HomeMy WebLinkAboutAirport.Agenda.11-07-1990A G E N D A
CAPE GIRARDEAU AIRPORT BOARD
MEETING
NOVEMBER 7, 1990
4:00 P.M.
CITY HALL
I. Approval of October 10, 1990, minutes.
II. Consideration of a motion reconsidering street names for airport
roadways.
III. Consideration of an update report on the Control Tower Contract.
IV. Consideration of a report on the Airport Improvement Program
(A.I.P) projects.
V. Review of the Monthly Use Report for the airport.
VI. New business.
VIZ. Adjourn.
The Airport Board of the City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, may as a
part of a study session or regular or special Airport Board Meeting,
hold a closed session to discuss legal actions, causes of legal action
or litigation, leasing, purchasing or sale of real estate, hiring,
firing, promotion of personnel or employee labor relations.
G;Ii Y�OF .K�RDEA�, `=
� T.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
"� LETTER OF COMMENDATION _'. o,—. .A...o..n—
To: Mr. Mark Seesing
Airport Manager
The members of the Airport Advisory Board of the City of Cape
Girardeau wish to commend the Airport Manager. Mr. Mark Seesing, for
"Fly Cape Aviation Days 1990" which was held at the airport on
September 22 and 23,- 1990.
We feel that this event should contribute to the appreciation of
the general public of this area of the significance of the airport to
an economic success as well as a quality of life.
Not only were the aerial demonstrations entertaining and
exciting, but the displays on the ground were also very educational.
'•.� We recognize that it took a lot of work to recruit and organize
the large number of volunteers needed to run such an event. We also
know that it took significant effort to provide the funding for such
an endeavor. We know, too, that other members of the City staff, in
addition to Mark, also contributed time and effort to the success of
Aviation Days.
We believe that the enthusiasm shown by the spectators,
especially the young people, indicate that it should be continued on
an annual basis and that continued effort be expended to make it even
more successful in the future, both from the standpoint of attendance
and revenue generated.
The Airport Advisory Board,
Jerry McClanahan
Paul Brinkopf
J. T. Seesing
Truman Cole
Jim Bowman
Bill Walker
Alan Maki
cc: ✓Mr. Douglas K. Leslie, Public Works Director
Mr. J. Ronald Fischer, City Manager
Mr. Al Stoverink, Assistant City Manager
A I
R P O R
T U SAG
E REPORT
Date:
OCT 1990
Enplanements
YTD
YT
1990
1990
1999
1999
TWE
646
5378
677
5721
CCA
202
2290
118
1777
otheT_I'SG —.
83_ _-
_. 424._—
—. _-11iL _
3164 -
totals
93113._662._
_ 1036
8662
NUMBER OF AIR CARRIER LANDINGS
RELIABILITY
FACTORS
METRO
-0-
ON TIME.
97.1.'0
J-31
104
_---_
COMPLETION 96.i
'►
;SAAB
-0-
0_EMB
EMU 12.0
-0-
other
-0-
AIR TRAFFIC COUNT
ITINERANT
1990.
1989
AIR TAXI
1.47
135
GENERAL AVIATION
2085
2949
MILITARY
14
16
LOCAL
CIVIL,
_'/IIB_.
1366
MILITARY
_ may_
4
INSTRUMENT OPERATIONS
AIR 'AAXI
t_},�.._
169
GENERAL AVIATION
327
476
OFFICE OF THE CITY OF CAPE GIRARDEAU
AIRPCflc MANAGER - -
November 6, 1990
Dr. Kala Stroup, President
Southeast Missouri State University
One Plaza Way
Cape Girardeau, NO 63701
Dear Dr. Stroup:
O. B X 817
CAPE GIRARCEAG, W W702d 17
TELEPIIGNE (314) 33�E230
FAX 13103] 7W
Recently Mr. Jerry McClanahan, Chairman of the Cape Girardeau
Airport Board, contacted you about the possibility of the University
becoming involved in an aviation oriented degree program. This type
of program has proven beneficial for institutions such as Central
Missouri State University in Warrensburg and Southern Illinois
University at Carbondale.
