Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. When we get requests from communities, we always go back to our runway length study that was undertaken in 2007, where there were a number of runways prioritized for extension following that study. We did work in Fort McPherson, Fort Good Hope and Tulita and we are in the process of updating that study. We’re interested to see the results and see what the next leads might be, but at the present time we’re not aware of any technical need, any technical driver for extending the runway in Aklavik. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to remind the Minister of my Member’s statement just briefly of the completion of the Fort McPherson expansion project. If you look in Hansard you’ll find it there.
The other question is for the community of Tsiigehtchic. I mentioned before that they would like to have an emergency airstrip as we don’t have an airstrip in the community. We have a lot of emergency situations there and I know the community would really like an airport. What are the plans for the community? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you. If the Member did raise that issue in the House in regard to the expansion of the airport in Aklavik, I will take a look back at that.
On the emergency airstrip for Tsiigehtchic, again, unless the Member, perhaps he’s raised that in a Member’s statement. I don’t recall that as well, but maybe we’ll go to the deputy minister for a response to that. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Providing an airport or emergency airport access in Tsiigehtchic has been raised quite a few times in the past. We’re going back some time now. The department has always looked at the request and analyzed it, but has not taken any action in terms of a runway and providing that type of infrastructure. But we have worked and there is a helipad in the community to provide access in emergency situations. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Committee, we’re on 9-4, Transportation. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to ask the Minister here on infrastructure and going forward in planning studies. The hub of the Sahtu airport is Norman Wells. With the increase of traffic, I believe Norman Wells is the second busiest airport in the North here. With the ranking so high – other than, of course, Yellowknife being the highest – does the Norman Wells Airport have the required support resources in that airport to sustain itself and to be prepared to deal with more traffic as the oil and gas systems are going forward in regard to the oil and gas exploration?
There are other airports in the North that also seem to have quite a bit of support services, and I’m not too sure if that justifies the amount of resources there than Norman Wells or even Tulita or Deline. They’re busy airports. I’d like to follow up from my colleague Mr. Bromley, who talked earlier about the going forward infrastructure planning and with the issue of Inuvik’s airport on the climate change and the dip in their airport. I’m not too sure if that would happen in the Sahtu, especially when there is going to be a lot of traffic coming into Norman Wells and that airport gets quite busy. When I was there this winter, quite a lot of people came off that airplane and the terminal was quite crowded at that time, so I wanted to ask the Minister in that regard.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Member for his questions today. Certainly, the airport at Norman Wells, as I mentioned in response to one of the other Members earlier, we believe it is capable of handling the traffic that it does currently. That’s not to say that it could be impacted further down the road when we see more activity in the Sahtu.
Through the Corridors for Canada plan, we have I believe it’s $15 million earmarked over a few years to look at the development of that airport, specifically commercial development and availability of land for commercial use at the airport. I do think we have some funding that we can look at down the road to ensure that we have an airport there that’s going to service the needs of not only the travelling public but also industry and development in the region.
Certainly I look forward to the approval of the corridor proposal that the Minister talks about and see if it comes to fruition in regard to supporting the transportation issues in the Sahtu and specifically Norman Wells. When I was there I certainly saw a number of airplanes parked and it’s quite crowded in there. Norman Wells, being the second busiest airport on a consistent basis in the Northwest Territories, I’d certainly like to see support for being in that category. We need to continue to support that. I’ll leave it at that.
I want to ask the Minister on the airport in Deline. I do thank the Minister for taking some time out of his busy schedule to talk to the chief, the land corp president and self- government negotiator when we were in his office this morning, about the willingness of the community of Deline to look at a type of partnership that was had by the Department of Transportation some years ago with Fort Good Hope. I need the willingness and the partnership of your department to say yes, we can make a go of it rather than drag its feet on this request. I say that because Deline has been at it for a while. They want the standards and the designs of extending their runway, because right now, under the regulations, the Department of Transportation says you only can use a certain type of aircraft with a number of people, and that doesn’t make any type of business case for NorthWright Airlines to come into the community, if you can only fly a certain number of people into that community. That’s what they are stating.
The bottom line: Deline wants to get into a partnership They need to know the designs and standards and the specs of increasing the runway, and they will go out and help get the money and go in the partnership just like they did in Fort Good Hope, but I need your department officials to play with them, work hard with them and get them the money. They’re not asking for all the money. They want to work in partnership to extend their runway. That’s all they’re asking. Even at their small airport facility, it’s really crowded in there. I mean, I do acknowledge the amount of money this government has and where do you put the money, and for some of the airports I keep seeing a new loader or a new dump truck. It seems like sometimes those take priority, for whatever reason, than to help some of the smaller communities. I’m going to leave it at that.
I want to ask because this is important infrastructure for people in the Sahtu, especially when we have to fly. We don’t have an all-weather road and that’s our only means of transportation through some parts of the season. Airports are very important to us.
