Program Manager:  Mike McKinnon – This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Program Assistant: Automme Circosta – This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

In 2007, the Denali Commission (Commission) partnered with the US Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District (USACE) to develop a Statewide Barge Landing Assessment to analyze barge mooring and fuel/freight transfer needs at Alaska’s coastal and riverside communities. This work was undertaken to further the general findings of three studies that had previously identified barge landing improvements as a critical need in rural Alaska.  This assessment is quickly becoming the center piece for one of the most needed construction programs in rural Alaska- shoreside infrastructure for barge operators that include mooring points and/or docks and gravel pad storage areas. 

USACE recently completed this assessment and a report was developed and is now completed. The executive summary is posted to both the Transportation Program Documents webpage as well as the Denali Commission Home Page.

The next phase of the barge landing assessment is to move the high priority projects (as noted in the executive summary) into design and then depending on funding and costs, move a select few to construction.

____

Recently, Commission Transportation Staff and Management met with Western Federal Lands Highway Division (WFLHD) and completed a review of current projects; all are on schedule.  Also discussed was the assignment of FY09 selected projects, those projects are now in the process of scheduling.

____

The Transportation Advisory Committee is meeting on May 11, 2009 in Anchorage, Alaska at the Denali Commission offices.  An agenda and announcement will be posted two weeks prior to May 11th.

This summary provides an overview of the FY 2009 Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) Project Selection meeting, held in Anchorage, AK on December 16-17, 2008.  The agenda and meeting minutes from the US Army Corps of Engineers meeting on December 18, 2008 in Anchorage, AK regarding project updates and the barge landing study are also included as an attachment.  The summary also provides the list of the projects selected at the TAC project selection meeting. 

The primary purpose of this meeting was for the TAC to select FY 2009 road and waterfront development projects on December 16th and 17th, 2008, for TAC approval and incorporation into the Transportation Program.  Other Committee work included:

• Program overview including status of program finances and operations
• Review and discussion of draft Commission-wide project selection policies
• Receive the program quarterly report and updated project status list
• Report on major project partnerships with the FHWA Western Federal Lands Highway Division (WFLHD) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
• Review of project nomination and selection processes 
• Set date and location of next meeting

In a separate meeting on December 18, several Committee members attended a Commission/USACE joint-projects status meeting.  These monthly meetings are important to the success of the joint project mission.  The December meeting included a review of the new project development section at the USACE, Interagency and International Support, that has been set up to serve an array of agency and international clients, including the Denali Commission.  

Program Development

The TAC and Denali Commission management, through the program’s project nomination and selection processes have successfully guided the program to a focus on basic safety and quality of life capital projects throughout rural Alaska.  Agencies and communities recognize this focus across the state as an appropriate target for program funding.

Selected road projects are generally basic community street improvements and waterfront development projects have focused on community needs and projects to improve regional transshipment operations.  An emerging and important capital project effort is barge landing improvements throughout coastal and riverine Alaska that can significantly improve the safety and efficiency of barge operations.  These barge landing improvements are likely to become a significant portion of program’s future waterfront development work.

Over the course of program development, the FHWA Western Federal Lands Highway Division, and the US Army Corps of Engineers have become central partners in project delivery.  In both cases, product delivery and interactions with communities has been excellent.  Partnerships with regional borough and tribal governments continue to develop and improve, and many midsized coastal communities continue to successfully partner with the Commission on local port and harbor projects.  DOT&PF also continues to be a solid partner on state-owned local roads projects that improve safety and quality of life. 

The key to program success continues to be grounded in the annual project nomination process that maintains local control over project scope, and the TAC project selection process that keeps the Commission focused on rural Alaska’s most pressing transportation improvement needs. 

Meeting Start Up  

Due to an array of factors, largely assignable to the Program Manager, the Committee faced not only the material mailed to them prior to the meeting, but also a mass of paperwork when they arrived at the meeting conference room.   

