Legislature(2011 - 2012)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/24/2011 03:30 PM Senate COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Planning for Alaska's Regional Ports and Harbors | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 24, 2011
3:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Donald Olson, Chair
Senator Thomas Wagoner
Senator Linda Menard
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Albert Kookesh
Senator Johnny Ellis
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Peggy Wilson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: PLANNING FOR ALASKA'S REGIONAL PORTS AND HARBORS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
PAT BURDEN, President and Principal Economist
Northern Economics
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the report, Alaska Regional Ports:
Planning for Alaska's Ports and Harbors.
DONALD FORE
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered a question regarding federal funds
for the maintenance of ports and harbors in Alaska.
JEFF OTTESEN, Director
Division of Program Development
Department of Transportation
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed the use of Public Private
Partnerships as a potential method of funding ports and harbors
in Alaska.
ED FOGELS, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave a presentation on the Statewide Digital
Mapping Initiative (SDMI).
NICK MASTRODICASA, Project Manager
Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative Project
Division of Statewide Aviation
Department of Transportation
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions of the committee
regarding SDMI.
MIKE O'HARE, Deputy Director
Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs (DMVA)
Fort Richardson, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the importance of SDMI from a
homeland security and emergency standpoint.
LARRY DIETRICK, Director
Division of Spill Prevention and Response
Department of Environmental Conservation
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Highlighted some of the items in the
Planning for Alaska's Ports and Harbors report that relates to
spill prevention and response.
SUSAN BELL, Commissioner
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
(DCCED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the Planning for Alaska's Ports
and Harbors report and discussed DCCED's role in the development
of ports and harbors in Alaska.
BOB PAWLOWSKI, Legislative Liaison
Denali Commission
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed the Denali Commission's role in
the development of ports and harbors in Alaska.
LARRY COTTER, CEO
Aleutian Island Community Development Association (APICDA) and
Chair
Western Alaska Community Development Association (WACDA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the importance of harbors and
ports of refuge in Alaska, specifically along the Aleutian
Chain, and answered questions of the committee.
MATT GANLEY, Vice President
Land and Resources
Bering Straits Native Corporation (BSNC)
Nome, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed the importance of obtaining Port
Clarence as a potential port of refuge and for spill response in
Bering Strait.
MARK DAVIS, Officer
Economic Development
Alaska Industrial Development & Export Authority (AIDEA)
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on the Planning for Alaska's Ports
and Harbors report and discussed some of the current and future
port and harbor projects AIDEA is involved with.
CHRISTINE KLEIN, Executive Vice President and COO
Calista Corporation
Bethel, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Emphasized the importance of state funding
for Alaska's ports and harbors, pointed out some issues in the
Planning for Alaska's Ports and Harbors report, and answered
questions of the committee.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:30:21 PM
SENATOR MENARD called the Senate Community and Regional Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present at the
call to order was Senator Menard. Chair Olson arrived shortly
thereafter.
3:31:08 PM
SENATOR MENARD presented a short film clip depicting the Knik
Arm Bridge and Toll Authority (KABATA) from Port Mackenzie to
the Port of Anchorage. She noted that a recommendation from the
Federal Highway Administration has been received. She added that
DVDs of the clip are available.
SENATOR MENARD turned the gavel over to Chair Olson at 3:32 p.m.
^PRESENTATION: PLANNING FOR ALASKA'S REGIONAL PORTS AND HARBORS
3:32:17 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the order of business would be to
hear a presentation regarding the recent release of a study on
planning for Alaska's regional ports and harbors.
3:33:10 PM
PAT BURDEN, President and Principal Economist, Northern
Economics, presented a report titled Alaska Regional Ports:
Planning for Alaska's Ports and Harbors. He said that the report
was created for the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the
Department of Transportation (DOT) [Report included in the
document packet].
He turned to his presentation [included in the document packet].
Slide 3 discussed the purpose of the study and how it
originated. He explained that in January 2008, USACE sponsored
the first Alaska Regional Ports Conference. The conference
highlighted the need for a collaborative planning effort between
the entities that were engaged in port and harbor development in
the state. He noted that at that time there was no statewide map
or plan for port and harbor development. During the conference
participants recommended development of a comprehensive master
plan to address the marine transportation challenges faced by
the state. He explained that a master plan would encourage the
coordination of facilities and resources, resulting in a more
functional system. This would allow the state to better address
the needs of its population and industries relying on marine
transportation. In order to properly draft such a document
research on global trends, regional networks, and the current
and future needs of Alaska was required.
Slide 4 laid out the scope of work for Alaska regional ports,
which was conducted by URS Corporation, Northern Economics, and
RISE Alaska LLC. He said that in order to develop the scope of
work, there were six basic tasks that needed to be undertaken.
3:37:22 PM
SENATOR WAGONER joined the committee.
MR. BURDEN continued with his presentation. Slide 5 discussed
the first task: the strategic trends report. This report
summarized the trends in the maritime transportation industry on
both a global scale and in the state of Alaska. The report
looked at:
· International developments in operations and facilities
such as new shipping routes, trade patterns, and port
ownership.
