Staff outlines boarding-bridge options and funding paths; commission to monitor state and FAA opportunities

Airport staff presented a side-by-side comparison of boarding-bridge and ramp options and told commissioners the options range from manual, lower-cost systems to powered automated units with longer warranties and higher cost.

Chelsea, who prepared the memo, described the Avaramp as a powered, one-person operation with a 10-year build warranty (electrical components carry a shorter warranty). She said Timberline models offer cost-saving manual options, while some Netier configurations include canopy coverage and may require two operators. Chelsea said the most automatic systems could be around $100,000 while manual options could be closer to $75,000 or less.

Staff and commissioners discussed funding. The engineer and staff noted a draft update to the FAA AIP handbook that could clarify rehabilitation and usable-life documentation and possibly expand the FAA's ability to fund boarding-bridge work. The commission discussed state grant proration (noted as roughly 70% state / 30% local under a state program) and that FAA-funded Airport Improvement Program projects can reach up to 95% federal funding. Staff also noted that boarding-bridge purchases could be PFC eligible and that the state would open an equipment window in the coming months.

Why it matters: boarding-bridge equipment affects airline and passenger handling for the regional jet types the airport expects to serve. Commissioners asked staff for follow-up detail and technical specifications, and staff said detailed model specifications are available in the memo and can be provided on request.