What initially was a stack of reports at 9:00 am quickly became a mound of paper that by 10:00 am had literally melded into one large paper morass on the conference table.  There were two lessons learned from this experience.  One, all documents to be used at the meeting must be in the binders sent to committee members 3-4 weeks in advance of the meeting.  The Committee has to have time to review and be familiar with all documents.  Two, if additional documents are brought to the meeting, they and their respective index sheets must be put into the binders before the meeting begins. 

Project Selection

After staff reports, a draft Commission policies discussion, and Committee housekeeping items, the project nomination process got underway.  The Committee’s experience with project selection quickly revealed several trends that held throughout the FY 2009 process:  

• An established project nomination process and Committee consensus about project priorities has narrowed the range of nominated projects.  It is apparent from the FY 2009 nominations that communities generally understand from posted ranking criteria and project selection guidelines that the Commission is looking to address basic rural transportation needs. 
• Community street and board road reconstruction and extension
• Regional port improvement and small boat harbor  inner-harbor facilities construction 
• As a result, the Committee saw a narrow range of project scores for basic repairs and improvements took away some of the numeric scoring value. 
• It became clear through project discussions both amongst Committee members and with project sponsors, whether a project was ready for the stage of work being requested and whether the project was serving a basic transportation improvement purpose

• In those cases where project sponsors had sufficient funds for design, the Committee asked the sponsor to complete design and return to the Commission for consideration of construction funding when final design documents were complete

• In some cases, there was a need to segregate utilities including water/sewer, lighting and electrical from the road work to evaluate eligible construction costs and to determine the percent of participation a Commission award would make to the road element.  In at least one major project, this exercise showed the road element was not ready for construction and that the Commission contribution would have been 100%, which is undesirable given the opportunity for Tribal Shares to contribute to the project

• Community, regional and in some cases, owner support played key roles in decisions about accepting some projects.  In at least two cases, local sponsors nominated good projects, but either the land or the facility itself was owned by another entity or agency.  If the owner did not support the nomination, the Committee did not evaluate the project, and asked the owner and sponsor to coordinate on a new nomination for FY 2010

• In some cases, the Committee selected a project for funding, but did so with directions to the sponsor.  In the case of the Gambell Evacuation Road project for instance, the Committee specified that Commission funding go to the first 2.5 miles of roadway, as this is the distance to a safe elevation and the proposed road beyond that distance is to reach other termini. 

• Four projects moving from design to construction, or experiencing substantive construction phase increases did not have nomination forms.  These were approved after much Committee discussion, and in light of funding availability.  However, the Committee directed staff that in the future all such proposals need to be submitted as project nominations within the timing and document requirements of new nominations.

• Several waterfront development projects were approved with the requirement that there be a review in July to determine that proposed State General Funds were in fact assigned to the projects through the State legislative and executive capital budget processes.  Projects that did not receive needed funding would be withdrawn.

• In the waterfront development program, the Committee investigated all opportunities to joint fund projects with the State of Alaska.  In the case of the Gustavus Dock, the requested funding of $1,300,000 was reduced to $750,000 with the remaining 50% to come from a State General Fund appropriation.

• In another example, the King Cove Boat Harbor project was assigned the full $1,500,000 request, even though it is substantially over the recommended cap of $1,000,000 because that funding matched to $1,500,000 in local funds brought in $3,000,000 in State funds to the community’s harbor rebuild.

• A late project brought to the nomination process during the meeting was the recently completed reconnaissance engineering report for the Shaktoolik Evacuation Road.  The project, which was discussed and approved during the meeting, will gain a design year.  This type of extenuating circumstance is accounted for in the project selection procedures, but the Committee clearly would have appreciated having this and other project presented under ordinary procedures and documentation.  

