DOCSLIB.ORG

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Market Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Market Overview Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Market Overview July 18, 2012 Contents . Definitions . Facts & Figures . UAS Budgets and Spending . Trends and Challenges . Future of Unmanned Aerial Systems . Summary and Recommendations . Appendix A: DoD UAS Acquisition Costs . Appendix B: DoD Current and Future Domestic UAS Locations 2 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Definitions . Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) . Refers to systems whose components include the necessary equipment, network, and personnel to control an unmanned aircraft . UAS is a broader term that includes equipment, networks, and personnel in addition to Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) . Refers to a powered aerial vehicle that does not carry a human operation, uses aerodynamic forces to provide vehicle life, can fly autonomously or be piloted remotely, can be expendable or recoverable, and can carry a lethal or nonlethal payload . Commonly known as “drones”. In practice, the terms UAS and UAV are often used interchangeably Source: CRS Report R41284, “Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Acquisition: Issues for Congress,” December 27, 2011. 3 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Facts & Figures . Dept. of Defense (DoD) spending on UAS has increased from $284 million in FY00 to $3.9 billion in FY12 . DoD’s unmanned aircraft inventory increased more than 40-fold from 167 aircraft in 2002 to nearly 7,500 in 2010 . In 2009, DoD completed almost 500,000 UAS flight hours just in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom . In May 2010, unmanned systems surpassed one million flight hours . In November 2010 unmanned systems achieved one million combat hours Sources: CRS Report R41284, “Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Acquisition: Issues for Congress,” December 27, 2011; CRS Report R42136, “Unmanned Aerial Systems,” January 3, 2012; Dept. of Defense, “Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap: FY2011 – 2036.” 4 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Facts & Figures Source: CRS Report R42136, “Unmanned Aerial Systems,” January 3, 2012. 5 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved DoD Unmanned Systems Budget by Domain $7,200.00 $7,000.00 $6,800.00 $6,600.00 $6,400.00 $6,200.00 $6,000.00 $ Millions $ $5,800.00 $5,600.00 $5,400.00 $5,200.00 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 Maritime $47.41 $113.08 $154.32 $160.94 $165.62 Ground $227.09 $259.83 $261.57 $249.16 $245.96 Air $6,055.36 $5,823.59 $6,049.48 $6,381.47 $6,510.72 Source: Dept. of Defense, “Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap: FY2011 – 2036.” 6 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved DoD Unmanned Aerial Systems Budget Estimates* $7,000.00 $6,000.00 $5,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,000.00 $ Millions $ $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 O&M $1,596.74 $1,631.38 $1,469.49 $1,577.65 $1,825.45 Proc. $3,351.90 $2,936.93 $3,040.41 $3,362.95 $3,389.03 RDT&E $1,106.72 $1,255.29 $1,539.58 $1,440.57 $1,296.35 *Sum of O&M. Proc., and RDT&E values may not equal Air Domain value from previous slide due to rounding. Source: Dept. of Defense, “Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap: FY2011 – 2036.” 7 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved DoD Prime Contract Spend on PSC 1550 – Drones* ($K) $2,500,000 $2,016,079 $2,000,000 $1,464,626 $1,500,000 $1,117,849 $1,000,000 $ Thousands $ $683,231 $951,369 $530,587 $500,000 $336,369 $539,864 $131,358 $290,608 $0 $129,643 * PSC 1550 is not exclusive to unmanned aerial systems. It may also include ground and maritime unmanned systems. Source: GovWin IQ analysis of FPDS contract data. 8 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved DoD Prime Contract Spend on PSC 1550 – Drones* by Component ($K) $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $ Thousands $ $400,000 $200,000 $0 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 USSOCOM $6,003 $16,285 $55,474 $85,754 Air Force $65,534 $32,200 $174,639 $233,430 Navy $40,243 $236,273 $86,737 $201,054 Army $1,006,069 $670,574 $1,152,308 $1,496,240 * PSC 1550 is not exclusive to unmanned aerial systems. It may also include ground and maritime unmanned systems. Source: GovWin IQ analysis of FPDS contract data. 9 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Top 20 Federal Prime Contractors for PSC 1550 - Drones* ($K) PARENT COMPANY FY08 ($K) FY09 ($K) FY10 ($K) FY11 ($K) TOTAL ($K) GENERAL ATOMICS INTERNATIONAL $204,247 $270,413 $446,462 $660,611 $1,581,732 TEXTRON INC $552,870 $5,904 $464,135 $502,769 $1,525,677 NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION $180,645 $330,488 $182,641 $258,578 $952,352 AEROVIRONMENT INCORPORATED $93,203 $94,007 $157,155 $247,573 $591,938 COMPOSITE ENGINEERING, INC (CEi) $40,610 $8,825 $71,081 $62,604 $183,120 HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC $4,922 $101,266 $22,893 $15,354 $144,436 BOEING COMPANY $692 ($50) $23,297 $90,318 $114,256 ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS INC (ATK) $13,284 $25,689 $33,591 $38,897 $111,461 BAE SYSTEMS PLC $24,022 $23,196 $28,356 $18,566 $94,141 TCOM, L.P. $30 $44 $13 $88,542 $88,629 ORBITAL SCIENCES CORPORATION $415 $46,277 $31,755 $813 $79,260 INSITU GROUP, THE (INC) (wholly owned subsidiary of Boeing Company) $138 $32,049 $7,851 $29,928 $69,966 L-3 COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION $4 $6,612 $6,801 ($0) $13,418 RALLY POINT MANAGEMENT, LLC $12,384 $12,384 AEROSTAR INTEGRATED SYSTEMS JV $6,151 $6,151 NEANY, INC $219 $1,974 $3,635 $5,828 AURORA FLIGHT SCIENCES CORP $4,986 $4,986 GICHNER SYSTEMS GROUP INC (a Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc Company) $311 $2,067 $955 $126 $3,458 AEROSTAR INTERNATIONAL, INC $3,206 $3,206 CANADIAN COMMERCIAL CORPORATION (CCC) $1,164 $630 $476 $851 $3,121 * PSC 1550 is not exclusive to unmanned aerial systems. It may also include ground and maritime unmanned systems. Source: GovWin IQ analysis of FPDS contract data. Links require GovWin IQ FPDS Vendor Profiles Subscription. For more info click here 10 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Top 20 NAICS Associated With PSC 1550 - Drones* ($K) NAICS DESCRIPTION FY08 ($K) FY09 ($K) FY10 ($K) FY11 ($K) TOTAL ($K) 336411 - Aircraft Manufacturing $968,757 $84,443 $1,255,046 $1,755,989 $4,064,236 336410 - Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing $788,248 $788,248 541330 - Engineering Services $112,740 $78,106 $113,500 $49,344 $353,690 336413 - Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Eq Manuf ($576) $96 ($8,910) $170,903 $161,513 336414 - Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manuf $37,538 $64,910 $55,920 $158,367 334290 - Other Communications Equipment Manuf $51,510 $51,510 611512 - Flight Training $12,384 $12,384 541380 - Testing Laboratories $2,955 $2,955 336412 - Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing $2,330 $2,330 541710 - R&D in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences ($475) $489 $1,477 $257 $1,747 541712 - R&D in the Physical, Engi & Life Sciences (except Biotech) $50 $1,000 $1,050 423410 - Photographic Eqand Supplies Merchant Wholesalers $875 $875 334511 - Search, Detect, Nav, Guid, Aero & Nautical Sys & Instr Manuf $746 $38 $784 326299 - All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing $397 $397 541990 - All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services $41 $121 $163 488190 - Other Support Activities for Air Transportation $95 $95 334515 - Instrument Manuf for Measuring & Testing Elec & Electric Sig $54 $13 ($0) $67 334510 - Nav, Measuring, Electromedical & Control Instruments Manuf $58 $58 339999 - All Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing $49 $49 423860 - Transportation Equipment & Supplies Merchant Wholesalers $25 $25 * PSC 1550 is not exclusive to unmanned aerial systems. It may also include ground and maritime unmanned systems. Source: GovWin IQ analysis of FPDS contract data. 11 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Top Drone Purchasing Agencies: FY08-FY11 ($K) AGENCY FY08 ($K) FY09 ($K) FY10 ($K) FY11 ($K) TOTAL ($K) Army $1,006,069 $670,574 $1,152,308 $1,496,240 $4,325,190 Navy $40,243 $236,273 $86,737 $201,054 $564,307 Air Force $65,534 $32,200 $174,639 $233,430 $505,803 U.S. Special Operations Command $6,003 $16,285 $55,474 $85,754 $163,515 Customs and Border Protection $1,362 $13,691 $33,995 $49,048 Federal Highway Administration $1,000 $1,000 National Oceanic And Atmospheric Admin $97 $13 $110 Federal Supply Service $24 $16 $39 National Park Service $15 $15 National Aeronautics And Space Admin $12 $12 U.S. Coast Guard $1 $1 * PSC 1550 is not exclusive to unmanned aerial systems. It may also include ground and maritime unmanned systems. Source: GovWin IQ analysis of FPDS contract data. Links require a GovWin IQ Agency Profiles Subscription. For more info click here. 12 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Drone Program of Record Inventory Levels Planned Through FY2017 Source: Dept. of Defense, “Report to Congress on Future Unmanned Aircraft Systems Training, Operations, and Sustainability,” April 2012. 