Mr. George Mardis of Southern Illinois University informed me
that they are actually turning away 150 to 200 applicants per year,
They are unable to accommodate the large demand being placed on the
aviation -related courses. In addition to the significant interest to
enter these programs, the demand for highly qualified professionals
after graduation is also very high.
The aviation industry has many different facets for career -
oriented applicants. The most popular is pilot training but, in
addition to this there are also career opportunities in aircraft
maintenance, avionics, aircraft design and engineering, aviation
management, control tower operations, weather observation, and more.
The proximity of the Southeast Missouri Port would also offer the
possibility of a unique multi -faceted transportation education
program.
This type of educational program would not only benefit
students of the region but would be a major attraction for
international students. Flight schools such as the one in Bolivar,
Tennessee, draw students from Europe, the Middle East, Africa,
Australia, and South America. A large portion of their enrollment
consists of international students.
With the influx of industrial arts and technical education into
the secondary education area, this would be an excellent opportunity
for Southeast Missouri State University to get in on the most
technically advanced and fastest growing industry in the world.
"HOME OF MISSOURI STATE FLAG"
Dr. Kala Stroup
Page 2
November 6, 1990
I would appreciate an opportunity to discuss this matter with
you further. We would also offer to arrange a site visit to these
schools to view the successful programs in the area. I will call
your office in the near future to arrange a convenient time to meet
on this matter. Thank you for your consideration, and please call if
you have any questions or would like additional information.
MS:gc
`r.
Sincerely,
Mark Seesing
Airport Manager
H.R. 5835 — Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1991
(The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation bill was approved by the House and the Senate on Oct. 27, 1990. The
five-year deficit reduction measure contains a comprehensive FAA reauthorization section which included
passenger facility charges and a national noise policy. The following is a summary of the aviation -related
provisions.)
Title IX TRANSPORTATION
Section 9102. (Construction of Firefighting Training Facilities)
Authorizes the FAA to make ALP funds available for the acquisition of land and equipment and construction
of on- or off -airport training facilities for aircraft rescue and firefighting personnel.
Section 9103. (Declaration of Policy)
Amends the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982's Declaration of Policy to state that airport anQ
airway programs should be administered in such a way that they do not unjustly discriminate between catego-
ries and classes of aircraft.
Section 9104. (AIP)
Authorizes appropriations for the airport improvement program (AIP) at a level of $1.8 billion for fiscal yen
1991 and at $1.9 billion for fiscal year 1992.
Section 9105. (F&E)
Authorizes appropriations for the FAA's facilities and equipment (F&E) at a level of $2.5 billion for fiscal
year 1991 and $3 billion for fiscal year 1992.
Section 9106. (O&M)
Authorizes appropriations for the FAA's operations and maintenance (O&M) program at a level of $4.088
billion for fiscal year 1991 and $4.412 billion for fiscal year 1992.
Section 9107. (Penalty Provision)
Repeals the penalty provision which currently reduces aviation trust fund financing for FAA operations when
capital development authorization is not fully funded. Allows for 75 percent of FAA's total budget to be
funded from the trust fund.
Section 9108. (Weather Service)
Authorizes trust fund reimbursement to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for the cost of
providing the FAA with weather reporting services. Fiscal year 1991 expenditure is $34 million and $35
million for fiscal year 1992.
Section 9109. (AIP Military Airport Program)
Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 Declaration of Policy is amended by adding that special
°i emphasis should be placed on the conversion of appropriate former military air bases to civil use and on the
identification and improvement of additional joint -use facilities. Amends AIP allocation by stating that not
less than 1.5 percent of the AIP funds made available in each of fiscal years 1991 and 1992 shall be distrib-
uted to sponsors of current or former military airports as designated by DOT for the purpose of developing
such airports to improve the national air transportation system capacity. Not more than 8 current or former
military airports may participate in the program. DOT must conduct a survey of current and former military,
L' airports to identify those which have the greatest potential to improve system capacity.
