[Federal Register: June 30, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 125)]
[Notices]
[Page 38693-38703]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30jn03-59]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DENALI COMMISSION
5-Year Strategic Plan
Introduction
The Denali Commission Act of 1998 (Title III, Pub.L. 105-277, 42
U.S.C. 3121) created a State-Federal partnership to address crucial
needs of rural Alaskan communities, particularly isolated Native
villages and other communities lacking access to the national highway
system, affordable power, adequate health facilities and other
impediments to economic self sufficiency. Guided by five Commissioners
representing statewide non-governmental organizations, the
unprecedented results to date testify to the efficacy of inter-agency
teamwork, effective training, and the setting of high sustainability
standards by those closest to the problems at hand. The Commission is a
highly effective catalyst for enhanced collaboration among federal,
State, tribal and local governments as well as private sector, non-
profit and other interests. The over arching goal of enabling economic
self sufficiency is based on effective community comprehensive
planning, and regional support.
This document will guide the reader through:
An introduction of the Denali Commission's mission
The workplan for fiscal year 2004 and
The 5-year strategic plan
Contact: Jeffrey Staser, Denali Commission, 510 L Street, Suite
410, Anchorage AK 99501, (907) 271-1414, (907) 271.1415 fax, http://www.denali.gov
.
Purpose of the Commission
The Denali Commission Act of 1998, as amended (Division C, Title
III, Pub. L. 105-277) states that the purposes of the Denali Commission
are:
To deliver the services of the Federal Government in the most cost-
effective manner practicable by reducing administrative and overhead
costs.
To provide job training and other economic development services in
rural communities, particularly distressed communities (many of which
have a rate of unemployment that exceeds 50 percent).
To promote rural development, provide power generation and
transmission facilities, modern communication systems, bulk fuel
storage tanks, water and sewer systems and other infrastructure needs.
Vision
Alaska will have a healthy well-trained labor force working in a
diversified and sustainable economy that is supported by a fully
developed and well-maintained infrastructure.
Mission
The Denali Commission will 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.
Values
Catalyst For Positive Change--The Commission will be an
organization through which agencies of government, including Tribal
governments, may collaborate, guided by the people of Alaska, to
aggressively do the right things in the right ways.
Respect For People and Cultures--The Commission will be guided by
the people of Alaska in seeking to preserve the principles of self-
determination, respect for diversity, and consideration of the rights
of individuals.
Inclusive--The Commission will provide the opportunity for all
interested parties to participate in decision making and carefully
reflect their input in the design, selection, and implementation of
programs and projects.
[[Page 38694]]
Sustainability--The Commission will promote programs and projects
that meet the current needs of communities and provide for the
anticipated needs of future generations.
Accountability--The Commission will set measurable standards of
effectiveness and efficiency for both internal and external activities.
Goals
The goals generated by the strategic planning process define
conditions that must be created to realize the Denali Commission
Vision.
1. All Alaska, no matter how isolated, will have the physical
infrastructure necessary to protect health and safety and to support
self-sustaining economic development.
2. Local residents in Alaskan communities will be provided the
opportunity to acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to be
employed on the construction, operation and management jobs created by
publicly funded physical infrastructure in their communities.
3. Alaskans will have access to financial and technical resources
necessary to build a cash economy to supplement the existing
subsistence economy.
4. Federal and state agencies will simplify procedures, share
information, and improve coordination to ensure equitable delivery of
services to all Alaskan communities.
Implementation Guiding Principles
[sbull] Projects must be sustainable. To assist with the
implementation of this principle, an Investment Strategy has been
drafted to ensure that the level of funding provided by the Denali
Commission to infrastructure projects in small, declining and/or
environmentally threatened communities serves a public purpose and is
invested in the most conscientious and sustainable manner possible.
(The Investment Strategy is now available on the Denali Commission
website for public review and comment.)
[sbull] The Denali Commission will generally not select individual
projects for funding nor manage individual projects, but will work
through existing state, federal or other appropriate organizations to
accomplish its mission.
[sbull] Projects in economically distressed communities will have
priority for Denali Commission assistance.
[sbull] Projects should be compatible with local cultures and
values.
[sbull] Projects that provide substantial health and safety
benefit, and/or enhance traditional community values, will generally
receive priority over those that provide more narrow benefits.
[sbull] Projects should be community-based and regionally
supported.
[sbull] Projects should have broad public involvement and support.
Evidence of support might include endorsement by affected local
government councils (municipal, Tribal, IRA, etc.), participation by
local governments in planning and overseeing work, and local cost
sharing on an ``ability to pay'' basis.
[sbull] Priority will generally be given to projects with
substantial cost sharing.
[sbull] Priority will generally be given to projects with a
demonstrated commitment to local hire.
[sbull] Denali Commission funds may supplement existing funding,
but will not replace existing federal, state, local government, or
private funding.
[sbull] The Denali Commission will give priority to funding needs
that are most clearly a federal responsibility.
[sbull] Denali Commission funds will not be used to create unfair
competition with private enterprise.
Additional Guiding Principles for Infrastructure:
[sbull] A project should be consistent with a comprehensive
community or regional plan.
[sbull] Any organization seeking funding assistance must have a
demonstrated commitment to operation and maintenance of the facility
for its design life. This commitment would normally include an
institutional structure to levy and collect user fees if necessary, to
account for and manage financial resources, and having trained and
certified personnel necessary to operate and maintain the facility.
Additional Guiding Principles for Economic Development
[sbull] Priority will be given to projects that enhance employment
in high unemployment areas of the State (economically distressed), with
emphasis on sustainable, long-term local jobs or career opportunities.
[sbull] Projects should be consistent with statewide or regional
plans.
[sbull] The Denali Commission may fund demonstration projects that
are not a part of a regional or statewide economic development plan if
such projects have significant potential to contribute to economic
development.
Additional Guiding Principles for Training
[sbull] Training should increase the skills and knowledge of local
residents to become employed on jobs created by the Denali Commission's
investment in public facilities in a community.
Intergovernmental Coordination--The Memorandum of Understanding:
The Denali Commission Act recognizes that our mission can only be
accomplished through a collaborative, coordinated effort by the State
of Alaska and key federal agencies. The State of Alaska also recognizes
benefits can be furthered if State agencies work in a collaborative and
coordinated effort. With this in mind, Denali Commission has drawn up a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which more than 20 agencies have
agreed to, that outlines some points of agreement that will facilitate
the collaboration and coordination necessary for achievement of the
purposes of the Denali Commission and related missions of agencies who
are parties to the MOU.
