Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/19/1993 08:40 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 50:
An Act making appropriations for capital projects; and
providing for an effective date.
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT/PF)
Northern Region
Co-chair Pearce invited John Horn, Regional Director,
Northern Region, DOT/PF, and Jonathan Widdis, Chief of
Planning, Northern Region, DOT/PF, to join members at the
committee table and proceed with the department
presentation.
JONATHAN WIDDIS directed attention to a handout entitled
"Department of Transportation and Public Facilities,
Northern Region, FY94 Capital Budget Request" which outlined
capital requests for the Northern Region (copy on file). He
explained that the handout listed HB 60 but applied also to
SB 50. He said the Northern Region Core Program preliminary
engineering was in the original bill at $2,085.0.
Amendments expected from OM&B increased preliminary
engineering to $5,100.0. The individual projects were
originally requested at $41,633.0, and amendments increased
it to $43,633.0. He stated the total amended Northern FHWA
core program is $48,733.0.
Mr. Widdis went on to outline the Northern FHWA borough
program. Preliminary engineering had been amended from 0 to
$1,600.0. Total individual projects requested were
$9,025.0, and were amended to $11,525.0. Those individual
projects (Fairbanks North Star Borough, Unorganized Borough,
Northwest Arctic Borough and the Safety Program) were
itemized in the handout. The total Northern FHWA borough
program, as amended, is $13,125.0.
Mr. Widdis then directed attention to the Northern FAA
Program with an amended preliminary engineering request of
$3,050.0 and amended individual projects request to
$25,965.0 for a total of $28,965.0. Northern general fund
deferred maintenance amended request is $3,500.0, and
Northern general fund facilities at $230.0. The next two
pages of the handout were the Northern Region's section of
HB 60 as submitted. He explained that corrections had been
made to reflect amendments. The changes are as follows:
Northern Region Safety Program from $3,600.0 t o
$3,900.0
Northern Region Preliminary
Eng'g, R-O-W & Utilities from $2,085.0 t o
$5,100.0
Northern Region FAA Program
Circle City A/P Improvements from $ 300.0 to $
700.0
Kotzebue Runway Resurfacing &
Sand Storage Bld'g Constr. from $ 700.0 t o
$1,025.0
Mr. Widdis explained that the fourth page of the handout
outlined additional projects added by amendments (see copy
of handout).
Co-chair Pearce called for specific questions on these
additional projects. In answer to Senator Sharp, Mr. Widdis
said that the request for Deadhorse was not an additional
project but continuation of the same paving project for the
airport.
SENATOR JAY KERTTULA asked if maintaining cabins was
included in the Northwest Arctic Borough trail staking as
had been done in the past. Mr. Widdis said that previously
general fund money had been used for some cabin maintenance
and was still being considered. However, at this time, only
trail staking was being considered. Mr. Widdis explained
that the cabin maintenance was a federal project and would
be addressed.
Co-chair Pearce asked about the May Creek Airport
improvements on line 12, page 19. She said that all other
airport improvement requests had significant population
bases associated with them, and questioned the population
base around May Creek and asked who uses this airport. Mr.
Widdis said that people utilizing the park, park service
employees, miners who have claims in the park, and small
communities like McCarthy use the airport. In answer to Co-
chair Pearce, Mr. Widdis said that the runway would be
resurfaced. Senator Kerttula added that quite a bit of
tourism was centered in this area. Mr. Widdis said that May
Creek was the park service headquarters for most of the work
done in that area.
Co-chair Pearce asked how DOT/PF northern region planned to
allocate ISTEA funds for the unorganized borough. Mr.
Widdis said that an agreement had been made between DC&RA
and DOT/PF, and those departments are developing a strategy
and meeting with the representatives of the unorganized
areas in order to allocate the funds fairly. In answer to
Co-chair Pearce, Mr. Widdis said those projects would be
line items brought before the legislature in the next
session. In the meantime, preliminary engineering would
anticipate those programs so the project design could begin.
SENATOR STEVE RIEGER asked if the $2,275.0 request to the
unorganized borough on the first page of the handout was
just a general appropriation to DOT/PF. Mr. Widdis answered
negatively and explained that it represented a specific road
project out of Delta that was already in work. Senator
Rieger asked about the Safety program amendment that
requested an additional $1,100.0. Mr. Widdis said that it
represented University College intersection improvements
preliminary engineering for $400.0; road upgrade in
Fairbanks for $435.0; and additional non-specific
engineering starts at $265.0 in the borough. Senator Rieger
asked if the safety program money relied on the helmet bill
passing. Mr. Widdis said that he did not think there was
any connection to the helmet bill and safety funding.