Section 9110. (PEC)
Authorizes commercial service airports to impose a passenger facility charge (PEGS subject to the following
requirements:
I. A PFC may only be charged in whole dollar amounts up to $3 per enplartement.
2. A PFC may be imposed only if the Secretary off ransportation makes affirmative
findings that:
A) The amount and duration of he proposed to will result in revenues which do not exceed amours, .
necessary to finance specific PPC eligible airport -related projects (eligibility defined below),
B) Each specific project involved will either preserve or enhance the capacity, safety or security of the
national air transportation system, or reduce noise resulting from an airpar which is par of a
national system, or furnish opportunities for enhanced competition between air carriers.
3. A PFC may not be imposed on passengers of an essential air service (EAS) air carrier when the passen-
gers are travelling from a mon-EAS airport to an EAS airport.
4- PFCs may not be imposed for projects which were not approved before Sept 30, 1992, if during fiscal
years 1991 and 1992 the amount appropriated for AIP is less than $3.7 billion, or if binding for EAS is
less than $26.6 million for 1991, or $38.6 million for 1992-
5. DOT may not allow PFCs unless DOT has issued a final role establishing a national noise program and
a notice of proposed rulemaking to consider more efficient allocation of existing slots at the four high-
dere iry airports (w be developed by July 1, 1991).
6. A PFC may be charged on originating and connecting passengers, but no more than two PFCs may be
imposed on each one-way trip,
7. Revenues derived from a PFC may not be treated as airport revenues for the purpose of establishing a
rate, fee or charge pursuant to a contract between an airport and air carrier. An airport may not include
in its rate base by means of depreciation, amortization or any other method that portion of the capital
costs of a PFC-funded project. Airline charges for PFC-funded facilities used by one or more carriers
on an exclusive basis shall be no less than airline charges for similar facilities that were not financed
with PFC revenues.
8. No state or local government which does not control an airport may prohibit or regulate PFCs. No
contract between an air carrier and an airport may impair the authority of the airport to collect PFCs and
apply PFC revenue.
9. No project developed through a PFC may be subject to an exclusive long-term lease or use
agreement as defined by the Secretary by regulation. Any lease or use agreement of an air carrier
governing a facility built with PFC funds may not contain conditions restricting the airport from
funding, developing, or assigning new capacity at the airport.
10. DISC shall issue regulations requiring air carriers and their agents w collect PFCs. The fees collected
mus be promptly remitted to the airport, less a uniform amount to cover expenses in collecting the fee.
The amount of any PFC must be indicated on the passenger's ticket.
11. Establishes procedures for applications to DOT for approval of a PFC. Before an application can be
submitted, the airport must provide a detailed explanation of the proposed PFC project and the opponu-
niry for consultation with air carriers operating at the airport. After the DOT Secretary receives an
application, he must provide notice and an opportunity for comment by air carriers and other interested
persons. The Secretary must make a final decision on an application within 120 days of the date of
receiving the application.
12. DOT is required to issue regulations requiring recordkeeping and auditing of air carrier accounts with
respect to PFCs. The DOT Secretary is directed to periodically audit PFCs and may terminate the
continued imposition of a fee in whole or in part if the revenues are not being used in accordance with
the law. If the Secretary determines that a PFC is excessive or that PFC revenues are not being used
properly, the Secretary may set off amounts necessary to achieve compliance with the law against
amounts otherwise payable to the airport under the AIP program.
13. Regulations necessary to carry out this law shall be issued in 180 days.
14. Eligible airport related projects (which are eligible for funding by a PFC include projects for airport
development, airport planning or terminal development as these projects are defined in the Airport and
.Airway Improvement Act of 1982; projects for noise planning and noise compatibility measures
eligible for funding under the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 without the necessity
for approval of a program under the procedures of that law; and the construction of gates and related
areas at which passengers are enplaned or deplaned. PFC financing for eligible projects include making
payments for debt service on bonds and other indebtedness incurred to carry out such projects.
r..
Section 9111. (Reduction in AIP Apportionments for Large and Medium .Airports Imposing a PFC)
Large and medium hub airports (that annually have 0.25 percent or more of total U.S. enplanements) which
impose a PFC shall have their AIP entitlement apportionment reduced by 50 percent of the amount collected
from a PFC. up to a maximum loss of 50 percent of the apportionment. Small airports may impose a PFC and
not forego any of their entitlement funds.
