Port of Alaska modernization on track; construction notice to proceed set for March 15, 2026

Terminal 1 of the Port of Alaska is moving into the construction phase, and officials told the Assembly oversight committee that permitting and major fabrication work are on schedule.

"All indications, we should have that by the end of this month," Eric Adams, Jacobs program manager supporting the Port of Alaska modernization, said of the permitting milestone, adding that the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was expected soon. Adams said piling fabrication and precast element production have started and that the construction notice to proceed is scheduled for March 15, 2026.

Adams described the pilings as "72‑inch diameter, each about 200 feet long" and said "general rule of thumb is this is about a ton per foot." He added the pilings and related subcap forms have been inspected and are being staged for shipment.

Assembly members asked about schedule risks and durability. Adams said large projects always carry potential hiccups but that "we don't see any" current issues and that the piles are "designed to last 75 years with maintenance." He also said there are outstanding items related to an electrical substation; staff are analyzing a possible relocation and will return with recommendations.

Staff also updated members on the port's plan of finance. "We submitted to the assembly on the December 2 agenda the revised comprehensive plan of finance for the Port of Alaska," said Michael Falsy, who described the plan as an "evergreen" document that will be updated annually with actual volumes and costs. Falsy said the framework aims to seek grant funding and backfill remaining needs with surcharge‑supported revenue bonds.

On prospects for outside funding, Falsy told the committee the state is unlikely to provide major capital support in the near term "unless there is a general obligation bond," and said federal grant programs have expanded but "will not really move the needle in a significant way" for the full rebuild. He said staff are maintaining regular communication with the congressional delegation but cautioned there are no guarantees.

Members pressed whether increased port surcharges could be diverted to general government. Falsy responded that port enterprise revenues generally remain within the port because the port operates as a self‑supporting municipal business enterprise, though enterprises can pay a dividend to general government under specific formulas. He noted the Assembly revised the dividend formula around 2019 to avoid diverting funds needed for the rebuild.

The committee took no formal action; staff said they will return with further analysis and recommendations, including the substation evaluation and continued financial updates.