Co-chair Pearce asked what projects could take advantage of
safety dollars. Mr. Widdis said that safety money could be
used for engineering and construction for such things as
guardrail, new traffic safety lights, extra turn lanes, etc.
There is a formula that ranks projects which takes into
account accident history, geometrics of the area, etc.
Discussion followed between Co-chair Pearce and Mr. Widdis
regarding state projects that are safety eligible. Mr.
Widdis stated that federal highways made the final decision
on what percent of a project was safety eligible.
Senator Kerttula encouraged the committee to communicate
with DOT/PF on what it proposes for unorganized borough
roads. He then asked Mr. Horn to speak to the Copper River
Highway funding. JOHN HORN, Regional Director, Northern
Region, DOT/PF, said that additional federal money would be
needed to complete the Copper River Highway project.
Senator Kerttula asked if line 8 and 10 were both alternate
allocations. Mr. Widdis said that line 8, preliminary
engineering is projected for 1994, and line 10, construction
phase, is an alternate in 1994, and was expected in 1995.
Both of these allocations are contingent on a location study
and an EIS that should be completed this fall. Mr. Widdis
explained that if the study came back as a "no-build", both
projects would not go forward. Senator Kerttula voiced his
concern over the legislature not being involved in the final
decision of certain road projects.
End SFC-93 #36, Side 2
Begin SFC-93 #38, Side 1
Co-chair Pearce asked if Kotzebue Third Avenue paving was
approved, would it be the first paving north of the Arctic
Circle. She pointed out that it was hard enough to keep
pavement on the runways. Mr. Horn said he was aware of at
least one paved road in Point Hope which is north of
Kotzebue. Co-chair Pearce asked why this road was going to
be paved when it was evident that there are problems with
maintenance because of permafrost. She cited the cost of
$1,550.0 for paving Deadhorse runway. Mr. Horn said the
department has experienced problems with permafrost anywhere
north of the Arctic range. He said that since the runway in
Kotzebue was going to be resurfaced, the department decided
to pave Third Avenue because of a dust problem. He said
that it had been a high priority in Kotzebue for some time.
He felt the maintenance for this road would not be any worse
than the one in Nome. Co-chair Pearce questioned the wisdom
of paving roads where maintenance is such a problem, and
stated research has pointed out other ways to solve dust
problems. SENATOR BERT SHARP asked the distance of the
proposed paving of Third Avenue. Mr. Horn said it was
approximately a mile. Co-chair Pearce remarked that would
amount to $1M a mile.
CO-CHAIR STEVE FRANK pointed out that 62 percent of the
roads were in the northern region and it was a big area to
maintain. The new ISTEA allocations do not do much to
maintain our ability to handle the responsibility. He said
that there had been a historical downward shift of funds for
the northern region from 45 percent to 38 percent. He felt
under the new ISTEA, it may be reduced further.
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT/PF)
Central Region
There being no further questions for the northern region,
Co-chair Pearce asked John Tolley, Chief, Planning & Admin.
Services, DOT/PF; Lowell Humphrey, Regional Director,
Central Region, DOT/PF; and Keith Morberg, Chief of Design,
DOT/PF, to come before the committee to speak to the central
region.
JOHN TOLLEY directed attention to a handout titled
"Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Central
Region, FY94 Capital Budget Request" (copy on file). He
explained that the first column represents funding totals in
SB 50, and the second column shows the totals after
amendments.
Mr. Tolley stated that the FHWA core program for central
region totaled $50,648.0 and of that preliminary engineering
is $1,412.0 and individual projects, $49,235.0.
Mr. Tolley then outlined the FHWA borough program that
totaled $68,416.0. He said of that total, $14,148.5 was for
preliminary engineering, and $54,267.6 for individual
projects that have been requested by the local boroughs.
The aviation program totals $25,743.1 of which $843.9 is for
continuing preliminary engineering, and $24,899.2 for actual
projects. He pointed out that the central region general
fund request of $2M is for deferred maintenance activities
for airports, highways and buildings. Another general fund
request in the amount of $490.0 is the cost for site cleanup
at about five locations.
In answer to Senator Kelly, Mr. Tolley said that the
preliminary engineering phase was underway in the Whittier
Tunnel project. He said that the construction phase is in
the 1998 spending plan. He said that the EIS would take
approximately 2 years to complete and the design, several
years. SENATOR TIM KELLY expressed disappointment that the
project was not on a faster track.