Section 9112. (Use of PFC Reduced ApponionmentlSmall Airport Discretionary Fund)
Of the revenues which become available through the reduced apportionments. 25 percent shall be placed in
the discretionary program established by existing law, of which 50 percent must be used for making grants for
small hub airport projects. The remaining 75 percent of the revenues available from reduced apportionments
will go into a special small airport fund. One-third of the amount is available for grants to general aviation
airports and two-thirds is available for small commercial service airports (less than -05 percent of total annual
cnplanements in the United States). Sense of Congress that DOT should not reduce funding under the existing
discretionary fund for small and general aviation airports as a result of additional AIP funds made available
under the new discretionary small airport fund.
Section 9113. (EAS)
Amends the essential air service (EAS) program to eliminate cities at which subsidy has already been termi-
nated under recent appropriations acts. Provides that DOT does not have discretion to eliminate other cities
from the program. Provides that funding for the EAS program will be contract authority payable out of the
�.. aviation trust fund. The amount of funding made available is $26.6 million for fiscal year 1991 and $38.6
million for fiscal years 1992-98.
n..
Section 9114. (State Block Grant Pilot Program)
Continues the AIP state block grant pilot program for an additional year.
Section 9115. (Auxiliary flight Service Stations)
DOT must develop and implement a system of manned auxiliary flight service station to supplement the
services of the planned consolidation to b] automated flight service stations. The auxiliary flight service
stations shall be located in areas of unique weather or operational conditions which am critical to the safety of
flight.
Section 9116. (Virgin Islands)
FAA must conduct an air space study of the Caribbean and Miami air traffic control regions for the purpose of
determining methods of improving air safety and must report to Congress its findings, FAA may not contract
with private parties the operation of the Virgin Island control towers until after the above mentioned report is
completed. FAA must also take action to replace the airport radar facilities at St. Thomas, which were de-
stroyed by Hurricane Hugo.
Section 9117. (Engine Condition Monitoring Systems)
FAA must conduct a study of the potential use of engine condition monitoring systems on aircraft.
Sections 9118 and 303. (Procurement Authority)
FAA may conduct multi-year and sole -source procurement and long-term leasing in a similar manner to DOD
procurement authority. FAA must conduct a study of the potential use of aircraft engine condition monitoring
systems on aircraft.
Section 9119. (Expanded East Coast Plan)
FAA roust conduct environmental impact statements and air safety investigations within six months of
enactment of Expanded Eau Coast Plan on New Jersey. Must report to Congress on needed changes and
make those changes within one year of enactment.
Section 9120. (Transfer of Format of Geodetic Navigation Information)
Not tater than two years after enactment, FAA and NOAA shall complete the transfer of geodetic coordinate
navigation information from NAD -27 format to NAD -83 format.
Section 9121. (Sensitive Security Information)
FAA may withhold disclosure of information in the conduct of security -related research and development
activities.
Section 9122. (Reports)
Eliminates DOT's annual repotting requirement on the effect of airline deregulation.
Section 9123. (Atlantic City Airport)
Repeals funding prohibition for Atlantic City airport development.
Sections 9124 and 613. (Natural Disaster Regulation)
FAA must establish regulations to prohibit aircraft overflights of any inhabited area that has been declared a
1W natural disaster area in Hawaii. Requires FAA to report to Congress on status of study to determine appropri-
ate minimum altitude for aircraft flying over national airport system units.
M
Section 9125. (Flight Takeoff or Landing Requirement for State Taxation)
No state or political subdivision shall levy a tax to any commercial aircraft Flight unless such aircraft takes off
or lands in such state or political subdivision.
Section 9126. (Allocation of Existing Capacity at Certain Airports)
DOT shall by July 1, 1991, initiate a rulemaking to consider more efficient methods of allocating existing
capacity at high density traffic airports in order to provide improved opportunities for operations by new
entrant air carriers.
Section 9127. (Certificate Transfers)
DOT must certify to Congtess that any transfer of an airline certificate is consistent with the public interest.
Section 9128. (Sevembdliry)
If any provision of this bill is held invalid, the remainder of the legislative provisions shall remain effective.
