter \
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)]
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding
Revised 8/31/2010
B-61
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
Are any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated icostsT
Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): January 1, 2014 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): June 26, 2016
For FAA Use1
i|9910|For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?i
'[ ] Yes
LlNol
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, 'or PFC application Due date, whichever is first?! I ] Yes'
LLNeT
i—,|99|— rj
[Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation or completion. Explain]
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
iFor FAA Use1
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej iwhichever_is sooner, [ ] Yes
LLNcT
jWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the .estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-62
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
c. Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use1
i i .
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied onf
by the FAA for its analysis.
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
JADO/RO Recommendation:'
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO^ use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.,
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costsJ
i ¦|910|Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
jADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:! [ 1 Approve.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-63
B 05 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and Replacement of EMAS
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues, uiat lead to determination.!
jApplication Reviewed by:!
Name Routing Symbol Date,
ltem(s) reviewed.
Name ¦ Routing Symbol Date,
ltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-64
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
~t r irm i if^n i r
LEGEND
|°°°°°] EMAS Replacement Area (13C, 31C) Runway & Taxiway Pavement Overlay | Runway Shoulder Pavement Overlay j Runway Keel Pavement Replacement
n
n
Runway Shoulder Pavement | Taxiway B Pavement and Shoulder Widening
NOTE
1/ Pavement areas are approximate, please refer to CDA drawings by exp US Services Inc, October 2013
SOURCE T Y Lin International, March 2013 (Midway eALP), exp U S Services Inc, September 2017 (rehabilitation areas) PREPARED BY Ricondo & Associates. Inc . September 2017
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C
NORTH|9 9|1,000 ft
Drawn-.] ¦! \C::ia'jo\f.1D- \"man:EalvP.:C\P,:CApplininon12017Pror-its^.pp:.itianiiilc-?'\Atiji:-i|L: er-K\lxiilis'AjaCAD'.UPDA".:!Onxi".itr= j2i)l70iG! dwijLayoiil f n*ii?pioinyl -i.sp It.201/. !(MIAM
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Project PFC Application
B-65
Exhibit 14
Runway 13C / 31C Rehabilitation and EMAS Installation
Description jProjectCost
Design $ 1,803,888
Construction $ 32,622,148
Acquisition & Installation of (EMASS) $ 3,500,000
Implementation $ 690,550
Total Project Costs $ 38,616,586
AIP Grants $ 3,116,597
Eligible PFC Bond Funding $ 35,499,989
Consulted PFC Bond Capital $ 32,078,641
Requested PFC Bond Capital $ 32,078,641
Local Funds $ 3,421,348
Source: Chicago Department of Aviation, November 2017 Prepared By: Ricondo and Assoicates, LLC, November 2017
B-66
6 8 £
°
= *1
™ ra a
T- O ¦<-
o .
o £
o ®
-J E
Ct o
UJ re
a
CO
a <
UJ
O
o
CO
a
CO
CO
CM CN
O) cn
CN CO IO
°- 2 *"- «
Kg J»
CO* CO CO CO
to to o a
im in m m
m m n ^.
t CN CN
't m m to co id u}
— -¦ g Ol CO 00
(£> ID Q O
cn cn 5 o
010)00
t $ cn
CN CN CO ro
Vt VI (A « W V) V> t
ss
^ CN
i- O O O O
tn m io m o o to io nnioo
tNCSI OO O O to (O
iritncpto cn cn cn cn
O O in i/i co aD
n*_ v v o o oi oi
o" o of of i^-." o o
CD O O O O
i n j j id io
¦ V O) C» (O (O
) O O O O) Oi I
inoor^i^otcnooi (Nr-oor-r-cotoinmoo
OrOONMOi- — - — —
oi m co m co to —
)U)WU)V)WWV)Wl
° ?5
E £ o|1010|eo co to m o o
CO CO CN CN O O
o o m m m o
S
^f co co Oi
_ in oo oo in m
co co cd eo f*» O)
N N (M (N n T
o o
O O CO CO CO CO (O (O
SIR
o o
o o
O CO|109|m
h*- i>- o) ci CT) cn ¦o co * t t v V ¦C co co co co
(ft in V* Ui IA
T- O ^
3 °
"a
X ?
« s
CN CN
° E
a >• « « n <5 >
2 o
J e
c S III
11S s
i Bel Si " I
C I J »
§ F S-c b o
rages CO CQ Q. CD
3 I°!
3 .a
|1010|_'i5 5
Is?
£ S.
in o.
It*
i ss
of
£ UJ &.UJ
i.S °- S "
a?-.
So"1
¦I|10 10|o
I'
Q.
s « O
< eg
cn *E
2 e
ooo ooo ooo o" o" o" co m co
CD CO CO
CO
nun
CO
co t- to
CN CN
to
o o o cn s-
o o o cn cn
O O 0_ CN CO
co" co" co" co" co"
05
r--
CO Q.
a
S a)
c a.
§ E
ni °
¦o- o cn o
^" CD CO CO t- CD t-
cn
CD
CO CD CN
o
0) CL
o
0)
a. CO
0)
Cl
o
©
CM
O o 5
m CM CO O O
O
O i-f S
E °-
L_ 4-1 +¦•
fl> CO C8
^ UJ Q
>%
CD
0_
co
T3
O C
g ra 15
CD >
O
O
o o o
£ o <
„ CD C
J= Q.
c
o
o
o o o o o o
ooo in co m
OI CO CO
o o
o
CO cn
o o
CM CO
CO CD
CO
o
o o
o
o o o
o o o o"
CO
to
o o o co"
o o o cn"
CN
to
o o o
o"
CO CO
o o o co"
CO
to
o o o
o o o cn"
CO CO
CD CO
eo co
o
CD
05
"J-
o
CN CO
T3
CO
co
CO CD
o (J
c o
o
o
(D
CD
cc t o
CL
CD
CO
^ o
CO CD|109|E
§ B
CC £
<
c o
<
I->-
CD
a z <
cc o
co \-o
82
> o b F
E§
111 o z
I
o
92>
o
Z u. cj.
O UJ UJ UJ 9
CO H
cc u
00 T-
a. cl o o
< oo cc
X
o z
oo Q - LU
9= <
cc H a.
o
a. a.
o >
CL
o x 2 o
CO CO
<
LU
o
_ X
< z z § O o
x ^ >-'-So
O LU
O X °-|109|o «
CO CO ±
<
a: o
CC <
< cc o cc <
CO
0.
< m
X
o
O Q
<
o
O LU
< LU
< < < <
< cm o cc <
< CC
o <
I-
o
D CL I-
co
LU <
z
< cc
Q
H CO Z3 -3
Q <
LU LU LU LU
O I z O i-o
LU CL CO
< CC
o 9= <
CL
>-
< <
LU LU
Q_ CL
> i_ >
LU CO
O Q £ LU
— UJ
Z H Q
< < Z
CC UJ
LU CO LU CD LU
Q 9 Q
^: r- I-< < < < ,
2 ce s rt: s
>- >-CO CO
co o
Q 2 UJ UJ
> <
Q_
LU
UJ UJ jE
> S Q.
< LU LU
a_ o D
o o
£ 5
o
o
Q o
£ E|1010|O
E <
o o o o
CO
o
o o o
CO CN
to
¦"I-
CO
¦>}¦"
CD
m eo
CD
m eo
o
CO
cn
CD CO
cn in o
CD CD d
t- ¦1- CO 1^
t-" CO" ¦<)¦"
i-- o>
OI IN
» » »
CN 5)
"5. £
B £
c a.|109|E
O o
CN CO CO
CO CN
in
T
CO CN
o o
CO 03
o cri m
co"
o o
O CN|1010|o E <
o o
o o
UJ
o z
o o
CL
CL 0)
CO LL
a.
E o O
o
o
CM
O O I
O o
o £
z s
CTJ c 0
E >%
CD CL
f
t= 0) I
to ro 1
CO|1010|o
O) CO
o .c O
CO
>
o O
CD £
N C
| §
i a
CO c J= CL
o O
o o
CN CO CO
o o
o o
o d
r- o
cn o
in" o"
o o o
CO
o o o
CD CD
O CO CD t-
O O
O
d o m m" to
o o d
CO
O)
o o o o o"
CN
m
in
CO
o d o o o" to
o o
CN
in in
o o o o d to
o o
CN
co co
o O co cn
cd" in m co
co co
o d o in
co"
m to
in
CD
o
CO
m
CO
o o d
o o o o r-i--" co to
o o ai m
cn r~
cn"
CN
o o d
CO
CO CN CN CD
o o
o o
o o
o o
O CD
CN ^-" *-"
cj) in o
CO I.— CO
to to CO
"=]- t- CN CN
O O
o o
LO CD CO
o o
o o
o"
o o
CO
cn"
O ¦o c
CO
„ o £ P
O O
CD O) CN
o o
CN
o o d o
CN
m
o o
CN
O O CN
o d
o o o>
00
O O
d
o o o o o
in
O O
CO CO
O CD
in cn
>-o
>-
o
< LU
>-CO
>- LL CO CO
LL LL LL < CO CO _l LU
< UJ
o (J
CD
CC t
O g
CO
c
o
CO CO
5 E § £ CC S
o
o
LL O
Q
LU
< o
LU CO CC|1010|< o
X UJ
a
LU
o o
So?
o
O O
z 3 ? < S CL
§ CC I-
CD
a
iz-< Q E
p, LU CO
3 b Q
O N Z CC -I <
D CO _
< CC Z
= i 3 <
u. —
c CD
o c
O '3
LU CO CC
3 o o
LU W LU
l~ °-LU < LU
cc £ cc o 5j o
o co yj co
o < o
z K z|109|LU|9109|9-|910|I-|99|H
5 !2. 5
Z
o
I-o
LU CO I— CO LU I-
cc o
o
LU CO LU H r~ CO LU LU CC I-
o
o o
CO LU
LU
LU CO < CD
o <
CC
O
z
o o
CO ID
o
LL CC 3 CO
cc o z o o
CO 3
o
CO T±
< b m m
LU
o <
LL CC 3 CO
CC LU
a _i|1010|o
CO
« O
LU Z ¥
CO x =
CC o|9109|s±|910|o < b
o a. m
X CO
LU CO CC 3
o cj m
D D 3
:— _ —. — rr\ _
LU
co cc|1010|o
O co
UJ
z <
cc
LU CL
LU -CC CN
X
CO 3
a <
< z
3 CC
o
|109|g
CC in
i oo
O
X CD
z § CO ?
I- L., ^ h-
9 < 3 £
O
5!
Q o
o E <
o o o
CD
O O CT)
o o
o o o
CM CD
to
o o ¦ o
u-> to
o
CM
35
CM
LU o
"5. £
•£ £
c CL|109|E
ni °
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o
^ CTJ
CO Q. CO
CO|10 10|
ra
£ £ a.
E
rt ° O O
o
o
CN
O o 5 m cn co ru o o
"a
co s n c
o § <
o o
o d
o cri
c o
g,
CD Q_
o
c g
as
"co
co >
o O
O)|1010|
„ CO
(J o
co ;=
J= CL
o O
o o
CO
I--"
o o
CM CO
o o
CD
CO"
O O CO
co"
o o cn
¦sr"
o o f-
oo"
o o co
o o
o o o
o o
cb
o-o o co"
o o o
o o cn cn
CM
to
o o
o o
CT)
cd
o o
CO
r--"
o o
CM 00
CD
o
o
CD
O CM
O) ¦"I-
00 CD
<
LU
< LU
<
LU
< LU
< LU
< LU
<
LU
<
LU
<
LU
< LU
< LU
<
LU
O
o
o
o
co .c
CD
CC tt
o °
» s
^ o
CO CO
S E
CC £
o Z
o o
LL O
31
O CJ
X
ID CO
<
CD h-X
o
g
_l
cc
LU CC
<
co a CO cj
<
< O
_ _ r>
CD
oo q: co cc
_l . _l Q .
CD CD CD LU Cj
i- i- i- i- y i_ ¦_ ,,, i_
CO X CO g X
X CD X co O
LU _J LU I
CO
X
g _i cc
LU CC
<
co co co
< ^
CD 5 ? LU Q
CD CD
CO LU
m co _
1-5 1-1-
CD
X £ X CO
CD 3 CD x
I LL I LU
CO CD CO
X
CD
CD
Z3
rc
CD
I-co =)
Q
- <
<
Q O
f | m ? I S
-|910|LU LU
^ °-
o£
CL Z
Q -LU >-
X >-|910|°9 §
V LU
I < - 5
| m w |
« \t P §
X I— z x
D7S
< X cc <
CD
S CD I— z
£x
< O Q Z
E O
¦ OP'
CO LU
co co
DlS^CDyg^1
LLLL_ILLLLXLU_ICQLL_I
o
ra Q o
£
E
o E <
o o o
o o o
CD CT) 00
to
r--
CN
to
o ¦or in
r~-" co
CO
oi I*-
CD
in"
CM
to
co
CO 03
o>
o co
CN CN
m
CO
o
CN
Si
"5. £
S £ c o.
3 E
ni ° <-> CJ
o o
CO
co o
LO
CO
o
o
CO CT)
o
CN
= ! ^ i
o 1
E
<
to
CO CL
CO CL CO
o
o
CN
o o
O o 5 ! CD «M °P
CO "D
CO
o
CO
CD
E
CD
Q_
O £ :
Z g I
CD CD :
CO Q.
± CD
*¦• *±
V) CO
LU Q
O O) CO
o
in co
_D CO
>
o o
o O
o co
o o o
co" in to
o o o
O O O
o o o
o CD CO
eo
o o o
co" cn
CO
o o o o"
CO CN
o o o
o
CN
in
r- t-o co r-. cn
r-" co" to tj-
to
CO CD
in to
CO
to
CO CJ TJ
c
CO
o o
o o
o o
o o
CO
o O
o
CJ
X) CO
CO
cc t
o °
CO i?
o
CO
^ o
CO CO
5 E
Ct £
CO
c o O
O
3!
t_ —
C CO
o c O Jj
X
g
—' LU
cn CD
LU Q
* LU
LU CL >-H
CD z <
X <
lu co
<
LU
H X
g
Ct LU
|S
LU H LU < CL >
O *
«S X < LU CO
< LU
CD
< o
X
is
CD or z o ~
I— to CO
co z z
w LU LU 2 CO CO
lu cc or
o
< x x
CL < < LU LU LU
or § §
< LU
LU
cc
05 •<* CO
< LU
D
cc < o
co
H O
>-" <
3 CC
is
LU
Q X
LU CO
< <£
CC <
LL CL
co
LU N CO
d
X _l CD <
CD LU N CO
CD
z
3 i= LL
CC 5
9- co o z
CD
p y cc
m CD cc|109|O
O O
CC CO
O Q
D Q
o <
CC 3
o o
LL O
CD —
- <°|910|CD LU O
§ N CC
< CO CD
V-" LU
O 5 LU LU S CC
i? f= °.
U 3 O _ UJ ° °
^6 5
2«8
O LU o
3 -5 ¦* W
Z 2 >- o O O ^ z
O O § LU
£ ra Q o
o E <
CO
cn"
CD
f-to
o o o
CO CD"
O CO CD D>" CN CO
cn"
CN
o o
LO
o o o in"
CD CD
o o o d
o o o in co
o o
o o d o o o"
¦*
O O
CO CO
cn Si
£ £ co ,o co.! I— CO c
O O
CD CO
CD
r— co
co
CD CO
co
LO O
o
CD 2
CO Q_
¦cT 9? i.
¦5, £ S £ c els' E
ni ° O o
o o
o o
o o
o o o
o o
o o d
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o o
XL s_
O
o
CM
O O 8 CM 00
o o
C O
o £ z S
^.i o
S— *; H LU Q
CO CL
CO
-a
o co
O
o O
O 3
£ o <
„ CO L) O CO c
±= CL
c
o
O
f-
CD CO
O O
O CO CO
CD
r-to
m
CO
o m
cn
CD
in co
CD CD
CD
in o
CO i-
CD CD
to
o o o
o o o
o o o
o o
T
CD"
O O
o o o
o o o
o"
o o o o"
o o o
m"
o o o
o
o
CD
CO
d
CO
O
O O r*-co o
CN
o o
o o
CD CD
o o
o
CD
o o
o o
CD
o
CD
LL < _l UJ
< < LU UJ
o o
o
o
CO
cc t
f 1 o
CO
CO
o
>* ^=
CO CO
S E § £
DC £
o u
LL O
3 I
o
o
< m I-o
§b
<1
EO
i= o
o o 111 >
-I 0.
Q -7 ^ <~
Mil
o ^ s z z0(10
UJ o ^ o
<
CQ H
o|1010|Q
I
< o
- UJ
> cn|109|O
CN O
z <
o y
LU o
O; UJ
Q UJ
O
o o
Q UJ Cn
o m
QJ l-J _ LLl
3 Q Z
o o
LU
<
Z <
cn a
LU CL
D X
CM
o
LU < UJ >-
cc § cn <
Q t^- Q §
LU < Q CN
< CD r-
o
3 Q _i < O
cn
H O
<
O X Q
z
<
X
_l
< o cn
CD (-O 3 Q _l < O
cn
H O
CO
LU CO LU LU O z LU z -J LU
iiii*
o < o < *
O 2 O X cn
Lu w
^ <
=i o
D LL
< LU
LU O
CD
co|1010|O
w|910|X|910|UJ b
ll m
O
O CD
> o o
cn tD
zF1
LU O CL O
£ 15
Q
o
0)
15 E
o E <
o o o
00 LO
CD CM
to
o
CM CD
^ £
£
c D.
E ni °
o
CD ^ CM CM
1) a.
CD
"5. £
C CL
§ E
a o
ooo ooo d d o
O P|109|I
o o|910|m cn oo
r~ © ©
c o
"a
o|910|z s
CD CD
c
CD
E >^
CD CL
** V.
(A «J
lu a
CO T3
o
CO
>
o O
|1010|co B n ?
<
CO c J= 0-
o O
o o
o o o
o
CM
o d
o o
o o o
CD CM CO
o|1010|o O
O >-< CO
en. O
o O
l= -|910|« 2 >
if £ «
I Ul IL
u a a
0 1
co
co
^ o
CO CO|109|E
I |
on £
cd z
Q UJ LU CO
LU Z <
CC LU 0.
DC * < CO
<
lu
i— ',
< JL.|109|co
Q <
LU ^
Ct UJ
UJ|910|z F1
CD CO
z >-
LU CO
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Project Number: 06
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $2.00
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ]$4.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
6. Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go $0 Bond Capital: $538,385 Bond Financing & Interest: $538,385
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $1,076,770
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $1,076,770
For FAA Use1
'a. Does the project include a proposed LOI?j '[ ]YEif~
[ ] NQ
ilf YES, does the Region support?!
'[ ]YEsr
"[ ] NO]
Tf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
b. For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?! '[ ] YESj
Lj_nq
jc. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's Ifive year CrP?! [ ]YES t_J_NOf
For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and S4.50ij
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ '[ ] YEST"
( ] NO[ i
|What percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.6oj and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
'[ ] YES . [ ] NOT
'[ ] n/a)
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding,!
If. Reasonableness of cost J Project Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-75
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOl are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use'
i ' ¦ ¦ ¦|910|If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional' approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration1 'of collection required if PFCs are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any| ' discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the, 'funding it proposes,
8. Project Description:
This project funded the rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin at Midway for drainage system repair (Exhibit 15, 16). The Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin is a 90,000 square-feet underground concrete structure designed to protect against flooding of the airfield and also serves as a glycol collection area.
Prior to the rehabilitation the detention basin was 22-years old and showing signs of cracking along the entrance ramp, exterior walls, and roof structure of the basin (Exhibit 17). This project funded a structural survey, environmental and PFC planning and necessary rehabilitation of the detention basin. Rehabilitation efforts included subbase construction, portland concrete cement (PCC) pavement scarification, replacement, and patching and epoxy crack injections.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-76
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
FOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there aj likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been. |completedJ~
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates, '[ ] YES [ ] NO[ \ 1 N/A
9. Significant Contribution:
This project increased safety with the rehabilitation of the Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad Detention Basin. Runway 31C Hold Apron is constructed above the Hold Pad Detention Basin and also serves as a deicing pad. Due to Chicago's harsh winter conditions, this deicing pad is extensively used. Repetitive use of deicing chemicals on concrete can significantly compromise the integrity of the concrete deck. Much of the cracking present prior to the rehabilitation could be attributed to the use of chemicals and age. Since 1/3 of the hold apron is above the detention basin it is critical that concrete distresses in this area are addressed immediately to maintain the integrity of the deck. If the necessary rehabilitation would not have been done could have led to more extensive concrete distresses that could have potentially reduced the use of the Runway 31 Hold Apron.
FOR FAA USE
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-77
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 f 1. Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date Competition. Competition Plan [ ] Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ j
LOI \ 1 FAA BCA \ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan
[ i ,
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN \ 1 Other (explain) j
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution rulesJ
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) 'of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?[
I ;—; ¦ ;|910|ilf competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, .competition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project was to preserve the safety of the airfield via drainage system repair by restoring the integrity of the concrete basin structure. The concrete structure was over 22 years old and showed various signs of cracking to the ramp, exterior walls, and roof structure of the basin. The rehabilitation of this project addressed these distresses and prevented further deterioration.
FOR FAA USE
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
¦ Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ].
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the,
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part ,of the PFC application]-
^Address adequacy of issuesJ
Revised 8/31/2010
B-78
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
11. Project Justification:
The Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad Detention Basin is an underground basin that is an integral portion of the Airport's drainage system which prevents flooding on the airfield and also collects glycol from deicing operations. Glycol run-off is kept in the basin until the ph levels are sufficient to meet the regulations for the run-off of all liquids to be released into the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) system.
Furthermore 1/3 of the Runway 31C Hold Pad is constructed over the basin. The detention basin was installed during the 1992 Runway 13C-31C Rehabilitation project. Since that time, the retaining walls along the entrance ramp, exterior walls, and the structure roof had begun to exhibit structural and hair-line cracks. The head wall at the entrance was exhibiting further cracking and some spalling. Rehabilitation of these areas increased the useful life of the structure by reducing the possibility of water infiltration and maintaining the integrity of the deck.
'FOR FAA USE'
i|99|¦—|
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s)l
iBased on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition1 benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part |of this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data1 and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding!
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above]
[Project Eligibility:;
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIT criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or
| PGL );l
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGLj
| );!
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;; [ 1 Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
Revised 8/31/2010
B-79
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
|[ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;!
[Title and Date of Part 150:^
[ ] Project included in a local sjudyj
[Title and Date of local study
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);!
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier }
| percentage of annual boardings )j
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter |
I 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
, .
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Rre any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated 'costsJ
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): November 1, 2013 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): September 17, 2014
For FAA Use
i i ¦ ¦ ¦ —¦—¦—i
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (12Q-day)?i
[ ] Yes
'u_NFor Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date! [or PFC application Due date, whichever is first?i [ ] Yes"
Ll_NIs this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation or Icompletion. Explain,
13. For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
iFor FAA Use1
i|99|. ¦|910|Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date,1
whichever is sooner.
[ ] Yes '
'Lim
|Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the, .estimated schedule for.each action?i
14. Project requesting PFC funding levels of S4.00 and $4.50:
Revised 8/31/2010
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use
i .|9910|Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public.'
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied o\{
by the FAA for its analysis.,
[If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
'ADO/RO Recommendation:!
i|9910|Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO,
,use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.,
Revised 8/31/2010
B-81
B 06 Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costsJ
[Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?i
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION J
i ||910|[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
Application Reviewed by:'
Name Routing Symbol Date,
ltem(s) reviewed/
Name Routing Symbol Date
ltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-82
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER:! 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Project Number: 07
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only: [X] Concurrent: Impose and Use [ ] Use Only:
[ ]$4.00 [X] $4.50
Link to application:
Level of Collection: [ ] $1.00 [ ] $2.00 [ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $3,915,865 Bond Financing & Interest: $3,915,865
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $7,831,730'
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant #3-17-0025-84-2015, 03-1-0025-87-2015, 03-1-0025-88-2015
Grant Funds in Project $9,583,694
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $9,583,694
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately): Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
1 The grant application was prepared based on AIP funds available to Midway, and did not include the total project costs. While this entire PFC project is AIP eligible, AIP funds are only a portion of the plan of finance for this project. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation maximized the amount of AIP funds available to them.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-86
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $1,370,325 Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $18,785,749
For FAA Use1
I l—|910|Does the project include a proposed LOI?i
'[ ] YES[~
I ] no, i
ilf YES, does the Region support'?i '[ ]YES[~
'[ ] NO|_
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation::
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?i '[ ] YESj~
\ 1 NQ
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, 'five year CIPj '[ ]YES
LlNQ
[d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of S4.00 and $4.50:1
lis there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ '[ ] YES
X ] nq ,
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through A1P?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding. ~
p. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00, and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, heeds of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates., '[ ] YES '[ ] NOT
[ ] N/Aj
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
Revised 8/31/2010
•B-87
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
If Reasonableness of costJ
i ,-|
'Project Total Cost Analysis, PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
Back-up Financing Plan:
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
iFor FAA Use
I , '|99|¦|910|If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration 'of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any] | discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the 'funding it proposes.,
Project Description:
This project funded the rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R and the reconfiguration of Taxiway P at Midway (Exhibit 18). Runway 4L-22R is approximately 5,507-feet long and 150-feet in width. The surface of the runway is comprised of primarily bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) with the exception of 700-feet on the Runway 4L approach end of portland cement concrete (PCC).
Taxiway P is approximately 4,280-linear feet extending from the south side of the Airport to Runway 4L-22R. This project only reconfigured 1,000-linear feet of the taxiway between Runway 4R-22L and 4L-22R.
Prior to the latest rehabilitation, the pavements for Runway 4L-22R were approximately 20-years old and showing surface distresses such as corner breaks, longitudinal and transverse cracking, joint and corner spalling, and joint seal damage. The magnitude and severity of these distresses indicated signs of structural deficiencies from repeated traffic loading, and weathering. This project included a variable depth asphalt mill with a six-inch AC overlay on the runway and installation of new PCC pavement sections on Runway end 22R run-up area. This project installed new AC surface course shoulders, new drainage systems, replaced runway edge lights and guidance sign bases, electrical cabling and fixtures, and sodding.
This project also funded the reconfiguration of Taxiway P with new AC pavement to allow for a 90 degree intersection at Runway 22R. This entailed the demolition of 50,000 square-feet of AC and material to install a new bituminous base course and
Revised 8/31/2010
B-88
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
three-inch AC surface course taxiway perpendicular to Runway 4L-22R. The project also funded new shoulders, new taxiway lighting, cabling, pavement markings, and environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
The cost estimate for this project is located on Exhibit 19.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ] YES
[ ] NO [X] N/A
iFOR FAA USE^_
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification1 information is not from PFC application]
i . . _—.—.—. _ .
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved]
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters] gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been1 !completedj~
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-89
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
[ ] YES
'[ ] NOT
'r 1 n/a
9. Significant Contribution:
This project reduced congestion and enhanced safety at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. The Airport's ongoing pavement management program serves to maintain all pavements with, a minimum condition of "Satisfactory/Fair" in order to avoid a costlier, reconstruction of the pavement sections and to avoid foreign object debris (FOD) that can have an adverse effect on the safety of aircraft operations at the Airport.
Deteriorating pavement can significantly impact the capacity of the airfield due to unanticipated airfield closures and would therefore lead to increased congestion. The closure of Runway 4L-22R would have a significant impact capacity of the airfield since this is one of the primary runways, dependent on operational flow, at the Airport.
Therefore, this project prevented the formation of FOD on the runway and reduced the likelihood of unanticipated closures for emergency repairs. Thus, this project meets the significant contribution requirements of improving air safety and reducing anticipated congestion.
The reconfiguration of Taxiway P allowed for a 90 degree intersection at Runway 22R that brings the section of pavement in compliance with FAA AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design criteria by correcting the taxiway geometry to prevent runway incursions with a perpendicular entry point to the runway.
for FAA Use!
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 f 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)]
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ J
LOI r 1 FAA BCA \ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan1|109|
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN H Other (explain) j
Revised 8/31/2010
B-90
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules.!
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
|How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?!
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, Icompetition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project was to preserve capacity and enhance safety on Runway 4L-22R to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. The rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R improved the existing level of safety and efficiency of the airport in addition to complying with FAA Title 14 CFR Part 139 Airport Certifications. The structural integrity of airfield pavements is critical to aviation safety. Airfield pavements that are rated near or below the minimum PCI rating of 70 could result in aircraft safety incidents. This project also reconfigured Taxiway P to allow for a 90 degree intersection at Runway 22R bringing this intersection into compliance with FAA airfield design standards.
FOR FAA USE1
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
¦ Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the1
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part ,of the PFC application.!
Address adequacy of issues.!
11. Project Justification:
Runway 4L-22R is used primarily by commuter and General Aviation aircraft. Operational use of this runway is critical to the Airport's capacity. The last major
Revised 8/31/2010
B-91
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
rehabilitation of this runway was over 20 years ago. The Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the useful life for airfield pavement is 20-years. The last major rehabilitation was done in 1995. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Runway 4L-22R were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, and raveling on the AC sections and presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking on the PCC sections. Runway 4L-22R had an overall PCI rating of 72 or "Satisfactory". Industry standards recommend that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
This proposed project also enhanced safety by complying with Federal Aviation Administration AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design criteria by correcting Taxiway P geometry to prevent runway incursions with a perpendicular entry point to the runway.
iFOR FAA USE!
i <-— ¦|910|[Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objectivefs)
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part |of this PFC application.!
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above-
Project Eligibility:1
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
I i|99|j
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or;
| PGL );!
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL!
! )CZ ,
:[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;;
i[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
1 [ 1 Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-92
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
[Title and Date of Part 150:'
[ ] Project included in a local study]
[Title and Date of local study:'
'[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C)j_ [ ] Shell ota gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier
| percentage of annual boardings );;
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
ilf analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
Are any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated, Icostsj
Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): July 1, 2013 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): October 22, 2015
For FAA Use
i i ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?|
[ ] Yes
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date or PFC application Due date, whichever is first?] [ ] Yes" 'U_NIs this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation orj Icompletion. Explain.
For an impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use
i i .
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej
whichever is sooner]
[ ] Yes '
\ 1 Nor
iWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the, .estimated schedule for each action?i
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-93
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ] YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
iFor FAA Use1
i _ i .
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public'
[Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied oil.
by the FAA for its analysis.
[If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (Iff the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
lADO/RO Recommendation:!
i i .
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RQ
,use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.! •
Revised 8/31/2010
B-94
B 07 Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?i
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
i I ¦|910|[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues, 'that lead to determination.!
Application Reviewed by:j
Name
Item(s) reviewed.'
Name
ltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SOURCE Core Plus, LLC, March 11, 2017 PREPARED BY Ricondo & Associates, Inc, June 2017
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
north 0 Not to Scale
Drawnc Z iCnicayGiMDvVIFinanaa'.PFO.PFC Ari;)loi:on ¦ 20! t Projects\A|>i>hc;i!;cn ."i-eslAlldchment B1.Exhitjils''AuloC-AD1:B 07 Rehab:!iU:Lion of Rurway ¦1L22R dwjLayM 3 5x1 IP tolled Jun 27, 2017. 0.: 53PM
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration Project PFC Application
B-96
Exhibit 19
Runway 4L-22R Rehabilitation & Taxiway P
Description
Design Construction Implementation
Total Project Costs
AIP Grants
Eligible PFC Bond Funding Consulted PFC Bond Capital
Requested PFC Bond Capital Local Funds
Source: Chicago Department of Aviation, November 2017 Prepared By: Ricondo and Assoicates, LLC, November 2017
Project Cost
$ 807,503 $ 13,873,683 $ 188,698
$ 14,869,884
$ 9,583,694 $ 5,286,190 $ 3,915,865
$ 3,915,865 $ 1,370,325
B-97
D o
o o d o o
E <
o o
o o
d d
CN
rr o
to to
o o
in —¦
CO CN CO" CO
O O O
O
d o
LO
CO
—¦ CN
TT O —¦" Tf
o d
o o d o o ¦<*"
o o d o o
TT
CN 4»
o o d o
CO
CO 0.
CN CN
o
m i
CO :
E !
¦5. a
•S a
C Q.
(3 0
o o o o
—: CN
co
co
o o
CN
o o
CO
000 000
cri '"t CN
o o o o
CO CO
o o o o
CN O
cn
o o
LO
o o cri
o o
CN
o o
o o
CN
o o 10
CN
CN CO
o
CO O)
o
o o
CO
o
CN CN CN
o|1010|o E <
o o p p d d
o p d
o p d
o p d
o p d
XL
1_
o
CN
O O £
rn ~" 00
c
O ¦¦ "°
v—' _» CO
i_ ~; a
OSS
^ »i
l— +±
CL
co 8"
0.
co a.
_ o
CL
o a.
">. a & a c a
a o
£0
o o d o o 0"
LO (A
<
_• CD U U CO _
J= CL
c
o
O
00000
O O O LO o
CO —¦ —'
—¦ T —¦ CN
«» T-
O O
o o|10 9 10|¦o- o
CO CO
o o d o
o o 0 o
o o d
o o d o
LO
O
o 0 o
LO
o o d
p
o o
o o
d d
o o
o o
o" o"
t co
t- CN
o o
o o|10 9|d
o o
o o
0000 0000 d d d d
o o o o d 0 o o o
o co
o o
o o|10 9|<»'
o r»-
00 co
—¦" co" co" 10"
o o
o o|10 9|d
o o
co p
co" TJ-"
W (ft tft o
o o
o o|10 9|ai o
Tf LO
co" cn"
o o d o
o o
d o 10
o cri
o o d o
O O O O CO
00"
O O
0 o
CN
o o d o
CO
cn"
o
o o
d o o rr"
(A
O
o d o o
O CN
O O
d o o
o O
0 o o
o o d o
LO
o o d o
co cn
o 01|1010|'sz O ro c g
o o
CO
o
o
<
CO
< <
LU LU
< < <
LU LU LU
<
LU
<
LU
< LU
o
<
LU
<
LU
co
a: cc
CN CN
o
<
c o
LO CO
o Z
o O
X X
CO
< <
Q.
