Loading...
2024-04-25 Work SessionKodiak Island Borough Assembly Work Session Assembly Chambers Thursday, April 25, 2024, 6:30 p.m. Work Sessions are informal meetings of the Assembly where Assembly members review the upcoming regular meeting agenda packet and seek or receive information from staff. Although additional items not listed on the work session agenda are discussed when introduced by the Mayor, Assembly, or staff, no formal action is taken at work sessions and items that require formal Assembly action are placed on regular Assembly meeting agenda. This work session is open to the public and will be broadcast on the Borough's YouTube Channel. Meeting packets are available online. Page 1. CITIZENS' COMMENTS 1-907-486-3231 or Toll Free 1-855-492-9202 (Limited To Three Minutes Per Speaker) 2. AGENDA ITEMS a. FY2025 Budget Discussions - Various General Fund 3-16 Departments, Special Revenue Funds, And Debt Service Agenda Item Report - Pdf b. Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste 17-40 Aaenda Item Report - Pdf C. Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda 41 -62 Setting And Submission Of Items Agenda Item Report - Pdf 3. PACKET REVIEW a. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS • Proclamation In Recognition Of The National Salvation Army Week • Proclamation Declaring May 5-11, 2024, As 55th Annual Professional Municipal Clerks Week ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION • Ordinance No. FY2024-17 An Ordinance Of The Assembly Of The Kodiak Island Borough Amending Title 2 Administration And Personnel, Section 2.30 Rules Of The Assembly, Sections 2.30.060 Order Of Business And Agenda, And Section 2.30.070 Ordinances, Resolutions, And Motions To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Submission Of Items Page 1 of 62 OTHER ITEMS • Declaring A Seat Vacant On The Architectural and Engineering Review Board/Building Code Board of Appeals (Mr. Codi Allen) 4. MANAGER'S COMMENTS 5. CLERK'S COMMENTS 6. ASSEMBLY MEMBERS' COMMENTS 7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 8. EVENTS CALENDAR • May 7-11, NACO Western Interstate Region, California • May 11-18, CIRCAC Meeting, New Orleans • May 22-23, AML Board Meeting, Girdwood, Alaska • July 11-16, NACo Annual Conference, Florida • August 13-15, Summer Legislative Conference, Kodiak, Alaska • December 9-13, Annual Local Government Conference, Anchorage This meeting is open to the public and will be broadcast on the Borough's YouTube Channel. Meeting packets are available online. Please subscribe to get meeting notifications when meeting packets are published. For public comments, please call (907) 486-3231 or (855) 492-9202. Page 2 of 62 AGENDA ITEM #2.a. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT APRIL 25, 2024 4 ' x ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: FY2025 Budget Discussions - Various General Fund Departments, Special Revenue Funds, And Debt Service ORIGINATOR: Aimee Williams, Borough Manager RECOMMENDATION: General Fund Departments being discussed during this meeting: • Revenues • Assessing • Community Development • Building Official • Parks & Recreation • Animal Control Special Revenue Funds being discussed during this meeting: • LEPC - Emergency Planning Committee Debt Service DISCUSSION: ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Kodiak Island Borough Page 3 of 62 FY2025 Budget Discussions - Various General Fund Departments, Special Re... TI C Q CD v 3 CD (n Cn CD C) v CD v (D O N WODLAS IS...LAD BUI?UGH Account Account Description 2021 Actual Amount 2022 Actual Amount 2023 Actual Amount 2024 Amended Budget Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund REVENUE Department 000 - Fund Revenues 311.100 Real Property Tax 3,539,827.79 2,799,823.60 1,604,686.30 1,737,702.00 1,687,028.21 97 732,316.00 311.200 Personal Property Tax 432,921.97 322,419.69 188,508.92 193,078.00 185,731.85 96 190,000.00 313.120 Aircraft Tax 23,100.00 22,700.00 25,700.00 26,900.00 23,100.00 86 25,000.00 314.100 PILT- Federal 1,598,935.00 1,635,659.00 1,753,028.00 1,600,000.00 .00 1,600,000.00 314.200 PILT - KIHA 16,870.58 19,082.65 14,920.72 19,000.00 21,881.60 115 15,000.00 314.210 PILT - Alaska Housing 20,053.35 17,471.10 15,248.39 17,000.00 .00 16,000.00 316.100 Sea Products 996,832.93 1,641,428.92 1,554,469.66 1,300,000.00 680,633.61 52 700,000.00 316.200 Mining - Gravel 5,301.79 2,893.43 1,479.13 5,000.00 1,782.45 36 1,500.00 316.300 Timber 47,294.99 33,272.72 41,377.94 30,000.00 29,439.59 98 35,000.00 319.100 Penalties & Interest 297,831.59 303,629.52 232,872.98 260,000.00 208,917.04 80 250,000.00 322.110 Building Permits 50,613.11 46,065.94 57,238.12 63,000.00 42,675.28 68 55,000.00 322.120 Subdivision 6,650.00 5,150.00 6,700.00 5,000.00 4,100.00 82 5,000.00 322.130 Conditional Use Permit 500.00 500.00 500.00 500.00 .00 500.00 322.140 Zoning Compliance Permit 5,630.00 4,285.00 4,500.00 5,500.00 4,440.00 81 5,000.00 322.160 Variance Fee 1,900.00 1,500.00 1,200.00 1,500.00 400.00 27 1,200.00 322.170 Zoning Change Fee 30.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 322.180 Electric Permit 5,451.55 2,373.75 2,581.60 4,500.00 1,568.02 35 2,500.00 322.190 Plumbing Permit 2,655.00 1,895.50 1,887.88 2,000.00 2,797.68 140 2,500.00 322.200 P & Z Review Fee .00 .00 350.00 1,000.00 .00 500.00 322.230 Dog Licenses 861.00 1,005.00 807.00 800.00 .00 500.00 322.239 Business License - Tobacco 300.00 200.00 400.00 300.00 200.00 67 400.00 322.240 Business License - Marijuana 1,200.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 323.100 Tobacco Excise Tax 700,674.63 683,019.03 829,274.10 675,000.00 402,954.60 60 625,000.00 323.110 Marijuana Excise Tax 1,466.92 952.46 .00 .00 .00 .00 331.119 CORONAVIRUS Relief Fund (CARES ACT) 5,504,978.54 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 332.100 National Wildlife Refuge 180,733.00 180,874.00 201,160.00 180,000.00 .00 180,000.00 335.110 State Community Assistance (formally State Revenue 317,746.33 343,543.23 477,242.27 477,242.00 481,596.09 101 302,379.00 Sharing) 335.130 Fisheries Business Tax 1,049,474.88 854,208.88 1,347,362.01 1,000,000.00 1,332,436.02 133 1,000,000.00 335.132 Business Fisheries & Landing Tax 41,644.72 95,843.30 59,341.15 100,000.00 70,620.02 71 70,000.00 335.150 Telephone & Electric 17,424.07 20,441.49 20,778.14 16,000.00 .00 17,000.00 335.170 Liquor License 423.00 .00 .00 .00 120.00 .00 335.175 Marijuana Licenses 300.00 600.00 3,000.00 .00 300.00 .00 335.190 PERS on Behalf Payment 184,755.63 160,242.35 51,677.31 67,070.00 49,933.49 74 116,792.00 351.100 Animal Control .00 .00 220.00 .00 111.00 .00 361.100 Interest Earnings 45,568.63 77,748.75 490,026.89 300,000.00 942,162.33 314 1,000,000.00 361.110 Gain / Loss on Sale .00 .00 .00 .00 110.00 .00 361.300 Change in Fair Market Value (22,551.93) (449,043.85) (67,243.40) .00 798,286.80 .00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:56 PM Page 1 of 13 TI C Q CD v 3 CD W CD C) v CD v 0 cri 0 N BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:56 PM Page 2 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund REVENUE Department 000 - Fund Revenues 380.110 Jury Duty 275.00 375.00 100.00 200.00 400.00 200 200.00 380.120 Sale of Copies 25.25 64.20 7.50 50.00 .00 50.00 380.122 Sale of Maps 189.61 710.38 519.89 500.00 474.47 95 500.00 380.130 Dishonored Check Fee 40.00 85.00 150.00 .00 100.00 .00 380.170 Other 7,815.51 381.10 10,191.74 .00 8,448.70 .00 380.280 IBEW Reimbursement 396.76 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 391.300 Debt Service .00 .00 5,879,272.00 .00 .00 .00 392.100 Sale / General Fixed Assets .00 .00 .00 .00 15,700.00 .00 Department 000 - Fund Revenues Totals $15,086,141.20 $8,831,401.14 $14,811,536.24 $8,088,842.00 $6,998,448.85 87% $6,949,837.00 REVENUE TOTALS $15,086,141.20 $8,831,401.14 $14,811,536.24 $8,088,842.00 $6,998,448.85 87% $6,949,837.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:56 PM Page 2 of 13 TI C Q CD v 3 CD In Cn CD C) v CD v 0 0 N BOWOU19H Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 3 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund EXPENSE Department 130 - Assessing Department 410.110 Salaries 303,427.37 419,512.78 335,191.37 399,904.00 294,195.27 74 466,966.00 410.120 Temporary Help 31,923.13 22,096.93 16,693.65 14,688.00 6,869.11 47 .00 410.130 Overtime 2,153.29 597.90 .00 .00 146.48 .00 410.152 Cell Phone Stipend 2,400.00 2,256.80 1,146.80 1,200.00 980.05 82 1,200.00 420.110 Unemployment Taxes 31.17 8,546.20 33.43 42.00 29.45 70 468.00 420.120 FICA Taxes 26,898.17 33,133.21 26,161.35 31,808.00 22,429.91 71 35,815.00 420.130 Group Insurance 98,966.38 120,718.10 111,436.94 127,827.00 96,037.17 75 160,080.00 420.140 Retirement 95,338.51 109,201.29 82,868.10 100,376.00 73,855.39 74 124,960.00 420.150 Workers Compensation 16,826.53 13,960.12 10,567.75 12,432.00 9,417.83 76 14,841.00 430.140 Contracted Services 250.00 .00 .00 .00 536.94 .00 431.110 Litigation Expenses .00 50,817.50 110,309.31 75,000.00 71,492.77 95 75,000.00 431.120 Legal Fees 27,549.00 12,916.00 7,401.70 30,000.00 9,536.45 32 30,000.00 450.100 Office Supplies 2,627.40 922.82 1,278.68 3,000.00 1,845.86 62 4,000.00 450.115 Computer Software <$5000 .00 .00 .00 .00 136.09 300.00 450.120 Printing / Binding 4,010.82 3,451.37 3,390.60 5,000.00 2,770.35 55 5,000.00 450.130 Postage 245.00 6.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.140 Dues/ Books/ Periodicals 1,584.78 3,173.03 4,702.02 3,500.00 1,423.00 41 5,000.00 450.160 Furniture / Fixtures 730.73 .00 8,659.09 3,000.00 .00 1,250.00 450.170 Machinery / Equipment <$5000 3,395.00 .00 .00 .00 849.99 .00 450.210 Food / Business Lunch/Meeting Rooms .00 .00 354.73 .00 .00 .00 450.230 Advertising / Hearings 562.86 590.39 969.56 500.00 2,137.38 427 3,000.00 450.245 Title Search Fees .00 .00 320.00 1,440.00 300.00 21 1,000.00 450.270 Continuing Education .00 4,562.12 3,815.26 10,000.00 6,179.45 62 10,000.00 450.290 Recruit/ Relocation 8,139.85 90.78 183.05 .00 94.01 .00 450.300 Travel/ Per Diem 40,784.62 8,145.00 607.74 25,000.00 174.00 1 25,000.00 450.330 Rent 42,558.00 42,528.00 42,528.00 47,822.00 47,822.00 100 47,822.00 450.340 Telephone/Communications 321.88 316.19 361.62 400.00 284.21 71 400.00 492.560 Allocated to 911 Services (1,500.00) (1,500.00) (1,500.00) (1,500.00) (1,500.00) 100 (1,500.00) Department 130 - Assessing Department Totals $709,224.49 $856,042.53 $767,480.75 $891,439.00 $648,043.16 73% $1,010,602.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 3 of 13 TI C Q CD Sv 3 CD In Cn CD C) v CD v O N BOWOU19H Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 4 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund EXPENSE Department 140- Community Development 410.110 Salaries 286,933.16 239,862.39 200,004.79 339,930.00 205,721.75 61 344,122.00 410.130 Overtime 2,857.70 1,301.70 1,537.53 3,000.00 1,723.83 57 4,000.00 410.152 Cell Phone Stipend 2,206.67 1,253.20 1,540.41 1,200.00 1,855.43 155 2,400.00 420.110 Unemployment Taxes 28.53 23.92 1,589.08 34.00 20.82 61 351.00 420.120 FICA Taxes 24,044.35 19,408.45 16,850.33 26,326.00 17,096.16 65 26,815.00 420.130 Group Insurance 109,088.62 94,120.04 65,139.58 105,363.00 66,155.08 63 106,720.00 420.140 Retirement 88,096.13 71,609.19 45,889.60 86,075.00 52,260.16 61 93,157.00 420.150 Workers Compensation 4,090.36 3,424.36 2,868.05 8,877.00 2,573.93 29 3,415.00 430.140 Contracted Services .00 4,440.00 15,250.00 50,000.00 720.00 1 40,000.00 430.145 Junk Removal Services 16,068.05 10,836.50 11,651.25 20,000.00 7,855.65 39 20,000.00 431.110 Litigation Expenses .00 .00 540.00 .00 .00 .00 431.120 Legal Fees 10,959.00 5,276.00 7,340.00 10,000.00 5,360.69 54 10,000.00 450.100 Office Supplies 372.12 1,409.79 1,041.49 1,500.00 784.12 52 1,500.00 450.120 Printing / Binding 6,417.02 2,123.53 3,367.72 6,000.00 1,172.38 20 6,000.00 450.130 Postage .00 .00 100.35 .00 .00 .00 450.140 Dues/ Books/ Periodicals 1,141.00 597.00 1,188.46 1,300.00 789.00 61 1,500.00 450.160 Furniture / Fixtures 380.98 .00 .00 500.00 203.29 41 500.00 450.170 Machinery / Equipment <$5000 .00 49.91 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.210 Food / Business Lunch/Meeting Rooms 120.10 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.230 Advertising / Hearings 5,468.06 2,650.79 4,133.10 5,500.00 3,015.34 55 5,500.00 450.240 Filing / Record Fees 165.85 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.245 Title Search Fees .00 .00 125.00 500.00 .00 500.00 450.270 Continuing Education 632.50 214.00 81.52 10,000.00 2,165.00 22 10,000.00 450.290 Recruit/ Relocation 12,264.10 12,833.69 9,477.88 8,500.00 12,422.59 146 .00 450.300 Travel/ Per Diem .00 .00 .00 5,000.00 .00 .00 450.302 Commission Travel/Training .00 650.00 .00 14,000.00 .00 14,000.00 450.330 Rent 68,533.00 68,472.00 68,472.00 55,448.00 55,448.00 100 55,448.00 450.340 Telephone/Communications 317.96 316.19 361.62 360.00 284.21 79 360.00 450.430 Maint & Repairs 298.56 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.480 Boards & Committees 14,015.55 15,200.00 15,200.00 16,800.00 10,200.00 61 16,800.00 Department 140 - Community Development Totals $654,499.37 $556,072.65 $473,749.76 $776,213.00 $447,827.43 58% $763,088.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 4 of 13 CD 00 0 N BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 5 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund EXPENSE Department 142 - Building Official 430.140 Contracted Services 151,594.37 157,470.99 194,528.60 170,000.00 37,795.05 22 170,000.00 450.330 Rent 20,491.00 20,491.00 20,491.00 20,295.00 20,295.00 100 20,295.00 Department 142 - Building Official Totals $172,085.37 $177,961.99 $215,019.60 $190,295.00 $58,090.05 31% $190,295.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 5 of 13 BUI?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund EXPENSE Department 160 - Economic Development 430.140 Contracted Services .00 .00 .00 .00 5,000.00 .00 448.362 Chamber of Commerce 5,250.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 448.415 Kodiak Economic Development Corporation .00 .00 10,000.00 .00 .00 .00 450.140 Dues/ Books/ Periodicals 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 100 600.00 Department 160 - Economic Development Totals $5,850.00 $600.00 $10,600.00 $600.00 $5,600.00 933% $600.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 6 of 13 TI C Q CD v 3 CD In Cn CD C) v CD v u� Co CD 0 N BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 7 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund EXPENSE Department 172 - Parks & Recreation 410.110 Salaries 1,206.48 1,980.99 925.15 17,915.00 342.00 2 .00 410.120 Temporary Help 5,877.91 1,921.80 2,097.67 18,260.00 1,075.82 6 5,000.00 410.130 Overtime .00 21.05 .00 .00 51.30 .00 420.110 Unemployment Taxes .11 .20 .10 4.00 .05 1 5.00 420.120 FICA Taxes 557.89 283.03 242.91 2,767.00 110.86 4 383.00 420.130 Group Insurance 1,720.60 592.10 325.05 6,478.00 87.70 1 .00 420.140 Retirement 292.37 416.96 219.63 4,497.00 85.90 2 .00 420.150 Workers Compensation 531.33 322.61 143.09 1,621.00 57.69 4 159.00 430.140 Contracted Services 7,524.79 13,427.50 .00 15,000.00 .00 15,000.00 450.170 Machinery/ Equipment <$5000 .00 .00 .00 2,000.00 .00 2,000.00 450.230 Advertising / Hearings .00 451.52 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.270 Continuing Education .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 3,000.00 450.380 Snow Removal/ Sanding 1,732.50 2,698.00 2,935.00 5,000.00 2,723.50 54 5,000.00 450.430 Maint & Repairs 116.15 9.29 5,871.49 15,000.00 .00 15,000.00 Department 172 - Parks & Recreation Totals $19,560.13 $22,125.05 $12,760.09 $88,542.00 $4,534.82 5% $45,547.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 7 of 13 TI C Q CD v 3 CD W CD C) v CD BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 8 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 100 - General Fund EXPENSE Department 186 - Animal Control 444.110 Animal Control 118,700.00 121,000.00 150,430.00 152,310.00 152,310.00 100 152,310.00 Department 186 - Animal Control Totals $118,700.00 $121,000.00 $150,430.00 $152,310.00 $152,310.00 100% $152,310.00 EXPENSE TOTALS $1,679,919.36 $1,733,802.22 $1,630,040.20 $2,099,399.00 $1,316,405.46 63% $2,162,442.00 Fund 100 - General Fund Totals REVENUE TOTALS $15,086,141.20 $8,831,401.14 $14,811,536.24 $8,088,842.00 $6,998,448.85 87% $6,949,837.00 EXPENSE TOTALS $1,679,919.36 $1,733,802.22 $1,630,040.20 $2,099,399.00 $1,316,405.46 63% $2,162,442.00 Fund 100 - General Fund Totals $13,406,221.84 $7,097,598.92 $13,181,496.04 $5,989,443.00 $5,682,043.39 95% $4,787,395.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 8 of 13 CD BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 9 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 234 - LEPC REVENUE Department 000 - Fund Revenues 331.119 CORONAVIRUS Relief Fund (CARES ACT) 2,665.82 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 389.100 Use of Fund Balance .00 .00 .00 1,000.00 .00 1,000.00 391.100 General Fund 10,072.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Department 000 - Fund Revenues Totals $12,737.82 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 0% $1,000.00 REVENUE TOTALS $12,737.82 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 0% $1,000.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 9 of 13 Iv CD W 0 N BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 10 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 234 - LEPC EXPENSE Department 242- Emergency Planning Committee 410.120 Temporary Help 2,409.39 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 420.120 FICA Taxes 184.31 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 420.150 Workers Compensation 72.12 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 450.120 Printing / Binding .00 .00 .00 1,000.00 .00 1,000.00 450.230 Advertising / Hearings 247.68 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Department 242 - Emergency Planning Committee $2,913.50 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 0% $1,000.00 Totals EXPENSE TOTALS $2,913.50 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 0% $1,000.00 Fund 234 - LEPC Totals REVENUE TOTALS $12,737.82 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 0% $1,000.00 EXPENSE TOTALS $2,913.50 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 0% $1,000.00 Fund 234 - LEPC Totals $9,824.32 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 +++ $0.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 10 of 13 TI C Q CD v 3 CD W CD C) v CD v Co 0 N BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 11 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 300 - Debt Service REVENUE Department 000 - Fund Revenues 311.100 Real Property Tax 2,012,518.48 2,163,273.96 1,843,933.33 418,517.00 378,482.33 90 1,459,915.00 311.200 Personal Property Tax 243,996.34 252,103.01 217,284.06 46,502.00 40,803.03 88 162,213.00 313.110 Motor Vehicle Tax 230,218.04 458,703.72 720,866.92 660,000.00 458,477.40 69 720,000.00 335.200 School Debt Reimbursement- Current .00 5,146,233.00 5,151,361.00 5,148,627.00 4,009,508.00 78 5,146,052.00 335.210 School Debt Reimbursement - Prior Years .00 9,064,279.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 389.100 Use of Fund Balance .00 .00 .00 296,248.00 .00 73,784.00 391.100 General Fund 3,016,076.00 2,303,196.00 .00 995,618.00 995,618.00 100 .00 391.276 Facilities Fund 827,316.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 391.469 Renewal & Replacement 1,574,487.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.110 Proceeds- 2012 Two Refunding Bond 4,225,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.515 Proceeds- 2011 Bond 4,070,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.516 Proceeds- 2013 Bond 14,535,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.517 Proceeds- 2014 Bond 14,520,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.523 Proceeds- 2020A Bond 10,802.65 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.524 Proceeds- 2020B Bond 32,843.85 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 393.600 Premium on Bonds 857,176.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Department 000 - Fund Revenues Totals $46,155,434.36 $19,387,788.69 $7,933,445.31 $7,565,512.00 $5,882,888.76 78% $7,561,964.00 REVENUE TOTALS $46,155,434.36 $19,387,788.69 $7,933,445.31 $7,565,512.00 $5,882,888.76 78% $7,561,964.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 11 of 13 TI C CD v 3 CD In W CD C) v CD BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 12 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 300 - Debt Service EXPENSE Department 300 - Debt Service - School 430.130 Consultants 9,450.00 6,300.00 3,150.00 3,150.00 3,150.00 100 3,150.00 450.320 Bad Debt Expense 745.48 688.35 7.62 .00 .76 .00 450.505 Bond Issuance Fee 20.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 475.239 2011 Bond Issue 5,264,601.00 330,000.00 340,000.00 355,000.00 355,000.00 100 375,000.00 475.241 2012A Refunding Bond Issue 2,524,173.00 545,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 475.242 2012B Refunding Bond Issue 2,835,000.00 665,000.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 475.243 GO 2013 - Principal 15,390,418.00 1,245,000.00 1,280,000.00 1,325,000.00 1,325,000.00 100 1,330,000.00 475.245 2014 GO Bond 15,352,318.00 1,220,000.00 1,255,000.00 1,310,000.00 1,310,000.00 100 1,360,000.00 475.246 2015 GO HS Bond 225,000.00 240,000.00 250,000.00 265,000.00 265,000.00 100 275,000.00 475.247 2015 GO R & R Bond 170,000.00 180,000.00 190,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 100 210,000.00 475.248 2016 GO HS Bond 75,000.00 80,000.00 80,000.00 85,000.00 85,000.00 100 90,000.00 475.249 2016 GO R & R Bond 515,000.00 540,000.00 570,000.00 595,000.00 595,000.00 100 630,000.00 475.252 2016 GO Series 3 - Principal 430,000.00 450,000.00 470,000.00 495,000.00 495,000.00 100 520,000.00 475.253 2018 AMBBA DL- HS Reno Principal 50,000.00 50,000.00 55,000.00 55,000.00 55,000.00 100 55,000.00 475.254 GO 2020 One Series A - Principal .00 25,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 100 30,000.00 475.255 GO 2020 One Series B - Principal .00 145,000.00 155,000.00 160,000.00 160,000.00 100 170,000.00 475.256 GO 2012 Two Refunding Bond - Principal .00 125,000.00 1,360,000.00 1,365,000.00 1,365,000.00 100 1,375,000.00 476.239 2011 Bond Issue 253,600.00 186,770.83 178,500.00 161,125.00 85,000.00 53 142,875.00 476.241 2012A Refunding Bond Issue 124,925.00 1,010.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 476.242 2012B Refunding Bond Issue 152,350.00 23,190.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 476.243 GO 2013 -Interest 756,790.00 284,205.99 253,536.65 209,739.00 106,336.80 51 202,162.00 476.245 2014 GO Bond Issue 857,112.50 425,542.20 386,971.53 335,498.00 211,869.43 63 281,072.00 476.246 2015 GO HS Bond 265,837.50 254,212.50 241,962.50 229,088.00 229,087.50 100 215,588.00 476.247 2015 GO R & R Bond 54,250.00 45,500.00 36,250.00 26,500.00 26,500.00 100 16,250.00 476.248 2016 GO HS Bond -Interest 58,543.76 54,668.76 50,668.76 46,544.00 46,543.76 100 42,169.00 476.249 2016 GO R & R Bond -Interest 162,625.00 136,250.00 108,500.00 79,375.00 79,375.00 100 48,750.00 476.252 2016 GO Series 3 -Interest 187,350.00 169,750.00 149,000.00 124,875.00 68,625.00 55 99,500.00 476.253 2018 AMBBA DL- HS Reno Interest 13,986.50 12,571.50 11,075.00 9,497.00 5,144.25 54 7,899.00 476.254 GO 2020 One Series A -Interest 15,525.00 16,625.00 15,250.00 13,750.00 7,250.00 53 12,250.00 476.255 GO 2020 One Series B -Interest 83,475.00 89,125.00 81,625.00 73,750.00 38,875.00 53 65,500.00 476.256 GO 2012 Two Refunding Bond -Interest .00 19,602.26 17,976.86 12,621.00 7,822.23 62 4,799.00 493.140 Bond Issuance Costs 251,850.71 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 494.100 General Fund .00 .00 5,879,272.00 .00 .00 .00 494.276 Facilities Fund .00 .00 2,213,366.00 .00 .00 .00 494.469 Renewal & Replacement Projects .00 .00 4,047,302.00 .00 .00 .00 Department 300 - Debt Service - School Totals $46,079,946.45 $7,566,012.39 $19,709,413.92 $7,565,512.00 $7,155,579.73 95% $7,561,964.00 EXPENSE TOTALS $46,079,946.45 $7,566,012.39 $19,709,413.92 $7,565,512.00 $7,155,579.73 95% $7,561,964.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 12 of 13 C Q CD 3 CD W CD C) v CD v Co 0 N BUl?UTIGH Budget Worksheet Report Budget Year 2025 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 13 of 13 2021 Actual 2022 Actual 2023 Actual 2024 Amended 2024 Actual FY25 Manager's Account Account Description Amount Amount Amount Budget Amount FY24 % Used Budget Fund 300 - Debt Service Totals REVENUE TOTALS $46,155,434.36 $19,387,788.69 $7,933,445.31 $7,565,512.00 $5,882,888.76 78% $7,561,964.00 EXPENSE TOTALS $46,079,946.45 $7,566,012.39 $19,709,413.92 $7,565,512.00 $7,155,579.73 95% $7,561,964.00 Fund 300 - Debt Service Totals $75,487.91 $11,821,776.30 ($11,775,968.61) $0.00 ($1,272,690.97) +++ $0.00 Net Grand Totals REVENUE GRAND TOTALS $61,254,313.38 $28,219,189.83 $22,744,981.55 $15,655,354.00 $12,881,337.61 82% $14,512,801.00 EXPENSE GRAND TOTALS $47,762,779.31 $9,299,814.61 $21,339,454.12 $9,665,911.00 $8,471,985.19 88% $9,725,406.00 Net Grand Totals $13,491,534.07 $18,919,375.22 $1,405,527.43 $5,989,443.00 $4,409,352.42 74% $4,787,395.00 Run by Dora Cross on 04/23/2024 12:34:57 PM Page 13 of 13 AGENDA ITEM #2.b. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT }. APRIL 25, 2024 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste ORIGINATOR: Aimee Williams, Borough Manager RECOMMENDATION: DISCUSSION: The KIB Landfill allocates specific areas for the disposal of various types of waste. Presently, it includes areas designated for municipal solid waste, construction and demolition (C&D) debris, and asbestos disposal. Onsite, there is also an area for processing metals, which are then transported off the island for recycling. EF staff have recently received questions regarding C&D and metal disposal at the landfill in preparation for a large demolition project planning to occur on island. It is projected that around 200 dump truck loads of C&D could be brought to the landfill for disposal along with 300 dump trucks of metal for recycling. The expansion of the unlined construction and demolition area, completed through blasting work in 2023, aimed to accommodate the needs of residents. However, spatial constraints exist, compounded by the presence of anadromous streams flanking the landfill. In 2023, the landfill received a total of 1,286 tons of construction and demolition waste. Considering that typical dump trucks can carry approximately 28,000 pounds or 14 tons, with variations based on material type, it was estimated that about 200 dump truck loads of waste would be transported to the landfill throughout the project duration. Assuming an average dump truck capacity of 14 tons, this estimation equates to approximately 2,800 tons of material. This represents double the annual intake of waste observed at the Kodiak Island Borough landfill in 2023. Preliminary information was made available to EF staff regarding possible large facility demolition projects to occur in the future. These large demolition projects can quickly fill up available landfill space, reducing the capacity for future waste disposal. This may lead to the need for more frequent expansions or the establishment of additional landfill sites, which can be costly and environmentally impactful. Discussion Topics • Landfill Property o Current footprint o Possibility of expansion o More information regarding airspace • Contractor Requirements/Responsibility o Possible policy changes ■ Notification of project and quantities anticipated to be generated o Encouraging salvage at project site to minimize what comes to the landfill o Testing (ADEC lead based paint conversations) • Waste Reduction / Natural Disaster Planning o Green and wood waste Kodiak Island Borough Page 17 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT APRIL 25, 2024 ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION ■ Tub grinder ■ Burner o Food Waste (NREL) ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Kodiak Island Borough Page 18 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste 7_W - 'IN " S;g- - - ® f s: NOW AGENDA ITEM #2.b. Celebrating ears Ai*rB urn &s Biomass Power Generation PGF100 A New Approach 2023 Page 21 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. This page intentionally left blank. Page 22 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 2.0 New Concept in Biomass Energy 3.0 Power Generating Systems 4.0 Compare the Systems 5.0 Systems Overview 6.0 Model PGF100 - 100 Kilowatts 7.0 Summary A„3urne7ri, AGENDA ITEM #2.b. Page 1 Page 2 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 17 "We don't need to mine coal, but we do need to eliminate biomass waste” Page 23 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 1.0 Introduction Air Burners, Inc. is the Number One manufacturer of Air Curtain Burner systems. We hold the most significant patents on Air Curtain Burners and FireBoxes with power generating capabilities. For the last twenty-three years, we have been building the best and most rugged machines in the industry. The primary objective of our machines is protecting the environment while efficiently reducing timber waste Dy combustion, but Air Burners machines are also the most economical method to dispose of such waste material and other vegetative waste streams. We are the only company to have our machines thoroughly tested by the best environmental agencies, including the US EPA and Australian EPA. We are proud to have found a good balance between the need for waste disposal and the need to protect the world we live in. No matter which side of the "global warming" issue you are on, we will help you breathe better with less particu- lates in the air and reduced CO2 . Air Burners' systems are used worldwide: i) in the construction inaustry to support land clearing operations and demolition debris removal 2) In forest industries for bushfire prevention (defensible zone building) and post -fire clean-up 3) At landfills to eliminate wood and other vegetative waste to extend landfill life 4) In agriculture, to eliminate waste from trimming and crop rotation of fruit and nut trees and vineyards They are also used in disaster recovery for clearing the aftermath from storm, flood or earthquake damage. All of the systems we manufacture are portable. They are designed for field use or semi -stationary to station- ary placement. Our main manufacturing facility is located in Palm City, Florida which is on the Atlantic Coast about two hours north of Miami. We have a second manufacturing facility nearby and also have offices in Eu- rope and Asia. This allows us to quickly and economically service our worldwide market. Our engineering staff uses the latest 3D CAD software for our equipment designs. We can quickly accommodate changes to support our customers' particular requirements. The employees of Air Burners are dedicated to maintaining the high standard of design and manufacturing that has made us the recognized leader in air curtain burner equipment and technology. T T T TTTTTTT 1l T TT TT� � T TT T T T TTT TT Thousands of machines worldwide Page 24 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 2.0 New Concept in Biomass Energy Today's Biomass systems are trying to solve the wrong problem. They are focused on energy and not waste. We do not have an energy problem, but we do have a worldwide vegetative waste problem. The priority of the PGFireBox is to eliminate waste and its second priority is to recover some energy. "On average 20% of the World's waste is burnable biomass" - World Bank For more than twenty-three years, Air Burners FireBoxes have been used around the world as the lowest cost method of eliminating wood and vegetative waste. Now, we are introducing the PGFireBox° the most eco- nomical biomass energy producing system available. This system is portable and does not require any per- manent structures just like our standard machines. One of the major problems of today's biomass energy systems is the high cost of preparing the "waste", so it can be burned in the system. Systems on the market today require multiple stages of grinding and sorting before the waste is acceptable to the system; but not with the PGFireBox. Biomass -to -energy systems on the market today can only accept about 80% of the wood and vegetative waste due to decay, mold, too fibrous, foreign objects, etc., but not with the PGFireBox. Sys- tems on the market today require a secondary fuel source, like natural gas to support combustion, but not the PGFireBox. These are the primary reasons biomass energy is so expensive and cannot compete with solar or wind energy, as alternative energy source to hydrocarbon fuels. Not anymore, the PGFireBox® eliminates all of these obstacles. The PGFireBox accepts whole logs, root balls, branches, limbs, palm fronds, wood pallets, crates, lumber waste, saw mill waste, forest logging waste and more without grinding or sorting. Grab the waste, drop it into the top of the PGFireBox° and it's gone, converted into useful electricity and thermal energy. Plus, at the end of the day, clean carbon ash and highly valuable BioChar can be collected and made available for resale. Page 25 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. The preprocessing of the waste material to accommodate the biomass systems on the market today is both costly and environmentally hazardous. Sure, the burning of biomass is considered by all the World's environ- mental agencies as carbon neutral, but the diesel powered machines that preprocess the waste are not. As an example, most of these grinders are powered by 500 to 1000 horsepower diesel engines consuming 50 to 100 gallons of diesel fuel per hour; the emissions from these machines are monumental. Grinders and chip- pers are good and useful machines, but if you don't need to use them to create biomass energy, then why would you want the environmental and economic costs added to your project? Power is not the problem, biomass waste is the problem. We have too much biomass waste in the world and no good options for recycling or elimination .......... until now. Unlike other biomass energy systems, a waste input to power output efficiency calculation does not apply to our machines. Our machines are designed for efficiency of waste elimination (98%), not efficiency of power production. For our customers, we first consid- er how much timber waste they want to eliminate and second, we size the generator to meet their budget and local needs to avoid (or reduce) the need to buy electricity from the power company. The PGFireBox® is ideal for customers who have a wood and vegetative waste problem and need to eliminate the waste. Our smallest machine can eliminate on average 8 tons per hour and our largest system eliminates 20 tons per hour (98% eliminated, remaining is BioChar and carbon ash). The PGFireBox eliminates the cost and the environmental impact, but it also opens some new doors to recy- cling. In the following pages, we will briefly describe the Air Burners PGFireBox° systems and their role in a new recycling method we call "Closed Circle Recycling." This document provides a brief overview, for more details please visit our website www.AirBurners.com , call us or one of our sales representatives. Page 26 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 2.1 Thermal Energy Utilizing the thermal energy is important in maximizing your overall efficiency. The thermal energy (heat) can replace the need for natural gas or propane. Thermal energy can be used simply to provide heat for a large work shop or garage, or the thermal energy can be used for heat processing, like drying material in a kiln. In the PGFireBox system we capture the thermal energy to first create electricity, we then exhaust it out of the Power Module. There is still a significant amount of heat energy available for other uses, and it is easily accessed at the exhaust port of each Power Module. The thermal energy is captured on each of the PGF ma- chines at the outlet of the Power Module providing 1 megawatt to 5 megawatts usable heat. Example of thermal energy being used to heat a workshop 4 Example of thermal energy being used to supply a wood kiln for drying Page 27 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 2.2 Biochar Biochar is charcoal from wood burning; it is used to improve soil conditions for growing crops and to foster forest health. That knowledge is not new, but in an effort to improve harvests without the need for undesir- able chemical fertilizers and pesticides, Biochar is getting a lot of worldwide attention in recent years. If you operate an Air Burners FireBox, you too, can make a fair amount of Biochar without much effort and add a profit line to your business. Biochar, as a porous carbon substance that retains water makes nutrients more available thereby strengthening plants in agriculture, gardening and woodlands. It is also produced naturally by forest fires and agricultural field burning. The process to produce Biochar is by pyrolysis; wood is burned in the absence of oxygen and what we have left is Biochar. This sounds like a simple process, but to produce large quantities of commercial Biochar economically and in an environmentally sound way has proven difficult. Air curtain burners were designed to control emissions and quickly eliminate wood waste. As any combustion process leaves behind an ash residue, so does the FireBox. As the wood ashes collect in the bottom of the FireBox, some coals are insulated by the ash and starved of oxygen. If their further combustion is curtailed, you have created Biochar. Recently, the US Forest Service, keen on using Biochar in forests around the country, has recognized the simplicity of this and has teamed up with Air Burners to de- velop a way to optimize Biochar production in a FireBox, yet still eliminate large amounts of wood waste or forest slash at the same time. This is underway through a CRADA, a research and development agreement between the US Forest Service and Air Burners. Some of Air Burners customers are already producing Bio - char from their FireBoxes. With little effort they are both helping the environment and creating a secondary income from their machines. These are the 5 basic steps to making Biochar in your Air Burners FireBox: 1. At the end of each work day the ash and coals are raked out of the FireBox. 