· Trends in demand for Alaska maritime operations and
facilities such as resource industry developments and
emergency response needs and the absence of harbors of
refuge in Western Alaska.
· Assessment of shipping and port development issues in
Alaska.
· Port and harbor investment needs and financing
opportunities.
Slide 6 discussed the second task: the baseline assessment of
existing ports and harbors in Alaska. He explained that USACE
conducted a mailed survey to owners of private and public port
and harbor facilities. These results established the basis for
describing existing port and harbor infrastructures, attributes,
and needs. He explained that the assessment also included
secondary materials such as financial statements, budgets, and
transportation plans to illustrate how different facilities are
governed and financed. Using the information from the survey as
a base, databases of port and harbor projects from the USACE,
DOT, and the Denali Commission were incorporated to create a
comprehensive statewide list of needs. He noted that the list is
a work in progress and will continue in the future.
Slide 7 described the third task: the preliminary identification
of regional and subregional hubs. He explained that hubs were
identified through a systems approach, where facilities with the
largest network impacts may become focal points for improving
regional transportation. Hubs were determined through industry
interviews and were vetted with a project advisory group.
MR. BURDEN explained that regional hubs represent the primary
ports of entry for goods moving into or out of the state and
region. While subregional hubs are primarily used for
distributing goods from the regional hubs to elsewhere in the
region. He emphasized that while Northern Economics believes
hubs should receive a priority there are a number of criteria
that should be used to rank projects.
3:42:00 PM
Slide 8 was a map and list of regional and subregional hubs that
were identified in the report.
Slide 9 discussed the fourth plan: to develop appropriate policy
and plan development. He explained that Northern Economics
identified impediments to efficient port and harbor development
and recommended improvements in the way federal, state, and
local governments work together and facilitate development. The
recommendations that were provided came from stakeholder
interviews, literature reviews, and experience with the
industry. The report identifies a number of areas of potential
improvement, including:
· Communication
· Coordination in planning
· Project prioritization
· Regional participation
· New thoughts on funding
Slide 10 included the fifth task: the Regional Port and Harbors
Conference. The conference was held to share information on
statewide port and harbor progress since the first Port and
Harbors conference in 2008. USACE and RISE Alaska organized and
sponsored the conference; Northern Economics participated as
speakers and aided in material presentation.
Slide 11 discussed the sixth task: the final plan preparation.
He said that based on the input from the conference, Northern
Economics revised the draft plans and posted the Final Plan for
public comment. He noted that this public comment period was
extended to March 31, 2011. He said that while it is not
expected that the final plan will be modified, the comments
received may be used in future revisions to the plan.
3:44:26 PM
CHAIR OLSON said the maintenance of ports and harbors that is
being given back to municipalities appears to be a fairly large
issue. He asked if Northern Economics took into consideration
the expense and the ease of maintaining these ports and harbors.
MR. BURDEN replied that the need for sustainability of the ports
and harbors was discussed. He noted that Northern Economics has
been working with a number of communities around the state in
order to maintain financial stability. He explained that often
these facilities are being subsidized through the general fund,
rather than being maintained through appropriate user charges.
CHAIR OLSON asked about federal funds related to ongoing
maintenance of ports and harbors.
MR. BURDEN replied that he is unaware of any federal funds for
harbor maintenance.
3:45:47 PM
DONALD FORE, US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), replied that
nationwide, USACE has a maintenance program for federally
authorized projects. Typically there is not enough funding to
maintain these projects properly. He noted that it is no
different in Alaska.
SENATOR WAGONER commented that a heavier emphasis needs to be
made on communication with individuals who own ports and
harbors. From his own personal experiences, he observed that it
appears there are large discrepancies in the charges that owners
are making in order to house a vessel. He said that "it all goes
back to the fact that Alaskans have gotten something for nothing
for so long that they are unwilling to pay for the services they
get." He said that this cuts through the entire problem with
regard to fees for maintenance.
3:47:40 PM
JEFF OTTESEN, Director, Division of Program Development,
Department of Transportation, discussed the use of Public
Private Partnerships (PPP) as a potential method of funding
ports and harbors in Alaska. He explained that his division led
the port study for DOT. He noted that Mr. Burden did a great job
in summarizing the overall report. He said that PPP might be a
financing technique that could be used for port and harbor work.
PPP has been used in the past in the United States and has
become very widely used in Europe and Asia. This type of
partnership is more recent in North America, though several
states are using it, which includes Alaska's KABATA project. He
noted that AIDEA [Alaska Industrial Development & Export
Authority] has many of the characteristics of a PPP, though it
is not precisely the same. He explained that in this type of
partnership a firm is hired, which takes on much of the risk:
this includes the acquisition of financing, the design and
building of the structure, and, ultimately, the operation and
maintenance of the facility for some period of time. Typically
at some point the facility is handed back to the public entity
that authorized the construction. He explained that the key is
there needs to be a bankable project with a robust base of users
who are willing to pay fees and will ultimately support the PPP.