Q.
O > CL
O O co cn
O.
i_ o
El "o a
£ 1-
_ <» o
£ ra o ¦» o E
CO
» «I
8 -
a.
1 > t|1010|CL
<
£ CO
8^
E 0 W 2
S CO CO
000 000
a;
ra u _o co tr
no
co u c ra
< S
¦a co
O >-ra
Ii or o
1 S oj ra
E m
a = o o
= CO
ra lo
¦S co
LU $
E "o 1 I
• 5 » >|910|-S. > S -5.
*o cn co o 01
LU _l CL Z _l
CO o c ra
< S Q 3 CJ C3 = co
0 o c ra
< 3 a = o u
= CO
ra lo
•S cp
CO o c ra
< .'2
a 3
O C3 = 00 ra to
13
1 CO JS "> 3
CO p -o
s I °
.¦g O) < Q
c 15 o
1.& - CO
? CO
S g
1 CO
s I °
CN|1010|"O
o 2 ^4
c ra
"g co '3
co
i? 2 is?
: co
•IS*
.5> ci 2
S S "D
c £ >
WLjQ.W_1Q.CO_1Q.WCtQ .
o
CN CN CN O
£ To Q o
£ ro
E
E <
_ E n °
o d o
d
LO
o o
o o d o
CO
co"
o d o o co" ¦*
o d o o
LO" CN
cn o r—"
co co co
tt"
CT)
¦q-
cri
CT)
co
en
O) CO
o o
LO
to
CN
o o d
CO CO CJ)
o"
CN
co co"
CN
CD O CO
CL
O
CN
CN GO O
O) O CO
LO
o
o o
CN CO o
o E <
o o d
o o d
o o d
o o d
o o d
o o d
o o d to
o
CO
XL i_
O
o
O CD
CM
CN 00
c
O ••
o °
o
¦o a>
n a
a. a
O 5 2
«*- On
cl
A) ia a UJ Q
CD
Cl
I -
— M
CO
8"
o.
o i=
CD _ CO LL
_ o
<
CO CZ
o
c
>. ro 3
13
CD
cc or
CN
¦5T >.
ro
I S = co
or co
o CJ
i -2 ^
CJ
C
o CJ
cj
O CJ
•S _>
C D.
_ E|109|o
- >-
CO =
N _
° s
O O
d o
o" m
£ a
O O CO co"
£ 1 1°
o o
CT)"
O O M-
00"
_, g,
o o
to _
._ 0.
< LU
o CJ
•a £
"2 c
> o|109|—
a. g>
<
Q co
CJ c
< LU
CD -I
or -j,
O) "D CD
— l (11 n
r~ —
0)
E K t_
ra o> >>cj
O) » _l LU
c c s -
co ! x cj) to ro
_: i LU il— CD
.1
CO CO
oi
D) CO
o o d
co co
co co co
o o"
o o r>r
LO CO CO
LO
o o oi
LO
CD I
CD CD N
in d
CO T1-
> _;
LO
CJ
£
SI
ro
_ O U 0.
o o
CO CO
o o
CO
o
o o
CO LO
cn"
CN 0>
o>"
o d
o o d
o o
LO
o o d
CN CO
o o d ¦*
CO
o o d o
o"
1^. to"
o o
o o
d oo
o —¦
o a>
¦*" CT)
o o
LO
o o
LO
o o
LO
o o oi to
o o d
CT)
r- cn
c/>
o o
o o
d oo
o CO
o o d
o o
CN CO CM
o
o o
LO CO
¦*
CN
o
o o d o
>-
CO
CN
ro
>-CO
2 o c o O
CO o
CO
>
a x
13 ¦—
CD
ro
CD O
a > S °-
c o LU 00 CD
10 CO j*; _.
CO =
O o) o >
o Q
c o
LU 00 ~'
0) £ t"
s ° s
o o ro
(J cn cn
¦ - * i
CO
or
'¦jo .2 J £
O o CJ CO
J_ 5 2
CO ^ CD
> —. >
ro co ro
o_ Q o.
o o d
ooo
OOO
odd
—¦ ¦<* CT)
o t o
CT)
d
CN
LO O LO
00 O CN
CO —¦ CD_
o o d
o o d
OO CT)
¦CO
to
o o
o o d
o o
CN h-
a>" cn"
o co
to —¦
—¦" r*-" co"
o o
o o
d d
o co
o o
CT) t/»
o" o"
—¦ o>
o o d
o o
LO
Hi t/>
ooo pop d —: lo
CO CO CO
OO —• CO
> o
>-cj
CN CN CN
_!>->->-
< CJ CJ CO
CJ CJ 0.
5 co r~
3 tS
< O
So"
— = 13
B E
o.
CD
- _
CO CO
E ">
or
—¦ —< CO
to CO
P O c
LL _)
g a.
_: o o. E
CO CO _ _ _
o or a. zi < LL
o o
O i-CO CO O O
^ If) ID S CO tO to to CO CO O O O O o
Q o a> 13 E
o E <
CO
to"
CO CO CN
tr> d
0)0 0 0|9 9 10|—¦ O O O LO O
d d cn cn d
co to to o) co o
O) —_ O) CN
CO O) CO
O CO II) *
—¦ to —• to
to to
ooo ooo d cn d —¦ LO
co to
CO
o r—" o
o
CO
o
CN CN CN O
§ E
a o
o o o o
O O O CO O CN O CO
o
LO
cn
co cri
LO
o o o o lo d
CN CO
co"
CO LO o o
¦fr CN O O
co co* d o
O LO
CN 0)_
co" co"
CO TT
CO CO
o o o o
p p p p
O O O O
t» o o o oo oooooooooo p p p pp pppppppppp d d d o o oooooooooo
o o
8 = 2
o
o
CM
OoC!
tn ¦*" 00
_^ o o
c
O ¦¦ "o
O 5 £
.E a>
fli CO CO
^ 111 Q
CO
Q_
o z
o
CD
'i?
a.
CD
a.
s -
CD. o W LL
_ o o.
«E
CO
c o
CO|1010|TO|1010|
_: O
o O
l= Cl § E O o
¦_ =
I §
f a <
—. a o u co ¦_
±= a.
c o
CJ
o
o o o o d d
o o o o d d
o o o> CO —" co"
o o o co
CO CN
o o d
LO CO
cn" co"
o o
LO O
CN d CN
O O O O
o
CT> CN
CD CD O
o o to
o o
LO CO
00 CO
O
o d
o o
LO
¦ r--cn
LO" LO CO (/}
o o
iri cn
o cn
CO
o o d
o o
10 CO
o co"
LO LO
to
o o
LO
o
CO
¦*
o o
O p
d d
o o
o o
d d
LO O
O) o
O) co"
CD
to
o o
o o
d d
LO O
—¦ O
to CO
CO
CO
O O O O O o
o o o o o p
o o d
O O O d O O
OOO
O p p d co d
S
CO t*.
O) O) CO
o o
o o d
CN CD
O
o d
CO O)
o iri co
O)
CO T-
LO —¦
co
r--" in
cn o
cn cn
to to
to
o d o o
—¦ to to
cn od cm o"
CM CM r- CO
o LO d
ooo
to LO O —' CN Tf
LO O CN O
d d o o in"
to to to to
ooo o p o to d d CO o o
CN O
o o o o o o o
CO —¦ CN
o o o o o o CO
N CO O) CO _
CO Tt CO CN CO t^-
r CO N O)
CO O CO LO
CO T— oo
—¦ CO
LO O
cn i—" o>
o
o
CJ
< < >- z
111 LU 10 h
>- LL
CO CJ
> LL LL LL CO CO CO CO
LL CJ > >- _l CO < CO CO <
CO
_: co
or
CN
|1010|c o
_
o
LO CO CN CO
o O
CD
Q
II
C CO
o c CJ _1
_ 3
o
CJ
—. ~ CD
CD CD CO
> >|910|co co|910|2- 2- <3
c „.
C_ t_ 2 a.
CD O-
i_ ¦a
CO CO
_C0 _ "qj
m b b
O O to
CJ 0) CJ ig
o
u o r_
CO fc? CO o|10999|CJ
° ° ° ™
£ O E g
E cd E jo|109|CO|99|t
._ CO _|910|o
CD CO CO CO
0) O «- CM
CO TJ- T)-
O O o o
CD
E
- CD CO > _ CO O 0. "S =
o
o CJ
E CN CO ,
CO CO
f c^
CD
I.?
_;
D) 0.
c
T3
O 9= W L_
t_|1010|CD "
"E co < W
CO|1010|co co
1 1 '< '<
CO
co _! _ a. lu co
ro
.- Q O
CD f-
o o
m _, a.
oocno—¦CNcoi-LotDr*-
Tj-TfLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
oooooooooo
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
iPFC APPLfCATlQNlsFUMBER^ 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the replacement of EMAS
Project Number: 08
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] S3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0
Bond Capital: $10,913,975
Bond Financing & Interest: $10,913,975
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $21,827,950'
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds: Grant #3-17-0025-89
Grant Funds in Project $11,790,715
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
1 The grant application was prepared based on All' Hinds available to Midway, and did not include the total project costs. While this entire PFC project is AIP eligible, AIP funds are only a portion of the plan of finance for this project. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation maximized the amount of AIP funds available to them.
Revised 8/3I/2010
B-101
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0 Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $33,618,665 For FAA Use1
||99|i 1
Does the project include a proposed L0I?| t ] YES
'[ ] NQ
ilf YES, does the Region support?] '[. ]YES[
I ] no!
If YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?i [ ] YESj~
For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's five year CIP?|
[ ]YES' U_NC_
For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ
'[ ] YES ' ' " '
J ] NO,
(What percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00j and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gatesJ [ ] YES '[ ] NO[
[ ] n/a!
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-102
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K., and the
replacement of EMAS
If. Reasonableness of costJ iProject Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
iFor FAA Use
i ^ _ i . .
lit required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional!
approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^
Jof collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap anyj |
discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the,
funding it proposes.^
8. Project Description:
This project funded the planning2 and rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of a section of Taxiway K, the construction of Taxiway V, and replacement of the Engineering Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) at Midway (Exhibit 20). Runway 4R-22L is 6,445-feet long and 150-feet wide and primarily comprised of bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) except for 345-feet at Runway end 22L, which is portland cement concrete (PCC).
Prior to the latest rehabilitation, the pavements for Runway 4R-22L were approximately 19-years old and showing signs of various levels of surface distresses due to structural deficiencies and repeated traffic loading. This project included a variable depth asphalt mill with a three to six-inch AC overlay on the runway, shoulders, and the adjacent connector/crossing taxiways and their shoulders. This project also included the construction of new shoulders, joint-sealing, replacement of runway edge lights, adjustments to the runway centerline lights, installation of new conduit and cabling and installation of underdrains.
This project also included the reconstruction of manholes and catch basins, removal and replacement of existing sewer pipes, and installation of a storm water detention system.
Taxiway Y is approximately 6,000 linear-feet and serves as the primary taxiway for Runway 4R-22L. This project only rehabilitated specific sections of the north end of Taxiway Y adjacent to the Terminal Ramp.
2 This includes environmental and PFC planning efforts.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-103
B 08: Rehabilitation of" Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
Taxiway K is approximately 4,250-feet long and 60-feet wide and configured in a west-east configuration traversing both Runways 13C-31C and 4R-22L. This project removed approximately 700 linear-feet of taxiway between Runway end 4R and hold block to eliminate angled geometry per FAA AC 150/5300-13A Airport Design criteria.
Taxiway V is approximately 250-feet long and 150-feet wide and was constructed between Taxiway Y and Runway 4R-22L to allow access from Taxiway to the Runway 4 end Hold Apron. This project was needed due to the removal of Taxiway K west of Runway 4R that eliminated the angled geometry that once provided access to the Runway 4 end Hold Apron.
This project also funded the design and construction of the replacement of the Runway 4R-22L EMAS systems on the west (EMAS #1) and east (EMAS #2) of the runway. EMAS arrestor beds are composed of lightweight, crushable cement material designed to stop aircraft that overshoot runways. It is a FAA acceptable alternative for preventing overrun catastrophes at airports where runway safety areas are not in compliance with FAA regulations.
The Runway end 4L EMAS was originally installed in 2006 at approximately 340-feet in length and 170-feet in width. This project replaced the Runway 4L end EMAS (EMAS #1) and installed a new system on Runway 22L (EMAS #2) with new "green EMAS". These new beds were designed and installed to meet the requirements established in AC 150-5220-22A Engineered Materials Arresting Systems for Aircraft Overruns.
The cost estimate for this project is located in Exhibit 21.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-104
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
FOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification, information is not from PFC application.
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved]
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been, pompleted.r~
,|910|jTerminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates!
'[ ] yes; [ ] noT
r 1 n/a!
9. Significant Contribution:
This project reduced congestion and increased safety at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. The Airport's ongoing pavement management program serves to maintain all pavements with a minimum condition of "Satisfactory/Fair" to avoid a costlier, reconstruction of the pavement sections and to avoid foreign object debris (FOD) that can have an adverse effect on the safety of aircraft operations at the Airport.
Deteriorating pavement can significantly impact the capacity of the airfield due to unanticipated airfield closures and would therefore lead to increased congestion. The closure of Runway 4R-22L would have a significant impact on the capacity of the airfield since this is one of the primary runways at the Airport with EMAS support.
Therefore, this project prevents the formation of FOD on the runway and reduces the likelihood of unanticipated closures for emergency repairs. Thus, this project
Revised 8/3 I/2010
B-105
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
meets the significant contribution requirements of improving air safety and reducing anticipated congestion.
This project also increased safety with the removal of Taxiway K and installation of Taxiway V to eliminate angled geometry per FAA AC 150/5300-13A Airport Design criteria provided a 90-degree intersection at Runway 4R-22L to provide access to the 4R Pad and Runway 4L-22R.
The replacement of the EMAS also preserved and enhanced capacity and safety of the Airport. The Airport is in a densely populated area on the southwest side of Chicago, IL. Midway is confined by W. 55th St to the north, S. Cicero Ave to the east, W. 63rd St to the south, and S. Central Ave. to the west. The distances between Runway ends to W. 63rd St and S. Central Ave are both less than 425-feet, significantly less than the established standard of 1,000-foot Runway Safety Area. The installation of EMAS #1 and #2 will stop aircraft that overshoot runways and prevent catastrophes where runway safety areas are not in compliance with FAA regulations.
FOR FAA USE,
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ ] Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]j
LOI r V FAA BCA I" 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan|
[ f . __J ~
I Other (explain) •
1 Noise. 65 LDN \ 1 Other (explain)
r Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rulesJ
puantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public, agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) |of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this findingJ
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, jcompetition at the airport.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-106
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K., and the
replacement of EMAS
Project Objective:
The objective of this project was to preserve capacity and enhance safety on Runway 4R-22L to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. The rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L improved the existing level of safety and efficiency of the airport in addition to complying with FAA Title 14 CFR Part 139 Airport Certifications. The structural integrity of airfield pavements is critical to aviation safety. Airfield pavements that are rated near or below the minimum PCI rating of 70 could result in aircraft safety incidents. This project will not only preserve the safety of the runway surfaces at the Airport but reduce maintenance cost. When airfield pavements fall below the critical 70 PCI the rate of deterioration of the pavement and the cost to rehabilitate increase exponentially, causing the cost to the Airport and U.S. Airport System to increase. This project also replaced the runways EMAS which provided a safe and reliable arresting system at the Airport without further reducing the runway length. EMAS is proven technology that has saved numerous of lives and significantly minimized damage to aircraft and infrastructure.
FOR FAA USE
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ].
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the,
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a parti ,of the PFC application.!
jAddress adequacy of issues]
Project Justification:
Runway 4R-22L is one of the primary runways at the Airport. The last major rehabilitation for Runway 4R-22L was 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by Edwards & Kelcey Design Services Inc. (E&K), indicated that distresses on Runway 4R-22L were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, and raveling on the AC sections and presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking on the PCC sections. The sections that were replaced on Taxiway Y also showed distress that were consistent with loading and climate issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, map cracking, and linear cracking.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-107
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
Runway 4R-22L had an overall weighted Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating of 79 or "Satisfactory". Although the overall PCI for Taxiway Y was 73, the sections that were replaced had PCIs averaging 64. It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI be maintained above 70 to maintain at a level sufficient to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
The removal of Taxiway K, between Runway 4R and the 4R Hold Pad was necessary in order to meet AC 150/5300-13A Airport Design criteria. AC 150/5300-13A states that right angle intersections are standard for all runway and taxiway intersections. FAA studies indicate the increased risk of a runway incursions on angled taxiways used for crossing runways.
Taxiway V was constructed as an alternative to the removal of Taxiway K. Taxiway V was constructed between Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y to provide more efficient aircraft movement. Taxiway V is approximately 300-feet long at a width of 120-feet with 25-foot shoulders.
Taxiway Y, northeast of Runway 13L-31R, is the only taxiway along the odd numbered B gates and Concourse C. This pavement was reconstructed as part of the new Midway Terminal Development in 2002. There are multiple areas of deteriorated concrete pavement requiring replacement to provide continued operation of the taxiway with minimal maintenance impacts. In 2013, the Chicago Department of Aviation completed an Airfield Drainage Study and as a result recommendations were made for improvements to the airfield drainage. Some of the recommendations have been implemented in recent construction projects.
The replacement of Runway 4L-22R EMAS preserved and enhanced safety by replacing an existing end-of-life-cycle EMAS bed with the latest arresting system technology to prevent aircraft from overrunning the runway. Midway is located in a densely populated area on the southwest side of Chicago, IL. Midway is confined by W. 55th St to the north, S. Cicero Ave to the east, W. 63r(1 St to the south, and S. Central Ave. to the west. The distances between Runway ends to S. Cicero and W. 63rd St. are both less than 450-feet, significantly less than the established standard of 1,000-foot Runway Safety Area (RSA).
According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the rehabilitation of an EMAS system is eligible if the EMAS bed was installed with Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds prior to fiscal year 2007.
This is because EMAS systems installed prior to 2007 did not have the plastic lids. After fiscal year 2007, the manufacturer began fully encasing the blocks, which has significantly improved moisture protection and joint seals.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-108
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
FOR FAA USE
I i !
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s)
i : < ¦|910|Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s)
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of thej project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition1 benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part ]of this PFC application!
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, l ist the source(s) of data1 and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
[Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above!
jProject Eligibility:^ _____
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category below!
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or;
! PGL );! " '
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL1
I )f ~ '__ .."
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504!
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;
(Title and Date of Part 150:[__
[ ] Project included in a local study!
[Title and Date of local study:;
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S~.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);!
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)( F) (air carrier"1
| percentage of annual boardings );
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter |
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)!
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated, 'costs!"
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): August 1, 2015 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): December 12, 2016
Revised 8/3 1/2010
B-109
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
For FAA Use
i ' ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?|
t ] Yes
[_]_Nd
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date [or PFC application Due date, whichever is First? [ ] Yes1"
!ls this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementationorj completion. Explain.
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use1
i i .
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date,'
iwhichever is sooner J
I ] Yes1
jWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-110
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use1
i '|910|[Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public1
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied on
by the FAA for its analysis]
i ¦ i
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (IE the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
jADO/RO Recommendation:;
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO| use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.!
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify, 'eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costsJ
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?!
jADO/RO RECOMMENDATION] [ 1 Approve.
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing 'issues that lead to determination.,
j ; > ¦ ¦ j
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues, that lead to determination]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-111
B 08: Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L and Taxiway Y, removal of Taxiway K, and the
replacement of EMAS
jApplication Reviewed by!
Name Routing Symbol Date;
jltem(s) reviewed.!
\~ Name Routing Symbol Date!
ltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-112
or O
< z o
<
o
< u
I
u
T3
c
(T3
c
CD
E
0)
^ Q. CtL cd
^ CD
ro
$ +-C T3
ql. ro
c ^ .2 |
ro x ±. ro — I—
-O H—
ro O
XL _
cd ro
oo t_ ° cD
CO *-
| o: i 6' ro"cu « £ <
° "S c
c|99|°
¦- F ra
+j o u
S E —
CD CD Ll_
q: q: o_
EXHIBIT 21
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT - RUNWAY 4R-22L REHABILITATION ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 100% PLANS SUBMITTAL March 10, 2017
SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES
ITEM NO. PAY ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TOTAL ESTIMATED QUANTITY LOADED UNIT PRICE ITEM COST
BID ITEMS
|109|M-101-01 MOBILIZATION - (TOTAL PRICE FOR MOBILIZATION MUST NOT EXCEED 3% OF THE TOTAL BASE BID) LS|99|$662,758 662,757 96 |109|N-110-01 STANDBY TIME ALLOW|99|$50,000 50.000 00 |109|D-701-01 REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE, 30", CLASS V LF 820 S300 246,000 00 |109|D-701-02 REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE, 36". CLASS V LF 555 S350 194.250 00 |109|D-701-03 VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE - EXTRA STRENGTH, 8" LF 218 S180 39.240 00 |109|D-701-04 VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE - EXTRA STRENGTH, 12" LF 217 S200 43.400 00 |109|D-701-05 VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE - EXTRA STRENGTH, 18" LF 110 S250 27.500 00 |109|D-701-06 DUCTILE IRON PIPE,18", CLASS 56 LF 172 S300 51,600 00 |10 9|02410-01 REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE, 30", TUNNELED IN PLACE LF 200 S800 160.000 00
10 02410-02 REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE, 36", TUNNELED IN PLACE LF 157 S800 125.600 00
11 D-705-01 SMOOTH WALL PVC PIPE, 8", SCH 40, PERFORATED LF 953 S175 166.775 00
12 D-705-02 SMOOTH WALL PVC PIPE, 8", SCH 40, NON-PERFORATED LF 115 S175 20,125 00
13 D-751-01 INSPECTION HOLES EA|99|S7.000 49.000 00
14 D-751-02 MANHOLE, 5' DIA (AIRCRAFT LOADING) EA|99|$30,000 60.000 00
15 D-751-03 MANHOLE. 6' DIA (AIRCRAFT LOADING) EA|99|$35,000 70.000 00
16 D-751-04 IDOT STANDARD MANHOLE, 4' DIA EA|99|$15,000 15,000 00
17 D-751-05 IDOT STANDARD MANHOLE, 6' DIA EA|99|$25,000 50,000 00
18 D-751-06 IDOT STANDARD MANHOLE. 7' DIA EA|99|S35.000 70.000 00
19 D-751-07 CATCH BASIN (NON-AIRCRAFT LOADING) EA|99|S25.000 75.000 00
20 D-751-08 CATCH BASIN (AIRCRAFT LOADING) EA|99|S35.000 140.000 00
21 D-751-09 ADJUST INSPECTION HOLE/HANDHOLE EA|99|$4,000 24.000 00
22 L-100-01 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING RUNWAY IN PAVEMENT CENTERLINE LIGHT TO BE RE-USED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER AND BASE ADJUSTMENT. COMPLETE EA 128 $1,500 192.000 00
23 L-100-02 LIGHTING - RUNWAY TYPE 1 MARKER LIGHT BASE WITH L-862-LED (L) ELEVATED EDGE LIGHT. COMPLETE EA|99|$5,000 15,000 00
_24 L-100-03 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING RUNWAY IN PAVEMENT EDGE LIGHT TO BE REUSED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER AND BASE ADJUSTMENT, COMPLETE EA 17 $1,500 25,500 00 |109|L-100-04 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING RUNWAY ELEVATED EDGE, THRESHOLD AND END OF RUNWAY LIGHT TO BE RE-USED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER, COMPLETE EA 107 $1,000 107.000 00
26 L-100-05 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING RUNWAY IN PAVEMENT GUARD LIGHT TO BE REUSED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER AND BASE ADJUSTMENT, COMPLETE EA 118 $1,500 177.000 00
27 L-100-06 LIGHTING -TAXIWAY LIGHT BASE WITH L-852C/D-LED (L) IN PAVEMENT CENTERLINE LIGHT WITH CDA PROVIDED LIGHT FIXTURE. COMPLETE EA 23 $1,500 34,500 00
28 L-100-07 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING TAXIWAY IN PAVEMENT CENTERLINE LIGHT TO BE RE-USED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER AND BASE ADJUSTMENT, COMPLETE EA 17 $1,500 25,500 00
29 L-100-08 LIGHTING -TAXIWAY TYPE 1 MARKER LIGHT BASE WITH L-861T-LED (L) ELEVATED EDGE LIGHT WITH CDA PROVIDED FIXTURE, COMPLETE EA 26 $5,000 130,000 00
30 L-100-09 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING RUNWAY IN PAVEMENT THRESHOLD LIGHT TO BE RE-USED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER AND BASE ADJUSTMENT, COMPLETE EA 32 $1,000 32.000 00
31 L-100-10 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - REMOVE GUIDANCE SIGN & BASE, COMPLETE EA|99|$5,000 25.000 00
32 L-100-11 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - NEW PANELS ON EXISTING SIGNS EA 175 $2,000 350.000 00
33 L-100-12 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - NEW L-858 - LED (L) GUIDANCE SIGN WITH NEW BASE. 1 MODULE. SIZE 1, COMPLETE EA|99|$10,000 10.000 00
34 L-100-13 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - NEW L-858 - LED (L) GUIDANCE SIGN WITH NEW BASE. 2 MODULES, SIZE 1, COMPLETE EA|99|$13,000 26,000 00
35 L-100-14 LIGHTING SYSTEMS-NEW L-858-LED (L) GUIDANCE SIGN WITH NEW BASE, 4 MODULES, SIZE 1, COMPLETE EA|99|$16,000 32,000 00
36 L-100-15 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - REMOVE ELEVATED EDGE LIGHT & BASE. COMPLETE EA 25 $1,000 25,000 00
37 L-100-16 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - TEMPORARY AIRFIELD LIGHTING MODIFICATIONS ALLOW|99|$20,000 20.000 00
38 L-100-17 LIGHTING - RUNWAY ELEVATED GUARD LIGHT WITH TYPE 1 MARKER LIGHT BASE WITH L-804-LED {1)1 ERGL-(L) LIGHT WITH CDA PROVIDED FIXTURE, COMPLETE EA|99|$6,000 12.000 00
39 L-100-18 REMOVE AND REINSTALL LIGHTING - EXISTING ELEVATED RUNWAY GUARD LIGHT TO BE RE-USED WITH NEW TRANSFORMER, COMPLETE EA 12 $3,000 36.000 00
40 L-100-19 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - INSTALL NEW LED RETROFIT KIT FOR EXISTING SIGNS, KIT PROVIDED BY CDA EA 63 $1,000 63.000 00
41 L-100-20 LIGHTING SYSTEMS - REMOVE AND REPLACE TRANSFORMER FOR EXISTING GUIDANCE OR DISTANCE REMAINING SIGN EA 63 $2,000 126.000 00
42 L-100-21 REPLACE EXISTING RUNWAY WEATHER SENSOR WITH NEW RUNWAY SENSOR EA|99|$8,000 24.000 00
43 L-107-01 REMOVE AND INSTALL NEW L-806 WIND CONE, COMPLETE EA|99|$12,000 24,000 00
44 L-108-01 POWER CABLE - L-824, TYPE C 5KV, 1/C SIZE 6 AWG LF 75,000 $5 375,000 00
45 L-108-02 COUNTERPOISE WIRE - 1/C, SIZE 6 AWG, 600V, BARE COPPER LF 3.800 $4 15,200 00
46 L-110-01 CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS. 2 WAY, 3" PVC LF 3,200 $115 368,000 00
47 L-110-02 CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS, 1 WAY. 2" PVC LF 300 $100 30,000 00
^48 L-110-03 CONCRETE ENCASED DUCTS, 1 WAY, 2" PVC in SAWKERF LF 600 $150 90.000 00
\w L-115-01 ELECTRICAL MANHOLE ELEVATION ADJUSTMENT EA|99|$4,000 16.000 00
L-115-02 ELECTRICAL HANDHOLE ELEVATION ADJUSTMENT EA|99|$3,000 9,000 00
51 L-115-03 ELECTRICAL HANDHOLE EA|99|$12,500 50,000 00
52 L-125-01 AIRFIELD LIGHTING CONTROL VAULT. MISCELLANEOUS MODIFICATIONS ALLOW|99|$25,000 25,000 00
53 P-150-01 PAVEMENT REMOVAL-PCC FULL DEPTH SY 4,396 $75 329,715 75
54 P-150-02 PAVEMENT REMOVAL-BITUMINOUS FULL DEPTH SY 6,292 $45 283,137 75
55 P-152-01 UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION CY 27,103 $75 2,032,725 00
56 P-152-02 ALLOWANCE FOR UNCLASSIFIED EXCAVATION - CONTAMINATED MATERIAL ALLOW|99|310,000 10.000 00
57 P-154-01 FROST PROTECTION COURSE, CA-6 B- I 14 CU YD 1,653 $70 115.710 00
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT - RUNWAY 4R-22L REHABILITATION ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 100% PLANS SUBMITTAL March 10, 2017
__ SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES
ITEM NO. PAY ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION UNITS TOTAL ESTIMATED QUANTITY LOADED UNIT PRICE ITEM COST
58 P-154-02 FROST PROTECTION COURSE, CA-7 CU YD 1.529 S80 122.320 00
59 P-154-03 FROST PROTECTION COURSE, CA-11 CU YD 103 S80 8,240 00
60 P-154-04 UNDERCUT AND BACKFILL WITH STABILIZATION COURSE SY 2.332 0 00
61 P-156-01 INLET PROTECTION EA 19 $420 7,980 00
62 P-156-02 TEMPORARY SEEDING ACRE|99|$550 3,850 00
63 P-156-03 STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SY 280 $50 14,000 00
64 P-401-01 BITUMINOUS SURFACE COURSE TON 34.354 $130 4,466,020 00
65 P-401-02 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 1.391 $130 180,830 00
66 P-404-01 ASPHALT TREATED PERMEABLE BASE COURSE TON 2,100 $130 273,000 00
67 P-405-01 BITUMINOUS CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE FOR SHOULDER (IDOT) TON 9,671 $130 1,257,230 00
68 P-405-02 BITUMINOUS CONCRETE BASE COURSE FOR SHOULDER (IDOT) TON 781 $130 101,530 00
69 P-602-01 BITUMINOUS PRIME COAT GAL 2.924 S3 8,772 00
70 P-603-01 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT GAL 36,184 S3 108,552 00
71 P-605-01 JOINT AND CRACK SEALING LF 4,010 S3 12,030 00
72 P-617-01 SCARIFICATION/MILLING - BITUMINOUS CONCRETE - 3" SY 118,997 $11 1,308,966 71
73 P-617-02 SCARIFICATION/MILLING - BITUMINOUS CONCRETE - 2" SY 51,956 S9 467,608 49
74 P-617-03 SCARIFICATION/MILLING - PCC PAVEMENT - 3" SY 43.812 $11 481,932 00
75 P-617-04 SCARIFICATION/MILLING - BITUMINOUS CONCRETE - 6" SY 3.195 $13 41,539 28
76 P-617-05 SCARIFICATION/MILLING - BITUMINOUS CONCRETE - VARIABLE DEPTH SY 17.732 $13 230,516 00
77 P-617-06 SCARIFICATION/MILLING - PCC PAVEMENT - VARIABLE DEPTH SY 596 $13 7,748 00
78 P-620-01 AIRFIELD MARKING - TEMPORARY SF 161.725 $2 242,587 50
79 P-620-02 AIRFIELD MARKING - PERMANENT SF 161.725 S3 485,175 00
80 P-620-03 AIRFIELD MARKING - PREFORMED THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT MARKING SF 1,178 $15 17.670 00
81 P-620-04 AIRFIELD MARKING - REMOVAL SF 1,178 $4 4,712 00
82 S-802-01 PAVEMENT GROOVING - BITUMINOUS CONCRETE SF 1,131.373 $0 395,980 55
83 T-904-01 SODDING SY 61,148 S18 1.100,664 00
84 T-905-01 TOPSOILING SY 3,000 S8 24.000 00
85 X-100-01 ALLOWANCE FOR UTILITY CONFLICTS & UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS ALLOW|99|S50.000 50,000 00
86 09900-01 PAINTING JET BLAST FENCE EA|99|S10.000 30,000 00
87 Z-100-01 ENGINEERED MATERIALS ARRESTOR SYSTEM (EMAS) - RWY 4R, REMOVE AND INSTALL EA|99|S3.450.000 3.450,000 00
_38 Z-100-02 MOCK-UP EMAS LS|99|S250.000 250.000 00
TOTAL LOCATION COSTS:
| 22,754,689.98
B-115
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER:'; 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
Project Number: 09
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
[ ]$4.00 [X] $4.50
Link to application:
Level of Collection [ ] $1.00 [ ] $2.00 [ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $2,668,767 Bond Financing & Interest: $2,668,767
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $5,337,534'
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # 3-17-0025-80-2012 Grant Funds in Project $2,250,000
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $2,250,000
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately): Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
' The grant application was prepared based on AIP funds available to Midway, and did not include the total project costs. While this entire PFC project is AIP eligible, AIP funds are only a portion of the plan of finance for this project. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation maximized the amount of AIP funds available to them.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-116
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0 Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $7,587,534
For FAA Use
I|9910|Does the project include a proposed LOI?i
'[ ]YESf~
[ ] NQ ;
If YES, does the Region support?! [ ]YESj"
J ] no!
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?! [ ] YESj~
Llnq
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's five year CIP?i '[ ]YES
L]_nc.
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:'
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs! '[ ] YES
[ ] NQ i
|What percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP?i List the source(s) of data used to make this Finding,
je! Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00j and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.' '[ ] YES, '[ ] NOT
'[ ] n/a!