Section 9129. (Buy America)
Prohibits DOT from obligating any Federal funds for any project unless die steel and manufactured products
used in such projects ate produced in the United States. Provides certain conditions for which a waiver from
this prohibition may be granted.
Section 9130. (Prutudi tion Against Fraudulent Use of "Made in America' Labels)
DOT Secretary shall declare a party ineligible to receive Federal contracts or grants for not less than three
years if the Secretary funds that the party intentionally used the "Made in .America' label for a product which
was not made in America.
Section 9131. (Restrictions on Contract Awards)
No person or enterprise domiciled oropemting under the laws of a foreign government may enter into a
contract with the FAA, if that foreign government maintains a significant and persistent pattern of discrimina-
tion against United States products or services.
Sections 9201, 9202 and 9203. (Aviation Research Authorization of Appropriations)
Authorizes appropriations for FAA's research, engineering and development (R6&D) at a level of $260
million for fiscal years 1991 and 1992. Provides that not less than $25 million of R,E&D appropriated funds
be used for enhancing airport capacity.
Section 9204. (Weather Service)
Authorizes appropriations for weather services at a level of $34 million for fiscal yeas 1991 and $35 million
for 1992.
.. Section 9205. (Aviation Research Grant and Consortium Program)
Establishes new grant program for university and college aviation research consortia. Up to 3 percent of
R,E&D funding may be made available for this new authorization.
Section 9206. (Study by the General Accounting Office of Multi -Year Contracting Authority)
Requires GAO to study FAA's long -tern lease and procurement authority with a comparison of Department
of Defense's similar experience.
Section 9207. (Buy -American Requirement)
FAA may enter into contracts with or make R.E&D grants in fiscal years 1991-92 to a U.S. firm wheat FAA
and other federal agencies agree it is in the public interest and the contract or grant is not more than 6 percent
more expensive and at least 51 percent domestically produced.
Section 9208. (Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research Program)
Authorizes FAA's research program to consider developing technologies to prevent catastrophic failure of an
aircraft Provides that FAA may make research grants to colleges, universities and non-profit research
organizations to conduct such research as it relates to aircraft catastrophic failure.
✓-Section 9209. (Aviation Research and Centers of Excellence)
FAA may make grants In colleges to establish and operate regional centers of air transportation excellence.
Section 9302. (Noise Findings)
Declares congressional findings regarding the need for a national noise policy.
Section 9303. (National Aviation Noise Policy)
DOT shall issue regulations establishing a national noise policy by July 1, 1991.
The national noise policy must be based upon a detailed economic analysis of the impact of the phaseout
of Stage 2 aircraft on competition and growth in the airline and air cargo industry, the impact on motion
and small community air service, and the impact on new entry into the airline industry.
By July 1, 1991, DOT shall transmit to Congress recommendations on the need for changes in stan-
dards and procedures for. 1) local entities to restrict aircraft operations, 2) law suits by persons ad-
versely affected by aviation noise, 3) FAA's regulation of airspace in order to better take into account
environmental effects and, 4) mandatory requirements for local restrictions on the use of land im-
pacted by aircraft noise. DOT must also state whether such actions can be accomplished through
regulatory, administrative or legislative action.
Section 9304. (Noise and Access Restriction Reviews)
National noise policy shall require the establishment by regulation, for the review of airport noise and access
restrictions on Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft and the opportunity or adequate public notice and comment on
w. such restrictions.
1. Subject to specific exemptions (in (3) below), no airport noise or access restriction proposed after Oct.
1, 1940 may restrict Stage 2 aircraft unless the airport publishes the proposed restriction 180 days prior
to its effective date, and prepares and makes available for public comment at the same time:
a.
A)an analysis of the anticipated or actual cost/benefits of the restriction:
B) a description of alternative restrictions; and
C) a description of non -aircraft restriction alternatives considered, with cost/benefits of
such alternatives compared to those of the proposed restriction.