The Points of the MOU Are--
[sbull] Sustainability. Federal and State agencies recognize the
importance of utilizing sustainability principles when investing in
public infrastructure projects
[sbull] Regional Strategies. Systematic planning and coordination
on a local, regional and statewide basis are necessary to achieve the
most effective results from investment in infrastructure, economic
development, and training.
[sbull] Community Plans. A single community strategic plan should
be sufficient to identify and establish the priorities of each rural
community.
[sbull] Sharing Information. Sharing information increases
efficiencies and decreases duplication of services by State and Federal
agencies.
[sbull] Economic Development. Economic development facilitates and
supports the growth of self-sufficient communities.
[sbull] Non-Profit Organizations and Other Community Organizations.
Non-profit and other organizations in Alaska are a valuable resource
for State and Federal Agencies. They provide regional planning, program
support and partnering opportunities
[sbull] Workforce Development (Vocational and Career Training).
Workforce development is a critical component to building sustainable
public infrastructure and self-sufficient communities in Alaska.
Workplan for 2004
The Commission has determined that the scope and scale of
infrastructure issues facing rural Alaska are staggering. The total of
known basic infrastructure needs for Alaskan communities is estimated
to be over $13 billion. These infrastructure needs include:
[[Page 38695]]
[sbull] Infrastructure:
--Housing Construction/Development
--Multi-use Facilities
--Power Utilities
--Fuel Storage
--Drinking Water and Waste Water Facilities
--Solid Waste Management Facilities
--Health Care Facilities
--Airport Facilities
--Road and Trail Construction
--Port, Dock and other Marine Facilities
--Telecommunications
--Community Facilities
[sbull] Economic Development:
--Comprehensive Planning
[sbull] Job Training, Education, Capacity Building:
--Comprehensive Planning
In Fiscal Year 2004, the Denali Commission will continue to
collaborate with other funding agencies and with all impacted and
interested parties to address identified needs on a priority basis.
Allocation of Denali Commission funds to various funding categories and
classes within those categories will be based on a formula agreed to by
the Commission at the beginning of each fiscal year.
For FY04 the formula allocates 85% of general appropriated funds to
Power, Health and related infrastructure and up to 10% to job training.
The Commission has a statutory limit of 5% for administrative expenses.
In addition to FY04 appropriated funds, the Commission expects to
receive approximately $3 million in interest from the Trans Alaska
Pipeline Liability (TAPL) fund in FY04, which is earmarked for bulk
fuel facility upgrade and maintenance.
The Commission may receive other special purpose funding from
Congressional appropriations such as dedicated training funding from
the U.S. Department of Labor pursuant to authorization received in
FY03.
Prioritization of Projects for FY 2004
Of necessity, the Commission's work must be phased over a number of
years based on the urgency of competing needs and availability of
funding. The theme of rural energy, as one important prerequisite to
all other utilities and economic development, was selected as the
Commission's top priority for infrastructure funding. Primary health
care facilities were identified as the second infrastructure theme for
the Commission beginning in FY00. These two themes will continue to be
the top priorities for infrastructure funds through FY04, and the
Commission, consistent with Congressional intent, may add one or more
additional themes.
For planning purposes, the Commission has allocated $12,500,000
using the Commission's approved formula for FY04.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY04 projected TAPL interest TAPL and FY04
FY04 work plan projection funding funds combined
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bulk Fuel................................................. $2,375,000 $2,700,000 $5,075,000
Power Generation.......................................... 1,979,167 ................ 1,979,167
Health Clinics............................................ 2,770,833 ................ 2,770,833
Other Infrastructure...................................... 950,000 ................ 950,000
Training.................................................. 950,000 ................ 950,000
-------------------
Subtotal.............................................. 9,025,000 2,700,000 11,725,000
Administration[hairsp]*................................... 475,000 300,000 775,000
-------------------
Total................................................. 9,500,000 3,000,000 12,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Administration: Figure used reflects 5% ceiling, not actual overhead cost. This includes future salary
obligations, directed studies, independent audits, and project support.
In accordance with the Denali Commission Code, Administrative funds
(5%) are solely the responsibility of the Federal Co-Chair. Allocation
of the balance of funds (95%) will be made by the full Denali
Commission, utilizing the guiding principles previously outlined in
this document, and priority systems designed specifically for each
budget category.
Project implementation will generally be accomplished through
state, local or federal government entities, regulated utilities, or
non-profit organizations. It shall be the responsibility of all such
implementing organizations to comply with all applicable laws. Any
special requirements will be articulated in the funding agreement
between the Denali Commission and the funding recipient. The MOU will
serve to guide intergovernmental coordination and collaboration among
agencies.
As indicated above, 85% of Denali Commission base funds are
designated for priority infrastructure focus areas and those funds are
distributed using priority systems designed for each area and following
the Denali Commission Investment Strategy guidance. Concurrently the
Commission encourages communities and regional entities to complete
comprehensive community and economic development plans. Priority
systems for focus areas selected for funding by the Commission give
credit to communities with current comprehensive plans.
Projects resulting from funding of infrastructure themes generally
are consistent with high priorities identified in community plans. The
existence of community plans greatly facilitates the location, design,
and completion of infrastructure projects within a community. The
Commission also participates in the organization and execution of
regional ``funding summits.'' These summits, which are held throughout
the State, bring key state and federal agencies together with
communities and regional organizations for the purpose of matching
needs identified in community and regional comprehensive plans with
federal, state and other available funding.
Performance Indicators for FY 2004
Energy
[sbull] Reduce the backlog of non-compliant bulk fuel storage
facilities in rural Alaska by renovating or building a bulk fuel
storage facility in 1 community.
[sbull] Increase the reliability, efficiency and sustainability of
power generation and/or transmission by renovating or building a power
facility in 1 community.
Health Care
[sbull] Complete construction or renovation of primary health care
facilities in 2 communities.
Training
[sbull] Increase the number of local area residents trained on
construction, operations and maintenance of Denali Commission-funded
physical infrastructure in Alaska by 5%.
[[Page 38696]]
[sbull] Increase the local resident payroll on Denali Commission-
funded projects by 2%.
[sbull] Increase the annual earnings of each local resident that
completes Denali Commission-funded training by 5%.
Financial and Technical Resources
[sbull] Produce reliable and timely performance and other financial
(proprietary and budgetary) information from the financial management
system for managing current operations.
[sbull] Safeguard assets (including performance and financial
information) from waste, loss, misappropriation or destruction.
[sbull] Prepare accurate and timely financial reports on Budget
Execution in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles
and meeting the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget and
U.S. Treasury.
Government Coordination
[sbull] Maintain administrative expenses of Denali Commission at 5%
or less of appropriated funds.