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding]
If. Reasonableness of cost J
i <-|
'Project Total Cost Analysis,
Revised 8/31/2010
B-117
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis 7. Back-up Financing Plan:
If proposed ALP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use
I|99|:|910|If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional' approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^ 'of collection required if PFCs are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any|~ discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the funding it proposes.!
8. Project Description:
This project funded the replacement of Runway 4R-22L centerline and threshold lights at Midway. This project entailed the replacement and installation of new centerline light base cans, lights, transformers, heat shrink kits, duct banks and conduit runs and the milling and resurfacing of the center portion of the runway.
This project also upgraded the airfield lighting control system to support the new lighting system, installed regulators, and installed new home run duct banks to accommodate the new circuit that will power the proposed centerline lights for Runway 4R-22L and the threshold hold and edge lights. All infrastructure (base cans, conduit etc.) for centerline lighting for Runway 13C-31C were installed within the limits of the runway safety area of Runway 4R-22L in anticipation of the future installation of a runway centerline lighting system. Additionally, the runway pavement at the intersection of Runway 4R-22L and 13C-31C (the bulls eye) was milled and resurfaced with asphalt for the full width of the runways 150 feet extending to the existing limits of the bituminous overlay on runway 13C-31C (612 feet) and 500 feet on 4R-22L. Underdrains within the limits of the bull's-eye paving for both runway 4R-22L and 13C-31C were designed and installed as part of this project. This project also included environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-118
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
FOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application,
i ¦ ;|910|If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing;
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.'
i - ... - - - — I
jlf the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been jcompleted.P
(Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways] aprons, and aircraft gates, [ ] YES
'[ ] NOT '[ 1 N/A
9. Significant Contribution:
This project increased safety at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. The airfield lighting system was over 30-years old prior to replacement. The continued use of faulty cabling could have resulted in the unexpected closure of certain sections of the airfield. The installation of new lighting, cans, cabling, duct banks, and additional lighting infrastructure increased airfield visibility for
Revised 8/31/2010
B-119
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
nighttime operations and reduced downtown due to failure of the lighting systems on the runway. This project made a significant contribution to improving air safety and reducing current or anticipated congestion at the Airport, which would occur at the Airport if this runway was taken out of a service due to a failure of the lighting system.
FOR FAA USB
_ Air safety. Part 139 f 1 Other (explain^
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
i
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]
LOl [ 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan1
[ 1
Other (explain) _J
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain) j
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules]
'Quantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public__ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) 'of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
iHow does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?!
ilf competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, Icompetition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project was to enhance safety and preserve capacity to ensure reliable lighting for aircraft operations on the airfield. This project provided for the replacement of the old and obsolete airfield lighting to increase airfield visibility for nighttime operations and reduce downtime due to failure of the lighting systems on the runways or taxiways. This project was also required to meet current FAA design standards and 14 CFR Part 139 certification requirements.
iFOR FAA USE'
| Safety, Preserve [ 1 Enhance [ 1
Revised 8/31/2010
B-120
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport!
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
'Finding ___
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part' ,of the PFC application.!
Address adequacy of issues.!
11. Project Justification:
The rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L centerline and threshold lights increased the visibility of the runway for non-precision approaches and nighttime operations. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, minimum useful life for airfield lighting is 10-years. The lighting for Runway 4R-22L was installed over 30-years and had exceeded its useful life.
FOR FAA USB
| I :
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means taj accomplish this objective(s)
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part; pf this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data' and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above!
Project Eligibility:!
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category below.]
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 on
LpGL );!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-121
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights \~] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGLj
I )CZ I ,
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505; [ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.J
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plany Title and Date of Part 150:1
[ ] Project included in a local studyj
Title and Date of local study:
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);!
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier J
| percentage of annual boardings );)
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j_
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
Uf analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data1 'and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!~"
Rre any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated,
'costs.r
Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): September 1, 2011 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): March 31, 2013
For FAA Use1
i|9910|For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?j
[ ] Yes
L]_N_
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, 'or PFC application Due date, whichever is first? [ ] Yes" L]_N_2r
ifs this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation otj 'completion. Explain!
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use1
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date] [Whichever is sooner., [ ] Yes1
Ll__f
Revised 8/31/2010
B-122
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the, estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the aiiport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
iFor FAA Use1
i i
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public.1
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orl,
by the FAA for its analysis!
i 1 ¦ ¦ — —. . — — . . . _. _
jlf a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (It; the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-123
B09 Replacement of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights
jADO/RO Recommendation:1
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO| use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.
i ¦ ¦|910|If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.!
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
jADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:' [ 1 Approve.
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[Application Reviewed by:|
Name Routing Symbol Date
Item(s) reviewed.!
Name Routing Symbol Date,
Item(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-124
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER:' 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
Project Number: 10
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $3,326,400 Bond Financing & Interest: $3,326,400
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $6,652,800
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B-125
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $6,652,800 For FAA Use1
I|9910|Does the project include a proposed LOI?i
t ]YESr~
'[ ] NO, i
ilf YES, does the Region support? '[ ]YES|
[ ] NO]
ilf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support? [ ] YESj"
[_]_NQ
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, five year CTP? [ ]YESr
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ
'[ ] YES
[ ] NQ i
|What percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP? List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.,
je. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.66, and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside; needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.! '[ ] YES
'[ ] no'
J ] N/A
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
if. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis,
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-126
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
IF proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of Financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^ [of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap anyj ' discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the, funding it proposes,
8. Project Description:
This project funds the extension and rehabilitation of Taxiway A (Exhibit 22, 23). Taxiway A is approximately 670 linear-feet and connects Runways 13C-31C and 13R-31L to Taxiway F. This project will extended Taxiway A approximately 400 feet at a 90 degree angle from Taxiway F, continue southwest with a slight bend to the west, and connect to Taxiway W at a 90-degree angle. This project will include the installation of concrete pavement, bituminous shoulders, and associated taxiway drainage and lighting, as well as replacement of existing taxiway light cables and pavement marking. The taxiway extension will be 35 feet wide, in compliance with taxiway design group (TDG) 2 FAA design standards per FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. Fillet widening will occur the at intersections of Taxiway A with Taxiway F and Taxiway W. Widening of fillets at existing and proposed Taxiway A pavement intersections will occur to meet required dimensions per FAA design criteria for Gulfstream G-650 aircraft. Additionally, a portion of the existing taxiway pavement at intersection of existing Taxiway A and Taxiway F will be resurfaced.
Prior to the extension and rehabilitation of this section of Taxiway A, the pavement was 30-years old and showing signs of various levels surfaces distresses related to traffic loading, weathering, and age. This project also includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-127
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
Number of gates: N/A
Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
jFOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.!
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing;
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a! likelihood the requirements will be met, or shouid the project be disapproved J
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been |completedJ~
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates., '[ ] YES1 ~ '[ ] NOT
\ i n/a1
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will reduce congestion and increase safety at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. The Airport's ongoing pavement management program serves to maintain all pavements with a minimum condition of "Satisfactory/Fair" in order to avoid a costlier, reconstruction of the pavement sections and to avoid FOD that can have an adverse effect on the safety of aircraft operations at the Airport.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-128
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
Deteriorating pavement can significantly impact the capacity of the airfield due to unanticipated airfield closures and would therefore lead to increased congestion. Therefore, this project prevents the formation of FOD on the taxiways and runways and reduces the likelihood of unanticipated closures for emergency repairs. Thus, this project meets the significant contribution requirements of improving air safety and reducing anticipated congestion.
The closures of Taxiway A would have a significant impact to the capacity of the airfield since this taxiway primarily serves general aviation (GA) aircraft exiting Runway 13C-31C. Closure of Taxiway A would increase the dwell times of GA aircraft on Runway 13C-31C which would also significantly impact the operations of larger commercial aircraft. This would require landing GA aircraft to exit Taxiway B that would require two additional correspondences to the air traffic control tower to access the West Ramp. Taxiway A maintains Airport capacity by reducing runway occupancy time and increasing the efficient use of Runway 31C.
FOR FAA USE'
Air safety. Part 139 f 1 Other (explain?
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ].
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA \ ] FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan'
[ 1 ~ "
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain) __J
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules.!
puantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public__ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) 'of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, 'competition at the airport.!
10. Project Objective:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-129
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
The objective of this project is to preserve capacity and enhance safety on Taxiway A to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. The rehabilitation of Taxiway A will improve the existing level of safety and efficiency of the Airport by improving the structural integrity of the taxiway and complying with FAA Title 14 CFR Part 139 Airport Certifications. The structural integrity of airfield pavements is critical to aviation safety. Airfield pavements that are rated near or below the minimum PCI rating of 70 could result in aircraft safety incidents. When airfield pavements fall below the critical 70 PCI the rate of deterioration of the pavement and the cost to rehabilitate increase exponentially, causing the cost to the Airport and U.S. Airport System to increase. The extension to the West Ramp will also reduce congestion by providing aircraft a direct route to the West Ramp existing Runway 13C-31C without additional tower communications based on the existing route.
iFOR FAA USE
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]|_
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport;
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport,
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding'
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part pf the PFC application.!
jAddress adequacy of issues.!
11. Project Justification:
Taxiway A located between Taxiway F and Runway 13C-31C was recently expanded to allow larger general aviation aircraft landing on Runway 31C to exit the runway more efficiently. While this improved the exit off the runway, the remainder of the taxiways leading to the West Ramp is not capable of supporting these larger aircraft per current FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design criteria. The extension and improvement of Taxiway A to the West Ramp area will increase the efficiency of Runway 13-31C by allowing all GA aircraft the ability to directly access the West Ramp.
A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on the rehabilitated Taxiway A section were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking. This section of Taxiway A had an overall PCI rating of 53 or "Poor".
Revised 8731/2010
B-130
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
Pavement industry standards recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
FOR FAA USE'
I i !
[Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means toj accomplish this objective(s),
'Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the,
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part of this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, l ist the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above.!
i|910|'Project Eligibility:!
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 qrj
| PGL );' ~
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL1
! )J
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;;
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.j
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;'
Title and Date of Part 150:__
[ ] Project included in a local studyj
[Title and Date of local study:;
.[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);1
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier _H
| percentage of annual boardings )_;j
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.,
Revised 8/31/2010
B-131
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated, jcostsl
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): June 13, 2017 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): July 15, 2018
For FAA Use
i
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC; application Due date (120-day)?j '[ ] Yes1
t_]_N_f
i—¦ ¦|910|For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, [or PFC application Due date, whichever is first? [ ] Yes'"
lis this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation otj Icompletion. Explain,
13. For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use
i
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej jwhichever is sooner) [ ] Yes' ' L]_N_f
i ¦ ¦ j
[Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the,
.estimated schedule for each action?
14. Project requesting PFC: funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AI P .funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-132
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
[X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
iFor FAA Use
I|99| ;|910|Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public! Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied onf by the FAA for its analysis.,
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (Iff the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
[ADO/RO Recommendation:1
jDoes the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RQ use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects,
I—- — —|910|If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify; .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costsj
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
i I ¦—: ¦
I" ) Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-133
B 10 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination]
jApplication Reviewed by:'
Name
iltem(s) reviewed/
Name Routing,Symbol Date
iltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-134
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
LEGEND
Runway Safety Area
| Proposed Project Area
Existing Air Operations Area (AOA) Fence
SOURCE Crawford, Murphy, and Tilly (CMT), November 2011 (aerial photography - for visual reference only, may not be to scale), Ricondo & Associates, Inc. September 2017 PREPARED BY Ricondo & Associates, Inc, September 2017
O
Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation Proposed Project Location
NORTH 0 350 ft
D-awng ] \C::lagoiMP: \: nan:;al\P.: C\R: C Apph:a;:or . 201 ? Pro (j: ls\Ap:jhiat.on i i:r:>WMfi|i J snu M xli; !sWu!oCAL'i\UP3Aii: '2 ] njil 17 r 1:- l "20170; 11 flwj.aynu! j >lul 1 ^oir-rl i: '«i 11 ?017. Oo ! PM
Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation Project PFC Application
B-135
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
O
NORTH|9 9|100 ft
Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation Proposed Project Elements
DM-.vn; ,: \C i:3'jo\MDi \i inanlijliPi C':P-C Apfi! aluvi.: 201 i" 3roc- Is'iA-p' nlnn ' ih?s\A!:.i r-rl -I .:r **.i:r,r.;GW?Dz ."¦ Ih * I V- r 2070; 1! r.f^jMi xii r 2 ?*vrrt ¦ op 11 -Oi / 03 7rjM
1 Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation Project PFC Application
B-136
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
iPFC APPLICATION NUMBER:! 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
Project Number: 11
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] S4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $2,856,113 Bond Financing & Interest: $2,856,113
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $5,712,226'
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds: Grant # 3-17-0025-81-2013, 3-17-0025-77-2009
Grant Funds in Project $6,067,639
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $6,067,639
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
1 The grant application was prepared based on AIP funds available to Midway, and did not include the total project costs. While this entire PFC project is AIP eligible, AIP funds arc only a portion of the plan of finance for this project. The City of Chicago Department of Aviation maximized the amount of AIP funds available to them.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-137
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0 Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $11,815,233
For FAA Use
a. Does the project include a proposed LOI? '[ ] YES
'[ ] NO ,
If YES, does the Region support? '[ ]YEST~ "
'[ ] no!
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
b. For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?
'[ ] YESj~
LJJNQ
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, five year CIP?|
[ ]YES LlNOf
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs.! '[ ] YESf~
I 1 NQ
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP? List the source(s) of data used to make this finding!
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.0Q and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES '[ ] NOf
\ ] n/a!
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-138
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
If. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis,
Back-up Financing Plan:
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
|For FAA Use _
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^ [of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any Jdiscussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the, funding it proposes.,
Project Description:
This project reconstructed and enhanced sections of Taxiways Y and K at Midway International Airport (Exhibit 24). Taxiway Y is approximately 6,445-feet long and 60-feet wide and is located parallel to primary Runway 4R-22L. This taxiway provides access from Runway 4R to the Terminal gates. This project rehabilitated the southern section or 2,850-linear feet from Runway 13C-31C to Runway end 4R.
Taxiway K is approximately 4,250-feet long and 60-feet wide and configured in a west-east configuration traversing both Runways 13C-31C and 4R-22L. This project rehabilitated approximately 2,475-linear feet of Taxiway K between Runway 13R-31L to Runway 4R-22L. The scope also included the rehabilitation of a section of the South Ramp.
Taxiway Y included variable depth concrete and asphalt milling on Taxiway Y and Taxiway D with the placement of six-inches of new bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) pavement. The overlay included the full width of Taxiways Y and D. This project also included the removal and replacement of taxiway lighting, cabling, vault infrastructure, circuits and regulators. Taxiway Yl was widened to 110-feet to accommodate Group III aircraft and reconstructed with 14-inches of PCC on 12-inches AC base course.
This project rehabilitated of a section of the South Ramp. Approximately 92,000 square-feet of the South Ramp was replaced with 17-inches of AC on three-inches of AC base course. Work also included light replacement and surface markings.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-139
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
The new pavements were designed in accordance with FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, AC 150/5320-6E, Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation, AC 150/5370-10G, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports, and AC 150/5370-14A, Hot Mix Asphalt Paving Handbook. This project restriped the construction affected zones in accordance to AC 150/5340-IL, Standards for Airport Markings. This project also included environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage f acilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
iFOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification' ^information is not from PFC application.
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing;
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a ¦likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.'
ilf the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,' gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been |completedJ~
Revised 8/31/2010
B-140
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
jTerminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate^ provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiwaysj aprons, and aircraft gates\ '[ ] YES '[ ] NOT
r 1 n/aj
9. Significant Contribution:
This project reduced congestion and enhanced safety at the Airport and for the national air transportation system. The Airport's ongoing pavement management program serves to maintain all pavements with a minimum condition of "Satisfactory/Fair" in order to avoid a costlier, reconstruction of the pavement sections and to avoid FOD that can have an adverse effect on the safety of aircraft operations at the Airport.
Deteriorating pavement can significantly impact the capacity of the airfield due to unanticipated airfield closures and would therefore lead to increased congestion. Therefore, this project prevents the formation of FOD on the taxiways and runways and reduces the likelihood of unanticipated closures for emergency repairs. Thus, this project meets the significant contribution requirements of improving air safety and reducing anticipated congestion.
The closures of Taxiways Y and K and the South Ramp would have a significant impact on the capacity of the airfield since these taxiways support the primary runways at the Airport. Taxiway Y supports Runway 4R-22L and Concourses B and C. Taxiway K supports the South Ramp and air carriers taxiing from Concourse A. The South Ramp serves as a critical hold ramp and deicing pad. The loss of the South Ramp could have a significant impact on Airport capacity.
FOR FAA USE
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
_ Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ ] Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ }
LOI r 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan'
[ 1:
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN \ ] Other (explain) j
Revised 8/31/2010
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement oFTaxiways Y and K and South Ramp Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules.!
^Quantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to! ^competition at the airport,
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project was to preserve capacity and enhance safety on Taxiways Y and K and the South Ramp to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. The rehabilitation of Taxiways Y and K and the South Ramp improved the existing level of safety and efficiency of the airport by enhancing the structural integrity of the taxiways and ramp by complying with FAA Title 14 CFR Part 139 Airport Certifications. This project strengthened and widened these pavements in order to support larger aircraft and the volume of operations. The structural integrity of airfield pavements is critical to aviation safety. Airfield pavements that are rated near or below the minimum PCI rating of 70 could result in aircraft safety incidents. When airfield pavements fall below the critical 70 PCI the rate of deterioration of the pavement and the cost to rehabilitate increase exponentially, causing the cost to the Airport and U.S. Airport System to increase.
FOR FAA USE1
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
_ Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the;
airport;
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part pf the PFC application.!
'Address adequacy"of issues.!
1 1. Project Justification:
Taxiways Y and K are critical components of the airfield since these taxiways support the primary runways at the Airport. Taxiway Y supports Runway 4R-22L
Revised 8/31/2010
B-142
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
and Concourses B and C. Taxiway K supports the South Ramp and air carriers taxiing from Concourse A to Runways 4R-22L and 4L-22R. The South Ramp provides aircraft parking for GA aircraft, but also stages carriers with delayed departures and serves as a designated area for deicing planes.
The last major rehabilitation of Taxiways Y and K was 1985 and 1995 respectively. Since that time some significant operational changes have occurred resulting in increased utilization and greater aircraft activity. The significant increase in the number of air carrier operations using larger and heavier aircraft than which these pavements were designed for had reduced the useful of these pavements.
According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for airfield pavement reconstruction or rehabilitation is 20 and 10- years respectively. The last overlay project for Taxiway K was a three-inch overlay in 2004, but the last major rehabilitation was done in 1985. The last major rehabilitation on Taxiway Y was in 1995. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Taxiway Y were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking. The distresses on Taxiway K were also consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, and raveling.
The E&K report indicated that Taxiway Y and K were "Satisfactory" with an overall weighted PCI rating of 71 and 76 respectively. The sections rehabilitated for this project had PCIs of 47 and 66, which is considered "Poor" and "Fair". The rehabilitated section of South Ramp had PCI of 73 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to maintain a level sufficient to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
FOR FAA USE
i|9910|[Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objectivefs),
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the,
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part ,of this PFC application.
if analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-143
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K. and South Ramp ¦Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured aboveJ
'Project Eligibility:|
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 on
| PGL );!_ ~
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL'
| )j
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;:
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;!
[Title and Date of Part 150:!
[ ] Project included in a local study]
[Title and Date of local study:
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier . J
| percentage of annual boardings );'
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)]
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Are any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated
'costs.r
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): July 1, 2012 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): October 18, 2013
'For FAA Use1
i i ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFQ
app 1 ication Due date (120-day)?|
{ ] Yes1
i ¦ ¦ ; ¦—¦ ¦|910|For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date or PFC application Due date, whichever is first? [ ] Yesr
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation on Completion. Explain,
Revised 8/31/2010
B-144
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K. and South Ramp
13. For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
iFor FAA Use1
i i ,
lis the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej
[Whichever is sooner.!
[ ] Yes
L]_Nf3r
Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the, .estimated schedule for each action?
14. Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ] YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-145
B 11 Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K and South Ramp
For FAA Use
i i—.—. ,
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the public.'
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orl.
by the FAA for its analysis,
i . .—.— .—.|910|jlf a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (Iff the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)'
[ADO/RO Recommendation:]
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO| use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects,
ilf the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costsF
i —|910|Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
i I — ¦
[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
'Application Reviewed by:'
Name
Item(s) reviewed.'
Name
iltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SOURCE Care Plus. LLC, March 11. 2017 PREPARED BY Ricondo & Associates, Inc, June 2017
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of
Taxiways Y & K
north 0 Not to Scale
Drawng li iClr,agoW.D] \] n::'.r, i laitPJ CtPj C Appl.lalirjn C 2017 Pror/jlstApphlaticini llfisWIIajin er.ti;\i xlliits\AjtoCAP\i ',1 laxiwayj U cwgLayoul U '|<1!P Plotted lull 27. 2017.03 10PM
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiways Y and K Project ¦ PFC Application
B-147
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
iPFC APPLICATION NUMBER^ 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHIV1ENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Project Number: 12
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] S2.00
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ]$4.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
6. Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0
Bond Capital: $10,236,800
Bond Financing & Interest: $10,236,800
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $20,473,600
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/3 1/2010
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Other (please specify) $0 Subtotal Other Funds: $0 Total Project Cost: $20,473,600
iFor FAA Use
Does the project include a proposed LOT?i '[ jYESf"
X ] NO ; i
If YES, does the Region support? '[ ]YES
I ] NO] |
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support? [ ] YESj"
LlNQ
c. For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, five year CIP?!
'[ ]yes; LLNQ
jd. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and S4.50:!
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costs! '[ ] YES
[ ] NO .
[What percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP? List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
Je. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00 and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside!~ needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.' '[ ] YES '[ ] Nd
J ] n/a!
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
If. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis, 7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/3 I/2010
B-149
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use
i '|910|If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional
approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^
'of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any| '
discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the
funding it proposes.!
8. Project Description:
This project will rehabilitate and replace portions of the Terminal Ramp Apron (Apron) pavements at Midway (Exhibit 25). The existing Apron was installed in 2000 and is approximately 40,000 square-yards and supports 45 gates. This project will include the full depth replacement of approximately 195,000 square-feet of existing Concourse C apron and also selective areas of the terminal ramp outside of the Concourse C apron that are in need of rehabilitation. This project includes repairs to existing drainage structures, grounding tie-downs, and new pavement markings. This project also includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
The new pavements will be designed and constructed in accordance with FAA AC 150/5300-13A Airport Design, AC 150/5320-6E Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation, and AC 150/5370-10G Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports. This project also restriped the construction affected areas in accordance to AC 150/5340-IL Standards for Airport Markings.
The cost estimate for this project can be found in Exhibit 26.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-150
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
iFOR FAA USE
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there aj likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.,
(If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,' 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been, jcompleted.P
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates.' [ ] YES
[ ] no'
'[ 1 N/A
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will reduce congestion and increase safety at the Airport and for the national air-transportation system. The Airport's ongoing pavement management program serves to maintain all pavements with a minimum condition of "Satisfactory/Fair" in order to avoid a costlier, reconstruction of the pavement sections and to avoid Foreign Object Debris (FOD) that can have an adverse effect on the safety of aircraft operations at the Airport.
Deteriorating pavement can significantly impact the capacity of the airfield due to unanticipated ramp closures and would therefore lead to increased congestion and potential closure of gates. These unanticipated closures would not only have a detrimental impact on the operations at Midway, but also on those airports that
Revised 8/31/2010
B-151
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
have flights arriving or departing from Midway. Midway is Southwest Airline's busiest airport. Midway averages 272 daily departures to 69 domestic destinations and nine international destinations. In calendar year 2015 Midway averaged approximately 702 aircraft operations a day. Any disruptions that would prevent access to the gates could significantly impact Airport capacity.
Therefore, this project prevents the formation of FOD on Ramp and reduces the likelihood of unanticipated closures for emergency repairs that would have significant impacts on congestion. Thus, this project meets the significant contribution requirements of reducing congestion and enhancing safety.
FOR FAA USE;
Air safety. Part 139 H Other (explain)!
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ 1 Part 108 \ ] Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]i
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA [ ] FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan
[ 1
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain) j
1 Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules]
|Quantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) jof data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, .competition at the airport.,
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to preserve capacity and enhance safety on the Terminal Ramp to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. The reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Terminal Ramp will improve the existing level of safety and efficiency of the Airport by improving the structural integrity of the ramp pavements and complying with FAA Title 14 CFR Part 139 Airport
Revised 8/3 I/2010
B-152
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Certifications. The structural integrity of airfield pavements is critical to aviation safety. Airfield pavements that are rated near or below the minimum PCI rating of 70 could result in aircraft safety incidents.
iFOR FAA USE;
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]i
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
'Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part ,of the PFC application.,
jAddress adequacy of issues]
11. Project Justification:
The existing concrete apron surrounding Concourse C and Gates, Bl, B2 and B3 was the first Ramp pavement installed as part of the new Midway Terminal Development Program in 2000. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for airfield pavement rehabilitation or reconstruction is 10 and 20 years respectively. The Concourse C Ramp is approximately 17-years old. A pavement evaluation completed in June 2015, by Jacobs indicated that distresses on the Concourse C Ramp were consistent with loading and climate issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, map cracking, and linear cracking.
The Concourse C Ramp had an overall weighted PCI rating of 44 or "Poor". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
FOR FAA USE1
I i !
Oefine how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s)
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-153
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of thet
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part 'of this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
iDiscuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above.!
Project Eligibility:]
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 ~~oij
| PGL );l
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGlJ
! )j ,
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;;
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;!
[Title and Date of Part 150:'
[ ] Project included in a local study]
jXitle and Date of local study:j
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);!
[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier ~]
| percentage of annual boardings J;;
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter J
\ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)j
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, l ist the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Are any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated,
!costs.r
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): November 1, 2017 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): December 31, 2018
[For FAA Use'
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC; application Due date (120-day)?| [ ] Yesr
Revised 8/31/2010
B-154
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date [or PFC application Due date, whichever is First? [ ] Yes"
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation oil Completion. Explain]
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use
i i . . —.
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date,1
|Whichever is sooner]
[ ] Yes1 "
[Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the1 .estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ] YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
15. List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-155
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
16. List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None
List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use
i|99|¦——|910|Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied orf
by the FAA for its analysis.'
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)
jADO/RO Recommendation?
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/ROj use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.
ilf the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify! leligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs,
lis the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
ADO/RO RECOMMENDATION
i I —: ¦
1" 1 Approve.!
] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination,
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues, that lead to determination!
Application Reviewed by]
Name Routing Symbol Date
Revised 8/31/2010
B-156
B 12 Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
jltem(s) reviewed.!
Name Routing Symbol Date!
iltem(s) reviewed
Revised S73I/20I0
B-157
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SOURCE Crawford. Murphy, and Tilly (CMT), November 2011 (aerial photography ¦ for visual reference only, may not be to scale), Ricondo & Associates, Inc, June 2017 PREPARED BY Ricondo a Associates, Inc, June 2017
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
NORTH|9 9|1,000 ft
Dravvirg 1 \C .lagpiMDl \; manualiP; C\P| C App.i;alm J 2017 P'pe.ls'iAppralion 1 il--s'ti:!:i :¦¦ enlt ¦¦¦ x.i!i!s\Au!oCAD;MC Ars.de rjrr>c is d-.vul.ayc.nl ¦: 12i:er' mal i ai pPlolled run 22 2017. 10 2'AM
; Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp Project PFC Application
B-158
EXHIBIT 26
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATED COST OF CONSTRUCTION MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
CHICAGO. ILLINIOS Torminal Ramp Improvements Augusta. 2014
ITEM NO DESCRIPTION OF WORK UNITS EST QTY. EST UNIT COST ITEM COST (TOTAL) |109|PCC Removal and Replacement 18" SY 31.000 S250 00 S7.750.000 00 |109|CTPB Removal and Replacement 6" CY 4,700 5200 00 S940.000 00 |109|Undercut and Backfill LS|99|S100.000 00 5100.000 00 |109|Pavement Marking LS|99|S35 000 00 S35.000 00 |109|Grounding Tie Down Replacement LS|99|S65.000 00 S65.000 00 |109|Structure Adjustments LS|99|S250.000 00 S250.000 00
Notes Scope includes the removal and replacement of concrete pavement, CTPB base, adjustment of structures, replacement of grounding tie down, and striping TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $9,140,000 00
DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY - 20% S1.828,000 00 SUBTOTAL S10.S68.000 00 DESIGN FEES - 10% S1.096.800 00
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST S12.064.800 00
B-159
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER:! 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Project Number: 13
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [ ] $4.50
[X] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $4,207,299 Bond Financing & Interest: $4,207,299
Subtotal PFC Funds*: 8,414,598
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A
State Grants: $0
Local Funds: $8,938,701
Revised 8/31/2010
B-160
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0 Total Project Cost: $17,353,299
For FAA Use
a. Does the project include a proposed LOI? '[ ] YES
[ ] NQ ; ,
ilf YES, does the Region support? [ ]YES{"
t ] no! ^
if YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support? '[ ] YESj ~
For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's, five year C IP?
( ]YES LlNQ
d. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ '[ ] YES
'[ ] NQ (
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP? List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00, and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.' '[ ] YES '[ ] NO
[ ] N/A
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
If. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-161
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds arc not available for the project.
Not Applicable
jFor FAA Use,
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration1 of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the funding it proposes.!
8. Project Description:
This project will rehabilitate the Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC) at Midway (Exhibit 27, 30, 31). The AMC was constructed in November of 1996, is approximately 95,000 square-feet, located on the south side of the Airport. The AMC serves as a snow removal equipment (SRE) storage facility and maintenance shop for all Midway vehicles.
This project consists of construction of a new, separate SRE storage structure directly south of the existing AMC building, the rehabilitation of the existing AMC building, and the replacement and expansion of the potassium acetate pumps and tanks to allow for an approximate onsite storage total of 90,000 gallons of potassium acetate. The new structure will accommodate snow removal equipment that is currently stored in the existing Secondary AMC Hangar. The existing Secondary will be rehabilitated, within a separate project that is not part of this PFC application, for use by airport operations. The existing Secondary AMC must be rehabilitated to bring the building in compliance with current building codes and ADA regulations. Rehabilitation to the existing AMC building includes the replacement of the HVAC system, overhead doors and associated hardware, an upgrade to the emergency generator and switchgear, replacement of the existing boilers, and the replacement of the roofing membrane. The existing potassium acetate pumps and tanks are utilized annually for airfield deicing, and were constructed in November of 1996. This project also includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
Table 13-1 shows the calculation of the estimated PFC-eligible costs associated with the rehabilitation of AMC. The eligible proration percentage calculation for the new SRE storage building is 51.6 percent, determined by the SRE spreadsheet calculator (Exhibit 29) based on Pt. 139-approved Snow & Ice Control Plan and current SRE inventory (Exhibit 28), which is applied to the $5,976,400 in new SRE building total construction costs. The eligible proration percentage calculation of the rehabilitation of the existing AMC is 3.0 percent, which is applied to the $4,759,288
Revised 8/3I/2010
B-162
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
in existing AMC rehabilitation total construction costs', less the high-cost 100 percent eligible item (i.e. potassium acetate pumps and tanks). Including the 100 percent eligibility, it is estimated that approximately 34.1 percent of the total construction cost is PFC-eligible, or $4,207,299.
The cost estimate for this project can be found in Exhibit 32.
|109|The total project cost estimate for the Rehabilitation of Midway AMC Project is $13,146,000,
which includes SI 1,394,660 in construction costs, in addition to $941,600 in bond, contractor fee, and building permit allowance and $809,740 in escalation, LEED, community outreach, and utility/unforeseen conditions allowance. All escalation, LEED, community outreach, and utility/unforeseen conditions allowance are not included in this application. If costs increase, the City of Chicago could amend this PFC application in the future to include additional PFC-eligible costs; any additional costs that arc not PFC eligible would be paid for with airport discretionary funds.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-163
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Table 13-1: Estimated PFC-Eligible Construction Project Costs
Phase 2: New AMC SRE Storage Building Space (by Type) PFC Eligible Areas:
Eligible SRE Storage1 PFC Eligible Area Square Footage Total [A] PFC Ineligible Areas:
Ineligible SRE Storage PFC Ineligible Area Square Footage Total |B| PFC Prorated Areas:
Maneuvering Lane PFC Prorated Areas Square Footage Total |C| Total New AMC SRE Storage Building Space
PFC Eligible Proration % |A/(A+B)|
Square Feet
19,648
19,648
18,416
18,416
13,430
13,430
51,494 51.6%
Phase 3: Rehabilitation of Existing AMC Space (by Type) PFC Eligible Areas:2
Eligible Maintenance Space
Salt Storage
Urea Storage
Sand Storage PFC Eligible Area Square Footage Total |A| PFC Ineligible Areas:
Ineligible Existing AMC Space PFC Ineligible Area Square Footage Total |B| PFC Prorated Areas:
Emergency Generator Space PFC Prorated Areas Square Footage Total [C] Total Rehabilitation of Existing AMC Space
Square Feet
,500 354 294 686
2,834
91,919
91,919
247
247
95,000
PFC Eligible Proration % (A/(A+B)]
Construction Component
Phase 1 - Potassium Acetate Tank
Phase 2 - New SRE Building
Phase 3 - Existing AMC Renovations
Total Construction Costs
S658,972 $5,976,400 $4,759,288
Estimated
PFC Eligibility
100.0% 51.6% 3.0%
Estimated PFC-Eligible Construction Costs
S658.972 $3,084,846 SI 42.347
Total Construction Costs
Bond
Contractor Fee
Building Permits Allowance
Total Project Costs
$11,394,660
$237,000 $604,600 $100,000 $12,336,260
$3,886,165 $80,829 $206,200 $34,105
$4,207,299
PFC Use Authority Requested
PFC PAYGO $0
PFC Bond Capital $4,207,299
PFC Bond Financing and Interest $4,207,299
Total PFC Use Authority Requested - Construction Project $8,414,598
1/ PFC eligible SRP.s determined by SRI:! spreadsheet calculator based on I't. 139-approved Snow & Ice Control Plan and inventor.: 21 PFC eligibility lor existing AMC renovations is based on up FAA Order 5100-38D Fable O-j.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-164
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
If applicable for terminal projects. Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
[FOR FAA USE'
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.,
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.!
