Fiscal Year 2009 Draft Work Plan, 74152-74159 [E8-28810]
Download as PDF
74152
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations.’’
7. Availability of EIS. It is anticipated
that the draft EIS will be available for
public review during the spring of 2010.
The draft EIS or a notice of availability
will be provided during the 45-day
review period to affected Federal, state
and local agencies, Indian tribes, and
other interested parties.
Dated: November 26, 2008.
Mark D. Jernigan,
Major (P), U.S. Army, Deputy District
Commander.
[FR Doc. E8–28823 Filed 12–4–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
DENALI COMMISSION
Fiscal Year 2009 Draft Work Plan
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
AGENCY: Denali Commission.
ACTION: Denali Commission Fiscal Year
2009 Draft Work Plan request for
comments.
SUMMARY: The Denali Commission
(Commission) is an independent Federal
agency based on an innovative federalstate partnership designed to provide
critical utilities, infrastructure and
support for economic development and
training in Alaska by delivering federal
services in the most cost-effective
manner possible. The Commission was
created in 1998 with passage of the
October 21, 1998 Denali Commission
Act (Act) (Title III of Pub. L. 105–277,
42 U.S.C. 3121). The Denali
Commission Act requires that the
Commission develop proposed work
plans for future spending and that the
annual Work Plan be published in the
Federal Register, providing an
opportunity for a 30-day period of
public review and written comment.
This Federal Register notice serves to
announce the 30-day opportunity for
public comment on the Denali
Commission Draft Work Plan for Federal
Fiscal Year 2009.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by January 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the
Denali Commission, Attention: Tessa
Rinner, 510 L Street, Suite 410,
Anchorage, AK 99501.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Tessa Rinner, Denali Commission, 510 L
Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 99501.
Telephone: (907) 271–1414. E-mail:
trinner@denali.gov.
Introduction: Rural Alaska is an
American treasure. Scattered across vast
tundra, tucked away along rugged
coastlines and forests and deep within
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
Alaska’s Interior, people living in over
300 communities raise families, educate
their children, and work to provide
opportunities for all. Alaska Native
people rely heavily on subsistence
hunting, fishing and gathering as a
central part of both culture and
economic sustenance. Values of sharing,
love of family and country and
traditional cultures run deep.
Rural Alaska still resembles the
United States at the time of Lewis &
Clark. Major rivers are undammed,
unbridged and lack even basic
navigational aids. Many health and
social indicators still resemble those in
developing countries.
No where else in our country can
people live amidst wilderness, largely
disconnected from highway and road
connections and from regional power
grids. Here, resilience and innovation
are required both to survive and thrive.
Reliance on air and river transportation
is essential for everyday living. And
where else in the country would
women, in their third trimester of
pregnancy, be required to fly into a
regional center and wait to have their
babies safely delivered, given the lack of
local medical facilities?
The Denali Commission has now
invested nearly a billion dollars in ten
years on basic infrastructure projects at
the local level. We know lives have been
improved through greater access to
primary health care, through safe and
reliable energy projects, through job
training programs, sanitation and
landfill improvements and basic surface
and water transportation improvements.
We know the taxpayer benefits from an
emphasis on coordinating the planning,
construction and delivery of capital
projects and through a focus on
sustainability.
We see innovation everywhere. The
regional corporations formed by the
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act,
for example, are becoming economic
powerhouses in their own rights. Major
investments in private-sector anchors in
each region complement the
Commission’s work in basic community
infrastructure. Many regional non-profit
corporations provide an array of
effective health and social services. The
Alaska Marketplace competition, now in
its fourth year, proves again that local
people have great ideas and with a small
infusion of capital and technical
assistance, have real potential for
making positive and lasting change. The
Community Development Quota
program, for example, offers
opportunities for residents in over 60
coastal communities to benefit directly
from offshore fishing revenues.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
We are buoyed by the sense of
progress over the last ten years, at the
resurgence of traditional culture, by the
progress in celebrating diversity at all
levels and by the awareness among
leaders to reduce dependency on
government and eliminate social ills
that seem to come with long winters and
isolation found in northern countries.
We take delight in working with many
progressive and innovative partners,
grant recipients and local champions
whose leadership and inspiration is
critical for village survivability.
We are alarmed, however, at the
recent convergence of several issues
which threaten the survival of many
Alaskan communities and provide
urgent impetus for the Commission to
improve our investment strategies.
These issues include the impacts of
climate change, unpredictable and
unaffordable energy costs at the village
level, the expectation of declining
federal revenues to support rural
investment in Alaska, evidence of outmigration from many small
communities into larger regional centers
and urban areas such as Anchorage, and
the urgent need to find regional and
systemic solutions to bolster long-term
community viability. The global
financial crisis will also strain an
already thin social service delivery
system and bring other consequences
yet unseen.
The following are some of the critical
issues which frame the debate over the
Denali Commission’s FY09 Work Plan:
Climate Change
Evidence is now overwhelming that
climate change is impacting Alaska and
the north faster than elsewhere in the
nation. Temperatures have been rising,
plant and animal species have been
moving north, and permafrost is
melting, resulting in major challenges
for all infrastructure programs. Denali
Commission funded wind turbines for
example, are major engineering
challenges for successfully placing a
vertical wind tower in a permafrost
setting. The Denali Commission is
committed to participating fully with
the State of Alaska, the U.S. Corps of
Engineers and other partners in a
coordinated approach to policy
formulation and the execution of
adaptation measures for climate change.
The most immediate challenge is the
urgent need to protect and relocate
many coastal communities impacted by
the lack of sea ice, the repetition of
major storm events, flooding and
erosion of coastlines. While Congress
provides no funds to the Commission to
support relocation efforts, we coordinate
closely with other agencies and tribes.
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
Our interagency Planning Work Group,
for example, oversees relocation efforts
in several communities, and the
Commission funded a relocation
community plan last year.
Unaffordable Energy at the Local Level
We recognize the urgent need to find
breakthrough solutions to the
widespread unaffordable energy costs in
Alaska’s rural communities. One study
reveals that rural residents earning the
lowest 20% of income spend almost half
that income on home heating and
electricity.
While the Commission’s energy
strategy remains a combination of
completing bulk fuel and power system
upgrades, an emphasis on conservation
and energy efficiency projects and
renewable energy, we continue to look
for breakthrough solutions that can be
replicated. We’ll also focus on pursuing
regional grids that can reduce the need
for stand-alone generation in Alaska’s
small villages. We remain a strong
partner as the State of Alaska prepares
an overall Energy Plan for submission to
the Alaska State Legislature this session.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Green Building Design and
Construction Cost Containment
High construction costs in rural
Alaska result from a combination of vast
distances, harsh climates and the rising
cost of construction materials. We are
committed to carrying out innovative,
cost-effective and creative design and
construction solutions. This year we
anticipate engaging in more diverse and
experimental partnerships, and we’ll be
seeking more innovative design,
construction and program and project
management practices. We may enhance
our normal project scopes to allow for
greater energy efficiencies. We
anticipate undertaking several pilot
projects focusing on green design, cost
containment and the combined use of
facility activities.
A Focus on Community, Regional
Planning and Government
Coordination
The Commission is committed to a
greater emphasis on community and
regional planning to ensure long-term
viability of our infrastructure
investments. Last year, we worked with
the State of Alaska, for example to help
reopen a tribal clinic that had closed its
doors for lack of capacity. This may be
the first instance of a Denali
Commission project which had
suspended service. Through our efforts
in government coordination, we work to
ensure our projects fit within a
framework of a local and regional plan,
and are designed, sized and placed in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
the most optimum locations and setting
for long-term success.
Background: The Commission’s
mission is to partner with tribal, federal,
state, and local governments and
collaborate with all Alaskans to improve
the effectiveness and efficiency of
government services, to develop a welltrained labor force employed in a
diversified and sustainable economy,
and to build and ensure the operation
and maintenance of Alaska’s basic
infrastructure.
By creating the Commission, Congress
mandated that all parties involved
partner together to find new and
innovative solutions to the unique
infrastructure and economic
development challenges in America’s
most remote communities.
Pursuant to the Denali Commission
Act, as amended, the Commission
determines its own basic operating
principles and funding criteria on an
annual federal fiscal year (October 1 to
September 30) basis. The Commission
outlines these priorities and funding
recommendations in an annual Work
Plan.
Pursuant to the Act, the Work Plan is
first provided in draft by the
Commission for publication in the
Federal Register providing an
opportunity for a 30-day period of
public review and written comment.
The Work Plan is also disseminated
widely to Commission program partners
including, but not limited to the Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA), the Economic
Development Administration (EDA),
and the United States Department of
Agriculture—Rural Development
(USDA–RD). Commission staff are
responsible for compiling written public
comment and forwarding it to the
Commission’s Federal Co-Chair (Mr.
George J. Cannelos).
The Federal Co-Chair then adopts a
final version of the Work Plan, which
includes, to the degree the Federal CoChair deems appropriate, modifications,
additions and deletions based on the
policy and program recommendations of
the full Commission and public
comment. The final version of the Work
Plan is forwarded to the Secretary of
Commerce for approval on behalf of the
Federal Co-Chair.
The Work Plan authorizes the Federal
Co-Chair to enter into grant agreements,
award grants and contracts and obligate
the federal funds identified by
appropriation below.
FY 09 Appropriations Summary
Public Law 110–329, Consolidated
Security, Disaster Assistance, and
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009,
was signed by President Bush on
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74153
September 30, 2008. The Continuing
Resolution section of that law provides
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 funding for
named agencies at the same levels
utilized in the first two quarters of FY
2008 (October 1, 2007 to March 31,
2008), through to March 6, 2009.