[sbull] Hold Denali Commission partners to the lowest reasonable
overhead costs needed to complete projects.
Work Toward the President's Management Agenda
President George W. Bush has set forth a strategy to improve
management of the federal government through government-wide goals in
five mutually reinforcing areas:
--Human Capital
--Competitive Sourcing
--Improved Financial Management
--Expanded e-Government
--Budget and Performance Integration
The Denali Commission is making progress in these strategic areas
in the following ways.
Human Capital
The Denali Commission attempts to be innovative in its recruitment
and retention of staff. With a small permanent staff of eight and an
on-loan staff of eight, the Denali Commission has a flat organization
chart, making it simple for customers to reach the staff they need to
and get the answers they require, through electronic messaging,
telephone, or in-person.
An additional advantage of a small organization is the ease of
managing the accurate measurement and appropriate rewarding of staff
for performance. Denali Commission utilizes many human capital
investment-oriented strategies for retaining qualified and effective
staff, such as preventive health programs, a student loan repayment
program, and appropriate training.
A project now underway is tying each position's roles and
responsibilities with the organizational mission. This matrix, once
completed, will be used to enhance efficiency and effectiveness by
realigning duties where they do not reflect the mission, and ensuring
that all mission-critical work is being addressed adequately.
Competitive Sourcing
As a very small agency headquarters, Denali Commission is highly
motivated, by necessity, to comply with this initiative. Although
formal assessments have not been carried out on the competitive
sourcing opportunities, Denali Commission regularly utilizes
contractors and private enterprise for many of our tasks. Examples
include graphic design, computer maintenance, and document scanning
services.
Improved Financial Management
Five of the Denali Commission permanent staff are responsible for
all operations and finance. Limited to 5% overhead, the agency has, and
will continue to, enthusiastically participate and pursue automation
and forward-thinking technology whenever possible. Through advances in
technology, we will continue to realize internal efficiencies and
increases in effectiveness.
To keep pace with the Government-Wide-Accounting (GWA) initiative,
a new accounting system is being developed, with an anticipated
implementation date of October 1, 2003. We are utilizing the Veterans
Affairs (VA) Financial Services Enterprise Center as consultants on
this project. We expect this accounting system to maintain the highest
quality of accuracy in reporting to OMB, Congress and the public.
Staff are working in conjunction with other federal agencies to
accomplish automation to the extent feasible, with Federal Treasury
payment and collection systems (IPAC, ASAP and SPS). We anticipate
being a pilot test site for the Internet Payment Platform (IPP) which
is being developed by Treasury for the efficient and timely payment of
vendors.
Expanded e-Government
Denali Commission is committed to managing our projects more
effectively and more transparently to our partners, customers and the
public. The Project Database is a significant step in this direction.
The Denali Commission Project Database, now operational on our website,
is an initiative that permeates several of the five strategic areas of
the President's Management Agenda. To enhance project management and
information sharing with our partners and the public, Denali Commission
has developed an Internet-based database of all Commission projects.
This tool is for tracking and managing Denali Commission and partner
project data. The database is built to provide information that is easy
to use, has the highest degree of integrity and maintainability, and is
accessible for all interested parties. In keeping with the Denali
Commission mission, the system allows for collaboration to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of government services. Within the
database, managers and grantees place reports, project financials,
photos and status information on each funded project. Also available
within the database are priority lists of projects yet to be funded in
communities across Alaska. Across the state of Alaska, Federal, State
and local entities (including regional non-profits, health
corporations, and tribal governments) share a vision for developing a
shared, central database (or portal) to further improve the
transparency of government. This database would be a part of that
larger effort.
Denali Commission now has an active link to our agency website
located on www.FirstGov.gov to help citizens find information and
obtain services from that central location. We are working to place
Denali Commission grant opportunities on the www.Grants.gov website as
well. Additional e-Government projects that Denali Commission is
monitoring and will participate in include e-Travel and e-
Authentication. To maximize IT partnerships (and coordination) with
other federal agencies, Denali Commission works with the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and Department of the Interior (DOI) to
support our local computer network.
Our commitment to internet and electronic payment and collection
systems is hailed by our vendors and customers, especially in this
large state with sometimes slow and unpredictable mail and telephone
(internet) services. These systems assist with streamlining and
ensuring timely and accurate transactions.
As we build and develop strong IT infrastructure at Denali
Commission, we maintain a high level of vigilance that proper and
adequate security is set in place. Our plan for IT development always
includes an assessment of value to the public, avoidance of duplication
[[Page 38697]]
and the goal of transparency and accountability.
Budget and Performance Integration
The Denali Commission, by legislation, is limited to 5% overhead/
administrative rate. So, 95% of our funds go into making progress
toward our vision:
Alaska will have a healthy, well-trained labor force working in a
diversified and sustainable economy that is supported by a fully
developed and well-maintained infrastructure.
Denali Commission has set in motion the tools to assist the staff
in measuring performance--the Project Database and a new accounting
system (under development).
We require our grantees to establish and meet milestones, and we
publish those on the Project Database. We set goals at an agency level
for construction projects reaching completion each year. That is the
bottom line that will improve the lives of the residents of Alaska. And
we set internal benchmarks for the quality and efficiency of services
provided to our customers. That keeps the Denali Commission staff on
track in prioritizing individuals' work time. We measure ourselves
against these standards constantly and check on them as a team once a
month.
Strategic Plan--2005-2009
Challenges to Development and Economic Self-Sufficiency in Alaska
Geography/Climate--The State of Alaska encompasses twenty percent
of the landmass of the United States, encompassing five (5) climatic
zones from the arctic to moderate rain forests in the south.
Isolation--Approximately 220 Alaskan communities are accessible
only by air or small boat. Some village communities are separated by
hundreds of miles from the nearest regional hub community or urban
center. The average community is over 1,000 miles from the state
capital.
Unemployment--The economy of rural Alaska is a mix of government or
government-funded jobs, natural resource extraction and traditional
Native subsistence activities. Many rural Alaskans depend on
subsistence hunting, fishing and gathering for a significant portion of
their foods, but also depend on cash income to provide the means to
pursue subsistence activities. Cash paying employment opportunities in
rural Alaska are scarce and are highly seasonal in many areas;
unemployment rates exceed 50% in 147 communities.
High Cost and Low Standard of Living--Over 180 communities suffer
from inadequate sanitation or a lack of safe drinking water. Residents
face high electric costs: 61 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity in
a few communities (average in rural Alaska is approximately 40 cents
per kilowatt-hour which is over 6 times the National average of 6.75
cents) even with State subsidies.