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been, |completed_.j~
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates! '[ ] YES '[ ] NOT \ 1 N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-165
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC) 9. Significant Contribution:
forTaa USE
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)!
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ].
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA \ ] FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan1
[ r :
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain) |
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rulesJ
^Quantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) |of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding,
i ¦ ¦—~~ ~ ¦|910|How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, Icompetition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective is to enhance airfield safety with the rehabilitation of the AMC snow removal equipment storage facility in order protect and maintain the snow removal equipment. The existing building and infrastructure is over 20-years old and in need of significant improvements.
FOR FAA USE'
, Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]^
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ }
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport;
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-166
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Finding
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part of the PFC application.,
{Address adequacy of issues.!
11. Project Justification:
The AMC was completed in November 1996. It has not had any significant improvements since in construction 21-years ago. This project is eligible according to FAA Order 5100.38D since this facility stores snow removal equipment that was federally funded. The AMC is in need of improvements to provide critical functions that are required at the Airport. This facility also houses all of the snow removal equipment for the Airport.
FOR FAA USE'
I i !
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s),
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the,
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part of this PFC application
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
ipiscuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above.!
jProject Eligibility:';
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under ALP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or
| PGL );|
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGLj
! ){ZZ '
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;!
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.)
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility planj
Title and Date of Part 150:|
1" 1 Project included in a local study.!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-167
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
[Title and Date of local study:]
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);'L_ '[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier
| percentage of annual boardings ))
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, l ist the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated' costs r
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): June 1, 2016 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): August 29, 2018
'For FAA Use
i i . .—,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?|
'[ ] Yes
LlnsT
iFor Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, [or PFC application Due date, whichever is First? { ] Yes1"
I|99|; j
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation ori ^completion. Explain]
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
iFor FAA Use1
i i
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval date,'
[Whichever is sooner.!
[ ] Yes'
|Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted?" What is the .estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
a. Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding. [ ]YES
Revised 8/31/2010
B-168
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
[X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a S3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for Financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use1
i i
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied oti,
by the FAA for its analysis.
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)'
|ADO/RO Recommendation:1
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO| use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects,
i|9910|If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identity .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-169
B 13 Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:'
[_] Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing 'issues that lead to determination.,
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues 'that lead to determination.!
{Application Reviewed by:'
Name
Item(s) reviewed.!
Routing Symbol Date,
Revised 8/31/2010
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SOURCE Crawford, Murphy, and Tilly (CMT), November 2011 (aerial photography - for visual reference only, may not be to scale), Ricondo 3i Associates, Inc, September 2017 PREPARED BY Ricondo Si Associates, Inc. September 2017
Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex
Dr.vA-nn Z ,iCni:3;c\N,^,.V\Fin3nciai\3FC,:PFC Application - 2017 Preji-nl;\App:ir:r.ion Fi!.?s\ArucniiGm Fj^liibils'v fJl> F.J F.vnb:.
' Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex Project I PFC Application
B-171
EXHIBIT 28 MDW Part 139-Approved Snow and Ice Control Plan SRE Inventory
Please also refer to Exhibits 3.4a and 3.4b for graphical depictions of the airfield clearing priority movement locations.
3.5 Airfield Clearance Times
Midway International Airport is sufficiently equipped to meet the FAA recommended snow clearance time standards outlined in the table below:
Clearance Times for Commercial Service Airports
Annual Airplane Operations (includes cargo operations) Clearance Time1 (hour)
40,000 or more ya
10,000 - but less than 40,000|99|
6,000 - but less than 10,000 VA
Less than 6,000|99|
General: Commercial Service Airport means a public-use airport that the U.S. Secretary of Transportation determines has at least 2,500 passenger boardings each year and that receives scheduled passenger airplane service [reference Title 49 United States Code, Section 47102(7)]. Footnote 1: These airports should have sufficient equipment to clear 1 inch (2.54 cm) of falling snow weighing up to 25 lb/if (400 kg/m3) from Priority 1 areas within the recommended clearance times.
3.6 Snow and Ice Control Equipment and Tools
Central to the Midway International Airport SICP is its fleet of snow and ice removal equipment, The current array of such equipment available at the airport is listed below:
21 Runway Brooms|109|20' Plows
Box Plows|109|4,000 gallon De-icers|109|14" Plows/Sanders*
Tractors with Blowers or Brushes|109|Snow Blowers|109|Rollover Plows|109|Highlifts|109|Salt Trucks
Beet Juice Dispenser
Dynatest Friction Testers
The sander trucks are also capable of dispensing solid deicer material.
3.7 Storage of Snow and Ice Control Equipment
With the exception of periodic adjustments to the runway brooms performed during the course of a snow removal operation, all maintenance of the Airport snow and ice control equipment is conducted inside the machine shop facility of the Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC). The machine shop is enclosed and heated.
During the winter months, when the average temperatures are below freezing, the Airport snow and ice control equipment is continually stored in a separate enclosed and heated hangar facility adjacent to the AMC when not staged for an alert or in use.
B-172
EXHIBIT 3.6
CHICAGO MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT SNOW/ICE CONTROL VEHICLE INVENTORY
Section Year f Make I Model I Function
Snow Vehicles (58)
AVB307 2016 Oshkosh TR HB2723 Runway Snow Blower
AVB308 2016 Oshkosh TR HB2723 Runwav Snow Blower
AVB309 2016 Oshkosh TR HB2723 Runwav Snow Blower
AVB310 2016 Oshkosh TR HB2723 Runwav Snow Blower
AVD204 2006 Oshkosh 6x6 P Series Runwav Deicer
AVD205 2006 Oshkosh 6x6 P Series Runwav Deicer
AVD207 2006 Oshkosh 6x6 P Series Runwav Deicer
AVD208 2015 Oshkosh 6x6 P Series Runwav Deicer
AVD209 2015 Oshkosh 6x6 P Series Runwav Deicer
AVFT73 (FT1) 2012 Ford E350 Friction Tester
AVFT72 (FT2) 2012 Ford E350 Friction Tester
AVS112 1999 Oshkosh 6X6P2546S/P Sander W/Plow .
AVS113 1999 Oshkosh 6X6P2546S/P Sander WflPlow
AVS114 1998 Oshkosh 6x6P2646S/P Sander W/Plow
AVS115 2000 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P Sander W/Plow
AVS116 2000 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P 20 Ft Rollover Plow
AVS117 2001 Oshkosh 6X6P2546S/P 20 Ft Box PLOW
AVS118 2001 Oshkosh 6X8P2546S/P 20 Ft Box PLOW
AVS119 2001 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P 20 Ft Rollover Plow
AVS129 2014 FrekjhtUner 108SD 20 Ft Rollover Plow
AVS120 2001 Oshkosh 6X8P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS121 2001 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS122 2002 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS123 2002 Oshkosh 6X6P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS124 2002 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS125 2002 Oshkosh 6X6P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS126 2002 Oshkosh 6x6P2M6S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS127 2002 Oshkosh 6x6P2546S/P 20 Ft PLOW
AVS500 2012 Wausau Snow Dozer Hiah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS501 2012 Wausau Snow Dozer Hlah Speed Runwav Broom
AVS502 2012 Wausau Snow Dozer Hiah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS503 2012 Wausau Snow Dozer Hiah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS380 2002 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS3B1 2003 Oshkosh HB2718 Hiah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS3B2 2003 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS383 2003 Oshkosh HB271B Hlah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS384 2008 Oshkosh HB2718 Hiah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS385 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 High Speed Runwav Broom
AVS386 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Speed Runwav Broom
AVS3B7 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Soeed Runwav Broom
AVS388 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 High Speed Runwav Broom
AVS3B9 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 Hiah Speed Runway Broom
AVS390 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Speed Runway Broom
AVS391 2006 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Speed Runwav Broom
AVS392 2007 Oshkosh HB2718 Hlah Soeed Runway Broom
AVS393 2007 Oshkosh HB271B Hlah Speed Runwav Broom
AVS394 2007 Oshkosh HB2718 Hiah Soeed Runway Broom
AVS395 2007 Oshkosh HB2716 Hlah Speed Runway Broom
AVS396 2008 Oshkosh HB2716 Hlah Speed Runwav Broom
AVS714 1995 Volvo L50C Hlah Lift
AVS715 1995 Volvo L50C Hlah Lift
AVS718 2002 Volvo L50C High Lift
AVC942 2009 Ford Salt Truck Salt Truck
AVC943 2009 Ford Sail Truck Salt Truck.
AVC980 2002 Ford 6x4 Dump w/lnsert Salt Truck
AVC986 ! 2005 Ford F350 w/irtserl Salt Truck
AVC987 I 2004 Ford F350 w/lnserl Salt Truck
AVC908 : 2002 Ford Flat Bed Beet Juice Dispenser
FAA Approval.
Original Oar. April 30.2009 RsvMan Dale: September 1,2016
B-173
EXHIBIT 29
Snow Removal liquipmcnt C'ulcukilions
Airport Name Location
Type of Airport Annual Operations
13C-31C 13L-31R
Shaded areas aulomaljcallv cakulatcci
I
Midway International Airport
Chicago, IL
44 5
'Source Illinois State Water Survey, University of Illinois,
>40,000
| Commercial Service I-| http //www sws.uiuc edu/data/climatedb/data asp (Accessed October 31, 2017)
width (ft) width (ft)
sq. ft sq. ft
5,141
"jTj Time allowed for removal per AC 15075200-30a
—' | 0.5lhours
150
6,522
978,300
150
771,150
length (ft) x length (ft) x
length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft) length (ft)
35 60 75 75 75 35 75 75 75 75
Parallel taxiway and one or two principle connecting taxiways
593
616
1,035
1,300
986
5,421
2,614
4,256
3,285
1,549
Alpha Bravo Echo 1 Echo 2 Echo 3 Foxtrot Kilo November Whiskey Yakee
sq. ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq. ft
Terminal, Cargo, and General Aviation Aprons
66.67
66 67
66 67
66.67
Critical apron area assumed as 2/3 of the apron % Req' x North % Req' x South % Req' x East % Req' x West
Total (sq ft) Total (sq ft) Total (sq ft) Total (sq ft)
sq ft
sq ft.
sq ft
sq ft
423,334
19,633
17,708
39,962
Other critical areas (le. emergency or ARFF access roads) ARFF Access Service Road ARFF Access Stage A ARFF Access Stage C ARFF Access Stage D
sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
6,718,202 |sq ft 600
Total Area
600 tons
1,714 |tons/hr
Eligible Items Snow Blower
Plow Sweeper
Hopper Spreader
Front End Loader
Tons of Snow (using 1 in of snow at 25 lbs/cu ft) Minimum snow removal rate (70% efficiency) Maximum Quantity
Assumptions Made. Class 1 (up to 600 tons/hr) F7|
2 times the # of snow blowers (plows should have equal capacity as blower)
1 sweeper per 750,000 sq ft (rounded up)
1 Hopper Spreader per 750,000 sq ft Front End Loader per 500k sq ft of critical apron space Commercial Service
Note- If an airport requests more than the listed quantities of snow Commercial Service justification must be submitted
10000
Class 1 (up to 600 tons/hr) Class 2 (up to 1500 tons/hr) Class 3 (up to 2500 tons/hr) Class 4 (up to 3000 tons/hr) Class 5 (up to 4000 tons/hr)
This program assumes at least 15" annual snow fall
10000
General Aviat <6,000 Commercial Service Commercial £6,000-10,000 10,000-40,000 >40,000
10,000 3,093,860 Front End Loader Area 305,168 771,706 1,758,696 258,290 3093859.95
Total Area
B-174
^ ex.
EXHIBIT 32
ESTIMATOR'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00 New AMC (SF)
IFPR SUBMITTAL Impacted Site Area (SF)
Phase 2 NEW BUILDING
51,984
71,995
Phase 1 & 3 RENOVATION
2,971
106,615
April 25, 2017
Storage Tank Areas (SF) Existing Building (SF)
CSI DESCRIPTION PHASE 2 NEW BUILDING PHASE 1 + 3 RENOVATION SUB-TOTAL
1000 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS $ 230,000 00 $ ' 392,300 00 $622,300 00
2000 EXISTING CONDITIONS $ 109,300 00 $ 539,900.00 $649,200.00
3000 CONCRETE $ 947,300 00 $ 7,900 00 $955,200.00
4000 MASONRY $ 126,000.00 S $126,000.00
5000 METALS $ 21,800.00 S 19,500.00 $41,300.00
6000 WOOD AND PLASTICS $ $ 34,400 00 $34,400.00
7000 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION $ 375,000 00 $ 1,634,550 00 $2,009,550.00
8000 DOORS AND WINDOWS $ 104,800.00 $ 324,800 00 $429,600 00
9000 FINISHES $ 76,500.00 $ 900.00 $77,400.00
10000 SPECIALTIES $ - ¦ $ $0.00
11000 EQUIPMENT $ S $0.00
12000 FURNISHINGS $ $ $0.00
13000 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $ 2,415,000.00 $ $2,415,000.00
14000 CONVEYING SYSTEMS $ $ $0.00
21000 FIRE SUPPRESSION $ 153,500.00 $ $153,500.00
22000 PLUMBING $ 134,100.00 $ 501,220.00 $635,320.00
23000 HVAC $ 240,000.00 $ 1,114,21000 $1,354,210.00
26000 ELECTRICAL $ 327,700.00 $ 761,980.00 $1,089,680.00
27000 COMMUNCIATIONS $ $ $0.00
28000 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY $ $ $0.00
31000 EARTHWORK $ 194,900.00 $ $194,900.00
32000 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS $ 196,200.00 $ 86,600.00 $282,800.00
33000 UTILITIES $ 324,300.00 $ $324,300.00
SUBTOTAL $ 5,976,000.00 $ 5,418,000.00 $ 11,395,000.00
LEED Silver / SAM Level "3 Planes" 1% $ 59,800 00 $ 54,200 00 $ 114,000 00
DESIGN CONTINGENCY 0% $ $ $
ESCALATION (through 2017) 3% $ 181,100.00 $ 164,200.00 $ 345,300.00
BOND 2% $ 124,300.00 $ 112,700 00 $ 237,000 00
CONTRACTOR FEE 5% $ 317,100.00 $ 287,500 00 $ 604,600 00
TOTAL $ 6,658,000.00 $ 6,036,600.00 $ 12,696,000.00 j
BUILDING PERMITS ALLOWANCE $ 100,000.00
UTILITY/ UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS ALLOWANCE $ 250,000 00
COMMUNITY OUTREACH ALLOWANCE $ 100,000.00
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $ 13,146,000.00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
ESTIMATOR'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
RS&H
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL ||
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS $ 230,000.00 ||
General Conditions|99|LS $ 230,000 00 $ 230,000 00
Temporary Protection / Access / Site Entrance Incl
. Inlet Protection [C300] --11ea Incl
Erosion Barrier @ Perimeter - 270LF [C300] Incl
Permits See Summary
Selective Testing & Inspection Incl.
Utility Tie-ins/ Tap Fee (Water, Sewer, Electricity, Cable) As Noted Below, See 33000
2000 EXISTING CONDITIONS $ 109,300.00 ||
Mass Excavation Refer to 31000 Earthwork
Demo/ Remove Existing Pavement Refer to 31000 Earthwork
Structural Excavation Refer to 31000 Earthwork
SITE DEMOLITION [C100]:
Demo Water Line 118 LF See 33000
Cap Water Line|99|EA See 33000
Demo Hydrant|99|EA See 33000
Demo Valve|99|EA See 33000
Demo Bollards|99|EA $ 300 00 $ 1,200 00
Demo Curbs N/A
Remove Existing Fence N/A
Highway Guardrail Demo N/A
Demolish Existing Paving - Bituminous Pavement [C200] 57,855 SF $ 0 90 $ 52,070 00
Demolish Existing Paving - Concrete 25,632 SF $ 1 60 $ 41,010 00
Haul/ Disposal (On Airport Property)|99|AL $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000 00
Environmental Abatement:
Abatement Containment/ Setup/ Disposal/ Project Management N/A
3000 CONCRETE $ 947,300.00 ||
Strip Footing. Cast in place (shallow fdtns. - 1'-6"h x 4'-6"w) 247 CY $ 375 00 $ 92,480 00
Column Bases Cast in place (1'-6"h x 6'-6"w x 6'-6") 80 CY $ 375 00 $ 29,930 00
Column Piers 34 EA $ 1,500 00 $ 51,000 00
Strap Beams 12"x16" 80 CY $ 375 00 $ 29,820 00
Foundation Wall -12" wide x 2'-6" h 46 CY $ 525.00 $ 24,210 00
Foundation Wall -12" wide x 6'-0" h 118 CY $ 525 00 $ 61,930 00
Backfill/ Compaction 769 CY $ 120 00 $ 92,230 00
SOG
Slab on Grade (10" thick w/ Epoxy #4 @ 12" o c ea way) 50,996 SF S 10 00 $ 509,960 00
Rebar(@150Lbs/CY) 118 Tons
CA-6 (6" compacted Fill) 944 CY $ 38 00 $ 35,890 00
Class A Vapor Barrier Refer to 7000
2" Insulation @ Perimeter of Foundation 3,944 SF $ 3 25 $ 12,820 00
Sunken Stairs Foundation / Footing Wall|99|AL $ 7,040 00 $ 7,040.00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
ESTIMATOR'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
RS&H
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL |
4000 MASONRY $ 126,000.001
8'h Grout Solid Masonry Wall @ Perimeter 7,000 SF $ 18 00 $ 126,000 00
5000 METALS $ 21,800.00
ENCLOSURE:
Steel Structure Supports - Trusses/ Purlins Refer to 13000
Roof Framing Refer to 13000
Wall Framing Refer to 13000
X-Bracing (8 instances) Refer to 13000
Catwalk / Ceiling Structure Excluded
Interior Stairs N/A
Exterior Galv Stairs - 4Treads + Landing / Handrails [A504]|99|EA $ 2,500.00 $ 7,500 00
Handrails @ Sunken Stair [S202] 35 LF $ 65 00 $ 2,280 00
Bollards @ Stairs / OH Door Openings / Hydrants 20 EA $ 600 00 $' 12,000.00
Interior Bollards @ Columns N/A
6000 WOOD AND PLASTICS $
I !
I
375,000.00
7000 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION
Roof - Standing Seam Metal Panels Refer to 13000
Prefinished Rake Trim @ Roof N/A
Roof Specialties N/A
Vapor Barrier 50,996 SF $ 0 25 $ 12,750 00
Intumescent Paint Sprayed @ Roof/ Ceiling - 1HR [A401] 51,984 SF $ 4 00 $ 207,940 00
Intumescent Paint Sprayed @ Walls - 1HR [A401] 29,526 SF $ 4 00 $ 118,100 00
Cementitious Sprayed-On Fireproofing (2HR)|99|AL $ 25,000 00 $ 25,000 00
@ End Wall Columns Included
@ Primary Steel Clearspan Framing Included
Firestopping Included in Prefab Bldg
Sealants and Caulking Included in Prefab Bldg
Downspouts 450 LF $ 25 00 $ 11,250 00
Gutters (pre-formed by bldg manufacturer) 685 LF Included in Prefab Bldg
8000 DOORS AND WINDOWS $ 104,800.00
Exterior Doors - Double / Single
Type B - 3' x7' HM/HM (3/4 hour rated)|99|EA $ 1,850 00 $ 14,800 00
Hardware|99|EA $ 750 00 $ 6,000 00
Overhead Doors
30'x20' High Speed Fabric Roll Up Doors|99|EA $ 21,000 00 S 84,000 00
Exterior Glazing Excluded
Interior Doors- Double / Single N/A
IFPR SUBMITTAL
ESTIMATOR'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
RS&H
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
51,984
71,995
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
365,000
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal |T 4/25/2017
153,500.00
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL
| 9000 FINISHES $ 76,500.00 |
Partitions (9' ht u.n o.) N/A
Wall Finishes / Painting / Sealing Walls N/A
Ceiling Finishes N/A
Floor
Floor Sealer / Hardener 50;996 SF $ 1 50 $ 76,500.00
| 10000 SPECIALTIES $
N/A
11000 EQUIPMENT $ -|
N/A
12000 FURNISHINGS $ -|
FF&E Excluded
13000 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $ 2,415,000.00 |
Pre-Fab Steel Manufactured Building|99|AL $ 2,415.000.00 $ 2,415.000 00
Gable Building'w/ Clear Span Frames Included
10" Roof Purlins and Girts Included
(4) OH Door Openings Included
Kynar Color Standing Seam Roof Panels w/ Insulation Included
Kynar Color Standing Seam Wall Panels w/ Insulation Included
Caulking / Firestopping Included
14000 CONVEYING SYSTEMS $
Conveying NIC
21000 FIRE SUPPRESSION
Fire Protection
Wet Sprinkler Heads 72 HDS $ 135 00 $ 9,720 00
Piping 2,115 LF S 45 00 $ 95,180 00
FP-1 1000 GPM Fire Pump|99|EA $ 38,500 00 $ 38,500 00
JP-1 10 GPM Jockey Pump|99|EA $ 5,100 00 $ 5,100 00
Portable Fire Extinguishers|99|LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LPS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION
22000 PLUMBING $ 134,100.00
Plumbing
4" Floor Drains 44 EA $ 1,100.00 $ 48,400 00
6" Underground Piping 250 LF $ 60.00 $ 15,000 00
4" Underground Piping 1,350 LF $ 45 00 $ 60,750 00
Clean Outs 22 EA $ 450 00 S 9,900 00
Trench Drains N/A
Sand Interceptors Excluded
Triple Oil Interceptor See RENOVATION - Phase 1
Heat Trace Excluded
23000 HVAC $ 240,000.00
[M105]
1 - Gas Fired Unit Heaters/ Piping Sterling SC-400 10 EA $ 3,437 50 $ 34,380.00
3" Piping 60 LF $ 70 00 $ 4,200 00
2 1/2" Piping 200 LF $ 65.00 $ 13,000 00
2" Piping 455 LF $ 52 00 $ 23,660 00
1 1/2" Piping 195 LF $ 45 00 $ 8,780 00
Thermostats 10 EA $ 375 00 $ 3,750 00
2 - Wall Mounted Exhaust Fan (13.000CFM)|99|EA $ 7,800 00 $ 31,200.00
3 - New Louvers/ Motorized Dampers (2 x 48" x 60")|99|EA $ 9,000 00 $ 36,000 00
4 - New CO/ N02 Sensors (x12)|99|LS $ 85,000 00 $ 85,000 00
Exhaust System Excluded
Door Heaters Excluded
NEW AMC B
IFPR SUBMITTAL
ESTIMATOR'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
RS&H
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport
6201 South Laramie Avenue
Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001
Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LPS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS - Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
UNIT UNIT PRICE
327,700.00
26000 ELECTRICAL
New Electrical. [E301]
Conduits/ Feeders from MSB|99|AL $ 30,000 00 $ 30,000.00
Distribution
LCP-1 (Lighting Control Panel)|99|AL $ 3,500 00 $ 3,500 00
HA 250A/ 277/480V.3P/ 4W|99|EA $ 6,750 00 $ 6,750.00
200A Breakers EA $ 175 00 $
110A Breakers|99|EA $ 150 00 $ 450 00
70A Breakers EA $ 90 00 $
30A Breakers|99|EA $ 70 00 $ 210 00
20A Breakers 30 EA $ 65 00 $ 1,950 00
EHA 40A / 277/480V/ 3P/ 4W|99|EA $ 600 00 $ 600 00
20A Breakers|99|EA $ 65 00 $ 130 00
LA 250A/ 120/208V/ 3P/ 4W|99|EA $ 6,750.00 $ 6,750 00
100A Breakers|99|EA $ 150 00 $ 450 00
20A Breakers 24 EA $ 65 00 $ 1,560 00
LB 100A/ 120/208V/ 3P/4W|99|EA $ 3,100 00 $ 3,100 00
20A Breakers 30 EA $ 65 00 $ 1,950 00
TA-75kVA/ 3P/4W|99|EA $ 13,477 50 S 13,480 00
Conduits and Feeders|99|LS S 15,000 00 S 15,000 00
New Electrical - Vehicle Storage Building [E-205]:
Lighting
Type A - High Bay 400W, Suspended CREE 77 EA $ 993 75 $ 76,520 00
X1 - Exit Signs, Lithonoa|99|EA $ 490 00 $ 3,920 00
OA- LED Flood, 400W, Wall Mounted, CREE|99|EA $ 1,337 50 $ 8,030 00
OB-LED Wall Pack, 250W, Wall Mounted CREE 12 EA $ 1,150 00 $ 13,800 00
OC-LED Wall Pack, Wall Mounted CREE|99|EA $ 1,150 00 $ 9,200 00
Conduits/ Wiring|99|LS $ 55,500 00 $ 55,500 00
New Electrical - Vehicle Storage Building [E-204]:
Ceiling Mounted Horn/Strobe|99|EA $ 275 00 $ 1,380 00
Wall Mounted Horn/ Strobe|99|EA $ 225 00 $ 1,800 00
Ceiling Mounted Strobe|9 9|EA $ 190 00 $
Wall Mounted Strobe|99|EA $ 175 00 $ 1,400 00
Pull Stations|9 9|EA $ 200 00 $
Duplex GFI 17 EA $ 175 00 $ 2,980.00
WP Duplex GFI|99|EA $ 450 00 $ 3,150 00
Conduits/ Wiring|99|LS $ 11,250 00 $ 11,250 00
Door Operators|99|EA S 1,500 00 $ 6,000.00
Grounding System 51,984 SF $ 0 25 $ 13,000 00
Lightning Protection System NIC
Communications/ Security NIC
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport
6201 South Laramie Avenue
Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001
Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
51,984
71,995
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
365,000
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal [T 4/25/2017=
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL |
26000 ELECTRICAL ~ contd. -contd.
New Electrical - [E204]
1-2 x 2" Conduit to AMC Building/ FA|99|AL $ 18,000 00 $ 18,000 00
2-Supervisory/ Monitoring Modules for FP/ FA System|99|AL $ 5,860 00 $ 5,860 00
2-Tamper Resistant Switch Incl
2-Flow Switch Monitor Module Incl
4 - Wall Mount Fire/ Jockey Pump CP Incl
Generator Included in RENOVATION
Testing / Commissioning|99|LS $ 10,000 00 $ 10,000 00
27000 COMMUNCIATIONS $ -|
N/A
| 28000 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY $
N/A
31000 EARTHWORK $ 194,900.00
Site Demolition:
Site - Cut and Fill (delta existing to new spot elevations) 1,926 CY. $ 25.00 $ 48,150 00
SOG - Cut 475 CY $ 20 00 $ 9,500 00
SOG - Fill 979 CY $ 60 00 $ 58,740 00
Haul and Disposal (airport property) 34 LDS $ 150 00 $ 5,070 00
Structural Excavation - Shallow Foundations/ Footing 711 CY $ 35 00 $ 24,870 00
Structural Excavation - Column Piers 209 CY $ „ 100 00 $ 20,870 00
Structural Excavation - Strap Beams 12"x16" 278 CY $ 35 00 $ 9,720 00
Haul and Disposal (airport property) 120 LDS $ 150 00 $ 17,950 00 Verify
Grade Beams/ Caissons/ Pot Holing / etc Excluded
Backfill / Compaction Refer to 3000 - Concrete
Shoring / Earth Retention NIC
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL
32000 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS $ 196,200.00 |
Phase 1 - New Site Work @ Underground Acetate Tank: [C200] See RENOVATION
New 2" Bit. Concrete Pavement/ 3" Binder 2,021 SF See RENOVATION
6" Bituminous Base Course 37 CY See RENOVATION
10" Granular Subbase Course (CA-6) 62 CY See RENOVATION
New Concrete Pavement - 11"PCC 525 SF See RENOVATION
4" Cement Treated Aggregate Base|99|CY See RENOVATION
8" Granular Subbase Course (CA-6) 13 CY See RENOVATION
New Curb and Gutter to match existing 11 LF See RENOVATION
New 5"PCC/ Over 4" Base Sidewalk 50 SF See RENOVATION
New Fence - 10' Type A 325 LF See RENOVATION
Phase 2 - New Site Work:
Sidewalk Stoop @ Door of Existing Building 37 SF $ 8 00 $ 300 00
Flexible Pavement 2" Bit' Concrete Pavement/ 3" Binder 30,830 SF $ 2 75 $ 84,780 00
6" Bituminous Base Course 571 CY $ 3 25 $ 1,860 00
10" Granular Subbase Course (CA-6) 952 CY $ 40 00 $ 38,060 00
Roadway Striping [C600]|99|LS $ 15,000 00 $ 15,000 00
Parking Lot Striping NIC
Signage|99|LS $ 5,000 00 $ 5,000 00
New Dumpster Pad [C200] 445 SF $ 12 00 $ 5,340 00
Concrete Pad [C200] 1,594 SF $ 12 00 $ 19,120 00
New Curb and Gutter to match existing [C200] 50 LF $ 35 00 $ 1,750 00
Landscaping / Site Restoration|99|AL $ 25,000 00 $ 25,000 00
Site Fencing Excluded
Protective Perimeter Guardrail Excluded
33000 UTILITIES $ 324,300.00
Utility Demolition / Conflicts TC1001:
Demo Water Line ~6"dia 118 LF $ 50 00 $ 5,900 00
Cap Water Line|99|EA $ 1,930 00 $ 1,930 00
Demo Hydrant|99|EA $ 840 00 $ 840 00
Demo Valve|99|EA $ 210 00 $ 210 00
Remove Abandoned Storm Pipe 950 LF $ 40 00 $ 38,000 00
Remove Storm Manholes|99|EA $ 420 00 $ 2,520 00
Haul / Dispose|99|AL $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000 00
Remove / Relocate Light Pole(s) NIC
Unknown Underground Utility Demo NIC
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport
6201 South Laramie Avenue
Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001
Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
Phase 2 - New AMC Building (SF) Phase 2 - Site Work Area (SF) Total Project Area (SF)
NEW BUILDING - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA - Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
UNIT UNIT PRICE
—contd.
33000 UTILITIES - contd.
Utilities:
Water Service - 8" 465 LF $ 135 00 $ 62,780 00
Fire Hydrant & Valve Box|99|EA $ 3,100 00 $ 6,200 00
Water Valves|99|EA $ 1,440 00 $ 2,880 00
Connect 8" DIP to Existing 12" DIP|99|AL $ 4,280 00 $ 4,280 00
Insulate Water Main Crossing Over Existing Piping|99|AL $ 5.000 00 $ 5,000 00
Electric Service (Connect to Main Building) See Above
Gas Service - 4" 275 LF $ 85 00 $ 23,380 00
Storm $
6" ESVCP 20 LF $ 16 00 $ 320 00
10" ESVCP (@ Existing Building) 225 LF $ 21 00 $ 4,730 00
12" ESVCP 500 LF $ 26 00 $ 12,990 00
18" ESVCP 28 LF $ 33 00 $ 940 00
21" ESVCP 172 LF $ 40 00 $ 6.880 00
36" RCP 219 LF $ 105 00 $ 23,000 00
Catch Basins|99|EA $ 2,750 00 $ 13,750 00
Cleanouts|99|EA $ 450 00 $ 2,250 00
Manholes|99|EA $ 3,350 00 $ 10,050 00
Proposed Oil Wells Included in RENOVATION
Connect to Building Drain|99|EA $ 1,090 00 $ 2,180 00
Connect to Building Drain - 6"|99|EA $ 1,090 00 $ 1,090 00
Trenching / Excavation / Backfill (note additional depth) 1,164 LF $ 60 00 $ 69,840 00
6" ESVCP for Downspouts 150 LF $ 16.00 $ 2,400 00
Site Lighting (2 Pole Mounted Lights) N/A
SUB TOTAL - NEW AMC BUILDING
IFPR SUBMITTAL
ESTIMATOR'S STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST
RS&H
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor- Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
4/25/2017
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION
| 1000 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS $ 392,300.00
General Conditions|99|LS $ 352,000 00 $ 352,000 00
Temporary Protection / Access Incl
Temporary Sound and Dust Barriers Incl
Selective Testing & Inspection By Owner
Allowance for Premium Time (Shutdowns) [P001, note 22] 288 HRS $ 140 00 $ 40,320 00
Permits See Summary
Utility Tie-ins/ Tap Fee (Water, Sewer, Electricity, Cable) As Noted
2000 EXISTING CONDITIONS $ 539,900.00
Environmental Abatement: |
Abatement Containment/ Setup/ Disposal/ Project Management N/A
Site Demolition: See also 32000 Exterior Improvements
Shoring / Earth Retention N/A
Highway Guardrail Demo N/A
Utility Demolition / Conflicts N/A
Unknown Underground Utility Demo N/A
Haul / Dispose N/A
SITE DEMOLITION [C100]:
Demolish Existing Paving - Concrete 25,632 SF See NEW AMC BUILDING
Demolish Existing Paving - Bituminous Pavement 57,855 SF See NEW AMC BUILDING
Phase 1 - Demo @ Existing Potassium Acetate Storage Tank
Demo Existing Retaining Wall / Bollards 88 LF $ 50 00 $ 4,400.00
Remove Metal Stairs / Filling Platform|99|AL $ 2,520 00 $ 2,520 00
Sawcut / Remove Existing Pavement 948 SF $ 1 00 $ 950 00
Remove Existing Tank/ Equipment (above Ground)|99|AL $ 12,580 00 $ 12,580 00
Demo. Abandoned Piping 117 LF $ 4 00 $ 470 00
Remove Existing Manholes|99|EA $ 420 00 $ 2,520 00
Phase 1 - Prep for New Underground Potassium Acetate Storage Tank See Div 32000
Interior Demolition - Architectural rAD101, AD102, AD1031:
1st Floor [AD101]
D3 - Demo Overhead Doors Entirely ~12'w 9 EA $ 2,280 00 $ 20,520 00
D3 - Demo Overhead Doors Entirely ~30'w|99|EA $ 6,080 00 S 24,320 00
D4 - Demo HM Exterior Door/ Frame & Hdwr to RO|99|EA $ 150 00 $ 900.00
2nd Floor [AD 102]
Rem Solid Surface Sill for Storefront (345LF) 345 LF $ 5 00 $ 1,730 00
D2 - Remove Storefront [A702] 2,140 SF $ 2 50 $ 5,350 00
D2 - Remove Base Flashing @ Storefront Incl
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor- Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
DESCRIPTION
2000 EXISTING CONDITIONS - contd.
Roof [AD102].