2. Subject to specific exemptions (in (3) below), no new direct or indirect airport noise or access restric-
tions on Stage 3 aircraft may be implemented after Oct. 1, 1990, unless it is reviewed and approved
by DOT or all aircraft operators at the airport have agreed to it. DOT must approve disapprove a
proposed restriction within 180 days of being asked to do so. DOT cannot approve a new Stage 3
restriction unless it finds that there has been adeouam opportunity for public comment and that the
restriction:
A) is reasonable, nonarbitary and non-discriminatory;
B) does not create an undue burden on interstate commerce;
C) is not inconsistent with maintaining the safe and efficient utilization of the navigable
airspace;
D) does not conflict with any existing federal statute or regulation; and
'►� E) does not create m undue burden on the national aviation system.
3. The provisions of (1) and (2) listed above do not apply to:
A) a local action to enforce a negotiated or executed airport aircraft noise or access agreement
between the airport operator and the aircraft operator in effect on the date of the enact-
ment of this Act;
B) a local action to enforce a negotiated or executed airport aircraft noise or access restriction
between the airport operator and the aircraft operators agreed to before the date of the
enactment of this Ac[
C) an intergovernmental agreement including airport aircraft noise or access restriction
in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act;
D) a subsequent amendment to an airport aircraft noise or access agreement or restriction
in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act that does not reduce or limit aircraft opera-
tions or affect aircraft safety;
E) a restriction which was adopted by an airport operator on or before Oct. 1, 1990, and
which was stayed as of Oct. 1, 1990, by a court order or as a result of litigation, if such
restriction or a pan thereof is subsequently allowed by a court to take effect; and
`. F) in any case in which a restriction described in E) is either partially or totally disallowed
by a coup, any new restriction imposed by an airport operator to replace such disallowed
restriction if such new restriction would not prohibit aircraft operations in effect as of the date
of the enactment of this Act.
O) a local action which represents the adoption of the final portion of a program of a staged
airport aircraft noise or access restriction where the iridal portion of such program was
�r► adopted during calendar year 1988 and was in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act;
and
H) where the FAA has prior to the date of the enactment of this Act formed a working group
(outside of a Part 150 process) with the airport to examine the noise impact of air traffic
control procedure changes. (This exemption applies only to Stage 3 restrictions.)
4. Airports imposing noise or access restrictions on Stage 3 aircraft operations after Oct. 1, 1990, shall not
be eligible to impose PFCs or be eligible for A1P grants unless such restrictions have been agreed to by
the airport proprietor and aircraft operators, or DOT has approved The restrictions, or the restrictions
have been rescinded.
5. DOT may reevaluate any Stage 3 noise restriction previously agreed to or that DOT has approved if an
aircraft operator demonstrates that there has been a change in the noise environment of the affected
airport. Such reevaluation may notoccurless than two years after approval of the restriction.
6. Except to the extent required by the application of provisions dealing with review/approval of new Stage
3 restrictions and notice for new Stage 2 restrictions, nothing in the Act shall be deemed to eliminate,
invalidate, orsupersede existing law with respect to airport noise or access restrictions by local authorities.
(The standards fora court to review achallenge of an existing restriction remain the same as they were prior
to the Act. The "grandfathering" of existing restrictions so they are not subject to the processes mandated
by this law does not imply that they are immune to challenge under preexisting law.)
Section 9305. (Determination Regarding Noise Restrictions On Certain Stage 2 Aircraft,
DOT shall conduct a study to determine applicability of the reviewlapproval or notice requirements on noise
restrictions on the operation of Stage 2 aircraft weighing less than 75,000 pounds. In making such determination,
DOT shall consider l) the noise levelsproducedby such aircraft relative to other aircraft: 2) the benefits to general
aviation and the need for efficiency in the national air transportation system; 3) the differences in the nature of
operations at airports and the areas immediately surrounding airpons:4) international standards and accords with
respect to aircraft noise; and 5) such other factors which the Secretary deems necessary.
Section 9306. (Federal Liability For Noise Damages)
The federal government will assume liability for noise damages based on a constitutional "taking" of pmpeny
that directly results from DOT's disapproval of an airport's proposed Stage 3 restriction.
Section 9307. (Limitation On Airport Improvement Program Revenue)
An airport may not receive AIP funds or impose a passenger facility charge unless DOT assures that the
airport is not imposing any noise or access restriction not in compliance with this Act.
