14968 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 

DENALI COMMISSION 

Fiscal Year 2009 Revised Draft Work 

Plan 

AGENCY: Denali Commission. 

ACTION: Denali Commission fiscal year 

2009 revised 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 

in training in Alaska by delivering 

Federal services in the most costeffective 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 revised draft Work Plan for 

Federal fiscal year 2009. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by May 3, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the 

Denali Commission, Attention: Adison 

Smith, 510 L Street, Suite 410, 

Anchorage, AK 99501. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adison Smith, Denali Commission, 510 

L Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 

99501. Telephone: (907) 271–1414. Email: asmith@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 over 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. 

However, for the first time in nearly 

ten years the Commission’s annual 

appropriations have been significantly 

reduced. As a result the Commission 

will be able to fund fewer critical 

infrastructure projects in the most 

remote communities, have limited 

resources to fund economic and 

workforce development initiatives, and 

be forced to make challenging program 

and policy decisions regarding the 

prioritization of projects that are critical 

foundations of community viability and 

sustainability. 

At the same time 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 round, 

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 outmigration from many small 

communities into larger regional centers 

and 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 

pressing 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 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. 

Our interagency Planning Work Group, 

for example, oversees relocation efforts 

in several communities, and the 

Commission funded a relocation 

community plan last year. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 14969 

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 alter or 

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. 

The Work Plan is adopted on an 

annual basis in the following manner, 

which occurs sequentially as listed: 

• Commissioners first provide a draft 

version of the Work Plan to the Federal 

Co-Chair. 

• The Federal Co-Chair approves the 

draft Work Plan for publication in the 

Federal Register providing an 

opportunity for a 30-day period of 

public review and written comment. 

During this time the draft 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). 

• Public comment concludes and 

Commission staff provides the Federal 

Co-Chair with a summary of public 

comment and recommendations, if any, 

associated with the draft Work Plan. 

• If no revisions are made to the draft 

the Federal Co-Chair provides notice of 

approval of the Work Plan to the 

Commissioners, and forwards the Work 

Plan to the Secretary of Commerce for 

approval; or, if there are revisions the 

Federal Co-Chair provides notices of 

modifications to the Commissioners for 

their consideration and approval, and 

upon receipt of approval from 

Commissioners, forwards the Work Plan 

to the Secretary of Commerce for 

approval. 

• The Secretary of Commerce 

approves the Work Plan. 

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. 

Written public comments regarding 

the FY09 Revised Draft Work Plan may 

be submitted via e-mail, fax or hard 

copy to the following by Close of 

Business (COB) May 3, 2009: Ms. 

Adison Smith, Denali Commission, 510 

L Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 

99501. asmith@denali.gov. Phone: 

907.271.1640. Fax: 907.271.1415. 

FY 09 Appropriations Summary 

The Omnibus Bill was approved by 

Congress on March 10, 2009, and was 

signed by President Obama on March 

11, 2009. The Omnibus Bill provides 

significantly different appropriations to 

the Commission then the FY09 

Continuing Resolution, which the first 

draft of the FY09 Work Plan was based 

on. 

The Denali Commission has 

historically received several Federal 

funding sources. These fund sources are 

governed by the following general 

principles: 

• In FY 2009 no project specific 

earmarks were defined. 

• Energy and Water Appropriations 

(commonly referred to as Commission 

‘‘Base’’ funding) are eligible for use in 

all programs, but have 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 be moved to the Economic 

Development Program. 

Final transportation funds received 

may be reduced due to agency 

modifications, reductions and fees 

determined by the U.S. Department of 

Transportation. Final program available 

figures will not be provided until later 

this spring. 

Final USDA–Rural Utility Services 

(RUS) funds received may be reduced 

based on the amount made available to 

the Commission. Historically, the 

Commission has received ∼50% of the 

total RUS funds available nationally. 

This year RUS is receiving $17.5 MM for 

the national program, and the 

Commission is using historic funding 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

14970 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 

percentages to provide the 

appropriations and program available 

estimate for RUS in the FY09 Work Plan 

and funding chart below. Final RUS 

figures will not be provided until later 

this spring. 

All Energy and Water Appropriation 

(Base) funds, including operational 

funds, designated as ‘‘up to’’ may be 

reassigned to the Legacy Energy 

program (Bulk Fuel and Rural Power 

System Upgrades (RPSU)) if they are not 

fully expended in a program component 

area. 

All U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services—Health Resources and 

Services Administration (HRSA) funds 

designated as ‘‘up to’’ may be reassigned 

to the primary care clinic program if 

they are not fully expended in a 

program component area. 

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. 