3:50:22 PM
MR. OTTESEN noted that this can't be done when there are thin
economics, but rather the kind of robust economics that will
satisfy Wallstreet. He explained that while PPPs have, in the
past, been focused on "mega projects," the focus has changed to
smaller projects. He summarized that PPP is an old idea that is
worth new consideration. However, it will not be ideal for
Alaska's economics because of geographical distance, terrain,
and thin population. He explained that there was an agreement
between the USACE and DOT to look into PPPs.
He said that there is a follow-up study that has been requested
in the Legislative Capital Budget to look at specific port needs
for larger vessels on the western and northern coasts of Alaska.
This study would focus on ports that would serve the export of
commodities, patrol needs of the Coast Guard and NOAA [National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration], and act as a port of
refuge. He noted that there are very few natural harbors along
the western and northern coast of Alaska; the Coast Guard, Navy,
and Alaska's congressional delegation are very interested in
this study.
3:53:48 PM
CHAIR OLSON asked, with regard to Public Private Partnerships,
what the ideal ratio between public money versus private money
might be.
MR. OTTESEN answered that PPPs seem to focus on projects that
have sufficient revenue to cover some of the risks. He
reiterated that very robust economics is needed. He noted that
it will not be easy to apply PPP in rural Alaska because of cost
and low population.
CHAIR OLSON asked if the population that would use KABATA is
large enough to avoid using a large amount of public funds.
MR. OTTESEN replied yes. He explained that the predictions of
growth show that the Matanuska Susitna Valley is one of the
fastest growing boroughs in the state and is located right next
to Alaska's "largest economic engine." He said "that would be
the sweet spot for a [PPP] in Alaska; that would be the kind of
project that would make it happen."
SENATOR MENARD said "I like that answer."
3:56:58 PM
ED FOGELS, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources,
gave a presentation on the Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative
(SDMI) [Power Point presentation included in the document
packet]. He explained that his presentation relates to the
discussion at hand because the state wants to, in its evaluation
of port facilities in northwestern Alaska, better its mapping of
that area. He explained that SDMI is trying to get a good
digital elevation model (DEM) of the terrain in northwest
Alaska.
Slide 2 of the presentation included the mission statement of
SDMI:
Alaska's Statewide Digital Mapping Initiative is an
interagency effort to produce high-resolution, digital
base maps of the entire state.
Slide 3 was a background on SDMI. The initiative was created
with a memorandum of agreement with the following state
departments:
· Department of Natural Resources
· Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs
· Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
· Department of Fish and Game
· Department of Environmental Conservation
· Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
· University of Alaska
Slide 4 addressed the problem statement: Alaska's current base
map consists of 40 to 50 year-old United States Geological
Survey (USGS) maps.
Slide 5 included an example of an old USGS topographical map
from 1962. He explained that these maps are not only non-
digital, but are inaccurate terrain models. He said that some of
the planets like Mars and Venus have been mapped more accurately
than Alaska by the federal government.
Slide 6 discussed the importance of DEM. He explained that DEM
is the resource for all other resource data layers and if it is
inaccurate then satellite images cannot be rectified.
4:04:42 PM
MR. FOGELS continued with his presentation. Slide 7 was an
example of a Landsat 7 image that was draped over the national
elevation dataset (NED). He explained that the image shows
rivers that flow up and down the sides of mountains. He stressed
the importance of having an accurate terrain model for
individuals such as pilots who have to take into account the
inaccuracies of the models they rely on.
Slide 8 gave the funding history of SDMI:
· FY2007 - $2 million CIP [Capital Improvement Projects]
Funding
· FY2008 - $2 million CIP Funding
· FY2009 - $2 million CIP Funding
Slide 9 included some of the accomplishments that have been made
with those funds. These include:
· Alaska Mapped Web Portal - where satellite imagery and
digital elevation data is collected and available to the
public.
· Purchased new statewide SPOT 2.5 meter imagery coverage.
· Purchased 20 foot contour interval DEM for 15 percent of
the state.
MR. FOGELS noted that the final bullet point is the most
pertinent to the current discussion.
Slide 10 included a more detailed discussion on the Alaska
Mapped Web Portal. He noted that it is the distribution site for
Alaska imagery and elevation data. This web portal is managed by
the University of Alaska Fairbanks and is a public website:
www.alaskamapped.org.
Slide 11 was a screen shot of the website.
Slide 12 was another image from the website. He noted that it is
similar to Google Earth for Alaska. He explained that the image
in the presentation is a zoom-in of the port facility at the Red
Dog Mine and that this is a very accurate satellite image. On
the upper right hand side of the image, the picture becomes
fuzzy, which illustrates where the good imagery stops and the
old imagery begins. He noted that once the SPOT 2.5 meter data
is acquired, this imagery will improve.
Slide 13 gave an overview of the web portal. He explained that
DNR has pulled in data from over 17 agencies and acquired over
84 million acres of high-resolution imagery and 18 million acres
of high-resolution elevation data. He reiterated that all of
this data is available to the public.
Slide 14 discussed the statewide imagery coverage. He explained
that DNR has purchased full satellite imagery for the entire
state. He noted that this was done with $2 million of CIP
funding and $2.6 million worth of federal coastal impact
assessment funds. He noted that DNR expects to complete this
project by 2013.
