GAO issues final report on regional airport funding

By RUSTY GARRETT
Times Staff Writer

The U.S. General Accounting Office had harsh criticism for the Federal Aviation Administration in its report examining compliance with federal grant requirements for the proposed Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport.

But the final written report of the GAO study issued Friday found no violations of rules or law to warrant revoking funds for the airport project, in effect clearing the way for completion of the $104 million project.

"It was basically what we had expected following the oral briefing and news releases they had issued," said Scott Van Laningham, a member of the airport staff. He said the report amounts to "a clean bill of health" for the funding of the project.

"With this, we've got what we need to go forward with the sale of the bonds and to finish building the new airport," he said.

The airport's governing body learned at a meeting Thursday an agreement on the sale of about $48 million in revenue bonds to fund the project will be ready for board action early next month.

Van Laningham called the issuance of the written report "somewhat anticlimactic."

Sen. Tim Hutchinson also reacted to the report. In a release issued from Washington, he said the information from the written report was consistent with that he heard in a briefing by GAO investigators May 21.

"As I read through the report, I found no surprises or anything that would give cause for disrupting the construction of the airport," Hutchinson said. He urged those responsible for the airport to "move on with the project." The 33-page report concluded the FAA followed its grant award process in deciding to issue nearly $30 million in letter of intent funds, which will be released to the airport authority over the next five years.

However, the GAO questioned the FAA's "subjective assessment of needs" in deciding to award the funds.

The study cited the FAA's reliance on an assessment that the new airport would replace Drake Field as the region's sole commercial service airport. However, Drake Field has stated its intent to compete with the new airport for passengers, a situation which the report says will force the FAA "to use (Airport Improvement Program) funds to support two commercial service airports - in a relatively limited market - within 30 miles of each other." The report said the FAA did not sufficiently ensure all the required criteria for LOI funds were met. It said "unverified or outdated" information was used to calculate the benefit-cost ratio for the project. The FAA relied on unverified weather data, gathered from two air traffic controllers at Drake Field, to calculate delays at the airport. In factoring in thundershower frequency, the FAA assumed the same delays would not occur or be a safety issue at the new airport, 30 miles away, the report said.

Also, the FAA's conclusion that the project "significantly enhanced systemwide capacity" was flawed because the FAA has no definition of what constitutes a significant capacity increase, according to the report.

The report noted the FAA did not update its data to reflect the installation of an instrument landing system at Drake Field.

The study also explored ground transportation to the new airport. It noted that better access roads to the airport are needed, but it may be at least five years before a planned airport connector from U.S. 71 is completed. Current access roads are "substandard and potentially could pose safety hazards," according to the report.

In examining the viability of the new airport, the study said "a degree of uncertainty" exists with several factors upon which the airport's success depends. The report focused on predicted passenger traffic. It said the airport financial plan "assumes that all of the air traffic now serving Drake Field, plus additional traffic currently diverted to other airports, will transfer to the new airport by early 2000." But the report adds, "none of the air carriers currently serving Drake Field has committed to use the new airport."

The report also incorporates FAA responses to an earlier draft of the study. FAA officials maintain the cost of bringing Drake Field up to the administration's design standards would equal or exceed the $38 million the FAA is providing in LOI grants to the new airport.

But the GAO report says the estimate was developed by consultants hired by the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport Authority, who never consulted with Drake Field officials.

The FAA also told GAO investigators the new airport will conform to all FAA design standards, and will provide the region a broader mix of aircraft operating in a wider range of weather conditions, "permitting faster and more reliable air service."

But the GAO said, "points raised by FAA officials do not relieve FAA of its responsibility to ensure compliance with the criteria for letters of intent nor to ensure that decisions, especially when subjective judgment is a major component, are based on reliable, complete and verifiable data."

The GAO report was requested by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. He asked for the probe in light of allegations by the ABC television news program "20/20" that construction of the airport was a waste of federal tax dollars.

All rights reserved. Copyright 1997, Northwest Arkansas Times. This content may not be archived, retransmitted, saved in a database, or used for any commercial purpose without the express written permission of the Northwest Arkansas Times