Senator Kerttula voiced his disapproval that only 2 percent
of the funding was for Mat-su Borough. Mr. Tolley answered
that the amount shown for the Mat-su Borough in the amount
of $1,289.6 is just for specific projects and the majority
of Mat-su projects are contained in the preliminary
engineering request which he believed to be about $7M. Mr.
Tolley agreed to provide Senator Kerttula with a list of
those Mat-su Borough's projects in the preliminary
engineering request.
Senator Sharp asked for clarification on how allocations are
passed from ISTEA to the boroughs. He said that he
understood population and car registration were going to be
used to justify funds. He felt that the requests on this
handout did not follow that allocation. Mr. Tolley said
that he would provide the breakdown of projects by borough
that were in preliminary engineering. He stated that DOT/PF
had agreed to share about 35 percent of the ISTEA funds with
the boroughs. Besides the allocation by population and car
registration, some of the funds had been set aside by
competition on a statewide basis. The Mill Bay Road project
in Kodiak had competed favorably for funding and $4M had
been brought into the Kodiak borough by that process.
Discussion followed between Senator Sharp, Co-chair Pearce,
and Mr. Tolley regarding funding and prioritization of
DOT/PF projects.
FRANK TURPIN, Commissioner, DOT/PF, stressed that
allocations are watched very carefully by all fifteen
boroughs. He pointed out that projects in this year's
Fairbanks program were previously approved. He said that
Fairbanks project average was not considerably lower than in
years past.
Co-chair Pearce asked how far ahead authorizations are
requested (in terms of dollars) compared to the actual
expenditure of the money. RON LIND, Director, Plans,
Programs and Budget, DOT/PF, answered that the department
did not ask for more dollars than needed. He said that a
program was put together for a two year cycle. After
subtracting the projects already authorized, the balance is
requested, and that becomes a "best guess" budget request.
In answer to Senator Rieger, Mr. Tolley said that
preliminary engineering was accomplished in-house, by
private consultants, or the borough could consult DOT/PF for
help. Commissioner Turpin said that additional engineering
staff would not be added to the department.
Discussion followed between Senator Rieger and DOT/PF staff
regarding Kodiak projects including the Mill Bay Road
project. Senator Rieger then asked for clarification about
central region safety and transportation enhancement
programs. Mr. Tolley said that the safety programs were
treated the same as in the northern region. Projects
throughout the region are ranked in relation to safety
problems, accidents, etc. for the highway safety improvement
program. Mr. Tolley said that the transportation
enhancement program authorizes funds that take advantage of
the new flexibility in ISTEA funds such as pedestrian
enhancement trails, landscaping, historic preservation, etc.
Legislation has required DOT/PF to spend 10 percent of the
surface transportation money each year on enhancement
projects. He said that view pullouts and other amenities
for major interstate highways are being considered for this
federal funding.
Senator Kerttula stated that a second class borough may have
very limited responsibility, but, by the vote of the people
can take on many other responsibilities. He pointed out
that legislators in these second class boroughs are the
authorizing agency, and should be brought into the borough
discussion at all times because the borough may not have the
authorization to make certain decisions. He reaffirmed that
the legislature is the appropriate authorizing agent for
second class boroughs. He voiced his opinion that there has
been a gradual overstepping of authority by the boroughs.
Discussion was held between Co-chair Pearce, Senators Rieger
and Kerttula regarding borough authorizations, and Mr.
Tolley agreed to provide information to the committee on
this subject.
Co-chair Pearce spoke to the amendments coming from OM&B
that would increase total federal dollars, and asked what
the increase for the state general fund match would be. Mr.
Lind said the department's match request was based on the
assumption of how many dollars the federal agency would let
the department use throughout FY94. Mr. Lind explained that
the money is not project specific so there would not be any
change in the request because of these items. He said that
the initial budget had not requested funding for some
projects. If an alternate project is requested, the
department would not be asking for matching funds.
Co-chair Pearce asked why SB 50 was being amended. Mr. Lind
explained that when the original budget was prepared, the
boroughs had not had time to identify projects that would
have used the "35 percent funding program" set aside for
boroughs for legislative authorization. Also, some of the
projects that were identified for one reason or another are
not going to proceed, so the request from each borough is
for its next range of priorities. Since there may be a
delay in one project or another, authorization is needed for
FY94 and FY95 programs in order to take advantage of the "35
percent program."