Slide 15 showed the satellite imagery that has already been
collected.
Slide 16 discussed the statewide DEM partnership. He noted that
the remaining $2 million of CIP funding along with federal funds
was used to purchase the DEM model for 15 percent of Alaska.
Slide 17 showed, in red, the area that was purchased. It also
broke down what area the state paid for and what the federal
agencies paid for.
Slide 18 discussed what needs to be done in the future with
regard to SDMI. He reminded the committee that 85 percent of the
state still needs DEM.
MR. FOGELS noted that, with regard to ports and harbors, DNR's
next target will, hopefully, be the acquisition of DEM for
Northwest Alaska. He explained that this will enable the state
to better study the northwest for feasible port sights. He said
that Nick Mastrodicasa, with DOT, is on the digital mapping
technical team and has spearheaded the effort to collect the
DEM.
He concluded that it is important for Alaska to get a better
base map. He noted that DNR has a very tight relationship with
DOT and other agencies on this project.
4:08:17 PM
SENATOR MENARD asked if DNR has used Google Earth as a resource.
4:08:47 PM
NICK MASTRODICASA, Project Manager, Statewide Digital Mapping
Initiative Project, Division of Statewide Aviation, Department
of Transportation, replied that Google purchased all of the data
from a data aggregator and this data already exists in Alaska
archives. Google did not acquire the data for Alaska and did not
acquire any elevation data.
CHAIR OLSON asked for confirmation that the maps used by
aviators are inaccurate.
MR. MASTRODICASA replied yes.
CHAIR OLSON asked for clarification that these charts are based
off of 1962 USGS surveys.
MR. MASTRODICASA replied that the USGS surveys began in 1948 and
ran through the mid to late 1950's. He explained that the FAA
[Federal Aviation Administration] has to correct the data on the
maps all the time in sectionals. He said that the ADSB
[automatic dependence surveillance-broadcast] and the Capstone
program have to be altered due to the inaccuracies in the
elevation data. He explained that if the data that is currently
available was put into the cockpit "you could potentially kill
somebody."
CHAIR OLSON asked what the estimated cost for mapping the
remaining 85 percent of Alaska would be.
MR. MASTRODICASA replied about $48 million. He explained that
federal funding would cover 73 percent of the cost and the
remaining 27 percent would be covered by the state.
4:10:37 PM
MIKE O'HARE, Deputy Director, Division of Homeland Security and
Emergency Management, Department of Military and Veterans'
Affairs (DMVA), said that SDMI addresses the full spectrum of
many agencies and its missions. With regard to the Division of
Homeland Security and Emergency Management, if an emergency
planner used Google Earth to locate a shelter, for example, it
may be "a mile off and sitting in a river." He explained that
for emergency planning this is very inaccurate and does not
allow for the planning efforts that are required. He reiterated
that SDMI is a collaborative effort between many state and
federal agencies.
4:12:08 PM
SENATOR MENARD asked for confirmation that there was no
legislative funding in 2010.
MR. MASTRODICASA replied that's correct.
SENATOR MENARD asked for confirmation that only 15 percent of
Alaska has been digitally mapped.
MR. MASTRODICASA replied that's correct.
SENATOR MENARD asked for confirmation that the various state
agencies are coming to the legislature to ask for additional
funding.
MR. MASTRODICASA replied "to continue the work and leverage
against federal funds."
4:12:56 PM
LARRY DIETRICK, Director, Division of Spill Prevention and
Response, Department of Environmental Conservation, highlighted
some of the items in the Planning for Alaska's Ports and Harbors
report that relates to spill prevention and response. He
explained that in order to support OCS [outer continental shelf]
development in Alaska there is a great need for deep draft ports
to accommodate OCS activity. He stressed the importance of
considering deep draft ports in the selection process and
identification for ports in the northern part of the state.
He said that another factor to take into consideration for port
site identification is the opening of the arctic and shipping
through the arctic that will occur. He said that an Arctic
Marine Shipping assessment is available that could be valuable
in terms of providing information on anticipated vessel traffic
in the arctic and through Bering Strait. He stressed that this
is a key pinch point for spill prevention and planning. There
are also concerns about vessels that may avoid US waters in
order to evade spill prevention response requirements, which is
of interest to the Coast Guard.
He noted that there is a spill prevention response plan for the
arctic and northwest Alaska. Included in the plan is the pre-
identification of some "places of refuge," which are areas where
vessels may anchor up and provide a safe harbor. He said that
this should also be a consideration in the selection and
identification of ports.
MR. DIETRICK pointed out that there is a disputed maritime
boundary at Inuvik in the Yukon Territory between Alaska and
Canada, which goes out into the Beaufort Sea. He noted that this
is an issue from a spill response perspective. He stressed the
importance of ports that support both off-shore development and
spill response.
4:18:14 PM
CHAIR OLSON recognized the presence of Representative Peggy
Wilson.
He asked Mr. Dietrick for confirmation that Inuvik has a port.