Project Nomination and Selection Process Modifications

At the close of the meeting, the Committee directed staff to implement the following modifications to the Project Nomination and Selection Process:

• Begin the nomination process on August 1 as usual, but include a specific effort to notify rural regional entities including boroughs, regional hub communities, regional tribal non-profits, Community Development Quota organizations and other organizations to ensure they are aware of the nomination process and schedule

• Extend the project nomination period by 30 days to November 1 each year to provide additional time after fishing and hunting seasons for nominations

• Add a third meeting to the annual calendar.  A meeting in early November would examine project nominations and would receive annual progress reports from major Program partners

• Reschedule the Committee’s Project Selection Meeting to mid-January each year to provide adequate time for staff products, including due diligence efforts to review and/or prepare all project nominations

• All projects to be considered by the Committee including Commission projects transitioning from one phase to another must be submitted in the project nomination format and must be submitted to the Committee in the original mail out of the project books 3-4 weeks in advance of the project selection meeting 

• Staff is to request an opportunity to present the Transportation Program to the annual CDQ meeting and at annual regional organization meetings as appropriate 

Committee Operations

As part of an overall review of Committee operations, the Committee directed staff to prepare material for a May 2009 Committee retreat.  Staff will investigate the merit of a facilitated meeting and report to the Committee by March.  Materials and/or issues for discussion at the retreat include:

• Review of ranking criteria to determine whether it is practical to develop a project ranking system within the established priorities that creates more separation in scores for basic projects

• Review of how to accommodate paving in approved projects.  The Committee continues to struggle with the issue of participating in the paving phase of road projects.  It is critical in many cases to preserve the road bed and to reduce dust and mud, but with so many unimproved roads in rural Alaska, paving can seem like a luxury.  The Committee will attempt to develop specific guidelines for supporting paving as part of approved projects

• Review and recommend improvements to the project status report.  This includes making the report more streamlined and adding a new column to indicate each project’s ‘difficulty score’.  Using a 1-5 designation indicate progress and funding stability with 1 being steady progress based on established scope-schedule-budget, and 5 being a project that is not moving forward and/or is likely to be closed out  

Project Selections for Commission approval and incorporation into the Transportation Program system

The attached FY 2009 project selections are provided for Commission review and approval.  Once approved, staff will send letters to each project nomination sponsor to indicate:

• Whether their project was selected for the Transportation Program
• If selected, what level of funding was assigned to the project  
• If selected, what agency is responsible for development and delivery?  This is a new step in the program system.  Most Borough, medium sized cities, regional Tribal non-profits and DOT&PF, will continue to receive awards directly.  However, most small governments, city or Tribal, will see their projects assigned to FHWA-competent development agencies as experience has shown Title 23 CFR regulations that govern Commission funding are too complex and burdensome for small community resources.  WFLHD will be the Program’s major road projects partner, while the USACE handles most waterfront development projects, including the major barge landing design effort currently underway

Please see Transportation's Program Documents webpage for FY09 Project Selections.

IRT Update

Meeting was held on January 15 to review the work plan for the IRT-sponsored survey of a 12-16-mile road corridor between Chignik Lagoon and Chignik Lake.  The corridor survey will set the base of the potential design and construction of a road between the two villages.  The road would provide two primary functions, one is to provide Chignik Lagoon with access to the Chignik Lake airport, a significant improvement over the substandard landing strip at the Lagoon.  The other is to provide Chignik Lake with access to the barge landing at Chignik Lagoon for fuel and freight deliveries.  Currently, Chignik Lake hauls fuel and freight by boat resulting in significant costs and safety risks. 

The survey is expected to take from early June to late August to conduct.  The Federal Highway Administration’s Western Federal Lands Highway Division, a primary transportation program partner to the Denali Commission will provide engineering support services to the military during the survey effort. 

On December 16-17, 2008 the Transportation Advisory Committee (Committee) met for its annual project selection meeting.  This is the fourth annual meeting of this type and resulted in the addition of 17 road projects and 16 waterfront development projects to the Transportation Program’s capital projects.  Several projects in this year’s selections are the design or construction phases of projects initiated under Transportation Program funding.

The project nominations come to the Denali Commission (Commission) through a public nomination process that begins in August of each year and closes in time for staff to review nominations and prepare nomination books for the Committee selection meeting in mid-December each year.  This year saw new nominations from the Bethel-based, regional non-profit, Association of Village Council Presidents (AVCP), a goal of the Commission in 2008.  The Commission recognized in 2007 that many of the most needed projects in western Alaska were not getting nomination attention and turned to AVCP for assistance.  AVCP, modeling after a very successful Kawerak, Inc. program, developed a transportation program, including an extensive startup effort to visit all of the region’s villages to understand transportation needs and to set up opportunities for BIA Tribal Shares compacting.  Compacting under that program allows remarkable flexibility to fund projects in villages through leveraging many villages’ funds over time.  In this way, regional tribal nonprofits are able to accomplish projects that would be beyond the financial capacity of individual Tribal Share funds.  Kawerak, Inc., AVCP and the Tlingit-Haida Central Council all submitted projects in this round of nominations. 