Co-chair Pearce asked why the core programs changed. Mr.
Tolley said that a better estimate was received on the Kenai
Spur road. Discussion followed between Mr. Lind, Mr.
Tolley, and Senator Rieger regarding authorizations,
changes, and federal dollars tied to them. Mr. Lind
explained that what is actually constructed by the federal
highway administration is related to the real federal
highway dollars given to the department. What is shown in
SB 50 is the authorization for construction. He said the
department could provide more authorization in the bill but
the if the federal highway dollars are not there, the
project will not happen.
Senator Rieger asked if all the projects in the central
region were bid ready and if all the federal allocated
dollars were being used. Mr. Lind affirmed that all federal
dollars were being used. A list of alternate projects was
ready in case a project could not move forward. Co-chair
Frank reiterated that there was not any tie between
authorization and the expenditure of funds. The
commissioner allocates the funds where needed.
Commissioner Turpin wanted the committee to know that the
department had to deal with many uncertainties. He
explained that the department is unsure of legislative
funding until October. Last year, instead of $210M, the
department received $178M. If Congress should pass the
supplemental funding bill, the difference - $37M could be
received between now and October, and the department must be
ready to spend it. Then in October, a new cycle is started
and the department must be flexible depending on the new
figure for that cycle. Discussion followed between Co-chair
Pearce, Commissioner Turpin, and Ron Lind regarding the
projects that were authorized or changed from last year's
authorization.
End SFC-93 #38, Side 1
Begin SFC-93 #38, Side 2
Senator Rieger pointed out that DOT/PF came before the last
LB&A meeting and ask for authorization on several other
projects. Senator Rieger again voiced his confusion that so
many projects are authorized, others are then put in place
of those already authorized, and the prioritization is
constantly shuffled. Mr. Lind said that the department does
not deal with programs on a first-come, first-serve basis.
The department does try to respect regional allocations,
even though it is never as high as people quote. The
situation with federal funding is that the department must
use it or lose it.
Co-chair Frank asked the Commissioner to address the fact
that allocations are substantially diminished for the
northern region. Mr. Lind said that a letter had been
written to the Fairbanks chamber on this issue with specific
numbers, and he would supply the committee with a copy of
the letter. Mr. Lind remembered that the total dollars in
the northern region were up before and after ISTEA, and even
after the 35 percent borough adjustments and core
applications. He said he did not know how the rest of the
breakdown ranked the northern region. In regard to the core
system, the department would like to move towards the
process of selecting projects based on statewide need and
priority which could take some time to accomplish. In the
interim, the department has given out base allocations and
with the addition of any incremental money, has tried to
look at statewide priorities across the six year plan.
Mr. Widdis said that between the core program and the
expansion of roads in the northern region, the norther
region is really not below its level. Co-chair Frank said
his concern was how realistic the proposed expansion
projects are in light of some of the opposition to them.
Discussion followed between Co-chairs Frank and Pearce, Mr.
Lind, Mr. Widdis, regarding the Nome Council Road, other
projects previously approved, and what projects DOT/PF had
brought to LB&A.
Recess 10:01am
Reconvene 10:05am
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT/PF)
Alaska Marine Highway System
Co-chair Pearce invited James Ayers, System Director, Alaska
Marine Highway System, DOT/PF, to join the committee at the
table. Mr. Ayers reminded the committee that the questions
left unanswered were: how many individuals the Marine
Highway System employs, how many of those are permanent
employees, and how many employees were Alaska residents. In
FY94, he said that the Marine Highway System has 715
permanent employees, and 174 permanent-parttime employees,
which does fluctuate with the summer season. He said that
there are 127 full-time and 30 parttime shoreside employees.
He said this number is the same as in FY86. The difference
since FY86 is that there has been a reduction of 10 full-
time employees on the shore, but permanent-parttime has
increased to 12. He explained that it had proved more
efficient to have permanent parttime employees, especially
on the shore. He said the number of permanent, full-time,
ship positions is basically the same as in FY86 when there
were 581 positions - now there are 588. There are 144
permanent parttime on the ships - the same number for the
last ten years.