Section 9308. (Prohibition On Operation Of Certain Aircraft Not Complying With Stage 3 Noise Levels)
Subject to the waiver provisions listed in the Act, no one may operate a Stage 2 civil subsonic turbojet ancran
weighing more than 75,000 pounds to or from any airpon in the continental United States (48 contiguous
states) after Dec. 31. 1999.
1. An air carrier whose fleet is at least 85 percent Stage 3 by July t, 1999 may apply to the Secretary for a
waiver allowing the continued operation of the remaining 15 percent or less of its fleet which is
Stage 2.
2. Such waiver may not permit the operation of Stage 2 aircraft beyond December 31, 2003.
3. DOT may grant the waiver if it finds that it is in the public interest and in doing so, must consider the
�.. effect of such waiver on competition in the airline industry and on small community air service.
4. DOT snail, by regulation, establish a schedule for phased -in compliance (with interim compliance
dares) beginning on the date of enactment of the Act and ending before Dec. 31, 1999.
5. Beginning in 1992, each air carrier shall submit to DOT annual reports showing the progress the carrier
is making to Comply with the phaseout-
Section
haseoutSection 9309. (Non -addition Rule)
Stage 2 aircraft may not be imported into the United States except pursuant to a written contract executed
before enactment of this Act, or if DOT provides an exemption in order to permit a person to modify the
aircraft to meet Stage 3 requirements.
Title XI REVENUE PROVISIONS
Section 11213. (Increase and Extension of Aviation -Related ,raxes and Trust Fund; Repeal of Reduction in
Rates)
Extends the current aviation excise taxes through Dec. 31, 1995, but as of Dec. 1, 1990, increases the tax on
air passengers to 10 percent, the tax on air freight to 6.25 percent, the tax on noncommercial aviation gasoline
to 15 cents per gallon, and the tax on noncommercial aviationjet fuel to 17.5 cents per gallon.
Revenues from the extension of the current aviation excise taxes continue to go to the Airport and Airway
Trost Fund through Dec. 31, 1995. All revenues from the increases in aviation excise taxes are to go to the
General Fund through 1992, and to the Airport and Airway Trost Fund for 19931995.
Repeals the aviation tax reduction trigger, effective on the date of enactment of this Act.
(Note: It is possible that section numbers may be revised when signed into taw.)
Page BA—SOUTHEAST MISSOURIAN, Cape Girardeau, Mo., Thurs., Nov. 8, 1990
Jerminal up in the air
Airport board rethinks building location
By Jay E, stlick
Staer
'It's my judgment that building a new terminal
(north of the existing building)
is a mistake for
CAPE GIRARDEAU — After
recommending months ago that the
the city, and this board
needs to make
C d build a new $1.3 million tem,;-
recommendations that are appropriate and
nal building at the Municipal Air-
port in Gen of plans to renovate the
reasonable.'
- Truman Cole
existing building, the Airport Ad-
visory Board now wants to
Leslie to calculate cost estimates
FAA might not have money avail -
reconsider the proposal.
for moving the facility. The board
able for its share of the project.
At Wednesday's airport board
will consider Leslie's report at its
The city receives $300,000 an -
meeting, board member Truman
next meeting Dec. 4.
nually in FAA entitlements for air -
Cole said he thought the planned
The board debated the rerrivationport
improvement projects pro -
site for the new terminal, just north
versus new construction issue for
vided it has 10,1100 enplanemenis
of the existing facility, was III-
months before recommending two
each year. The entitlement funds
conceived.
months ago that a new facility be
are lost if they aren't used within
Cole and other board members
built. The city staff has said
three years.
said the ideal site for the new build-
revenue bonds could be used to fi-
But board member J. q'. Scesing
ing is north and west of the existing
nance the city's share of the pro-
said a federal law passed this year
terminal, on the opposite side of the
jeer's cost.
will result in sone reductions in
ai(M
The bond's recommendation in-
FAA apportionments for larger wr-
it's my judgment that building a
eluded a six-month interval before
ports, and a portion of the funds
new terminal (north of the existing
designing the facility to allow the
will be set aside for small airports
is a mistake for the city,
city to secure a repair for the exist-
like Cape Girardeau's.