Since a new Administration will take
office in January 2009, it is unknown at
this time if there will be a new budget
presented to Congress, or if this
Continuing Resolution will be extended
to September 2009 or modified in some
other way. For the Commission, this
may result in budgetary resources as
high as $113,879,591 for FY 2009. If FY
2009 congressional appropriations are
significantly different from the amounts
in this Work Plan the Commission will
develop an alternate Work Plan for FY
2009.
The Denali Commission has
historically received several federal
funding sources. These fund sources are
governed by the following general
principles:
• In FY 2008 no project specific
earmarks were defined.
• Energy and Water Appropriations
(commonly referred to as Commission
‘‘Base’’ funding) is eligible for use in all
programs, but has historically been used
substantively to fund the Energy
Program.
• The Energy Policy Act of 2005
established new authorities for the
Commission’s Energy Program, with an
emphasis on renewable and alternative
energy projects. No new funding
accompanied the Energy Policy Act, and
prior fiscal year Congressional direction
has indicated that the Commission
should fund renewable and alternative
Energy Program activities from the
available ‘‘Base’’ appropriation.
• All other funds outlined below may
be used only for the specific program
area and may not be used across
programs. For instance, Health
Resources and Services Administration
(HRSA) funding, which is appropriated
for the Health Facilities Program, may
not fund the Economic Development
Program.
Final transportation funds received
are typically slightly reduced due to
agency modifications, reductions and
fees determined by the U.S. Department
of Transportation.
The figures appearing in the table
below include an administrative
deduction of 5%, which constitutes the
Commission’s 5% overhead. In
instances where the overhead differs
from the 5% it is due to the
requirements related to that
appropriation. For example, USDARural Utilities Services (RUS) funding is
limited to 4% overhead.
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
74154
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
The table below provides the
following information, by appropriation:
• Total FY 09 Budgetary Resources
provided in the Continuing Resolution:
These are the figures that appear in
the rows entitled ‘‘FY 09
Appropriation’’ and are the original
appropriation amounts which do not
include Commission overhead
deductions. These appropriations are
identified by their source name (i.e.,
‘‘Energy and Water Appropriation;
USDA, Rural Utilities Service, etc.)
• Total FY 09 Program Available
Funding:
These are the figures that appear in
the rows entitled ‘‘FY 09
Appropriations—Program Available’’
and are the amounts of funding
available for program(s) activities after
Commission overhead has been
deducted.
• Program Funding:
These are the figures that appear in
the rows entitled with the specific
Program and Sub-Program area, and are
the amounts of funding the Draft FY09
Work Plan recommends, within each
appropriation.
• Subtotal of Program Funding:
These are the figures that appear in
the rows entitled ‘‘subtotal’’ and are the
subtotals of all program funding within
a given appropriation. The subtotal
must always equal the Total FY 09
Program Available Funding.
DENALI COMMISSION FY 09 APPROPRIATIONS FUNDING TABLE
$21,800,000
20,511,620
10,750,000
(up to) 4,261,620
4,750,000
500,000
(up to) 250,000
sub-total .....................................................................................................................................................................
20,511,620
FY 09 USDA—Rural Utilities Service (RUS) ...........................................................................................................................
FY 09 USDA—Rural Utilities Service (RUS)—Program Available (less 4% overhead) .........................................................
Energy Program: high energy cost communities ....................................................................................................................
10,000,000
9,600,000
9,600,000
sub-total $ ..................................................................................................................................................................
9,600,000
FY 09 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL) Trust ................................................................................................................
FY 09 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL)—Program Available (less 5% overhead)—Estimate ......................................
Energy Program: bulk fuel .......................................................................................................................................................
5,830,940
5,539,393
5,539,393
sub-total $ ..................................................................................................................................................................
5,539,393
FY 09 DHHS—Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA) ...................................................................................
FY 09 DHHS—Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) ....................................................................................................................................................................................
Health Program: Primary Care Clinic Design, Planning, and Construction ............................................................................
Health Program: Behavioral Health .........................................................................................................................................
Health Program: Primary Care in Hospitals ............................................................................................................................
Health Program: Elder Housing/Assisted Living Facilities—Construction ..............................................................................
38,596,726
36,666,889
29,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
2,666,889
sub-total $ ..................................................................................................................................................................
36,666,889
FY 09 Department of Labor (DOL) ..........................................................................................................................................
FY 09 Department of Labor (DOL)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) ...................................................
Training Program: Various .......................................................................................................................................................
6,754,894
6,417,149
6,417,149
sub-total $ ..................................................................................................................................................................
6,417,149
FY 09 Federal Transportation Administration (FTA)—Estimate .............................................................................................
FY 09 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)—Estimate ...................................................................................................
FY 09 Transportation (less 5% Commission overhead)—Estimate ........................................................................................
Transportation Program: Docks & Harbors .............................................................................................................................
Transportation Program: Roads ..............................................................................................................................................
5,000,000
25,463,091
28,939,936
8,804,686
20,135,250
sub-total $ ..................................................................................................................................................................
28,939,936
FY 09 USDA—Solid Waste .....................................................................................................................................................
FY 09 USDA—Solid Waste—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) ..............................................................
Solid Waste Program: planning, design and construction ......................................................................................................
433,940
412,243
412,243
sub-total $ ..................................................................................................................................................................
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
FY 09 Energy & Water Appropriation ......................................................................................................................................
FY 09 Energy & Water Appropriations (‘‘Base’’)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) ..............................
Energy Program: bulk fuel, RPSU, etc. ...................................................................................................................................
Energy Program: alternative & renewable energy ..................................................................................................................
Teacher Housing Program: design & construction .................................................................................................................
Economic Development Program: various ..............................................................................................................................
Recruitment and Retention of Health Workers .......................................................................................................................
412,243
Total FY 09 Appropriations—Estimate .......................................................................................................
113,879,591
Total FY 09 Program Available—Estimate .................................................................................................
107,987,230
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
FY 09 Program Details and General
Information
The following section provides
narrative discussion, by each of the
Commission Programs identified for FY
08 funding in the table above, in the
following categories:
• Program History and Approach
• Applicant/Grant Process
• Program Project Selection Process
• Program Policy Issues (as
applicable)
In addition to the FY 09 funded
program activities; the first section of
the narrative provides an update on the
Commission’s Government
Coordination Program. The Program is
not funded by Commission
appropriations, but is an integral
component of the Commission’s
mission, the success of other programs,
and the legacy of the Commission’s
work in Alaska.
The final section includes a general
summary of other issues facing the
Commission, statements of support by
the Commission for the funding requests
and activities of other program partners
which the Commission works in
partnership with, and detail regarding
the Commission’s evaluation and
reporting efforts.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Government Coordination
The Commission is charged with the
special role of increasing the
effectiveness of government programs
by acting as a catalyst to coordinate the
many federal and state programs that
serve Alaska. In FY09 the Commission
will continue its role of coordinating
State and Federal agencies and other
partner organizations to accomplish its
overall mission of developing Alaska’s
communities. Particular focus will be
given to the collaborative efforts of the
Commission’s Federal and State
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
and the various workgroups and
planning sessions and forums that occur
as a result of the MOU meetings. The
Commission intends to engage, along
with MOU members, in at least two
regional forums in FY09. These sessions
will be regionally focused, and will
provide regional partners and
community members with an
opportunity to discuss projects
successes, failures and opportunities,
and provide direct feedback to the
Commission and other funding
organizations regarding their policies
and funding processes.
Additionally, the Commission
continues to recognize the issues related
to erosion, relocation and climate
change which are effecting Alaskan
communities and policy decisions. The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
Commission plays an active role in the
Immediate Action Working Group and
has also worked to build relationships
with the Innovative Readiness Training
(IRT) program which includes the
various military branches.
Energy Program
The Energy Program is the
Commission’s oldest program and is
often identified, along with the Health
Program, as a ‘‘legacy’’ program. The
Program focuses on bulk fuel facilities
(BFU) and rural power system upgrades/
power generation (RPSU) across Alaska.
The purpose of this program is to
provide code-compliant bulk fuel
storage and electrification throughout
rural Alaska, especially for communities
‘‘off the grid’’ and not accessible by road
or rail.
The needs in the bulk fuel and power
generation projects are presently
estimated at $250 million and $135
million, respectively. The Commission
has also funded a very successful
program of competitively selected
energy cost reduction and alternative
energy projects. In three completed
rounds of funding, approximately $6
million in grant funds have leveraged
$8.1 million in participant funding,
with estimated life-cycle cost savings
(generally diesel fuel avoided over the
life of the project) of $29 million.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005
established new authorities for the
Commissions Energy Program, with an
emphasis on alternative and renewable
energy projects, energy transmission,
including interties, and fuel
transportation systems. Although the
2005 Energy Policy Act did not include
specific appropriations, the Commission
is expected to carry out the intent of the
Act through a portion of its ‘‘Base’’
funding. To date, the Commission has
co-funded a number of renewable
projects, including hydroelectric
facilities, a geothermal power plant, a
biomass boiler, and a number of dieselwind power generation systems. The
FY09 Work Plan outlines a strategy to
balance the Energy Program in both
legacy and renewable systems,
providing up to $4,261,620 for
alternative and renewable projects.
About 94% of electricity in rural
communities which receive Power Cost
Equalization (PCE) payments is
produced by diesel and about half the
fuel storage in most villages is used for
the power plants. Any alternative means
of generating power can reduce the
capacity needed for fuel storage. This
reduces capital costs and operations and
maintenance (O&M) and repair and
renovation (R&R) costs for fuel storage
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74155
facilities and may reduce the cost of
power to the community.
The Energy Program has historically
used a ‘‘universe of need’’ model to
determine project and program funding.
Specifically, the Program is focused on
using the existing statewide deficiency
lists of bulk fuel facilities and power
generation/distribution systems to
prioritize project funding decisions. A
program partnership model is utilized
for project management and partners are
actively involved in the design and
construction of projects. Partners
coordinate project funding requests with
the Commission to balance the relative
priority or urgency of bulk fuel and
power generation needs against
available funding, readiness of
individual communities and project
participants for the project(s), and
capacity of the partners to carry out the
work. Communities are identified by
partners and through the deficiency list
process. Legacy program (RPSU, bulk
fuel and intertie) projects are selected
and reviewed by Commission staff and
program partners. Thus, a renewable
project sometimes is proposed in
conjunction with a deficiency list
project to reduce the dependence on
diesel fuel, and the concomitant fuel
storage requirements. So too, an intertie,
can remove the need for a new power
plant, and reduce fuel storage
requirements in the intertied
communities. Therefore, the legacy
program may also include these types of
energy infrastructure. Each community
and project must be evaluated
holistically. Program partners also
perform initial due diligence and Denali
Commission’s Investment Guidance
screenings, as well as assisting in
development of the business plans for
the participants as the designs are
underway. The Program is dynamic:
Priorities fluctuate throughout the year
based on design decisions, due
diligence and investment guidance
considerations, site availability, the
timing of funding decisions, etc.
In 2008 the Commission completed a
study on intertie/transmission lines
between communities, regions and
statewide. The study summarized the
vast amount of research, planning and
studies that have occurred to date and
identified the policy and economic
considerations for investment in intertie
infrastructure. The program will
continue to support projects where
connections via intertie are feasible. The
program will also be further defining the
role of the Denali Commission in
intertie planning, development and
execution statewide as recommended in
the study.
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
74156
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Health Facilities Program
The Denali Commission Act was
amended in 1999 to provide for the,
‘‘planning, constructing and equipping
of health facilities.’’ Since 1999, the
Health Facilities Program has been
methodically investing in the planning,
design and construction of primary care
clinics across Alaska.
Primary care clinics have remained
the ‘‘legacy’’ priority for the Program.
However, in 2003 the ‘‘Other Than’’
primary care component of the Program
was adopted in response to
Congressional direction to fund a mix of
other health and social service related
facility needs. Over time, the Program
has developed Program sub-areas such
as Behavioral Health Facilities,
Domestic Violence Facilities, Elder
Housing, Primary Care in Hospitals,
Emergency Medical Services Equipment
and Hospital Designs. The FY09 Draft
Work Plan emphasizes the priority of
the Primary Care Clinic Program as the
legacy program area, with the majority
of funding dedicated to clinics. Under
the scenario in which the Commission
receives apportioned funds in advance
of appropriations under a Continuing
Resolution, staff recommends these
funds be dedicated solely to the clinic
program.
The Program utilizes a ‘‘universe of
need’’ model for primary care and a
competitive selection process for other
sub-program areas. In 1999 the Program
created a deficiency list for primary care
clinics, which totaled 288 communities
statewide in need of clinic replacement,
expansion and/or renovation. Currently,
110 clinics have been completed or are
in construction and approximately 40
are in design.
The Program is guided by the Health
Steering Committee, an advisory body
comprised of the following membership
organizations: The State of Alaska,
Alaska Primary Care Association, the
Alaska Native Tribal Health
Consortium, the Alaska Mental Health
Trust Authority, the Alaska Native
Health Board, the Indian Health Service,
the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing
Home Association, and the University of
Alaska.
Projects are recommended for funding
by Commission staff if they demonstrate
project readiness, which includes the
completion of all due diligence
requirements. This includes an
approved business plan, community
plan, site plan checklist, completed
100% design, documentation of cost
share match, and realistic ability to
move the project forward in a given
construction season.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
In addition to construction
challenges, the health program has
indicated that a major sustainability risk
to health projects is workforce
recruitment and retention.
Recommendations on this challenge are
made in the ‘‘Other Issues’’ section of
the Work Plan.
Additionally, the Health Program is
committed to assisting in the discussion
regarding access to primary care
facilities and services for veterans. The
Health Steering Committee will engage
in discussions about this issue during
FY 09.
Training Program
In a majority of rural communities
unemployment rates exceed 50% and
personal capita income rates are over
50% below the national average. When
job opportunities in rural Alaska do
become available, rural residents often
lack the skills, licensing and
certifications necessary to compete and
often lose those jobs to people from
outside the community, region or even
state. With the limited number of jobs
available, the Commission believes it is
imperative to ensure that local residents
have the skills and essential
certifications necessary to work on the
construction of projects funded by the
Denali Commission. Through the
Training Program, the Commission
builds sustainability into their
investments by providing training for
the long term management, operations
and maintenance of these facilities and
thus increasing local capacity and
employment.
The Training Program’s mission is to
build a community’s capacity through
training and increase the employment
and wages of unemployed or
underemployed Alaskans. The Training
Program’s primary purpose is to support
the Commission’s investment by
providing training for the careers related
to the Commission infrastructure
programs (such as Energy and Health
Facilities).
The Training Program is also guided
by the following principles:
• Priority on training for Denali
Commission infrastructure, projects and
priorities
• Training will be tied to a job
• Training for construction,
operations and maintenance for other
public infrastructure
• Training will encourage careers not
short term employment
Each year, the Commission dedicates
training funds to careers associated with
infrastructure development and longterm sustainability in rural Alaska. The
Commission has funded construction,
operations and maintenance training in
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
communities statewide with large
success.
The Commission anticipates that the
general priority areas of construction,
operations and maintenance of
Commission Projects; management
training for Commission Projects; youth
initiatives that support employability
skills; and construction, operations and
maintenance training of ‘‘other public
infrastructure’’ will continue to be
funded in FY09. These projects are
selected through a competitive Request
for Grant Application (RGA) process
with partners, and at the
recommendation of Commission staff,
and policy guidance and priority areas
for funding are set by the Training
Advisory Committee (TrAC).
In 2008, the TrAC recommended
several new initiatives for the FY09
Work Plan. These new initiatives are
explained in the following paragraphs.
The Commission and the TrAC
recognize the threat of out migration
due to high costs of living and
joblessness in Alaska communities. For
this reason, the Training Program
recommends expanding its priorities to
include ‘‘Funding ‘other’ training that
contributes to the survivability of a
community’’. However, funding for
these projects will be facilitated through
the RGA competitive process and
funding will be substantially less than
the other priority areas.
The Commission and TrAC support
regional employment and training
entities and recommend a shift of
workforce development ownership and
responsibility in that direction. These
local training entities know first-hand
the workforce needs and challenges and
resources available. The TrAC
recommended that funding be directed
to Regional Training Centers/Campuses,
Community Development Groups
(CDQ), Regional Health Corporations
and rural Job Centers for training related
to Denali Commission investments.
Historically the Commission has
provided funding directly to
organizations that are able to deliver
results in the priority areas as described
above. These organizations have
typically been selected by the
Commission directly or through
competitive requests for proposals
managed by partner organizations. This
process is recommended to continue in
the FY09 Work Plan.
Transportation
Section 309 of the Denali Commission
Act 1998 (amended), created the
Commission’s Transportation Program,
including the Transportation Advisory
Committee. The advisory committee is
composed of nine members appointed
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
by the Governor of the State of Alaska
including the Chairman of the Denali
Commission; four members who
represent existing regional native
corporations, native nonprofit entities,
or tribal governments, including one
member who is a civil engineer; and
four members who represent rural
Alaska regions or villages, including one
member who is a civil engineer.
The Transportation Program
addresses two areas of rural Alaska
transportation infrastructure, roads and
waterfront development. There is a solid
base of 114 projects underway, with the
FY09 project nomination and selection
process likely to add another 15 to 20
projects. Up to 10 projects currently in
the design phase in the Commission
program will also move to construction
in FY09.
There is a consensus amongst
agencies and communities that the
Transportation Program is successfully
addressing improvements to local and
regional transportation systems. This is
largely a function of the Transportation
Advisory Committee’s success at project
selection and monitoring, and the
success of the program’s project
development agencies.
The program is generally a
competitively-bid contractor or
materials-based system grounded in
Title 23 CFR. These strict project
development and construction rules
have presented some challenges to the
Denali Commission’s ability to respond
quickly to targets of opportunity, but
they have also had the positive effect of
ensuring project design and
construction is executed at a
professional level. The program operates
under a reimbursable payment system
that requires local and state sponsors
pay close attention to accounting
procedures prior to their payments to
contractors and vendors. This system
helps ensure project payments are
eligible when submitted to the
Commission.
Four important trends are emerging as
the program enters its fourth year of
operations:
• Fewer project partners, with fully
developed project development
capabilities
• Narrowing focus on core project
types
• Commission’s use of State of Alaska
General Funds to match Title 23 CFR
funds
• Preparation for federal highway
reauthorization legislation
Project Partners
As the transportation program began
its work in FY 2006, the Commission,
responding to local and regional
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
interests sought to encourage local
sponsor project development through
tribal governments and regional non
profits, cities and boroughs, as well as
traditional state and federal
transportation agencies.
Through experience, the level of
project management oversight needed
for small cities and tribes to succeed in
the Title 23 CFR environment is not
sustainable under the limited personnel
resources available to the Commission.
Therefore, partnerships with state and
federal transportation agencies will
increasingly become the Commission’s
primary project development partners;
they have the level of expertise and
resources needed to successfully
execute project development.
Core Project Types
As the transportation program got
underway in FY06, a wide array of rural
transportation projects was undertaken.
As the road program has evolved under
the guidance of the Transportation
Advisory Committee, the original
emphasis on local street improvements
has been confirmed. Local street
improvements in villages, including
board roads in tundra communities are
a necessary focus area. While a mix of
projects is still likely, it is clear that
local roads, sometimes including access
between communities and/or access to
local resources, including gravel and
rock, will increasingly become the focus
of the road program.
In the waterfront development
program, there will continue to be
limited contributions to major small
boat harbor projects and regional port
developments. In these cases, the
Commission is often providing needed
funds in the range of $500,000–
1,000,000 for projects with other fund
sources in the range of $4,000,000–
12,000,000. There is currently an array
of these successful projects underway
and it is expected that there will
continue to be a mix of these projects in
the program.
However, the program will
specifically increase its focus on barge
landings at rural communities. These
projects range from a couple of mooring
piling to secure a barge, to small dock
structures, depending on community
size and barge operation characteristics.
The value of these structures lies in
improved fuel/freight transfer
operations and improved worker and
environmental safety. The Commission
and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have
prepared a barge landing analysis that
under review at this time, with the final
report due in December 2008. This work
has turned out to be an excellent
analysis of barge operation needs and it
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74157
is forming the basis of a design and
construction program. The universe of
need for the first generation of projects
is in the range of $40,000,000.
For both road and waterfront
development projects, a continuing
planning effort, especially through
regional tribal non-profits like Kawerak,
Inc. and the Alaska Village Council
Presidents, will provide valuable
information on future program needs.
State General Fund Match
Federal Highway Authority (FHWA)
and Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) funds require a match of 9–20%.
As the program got underway in FY
2006, it became apparent that the need
to provide match funds severely limited
the types of projects the Commission
could undertake.
In FY 2007, the state legislature, with
information from the Commission and
guidance from Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities
(DOT&PF) leadership at that time,
appropriated $4,500,000 to DOT&PF for
the purpose of providing match funds to
Commission projects. This
appropriation has been critical to the
success of the Commission’s effort to
address local street and barge landing
projects where the need is great, but the
community resources to provide
sometimes substantial match is often
limited.
Using a quarterly report/request
method, the Commission provides a list
of projects underway to DOT&PF. Upon
approval, DOT&PF transfers funds to an
account at the Commission, which is
subsequently assigned to selected
projects. Again, this single action by the
State of Alaska has been critical to being
able to provide transportation
improvements to smaller communities.
There are currently informal
discussions with DOT&PF regarding the
potential for a separate appropriation to
provide for joint funding between the
Commission and DOT&PF for stateowned rural roads. This may be an
opportunity to expand what has been a
successful program of upgrading and
surfacing DOT&PF roads in small
communities like Cantwell, Eagle, Circle
and Tanana.
Highway Legislation Reauthorization
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy
for Users (SAFETEA–LU) expires at the
end of FY 2009. Due to significant
transportation policy and program
discussions underway in Congress, it is
likely that continuing resolutions will
fund existing programs at FY08 or FY09
levels for at least FY10 and likely FY11.
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
74158
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
In the meantime, the Commission is
working with FHWA and FTA to
provide information regarding the
emerging focus on local roads and barge
landing projects. Both agencies
recognize that the Commission’s
transportation program is addressing
these categories of projects in a
systematic and statewide manner. There
also appears to be a consensus that it is
appropriate to try to address these
program elements directly in new
highway funding legislation. Other
efforts to address more efficient funding
transfers between the Commission and
Western Federal Lands Highway
Division (WFLHD) are also underway.
Solid Waste
The goal of the solid waste program
at the Denali Commission is to provide
funding to address deficiencies in solid
waste disposal sites which threaten to
contaminate rural drinking water
supplies. Solid waste handling and
disposal is one of the most under-served
arenas in the context of rural Alaska’s
environmental and public health.
The program employs a competitive
RFP process to select and identify
projects, and has utilized a
multidisciplinary review panel to
ensure that projects meet all Denali
Commission due diligence and policy
requirements. The Commission intends
to utilize this same process for selection
of FY09 projects.
The Rural Alaska Community Action
Program is a program partner with the
Denali Commission Solid Waste
Program. The program also coordinates
with USDA Rural Development’s Water
and Environmental Program and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Teacher Housing
Teaching in rural Alaska can be one
of the most rewarding and challenging
professions. A critical issue for rural
teachers is finding safe, affordable
housing during the school year. Housing
availability varies by community from
newer adequate homes, to old housing
units with multiple safety and structural
problems, to a lack of enough available
housing, requiring teachers to double-up
or even live in the school.
Teacher turnover rates are high in
rural Alaska, with many teachers citing
unavailable or inadequate housing as a
factor in their decision to move. The
quality of education received by
students is impacted by teacher
retention. By improving the availability
and quality of housing for teachers, the
Commission strives to also increase the
quality of education received by the
next generation of Alaskans.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
In FY04, Congress directed the
Commission to address the teacher
housing needs in rural Alaska. The
Commission launched a statewide
survey of 51 school districts and rural
education attendance areas to identify
and prioritize the teacher housing needs
throughout the state. Urban districts in
Anchorage, Fairbanks, Mat-Su and
Juneau were not included in the survey.
The Commission utilizes a program
partnership model to implement the
teacher housing program. An annual
RFP process identifies eligible projects
and other funding sources, such as debt
service, available to fill the gap between
the project’s capacity to carry debt and
the total development cost of the
project. Acquisition, rehabilitation, new
construction, and multi-site
rehabilitation are eligible development
activities under this program.
In FY09 the Commission will expand
its teacher housing program to include
housing for health care professionals.
This change will be administered
through the Commission’s program
partner, the Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation (AHFC), and its Greater
Opportunity for Affordable Living
(GOAL) process. This expansion shall
include the following provider types:
mid-level providers, nurses, mental and
dental health specialists and health
aides.
Economic Development
Since its earliest days as a territory of
the United States, Alaska has
contributed to the economy of America,
largely through supply of raw materials
or partially processed products. Now
Alaska’s abundant natural resources,
from fossil fuel and mineral products to
timber and fish, must compete in the
global marketplace. Innovation and
entrepreneurship have become critical
to business success.
One of the purposes of the
Commission is economic development.
The Commission firmly believes that
sustainable economic development for
Alaska’s rural communities, like that of
the rest of America, will be generated in
the private, commercial sector, not
within government. To that end, the
Commission supports the development
of public infrastructure upon which the
private sector creates jobs and wealth,
and helps ensure that good businesses
and business ideas have a chance to
become long-term, self-sustaining
enterprises.
Over the history of the Program, the
Commission has supported and
advanced a wide-array of economic
development program activities ranging
from community profile mapping to
supporting innovative models for
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
lending, and equity investment in
Alaska.
The Program is guided by
Commission staff and the Economic
Development Advisory Committee,
which provides general policy guidance
and funding recommendations in broad
categories.
Other Policy Issues
Multi-Use Facilities
At this time the Commission is not
undertaking a stand-alone program for
multi-use facilities. However, as
opportunities arise in FY09 for the
Commission to leverage federal funds
for combined use facilities or to take
advantage of placing community
infrastructure, such as clinical facilities,
within the confines of existing
community buildings the Commission
may utilize program funds for such
efforts. Projects will be selected based
on the opportunity for cost savings,
construction readiness and correlation
to existing Commission program
activities. Funds will not be used to
identify stand-alone multi use projects.
Pre-Development
The Commission intends to continue
to engage in the Pre-Development
program in FY09. Pre-Development is a
joint collaboration between the Alaska
Mental Health Trust Authority, the
Denali Commission, The Foraker Group,
and the Rasmuson Foundation to assist
organizations with development of
plans for successful capital projects.
The funding agencies are concerned
that inadequate planning during the
initial project development phase can
result in projects that are not sustainable
in the long term. The Pre-Development
Program was created to provide
guidance and technical assistance to
ensure that proposed projects: meet
documented need, are consistent with
strategic and community plans, consider
opportunities for collaboration, have
appropriate facility and site plans and
realistic project budgets, are financially
sustainable and will not negatively
impact the sustainability of the
proposing organization. Through this
partnership an agency’s capital project
is better equipped to proceed.
Strategic Planning and Agency
Evaluation
In FY09 the Commission will be
creating an on-going, agency-wide
evaluation system to measure the
outcomes of Commission programs. It is
anticipated that this work will begin
January of 2009, and would be designed
to provide by empirical and qualitative
data regarding Commission programs,
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
projects and overall goal
accomplishments in a broad set of
evaluation criteria. It is the
Commission’s intent to maintain highlevel measures that are correlated to the
Commission’s goals related to
improving access, reducing cost and
improving the quality of services and
facilities across Alaska. Program
Advisory Committees, staff and
Commissioners will play a critical role
in shaping this evaluation methodology.
Specific evaluation and strategic
planning undertakings include the
following:
• Adoption and implementation of
program missions and 2–3 key output
and outcome measures for each
program.
• Development, draft, and application
of strategic plan in accordance with
GPRA provisions and Denali
Commission needs.
• Production of annual performance
plan per OMB requirements.
• Establishment of processes to
support performance measurement
improvements.
Such processes include:
• Compilation and maintenance of
projects by community,
• Mechanism to obtain feedback
about impact of projects,
• Semi-annual assessment by key
staff and management of long- and
short-term performance by program, and
• In-depth and comprehensive
evaluation of dedicated program
annually.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Recruitment and Retention of Health
Workers
Alaska Rural Human Resources
Collaborative (ARHRC) provided
presentations to both the Health
Steering Committee and the Training
Subcommittee in 2008. Both advisory
committees support the concept which
develops a system for recruitment and
temporary staffing of health
professionals. Seed funding in the
amount of $250,000 is needed at this
time, with startup funds in the amount
of $1.2m over the next year. This Work
Plan includes a challenge grant of up to
$250,000 for this collaborative project.
This funding will be provided to the
project from the Energy and Water
Appropriations (Base) and will include
an incentive for Regional Health
Corporation and other financial
contributors to provide funding
(challenge grant). In conclusion, this
initiative cannot be funded through
either the Training Program or the
Health Program due to restricted
funding requirements.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Dec 04, 2008
Jkt 217001
Dated: November 25, 2008.
George J. Cannelos,
Federal Co-Chair.
[FR Doc. E8–28810 Filed 12–4–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3300–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Proposed Information
Collection Requests
AGENCY: Department of Education.
SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official,
Regulatory Information Management
Services, Office of Management, invites
comments on the proposed information
collection requests as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before February
3, 2009.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) provide interested
Federal agencies and the public an early
opportunity to comment on information
collection requests. OMB may amend or
waive the requirement for public
consultation to the extent that public
participation in the approval process
would defeat the purpose of the
information collection, violate State or
Federal law, or substantially interfere
with any agency’s ability to perform its
statutory obligations. The IC Clearance
Official, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of
Management, publishes that notice
containing proposed information
collection requests prior to submission
of these requests to OMB. Each
proposed information collection,
grouped by office, contains the
following: (1) Type of review requested,
e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or
reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of
the collection; (4) Description of the
need for, and proposed use of, the
information; (5) Respondents and
frequency of collection; and (6)
Reporting and/or Recordkeeping
burden. OMB invites public comment.
The Department of Education is
especially interested in public comment
addressing the following issues: (1) Is
this collection necessary to the proper
functions of the Department; (2) will
this information be processed and used
in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate
of burden accurate; (4) how might the
Department enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (5) how might the
Department minimize the burden of this
collection on the respondents, including
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74159
through the use of information
technology.
Dated: December 1, 2008.
Angela C. Arrington,
IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of Management.
Office of Civil Rights
Type of Review: Revision.
Title: Assurance of Compliance—Civil
Rights Certificate, Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the
Education Amendments of 1972,
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, the Age Discrimination Act of
1975, and the Boy Scouts of America
Equal Access Act of 2001.
Frequency: One time.
Affected Public: Not-for-profit
institutions; businesses or other forprofit; State, Local, or Tribal Gov’t,
SEAs or LEAs.
Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour
Burden:
Responses: 50.
Burden Hours: 17.
Abstract: The Office for Civil Rights
(OCR) has enforcement responsibilities
under several civil rights laws,
including Title VI, Title IX, Section 504,
the Age Discrimination Act, and the Boy
Scouts of America Equal Access Act. To
meet these responsibilities, OCR collects
assurances of compliance from
applicants for Federal financial
assistance from, and applicants for
funds made available through, the
Department of Education, as required by
regulations. These entities include, for
example, State educational agencies,
local education agencies, and
postsecondary education. If a recipient
violates one or more of these civil rights
laws, OCR and the Department of Justice
can use the signed assurances of
compliance in an enforcement
proceeding.
Requests for copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and by clicking on
link number 3918. When you access the
information collection, click on
‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed
to 202–401–0920. Please specify the
complete title of the information
collection when making your request.
Comments regarding burden and/or
the collection activity requirements
should be electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who
E:\FR\FM\05DEN1.SGM
05DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 235 (Friday, December 5, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74152-74159]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-28810]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DENALI COMMISSION
Fiscal Year 2009 Draft Work Plan
AGENCY: Denali Commission.
ACTION: Denali Commission Fiscal Year 2009 Draft Work Plan request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Denali Commission (Commission) is an independent Federal
agency based on an innovative federal-state partnership designed to
provide critical utilities, infrastructure and support for economic
development and training in Alaska by delivering federal services in
the most cost-effective manner possible. The Commission was created in
1998 with passage of the October 21, 1998 Denali Commission Act (Act)
(Title III of Pub. L. 105-277, 42 U.S.C. 3121). The Denali Commission
Act requires that the Commission develop proposed work plans for future
spending and that the annual Work Plan be published in the Federal
Register, providing an opportunity for a 30-day period of public review
and written comment. This Federal Register notice serves to announce
the 30-day opportunity for public comment on the Denali Commission
Draft Work Plan for Federal Fiscal Year 2009.
DATES: Comments and related material must be received by January 15,
2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the Denali Commission, Attention: Tessa
Rinner, 510 L Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 99501.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Tessa Rinner, Denali Commission,
510 L Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 99501. Telephone: (907) 271-
1414. E-mail: trinner@denali.gov.
Introduction: Rural Alaska is an American treasure. Scattered
across vast tundra, tucked away along rugged coastlines and forests and
deep within Alaska's Interior, people living in over 300 communities
raise families, educate their children, and work to provide
opportunities for all. Alaska Native people rely heavily on subsistence
hunting, fishing and gathering as a central part of both culture and
economic sustenance. Values of sharing, love of family and country and
traditional cultures run deep.
Rural Alaska still resembles the United States at the time of Lewis
& Clark. Major rivers are undammed, unbridged and lack even basic
navigational aids. Many health and social indicators still resemble
those in developing countries.
No where else in our country can people live amidst wilderness,
largely disconnected from highway and road connections and from
regional power grids. Here, resilience and innovation are required both
to survive and thrive. Reliance on air and river transportation is
essential for everyday living. And where else in the country would
women, in their third trimester of pregnancy, be required to fly into a
regional center and wait to have their babies safely delivered, given
the lack of local medical facilities?
The Denali Commission has now invested nearly a billion dollars in
ten years on basic infrastructure projects at the local level. We know
lives have been improved through greater access to primary health care,
through safe and reliable energy projects, through job training
programs, sanitation and landfill improvements and basic surface and
water transportation improvements. We know the taxpayer benefits from
an emphasis on coordinating the planning, construction and delivery of
capital projects and through a focus on sustainability.
We see innovation everywhere. The regional corporations formed by
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, for example, are becoming
economic powerhouses in their own rights. Major investments in private-
sector anchors in each region complement the Commission's work in basic
community infrastructure. Many regional non-profit corporations provide
an array of effective health and social services. The Alaska
Marketplace competition, now in its fourth year, proves again that
local people have great ideas and with a small infusion of capital and
technical assistance, have real potential for making positive and
lasting change. The Community Development Quota program, for example,
offers opportunities for residents in over 60 coastal communities to
benefit directly from offshore fishing revenues.
We are buoyed by the sense of progress over the last ten years, at
the resurgence of traditional culture, by the progress in celebrating
diversity at all levels and by the awareness among leaders to reduce
dependency on government and eliminate social ills that seem to come
with long winters and isolation found in northern countries. We take
delight in working with many progressive and innovative partners, grant
recipients and local champions whose leadership and inspiration is
critical for village survivability.
We are alarmed, however, at the recent convergence of several
issues which threaten the survival of many Alaskan communities and
provide urgent impetus for the Commission to improve our investment
strategies. These issues include the impacts of climate change,
unpredictable and unaffordable energy costs at the village level, the
expectation of declining federal revenues to support rural investment
in Alaska, evidence of out-migration from many small communities into
larger regional centers and urban areas such as Anchorage, and the
urgent need to find regional and systemic solutions to bolster long-
term community viability. The global financial crisis will also strain
an already thin social service delivery system and bring other
consequences yet unseen.
The following are some of the critical issues which frame the
debate over the Denali Commission's FY09 Work Plan:
Climate Change
Evidence is now overwhelming that climate change is impacting
Alaska and the north faster than elsewhere in the nation. Temperatures
have been rising, plant and animal species have been moving north, and
permafrost is melting, resulting in major challenges for all
infrastructure programs. Denali Commission funded wind turbines for
example, are major engineering challenges for successfully placing a
vertical wind tower in a permafrost setting. The Denali Commission is
committed to participating fully with the State of Alaska, the U.S.
Corps of Engineers and other partners in a coordinated approach to
policy formulation and the execution of adaptation measures for climate
change.
The most immediate challenge is the urgent need to protect and
relocate many coastal communities impacted by the lack of sea ice, the
repetition of major storm events, flooding and erosion of coastlines.
While Congress provides no funds to the Commission to support
relocation efforts, we coordinate closely with other agencies and
tribes.
[[Page 74153]]
Our interagency Planning Work Group, for example, oversees relocation
efforts in several communities, and the Commission funded a relocation
community plan last year.
Unaffordable Energy at the Local Level
We recognize the urgent need to find breakthrough solutions to the
widespread unaffordable energy costs in Alaska's rural communities. One
study reveals that rural residents earning the lowest 20% of income
spend almost half that income on home heating and electricity.
While the Commission's energy strategy remains a combination of
completing bulk fuel and power system upgrades, an emphasis on
conservation and energy efficiency projects and renewable energy, we
continue to look for breakthrough solutions that can be replicated.
We'll also focus on pursuing regional grids that can reduce the need
for stand-alone generation in Alaska's small villages. We remain a
strong partner as the State of Alaska prepares an overall Energy Plan
for submission to the Alaska State Legislature this session.
Green Building Design and Construction Cost Containment
High construction costs in rural Alaska result from a combination
of vast distances, harsh climates and the rising cost of construction
materials. We are committed to carrying out innovative, cost-effective
and creative design and construction solutions. This year we anticipate
engaging in more diverse and experimental partnerships, and we'll be
seeking more innovative design, construction and program and project
management practices. We may enhance our normal project scopes to allow
for greater energy efficiencies. We anticipate undertaking several
pilot projects focusing on green design, cost containment and the
combined use of facility activities.
A Focus on Community, Regional Planning and Government Coordination
The Commission is committed to a greater emphasis on community and
regional planning to ensure long-term viability of our infrastructure
investments. Last year, we worked with the State of Alaska, for example
to help reopen a tribal clinic that had closed its doors for lack of
capacity. This may be the first instance of a Denali Commission project
which had suspended service. Through our efforts in government
coordination, we work to ensure our projects fit within a framework of
a local and regional plan, and are designed, sized and placed in the
most optimum locations and setting for long-term success.
Background: The Commission's mission is to partner with tribal,
federal, state, and local governments and collaborate with all Alaskans
to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of government services, to
develop a well-trained labor force employed in a diversified and
sustainable economy, and to build and ensure the operation and
maintenance of Alaska's basic infrastructure.