Just before I get to the issue with Deline and the runway extension there, I wanted to mention, also, that in Norman Wells we’re looking at the runway vulnerability assessment, and that is in response to Mr. Bromley’s questions, as well, on what we’re doing to deal with climate change. So we’re looking at the runway in Norman Wells and assessing that. The Member would know, as he travels through Norman Wells quite often, that we’ve put grooves in that runway, as well, to help with the water, and that has been very successful as well. I wanted to mention that.
Getting to the issue with the extension in Deline, we did have a successful partnership with Fort Good Hope in the past. The extension for Deline, we continue to work towards updating the runway length study that we completed a couple of years ago. It’s not going to come with a small price tag though. If you look at even extending the runway to 5,000 metres, it’s going to be at a price tag of about four and a half million. Then if you went to 6,000 metres, that price would jump to seven and a half million. It’s not a small undertaking for the community. A community the size of Deline, how could they partner with us, you know. That’s a big amount of money. We’d be looking to continue to move forward, and I think we’re going to update the length study that we have.
We’ll continue to discuss with the community. I know the community is interested in getting some preliminary design, and we could provide that, a very rough estimate of that to the community so they have a better idea of the numbers that we’re talking about, and we can all be on the same page here, because I think the numbers that are there are substantial numbers.
Again, I think when you’re looking at the prospect of spending four and half to seven and a half million dollars expanding a runway in Deline, there has to be that economic driver, something that’s going to really necessitate the government spending that type of money on extending a runway in a community like Deline. But again, that’s not to say we don’t want to continue the dialogue, continue the discussion with the community. We will do that.
Mr. Chair, I certainly appreciate the response back from the Minister on the runways. I specifically want to talk to Deline in regards to their willingness and their partnership, even though for the department, maybe for the government it seems like a small community. How do we erase the $4.5 million? Well, that is their business. Let them do it. They have been in business for long enough. Give them the ability. Give them the credence and the faith that they could come up with money. It’s for them to decide. All we do is lend our hand in a partnership and see what they can do. It might take them a year, it might take them two years, but it’s up to them. We’re not the boss. That is what Deline is saying. Give us the design. It’s a rough estimate. We will come and we will find the money ourselves. It has been proven in the past. Communities have come to that stage where they can raise money themselves to come into a partnership. There are many means of raising a partnership.
I ask the Minister if he would be open-minded and give Deline, have some faith into our people that they can raise money. This issue is important enough for them to have the extended runway that might create economic opportunities in the future. It is the chicken and egg type of scenario here. I’m thinking that the government is willing to be a partner; then I think we can go along with it. I hope the Minister has that openness to Deline’s unique approach. That’s all I’m asking, if we consider this approach with Deline. We will see where it goes within the two years of life of this government. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, as the Member knows, I have a great deal of respect for the community leadership in Deline. I never would underestimate their ability to raise money and to deliver on a project.
I think, at the end of the day, the House would still have to approve any funding that went into a runway extension in Deline. I think, perhaps as the next step, we could sit down with the community leaders, talk to them about what they believe the economic drivers are or the impetus to get the runway extension done and, again, continue the dialogue, because we really need to do that. We have to get a better understanding from them where they are looking to the future and how it is that a runway extension there will be beneficial to the community and to the region. I look forward to those discussions.
If at all, I can be available – I wouldn’t want it to be just department officials – I certainly would like to be at the meeting with community leaders and the deputy minister to discuss the future of that runway extension in Deline. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Continuing with questions, we have Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to follow up briefly on the application of EK35 product. Sometimes my memory slips on what this is exactly, so I just want to confirm. I have a feeling it’s a substance used for dealing with moisture on runways that suffer from frequent large temperature changes as a result of our changing climate. Am I in the right ballpark on what EK35 product is used for? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It’s not for moisture control; it’s for dust control. It is a dust suppressant. I think Tulita had applied EK35 to the roads in Tulita a few summers back. We were there and it was a marked improvement on the amount of dust in the community. That is what EK35 used for, is a dust suppressant.
Mr. Chair, I wasn’t even close. Maybe I can get an update on what happened with the Inuvik situation. I guess that is an airport that, because of the frequent temperature changes, gets moisture build-up and it was causing jets to slide and so on; scary stuff. What was the resolution on that issue? Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I believe the Member is getting to the issue of frost and friction on the runways and the inability of large aircraft to land. I know Inuvik experienced a few days like that last winter where it was a clear day but the runway couldn’t accept large planes. That’s something that we have avoided in Norman Wells where we have gone to the grooving of the runway in Norman Wells and we don’t experience that frost and friction. So that is something. It is not an inexpensive fix, but going forward I think we are going to take a look at how the grooving works again this winter in Norman Wells. If it continues to hold up and do the job, I think we may, at some point in time, be able to do that in Inuvik as well. Thank you.
That’s great. Thank you very much and thanks to the Minister. I know there were some real incidences there. It wasn’t just a concern that it might happen; it actually was happening. I appreciate that information.
