Augusta Aviation Commission reviews construction projects

Augusta Regional Airport. Photo by Skyler Q. Andrews.

Date: April 25, 2025

The Augusta Aviation Commission, during its monthly meeting Thursday morning at the Augusta Regional Airport (AGS), listened to a review of a planned new design for two taxiways at the airport — A4 and G2.

Elizabeth Giles, senior construction manager with AGS, explained that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is insisting that AGS prioritize the refurbishing of the taxiways above its other construction projects.

Long-term goals for the taxiway, said Giles, would entail a taxiway parallel to its current one. The FAA, however, would prefer a more complex design with more turns, as a means of decreasing the odds of accidents near or along the runway.

“The more turns that you have before you hit an active runway, the more aware you have to be of your surroundings,” Giles said. “So to us, logically, it looks like, ‘why are we doing this?’ It looks like it complicates things out there more, but that’s the that’s the intent. You want more turns, you want more offset connectors.”

MORE: Greenbrier Preschool workers receive quality rated workforce bonus

The full project would cost approximately $6.8 million, drawn from federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant funds.

Last year, AGS announced that it would receive $4 million in federal Airport Terminal Program (ATP) funds towards the expansion of its passenger security screening checkpoints. During Thursday’s meeting, AGS executive director Herbert Judon noted that the project is currently on hold as the airport waits for the FAA to review language in the grant agreement.

“But without the grant agreement being signed, typically, you can’t start the project, and you can’t give the contractor a notice to proceed,” said Judon to the Aviation Authority commissioners.

The project would take a year to complete, Judon explained, and the airport aimed to have the new checkpoints in place by Masters Week of 2026.

“So we’re getting precarious right now in terms of that time schedule,” Judon said. A proposed plan B, he then noted, may entail drawing from another available source of funds, those from the Airport Infrastructure Grant (AIG).

This, however, may present two risks, Judon stated: that of depleting the limited AIG funds before the project is complete, and that of possibly losing a portion of ATP funds once the agreement is signed.

MORE: Dr. Keen officially steps into role as Augusta University’s second president

“What we’re anticipating, assuming or hoping, is that, if we get started, that the project is complete to the extent that we can use the lane operation,” said Judon, who had earlier noted that his addressing the situation was to raise a “red flag” to the commission.

Skyler Andrews is a reporter covering business for The Augusta Press. Reach him at skyler@theaugustapress.com.

What to Read Next

The Author

Skyler Andrews is a bona fide native of the CSRA; born in Augusta, raised in Aiken, with family roots in Edgefield County, S.C., and presently residing in the Augusta area. A graduate of University of South Carolina - Aiken with a Bachelor of Arts in English, he has produced content for Verge Magazine, The Aiken Standard and the Augusta Conventions and Visitors Bureau. Amid working various jobs from pest control to life insurance and real estate, he is also an active in the Augusta arts community; writing plays, short stories and spoken-word pieces. He can often be found throughout downtown with his nose in a book, writing, or performing stand-up comedy.

Comment Policy

The Augusta Press encourages and welcomes reader comments; however, we request this be done in a respectful manner, and we retain the discretion to determine which comments violate our comment policy. We also reserve the right to hide, remove and/or not allow your comments to be posted.

The types of comments not allowed on our site include:

  • Threats of harm or violence
  • Profanity, obscenity, or vulgarity, including images of or links to such material
  • Racist comments
  • Victim shaming and/or blaming
  • Name calling and/or personal attacks;
  • Comments whose main purpose are to sell a product or promote commercial websites or services;
  • Comments that infringe on copyrights;
  • Spam comments, such as the same comment posted repeatedly on a profile.