By creating the Commission, Congress mandated that all parties
involved partner together to find new and innovative solutions to the
unique infrastructure and economic development challenges in America's
most remote communities.
Pursuant to the Denali Commission Act, as amended, the Commission
determines its own basic operating principles and funding criteria on
an annual federal fiscal year (October 1 to September 30) basis. The
Commission outlines these priorities and funding recommendations in an
annual Work Plan.
Pursuant to the Act, the Work Plan is first provided in draft by
the Commission for publication in the Federal Register providing an
opportunity for a 30-day period of public review and written comment.
The Work Plan is also disseminated widely to Commission program
partners including, but not limited to the Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA), the Economic Development Administration (EDA), and the United
States Department of Agriculture--Rural Development (USDA-RD).
Commission staff are responsible for compiling written public comment
and forwarding it to the Commission's Federal Co-Chair (Mr. George J.
Cannelos).
The Federal Co-Chair then adopts a final version of the Work Plan,
which includes, to the degree the Federal Co-Chair deems appropriate,
modifications, additions and deletions based on the policy and program
recommendations of the full Commission and public comment. The final
version of the Work Plan is forwarded to the Secretary of Commerce for
approval on behalf of the Federal Co-Chair.
The Work Plan authorizes the Federal Co-Chair to enter into grant
agreements, award grants and contracts and obligate the federal funds
identified by appropriation below.
FY 09 Appropriations Summary
Public Law 110-329, Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, was signed by President Bush on
September 30, 2008. The Continuing Resolution section of that law
provides for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 funding for named agencies at the
same levels utilized in the first two quarters of FY 2008 (October 1,
2007 to March 31, 2008), through to March 6, 2009.
Since a new Administration will take office in January 2009, it is
unknown at this time if there will be a new budget presented to
Congress, or if this Continuing Resolution will be extended to
September 2009 or modified in some other way. For the Commission, this
may result in budgetary resources as high as $113,879,591 for FY 2009.
If FY 2009 congressional appropriations are significantly different
from the amounts in this Work Plan the Commission will develop an
alternate Work Plan for FY 2009.
The Denali Commission has historically received several federal
funding sources. These fund sources are governed by the following
general principles:
In FY 2008 no project specific earmarks were defined.
Energy and Water Appropriations (commonly referred to as
Commission ``Base'' funding) is eligible for use in all programs, but
has historically been used substantively to fund the Energy Program.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established new authorities
for the Commission's Energy Program, with an emphasis on renewable and
alternative energy projects. No new funding accompanied the Energy
Policy Act, and prior fiscal year Congressional direction has indicated
that the Commission should fund renewable and alternative Energy
Program activities from the available ``Base'' appropriation.
All other funds outlined below may be used only for the
specific program area and may not be used across programs. For
instance, Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) funding,
which is appropriated for the Health Facilities Program, may not fund
the Economic Development Program.
Final transportation funds received are typically slightly reduced
due to agency modifications, reductions and fees determined by the U.S.
Department of Transportation.
The figures appearing in the table below include an administrative
deduction of 5%, which constitutes the Commission's 5% overhead. In
instances where the overhead differs from the 5% it is due to the
requirements related to that appropriation. For example, USDA-Rural
Utilities Services (RUS) funding is limited to 4% overhead.
[[Page 74154]]
The table below provides the following information, by
appropriation:
Total FY 09 Budgetary Resources provided in the Continuing
Resolution:
These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled ``FY 09
Appropriation'' and are the original appropriation amounts which do not
include Commission overhead deductions. These appropriations are
identified by their source name (i.e., ``Energy and Water
Appropriation; USDA, Rural Utilities Service, etc.)
Total FY 09 Program Available Funding:
These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled ``FY 09
Appropriations--Program Available'' and are the amounts of funding
available for program(s) activities after Commission overhead has been
deducted.
Program Funding:
These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled with the
specific Program and Sub-Program area, and are the amounts of funding
the Draft FY09 Work Plan recommends, within each appropriation.
Subtotal of Program Funding:
These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled ``subtotal''
and are the subtotals of all program funding within a given
appropriation. The subtotal must always equal the Total FY 09 Program
Available Funding.
Denali Commission FY 09 Appropriations Funding Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 Energy & Water Appropriation................ $21,800,000
FY 09 Energy & Water Appropriations (``Base'')-- 20,511,620
Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead)..
Energy Program: bulk fuel, RPSU, etc.............. 10,750,000
Energy Program: alternative & renewable energy.... (up to) 4,261,620
Teacher Housing Program: design & construction.... 4,750,000
Economic Development Program: various............. 500,000
Recruitment and Retention of Health Workers....... (up to) 250,000
---------------------
sub-total..................................... 20,511,620
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 USDA--Rural Utilities Service (RUS)......... 10,000,000
FY 09 USDA--Rural Utilities Service (RUS)--Program 9,600,000
Available (less 4% overhead).....................
Energy Program: high energy cost communities...... 9,600,000
---------------------
sub-total $................................... 9,600,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL) Trust 5,830,940
FY 09 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL)-- 5,539,393
Program Available (less 5% overhead)--Estimate...
Energy Program: bulk fuel......................... 5,539,393
---------------------
sub-total $................................... 5,539,393
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 DHHS--Health Resources & Services 38,596,726
Administration (HRSA)............................
FY 09 DHHS--Health Resources & Services 36,666,889
Administration (HRSA)--Program Available (less 5%
Commission overhead).............................
Health Program: Primary Care Clinic Design, 29,000,000
Planning, and Construction.......................
Health Program: Behavioral Health................. 2,000,000
Health Program: Primary Care in Hospitals......... 3,000,000
Health Program: Elder Housing/Assisted Living 2,666,889
Facilities--Construction.........................
---------------------
sub-total $................................... 36,666,889
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 Department of Labor (DOL)................... 6,754,894
FY 09 Department of Labor (DOL)--Program Available 6,417,149
(less 5% Commission overhead)....................
Training Program: Various......................... 6,417,149
---------------------
sub-total $................................... 6,417,149
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 Federal Transportation Administration (FTA)-- 5,000,000
Estimate.........................................
FY 09 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)-- 25,463,091
Estimate.........................................
FY 09 Transportation (less 5% Commission 28,939,936
overhead)--Estimate..............................
Transportation Program: Docks & Harbors........... 8,804,686
Transportation Program: Roads..................... 20,135,250
---------------------
sub-total $................................... 28,939,936
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 09 USDA--Solid Waste........................... 433,940
FY 09 USDA--Solid Waste--Program Available (less 412,243
5% Commission overhead)..........................
Solid Waste Program: planning, design and 412,243
construction.....................................
---------------------
sub-total $................................... 412,243
---------------------
Total FY 09 Appropriations--Estimate...... 113,879,591
---------------------
Total FY 09 Program Available--Estimate... 107,987,230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 74155]]
FY 09 Program Details and General Information
The following section provides narrative discussion, by each of the
Commission Programs identified for FY 08 funding in the table above, in
the following categories:
Program History and Approach
Applicant/Grant Process
Program Project Selection Process
Program Policy Issues (as applicable)
In addition to the FY 09 funded program activities; the first
section of the narrative provides an update on the Commission's
Government Coordination Program. The Program is not funded by
Commission appropriations, but is an integral component of the
Commission's mission, the success of other programs, and the legacy of
the Commission's work in Alaska.
The final section includes a general summary of other issues facing
the Commission, statements of support by the Commission for the funding
requests and activities of other program partners which the Commission
works in partnership with, and detail regarding the Commission's
evaluation and reporting efforts.
Government Coordination
The Commission is charged with the special role of increasing the
effectiveness of government programs by acting as a catalyst to
coordinate the many federal and state programs that serve Alaska. In
FY09 the Commission will continue its role of coordinating State and
Federal agencies and other partner organizations to accomplish its
overall mission of developing Alaska's communities. Particular focus
will be given to the collaborative efforts of the Commission's Federal
and State Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and the various workgroups
and planning sessions and forums that occur as a result of the MOU
meetings. The Commission intends to engage, along with MOU members, in
at least two regional forums in FY09. These sessions will be regionally
focused, and will provide regional partners and community members with
an opportunity to discuss projects successes, failures and
opportunities, and provide direct feedback to the Commission and other
funding organizations regarding their policies and funding processes.
Additionally, the Commission continues to recognize the issues
related to erosion, relocation and climate change which are effecting
Alaskan communities and policy decisions. The Commission plays an
active role in the Immediate Action Working Group and has also worked
to build relationships with the Innovative Readiness Training (IRT)
program which includes the various military branches.
Energy Program
The Energy Program is the Commission's oldest program and is often
identified, along with the Health Program, as a ``legacy'' program. The
Program focuses on bulk fuel facilities (BFU) and rural power system
upgrades/power generation (RPSU) across Alaska. The purpose of this
program is to provide code-compliant bulk fuel storage and
electrification throughout rural Alaska, especially for communities
``off the grid'' and not accessible by road or rail.
The needs in the bulk fuel and power generation projects are
presently estimated at $250 million and $135 million, respectively. The
Commission has also funded a very successful program of competitively
selected energy cost reduction and alternative energy projects. In
three completed rounds of funding, approximately $6 million in grant
funds have leveraged $8.1 million in participant funding, with
estimated life-cycle cost savings (generally diesel fuel avoided over
the life of the project) of $29 million.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established new authorities for the
Commissions Energy Program, with an emphasis on alternative and
renewable energy projects, energy transmission, including interties,
and fuel transportation systems. Although the 2005 Energy Policy Act
did not include specific appropriations, the Commission is expected to
carry out the intent of the Act through a portion of its ``Base''
funding. To date, the Commission has co-funded a number of renewable
projects, including hydroelectric facilities, a geothermal power plant,
a biomass boiler, and a number of diesel-wind power generation systems.