Community Development Quota (CDQ) corporations have also become important partners in the Transportation Program.  The St. Paul Boat Harbor construction project, reconnaissance engineering for waterfront development needs in the Goodnews Bay-Platinum area, and a winter trail marking project in the lower Kuskokwim River area are examples of efforts CDQs and the Commission are jointly funding.  As both the CDQ and Commission programs mature, we expect this partnership to become even more aggressive in jointly funded projects, especially in the waterfront development area. 

City and Borough governments continue to also provide strong project nominations and several were selected this year in both the road and waterfront development categories. 

Commission staff are now in the process of preparing a short report on the meetings, including how the meeting was conducted, which projects were selected, and what agency or community will be assigned the project.  This last item has shown significant change over the last few years.  In the early years of the program, individual villages and communities were often assigned responsibility for project design and/or construction, but it quickly became clear that the Federal Highway Administration rules the program operates under are more complex and time-consuming than many communities are set up to handle.  As a result, the Federal Highway Administration’s exceptionally capable Western Federal Lands Highway Division has come on board as a successful road project partner for the Commission; the Corps of Engineers has done the same for the waterfront development element of the program.  The Corps of Engineers recently completed Phase I of a barge landing improvements strategy that is quickly becoming the center piece for one of the most needed construction programs in rural Alaska- shoreside infrastructure for barge operators that include mooring points and/or docks and gravel pad storage areas. 

As 2009 gets underway, the Commission’s Transportation Program will have over 100 projects underway, with a solid record of moving projects from design through construction to completion in many rural Alaska sites.  The current project list is available on the Commission web site, and in short order, it will be modified to include approved FY 2009 projects.   

Products and tasks coming out of the successful Denali Commission Transportation Advisory Committee (Committee) meeting December 12-13, 2007 will be the focus of staff work in January 2008.

During the December meeting, the Committee welcomed a new member, Carvel Zimin, Jr., of Naknek, recently appointed by Governor Palin, and expressed their appreciation to the exceptional job Ray Koonuk from Point Hope had done to shape the committee's goals and its operating systems during his term as Committee member.

The Committee selected 37 design and construction projects from the FY 2008 nominations submitted to Denali Commission by federal, state and local government sponsors during the fall 2007 project nomination process.

Over the course of three project nomination/selection cycles, the Committee has developed a balanced and determined view of project priorities. To the extent possible, especially in the roads program, the Committee selected projects for small community streets to improve quality of life, and regional/subregion hubs to improve transportation efficiencies. The Committee also focused on project that will move to completion in the near term.

The pressure to select projects slated to move forward expeditiously is primarily a result of two forces. One is the real need for capital project improvements. Health, quality of life and transportation safety are addressed by making basic improvements to village streets. Communities also need barge landing enhancements to improve fuel and freight transfers, to improve worker safety, and reduce environmental risks. Regardless of the project type, it is critical that projects move through design and to construction as expeditiously as possible.  

The Committee fully understands that there is also a need for patience. Design and construction projects in remote sites take time, sometimes considerably more time than in urban areas. The pressure to get projects completed quickly is often met by an equal force during design of time-consuming fieldwork and during construction, short construction seasons, complex and costly logistics, and sometimes, the small dollar value of contracts.  

Recognizing these forces are at work in rural infrastructure development, the Committee successfully achieved a blend of design and construction projects and a blend of traditional road and waterfront development projects with challenging and/or unique projects that serve the transportation fleet in rural Alaska. The result is a Denali Commission Transportation Improvement Program that creates a stream of high priority projects to communities. The selection meeting also demonstrated the program's success in targeting small, but important projects that other agencies are not able to address with their programs.