MR. DIETRICK replied Tuktoyaktuk is the off-shore port; Inuvik
is the oil-support base.
CHAIR OLSON asked what kind of resources [DEC] has for off-shore
spills, especially when it is between international waters and
US controlled waters.
MR. DIETRICK replied that in the US, on both the state and
federal level, the capacity to respond to spills is placed upon
the responsible party. It is the regulated community that has
the capacity to respond. He explained that currently in the
state, with the OCS lease sale areas, the capacity to respond to
spills is provided by those that explore the area. For example,
when Shell Oil conducts any activity in that area it has the
necessary instruments and plan in tact to respond, contain, and
remove the oil.
4:20:13 PM
SUSAN BELL, Commissioner, Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development (DCCED), said the ports and harbors
infrastructure, from DCCED's perspective, is essential for both
community vitality and economic development. She noted that the
Planning of Alaska's Regional Ports and Harbors report provides
a lot of current information on the state's infrastructure
needs, industry trends, and other factors to consider. It is
also in alignment with a current approach from the governor to
be looking at hub communities and prioritizing some of the ports
and areas that are going to generate economic development. She
supported the importance of prioritizing Alaska's ports and
looking at public private partnerships. She acknowledged Mr.
Ottesen's comments on PPP and AIDEA. She stressed the importance
of looking at each unique project.
She said that DCCED has noticed that many of the issues in the
ports and harbor study are very similar to the issues that DCCED
faced with sanitation: the need for coordinated planning,
expensive projects that need to be phased in, and the need to
often augment management capabilities at the community level.
She noted that the Denali Commission took a lead role in
coordinating the Rural Utility Sanitation Committee to work
through these issues.
4:23:50 PM
COMMISSIONER BELL proceeded by answering some of the specific
questions that DCCED was asked to address.
The first question was how DCCED assists many of the small
communities with port and harbor projects. She acknowledged the
work of the Division of Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA),
which has helped communities build its management capacity in
order to develop and maintain its infrastructure. She pointed
out that DCCED is part of the multi-agency effort working on
SDMI and this information is critical for port planning. DCCED
also administers many grants to ports and harbors: some funded
through the legislature, the Alaska Community and Development
Block grants, or other specific programs. One of the
recommendations listed in the report was to look into a
threshold grant [for ports and harbors]. She noted that DCCED is
currently working with OMB [Office of Management and Budget] to
figure out how grants can be stream-lined through DCRA. She
explained that, currently, no matter the grant amount, the same
set of paperwork is needed.
She continued that the Division of Economic Development is an
area where DCCED is looking to help strengthen the industries
that help make these ports and harbors economically viable. She
reiterated that AIDEA's work is noted in the report. She said
that in Skagway the Red Dog Mine funds some of the businesses
that help strengthen the user groups of ports and harbors.
She explained that the Alaska Energy Authority's (AEA) work with
the bulk fuel tank farms, while not directly engaged in port and
harbor development, are located in Alaska's river and coastal
areas.
4:26:02 PM
COMMISSIONER BELL continued with the second question DCCED was
asked to address with regard to giving tax powers to port
authorities. She explained that this topic needs to be more
fully explored and there are pros and cons with it. She said
that giving tax powers to port authorities would help create a
dedicated funding source for port and harbor development.
However, it is important that a municipality figure out what the
overall needs for a community are and where its funds should be
allocated.
She said that, finally, DCCED was asked to speak about maritime
policy. She explained that, to her knowledge, the state does not
have a maritime policy and that marine-related issues are
addressed through a number of individual agencies and multi-
agency efforts. She added that coastal and river areas are very
different throughout the state with regard to seasonality,
climate, population, and the types of industrial opportunities
available.
She concluded that, as a state, there is a great effort to make
sure that the public is aware of these maritime issues, that
there is sustainable use of Alaska's bodies of water, and
leadership in national and international maritime affairs is
promoted.
4:28:25 PM
CHAIR OLSON said that while it is okay to build a port at a
sight, there has to be surface transportation to bring the goods
to the port. For instance, there are a lot of areas that would
work well for a deep water port, but the area is not connected
to any place. He asked if DCCED has given any consideration to
surface transportation.
COMMISSIONER BELL replied that DCCED looked at the report and
recognized that the linkage from a port to places such as
Anchorage or the Matanuska Susitna Valley is critical. She
stressed the need to think about ports and harbors in a broader
context. She acknowledged that "DOT is a big piece of that."
4:29:43 PM
BOB PAWLOWSKI, Legislative Liaison, Detail for Alaska State
Legislature, Denali Commission, discussed the Denali
Commission's role in the development of ports and harbors in
Alaska. He paraphrased the following piece of written testimony:
The [Alaska Regional Ports: Planning for Alaska's
Ports and harbors] report is very clear that waterways
are vitally important to the state as most communities
depend heavily on movement of general cargo, building
materials, and freight. The lack of roads to and
amongst most communities further emphasizes the
importance waterways and ports, harbors and barge
landings at each community fulfill. And finally this
is complicated by the short navigational season that
depends on efficient and cost effective operations.
The Denali Commission, as an independent Federal
Agency with state and federal co-chairs, received
program authorization and funding in 2005 as part of
SAFETEA-LU transportation bill for both road and
waterfront programs. The waterfront development
program addresses port, harbor, and other waterfront
needs for rural communities. The focus areas are
important to regional ports, and construction of barge
landings and docking facilities.
Of particular merit, since 2005 the Denali Commission
has invested over $50 million in waterfront projects
throughout Alaska. Recently, the Denali Commission
approved $14,826,397 in funding for 25 FY2011
waterfront development projects across the state. The
approval for innovative barge mooring points in
various communities on the Kuskokwim and Yukon rivers
is an excellent example of partnerships in innovative
ways to support local communities on Alaska's rivers.
These points were developed in partnership with the US
Army Corps of Engineers Alaska District, the
communities, and the tug and barge industry to allow
the offloading of freight and fuel in a moored and
more efficient manner, thus saving the communities
money and minimizing disruption to the river
environment (i.e. shoaling problems and other damage).
The Denali Commission encourages the committee to
further explore plans for improving the harbors and
river landings, including opportunities for public
private partnerships that support local communities
with a combination of federal and non-federal funds.
Having staff actively involved in the "Planning for
Alaska's Regional Ports and Harbors" study and the
2008 and 2010 Alaska Ports workshops, we understand
the needs identified in this report and offer our
waterfront and community development expertise in
helping to sustain rural Alaska communities that
depend on navigable waters.
4:32:39 PM
CHAIR OLSON asked what federal funds can be counted on in the
near future for building port facilities.
MR. PAWLOWSKI replied that it is difficult to see what will
happen. He noted that congressionally directed funds with bills
that are under reauthorization are being discussed. Currently
the safety lieu is being continued through 2013. However, there
is a chance that the FTA [Federal Transit Administration] money
of $5 million per year, may be slipping out under a different
clause.
4:33:46 PM
LARRY COTTER, CEO, Aleutian Island Community Development
Association (APICDA) and Chair, Western Alaska Community
Development Association (WACDA), said that the state is very
reliant on [harbors] in Alaska, particularly in rural and
western Alaska. He said "if we don't have a [harbor], the
viability of the community is greatly at risk." He noted that
there is a very important distinction between a port and a
harbor. A port is a facility that receives cargo for subsequent
transport out and is typically located in larger communities. A
harbor is a facility that serves as a key infrastructure for a
community and is typically located in smaller communities. He
stressed that harbors serve as the backbone for economic
stability in western Alaska. He explained that it is very
competitive to try and get money for harbors, particularly in
Washington D.C. He said that what the state is doing in
conjunction with USACE, with regard to the particular project at
hand, is long overdue. It is important to have a logically
worked-out program that will help identify: "what we want to do,
where we are going to do it, and why we're going to do it." He
recognized that the state will need financial help to develop
ports and harbors.
4:36:38 PM
MR. COTTER said that with regard to ports of refuge and safety
there is a lot of attention focused on the arctic and the need
to develop deep water ports. However, the Aleutian Chain already
has well over 2,000 vessels transiting it; this has been noted
in the Planning for Alaska's Regional Ports and Harbors report.
He explained that in the past five or six years there have been
at least four major groundings in the Aleutian Islands and
several near misses.
He said that safety is very important and harbors play a key
role. He noted that in the Bering Sea during the snow crab
fisheries, there is one port, Saint Paul, which gets iced over
in the winter. He explained that this means there is no place
for vessels to go during a storm. He said that these issues can
be avoided when a port and harbor plan has been properly
developed for Alaska.
4:38:51 PM
SENATOR MENARD said she appreciates his comments.
CHAIR OLSON asked what the plan is for funding some of these
capital projects and whether the CDQ (Community Development
Quota) [of APICDA] plans on getting involved in some of these
projects.
MR. COTTER replied that APICDA has in the past and plans to
continue doing so. He explained that the association has always
put up $1 million or more into such projects. For example, in
Saint George APICDA has already put over $3 million into the
port. He noted that NSEDC [Norton Sound Economic Development
Corporation] and other groups have invested similar amounts.
CHAIR OLSON said the House and Senate Finance committee has had
a lot of discussions on harbor maintenance. He asked what kind
of involvement the CDQ of APICDA is doing with regard to this
topic.
MR. COTTER replied that APICDA has not faced that issue yet.
However, he said "if a harbor goes in then we're going to have
money in that harbor." He noted that economic activity will
develop as a result of that harbor. Finally, he explained that
if the viability of that harbor in the future is contingent upon
APICDA funds the association will provide it.
4:40:44 PM
MATT GANLEY, Vice President, Land and Resources, Bering Straits
Native Corporation (BSNC), discussed the importance of obtaining
Port Clarence as a potential port of refuge and spill response
in Bering Strait. He explained that spill response directly
affects BSNC shareholders and Bering Strait communities. He
expressed the corporation's interest on the ports and harbors
report and the related studies on the ports of refuge. He
explained that Nome is the hub for the Bering Strait region; it
has a port that may or may not be able to take deeper vessels
depending on what modification could be made there. BSNC
selected Port Clarence, the 2,000 acres that are under military
withdrawal, in 1976. The port was decommissioned on a fast-track
this past summer by the Coast Guard. He explained that this
facility is incredible with an impressive infrastructure, which
now lies abandoned. The corporation is seeking to receive that
land under angst. However, he explained that depending on the
Coast Guard's plans, the property will not be in private
ownership for 20 years. Currently, BSNC is pursuing every
possible option.
MR. GANLEY explained that this situation opens up the
opportunity for a PPP. NSEDC, which is the CDQ for the region,
would have an interest in the facility, particularly with regard
to safety and the fisheries that could open up. Because of the
location of the facility (about halfway between Nome and Bering
Straits), it would make sense to have this port operational to
respond to vessels in distress in Bering Strait. He concluded
that the corporation is concerned about receiving the property
with a liability, since it currently lies abandoned; the longer
that it takes to receive that land, the greater the liability
will be.
4:45:47 PM
CHAIR OLSON asked for confirmation that his expertise is in
archaeology.
MR. GANLEY answered yes. He explained that he has been with the
BSNC for a long time and has dealt with a number of issues.
SENATOR MENARD asked for confirmation that the facility has been
dormant since the 1970's.
MR. GANLEY replied no; the land was selected in the 1970's under
the Alaska Native Land Claims Settlement Act. However, it was
withdrawn in the 1960's as a communication site by the federal
government and the Coast Guard built its Loran Station there. He
explained that the Loran Mission ended in 2010 and the Coast
Guard decommissioned the station.
SENATOR MENARD asked for confirmation that there is 7,000 feet
of runway.
MR. GANLEY replied yes.
SENATOR MENARD asked if there is a hangar out there.
MR. GANLEY replied no.
SENATOR MENARD asked if there was a school.
MR. GANLEY replied no; it was strictly a station to run the
[Loran-C] tower.
SENATOR MENARD said that she feels strongly that infrastructures
like this should not go to waste. She asked what the legislature
can do.
MR. GANLEY answered that the Bering Straits Native Corporation
is discussing this with the congressional delegation.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked what kind of land the facility is on
and whether it can be built on.
MR. GANLEY replied yes. He explained that the corporation
contracted a geomorphologist to take a look at the property
since there was concern that the land might not have a long-term
life because the property is not very high. The
geomorphologist's report stated that it's a very stable landform
that, for the last 1,500 years, has not experienced much
erosion.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked for confirmation that there is space
for 24 people to live.
MR. GANLEY replied yes.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how deep the port is.
MR. GANLEY answered that the water close to the point is deeper
than the port of Nome and is a deep water port. He explained
that while the spit is low, it would protect vessels. The
geography is very good as a port of refuge. He encouraged the
committee members to look at a map of the area.
CHAIR OLSON asked how deep the water is.
MR. GANLEY replied about 25 feet at the end of the spit.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if the plans are to have a town at
Port Clarence.
MR. GANLEY replied not necessarily a town. He explained that
BSNC is in line to receive the property and land under angst,
but it doesn't want to take it with liability. He reiterated
that he can't speak to what the Coast Guard's plans are.
However, he explained that because of cuts to the Bureau of Land
Management, it will be, optimistically, 2050, before Native
corporations receive its lands. He noted that this is the same
situation for potential state lands. He explained that the BSNC
hopes to seek legislation in Washington D.C. to expedite the
process. From a safety standpoint and for the economy of the
region the Bering Straits Native Corporation is committed to
take this on, Mr. Ganley explained.
SENATOR MENARD commented that the response capability [of Port
Clarence] is tremendous.
MR. GANLEY concurred.
4:52:26 PM
MARK DAVIS, Officer, Economic Development, Alaska Industrial
Development & Export Authority (AIDEA), Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development (DCCED), said that AIDEA is
very active in the Public Private Partnerships (PPP) arena. The
Red Dog Mine's DeLong Mountain transportation system port and
the current plan for the port of Skagway both involve a PPP
structure. He explained that there is also a potential port
project in Seward that would involve using private and public
funds.
He said that with regard to other finance mechanisms there are
several. One mechanism is called "patient capital," and is a
form of structuring debt. He noted that the DeLong Mountain
Transportation Corridor is an example of this type of funding.
He continued that another mechanism for funding is a Florida SIB
(State Infrastructure Bank). Yet another mechanism is federal
tax credits, under New Market Tax Credit. Finally, another idea
for funding, which is not mentioned in the Planning for Alaska's
Regional Ports and Harbors report, is Below-Market Loans, which
is used by the California Industrial Development Bank. He noted
that while AIDEA does not have that authority, some development
authorities do.
He commented that AIDEA is happy with the review that it has
received.
MR. DAVIS noted that the Port of Skagway was classified, in the
report, as a "subregional port," which AIDEA respectfully
disagrees with. He explained that the definition of a
subregional port is located in the introduction of the report on
page five and states:
subregional hubs do not directly send or receive goods
from outside the state…
He said that the Port of Skagway is currently exporting
substantial amounts of ore concentrate from the Minto Mine.