The table below provides the 

following information, by fund source: 

• Total FY 09 Budgetary Resources 

provided in the Omnibus Bill: 

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 funds are identified 

by their source name (i.e., ‘‘Energy and 

Water Appropriation; USDA, Rural 

Utilities Service, etc.). The grand total, 

for all appropriations appears at the end 

of the chart. 

• 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. Traditionally, the 

Commission’s overhead rate has been 

limited to 5%, except in the case of RUS 

funds, where it is limited to 4%. The 

following appropriations language for 

the Base funds in FY09 allows the 

Commission to retain more than 5% of 

the Base for operational activities as it 

deems appropriate and prudent: ‘‘* * * 

not withstanding the limitations 

contained in section 306(g) of the Denali 

Commission Act of 1998.’’ The grand 

total, for all program available funds 

appears at the end of the chart. 

• 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 Revised 

Draft FY09 Work Plan recommends, 

within each program fund source for 

program components. 

• 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 fund source. The subtotal must 

always equal the Total FY 09 Program 

Available Funding. 

Denali Commission FY09 Funding Table Totals 

FY 09 Energy & Water Appropriation .................................................................................................................................. $11,800,000 

For expenses of the Denali Commission including the purchase, construction, and acquisition of plant and capital 

equipment as necessary and other expenses, $11,800,000, to remain available until expended, notwithstanding the 

limitations contained in section 306(g) of the Denali Commission Act of 1998. 

FY 09 Energy & Water Appropriations (‘‘Base’’)—Program Available (less Commission overhead—not limited to 5% in 

FY09 and designated as ‘‘up to’’) .................................................................................................................................... 8,800,000 

Energy Program: bulk fuel, RPSU, etc. ....................................................................................................................... 5,800,000 

Energy Program: alternative & renewable energy ....................................................................................................... 850,000 (up to) 

Pre-Development Program ........................................................................................................................................... 150,000 

Teacher Housing & Health Professional Housing Program: design & construction .................................................... 1,500,000 

Economic Development Program: various ................................................................................................................... 250,000 (up to) 

Healthcare Infrastructure Initiatives .............................................................................................................................. 250,000 (up to) 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 8,800,000 

FY 09 USDA, Rural Utilities Service (RUS)—Estimate ...................................................................................................... 8,925,000 

FY 09 USDA—Rural Utilities Service (RUS)—Program Available (less 4% overhead)—Estimate ................................... 8,568,000 

Energy Program: high cost energy communities ......................................................................................................... 8,568,000 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 8,568,000 

FY 09 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL) Trust ............................................................................................................ 5,830,940 

FY 09 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL)—Program Available (less 5% overhead) ESTIMATE ................................ 5,539,393 

Energy Program: bulk fuel ............................................................................................................................................ 5,539,393 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 5,539,393 

FY 09 DHHS—Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA) ............................................................................... 19,642,000 

Provided further, that of the funds provided, $19,642,000 shall be provided to the Denali Commission as a direct lump 

payment pursuant to Public Law 106–113. 

FY 09 DHHS—Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) ................................................................................................................................................................................ 18,659,900 

Health Program: Primary Care Clinics—Design, Planning, and Construction ............................................................ 14,758,102 

Health Program: Behavioral Health .............................................................................................................................. 1,017,831 (up to) 

Health Program: Primary Care in Hospitals ................................................................................................................. 1,526,746 (up to) 

Health Program: Elder Housing/Assisted Living Facilities—Construction ................................................................... 1,357,221 (up to) 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 18,659,900 

FY 09 US Department of Labor (DOL) ............................................................................................................................... 3,378,000 

There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Denali Commission through the Department of Labor to conduct job training of the local workforce where Denali Commission projects will be constructed. $3,378,000 for the Denali Commission, which shall be available for the period July 1, 2009 through June 

30, 2010. 

FY 09 US Department of Labor (DOL)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) ......................................... 3,209,100 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 14971 

Denali Commission FY09 Funding Table Totals 

Training Program: Various ........................................................................................................................................... 3,209,100 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 3,209,100 

FY 09 Federal Transit Administration (FTA)—Estimate ...................................................................................................... $5,000,000 

$5,000,000 from section 3011 (FTA) for docks and harbors; 

FY 09 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)—Estimate ............................................................................................... 21,900,000 

For necessary, expenses for the Denali Access System Program as authorized under Section 1960 of Public Law 

109–59, $5,700,000, to remain available until expended and $4,800,000 from section 1934 (FHWA) for docks and 

harbors; and $11,400,000 from section 1960 (FHWA) for Denali Access System Program. 