Mr. Ayers went on to explain that permanent-parttime
referred to individuals that have not reached full time
status or what is referred to as a bid-job. They are not in
a regularly assigned position, and only work when called
out--when someone is sick or on vacation. Discussion
followed between Co-chair Frank and Jim Ayers regarding the
actual number of positions, the actual number of individuals
that fill those positions, and vacation and leave accrued by
employees. Mr. Ayers explained that lay off notices now are
being sent out to junior employees instead of leaving them
on the system. He said the biggest challenge for the
department is the fact that the work force is consuming 25-
30 percent of its operating budget in leave status (when
vacation and sick leave are combined). He said the
bargaining units have been reasonable during the last
negotiations. He believed that people hired after 1985
would receive a reasonable package even though a couple of
items are still undecided. Co-chair Frank asked what
percentage of the work force had been hired since 1985. Mr.
Ayers said that he would provide that information as soon as
he could. More discussion followed between Senators Sharp
and Kelly, and Mr. Ayers regarding employee leave, benefits,
and negotiations with bargaining units.
Mr. Ayers then spoke to the new ferry vessel. He said that
it was not just a southeast vessel, and gave three reasons
why it would impact the whole state. First, the vessel
would be ocean-going and could serve any of the 32 ports
that are currently served by AMHS, including Prince William
Sound, Kenai, Kodiak, the Aleutian chain areas, and is
already scheduled to service Yakutat. Secondly, although
this vessel is serving southeast, 40-50 percent of its
traffic continues on to Anchorage, Fairbanks, and the
interior. Thirdly, this vessel would finance itself. He
went on to explain that the vessel was at the 100 percent
conceptual level and provided a video showing the vessel to
scale. The vessel would be capable of assisting in case of
an oil spill, provide a command center capability, house
personnel and service vessels, have a crane and pontoon,
provide an area for a helipad, and have the ability to track
a spill. Even if the vessel was in Bellingham when a spill
occurred, it would take a maximum of 96 hours to reach the
it. The Malispina would be hot berthed in Ketchikan, and in
such an emergency, could take over the new vessel's
schedule.
End SFC-93 #38, Side 2
Begin SFC-93 #40, Side 1
Mr. Ayers felt the vessel was a statewide project and would
provide major benefits. Since the operating budget has been
declining and the department cannot afford any more
expenses, the new vessel has been projected to be self
supporting in its operation and overhaul. It would carry
about 80,000 people a year (same as the existing traffic
today). He said that also reflected a huge amount of
independent travelers, the kind of traveler the state needs
to keeps dollars here. He pointed out that the Alaska
Marine Highway System, in comparison by number of employees,
is the same size as the Department of Fish and Game, and
larger than the Departments of Natural Resources,
Environmental Conservation, and Commerce & Economic
Development, with less than $30M in its operating budget.
Eighty to ninety percent of AMHS' employees are Alaskan
residents, more than any other department in comparison to
the amount of general funds invested. By 1996, Mr. Ayers
projected that the AMHS front section of the budget would be
$28M, with a total budget of about $75M. The 1996
projection is that AMHS's receipts will be about $46M to
maintain existing services.
Co-chair Pearce asked Mr. Ayers to return to the committee
to speak to the final design concept. She also asked for a
breakdown of all dollars expended that were appropriated to
the new ferry last year ($7.5M), a breakdown of the
$66,400.0 that is in the capital request, and the additional
money coming from the "470" fund requested in the Governor's
budget. She asked for an outline of the design, engineering
and construction phase.
In answer to Senator Kelly, Mr. Ayers said that the new
vessel, which will replace the Malaspina, is 388 feet long
(larger than the Taku but smaller than the Malaspina).
Discussion followed between Mr. Ayers and Senator Kelly
regarding how parts would be held in storage from the Taku
for the Malaspina. Mr. Ayers explained that a crew would
not be held on the system for the Malaspina after it was
moth-balled. The transition to the new vessel would cause
an approximate overall reduction of 20 positions, 10 to 12
parttime winter time positions, and about 6 summertime
positions.
In answer to Senator Jacko, Mr. Ayers said that the proforma
for the new vessel was based on the existing traffic of the
Malaspina. SENATOR GEORGE JACKO spoke in support of AMHS
building an ocean-going vessel. Discussion was held between
Senator Frank and Mr. Ayers regarding the cost of moth-
balling the Malaspina.
Co-chair Pearce voiced her concern about the cost for design
and construction of the new vessel. She asked Mr. Ayers to
provide the committee with some kind of assurance that it
would not go over budget.
SENATOR ROBIN TAYLOR asked Mr. Ayers if the new vessel would
give southeast an increase or decrease in service. Senator
Taylor wanted Mr. Ayers to speak to the economy of southeast
in relation to AMHS.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:25 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|