The Commission determined that the scope and scale of
infrastructure issues facing rural Alaska are staggering. Assessment of
needs and refinement of estimates will be an ongoing process. The total
of known infrastructure needs is estimated to be over $13 billion.
Training and economic development needs have not been quantified, but
the unmet needs in these areas are also believed to be quite large.
Consequently, it is imperative that efforts to address the most
essential needs be both focused and strategic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding category Category/Class Needs ($) Total ($)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infrastructure........................... Housing Construction/Development. 1,800,000,000 ................
Power Utilities.................. 300,800,000 ................
Fuel Storage..................... 362,500,000 ................
Drinking Water and Waste Water 650,000,000 ................
Facilities.
Solid Waste Management Facilities \1\ ................
Health Care Facilities........... 481,000,000 ................
Airport Facilities............... 1,300,000,000 ................
Road Construction................ 8,600,000,000 ................
Port Facilities.................. 300,000,000 ................
Telecommunications............... (\1\) ................
Community Facilities............. (\1\) ................
Other............................ (\1\) ................
-----------------
Subtotal......................... ................ 13,794,300,000
Economic Development..................... Comprehensive Planning........... (\1\) ................
Other............................ (\1\) ................
Job Training, Education, Capacity Comprehensive Planning........... (\1\) ................
Building.
Other............................ (\1\) ................
-----------------
Total............................ ................ 13,794,300,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unknown.
Goals, Objectives and Key Activities
Goal 1
All Alaska, no matter how isolated, will have the physical
infrastructure necessary to protect health and safety and to support
self-sustaining economic development.
Objectives
1. Energy facilities (bulk fuel storage, power generation and
transmission) will be constructed and upgraded at a significantly
accelerated pace.
2. All Alaskans will have reasonable access to primary health care
services.
3. All Alaskans will have safe drinking water and sanitary waste
disposal systems.
4. All Alaskans will have reasonable access to telecommunication
services comparable to those available in major urban centers at
comparable costs.
5. Construction of other basic physical infrastructure including
but not limited to roads, ports, airports, and community facilities
will be accelerated on a priority basis.
Key Activities to Achieve Goals and Objectives
[sbull] Complete a statewide energy strategy to clearly identify
needs and set priorities for completion of bulk fuel storage
facilities, power generation facilities including innovative and
alternative facilities and power transmission facilities. The strategy
will
[[Page 38698]]
identify institutional structures and measures to achieve sustainable
operation and maintenance of completed physical systems.
[sbull] Complete a statewide needs assessment for primary health
care facilities and develop a system to establish priorities for
completion of needed facilities.
[sbull] Collaborate with federal agencies and assist the State of
Alaska as necessary in identifying gaps in funding for physical
infrastructure that can be filled first by existing federal programs
or, if necessary, by Denali Commission funding.
[sbull] Utilize the annual work plan development process to
allocate funds to physical infrastructure categories. Allocation of
funds to specific projects will generally be guided by statewide
priority systems and comprehensive plans developed at the community and
regional levels.
Performance Indicators
[sbull] Reduce the backlog of non-compliant bulk fuel storage
facilities in rural Alaska in 6 communities annually.
[sbull] Increase the reliability, efficiency and sustainability of
power generation and/or transmission in 6 communities annually.
[sbull] Complete construction or renovation of primary health care
facilities for at least 5 communities is anticipated annually.
[sbull] Enter into formal agreements with State and Federal
agencies and others as appropriate to ensure accomplishment of
objectives 3-5.
Goal 2
Local residents in Alaskan communities will have the opportunity to
acquire skills and knowledge necessary to be employed on the
construction, operation and management jobs created by publicly funded
physical infrastructure in their communities.
Objectives
1. Local residents will have access to skills and knowledge
training that is necessary for employment on publicly funded physical
infrastructure in their communities.
2. The Denali Commission's investment in physical infrastructure
will be protected by local residents trained to operate and maintain
facilities.
3. Workers from outside a community will not need to be imported to
fill construction, operations and maintenance jobs necessary for
publicly funded physical infrastructure.
4. Communities will benefit from the increase in earnings from
local residents employed on publicly funded physical infrastructure.
Key Activities To Achieve Goals and Objectives
[sbull] Provide funding to a coordinated training system including,
regional and local coordination, career pathway information, specific
training courses, union apprenticeship-based training and non-union
based training.
[sbull] Partner with the State of Alaska, Native Non-Profit
Corporations, private sector, union-based training organizations, non-
union based training organizations and other federal agencies to create
a coordinated system to meet the training needs of local residents.
[sbull] Provide financial assistance to communities and
organizations that will provide specific training to local residents to
become employed on construction, operations and maintenance jobs
created by publicly funded physical infrastructure projects.
Performance Indicators
[sbull] Increase the number of local area residents trained on
construction, operations and maintenance of Denali Commission funded
physical infrastructure in Alaska by 5% annually.
[sbull] Increase the local resident payroll on Denali Commission
funded projects by 2% annually.
[sbull] Increase the annual earnings of each local resident that
completes Denali Commission funded training by 5%.
Goal 3
Rural Alaskans will have access to financial and technical
resources necessary to build a cash economy to supplement the existing
subsistence economy.
Objectives
1. All Alaskans will have access to programs that provide
entrepreneurial education. Technical assistance and business services
will be available to entrepreneurs and business owners.
2. Entrepreneurs will have access to capital resources appropriate
for their circumstances including bank loans, micro loans, BIDCO loans,
venture capital, SBA loans, USDA Rural Development loans, U.S.
Department of Commerce EDA loans or grants.
3. Support access to partnership funding for community based
utilities, infrastructure and health delivery projects.
Key Activities To Achieve Goals and Objectives
[sbull] Financial assistance will be provided through the State
Department of Community and Economic Development and the First Alaskans
Foundation to assist entrepreneurs, communities and regional entities
to develop economic capacity.
[sbull] Financial assistance will be provided to Alaska Growth
Capital to enable that company to make loans and provide hands on
technical assistance to entrepreneurs in economically distressed areas
of Alaska.
[sbull] The Denali Commission will work with financial
institutions, foundations and other entities as appropriate to create a
revolving loan fund expressly for funding feasibility studies.
[sbull] A minimum of two partnerships will be facilitated annually
leading to completed projects within 5 years.
Performance Indicators
[sbull] Minimum annual disbursement of financing by Alaska Growth
Capital to business in communities defined as distressed by the Denali
Commission will be $275,000.
[sbull] Annual payroll of projects financed through Alaska Growth
Capital will be at least $90,000 and will increase annually by at least
$30,000.
[sbull] A minimum of 5 feasibility studies for new business
startups in economically distressed areas of Alaska will be funded
annually from the revolving loan fund.