Cbudding)
is said, "and this board needs to
ing building.
"I think the money's out there, as
make recommendations that are ap-
Board chairman Jerry
long as you keep sniffing for it,"
propriatc and reasonable."
McClanahan said he was reluctant
Sewing said.
But same board members ques-
tinned whether the city could afford
to go before the City Council with
an altered recommendation.
In other business, Mak Scesing
the additional cost of moving the
"1 don't want to have to go to the
said bids on operation of the airpart
control tower will be opened tod:ry.
site.
The western site would add costs
council and say: 'Hey, we've
changed our minds and now we
The city last year took over oper-
ation of the lowde
lower under a five-year
to the project for land acquisition,
utility extension, taxiway,
want a million and a half (dollars),"
contract with the FAA, which sub -
and
apron and ramp paving.
McClanahan said.
But Cole said the total cast
sidiud the tower's operations. The
Airport consultants have said a
shouldn't be the only consideration
contract was to be renewed annual -
ly
new building on that site would
in determining where to build a
cast $4.5$5 million, of which the
new terminal. fie said he didn't
But the PAA recently informed
city would be responsible for about
want funding concerns to allow the
the cit that it would not inner its
y
$IS million. Federal Aviation Ad-
city to "makea 50 -year mistake,
contact next year and that the city
ministration entitlements would
1 think this Wird needs to bo the
was required to bid the control
fund the remaining cost.
catalyst to get the city to change its
tower service contract out.
If constructed adjacent to the air-
thinking," Cole said. "if the city
City officials have contended that
port control tower, just north of the
wants to do it, they'd get it done.
it shouldn't be required to bid the
existing terminal, the new building
They'll find the money."
service and Leslie said the city will
would cost the city about $650,000,
Cote said the new terminal build-
continue to contest the matter if it
according to an architect's
ing should be situated in an area
isn't awarded the new contract.
estimates.
Pa's isolated from other airport
He said the FAA likely suc-
Board members said the western
activities for "security" reasons.
combed to pressure from private
site would be ideal, but board
He also said putting the terminal
companies who want to operate the
member Bill Walker said dic City
at the west end of the airport would
tower.
Council might not he willing to
have marketing advantages as the
Leslie said that since the city has
concede the additional "out of
city tries to attract industry and ad-
taken over the contract, reliability
pocket" expense for the facility-
d. iotaI air -passenger service at the
and service has improved at the
( Being pragmatic, I question
(rwhelher we can realistically lake
arrywrL
Board member Allan Maki
tower. When the city look over op-
this approach," Walker said, "I'm
said
having a "well-placed and well-
emtions last year, records revealed
that the previous operator was on -
nm convinced that moving the fa-
planned" site for the terminal build-
derslatfed nearly a third of the time
citity could be accomplished for
ing is "paramount" to airport
it had the contract.
$4.5 million."
The board didn't take any formal
marketing.
But Leslie said that even if the
Leslie also said tower workers
had a high turnover rate that
action on Cole'sproposal, but
Urector
city approved the new site and
resulted in inexperienced operators
asked Public Works Done
came up with the needed funds, the
and poor service.
1 I
1�
W)L,'PI�11
November 16, 1990
Mr. J. Ronald Fischer
City Manager
City of Cape Girardeau
401 Independence
Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63701
Dear Mr. Fischer:
Per our conversation last night I would like to offer my
resignation from the Cape Girardeau Airport Board effective
immediately.
yr, It has been a real pleasure working with you, Al Stoverink,
Doug Leslie, Mark Seesing and the members of the Airport
Board. I especially appreciate the time, and education that
Al has provided to me relating to the business of City
Government.
It is with regret that I make this decision as I consider
the airport a key facility to the continued progress and
growth of our city. However, I feel much has been
accomplished, and I am convinced that with a full time
Airport Manager, we will continue to improve our facility.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve
Best Regards,
rinkopf
I/
P. O. BOX 1342 - CAPE GIFARDEAU, MO 637021342 314334-6024