13 7/18/2012 ©2012 Deltek, Inc. All Rights Reserved Current UAS Missions . Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) . Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition (RSTA) . Electronic Warfare (EW) . Anti-Surface Warfare (ASUW) . Mine Warfare (MIW) . Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) . Force Protection/Strike . Some UAS carry precision-guided weapons to attack ground targets, and more are being weaponized, although this is still adding strike capability to systems originally designed for reconnaissance .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • JBLM Lark Monitoring Final Report 2015 W911S8-14-2-0026 W911S8-15-2-0001 CNLM Task Orders #G1108, G1118 April 2016
    Habitat and Species Cooperative Restoration Program Joint Base Lewis-McChord Center for Natural Lands Management JBLM Lark Monitoring Final Report 2015 W911S8-14-2-0026 W911S8-15-2-0001 CNLM Task Orders #G1108, G1118 April 2016 Submitted to: Joint Base Lewis-McChord Fish and Wildlife Program Submitted by: Adrian Wolf, Gary Slater and Hannah Anderson Center for Natural Lands Management 120 Union Avenue Southeast Olympia WA, 98501 Phone: 360-584-2538 Joint Base Lewis-McChord is a key military installation and the most important conservation area in the Puget Trough region. The Center for Natural Lands Management strives to assist Joint Base Lewis-McChord in the conservation of its natural resources within the framework of the military training mandate. Joint Base Lewis- McChord and its conservation partners have shared interests because: Healthy natural ecosystems are essential for realistic and sustainable training lands. Rare species recovery throughout the region reduces the burden of recovery on any single landowner or site. Pest plants harm natural areas and reduce their suitability for military training. Page 2 Table of Contents Project Highlights ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.1 Goals and Objectives ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Specifications and Contract Documents
    SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Killeen, Texas Robert Gray Army Airfield (RGAAF) Security Surveillance Improvements at Robert Gray Army Airfield City of Killeen RFP No. 19-10 ISSUED FOR RFP Garver Project No. 17181082 Project Sponsors: Prepared For: City of Killeen November 6, 2018 This page intentionally left blank Security Surveillance Improvements at RGAAF Project No. 17181082 Issued for RFP November 6, 2018 SECTION I. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Security Surveillance Improvements at RGAAF Project No. 17181082 Issued for RFP November 6, 2018 This page intentionally left blank Security Surveillance Improvements at RGAAF Project No. 17181082 Issued for RFP November 6, 2018 SECTION 000001 CERTIFICATIONS SECURITY SURVEILLANCE IMPROVEMENTS AT ROBERT GRAY ARMY AIRFIELD PROJECT GARVER PROJECT NO. 17181082 CITY OF KILLEEN RFP NO. 19-10 I hereby certify that the applicable portions of this project plans and specifications were prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Engineer under the laws of the State of Texas. APPLICABLE DIVISION OR SEAL AND SIGNATURE PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY Derek Mayo, P.E. General Plans and Specifications Digitally Signed: Matthew LeMay, P.E. Electrical Plans and Specifications Digitally Signed: Security Surveillance Improvements at RGAAF Project No. 17181082 Issued for RFP 000001-1 November 6, 2018 SECTION 000001 CERTIFICATIONS APPLICABLE DIVISION OR SEAL AND SIGNATURE PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY Michael A. Guzik, P.E. CTI Telecom Plans and Specifications Digitally Signed GARVER, LLC CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION: TX ENGINEERING REGISTRATION NO. F-5713 TX ARCHITECTURAL REGISTRATION NO. 21507 CTI CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION: TX REGISTERED CONSULTING FIRM B-17368 Security Surveillance Improvements at RGAAF Project No.
    [Show full text]
  • Mid-Twentieth Century Architecture in Alaska Historic Context (1945-1968)
    Mid-Twentieth Century Architecture in Alaska Historic Context (1945-1968) Prepared by Amy Ramirez . Jeanne Lambin . Robert L. Meinhardt . and Casey Woster 2016 The Cultural Resource Programs of the National Park Service have responsibilities that include stewardship of historic buildings, museum collections, archeological sites, cultural landscapes, oral and written histories, and ethnographic resources. The material is based upon work assisted by funding from the National Park Service. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of the Interior. Printed 2018 Cover: Atwood Center, Alaska Pacific University, Anchorage, 2017, NPS photograph MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE IN ALASKA HISTORIC CONTEXT (1945 – 1968) Prepared for National Park Service, Alaska Regional Office Prepared by Amy Ramirez, B.A. Jeanne Lambin, M.S. Robert L. Meinhardt, M.A. and Casey Woster, M.A. July 2016 Table of Contents LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................... 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 8 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Historic Context as a Planning & Evaluation Tool ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • JBLM Streaked Horned Lark Surveys and Monitoring 2016
    Habitat and Species Cooperative Restoration Program Joint Base Lewis-McChord Center for Natural Lands Management JBLM Lark Monitoring Final Report 2016 W911S8-15-2-0001 W911S8-15-2-0004 W911S8-15-2-0012 W911S8-16-2-0010 CNLM Task Orders #G1117, G1118, G1131, G1155 March 2017 Submitted to: Joint Base Lewis-McChord Fish and Wildlife Program Submitted by: Adrian Wolf, Gary Slater and Jerrmaine Treadwell Center for Natural Lands Management 120 Union Avenue Southeast Olympia WA, 98501 Phone: 360-584-2538 Joint Base Lewis-McChord is a key military installation and the most important conservation area in the Puget Trough region. The Center for Natural Lands Management strives to assist Joint Base Lewis-McChord in the conservation of its natural resources within the framework of the military training mandate. Joint Base Lewis- McChord and its conservation partners have shared interests because: Healthy natural ecosystems are essential for realistic and sustainable training lands. Rare species recovery throughout the region reduces the burden of recovery on any single landowner or site. Pest plants harm natural areas and reduce their suitability for military training. Page i Table of Contents Project Highlights ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Goals and Objectives ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Boreal Partners in Flight 2009 Project Summaries
    Boreal Partners in Flight 2009 Project Summaries Table of Contents BCR REPORTS BCR 1 – Renner ………………………………………………………………….……….4 BCR 2 – Savage…………………………………………………………………………...4 BCR 5 – Cady………………………………………………………...…………………...6 PROJECT SUMMARIES Ajmi – Fort Wainwright Tanana Flats Training Area and Yukon Training Area………..7 Ambrose et al. – American Peregrine Falcon (Falocperegrinus anatum) Monitoring along the Upper Yukon River in Yukon-Charley River National Preserve……………………………………………………………………………….….10 Baluss and Hopey – Tongass National Forest Partners in Flight…………………….…12 de Zeeuw – New National Eagle Take Permit Program…………………………...……13 Ely and Shook – Tundra Swan Avian Influenza Sampling on the North Slope of Alaska……………………………………………………………………………………14 Gotthardt et al. – Biogeography of Select Avian Species in Alaska’s National Parks…………………………………………………………..………….………………14 Griese and Moran – Elmendorf AFB Update…………………………………………..15 1 Harwood – Landbird Update for Kanuti NWF...........................................................…..15 Johnson et al. – Using Satellite Telementry to Determine Migratory Movements of Short-eared Owls from the Seward Peniusula……………………………………….…..16 Johnson et al. – Landbird Update from Tetlin NRW………………………...…………16 Kirchhoff – The Audubon Alaska WatchList……………………………………….…..20 Kovach – Bird Monitoring at Innoko NWR…………………………………….……….21 Macander and Augustine – USAF Goose Forage Study, the Near Island Group in Western Aleutians…………………………………………………..................................21 Matsuoka and Pardieck – North American
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 2013
    INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN 2013 611th Air Support Group Alaska Installations U.S. AIR FORCE, 611th AIR SUPPORT GROUP, ALASKA 611th CIVIL ENGINEER SQUADRON, ASSESSMENT MANAGEMENT INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN 2013 611th Air Support Group, Alaska Installations This revised Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) meets requirements of the Sikes Act (16 USC 670a et seq.) as amended and as approved in previous plans in 2007, 2008, and 2009 by the 611th Air Support Group Commander, the Alaska Regional Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game commissioner. Use and mission of the installations have not significantly changed since approval of the previous plans. The Short and Long Range Radar Sites and Eareckson Air Station INRMPs were approved for use in 2007; the King Salmon Airport INRMP was approved for use in 2008; and the Inactive Sites INRMP was approved for use in 2009. They will remain in use until replaced by the final version of this plan. The primary change in this revised INRMP is that of format to follow guidance provided in Air Force Instruction 32-7064. This INRMP also groups installations from the four previous plans into one document. Data specific to each installation and management goals, objectives, and projects have also been updated and included in this revision. Sikes Act Cooperating Agencies* ROBYN M. BURK, Colonel, USAF Commander 611th Air Support Group GEOFFREY HASKETT Regional Director, Region 7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service *Above signatures are digital copies of originals, which are on file at the 611th Air Support Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Hood Noise Study
    130 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD 1312 Fort Hood Noise Study RICHARD M. LETTY At the request' of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineer , Fort WortJ1 measuring airfield noise and impulsive weapon-firing blast District Office, an in tallation compatible-use zone (ICUZ) noise noise, it was decided that the noise monitoring would be study was prepared for Fort Hood, Texa . The purpose f this performed in two phases. The Phase I noise measurements study was to addres the n i e impact from military training ac­ focused on airfield noise. A total of nine noise measurement tivity conducted at Fort Hood. The major component of this Fort Hood I UZ noise study wa a comprehensive long-term noise locations were selected: two in the vicinity of RGAAF, four monitoring program and the use of computer modeling to develop around HAAF, and three along the various flight corridors noi e contour to iden tify noise-impacted areas. Noise measure­ leading to and from the Fort Hood Army Installation. The ments were obtained at a total of 17 noise measurement locations: Phase II noise measurements focused on the blast noise from 9 airfield noi e monitoring ·itc , and 8 weapon-fi ring blast noise artillery and weapon-firing activity on the various ranges at monitoring site . Because of the day-to-day variations in military Fort Hood. The purpose of the noise monitoring program was training activity, it was determined that 60 days of noise data at ach of the 17 noise-m nitoring sites would be useful in under­ not only to define the actual noise levels from airfield and standing long-term airfield and weapon-firing blast noise levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Post Newspaper
    FREE RECYCLED an edition of the Recycled material is used in the making of our ALASKA POST newsprint The Interior Military News Connection Vol. 8, No. 37 Fort Wainwright, Alaska September 15, 2017 Alaska, California rescue squadrons unite to save lives in Southeast Texas Staff Sgt. Balinda O’Neal Dresel 249th Airlift Squadron bound for Alaska National Guard Public Moffett Federal Airfield, Calif., Affairs to pick up two HH-60 Pave Hawk helicopters and aircrews from the Air National Guardsmen from 129th Rescue Squadron. They Alaska’s Chugach Mountains and the arrived in Fort Hood in the early- heart of California’s Silicon Valley morning hours of Aug. 29 and spent last week in the flooded cities of began moving equipment to a Southeast Texas, with one mission— staging area on Gray Army Airfield to save lives. where they were later paired Aircrews, combat rescue officers, with search and rescue personnel pararescuemen and support personnel from California’s 131st Rescue from the Alaska Air National Guard’s Squadron. 176th Wing and members of the “One of the greatest aspects California Air National Guard’s of working with other pararescue 129th Rescue Wing joined more than teams is that we can come together 18,000 National Guard personnel under a common thread and who responded to the call to assist train and work as a joint force,” with Hurricane Harvey humanitarian explained Senior Master Sgt. disaster relief operations. The Airmen Brandon Stuemke, a pararescueman left home Aug. 28 to help their with the 212th Rescue Squadron. neighbors in Texas still needing relief “It allowed for us to seamlessly Air National Guard search and rescue personnel from Alaska and California conduct water and evacuation.