2. Air Burners ash rake is used to rake away the solids which may include some unburned wood separating them from the powdery light-colored ashes. 3. The solid coals and wood chunks are dowsed (quenched) with water from a hand-held hose. 4. Now the material is sized by using a simple %' screen. 5. The Biochar that passes through the screen is half-inch minus in size and taken to the Biochar storage pile. And that is it. Some of our customers are making as much as 10-15 cubic yards per day, per machine. The Biochar can now be sold in bulk or bagged to local farmers, tree nurseries and home gardeners. As no special equipment or machinery is needed for the Biochar extraction, the only additional cost component is the ex- tra time at the end of the normal work shift to complete the above steps. Page 28 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 3.0 Power Generating Systems C�FirreBo�lr" Air Burners designed and manufactures a revolutionary new machine that combines two well known and refined technologies to create the first portable machine for power generation from unprocessed biomass. We call this system the "PGFireBox®". This system uses two current technologies, Air curtain pollution control technology and Organic Rankine Cy- cle Power Generation. We have teamed with one of the best ORC manufactures in the world: ElectraTherm, based in the USA. These technologies combine to produce a portable self-contained unit which generates sig- nificant amounts of electricity from vegetative waste and is the most economical and environmentally friend- ly method for eliminating vegetative waste Vegetative waste, in particular wood waste, has long been a difficult problem for community landfills and lumbering operations. Grinding it to reduce its volume is expensive and extremely harmful to the environ- ment, and while grinding reduces the "volume", you are still left with the same amount of wood waste. Ten tons of logs in will give you ten tons of wood chips out. When you consider the amount of energy stored in wood, it is highly desirable to extract this energy as op- posed to depositing it in a landfill and losing it forever. Wood has long been used as a fuel, but extracting this energy on a large scale has been cumbersome and expensive until now. As an example, the Air Burners 100kW PGFireBox°, the PGF100, is delivered to a site fully self-contained and ready for use, no permanent fixtures, structures or buildings are necessary, and the PGF100 can be purchased and delivered for less than the cost of a typical whole log grinder. An Air Burners PGFireBox® is the most economical and lowest environmental impact method to deal with vegetative waste. The Power Generating FireBox accomplishes five important tasks: 1) It reduces the wood waste by 98%, ten tons of logs in, gives you a couple hundred pounds of ash out. A clean, natural ash which is a highly desirable recycled product for agriculture, growers, nurseries and it is also a good daily landfill cover supplement. 2) It captures energy from the wood waste and converts it to electricity providing an additional income from the use or sale of that electricity. 3) It delivers a significant amount of Thermal Energy, eliminating the need for natural gas or propane. Ther- mal Energy can be used for drying operations, like a wood kiln or for heating large buildings or garages. 4) It significantly reduces the greenhouse gas emissions from the current methods of disposal, grinding and landfilling. 5) Relocate - The PGFireBox is easily relocated. One of the major problems for biomass energy is the "Waste Travel Zone", the distance the waste must travel to the biomass facility. It is not uncommon for a perma- nently placed biomass energy plant to close, because it has become too costly to transport the waste. Consider as an example, a small town installs a biomass energy system to eliminate waste generated by cleaning the forests to construct defensible zones to prevent bushfires. After 5 or 8 years the forest at some radius, say 50 miles, is clear. Transporting the timber waste and forest slash beyond that radius will be cost prohibitive and the brick -and -mortar biomass facility will eventually shut down due to lack of fuel. With the PGFireBox, the system is packed -up and moved, no permanent structures are necessary. Page 29 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 4.0 Compare the Systems The primary difference between the PGFireBox and current designs of biomass power generating facilities is the ability to convert whole logs, branches, limbs, pallets and other wood waste into energy without the costly processing (see the comparison chart below). This is one of the major downfalls of biomass energy facilities today, as this preprocessing adds a significant cost and creates large amounts of greenhouse gas emissions. To accept whole logs, branches and other whole wood waste products, current biomass energy systems require multiple stages of grinding and pelletizing to precondition the waste. Then, most of these type of biomass facilities require a supplemental fuel like natural gas (as high as 20%) to support combus- tion. The PGFireBox° does not require any waste preconditioning or supplemental fuels. Typical Biomass Incinerator Whole logs and branches liiiwpoo� I Whole log grinding Trucking 30 to 40 gallons ofdiesel per hour 10 t.15 gallons of diesel \� Second grindingforl erator 10 to 20 gallons of el per hoar I� 411111111111ir—a Supplementary k2ff% Usually natural gas of 1 FieTeBox zA Trucking 10 to 15 gallons of diesel Eliminating the Cost, Time and Pollution Whole logs and branches Clean Efficient Power 7 Page 30 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste 5.0 Systems Overview The Air Burners PGFireBox (PGF100) PGF -100 • 100 M Electric Power . 1 MW Thermal Power . Eliminates up to 8-20 tons of wood waste per hour . Truly portable - ships in three self-contained modules AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 5DOFireBox Page 31 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 6.0 Model PGF100 (100 Kilowatts - 1MW Thermal Energy) The 100 kW Power Generating FireBox by Air Burners brings together the cost savings and environmental advantages of our standard machines with the electrical power generating capabilities of the ElectraTherm Organic Rankin Cycle waste heat generator. This machine is portable, fully self contained and eliminates wood waste without the burdensome need for chipping and grinding. Whole logs and slash go straight into the FireBox eliminating the waste and creating electricity. Your waste is your fuel, no supplemental fuels are used to support combustion, the wood waste is allowed to combust naturally. That all combines to produce the lowest environmental impact possible in eliminating vegetative waste and the lowest cost method of disposal. This new machine arrives self-contained in three units, the Power Module, FireBox Module and the Cooling Module. The modules are delivered to site, pushed together, connected to the local electrical grid and they are ready to operate. If sufficient cooling water is available from a stream, river, large lake or well, the air blast Cooling Module can be eliminated. The FireBox Module uses a self -powered electric motor to drive the air curtain fan. The Power Module in- cludes the control room. Touch screens provide the user interface but the system is fully automated so oth- er than start and stop, the only time any attention might be needed is a hardware fault. In that circum- stance through offsite monitoring, Air Burners engineers at the factory will get an alarm notice and with your permission, can remotely access the system to analyze and correct most faults. The complete system, including air blast cooling has an MSRP less than USD $898,000 (FOB Factory/US) based on early 2023 pricing. Please, contact Air Burners Sales Department for a firm quotation that would include freight, commissioning and operator training and certification. See the operation video at: www.PGFireBox.com Air Burners 100 kW Demonstration Unit in Florida Page 32 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. PGF100 consists of three units: the FireBox Module where the wood waste burns, the Power Module where the heat is captured and turned into electricity, and the Cooling Module used to condense the working fluid. The operation of the PGFireBox only requires one person to load waste, the electricity generating compo- nent is fully automated. FireBox Module uses Air Burners' patented air curtain technology to eliminate wood waste. Whole logs, stumps and trimmings are loaded directly into the top of the FireBox. The air curtain technology reduces particulate release and is the most cost effective method of eliminating wood waste. The two rear doors al- low for ash removal. The ash removal process is completed each morning before a new burn; the ash remov- al takes about 15 minutes. Power Module includes the unique heat recovery system, the ElectraTherm ORC generator and the operator control station. Operation is fully automated. Using a touch screen interface, the operator pushes the green start button, the system will go through a series of checks and setup actions, then position the hood and begin generating electricity when sufficient heat is available. The operator's primary job is to load the Fire - Box Module, but he/she can review the complete status of the machine anytime using the touch screen dis- play. System maintenance and health are also monitored, notices are displayed as appropriate. With owner permission, factory remote access is also available. This option will alert the factory of any maintenance or fault issues which can generally be corrected remotely by our engineers. Cooling Module that is included in the Standard price is an air blast cooling system. This air blast cooler is skid mounted, fits in a standard container and arrives on site ready to use, pre -tested at the factory. Con- nections are made easy with two quick disconnect flexible hoses on the side of the Power Module (other options are available, depending on your site). The other cooling option is water. This generally is a lower cost option. For water cooling there is an inlet and outlet connection standard pipe size on the side of the Power Module. Cool water is pumped into the Power Module from a well, stream, lake or other water source. The water circulates in a isolated system and is returned to the outlet connection with no physical change, except an approximate temperature rise of 10°C. No water is consumed or evaporated in the process. ,v ��• - - s :,,rte= = -- �=-- 11 Cooling Module FireBox Module =� Power Module io Page 33 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. Electrical Connection is completed by the system owner and is determined according to local regulations. Typically, the connection is very simple and includes a "net meter" which is an electrical meter that runs both ways. If you are using electricity, it adds the kWh's to your account with the power company; if you are creating electricity, it subtracts kWh's from your account. The PGFireBox requires a 3-phase, 480 volt con- nection to the power company's electrical grid (other voltage and frequency options are available; contact Air Burners for more information). Cooling Module . � 1 .rP. Water Cooling Pond or nearby stream 11 Page 34 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. Shipping the PGFireBox is not difficult. For truck shipment each Module will travel on a standard flat deck trailer. For ocean shipment each unit will fit in a 40 foot high cube container. If you have selected the air blast cooling then it will fit in a container as well. For the water cooling option the components will ship in the FM and PM containers. Air Burners will arrange all shipping (shipping cost quoted upon request). Operating the machine is easy. The operator enters the "control station" on the Power Module and will see a green start indicator on the touch screen panel. Pressing the start button will put the system in standby auto- matic mode. The waste material is loaded into the FireBox Module and is ignited. Once the unit senses the correct temperature from the FireBox Module it will automatically start generating electricity. The operator continues loading waste material. At the end of day once the temperature drops below minimum required the Power Module will automatically go back into standby mode. 12 Page 35 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. Air Burners PGFireBox 100 Me Specifications Power Module 1 POWER REQUIREMENTS 460 VAC/60 Hz/3cp or 400 VAC/50 Hz/3cp, 225 A Service 2 POWER FACTOR Load- and site -dependent (0.9 -1.0) Fully -Integrated Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Power Module with 100 kW Gross 3 POWER GENERATION MODULE Asynchronous Generator 4 POWER GENERATION Gross Electric:100kW, Thermal:1MW 5 ORC WORKING FLUID Honeywell Genetron 245fa (Non -ozone-depleting) 6 SAFETY SYSTEMS Electrical Grid Protection, Over -Temperature, Over -Pressure 7 CONTROL SYSTEM PLC -Based with Touch -Screen a REMOTE MONITORING Internet -based monitoring and Operations Ships in containers; Ready for immediate use after simple hood installation; Padeyes 9 TRANSPORTATION AND SETUP provided for crane lifting. Full skid base facilitates final positioning COOLING WATER (CW) 30 325 gpm [20.5 I/s], 70° F [20° C] See option below REQUIREMENTS 11 CW INTERFACE 4" Nominal, 150 Ib -Class ANSI Flanges 12 INDUCTION FAN PLC -Controlled; Variable Speed 13 HOT WATER (HW) PUMP PLC -Controlled; Variable Speed 14 HW SYSTEM WORKING FLUID Ethylene-Glycol/Water Mix 15 CONSTRUCTION Steel WF beam and square tubing construction with full-length skid plate; Epoxy -paint 16 APPROX. WEIGHT 35,500 lbs [16,100kg] LxWxH DIMENSIONS 17 34'x 7'5" x 8'5" (W/ HOOD INSTALLED) [10.4mx2.1mx2.6m] FireElox Module 1 AIR CURTAIN FAN POWER 30 hp [22 kW] Electric Motor VFD-Controlled 4" [102 mm] thick refractory panels filled with proprietary thermal ceramic material. 2 BURN CONTAINER (FIREBOX) Two full -height rear doors, two ignition holes 3 SAFETY SYSTEMS Fully integrated with PGF controller 4 INSTRUMENT PANEL Touch -screen control from PGF Control Room AIR CURTAIN FAN MOTOR 5 PLC -Based; Speed selection fully integrated with system controller CONTROL SYSTEM 6 AIR SUPPLY Custom Heavy Duty Fan Shipped fully assembled and tested, requires only connection of the three-phase motor 7 TRANSPORTATION AND SETUP power to the PG Module power distribution panel WASTE MATERIAL ELIMINATION a Up to 8 tons per hour RATE 9 FIREBOX MODULE WEIGHT 36,000 lbs [16,300 kg] LxWxH 30'x 7'5" x 8'5" 10 OVERALL DIMENSIONS [9.1 m x 2.1 m x 2.6 m] Cooling.. (Optional) 1 APPROX. WEIGHT (DRY) 17,500 lbs [7900 kg] LxWxH DIMENSIONS 2 32' x 7' x 13' (INCLUDING SKID BASE) [9.7mx2.1mx4m] 13 Page 36 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. o o a ym m o o¢ o U qLL o a ui w rn a U D p W Hj C7 w d_U Lu FS azli c~71w 1-w w W � �}a} O¢ � Z No �g+� C U JN fn Z O NF LL LL Q' 8 d w O W N O U O 1 W O O N K E m z o z p Q O w O J m r Z d O O KCD Q LL' Z O Z 4O ax o O z L z wLd �W u o ' ~O wO�z�aa—i z0 wU pya h0 a w0 Z �� mM Luz �_� Po moo¢. .iz w, o N O ��oavi oz� oW Qyzo ¢W z z $_ W �`+aw �Ow > rn }Z U oui r o ~ zo03a x^o � is ¢Nw za oo Up s<�QLS Q Op �7aIV K� LL} 7 OON W Oz W 0 W U UZwZ LL OLL FO UZ W LL. W Z Z Om - Oa O� O� OLL ? OLL Ow qw e E -Y z a�ooao � ism aooa�aa JJN ¢Z W Uo w J i�V Z O VUZ ❑ 2� W O JO n .z ZV WU OU UZO pZ U O S U U I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII O aIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII U m Vi IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII z Z O IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII w0 tiVW IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII � a j iz �i p^, IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Z az O Ea IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII O O a ., IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII m � 8 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Q IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �u N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII j IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII F IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII rc w f� � ¢& 8 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII U 3 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII � g Oa IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII U Z w° oololl000mu o � W olololoollmu ool0000llmu o�O IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII w O x� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII U 2.12—rc IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII z xw w �OO mmulloum U rc nmoumuuuu o U w o IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII m IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII N o� IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII x� IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII w E Q < `.Q �? u�j IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII a ¢ IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII U IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII Z IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII o Q U w a N 14 Page 37 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. Page 38 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste U ZUi W Nz g8 Z sg E m i7� g <Q4Q Sow � O O 1- Sg Ar, 01.9 21 0 o = 5 js as �� 1 °� woa ��C/) U FOa U) 00 C)w LL ry �ry, �w LL LU ry z X X 0o Z D m a 0 eo w o U O O ILI h O F _ 3 0 a M U O F- M m K Q U i7l Z O Q U LL U W a N 15 Page 38 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 16 Page 39 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 7.0 Summary The PGFireBox system represents a revolution in Biomass Energy and eliminates road blocks that have pre- vented us from realizing the energy stored in wood and vegetative waste at reasonable costs. The high cost of waste processing and the associated harmful emissions have been eliminated. The PGF is not a permanent system therefore it can be moved if the biomass waste supply in a particular area diminishes. Waste is actual- ly eliminated and the system produces a desirable recycled product. Due to its size and portability the PGFire- Box supports the power company's desire for "distributed power production," giving us a more secure and reliable power grid. Taking a page from the "green cycle of life", we have developed a system that makes a positive contribution to our waste and energy infrastructure. For more details on the Air Burners PGFireBox Systems please con- tact the factory, and please visit our website for videos and additional information on the Air Burners product line. Celebrating / yeai 06 AirBurn ers AIR BURNERS, INC. 4390 SW Cargo Way Palm City, Florida 34990 USA "We don't need to pump oil out of the ground, but we do need to eliminate biomass waste" www.AirBurners.com © 2022 Air Burners, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 17 info@AirBurners.com Phone +1-772-220-7303 Rev H Page 40 of 62 Landfill Policy Discussion On Construction And Demolition Waste AGENDA ITEM #2.c. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT APRIL 25, 2024 4 ' x ASSEMBLY WORK SESSION SUBJECT: Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Submission Of Items ORIGINATOR: Nova M. Javier, MMC, Borough Clerk RECOMMENDATION: For assembly review and discussion. DISCUSSION: This item was requested by Assembly member LeDoux and co-sponsored by Assembly member Sharratt. Below is the timeline for this ordinance. February 29, 2024, Work Session • Assembly gave direction to place this item on the March 21, 2024, regular meeting as an ordinance for introduction. March 14, 2024, Work Session • A revised version was provided by Mayor Arndt for consideration, and this version was reviewed by the attorney. March 21, 2024, Regular Meeting • Distributed attorney's opinion dated 03/19/2024. Attorney needed to make recommendations for a more cohesive ordinance. Staff recommended postponement to May 2. • Assembly postponed Ordinance to May 2, 2024, as an ordinance for introduction Version 2 which is the latest draft is attached to the packet for Assembly review. ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Kodiak Island Borough Page 41 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. VERSION 2 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ORDINANCE NO. FY2024-17 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH AMENDING TITLE 2 ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL, CHAPTER 2.20 BOROUGH MAYOR, SECTION 2.20.070 MISCELLANEOUS, CHAPTER 2.30 RULES OF THE ASSEMBLY, SECTIONS 2.30.030 TYPES OF MEETINGS, 2.30.060 ORDER OF BUSINESS AND AGENDA, 2.30.070 ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS, AND SECTION 2.30.100 MISCELLANEOUS, TO UPDATE PROCESSES FOR AGENDA SETTING AND SUBMISSION OF ITEMS WHEREAS, this ordinance is submitted in order to update processes for agenda setting and submission of items. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that: Section 1: This ordinance is of a general and permanent nature and shall become a part of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances. Section 2: That Section 2.20.070 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to include a new subsection (C) to read as follows: 2.20.070(C). Requests for Staff Assistance or Legal Opinions. 1. During a work session or a meeting, or by submitting a request for services on a form provided by the borough clerk's office, the mayor may request that the manager, clerk, or attorney prepare a proposed ordinance or resolution to be submitted to the clerk for placement on the agenda in accordance with section 2.30.060(C)(4). 2. During a work session or a meeting, or by submitting a request for services on a form provided by the borough clerk's office, the mayor and an assembly member may request written legal opinions, relating to borough business, from the attorney through the manager's or the clerk's office. Upon receipt of assembly requested written legal opinion, the clerk shall forthwith cause to have distributed the written legal opinion to all assembly members so that all members may be fully informed of the status of borough affairs. Section 3: That Section 2.30.030 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 1 of 12 Page 42 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. 43 2.30.030 Types of Meetings 144 A. Regular Meeting. The assembly shall meet in the borough assembly chambers, in the 45 borough administration building, Kodiak, Alaska, and meetings are to commence at 6:30 46 p.m. on the first and third Thursdays of each month, or such other time and place as may 47 be designated in the notice of the meeting. If the regular meeting day falls on a holiday or 48 holiday eve, then the assembly may advance, postpone, or cancel the meeting as 49 necessary. When the lack of a quorum of the assembly necessary for holding a meeting 50 occurs, or when there is little or no business to be considered at a scheduled regular 51 meeting, the assembly may cancel such meeting and hear its business at the next regular 52 meeting. Public notice of changed meetings shall be made in at least one newspaper of 53 general circulation in the borough. Meetings shall adjourn at 10:30 p.m. unless the time 54 is extended by a majority of the votes to which the assembly is entitled. No meeting shall 55 be extended beyond 11 p.m., unless extended by a two-thirds vote of the assembly, 56 except the meeting shall be extended to set the time and place for resumption of the 57 meeting. 58 B. Special Meetings. Special meetings may be called by the mayor, deputy presiding 59 officer, or by three members of the assembly and, except in an emergency, upon no less 60 than 24 hours' effective notice to each member. Effective notice shall be written or oral. 61 The notice shall indicate time, location and the purpose of the special meeting and by 62 whom called. The calendar for a special meeting shall be as follows: Z.7IMF 11 64 2. Citizens' comments. 65 3. Consideration of matters in the call for the special meeting. 66 4. Adjournment. 67 Matters not included in the call for the special meeting may not be considered. Special 68 meetings shall commence and adjourn as provided in subsection A of this section unless 69 specifically amended. 70 C. Adjourned or Recessed Meetings. If the assembly has not concluded the agenda, the 71 time and place of the resumption of the meeting shall be announced or the items shall be 72 carried over to the following regular meeting or taken up at a special meeting called for 73 that purpose. 74 D. Work Sessions. The assembly may meet informally in work sessions, at the call of the 75 mayor, deputy presiding officer, or by three members of the assembly, to review 76 forthcoming programs of the borough, receive progress reports on current programs or 77 projects or receive other similar information from the manager; provided, that all 78 discussions and conclusions thereon shall be informal. Work sessions are public Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Page 2 of 12 Version 2 Page 43 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 Wo 97 98 99 100 1101 102 1103 1104 105 106 107 108 109 110 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. meetings at which and no formal action shall be taken by the assembly,provided, however, that the assembly may, by consensus of at least four members, provide direction to the manager, clerk, or attorney to prepare a report or agenda item to be considered by the assembly at a later meeting. Regularly scheduled work sessions are to commence at 6:30 p.m. and shall adjourn at 10:30 p.m. unless the time is extended by majority members of the assembly. E. Other Public Meetings or Work Sessions. The assembly may hold other meetings or work sessions at such other time and place as it deems appropriate as long as reasonable public notice is given. F. Executive Sessions. The assembly may meet in executive session, at the call of the mayor, deputy presiding officer, or any four members of the assembly, only during a regular or special meeting, to privately discuss matters of confidential concern to the well- being of the borough government. An executive session may be listed on the agenda or may be convened concerning an item which appears on the published agenda where appropriate. 1. Upon adoption of a motion stating the purpose for an executive session the assembly in closed session may discuss: a. Potential or pending litigation to which the borough may become or is a party; b. Any matter the immediate public knowledge of which would tend to affect adversely the finances of the borough; c. Any matter which would tend to defame or prejudice the character or reputation of any person, except that the person may request a public discussion; d. Matters involving negotiations with labor organizations representing borough employees; e. Matters which by law or ordinance are required to be confidential; f. Confidential attorney-client communications made for the purpose of facilitating the rendition of professional legal services to the borough; g. Matters pertaining to personnel; and h. Land acquisition or disposal. G. This section does not apply to quasi-judicial boards when holding a meeting solely to make a decision in an adjudicatory proceeding. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 3 of 12 Page 44 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Section 4: That Section 2.30.060 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: 2.30.060 Order of business and agenda. A. Order of Business. The order of business for each regular meeting of the assembly shall be as follows: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Statement of land acknowledgment. 4. Roll call. 5. Approval of agenda and consent agenda. (Approval of consent agenda passes all items indicated. Consent agenda items are not considered separately unless an assembly member so requests. In the event of such request, the item is returned to the general agenda.) 6. Approval of minutes. 7. Citizens' comments. a. Agenda items not scheduled for public hearing and general comments. 8. Awards and presentations. 9. Committee reports. 10. Public hearing. 11. Borough manager's report. 12. Messages from the borough mayor. 13. Consideration of calendar — unfinished business. 14. Consideration of calendar — new business. a. Contracts. b. Resolutions. c. Ordinances for introduction. d. Other items. 15. Citizens' comments. 16. Assembly members' comments. 17. Adjournment. B. Preparation of Aaenda Items. Ordinances. resolutions. or other proposed agenda items may be submitted to the clerk by an assembly member, a committee of the assembly, the mayor, or the manager for placement on the agenda. An assembly member may request placement of an item on the assembly agenda by completing an agenda request form provided by the borough clerk's office and providing a copy of the proposed item in a format that is ready to be placed on the agenda. Upon receipt of an agenda item request the borough clerk shall immediately provide a copy of a written request to place an item on the agenda to the borough manager. The borough manager may provide information or make recommendations. if applicable. and submit such information to the borouah clerk for inclusion with the agenda item. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 4 of 12 Page 45 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. 1152 If an assembly member or the mayor desires assistance of staff in the preparation 153 of an agenda item staff assistance may be requested and provided in accordance 154 with section 2.20.070(C) or 2.30.100(G). 1155 Agenda items submitted to the clerk shall be scheduled on the agenda in 156 accordance with subsection C of this section. 1157 8C. Agenda. The mayor shall determine items for the agenda of the assembly, subject 158 to assembly approval, and in accordance with this section. " Mernher.,f the assembly, 159 delegate to the assembly, the rnaRager, or the mayor may submit iterns to the Glerk to be 160 planed on the agenda 1161 1. Agenda items which have been scheduled for a specific meeting or date by law 162 or by a majority vote of the assembly shall be placed on the agenda for that 163 meeting. 1164 2. Agenda items which require consideration prior to a certain date to satisfy 165 statutory requirements, to avoid prejudice to the borough, or to avoid the item 166 becoming moot, shall be scheduled prior to that date where possible. 167 3. Agenda items submitted by an assembly member or the mayor without staff 168 assistance, or submitted by the manager, shall be included on the agenda within 169 60 days. 1170 4. Agenda items prepared by staff at the request of the mayor or by two or more 171 assembly members under section 2.20.070(C) or 2.30.100(G) shall be scheduled on 172 an agenda within 60 days of the agenda item request being submitted to the clerk, 173 unless the assembly directs that the item appear on a particular meeting agenda. 1174 5. Subject to provisions of subsection GD of this section, no business may be transacted 175 nor any measure considered that is not on the agenda. 1176 The clerk shall prepare an agenda for each regular meeting after consulting with the 177 mayor, deputy presiding officer, and manager. The agenda shall be distributed to 178 assembly members, along with the meeting packet, and made available to the public 179 one week at least three (3) days prior to the regular meeting. Agendas will be available 180 for the publiG net loss than 24 hours prior to the rneetinrr 1181 SD. Agenda Additions. A subjeet net en the—Agenda may he ^^psi, -oro, enl„ h„ 182 183 before the assembly. An item may be added to the agenda less than sixteen (16) 184 days prior to a meeting, but before the meeting packet has been distributed, if the 185 request to add the item is submitted by the mayor, by two or more assembly 186 members, or by the manager, and is approved for addition by the mayor. After 187 distribution of the packet for a meeting the agenda may be amended to add or Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Page 5 of 12 Version 2 Page 46 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 02 03 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 14 15 216 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. delete items only if the assembly, by a majority vote, approves a "motion to amend the agenda," to add or delete items from the published agenda during the course of a meeting subject to the limitations in this section. Provided, however, that no action item may be added in this manner. (1) An action item is an item which: a. Introduces an ordinance; b. Requires an ordinance; c. Requires a resolution; d. Is a resolution: e. Awards a contract (except as provided in subsection D(2)(c) of this section): f. Expends budgeted funds or authorizes expenditure of budgeted funds in excess of an amount the manaqer could expend without assembly approval; or q. Is a matter which, due to its significant or complex nature, requires more extensive public notice. (2) This provision is intended to allow addition of items which are in the nature of: a. Requests or directives that the borough manager, borough clerk or borough attorney investigate and report on an issue, or prepare item for future consideration by the assembly : b. Internal borough administrative matters including matters relating to the employment and supervision of assembly employees; c. Naming of mayoral appointees selected when the fact of the appointment has appeared on the published agenda and the name(s) of the appointee(s) have been made available at the start of the meetina d. Naming of the recipient for award of a contract when the consideration of the contract award has appeared on the published agenda and the recommended awardee is made available at the start of the meetina: e. Is for purposes of receiving information only without making a decision; or f. Other minor matters of the same nature as those listed in subsections D(2)(a) through D(2)(e) of this section. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 6 of 12 Page 47 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. E. Reading of Minutes. Unless a reading of the minutes of an assembly meeting is requested by the assembly, minutes may be approved without reading if the clerk previously furnished each member with a copy thereof. F. Staff Request for Input. If the Manager, clerk or other staff request assembly comment or input on an issue during the meeting, but a decision by the assembly is not required, or the request is for placing the topic on a future agenda, the topic identified by staff need not be added to the agenda, but no vote may be taken and no decision may be made. Section 5: That Section 2.30.070 Ordinances, resolutions, and motions of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: 2.30.070 Ordinances, Feselutions, and motions. A /A^ or.-iRaRGeiS iRtreduGed i ,ri+i^i. iR the form required by the ^ ,,,hi„. 9—The following procedure governs the enactment of all ordinances, except emergency ordinances which are specified in KIBC 2.30.075. 1. managed An ordinance shall be set by the assembly for a public hearing by the affirmative vote of a majority four of the votes authorized on the geestlea motion; 2. At least five days before the public hearing, a summary of the ordinance shall be published together with a notice of the date, time, and place for the hearing. At least six days shall lapse between introduction and final passage; 3. Copies of the ordinance er reseletiee shall be made available to all ^or^^^^ ^rose^+ at the hearing, or the ordinance shall be read in full; 5. During the hearing, the assembly shall hear all interested persons wishing to be heard; 6. After the public hearing, the assembly shall consider the ordinance and may adopt it with or without amendment; 7. The assembly clerk shall print ^^dMake ^ ^'^h'o Gepies ^f ^ r+;^^^^o that ; adep+o + a copy of the ordinance for permanent retention. B. An ordinance takes effect upon adoption or at a later date specified in the ordinance. C. This section does not apply to an ordinance proposed under AS 04.11 .507(d) relating to procedure for local option elections. D. Voting. 1. All assembly members present shall vote unless the assembly for special reason permits a member to abstain, except no assembly member may vote on a geestieR motion in which he has a substantial financial interest. All motions to excuse a member shall be made before the call of "ayes" and "noes" is commenced, and any member requesting to be excused from voting may Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 7 of 12 Page 48 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 X296 297 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. make a brief statement of the reasons for making such a request, and the vote shall be taken without further debate. 2. If a member refuses to vote, the clerk shall record a vote for the prevailing side. The "prevailing side" is the side that carried the motion and is described as follows: a. If the questfen motion passed, having received the affirmative votes of the quorum, that is the prevailing side; or b. If the questlen motion failed, having not received the affirmative votes of the quorum, that is the prevailing side. 3. No member shall be allowed to explain his vote or discuss the question motion while the "ayes" and "noes" are being called. A member may change his vote between the time of calling for the vote by the clerk and the announcement of the result by the chair or the clerk. The chair or the clerk shall ask if anyone wishes to change their vote. 4. The vote upon any question motion shall be "ayes" and "noes" and shall be recorded in the jeuFRal minutes of the assembly. In the case where only six members of the assembly are present and there is a three/three tie vote of the assembly, the mayor may vote. No resolution, ordinance or motion before the assembly shall be valid unless affirmed by a majority Of the VE)tes f„ whiGh the assembly ,s; e—Atitle-d- „h the ,. estiGRG Jf2M6 vote of the assembly. E. Numbering Ordinances and Resolutions. A number shall be assigned to each ordinance or resolution by the clerk prior to introduction. F. Ordinance and Resolution Passage Procedures. When passed by the assembly, an ordinance or resolution shall be signed by the mayor and attested by the clerk; and it shall be immediately filed and thereafter preserved in the office of the clerk. G. Motions. When a motion is made and seconded, it shall be stated by the chair or, being in writing, it shall be presented to the chair and read aloud before debate. The mover shall state his Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 8 of 12 Page 49 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 298 299 �00 301 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 11 12 13 P14 315 316 �17 318 319 320 021 322 323 324 325 326 327 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. motion in concise language and shall not discuss it nor his reason for making it until the motion is seconded. K. Privileged Motions. When a question is under debate, no motion shall be made except for the following privileged motions which shall have precedence: 1. To adjourn;* 2. To recess;* 3. To raise a question of privilege;* 4. To call for the order of the day, or the regular order;* 5. To lay on the table;* 6. For the previous question;* 7. To limit or extend limits of debate;* 8. To postpone to a certain time; 9. To refer; 10. To amend; 11. To postpone indefinitely. * Note: Not debatable. When one of the above motions has been made, none of the others inferior to it in the order in which they stand above shall be made and, in proceeding to vote, motions pending shall be put in the order of their rank as above arranged. The first seven are not subject to debate. A motion to postpone to a certain time, refer, amend, or to postpone indefinitely may be amended. The motion to postpone to a certain time is the motion by which action on a pending question or agenda item can be deferred beyond the next meeting to a definite day, meeting or hour, or until after a certain event. The previous question may be demanded before an amendment, which motion shall be decided without debate. A motion to adjourn shall always be in order; provided, that business of a nature to be recorded in the journal has been defeated. No motion or proposition of a subject different to that under consideration shall be admitted under cover of an amendment. When a matter has been especially assigned to be taken up at a fixed time, or at a certain stage of proceedings, such matter shall, at the appointed time, or at any time subsequent thereto, be in order upon the call of any member and take precedence over all other business. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 9 of 12 Page 50 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... X28 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 037 338 039 340 041 342 043 344 345 E. 347 348 349 350 351 352 �53 354 355 �56 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 �64 365 366 367 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. L. Previous Question. The previous question may be ordered by a majority vote of the members present upon all recognized motions which are debatable and shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the assembly to a direct vote upon the motion before the assembly. The question shall be put in this form: "The previous question has been moved and seconded; all those in favor of calling the previous question say "aye"; all those opposed say "no."" The results of the motion are as follows: If determined in the negative, the consideration goes on as if the motion had never been made; if it is decided in the affirmative, the chair at once and without debate proceeds to put the main motion as ordered. If an adjournment is after the previous question is ordered, the subject comes up in its regular order at the next meeting and the previous question still operates. M. Division of Question. The chair may divide the question or an assembly member may request a division of a question. N. The assembly may amend, repeal, rescind or reconsider an ordinance by enacting another ordinance. O. The same motion that receives the same outcome two meetings in a row shall not be revisited for six months unless the members by a majority vote agree to do so. P. A motion to reconsider may be applied to any ordinance, resolution, or action of the assembly and has precedence over all motions except the motion to adjourn. An assembly member may make a motion to reconsider only if: 1. The assembly member voted with the prevailing side on the question to be reconsidered. If an ordinance, resolution, or other action which is the subject of a motion to reconsider was not adopted on initial consideration because it did not receive the required number of "yes" votes, then those assembly members voting "no" shall constitute the prevailing side regardless of the relative number of "yes" and "no" votes cast on the question. An assembly member who changes his vote in accordance with these rules shall be a member of the side on which his vote is finally recorded by the clerk; and 2. The assembly member makes the motion to reconsider on the same day and at the same meeting at which the vote to be reconsidered was taken. Such a motion for reconsideration requires a two-thirds vote to carry; or 3. Two assembly members file with the clerk, not later than 5 p.m. on the first borough business day following the day on which the vote was taken, a notice of intent to reconsider and then makes the motion to reconsider at the next regular assembly meeting. The assembly member can file by telephone; provided, that the notice of intent to reconsider is signed before the motion is considered. Such a motion for reconsideration requires a majority vote to carry. An assembly meeting which is recessed and reconvened on a different day shall constitute one meeting. The reconvened session of such a meeting shall not constitute the "next regular assembly meeting" as that term is used in this section. Only one motion to reconsider shall be entertained on any ordinance, resolution or other action even if the assembly overturns the original action. If a motion to reconsider a particular ordinance, resolution, or other action fails, a second motion to reconsider the same action shall not be in order. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 10 of 12 Page 51 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... X68 369 i 70 P71 372 373 074 375 076 377 078 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Q. A motion to rescind may be applied to any previously adopted ordinance, resolution, or action of the assembly except: 1. When the question could be reached by a motion to reconsider; 2. When something has been done, as a result of the vote on the main motion, that is impossible to undo or persons have otherwise reasonably relied on the vote to their detriment (the unexecuted part of an action, however, can be rescinded); 3. When the matter is in the nature of a contract, and the other party has been informed of the vote; or 4. When a resignation has been acted upon, or a person has been elected to or expelled from membership or office, and the person was present or has been officially notified of the action. A motion to rescind may be made at any subsequent assembly meeting and there is no time limit on when the motion can be made. A motion to rescind shall not be renewed during the same meeting at which it was made, but it may be reconsidered in the same manner as any other main motion. A motion to rescind yields to all privileged, subsidiary and incidental motions and it requires the same vote as that required to pass the previously adopted action. There shall be no more than one motion to rescind on a question. If the motion to rescind passes, the question on the main motion is automatically before the assembly for further action, including amendment. Section 6: That Section 2.30.100 Miscellaneous of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to include a new subsection G to read as follows: 2.30.100(G). Requests for Staff Assistance or Legal Opinions. 1. During a work session or a meeting, or by submitting a request for services on a form provided by the borough clerk's office any two or more members of the assembly may request that the manager, clerk, or attorney prepare a proposed ordinance or resolution to be submitted to the clerk for placement on the agenda in accordance with section 2.30.060(C)(4). 2. During a work session or a meeting, or by submitting a request for services on a form provided by the borough clerk's office any two or more members of the assembly, may request written legal opinions, relating to borough business, from the attorney through the manager's or the clerk's office. Upon receipt of assembly - requested written legal opinion, the clerk shall forthwith cause to have distributed the written legal opinion to all assembly members so that all members may be fully informed of the status of borough affairs. Effective Date: This ordinance takes effect upon adoption. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 2 Page 11 of 12 Page 52 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. 405 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 406 THIS DAY OF , 202X 07 08 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 09 10 ATTEST: 11 12 Scott Arndt, Borough Mayor 13 Nova M. Javier, MMC, Borough Clerk 14 15 Introduced by: 416 First reading: 417 Second reading/public hearing: 18 19 VOTES: 20 Ayes: 21 Noes: Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Page 12 of 12 Version 2 Page 53 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH STAFF REPORT MARCH 21, 2024 ASSEMBLY REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM #2.c. REGULAR MEETING SUBJECT: Ordinance No. FY2024-17 An Ordinance Of The Assembly Of The Kodiak Island Borough Amending Title 2 Administration And Personnel, Section 2.30 Rules Of The Assembly, Sections 2.30.060 Order Of Business And Agenda, And Section 2.30.070 Ordinances, Resolutions, And Motions To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Submission Of Items ORIGINATOR: Larry LeDoux, Assembly Member RECOMMENDATION: Primary motion: Move to advance Ordinance No. FY2024-17 to public hearing at the next regular meeting of the Assembly. Secondary motion: Move to postpone Ordinance No. FY2024-17 as an Ordinance for Introduction at the May 2, 2024, regular meeting. DISCUSSION: This item was requested by Assembly member LeDoux and co-sponsored by Assembly member Sharratt. After discussion at the February 29 Work Session, the Assembly directed the Clerk to place this item on the agenda for the March 21 regular meeting for introduction. At the March 14 work session, a revised version from Mayor Arndt was provided and it was reviewed by the Borough Attorney. After Attorney review, it is recommended that we allow the attorney to additional time to come up with alternatives for a more cohesive ordinance. Staff recommends that you postpone this item to the May 2, 2024, regular meeting as an ordinance for introduction. ALTERNATIVES: FISCAL IMPACT: OTHER INFORMATION: Per KIBC 2.30.070 (N), the Assembly may amend, repeal, rescind, or reconsider an ordinance by enacting another ordinance. Kodiak Island Borough Page 54 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 VERSION 1 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ORDINANCE NO. FY2024-17 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH AMENDING TITLE 2 ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL, SECTION 2.30 RULES OF THE ASSEMBLY, SECTIONS 2.30.060 ORDER OF BUSINESS AND AGENDA, AND SECTION 2.30.070 ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS TO UPDATE PROCESSES FOR AGENDA SETTING AND SUBMISSION OF ITEMS WHEREAS, this ordinance is submitted in order to update processes for agenda setting and submission of items. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that: Section 1: This ordinance is of a general and permanent nature and shall become a part of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances. Section 2: That Section 2.30.060 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: 2.30.060 Order of business and agenda. A. Order of Business. The order of business for each regular meeting of the assembly shall be as follows: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Statement of land acknowledgment. 4. Roll call. 5. Approval of agenda and consent agenda. (Approval of consent agenda passes all items indicated. Consent agenda items are not considered separately unless an assembly member so requests. In the event of such request, the item is returned to the general agenda.) 6. Approval of minutes. 7. Citizens' comments. a. Agenda items not scheduled for public hearing and general comments. 8. Awards and presentations. 9. Committee reports. 10. Public hearing. 11. Borough manager's report. 12. Messages from the borough mayor. 13. Consideration of calendar — unfinished business. 14. Consideration of calendar — new business. a. Contracts. b. Resolutions. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 1 Page 1 of 4 Page 55 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 c. Ordinances for introduction. d. Other items. 15. Citizens' comments. 16. Assembly members' comments. 17. Adjournment. B. Agenda. The mayor, deputy presiding officer, or manager shall determine items for the agenda of the assembly, rubjeGt te assembly appreval. A member of the assembly, delegate to the as6ernbly, the manager, or the mayer may s--hmot items t() the Glerk te be plaGed en the agenda—Subject to provisions of subsection C of this section, no business may be transacted, nor any measure considered that is not on the agenda. The clerk shall prepare an agenda for each fegUlaFmeeting_ afteF GGRSURORg with the mayoF and maRageF. The aged^ and it shall be distributed to assembly members, along with the meeting packet, ^nom^ ^ek at least two days prior to the- regulaFmeeting. Agendas will be available for the public not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting. C. Agenda Additions. An item that isE;Ybjest not on the regular meeting agenda may be considered only by unanimous consent, and when the time for its consideration arrives, the chair shall lay it before the assembly. D. Reading of Mini Ftes Unless readiRg ef the min, -tp,; nf An as embly meetiRg is requested by member with a GOPY thereof. D. Submission of items. 1. Two assembly members may sponsor a work session agenda item by filling out an agenda item request form. Such request shall be scheduled within 30 days from submission of the request form. 2. The mayor or two assembly members may sponsor ordinances, resolutions, or other items on the agenda by filling out an agenda item request form. The request shall be scheduled as an item for discussion at a work session within 30 days from submission of the request form, and the majority of the Assembly shall develop consensus if and when the item should be scheduled on an agenda. 3. The borough manager and borough clerk may submit items that are routine in nature and within the scope of the performance of their duties. Section 3: That Section 2.30.070 Ordinances, resolutions, and motions of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: 2.30.070 Ordinances; Ali. The following procedure governs the enactment of all ordinances, except emergency ordinances which are specified in KIBC 2.30.075. 1. An erd'naRGe by a member or --o-mmittee of the assembly, or by the mayor 0 FnaRager; 12. An ordinance shall be set by the assembly for a public hearing by the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes authorized on the cuestienmotion; Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 1 Page 2 of 4 Page 56 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 87 23. At least five days before the public hearing, a summary of the ordinance shall be published 88 together with a notice of the date, time and place for the hearing. At least six days shall lapse 89 between introduction and final passage; 1 90 34. Copies of the ordinance nr ro l„t;^^n shall be made available to all ^8•G^^6 ^•eese^f at the 91 hearing, or the ordinance shall be read in full; 92 5. During the hearing, the assembly shall hear all interested persons wishing to be heard; 93 6. After the public hearing, the assembly shall consider the ordinance and may adopt it with or 94 without amendment; 95 7. The clerkassen4J* shall print a copy of the ordinance for permanent retention..�ake 96 available GGPies of An erdinanre that is adepted. 97 B6. An ordinance takes effect upon adoption or at a later date specified in the ordinance. 98 C13. This section does not apply to an ordinance proposed under AS O4.11.507(d) relating to 99 procedure for local option elections. 100 F. ReGGFdiRg ef Vetes. The "ayes” -and "n.Ae,;" -;.hall be takeR YpGn the passage ef all Ardinanr-es 101 And reselutions aR d entered u n the Af ir-'al reAerd of the aen*4y 102 D. Voting. 103 1. All assembly members present shall vote unless the assembly for special reason permits a 1104 member to abstain, except no assembly member may vote on a gaestien motion in which he has 105 a substantial financial interest. All motions to excuse a member shall be made before the call of 106 "ayes" and "noes" is commenced, and any member requesting to be excused from voting may 107 make a brief statement of the reasons for making such a request, and the vote shall be taken 108 without further debate. 109 2. If a member refuses to vote, the clerk shall record a vote for the prevailing side. The "prevailing 110 side" is the side that carried the guestieamotion and is described as follows: III a. If the questleamotion passed, having received the affirmative votes of the quorum, that is the 112 prevailing side; or 1113 b. If the gaestieamotion failed, having not received the affirmative votes of the quorum, that is 114 the prevailing side. 115 3. No member shall be allowed to explain his vote or discuss the gaestien motion while the "ayes" 116 and "noes" are being called. -but A member may change his vote between the time of calling for 117 the vote by the clerk and the announcement of the result by the chair or the clerk. The chair or 118 the clerk shall ask if anyone wishes to change their vote. 119 4. The vote upon any gaestienmotion shall be "ayes" and "noes" and shall be recorded in the 120 minutesJournal of the assembly. In the case where only six members of the assembly are present 121 and there is a three/three tie vote of the assembly, the mayor may vote. No resolution, ordinance 122 or motion before the assembly shall be valid unless affirmed Ar denied by a majority of the votes 123 to whish of the assembly is entitled en the ^ e6"^^ 124 125 126 the state of Alaska 127 EG. Numbering Ordinances and Resolutions. A number shall be assigned to each ordinance or 128 resolution by the clerk prior to introduction. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Page 3 of 4 Version 1 Page 57 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 FH. Ordinance and Resolution Passage Procedures. When passed by the assembly, an ordinance or resolution shall be signed by the mayor and attested by the clerk; and it shall be immediately filed and thereafter preserved in the office of the clerk. Gl. Request for Ordinances Ar Legal Opinions. A^Y member ^f the assembly may est the te have prepared proposed ordinanr-es with ;--rh Ardinanres te be plaGed en the agenda of the next scheduled assembly meeting, provided the ordinance Gan be drafted and Q of this sentmo^ During a work session or a meeting, any two or more members of the assembly may request written legal opinions, relating to borough business, from the attorney through the manager's or the clerk's office. Upon receipt of assembly -requested written legal opinion, the clerk shall forthwith cause to have distributed the subjeGt ordinance or written legal opinion to all assembly members so that all members may be fully informed of the status of borough affairs. WFitiRg, it shall be P%GeRt8d to the r;hair and read aloud befere debate. The movershall state his motion On GonGdse language and shall not discuss it nor his reason for making it until the motion is- Qr0Rd(-d Effective Date: This ordinance takes effect upon adoption. ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH THIS DAY OF 202X KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Scott Arndt, Borough Mayor Introduced by: Mayor and Assembly First reading: Second reading/public hearing: VOTES: Ayes: Noes: Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 1 ATTEST: Nova M. Javier, MMC, Borough Clerk Page 4 of 4 Page 58 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 VERSION 1 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ORDINANCE NO. FY2024-17 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH AMENDING TITLE 2 ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL, SECTION 2.30 RULES OF THE ASSEMBLY, SECTIONS 2.30.060 ORDER OF BUSINESS AND AGENDA, AND SECTION 2.30.070 ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS TO UPDATE PROCESSES FOR AGENDA SETTING AND SUBMISSION OF ITEMS WHEREAS, this ordinance is submitted in order to update processes for agenda setting and submission of items. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that: Section 1: This ordinance is of a general and permanent nature and shall become a part of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances. Section 2: That Section 2.30.060 of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: 2.30.060 Order of business and agenda. A. Order of Business. The order of business for each regular meeting of the assembly shall be as follows: 1. Invocation. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Statement of land acknowledgment. 4. Roll call. 5. Approval of agenda and consent agenda. (Approval of consent agenda passes all items indicated. Consent agenda items are not considered separately unless an assembly member so requests. In the event of such request, the item is returned to the general agenda.) 6. Approval of minutes. 7. Citizens' comments. a. Agenda items not scheduled for public hearing and general comments. 8. Awards and presentations. 9. Committee reports. 10. Public hearing. 11. Borough manager's report. 12. Messages from the borough mayor. 13. Consideration of calendar — unfinished business. 14. Consideration of calendar — new business. a. Contracts. b. Resolutions. Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 1 Page 1 of 4 Page 59 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 c. Ordinances for introduction. d. Other items. 15. Citizens' comments. 16. Assembly members' comments. 17. Adjournment. B. Agenda. The mayor, deputy presiding officer, or manager shall determine items for the agenda of the assembly. Subject to provisions of subsection C of this section, no business may be transacted, nor any measure considered that is not on the agenda. The clerk shall prepare an agenda for each meeting and it shall be distributed to assembly members, along with the meeting packet at least two days prior to the meeting. Agendas will be available for the public not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting. C. Agenda Additions. An item that is not on the regular meeting agenda may be considered only by unanimous consent, and when the time for its consideration arrives, the chair shall lay it before the assembly. D. Submission of items. 1. Two assembly members may sponsor a work session agenda item by filling out an agenda item request form. Such request shall be scheduled within 30 days from submission of the request form. 2. The mayor or two assembly members may sponsor ordinances, resolutions, or other items on the agenda by filling out an agenda item request form. The request shall be scheduled as an item for discussion at a work session within 30 days from submission of the request form, and the majority of the Assembly shall develop consensus if and when the item should be scheduled on an agenda. 3. The borough manager and borough clerk may submit items that are routine in nature and within the scope of the performance of their duties. Section 3: That Section 2.30.070 Ordinances, resolutions, and motions of the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances is amended to read as follows: 2.30.070 Ordinances. A. The following procedure governs the enactment of all ordinances, except emergency ordinances which are specified in KIBC 2.30.075. 1. An ordinance shall be set by the assembly for a public hearing by the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes authorized on the motion; 2. At least five days before the public hearing, a summary of the ordinance shall be published together with a notice of the date, time, and place for the hearing. At least six days shall lapse between introduction and final passage; 3. Copies of the ordinance shall be made available at the hearing, or the ordinance shall be read in full; 5. During the hearing, the assembly shall hear all interested persons wishing to be heard; 6. After the public hearing, the assembly shall consider the ordinance and may adopt it with or without amendment; Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 1 Page 2 of 4 Page 60 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 7. The clerk shall print a copy of the ordinance for permanent retention. B. An ordinance takes effect upon adoption or at a later date specified in the ordinance. C. This section does not apply to an ordinance proposed under AS O4.11.507(d) relating to procedure for local option elections. D. Voting. 1. All assembly members present shall vote unless the assembly for special reason permits a member to abstain, except no assembly member may vote on a motion in which he has a substantial financial interest. All motions to excuse a member shall be made before the call of "ayes" and "noes" is commenced, and any member requesting to be excused from voting may make a brief statement of the reasons for making such a request, and the vote shall be taken without further debate. 2. If a member refuses to vote, the clerk shall record a vote for the prevailing side. The "prevailing side" is the side that carried the motion and is described as follows: a. If the motion passed, having received the affirmative votes of the quorum, that is the prevailing side; or b. If the motion failed, having not received the affirmative votes of the quorum, that is the prevailing side. 3. No member shall be allowed to explain his vote or discuss the motion while the "ayes" and "noes" are being called. A member may change his vote between the time of calling for the vote by the clerk and the announcement of the result by the chair or the clerk. The chair or the clerk shall ask if anyone wishes to change their vote. 4. The vote upon any motion shall be "ayes" and "noes" and shall be recorded in the minutes of the assembly. In the case where only six members of the assembly are present and there is a three/three tie vote of the assembly, the mayor may vote. No resolution, ordinance or motion before the assembly shall be valid unless affirmed by a majority vote of the assembly. E. Numbering Ordinances and Resolutions. A number shall be assigned to each ordinance or resolution by the clerk prior to introduction. F. Ordinance and Resolution Passage Procedures. When passed by the assembly, an ordinance or resolution shall be signed by the mayor and attested by the clerk; and it shall be immediately filed and thereafter preserved in the office of the clerk. G. Request for Legal Opinions. During a work session or a meeting, any two or more members of the assembly may request written legal opinions, relating to borough business, from the attorney through the manager's or the clerk's office. Upon receipt of assembly -requested written legal opinion, the clerk shall forthwith cause to have distributed the written legal opinion to all assembly members so that all members may be fully informed of the status of borough affairs. Effective Date: This ordinance takes effect upon adoption. ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH THIS DAY OF 202X KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Version 1 Page 3 of 4 Page 61 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... AGENDA ITEM #2.c. PACKET INFORMATION MARCH 21, 2024 REGULAR MEETING 130 131 ATTEST: 132 133 Scott Arndt, Borough Mayor 134 Nova M. Javier, MMC, Borough Clerk 135 136 Introduced by: Mayor and Assembly 137 First reading: 138 Second reading/public hearing: 139 140 VOTES: 141 Ayes: 142 Noes: 143 144 145 Ordinance No. FY2024-17 Page 4 of 4 Version 1 Page 62 of 62 Discussion Of An Ordinance To Update Processes For Agenda Setting And Su... 0 AKKW, 311.100 Real Property Tax Amount of property tax we need to balance the Manager's Budge 311.200 Personal Property Tax Business Personal Property Tax 313.120 Aircraft Tax Self-explanatory 314.100 PILT- Federal See Note #1 314.200 PILT- KIHA See Note #1 314.210 PILT -Alaska Housing See Note #1 316.100 Sea Products Local / Severance Tax, See Note #2 316.200 Mining - Gravel % of Gravel Sales (This is not royalties from land we own) 316.300 Timber Self-explanatory 319.100 Penalties & Interest Accumulates due to residents not paying their tax bills 322.110 Building Permits From Building Official for Permits outside of city limits 322.120 Subdivision Community Development / P&Z Fees 322.120 Conditional Use Permits Community Development / P&Z Fees 322.140 Zoning Compliance Permits Community Development / P&Z Fees 322.160 Variance Fee Community Development / P&Z Fees 322.170 Zoning Change Fee Community Development / P&Z Fees 322.180 Electric Permits From Building Official for Permits outside of city limits 322.190 Plumbing Permits From Building Official for Permits outside of city -imits 322.200 P&Z Review Fee Community Development / P&Z Fees 322.230 Dog Licenses Self-explanatory 322.239 Buisness License - Tobacco Local New or Renewal 322.240 Business License - Manitina Local New or Renewal 323.100 Tobacco Excise Tax Excise Tax added by KIB 323.110 Marijuna Excise Tax Excise Tax added by KIB on cultivators 331.119 CARES Act $ Self-exp'=anatory 332.100 National Wildlife Refuge See Note #3 335.110 State Community Assistance We have the exact amount for FY25. 