Airport Board: FAA refuses $80,000 grant request for FAA-mandated work

The Federal Aviation Administration has refused to pay for work the airport was mandated to complete.

According to Wolpert Engineering, the firm contracted for the design and implementation of airport projects, the FAA has refused to pay for the work due to certain items not being completed. Specifically, a paper detailing the options for the remedy of the situation regarding three 75-foot obstruction signal towers and some tall trees on the western approach to Runway 09.

The airport had been forced to install the towers in the 1990s at the FAA’s direction and then in 2013, the FAA banned instrument assisted landings due to the towers. The FAA said the ban would remain in place as long as the towers and some trees also identified as obstructions were standing.

During that time, instrument approaches could be made from the east except in certain weather conditions.
Based on these issues, the Dubois County Airport Authority went through the lengthy and costly process of removing the towers and trees. This required them to complete environment assessments and negotiate for the purchase of easements of about six acres of land owned by Mable and Leroy Bartelt.

They acted under the assumption the FAA would reimburse them for the work to the tune of about $80,000.
Unfortunately, the FAA recently gave notice they would not pay the reimbursement due to the lack of a form that indicated the airport authority had explored other methods to remedy the situation.

This caused some consternation between airport authority board member Fred Souders and Wolpert Engineering associate Luke Reynolds. Souders said he understood a single form not being filed by the engineering firm is what gave the FAA cause to not reimburse the airport authority about $80,000.

Reynolds explained the FAA dictated how the airport should proceed with bringing the approach back into compliance. Therefore, Wolpert did not include the completion of the form in the contract to save the airport authority some money since the FAA had given direction in handling the situation.

According to airport Vice President Michael Cummings, who presided over Monday’s meeting in President Brian Craig’s absence, since other options were not given to the FAA for review — despite the FAA’s insistence the towers had to be removed and the trees trimmed or taken down — the FAA had deemed it unnecessary to pay for the work for noncompliance. “We pressed them a little and asked what other alternatives there were,” Cummings said about a phone conference he attended with the FAA, “and basically, they said we could have left the trees and towers in place and shut down the approach from that direction.”

Cummings pointed out there were many airport users who were upset about the FAA shutting down instrument-assisted landings on Runway 09. “You couldn’t come in at night anymore,” he said.

And the board didn’t expect the FAA to react this way in regards to the board’s actions to keep the approach open. Cummings suggested contacting Congressman Larry Bucshon to speak on the board’s behalf to FAA officials asking them to reconsider.

“I am hesitant to do it,” he said. “I think it is more of a last resort. But I don’t believe they gave us a fair shake.”

Attorney Phil Schneider, legal counsel for the authority, advised the members to consider the long-term impact on other projects if they push Bucshon to intervene on their behalf. “I do recall during the discussions of this whole project it was the board’s unanimous decision to proceed with the project,” he explained. “That’s what the board wanted and of course, so did the pilots. We proceeded on the supposition that all the work would be reimbursable but had it not been reimbursable, I don’t know that the board would not have gone forward anyway.”

Schneider pointed out the board could be jeopardizing hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding over the $80,000 reimbursement.

Reynolds advised the board he would like to complete a letter outlining work the airport had completed for the project to show it had explored all options to remedy the situation. He explained that despite the denial on the payment for the entire project based on this one form, it would be hard for the FAA to argue against paying for the easement. “If it works for the land, let’s get $35,000,” he told the board.

According to Reynolds, Wolpert will prepare all the information for review for the FAA before the board goes the route of calling the congressman.

Reynolds will also review instances in which the FAA approved reimbursement under similar circumstances.
“I think that would be a nice part of the memo to the FAA,” Reynolds said. “I think it could give you leverage.”
Wolpert will compile all the data on the studies and work completed on the property to submit to the FAA. The board will review the information before it is submitted.

“$80,000 is a big chunk of money for us,” Schneider said.

The airport authority also took the following actions:

• Heard fixed-base operations had purchased 14,960 gallons of Jet A in July. They also purchased 2,498 gallons of 100LL fuel.
• Heard the new T-Hangars are full; Hangar 3 is at 85% capacity; Hangar 5 is at 45% capacity.
• Learned crop dusters were in the area and have been using about a gallon of fuel per two acres of land they treat, which is good for local fuel sales.
• Approved the Huntingburg Airport’s 2016 budget. The proposed operating budget is $398,750. Of that amount, about $106,000 will come from a property tax levy of about $0.0047 per $100 of assessed valuation. The rest comes from corporate leases, fuel sales, service fees and hangar rentals.
• Will request the county council advertise for $300,000 to be allocated from the cumulative capital fund for projects in 2016. The cum-cap fund currently contains about $900,000 accumulated over the years at a rate of around $0.003 per $100 of assessed value; or about $76,000 annually. The $300,000 will be used to pay the airport’s portion on improvements being made as well as the runway extension project.
• Heard the county council will have a final discussion and approve the budget at their regular meeting on August 24 at 4:30 p.m. at the county annex building on the square in Jasper. Story on this here.