Projects ready for construction bidding were prime candidates for project selection, and there are several of these projects in the list for FY 2008, especially in the waterfront development program.

There is also an array of reconnaissance engineering projects selected in FY 2008, primarily in the roads program. Reconnaissance engineering is the correct project development step when the purpose is known, but the routing, soil conditions, environmental issues, community preferences, construction cost estimates and other design and construction factors are unknown. A successful reconnaissance engineering effort provides transportation managers tools to determine if a project is practical and in the interest of a community and/or region.

Another key feature of project selection this year was guidance from the Federal Highway Administration and others that reinforced the need to take on projects where the funding is imminent from other primary sources, or where the Denali Commission is ready to take responsibility for the entire cost of construction. Discussions during project selection helped to refine this element of project selection.  

Three sponsors submitted large design projects that already have substantial funds. Understandably, the sponsors are continuing their efforts to build a construction fund that meets construction estimates. These sponsors were encouraged to use existing funds to complete design and then work with the Committee to prepare a construction-funding package once construction was eminent.  

Several sponsors submitted projects that were close to construction-ready, but did not meet the test of bid-ready with all permits in hand. It turns out that communities often bid out projects without permits and then work with the contractor to negotiate the cost of construction changes resulting from permit stipulations or other conditions. This will not work in the Denali Commission program. FHWA staff attending the meeting confirmed staff assessments that under SAFETEA-LU and Title 23 regulations that guide the Denali Commission Transportation Program, all permits need to be in hand before contract bids can be advertised. This was an important discussion for both staff and sponsors, and Commission staff are committed to doing a better job of explaining this requirements in future years.

With a $1,000,000 project limit per community, the Committee finds that filling funding gaps in large project funding or funding an additive alternative element that clearly meets Denali Commission goals is practical. This has generally resulted in one or two regional port projects and one or two small boat harbor projects each year.  

Another important development this year has been the partnerships with the Community Development Quota (CDQ) fisheries groups. This pattern will expand overtime as CDQ groups and Denali Commission develop common goals for rural infrastructure development.

Finally, a new category of projects, ATV roads, were selected for development in three communities. The projects are reconnaissance engineering, with the expectation that these projects will go to design in the following year. ATV roads are cost-effective alternatives to traditional road projects and are becoming common solutions for a number of saturated soil conditions.  

In the waterfront development program, a boat haul-out facility nomination represents a new approach to boat repairs that were previously completed on harbor grids. Since environmental considerations now make grids impractical in most harbor settings, the boat haul-out approach to routine repairs may make sense for harbors in rural areas with substantial commercial and subsistence fleets. Two projects were selected in this new category.

Tasks associated with the selection process include posting the Committee's FY 2008 project selection list, sending out letters to project sponsors letting them know the status of their nominations and most important, preparing the Financial Assistance Award documents for selected projects.

These documents are the base for recording funding sources, scope of work, timelines and responsibilities of the Denali Commission and sponsor. Several projects selected by the Committee have tentatively been assigned to partner agencies for execution. Assignments are based on the partner having a pool of similar projects underway, or because a partner has a special expertise that is well suited to the project stage of a selected project. Final decisions on project assignments will be completed by January 31.

Another major task for completion in January is posting the program's first comprehensive status report for transportation projects. This will serve as the base for subsequent quarterly project updates.

Finally, program staff will continue work on design and construction projects currently underway, including project management plans for locally managed projects.

During January, the Denali Commission staff closed out the FY 2008 project nomination process, including notices to project sponsors about the status of their project nominations.

In February and throughout the rest of the year, Transportation Program staff will return its focus to two primary tasks, financial document development and management and general project management. Financial document completion is subject to funding availability, which continues to be a challenge. While we expect our final funding distributions in the near future, there could still be some delays in getting approved documents to project sponsors. Construction funding remains a priority, but we expect to be able to move all project documents to sponsors within the next two months.  