The FY09 Work Plan outlines a strategy to balance the Energy Program in
both legacy and renewable systems, providing up to $4,261,620 for
alternative and renewable projects. About 94% of electricity in rural
communities which receive Power Cost Equalization (PCE) payments is
produced by diesel and about half the fuel storage in most villages is
used for the power plants. Any alternative means of generating power
can reduce the capacity needed for fuel storage. This reduces capital
costs and operations and maintenance (O&M) and repair and renovation
(R&R) costs for fuel storage facilities and may reduce the cost of
power to the community.
The Energy Program has historically used a ``universe of need''
model to determine project and program funding. Specifically, the
Program is focused on using the existing statewide deficiency lists of
bulk fuel facilities and power generation/distribution systems to
prioritize project funding decisions. A program partnership model is
utilized for project management and partners are actively involved in
the design and construction of projects. Partners coordinate project
funding requests with the Commission to balance the relative priority
or urgency of bulk fuel and power generation needs against available
funding, readiness of individual communities and project participants
for the project(s), and capacity of the partners to carry out the work.
Communities are identified by partners and through the deficiency list
process. Legacy program (RPSU, bulk fuel and intertie) projects are
selected and reviewed by Commission staff and program partners. Thus, a
renewable project sometimes is proposed in conjunction with a
deficiency list project to reduce the dependence on diesel fuel, and
the concomitant fuel storage requirements. So too, an intertie, can
remove the need for a new power plant, and reduce fuel storage
requirements in the intertied communities. Therefore, the legacy
program may also include these types of energy infrastructure. Each
community and project must be evaluated holistically. Program partners
also perform initial due diligence and Denali Commission's Investment
Guidance screenings, as well as assisting in development of the
business plans for the participants as the designs are underway. The
Program is dynamic: Priorities fluctuate throughout the year based on
design decisions, due diligence and investment guidance considerations,
site availability, the timing of funding decisions, etc.
In 2008 the Commission completed a study on intertie/transmission
lines between communities, regions and statewide. The study summarized
the vast amount of research, planning and studies that have occurred to
date and identified the policy and economic considerations for
investment in intertie infrastructure. The program will continue to
support projects where connections via intertie are feasible. The
program will also be further defining the role of the Denali Commission
in intertie planning, development and execution statewide as
recommended in the study.
[[Page 74156]]
Health Facilities Program
The Denali Commission Act was amended in 1999 to provide for the,
``planning, constructing and equipping of health facilities.'' Since
1999, the Health Facilities Program has been methodically investing in
the planning, design and construction of primary care clinics across
Alaska.
Primary care clinics have remained the ``legacy'' priority for the
Program. However, in 2003 the ``Other Than'' primary care component of
the Program was adopted in response to Congressional direction to fund
a mix of other health and social service related facility needs. Over
time, the Program has developed Program sub-areas such as Behavioral
Health Facilities, Domestic Violence Facilities, Elder Housing, Primary
Care in Hospitals, Emergency Medical Services Equipment and Hospital
Designs. The FY09 Draft Work Plan emphasizes the priority of the
Primary Care Clinic Program as the legacy program area, with the
majority of funding dedicated to clinics. Under the scenario in which
the Commission receives apportioned funds in advance of appropriations
under a Continuing Resolution, staff recommends these funds be
dedicated solely to the clinic program.
The Program utilizes a ``universe of need'' model for primary care
and a competitive selection process for other sub-program areas. In
1999 the Program created a deficiency list for primary care clinics,
which totaled 288 communities statewide in need of clinic replacement,
expansion and/or renovation. Currently, 110 clinics have been completed
or are in construction and approximately 40 are in design.
The Program is guided by the Health Steering Committee, an advisory
body comprised of the following membership organizations: The State of
Alaska, Alaska Primary Care Association, the Alaska Native Tribal
Health Consortium, the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority, the Alaska
Native Health Board, the Indian Health Service, the Alaska State
Hospital and Nursing Home Association, and the University of Alaska.
Projects are recommended for funding by Commission staff if they
demonstrate project readiness, which includes the completion of all due
diligence requirements. This includes an approved business plan,
community plan, site plan checklist, completed 100% design,
documentation of cost share match, and realistic ability to move the
project forward in a given construction season.
In addition to construction challenges, the health program has
indicated that a major sustainability risk to health projects is
workforce recruitment and retention. Recommendations on this challenge
are made in the ``Other Issues'' section of the Work Plan.
Additionally, the Health Program is committed to assisting in the
discussion regarding access to primary care facilities and services for
veterans. The Health Steering Committee will engage in discussions
about this issue during FY 09.
Training Program
In a majority of rural communities unemployment rates exceed 50%
and personal capita income rates are over 50% below the national
average. When job opportunities in rural Alaska do become available,
rural residents often lack the skills, licensing and certifications
necessary to compete and often lose those jobs to people from outside
the community, region or even state. With the limited number of jobs
available, the Commission believes it is imperative to ensure that
local residents have the skills and essential certifications necessary
to work on the construction of projects funded by the Denali
Commission. Through the Training Program, the Commission builds
sustainability into their investments by providing training for the
long term management, operations and maintenance of these facilities
and thus increasing local capacity and employment.
The Training Program's mission is to build a community's capacity
through training and increase the employment and wages of unemployed or
underemployed Alaskans. The Training Program's primary purpose is to
support the Commission's investment by providing training for the
careers related to the Commission infrastructure programs (such as
Energy and Health Facilities).
The Training Program is also guided by the following principles:
Priority on training for Denali Commission infrastructure,
projects and priorities
Training will be tied to a job
Training for construction, operations and maintenance for
other public infrastructure
Training will encourage careers not short term employment
Each year, the Commission dedicates training funds to careers
associated with infrastructure development and long-term sustainability
in rural Alaska. The Commission has funded construction, operations and
maintenance training in communities statewide with large success.
The Commission anticipates that the general priority areas of
construction, operations and maintenance of Commission Projects;
management training for Commission Projects; youth initiatives that
support employability skills; and construction, operations and
maintenance training of ``other public infrastructure'' will continue
to be funded in FY09. These projects are selected through a competitive
Request for Grant Application (RGA) process with partners, and at the
recommendation of Commission staff, and policy guidance and priority
areas for funding are set by the Training Advisory Committee (TrAC).
In 2008, the TrAC recommended several new initiatives for the FY09
Work Plan. These new initiatives are explained in the following
paragraphs.
The Commission and the TrAC recognize the threat of out migration
due to high costs of living and joblessness in Alaska communities. For
this reason, the Training Program recommends expanding its priorities
to include ``Funding `other' training that contributes to the
survivability of a community''. However, funding for these projects
will be facilitated through the RGA competitive process and funding
will be substantially less than the other priority areas.
The Commission and TrAC support regional employment and training
entities and recommend a shift of workforce development ownership and
responsibility in that direction. These local training entities know
first-hand the workforce needs and challenges and resources available.
The TrAC recommended that funding be directed to Regional Training
Centers/Campuses, Community Development Groups (CDQ), Regional Health
Corporations and rural Job Centers for training related to Denali
Commission investments.
Historically the Commission has provided funding directly to
organizations that are able to deliver results in the priority areas as
described above. These organizations have typically been selected by
the Commission directly or through competitive requests for proposals
managed by partner organizations. This process is recommended to
continue in the FY09 Work Plan.
Transportation
Section 309 of the Denali Commission Act 1998 (amended), created
the Commission's Transportation Program, including the Transportation
Advisory Committee. The advisory committee is composed of nine members
appointed
[[Page 74157]]
by the Governor of the State of Alaska including the Chairman of the
Denali Commission; four members who represent existing regional native
corporations, native nonprofit entities, or tribal governments,
including one member who is a civil engineer; and four members who
represent rural Alaska regions or villages, including one member who is
a civil engineer.
The Transportation Program addresses two areas of rural Alaska
transportation infrastructure, roads and waterfront development. There
is a solid base of 114 projects underway, with the FY09 project
nomination and selection process likely to add another 15 to 20
projects. Up to 10 projects currently in the design phase in the
Commission program will also move to construction in FY09.
There is a consensus amongst agencies and communities that the
Transportation Program is successfully addressing improvements to local
and regional transportation systems. This is largely a function of the
Transportation Advisory Committee's success at project selection and
monitoring, and the success of the program's project development
agencies.
The program is generally a competitively-bid contractor or
materials-based system grounded in Title 23 CFR. These strict project
development and construction rules have presented some challenges to
the Denali Commission's ability to respond quickly to targets of
opportunity, but they have also had the positive effect of ensuring
project design and construction is executed at a professional level.
The program operates under a reimbursable payment system that requires
local and state sponsors pay close attention to accounting procedures
prior to their payments to contractors and vendors. This system helps
ensure project payments are eligible when submitted to the Commission.
Four important trends are emerging as the program enters its fourth
year of operations:
Fewer project partners, with fully developed project
development capabilities
Narrowing focus on core project types
Commission's use of State of Alaska General Funds to match
Title 23 CFR funds
Preparation for federal highway reauthorization
legislation
Project Partners
As the transportation program began its work in FY 2006, the
Commission, responding to local and regional interests sought to
encourage local sponsor project development through tribal governments
and regional non profits, cities and boroughs, as well as traditional
state and federal transportation agencies.
Through experience, the level of project management oversight
needed for small cities and tribes to succeed in the Title 23 CFR
environment is not sustainable under the limited personnel resources
available to the Commission. Therefore, partnerships with state and
federal transportation agencies will increasingly become the
Commission's primary project development partners; they have the level
of expertise and resources needed to successfully execute project
development.