Goal 4
Federal and state agencies will simplify procedures, share
information, and improve coordination to enhance and improve the
efficiency of the delivery of services to Alaskans and the communities
in which they reside.
Objectives
1. The Denali Commission will limit its own administrative expenses
to no more than 5% of its total budget and will ensure that all Denali
Commission partners are kept to the lowest possible overhead needed to
complete a project.
2. The Denali Commission will work to gain acceptance of a single
community developed comprehensive plan as the basis for all federal and
state agency funding.
3. The Denali Commission will work to gain acceptance and
utilization of a single comprehensive database for information (plans
and project information) for rural Alaskan communities.
Key Activities To Achieve Goals and Objectives
[sbull] The Denali Commission will work with key state and federal
agencies to complete and periodically update a memorandum of agreement
that outlines
[[Page 38699]]
key actions necessary to achieve this goal.
[sbull] The Denali Commission will actively engage the Alaska
Federal Executives Association, consistent with its charter, as a means
to achieve this goal.
[sbull] The Denali Commission will seek the guidance and assistance
of the State Co-Chair as he/she works with the Governor's cabinet to
assist in meeting these goals and objectives.
[sbull] Agreements with Denali Commission program implementation
partners will be negotiated to achieve the minimum practicable overhead
rates.
Performance Indicators
[sbull] Administrative expenses of Denali Commission will be 5% or
less.
[sbull] Denali Commission partners will be held to the lowest
reasonable overhead costs needed to complete projects.
[sbull] An MOU will be reviewed annually, and updated as necessary
to memorialize the commitment of federal and state agencies to this
goal.
[sbull] Progress in meeting these goals and objectives will be
documented annually.
Implementation Guiding Principles
[sbull] Projects must be sustainable. To assist with the
implementation of this principle, an Investment Strategy has been
drafted to ensure that the level of funding provided by the Denali
Commission to infrastructure projects in small, declining and/or
environmentally threatened communities serves a public purpose and is
invested in the most conscientious and sustainable manner possible.
(The Investment Strategy is now available on the Denali Commission
website for public review and comment.)
[sbull] The Denali Commission will generally not select individual
projects for funding nor manage individual projects, but will work
through existing state, federal or other appropriate organizations to
accomplish its mission.
[sbull] Projects in economically distressed communities will have
priority for Denali Commission assistance.
[sbull] Projects should be compatible with local cultures and
values.
[sbull] Projects that provide substantial health and safety
benefit, and/or enhance traditional community values, will generally
receive priority over those that provide more narrow benefits.
[sbull] Projects should be community-based and regionally
supported.
[sbull] Projects should have broad public involvement and support.
Evidence of support might include endorsement by affected local
government councils (municipal, Tribal, IRA, etc.), participation by
local governments in planning and overseeing work, and local cost
sharing on an ``ability to pay'' basis.
[sbull] Priority will generally be given to projects with
substantial cost sharing.
[sbull] Priority will generally be given to projects with a
demonstrated commitment to local hire.
[sbull] Denali Commission funds may supplement existing funding,
but will not replace existing federal, state, local government, or
private funding.
[sbull] The Denali Commission will give priority to funding needs
that are most clearly a federal responsibility.
[sbull] Denali Commission funds will not be used to create unfair
competition with private enterprise.
Additional Guiding Principles for Infrastructure
[sbull] A project should be consistent with a comprehensive
community or regional plan.
[sbull] Any organization seeking funding assistance must have a
demonstrated commitment to operation and maintenance of the facility
for its design life. This commitment would normally include an
institutional structure to levy and collect user fees if necessary, to
account for and manage financial resources, and having trained and
certified personnel necessary to operate and maintain the facility.
Additional Guiding Principles for Economic Development
[sbull] Priority will be given to projects that enhance employment
in high unemployment areas of the State (economically distressed), with
emphasis on sustainable, long-term local jobs or career opportunities.
[sbull] Projects should be consistent with statewide or regional
plans.
[sbull] The Denali Commission may fund demonstration projects that
are not a part of a regional or statewide economic development plan if
such projects have significant potential to contribute to economic
development.
Additional Guiding Principles for Training
[sbull] Training should increase the skills and knowledge of local
residents to become employed on jobs created by the Denali Commission's
investment in public facilities in a community.
[sbull] In order to protect the federal investment, training should
increase the local capacity to operate and maintain Denali Commission
funded public infrastructure.
Intergovernmental Coordination--The Memorandum of Understanding
The Denali Commission Act recognizes that our mission can only be
accomplished through a collaborative, coordinated effort by the State
of Alaska and key federal agencies. The State of Alaska also recognizes
benefits can be furthered if State agencies work in a collaborative and
coordinated effort. With this in mind, Denali Commission has drawn up a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which more than 20 agencies have
agreed to, that outlines some points of agreement that will facilitate
the collaboration and coordination necessary for achievement of the
purposes of the Denali Commission and related missions of agencies who
are parties to the MOU.
The points of the MOU Are--
[sbull] Sustainability. Federal and State agencies recognize the
importance of utilizing sustainability principles when investing in
public infrastructure projects.
[sbull] Regional Strategies. Systematic planning and coordination
on a local, regional and statewide basis are necessary to achieve the
most effective results from investment in infrastructure, economic
development, and training.
[sbull] Community Plans. A single community strategic plan should
be sufficient to identify and establish the priorities of each rural
community.
[sbull] Sharing Information. Sharing information increases
efficiencies and decreases duplication of services by State and Federal
agencies.
[sbull] Economic Development. Economic development facilitates and
supports the growth of self-sufficient communities.
[sbull] Non-Profit Organizations and Other Community Organizations.
Non-profit and other organizations in Alaska are a valuable resource
for State and Federal Agencies. They provide regional planning, program
support and partnering opportunities.
[sbull] Workforce Development (Vocational and Career Training).
Workforce development is a critical component to building sustainable
public infrastructure and self-sufficient communities in Alaska.
Appendix A: Needs Assessment Supporting Information
Power Utilities
Need: $300.8 million
Annual Funding: Denali Commission to establish.
Source: AEA Assessment, 2000.
Background: 178 communities were surveyed by the Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA) which was completed in 2000. The total need for power
utilities which includes power plant
[[Page 38700]]
construction, rehabilitation, distribution, and cost reduction projects
totals $300.8 million. The information presented below is separated by
needs of communities that are part of the Alaska Village Electric
Cooperative (AVEC) and all other remote communities.
AVEC
$76,000,000--Power Plant Construction and Rehabilitation.
$18,000,000--Wind Power Generation Projects.
$1,800,000--Other Power Distribution.