D5 - Rem Metal Coping for Roof Install / Salvage & Reuse 515 LF $ 10 00 $ 5,150 00
D6 - Rem Mem Roof & Pads @ 1st Story to Mtl Deck 11,825 SF $ 3 00 $ 35,480 00
Roof [AD103]-
D1 - Rem Roof/ Insultn & Walkway Pads to Metal Deck 80,950 SF $ 3 00 $ 242,850 00
D2 - Rem Metal Coping 1,255 LF $ 1 50 $ 1,880 00
D3 - Remove Roof Drain & Drain Pan to Coupling [AD103]|99|EA $ 760 00 $ 6,080 00
D4 - Demo Prefab Insulated Equipment Roof Curbs 317 LF $ 6.00 $ 1,900.00
D5 - Remove Existing Expansion Joint & Foam Rubber Tube 182 LF $ 15 00 $ 2,730 00
Investigate Substrate For Damage/ Deterioration/ Moisture NIC
Haul / Disposal|99|AL $ 15,000 00 $ 15,000 00
Interior Demolition - Mechanical - 1st Floor TMD-1011:
1 - Rem VAV Box/ Coils/ Accessories/ Valves & Controls 14 INST $ 840 00 $ 11,760.00
2 - Rem. Hot Water Heating Coil + Access / Control Valves|99|INST $ 6,720 00 $ 6,720 00
3 - Rem and Dispose, Gas-Fired Modular Type Boilers|99|INST $ 6,540 00 S 13,080 00
Base Mounted Hot Water Pumps|99|EA $ 840 00 $ 3,360 00
Inline Hot Water Pumps/ Piping/ Breeching/ Controls|99|EA $ 420 00 $ 2,940 00
4- Rem And Dispose HW Unit Heaters 15 EA $ 420 00 $ 6,300 00
Mechanical - 2nd Floor - [MD-102]:
1 - Rem VAV Box/ Coils/ Accessories/ Valves & Controls 10 INST $ 840 00 $ 8,400 00
2 - Rem Hot Water Heating Coil + Access / Control Valves|99|INST $ 5,040 00 $ 5,040 00
3 - Rem HVAC AHU + Accessories/ Valves/ Controls|99|INST $ 7,720 00 $ 7,720 00
4- Rem Floor Mounted Vertical Air-Conditioning Unit|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 1,680 00
Rem Integral Compressors/ Controls/ Accessories Incl.
5- Rem And Dispose HW Unit Heaters|99|EA $ 420 00 S 420 00
Mechanical - Garage - [MD-103]:
1 - Rem Ex Gas Vacuum Type Low Intensity Infrared He|99|EA $ 3,360 00 $ 16,800.00
2 - Rem Exist Duct to HRV|99|EA $ 1,260.00 $ 5,040 00
3 - Disconnect Gas Fired Door Heater/ Gas Piping|99|EA $ 840 00 $ 3,360 00
Mechanical - Roof - [MD-104]:
1 - Demo Heat Recovery Unit + Piping/ Connections, etc|99|INST $ 1.680 00 $ 3,360 00
2 - Recover Refrigerant @ Air-Cooled Condenser|99|INST $ 315 00 $ 630 00
Haul / Disposal - Mechanical|99|AL $ 10,000 00 $ 10,000 00
Interior Demolition - Electrical - 1st Floor TED-2011:
1 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Power Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Boiler Units|99|INST $ 1,680 00 S 1,680 00
2 - Disconnect/ Rem. All Disconnects/ Power Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Hot Water Pumps|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 840 00
3 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ VAV Units (existing conduit to remain) 13 INST $ 210 00 $ 2,730 00
4- Disconnect and Remove lighting switch 21 INST $ 105 00 $ 2,210 00
5 - Disconnect/ Rem. All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ HUH Units (existing conduit to remain) 15 INST $ 210 00 $ 3,150 00
6-Re-Label existing Panels|99|AL $ 1,680 00 $ 1,680 00
7- Disconnect/ Rem Power/ Wiring associated with Motorized Door Operators|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 2,520 00
8- Disconnect/ Rem Power/ Wiring associated with HV Units|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 1,260 00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
1st Floor- Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
4/25/2017
DESCRIPTION.
2000 EXISTING CONDITIONS - contd.
Electrical - 2nd Floor TED-2021:
1 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ AHU Unit (existing conduit to remain)|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 840 00
2 - Disconnect/ Rem. All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ VAV Units (existing conduit to remain) 9 INST $ 210 00 $ 1,890 00
3 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ ACU Unit (existing conduit to remain)|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 1,260 00
4- Disconnect and Remove lighting switch 11 INST $ 105 00 $ 1,160 00
5 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ HUH Units (existing conduit to remain)|99|INST $ 210 00 $ 210 00
Electrical - Garaqe TED-2031:
1 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Control Panels / Accessories / Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Motorized Door Operators|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 2,940 00
2 - Disconnect/ Rem MSB-1, Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Main Switchboard|99|INST $ 5,040 00 $ 5,040 00
3 - Disconnect/ Rem ATS-1, Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ ATS to be replaced in new location|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 420 00
4 - Disconnect/ Rem ATS-2, Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ ATS to be replaced in new location|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 420 00
5 - Disconnect/ Rem All Non-Emergency Loads from Existing Emergency Power System to remain|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 2,520 00
Field Verify EM Panels|99|AL $ 1,680 00 $ 1,680 00
Relocate Circuits to nearest Power Panels TBD
Rework Existing Conduit and Wiring, as needed to complete installation TBD
6 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Starters / Accessories / Wiring and Conduit Assoc. w/ De-icinq Pumps to be replaced in new location|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 1,680 00
7-Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Starters/ Accessories associated with De-lcinq Pumps|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 1.680 00
8 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Accessories / Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Infrared Heaters 14 INST $ 210 00 $ 2,940.00
9 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Accessories / Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Door Heaters|99|INST $ 420 00 $ 1,680 00
10 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Accessories / Wirinq and Conduit Assoc. w/ Air Compressors|99|INST $ 210.00 $ 210 00
Electrical - Roof - [ED-250]:
1 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Control Panels / Accessories / Wiring and Conduit Assoc w/ Heat Recovery Units to be replaced|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 1,680 00
2 - Disconnect/ Rem All Disconnects/ Wiring and Accessories Assoc w/ ACCU Unit (existing conduit to remain)|99|INST $ 840 00 $ 1,680 00
Code Deficiency Remediation NIC
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor- Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION
3000 CONCRETE $ 7,900.00
Core and Patch Access Holes|99|AL $ 4,860 00 $ 4,860 00
Housekeeping Pads - Interior - 4"h|99|AL $ 3,000 00 $ 3,000 00
| 4000 MASONRY $
Existing to remain
Interior Walls 8" CMU
5000 METALS $ 19,500.00
Structural Steel / Metals @ OH Doors|99|AL $ 19,50000 $ 19,500 00
6000 WOOD AND PLASTICS $ 34,400.00 |
Rough Carpentry - Office Spaces Excl
3/4" Fire Treated Plywood Excl
Misc. Millwork/ Casework Excl
14"w Sill @ New Windows - Solid Surface [2/A505] 345 LF $ 65 00 $ 22,430 00
New Roof Equipment Curbs [A103]
Roof Curbs - min 14"h For ACCUs + HRV Units 300 LF $ 40 00 $ 12,000 00
7000 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION $ 1,634,550.00 |
New Membrane Roof (Incl 5% deck repairs) 92,775 SF $ 16 00 $ 1,484,400 00
Insulation - 6" Rigid Insulation 92,775 SF Included Above
Replace Roof Drain & Drain Pan to Coupling|99|EA $ 2,200 00 $ 17,600 00
Metal Coping - Reinstall Salvaged 515 LF $ 10 00 $ 5,200 00
Metal Coping - New 1,255 LF $ 25 00 $ 31,400 00
Patch Roof as Needed @ Removed Curbs|99|AL $ 15,000 00 $ 15,000.00
New Expansion Joint & Foam Rubber Tube 182 LF $ 125 00 $ 22,750 00
Flashing Incl
Roof Specialties N/A
Roof Walkway Pavers 4,020 SF $ 12 00 $ 48,200 00
Skylights - Repair Existing N/A
Limited Caulking/ Sealing/ Safing @ Select Penetrations|99|AL $ 10,000 00 $ 10,000 00
| 8000 DOORS AND WINDOWS $ 324,800.00
Exterior Doors
Type B 3'-0" x 7'-0" HM/HM, Insulated Single Doors|99|EA $ ' 1,500 00 $ 9,000 00
1/4" x 36"w x18" @ Transom|99|EA $ 410 00 $ 2,500 00
Double Doors N/A
Hardware|99|EA $ 1,800 00 $ 10,800 00
Interior Doors - height 7'-0" N/A
Steel Overhead Coiling Doors with High Speed Motors w/ Visual Panels (factory painted, u n o )
Type A 12'-0"w x 8'-8"h, Insulated w/ Vision Panels|99|EA $ 5,200 00 $ 31,200 00
Type A 13'-0"wx 19'-10"h, Insulated|99|EA $ 12,900.00 S 25,800 00
Type A 12'-0"wx 19'-10"h, Insulated|99|EA $ 11,900 00 $ 11,900 00
Type A 30'-0"wx 19'-10"h , Insulated|99|EA $ 29,800 00 S 59,600 00
Type A 13'-0"w x 18'-8"h, Insulated|99|EA $ 12,100 00 $ 24,200 00
Tie Door into Alarm System Incl
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF - Square Foot Area
UNIT UNIT PRICE
| 8000 DOORS AND WINDOWS - contd. -contd.
Glazing.
Window Type A 1,124 SF $ 70.00 $ 78,700 00
Window Type B 507 SF $ 70 00 $ 35,500 00
Window Type C 509 SF $ 70 00 $ 35,600 00
Louvers N/A
9000 FINISHES $ 900.00
Flooring Existing to Remain
Ceiling Existing to Remain
Painting
Hollow Metal Doors|99|AL S 900 00 $ 900 00
Garage Existing to Remain
Offices Existing to Remain
|
10000 SPECIALTIES $
Exterior Building Signage Existing to Remain
Signage @ Site/ Entrance Existing to Remain
Signage - Interior Existing to Remain
Toilet Accessories Existing to Remain
Misc Specialties:
Fire Extinguisher Cabinets @ Each Exterior Door Existing to Remain
Convex Mirrors Existing to Remain
11000 EQUIPMENT Existing to remain $ -1
I I
12000 FURNISHINGS $ -|
Excluded
Casework
13000 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION N/A $ -1
I I I I
14000 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT N/A $ -|
I I I I
21000 FIRE SUPPRESSION Existing to remain $
I I I i |
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
26,450
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL
22000 PLUMBING $ 501,220.00 |
Exterior
Potassium Acetate System (exterior) [PS-101 / P-401/ P-402].
34,000 Gal Tanks (single walled)|99|EA $ 135,000 00 $ 270,000 00
Xylem Lineshaft Turbine Pumps #6CLC|99|EA $ 21,915.00 S 87,660 00
PP-2, SS Self Priming Cent Pump, 170 GPM|99|EA $ 3,555 00 $ 3,560 00
Alum Loading Platform w/ Variable Reach Swing Arm|99|EA $ 25,000.00 $ 100,000 00
60'w x 30' Concrete Pads x 2 See Div 3000
Piping / Connections|99|AL $ 40,000 00 $ 40,000 00
Roof Drain Replacement See Div 7000
Interior
Toilet Fixtures Existing to Remain
Floor Drains Existing to Remain
Electric Water Cooler Existing to Remain
Underground Plumbing Existing to Remain
Sanitary Piping/ Supply/ Drainage/ Venting - Garage Existing to Remain
Heat Trace N/A
23000 HVAC $ 1,114,210.00
New Mechanical - 1st Floor [M-101]:
1 - New DDC-Type VAV Box/ Coils/ Acces / Valves & Controls + Transition Ductwork 14 EA $ 3,230 00 $ 45,220 00
2 - ACU- New Ceiling Mounted HV Unit w/ HW Coil + Assoc Accessories/ Control Valve (101/201/ 301)
ACU-101 (8.950CFM)|99|EA $ 49,880 00 $ 49,880 00
ACU-201 (5.600CFM)|99|EA $ 32,960.00 $ 32,960 00
ACU-301 (8.100CFM)|99|EA $ 46,480 00 S 46,480 00
3 - HWB - New Condensing-Type Hot Water Boilers, 1200MBH, Camus DRNH|99|EA $ 38,000 00 $ 114,000 00
Pumps
HWP-B1-3 (76GPM, Inline, B&G 60)|99|EA $ 3,555 00 $ 10,670 00
HWP-1-1A (156 GPM, Inline, B&G e-80) + VFD|99|EA $ 8,555 00 $ 17,11000
HWP-2-2A (152 GPM, Inline, B&G e-80) + VFD|99|EA S 8,555 00 $ 17,11000
HWP-3-3A (10GPM, Inline, B&G XL) + VFD|99|EA $ 5,840 00 $ 11,680 00
Provide VFDs For Existing Chiller Pump Motors|99|EA S 1,500 00 $ 1,500 00
HX-1 Replace Heat Exchanger (94 5 MBH, B&G P8)|99|AL $ 25,000 00 $ 25,000 00
4 - HUH Hot Water Unit Heaters (480-1780 CFM) 16 EA S 2,505 00 $ 40,080 00
5- New 10HP Motor + VFD for Ex CWP|99|EA $ 8,760 00 $ 17,520 00
6 - HCP 101 (29GPM, Inline, B&G 60) + VFD|99|EA $ 4,815 00 $ 4,820 00
6- HCP 201 (14 7GPM, Inline, B&G 60) + VFD|99|EA $ 4,190 00 $ 4,190 00
6 - HCP 301 (12 5GPM, Inline, B&G 60) + VFD|99|EA $ 4,190 00 $ 4,190 00
6 - HCP 401 (37.8GPM, Inline, B&G 60) + VFD|99|EA $ 4,815 00 $ 4,820 00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor- Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION
23000 HVAC -- contd.
2nd Floor - [M-102]:
1 - New DDC-Type VAV Box/ Coils/ Acces / Valves & Controls + Transition Ductwork 10 EA $ 3,230 00 $ 32,300 00
2 - New Ceiling Mounted HV Unit w/ HW Coil + Assoc Accessories/ Control Valve|99|EA Incl above
3 - New VAV-Type HVAC AC Unit + Accessories/ Valves/ Controls See Below
4- ACU - New Floor Mounted Vertical Air-Conditioning Unit (501/502)
ACU-401 (17.600CFM, Carrier 39M36W)|99|EA $ 94,200 00 $ 94,200 00
ACU-503 (700CFM)|99|EA $ 2,670 00 $ 2,670 00
New Integral Compressors/ Controls/ Accessories Incl
5-New Ceiling Mtd HW Unit Heater/ Piping/ Controls|99|EA $ . 2,505 00 $ 2,510 00
6-New HCP|99|EA $ 4,815 00 $ 4,820 00
Garage - [M-103]:
1- Gas Fired Door Heater/ Piping/ Flue (1,296 MBH, Weather|99|EA $ 8,145 00 $ 32,580 00
2 - IH-1-14 New Gas Infrared Heating Units 14 EA $ 5,780 00 $ 80,920 00
Gas Piping ETR
2"/1" Gas Piping connections|99|AL $ 5,000 00 $ 5,000.00
Trim Length for Calcana SR-200-80' 200.000BTU/HR (typ 14 INST $ 2,520.00 $ 35,280 00
I Vehicle Exhaust System Replacement/ Upgrade Excluded
3 - New Air Compressors/ Associated Piping
GE-J 100PSIG|99|EA $ 40,405 00 $ 40,410 00
GE-K 100PSIG|99|EA $ 40,405 00 S 40,410 00
Roof-[M-104]:
1 - HRV 1/ 2 New Heat Recovery Units Xetex-XLT-H, 30.000C|99|INST $ 65,940 00 $ 131,880 00
2 - New Air-Cooled Condenser/ Accessories/ Piping, etc|99|INST $ 8,500 00 S 17,000 00
Roof Curb Incl
Chemical Pot Feeder Existing to Remain
Insulation (limited insulation)|99|LS $ 10,000 00 $ 10,000 00
Temperature Controls - DDC 10% $ 97,000 00
C02 and NOx Detection Systems Existing to remain
Testing|99|LS $ 15,000.00 S 15,000 00
Commissioning|99|LS $ 25,000 00 $ 25,000 00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION
761,980.00
26000 ELECTRICAL
Electrical Service/ Distribution: [E301]
New 2000A 277/480V, 3P, 4W Mam Switch Gear MSFJ-1|99|AL $ 68,750.00 $ 68,750 00
1600A Breaker|99|EA $ 15,000 00 $ 15,000 00
1200A Breaker|99|EA $ 11,500 00 $ 11,500 00
800A Breaker|99|EA $ 8,900 00 $ 8,900 00
400A Breaker EA $ 5,000.00 $ 10,000 00
300A Breaker|99|EA S 4,750 00 $ 4,750 00
250A Breaker|99|EA $ 4,750 00 S 4,750 00
175A Breaker|99|EA $ 4,500 00 $ 4,500 00
Feeders/ Conduit|99|LS $ 15,000 00 $ 15,000 00
Provide Temporary Power Connections/ Panels, etc|99|AL $ 3,000 00 $ 3,000 00
Concrete Encased Conduits from Standby Generator to Bldg
1 x 4" Empty PVC S40 +2x1" PVC S40 150 LF $ 89 00 $ 13,350 00
4 X #600 Kcmil + 1 x #250Kcmil in 4" Conduit 150 LF $ 99 65 $ 14,950 00
Control Wiring/ Power 150 LF $ 35.00 $ 5,250 00
Excavation / Backfill 150 LF $ 50 00 $ 7,500.00
NEMA 3R ATS-1 125A|99|EA $ 2,750 00 $ 2,750 00
NEMA 3R ATS-2 300A|99|EA $ 3,750 00 $ 3,750.00
Transformer @ Existing Building Excluded
[E-310/E-311]
Breakers in existing panels
3 x 15A New Load Bank in HMP-1|99|EA $ 105 00 S 320 00
3 x 125A New HRV-1 in HMP-1|99|EA $ 250 00 $ 750 00
3 x 125A New HRV-1 in HMP-2|99|EA $ 250 00 $ 750 00
3 x 20A New DO-1 in HMP-2|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
3 x 20A New PCP-1A in HMP-2 A|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
3 x 20A New PCP-1B in HMP-2A|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
3 x 20A New PCP-1C in HMP-2A|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320.00
3 x 20A New PCP-1D in HMP-2A|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
3x90ANewAC-1 in HMP-3|99|EA $ 200 00 $ 600 00
3x90ANewAC-2 in HMP-3|99|EA $ 200 00 $ 600 00
3 x 40A New DH-1 in HMP-3|99|EA $ 125 00 $ 380 00
3 x 40A New DH-2 in HMP-3|99|EA $ 125 00 $ 380 00
3 x 40A New DH-3 in HMP-3|99|EA $ 125 00 $ 380 00
3 x 40A New DH-4 in HMP-3|99|EA $ 125 00 $ 380 00
1 x 20A New Rooftop Receptacle in LPM-1|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 11000
3x15A New DO-2 in LPM-2|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
1 x 20A New Rooftop Receptacle in LPM-2A|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 11000
3 x 40A New PCP-2 in LPM-3|99|EA $ 125 00 $ 380 00
9 x 20A New DO-2 in LP1-C 9 EA $ 105 00 $ 950 00
3x20A HWB-1-3 in LP1-D|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
2x20A NewVAV'sin LP1-D|99|EA $ 105.00 $ 210 00
1 x 20A New Rooftop Receptacle in LP2-B|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 11000
3 x 15A New DO-2 in CP-1|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00
3x15ANewDO-2 in PP-1|99|EA $ 105 00 $ 320 00 IFPR A
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAL.il
-contd.
26000 ELECTRICAL - contd.
New Electrical - 1st Floor [E-201]:
1 - New Breakers in Existing Panels & Wiring In Existing Conduit System For New VAV Units 13 INST See above
Wiring 2#12, 1#12G Incl
2- New Occupancy Sensors Wall Switch 20 EA $ 115 00 $ 2,300 00
3A-New Ceiling Mounted Occupancy Sensors (A)|99|EA $ 200 00 $ 200 00
3B-New Ceiling Mounted Occupancy Sensors (B) 9 EA $ 230 00 $ 2,070 00
4-Cutf Patch/ Paint existing ceiling as needed|99|AL $ 1,500 00 $ 1,500 00
5- New breakers in existing panels 15 EA $ 100 00 $ 1,500 00
6-Re-Label Panels See Above
7-VFD'sforEx CWP See Above
8-VFD's for New HWP See Above
9-Replace Starter Bucket in Ex. MCC|99|EA $ 510 00 $ 510 00
10-New Wiring/ Conduit to Pumps/ New Breaker in Ex Panel See Below
New Electrical - 2nd Floor [E-202]:
1 - New Breakers in Existing Panels & Wiring In Existing Conduit System For New ACU Unit|99|INST See above
2 - New Breakers in Existing Panels & Wiring In Existing Conduit Svstem For New VAV Units 10 INST See above
3 - New Breakers in Existing Panels & Wiring In Existing Conduit Svstem For New ACU Units|99|INST $ 300 00 $ 600 00
4-Provide Wattstopper ELCU-200 ELC|99|EA $ 378 75 $ 760 00
5- New Occupancy Sensors Wall Switch 10 EA $ 11500 $ 1,150 00
6A-New Ceiling Mounted Occupancy Sensors|99|EA $ 200 00 $ 1,600 00
6B-New Ceiling Mounted Occupancy Sensors|99|EA $ 230 00 S 1.610 00
6D-New Ceiling Mounted Occupancy Sensors|99|EA $ 205 00 $ 620 00
7-New Breakers for New HUH Units|99|AL $ 500 00 $ 500 00
8-New Wiring/ Conduit to Pumps/ New Breaker in Ex Panel See above
New Electrical - Garage [E-203]:
1 - New Wiring and Conduit System for DO-1 Units, New Breakers in Existing Panels|99|INST $ 2,180 00 $ 15,260 00
2- New 2000A MSB See above
3 - New ATS-1 See above
4- New MEMA 3R ATS-2 See above
5- Disconnect all non-emergency loads|99|INST $ 210 00 $ 630 00
6 - New Breakers to Feed new De-Icing Pumps/ Control Panels, 7 5HP|99|INST See above
7 - New Wiring and Conduit System Infrared Heaters, New Breakers in Existing Panels 14 INST $ 1,500 00 $ 21,000 00
Wiring 2#12, 1#12G Incl
8- New 1250 kW Diesel Generator See below
9-New Underground feeder from generator to building See above
10B- Ceiling mounted OS|99|EA S 230 00 $ 920 00
14-New Wiring/ Conduit to Door Heaters|99|EA $ 1,340 00 $ 5,360 00
15-New Wiring/ Conduits to Air Compressor|99|EA $ 920 00 $ 1,840 00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor-Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF) RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT PRICE BUDGET SUB-TOTAlII
| 26000 ELECTRICAL - contd. -contd.
Mechanical/ Plumbing Tie Ins
VAV 24 EA $ 415 00 $ 9,960 00
IR 14 EA S 415 00 $ 5,810 00
HRV|99|EA $ 1,340 00 $ 2,680 00
HWP 9 EA $ 570 00 $ 5,130 00
HWUH 16 EA $ 310 00 $ 4,960 00
AHU|99|EA $ 1,340 00 $ 1,340 00
ACU|99|EA $ 465.00 $ 1,400 00
AC|99|EA $ 415 00 $ 830 00
New Electrical - Roof [E-250]:
1 - New Wiring and Conduit System to Feed New Heat Recovery Units (HRV) @ Roof|99|INST See above
New WP/GFCI @ Roof for HRVs|99|EA $ 650 00 $ 1,950 00
Receptacles Existing to remain
Lighting Existing to remain
Lightning Protection NIC
Grounding System Existing to remain
Standby Generator Diesel (1,250 KW, 277/408V) [E-203]|99|AL $ 400,000 00 $ 400,000.00
Weatherproof Enclosure|99|AL $ 40,000 00 $ 40,000 00
Load Bank (650KW) Incl
(2) NEMA 3R Automatic Transfer Switches Incl
Re-Feed Existing Panels as Needed for New ATS Units Incl
Connect to Existing 230KW Generator Incl
Underground Feeder From Gen to MSB-1 in Bldg. Overhead See Above
(4) 5" Empty PVC S40 Incl
Fuel Tank, exterior pad mounted (~12HRs) Incl
New Concrete Pad - 8' x 18' Incl
Generator Grounding System Incl
Existing 200Gallon Aboveground Fuel Tank Existing to remain
Verify/ Replace Conduit Size Prior to Re-pulling New Circuits|99|AL $ 25,00000 $ 25,000 00
27000 COMMUNICATIONS $ -|
| 28000 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY Existing to Remain $
Electronics Safety and Security Existing to Remain
Fire Alarm System Existing to Remain
31000 EARTHWORK $ -I
Site Work:
Structural Excavation N/A
Backfill / Compaction N/A
Haul/ Disposal of Spoils (On Airport Property) N/A
Haul/ Disposal (On Airport Property) N/A
Exterior Concrete / Backfill / Compaction N/A
IFPR SUBMITTAL
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements Chicago - Midway International Airport 6201 South Laramie Avenue Task Order No. 26650-85-TSK-00001 Spec. No 26650
Project No. M8119.15-00
106,615
RENOVATION - Phase 1 + 3 Phase 3 - Existing Building (SF)
26,450
65,365
14,800
2,971
4/25/2017
1st Floor - Office (SF) 1st Floor - Storage (SF) 2nd Floor - Office (SF) Phase 1 - Pot/ Ace. Tank Areas (SF)
RENOVATION - IFPR Submittal
AL = Allowance; CY = Cubic Yard (volume); EA = Each; INST = Instance; LDS = Truck Loads; LF = Linear Foot; LS = Lump Sum; SF = Square Foot Area
DESCRIPTION
32000 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS
Site Demolition:
Phase 1 - Demo @ Existing Potassium Acetate Storage Tank
Phase 1 - Prep for New Underground Potassium Acetate Storage Tank
Sawcut / Remove Existing Pavement - Concrete
Remove Pavement Markings
Remove Fence
Remove Existing Pavement
Sawcut Pavement (Concrete)
Excavation for New Tank
Haul/ Disposal (non-contaminated)
New Underground Potassium Ace Storage Tank
Remove Abandoned Storm Pipe
Remove Storm Manholes
Remove Vents
Remove Oil & Water Separator
New Site Work:
Phase 1 - New Site Work @ Underground Acetate Tank: [C200]
New 2" Bit Concrete Pavement/ 3" Binder
6" Bituminous Base Course
10" Granular Subbase Course (CA-6)
New Concrete Pavement - 11"PCC
4" Cement Treated Aggregate Base
8" Granular Subbase Course (CA-6)
'New Curb and Gutter to match existing
New 5"PCC/ Over 4" Base Sidewalk
New Fence - 10' Type A
New Oil & Water Separator
Site Lighting
Site Landscaping / Restoration Site Parking / Signage / Stripping
33000 UTILITIES $
Storm/ Sewer N/A
Storm Detention - Detention Pond N/A
Water N/A
Electrical N/A
Gas N/A
Telephone N/A
CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL - RENOVATION $ 5,418,000.00
IFPR SUBMITTAL
B 14 Installation of F1S 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Project Number: 14
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0
Bond Capital: $$7,037,197
Bond Financing & Interest: $$7,037,197
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $ $14,074,394
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing ALP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A
State Grants: $0
Local Funds: $4,664,753
Revised 8/31/2010
B-197
B 14 Installation of FIS 2 Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Other (please specify) $0 Subtotal Other Funds: $0 Total Project Cost: $18,739,147
For FAA Use1
Does the project include a proposed LOI?| '[ ] YES
l ] NQ i
ilf YES, does the Region support?] { ]YES[
I ] NOJ
ilf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?! '[ ] VEST
c. For any proposed ALP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's fcive year CIPj ' '[ ]YES
[_]_NQ
jd. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:;
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ '[ ] YES"
I ] NOf .
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through A1P?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00, and $4.50. The publ ic agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, arid aircraft gates, '[ ] YES [ ] NOT
J ] N/AJ
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding]
|f. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis,
iPFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-198
B 14 Installation of F1S 2 Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
For FAA Use1
I|99|:|910|Ilf required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional1 approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration^ jof collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any ' discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the funding it proposes.,
8. Project Description:
This project funds the redevelopment of the Federal Inspection Services (FIS) Bag Claim area and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office area to provide additional bag claim capacity at Midway (Exhibit 34, 35). A letter from the CBP approving of the proposed revisions to their operating area can be found in Exhibit 33.
This project will demolish approximately 800 square-feet of existing CBP office space to create additional public finished space to install an additional slope plate bag claim device with associated conveyors. This project will add one additional slope plate bag claim device in an area currently occupied by CBP offices, and replace the existing flat plate bag claim device in the FIS International Bag Claim Hall with a new slope plate claim device. The current FIS space is 12,000 square-feet and will be reconfigured to approximately 12,860 square-feet. This project also includes environmental planning and PFC planning efforts.
Table 14-1 shows the calculation of the estimated PFC-eligible costs associated with the FIS Second Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration. The eligible proration percentage calculation is 72.86 percent1, which is applied to the $5,703,090 in FIS second bag claim device and space reconfiguration total construction costs2, less the high-cost 100 percent eligible items (i.e. baggage handling devices). Including the 100 percent eligibility of high-cost items, it is estimated that approximately 79.33 percent of the total construction, design, and program management costs are PFC-eligible, or $7,037,197. The cost estimate for this project is in Exhibit 36.
1 The 72.86% eligibility was determined by analyzing the entire FIS project area. Eligible components include FIS processing space, baggage claim areas, egress paths, baggage inspection space and public bathrooms. Ineligible spaces include administration spaces, passenger search rooms, storage rooms, and non-public corridors.
: The total project costs estimate for the Installation of FIS 2"d Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration is $11,701,950, which includes $8,871,105.55 in construction costs, in addition to $2,830,844.46 in contingencies. All contingencies arc not included in this application.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-199
B 14 Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Table 14-1: Estimated PFC-Eligible Construction Project Costs
„ „ „|99|Total Construction Estimated PFC Estimated PFC-Eligible
Construction Component .... _ °.
Costs Eligibility Construction Costs
Hard Costs $5,703,090 72.86% $4,155,285
Baggage Handling $1,784,057 100.00% $1,784,057
Total Construction Costs $7,487,147 79.33% $5,939,342
Design $473,383 79.33% $375,521
PM $910,576 79.33% $722,334
Total Construction Project Costs $8,871,106 $7,037,197
PFC Use Authority Requested
PFC PAYGO $0
PFC Bond Capital $7,037,197
PFC Bond Financing and Interest $7,037,197
Total PFC Use Authority Requested - Construction Project $14,074,394
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: 74 Number of gates: 43
Number of baggage facilities: There are 8 Bag Claim Carousels for the Inbounds, 4 Makeup Units for the Outbound, and 1 Bag claim in the FIS.
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: 74 Number of gates: 43
Number of baggage facilities: There will be 8 Bag Claim Carousels for the Inbounds, 4 Makeup Units for the Outbound, and 2 Bag claims in the FIS.
Net change due to this project: 0 Number of ticket counters: 0 Number of gates: 0 Number of baggage facilities: 1
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
iFOR FAA USE'
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.,
Revised 8/31/2010
B-200
B 14 Installation of FIS 2 Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing_ runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is t likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.!
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,' gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been Icompleted.P
jTerminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate1 provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES^
[ ] no' f i n/a1
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will reduce congestion and enhance capacity with the installation of a new bag claim carousel to improve baggage processing efficiency. This project will also replace the existing flat plate carousel installed during the Terminal Modernization project in 2001. The installations of the new baggage carousel devices will double the existing baggage processing capacity. The addition carousel configuration will provide capacity to handle approximately 200 additional bags on two rotating sloped plate bag carousels to handle the volume from a 737-800 gauge aircraft. The existing flat plate carousel unit will be replaced with a smaller carousel unit with sloped plates that will allow for additional baggage capacity. This smaller carousel will reduce the unit's footprint and provide additional circulation space for arriving passengers.
Therefore, this project reduces congestion and increases baggage handling capacity. Thus, this project meets the significant contribution requirements of reducing congestion and enhancing safety.
FOR FAA USF|
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)'
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ 1 or Anticipated [ ]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-201
B 14 Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
LOI [ j FAA BCA [ J FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan
¦ l "" '. "in "
Other (explain) ;
Noise. 65 LDN \ 1 Other (explain) L - |
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules.'
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of signi ficant contribution option chosen by public agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s)1 pf data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
[If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers toj [competition at the airportJ
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to enhance capacity with the reconfiguration of the existing FIS space for the installation of a new bag claim carousel and for the replacement of the new baggage carousel for improved baggage processing efficiency.
iFOR FAA USE _
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
airport _
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport;
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding'
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part; bf the PFC application.r
Address adequacy of issues.!
11. Project Justification:
The Airport is experiencing an increase in international flight arrivals. As shown in Table 14-2, the average number of international flights arriving daily has increased significantly in the last decade. In 2017, there are on average between 10 and 14
Revised 8/31/2010
B-202
B 14 Installation of FIS 2 Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
daily international arrivals scheduled and during peak season (April and July 2017), the Airport had as many as 16 scheduled international arrivals on a single day.
Table 14-2: Average Daily International Arrivals at MDW (January 2004 to December 2017)
*3-OOOOOOOOOOOOtHrHtHtHtHrH^HT-lrH^HTH^H^HtH^H^H
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
rNr\lnJfNrgr\lr>jrNloJr>lrN(N(N(Nrvtr>J(N(Nrsir>jrNjrvlrgrvlrvifNr^(N c "5 c 3 c "5 c "5 c ~5 c "5 c"5 c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 c 3 c"5 c 3
Source: Innovata, October 2017.
This increase in international flights has increased passenger volumes and bag volumes within the FIS area and the current FIS Bag Claim area is undersized to accommodate two simultaneous arrival operations. This new bag claim configuration will provide capacity to handle approximately 200 bags on two rotating sloped plate bag claim units. The anticipated bag volume from a 737-800 gauge aircraft (variables include load factor, bags per passenger and origination location) is expected to be approximately 175 bags per flight or 350 bags for two simultaneous flights. This project will enhance the Airport's capacity and competition abilities. In addition, the reconfigured CBP spaces will consolidate certain functions and improve passenger interview and screening spaces.
iFOR FAA USB
i|9910|Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objectivefs)
i r
Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this obiective(s)
Revised 8/31/2010
B-203
B 14 Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of thct
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part jofthis PFC application,
(¦- — — ¦- ¦ — --¦ ._
ilf analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding!
[Project Eligibility:',
(Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category below.]
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or
| PGL_);I
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGL!
I );!
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above]
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;
[ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.1
| [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;
[Title and Date of Part 150:[___
[ ] Project included in a local study]
(Title and Date of local study:|
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C)_ :'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)( F) (air carrier
| percentage of annual boardings )_;;
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)]
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, l ist the source(s) of data. and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
ATe any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated,
icosts.r
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): September 1, 2014 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): December 31, 2017
For FAA Use
i|99|—|910|For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?|
[ ] Yes LLNoT
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, [or PFC application Due date, whichever is first?
\ 1 Yes
Revised 8/31/2010
B 14 Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
lis this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation oij completion. Explain.!
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
For FAA Use
i _i
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej
|Whichever is sooner.
[ ] Yesr
LlNof
i ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ j
|Which actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the; .estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and S4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-205
B 14 Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
16. List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None
List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
iFor FAA Use
i _ i .
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ
Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied on
by the FAA for its analysis.r
i ——————¦ ¦ . ,
jlf a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)'
ADO/RO Recommendation3
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RQ use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.!
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify] .eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costsJ
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
lADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
i ||910|[_] Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.'
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues, !that lead to determination.!
^Application Reviewed byj
Name Routing Symbol Date,
jltem(s) reviewed.
Name Routing Symbol Date,
ltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-206
5600 Pearl Street Rosemont, IL 60018-5213
OCT 2 6 2017
Mr. Michael Cosentino Director, Capital Finance Chicago Department of Aviation Aviation Administration Building 10510 West Zemke Road Chicago, IL 60666
Mr. Cosentino,
This letter verifies that the installation of the second bag claim device and space reconfiguration construction within the Federal Inspection Service area at Chicago Midway International Airport is aligned to current CBP staffing levels in order to address the level of flight arrivals that now arrive at this facility.
Please feel free to contact Chief CBP Officer Joseph Chavez via phone at (773) 948-6330 x 103 or through email at ioseph.a.chavez@,cbp.dhs.gov should you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Matthew S. Davies Area Port Director U.S. Customs and Border Protection Chicago, Illinois
B-207
• il
Hi
r— O rf
II*
—: -i- l_ " r- .: JS.
, tl CO : . D
|°| 5:5, 0. !s« } I*
, 9bg 55*1 '¦, ,lu i . IP. i
(5)
iff 111
i ill! I
III "-HI--, h I-
13)
23
-o: lij
i < *
j! o
:i
I j i.
T3
cz
CD
OJ O
Q CL E o
TO ©
rS g ^2
CM Q_ CO . Ll_ £
M— .2
° "co
_ _
"ro o ¦*-* o
' ® oo ro
tr co go
X X LU
> o
cr: o
,o
I
I- o t
CC O i
o < ;
CL o l
Q= =F <
9 P
o q is*
s ? s i i 3
a - 5 - ¦
Z * I : I :
- i I I = : 18 B«= S| iK « O I : I r I s
5sSs|ij:
¦5Mp|s>
ami
C3 CC °° z
IS Jul i o < o cc
_.!'!
III!
U lili
I !
m
.....
TS
¦ I.,
;i':'T2flpgP:j
i if n. «
S -II i l l! 3
-
I 2t ,—--„'->. irfjl'l
\ ¦' i r Ss . X&\%, n* mtv
''•I. !• :,. |
/-S I- I S-i
z|1010|CL
Lu5
o < 5
< O *
5 O Q
LU
h
01 .» II
I^Jn .1
56^
Mil
if
- s: I 3
? JfH|J||!fi ?i
iiiilisiiieiseii
.Jl.:.1|J
5 z w & S iT °- Fn
2218
i O < CJ CC
1 <
is !
li i*
!l i
J 1 i v
I
; i I'fr i
!'~n.-
I " !
! I!
i
i! /
El-l'1!111!-
\i 8, I !!? I ill il S!l fillip HIHI
i .
o 2
LU3 , —i u
EXHIBIT 36 Detailed Cost Estimate - Total Project Cost FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space
Description Contracted/Pending
Soft Costs $ 1,383,959.00
Design $ 473,383.00
PM $ 910,576.00
Baggage Handling $ 1,784,056.58
Gen. Conditions/Supv. $ 211,528.00
Submittals/Engineering $ 209,000.00
Manufacturing - Recheck $ 167,000.00
Installation - Recheck $ 180,300.00
Manufacturing - Claim Devices $ 411,000.00
Installation - Claim Devices $ 545,700.00
Change Order #1 -VSU instead of HD (Construe. Savings) $ 29,155.00
Change Order #2 -Misc./Esc. $ 30,373.58
Hard Costs - Includes Enabling and Main FIS Work $ 5,703,089.97
Pre-Construction Services $ 70,000.00
Demolition $ 240,000.00
Concrete/Excavation $ 75,000.00
Masonry $ 5,000.00
Misc. Metals $ 50,000.00
Fencing $ 15,000.00
Carpentry / Drywall / Ceilings $ 741,105.00
Wall Protection $ 11,720.00
HM Doors/Frames $ 124,062.00
Casework $ 218,000.00
Ticket Counters $ 32,425.00
Glazing $ 113,407.00
Flooring (Carpet/VCT) $ 75,750.00
Terrazzo $ 239,300.00
Painting $ 85,000.00
Signage $ 80,761.00
Toilet Accessories $ 5,520.00
Plumbing $ 236,645.00
HVAC $ 241,272.00
Sprinkler $ 77,940.00
Electrical $ 1,039,520.00
Furniture $ 96,300.00
Scope Change (Enabling) $ 230,384.15
Change Order (Enabling Close) $ 65,051.30
Change Orders (Main FIS) $ 277,738.67
General Conditions / OHP $ 1,256,188.85
Sub-Total $8,871,106
Contingency
$2,830,844
Total $11,701,950
Source: Chicago Department of Aviation, November 2017 Prepared by: AvAirPros, November 2017
B-214
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
iPFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Replace Trunked Radio System
Project Number: 15
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4,00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $850,232 Bond Financing & Interest: $850,232
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $1,700,464
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B-215
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $1,700,464
For FAA Use!
Does the project include a proposed LOT? '[ JYES^
I 1 NO{ i
ilf YES, does the Region support?! '[ ¦ ] YES[
[ ] NO]
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support?! '[ ] YES| ~
jc. For any proposed ALP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's1 five year CIP?i '[ ]YES
Llnq
jd. For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:[ _
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ
'[ ] YESr
I ] NO[ i
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP?| List the source(s) of data used to make this finding
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00, and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ] YES1 [ ] NO'
[ ] N/A
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding]
If. Reasonableness of costJ
i >-]
Project Total Cost Analysis jPFC Share of Total Cost Analysis 7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-216
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
iFor FAA Use1
i i , ,
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional.
approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration!
jof collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any '
discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the
funding it proposes.'
8. Project Description:
This project includes the planning1, design and implementation of new trunked radio units within Midway's fleet vehicles. This project will include the purchase, removal and installation of 180 radio units mounted in the Midway (MDW) fleet vehicles. Many component parts of the existing system are no longer supported by the manufacturer. With changes in technology, certain sub-systems are no longer compatible with older components and software and hardware upgrades are often not available because of the age and platform of existing equipment. The proposed units will tie into a new trunked radio system which will provide more technologically advanced equipment, allowing a split of the existing six (6) channels to 12 channels to support multiple talk groups. The additional channels will be particularly advantageous during snow operations when multiple snow teams are operating. The trunked radio system will only be used at MDW for the support and safety of passengers.
Table 15-1 shows the Trunked Radio System replacement in MDW's vehicle fleet. The total cost for the 180 mobile radios and the costs associated with the installation into the vehicles is $850,232.
Table 15-1: Replacement of Radio Units in MDW Fleet Vehicles
150 30 180 180
Description
APX 6500 Mobiles APX 7500 Mobiles DB Mobile Radio Programming Mobile Radio Installation
Total Cost
Unit Price
$4,129 $5,424 S50 S329
Total Price
$619,365 $162,725 $9,000 $59,143
$850,232
This includes environmental and PFC planning efforts.
B-217
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Net change due to this project: N/A Number of ticket counters: N/A Number of gates: N/A Number of baggage facilities: N/A
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
FOR FAA USE1
i ¦ . .
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification
information is not from PFC application.,
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved/
I f the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters} 'gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has been1 ^completed!"
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways) aprons, and aircraft gates, '[ ] YES
I ] no; r i n/a]
Revised 8/3 1/2010
B-218
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will enhance security at the Airport and the surrounding community as the existing trunk radio system establishes communication among approximately 15 different Airport talk groups in emergency situations, including Police, Fire, Trades, Ground Operations, Airside Operations, and Facilities. This proposed radio system replacement will replace a public safety, mission critical radio system with emergency and identification capability that has been in operation for more than 20-years and at the end of its useful life.
FOR FAA USE
_ Air safety. Part 139 [1 Other (explanVj
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 [ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ 1 Other (explain),
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]i
LOI [ 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan1
[ t I .
Other (explain) H
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain)
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules]
jQuantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) ,of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?i
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, 'competition at the airport.
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to enhance security by replace the existing the trunk radio system with a new more reliable radio system. The existing system has been in operation for more than 20 years and is nearing its useful life. Replacement parts and equipment for the existing system are scarce and expensive. This radio system is necessary for effective communication on the airfield.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-219
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
FOR FAA USE
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ J
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
a i rport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport!
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
i |910|Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part
of the PFC application.! Kddress adequacy of issues! 11. Project Justification:
The existing system has been in operation for 20-years and beyond its useful life. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion the useful life for equipment is 10 years. Midway uses a digital radio system to accommodate communications between various Airport operations talk groups. The existing system has experienced an increase in maintenance issues which have resulted in system failures. The radio system currently supports approximately 15 talk groups, which include such entities as Police, Fire, Trades, Ground Operations, Airside Operations, and Facilities, etc. This system is a public safety, mission critical radio system with emergency and ID capability. The system, which has been in operation since 1996, is a UHF, 6-channel, narrow bandwidth system that operates within a one-mile radius of the Airport proper. The narrow bandwidth technology was mandated by the FCC for compliance originally in 2004, but then extended to 2013.
FOR FAA USB
i >-|910|Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s),
i|910|Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s).
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the,
project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part pf this PFC application.!
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data| and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-220
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured above]
Project Eligibility:1
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category below]
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 on
| PGL );!__
[ ] Planningeligible under ATP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 or PGLj
| );' '"
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505;' [ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.|_ j [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan] (title and Date of Part 150:| [ ] Project included in a local study]
(Title and Date of local study:j
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C)]
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 40117(a)(3)(F) (air carrier
| percentage of annual boardings );'
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter j
[ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)]
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
ATe any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated costsT
Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): December 1, 2012 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): December 31, 2017
For FAA Use1
i — ¦ ,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?|
'[ ] Yes
'U_Nc[
For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date; pr PFC application Due date, whichever is first? [ ] Yes"
LlNsi
i — ¦ ¦—¦ j
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation on completion. Explain,
For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year): N/A
Revised 8/31/2010
B-221
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
For FAA Use
i _i—. .
Is the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej
whichever is sooner,
[ ] Yes
LLNcT
iWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the .estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X] NO
If the FAA determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a $4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use,
Revised 8/31/2010
B-222
B 15 Replace Trunked Radio System
[Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied ori by the FAA for its analysis;
If a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)1
|ADO/RO Recommendation:1
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO| use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.'
If the amount requested if over $10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify ^eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs.
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested? ADO/RO RECOMMENDATION:!
! | ¦ '
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing ¦issues that lead to determination.
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues mat lead to determination.!
[ 1 Approve.!
{Application Reviewed byj
Name Routing Symbol Date,
Item(s) reviewed.,
Name Routing Symbol Date!
Item(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-223
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
PFC APPLICATION NUMBER: 17-13-C-00-MDW
ATTACHMENT B: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Project Number: 16
Use Airport of Project: Chicago-Midway International Airport (MDW)
Project Type
[ ] Impose Only:
[X] Concurrent: Impose and Use
[ ] Use Only:
Link to application:
Level of Collection:
[ ] $1.00 [ ] $4.00
[ ] $2.00 [X] $4.50
[ ] $3.00
Financing Plan
PFC Funds: Pay-as-you-go: $0 Bond Capital: $5,032,800 Bond Financing & Interest: $5,032,800
Subtotal PFC Funds*: $10,065,600
If amount is over $10 million, include cost details sufficient to identify eligible and ineligible costs.
Existing AIP Funds:
Grant # N/A Grant Funds in Project $0
Subtotal Existing AIP Funds: $0
Anticipated AIP Funds (List Each Year Separately):
Fiscal Year: N/A Entitlement $0 Discretionary $0 Total $0
Subtotal Anticipated AIP Funds: $0
Other Funds: N/A State Grants: $0 Local Funds: $0
Revised 8/31/2010
B-224
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Other (please specify) $0
Subtotal Other Funds: $0
Total Project Cost: $10,065,600 For FAA Use!
Does the project include a proposed LOI?i '[ ]YESf
I ] NQ ; ,
If YES, does the Region support? [ ]YES[~
\ ] NOl
jlf YES, list the schedule for implementation:;
For any proposed AIP discretionary funds, does the Region intend to support? '[ ] YESj"
Ll_NQ
For any proposed AIP funds, is the request within the planning levels for the Region's five year CTP?!
'[ ] YES1
Llns
For project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:]
Is there an expectation that AIP funding will be available to pay the project costsJ '[ ] YES
I ] NQ |
jWhat percentage of the total project cost is funded through AIP? List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.
e. Terminal and surface transportation projects requesting a PFC funding level of $4.00] and $4.50. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside, needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gatesJ '[ ] YES '[ ] NO
[ ] N/A
List the source(s) of data used to make this finding.!
if. Reasonableness of costJ Project Total Cost Analysis
PFC Share of Total Cost Analysis
7. Back-up Financing Plan:
Revised 8/31/2010
B-225
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
If proposed AIP discretionary funds or a proposed LOI are included in the Financing Plan, provide a Back-up Financing Plan or a project phasing plan in the event the funds are not available for the project.
Not Applicable
iFor FAA Use1
If required to use a back-up financing/phasing plan, indicate the need to obtain additional approvals to obtain an alternate source of financing. Indicate the additional PFC duration; 'of collection required if PFC's are to be used to fund the difference. Recap any]~ 'discussion from previous item regarding likelihood of public agency obtaining the funding it proposes,
8. Project Description:
This project will enable the airlines to separate bags from multiple flights with similar departure times by directing baggage to a fourth makeup unit (BMU). The current operational restriction only allows baggage to be sent to three BMUs. This project will increase operational flexibility by allowing bags inducted at the north or south ticket counters to be sent to any of the four BMUs at the Airport. In addition, the project includes the replacement of the Explosives Detection System (EDS) equipment on the north portion of the system as part of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Recapitalization and Optimization program. A letter from the TSA approving of the proposed construction can be found in Exhibit 37.
This project includes the relocation of sprinkler heads, lights, cameras, and exit signs, modifications to the air ducts, installation of a conveyor line from X07 conveyor line, modifications to the Out Bound 4 conveyor line, installation of six new conveyors, installation of two high definition scanners (typically installed over a Baggage Handling System (BHS) line to scan bag labels) and required catwalk, and additional power to the required Motor Control Panel (contains electrical control and power circuit devices for the control of the BHS and power distribution points. This project also includes environmental and PFC planning efforts.
If applicable for terminal projects, Prior to implementation of this project, Number of ticket counters: 74 Number of gates: 43
Number of baggage facilities: There are 8 Bag Claim Carousels for the Inbounds, 4 Makeup Units for the Outbound, and 1 Bag claim in the FIS.
At completion of this project, Number of ticket counters: 74 Number of gates: 43
Number of baggage facilities: There will be 8 Bag Claim Carousels for the Inbounds, 4 Makeup Units for the Outbound, and 1 Bag claim in the FIS.
Revised 8/31/2010
B-226
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Net change due to this project: 0 Number of ticket counters: 0 Number of gates: 0 Number of baggage facilities: 0
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates. [ ]YES [ ] NO [X] N/A
FOR FAA USE'
Comment upon and/or Clarify Project Description. Include source citation if clarification information is not from PFC application.
If project involves the construction of a new runway or modification of an existing
runway, have the requirements of Order 5200.8, with regard to runway safety areas been1 met? If not, is the runway grandfathered or has a modification been approve, or is there a likelihood the requirements will be met, or should the project be disapproved.!
If the project involves terminal work, confirm information regarding ticket counters,! gates, and baggage facilities for construction and/or rehabilitation above has beenr !completed.j~
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways] aprons, and aircraft gates. '[ ] YES '[ ] NOT
'r i n/a]
9. Significant Contribution:
This project will reduce congestion and maintain security with the installation of new EDS equipment and the crossover infrastructure to allow inducted bags to all four BMUs serving the Airport. The current operation restriction only allows baggage to be sent to three BMUs. The installation of the crossover will allow for usage of all four units increasing operational efficiency and reducing congestion. Interruptions in aircraft departure or arrival times can have a detrimental effect on baggage handling capacity during peak periods. Since baggage handling is not automated, it requires baggage handlers to evaluate and scan each bag label and place it in the correct baggage cart. When too many bags are being directed to certain BMUs the
Revised 8/31/2010
B-227
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
system can reach a saturation point and potentially shut down, which often causes delays and therefore creates congestion on the ramps and airfield.
In addition this project will maintain security with the EDS replacement. Before replacement the EDS equipment was over 10 years old and at the end of its useful life.
FOR FAA USE'
Air safety. Part 139 [ ] Other (explain)
Certification Inspector concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Air security. Part 107 [ ] Part 108 \ 1 Other (explain)'
CASFO concur. Yes [ ] No [ ] Date
Competition. Competition Plan [ ] Other (explain)
Congestion. Current [ ] or Anticipated [ ]
LOI I" 1 FAA BCA [ 1 FAA Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan,
[ t
Other (explain)
Noise. 65 LDN [ 1 Other (explain)
Project does not qualify under "significant contribution " rules.}
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of significant contribution option chosen by public^ agency. If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) jof data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.;
i " ;|910|How does this project address the deficiency sited by the public agency?
If competition is the chosen option, provide the FAA's analysis of any barriers to, {competition at the airport]
10. Project Objective:
The objective of this project is to enhance capacity and preserve security with the addition of a crossover to allow baggage induction from the north and south ticket counters to any of the BMUs and the replacement of EDS units. The use of all the BMUs will prevent baggage saturation on a BMU that could impact the rate at which bags are loaded to carts to aircraft. A BMU shut down due to saturation could have a significant impact on airfield operations due to delays. The current EDS equipment was over 10 years old and nearing the end of its useful life. Replacement of this equipment is needed in order to maintain baggage capacity and Airport security.
FOR FAA USE!
Revised 8/31/2010
B-228
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Safety, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ~]
Security, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Capacity, Preserve [ ] Enhance [ ]
Furnish opportunity for enhanced competition between or among air carriers at the
ai rport
Mitigate noise impacts resulting from aircraft operations at the airport!
Project does not meet any PFC objectives (explain)
Finding
I e !
Current deficiency. List the source(s) of data used to make this finding if it is not a part of the PFC application.!
Kddress adequacy of issues]
11. Project Justification:
Southwest Airlines (Southwest) is the largest air carrier located at Midway. Southwest utilizes all the ticket counters that feed the north baggage handling system (BHS). The current layout of the north BHS allows for bags to be sent to BMUs (1), (3), and (4). The BHS does not allow for bags to be sent to BMU 2. As Southwest passenger and bag volumes increase, the makeup capacity of the BHS also needs to increase. The sortation from X07 to Makeup 2 will increase Southwest's makeup capacity by providing a conveyor line to feed BMU 2 from the north BHS. This project also replaced EDS equipment. The EDS units were over 10 years old and all used by Southwest and accounted for 90 percent of the total bag processing for the Airport.
FOR FAA USE
i i
Define how the project accomplishes PFC Objective(s)
i ; ¦|910|Explain how project is cost-effective compared to other reasonable and timely means to, accomplish this objective(s)
Based on informed opinion or published FAA guidance, specify how the cost of the project is reasonable compared to the capacity, safety, security, noise and/or competition benefits attributable to the project. Include citation for any documents that are not a part 'of this PFC application.
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding]
i — .. .. . _ —|910|Discuss any non-economical benefits which are not captured aboveJ
Revised 8/31/2010
B-229
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Project Eligibility:1
Indicate project eligibility by checking the appropriate category belowJ
[ ] Development eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 ori
| PGL );l "
[ ] Planning eligible under AIP criteria (paragraph of Order 5100.38 orPGl]
! );!
[ ] Noise compatibility planning as described in 49 U.S.C. 47505} [ ] Noise compatibility measures eligible under 49 U.S.C. 47504.|_ | [ ] Project approved in an approved Part 150 noise compatibility plan;'
Title and Date of Part 150:^
[ ] Project included in a local study]
jTitle and Date of local study:]
[ ] Terminal development as described in 49 U.S.C. 40117(a)(3)(C);'
'[ ] Shell of a gate as described in 49 U.S.C 401 17(a)(3)(F) (air carrier ~3
| percentage of annual boardings );<
[ ] PFC Program Update Letter
\ 1 Project does not meet PFC eligibility (explain)J
i ——. . . . ,
If analysis is based on a source other than this PFC application, list the source(s) of data and attach the relevant documentation used to make this finding.!
Are any work elements or portions of the overall project ineligible? Provide associated,
Icosts.r
12. Estimated Project Implementation Date (Month and Year): April 12, 2017 Estimated Project Completion Date (Month and Year): December 31, 2018
iFor FAA Use
i|99|,
For Impose and Use or Use Only projects, will the project begin within 2 years of PFC;
application Due date (120-day)?j
'[ ] Yes
i ¦— — ¦|910|For Impose Only project, will the project begin within 5 years of the charge effective date, pr PFC application Due date, whichever is first? | ] Yes"
Is this project dependent upon another action to occur before its implementation or Icompletion. Explain.
13. For an Impose Only project, estimated date Use application will be submitted to the FAA (Month and Year):N/A
iFor FAA Use]
Revised 8/31/2010
B-230
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
lis the date within 3 years of the estimated charge effective date or approval datej whichever is sooner., [ ] Yes1 ' L]_N2r
jWhich actions are needed before the use application can be submitted? What is the estimated schedule for each action?
Project requesting PFC funding levels of $4.00 and $4.50:
Can project costs be paid for from funds reasonably expected to be available through AIP funding.
[ ]YES [X]NO
If the FAA'determines that the project may qualify for AIP funding, would the public agency prefer that the FAA approve
[X] the amount of the local match to be collected at a S4.50 PFC level, or [ ] the entire requested amount at a $3.00 PFC level.
Terminal and surface transportation projects. The public agency has made adequate provision for financing the airside needs of the airport, including runways, taxiways, aprons, and aircraft gates.
[X] YES [ ] NO [ ] N/A
List of Carriers Certifying Agreement
Carriers implied certification of agreement in accordance with 14 CFR Part 158.23(c)(3): If a carrier fails to provide the public agency with timely acknowledgement of the notice or timely certification of agreement or disagreement with the proposed project, the carrier is considered to have certified its agreement.
List of Carriers Certifying Disagreement: None
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
List of Comments Received from the Public Notice: None List of Parties Certifying Agreement.
Recap of Disagreements
Public Agency Reasons for Proceeding:
For FAA Use
Revised 8/31/2010
B-231
B 16 Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Provide an analysis of each issue/disagreement raised by the air carriers and/or the publicJ Provide citations for any documents not included in the PFC application that are relied oxi,
by the FAA for its analysis]
jlf a Federal Register notice is published, discuss and analyze any new issues raised. (If the comments from the consultation are repeated, state that.)!
[ADO/RO Recommendation:1
Does the ADO/RO find the total costs of this project to be reasonable? Did the ADO/RO; use comparable projects to make this finding? If so, list projects.!
If the amount requested if over S10 million, was the level of detail sufficient to identify {eligible and ineligible costs. Summarize ineligible costs
Is the duration of collection adequate for the amount requested?
ADO/RO RECOMMENDATION!
i I :|910|[ 1 Approve.!
[ ] Partially Approve. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
[ ] Disapprove. Summarize findings from earlier in the Attachment B discussing issues that lead to determination.!
jApplication Reviewed by]
Name Routing Symbol Date,
!tem(s) reviewed.!
Name Routing Symbol Date!
jltem(s) reviewed
Revised 8/31/2010
B-2 32
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Chicago Midway International Airport
Transportation
Security
Administration
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael Cosentino
Director - Capital Finance Chicago Department of Aviation
FROM: Kevin G. McCarthy
Federal Security Director ( Chicago Midway International Airport
DATE: November 17,2017
RE: Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
The City of Chicago Department of Aviation is pursuing utilizing Passenger Facility Charges (PFC) funding via the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to expand the passenger security checkpoint, install a Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover and replace the Explosive Detection System (EDS) equipment at Chicago Midway International Airport. The TSA understands that the FAA is seeking TSA approval and concurrence with these proposed projects. The TSA supports these projects and expects to the staff the expanded checkpoint facilities. The TSA support for these initiatives is provided with the full understanding from all interested parties that TSA bears no financial obligation, either implicitly or explicitly, to fund these projects. The TSA will further review and approve the design plans for the passenger checkpoint expansion and Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover to ensure both projects meet operational requirements.
5561 S. Archer Avenue, Suite 2A Chicago, Illinois 60638
www.tsa.gov
Phone: (773) 498-1329 Fax: (773) 948-6153
B-233
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ATTACHMENT C. AIR CARRIER CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC NOTICE
INFORMATION
The section contains the following information:
Page C -1 The May 2, 2017 letter and distribution list that provided notification to the air carriers and foreign air carriers at Chicago Midway International Airport as required by 14 CFR Part 158.
Page C-27 PFC Application 17-13-C-00-MDW Distribution List
Page C - 30 Letters from carriers acknowledging receipt of the notification letter.
Page C - 31 Proof that Public Notice was provided on the Department of Aviation website as required by 14 CFR Part 158. This posting ran from June 1, 2017 through July 1, 2017.
Page C - 33 The full text of the Public Notice.
Page C - 48 A list of the airline representatives that attended, via phone, the Air Carrier Consultation Meeting held on June 1, 2017.
Page C - 49 Air Carrier Consultation Meeting summary
Page C - 51 Meeting agenda and materials provided for the Air Carrier Consultation Meeting
Page C - 54 No comments from the air carriers or public comments were received for the projects included in this application.
j PFC Application No. 18-13-C-OO-MDW
Chicago Department of Aviation city of chicago
May 2, 2017
Re: City of Chicago notice to air carriers prior to submitting a Notice of Intent to impose and use a passenger facility charge (PFC) at Chicago Midway International Airport, PFC Application No. 17-13-C-00-MDW
:
In accordance with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 158.23, the City of Chicago (City) hereby provides written notice of its intent to file an application with the Federal Aviation Administration for authority under provisions of the United States Code (49 U.S.C. 40117) to impose a passenger facility charge, and to use passenger facility charge revenue for projects at Chicago Midway International Airport ("Midway"). This notice includes information pursuant to 14 CFR 158.23 and is provided to all air carriers and foreign air carriers having a significant business interest at M idway.
The City will hold a meeting to present the projects to air carriers operating at Midway on Thursday, June 1,2017. The City will accept carrier comments, and certifications of agreement or disagreement with the proposed projects, until July 1, 2017.
Application to Impose a PFC and Use PFC Revenue for Projects at Midway
14 CFR 158.23(a)(1). Description of Projects
The City intends to file an application to impose a PFC and to use PFC revenue for the following projects at Midway:
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall|1010|
BOX £61,42, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60666
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway Alpha Extension and Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Yankee & Kilo
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Replacement of Trunk Radio System
Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
The following information is included under 'Additional Information' with this notice for use at the meeting on June 1, 2017:
Descriptions and justifications of the proposed PFC projects. PFC Authority Proposed PFC Timeline
Air Carrier Consultation Meeting Notice Receipt Acknowledgment
The total amount of PFC revenue currently estimated to be associated with this proposed impose and use application is $397,208,965 ($198,604,483 of capital funding authority and $198,604,483 of financing authority). The total amount of this PFC Application is subject to refinement based on the PFC eligibility of certain components. The City anticipates that this entire amount will be approved for a PFC at the $4.50 level.
14 CFR 158.23 (a)(2). The PFC Level, Effective Date, Expiration Date and Total Revenue
PFC Level: $4.50 per enplaned passenger at Midway
Charge Effective Date: September 1, 2054
Estimated Charge Expiration Date1: September 1, 2062
Estimated Total PFC Revenue: $2,603,781,950
The above proposed charge expiration date and total PFC revenue reflect the current impose and use PFC approval and the total amount of PFC revenue as modified only by this proposed impose and use application.
1 Expiration date estimated based on an annual collection of approximately $45 million, rounded to the nearest month.|1010|
C-2
14 CFR 158.23(a)(3). Request that a Class of Carriers not be Required to Collect PFCs.
The following is information required specifically for the proposed impose and use application above.
(i) Class Designation: Air Taxi
(ii) /(iii) Names of Known Carriers .Belonging to Class Identified in this Section
and Estimated Number of Annual Enplaned Passengers:
Carrier 2015 Enplanements
Aero Jet Services 67
Cobb Aviation Services Inc. 25
Corporate Flight Alternatives, Inc. 33
Crow Executive Air, Inc. 32
North Country Aviation, Inc. 1,000
Priester Aviation LLC 161
Skybird Aviation, Inc.|910|Tulip City Air Service, Inc. 15
Total 1,337
Source: ACAIS Database, Accessed April 2017
(iv) Reasons for Reguesting that Carriers Identified in this Section Not be Reguired
to Collect the PFC: The number of passengers enplaned annually by this class of carriers represents fewer than one percent of total enplanements at Midway. The estimated annual PFC revenue from these carriers would be approximately $5,869 as compared to the estimated PFC revenue of $41,692,000 from all other carriers. In accordance with 14 CFR 158.11, the City may request of the FAA in its application for authority to impose PFCs, and in its application for authority to use PFCs, that collection of PFCs by any class of air carriers or foreign air carriers not be reguired if the number of passengers enplaned by the carriers in this class constitutes no more than one percent of the total number of passengers enplaned annually at the airport at which the PFC is imposed. This is the case with the class of carriers identified herein.
This is the same class that was already approved for exemption by FAA (See June 28, 1993 Record of Decision, p.26). Information on known carriers belonging to the class has been updated to reflect the Department of Transportation (DOT) Air Carrier Activity Information System Report for calendar year 2015, the most recent report available to the City.
|1010|
C-3
14 CFR 158.23(a)(4). Date and Location of Air Carrier Consultation Meeting.
The City will hold a meeting to present the project to air carriers operating at Midway:
Date: Thursday June 1, 2017 Time: 11:30AM
Chicago Department of Aviation - Executive Conference Room Chicago Midway International Airport 5700 S. Cicero Ave. Chicago, IL 60638
Dial In Number: 641-715-3580 Pass Code: 685937
If you or a representative are unable to attend the meeting and would like to review information to be provided at the meeting, please call Reshma Soni at (773) 686-7635 or email Reshma.Soni@cityofchicago.org to receive the package electronically or through the mail.
In accordance with 14 CFR 158.23(c)(1), please provide a written acknowledgment that you have received this notice to the address below, or by sending an email to Reshma.Soni@cityofchicago.org . The last page of this notice can be used to send written acknowledgement of receiving the notice.