Core Project Types
As the transportation program got underway in FY06, a wide array of
rural transportation projects was undertaken. As the road program has
evolved under the guidance of the Transportation Advisory Committee,
the original emphasis on local street improvements has been confirmed.
Local street improvements in villages, including board roads in tundra
communities are a necessary focus area. While a mix of projects is
still likely, it is clear that local roads, sometimes including access
between communities and/or access to local resources, including gravel
and rock, will increasingly become the focus of the road program.
In the waterfront development program, there will continue to be
limited contributions to major small boat harbor projects and regional
port developments. In these cases, the Commission is often providing
needed funds in the range of $500,000-1,000,000 for projects with other
fund sources in the range of $4,000,000-12,000,000. There is currently
an array of these successful projects underway and it is expected that
there will continue to be a mix of these projects in the program.
However, the program will specifically increase its focus on barge
landings at rural communities. These projects range from a couple of
mooring piling to secure a barge, to small dock structures, depending
on community size and barge operation characteristics. The value of
these structures lies in improved fuel/freight transfer operations and
improved worker and environmental safety. The Commission and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers have prepared a barge landing analysis that under
review at this time, with the final report due in December 2008. This
work has turned out to be an excellent analysis of barge operation
needs and it is forming the basis of a design and construction program.
The universe of need for the first generation of projects is in the
range of $40,000,000.
For both road and waterfront development projects, a continuing
planning effort, especially through regional tribal non-profits like
Kawerak, Inc. and the Alaska Village Council Presidents, will provide
valuable information on future program needs.
State General Fund Match
Federal Highway Authority (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) funds require a match of 9-20%. As the program got underway in FY
2006, it became apparent that the need to provide match funds severely
limited the types of projects the Commission could undertake.
In FY 2007, the state legislature, with information from the
Commission and guidance from Alaska Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOT&PF) leadership at that time, appropriated
$4,500,000 to DOT&PF for the purpose of providing match funds to
Commission projects. This appropriation has been critical to the
success of the Commission's effort to address local street and barge
landing projects where the need is great, but the community resources
to provide sometimes substantial match is often limited.
Using a quarterly report/request method, the Commission provides a
list of projects underway to DOT&PF. Upon approval, DOT&PF transfers
funds to an account at the Commission, which is subsequently assigned
to selected projects. Again, this single action by the State of Alaska
has been critical to being able to provide transportation improvements
to smaller communities.
There are currently informal discussions with DOT&PF regarding the
potential for a separate appropriation to provide for joint funding
between the Commission and DOT&PF for state-owned rural roads. This may
be an opportunity to expand what has been a successful program of
upgrading and surfacing DOT&PF roads in small communities like
Cantwell, Eagle, Circle and Tanana.
Highway Legislation Reauthorization
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) expires at the end of FY 2009. Due to
significant transportation policy and program discussions underway in
Congress, it is likely that continuing resolutions will fund existing
programs at FY08 or FY09 levels for at least FY10 and likely FY11.
[[Page 74158]]
In the meantime, the Commission is working with FHWA and FTA to
provide information regarding the emerging focus on local roads and
barge landing projects. Both agencies recognize that the Commission's
transportation program is addressing these categories of projects in a
systematic and statewide manner. There also appears to be a consensus
that it is appropriate to try to address these program elements
directly in new highway funding legislation. Other efforts to address
more efficient funding transfers between the Commission and Western
Federal Lands Highway Division (WFLHD) are also underway.
Solid Waste
The goal of the solid waste program at the Denali Commission is to
provide funding to address deficiencies in solid waste disposal sites
which threaten to contaminate rural drinking water supplies. Solid
waste handling and disposal is one of the most under-served arenas in
the context of rural Alaska's environmental and public health.
The program employs a competitive RFP process to select and
identify projects, and has utilized a multidisciplinary review panel to
ensure that projects meet all Denali Commission due diligence and
policy requirements. The Commission intends to utilize this same
process for selection of FY09 projects.
The Rural Alaska Community Action Program is a program partner with
the Denali Commission Solid Waste Program. The program also coordinates
with USDA Rural Development's Water and Environmental Program and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Teacher Housing
Teaching in rural Alaska can be one of the most rewarding and
challenging professions. A critical issue for rural teachers is finding
safe, affordable housing during the school year. Housing availability
varies by community from newer adequate homes, to old housing units
with multiple safety and structural problems, to a lack of enough
available housing, requiring teachers to double-up or even live in the
school.
Teacher turnover rates are high in rural Alaska, with many teachers
citing unavailable or inadequate housing as a factor in their decision
to move. The quality of education received by students is impacted by
teacher retention. By improving the availability and quality of housing
for teachers, the Commission strives to also increase the quality of
education received by the next generation of Alaskans.
In FY04, Congress directed the Commission to address the teacher
housing needs in rural Alaska. The Commission launched a statewide
survey of 51 school districts and rural education attendance areas to
identify and prioritize the teacher housing needs throughout the state.
Urban districts in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Mat-Su and Juneau were not
included in the survey.
The Commission utilizes a program partnership model to implement
the teacher housing program. An annual RFP process identifies eligible
projects and other funding sources, such as debt service, available to
fill the gap between the project's capacity to carry debt and the total
development cost of the project. Acquisition, rehabilitation, new
construction, and multi-site rehabilitation are eligible development
activities under this program.
In FY09 the Commission will expand its teacher housing program to
include housing for health care professionals. This change will be
administered through the Commission's program partner, the Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC), and its Greater Opportunity for
Affordable Living (GOAL) process. This expansion shall include the
following provider types: mid-level providers, nurses, mental and
dental health specialists and health aides.
Economic Development
Since its earliest days as a territory of the United States, Alaska
has contributed to the economy of America, largely through supply of
raw materials or partially processed products. Now Alaska's abundant
natural resources, from fossil fuel and mineral products to timber and
fish, must compete in the global marketplace. Innovation and
entrepreneurship have become critical to business success.
One of the purposes of the Commission is economic development. The
Commission firmly believes that sustainable economic development for
Alaska's rural communities, like that of the rest of America, will be
generated in the private, commercial sector, not within government. To
that end, the Commission supports the development of public
infrastructure upon which the private sector creates jobs and wealth,
and helps ensure that good businesses and business ideas have a chance
to become long-term, self-sustaining enterprises.
Over the history of the Program, the Commission has supported and
advanced a wide-array of economic development program activities
ranging from community profile mapping to supporting innovative models
for lending, and equity investment in Alaska.
The Program is guided by Commission staff and the Economic
Development Advisory Committee, which provides general policy guidance
and funding recommendations in broad categories.
Other Policy Issues
Multi-Use Facilities
At this time the Commission is not undertaking a stand-alone
program for multi-use facilities. However, as opportunities arise in
FY09 for the Commission to leverage federal funds for combined use
facilities or to take advantage of placing community infrastructure,
such as clinical facilities, within the confines of existing community
buildings the Commission may utilize program funds for such efforts.
Projects will be selected based on the opportunity for cost savings,
construction readiness and correlation to existing Commission program
activities. Funds will not be used to identify stand-alone multi use
projects.
Pre-Development
The Commission intends to continue to engage in the Pre-Development
program in FY09. Pre-Development is a joint collaboration between the
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority, the Denali Commission, The
Foraker Group, and the Rasmuson Foundation to assist organizations with
development of plans for successful capital projects.
The funding agencies are concerned that inadequate planning during
the initial project development phase can result in projects that are
not sustainable in the long term. The Pre-Development Program was
created to provide guidance and technical assistance to ensure that
proposed projects: meet documented need, are consistent with strategic
and community plans, consider opportunities for collaboration, have
appropriate facility and site plans and realistic project budgets, are
financially sustainable and will not negatively impact the
sustainability of the proposing organization. Through this partnership
an agency's capital project is better equipped to proceed.
Strategic Planning and Agency Evaluation
In FY09 the Commission will be creating an on-going, agency-wide
evaluation system to measure the outcomes of Commission programs. It is
anticipated that this work will begin January of 2009, and would be
designed to provide by empirical and qualitative data regarding
Commission programs,
[[Page 74159]]
projects and overall goal accomplishments in a broad set of evaluation
criteria. It is the Commission's intent to maintain high-level measures
that are correlated to the Commission's goals related to improving
access, reducing cost and improving the quality of services and
facilities across Alaska. Program Advisory Committees, staff and
Commissioners will play a critical role in shaping this evaluation
methodology.
Specific evaluation and strategic planning undertakings include the
following:
Adoption and implementation of program missions and 2-3
key output and outcome measures for each program.
Development, draft, and application of strategic plan in
accordance with GPRA provisions and Denali Commission needs.
Production of annual performance plan per OMB
requirements.
Establishment of processes to support performance
measurement improvements.
Such processes include:
Compilation and maintenance of projects by community,
Mechanism to obtain feedback about impact of projects,
Semi-annual assessment by key staff and management of
long- and short-term performance by program, and
In-depth and comprehensive evaluation of dedicated program
annually.
Recruitment and Retention of Health Workers
Alaska Rural Human Resources Collaborative (ARHRC) provided
presentations to both the Health Steering Committee and the Training
Subcommittee in 2008. Both advisory committees support the concept
which develops a system for recruitment and temporary staffing of
health professionals. Seed funding in the amount of $250,000 is needed
at this time, with startup funds in the amount of $1.2m over the next
year. This Work Plan includes a challenge grant of up to $250,000 for
this collaborative project. This funding will be provided to the
project from the Energy and Water Appropriations (Base) and will
include an incentive for Regional Health Corporation and other
financial contributors to provide funding (challenge grant). In
conclusion, this initiative cannot be funded through either the
Training Program or the Health Program due to restricted funding
requirements.
Dated: November 25, 2008.
George J. Cannelos,
Federal Co-Chair.
[FR Doc. E8-28810 Filed 12-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3300-01-P