Total AVEC: $93,800,000.
Other Communities
$131,000,000--Power Plant Construction and Rehabilitation.
$20,000,000--Power Distribution Construction and Rehabilitation.
$56,000,000--Energy Cost Reduction Projects*.
Total for other communities: $207,000,000.
In terms of facility upgrades, AEA is approximately 10% complete
with the initial scope of projects. Based upon current and projected
funding, AEA anticipates completing the program of upgrading projects
for communities outside of AVEC by 2015.
* Energy Cost Reduction Projects include: Alternative Energy
Projects (Wind $30 million and Hydro $20 million) and Energy Efficiency
Upgrades $6 million.
Bulk Fuel Storage
Need: $362.5 million.
Annual Funding: $20 to $40 million Denali Commission Funding.
Source: AEA Assessment, 2000.
Background: The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) initiated an
assessment of bulk fuel tank farms in rural Alaska communities in 1996.
This assessment was completed in 2000.
AEA is responsible for 141 projects while the Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative (AVEC) has assumed responsibility for 51
communities under construction agreements between the Commission and
AVEC.
Of AEA's 141 projects, 9 have been completed by others. The balance
of 132 AEA projects has a bulk capacity upgrade need of approximately
26,000,000 gallons. This average is anticipated to decline as AEA
undertakes projects that are lower on the deficiency list and thus
require less effort to upgrade. To date (including the 2003
construction season), AEA has upgraded 9,500,000 gallons of capacity
and has projected that 11,000,000 of capacity remain to be upgraded.
The average project size AEA has undertaken is decreasing in size
from an average of $2,100,000 in 2001 to a projected cost of $1,700,000
in 2004. The average cost of upgrading since 2001 (including the 2003
Construction Season) is approximately $15.00 per gallon. It is not
anticipated that this cost will increase over the next few years.
In terms of storage capacity, AEA is approximately 48% complete
with the initial scope of projects. Based upon current and projected
funding, AEA anticipates completing the program of upgrading their
respective project communities by 2010.
Of AVEC's 52 projects a total of 9 have been completed. Of the 42
remaining communities, a total of 9,800,000 gallons remains to be
completed for AVEC communities.
Water and Wastewater
Need: Current need: $650 million (FY 02 estimate for Alaska Natives
only).
(Funded Fiscal years 1960--2002: $1.33 billion).
Annual Funding: There are six existing primary funding sources for
developing and improving water and wastewater facilities in rural
Alaska. Those sources and the amounts contributed in federal fiscal
year 2002 are shown below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Public Health Service--Indian Health Service....... $17,863,000
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water 3,958,200
Tribal Set-Aside.......................................
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Clean Water Tribal 7,053,100
Set-Aside..............................................
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Infrastructure 36,494,500
Grant..................................................
U.S. Department of Agriculture--Rural Development....... 23,120,000
State of Alaska, Village Safe Water..................... 19,873,370
---------------
Total............................................... 108,362,170
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While these amounts vary from year to year, the annual average for
fiscal years 1997 through 2002 is $85.7 million. The trend has been
towards increased funding levels.
Background: Assistance in developing water and wastewater
facilities in rural Alaska is provided to communities through two
programs. The Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) is the
organization responsible for administering Indian Health Service, and
EPA Indian Set-Aside sanitation construction funds in Alaska. The
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation's Village Safe Water
(VSW) program is the organization responsible for administering
sanitation construction funds provided by the State, EPA (non-Tribal
Set-Aside), and the USDA--Rural Development.
Both ANTHC and VSW work with rural communities to plan, design and
construct sanitation systems. ANTHC and VSW have developed a close
working relationship despite the relative recent transfer of the
sanitation program from IHS to ANTHC in October 1998. The priority
funding lists of both organizations are coordinated and generally
complement each other. ANTHC predominantly works in Alaska communities
with Native-owned homes, whereas VSW works in all rural communities
(Native and non-Native). A lead agency is designated for each community
receiving assistance. Lead agencies typically have responsibility for
administering all state and federal funding in the community.
Existing funding streams and programs are making progress towards
satisfying the overall need for sanitation facilities in rural Alaska.
An estimated remaining need of $650 million and a current funding level
of $108 million combine to suggest a 6-year timeframe for meeting the
need.
The Denali Commission has not targeted water and wastewater
improvements as a major initiative for infrastructure funding due to
the level of funding and effort already underway in this sector of
critical infrastructure. However, the Commission is involved in
improving, planning and interagency coordination.
Primary Health Care Facilities
Identified Need: $253 Million as of October 1, 2000.
$481 Million as of April 17, 2003 for the total unmet need.
$165 Million from the Commission to fully address clinic needs.
Annual Funding: Typically $30 Million/Year.
Source: Annual funding is a mixture of Health Resources Services
Administration (HRSA) funding and Denali Commission Base funding.
Background: In October 2000 the Commission published the ``Alaska
Rural Primary Care Facility Needs Assessment--Final Report''. The
report looked at primary care clinic improvements in 288 Alaskan
communities with a minimum population size of 20 year-round residents,
and lacking in-patient services (hospital). The report identified an
unmet primary care need of $253 Million.
Not long after the report was published the Commission recognized
that the unmet primary care need for ``hospital'' communities was
extremely
[[Page 38701]]
high and was not reflected in the Final Report. Within two years, the
Commission also recognized that the clinic space guidelines developed
for the Final Report did not correspond to the needed square footage
necessary to provide behavioral health and dental services most health
organizations felt were minimally necessary. The Commission has
increased their space guidelines approximately 20%. In addition, there
are normal inflationary construction cost increases. Listed in the
table below is the revised estimate to fully address expected local and
regional interests in improved primary care facilities.
April 2003 Estimate for Primary Care Facilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Denali funds Match required
Total (millions) (millions) 65% 35%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Unmet Need.......................................... $481 $313 $168
Demand Adjustment--20% reduction.......................... ($96) ($63) ($34)
Funded in FY2001 and FY2002............................... ($77) ($50) ($27)
Estimated Funding For FY2003.............................. ($54) ($35) ($19)
-------------------
Total Remaining Unmet Need................................ $254 $165 $89
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total costs to fund the expected demand for primary care
infrastructure development after the FY2003 funding cycle are estimated
at $254 million dollars. At current match requirements, the match will
be $89 million dollars of that total, and the Denali Commission
requirement will be $165 million. The Commission has noticed a trend
that about 1 in 5 communities surveyed (from the Final Report) are not
interested in improvements to primary care facilities due to
sustainability and health service operational concerns.
Airport Facilities
Need: $1.3 billion.
Annual Funding: $65-90 million.