    [Show full text]
  • National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) (2011-2015)
    NPIAS 2011-2015 Illustrated by GRA, Incorporated Federal Aviation Administration U.S. Department of Transportation National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) (2011-2015) Report of the Secretary of Transportation to the United States Congress Pursuant to Section 47103 of Title 49, United States Code The NPIAS 2011-2015 report is available online at http://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/npias/reports Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. VI Development Estimates .......................................................................................................... vii Estimates by Airport Type......................................................................................... viii Estimates by Type of Development...............................................................................x Status of the Industry .............................................................................................................. xii CHAPTER 1: SYSTEM COMPOSITION.......................................................................................1 Overview....................................................................................................................................1 U.S. Department of Transportation................................................................................2 Federal Aviation Administration ...................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • EXHIBIT 2 Recovery Outline for the Streaked Horned Lark
    EXHIBIT 2 Recovery Outline for the Streaked Horned Lark U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Outline for the Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) Photo: D. Leonard, USFWS Common Name Streaked horned lark Scientific Name Eremophila alpestris strigata Listing Status and Date Threatened; October 3, 2013 (78 FR 61452) Critical Habitat and Date Designated; October 3, 2013 (78 FR 61506) Lead Agency/Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1 Lead Field Office Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office 2600 SE 98th Avenue, Suite 100 Portland, Oregon 97266 (503) 231-6179 Lead Biologist Cat Brown (503) 231-6179, [email protected] Purpose of the Recovery Outline: This document lays out a preliminary course of action for the survival and recovery of the streaked horned lark. It is meant to serve as interim guidance to direct recovery efforts and inform consultation and permitting activities until a comprehensive draft recovery plan has been completed. Recovery outlines are intended primarily for internal use by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), and formal public participation will be invited upon the release of the draft recovery plan. However, we will consider any new information or comments that members of the public may wish to offer in response to this outline during the recovery planning process. For more information on Federal survival and recovery efforts for the streaked horned lark, or to provide additional comments, interested parties may contact 1 Recovery Outline for the Streaked Horned Lark the lead biologist for this species, Cat Brown, at the above address, telephone number, or e-mail.
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue of Meteorological Bulletins Location Indicators Used in the Abbreviated Headings (Ttaaii CCCC) Ccccs by Location Indicator CCCC Location Name Country Name
    WMO No. 9 - Weather Reporting Volume C1 - Catalogue of Meteorological Bulletins Location Indicators used in the Abbreviated Headings (TTAAii CCCC) CCCCs by Location Indicator CCCC Location Name Country Name ABCS Cairns Australia ABRF Brisbane (Regional Forecasting Centre) Australia ABRK Rockhampton Australia ABTD Thursday I. Australia ABTL Townsville Australia ABWP Weipa Australia ACCC Cocos Island Cocos Island ADDN Darwin Australia ADRM Darwin/Regional Met. Centre Australia AGGG Honiara (COM Centre), Guadalcanal I. Solomon Islands AMMC Melbourne/World Met. Centre Australia AMML Melbourne/Intl. Australia AMRF Melbourne (Regional Forecasting Centre) Australia ANAU Nauru Is. Nauru APRF Perth (Regional Forecasting Centre) Australia APRM Adelaide (Regional Forecasting Centre) Australia ASRF Sydney (Regional Forecasting Centre) Australia ASRI Richmond(RAAF) Australia AYPY Port Moresby Papua New Guinea BABJ Peking (Beijing) China BGAM Angmagssalik Greenland BGSF Søndre Strømfjord Greenland BGTL Thule AB Greenland BICC Reykjavik (Gufunes COM Centre) Iceland BIEG Egilsstadir Iceland BIKF Keflavík Iceland BIRK Reykjavík Airport Iceland BOCW Call sign of ship recruited by/Indicatif d'appel de navire China recruté par BOIA Call sign of ship recruited by/Indicatif d'appel de navire China recruté par BOID Call sign of ship recruited by/Indicatif d'appel de navire China recruté par BOIJ Call sign of ship recruited by/Indicatif d'appel de navire China recruté par BOIP Call sign of ship recruited by/Indicatif d'appel de navire China recruté par BOIT
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior
    Vol. 78 Thursday, No. 192 October 3, 2013 Part III Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Taylor’s Checkerspot Butterfly and Streaked Horned Lark; Final Rule VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Oct 02, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\03OCR3.SGM 03OCR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 61506 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 192 / Thursday, October 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR by appointment, at the Washington Fish Washington; and in Benton County in and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER Oregon. Fish and Wildlife Service INFORMATION CONTACT). Any additional • Approximately 4,629 ac (1,873 ha) tools or supporting information that we in two units for the streaked horned lark 50 CFR Part 17 developed for this critical habitat in Grays Harbor, Pierce, Pacific, and [Docket No. FWS–R1–ES2013–0009; designation will also be available at the Wahkiakum Counties in Washington; 4500030114] Fish and Wildlife Service Web site and and in Clatsop, Columbia, Marion, Polk, field office set out above, and may also and Benton Counties in Oregon. RIN 1081–AZ36 be included at http:// We have prepared an economic www.regulations.gov. analysis of the designation of critical Endangered and Threatened Wildlife habitat. We have prepared an analysis FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken and Plants; Designation of Critical of the probable economic impacts of the Berg, Manager, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Habitat for Taylor’s Checkerspot critical habitat designations and related Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Butterfly and Streaked Horned Lark factors.
    [Show full text]