TESTIMONY OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION BEFORE THE SENATE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE ON EROSION IN ALASKA JUNE 29, 2004
Presented by Patrick N. Poe Regional Administrator, Alaskan Region FAA 222 W 7th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7587
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today to share FAA concerns and issues regarding the erosion in Alaskan communities.
I wish to preface my remarks by setting the scene for this august committee and tell you that Alaska is often called, “the flyingest state in the Union” because its residents depend to such a great extent upon air travel. For more than 200 communities there is no road access connecting them to the rest of the state. Transportation within Alaska is largely by aircraft. There are fewer than 15,000 miles of highway of which only 30 percent are paved in a state of 365 million acres. Air carriers transport the equivalent of four times the state’s population each year compared to 1.7 times the U.S. population carried by air commerce in the other states. There are 225 air carriers certified to operate in Alaska as either scheduled or on-demand carriers. Alaska has 387 public use airports and thousands of unofficial landing areas. Since 1982, the Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) has provided funding for 900 airport construction and improvement projects. This year alone, we anticipate distributing approximately $190 million in grants to State and local airport sponsors in Alaska. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Airports Division provides grants to improve airport infrastructure development including those threatened by flooding and erosion. The AIP program could potentially contribute a significant portion of the funding for relocation of an airport, if necessitated by community relocation. Once the decision is made to relocate a village, the airport sponsor shall make a determination as to whether the existing airport no longer meets the community’s needs. The sponsor may apply for an AIP grant to begin the planning process concurrently with the relocation effort. FAA Airports Division will review the application and either confirm the decision to relocate or offer to assist in funding alternative measures. It should be noted that the following criteria must be met in order for federal AIP funding to be programmed for airport development:
The airport is in the National Plan of Integrated Airport System (NPIAS). Some of the primary factors for the adoption of an Alaska airport into the NPIAS are: (i.) the airport is a public-use airport available for use by all citizens and (ii.) the airport serves an established community that receives scheduled U.S. mail service.
Any airport project must comply with the procedures and policies of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The proposed new airport must meet all applicable FAA airport design standards and be documented within an FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan (ALP).
Any airport project must be requested and supported financially by the designated airport sponsor. The airport sponsor must have the legal authority and financial capability to carry out its responsibilities under the grant agreement. Those responsibilities include contributing a percentage of funding and operating the airport according to grant assurances.
Alaska Villages Subject to Flooding and Erosion:
Alaska villages planning to relocate in an effort to address flooding and erosion include: Kivalina, Shishmaref, Newtok, and Koyukuk. Of these communities, all are State owned and operated airports. Alaska villages taking actions to mitigate erosion and flood damage include: Kaktovik, Point Hope, Barrow, Unalakleet, and Bethel.
Concurrent with deliberations regarding community relocation, the FAA and the villages will consider whether the local airports also need to be relocated or whether the existing facilities can continue to serve the communities at the new village sites.
At the villages of Kivalina, Shishmaref, and Newtok the Airports Division of FAA will support maintaining the existing infrastructure while the communities decide to undertake relocation. No major AIP-funded projects are currently programmed or anticipated in the near future for the current airports. If a village decides to relocate and it is determined that the airport must also be established in a new location, an application for an AIP grant will be entertained by the FAA.
At the village of Koyukuk, a $10,000,000 AIP grant was issued in fiscal year 2003 to elevate the runway out of the 100-year flood plain. This existing State-owned airport will continue to serve the existing community, and either of the two sites currently being considered as new locations for the village. FAA may assist in funding an access road if one is needed to connect the new community site with the airport.
At the village of Kaktovik, the airport is subject to periodic seasonal flooding. A $300,000 AIP grant was issued in fiscal year 2002 for the development of a comprehensive airport master plan. The plan, due to be completed in the spring of 2005, will evaluate current flood and erosion protection at the existing airport and identify future potential airport relocation sites that would best serve the future needs of the village.
At the villages of Barrow, Bethel, Point Hope and Unalakleet the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities owns and operates the airports. The Point Hope airport experiences occasional erosion on the north end and is programmed for future AIP funding to provide erosion control measures (i.e. armored rock). The airport infrastructure at these villages is not subject to coastal erosion or flooding.
Alaska Airport Development Data:
Typical costs to construct a new airport in western rural Alaska are approximately $15-$20 million. New construction typically takes 3-5 years to complete depending upon the site, the availability of adequate base materials, and environmental conditions. In an extreme case, where the new location is unknown and the environmental process will have to be conducted, the timeframe could extend to 10 years. Many rural Alaska airports are constructed using a technique termed “silt push up.” This method of airport construction involves the placement of a silt sub-base material that often takes several years to settle and drain prior to the placement and compaction of the top surface course material.
These high costs and extended construction schedules reflect the challenges of building in rural Alaska with expensive mobilization costs, lack of suitable construction embankment materials, and short construction seasons.
Capital investments undertaken by the FAA are subject to analysis and review requirements set forth in the National Environmental Policy Act, as amended. This process includes mandatory coordination with other State, Federal, local community, and tribal agencies and governments prior to any work being undertaken. Because of these review requirements, it is highly unlikely that any FAA project would commence at a village without knowledge of an impending relocation.
FAA Order 7031.2C, Airway Planning Standard Number One (APS-1) is a working order, which contains the policy and summarizes the criteria used in determining eligibility of terminal locations for establishment, discontinuance and improvements of specified types of air navigation facilities and air traffic control services.
Former FAA Administrator Donald Engen wrote the Forward stating the following: “The safety and efficiency of air traffic determine requirements for air navigational facilities and air traffic control services, but these facilities and services should only be established at locations where the benefits of service exceed the cost to the government. Economic consideration of benefits and costs for both new establishments and improvements to existing facilities or service is related to air traffic activity levels. This order specifies minimum activity levels for terminal air navigation facilities and air traffic control services. For certain types of facilities, the order also establishes a requirement for additional cost benefit and other analyses prior to facility commissioning or decommissioning. Satisfying criteria specified herein does not constitute a commitment by the Federal Aviation Administration to provide, modify, or discontinue eligible facilities or services.”
Acknowledging Alaska’s dependence upon air transportation, there are provisions in the Order exempting both the agency and airport sponsors in remote locations from the cost/benefit analyses required in other regions of the United States.
If a determination were made requiring the relocations of runways or navigational aids, the instrument procedures for the airport would be developed concurrently with the new airport construction. The current time frame for the development of instrument procedures is approximately 12 to 18 months depending upon the availability of survey data, completion of environmental studies, and establishment of weather and communications facilities.
In association with the creation of a new airport there will be the establishment of air routes and installation of navigation aids. Estimates of costs per airport range from $30,000 to $40,000 for two approaches. FAA has limited facilities at the Kivalina and Shishmaref airports, and no facilities at the other airports. There are no known FAA environmental cleanup requirements at any of the airports. Costs to remove the facilities at the two airports are estimated at $60,000. There are requirements in the FAA leases to restore the property upon decommissioning of facilities. The estimated costs for FAA facilities restoration are $100,000.
In 2002, Congress funded the Rural Airport Lighting Program to improve access for medical and other emergencies. Lighting continues to be installed at rural airports until any relocation is completed. At three of the four locations referenced in the GAO report (i.e., Kivalina, Shishmaref, and Koyukuk) there are projects identified to establish airport lighting as an aid to rural access as follows:
Establish runway end identifier lights (REIL) and precision approach path indicators (PAPI) on Runway ends 12 and 30 at Kivalina Airport (per the Rural Alaska Lighting Program; funded but not yet scheduled for implementation).
Establish REIL and PAPIs on Koyukuk Airport. A portion of this work is funded by AIP dollars as part of the raising of the runway. This existing State-owned airport will continue to serve the existing community, and the proposed village relocation sites.
Other projects are on schedule as part of the FAA mission to maintain navigation aids while airports remain in use such as:
Replace radio control equipment for the remote communications outlet at Shishmaref Airport (active maintenance operations project).
Replace obstruction lights on the nondirectional beacon tower at Shishmaref Airport (active maintenance operations project).
In closing, the FAA has a long history of partnership with Alaska’s communities to develop and improve aviation infrastructure that supports the life and economy of this state. We continue that work as part of our mission and our stewardship of the state’s resources.
Thank you for inviting me to present this testimony today and for your interest in this very important topic.