Staff generally executes project management tasks through one of two approaches. One approach, used with agency sponsors or partners like the Federal Highway Administration's Western Federal Lands Highway Division (WFLHD) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) is akin to a client-consultant relationship. Denali Commission staff work with project managers to stay up on project development status and fund transfers. We attend project meetings and community meetings as needed, review and process project documents, and generally ensure communities keep up to date on progress. Overall, our partners do an excellent job of working with staff and show a real commitment to getting projects to and through the construction phase.

Staff uses a more hands-on approach when local governments or organizations are developing projects. Local sponsor project assignments have grown out of Denali Commission's interest in seeing communities build a capacity to manage projects on their own in the future. In these cases, staff works with the sponsor to develop a Request for Proposals to bring in a consultant-engineering firm. Once the engineering firm is under contract, staff works with the community and the contractor to develop a work plan for the project and then routinely check with contractor and the community on progress with a formal step-by-step reviews and approvals required by Denali Commission staff.  

If the project is in the design phase, our two primary partners, WFLHD and COE depending on the project type, will review engineering documents, including construction bid packages for the Denali Commission. If the project is under construction, our partners will, at the Denali Commission's request, conduct construction inspections, including field office reviews.

In both approaches to project development, the Transportation Program staff maintains a constant series of communication links with communities and engineering firms/agencies to ensure projects maintain proper scope, schedule and budget. In the early days of the program, fieldwork by staff ranged in the 5-10% range in terms of overall staff time. As more local sponsors develop projects and more construction gets underway it is clear that percentage of time spent in the field, especially during the summer field season is increasing to toward the 20% range.

A meeting of particular importance this month is the Kivalina Evacuation Road status report to the community of Kivalina and the Northwest Arctic Borough in Kivalina. The February 20 meeting will be a chance for staff to report on project progress, and it will be a chance for the COE to report in on their shoreline protection plans for the coming year. Work on the evacuation road has revealed important information that will be critical to the community's ongoing discussion on village relocation.

Another important meeting this month is the February 11-15 Alaska Forum on the Environment. Not only is this an excellent opportunity to network with rural communities from around Alaska, it is an important opportunity to get updates on important issues as broad as climate change and as specific as ATV trail and road development practices. Throughout this week of presentations and meetings, you will be able to connect with Denali Commission staff and management.

June was a busy month of getting Denali Commission road and waterfront development projects underway. It also included fieldwork to analyze potential future projects, including an innovative effort by the military to use an expeditionary road standard on a road between Chignik Lagoon and Chignik Lake. The military, after initial field reviews has agreed to come to the Chignik Lagoon-Chignik Lake area next summer to perform a route survey and determination of practical application of their standards to this much needed road. This is a training program opportunity for the military, and a chance for Denali Commission to promote its efforts to find cost-effective road construction opportunities in rural Alaska.

Currently, Chignik Lake has to bring fuel up a river to the community in small quantities and Chignik Lagoon has a marginal runway that is frequently closed due to weather. By building a road between the two communities, Chignik Lake could receive fuel by barge at the Lagoon, for transfer by truck to the community and Chignik Lagoon would have access to the much better runway at Chignik Lake. Long-term, there are plans for a new larger runway mid point between the two Chigniks.

The use of expeditionary road standards, or pioneer road standards is a recent attempt by Denali Commission and its engineering agency partners to look at vehicle fleet-appropriate road widths and design speeds. The vehicle fleet in most rural communities is ATV's, light trucks and an occasional single or dual axle fuel truck. By building low-speed, low-volume roads to meet a slower, lighter vehicle fleet, there is a strong potential to significantly reduce per mile road construction costs.

A key to making these roads practical has turned out to be the BIA Tribal Shares funding program. These funds, assigned to communities based on a road miles and population formula are key because they allow tribal governments to conduct road repairs and maintenance. Absent an organization to sign a maintenance agreement, federal funds cannot be used on a project. Tribal Shares allows tribal governments to sign those agreements. In the case of the Chigniks Road, the Lake and Peninsula Borough, who participated in the fieldwork, is also discussing what role their government can play in making a project happen. That role could be ownership of the road and/or contributions toward design and/or construction.

This is one of several innovative road projects effort currently underway at Denali Commission. The other most significant innovation is an effort to develop ATV roads where appropriate. This effort has been led in western Alaska by the National Park Service, who is promoting ATV road construction to subsistence use areas. It is quickly being picked up by communities around the state as a practical alternative to full standard roads, and again goes to the idea that vehicle-fleet appropriate transportation infrastructure can be affordable and pracitcal.

The ATV roads can be made from commercial products generally known as geo-blocks, from gravel or other techniques using in place materials. The benefits to communities are numerous, including the fact that these types of low speed, light duty roads cost in the range of 20-30% of the cost of a full standard road.

Benefits include, improved driver safety, much less wear and tear on vehicles, and importantly, reduction in habitat damage, some of which is valuable bird nesting and rearing areas. There is an emerging construction equipment fleet based on ATV vehicles, including excavators, belly and end dumps and graders that are designed for just this type of road system. The technology and engineering had its genesis in large recreational trail construction, but it has easily and rapidly shifted to ATV uses.

Denali Commission has partnered with FHWA's Western Federal Lands Highway Division to look at routes in Hooper Bay, Chefornak and other sites this summer to determine if there are practical projects in these locations.  Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is currently constructing a Denali Commission funded ATV road to access its new wind tower project in Hooper Bay.

In July, Denali Commission and Western Federal Lands Highway Division staff will participate in a field review with National Park Service staff and community leaders in Hooper Bay to examine the access road and another ATV road project that the route Denali Commission has selected to join in on as one of its initial ATV road projects.

Also in July, Denali Commission staff and FHWA Alaska Division staff will begin work with a number of local road project sponsors to get their projects underway. Projects in Nenana, Gakona and Nondalton are three of those projects.  In addition, both Western Federal Lands Highway Division and the Corps of Engineers will be conducting construction inspections for Denali Commission projects.  Inspections will be conducted in Galena, Nome, and Thorne Bay as well as other communities throughout the state.

Waterfront development projects generally do not need the same oversight we are seeing as essential to success in the roads program. Port and harbor projects Denali Commission has selected to participate in are generally being constructed by communities with substantial experience in contract management. The majority of the ports and harbor projects Denali Commission has selected are contributions under $1,000,000 to projects that cost several million dollars.

In addition, the engineering firms managing projects for these communities are well aware of the Denali Commission project development requirements. Yakutat, Galena, Seward, the Bristol Bay port at Naknek and harbor improvements in small communities like Haines and Wrangell are examples of the construction projects currently underway.

Barge landings, a much needed transportation improvement in rural Alaska are currently being evaluated by the Corps of Engineers under agreement with the Denali Commission. The project stage of interviews with barge operators, communities and construction companies about barge landing needs in each community is complete and a draft priority list for a first round of design and construction is on target of a final report this fall. In addition, several agencies and governments are developing barge landing designs under agreement with Denali Commission including Alaska Energy Authority in Kwethluk, and the Lake and Peninsula Borough for the Iliamna Lake communities. The combined engineering products will provide the base for barge landing improvements that will likely range from deadmen anchors in a river bank to hold barges in place, to full sheet pile structures where appropriate. These facilities will enhance fuel deliveries, improve work safety and significantly reduce nearshore habitat impacts from current barge operation practices.

July will also be a time for updating project nomination forms, criteria, procedures and process in anticipation of the Fiscal Year 2009 Project Nomination Process that begins in August. This annual window for submitting road and waterfront development project nominations has become more refined each year as the Transportation Advisory Committee has refined its priorities for project selection, which takes place during a project selection meeting in Anchorage in mid-December each year.

Keep an eye on the Denali Commission website, www.denali.gov for information about the Project Nomination Process. The forms and packages will be available from a link on the home page for the duration of the open period, August 1 through October 1.

Finally, Denali Commission is involved in ongoing efforts by Alaska's tribal governments, FHWA, BIA, DOT&PF, and other agencies to find ways to streamline joint ventures in rural Alaska project funding and development. One current task is to set up a Tribal Transportation Summit in October to try to bring tribes and agencies together for training in project development and for discussion on how to leverage funds to accelerate road project developments in rural Alaska. This effort is led by a group of tribal entities and Denali Commission has found good value in working on these project delivery tasks.