FY 09 Transportation—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead)—Estimate .................................................. 25,555,000 

Transportation Program: Docks & Harbors .................................................................................................................. 5,000,000 

Transportation Program: Roads ................................................................................................................................... 20,555,000 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 25,555,000 

FY 09 USDA, Solid Waste .................................................................................................................................................. 434,000 

There is hereby appropriated $434,000 to remain available until expended for the Denali Commission to address deficiencies in solid waste disposal sites which threaten to contaminate rural drinking water supplies. 

FY 09 USDA—Solid Waste—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) .......................................................... 412,300 

Solid Waste Program: planning, design and construction ........................................................................................... 412,300 

sub-total $ .............................................................................................................................................................. 412,300 

TOTAL FY 09 Appropriations—Estimate ....................................................................................................... 76,909,940 

TOTAL FY 09 Program Available—Estimate ................................................................................................ 70,743,693 

FY 09 Program Details & General 

Information 

The following section provides 

narrative discussion, by each of the 

Commission Programs identified for 

FY09 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 last 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 also includes a 

general summary of other program and 

policy 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 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. 

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 reliable and efficient 

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 $850,000 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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

14972 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 

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) 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 

Investment Policy 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 policy 

considerations, site availability, the 

timing of funding decisions, etc. 

The Energy Program anticipates the 

revised Commission policy document, 

which was adopted in November of 

2008, will impact the current project 

prioritization and development process. 

Specifically the Investment Guidance 

section that promotes regional planning 

and prioritizes regional or multicommunity connectivity versus stand 

alone projects, evaluates similar 

infrastructure projects in communities 

with populations less than 100 

residents, and prioritization of projects 

that include a cost share match. The 

policies will change the development 

and design of several communities on 

the Bulk Fuel Upgrade and Rural Power 

System Upgrade needs lists which meet 

the definition of having ‘‘stand alone 

facilities’’ and/or ‘‘under 100 residents’’. 

Projects that meet these definitions will 

require communities and partner 

organizations to develop multicommunity solutions (i.e. Interties, 

cooperative management or regional 

management) before construction can 

proceed. This may lead to delays in 

projects on the needs list or projects not 

being constructed in several 

communities. Historically, the Bulk 

Fuel and Rural Power System Upgrade 

programs have had no cost share match 

requirements, under the new policy 

projects with cost share will be 

prioritized over projects without. 

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. 

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. 

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, the Rasmuson 

Foundation 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. 

The Health Facilities Program 

anticipates the Commission policy 

document, which was adopted in 

November 2008, will impact the clinic 

prioritization process, specifically for 

those communities located on the road 

system, and within proximity to one 

another, and for communities with 

populations less than 100. In 2008 the 

program identified small communities 

as an area for improvement in terms of 

cost containment and sustainability. 

Consequently, for communities with 

populations of less than 100, only 

projects already in the pipeline have 

been proceeding while the Commission 

has funded pilot projects to design a 

more cost effective, potentially relocatable clinic prototype to serve small 

communities. Finally, an emphasis on 

renovation over new construction has 

emerged as a means for overcoming high 

construction costs. 

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 FY09 Work Plan. 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 14973 

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 communities 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 

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. 

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 

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 Transportation Program 

anticipates the adopted Commission 

policy document will impact the project 

selection process, specifically for those 

communities located within proximity 

to one another, and for communities 

with populations less than 100. 

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 nonprofits, 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. 

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 Corp of 

Engineers have prepared a barge landing 

analysis that is 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. 

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 underserved 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

14974 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 62 / Thursday, April 2, 2009 / Notices 

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 the 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. 

Other Program and Policy Issues 

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. 

Pre-Development has historically 

been funded out of the Commission’s 

operational budget; however, given its 

direct correlation and benefit to program 

functions, it has been moved to the 

program funding section of the Work 

Plan. The amount of $150,000 will 

provide funding for the predevelopment program for the last 

quarter of FY09, and FY10. 

Strategic Planning & 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, 

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 FY 2009–2015 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. 

Healthcare Infrastructure Initiatives 

Recognizing the significant need for 

electronic health records (EHRs) and 

health technology infrastructure in 

Alaska, and the funding that has been 

made available for this initiative 

nationally through the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) 

and the Obama administration the 

Commission will provide up to 

$250,000 to the Alaska Health 

Information Network (AHIN). These 

funds shall be used in conjunction with 

program funds already secured by AHIN 

to carry out EHR and health information 

technology activities in Alaska. 

Additionally, the funds provided by the 

Commission shall be used to support 

operational and administrative activities 

undertaken by AHIN in coordinating, 

implementing and developing a statewide EHR and technology infrastructure 

system for Alaska. 

Dated: March 27, 2009. 

George J. Cannelos, 

Federal Co-Chair. 

[FR Doc. E9–7382 Filed 4–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3300–01–P 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES