1. A. One of the basic objectives of a priority process is to identify projects that benefit the highest number of aviation system users; however, it primarily identifies projects that have the greater need, even if the airport serves less users than another airport. When airports are compared based on persons served, airports offering scheduled or unscheduled passenger airline service to the public serve more persons than airports that support general aviation activity. Differences in the size, revenue generation capability, and usage of commercial service air carrier airports—those airports that enplane 2,500 or more passengers annually—as compared to general aviation airports make it difficult to compare the need for projects between the commercial service air carrier and general aviation airports.
2. B. Due to aircraft size, weight, speed, operational characteristics, and FAA design standards, facilities at air carrier airports have more demanding requirements, resulting in costlier engineering and construction. Because of the significant differences between air carrier and general aviation airports project standards, each group's projects are prioritized separately.
3. C. The air carrier airports priority projects must have an established funding level, just as the general aviation priority projects must have an established funding level. To accomplish this, the total funds available for airport improvement projects in a given year are allocated between air carrier and general aviation airport projects in a ratio of 65 percent for air carrier airports and 35 percent for general aviation airports. This balance is adjusted if there are insufficient projects in either category to fully utilize available funding. This 65 percent/35 percent allocation is based on past experiences in the state's aviation program and the levels of state funding allocated to each type of airport. It also reflects the fact that air carrier airports have a greater capability of generating revenue through means unavailable to general aviation airports such as: concessions, vendor leases, landing fees, airline contracts, passenger facility charges, rental car lease agreements, and consolidated rental car facility charges. Passenger facility charges (PFC) are charges passed on to a commercial service passenger, which can be collected by the airport to fund projects not otherwise funded. These projects are eligible to be approved by the FAA for 100 percent funding through the PFC collection. Therefore, those portions of projects using PFC funds are not eligible to receive matching funds from the state.
4. D. The division of projects by air carrier or general aviation airport categories results in two project priority lists, one for each of the two types of airports.

5. E. LAS has air carrier airports that are FAR Part 139 certificated. Due to this federal certification standard, these airports are required by the FAA to meet all standards set forth in FAR Part 139. Therefore, each of these airport’s projects will be prioritized in accordance with the Air Carrier Enhancement Program. Programmed projects shall receive a calculated percentage of the Airport Construction and Development Priority Program for Air Carrier Airports each year based on the annual aviation appropriation approved by the Louisiana State Legislature. The percentage shall be reviewed and recalculated/revised every two years by DOTD in accordance with the Air Carrier Enhancement Program. The projects included in the Air Carrier Airport Construction Program may be prioritized and selected utilizing a process based system. That system includes, but may not be limited to, objective analysis and public data that considers, at a minimum, aviation factors relative to project eligibility for funding within the air carrier airport construction program, hub classification status, economic analysis, studies by DOTD, FAA data for enplanements, operations, historical funding, and financial/grant management practices.

   1. 1. Air Carrier Enhancement Pilot Program (ACE Program)—The ACE Program is designed to allow maximum flexibility in construction and development project requests while retaining the need and integrity of continuing the process to compile and develop a prioritized list of projects to be complete at air carrier airports. The program shall foster operational safety and provide for the optimal use and efficiency of existing transportation facilities and funding strategies. Further, it may support resiliency in the transportation system and promote diverse economic development, job growth, commerce, and tourism. It shall encourage innovation, support environmental practices, and improve the quality of life for Louisiana citizens. The primary objective of the ACE Program is to prioritize airport improvement and development projects in accordance with the air carrier airport sponsor capital improvement plans (CIP), and the desired necessity to adapt to air carrier airport operational requirements. Percentage formulas derived through the program process shall include, but may not be limited to, FAA hub classification, enplanements, and operations in accordance with the air carrier entitlement program. Projects shall be included in the priority system evaluation as individual projects, but shall be funded through the total approved percentage amounts for each airport the category of projects requested. Differences in the criteria for assessing these types of projects, the costly amount of these projects, and the complex nature of the project timelines require state funding to be available to ensure practicality and inclusion in the same process with FAA and other federally funded airport improvement projects and processes. State statutes require a priority system to document and prioritize projects in logical order for addressing documented needs at the state's air carrier public airport system. The priority system is a process that has been developed to allocate planned consistent and reliable funding to air carrier airports to ensure they are able to address their critical needs and the needs of the LAS. The system reflects the state's development policy for the airport system, assigning higher values to projects which are consistent with the policy and the LASP.

      1. a. From the estimated percentage of allocation amount, air carrier airports shall first provide funding for all match requirements to FAA grants received during each fiscal year the ACE is allocated.
      2. b. Any remaining funds may be used for the next highest priority or appropriate project as identified by the airport sponsor through project support documentation submitted to DOTD.
      3. c. Air Carrier airports may state their intent in writing to enhance their larger project requests by merging the previous year funded allocation amount and/or anyremaining funds from previously approved projects for a legislatively approved project with their planned allocated amount and the request on file for the next fiscal year program to ensure and have the ability to fund a larger multi-year project.
6. d. If the air carrier airport elects to change a project that was previously prioritized or submitted as a merger project, the air carrier airport shall submit their intent to do so to DOTD in writing. The current project shall be canceled, and the new project shall be submitted in accordance with the prioritization process in the Airport Construction and Development Program. Funds, which had been approved for the canceled project will be reallocated to any other prioritized project the legislature has approved as needed in accordance with reallocation compliance procedures statutorily or by DOTD.

Authority Note

AUTHORITY NOTE: Promulgated in accordance with USC 49:40117, USC 49:47102, SCR 67(1997), R.S. 2:6, .and R.S. 2:802.

Historical Note

HISTORICAL NOTE: Promulgated by the Department of Transportation and Development, Division of Aviation, LR 16:538 (June 1990), amended LR 24:1507 (August 1998), amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Intermodal Transportation Division, LR 33:521 (March 2007), repromulgated by the Department of Transportation and Development, Aviation Section, LR 39:106 (January 2013), amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Intermodal Transportation Division, Aviation Section, LR 42:759 (May 2016), amended by the Department of Transportation and Development, Office of Multimodal Commerce, LR 49:1419 (August 2023).