After years of planning, members of the Breaks Regional Airport Authority are questioning whether waiting for federal funding is still the best path to building a new airport.
Representatives of Talbert, Bright and Ellington, an aviation planning, design and construction administration firm, updated the authority during a special-called meeting Sept. 14 at the Grundy Town Offices.
Jeff McSwain, the firm’s vice president and Mid-Atlantic lead, reviewed the airport master plan and explained the federal requirements the airport must meet before it can move toward construction. He was joined by Jeff Tarkington, a principal and vice president with the firm.
Talbert, Bright and Ellington has served as an aviation consultant for the region for years, helping coordinate engineering work, grant projects and communication with state and federal agencies.
The current effort follows the closure of the former Grundy Municipal Airport and years of mining and site preparation intended to create space for a larger regional airport.
The authority began a National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) study in 2021 to return the proposed Breaks Regional Airport to the federal airport system. The Federal Aviation Administration recognized the need for an airport in the region and approved its return to the system in 2023, making the project eligible to compete for federal grants.
Eligibility, however, does not guarantee funding.
The authority is now waiting for the FAA to approve its aviation activity forecast, which projects the number of aircraft that would be based at the airport and the number of annual takeoffs and landings. The FAA will not allow the rest of the master plan to proceed until it approves that forecast.
McSwain said the district has submitted three revisions. Because the project involves construction of a new airport, the forecast must be reviewed at FAA headquarters rather than solely by a regional airport district office.
“That’s been the bottleneck,” McSwain said, explaining that one planner is reviewing such projects from across the country.
Once the forecast is approved, the planning process will determine which facilities can be justified under federal standards, including runway length, taxiways, aircraft parking areas, vehicle parking and other infrastructure.
FAA standards require a publicly owned airport seeking federal assistance to have at least 10 validated based aircraft and be at least 30 miles from the nearest airport already receiving federal grant funding. McSwain said the Tazewell County Airport in Richlands is slightly more than 30 miles away, allowing the proposed Breaks airport to meet the distance requirement.
Federal funding could cover up to 95% of eligible project costs, with the state paying 4% and the authority responsible for the remaining 1%. A state-funded project could require a 10% local match.
That potential support comes with strict federal requirements governing what the FAA will fund.
The consultants said federal officials are unlikely to support the full 5,100-foot runway envisioned by the authority because current data do not show enough aircraft operations requiring that length. The probability of obtaining federal support for a shorter runway was estimated at greater than 50%, while the likelihood of federal funding for the full 5,100-foot runway was described as “very low.”
Several board members expressed frustration with that reasoning, noting that larger aircraft could not use the former Grundy airport because its approximately 2,300-foot runway was too short. Without a longer runway, they argued, the authority cannot generate the larger-aircraft activity the FAA wants documented.
Board member Todd Elswick said the community cannot afford to wait indefinitely while its population declines and businesses leave.
“There’s one word I’ve heard a whole lot that I don’t like,” Elswick said. “It’s years.”
“We don’t have years,” he continued. “Our town don’t have years. Our county don’t have years. We need an airport tomorrow. What is the plan to do that?”
Elswick said the effort dates to 2008 and questioned whether an airport would still be viable if the authority waited another eight to 10 years.
“In my opinion, it’s time to do something now,” he said.
The consultants told the board that federal and state funding processes could take several more years and would offer no guarantee that all requested money would be awarded. Even after becoming eligible, the project would compete against airports across Virginia and the nation.
The Virginia Aviation Board has an annual budget of approximately $30 million to distribute among 65 public-use airports, according to the presentation. More than 100 projects competed for state aviation funding during the board’s August funding cycle.
Authority members discussed moving forward with local money instead of waiting for federal assistance. Elswick said he believes the only way to complete the project quickly may be for the locality to write the check and build it.
“If we wait the six years or the eight- to 10-year plan, we don’t even need the airport,” Elswick said.
The consultants said the authority could build an airport without federal assistance. A locally funded project could also be designed so the runway, taxiways, lighting and other infrastructure could be expanded later as demand grows.
“If you turned us loose to design it, we could design it in a year, and you could start construction,” McSwain said.
Authority members discussed initially constructing a runway between 3,000 and 4,000 feet long while preserving the prepared site for a future extension. Once aircraft begin using the airport, the authority could document actual activity that could strengthen future requests for state or federal expansion money.
Any locally financed airport would still have to meet applicable design, environmental and permitting requirements. However, avoiding federal funding could shorten the environmental review process and allow design work and other preparations to move forward at the same time.
The consultants said they will develop cost estimates and possible funding plans through the master-planning process. No final decision on the runway length or funding approach was made during the meeting.