Currently there are 12 shipments per year, and by 2018 shipments
are estimated to increase to about 50 shipments per year. He
explained that AIDEA believes this will occur because of the
development of three major mining projects. He explained that in
addition to these projects AIDEA is in communication with
several mines in Canada about making Skagway an import harbor.
He explained that, with this in mind, the governor has requested
a $10 million appropriation for Skagway, which would build a
part of the infrastructure that can't generate revenue. AIDEA
would then put in about $65 million through bonding, along with
other private partnership commitments. This means that only a
small amount of general funds would be used for the port
development.
4:57:06 PM
CHRISTINE KLEIN, Executive Vice President and COO, Calista
Corporation, Bethel, AK, said the Planning for Alaska's Regional
Ports and Harbors report is an excellent start. She emphasized
that both ports and harbors in Alaska are absolutely essential
for access, delivering supplies to rural communities, and
commerce. She explained that one thing the state has relied on
is the US Rivers and Harbors Act, developed in the 1860's, which
gave USACE authority over all ports and harbors. However, that
program was never intended to address or fund all of the ports
and harbors in the United States, in particular some of the
unique situations found in Alaska.
She noted that while there are very few ports there are hundreds
of harbors, which are depended upon by villages and thousands of
citizens. Most of these harbors are not eligible for any federal
aid. She explained that there is no funding program to deal with
Alaska's ports or harbors and this has been underemphasized in
the report. She added that this is one of the larger policy
issues that state legislators are probably going to need to
address. She noted that, for as many ports and harbors that the
state has, the funding cycles within DOT has a very intermittent
municipal harbor matching grant and deferred maintenance
program. This program is funded year-to-year and averages about
$5 million to cover all ports and harbors in Alaska. She
stressed the need for the state to have a designated program or
funds to rely on. She suggested that if the report could, when
it is finalized, better summarize some of the solutions and
directions this will help everyone in the future.
She noted that there were two areas within the report that she
found to be issues. The first issue is the lack of regular state
funding sources; whether this is user fees or taxes. The second
issue is the need for a constitutional amendment or
authorization to enable the state to dedicate, accept, and
utilize funds for transportation needs. She noted that this was
in Alaska's constitution at one time, but has since been
changed. She explained that this would enable there to be some
consistent statewide comprehensive planning and address some of
the construction and renovation needed for reliable access and
economic activity, particularly in rural areas. She noted that
most states in the nation have some type of transportation trust
fund or core program to supplement its transportation
infrastructure. Alaska is one of the few states that does not
have this.
5:02:50 PM
MS. KLEIN explained that because the Yukon Kuskokwim region is a
river delta, it is more of a river port than a maritime port.
Emmonak and Alakunuk is the other site where shipments enter the
Yukon River from the ocean. She explained that some of the
difficulty has been in developing and funding of ports; which
requires high-intensive funding. Small communities in western
and northwestern Alaska cannot take on those types of costs.
However, these regions are probably the most reliant on this
mode of transportation.
She noted that with respect to some of the industries, which the
Calista Corporation has hopes of developing, maritime and river
barge shipping is known to be the cheapest mode of
transportation, especially for heavy commodities. She said that
she is pleased with the recommendation in the report to
establish a lead agency or group that would help coordinate the
many entities. She said that there should be an effort made by
the state to not only pull together these groups but to
prioritize some of the needed ports and hubs in the state. She
reiterated the importance of having more stable funding, rather
than relying on federal grants and earmarks.
Finally, she explained that with regard to port financing there
are options that could be made easier for public private
partnership, such as tax incentives.
5:08:05 PM
SENATOR MENARD commented that she appreciates the Planning for
Alaska's Regional Ports and Harbors report and that it is
noteworthy that the final report will not be issued until after
this meeting. She said that the SDMI presentation was
educational and that the legislature needs to look into funding
the mapping for the rest of the state.
CHAIR OLSON asked Ms. Klein what her position is with Calista
Corporation.
MS. KLEIN answered the chief operating officer and executive
vice president.
CHAIR OLSON said there has been some discussion about a port on
Donlin Creek above Bethel in order to access some of the oil
reserves in the area. He asked what Calista's involvement will
be in that port.
MS. KLEIN replied that at this point it would be a private
development. She said that she could not speak to the funding
for the Donlin Creek project. She said that with regard to the
location the Birch Tree Crossing near Aniak and a site near the
village of Crooked Creek are being considered. She noted that
the Calista Corporation's type of involvement depends on the
site that is chosen.
CHAIR OLSON explained that he brings the question forward
because there has been a request to the state from the community
of Akiak to build a port in conjunction with the Donlin Creek
project. He asked if Calista is involved with this.
MS. KLEIN answered that the Donlin Creek development recently
had a request for proposals for sites on the Kuskokwim River.
These came from communities and tribal groups that have land
available that might be deemed as a possible port site. She
noted that many communities submitted letters of interest.
CHAIR OLSON closed public testimony.
5:11:40 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Olson adjourned the meeting at 5:11 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|