Source: Transportation Needs and Priorities in Alaska (November
2002) and Transportation Investment Analysis (Spring 2002), published
by the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (ADOT&PF).
Background: Alaska's extensive aviation system plays a crucial role
in the movement of people and goods throughout the state. In many parts
of rural Alaska, aviation serves as the principal link between
communities. There are 1,112 designated airports, seaplane bases, and
aircraft landing areas in the State of Alaska. The ADOT&PF owns and
operates 261 public airports, the majority of Alaska's public airports.
23 public airports are owned and operated by local governments.
Nearly all of Alaska's airport capital improvements rely on funding
from the Federal Aviation Trust Fund. This fund, supported by federal
taxes on airline tickets, cargo, and fuel, supplies monies for capital
improvements through the Airport Improvement Program (AIP), which is
authorized for funding on an annual basis. In recent years, AIP
entitlement funds for Alaska's airports varied from approximately $65
million to $90 million annually. The state or local sponsor is required
to contribute 6.25% in the form of match. The current AIP authorizing
legislation expires on September 30, 2003, and at this time, it is
unknown what changes Congress may incorporate into the AIP legislation.
Road Construction and Major Maintenance
Need: $8.6 billion.
Annual Funding: $260-350 million.
Source: Transportation Needs and Priorities in Alaska (November
2002) and Transportation Investment Analysis (Spring 2002), published
by the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (ADOT&PF).
Background: Improved surface transportation can have many positive
effects including lowering costs for goods and services, improving
village to village interaction, and allowing for state and federal
investments in schools, clinics, airports, harbors, and tank farms to
serve more communities per project. Because of its vast geographic
expanse and young age as a state, Alaska continues to require
significant resources for transportation improvements.
The list of unmet surface transportation needs in Alaska is about
1,950 projects with a total estimated cost approximating $8.6 billion.
The primary funding source for surface transportation projects in
Alaska is federal-aid highway funding, which flows through the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA). State funds are required to match these federal funds; for most
highway projects, the federal ratio is 91 percent.
The State of Alaska administers most of the FHWA funding allocated
to Alaska with the exception of money specifically designated for the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), which currently amounts to
approximately $17 million per year. One important distinction between
FHWA and BIA funding for roads is the long-term maintenance obligation.
Under FHWA, the recipient is responsible for maintenance in perpetuity,
with no federal support for this activity. Under the BIA funding
system, such roads are then added to the Indian Reservation Road system
(IRR) and are eligible for a share of a national pot of money allocated
to maintenance of IRR roads.
Through the recent TEA-21 era, average funding levels have been
approximately $350 million per year, up substantially from the
approximately $220 million under ISTEA (1991-1997). Most FHWA funding
received by the state stays in larger auto-dependent communities, with
some funding going to rural communities largely for sanitation roads
and trail markings. Funding for projects off the road system goes
primarily to the larger hub communities.
The existing authorizing legislation, TEA-21, expires on September
30, 2003. Congressional changes to the reauthorization are unknown at
this time. However, given the current economic climate, estimates of
future federal funding are not as optimistic as those made one year
ago.
Port Facilities
Need: $300 million.
Annual Funding: $7 to 15 million.
Source: Transportation Needs and Priorities in Alaska (November
2002) and Transportation Investment Analysis (Spring 2002), published
by the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (ADOT&PF).
Background: With over 30,000 miles of shoreline, relatively few
roads, and 90 percent of the state's population living within ten miles
of the coast or along a major river, Alaska's marine facilities are
integral to the local, statewide, and international transportation of
goods and people.
[[Page 38702]]
Ports and harbors have no federal capital assistance program
comparably to the highway and airport funding programs. Federal funds
for ports and harbors come through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The Corps distributes funding on a nationally competitive, project-by-
project basis. State and local communities in Alaska have been awarded
between $7 and 15 million annually in federal funding for all Corps of
Engineers programs in recent years. For construction, the Corps
requires between 20 and 35 percent match for projects such as dredging
basins, docks, floats, grids, and upland facilities. Though not a
dedicated funding source, the Marine Users Fuel Tax is the traditional
foundation of small boat harbor improvements in the State, and general
obligation bonds have been the foundation of State assisted port
development.
Telecommunications
Need: Unknown.
Annual Funding: $7.5m in FY03 funding for Regulatory Commission of
Alaska's Rural Broadband Internet Grant Program. Several other funding
support mechanisms including Universal Service Fund also exist.
Background: In January 2001, the Denali Commission, in partnership
with the State of Alaska, completed an inventory of available
telecommunication services in rural Alaska. Among other findings, the
inventory found that 61% of all Alaskan communities do not have access
to local dial-up Internet service. This identified need is being
addressed through the Regulatory Commission of Alaska's Rural Broadband
Internet Grant Program and Telecommunications Industry investment and
expansion of Internet offerings in most rural communities in the next
1-3 years.
Solid Waste Disposal Facilities
Need: Unknown.
Annual Funding: Generally less than $1,000,000.
Background: Solid waste disposal is a necessity for all rural
Alaska communities as it is for every community in the country.
Observation would indicate that the majority of rural Alaska
communities do not have facilities that meet basic legal requirements
for solid waste disposal. The State of Alaska is preparing a state
solid waste/regionalization plan. That plan will be available in the
fall of 2003 and will include recommendations for managing solid wastes
in the different regions of the State.
Community Facilities
Need: Unknown.
Annual Funding: Unknown.
Background: Communities have a need for community assembly
facilities for various purposes, including planning, meetings,
traditional functions, and recreation for youth. These facilities, when
available, are heavily used in rural communities. No assessment
mechanism is in place for determining statewide needs for community
facilities.
Appendix B: Program Principles Supporting Information
Rural Infrastructure Development
In the evolution of the Denali Commission and its approach to
infrastructure development some principles have been established. These
include the following:
[sbull] Selection of infrastructure themes for allocating funds. In
FY99 rural energy was selected as the primary infrastructure theme.
That priority was continued in FY00, and is expected to continue in
FY01 and beyond. In FY00 rural health care facilities were selected as
the second infrastructure theme. Other themes may be selected in future
years.
[sbull] Selection of program/project partners to carry out
infrastructure development. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) was
selected as the Denali Commission's first partner for rural energy
projects. AEA was selected because of its demonstrated capability to
prioritize and implement rural energy projects. The Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative was selected as the second energy partner and
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium was selected as the Commission's
primary partner for clinic design and construction. The overriding
point in selection of a program/project partner is that the Commission
wishes to utilize existing capabilities provided by state or federal
agencies or other organizations. More than one partner may be
identified to participate in carrying out Commission sponsored
programs/projects for a particular theme.