Reshma Soni
Chief Financial Officer
Aviation Administration Building
10510 West Zemke Road, 2nd Floor
Chicago, IL 60666
Ginger S. Evans Commissioner
Sincerely,
|1010|
C-4
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Application to Impose a PFC and Use PFC Revenue for Projects at Midway Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Project Description:
This proposed project is for the rehabilitation of the airfield lighting infrastructure system at Chicago Midway International Airport (Midway or the Airport). This project will design and install a new duct bank and manhole system that will provide a more efficient and maintainable airfield electrical system. This project will include the installation of a new duct bank to provide more direct routing of circuits, as well as include the installation of new manholes and hand holes that minimize the need to access runway and taxiway safety areas for system maintenance. Also included in this project is the replacement of aging cabling and new duct banks for additional capacity to handle future improvements and demand.
Project Need/Justification:
The airfield lighting infrastructure improvements rehabilitation will enhance safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for the minimum useful life for airfield lighting is 10-years. Much of the Airport's current airfield electrical infrastructure is over 30-years old and beyond its useful life. As circuits have been added and modified over the years, the existing duct bank system has been fully utilized or slightly modified to accommodate these changes. As the duct bank system nears its capacity, maintenance operations and future modifications will be more labor intensive and costly. Steps have been taken to address a portion of the home run cabling on the airfield through the installation of the new duct bank on the prior Runway 13C-31C Rehabilitation project; however, additional infrastructure will be needed to add capacity to re-cable the airfield lighting system. This project will also relocate much of the existing electrical infrastructure and manholes outside of the runway safety area to allow Airport maintainers access with minimum disruption to airfield operations.
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Project Description:
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of the airside Service Road at|1010|
C-5
Midway. The airside Service Road is approximately 12,600 linear-feet and services the airside of the entire Airport. Prior to the rehabilitation of the Service Road the roadway was an approximately 20-years old and showing significant sign of structural deficiencies due to repeated traffic loading, weathering, and age. Work included a three-inch mill and overlay throughout the roadway system, adjustments to the drainage structures, and restriping of roadway markings.
Project Need/Justification:
The airside Service Road rehabilitation preserved capacity and maintained safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft and vehicular operations on the airfield. The airside Service Road is vital to airside service operations for both Airport staff and air carriers. Prior to the rehabilitation the road surface needed frequent patching, crack sealing and repairs to maintain its functionality. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion the useful life for airfield pavements is 20 years. Prior to this project the airside service road was last rehabilitated in 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in April 2013, by Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs), indicated that distresses on the service road were consistent with loading and water infiltration due to the presence of fatigue, longitudinal, and edge cracking and pot holes.
The Service Road had an overall weighted PCI rating of 70 or "Satisfactory", but the worst of inspected sections had a PCI of 57 or "Poor". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
Rehabilitation of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Project Description:
This proposed project will rehabilitate sections of Midway's Air Operations Area (AOA) Perimeter Sound Wall (Sound Wall). The Sound Wall is approximately 15,000 linear-feet at a height of 12-feet. The rehabilitation will include selective replacement of damaged panels, columns, and structural wall components, as well as grading at the base of the structures, and painting.
|1010|
C-6
Project Need/Justification:
The Sound Wall is an important component in the Airport's "Fly Quiet Program". These walls are designed to reduce ground level noise associated with aircraft taxiing and takeoff thrust on the communities surrounding the Airport. The Sound Walls' were first installed in 2001 in conjunction with the construction of the new Midway Terminal program. Due to the age of the walls, exposure to the elements and proximity to the surrounding roads have resulted in deterioration of the panels and structural components. This deterioration or damage includes rusted components, dented or punctured panels and deteriorating obstruction lighting. All these components are in need of rehabilitation to ensure continued aesthetic, reduce the impact of aviation noise on people living near the airport, and compliance with Federal Aviation Administration Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program.
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Project Description:
This proposed project will expand the passenger security checkpoint at Midway. The project will construct an 80,000 square-foot pavilion to accommodate current and future passenger traffic flow. This project will also increase the area available for passenger queuing by approximately 80,000 square feet. The existing security checkpoint would be relocated into the pavilion, creating an additional 18,000 square feet of potential revenue-generating areas adjacent to the existing food court.
This project includes the installation of building foundations, erection of structural concrete and steel, installation of a building roof, HVAC systems, communications and security systems along with a facade to complement the existing building finishes both north and south. The building shell and core elements such as mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection will be extended to service the building expansion and new space will receive tenant interior finishes. The tie-in to the existing bridge would include demolition of the existing facade and miscellaneous items to facilitate tie-ins to the pedestrian bridge. In addition to the widening of the pedestrian bridge, there will be a 10,000 square-foot build out to the south of the bridge which ties to the Terminal.
Project Need/Justification:
This project will enhance capacity at the Airport. The expansion of the passenger|1010|
C-7
security checkpoint is needed to increase public circulation in the Terminal to more efficiently accommodate the increasing passenger growth at the Airport. This project will add 10 additional checkpoint lanes to handle over 5,000 passengers per hour. Currently during peak hours, passenger security screen lines extend beyond the existing bridge and into the terminal parking garage. Existing passenger demand and forecast activity increase both support the expansion of the security checkpoint area.
Rehabilitation of Runwav 13C-31C
Project Description:
This proposed project funded for the design and rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and the replacement of the Engineering Material Arresting Systems (EMAS) at Midway. Runway 13C-31C is one of the primary runways at the Airport. The runway is 6,522-feet long by 150-feet wide and comprised of 6,405 linear-feet of bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) pavement and 120-linear feet of portland cement concrete (PCC) on the Runway 31C end.
Prior to the rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31 the pavements were approximately 22-years old and showing signs of fatigue cracking due to structural deficiencies and repeated traffic loading. The rehabilitation of the runway and shoulder included variable depth PCC and AC milling with an overlay of three to nine-inches of bituminous base course and AC surface course. This project also included the installation of new centerline and edge lighting, replacement of signage, installation of new electrical infrastructure, drainage improvements, placement of sodding/seeding for the surrounding runway area, and pavement markings.
The new pavements were designed in accordance with FAA Advisory Circulars (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, AC 150/5320-6E, Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation, and AC 150/5370-14A, Hot Mix Asphalt Paving Handbook. This'project will also restripe the full length of Runway 13C-31C in accordance to AC 150/5340-1L, Standards for Airport Markings.
This proposed project also funded for the design and construction of the replacement of the Runway 13C-31C EMAS. EMAS arrestor beds are composed of lightweight, crushable cement material designed to stop aircraft that overshoot runways. It is a FAA acceptable alternative for preventing overrun catastrophes at airports where runway safety areas are not in compliance with FAA regulations.|1010|
C-8
The replaced EMAS systems were installed in 2006. The EMAS system on Runway End 13C was approximately 215-feet in length and 170-feet in width; Runway End 31C was approximately 200-feet in length and 170-feet in width. This project replaced both EMAS systems with "third generation" EMAS blocks designed to be more durable to weather conditions. The new bed will be designed and installed to meet the requirements established in AC 150-5220-22A Engineered Materials Arresting Systems for Aircraft Overruns.
Project Need/Justification:
The rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C preserved capacity by extending the useful life of the runway to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for runway rehabilitation is 10 years. Runway 13C-31C was last rehabilitated in 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by Edwards & Kelcey Design Services Inc. (E&K), indicated that distresses on Runway 13C-31C were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, rutting, and slippage cracking on the AC sections and presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking on the PCC sections. Runway 13C-31C had an overall PCI rating of 71 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
The replacement of Runway 13C-31C EMAS preserved and enhanced safety by replacing an existing end-of-life-cycle EMAS bed with the latest arresting system technology to prevent aircraft from overrunning the runway. Midway is located in a densely populated area on the southwest side of Chicago, IL. Midway is confined by W. 55th St to the north, S. Cicero Ave to the east, W. 63rd St to the south, and S. Central Ave. to the west. The distances between Runway ends to W. 63rd St and S. Central Ave are both less than 425-feet, significantly less than the established standard of 1,000-foot Runway Safety Area (RSA).
According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the rehabilitation of an EMAS system is eligible if the EMAS bed was installed with Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds prior to fiscal year 2007. This is because EMAS systems installed prior to 2007 did not have the plastic lids. After fiscal year 2007, the|10 10|
C-9
manufacturer began fully encasing the blocks, which has significantly improved moisture protection and joint seals.
Rehabilitation of Runwav 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Project Description:
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin at Midway. The Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin is a 90,000 square-feet concrete structure designed to protect against flooding of the airfield.
Prior to the rehabilitation the detention basin was 22-years old and showing signs of cracking along the entrance ramp, exterior walls, and roof structure of the basin. This project funded for a structural survey and necessary rehabilitation of the detention basin. Rehabilitation efforts included concrete patching and epoxy crack injections.
Project Need/Justification:
Upon completion, this proposed project will preserve capacity of the Airport by preventing flooding on the airfield. The detention basin was installed during the 1992 Runway 13C-31C Rehabilitation project. Since that time, the retaining walls along the entrance ramp, exterior walls, and the structure roof have begun to exhibit structural and hair-line cracks. The head wall at the entrance is exhibiting further cracking and some spalling. Rehabilitation of these areas will increase the useful life of the structure by reducing the possibility of water infiltration into the structure.
Rehabilitation of Runwav 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Project Description:
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R and the reconfiguration of Taxiway Papa (P) at Midway. Runway 4L-22R is approximately 5,507-feet long and 150-feet in width. The surface of the runway is comprised of primarily bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) with the exception of 700-feet on the Runway 4L approach end of portland cement concrete (PCC).
Taxiway P is approximately 4,280-linear feet extending from the south side of the Airport to Runway 4L-22R. This project only reconfigured 1,000-linear feet of the taxiway
10
c-10
between Runway 4R-22L and 4L-22R.
Prior to the latest rehabilitation, the pavements for Runway 4L-22R were approximately 20-years old and showing surface distresses such as corner breaks, longitudinal and transverse cracking, joint and corner spalling, and joint seal damage. The magnitude and severity of these distresses indicated signs of structural deficiencies from repeated traffic loading, and weathering. This project included a variable depth asphalt mill with a six-inch AC overlay on the runway and installation of new PCC pavement sections on Runway end 22R for a run-up area. This project installed new AC surface course shoulders, new drainage systems, replaced runway edge lights and guidance sign bases, and electrical cabling and fixtures.
This proposed project also funded for the reconfiguration of Taxiway P with new AC pavement to allow for a 90 degree intersection at Runway 22R. This entailed the demolition of 50,000 square-feet of AC and material to install a new bituminous base course and three-inch AC surface course taxiway perpendicular to Runway 4L-22R. The project also funded for new shoulders, new taxiway lighting, cabling, and pavement markings.
Project Need/Justification:
The rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R and reconfiguration of Taxiway P preserved capacity and enhance safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the useful life for airfield pavement is 20-years. The last major rehabilitation was done in 1995. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Runway 4L-22R were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, and raveling on the AC sections and presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking on the PCC sections. Runway 4L-22R had an overall PCI rating of 72 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
This proposed project also enhanced safety by complying with Federal Aviation Administration AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design criteria by correcting the taxiway geometry to prevent runway incursions with a perpendicular entry point to the runway.
11
c-11
Rehabilitation of Runwav 4R-22L
Project Description:
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L, supporting Taxiway Y, removal of section of Taxiway K, the installation of Taxiway V, and replaced the Engineering Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) at Midway. Runway 4R-22L is 6,445-feet long and 150-feet wide and primarily comprised of bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) with the exception of 345-feet at Runway end 22L, which is portland cement concrete (PCC).
Taxiway Y is approximately 6,000 linear-feet and serves as the primary taxiway for Runway 4R-22L. This project only rehabilitated specific sections of the north end of Taxiway Y adjacent to the Terminal Apron Ramp.
Taxiway K is approximately 4,250-feet long and 60-feet wide and configured in a west-east configuration traversing both Runways 13C-31C and 4R-22L. This project removed approximately 700 linear-feet taxiway between Runway end 4R and hold block.
Prior to the latest rehabilitation, the pavements for Runway 4R-22L were approximately 19-years old and showing signs of various levels of surface distresses due to structural deficiencies and repeated traffic loading. This project included a variable depth asphalt mill with a three to six-inch AC overlay on the runway, shoulders, and the adjacent connector/crossing taxiways and their shoulders. This project also included the construction of new shoulders, replacement of runway edge lights, adjustments to the runway centerline lights, installation of new conduit and cabling and installation of underdrains to match the improvements that were made to the north section of Taxiway P.
This proposed project also upgraded Taxiway P north of 4R-22L to meet FAA criteria for Boeing 737 aircraft.
Also included in this proposed project was the removal of Taxiway K west of Runway 4R to eliminate angled geometry per FAA AC 150/5300-13A Airport Design criteria and installation of Taxiway V. Additionally complete selective repair and replacement of concrete pavement on Taxiway Y along the terminal ramp including shoulder resurfacing and joint seal replacement.
12
C- 12
This proposed project also included the reconstruction of manholes and catch basins, removal and replacement of existing manholes and catch basins, removal and replacement of existing sewer pipe to incorporate larger sizes and installation of a storm water detention system.
This proposed project also funded for the design and construction of the replacement of the Runway 4R-22L EMAS. EMAS arrestor beds are composed of lightweight, crushable cement material designed to stop aircraft that overshoot runways. It is a FAA acceptable alternative for preventing overrun catastrophes at airports where runway safety areas are not in compliance with FAA regulations.
The replaced EMAS system was installed in 2006. The EMAS system on Runway End 4L was approximately 340-feet in length and 170-feet in width. This project replaced the Runway 4L end and installed a new system on Runway 22L with "green EMAS". These new beds were designed and installed to meet the requirements established in AC 150-5220-22A Engineered Materials Arresting Systems for Aircraft Overruns.
Project Need/Justification:
The rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L project preserved capacity and enhanced safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for airfield pavement reconstruction is 20 years. The last major rehabilitation for Runway 4R-22L was 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Runway 4R-22L were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, and raveling on the AC sections and presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking on the PCC sections. The sections that were replaced on Taxiway Y also showed distress that were consistent with loading and climate issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, map cracking, and linear cracking.
Runway 4R-22L had an overall weighted PCI rating of 79 or "Satisfactory". Although the overall PCI for Taxiway Y was 73, the sections that were replaced had PCIs averaging 64. It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI be maintained above 70 to maintain at a level sufficient to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
13
C - 13
The removal of Taxiway K, between Runway 4R and the 4R Hold Pad was necessary in order to meet AC 150/5300-13A Airport Design criteria. AC 150/5300-13A states that right angle intersections are standard for all runway and taxiway intersections. FAA studies indicate the increased risk of a runway incursions on angled taxiways used for crossing runways.
The replacement of Runway 4L-22R EMAS preserved and enhanced safety by replacing an existing end-of-life-cycle EMAS bed with the latest arresting system technology to prevent aircraft from overrunning the runway. Midway is located in a densely populated area on the southwest side of Chicago, IL. Midway is confined by W. 55th St to the north, S. Cicero Ave to the east, W. 63rd St to the south, and S. Central Ave. to the west. The distances between Runway ends to S. Cicero and W. 63rd St. are both less than 450-feet, significantly less than the established standard of 1,000-foot Runway Safety Area (RSA).
According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the rehabilitation of an EMAS system is eligible if the EMAS bed was installed with Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds prior to fiscal year 2007.
Rehabilitation of Runwav 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Project Description:
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L centerline and threshold lights at Midway and for the installation of new runway centerline and threshold lighting systems for both ends of Runway 4R-22L. The lighting system includes new centerline light base cans, lights, transformers, heat shrink kits and conduit runs into the runway pavement. The duct banks will be drained at low points and other locations where feasible, approximately every 200 feet.
The airfield lighting control system will be updated to reflect the new lights and ten new regulators on the runway. Two new home run duct banks will be installed to accommodate the new circuit that will power the proposed centerline lights for Runway 4R-22L and the threshold hold and edge lights. All infrastructure (base cans, conduit etc.) for centerline lighting for Runway 13C-31C will be installed within the limits of the runway safety area of Runway 4R-22L in anticipation of the future installation of a runway centerline lighting system. Additionally, the runway pavement at the intersection of Runway 4R-22L and 13C-31C (the bulls eye) will be milled and resurfaced with
14
C- 14
asphalt for the full width of the runways 150 feet extending to the existing limits of the bituminous overlay on runway 13C-31C (612 feet) and 500 feet on 4R-22L. Underdrains within the limits of the bullseye paving for both runway 4R-22L and 13C-31C will be designed and installed as part of this project.
Project Need/Justification:
The rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L centerline and threshold lights enhance safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield by increasing the visibility of the runway for non-precision approaches. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, minimum useful life for airfield lighting is 10-years. The lighting for Runway 4R-22L was installed over 30-years and has exceeded their useful life.
Taxiway A Extension & Rehabilitation
Project Description:
This project funded for the extension and rehabilitation of Taxiway A. Taxiway A is approximately 670 linear-feet and connects Runways 13C-31C and 13R-31L to Taxiway F. This project expands a portion of the 150 linear-foot section between Runways 13C-31C and 13R-31L and extends the taxiway 360-linear feet to the West Ramp. Taxiway A is comprised of both portland cement concrete (PCC) and bituminous asphalt overlay on PCC (APC).
Prior to the extension and rehabilitation of this section of Taxiway A the pavement was 30-years old and showing signs of various levels surfaces distresses related to traffic loading, weathering, and age. This project will widen this section to the required dimension criteria according to FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. This project will install approximately 8,000 square-feet of new three-inch bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) surface course between Runway 13R-31L and Taxiway F and expand to 35-feet.
This extension to the West Ramp includes the construction of approximately 13,000 square-feet of a new taxiway consisting of a 21-inch frost protection course, four-inches of AC base course, and four-inches of AC surface course. This project will also construct new bituminous shoulders, and associated drainage and lighting installation.
15
C- 15
Project Need/Justification:
This project preserves capacity and enhances safety of Taxiway A. Taxiway A, within the Runway Safety Area (RSA) of Runway 13-31C was recently enlarged to allow larger general aviation aircraft landing on Runway 31C to exit the runway more efficiently. While this improved the exit off the runway, the remainder of the taxiways leading to the west ramp is not capable of supporting these larger aircraft per current FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design criteria. The extension and improvement of Taxiway A to the West Ramp area will increase the efficiency of Runway 13-31C by allowing all general aviation aircraft the ability to directly access the West Ramp.
A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on the rehabilitated Taxiway A section were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking. This section of Taxiway A had an overall PCI rating of 53 or "Poor". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Y/K and South Ramp
Project Description:
This proposed project reconstructed and enhanced sections of Taxiway Y and K at Midway. Taxiway Y is approximately 6,445-feet long and 60-feet wide and is located parallel to primary Runway 4R-22L. This taxiway provides access from Runway 4R to the Terminal gates. This project rehabilitated the southern section or 2,850-linear feet from Runway 13C-31C to Runway end 4R.
Taxiway K is approximately 4,250-feet long and 60-feet wide and configured in a west-east configuration traversing both Runways 13C-31C and 4R-22L. This project rehabilitated approximately 2,475-linear feet Taxiway Kilo between Runway 13R-31L to Runway 4R-22L. The scope also included the rehabilitation of a section of the South Ramp.
Taxiway Y included variable depth concrete and asphalt milling on Taxiway Y and Taxiway D with the placement of six-inches of new bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) pavement. The overlay included the full width of Taxiways Y and D. This project also
16
C- 16
included the removal and replacement of taxiway lighting, cabling, vault infrastructure, circuits and regulators. Y1 was widened to 110-feet to accommodate Group III aircraft and reconstructed with 14-inches of PCC on 12-inches AC base course.
This project also funded for the rehabilitation of a section of the South Ramp. Approximately 92,000 square-feet of the South Ramp was replaced with 17-inches of AC on three-inches of AC base course. Work also included light replacement and surface markings.
The new pavements were designed in accordance with FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, AC 150/5320-6E, Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation, AC 150/5370-10G, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports, and AC 150/5370-14A, Hot Mix Asphalt Paving Handbook. This project also restriped the construction affected zones in accordance to AC 150/5340-1L, Standards for Airport Markings.
Project Need/Justification:
The reconstruction of Taxiway Y and K preserved capacity and enhanced safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for airfield pavement reconstruction or rehabilitation is 20 and 10- years respectively. The last overlay project for Taxiway K was a three-inch overlay in 2004, but the last major rehabilitation was done in 1985. The last major rehabilitation on Taxiway Y was in 1995. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Taxiways Y were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, and linear cracking. The distresses on Taxiway K were also consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of longitudinal and transverse cracking, alligator cracking, and raveling
The E&K report indicated that Taxiway Y and K were "Satisfactory" with an overall weighted PCI rating of 71 and 76 respectively. The sections rehabilitated for this project had PCIs of 47 and 66, which is considered "Poor" and "Fair". The rehabilitated section of South Ramp had PCI of 73 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to maintain a level sufficient to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
17
C- 17
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Project Description:
This project will rehabilitate and replace portions of the Terminal Ramp Apron (Apron) pavements at Midway. The existing Apron was installed in 2000 and is approximately 40,000 square-yards and supports 45 gates. This project will include the full depth replacement of approximately 195,000 square-feet of existing Concourse C apron and also selective areas of the terminal ramp outside of the Concourse C apron that are in need of rehabilitation. This project also includes repairs to existing drainage structures, grounding tie-downs, and new pavement markings.
The new pavements will be designed and constructed in accordance with FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, AC 150/5320-6E, Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation, and AC 150/5370-10G, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports. This project also restriped the construction affected areas in accordance to AC 150/5340-1L, Standards for Airport Markings.
Project Need/Justification:
The reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Terminal Ramp Apron will preserve capacity and ensure safe and efficient aircraft operations on the Apron. The existing concrete apron surrounding Concourse C and Gates, B1, B2 and B3 was the first Apron pavement installed as part of the new Midway Terminal Development Program in 2000. According to FAA Order 5100.38D Airport Improvement Program Handbook, the criterion for airfield pavement reconstruction is 20 years. The Concourse C Ramp apron is approximately 27-years old. A pavement evaluation completed in June 2015, by Jacobs indicated that distresses on the Concourse ,C Ramp were consistent with loading and climate issues due to the presence of joint seal damage, joint spalling, map cracking, and linear cracking.
The Concourse C Ramp had an overall weighted PCI rating of 44 or "Poor". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations. Once pavement surfaces reach a PCI of 70 the surface deterioration rate significantly increases.
18
C -18
Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Project Description:
This project rehabilitates the Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC) at Midway. The AMC was constructed in 1997 is located on south side of the Airport.
This project consists of the replacement of the HVAC system for the garage with an energy efficient system, replacement of the overhead doors and associated hardware, an upgrade to the emergency generator and switchgear, and replacement of the existing boilers with more energy efficient boilers. Also included is the expansion and replacement of the potassium acetate pumps and tanks to allow for a total of 90,000 gallons of onsite storage. The project also includes the replacement of the roofing membrane, an upgrade of the windows and replacement of the HVAC system in the office area, replacement of the emergency egress doors and hardware, and improvements for ADA accessibility.
Project Need/Justification:
The AMC was built approximately 20-years ago and since then has not had any significant improvements. The AMC is in need of improvements to provide critical functions that are required at the Airport. This facility also houses all of the snow removal equipment for the Airport.
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
Project Description:
This project will provide for the acquisition of the following pieces of equipment for the Airport. All acquisitions are cyclical replacements.
c-19
Replacement
Year Equipment Quantity
CFD Staircase|910|Jet Air|910|Dual Sweeper|910|CPD Tow Truck|910| High Lift|99|
CFD Crash Truck|910|Runway Blower|910|Sander w/ Plow|910|Runway Blower|910|Mower Tractor|910|Total 17
Project Need/Justification:
Cyclical replacements are necessary to maintain the effectiveness of the security and snow removal operations at the Airport. Due to their high mileage and hours of operation, the vehicles now need annual replacements.
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Project Description:
This project is for facility modifications and redevelopment to the Federal Inspection Services (FIS) Bag Claim area and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office to provide additional bag claim capacity at Midway.
This project will add one additional slope plate bag claim device in an area currently occupied by CBP offices, and replace the existing flat plate bag claim device in the FIS International Bag Claim Hall with a new slope plate claim device. This project will also demolish a portion of the existing CBP offices, renovate approximately 800 square-feet of existing CBP offices, and create additional public finished space to allow installation of the additional slope plate bag claim device with associated conveyors. The current FIS space is 12,000 square-feet and will be reconfigured to approximately 12,860 square-
20
C-20
feet. To accommodate the CBP requirements, changes to the existing Bag recheck Lobby and existing TSA office space will be required.
The project also includes allowances for design services, project management, and contingency and reflects requirements for interim bag portering, permitting and second shift work.
Project Need/Justification:
The Airport is experiencing an increase in international flight arrivals. The impact is demonstrated by increased passenger volumes and bag volumes within the FIS area. The current FIS Bag Claim area is undersized to accommodate two simultaneous arrival operations.
This bag claim configuration will provide capacity to handle approximately 200 bags on two rotating sloped plate bag claim units. Anticipated bag volume from a 737-800 gauge aircraft (variables include load factor, bags per passenger and origination location). There is expected to be approximately 175 bags per flight or 350 bags for two simultaneous flights. The reconfigured CBP spaces will consolidate certain functions and improve passenger interview and screening spaces.
Replacement of Trunk Radio Svstem
Project Description:
This project includes the design and implementation of a new trunk radio system at Midway. This project will include existing system removal and salvage of equipment and components for trade-in value. The trunk radio system has a total of approximately 450 subscriber units, which includes 250 portable radios and 200 mobile radio units. The mobile units are mounted in the Midway fleet and portable radios are used by various Midway groups. The system has four positions of dispatch consoles; one located in the AMC and three other remotely located in the Airport communications center. A five-year maintenance service contract for the new trunk radio system will also be included.
21
C -21
Project Need/Justification:
The trunk radio system replacement will enhance safety and security at the Airport. The existing system has been in operation for 20-years and nearing its useful life. Midway uses a digital radio system to accommodate communications between various airport operations talk groups. The radio system currently supports approximately 15 talk groups, which include such entities as Police, Fire, Trades, Ground Operations, Airside Operations, and Facilities, etc. This system is a public safety, mission critical radio system with emergency and ID capability. The system, which has been in operation since 1996, is a UHF, 6-channel, narrow bandwidth system that operates within a one-mile radius of the Airport proper. The narrow bandwidth technology was mandated by the FCC for compliance originally in 2004, but then extended to 2013.
Pre-Check Baggage Inspection Svstem Crossover
Project Description:
Upon completion this project will enable the airlines to separate bags from multiple flights with similar departure times by directing baggage to a fourth makeup unit. The current operational restriction only allows baggage to be sent to three makeup units. This project will increase operational flexibility by allowing bags inducted at the north or south ticket counters to be sent to any of the four makeups units. In addition, the project includes the replacement of the Explosives Detection System (EDS) equipment on the north portion of the system as part of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Recapitalization and Optimization program.
This project includes the relocation of sprinkler heads, lights, cameras, and exit signs, modifications to the air ducts, installation of a conveyor line from X07 conveyor line, modifications to the OB4 conveyor line, installation of six new conveyors, installation of two HDS and required catwalk, and additional power to the required MCP and PDP. Project will also require installation coordination with MATCO, on site testing of the new conveyor line, punch list creation and management.
22
C-22
Project Need/Justification:
Southwest Airlines (Southwest) is the largest air carrier located at Midway. Southwest utilizes all the ticket counters that feed the north baggage handling system (BHS). The current layout of the north BHS allows for bags, to be sent to BMUs (1), (3), and (4). The BHS does not allow for bags to be sent to BMU 2. As Southwest passenger and bag volumes increase, the makeup capacity of the BHS also needs to increase. The sortation from X07 to Makeup 2 will increase Southwest's makeup capacity by providing a conveyor line to feed BMU 2 from north BHS.
23
C-23
PFC AUTHORITY PROPOSED
Proposed Amount
Proposed Amount
Proposed Amount
Total Proposed
PAYGO Bond Capital
Airfield Lighting Infrastructure Improvements Airside Service Road Rehab .AOA Perimeter Sound Wall Improvements Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Runway 13C/31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin Runway 13C/31C Rehabilitation
Runway 4L/22R Rehabilitation & Taxiway P Reconfiguration Runway 4R/22L Rehabilitation
Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway Y&K Reconstruction & Enhancement
Terminal Ramp Improvements
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
FIS 2nd Bag Claim & Space Reconfiguration
Taxiway A Extension
Trunk Radio System Replacement
Pre-Checked Baggage Inspection System Crossover
$0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$10,058,400 2,709,346 6,020,850
65,572,954 538,385
32,078,641 3,915,865
19,783,003 2,668,767 2,856,113
12,064,800
12,233,337 3,262,873
11,701,950 3,326,400 4,780,000 5,032,800
$10,058,400 2,709,346 6,020,850
65,572,954 538,385
32,078,641 3,915,865
19,783,003 2,668,767 2,856,113
12,064,800
12,233,337 3,262,873
11,701,950 3,326,400 4,780,000 5,032,800
$20,116,800 5,418,692
12,041,700 131,145,907 1,076,770
64,157,281 7,831,731
39,566,006 5,337,534 5,712,225
24,129,600
24,466,674 6,525,746
23,403,900 6,652,800 9,560,000
10,065,600
$198,604,483 $198,604,483 $397,208,965
24
C -24
PFC TIMELINE
Air Carrier Notification Distributed Air Carrier Consultation Meeting Air Carrier Comment Due
Proposed Date of Submission of Draft Application to FAA
25
C-25
PFC Application No. 17-13-C-00-MDW
Notice of Intent of Application to Impose and Use a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at Chicago Midway International Airport
Acknowledged Receipt of Air Carrier Consultation Meeting Notice:
Name (print)
Name (sign)/Date
Air Carrier Name
26
C-26
PFC Application No. 17-13-C-00-MDW Distribution List
• Mr. Dallas Belt Manager - Airport Planning Frontier Airlines 7001 Tower Road Denver, CO 80249 Mr. Blaine Peters Regional Director - Airport Affairs Delta Airlines 1030 Delta Blvd. Dept 877 Office 4SW8 Atlanta, GA 30354-1989
Mr. Ted Meighen Director, Regional Airport Operations Porter Airlines Inc. Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport 1 Bathurst St. Toronto, Ontario CANADA M5V 1A1 Mr. Pete Houghton Director of Properties Southwest Airlines, Inc. P. O. Box 36611, HDQ/4PF Dallas, Texas 75235-1611
Mr. Gildardo Villasenor Volaris Airlines P.O. Box 388010 Chicago, IL 60638 • Director of Finance Public Charters, Inc. 201 Hangar Road Avoca, PA 18641
C-27
PFC Application No. 17-13-C-00-MDW Distribution List
• Mr. Brian Randow Vice President/CEO Compass Airlines 7500 Airline Drive, Suite 130 Minneapolis, MN 55450 Mr. Ryan Gumm President & CEO Endeavor Air 7500 Airline Drive Minneapolis, MN 55450
Ms. Alexandria Marren ^ coo ExpressJet Airlines 100 Hartsfield Centre Parkway Suite 700 Atlanta, GA 30354 Mr. Bryan K. Bedford CEO Shuttle America 8909 Purdue Road, Suite 300 Indianapolis, IN 46268
Mr. Michael B. Thompson coo SkyWest 44 South River Road St. George, UT 84790 • Mr. John Fredericksen CEO Sun Country 1300 Mendota Heights Road Mendota Heights, MN 55120
C-28
PFC Application No. 17-13-C-OO-MDW Distribution List
» Director of Finance Ultimate Air Shuttle Atlantic Aviation Terminal 6150 South Laramie Ave. Chicago, IL 60638 Director of Finance Via Airlines d/b/a Charter Air Transport 220 E Central Pkwy Altamonte Springs, FL 32701
#
#
C - 29
PFC Application No. 17-13-C-OO-MDW
Notice of Intent of Application to Impose and Use a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at Chicago Midway International Airport
Acknowledged Receipt of Air Carrier Consultation Meeting Notice:
Name (print)
Name (sign)/Date
Air Carrier Name p
26
C-30
CO
O
June 1, 2017
City of Chicago
Chicago Department of Aviation
Chicago-Midway International Airport
Proposed Application to the Federal Aviation Administration to Impose a Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) at Chicago-Midway International Airport and to Use PFC Revenue for projects at Chicago-Midway International Airport
NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
The City of Chicago (the City) has determined the need to submit to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) a Notice of Intent to impose and use a passenger facility charge (PFC) at Chicago-Midway International Airport (the Airport or Midway); and has issued this public notice as part of the PFC application process as per Title 14 Code of Regulations (CFR) Part 158.24 Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before Wednesday, July 1, 2017.
ADDRESS: Comments may be mailed or emailed to Reshma Soni, Chief Financial Officer, Aviation Administration Building, 10510 West Zemke Road, 2nd Floor, Chicago, IL 60666. Reshma.Soni@cityofchicago.org
The following information is provided in accordance with 14CFR 158.24(b)(1): Project Descriptions
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Project Description:
This proposed project is for the rehabilitation of the airfield lighting infrastructure system at Midway Airport. This project will design and install a new duct bank and manhole system that will provide a more efficient and maintainable airfield electrical system. This project will include the installation of a new duct bank to provide more direct routing of circuits, as well as include the installation of new manholes and hand holes that minimize the need to access runway and taxiway safety areas for system maintenance. Also included in this project is the replacement of
C-33
aging cabling and new duct banks for additional capacity to handle future improvements and demand.
Project Need/Justification
The airfield lighting infrastructure improvements rehabilitation will enhance safety to ensure safe reliable aircraft operations on the airfield. Much of the Airport's current airfield electrical infrastructure is over 30-years old and beyond its useful life. As circuits have been added and modified over the years, the existing duct bank system has been fully utilized or slightly modified to accommodate these changes. As the duct bank system nears its capacity, maintenance operations and future modifications will be more labor intensive and costly. Steps have been taken to address a portion of the home run cabling on the airfield through the installation of the new duct bank on the prior Runway 13C-31C Rehabilitation project; however, additional infrastructure will be needed to add capacity to re-cable the airfield lighting system. This project will also relocate much of the existing electrical infrastructure and manholes outside of the runway safety area to allow Airport maintainers access with minimum disruption to airfield operations.