I’m always open to hearing more on what we are up to there, but it sounds like we are doing some monitoring of the situation of the possible solution in Norman Wells. It sounds interesting.
I also just wanted to comment very quickly again on the wood pellet boiler plan for the Yellowknife Airport. Again, I’m very happy to see that sort of thing. Now the Minister is on the right track with energy projects. I just wondered if he would happen to have what sort of payback we’re talking about here with this installation and what sort of greenhouse gas reductions from the normal course of events that this will get us. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I thank the Member for the question. The wood pellet boiler that’s to be installed at the terminal building is budgeted to cost $750,000. It’s estimated to displace 320,000 litres of propane annually, generating an annual savings of $80,000 and a payback period of 9.4 years. Greenhouse gas emissions would be greatly reduced and, in fact, by 477 tonnes on an annual basis. Thank you.
That was all I had on this page. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Continuing on with questions, I have Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have two quick questions here, and one that was already alluded to with the Inuvik runway. It was in the news. There was a big dip and it did prevent some planes from landing there, and they had to make some adjustments and some emergency repairs to it. As a result, there was some history that was brought up in the news reports as well. There was a discussion on the type of geographical landscape that it was built on, that it could result in future issues with the runway as well.
Has the Minister and his department looked at that in terms of safety, in terms of one of the priorities of our government when dealing with infrastructure, as an opportunity to do a planning study or do some restructuring to that runway? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have done a great deal of work in that regard. We have had a geophysics summit on the Inuvik Airport back in 2011, I believe it was. For a more detailed response, I am going to go to Deputy Minister Neudorf with the technical answer for that. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have developed a runway vulnerability protocol, working in conjunction with researchers so that we can know, assess what the impact is of climate change on our runways. We are in the process of applying that vulnerability to Norman Wells, Yellowknife, Inuvik and the Fort Simpson runways, so that work is underway.
In terms of Inuvik specifically, we always appreciate when we get historic views of what the situation, what the conditions were like before the runway was there, because it does help to understand what might be happening underneath the runway when we have these types of challenges.
We were aware that in that particular spot there was an old lake and/or water moving underneath that spot, and that will help us as we move forward to come up with the long-term, permanent fix. The solution that was applied just in the last few weeks is a temporary repair. We also have some money to do some additional engineering, so we will go in, do some testing and try to understand exactly what the problem is. Then we will use that to design the permanent repair, which should occur next summer. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Mr. Moses.
I appreciate the response and also see, looking at the project list for airports here, that the Inuvik terminal building, there was a planning study. Maybe I could get a quick update on that planning study. I believe the Inuvik Airport during our last infrastructure discussions, was recognized as the oldest infrastructure in Inuvik, so it’s nice to see it on the list for a planning study. If I could just get a quick update to see where that is at. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Members know, the facility has reached its end of service life and generally is in fair to poor condition. We had an issue last winter with a wind storm and the building suffered some damage as a result of that. So we need to move forward. Our long-term plan is to build a new air terminal building in Inuvik, so part of the process is to get a planning study underway. The money is going to hopefully be coming through the Corridors for Canada III proposal. Again, that’s a proposal, but we’re looking to build a new air terminal building in Inuvik and this is just part of the process of that happening. So we’re going to continue to move forward with the planning study in an effort to get a new air terminal building in Inuvik. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Committee, we’re on 9-4, Transportation, activity summary, airports, infrastructure investment summary, infrastructure investments, $3.075 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. Page 9-7, Transportation, activity summary, marine, infrastructure investment summary, infrastructure investments, $400,000. Does committee agree? Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a couple of quick questions. I see there are plans to expand the new shop at the Peel River ferry. I was under the impression that it was going to be a stand-alone building. Is that going to be a stand-alone building?
Thank you, Mr. Blake. For that we’ll go to Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The facility there is used by both highways and marine groups to store their equipment and the existing facility is small. Not all of the equipment can get in when it needs to be stored in there, so we are looking at expanding the camp there by approximately 2,400 square feet. It will be a metal, prefabricated building. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Mr. Blake.
Thank you. That answers my question.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Page 9-7, Transportation, activity summary, marine, infrastructure investment summary, infrastructure investments, $400,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Page 9-10, Transportation, activity summary, highways, infrastructure investment summary, Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Over our business planning process, we were scheduled to have $4 million for Highway No. 8, which is the Dempster Highway. I’d like to ask the Minister why it is not in this description.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is no money for Highway No. 8 this year. We are waiting for the Corridors for Canada III proposal where we would have money on an ongoing basis for Highway No. 8.
During our session this past spring, the Minister assured that there would be ongoing money with the Inuvik-Tuk Highway Project happening. We need to upgrade that highway. Just this fall alone we had two tractor trailers that went off the highway and four small vehicles. There needs to be a lot of work done to this highway. We’re putting public safety at risk here. Is the Minister fine with that? Thank you.