[sbull] Project selection by the Commission and/or the program/
project partner must be defendable and credible. In the case of AEA,
two separate comprehensive statewide project priority lists had been
developed--one for bulk fuel storage facilities, and a second for power
generation/distribution projects. As in the case of AEA the Commission
will utilize existing credible priority systems. Where a credible
statewide priority methodology for a selected theme does not exist, the
Commission in cooperation with appropriate organizations will foster
the development of a system. This is illustrated by the Commission's
efforts in partnership with the Alaska Department of Health and Social
Services, the Indian Health Service, and the Alaska Native Tribal
Health Consortium to develop a prioritization methodology for primary
health care facilities.
[sbull] Theme selection is a methodical process. The Commission has
stressed the importance of comprehensive investigation and exploration
of infrastructure themes so that Commission resources are strategically
funneled to ``gaps'' in state and federal funding streams. Carrying out
needs assessments on various infrastructure themes is central to the
development of a theme. Energy, telecommunications, and rural primary
health care facilities are examples of assessments that were initiated
in conjunction with interested state and federal agencies in the
Commission's first year.
[sbull] Commission partners are responsible for compliance with
procedural and substantive legal requirements. It is the expectation of
the Denali Commission that partners will comply with all applicable
local, state and federal laws in carrying out Commission funded
programs/projects. For example, the partner must address NEPA and OSHA
regulations, federal auditing requirements, competitive procurement
issues and so forth. As a result, the Commission will look to partners
who have demonstrated both administrative and program/project
management success.
[sbull] Adherence to the successful project management elements of
time, budget and quality. Each of these factors is central to Denali
Commission agreements with partners. The Commission wants to put our
partners in a position of success in meeting the triple constraint of
project management: Deliver the project on time, on budget and
completion of the full project scope in a cost effective manner. The
challenge to the Commission is to allow sufficient flexibility for each
partner to carry out the programs/projects within their own established
methods while assuring confident project completion and meeting all
requirements of applicable laws and regulations. For example, the AEA
employs a project methodology that relies heavily on force account
construction (locally sponsored government crews). AEA also uses
construction contracting to a lesser degree. In short, each agreement
with a partner organization must be tailored to
[[Page 38703]]
fit their approach to program/project management.
Rural Energy Approach
AEA has employed a two-step approach to bulk fuel project funding
that is strongly supported by the Commission. Starting at the top of
the AEA priority list, projects are provided 35% design funds one or
more years before being eligible for capital funding. This allows for
more accurate project cost estimates, resolution of easement and land
issues, development of agreements between various local parties in site
selection and tank farm ownership/maintenance. This step also serves to
filter projects that are not ready for construction, for one reason or
another, from advancing to the second step of project funding. This
two-step approach ensures that funding does not sit unused by projects
that are not ready for construction. Once a project has resolved any
obstacles at the 35% design stage, then they are eligible for capital
funding.
AEA will reevaluate its priority list from time to time in order to
factor in new information, particularly information from the statewide
energy strategy. This reevaluation may result in some modification of
the list. Funding priorities will also be subject to ``readiness to
proceed'' considerations as described in part above.
Rural Primary Care Facilities Approach
In the past, communities constructed clinics based upon available
grant funds (typically community development block grants of $200,000
to $500,000). Consequently clinic square footage was based upon
available funding and not necessarily upon health care delivery service
appropriate for the population and demographics of the community. Many
clinics are therefore undersized. In FY99 the Commission allocated
$300,000 to undertake a needs assessment for rural primary care
facilities. The needs assessment was completed in October 2000 and
included a database of primary health care facility needs statewide as
well as a project prioritization methodology. The Commission's
investments in rural health facilities is based on this needs
assessment.
Job Training Strategy
The Commission realizes that proper and prudent investment in
public infrastructure must include a component for training local
residents to maintain and operate publicly funded infrastructure. The
Commission further realizes that through its investment in public
infrastructure, such as bulk fuel storage facilities, it is creating
numerous jobs related to the construction of these facilities and must
develop a strategy to ensure local residents are properly trained to
receive these jobs.
The Denali Commission's Training Strategy creates a statewide
system to increase the local employment rates in Alaskan communities
through the development of skills necessary to construct, maintain, and
operate public infrastructure.
The Commission has approved 10% of the FY00-FY 02 funding for
implementation of the Training Strategy. Through this funding the
Commission ensures local residents are employed on public facility
construction projects in their communities, while also protecting the
Denali Commission's investment in infrastructure by ensuring local
residents are properly trained in the operations and maintenance of
completed facilities.
The Denali Commission's Training Strategy involves several
components that create a statewide system for job training outreach,
coordination and delivery in rural Alaska. The Commission has partnered
with several statewide organizations that will perform the necessary
functions that make up the Denali Commission's Training Strategy.
The Training Strategy provides the Denali Commission the
flexibility for future investment in job training needs statewide.
Currently the Commission's partners and the Denali Training Fund are
focusing on jobs created by the construction of energy and health
related projects. In the future, the Training Strategy will focus its
efforts on other areas where the Commission is investing.
Economic Development Strategy
The Denali Commission in not a funding agency for traditional
economic development activities. The Commission has a strategy that
outlines the appropriate role of the Commission in the area of economic
development. The strategy includes the following components:
[sbull] The Commission, where appropriate will play the role of
convener, bringing potential economic development participants together
to support projects that meet Commission Standards outlined in
paragraph IV below.
[sbull] The Commission will act as a facilitator to assist in
matching high priority, high potential public or private investment
opportunities with available funding sources.
[sbull] The Commission will serve as a catalyst for identification
and removal of unnecessary economic development barriers by government.
Regional Development Strategy
The Denali Commission encourages communities/tribes to build a
local comprehensive plan and strategy, a component of which will be
economic development. A comprehensive plan may also be referred to as a
Development Strategy.
Communities are encouraged to work with regional organizations such
as ARDOR's, Regional Non-Profit Corporations, Borough Governments and
Regional for-profit organizations to develop comprehensive strategies
of which economic development will be a component. Regional strategies
should take into consideration existing regional planning and strategy
efforts including, but not limited to, the efforts of the FAA, HUD,
Alaska DOT, ANTHC, Alaska VSW, State Division of Public Health, Alaska
Department of Public Safety, regional non-profits and others.
The Denali Commission encourages the state to assist with technical
support and funding at the local and regional level to build local and
regional development strategies. The Denali Commission also encourages
state and federal governments to utilize the local and regional
development strategies when prioritizing projects in the state or in a
region.
Jeffrey B. Staser,
Federal Co-Chair.
[FR Doc. 03-16416 Filed 6-27-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3300-01-P