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Project Description
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of the airside Service Road at Midway. The airside Service Road is approximately 12,600 linear-feet and services the airside of the entire Airport. Prior to the rehabilitation of the Service Road the roadway was an approximately 20-years old and showing significant sign of structural deficiencies due to repeated traffic loading, weathering, and age. Work included mill and overlay throughout the roadway system, adjustments to the drainage structures, and restriping of roadway markings.
Project Need/Justification
The airside Service Road is vital to airside service operations for both Airport staff and air carriers. Prior to the rehabilitation the road surface needed frequent patching, crack sealing and repairs to maintain its functionality. A pavement evaluation completed in April 2013, by Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs), indicated that distresses on the service road were consistent with loading and water infiltration due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking. The Service Road had an overall weighted PCI rating of 70 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
C-34
Rehabilitation of the AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Project Description
This proposed project will rehabilitate sections of Midway's Air Operations Area (AOA) Perimeter Sound Wall (Sound Wall). The Sound Wall is approximately 15,000 linear7feet at a height of 12-feet. The rehabilitation will include selective replacement of damaged panels, columns, and structural wall components, as well as grading at the base of the structures, and painting.
Project Need/Justification
The Sound Wall is an important component in the Airport's "Fly Quiet Program". These walls are designed to reduce ground level noise associated with aircraft taxiing and takeoff thrust on the communities surrounding the Airport. The Sound Walls' were first installed in 2001 in conjunction with the construction of the new Midway Terminal program. Due to the age of the walls, exposure to the elements and proximity to the surrounding roads have resulted in deterioration of the panels and structural components. The deterioration or damage includes rusted components, dented or punctured panels and deteriorating obstruction lighting. All these components are in need of rehabilitation to ensure continued aesthetic, reduce the impact of aviation noise on people living near the airport, and compliance with Federal Aviation Administration Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program.
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Project Description
This project will expand the passenger security checkpoint at Midway. The project will construct an 80,000 square-foot pavilion to accommodate current and future passenger traffic flow. This project will also increase the area available for passenger queuing by approximately 80,000 square feet. The existing security checkpoint would be relocated into the pavilion, creating an additional 18,000 square feet of potential revenue-generating areas adjacent to the existing food court.
This project includes the installation of building foundations, erection of structural concrete and steel, installation of a building roof, HVAC systems, communications and security systems along with a facade to complement the existing building finishes both north and south. The building shell and core elements such as mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection will be extended to service the building expansion and new space will receive tenant interior finishes.
C-35
The tie-in to the existing bridge would include demolition of the existing facade and miscellaneous items to facilitate tie-ins to the pedestrian bridge. In addition to the widening of the pedestrian bridge, there will be a 10,000 square-foot build out to the south of the bridge which ties to the Terminal.
Project Need/Justification
The expansion of the passenger security checkpoint is needed to increase public circulation in the Terminal to more efficiently accommodate the increasing passenger growth at the Airport. This project will add 10 additional checkpoint lanes to handle over 5,000 passengers per hour. Currently during peak hours, passenger security screen lines extend beyond the existing bridge and into the terminal parking garage. Existing passenger demand and forecast activity increase both support the expansion of the security checkpoint area.
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C
Project Description
This proposed project funded for the design and rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C and the replacement of the Engineering Material Arresting Systems (EMAS) at Midway. Runway 13C-31C is one of the primary runways at the Airport. The runway is 6,522-feet long by 150-feet wide and comprised of 6,405 linear-feet of bituminous asphalt concrete (AC) pavement and 120-linear feet of portland cement concrete (PCC) on the Runway 31C end.
Prior to the rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31 the pavements were approximately 22-years old and showing signs of fatigue cracking due to structural deficiencies and repeated traffic loading. The rehabilitation of the runway and shoulder included variable depth PCC and AC milling with an overlay of a bituminous base course and AC surface course. This project also included the installation of new centerline and edge lighting, replacement of signage, installation of new electrical infrastructure, drainage improvements, placement of sodding/seeding for the surrounding runway area, and pavement markings. This project also funded for the design and construction of the replacement of the Runway 13C-31C EMAS.
Project Need/Justification
Runway 13C-31C was last rehabilitated in 1992. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by Edwards & Kelcey Design Services Inc. (E&K), indicated that distresses on Runway 13C-31C were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking. Runway 13C-31C had an overall PCI rating of 71 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
C-36
The replacement of the EMAS was necessary since the existing EMAS had reached the end of its useful life.
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin
Project Description
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin at Midway. The Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad-Detention Basin is a 90,000 square-feet concrete structure designed to protect against flooding of the airfield and serves as a glycol collection area.
Prior to the rehabilitation the detention basin was 22-years old and showing signs of cracking along the entrance ramp, exterior walls, and roof structure of the basin. This project funded for a structural survey and necessary rehabilitation of the detention basin. Rehabilitation efforts included concrete patching and epoxy crack injections.
Project Need/Justification
The detention basin was installed during the 1992 Runway 13C-31C Rehabilitation project. Since that time, the retaining walls along the entrance ramp, exterior walls, and the structure roof have begun to exhibit structural and hair-line cracks. The head wall at the entrance of the basin is exhibiting further cracking and some spalling. Rehabilitation of these areas will increase the useful life of the structure by reducing the possibility of water infiltration into the structure.
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Project Description
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 4L-22R and the reconfiguration of Taxiway Papa (P) at Midway. Runway 4L-22R is approximately 5,507-feet long and 150-feet in width. The surface of the runway is comprised of primarily bituminous AC with the exception of 700-feet on the Runway 4L approach end of PCC.
Taxiway P is approximately 4,280-linear feet extending from the south side of the Airport to Runway 4L-22R. This project only reconfigured 1,000-linear feet of the taxiway between Runway 4R-22Land4L-22R.
Prior to the latest rehabilitation, the pavements for Runway 4L-22R were approximately 20-years old and showing major surface distresses consistent with repeated loading issues, weathering, and age. This project included a variable depth asphalt mill and overlay on the runway and
C-37
installation of new PCC pavement sections on Runway end 22R for the run-up area. This project installed new AC surface course shoulders, new drainage systems, replaced runway edge lights and guidance sign bases, and electrical cabling and fixtures.
This proposed project also funded for the reconfiguration of Taxiway P with new AC pavement to allow for a 90 degree intersection at Runway 22R. This entailed the demolition of 50,000 square-feet of AC and material to install a new bituminous base course and three-inch AC surface course taxiway perpendicular to Runway 4L-22R. The project also funded for new shoulders, new taxiway lighting, cabling, sodding, and pavement markings.
Project Need/Justification
A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Runway 4L-22R were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking. Runway 4L-22R had an overall PCI rating of 72 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
This project also reconfigured the geometry of Taxiway P by creating a 90 degree intersection at the runway with to comply with FAA airfield design criteria.
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L
Project Description
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L, supporting Taxiway Y, removal of section of Taxiway K, the installation of Taxiway V, and replaced the Engineering Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS) at Midway. Runway 4R-22L is 6,445-feet long and 150-feet wide and primarily comprised of bituminous AC with the exception of 345-feet at Runway end 22L, which is PCC.
Taxiway Y is approximately 6,000 linear-feet and serves as the primary taxiway for Runway 4R-22L This project only rehabilitated specific sections of the north end of Taxiway Y adjacent to the Terminal Apron Ramp.
Taxiway K is approximately 4,250-feet long and 60-feet wide and configured in a west-east configuration traversing both Runways 13C-31C and 4R-22L This project removed approximately 700 linear-feet taxiway between Runway end 4R and hold block.
Prior to the latest rehabilitation, the pavements for Runway 4R-22L were approximately 19-years old and showing signs of various levels of surface distresses due to structural deficiencies and
C-38
repeated traffic loading. This project included a variable depth asphalt mill and overlay on the runway, shoulders, and the adjacent connector/crossing taxiways and their shoulders. This project also included the construction of new shoulders, replacement of runway edge lights, adjustments to the runway centerline lights, installation of new conduit and cabling and installation of underdrains to match the improvements that were made to the north section of Taxiway P.
This proposed project also upgraded Taxiway P north of 4R-22L to meet FAA criteria for Boeing 737 aircraft.
Also included in this proposed project was the removal of Taxiway K west of Runway 4R to eliminate angled geometry to comply with FAA airfield design criteria and installation of Taxiway V. Additionally complete selective repair and replacement of concrete pavement on Taxiway Y along the terminal ramp including shoulder resurfacing and joint seal replacement.
This proposed project also included the reconstruction of manholes and catch basins, removal and replacement of existing manholes and catch basins, removal and replacement of existing sewer pipe to incorporate larger sizes and installation of a storm water detention system.
This proposed project also funded for the design and construction of the replacement of the Runway 4R-22L EMAS.
Project Need/Justification
A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Runway 4R-22L were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking. The sections that were replaced on Taxiway Y also showed distress that were consistent with loading and climate issues also due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking.
Runway 4R-22L had an overall weighted PCI rating of 79 or "Satisfactory". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI be maintained above 70 to maintain at a level sufficient to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
The removal of Taxiway K, between Runway 4R and the 4R Hold Pad was necessary in order to comply with FAA design criteria.
The replacement of the EMAS was necessary since the existing EMAS had reached the end of its useful life.
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Project Description
C-39
This proposed project funded for the rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L centerline and threshold lights at Midway and for the installation of new runway centerline and threshold lighting systems for both ends of Runway 4R-22L. The lighting system includes new centerline light base cans, lights, transformers, heat shrink kits and conduit runs into the runway pavement. The duct banks will be drained at low points and other locations where feasible, approximately every 200 feet. The scope also included a milling and resurfacing of the center portion of the runway.
The airfield lighting control system will be updated to reflect the new lights and ten new regulators on the runway. Two new home run duct banks will be installed to accommodate the new circuit that will power the proposed centerline lights for Runway 4R-22L and the threshold hold and edge lights. All infrastructure (base cans, conduit etc.) for centerline lighting for Runway 13C-31C will be installed within the limits of the runway safety area of Runway 4R-22L in anticipation of the future installation of a runway centerline lighting system. Additionally, the runway pavement at the intersection of Runway 4R-22L and 13C-31C (the bulls eye) will be milled and resurfaced with asphalt for the full width of the runways 150 feet extending to the existing limits of the bituminous overlay on runway 13C-31C (612 feet) and 500 feet on 4R-22L. Underdrains within the limits of the bull's-eye paving for both runway 4R-22L and 13C-31C will be designed and installed as part of this project.
Project Need/Justification
The lighting for Runway 4R-22L was installed over 30-years and has exceeded their useful life. Prior to the replacement of the centerline and threshold lights, the runway lighting system was approximately 25 years old and outlived its useful life. The new lights increased visibility for nighttime operations and reduced down time due potential disruptions to service with old cabling.
Taxiway A Extension & Rehabilitation
Project Description
This proposed project funded for the extension and rehabilitation of Taxiway A. Taxiway A is approximately 670 linear-feet and connects Runways 13C-31C and 13R-31L to Taxiway F. This project expands a portion of the 150 linear-foot section between Runways 13C-31C and 13R-31L and extends the taxiway 360-linear feet to the West Ramp. Taxiway A is comprised of both PCC and bituminous asphalt overlay on PCC (APC).
Prior to the extension and rehabilitation of this section of Taxiway A the pavement was 30-years old and showing signs of various levels surfaces distresses related to traffic loading, weathering, and age. This project will widen this section and install a new section of taxiway to connect to
C -40
the West Ramp. This project will also construct new bituminous shoulders, and associated drainage and lighting installation.
Project Need/Justification
Taxiway A is primarily used for General Aviation (GA) aircraft exiting Runway 13C-31C. Taxiway A, within the Runway Safety Area (RSA) of Runway 13C-31C was recently enlarged to allow larger GA aircraft landing on Runway 31C to exit the runway more efficiently. While this improved the exit off the runway, the remainder of the taxiways leading to the West Ramp is not capable of supporting these larger aircraft. The extension and improvement of Taxiway A to the West Ramp area will increase the efficiency of Runway 13C-31C by allowing all GA aircraft the ability to directly access the West Ramp.
A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on the rehabilitated Taxiway A section were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking. This section of Taxiway A had an overall PCI rating of 53 or "Poor". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Y/K and South Ramp
Project Description
This proposed project reconstructed and enhanced sections of Taxiway Y and K at Midway. Taxiway Y is approximately 6,445-feet long and 60-feet wide and is located parallel to primary Runway 4R-22L This taxiway provides access from Runway 4R to the Terminal gates. This project rehabilitated the southern section or 2,850-linear feet from Runway 13C-31C to Runway end 4R.
Taxiway K is approximately 4,250-feet long and 60-feet wide and configured in a west-east configuration traversing both Runways 13C-31C and 4R-22L. This project rehabilitated approximately 2,475-linear feet Taxiway Kilo between Runway 13R-31L to Runway 4R-22L. The scope also included the rehabilitation of a section of the South Ramp.
Taxiway Y included variable depth concrete and asphalt milling on Taxiway Y and Taxiway. The overlay included the full width of Taxiways Y and D. This project also included the removal and replacement of taxiway lighting, cabling, vault infrastructure, circuits and regulators. Yl was widened and reconstructed to 110-feet to accommodate Group III aircraft.
This project also funded for the rehabilitation of a section of the South Ramp. Approximately 92,000 square-feet of the South Ramp was rehabilitated along with light replacement and surface markings.
C -41
Project Need/Justification
The last minor overlay project for Taxiway K was completed in 2004, but the last major rehabilitation was done in 1985. The last major rehabilitation on Taxiway Y and the South Ramp was in 1995. A pavement evaluation completed in December 2011, by E&K, indicated that distresses on Taxiways Y and K were consistent with loading and weather issues due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking.
The E&K report indicated that Taxiway Y and K were "Satisfactory" with an overall weighted PCI rating of 71 and 76 respectively. The E&K report also indicated that the South Ramp had a PCI rating of 47. It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to maintain a level sufficient to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Project Description
This proposed project will rehabilitate and replace portions of the Terminal Ramp Apron (Apron) pavements at Midway. The existing Apron was installed in 2000 and is approximately 40,000 square-yards and supports 45 gates. This project will include the full depth replacement of approximately 195,000 square-feet of existing Concourse C apron and also selective areas of the terminal ramp outside of the Concourse C apron that are in need of rehabilitation. This project also includes repairs to existing drainage structures, grounding tie-downs, and new pavement markings.
Project Need/Justification
The existing concrete apron surrounding Concourse C and Gates, Bl, B2 and B3 was the first Apron pavement installed as part of the new Midway Terminal Development Program in 2000. The Concourse C Ramp apron is approximately 17-years old. A pavement evaluation completed in June 2015, by Jacobs indicated that distresses on the Concourse C Ramp were consistent with loading and climate issues due to the presence of various degrees of surface cracking.
The Concourse C Ramp had an overall weighted PCI rating of 44 or "Poor". It is recommended that the airfield pavement PCI should be maintained above 70 to ensure safe and reliable aircraft operations.
Rehabilitation of Midway Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC)
Project Description
This project rehabilitates the Airport Maintenance Complex (AMC) at Midway. The AMC was constructed in 1997 is located on south side of the Airport.
C -42
This project consists of the replacement of the HVAC system for the garage with an energy efficient system, replacement of the overhead doors and associated hardware, an upgrade to the emergency generator and switchgear, and replacement of the existing boilers with more energy efficient boilers. Also included is the expansion and replacement of the potassium acetate pumps and tanks to allow for a total of 90,000 gallons of onsite storage. The project also includes the replacement of the roofing membrane, an upgrade of the windows and replacement of the HVAC system in the office area, replacement of the emergency egress doors and hardware, and improvements for ADA accessibility.
Project Need/Justification
The AMC was built approximately 20-years ago and since then has not had any significant improvements. This project is eligible according to FAA Order 5100.38D since this facility stores snow removal equipment that was federally funded. The AMC is in need of improvements to provide critical functions that are required at the Airport. This facility also houses all of the snow removal equipment for the Airport.
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
Project Description
This proposed project will provide for the acquisition of the following pieces of equipment for
the Airport. All acquisitions are cyclical replacements. Replacement
Year Equipment Quantity
CFD Staircase|910|Jet Air|910|Dual Sweeper|910|CPD Tow Truck|910|High Lift|910|CFD Crash Truck|910|Runway Blower|910|Sander w/Plow|910|
C-43
Runway Blower 2 Mower Tractor 1 Total 17
Project Need/Justification:
Cyclical replacements are necessary to maintain the effectiveness of the security and snow removal operations at the Airport. Due to their high mileage and hours of operation, the vehicles now need annual replacements.
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Project Description
This proposed project is for facility modifications and redevelopment to the Federal Inspection Services (FIS) Bag Claim area and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office to provide additional bag claim capacity at Midway.
This project will add one additional slope plate bag claim device in an area currently occupied by CBP offices, and replace the existing flat plate bag claim device in the FIS International Bag Claim Hall with a new slope plate claim device. This project will also demolish a portion of the existing CBP offices, renovate approximately 800 square-feet of existing CBP offices, and create additional public finished space to allow installation of the additional slope plate bag claim device with associated conveyors. The current FIS space is 12,000 square-feet and will be reconfigured to approximately 12,860 square-feet. To accommodate the CBP requirements, changes to the existing Bag recheck Lobby and existing TSA office space will be required.
The project also includes allowances for design services, project management, and contingency and reflects requirements for interim bag portering, permitting and second shift work.
Project Need/Justification:
The Airport is experiencing an increase in international flight arrivals. The impact is demonstrated by increased passenger volumes and bag volumes within the FIS area. The current FIS Bag Claim area is undersized to accommodate two simultaneous arrival operations.
This bag claim configuration will provide capacity to handle approximately 200 bags on two rotating sloped plate bag claim units. Anticipated bag volume from a 737-800 gauge aircraft
C-44
(variables include load factor, bags per passenger and origination location). There is expected to be approximately 175 bags per flight or 350 bags for two simultaneous flights. The reconfigured CBP spaces will consolidate certain functions and improve passenger interview and screening spaces.
Replacement of Trunk Radio System
Project Description
This proposed project includes the design and implementation of a new trunk radio system at Midway. This project will include existing system removal and salvage of equipment and components for trade-in value. The trunk radio system has a total of approximately 450 subscriber units, which includes 250 portable radios and 200 mobile radio units. The mobile units are mounted in the Midway fleet and portable radios are used by various Midway groups. The system has four positions of dispatch consoles; one located in the AMC and three other remotely located in the Airport communications center. A five-year maintenance service contract for the new trunk radio system will also be included.
Project Need/Justification
The existing system has been in operation for 20-years and nearing its useful life. Midway uses a digital radio system to accommodate communications between various airport operations talk groups. The radio system currently supports approximately 15 talk groups, which include such entities as Police, Fire, Trades, Ground Operations, Airside Operations, and Facilities, etc. This system is a public safety, mission critical radio system with emergency and ID capability. The system, which has been in operation since 1996, is a UHF, 6-channel, narrow bandwidth system that operates within a one-mile radius of the Airport proper. The narrow bandwidth technology was mandated by the FCC for compliance originally in 2004, but then extended to 2013.
Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
Project Description
This proposed project will enable the airlines to separate bags from multiple flights with similar departure times by directing baggage to a fourth makeup unit. The current operational restriction only allows baggage to be sent to three makeup units. This project will increase operational flexibility by allowing bags inducted at the north or south ticket counters to be sent to any of the four makeups units. In addition, the project includes the replacement of the Explosives Detection System (EDS) equipment on the north portion of the system as part of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) Recapitalization and Optimization program.
c -45
This project includes the relocation of sprinkler heads, lights, cameras, and exit signs, modifications to the air ducts, installation of a conveyor line from X07 conveyor line, modifications to the OB4 conveyor line, installation of six new conveyors, installation of two high definition scanners (HDS) and required catwalk, and additional power to the required motor control panel (MCP) and power distribution points (PDP). Project will also require installation coordination with MATCO, on site testing of the new conveyor line, punch list creation and management.
Project Need/Justification:
Southwest Airlines (Southwest) is the largest air carrier located at Midway. Southwest utilizes all the ticket counters that feed the north baggage handling system (BHS). The current layout of the north BHS allows for bags to be sent to baggage makeup units (BMU) (1), (3), and (4). The BHS does not allow for bags to be sent to BMU 2. As Southwest passenger and bag volumes increase, the makeup capacity of the BHS also needs to increase. The sortation from X07 to BMU 2 will increase Southwest's makeup capacity by providing a conveyor line to feed BMU 2 from north BHS. This project also replaces five EDS units that were nearing their useful life.
The Authority will seek authority from the FAA to use PFCs with the following characteristics:
PFC level: A four dollar and fifty cent ($4.50) charge on passengers enplaned at the Airport.
Charge effective date: September 1, 2054 (which reflects the estimated charge expiration date for approved PFC Application No. 07-12-C-01-MDW).
Estimated charge expiration date: September 1, 2062 (or until collected PFC revenue plus interest thereon equals the allowable cost of the approved projects, as permitted by regulation).
Estimated Total PFC Revenue under this Application: Approximately $397,208,965 in PFC project cost with bond capital and financing and interest.
C-46
Proposed Proposed Total
Amount Amount Proposed Amount Proposed
Project Description
Airfield Lighting Infrastructure Improvements Airside Service Road Rehab AOA Perimeter Sound Wall Improvements Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Runway 13C/31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin Runway 13C/31C Rehabilitation
Runway 4L/22R Rehabilitation & Taxiway P Reconfiguration Runway 4R/22L Rehabilitation
Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway Y&K Reconstruction & Enhancement
Terminal Ramp Improvements
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
FIS 2nd Bag Claim & Space Reconfiguration
Taxiway A Extension
Trunk Radio System Replacement
Pre-Checked Baggage Inspection System Crossover
$0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$10,058,400 2,709,346 6,020,850
65,572,954 538,385
32,078,641 3,915,865
19,783,003 2,668,767 2,856,113
12,064,800
12,233,337 3,262,873
11,701,950 3,326,400 4,780,000 5,032,800
$10,058,400 2,709,346 6,020,850
65,572,954 538,385
32,078,641 3,915,865
19,783,003 2,668,767 2,856,113
12,064,800
12,233,337 3,262,873
11,701,950 3,326,400 4,780,000 5,032,800
$20,116,800 5,418,692
12,041,700 131,145,907 1,076,770
64,157,281 7,831,731
39,566,006 5,337,534 5,712,225
24,129,600
24,466,674 6,525,746
23,403,900 6,652,800 9,560,000
10,065,600
$198,604,483 $397,208,965
C-47
Midway International A irport
ATTACHMENT C
CONSULTATION MEETING ATTENDEES
The following people attended the June 1, 2017 Air Carrier Consultation Meeting via telephone:
Erin O'Donnell - Chicago Department of Aviation
Reshma Soni - Chicago Department of Aviation
Michael Cosentino - Chicago Department of Aviation
Blaine Peters - Delta Airlines
Laurie Vacco - Porter Airlines
Matt Ruffra - Ricondo & Associates, Inc.
Kathy Dziedzic - CARE Plus, LLC
PFC Application
Midway International Airport
ATTACHMENT C CONSULTATION MEETING SUMMARY
The June 1, 2017 Air Carrier Consultation Meeting is summarized as follows:
Phone call initiated and introductions made from those on the call.
Reshma Soni, CFO, Chicago Department of Aviation opened the meeting by introducing herself and providing background information on the proposed PFC application.
Reshma Soni discussed the notification letter mailed to the carriers on May 2, 2017 and provided information regarding:
1. the proposed projects in the application;
The City intends to file an application to impose a PFC and to use PFC revenue for the following projects at Midway:
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway Alpha Extension and Rehabilitation
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Yankee & Kilo
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Replacement of Trunk Radio System
Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
PFC Application
Midway International Airport
the proposed PFC authority being sought;
The total amount of PFC revenue currently estimated to be associated with this proposed impose and use application is $397,208,965 ($198,604,483 of capital funding authority and $198,604,483 of financing authority). The total amount of this PFC Application is subject to refinement based on the PFC eligibility of certain components.
PFC Level: $4.50 per enplaned passenger at Midway Charge Effective Date: September 1, 2054 Estimated Charge Expiration Date: September 1, 2062 Estimated Total PFC Revenue: $2,603,781,950
the proposed PFC application process timeline.
PFC TIMELINE
Air Carrier Notification Distributed May 2, 2017
Air Carrier Consultation Meeting June 1, 2017
Air Carrier Comment Due July 1,2017
Proposed Date of Submission of Draft Application to FAA July 2, 2017
Air carriers were provided an opportunity to ask any questions or provide any comments on the application. At this time the carriers acknowledged that the projects included in the application have each received Majority-ln-lnterest approval from the carriers. No other questions or comments made.
Meeting was adjourned.
PFC Application
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Chicago Midway International Airport Passenger Facility Charge Program
Air Carrier Consultation Meeting Thursday, June 1, 2017 Dial In Number: 641-715-3580 Pass Code: 685937
Introduction and Opening Remarks
Proposed Projects and PFC Authority
Detailed Financial Plan
PFC Timeline
Questions from Carriers
Meeting Adjournment
Passenger Facility Charge Program - Carrier Consultation Meeting Agenda
C-51
PFC AUTHORITY PROPOSED
Proposed Amount
Proposed Amount
Proposed Amount
Total Proposed
Financing &
Interest PFC Amount
Airfield Lighting Infrastructure Improvements Airside Service Road Rehab AOA Perimeter Sound Wall Improvements Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Runway 13C/31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin Runway 13C/31C Rehabilitation
Runway 4L/22R Rehabilitation & Taxiway P Reconfiguration Runway 4R/22L Rehabilitation
Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway Y&K Reconstruction & Enhancement
Terminal Ramp Improvements
Airport Maintenance Complex Improvements
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
FIS 2nd Bag Claim & Space Reconfiguration
Taxiway A Extension
Trunk Radio System Replacement
Pre-Checked Baggage Inspection System Crossover
$0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$10,058,400 2,709,346 6,020,850
65,572,954 538,385
32,078,641 3,915,865
19,783,003 2,668,767 2,856,113
12,064,800
12,233,337 3,262,873
11,701,950 3,326,400 4,780,000 5,032,800
$10,058,400 2,709,346 6,020,850
65,572,954 538,385
32,078,641 3,915,865
19,783,003 2,668,767 2,856,113
12,064,800
12,233,337 3,262,873
11,701,950 3,326,400 4,780,000 5,032,800
$20,116,800 5,418,692
12,041,700 131,145,907 1,076,770
64,157,281 7,831,731
39,566,006 5,337,534 5,712,225
24,129,600
24,466,674 6,525,746
23,403,900 6,652,800 9,560,000
10,065,600
$198,604,483 $198,604,483 $397,208,965
24
C-52
PFC TIMELINE
Air Carrier Notification Distributed May 2, 2017
Air Carrier Consultation Meeting June 1, 2017
Air Carrier Comment Due July 1,2017
Proposed Date of Submission of Draft Application to FAA July 2, 2017
25
C-53
Midway International A irport
ATTACHMENT C
AIR CARRIER CERTIFICATION OF AGREEMENT/DISAGREEMENT
No letters were received from air carriers certifying disagreement following the carrier consultation meeting.
No public comments were received for any of the projects included in this application.
PFC Application
MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ATTACHMENT D. REQUEST TO EXCLUDE
CLASS OF CARRIERS
The section contains the following information:
Page D -1 Excerpt from the Notification Letter on May 2, 2017 that updated the carrier class to be exempted from charging a PFC at Midway International Airport.
PFC Application No. 18-13-C-OO-MDW
Section 158.23(a)(3). Request that a Class of Carriers not be Required to Collect PFCs.
The following is information required specifically for the proposed impose and use application above,
(i) Class Designation: Air Taxi
Names of Known Carriers Belonging to Class Identified in this Section and Estimated Number of Annual Enplaned Passengers:
Carrier
Aero Jet Services Cobb Aviation Services Inc. Corporate Flight Alternatives, Inc. Crow Executive Air, Inc. North Country Aviation, Inc. Priester Aviation LLC Skybird Aviation, Inc. Tulip City Air Service, Inc.
Total
2015 Enplanements 67 25 33 32 1,000 161 4
15
1,337
Source: ACAIS Database, Accessed April 2017.
(iv) Reasons for Requesting that Carriers Identified in this Section Not be Required to Collect
the PFCThe number of passengers enplaned annually by this class of carriers represents fewer than one percent of total enplanements at Midway. The estimated annual PFC revenue from these carriers would be approximately $5,869 as compared to the estimated PFC revenue of $41,692,000 from all other carriers. In accordance with 14 CFR 158.11, the City may request of the FAA in its application for authority to impose PFCs, and in its application for authority to use PFCs, that collection of PFCs by any class of air carriers or foreign air carriers not be required if the number of passengers enplaned by the carriers in this class constitutes no more than one percent of the total number of passengers enplaned annually at the airport at which the PFC is imposed. This is the case with the class of carriers identified herein.
This is the same class that was already approved for exemption by FAA (See June 28,1993 Record of Decision, p.26). Information on known carriers belonging to the class has been updated to reflect the Department of Transportation (DOT) Air Carrier Activity Information System Report for calendar year 2015, the most recent report available to the City.
D-1
CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION MIDWAY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ATTACHMENT G. ALP/AIRSPACE/
ENVIRONMENTAL
PFC Application No. 18-13-C-OO-MDW
ATTACHMENT G: AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN (ALP), AIRSPACE, AND
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
ALL PROJECTS FOR WHICH IMPOSE AND USE OR USE AUTHORITY IS REQUESTED IN THE APPLICATION MUST BE LISTED UNDER EACH TYPE OF FINDING BELOW.
*********************************************************************************************
*****FOR FAA USE PFC Application Number:
***************************^***^
ALP Findings
1. Current ALP approval date: November 05,1996
List proposed project(s) shown on this ALP:
• Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure [NEPA Approval 7/10/2017]
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion [NEPA Approval 1/30/2017]
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C [NEPA Approval 2/24/2014] Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
[NEPA Approval 4L/22R: 4/15/2015; Twy. P: 9/15/2014; 4R-22L Rehab: 2/23/2016]
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L [NEPA Approval 2/23/2016] Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
Taxiway A Extension and Rehabilitation [NEPA Approval 7/10/2017]
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Y & K Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex [NEPA Approval 11/14/2017]
2. List proposed project(s) not required to be shown on an ALP:
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Replacement of Trunk Radio System
• Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
*****pQr^ p^y^ |jgr£******************************************************************************************^
Public agency information confirmed? YES [ ] PARTIALLY [ ] NO [ ]
For each project which the ADO/RO disagrees with the public agency's finding, discuss the reason(s) for the FAA's nonconcurrance below.
*******************************************************************
G-1
Airspace Findings
FAA Airspace finding date: 10/2/2017: 10/3/2017 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure
FAA Airspace finding date: 6/13/2012 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road
FAA Airspace finding date: 9/22/2016 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion
FAA Airspace finding date: 4/24/2014 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C
FAA Airspace finding date: 6/25/2015 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
FAA Airspace finding date: 3/28/2016 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L
FAA Airspace finding date: 6/13/2012 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation
FAA Airspace finding date: 04/04/2017 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Taxiway Alpha Extension and Rehabilitation
FAA Airspace finding date: 3/11/2013 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Yankee & Kilo
FAA Airspace finding date: 11/05/1996 (repeat as necessary)
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp
G-2
11. FAA Airspace finding date: 06/05/2017 (repeat as necessary) List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex
12. List proposed project(s) not required to have an airspace determination
Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration
Replacement of Trunk Radio System
• Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover
*****pQP^ USE ******************************************************************************** Public agency information confirmed? YES [ ] PARTIALLY [ ] NO [ ]
For each project which the ADO/RO disagrees with the public agency's finding, discuss the reason(s) for the FAA's nonconcurrance below.
****************************************************
III. Environmental Findings
1. List proposed project(s) which are categorically excluded from the requirement for formal environmental review:
Rehabilitation of Airfield Lighting Infrastructure [7/10/2017]
Rehabilitation of Airside Service Road [8/22/2011]
Rehabilitation of AOA Perimeter Sound Wall [7/10/2017]
Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion [1/30/2017]
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C [2/24/2014]
Rehabilitation of Runway 13C-31C Hold Pad - Detention Basin [6/28/2011]
Rehabilitation of Runway 4L/22R & Taxiway P Reconfiguration
[4L/22R: 4/15/2015; Twy. P: 9/15/2014; 4R-22L Rehab: 2/23/2016]
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R/22L [2/23/2016]
Rehabilitation of Runway 4R-22L Centerline & Threshold Lights Installation [4R: Lights: 6/15/2012; 4R-22L Rehab: 2/23/2016]
Taxiway Alpha Extension and Rehabilitation [7/10/2017]
Rehabilitation and Enhancement of Taxiway Yankee & Kilo [Y, K, & D: 1/10/2013; Y, ASouth, etc.: 12/13/2011]
Rehabilitation of Terminal Ramp [7/10/2017]
Rehabilitation of Airport Maintenance Complex [11/14/2017]
Cyclical Vehicle Replacement [7/10/2017]
Installation of FIS 2nd Bag Claim Device and Space Reconfiguration [7/10/2017]
Replacement of Trunk Radio System [7/10/2017]
Pre-Check Baggage Inspection System Crossover [7/10/2017]
G-3
2. Date of FAA Finding of No Significant Impact:
(repeat as necessary)
Not Applicable
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
3. Date of FAA environmental record of decision:
(repeat as necessary)
Not Applicable
List proposed project(s) covered by this finding:
*****pQr^ ***************************************************************************************
Public agency information confirmed? YES [ ] PARTIALLY [ ] NO [ ]
For each project which the ADO/RO disagrees with the public agency's finding, discuss the reason(s) for the FAA's nonconcurrance below.
*******************************************************************************************************************
Application Reviewed by:
Name Routing Symbol . Date
G-4
|