Should My Airport Contract with USDA Wildlife Services?
Important Considerations for Airports Contemplating Hiring USDA Wildlife Services-Even when using local funds; If your airport receives federal funding through programs such as the Airport Improvement Program (AIP), Passenger Facility Charge (PFC), Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) Airport Terminal Program (ATP), Airport Infrastructure Grants (AIG), or Federal Contract Tower (FCT) Program, you are subject to FAA regulations that prioritize competitive procurement to ensure efficiency, safety, and responsible use of resources, as outlined in FAA Order 5100.38D, Chapter 10, Section 10-1, and the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA), 41 U.S.C. § 3306(a). Even if you plan to use local funds to hire USDA Wildlife Services (USDA WS) for wildlife hazard management, the federal funding nexus-established by accepting these FAA funds-extends these competitive requirements to all procurements, per FAA Order 5190.6B, Section 1.3. Choosing USDA WS would be out of compliance, as their federal status may discourage private firms from bidding, potentially reducing competition and leading to inefficiencies or higher costs that conflict with FAA's expectations for fair and open processes.
Beyond competition concerns, FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-36B, Section 3.2, recommends private sector wildlife biologists with specialized certifications for hazard management, highlighting their expertise over general federal staff, while Program Guidance Letter 09-01, Section 2.1, advises against using federal agencies unless private options are unavailable-a rare scenario given the availability of qualified private providers. FAA grant assurances tied to AIP, PFC, ATP, AIG, and FCT funding (e.g., No. 30, "Economic Nondiscrimination"; No. 34, "Operation and Maintenance"; No. 31, "Exclusive Rights"), detailed in FAA Order 5190.6B, Section 4.1, require avoiding favoritism, ensuring efficient services, and maintaining competition across all procurements-federal or local-due to this nexus. Hiring USDA WS, despite their FAA MOU being for cooperation, not bidding (FAA Order 5190.6B, Section 1.4), risks breaching these assurances, potentially compromising safety, reducing disadvantaged business participation (49 CFR Part 26), and inviting FAA scrutiny or funding penalties, making it a choice worth reconsidering in favor of competitive private alternatives.
Beyond competition concerns, FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-36B, Section 3.2, recommends private sector wildlife biologists with specialized certifications for hazard management, highlighting their expertise over general federal staff, while Program Guidance Letter 09-01, Section 2.1, advises against using federal agencies unless private options are unavailable-a rare scenario given the availability of qualified private providers. FAA grant assurances tied to AIP, PFC, ATP, AIG, and FCT funding (e.g., No. 30, "Economic Nondiscrimination"; No. 34, "Operation and Maintenance"; No. 31, "Exclusive Rights"), detailed in FAA Order 5190.6B, Section 4.1, require avoiding favoritism, ensuring efficient services, and maintaining competition across all procurements-federal or local-due to this nexus. Hiring USDA WS, despite their FAA MOU being for cooperation, not bidding (FAA Order 5190.6B, Section 1.4), risks breaching these assurances, potentially compromising safety, reducing disadvantaged business participation (49 CFR Part 26), and inviting FAA scrutiny or funding penalties, making it a choice worth reconsidering in favor of competitive private alternatives.