FAA REPLY TO CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

The city has not produced any information on the following letter.  No articles in the paper, not even a mention in the council minutes.  It is like they did not get a copy of the letter.  There were plenty of articles in the paper about MoDOT stating they would not oppose the closure.  Why have we not heard from the City on this letter? 

FAA REPLY TO CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

May 21, 2013

Mr. Rick Childers
City Administrator
City of St. Clair
#1 Paul Parks Drive
St. Clair, MO 63077

Re: St. Clair Regional Airport

March 26, 2013 Correspondence

Dear Mr. Childers:

Thank you for your March 26, 2013 letter. The corrective actions described in your letter demonstrate that the City has made significant progress in addressing the action items contained in my December 21, 2012 letters and Jim Johnson’s December 28, 2012 letter.
However, there are still a few items that must be addressed in order for the City’s corrective action plan to be accepted by MoDOT and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The purpose of this letter is to outline the items which require additional action and to provide the City with guidance to ensure that its corrective action plan is accepted. 

Routine Maintenance items 

For item 1, “Grass and Weeds in Cracks on Runway and Apron”, the City’s response suggests that pavement cracks are only sprayed once a year. However, if weeds begin to grow out of pavement cracks after the annual spraying has occurred, these weeds should be sprayed as needed. An acceptable corrective action plan will include a commitment from the City to ongoing routine maintenance of grass and weeds in cracks on pavement surfaces. 

For Item 4, “Rotating Beacon Inoperative”, and Item 7, “Runway Lights Broken and Mounted Improperly”, ongoing routine maintenance must continue regardless of the status of negotiations on the City s closure request. An acceptable corrective action plan will include a commitment from the City to ongoing routine maintenance of the rotating beacon and the runway lighting system and will not condition that commitment on the outcome of closure discussions. 

Compliance Plan Correspondence 

For Item 3, which relates to main hangar storage, the actions proposed are acceptable and address the compliance issues raised, but additional information is needed for MoDOT and the FAA to accept the City’s corrective action plan for this item. Please provide me with documentation demonstrating that the $ 11,700 transfer to the new airport account has occurred. Please also provide documentation of the public auction to sell any items remaining in the hangar and documentation demonstrating that the auction proceeds were transferred to the new airport account. 

For Item 4, which relates to Air Evac’s lease, MoDOT and the FAA agree that inclusion of a CPI indexing clause in the next Air Evac lease will help to ensure that Air Evac’s monthly rental rate reflects current economic conditions. MoDOT and the FAA also agree that different categories of tenants can have different rental rates, so long as a consistent methodology is utilized to establish fees for comparable aeronautical users of the airport. 

Although the City’s letter indicates it will include a CPI indexing clause in its next lease agreement with Air Evac, the letter does not state whether the base monthly rental rate for Air Evac will increase from $300/month when the Air Evac lease is next negotiated. Without this information, MoDOT and the FAA cannot determine whether the City’s proposed corrective action plan for Item 4 is acceptable. 

The City’s March 26 letter stated that its lease rates reflect a variety of factors that differentiate certain types of tenants from one another. The differences between Air Evac and the fixed wing tenants may substantiate different rental structures for businesses operating at the airport and for other fixed wing tenants, but without any type of documentation outlining the City’s rental structure for businesses
operating at the airport, MoDOT and the FAA cannot determine whether Air
Evac’s lease agreement is consistent with such rental structure. 

In order to address the remaining questions relating to Item 4, any future Air Evac leases should reflect a similar percentage increase in the base monthly rate to the increases experienced by other tenants from 2007-2013 pursuant to Title 49 United States Code Section 47107. In the alternative, the City should provide its cost allocation methodology for its rental rates. This methodology should be consistent with the FAA’s Rates and Charges Policy. 

MoDOT is available to work with the City to address these remaining corrective action plan items and to identify steps the City can take to ensure future compliance. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. As soon as a response is received on these remaining items, I will coordinate with the FAA to determine whether the City’s corrective action plan is acceptable. 

Sincerely, 

Amy Ludwig
Administrator of Aviation
cc: Mr. Jim Johnson, Federal Aviation Administration
Ms. Lynn Martin, Federal Aviation Administration