335.130 Fisheries Business Tax See Note #4 335.132 Business Fisheries & Landing Tax See Note #S 335.150 Telephone & Electric Share of state tax 335.170 Liquor License Share of state tax 335.17S Marijuana License Share of state tax 335.190 PERS on Behalf Payment State payment to KIB for anything above 22% share that KIB pays 351.100 Animal Control Money that domes to KIB from the court system 361.100 Interest Earnings Interest on our investments 361.110 Gain / Loss on Sale General fund monies from surplus sale 361.300 Change in Fair Market Value Not rearized. See Note 6. 380.110 Jury Duty Jury Pay given back to KIB so that staff can keep KlB pay 380120 Sale of Copies Community Development/ Records Requests 380.122 Sale of Maps GIS made maps 380.130 Dishonored Check Fee Self-explanatory 380.170 Other Car Insurance payments / amazon returns 380.280 IBEW Reimbursement Paying for use of staff time as needed 391.300 Debt Service State payment of bund debt that they had not paid previously 392-100 Sale /General Fixed Assets Sale of a 2006 and 2010 Ford EsQ" NOTE 1 Payment in Lieu of Tax (PILT) - Payments in lieu of taxes are payments to local governments that help offset losses in property taxes due to nontaxable lands within their boundaries. PILT payments are made annually for tax exempt Federal lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the National Park Service, The US Fish and Wildlife Service ,The US Forest Service, and for Federal water projects and some military installations. Congress appropriates PILT payments each year. The BLM allocates payments according to a formula in the PILT Act that includes population, receipt -sharing payments, and the amount of Federal land within the borough. Non-federal PILT payments are received from the Alaska Housing Authority (for Pacific Terrace) and the Kodiak Housing Authority for various properties across KIB. NOTE 2 Sea Products Severance Tax - Budgeting for sea products severance tax involves many How many fish will be available for harvesting? . What other types and how much of other sea products will be harvested? (Kelp / Oysters) . What countries will be buying our products? • What will the price per pound be? • What will the environmental issues be? . Does the market prefer wild products to farm products? . Will all of our processing plants be in operation? All of these variables are difficult to predict. Local Sea Products Severance Tax Revenues for FY07- 3rd Quarter FY24 Fiscal Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Year IJU) - $e DI (Oct _ Dec) Oan - Marl r - n Total (due 10/311 (due 01/31) (due 4/30) (due 7/31) 2007 $ 452,345 $ 274,961 $ 267,827 $ 290,165 $ 1,285,298 2008 $ 478,073 $ 269,908 $ 311,534 $ 349,738 $ 1,409,253 2009 $ 589,181 $ 238,170 $ 185,957 $ 276,386 $ 1,289,694 ----------------------------------------------------------- 2010 $ 511,161 $ 149,095 $ 284,057 $ 343,380 $ 1,287,693 2011 $ 568,314 $ 181,182 $ 405,994 $ 427,786 $ 1,583,276 2012 $ 796,959 $ 228,854 $ 436,468 $ 430,473 $ 1,892,754 ------------------------------------------------------------ 2013 $ 734,259 $ 234,181 $ 341,449 $ 344,259 $ 1,654,148 2014 $ 814,126 $ 189,724 $ 350,783 $ 360,862 $ 1,715,495 $ $226,968 $ 329,057 $ _ $ 1,5_50,706_ _2015 - 2016 ----$ _671,773 - 544,807 __ $ _ _ 282,182 _ $ _ _ 217,857 _ $ _ _322,908 _ 324,230 $ 1,369,076 2017 $ 413,955 $ 194,679 $ 237,539 $ 336,752 $ 1,182,924 2018 $890,820 $222,085 $ 272,830 $ 275,106 $1,660,841 ----------------------------------------------------- 2019 $ 452,723 $ 190,871 $ 265,587 $ 254,057 $ 1,163,238 2020 $ 696,403 $ 125,953 $ 179,015 $ 168,989 $ 1,170,360 2021 $ 490,573 $ 115,046 $ 153,798 $ 237,415 $ 996,832 ----------------------------------------------------- 2022 $ 762,882 $ 167,384 $ 361,879 $ 349,284 $ 1,641,429 2023 $ 697,688 $ 285,915 $ 410,321 $ 160,546 $ 1,554,470 2024 $ 443,668 $ 112,913 $ 124,053 $ 680,634 FY24 Budget $ 1,300,000 FY24 YTD Actual v. Budget $ (619,366) k r9 La NOTE 4 Fisheries Business Tax - Alaska Statue 43.75 levies tax on businesses and persons who process or export fisheries resources in Alaska. The tax is based on the value paid to commercial fishers. The rate of the tax is based on the processing activity of the business. The processing activity is classified as either "Established" or "Developing" by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The rates are as follows: Established Developing Floating 5.0% Floating 5.0% Salmon 4.5% Shore -based 1.0% Cannery - shore based 3.0% Fisheries businesses file with the State on a calendar -year basis. Their tax returns are due by March 31 of the following year. From the taxes collected, the Department of Revenue distributes the taxes based on the location of the business. Municipalities will receive 50% of the tax collected from businesses from within their jurisdiction. If the collected is from a business within a city as well as a borough, the payment will be split equally between the city and borough, 50% of those funds funds collected are shared through an allocation program administered by the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development. NOTE 5 Fisheries Resource Landing Tax Authorized by Alaska Statute 43.77 levies the tax on processed fishery resources first landed in Alaska. The tax amount is based on unprocessed value of the resource. This value is determined by multiplying a statewide average price per pound (based on ADF&G data)by the unprocessed weight. This tax is primarily collected from factory trawlers and floating processors which process fishery resources outside of the state's three-mile limit and bring their products to Alaska for shipment. This tax is based on a calendar year d must be filed by March 31st. The rate is based on classification as determined by ADF&G deciding if a resource is established (3%) or developing (1 %). Tax collected in this category is distributed in the same manner as the Fisheries Business Tax. (See Note 4) NOTE 6 Change in Fair Market Value Once a month, KIB is required to record what would happen if we were to sell our bonds. This number is the cumulative number of all of those spot checks. This amount is not ever realized because we do not sell our bonds. Kodiak Island Borough SOA Fisheries Business and landing Tax and Local Severance Tax Revenue Summary Fiscal Year 19"-2024 (as of 04/22/2024) NOTF State year end final payments are received by the Borough after their fiscal year end this creates d+fferences between annual State reporting payment tota)s as found on the State website and annual Borough income totals State DOR is State Department of Revenue (usuallyrecerm n October/November) State DCCED is State Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development (usually reccrve m April) a1205.1laa 335. 132 '14-2- -6110.106 1 * 2-. i fisherlo Business Tail landing Tax, State Tax 00MM"M Combined Tax f S al Yepr State DOR/DCCED State - DOR/DCCED Total Total 1999 $ 855,077 $ 62,933 $ 918,009 $ 900,331 $ 1,818,340 2000 $ 728,557 $ 105,423 S 833,980 5 1,051,377 $ 1,885,357 ---_2001_$ 948,364_--_$_---._58.583 jS 1,0_6:947 3. ,_J. _ $1,798,180 _ 8 7,90 $ 1,34,248202--_$_----_ 674,612 ; $ 2,038,860 2003 $ 796,373 $ 44,395 S 840,768 $ 639,487 $ 1,480,255 _2004_ - - - - - $ - 573,595 - - - - - - - $ - _ - - _ 76.333 $_ 64_9,928 _$ _ 746,1_18 _ �- - S - _ 1,396,046 2005 $ 717,066 $ 56,224 $ 773,289 S 980,109 $ 1,753,399 2006 $ 802,313 $ 62,877 I $ 865,190 $ 1,108,742 I $ 1,973,932 958,965 S_ , 66.235 $_1,02_5.200 1,285,2_98 �_ $ _2007_ _ _ - 2008 _$ _ S _ _ _ _ -1,059,161 _ _ _ 41,811 $ 1,100,973 _$ $ _ _ _ 1,409,253-� $ _ _2,310,498_ 2,510,226 2009 $ 1,288,927 S 55,382 j $ 1,344,309 $ 1,289,695 I $ 2,634,004 1,339,575 S_ 68,855 ; $_1,40_8,430 1,287,6_93 $ _2010_ 2011 _$ S _ _ _ _ - 1,026,385 _ _ _ S _ _ _ _ - 88,859 $ 1,115,244 _$ $ _ _ 1,583,276 $- _ _2,696,123_ 2,698,520 2012 $ 1,405,360 $ 101,364 $ 1,506,723 $ 1,892,754 $ 3,399,477 $ 1,647,025 $_ 110,532 $_1,75_7,556 $ 1,654,1_48 $ _2013__ 2014 _ S _ _ _ _ _ _ ],546,308 _ -$ _ _ - - 97,679 ( $ 1,643,986 -$ _ _ 1,715,495 �- _ _ $ _3,411,704_ 3,359,481 2015 $ 1,561,675 $ 92,730 $ 1,654,405 $ 1,550,706 $ 3,205,111 1,382_320 20,370 $_1,40_2:690 1,395,6_10 S _2016 2017_ _$ S _ 1,270,403 _$_ $ _ 60,422 I S 1,330,825 _$ S-1,182,923 _ I _ S _2,798,300_ 2,513,748 2018 $ 1,103,101 $ 14,867 $ 1,117,968 $ 1,660,842 S 2,778,810 2019_ $ 1,816,530 $ 184,559 $ 2_,00_1,089 $ 1,163,2_38 $ _ 718,307 - - $ _ - 210,07S - - $- 928,382 -$ - _ ],170,360- �- - $ - _3,164,327_ - 2,098,742 2021 $ 1,023,975 $ 38,655 $ 1,062,630 $ 996,832 $ 2,059,462 2022 $ 854,209 $ 95,843 I $ 950,052 S 1,641,429 $ 2,591,481 2023 S 1,347,362 $ 59,341 $ 1,406,703 $ 1,554,470 $ 2,961,173 2024 $ 1,332,436 $ 70,620 $ 1,403,056 S 680,634 $ 2,083,690 las Of 04/19/24) FY24 Eudget $ 1,100,000 $ 1,300,000 2,400,000 15 year Annual Average (thru MU23) $ 1,200,381 5 1,253,041 $ 2,453,422 NOTF State year end final payments are received by the Borough after their fiscal year end this creates d+fferences between annual State reporting payment tota)s as found on the State website and annual Borough income totals State DOR is State Department of Revenue (usuallyrecerm n October/November) State DCCED is State Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development (usually reccrve m April) Kodiak Island Borough � OFFICE of the MANAGER 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Phone (907) 486-9301 TO: Kodiak Island Borough Assembly FROM: Aimee Williams RE: Manager's Report, April 25, 2024 Manager's Department Groundbreaking Ceremony- The Kodiak Fire Department will be having a groundbreaking ceremony on Tuesday, April 30, 2024, at 2PM. There will also be a reception following the event at the Koniag Building at 3PM to celebrate Manager Tvenge as he retires from the City of Kodiak. KEA Easements - KEA has asked to put a utility easement through KIB land near the ball fields at the Dark Lake area. Staff is working through the administrative process now for the disposal of that land. The request will work its way through Planning & Zoning and then come to the Assembly for final decision. IBEW - Our collective bargaining representative had some questions about our newly implemented travel policy. I am working with him to clarify the sections that he had questions about. Port Lions - Waiting information on which powers they might have specific questions about. Also informed them that there is Assembly interest to attend one of their work sessions and that we are looking at either May or June to do so. Budget Calendar - o Local Contribution Ask Expected - April 30th o Level II Manager's Budget - May 61h o Budget Ordinance in Packet Review - May 9th o Certified Roll Expected - May 10th o Ordinance Introduction - May 16th o Public Hearing - June 6th o Due Date - June 10th Fire Alarm — Audible alarms were tested in the main building this morning by Taylor Fire Inspections. They work. KISA Lease — Meeting set up for next week to address sections of the lease about types of guns authorized at the range. Emergency Management Training — Kodiak Island Borough will be hosting Texas A&M Engineering Extension Services (TEEX), Emergency Services Training Institute's MGT -312- Senior Officials Workshop for All Hazards Preparedness and MGT 340 — Crisis Management on June 10-11, 2024. All training will be delivered at Bayside Volunteer Fire Department. Upcoming Travel — • PWSRCAC — April 30th — May 3rd (Assessing Director will sit at Manager's Desk for the May 2nd Regular Meeting) • Vacation — May 8-10, 2024 (E&F Director will sit at the Manager's Desk for the May 9'h Work Session) Community Development Multi -Hazard Multi -Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan — Community Development staff held an in-person kick-off meeting on April 23. A small group of people attended the meeting to learn more about hazard mitigation and the process for updating the current plan. Staff is working on a community survey that will be released on May 3. Hydrology Study Project for the Russian River and Sargent Creek — An online kick- off meeting for the hazard mitigation grant award was held by ADHS&EM with borough staff on April 23. Borough staff is currently working on the procurement process for the project. PLAN 2045 — Community Development staff is working with Kodiak High School to develop a logo contest for the new comprehensive plan. The logo contest is open to all high school students. The contest closes on May 17. More information on the logo contest can be found on the PLAN 2045 website at https://www.kodiakak.us/759/Plan- 2045. Assessing Department Board of Equalization (BOE) - The BOE (KIBC 3.35.050) meets Monday, May 6, 2024. Assessing had twenty-nine (29) logged appeals for the BOE. At the end of Wednesday, April 24th, twenty-four (24) of the twenty-nine (29) appeals had been withdrawn. The BOE will hear 5 appeals. One late appeal request was considered by the BOE on April 23, 2024. It was denied. Current Projects - Property cleanup for Tyler Conversion • Conversion meetings with Tyler began Tuesday April 2, 2024. • Tyler assigned Assessing eleven (11) tasks this week, of which ten (10) were completed by Wednesday April 17, 2024. • Assessing and Finance need to meet to discuss some Tyler issues. • Assessing is passing through the GIS information on its task list to IT • Tyler has scheduled 5 (2 hour) meetings with Assessing in the month of April. Certified Roll — Assessing will work with the BOE to get the roll certified by May 10, 2024. Exemptions - 4 new exemption applications were received by the Jan. 15 deadline for 2024 for either non-profit religious or charitable uses. (KANA Marketplace, KCHC, Alutiiq Museum and Calvary Baptist Church Bells Flats) One exemption application was received past the deadline. Engineering and Facilities TRI -Annual AHERA Inspection Invitation to Bid — Released to public on April 26th via the KIB Website. The Tri -Annual AHERA inspections are a compliance requirement for 40 CFR 763 regarding asbestos containing materials in school facilities around Kodiak Island. HFAB — Hospital Facilities Advisory Board — The next scheduled meeting is May 13, 2024, at the PKIMC Barometer Conference Room. Solid Waste Contract Committee — The next scheduled meeting is on May 14, 2024, at 1:OOpm in the KIB Conference Room. Old Mental Health Facility — Sampling took place April 12th - 13th. Staff is waiting for results. (It usually takes two — three weeks for water samples to be returned) Landfill — Still waiting to hear if Denali Commission funding will be awarded for an update to the Solid Waste Management Plan KIBSD — Petersen Roof — Met with Project Manager, Site Supervisor, School Principal, and several teachers on Friday, April 19, 2024, to go over the project and let the school know what to expect as the work takes off. The supplies for the project have made it to the Port of Seattle and are scheduled to depart mid-May. There are nineteen forty -foot containers that will be staged on the ball field next to the school. They should arrive after the school year is complete, so they will not interfere with end of school year activities. Leachate Treatment Plant —The contractor and engineering firm are working on rectifying the gallons per minute flow deficiency. Long Term Care — Contact has been made with the Providence real estate division. R&R discussion and lease update is being started. Finance Department Budget — Collecting changes for the Level II Manager's Budget Property Taxes — . Real Property: The end of the Foreclosure process is approaching for tax year 2022 and staff has sent warning letters to property owners. . Personal Property: Borough staff is continuing to file small claims documents with the court for delinquent personal property accounts. Property Assessment and Taxation Implementation Project — Staff is continuing to meet with Tyler staff to review business rules and processes. Staffing — We are still advertising for an accountant position. IT Department Exchange 2019 Upgrade — IT is working on upgrading our Exchange on premise server to 2019 and migrating it and the Borough mailboxes to a new resource Forest named Kodiak.gov. Rename kib.local to kodiak.gov — IT is researching a project to rename the kib.local Microsoft Windows forest to Kodiak.gov — this will align our systems with Microsoft best practices and provide a solid foundation for subsequent additional infrastructure and security measures. — currently in the early testing phase. GIS- Aggregating and simplifying tools for Borough and public use: i. Working on moving archival data to current GIS website for backwards compatibility. ii. Working on the Parcel Fabric (Basically making the parcel lines more accurate to reality through a long arduous process) — latest area is Old Harbor iii. Assisting Community Development with data for their Comprehensive plan. iv. Working on Documentation of our GIS Data and what's critical/how we edit it/why we edit it in this way. V. Working on Identification of Missing Parcel IDs within our system. vi. Creating maps for the Hazard Mitigation plan for Community Development. vii. Preparing for the resumption of the summer google street view project. Network Security - Ongoing efforts to improve overall network security. i. Active directory accounts review ii. Active Directory reorganization iii. Group policy review iv. Network device vulnerability scanning V. System Patch policy and enforcement vi. Ongoing efforts to upgrade server operating systems and switch infrastructure vii. Working on a comprehensive network diagram for documentation. viii. Reviewing different security software for user account and file access reporting ix. Reviewing endpoint and log management via an open source SIEM X. Reviewing other grants that are available to KIB for additional improvements and capabilities. A. Cleaning up network documentation of any username and passwords stored in plain text. Alaska State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program (SLCGP) – This is a grant from the state of Alaska that is focused on improving the network security of the State and Local governments in Alaska. It covers multiple years with multiple rounds of funding for security audits and follow up projects. i. Audit - IT is preparing for a security audit of the KIB systems that will be paid for via a grant via the State of Alaska Statewide Cybersecurity Strategic Plan (SCSP). This has been approved and will be advertised this week. ii. VPN Assessment — looking at improving the stability and usability of the Client VPN technology implemented at the Borough. Ideally the VPN technology will be automatic, and able to be used behind remote unmanaged firewalls. iii. IDS Review – IT currently uses DarkTrace for its IDS, however the SLCGP has kicked off a review of its capabilities vs other solutions which is ongoing. Hyper V Virtualization Testing – IT is setting up a Microsoft based virtualization platform utilizing old servers to test out Hyper -V and if it is a viable alternative to newly expensive VMWare licensing after Broadcom acquired VMWare earlier this year. Bayside Fire Department Personnel Activity / Professional Development / Training The Bayside Fire Department will be unveiling a new summer long recruitment drive for regular probationary firefighters and cadet firefighters (16- & 17 -year-old). The goal is to unveil the drive at Crab Fest. The initial focus of the Department for fall / winter 2023 and winter / spring 2024 was to retain and develop current staff, this was very successful, and the department was able to passively recruit 6 new members during that period. The Bayside Fire Department is in the initial fact-finding stages of a potential island wide public safety -oriented Explorer Post. This potentially would encompass youth between the ages of 14-21 and offer engagement with all facets of public safety including EMS, Fire, Law Enforcement, Search & Rescue, and Public Safety Telecommunications. Once fact finding is complete, the department will engage with public safety partners and present to Borough Staff & Assembly. • The Bayside Fire Department responded to a request for mutual aid from the Kodiak Fire Department on Tuesday the 23rd in the early morning hours. This was for a occupied residential structure fire. The Bayside Fire Department provided Engine Co. 11 with 2 firefighters, a Driver Operator and Company Officer (Captain), Engine Co. 10 with a Firefighter, Driver Operator and Company Officer (Lieutenant). Additionally, a Bayside FD Chief Officer responded as well. Once again, the seamless operation of Kodiak FD, USCG FD, & Borough Fire Personnel under the Incident Command System and extremely competent leadership of KFD Deputy Chief Steel McNeil was instrumental in the fire being contained to the structure of origin with limited damage to a single exposure structure (less than 10 feet from the Fire Building) and no civilian injuries. It should be noted that adequate Fire & EMS protection was maintained in the Borough Fire & Rescue areas of responsibility via Bayside FD Personnel, Women's Bay FD Personnel, and Call Back Personnel from KFD and USCG FD. The Bayside Fire Department Responded to a gasoline fed fire at a salvage yard Wednesday afternoon which was extending to storage laden intermodal containers. Squad Co. 11 (Fast Attack) arrived on scene and knocked down the fire utilizing the front bumper mounted monitor with Class B Foam with the Driver Operator never exiting the vehicle (Pump & Roll Capable). Engine Co. 11 Responded as well with a Driver Operator and Company Officer (Lieutenant). An Engine from KFD was requested due to the number of 911 calls and large volume of black smoke emanating from the area. It should be noted that weekday afternoons is the leanest time slice for response of Bayside FD Firefighters. BFD Leadership is looking at potential solutions via a task group for this staffing anomaly. Campus Upgrades and Maintenance — The final "touches" on the new Firefighter Day Room & Lounge in the Lower Apparatus Building are being completed. Firefighters have been working diligently to outfit a space in proximity to response apparatus for members to decompress, relax, and build morale and camaraderie. Once upgrades are complete, BFD Leadership will reach out to the Manager's Office to schedule a facility tour for the Assembly and Staff. "Stuff to Just Make You Happy" - Squad Co. 11, with Company Officer Lieutenant Shelby Bacus, recently hosted a NCAA Women's Final Four Watch Party at the BFD. The event was well attended, and the peripheral result was the Fire Station being staffed with an Engine, Tender, and Squad crew for day at no cost to the community. Thanks to Squad Co. 11 for hosting and Lt. Baucus for continued excellence in leadership! We hear rumors that Engine Co. 11 is planning to upstage Squad 11 with a NHL Stanley Cup watch party in the new lounge....more to follow. 6 Kodiak Island Borough - Fund/Department Listing Assembly Review Schedule Fund/Dept No. Fund Type - Fund Name Responsible Employee/Entity 100-115 GF - Borough Attorney Dora 3/14/2024 100-120 GF - Finance Department Dora 3/14/2024 10_0-125GF-Information Technology Fred 3/14/2024 100-165 GF -General Administration Dora 3/14/2024 100-190 GF - Education / Culture / Recreation Dora 3/14/2024 10_0-191 - Non -Profit Kodiak Colleges Libraries_ 3/14/2024 _ _ _ _ 100-192-110 _ _GF _Fun_ding: _& _ _ _ _ GF - Non -Profit Funding: Health & Social Services _ _ _Aime_e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Aimee _ 3/14/2024 100-192-120 GF - Non -Profit Funding: Education, Culture & Recreation Aimee 3/14/2024 10_0-135 GF - Engineering / Facilities 3/28/2024 _ 100-175 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GF - Emergency Preparedness _ _ _Dave_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dave/Chris _ 3/28/2024 220 SR - Building & Grounds Dave 3/28/2024 -232 -Borough Building 3/28/2024 _____220 220-2337 __________________________________ __ -Mental Health Center 3/28/2024 220-234 -215 - Closed School - Larsen Bay 3/28/2024 -2.25 -Closed Scho_ol-_Karluk_ 3/28/2024 - 2-2 220-235 __ _ - School Building Major Repairs 3/28/2024 220-237 - Chiniak School 3/28/2024 220-238_ -_Maintenance Building 3/28/2024 -----220-241 - — - — - Project Office------------------------------------- 3/28/2024 220-247 - Egan Way Annex 3/28/2024 100-100 GF - Legislative Nova 4/11/2024 100-105 GF - Borough Management Aimee 4/11/2024 10_0--110 GF- Boroug_hClerk_ Nova_ 4/11/2024 210 _ _ _ _ _ SR - Land Sales - Resource Management _ Aimee/Dora 4/11/2024 100-000 GF - Revenues Dora/Aimee 4/25/2024 100-130 GF - Assessing Department Seema 4/25/2024 100-140 GF - Community Development Chris 4/25/2024 100-142 GF - Building Official Chris 4/25/2024 100-160 GF - Economic Development Chris 4/25/2024 100-172 GF - Parks & Recreation Dave/Chris 4/25/2024 100-186 GF - Animal Control Chris 4/25/2024 234 SR - LEPC - Emergency Planning Committee Chris 4/25/2024 30_ SR -Debt Service - Schools Dora 4/25/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 201 _0 _ _ _ _ _ SR -_Education Support Fund _ Aimee 4/30/2024 240 SR - Womens Bay Road Service District Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 242-------- SR-_Serv_ice_District_No.1 Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 244 _ _ _ SR - Monashka Bay Road District _ _ _ Board (due 3/31) _ _ 5/9/2024 246 SR - Bay View Road Service District Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 250 SR -_Fire Protection Area No. 1-- Bayside_ Fire_ Station (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 252 _ _ _ _ _ _ Si - Womens Bay Fire Department _ _ _B_oard _ _ _ Board (due 3/31) _ _ 5/9/2024 254 SR - KIB Airport Fire District Dora 5/9/2024 260SR -Wo_odland_Acre Lights_ Dora 5/9/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 61 _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ Trinity Island Light District SR Dora 5/9/2024 262 SR - Mission Lake Tide Gate Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 273________ SR -_ Opioid 5/9/2024 276 _Settleme_ntDora SR - Facilities Fund_ Dora 5/9/2024 277 SR - Tourism Development Dora 5/9/2024 278 SR -_Passenger Vessel 5/9/2024 530-731-701 WastCommercial _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EF -e Disposal -Landfill _ _ _Dora_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dave/Dora _ _ 5/30/2024 530-731-702 EF - Waste Disposal - Leachate Plant Dave 5/30/2024 540 EF - Hospital Enterprise Fund Dave/Dora 5/30/2024 54_5_ EF - Long -Term Care Health Services_ 5/30/2024 _ _ _ _ _ 555-758 _ _ _ _ _ _ EF - KFRC -Research Facility _ _ _Dave/Dora _ _ _ _ _ Dave/Dora _ _ 5/30/2024 556 EF - Research Court Apartments Dave/Dora 5/30/2024 56_0 EF-_911_Service Dora_ 5/30/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ 100-195 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GF-TranWePsG3Mral Fund SR = Special Revenue Fund _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EFD&gerprise Fund _ xx �Ov P�RB INVITED TO JOIN (49. The Kodiak Fire Department GROUND BREAKING CEREMONY On April 30'2024 2:00 P.M. (Parking Available at Kodiak Ice Rink) Followed by a reception At Koniag Bldg. Board Room (194 Alimaq Dr.) Aimee Williams From: Taylor, Brooke D <BTaylor@pwsrcac.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 8:24 AM Subject: PWRCAC board meeting in Valdez, May 2-3 News release Prince William Sound RCAC board meeting and reception in Valdez, May 1-3 The Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council will hold several events in Valdez, May 2-3, 2024. They will include the council's annual board meeting and a public reception. These events are free and open to the public. Public reception: Wednesday, May 1 In conjunction with the board meeting, the board of directors for the Alaska Tanker Company, Hilcorp and the council will be co -sponsoring a public reception on Wednesday, May 1. The reception will be held outdoors from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Kelsey Municipal Plaza, at 412 Ferry Way (in the event of poor weather, the reception will be moved to the Valdez Civic Center). Board meeting: Thursday and Friday, May 2-3 The meeting will be held in the Valdez Civic Center, at 110 Clifton Drive. Those interested in attending the board meeting can do so in person, by teleconference (1-888-788-0099, meeting ID: 811 8669 6249) or videoconference (https://pwsrcoc.zoom.usil/B1186696249). Visual presentations given during the meeting can be streamed live through the Zoom link or accessed by download on the c-Quncil's website when available. The tentative schedule for the Thursday session is from 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. On Friday, the meeting is scheduled from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. The meeting is open to the public, except for executive sessions. Public comments are scheduled to be taken on Thursday starting at 8:40 a.m. Those wishing to speak during public comments are highly encouraged to sign up ahead of time by emailing Jennifer Fleming: tW[r3ingftw-arcac,4.[g. The council will be conducting regular business during the meeting, including seating of established directors and committee members, election of new board officers and updates from council ex officio members, staff and committees. Other topics included on the agenda are: • An activity report by Alyeska Pipeline Service Company on the Valdez Marine Terminal and Ship Escort Response Vessel System operations, including an update on Alyeska's efforts to address concerns identified in the council's report "Assessment of Risks and Safety Culture at Alyeska's Valdez Marine Terminal." • A presentation on the Pikka Project as it relates to the Valdez Marine Terminal by representatives of Santos. • An update from council staff on work being done by the Alaska Regional Response Team's Regional Stakeholder Committee Task Force. • Consideration of a resolution requesting a voluntary vessel speed reduction by the Trans Alaska Pipeline System tankers submitted by Oasis Earth. • A summary of the council's monitoring of drills and exercises in 2023. • An update on community outreach activities done by the council over the past year. • A report from the council's legislative monitors and staff on political developments and prospects coming out of Washington, D.C. and Juneau. Anyone exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19, flu or cold should attend virtually. The meeting agenda is subject to change before or during the meeting. Council board meetings are routinely recorded and may be disseminated to the public by the council or by the news media. For more information, visit www.pwsrcac.org. fir. kjaoYl SYlt�rccM 6 l W1 Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016} 438-446 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect - - 1 Atmospheric Pollution Research `y t journal homepage: http. www.journals.elsevier.corn locate apr Original article Emissions from burning municipal solid waste and wood in domestics CrossMark heaters Marek Maasikmets Hanna-Lii Kupri , Erik Teinemaa ', Keio Vainumae Tarvo Arumae ", Ott Roots a, Veljo Kimmel a Estonian Environmental Research Centre (EERC), Moja 4d, 10617 Tallinn, Estonia b Estonian University of Life Sciences (EULC), Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014 Tartu, Estonia Tallinn University of Technology (TUT), Ehitajate tee, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Article history. Waste burning is globally important emission source of several toxic compounds. The objective of this Received 30 July 2015 study was to acquire emission factors (EF) for PCDD1Fs, HCBs, PAHs, PMx and for several gaseous pol- Received in revised form lutants from the residential combustion, where wood is burned with municipal solid waste (MSW). In 22 October 2015 Accepted 26 October 2015 addition to the wood, paper and cardboard waste, people also tend to burn MSW. As the burnable waste Available online 21 November 2015 content in MSW has changed during the past years, it is important to assess the effect of this factor for air emissions nowadays and in the past. Therefore an attempt was made to derive EF for the past emissions. Keywords 18 experiments including samples of firewood and MSW were burned using Estonian most common old MSW and wood combustion type masonry heater, measuring PMx, PCDD;F, HCB, PAH -s and gaseous pollutants. Emissions of PMx Significant correlation was found between PCDD/F, HCI, HCB and CO and between HCI and HCB in all 18 PCDD,F experiments. In three experiments (years 1990,1995, 2000), the mean levels of PCDD/F were higher than PAH the legislative limit value for combustion of MSW in waste incineration plants. The mean PCDD/F con- HCB centrations during the experiments was 0.0833 (0.0116-0.1550 95% CI) ng 1-TEQ Nm 3 11% Oi. Since low chlorine levels in used fuel caused high emissions of PCDD/F and HCB, it indicates that the habit of burning these kinds of waste in residential heaters should be avoided. We can conclude that RWC is significant source of PCDD/F, HCB and PAH. In general, EF measured within this study are in accordance with literature data. There was remarkable difference in EF between different years. EF of PCDD/F and HCB found confirm the trend of development of MSW collection system leading to an increasing usage of MSW recycling. Nevertheless, people's awareness about the negative impacts of waste burning in household heaters, should be raised. Copyright © 2015 Turkish National Committee for Air Pollution Research and Control. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Burning waste, whether at individual residences, businesses, or dump sites, is a large source of air pollutants. However, waste burning is not included in many current emission inventories used for chemistry and climate modelling applications (Wtedinmyer et al., 2014). Trash burning can be an important organic aerosol source and there are only few studies available (Mohr et al, 2009). • Corresponding author. Estonian Environmental Research Centre, Marja 4d, Tallinn. Estonia. Tel,: +372 5648 7722: fax: +372 6112 901. E-mail address: marek nnaasikmets@klab.ee (M. Maasikmets). Peer review under responsibility of Turkish National Committee for Air Pollu- tion Research and Control. There is an estimation that emissions of PMIO from open burning of domestic waste in China is equivalent to 22% of China's total re- ported anthropogenic PM10 emissions (Wiedininyer et al„ 2014). Waste burning is one important source of aerosols, which has been largely overlooked. It is estimated, that around 40 percent of the world's waste is disposed in this reckless and toxic way (Wtedinmyer et al., 2014). Incomplete combustion occurs often during domestic heating, wherein organic material in the presence of chlorine causes the formation of chlorinated organic by-products, such as poly- chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), polychlorinated di- benzofurans (PCDFs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and hexachlorobenzene (HCB) (Hedman et al., 2006). In general, considerable PCDD/F emission reduction has been achieved with http . dx do.org/10.1016;1 api 201510 021 1309-1042/Copyright 0i 2015 Turkish National Committee for Air Pollution Research and Control Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V All rights reserved. M. Maasikmets et al. / Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438-446 respect to the industrial emission sources, whereas emissions from non -industrial sources hardly decreased (Quaf3 et al., 2004). Ac- cording to the European Emission Inventory, wood combustion is one of the most important air emission sources for dioxins (Quag et al., 2000). Based on the analyses of PCDD/F and PCBs in oil shale and fly ash from oil shale fired power plants in Estonia (covering more than 90% from Estonian electricity needs), it was concluded, that the power plants are probably not the major sources of dioxins in Estonia (Roots, 2004; Roots et al., 2015). Res- idential wood combustion (RWC) in wood heaters and fireplaces is estimated to account for 78% of PAH, 53% of PCDD/F 70% of HCB and 50% of PM2.5 emissions in Estonia in 2010 (EEIC, 2012). Biomass combustion is a major global source of fine PM in the atmosphere with significant impacts on regional air quality, visi- bility, ecosystems, human health, and global climate (Hobbs et al., 1997). Fine particulates, especially fine particulates (PM2.5 and smaller), are particularly risky to human health, causing various respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, even lung cancer (Delfino et al., 2005; Pope et al.. 2002). Estonia's health impact assess- ment study showed, that fine PM in ambient air has shortened the life expectance up to 13 months, with the highest decrease in city centres or areas with extensive domestic heating (Orru et al., 2011). Additionally, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH -s) are emitted during the biomass combustion, that have been proposed to cause high toxicity (Fernandez et al., 2001). There is, however, lack of information concerning the charac- terisation of emissions from small scale biomass combustion sys- tems. According to the Estonian Construction Registry there are around 164,000 households (30% from the total households) using wood for heating purposes, whereby more than 80% of thein exploit old type masonry heaters. In Estonia wood and wood chips account >90% of the fuel used for residential heating (TUT, 2008). According to the members of Estonian Chamber of Chimney Sweepers evaluation (Kupri, 2014), in addition to the wood, paper and cardboard waste, people also tend to burn Tetra Pak's', sanitary napkins, diapers, various plastic packages, shoes, textile etc. It is difficult to assess the exact number of people who still practice burning MSW since such activities are done clandestinely (Kupri, 2015b). PMF analysis of Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM, Aerodyne Inc.) dataset showed that during the heating season, plastic burning aerosols can be identified in residential areas (Maasikmets et al., 2015). Presumable, some households burn MSW on their domestic fires either to reduce fuel costs or to avoid disposal fees (Watson, 2012). Nevertheless, the issue of burning waste remains an important topic to address. The available evi- dence indicates that waste combustion in domestic conditions can be a significant generator of dioxins and, particularly, of PAHs. These emissions should therefore be reduced and eliminated where possible (Watson, 2012). In addition to health effects caused by emissions from the MSW burning in households, quality of country specific emission in- ventories depend on reliable activity and emission data. Therefore verified EFs are needed for the annual emission reporting to the 1979 Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) and to estimate the compliance with the Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPS) Protocol. At the moment, Estonia is not in compliance with the referred protocol. The main reason for being in non-compliance is caused by the fact, that during the past years the biomass, as an energy source, has been favoured due the climate policy and this has led to higher PCDD/F, HCB, PAHs and PMx emissions from the wood combustion sector, e.g. small scale com- bustion. On the other hand, used EF for national emission reporting are based on EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook (EEA, 2013), where the given EF are highly uncertain and may differ from Estonia's conditions. In -field measurements make a better 439 database for inventory EF as they take into account a several important factors for the level of the pollutant emissions, which include the co -incineration of wastes, the complete system con- sisting of combustion unit, flue pipe and chimney, memory effects in the chimney and the habitual practice of the operators (Hubner et al., 2005). These factors should be considered when compiling the national emission inventories and therefore, it is crucial to have EF which are representing, in more accurate way, the real situation in Estonia. The burnable waste content in MSW has changed during the past 15 year; nevertheless our study enables to assess the possible effect of this factor for air emissions nowadays and in the past. Therefore an attempt was made to derive EF for years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2013 using the amount of MSW generated during those years. The most common heater type (batch fuelled old type masonry heater) was used for measuring emissions from the 18 experiments carried out in EERC stove laboratory. 2. Methods and materials According to Statistics Estonia, between 2000 and 2005, orga- nized MSW collection systems covered 79'=. of the Estonia's popu- lation. By 2010 the percentage increased to 90% and by 2012 95% of Estonia's population was connected with the organized waste collection system (Statistics Estonia, 2015). MSW is an extremely heterogeneous material and the composition varies greatly be- tween countries and even seasons (Lundin et al., 2013). For esti- mating the MSW generated, sorting studies of 2002 (Oras, 2002), 2007/2008 (SEI, 2008) and 2012/2013 (SEI, 2013) were taken into account for precise preparing the MSW content for the experi- ments. MSW burning experiments are based on the amount of MSW generated by Estonia's average household. Estonian average households are relatively small—according to Estonia's Statistics information in 2011, the average size of households consisted of 2.13 people (Statistics Estonia. 2014). For calculating the amount of MSW burned per household, a family of three as an average is taken into account in any observed year. It can be assumed, that people tend to burn flammable materials consisting plastic, paper and cardboard, wood, other flammable wastes and textile. Burning biodegradable waste is not included to this study, because biolog- ical treatment of solid waste is practiced widely. For determining year's specific EFs, MSW from Table 1 was burned together with firewood. More detailed overview about the content of MSW included to the experiments is described by Kupri (2015a). Six experiments with three tests for each year (1990,1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2013) were prepared using firewood (alder, Alnus incana) mixed with common MSW in a way that different types of materials within the combustible waste material group were pre- sent. In each case, the wood was cut into pieces of 0.4--0.5 m length and split into halves or quarters. The wood was stored in a con- ventional way in an outdoor woodshed and was brought to heater laboratory at least 1 day prior to combustion experiment. The wood moisture content ranged between 14 and 18% on wet basis. The fuel net calorific value measured in all 18 experiments was 20.399 ± 0.662 MJ kg 1. Analysis showed that the average chlorine content of the mixed fuel was 0.101 t 0.034%. Fuel was ignited from the bottom, as this is the most common method used by the most of the heater users in Estonia. MSW was sourced from the Estonian Environmental Research Centre's kitchen, different households and a package waste receptacle of an apartment building. Statistical variation between the data was analyzed by statistical software SPSS Statistics 17.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics), using Bivariate Correlation procedure to calculate Spearman Correlation Coeffi- cient (Spearman's rho p, nonparametric correlations algorithm). Additionally descriptive statistics like mean, standard deviation 440 M. Moasikmets et al. / Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438 446 Table 1 Amount of MSW burned in households (kg) in different years Fuel type/Year 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2013 1. Plastic waste (kg) 0.147 0.217 0.245 0.175 0.104 0.108 2. Paper and Cardboard waste (kg) 0.153 0.227 0.257 0.164 0.078 0.081 3. Wood waste (kg) n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.004 0.012 0.012 4. Other flammable materials (kg) n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.060 0.073 0.075 5. Textile waste (kg) 0.020 0.030 0.033 0.042 0.029 0.031 Kg per household per day (three people) 0.959 1.4222 1.606 1.333 0.888 0.921 Hardwood (Amus incana) (kg) 4.09 t 0.03 3.55 t 0.04 4.52 t 0.20 3.67 t 0.05 4.29 t 0.13 4.25 t 0.10 n.a. - not analyzed (SD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated. In addi- tion, principal component analysis (PCA) was used to evaluate similarities and dissimilarities between measured data. PCA is described as powerful multivariate data analysis technique in similar studies by many authors (Colombo et al., 2009; Hedlnan et al., 2006; Wikstrom and Marklund, 2001). The primary inten- tion of PCA is to obtain an overview of the dominant "pattern" in a dataset (Wikstrom and Marklund, 2001). The obtained data was divided into different years (six experiments with three tests for years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2013) and measured vari- ables (concentration of measured gases. PMx, 17 PCDDjF congeners and 16 PAH compounds). The variables are used to characterize results from different years. PCA results are visualized using component plot in rotated space. 2.1. Emission measurements 18 samples of firewood and MSW were burned under laboratory conditions at the Estonian Environmental Research Centre's stove laboratory measuring PMx, PCDDiF, HCB, PAH and gaseous pollut- ants. All samples were taken from the hot flue gas from an Estonian old type masonry heater that was chosen for conducting the ex- periments, as more than 80% of households are using an old type masonry heater for heating purposes (TUT, 2008). The primary air access can be regulated manually with the heater door. Estonian old type masonry heater is in general similar to Finnish masonry heater, described by Tissari et al. (2009). The difference is that Estonian old type masonry heater does not have a secondary air access, therefore the combustion conditions may differ when comparing the results with the experiments made in the Finnish masonry heater. Similar to Finnish appliances (Tissari et al., 2009), also Estonian heaters are operated for a short time and at a high combustion rate, which is not always the case in Central -Europe, where mostly lightweight metal stoves are used and operated at the low combustion rate (Tissari et al., 2009). Based on assumptions given by many potters, during the experiments the heater door was open around 10% from the maximum, as this should represent habits used by the most of the population. As the draught in household chimneys is strongly influenced by the ambient condi- tions, flue gas blower on the top of chimney was used. Using flue gas blower it was possible to establish similar draught conditions (flue gas speed in chimney around 1.5--2 m s 1) in all 18 experiments. For the PCDD/F, HCB and PAH sample collection EVA Dioxin Sampler 1.5 E -type (Metlab Miljo AB) was used. All samples were taken from the hot flue gas according to standard EN 1948-1, through an externally heated metal tube of 180 C that is connected to chimney. Inside the heated metal tube is a glass tube that has a pipe shaped nozzle that is pointed towards the analyzed gas flow. After heated tube, hot flue gas flows to a heated chamber where a fibreglass pre -filter separates solid particles. After passing the filter, hot flue gas flows through a glass spiral cooler column into a col- umn filled with adsorbent (XAD-2). XAD-2 column is capturing PCDD/F, HCB, PAH from cooled flue gas after what sampling gas is dried and sucked through gas measurement clock to specify the gas volume. The glass tube, pipe shapes nozzle and glass spiral cooler are washed with acetone and toluene before and after experiments. Liquid collected for analyzing residue dioxins. Collected sample consists of a fibreglass pre -filter, XAD-2 adsorbent column and pre and after wash from glass details. PCDD/F (17 PCDD/F-s), HCB and PAH (16 PAH -s) analysis was performed in ALS Laboratory Group laboratory in Czech Republic, using a HRGC-HRMS (high resolution gas chromatograph and -mass spectrometer). ALS Laboratory Group operates a fully documented quality management system accredited by UKAS to the ISO/IEC 17025 standard. PMx concentrations were sampled using Delcati' Diluter (2 stage dilution, 64 times dilution), where the sampling line was heated up to 180 C and the filtered dilution air provided by the compressor was heated up in first stage up to 180 C. For the second dilution stage filtered dilution air with room temperature (around 20 C) was provided. For the PMx measurement ELPITM (Dekati'",12 size classes in range of 0.04-10 µm) and ELPI , Thf (Delcati", 14 size classes in range of 0.006-10 µm) was used. ELPIT"1 and ELPI-r TM has been used in many RWC studies and Tissan 120081 and Obaidullah et al. 1.2012) have described it as suitable measurement technique for this purpose. Simultaneously gas samples (SOS, NOx, CO, CO?, HCI, HE CH4, 02 and 11 calibrated volatile organic compounds), temperature ( C), water content (%) was measured during the whole burning process using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR, Gasmet Technologies Ltd.) analyzer. Insulated, externally heated (180 'C) sample lisle is lead- ing gas through filter units to FT -IR gas analyzer. Calcmet Analyzis Software is used together with Gasmet'rM DX -4000 analyzers to collect FT -IR spectra of the sample gas and to analyze the concen- tration of gas components. Measured concentration was normalized according to methods described by Tissan .2008) and Van Loo and Koppejan ;.2008). For the EF calculation following equation (Ministerial i egulatlon no 99, 2004, Tissari, 2008) was used: q,- c, a x 0.25 x k, mg Mj I (7) where: c, - concentration in dry flue gas, ing Nm 3; a - excess air at - 20.9/(20.9 02); 0.25 - the dry volume of the flue gas per energy unit formed in the combustion of dry fuel, Nm3 Mj 1. k -- fuel moisture factor. 3. Results and discussion We found significant correlations between measured PCDDIF and HCI (p -- 0,932' ); PCDD/F and HCB (p - 0.973 ); HCI and HCB (p 0.961') concentrations. The PCDD/Fs formation in MSW combustion processes are mainly involved by chemically similar ' Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level 2 -tailed M. Maosikmets et al. /Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438 446 precursors, such as chlorophenols, which may be formed initially as the products of incomplete combustion (Altwicker and Milligan, 1993). PCDD/Fs may be produced from the reaction of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and molecular chlorine under relatively low combustion temperature conditions (Liu et al., 2000). The small organic molecules can be adsorbed onto the fly ash from flue gases and are subsequently converted to PCDD/Fs. Compared with Cl2, HCI is very unlikely to undergo aromatic substitution reactions to yield PCDD and PCDF precursors (Liu et al., 2000; Raghunathan and Gullett, 1996). Therefore, the formation of molecular chlorine may play a controlling role in the production of PCDD/Fs (Liu et al., 2000). Combustion experiments conducted in domestic stove burning hard coal demonstrated, together with a pronounced effect of the flue gas temperature, a predominant influence of the coal chlorine content on the PCDD/F emissions (Paradiz et aL, 2015). On the other hand, Wikstrom and Marklund (2001) found, that the most important variable for changes in the PCDDs/Fs formation is disturbance in the combustion condition and not the variation in chlorine content of the fuel. Halasz (1996) has found, that the PCCD/ F emissions in stack gases depend strongly on the particle con- centration. There are two temperature windows in which dioxin - like compounds can form: the "homogeneous" route between 500 and 800 °C and the "heterogeneous" one at 200-400 C (Stanmore, 2004). When suitably catalyzed, PCDD/Fs also form on solid surfaces at temperatures of 200-400 C. They can form via two routes, either from precursors such as chlorophenols and chlorobenzenes or from elemental carbon (the de novo reaction) (Addink and Olie, 1995; Stanmore, 2004). The heterogeneous route is probably dominating in RWC, as the temperatures in stoves used in RWC sector, are normally below 500 °C and high EC/OC con- centrations in flue gases are normally observed (Tissari, 2008). Stanmore (2004) detected a good correlation between PCDD/F and other chlorinated products (and thus possible precursors). The maximum formation of PCDD/F occurred at 340 C with the longest residence time (2.9 s) (Fangmark et al., 1994). In our experiments, similar temperature range and flue gas residence time was observed. According to Hedman et al. (2006), HCB levels generally corre- lated with the PCDD/F levels. Nevertheless, the proportions appeared to be lower in the combustions with the highest PCDD/F levels, such as the intermittent pellet combustion and plastic waste combustion. This is indicating that conditions in these combustions may have specifically favoured dioxin formation rather than gen- eral POP formation. There were considerable differences between the EF in different years. Highest PCDD/F and HCB EF were treasured with the fuel mix from the year 2000. This is probably caused by the fact that during that experiment biggest portion of MSW (1.606 kg) was burned with firewood. At the same time high CO, NOX and PMx concentrations were measured, which indicates, that the combustion was due the small combustion chamber and high load of MSW, insufficient. Similar results were obtained also by Hubner et al. (2005). A positive correlation (p = 0.829 ) between PCDDs/Fs formation and CO concentration was found, which is in line with finding by Wikstrom and Marklund (2001). Within our experiments, it was noticed that particulate number (PN) and HCI, CO2 concentrations rose during the fuel adding pro- cess and CH4 level rose during the mixing of fuels (see the Supporting Material, SM, Fig. S1). After adding fuel, CH4 concen- trations decreased, including a slight decrease in chamber tem- perature. CH4 emissions are a result of too low combustion temperatures, too short residence times or lack of available 02 (Van Loo and Koppejan, 2008). It was also observed, that during firing phase and after fuel adding PM size distribution changed slightly to bigger size fraction (SM, Fig. S2). Similar tendency was also observed by Tissari et al. (2009), where they noticed that the size 441 distributions were widest during the firing phase when the sizes of the particles were also larger. This is probably caused by insufficient supply of air and insufficient mixing of air and fuel. HCI concen- trations increased rapidly after adding fuel and stayed high for few minutes, after what, the concentrations decreased until new fuel was added. This phenomenon was more clearly evident at the beginning of test, shown in SM Fig. S1, as chloride compounds are due the high vapour pressure volatile. HCI concentrations formed during fuel combustion are usually related to the chlorine con- centration of the burned fuel. In all fuel adding similar fuel mix was used, nevertheless, MSW content may vary from batch to batch, as all MSW batches were composed manually. For more homogenous fuel mix shredded MSW could be used, but in our experiments this was avoided, as this doesn't represent the situation how the MSW is burned by people in households. In our experiments, chamber temperature increased rapidly up to 300 C at the beginning and approximately after 1 h reached maximum around 400-500 C. After reaching temperature around 400 'C, HCI concentrations slowly dropped down. Fuel mixing did not increase HCI concen- trations. According to Miller et al. (2003) the chlorine in the fuel has been found to play an important role in the release of ash -forming elements to gas phase. The metallic chlorides, in biomass com- bustion typically alkali metal chlorides, have high vapour pressures and hence, they condense at low temperatures in the flue gas. The behaviour of chlorine is strongly affected by fuel sulphur content (Sippula, 2010). On the other hand, the fuel sulphur has been seen to affect the particle formation in several ways. Throughout the sulphation reaction, chlorine of the metallic chloride is released as HCl (Sippula et al., 2008). Additionally Sippula et al. (2008) has found, that the increase of HCI in the combustion increased both PN concentration and mean particle size and obviously, the fine par- ticle mass concentration. Similar tendency was also observed dur- ing our experiments (SM Fig. SI). PAH (Fig. 2) has the highest EF during 1990 year experiment, which is not following the overall trend regarding other EF, where the highest EF were observed with mixtures including highest MSW load. Nevertheless, also during 1990 year experiment the MSW load was high, which has probably led to the high EF. EF of PMx and gases are following similar trend with PCDD/F and HCB EF, where the highest EF (except SO2) were measured during the year 2000 experiment, where the fuel load (incl. highest MSW load) was highest and therefore the optimal combustion conditions were not achieved. Highest S02 EF was measured during the 2010 year experiment, which was caused by higher sulphur content (0.14%) of fuel. Mean PCDD/F concentrations were in range within 95`- Cl of 0.0116-0.1550 ng I TEQNm 311 % 02. The highest PCDD/F level was found in the year 2000 samples and highest levels of 2,3,4,7,8- PeCDF and 2,3,7,8 TCDF were identified (SM Fig. S3). No PCDD compounds were found from the samples. This finding is in line with the statement reported previously that the PCDD/Fs formed in wood combustion are mainly PCDF compounds (Kaivosoja et al., 2012; Tame et al., 2009). In three experiments (years 1990, 1995, 2000) the mean levels of PCDD/F were higher than the legislative limit value for combustion of MSW in waste incineration plants, which is for PCDD/F 0.1 ng 1 TEQ Nm 3 (11 % 02) (IED, 2010). Mean PCDD/F concentrations measured during the experiments, are generally in the same range of limit value set for the MSW incin- eration plants. Similar results were obtained by Schatowitz et al. (1993), Fiedler (1993), Launhardt et al. (1998), Pfeiffer et al. (2000) and Wevers et al. (2004). As quite low levels of chlorine caused this effect, it indicates, that the habit of burning these kinds of waste in residential stoves should be avoided. Our results for the concentration of NO and NO2, in comparison with Hedman et al. (2006) experiments 2.4a and 2.4b, where 442 M. Maasikmets et al. / Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438 446 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 0.264 LLL 0.176 0 U 0 0.088 0.000 60000 m 45000 c 30000 a m 15000 0 - 60000 50000 m 40000 30000 M 20000 m 10000 0 1990 300 250 200 0, 150 m U 100 = 50 0 Year Fig. t. PCMF and HCB EF with standard deviation. 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 26400 rn 17600 0 8800 v 0 r m ■ Hedman et al -2006 exp. 2.4b e 4.64 7.6 ■ NO, mg Nm 3 167.73 ■ 40 - A e 130 SO2, mg Nm 3 32.99 0.1 - HCI, mg Nm 3 16.70 44 a ■ 1990 300 250 200 0, 150 m U 100 = 50 0 Year Fig. t. PCMF and HCB EF with standard deviation. 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 26400 rn 17600 0 8800 v 0 r 18900 12600 c 6300 m ■ Hedman et al -2006 exp. 2.4b 0 4.64 7.6 ■ NO, mg Nm 3 167.73 130 40 - A e 130 SO2, mg Nm 3 32.99 0.1 e HCI, mg Nm 3 16.70 44 130 ■ 106.45 (1-TEQ) 6.9 x 103 t 690 ; WHO-TEQ) 24 x 103 t 1.4 x 101 (WHO-TEQ) -------------- 4 18900 12600 c 6300 m Hedman et al. 2006 exp. 2.4a Hedman et al -2006 exp. 2.4b 0 4.64 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Year Fig. 2. BaP. BkF. BbP and Indeno (1 2 3-cd)pyrene EF with standard deviation birchwood was burned with paper and plastic, were slightly higher et al. 2006) are expressed in WHO-TEQ and they are on average and for all other compounds lower (Table 2). The biggest difference 10-20% higher compared to 1-TEQ values, than our results remain is in PCDD/F results, as our measurements showed on average 145 still much lower. Also the S02 concentration from Hedman et al. times lower results. Taking into account, that results by Hedman 2006 exp. 2.4b is around 51 times higher compared to ours. Table 2 Comparison of measured data. Substance (273.15 K. 101,325 kPa, 10% Co,) This study, mean Hedman et al. 2006 exp. 2.4a Hedman et al -2006 exp. 2.4b CO, g Nm 3 4.64 7.6 26 NO, mg Nm 3 167.73 130 40 NO2, mg Nm 3 218.47 31 130 SO2, mg Nm 3 32.99 0.1 1700 HCI, mg Nm 3 16.70 44 130 PCDD)F, pg Nm 3 106.45 (1-TEQ) 6.9 x 103 t 690 ; WHO-TEQ) 24 x 103 t 1.4 x 101 (WHO-TEQ) M. Maasikmets et al. /Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438-446 This indicates that at least during the exp. 2.4b, quite high sulphur containing fuel was used. Nevertheless, in Hedman et al. (2006) exp. 2.4b even higher PCDD/F results were obtained compared to exp. 2.4a, where the fuel SO2 concentration was 0.1 mg Nm 3 (at 273.15 K, 101,325 kPa, 10% CO2). This is in contradiction with find- ings by Liu et al. (20001 and Addink et al. (1996), where high sulphur content in fuel was found as good inhibitor for PCDD/F formation. The main reason for having differences in PCDD/F results compared to Hedman et al. (2006) can be that different type and amount of MSW was used and in our case, the experiments were done using masonry heater, while Hedman et al. (2006) in exper- iments 2.4a and 2.4b has used an approximately 30 -year old boiler. For PCDDJF formation (heterogeneous reaction) gas residence time in order of second in combustion chamber for certain temperature range (200-400 C) is needed, in our case this criteria is fulfilled. Furthermore, as the flue gas moves inside the heater are around 5000 mm long (additionally to flue gas residence time 2-3 s inside the heater), after that the flue gas is cooled down around 2 times. In sampling point the normal temperature stays around 100-200'C, which is 2-4 times lower compared to temperatures in combustion chamber. Such conditions in conjunction with chlorine have been found suitable for PCDD/F formation (Wikstr6m et al., 2003). The mean PM10 concentration during the experiments was 1113.55 (275.2-1951.9 95% Cl) mg Nm 3 (13% 02). Highest con- centrations were measured during year 2000 experiments, with the mean level of 2384.461 (618.083-4150.840 95% Cl) mg Nm 3 (13% 02). High concentrations were caused by high load of MSW and concentrations rose during the fuel adding significantly. In average, during year 2000 experiment, mean concentration of CO was 3847.11 (2271.88--5422.34 95% CI) mg Nm 3 (13% 02). PM emission and size distribution from heaters largely depends on combustion conditions (SM Fig. Si), which is mainly caused by incomplete combustion due to too fast pyrolysis and increased ash release due to high combustion temperature. We noticed remarkable increase of PM and PN concentrations during the firing phase and fuel adding, in line with findings by Tlssari et al. (2009). Comparing POP EF from MSW combustion only few literature reports on emissions from masonry batch fuelled heater, where the wood is combusted with MSW, were found. In a series of field studies of domestic heating appliances Hubner et al. (2005) found highest PCDD/F emissions (0.03-0.1 ng I TEQ MJ 1) when relevant amounts of other combustible materials, such as MSW, were co - combusted or used in order to facilitate lightning -up. In average, EF for PCDD/F (Table 3) measured within this study are lower compared to Hubner et al. (2005), nevertheless, results from year 2000 experiments (Fig. 1) (highest MSW load) are in the same range (0.0050-0.5392 95% Cl ng 1-TEQ MJ 1). According to EEA (2013), EF for conventional stoves using wood and similar wood waste are within 95% confidence interval (95% CI), in range from 0.02 to 5 ng 1-TEQ MJ 1. In average, the EF for HCB concentration found within this study are in range of 10.744--143.817 ng MJ -1 (95% CI), which is much higher compared to default EF from EEA (2013), where the EF 5 ng MJ 1 for conventional stoves using wood and similar wood waste is proposed. According to EEA (2013), emissions of HCB from combustion processes are highly uncertain, but on the whole, processes resulting in PCDDJF formation is also leading to HCB emissions. Similar to high PCDDIF emissions, highest HCB emis- sions were measured during the year 2000 experiments, where we obtained mean EF of 241.216 (4.447-477.985 95% CI) ng MJ 1. Mean PAH concentration (16 PAH) was in range within 95% Cl of 0.451-5.774 mg Nm 3 (13% 02). PAH profiles varied between the different samples. Naphthalene, acenaphtylene, fluorine and phenanthrene were among the four most common PAH 443 compounds (SM Fig. S4) during the tests and contributed from 80% to 95% of the total PAHs. Similar results were obtained also by Kaivosoja et al. (2012). EF for PAH -s (benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(k)flu- oranthene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene) are much higher compared to results proposed in EEA (2013), where EF within 95% Cl were for benzo(a)pyrene is in range of 12-1210 ng MJ 1, for benzo(k)fluoranthene 4-420 ng MJ -1, for benzo(b)fluoranthene 11-1110 ng MJ 1 and for Indeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene 7-710 ng MJ 1. The emission of PAH depends mostly on the combustion process, particularly on the temperature (lower temperatures favourably increases their emission), residence time in the reaction zone and the availability of oxygen (EEA, 2013; Van Loo and Koppejan, 2008). The main reason for high level of PAH, is due to the low temperatures in combustion chamber during the firing and high fuel load. In our experiments, we added MSW to wood, which may lead to poor combustion conditions in the heater chamber. PCA was used to evaluate the potential variation and simi- larities of the measured variables, consisting of 18 emission test and 41 variables (17 PCDD/Fs congener patterns, 16 PAH com- pounds and other measured variables) in flue gas samples. Fig. 3 is showing a distinct correlation between the formation of the variables. Based on the two components extracted from PCA, the first principal component (Component 1) accounted for 84.1% of the total variance, and the second principal component (Component 2) accounted for 15.2% of the total variance. The score plot (Fig. 3) of PCA indicated that all the measured vari- ables can be assigned to four groups. Group 1 includes only SO2, which can be explained by the fact that mostly more than 95.`8 of SO2 is result of complete oxidation of the fuel sulphur. Group 2 includes several compounds, like all PAH -s, particulates, CO, CH4, VOC and N2O. This group consists mainly compounds (except N2O), which are result of incomplete combustion. Group 3 in- cludes CO2 and NOx, which are results of complete combustion. Group 4 includes mainly chlorinated compounds, including all PCDD/F-s, HCB and HCI. This indicates that HCl and PCDDJF, HCB are strongly correlated and we can assume that within our tests fuel chlorine content played important role in PCDD/F and HCB formation. Nonparametric statistics was used to test the correlation of measured variables in Group 2, Group 3 and Group 4 (Group 1 was not included due to only one variable). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient matrix of Group 2, 3 and 4 showed strong correlation between some variables, especially in Group 4. The correlation coefficients of 4 are all (except HF) higher than 0.8 and are signif- icant at the 0.01 level. Some results of nonparametric statistics verified well with the PCA. For the proper PCA analysis more results are needed and therefore PCA analysis with only 18 results may be insufficient. 4. Conclusions Significant correlation between measured PCDD/F and HCI (p 0.932); PCDD/F and HCB (p - 0.973'); HCI and HCB (p 0.961); PCDDs1F and CO (p 0.829 ) concentrations was found. In three experiments (years 1990, 1995, 2000) the mean levels of PCDDJF, was higher than the legislative limit value for combustion of MSW in waste incineration plants. Quite a low levels of chlorine in used fuel resulted with rather high emissions of PCDD/F and HCB. This is indicating that the habit of burning these kinds of waste in residential heaters should be avoided. PCA was used to evaluate the potential variation and similarities of the measured variables. The score plot of PCA indicated that all the measured variables can be assigned to four groups. Group 4 includes all PCDDJF-s, HCB and HCI with all the compounds 444 M. Maasikmets et al. Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438 446 Table 3 Mean EF (95% Cl of mean) Substance, unit EF, mean Lower 95% Cl of mean Upper 95% Cl of mean PCDD/F, ng MJ ' 0.059 0.020 0.098 HCB, ng MJ ' 48.469 13.299 83.638 Benzo(a)pyrene, ng MJ ' 16502.425 6023.862 26980.988 Benzo(k)fluoranthene, ng MJ ' 7172.284 2939.232 11405.337 Benzo(b)fluoranthene, ng MJ ' 17764.485 7229.314 28299.656 htdenoll,23-cd1pyrene, ng MJ ' 10599.901 3648.999 17550.803 PM., mg MJ ' 975.960 103.140 1848.780 PM25• mg MJ ' 1027.327 108.569 1946.084 PM10, mg MJ ' 1048.292 110.785 1985.800 CO, mg MJ ' 2839.242 2154.374 3524.109 N20. mg MJ 1.782 1.180 2.385 NO., mg MJ ' 469.528 370.175 568.881 SO2, mg MJ 1 19.988 11.988 27.988 NHS, mg MJ ' 3.460 0.297 6.623 HCl, mg MJ ' 9.242 2.181 16.302 HF, mg MJ ' 1.568 0.813 2.323 VOC, mg MJ ' 645.395 491.489 799.301 1,o- 0,5- ry N C 0,o' d C O V •0,5- 1.0 - Group 4 PCDDFHxCDF2PeCDF2 T HOHD Hz Groups O O O Hq W HF WCDr- �PeCDFt �2 GrouD 3 Group 2 O O ANR ONOx 1 DahAN BbFLAN qPu2M00 OkFLAN O VO OICO 15O�A O 0 01123cdPY 020 N cm BghiPERY CH 0 BaP FL W 88ANTH O NA O 1,0 •0,5 0,0 0,5 1.0 Component 1, (84.10%) Fig. 3. Principal components plot of the measured concentrations ,acronyms names are given 1n SM Table Sl I. strongly in correlation, therefore we can assume that within our tests, fuel chlorine content played important role in PCDDJF formation. From our experiments we can conclude, that there was remark- able difference in EF between different years. PCDDJF and HCB EF conform to the development of the MSW collection system in Estonia (since 2005, parishes with more than 1500 inhabitants are obligated to join to the organized waste disposal system). Devel- opment of the waste disposal system has led to an increasing trend of waste recycling, instead of burning it either in heaters or in backyard. As nowadays more plastic waste is recycled, it can be assumed that less plastic waste is burned in household heaters as well. Never- theless, there are still households which are practizing such kind of activity; therefore people's awareness about the negative impacts (environmental and technical regarding heater maintenance) of waste burning in household heaters should be raised. We can conclude that EF obtained during experiments can be used in national emission inventories, as they are representing local circumstances regarding MSW burning in household heaters. We can conclude that RWC is significant source of PCDDJF, HCB and PAH, as RWC is estimated to account for more than 50:,� of PCDD/F, more than 70% of HCB and more than 80% of PAH emissions in Estonia in 2013. Nowadays more masonry heaters with secondary air excess are built, which are similar to Finnish masonry heaters described by Tlssari et al. 12009), therefore further studies are needed to inves- tigate emissions from those heater types, including local habits of fuel usage and operational circumstances. Further research is also M. Maasikmets et al. /Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438-446 needed to validate the obtained EF, combining dispersion calcula- tions and ambient air measurements. Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflict of interests. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge to Estonia's Ministry of Envi- ronment for providing resources to M. Maasikmets, H. -L., Kupri, E. Teinemaa, T. Arumae and K. Vainumae with financing project no 4- 1.1/141189 and Estonia's Ministry of Education and Environmental Conservation and Environmental Technology R&D Programme for providing resources to V. Kimmel and M. Maasikmets corre- spondingly with targeted financing project SF1090050s07 and project B1oAtmos (3.2.0802.11-0043). Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data related to this article can be found at 11ttp: // dx.doi.org/10.1016/J".apr.2015.10.021. References Addink. R., Olie. K.. 1995. Mechaoisma of formation and destruction of poly- chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans in heterogeneous systems. Environ. Sci.1'echnol. 29. 1425-1435. Addink, R., Paulus, R.H.W.L-, Otte, K., 1996. Prevention of polychlorinated dibenzo-p- dioxins/dibenzofurans formation on municipal waste incinerator fly ash using nitrogen and sulfur compounds. Environ. Sci. Technol. 30. 2350-2354. Altwicker, E.R , Milligan. M.S., 1993. Formation of dioxins: competing rates between chemically similar precursors and de novo reactions. Chemosphere 27, 301-307. Colombo. A., Benfenan, E., Manam. G.. Lodi, M., Marras. R., Rotella. G., Senese, V, Fattore. E.. Fanelli, R., 2009- PCDD/Fs in ambient air in north-east Italy: the role of a MSWI inside an industrial area. Chemosphere 77, 1224-1229. Delfino, R.J., Stoutas, C., Malik, S.. 2005. Potential role of ultrafine particles in as- sociations between airborne particle mass and cardiovascular health. Environ. Health Perspect.113, 934-946. EEA, 2013. In: European Environment Agency (Ed.), EMEPJEEA Air Pollutant Emis- sion Inventory Guidebook - 2013. European Environment Agency. Technical report No 12/2013. littp //www.cea.europa.eti/publications/einep-eea- guidebook-2013. EEIC, 2012. In: Kohv, N., Herntalu, H., Mandel, E., Link, A. (Eds.), Estonian Informative Inventory Report 1990-2010. Estonian Environment Information Centre. http:// www.keskkoniiaiiifo,ce/failidiFstoiiian-J[R-2012.pdf. Fangmark, L. Stromberg, B.. Berge. N., Rappe. C., 1994. Influence of postcombustion temperature profiles on die formation of PCDDs, PCDFs, PCBzs, and PCBs in a pilot incinerator. Environ. Sci, Technol. 28, 624-629. Fernandez, A., Davis, S.B.. Wendt, J.o.L, Cenm, R., Young, R.S., Witten, M.L. 2001. Public health: particulate emission from biomass combustion. Nature 409, 998. Fiedler, H., 1993. Formation and sources of PCDDIPCDF. Organohalogen Compd. 11, 221-228. Halasz. A., 1996. PCDDJF emission control by intermediate dust removal at medical waste incinerators. Waste Manag. Res. 14. 3-14. Hedman, B., Naslund. M., Marklund, S.. 2006. Emission of PCDD/F. PCB. and HCB from combustion of firewood and pellets in residential stoves and boilers. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40. 4968--4975. Hobbs, P.V.. Reid, J.S., Kotchenruther, R.A. Ferek, RJ., Weiss. R., 1997. Direct radiative forcing by smoke from biomass burning. Sci. Total Environ. 275, 1776--1778, Hubner, C., Boos, R., Prey, 1.. 2005. In -field measurements of PCDD/F emissions from domestic heating appliances for solid fuels. Chemosphere 58, 367-372. IED, 2010. Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUrrSery/LexUriServ.do?uri-OJ. L:2010: 334:0017:0119:EN: PDF. Karvosola, T., Viren, A.,Tissari, J., Ruuskanen, J., Tarhanen, J., Sippula. O., Jokinrerni, J., 2012. Effects of a catalytic converter on PCDD/F, chlorophenol and PAH emis- sions in residential wood combustion. Chemosphere 88. 278-285. Kupri, H. -L., 2014. Request for Information from Estonian Chamber of Chimney Sweepers about Waste Burning in Household Stoves e-mail, personal communication. Kupri, H: L. 2015a. An Pollutants from the Combustion of Waste in Masonry Stoves. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering. Tallinn University of Technology. 445 Kupri, HA_ 2015b. MSW Incineration in Household Stoves. In: Opinion of Estonian Environmental Inspectorate e-mail, personal communication. Launhardt, T.. Strehler, A., Dumler-Gradl, R..Thoma, K. Vierle, 0., 1998. PCDD/F- and PAH -emission from house heating systems. Chemosphere 37. Liu, K., Pan. W.P Riley. J -T.. 2000. A study of chlorine behavior in a simulated flu- idized bed combustion system. Fuel 79, 1115-1124. Lundin, L, Gullett. B. Carroll Jr., W.F., Touatr, A.. Marklund. S., Fiedler, H., 2013. The effect of developing nations' municipal waste composition on PCDD/PCDF emissions from open burning. Atmos. Environ. 79, 433-441, Maasikmets, M., Kupri, H. -L., Teinernaa. E., Vainumae, K., Arumae, T.. Kimmel. V.. 2015- ACSM study to assess possible municipal solid waste burning in house- hold stoves. lit: European Aerosol Conference 2015, Milano, Italy. Miller, B, Dugwell, D.R Kandiyoti, R., 2003. The influence of injected HCI and S01 on the behavior of trace elements during wood -bark combustion. Energy Fuels 17,1382-1391. Ministerial Regulation No 99, 2004. Air Emission Determination Procedure and Methods from the Combustion Plants (Poletusseadmetest viihsohku eralduvate saasteainete heitkoguste maaramise kord ja miiramismeetodid). In: Estonian., Riigiteataja, RTL 2004, 108, 1724. Riigi Teataja (State Gazette). haps://www. ri igi teataia.eela kt/789462. Mohr, C.. Huffman, JA, Cubison, MJ., Aiken, A.C., Docherty. K.S., Kimmel, J.R, Ulbrich, I.M., Hannigan, M., Jimenez, J.L., 2009. Characterization of primary organic aerosol emissions from meat cooking, trash burning, and motor vehicles with high-resolution aerosol mass spectrometry and comparison with ambient and chamber observations. Environ. Sci. Technol, 43, 2443-2449. Obaidullah, M., Bram, S., Verma. VK, De Ruyck, J., 2012. A review on particle emissions from small scale biomass combustion. Int. J. Renew. Energy Res. 2. Oras, K. 2002. Statistical Work on Developing a Methodology for Determination of Waste Generated rn Non -covered Areas by the Waste Collection System and the Estimation of Generated Municipal Waste Quantities. Final report on Phare Multi -country Programme ESTAT/FO12000/0001 project No SFCC-008/2002, 2002. Onv, H, Maasikmets, M., Lai, T., Tamm. T., Kaasik, M., Kunmel, V., Ornr, K., Merisalu, E. Forsberg, B.. 2011. Health impacts of particulate matter in five major Estonian towns: main sources of exposure and local differences air quality. Atmos. Health 4, 247-258. Paradiz, B.. Dilara, P.. Umlaut, G., Bajsic, L. Butala, V., 2015. Dioxin emissions from coal combustion in domestic stove: formation in the chimney and coal chlorine content influence. Thei m. Sci. 19. 295-304. Pfeiffer, F., Strusehka, M., Baumbach, G., Hagenmaier, H., Hein, K.R-G., 2000. PCDD/ PCDF emissions from small firing systems in households. Chemosphere 40, 225-232. Pope, CA, Burnett. R.T., Thun, M.J., Calle, E.E.. Krewski, D.. Ito, K.. Thurston, G.D., 2002. Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA - J. Am. Med. Assoc. 287,1132-1141. Quafg, U.. Fermann, M.. Broker, G.. 2004. The European dioxin air emission inventory project --final results. Chemosphere 54, 1319-1327. Quaf3, U.. Fermann. M,W.. Broker, G., 2000. Steps towards a European dioxin emission inventory. Chemosphere 40.1125-1129. Raghunathan, K., Gullett, B.K.. 1996. Role of sulfur in reducing PCDD and PCDF formation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 30, 1827-1834. Roots, 0.. 2004. Polychlormated biphenyls (PCB), polychlorinated dibenzo-p- dioxins (PCDD) and dibenzofurans (PCDF) in oil shale and fly ash from oil shale -fired power plant in Estonia. Oil Shale 21, 333-339. Roots, 0.. Lukki, T., Pribylova. P, Boruvkova, J., Kukueka, R. Audy, 0., Kalina, J., WnoW. J., Holoubek, L. Sweetman, A., Schleicher, 0., 2015. Measurements of persistent organic pollutants in Estonian ambient air (1990-2013). Prot. Esto- nian Acad, Sci. 64,184-199. Schatowitz, B„ Brandt, G.A., Garner. F.. Schlumpr. E.. Buhler, R„ Hasler, P., Nussbauner, T., 1993, Dioxin emissions from wood combustion. Organohalogen Compd. 11, 307-310. SEL 2008. In: Moora. H. (Ed.j. Analysis of Estonian Municipal Waste (Including Separate Packaging Waste and Biodegradable Waste) Composition and Quan- tity. Municipal Waste Sorting Study. (Eestis tekkinud olmejiitmete (sh eraldi pakendijaatmete Ja biolagunevate jiatmete) koostise ja koguste analiius. Segaolmejaa[mete sortimisuuring). http:/Iwww.enviree/sitesldefault/files) of. mej aat m eteu u n ng2008-pd f. SEI, 2013. Final Report - study of composition of municipal waste, separately collected paper and packaging and WEEE in 2013 in Estonia. (Uuringu Iopparuanne -- 2013 Eestis tekkinud segaolmejiatmete, eraldi kogutud paberi- ja pakendijaatmete ning elektroonikaromu koostise uurrngl. In: Moora, H. (Ed.), SA Stockholmi Keskkonnainstituudi Tallinn Keskus. Saastva Eesti Instituut. http://www.envir.ee sites/default/filesrsortimisuuring-201310plik.pdf. Sippula. 0., 2010. Fine Particle Formation and Emission in Biomass Combustion 2010. Department of Environmental Science. University of Eastern Finland. Report Series in Aerosol Science N:o 108 (2010). Sippula, 0., Lind, T., Jokiniemi, J., 2008. Effects of chlorine and sulphur on particle formation in wood combustion performed in a laboratory scale reactor. Fuel 87, 2425-2436. Stanmore. B.R., 2004. The formation of dioxins in combustion systems. Combust. Flame 136,398-427. Statistics Estonia. 2014. In: Servinski, M. (Ed:), Regional Development in Estonia. Eesti piirkondlik areng. Statistics Estonia. littp:l/www.stat.ee/publrcation- download-pdf7publicationtd =36388. 446 M. Maasikmets et at. / Atmospheric Pollution Research 7 (2016) 438-446 Statistics Estonia, 2015. Waste, Statistical Database: Environment - Environmental Pressure - EN82: WASTE - Coverage of Municipal Waste Collection, % of Population. Statistics Estonia. http:( pub,statee(px-web 2001 /Dialog rvarval. asp?ma-LN82b;t- WASTE&path-,./I_Databas(hnvu-onmentfOlEnvironmental_ pressureJO4General_data/Rlang- I. Tame, N.W., Dlugugurski, B.2., Kennedy, E.M., 2009. Converaiun of Wood Pyrolysates to PCDDJF. In: Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, vol, 32, pp. 665 -671. Tissarl, J., 2008. Fine Particle Emissions from Residential Wood Combustion. Department of Environmental Science. University of Kuopio. http:/lwanda.uef fi(uku-vaitoksetivaitokset(2008/tsbn978-951-27-0975-5.pdf. 'Irssan, J, Hytonen, K.. Sippula, 0., Jokmiemi, J., 2009. The effects of operating conditions on emissions from masonry heaters and sauna stoves. Biomass Bioenergy 33, 513-520. TUT T.U.o.T., 2008. In: Loosaar, J., Kask, 0., Kask, L, Parve, T., Link, S. (Eds.), Emission Evaluation from the Household Heating in Estonia (in Estonian). Hinnang era - mute k6tnisest valisohku eralduvate saasteainete heitkoguste kohta Eestis. Tallinn University of Technology. Contract no 7082. http:((www.env¢ee;sitesf default files Itty-eianmd_kkmaruannefinal2.pdf, Van I,00, S., Koppejan, J., 2008. The Handbook of Biomass Combustion and Co-firmg- Farthscan, London ;. Watson, A., 2012. Emissions from Burning Plastics in Domestic Fireplaces, House- hold Stoves and Boilers with Special Focus on Pei sistent Organic Pollutants - a Literature Review. Alan Watson C. Eng, Public Interest Consultants. Wevers. M., De Fre, R.. Desmedt, M., 2004. Effect of backyard burning on dioxin deposition and air concentrations. Chemosphere 54, 1351-1356. Wiedimnyer, C-, Yokelson, RJ-, Gullett. B.K., 2014. Global emissions of trace gases, particulate matter, and hazardous air pollutants from open burning of domestic waste. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 9523-9530. Wikstrom. E,. Maiklund, S., 2001. The influence of level and chlorine source on the formation of mono- to octa-chlorinated dibenzu-p-dioxins, dibenzofurans and coplanar polychlorinated biphenyls during combustion of an artificial munic- ipal waste. Chemosphere 43, 227-234. Wikstrom, E-, Ryan, S-, Touati, A.. Gullett, B.K., 2003. Key parameters for de novo formation of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dloxins and dibenzofurans. Environ. Sci, Technol. 37, 1962-1970. A International Joumal of Environmental Research and Public Health MDPI Article Plastic Waste Degradation in Landfill Conditions: The Problem with Microplastics, and Their Direct and Indirect Environmental Effects Irena Wojnowska-Baryla, Katarzyna Bernat * and Magdalena Zaborowska check for updates Citation: Wojnowska-Baryla, I.; Bernat, K.; Zaborowska, M. Plastic Waste Degradation in Landfill Conditions: The Problem with Microplastics, and Their Direct and Indirect Environmental Effects. Int. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13223. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph192013223 Academic Editors: Elena Rada, Marco Ciolli and Gabriela Ionescu Received: 2 September 2022 Accepted: 11 October 2022 Published: 14 October 2022 Publisher's Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations. cc 0 Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPT, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (helps:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). Department of Environmental Biotechnology, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Slonec7na 45G, 10-709 Olsztyn, Poland * Correspondence: bernat@uwm.edu.pl; Tel.: +48-89-523-41-45; Fax: +48-89-523-41 Abstract: As landfilling is a common method for utilizing plastic waste at its end -of -life, it is im- portant to present knowledge about the environmental and technical complications encountered during plastic disposal, and the formation and spread of microplastics (MPs) from landfills, to better understand the direct and indirect effects of MPs on pollution. Plastic waste around active and former landfills remains a source of MPs. The landfill output consists of leachate and gases created by combined biological, chemical, and physical processes. Thus, small particles and/or fibers, including MPs, are transported to the surroundings by air and by leachate. In this study, a special focus was given to the potential for the migration and release of toxic substances as the aging of plastic debris leads to the release of harmful volatile organic compounds via oxidative photodegradation. MPs are generally seen as the key vehicles and accumulators of non -biodegradable pollutants. Because of their small size, MPs are quickly transported over long distances throughout their surroundings. With large specific surface areas, they have the ability to absorb pollutants, and plastic monomers and additives can be leached out of MPs; thus, they can act as both vectors and carriers of pollutants in the environment. Keywords: microplastics (MPs); plastic breakdown and degradation; landfill leachate; landfill gases; pollutant vectors and carriers 1. Introduction Microplastics (MPs) pollution is released to the environment directly from primary sources (such as cosmetic and cleansing commodities, and personal care and pharma- ceutical products), or indirectly from secondary sources, through the fragmentation and degradation of nano-, meso- and macroplastics [ I J. The identified primary sources of MPs emissions to the environment include plastic pellets from industry, washing machines, which release a large amount of MPs in the form of fibers ["?], microbeads from personal care products (PCPs) and paint, wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), rubber roads, artificial turf, and tire wear []. Emissions from WWTPs are considered to be one of the main sources of MPs released to the environment as large amounts of effluent are directly discharged into surface water every year. Conley et al. [':] found that MPs concentrations (counts per L) varied within a factor of 2.5 in influent and 4.8 in effluent from each of three monitored WWTPs, and that neither concentrations nor removal efficiencies demonstrated a seasonal trend. The WWTPs that operated with primary clarification had the highest MPs removal efficiency of 97.6 f 1.2%. The two smaller facilities had average removal efficiencies of 85.2 i 6.0% and 85.5 f 9.1%. Based on flow rates and MPs counts, the load of MPs discharged with the effluent totaled 500-1000 million MPs particles per day. This is equivalent to emissions of 0.34-0.68 g MPs per capita per year in treated wastewater. In addition, because activated sludge also accumulates most of the removed MPs (69-80°o), it can be an emission source if improperly managed [51. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13223 2of15 Another source of microplastics emissions is larger plastic products that are not properly disposed of, mainly including plastic films from agricultural applications, fishing waste, and municipal debris from plastic bags, bottles, tableware, and packing products [6]. Landfills are major reservoirs of MPs, including tiny plastic granules used in cosmetics and small plastic fragments derived from the breakdown of macroplastics. Currently, secondary sources are estimated to emit the majority of MPs to the environment even though, under natural conditions, it takes years for large plastic waste to be broken down into MPs [3]. For example, microplastic films and foams are derived mainly from the erosion of plastic bags and packing products, which are essential items in humans' daily lives [%]. Since the 1990s, they have been widely used because of their advantages of a low cost, large capacity, light weight, and easy storage. Globally, up to five trillion plastic bags are consumed every year and —39.7% of total plastic production is used for packing [8]. Most of this plastic waste is landfilled and is subject to long-term degradation. Plastic materials undergo significant changes in their chemical structure under specific environ- mental conditions, resulting in the loss of some of their properties. Polymeric characteristics play a significant role in the degradation. These characteristics include molecular weight, crystallinity, functional groups, mobility, substituents present in the structure, and the additives added to the polymers. The fate of these polymers in the landfill and the time required for their total mineralization to CO2 have yet to be fully understood. Polymers can be degraded via chemical degradation, photodegradation, and biological degradation, which may lead to the formation of secondary MPs pollution. The presence of MPs in the environment has been shown to have numerous hazardous effects on a wide range of floral and faunal species. In addition, MPs act as carriers or chelators of various co -contaminants, such as heavy metals, brominated flame retardants and other types of plasticizers, and pharmaceutical toxicants. These co -contaminants easily bind to the microplastic surface due to their hydrophobicity [9]. The microbial species that have been associated with the degradation of these polymers include bacteria (Psettdomollas, Streptococcus, Staphylococcus, Micrococcus) and fungi (Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus glaucus, Trichoderma) [10]. The extracellular enzymes involved are too large to penetrate deeply into the polymer material, acting only on the polymer surface, and consequently, the biodegradation of plastics is usually a surface erosion process. Biodegradation can be improved by UV irradiation (photooxidation), and thermal and chemical oxidation of polyethylene (PE) prior to its exposure to a biotic environment. 'End -of -life' (EoL) does not equate to the end of the impact of plastic waste. Plastic materials persist and pollute long after their intended use is finished, which means that there is no such thing as an end to the impact of plastics within a typical human lifespan. Depending on how plastic is handled, it may pose a significant threat to the environment and to the climate when it reaches the waste phase of its life cycle. The objective of this article was to delineate the complications—both environmental and technical—encountered during the disposal of plastic products when they are landfilled at their EoL. A special focus was given to the potential for the migration and release of various types of microplastics. In addition, the emissions of potentially toxic substances during landfilling were assessed. 2. Plastic Waste Generation and Disposal Plastics in the global ecosystem are distributed between three groups: plastics in use, post -consumer managed plastic waste, and mismanaged plastic waste (MPW), which includes urban litter. Plastic waste is dominated by thermoplastic types of polypropylene (PP) (21%), low-density and linear low-density polyethylene (LDPE and LLDPE) (18%), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) (1700), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) (15%). Other plastic types include polystyrene (PS) and expandable PS (EPS) (8°.), polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (7%, excluding PET fibers), and thermosetting plastic polyurethane. The types of MPs that are generated and released vary with the composition of the plastic waste from which they are derived, and are identified and synthesized using dispersed data on the production, Lit. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 3of15 use, and end -of -life management of polymer resins, synthetic fibers, and additives. Geyer et al. [11] presented a global analysis of all mass-produced plastics ever manufactured. A total of 8300 million metric tons (Mt) of virgin plastics has been produced to date. As of 2015, approximately 6300 Mt of plastic waste has been generated, around 9°0 of which has been recycled, 12% has been incinerated, and 79% has accumulated in landfills or the natural environment. If current production and waste management trends continue, roughly 12,000 Mt of plastic waste will be in landfills or in the natural environment by 2050. In 2018, landfills in the European Union (EU) received 7.2 million tons of plastic. Packaging plastics made of HDPE, LDPE, PP, PET, PS, and PVC constitute a significant portion of all plastics in landfills [12]. The total consumption of LDPE, HDPE, PP, PS, EPS, PVC, and PET was 90.0 f 4.8 kg/cap in 2016. The in -use stock that year was 47 kg/cap for LDPE, 81 kg/cap for HDPE, 81 kg/cap for PP, 21 kg/cap for PS, 56 kg/cap for EPS, 163 kg/cap for PVC, and 16 kg/cap for PET. For EPS and PVC, the fraction contained in the in -use stock was 51% and 39% of the total production. Landfills constitute the major repository of LDPE, HDPE, PP, PS, and PET (48-60%) [13]. A landfill is an ecological system, where the inputs are solid waste and water, and the outputs are leachate and gas produced by the joint action of biological, chemical, and physical processes. The typical municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill conducts five phases of waste treatment: (1) initial adjustment (aerobic biodegradation); (2) transition (from aerobic conditions to anaerobic conditions); (3) acid formation (hydrolysis); (4) methane fermentation (methanogenesis); and (5) final maturation and stabilization of the solid waste. Once landfilled, plastics undergo aerobic biodegradation (at an initial stage), but soon make the transition to anaerobic conditions, with the consequent influences on plastic degradation of acid formation and methane fermentation of organic solid wastes. Even in the absence of light and oxygen, landfilled MPs will continue to fragment into nanoplastics due to the fluctuating temperatures (reaching as high as 60 to 90 C) and pH (4.5-9), deep-seated fires, physical stress, and compaction, as well as limited microbial activity. Each phase accelerates the breakdown and degradation of plastics. Most of the polymers and plastics in landfills remain unchanged, or they may degrade via some biotic or abiotic process into fragments that either remain as produced or biodegrade to gaseous products and water. The gaseous products are carbon dioxide in aerobic environments and a mixture of carbon dioxide, methane, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in an anaerobic environment. The ultimate fate of plastic in landfills is a major concern, particularly as there is no established method of determining whether the plastic degrades, biodegrades, or is recalcitrant. Degradation or biodegradation may have potential negative effects such as the destabilization of the structural stability of the landfill. Landfills are designed to prevent any exchange with the surrounding environment. Leachate recycling landfills are designed to capture and recycle aqueous leachate to prevent or reduce the environmental leakage of potentially harmful waste or degradation residues. Controlled contaminant release landfills allow for the gradual migration of leachate into the environment under closely monitored conditions to ensure that no harmful events happen. Unrestricted contaminant release landfills, which are older waste dumps, have no controls on leachate or environmental contamination. Like the variation in plastic waste inputs, the types of MPs generated and released will vary with the composition of different MP polymers. Near an abandoned coastal landfill, PS, PET, PA, and PP were the dominant MP polymers [14]. A large amount of plastics is buried in landfills. As landfills are relatively closely sealed reactors with complex biochemical reactions and physical changes, plastic waste buried in landfills is subjected to much more severe environmental conditions, e.g., leachate pH (varying from 4.5 to 9), high salinity, fluctuating temperature, gas generation (e.g., CO2 and CH4), physical stress, and microbial degradation. All of the above factors may lead to the fragmentation of plastics to MPs, and small plastic debris could be carried out by the discharge of leachate. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 4of15 The abundance of MPs in landfill refuse is 20,000-91,000 items/kg, which is much higher than the concentrations in sediments, sewage sludge, and agricultural soil [17]. Su et al. [16] suggested that landfills were not only the primary disposal sites of plastic waste, but also important sources of MPs. They found that the average abundance of MPs in refuse was 62 (f23) items/g. Fragments and PE were the predominant shapes and polymer type, respectively, of the MPs in refuse. The authors identified irregular shapes and hack structures in refuse microplastics, which indicates that the breakdown of plastic debris was the primary contributor to MPs formation, specifically secondary MPs in landfills. The microplastics in landfill leachate originated mainly from the breakdown of different kinds of plastic products, and thus the proportion of plastic fibers is influenced by the amount of plastic fiber products that are landfilled [11]. It is possible to assess the degree of degradation of plastics mined from a landfill based on their characteristics. According to Zhou et al. [ ! ], after 24 years of landfilling, plastic wastes accounted for 10.62 5.1200 of the total stored wastes in an old landfill. Of these plastic wastes, 69.13% were plastic bags 11.34" o were white PE plastic bags; 29.77% were colored PE plastic bags; 28.02°o were other plastic bags; and 30.87% were other plastics, including PP, PVC, and PS. Compared to normal plastic wastes, the landfill plastic waste had a significantly lower content of carbon and sulfur, but a higher content of oxygen, silicon, aluminum, and a similar content of nitrogen and chlorine. The ash content of landfill -mined plastic waste was 9.03 times higher than that of normal plastic waste. Surface images of normal plastic waste and the landfill plastic waste indicated that there were many particles that had heavier molecular weights than normal plastic, with particle sizes ranging from 5 to 60 mm. The application of suitable technology for the management of waste landfills is neces- sary for reducing the volume of N/MPs in the environment. A semi -aerobic landfill is a concept for solid waste disposal which accelerates waste decomposition with low emissions of methane. Air is supplied into these landfills through leachate collection pipes by heat convection between the higher -temperature waste and the lower -temperature atmosphere. In semi -aerobic landfill conditions, the oxygen content in the waste bed varied between 3% and 8% (v/v), and the highest temperature in the landfill chamber was 75.8 C [18]. Although many microorganisms in waste play important roles in degrading persistent wastes, methanotrophs are particularly important for their roles in reducing global warm- ing and natural resource contamination. These microorganisms utilize methane as their sole carbon and energy source. Over 300 persistent compounds, such as aliphatics, alkanes, aromatics, and chlorinated hydrocarbons, are co -metabolized by the methane monooxyge- nase (MMO) enzyme produced by methanotrophs [19]. According to Muenmee et al. [20], methane oxidation rates correlated with percent losses of plastics, indicating the impor- tance of methanotrophs for plastic degradation. The biodegradation of plastic wastes in a semi -aerobic landfill could be accelerated by supplying aeration in proportion to the methane available in the waste bed. An available oxygen concentration of about 3-8% v/v accelerated the biodegradation of plastic waste and significantly increased weight percent losses (15-20% of HDPE and 5-9% of PP). The use of a semi -aerobic landfill for MSW not only reduced methane emissions, but also improved plastic waste deterioration. Ishigaki et al. [21] applied forced aeration to a landfill reactor to create aerobic conditions that could potentially stimulate polymer -degrading microorganisms. The individual degra- dation behaviour of biodegradable plastics (BPs) varied widely under aerobic conditions. Polycaprolactone plastic, a chemically synthesized BP, showed film breakage under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions, which may have contributed to a reduction in the volume of this waste regardless of the variant. Polyhydroxybutyrate and hydroxyvalerate plastics were effectively degraded in aerobic conditions but not in anaerobic conditions. In contrast, aeration did little to accelerate the volume reduction of a blend of starch and polyvinyl alcohol (SPVA) plastic and cellulose acetate plastic. The degradation of these BPs may have been prevented by the recalcitrant portions of the plastics, such as the polyvinyl alcohol and the highly substituted cellulose acetate. The great variability in the degradability of Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13223 5 of 15 BPs in aerobic and anaerobic waste landfills suggests that landfilling must be combined with the utilization of BPs to improve the reduction of waste volume in landfill sites. 3. Bio -/Degradation of Petroleum -Based Plastic In the case of petroleum-based plastic, degradation is often synonymous with biodegra- dation. Degradation is any physical or chemical change in a polymer that results from environmental factors, such as light, heat, moisture, chemical conditions, or biological activity. These changes include bond scission, chemical transformation, and the formation of new functional groups [22]. Degradation is reflected by changes in material properties, such as mechanical, optical, or electrical characteristics, and by crazing, cracking, erosion, discoloration, phase separation, or delamination. In photodegradable plastics, the groups that are connected to the polymer backbone are light-sensitive. When they are exposed to UV radiation for a long time, their polymeric structure can be disintegrated. However, when radiation exposure is stopped, degradation is not possible. As the interiors of landfills lack sunlight, plastics in landfills degrade via different means. Artificial photodegradation can be problematic, as it may lead to the release of toxic VOCs, which are potentially hazardous and associated with the environmental weathering of plastic debris [2"'.]. The susceptibility of polymers to photodegradation is related to their ability to absorb the harmful part of tropospheric solar radiation. This includes UV -B radiation (-295-315 nm) and U V-A radiation (-315-400 nm), which are responsible for direct photodegradation (photolysis, initiated photooxidation). The visible part of sunlight (400-760 nm) accelerates polymeric degradation by heating, and infrared radiation (760-2500 nm) accelerates thermal oxidation [22]. Most plastics tend to absorb high-energy radiation in the ultraviolet portion of the spectrum, which increases the reactivity of their electrons and causes oxidation, cleavage, and other degradation [24]. The degradation of most synthetic plastics is a very slow process that involves environ- mental factors, followed by the action of microorganisms. The primary mechanism for the biodegradation of high molecular weight polymers is oxidation or hydrolysis by enzymes to create functional groups that increase their hydrophilicity. The main polymer chains are degraded, producing polymers with a low molecular weight and feeble mechanical proper- ties, which makes them more accessible for further microbial assimilation. Examples of synthetic polymers that biodegrade include poly(vinyl alcohol), poly(lactic acid), aliphatic polyesters, polycaprolactone, and polyamides. Several oligomeric structures are known to biodegrade: oligomeric ethylene, styrene, isoprene, butadiene, acrylonitrile, and acrylate. Biodegradation is governed by different factors that include polymer characteristics, the type of organism, and the nature of pretreatment. Polymer characteristics play im- portant roles in their degradation, including mobility, tacticity, crystallinity, molecular weight, the type of functional groups and substituents present in their structure, and the plasticizers or additives added to the polymers. Their physical properties also affect the rate of degradation, such as crystallinity, orientation, and morphological properties such as surface area [25]. PE is the most abundant synthetic, petroleum-based plastic material produced globally and one of the most resistant to biodegradation, which causes it to accumulate in massive quantities in landfills. The process of biodegradation of PE is defined by four stages: biodeterioration, biofragmentation, bioassimilation, and mineralization. The complete biodegradation of PE requires that the molar mass and molecular mass of the polymer be reduced by fragmentation into smaller molecules that are subsequently catabolized by microorganisms. However, most studies of what is usually called the biodegradation of PE by microorganisms have reported only biodeterioration, and a few have reported biofragmentation. Evidence for bioassimilation and mineralization has so far been lacking. Complete PE biodegradation may be defined as the oxidation of intact polymers to highly fragmented polymers, with corresponding decreases in molar mass (Mw) and molecular mass (Mn), followed by the subsequent conversion of the polymer fragments to CO2 and biomass (under aerobic conditions). ML J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 6of15 A clear definition of what constitutes true biodegradation of PE is lacking and there is a general misunderstanding of the biodegradation process. Biodegradation has been defined as the change in surface properties or the loss of mechanical strength, assimilation by microorganisms, degradation by enzymes, backbone chain breakage, and subsequent reduction in the average molecular weight of the polymers. Biodegradation is also defined as the conversion of materials into less complex intermediates or end products by solubiliza- tion, simple hydrolysis, or the action of biologically formed entities such as enzymes and other products of the organism. Polymer molecules may break down to produce fragments in this process, but not always, although the integrity of the material decreases in this type of process [26]. A key weakness of these definitions of 'biodegradable' is that they do not contain any information about the location, timescale, and extent of the decomposition process [27]. The implementation of high -throughput metagenomic sequencing to provide insights into the microbial community structures and the abundance of plastic degradation genes present in an MSW landfill site indicated that plastic waste is biodegraded in anaerobic conditions. Microbial richness was high, and Thermobifida ftisca, Psettdomollas trtendocina, and Nocardia sp. were present. Functional analysis revealed an abundance of genes cod- ing for enzymes involved in the degradation of plastic waste, such as oxidoreductase, cutinase, lipase, alkane 1 -monooxygenase, poly(ethylene terephthalate) hydrolase, mono (2 -hydroxyethyl) terephthalate hydrolase, styrene monooxygenase, styrene monooxyge- nase reductase, etc. [28]. Plastics can undergo degradation through abiotic and/or biotic processes. The former is an essential first step that precedes the latter, as biodegradation mechanisms require an initial abiotic degradation process. This creates materials with diminished structural and mechanical integrities, creating particles with higher surface -area -to -volume ratios, which are amenable to microbial action [29]. Abiotic degradation pathways may be separated into two distinct types of processes which depend on the polymer type. More concisely, they depend on whether the polymer consists solely of a C—C backbone, as in PP, PS, PVC, and PE, or if heteroatoms are present in the backbone, as in PET and PU. In the first case, the process is initiated by a random photolytic cleavage of a C—H bond, while in polymeric materials containing heteroatoms, hydrolysis is usually the initiating step [311]. However, these mechanisms have been described in unadulterated materials, and polymers are rarely used in their pure form, and therefore rarely occur in the environment in this form. Consequently, the described mechanistic pathways of degradation may be incomplete, and products are released during (bio)degradation [31]. Using a lysimeter, Muenmee et al. [32] simulated an open waste dump in which waste plastics (HDPE/LDPE, PP, PS) were biodegraded. Methane oxidation conditions were imitated with a flow of synthetic biogas through the lysimeter. They observed that methanotrophs were the principal decomposers in plastic biodeterioration, and their abundance tended to increase, particularly that of type I/II methanotrophs (Methylobacter sp./Methylocella sp.). HDPE had the highest K constant, (0.128 y 1), and LDPE had the lowest (0.048 y 1). The K values correlated well with the rate of methane oxidation. Adamcova and Vaverkova [33] provided information about the biodegradability in a municipal solid waste landfill of biodegradable/ degradable materials advertised as 100% degradable or certified as compostable. They described a 12 -month decomposition process in a municipal solid waste landfill. During this time, the PE with the additive and plastic waste labelled as 100% degradable had not decomposed, and no physical changes had occurred; however, their colour had changed slightly and the plastic waste exhibited minor surface changes. In contrast, cellulose filter paper fully biodegraded after eight months in the landfill conditions. One indicator of the degradation of waste plastic during landfilling is the carbonyl index (CI), which is the average value of different infrared spectra [34]. The CI average of fresh PE is 0.53, which is higher than that of excavated PE. Cl values decrease over time, with values of 0.46 and 0.41 for PE with <10 years and >10 years of landfilling, respectively. Int. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13223 7 of 15 The slight decrease in the carbonyl index of the PE samples with >10 years of landfilling could indicate that some degradation has taken place. After initial degradation, the samples may degrade via chain scission, crosslinking, and CO2 release. 4. Potential Pathways for the Transfer of Plastic Debris from Landfills to the Environment The possible pathways for plastic losses from landfills encompass environmental processes, including mechanisms such as wind, flooding, leaching, and runoff, and the influence of biota, including their removal by animals. Sanitary and well-managed engi- neered landfills have physical barriers to prevent losses in these ways, and their locations typically have environmental attributes that significantly reduce the losses of plastics from these landfills to the environment. Open dumps, in contrast, have negligible barriers to stop the losses of plastics to the environment, i.e., open dumps have neither fencing, to stop the movement of macroplastics via winds, runoff, or floods, nor liners to prevent microplastic movement via leachate [35]. The majority of MPs in groundwater come from landfills. For example, Bharath et al. found that 90% of the MPs in groundwater were derived from buried plastics. Based on their morphological characteristics, these plastic particles were probably derived from the breakdown of daily plastic products. Both of the nearby landfill sites had 92% of the microplastics that were found in the groundwater, which were derived from the fragmen- tation of the buried plastics. The main source of MPs transfer from the landfill sites to the groundwater were surface runoff, effluent, open dumping, and open burning. The results of Kazour et al. [14] also indicate that landfills are not final sinks of plastics, but potential sources of microplastics. This can create serious environmental problems because microplastics are not listed as a pollutant in the landfill regulations of any country. Landfill outputs include leachate and gases, which are sources of N/MPs. Landfill leachate is produced when water percolates through waste deposits, and it contains various pollutants. Leachate generated during landfilling contains microplastics because some personal care products used worldwide have incorporated plastic microbeads and other plastics in landfills are degraded over time. 5. Microplastics in Landfill Leachate As landfill leachate acts as a source of NIPS, it should be adequately managed to mitigate its potential adverse effects on the nearby environment. It is estimated that 0.2-1.0 m3 of leachate is produced per ton of waste landfilled each year in Europe [37]. About 52 million tons of municipal waste were landfilled in the EU in 2018, which would correspond to 10.4 Mm3 of leachate. Based on an estimate of 291 particles of MPs per liter per year [38], this would mean that around 3.03 billion of these particles were released in that year. Another example comes from 30 cities in China, in which 1.3-3.2 m3 of leachate accumulated per ton of waste over 100 years [39]. If these residues are not properly treated, not only wastewater effluents, but also a great quantity of microplastics eventually find their way into natural ecosystems, where they pose a serious risk to the environment [40]. MPs contain a large variety of chemical additives such as bisphenol A (BPA), phtha- lates, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers, which are used during raw plastic synthesis to improve plasticity. These additives are endocrine disruptors and thus may exhibit toxic effects upon release. The concentrations of such plasticizers in plastic debris on remote and urban beaches are as follows: BPA, up to 35 ng/g on remote beaches and up to 700 ng/g on urban beaches; polybrominated diphenyl ethers, between 0.1 and 400 ng/g on remote beaches and up to 9900 ng/g on urban beaches; and phthalates, up to 3940 ng/g [; ! ]. These plastic additives have been detected in most microplastic polymers [42]. Researchers have also reported that BPA and nonylphenol leach from silicone and polycarbonate microplas- tics [43]. MPs in leachate can be carried into the environment through leachate leakage and the discharge of leachate by collecting and treatment systems. Leakage through landfill liners Int. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 8of15 is a potential pathway for microplastics to enter the environment, and despite carefully controlled manufacturing and installation, defects in landfill liners (geomembranes) can occur. The concentration of MPs in leachate was reported as 0.42-24.58 items/L in southern China [44] and 0-4.51 items/L in Nordic countries [451. In 88 Norwegian landfills in 2007, 9,100,000 m3 of leachate formed and 80 g of fine-grained plastics (PBD99) were emitted per year [46]. If this measured amount were recalculated as emissions of, for example, PBD -contaminated plastic dust concentrations such as those found in shredder dust (with a concentration of fine-grained plastics of 7.5 mg PBD 99 per kg), this would hypothetically equate to landfill emissions of (80.000/7.5) 10 tons of plastic particles annually. This is assuming that all the microplastics in the leachate were in particulate form. Additionally, 441 kg of BPA were found in the total leachate. This substance is typically present in polycarbonate plastics and epoxy plastics. According to industry sources, it is bound in the material, so no emissions should be expected. However, even though there was no evidence of the breakdown of these plastics in Norwegian landfills, the amount of BPA found in the leachate indicates that the plastics are not completely inert and may release free monomers or particles [46]. Kilponen [47] reported that, in a brook that received leachate from an old, closed landfill in Finland for over 30 years, MPs concentrations reached 1.1 items/L. MPs were found in landfill leachate in Nordic countries, including known polymers such as PE, PA, PVC, PET, PU, tire rubber, and polymer modified bitumen. Their levels did not seem to correspond to the period in which each landfill was operative. There was considerable variation both between the landfills and in the minimal and maximal loads of MPs. The approximate annual load of MPs emitted from the landfills in the particle size range of 50-5000 µm was 0-177 kg/landfill. Most particles were in the lower part of the size range, close to 50 µm, and their maximum loads were 25.3 kg per landfill [45]. Sun et al. [48] reported that the MPs particle and mass concentrations in leachate were 235.4 f 17.1 item/L and 11.4 f 0.8 µg/L, respectively. Over 50% of the MPs in leachate were less than 50 µm in size, and MPs with sizes > 100 µm and 50-100 µm accounted for 22% and 26%, respectively. The neutral buoyancy of the MPs (average density: 0.94 g/cm3) and their irregular shapes suggested they may be difficult to remove by sedimentation. In the leachate, over 90% of the MPs were transparent or yellowish, while some (<10%) were red, pink, purple, black, blue, and brown. The high abundance of transparent and yellowish colors suggested that most particles were aged and had been present in the landfill system for a long time. He et al. [44] identified 17 different types of plastics in leachate samples with concentra- tions ranging from 0.42 to 24.58 items/L. PE and PP were the predominant polymer types. A total of 99.36% of the MPs were derived from the fragmentation of plastic waste buried in landfills. The size of 77.48% of the microplastics was between 100 to 1000 µm. According to Xu et al. [49], the abundance of target MPs in raw landfill leachate was 291 f 91 particles/L. PP (40%), PA (36%), and rayon (1800) were the main types of MPs that were detected, while PP, polyester PET, and other kinds of MPs were also found occasionally. Approximately 90% of the MPs were <60 µm. Ignoring small MPs, especially those smaller than 50 µm, can cause bias when determining the abundance of MPs in landfill leachate samples. Su et al. [16] examined landfills with different ages (3-20 years) and found that the average abundance of MPs in leachate was 8 ( r-3) items/ L. The predominant shapes and polymer types of the detected MPs were fibers and cellophane. The MPs in the landfill leachate had sizes that ranged from 3.6 to 70 µm. MSW landfill sites are the destination for many types of chemical substances contained in the disposed MSW. Microcontaminants such as nonylphenol, phthalate acids, and BPA can leach from plastic materials after the weathering or aging of microplastic particles. Because of their hydrophobic nature and high surface area, they can interact with other pollutants that are present. Among these substances, BPA, a potential endocrine disrupting chemical, is frequently found in leachate from MSW landfills with a concentration that varies widely, from 1.3 to 17,200 µg/L. Yamamoto et al. [50] stated that the source of BPA in landfill leachate may be the waste plastics that were landfilled. Similarly, a study by bit. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 9of15 Narevski et al. [ } 1 ] reported that average BPA concentrations, which ranged from 0.70 to 2.72 mg/L, are related to the content of microplastics. When wastes containing BPA are disposed of in landfills, hydrolytic or leaching processes may occur, which can release BPA from these wastes to the leachate. It is well-known that the behaviour of organic contaminants in landfills is influenced by the combined effects of biodegradation, sorption, and transfer in the gas and/or liquid phases (i.e., volatilization and abiotic transformation, such as hydrolysis). BPA is incorporated into plastic polymers through either reaction or addition. Reaction produces plastic products with covalently bonded stabilizers that are less likely to leave the products. In the addition process, compounds are simply mixed with the polymer resins, so they can continually leach out of these products. Another potential source of BPA in MSW landfill leachate is paper waste, which is usually neglected when BPA pollution is considered. In fact, paper waste can make up 32.7% of MSW [52]. For a preliminary insight into the source and leaching behaviour of BPA from MSW, Xu et al. [49] leached five kinds of plastic and four kinds of paper materials with distilled water. PVC waste was found to have the highest BPA content of 12.1 µg/g and a leachability of 34.7% in distilled water, while cardboard had a relatively low BPA content but also displayed high leachability (53.6%). Subsequently, those authors used fresh leachate and leachate from landfills aged 1.5 and 10 years, to simulate the leaching of BPA from PVC plastic and cardboard in a landfill environment. More leaching took place with the leachate than with distilled water. The 10 -year-old leachate caused the greatest increase in leaching due to its basic pH and high content of humic organic matter. The fresh leachate increased BPA leaching more than the 1.5 -year-old leachate, possibly due to the presence of small molecules such as volatile fatty acids, amino acids, etc., in the fresh leachate. The paper waste was only a minor source of BPA leaching, and interestingly, it was an important factor in retarding BPA transformation, due to its BPA sorption Kf value of 0.2224 mg 0 °)/(Ln g) (n -= 0.7680; Freundlich equation), which is higher than that of natural organic adsorbents such as sediment. This finding suggests that the presence of paper with a high sorption capacity in MSW will reduce BPA transport and bioavailability in landfills. 6. Landfill Gases as a Source of Nano4Microplastics Small particles or fibers can be spread from landfills to the surrounding environments via the air. Indeed, the windborne movement of plastics to the nearby environment is a key challenge of operating landfills. Even though landfills have tried to reduce the scope of this problem and some cleanups have been performed, plastic waste around active and former landfills remains a source of MPs. For investigating the atmospheric deposition of MPs, living organisms (biomonitors) could be very useful, as they are in the monitoring of other important persistent air pollutants, but to date, studies on this topic are very scarce. Roblin and Aherne [53] evaluated the use of bryophytes (Hylocomium splendens) as biomonitors of airborne anthropogenic microfibers. Loppi et al. [54] explored the possibility of using lichens as bioaccumulators of airborne MPs. To investigate the amount of MPs that landfills release to the wider environment and the area over which they are released, they compared the accumulation of MPs in lichens at various distances from a landfill. Lichens from the vicinity of the landfill accumulated the highest number of anthropogenic microfibers and fragments (147 mp/g dw), and consequently, the largest number of microplastics (79 mp/g dw), suggesting that the impact of landfill emissions is spatially limited. The proportion of fibers and fragments identified as MPs was 40'. across all sites, and the most abundant polymer type was polyester or PET (68%). The aging of plastic debris in typical environmental conditions determines the re- lease of harmful volatile organic compounds via oxidative photodegradation processes. Some compounds emitted are typical of the specific polymeric material. For example, Lomonaco et al. [23] found that aromatic compounds were produced only from polyolefins, and that PET had a negligible release profile which mainly included very modest quantities of ketones and aromatics. Most volatile compounds that are released play key roles in Lit. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19,13223 10 of 15 atmospheric chemistry because they are involved in complex photochemical reactions. For example, aldehydes are prone to atmospheric photolysis, contributing to the formation of airborne particles; similarly, the photooxidation of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene produces important precursors of secondary organic aerosols [5.5]. Royer et al. [561 demonstrated that environmentally aged LDPE, incubated for 14 days at ambient out- door temperature (18.5-32.5 C), produced 0.37 f 0.11, 0.14 f 0.09, 0.21 i. 0.12, and 0.06 f 0.03 nmol/g per day of CH4, C21-14, C21-16, and C31-16, respectively. They reported that, as the surface -to -volume ratio increased, so did the rate at which these compounds were produced, indicating that they may be released throughout the lifetime of the plastics as long as they remain exposed to thermal and/or photooxidative degradation conditions. 7. Environmental Effects of Plastics and MPs The adverse effects of MPs exposure on organisms can be divided into two cate- gories: physical effects and chemical effects. The former is related to the size and shape of the particles, and the concentration of the MPs, whereas the latter is related to the haz- ardous chemicals that are released from the MPs. MPs can contain two types of chemicals: (1) additives and polymeric raw materials (e.g., monomers or oligomers) originating from the plastics; and (2) chemicals absorbed from the surrounding environment. These include inert or reinforcing fillers, plasticizers, antioxidants, UV stabilizers, lubricants, dyes, and flame retardants. Among the additives, wood and rock flour, clay, kaolin, graphite, glass fibers, cotton flakes, jute or linen, cellulose pulp, etc., are used. The additives, in almost all cases, are not chemically bound to the plastic polymer; only some flame retardants are polymerized with plastic molecules, becoming part of the polymeric chain. Though these additives improve the properties of polymeric products, many of them are toxic, and their potential to contaminate the soil, air, and water is high [ 97]. MPs have a high surface -area -to -volume ratio, making them a good sorbent for toxic chemicals, such as heavy metals and organic chemicals. The transport and deposition of chemical contaminants by MPs can vary depending on the age, concentration, and type of the contaminant (e.g., additives, heavy metals, persistent organic contaminants, antibiotics, pesticides, fungicides). Organic contaminants are most commonly adsorbed on microplastics via hydrophobic interactions, followed by electrostatic interactions, H -bonding, halogen bonding, and 7r -r interactions. Metal ions are adsorbed mainly by electrostatic interactions and surface complexation. For both organic and inorganic contaminants, the adsorption kinetics data are best described with a pseudo - second -order (PSO) model, but depending on the system, the isothermal data are best described by either the Freundlich or the Langmuir isotherm model [58]. Holmes et al. [=,Q] found that heavy metals displayed a greater affinity for PVC and PP than other MPs. The ranges of metal concentrations adsorbed on PE resin pellets decreased in the following order: Cr (44-430 µg/g) > Ni (40-131 µg/g) > Fe (41-97.8 µg/g) > Co (17.7-107 µg/g) > Cd (1.09-76.7 µg/g) > Al (16.9-55.8 ltg/g) > Zn (0.299-23.3 µg/g) > Mn (1.16-20.5 µg/g) > Cu (0.064-1.32 ltg/g). Munier and Bendell [60] reported the following ranges of mean metal concentrations on different MP surfaces: Cd, 0.37 µg/g on PP to 1.77 µg/g on LDPE; Cu, 2.93 µg/g on nylon to 47.53 µg/g on LDPE; Zn, 4.3 µg/g on PVC to 604.24 µg/g on LDPE; and Pb, 0.71 µg/g on PET to 17.68 µg/g on LDPE. In general, LDPE had larger amounts of metals adsorbed to its surface. The large loads of toxic metals on the surface of MPs indicates that they can serve as alternative sources or sinks of toxic metal contaminants in the environment. However, data on toxic metal adsorption onto MPs that are present in the soil or air are limited. MPs convey contaminants to organisms and between environment media. Liu et al. [61 ] investigated the sorption behaviour of two phthalate esters (PAEs), diethyl phthalate (DEP) and dibutyl phthalate (DBP), on three types of microplastics with particle sizes less than 75µm: PVC, PE, and PS. The amount of the two PAEs that sorbed on the three microplastics decreased in the following order: PS > PE > PVC. With each kind of MP, DBP sorption was Int. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 11 of 15 almost 100 times greater than that of DEP, demonstrating the predominant influence of hydrophobic interactions on partition. The sorption capacity of MPs is influenced by their physicochemical properties. The surface charge of MPs, which is influenced by the presence of functional groups in their structure, can affect the adsorption of polar compounds such as pharmaceuticals. For example, Elizalde-Velazquez et al. [62] found that PE shows a great sorption affinity for pharmaceuticals, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Polyamide has a porous structure and can form hydrogen bonds with antibiotics. Adsorption isotherms demonstrated that polyamide had the highest capacity for adsorbing antibiotics with distri- bution coefficient (Kd) values ranging from 7.36 f 0.257 to 756 f 48.0 L/kg. Li et. al. [63] reported that the amounts of antibiotics adsorbed on PS, PE, PP, and PVC decreased in this order: ciprofloxacin > amoxicillin > trimethoprim > sulfadiazine > tetracycline. Smaller MPs have a higher specific surface area, and thus provide more adsorption sites and have a higher sorption capacity. This was confirmed by Elizalde-Velazquez et al. [62], who found that a decrease in the particle size led to an increase in the amount of NSAIDs sorbed to MPs. When antibiotics are adsorbed on MPs, they can be transported over long distances, and may contribute to compound effects by interacting with other substances that have been absorbed. Imran et al. [64] concluded that co -contamination with MPs, metals, and an- tibiotics results in the development and spread of multiple drug-resistant human pathogens through a co -selection mechanism. MPs act as hotspots for the metal -driven co -selection of multidrug -resistant human pathogens. Wu et al. [65] quantified antibiotics, heavy metals, and 28 antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs) in refuse and leachate from landfills of differ- ent ages (<3, >10, >20, and >29 years). They found that the drivers and patterns of antibiotic release differ as a function of landfill ages. Specifically, younger landfills may release higher levels of antibiotics than older landfills, presumably due to degradation or changes in usage patterns. Shi et al. [66] indicated that municipal landfill leachate is a huge reservoir of N/MPs and ARGs. N/MPs have a proven ability to affect the growth of bacteria and the composition of bacterial communities, which may further influence the spread of ARGs in the environment. The presence of N/MPs in landfill leachate can facilitate the propagation of ARGs, which is closely linked to N/MPs effects on cellular membrane permeability. The long-term exposure of leachate to MPs having a size of 200-500 nm was proved to promote the propagation of ARGs, due to the MPs large effects on the composition of ARG -hosting bacteria and the great damage they cause to bacterial membranes. The enrichment of ARGs induced by N/MPs substantiates the urgent need for the strict management of plastic waste in MSW landfills to control the spread of ARGs [66]. The aging process affects the behaviour of MPs in the environment by increasing their specific surface area, the roughness of their surface morphology, and the formation of hydrophilic groups, which increases the likelihood of microbial colonization [67]. The long-term aging of MPs in effluent changes their properties and increases their potential to serve as vectors for ARGs. Bacterial consortiums on MPs display a greater potential for biofilm formation and pathogenicity than consortiums in the effluent. Moreover, MPs appear to selectively enrich ARGs, and the aging process seems to increase the enrichment potential. Finally, it is important to keep in mind that ARGs are present not only in the bacteria, but also in the extracellular DNA in the biofilms that they create on the surface of MPs, and this extracellular DNA is an important reservoir of ARGs. 8. Conclusions Plastics persist and pollute long after their intended use is finished, which means that there is no such thing as an end to the impact of plastics within a typical human lifespan. Depending on how plastic is handled, it may pose a significant threat to the environment and to the climate when it reaches the waste phase of its life cycle. The direct impact of landfills on the formation of MPs in the environment is due to the way landfills are operated, the impact of environmental processes such as wind, flooding, leaching, and Int. 1. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13223 References 12 of 15 runoff, and the distribution of waste by animals. Landfills have tried to reduce the scope of this problem, but plastic waste around active and former landfills remains a source of MPs. The indirect impact of landfills on the formation and spread of MPs is due to the structure of plastic waste containing nano-/microparticles and the defragmentation of plastic waste during landfilling. Fine particles or fibers can be transported from landfills to the surrounding environment by leachate and air. The aging of plastic debris in typical environmental conditions determines the release of harmful volatile organic compounds via oxidative photodegradation processes. In addition, MPs act as carriers or chelators of various co -contaminants, such as heavy metals, brominated flame retardants and other types of plasticizers, and pharmaceutical toxicants. These co -contaminants easily bind to the microplastic surface due to their hydrophobicity. MPs contain a large variety of chemical additives such as bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers, which are used during raw plastic synthesis to improve plasticity. These additives are endocrine disruptors, and thus may exhibit toxic effects upon release. It is necessary to generate, analyze, and disseminate an ever more extensive dataset on landfills that includes information on the characteristics and variability of MPs, including changes over time, which will necessitate multi -annual studies. To understand MPs degradation patterns and the most common types of polymers that they contain, it is necessary to characterize MPs from landfills. This will help to develop an understanding of the environmental effects of MPs from landfills. To better understand the indirect effects of MPs pollution, it will be necessary to perform holistic multidisciplinary studies that address the migration and fate of MPs, as well as their role in the dissemination and evolution of antibiotic resistance. The elements of plastic waste that are most prone to fragmentation that could be reduced by improved product design strategies should be identified, as well as methods of reducing consumption or increasing recycling. The landfilling of plastics should be avoided by implementing strategies to prioritize the reduction, recycling, and conversion of waste into energy, and by campaigning to change consumer behaviour, in particular by avoiding the purchase of short-lived products, such as single -use plastics. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, I.W.-B., K.B. and M.Z.; validation, I.W.-B., K.B. and M.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, I.W.-B., K.B. and M.Z.; writing—review and editing, I.W.-B., K.B. and M.Z.; supervision, I.W.-B. and K.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research received no external funding. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Not applicable. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. 1. Schernewski, G.; Radtke, H.; Hauk, R.; Baresel, C.; Olshammar, M.; Osinski, R.; Oberbeckmann, S. Transport and behavior of microplastics emissions from urban sources in the Baltic Sea. Front. Environ. Sci. 2020, 8, 579361. [CrossRef] 2. Cai, Y.; Yang, T.; Mitrano, D.M.; Heuberger, M.; Hufenus, R.; Nowack, B. Systematic study of microplastic fiber release from 12 different polyester textiles during washing. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020, :i4, 4847-4855. [CrossRef ] [PubMed] 3. An, L.; Liu, Q.; Deng, Y.; Wu, W.; Gao, Y.; Ling, W. Sources of microplastic in the environment. In Microplastics in Terrestrial Environments: The Handbook of Environmental Chendstry; He, D., Luo, Y, Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 95, pp. 143-159. [CrossRef] 4. Conley, K.; Clum, A.; Deepe, J.; Lane, H.; Beckingham, B. Wastewater treatment plants as a source of microplastics to an urban estuary: Removal efficiencies and loading per capita over one year. Water Res. 2019, X3,100030. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 5. Li, X.; Chen, L.; Mei, Q.; Dong, B.; Dai, X.; Ding, G.; Zeng, E.Y. Microplastics in sewage sludge from the wastewater treatment plants in China. Water Res. 2018,142, 75-85. [CrossRef ] [PubMed] 6. Ng, E.L.; Lwanga, E.H.; Eldridge, S.M.; Johnston, P.; Hu, H.W.; Geissen, V.; Chen, D. An overview of microplastic and nanoplastic —1h,Hi in Cri Tnlnl P,17,irnn )n1R A77 1g77._1QRR fPnhi\R..11 Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13223 13 of 15 7. Zhou, Y.; Wang, J.; Zou, M.; Jia, Z.; Zhou, S.; Li, Y. Microplastics in soils: A review of methods, occurrence, fate, transport, ecological and environmental risks. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 748,141368. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 8. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Marine Plastic Debris and Microplastics—Global Lessons and Research to Inspire Action and Guide Policy Change; UNEP: Nairobi, Kenya, 2016. 9. Chatterjee, S.; Sharma, S. Microplastics in our oceans and marine health. Field Actions Sci. Rep. 2019,19,54-61. 10. Gajendiran, A.; Krishnamoorthy, S.; Abraham, J. Microbial degradation of low-density polyethylene (LDPE) by Aspergillus clavatus strain JASK1 isolated from landfill soil. 3 Biotech 2016, 6, 52. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 11. Geyer, R.; Jambeck, J.R.; Law, K.L. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1700782. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 12. Plastics Europe. Plastics—The Facts 2020. An Analysis of European Plastics Production, Demand and Waste Data. Available online: https://plasticseurope.org/knowledge-hub/plastics-the-facts-2020/ (accessed on 16 August 2022). 13. Kawecki, D.; Wu, Q.; Gongalves, J.S.; Nowack, B. Polymer -specific dynamic probabilistic material flow analysis of seven polymers in Europe from 1950 to 2016. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 173, 105733. [CrossRef] 14. Kazour, M.; Terki, S.; Rabhi, K.; Jemaa, S.; Khalaf, G.; Amara, R. Sources of microplastics pollution in the marine environment: Importance of wastewater treatment plant and coastal landfill. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019,146, 608-618. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 15. Golwala, H.; Zhang, X.; Iskander, S.M.; Smith, A.L. Solid waste: An overlooked source of microplastics to the environment. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 769,144581. [CrossRef] 16. Su, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, D.; Zhan, L.; Shi, H.; Xie, B. Occurrence of microplastics in landfill systems and their fate with landfill age. Water Res. 2019, 164, 114968. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 17. Zhou, C.; Fang, W.; Xu, W.; Cao, A.; Wang, R. Characteristics and the recovery potential of plastic wastes obtained from landfill mining. J. Clean. Prod. 2014,80,80-86. [CrossRef] 18. Huang, Q.; Yang, Y.; Pang, X.; Wang, Q. Evolution on qualities of leachate and landfill gas in the semi -aerobic landfill. J. Environ. Sci. 2008, 20,499-504. [CrossRef] 19. Semrau, J.D. Bioremediation via methanotrophy: Overview of recent findings and suggestions for future research. Front. Environ. Sci. 2011, 2, 209. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 20. Muenmee, S.; Chiemchaisri, W.; Chiemchaisri, C. Enhancement of biodegradation of plastic wastes via methane oxidation in semi -aerobic landfill. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2016,113, 244-255. [CrossRef] 21. Ishigaki, T.; Sugano, W.; Nakanishi, A.; Tateda, M.; Ike, M.; Fujita, M. The degradability of biodegradable plastics in aerobic and anaerobic waste landfill model reactors. Chemosphere 2004, 54, 225-233. [CrossRef] 22. Pospf9il, J.; Negpurek, S. Highlights in chemistry and physics of polymer stabilization. Macrorrrol. Syrup. 1997, 115, 143-163. [CrossRef] 23. Lomonaco, T.; Manco, E.; Corti, A.; La Nasa, J.; Ghimenti, S.; Biagini, D.; Di Francesco, F.; Modugno, M.; Ceccarini, A.; Fuoco, R.; et al. Release of harmful volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from photo -degraded plastic debris: A neglected source of environmental pollution. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 394,122596. [CrossRef] 24. Shah, A.A.; Hasan, F.; Hameed, A.; Ahmed, S. Biological degradation of plastics: A comprehensive review. Biotechnol. Adv. 2008, 26,246-265. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 25. Huang, J.C.; Shetty, A.S.; Wang, M.S. Biodegradable plastics: A review. Adv. Polym. Technol. 1990, 10, 23-30. [CrossRef] 26. Singh, B.; Sharma, N. Mechanistic implications of plastic degradation. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2008, 93, 561-584. [CrossRef] 27. Montazer, Z.; Habibi Najafi, M.B.; Levin, D.B. Challenges with verifying microbial degradation of polyethylene. Polymers 2020, 12,123. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 28. Kumar, R.; Pandit, P.; Kumar, D.; Patel, Z.; Pandya, L.; Kumar, M.; Joshi, C.; Joshi, M. Landfill microbiome harbour plastic degrading genes: A metagenomic study of solid waste dumping site of Gujarat, India. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 779, 146184. [CrossRef] 29. Alshehrei, F. Biodegradation of synthetic and natural plastic by microorganisms. J. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 5, 8-19. 30. Gewert, B.; Plassmann, M.M.; MacLeod, M. Pathways for degradation of plastic polymers floating in the marine environment. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 2015,17,1513-1521. [CrossRef] 31. Paluselli, A.; Fauvelle, V.; Galgani, F.; Sempere, R. Phthalate release from plastic fragments and degradation in seawater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 53,166-175. [CrossRef] 32. Muenmee, S.; Chiemchaisri, W.; Chiemchaisri, C. Microbial consortium involving biological methane oxidation in relation to the biodegradation of waste plastics in a solid waste disposal open dump site. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2015, 102, 172-181. [CrossRef] 33. Adamcova, D.; Vaverkova, M. Degradation of biodegradable/ degradable plastics in municipal solid -waste landfill. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2014, 23,1071-1078. 34. Canopoli, L.; Coulon, F.; Wagland, S.T. Degradation of excavated polyethylene and polypropylene waste from landfill. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 698,134125. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 35. Borthakur, A.; Singh, P. India's lost rivers and rivulets. Energy Ecol. Environ. 2016, 1, 310-314. [CrossRef] 36. Bharath, M.; Natesan, U.; Vaikunth, R.; Kumar, P.; Ruthra, R.; Srinivasalu, S. Spatial distribution of microplastic concentration around landfill sites and its potential risk on groundwater. Chemosphere 2021, 277, 130263. [CrossRef] Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 14 of 15 37. Brennan, R.B.; Healy, M.G.; Morrison, L.; Hynes, S.; Norton, D.; Clifford, E. Management of landfill leachate: The legacy of European Union Directives. Waste Manag. 2016,55,355-363. [CrossRef] 38. Xu, Z.; Sui, Q.; Li, A.; Sun, M.; Zhang, L.; Lyu, S.; Zhao, W. How to detect small microplastics (20-100 µm) in freshwater, municipal wastewaters and landfill leachates? A trial from sampling to identification. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 733,139218. [CrossRef] 39. Yang, N.; Damgaard, A.; Kjeldsen, P.; Shao, L.M.; He, P.J. Quantification of regional leachate variance from municipal solid waste landfills in China. Waste Manag. 2015, 46, 362-372. [CrossRef] 40. Prata, J.C. Microplastics in wastewater: State of the knowledge on sources, fate and solutions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 129,262-265. [CrossRef] 41. Hirai, H.; Takada, H.; Ogata, Y.; Yamashita, R.; Mizukawa, K.; Saha, M.; Kwan, K.; Moore, C.; Gray, H.; Laursen, D.; et al. Organic micropollutants in marine plastics debris from the open ocean and remote and urban beaches. Mar. Pollitt. Bull. 2011, 62, 1683-1692. [CrossRef] 42. Jiang, J.Q. Occurrence of microplastics and its pollution in the environment: A review. Sustain. Prod. Consutn. 2018,13,16-23. [CrossRef] 43. Fasano, E.; Bono-Blay, F.; Cirillo, T.; Montuori, P.; Lacorte, S. Migration of phthalates, alkylphenols, bisphenol A and di(2- ethylhexyl) adipate from food packaging. Food Control, 2012, 27,132-138. [CrossRef] 44. He, P.; Chen, L.; Shao, L.; Zhang, H.; Lu, F. Municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill: A source of microplastics? Evidence of microplastics in landfill leachate. Water Res. 2019,159, 38-45. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 45. Van Praagh, M.; Hartman, C.; Brandmyr, E. Microplastics in Landfill Leachates in the Nordic Countries; Nordisk Ministerrad: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2018. [CrossRef] 46. Sundt, P; Schulze, P. -E.; Syversen, F. Sources of Microplastics-Pollution to the Marine Environment; Norwegian Environment Agency Miljedirektoaret: Trondheim, Norway, 2014. 47. Kilponen, J. Microplastics and Harmful Substances in Urban Runoffs and Landfill Leachates: Possible Emission Sources to Marine Environment; Faculty of Technology, Environmental Technology, Lahti University of Applied Sciences: Lahti, Finland, 2016. 48. Sun, J.; Zhu, Z.R.; Li, W.H.; Yan, X.; Wang, L.K.; Zhang, L.; Jin, J.; Dai, X.; Ni, B.J. Revisiting microplastics in landfill leachate: Unnoticed tiny microplastics and their fate in treatment works. Water Res. 2021, 190, 116784. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 49. Xu, S.Y.; Zhang, H.; He, P.J.; Shao, L.M. Leaching behaviour of bisphenol A from municipal solid waste under landfill environment. Environ. Technol. 2011,32,1269-1277. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 50. Yamamoto, T.; Yasuhara, A.; Shiraishi, H.; Nakasugi, O. Bisphenol A in hazardous waste landfill leachates. Chemosphere 2001, 42, 415-418. [CrossRef] 51. Narevski, A.C.; Novakovic, M.I.; Petrovic, M.Z.; Mihajlovic, I.J.; Maodug, N.B.; Vujic, G.V. Occurrence of bisphenol A and microplastics in landfill leachate: Lessons from South East Europe. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021,28,42196-42203. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 52. U.S. EPA. Municipal Solid Waste in The United States: 2011 Facts and Figures; Office of Solid Waste: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. 53. Roblin, B.; Aherne, J. Moss as a biomonitor for the atmospheric deposition of anthropogenic microfibres. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 715, 136973. [CrossRef] 54. Loppi, S.; Roblin, B.; Paoli, L.; Aherne, J. Accumulation of airborne microplastics in lichens from a landfill dumping site (Italy). Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 4564. [CrossRef] 55. Li, K.; Wang, W.; Ge, M.; Li, J.; Wang, D. Optical properties of secondary organic aerosols generated by photooxidation of aromatic hydrocarbons. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 4922. [Cross Rei] 56. Royer, S.; Ferr6n, S.; Wilson, S.T.; Karl, D.M. Production of methane and ethylene from plastic in the environment. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0200574. [CrossRef] 57. Hahladakis, J.N.; Velis, C.A.; Weber, R.; Iacovidou, E.; Purnell, P. An overview of chemical additives present in plastics: Migration, release, fate and environmental impact during their use, disposal and recycling. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 344,179-199. [Cro""Ref] 58. Kinigopoulou, V.; Pashalidis, I.; Kalderis, D.; Anastopoulos, 1. Microplastics as carriers of inorganic and organic contaminants in the environment: A review of recent progress. J. Mol. Liq. 2022, 350, 118580. [CrossRef] 59. Holmes, L.A.; Turner, A.; Thompson, R.C. Adsorption of trace metals to plastic resin pellets in the marine environment. Environ. Pollut. 2012,160,42-48. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 60. Munier, B.; Bendell, L.I. Macro and micro plastics sorb and desorb metals and act as a point source of trace metals to coastal ecosystems. PLoS ONE 2018,13, e0191759. [CrossRef] 61. Liu, F.F.; Liu, G.Z.; Zhu, Z.L.; Wang, S.C.; Zhao, F.F. Interactions between microplastics and phthalate esters as affected by microplastics characteristics and solution chemistry. Chentosphere 2019, 214, 688-694. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 62. Elizalde-Velazquez, A.; Subbiah, S.; Anderson, T.A.; Green, M.J.; Zhao, X.; Canas-Carrell, J.E. Sorption of three common nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to microplastics. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 715, 136974. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 63. Li, J.; Zhang, K.; Zhang, H. Adsorption of antibiotics on microplastics. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 237,460-467. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 64. Imran, M.; Das, K.R.; Naik, M.M. Co -selection of multi -antibiotic resistance in bacterial pathogens in metal and microplastic contaminated environments: An emerging health threat. Chemosphere 2019, 215, 846-857. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 65. Wu, D.; Huang, X.H.; Sun, J.Z.; Graham, D.W.; Xie, B. Antibiotic resistance genes and associated microbial community conditions in aging landfill systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 12859-12867. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Int. j. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,13223 15 of 15 66. Shi, J.; Wu, D.; Su, Y.; Xie, B. (Nano) microplastics promote the propagation of antibiotic resistance genes in landfill leachate. Environ. Sci. Nano 2020, 7,3536-3546. [CrossRef] 67. Su, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Zhu, J.; Shi, J.; Wei, H.; Xie, B.; Shi, H. Microplastics act as vectors for antibiotic resistance genes in landfill leachate: The enhanced roles of the long-term aging process. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 270,116278. [CrossRef] �__404� BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS Routledge 2022, VOL. 78, NO. 3, 148-151 https://doi.org/10.1080100963402.2022.2062939 Taylor & Francis Group 10 Check for updates Burning biomass: A Drax -tic idea, and bad for environmental justice Stefan Koester ABSTRACT KEYWORDS The world is in a scramble for energy, with governments looking at every possible source to fulfill Climate change; global their energy needs. Concerns about environmental justice, biodiversity, and the protection of our warming; environmental natural resources are at risk of being shunted aside. And while energy sources such as biomass are justice; climate crisis; being marketed as lower -carbon alternatives, they must be looked at extra closely to make sure biomass; renewable energy; that the cure is not worse than the disease - especially in communities of color. fossil fuel After Russia's invasion of Ukraine, many nations are realizing that they are exceedingly vulnerable to just -in - time energy supplies, as well as to the outsized power of near -monopolistic energy states. In response, one of the energy strategies that world leaders are now pursuing is to shift away entirely from polluting, high -carbon energy sources such as coal, oil, and natural gas to renewable energy, electric vehicles, and electric heating. This situation has led to a renewed emphasis on an ancient but problematic energy source: flee combustion of wood. Or, to be more precise, the burning of "bio- mass" - that is, the burning of any plant matter that is already a part of the existing carbon cycle, be it weeds,} corn, soybeans, leaves, roots, sawdust, sugarcane,; stumps, lumberyard waste, bark, roots, stumps, or thq leftover "slash" from clearcutting a forest. In reality, however, the use of biomass usually comes down to grinding up logs into quarter -inch long pellets, shipping them thousands of miles to converted coal-fired gener- ating plants such as the Drax facility in England - the world's largest - and then burning the pellets in a conventional coal boiler to generate electricity or heat. This is because firms that produce biomass pellets require consistency and reliability in their product, which is shipped around the world, in a form that easily replaces coal. (The pellets can be easily shoveled, put on a conveyor belt, or otherwise fed into a hopper, where they go into the flames of the furnace.) While some localized facilities may use wood scraps and other bio- mass waste onsite, most biomass burned today for heat and power comes from special purpose, large-scale tree plantations. In theory, this practice could replace some of our existing dependence on the burning of fossilized carbon with the burning of a renewable material that is already part of the existing carbon cycle; after all, plants are renewable, given enough time to regrow. CONTACT Stefan Koester ® skoester@itif.org 2022 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Or so the argument goes. Even before the tragic events in Ukraine, biomass had already been a large and growing source of global energy demand, both in developing and developed countries. In their groundbreaking 2019 Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - the premier body of interna- tional climate scientists - noted that the world will need to rely on biomass for as much as 25 percent of pro- jected global energy demand by 2050 if it is to limit warming while maintaining global economic growth (IPCC 2018). Worldwide, the use of biomass as an energy source has grown considerably over the past two decades, often under the guise of a climate solution. After hydro and wind power, biomass is the third- largest source of global renewable electricity generation, more than tripling in supply from 214 terawatt-hours in 2000 to 768 terawatt-hours in 2019 (World Bioenergy Association 2021). To give a sense of scale, on average, Hoover Dam generated about 4.2 terawatt-hours of electricity each year up until 2008. (For the past several years, the amount of electricity generated by Hoover Dam has been decreasing as the water levels fall due to prolonged drought; in 2021 the dam produced roughly about 25 percent less electricity than average.) A terawatt-hour of electricity is enough to power almost 94,000 US homes for a year. Biomass as a share of the supply of total renewable electricity ranges from around 1 percent in Africa to as high as 24 percent in the European Union. Most of the supply of biomass comes from solid roundwood -- otherwise known as trees and tree by. products. Roughly 85 percent of the biomass burned in European and American power plants for electricity and heat comes from wood pellets that are processed and produced at industrial scales from forests, either natural -growth forests or tree farms. In the United States, 80 percent of biomass pellet production capacity is in the southeastern part of the country - predomi- nantly North and South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi. In 2021, these facilities produced 7.7 million tons of wood pellets for utility power plants, of which more than 85 percent was exported to inter- national markets, most likely the EU and UK. (US Energy Information Agency 2022). But the idea of using biomass as a substitute for fossil fuels has really picked up steam lately; for example, in its recent joint -action energy plan, the European Commission called for an increase in the use of biomass and biomethane (methane gas created by the digestion of cow manure, plant matter, and the emissions from landfills) to replace Russian fossil fuel imports (European Commission 2022). The European Union has already cut off imports of Russian biomass pellets, which previously accounted for about 15 percent of Europe's total supply (Bioenergy News 2022). (In the United Kingdom, residents squeezed by a 500 percent increase in nat- ural gas prices have increasingly turned to burning wood in home stoves to keep warm). The UK already gets as much as 7 percent of its electricity from the burning of biomass, and some energy experts predict that the country's appetite for biomass will increase due to natural gas prices and shortages. The problem is that the burning of biomass is likely to do more damage to the atmosphere - and our efforts to avert climate change - than if we were to do without it (Wolfe and Nowicki 2020). And the increase in the unmitigated burning of biomass for electricity and heat brings with it problems of environmental justice, health, biodiversity, and land use that affect already margin- alized and overburdened communities. Environmental justice should not be forgotten in the push for fossil fuel alternatives Proponents of unmitigated biomass use argue that it is a carbon -neutral fuel or even a carbon -negative fuel - meaning a renewable energy resource that sequesters atmospheric carbon, thereby negating or offsetting the inevitable emissions from its combus- tion. Intuitively, however, it seems like an accounting trick that logging companies and power plants can cut down and burn trees today and claim it as carbon neutral and beneficial to the world - while in reality the planet must wait years for a forest to regrow and re -sequester the emitted carbon. BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS O 149 The simple truth is that biomass energy is not a clean or carbon -neutral alternative to fossil fuels. In fact, at the smokestack, burning wood is 30 percent more car- bon -intensive and polluting than coal, and 2.5 times more polluting than natural gas (Hanson and Ranganathan 2017). Biomass proponents argue that because trees regrow and re -sequester the initial emitted carbon from the combustion of trees, this pulse of carbon dioxide emis- sions is offset through regrowth. But it takes time for degraded forest lands to grow and get to that point - and time may be the most precious resource that humanity lacks when it comes to tackling climate change. While estimating the amount of so-called "car- bon debt" varies based on a number of assumptions, the consensus view is that it can take anywhere from 40 to 100 years before those emissions are recaptured by regrowth (Mitchell, Harmon, and O'Connell 2012). (Carbon debt can be thought of in this case as the total amount of time required before the airborne carbon emissions are safely locked away, or "re -sequestered," in the form of long-term storage of carbon in plants, soil, geological formations, and the oceans.) In addition, the siting of the facilities is unevenly dis- tributed. If you live in an environmental justice county, defined as one where the poverty level is above the state median and at least one-quarter of the population is non- white, you have a 53 percent greater chance of having a facility that makes wood pellets in your community, as reported in Environmental Justice magazine (Koester and Davis 2018). My fellow researchers and I also found that all wood pellet production facilities in North Carolina and South Carolina are located in communities designated as environmental justice communities. Furthermore, this data is likely to already be out of date, as 12 new biomass pellet facilities, with a combined annual capacity of 7.6 million tons of pellet production, have been proposed for the southeastern United States in the last few years (Southern Environmental Law Center 2021). These communities are predominantly minority and lower income communities that already bear a disproportionate burden when it comes to industrial and energy infrastructure development. In addition to losing forest lands within their community, areas around wood pellet facilities must contend with an increase in the amount of airborne pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate mat- ter - all of which have been linked to increased risk of respiratory issues. Residents of communities in North Carolina where biomass wood pellet processing facilities are located have complained about increased noise, dust, haze, smells, and trouble sleeping after production facilities began operating (de Puy Kamp 2021). In 150 O S. KOESTER addition, many of these communities are more likely to suffer higher fatality rates as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is also more likely to kill those who are already exposed to poor air quality, found a study by researchers at Harvard University's T.H. Chan School of Public Health (Wu et al. 2020). Nor is the problem exclusive to the Southeastern United States; Springfield, Massachusetts — which is just over 41 percent nonwhite, according to the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau 2020) — was slated to have a controversial 35 -megawatt wood -burning biomass plant until its permit was revoked in April 2021. "For too long communities like ours have been targeted by out-of-town developers seeking to get rich at the expense of the public health and environment of our children, seniors, and all residents, leading to generations of concentrated pollution and health and environmental inequities," said Springfield City Councilor Jesse Lederman to the press (Wasser 2021). If built, the facility would have been " ... the state's only large-scale biomass plant and would have burned about 1,200 tons of waste wood per day in the heart of a state -designated environmental justice community... " said the local radio station, WBUR. Furthermore, nearly one in five children in Springfield have asthma; the air quality is so poor that the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America has ranked Springfield the "Asthma Capital of the country" (Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America 2019). And this is not a rare issue, confined to just the two examples above; the United States is the world's largest global producer, processor, and exporter of woody bio- mass pellets. A troubled future for the biomass industry Consequently, there is a strong activist community opposed to both pellet facilities and biomass energy plants in the United State. Local communities have raised stiff resistance to the siting of new biomass plants. In North Carolina, a state at the epicenter of the recent boom in biomass pellet production over the last five years, residents are trying to stop a wood pellet produc- tion facility capable of producing hundreds of thousands of tons of wood pellets sourced from local forests and destined for foreign markets (Kenoyer 2021). These com- munities oppose both the burning and production of biomass because of its significant impact on rural and urban communities, its effects on regional forests and wetlands, and because of its dubious climate benefits. The unmitigated use of woody biomass to replace fossil fuels like coal and natural gas is a fool's bargain, compar- able to continuing to dig when we're already in a hole. It's also important to note that biomass is uneco- nomic in almost all markets, and only able to survive with the help of massive subsidies. The United Kingdom, for example, provided just one large-scale biomass power plant more than $1 billion in govern- ment subsidies in 2020 alone, money that could be spent subsidizing actual low -carbon energy sources or fund- ing electric heat pump conversions. (MacDonald 2021). Biomass also benefits from regulatory and emis- sions accounting loopholes in the European Union that classify most biomass sources as a renewable energy resource, enabling biomass facilities to avoid having to pay carbon emissions credits while at the same time benefiting from renewable energy subsidi- zation schemes. Compared to utility -scale wind and solar, woody biomass can be as much as four times more expensive, depending on market conditions — and more than 50 percent more expensive than coal- fired electricity in Europe (Argus Media 2021). A clean future can do without energy from biomass The world faces a series of crises, with climate change and the energy transition being the most pressing and serious to continued long-term existence. With Russia's aggression in Ukraine and ongoing instability around the world — with petro -dollars being used to fuel dicta - tors and human rights abusers — there is undoubtedly an increased need to transition away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible. With this transition there will inevi- tably be significant turmoil in global markets as consu- mers face rising prices. The United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union are right to seize this moment as the time to speed up that transition. But they should not do so in such a way that perpetuates existing environmental injustices and increases pressure on already strained ecosystems. Biomass energy use just doesn't make a lot of sense ! from any perspective, be it cost, efficiency, climate - mitigation potential or as a more ethically produced type of energy. This is not to say that biomass under any circumstances does not makes sense as an energy source; trees can play an incredibly versatile in role in a low- carbon economy. But there should be little role for biomass energy in devel9ped economies' low carbon portfolio. Acknowledgments The author would like to thank the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Notes on contributor Stefan Koester is a senior policy analyst at the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation. He has worked as an energy and environmental researcher for almost a decade and has spent significant time investigating the detrimental effects of biomass and bioenergy on the environment and commu- nities. He earned a double master's degree in international relations from the Fletcher School and urban planning from the Department of Urban and Environmental Policy & Planning at Tufts University. He can reached via e-mail at skoester@itiforg or via Twitter @skoester8 References Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America. 2019. https:// community.aafa.org/blog,'springfield-massachusetts-why -it-s-the- l -asth ma -capital. Bioenergy News. 2022. "Wood Pellet Prices Rise as UK Ends Russian Imports." March 15. https://www.bioenergy-news. com/news/wood-pellet-prices-rise-as-uk-ends-russian -imports/. de Puy Kamp, M. 2021. "How Marginalized Communities in the South are Paying the Price for `Green Energy' in Europe." CNN. July 9. https://www.cnn.com/interactive/ 2021/07/us/american-south-biomass-energy-invs/. European Commission. 2022. Joint European action for more affordable, secure and sustainable energy. March 8. Strasbourg: European Commission. https:/,'ec.europa.eu/ commission/presscorner'detail/en/ip_- 22_ 1511. Hanson, C., and J. Ranganathan. 2017. "Insider: Why Burning Trees for Energy Harms the Climate." December 6. World Resources Institute. https:/'www.wri.org;insights/insider- why-burning- trees -energy - harms climate. IPCC. 2018. "Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development." Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5'. October 8. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https:/)www.ipcc.ch/srl5?. BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS O 151 Kenoyer, K. 2021. "Green Energy or Greenwashing? The Wood Pellet Industry Is the Target of Fierce Debate." WHQR. October 26. https://www.whgr.org/local/2021-10- 26. green-energy-or-greenwashing-the-wood-pellet-indus try is -the -target -of -fierce -debate. Koester, S., and S. Davis. 2018. "Siting of Wood Pellet Production Facilities in Environmental Justice Communities in the Southeastern United States." Environmental Justice. April 1. https://www.liebertpub. com/doi/10.1089/etiv.2017.0025. MacDonald, P. 2021. "The Extent of Drax's Biomass Subsidies." Ember. February 25. https://ember-climate. org/insights/research/drax-biomass-subsidies/. Media, Argus. 2021. Biomass Markets: Weekly Biomass Markets, News, and Analysis. Issue 21-50. December 15. https://www.argusmedia.coin/-/media/Files/sample - reports/argus-biomass -markets.ashx?la=en&hash= 872E2CO3AOA78FE3F236BBFOOE7729E3114326E0. Mitchell, S., M. Harmon, and K. O'Connell. 2012. "Carbon Debt and Carbon Sequestration Parity in Forest Bioenergy Production." Wiley Online Library. May 11. https://online library.wiley.com/doi/ 10.1111 /j.1757 -1707.2012.01173.x. Southern Environmental Law Center. 2021. "Wood Pellet Plants Exporting to Europe from the Southeast United States." Accessed 1 July 2021. https://www.southernenviron ment.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/maps/SELC - W oodPelletExportMap_2021_0701_map+table.pdf. US Census Bureau. 2020. QuickFacts: Springfield, Massachusetts. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/ springfieldcitymassachusetts. US Energy Information Administration. 2022. "Monthly Densified Biomass Fuel Report." 16 March 2022. https:;': www.eia.gov/biofuels/biomass/#table __data. Wasser, M. 2021. "Mass. Revokes Air Permit For Controversial Biomass Facility In Springfield." WBUR. April 2. https://www.wbur.org/news/2021/04/02: spring field- biomass -permit -revoked. Wolfe, S., and B. Nowicki. 2020. "Biomass Energy Is Polluting: A False Climate Solution that Worsens the Climate Crisis." Center for Biological Diversity. June. https://www.biologi caldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/pdfs/ Bio mass -Energy- Is-Polluting-2.pdf. World Bioenergy Association. 2021. Global Bioenergy Statistics. https://www.worldbioenergy.org"uploads/ 211214%20 W BA%20GBS%202021.pdf. Wu, X., R. C. Nethery, M. B. Sabath, D. Braun, and F. Dominici. 2020. "Air Pollution and COVID-19 Mortality in the United States: Strengths and Limitations of an Ecological Regression Analysis." Science Advances. October 23. https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/covid-pm. Copyright of Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listsery without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. Kodiak Island Borough OFFICE of the MANAGER TO: Kodiak Island Borough Assembly FROM: Aimee Williams RE: Manager's Report, April 25, 2024 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Phone (907) 486-9301 Manager's Department Groundbreaking Ceremony— The Kodiak Fire Department will be having a groundbreaking ceremony on Tuesday, April 30, 2024, at 2PM. There will also be a reception following the event at the Koniag Building at 3PM to celebrate Manager Tvenge as he retires from the City of Kodiak. KEA Easements — KEA has asked to put a utility easement through KIB land near the ball fields at the Dark Lake area. Staff is working through the administrative process now for the disposal of that land. The request will work its way through Planning & Zoning and then come to the Assembly for final decision. IBEW — Our collective bargaining representative had some questions about our newly implemented travel policy. I am working with him to clarify the sections that he had questions about. Port Lions — Waiting information on which powers they might have specific questions about. Also informed them that there is Assembly interest to attend one of their work sessions and that we are looking at either May or June to do so. Budget Calendar — o Local Contribution Ask Expected — April 30th o Level II Manager's Budget — May 6th o Budget Ordinance in Packet Review — May 9th o Certified Roll Expected — May 10th o Ordinance Introduction — May 16th o Public Hearing — June 6th o Due Date —June 10th Fire Alarm — Audible alarms were tested in the main building this morning by Taylor Fire Inspections. They work. KISA Lease — Meeting set up for next week to address sections of the lease about types of guns authorized at the range. Emergency Management Training — Kodiak Island Borough will be hosting Texas A&M Engineering Extension Services (TEEX), Emergency Services Training Institute's MGT -312- Senior Officials Workshop for All Hazards Preparedness and MGT 340 — Crisis Management on June 10-11, 2024. All training will be delivered at Bayside Volunteer Fire Department. Upcoming Travel — • PWSRCAC — April 30th — May 31d (Assessing Director will sit at Manager's Desk for the May 2nd Regular Meeting) • Vacation — May 8-10, 2024 (E&F Director will sit at the Manager's Desk for the May 9th Work Session) Community Development Multi -Hazard Multi -Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan — Community Development staff held an in-person kick-off meeting on April 23. A small group of people attended the meeting to learn more about hazard mitigation and the process for updating the current plan. Staff is working on a community survey that will be released on May 3. Hydrology Study Project for the Russian River and Sargent Creek — An online kick- off meeting for the hazard mitigation grant award was held by ADHS&EM with borough staff on April 23. Borough staff is currently working on the procurement process for the project. PLAN 2045 — Community Development staff is working with Kodiak High School to develop a logo contest for the new comprehensive plan. The logo contest is open to all high school students. The contest closes on May 17. More information on the logo contest can be found on the PLAN 2045 website at https://www.kodiakak.us/759/Plan- 2045. Assessing Department Board of Equalization (BOE) - The BOE (KIBC 3.35.050) meets Monday, May 6, 2024. Assessing had twenty-nine (29) logged appeals for the BOE. At the end of Wednesday, April 24th, twenty-four (24) of the twenty-nine (29) appeals had been withdrawn. The BOE will hear 5 appeals. One late appeal request was considered by the BOE on April 23, 2024. It was denied. Current Projects - 0 Property cleanup for Tyler Conversion • Conversion meetings with Tyler began Tuesday April 2, 2024. • Tyler assigned Assessing eleven (11) tasks this week, of which ten (10) were completed by Wednesday April 17, 2024. • Assessing and Finance need to meet to discuss some Tyler issues. • Assessing is passing through the GIS information on its task list to IT • Tyler has scheduled 5 (2 hour) meetings with Assessing in the month of April. Certified Roll — Assessing will work with the BOE to get the roll certified by May 10, 2024. Exemptions - 4 new exemption applications were received by the Jan. 15 deadline for 2024 for either non-profit religious or charitable uses. (KANA Marketplace, KCHC, Alutiiq Museum and Calvary Baptist Church Bells Flats) One exemption application was received past the deadline. Engineering and Facilities TRI -Annual AHERA Inspection Invitation to Bid — Released to public on April 26th via the KIB Website. The Tri -Annual AHERA inspections are a compliance requirement for 40 CFR 763 regarding asbestos containing materials in school facilities around Kodiak Island. HFAB — Hospital Facilities Advisory Board — The next scheduled meeting is May 13, 2024, at the PKIMC Barometer Conference Room. Solid Waste Contract Committee — The next scheduled meeting is on May 14, 2024, at 1:OOpm in the KIB Conference Room. Old Mental Health Facility — Sampling took place April 12th - 13th. Staff is waiting for results. (It usually takes two — three weeks for water samples to be returned) Landfill — Still waiting to hear if Denali Commission funding will be awarded for an update to the Solid Waste Management Plan KIBSD — Petersen Roof — Met with Project Manager, Site Supervisor, School Principal, and several teachers on Friday, April 19, 2024, to go over the project and let the school know what to expect as the work takes off. The supplies for the project have made it to the Port of Seattle and are scheduled to depart mid-May. There are nineteen forty -foot containers that will be staged on the ball field next to the school. They should arrive after the school year is complete, so they will not interfere with end of school year activities. Leachate Treatment Plant —The contractor and engineering firm are working on rectifying the gallons per minute flow deficiency. Long Term Care — Contact has been made with the Providence real estate division. R&R discussion and lease update is being started. Finance Department Budget — Collecting changes for the Level II Manager's Budget Property Taxes — . Real Property: The end of the Foreclosure process is approaching for tax year 2022 and staff has sent warning letters to property owners. . Personal Property: Borough staff is continuing to file small claims documents with the court for delinquent personal property accounts. Property Assessment and Taxation Implementation Project — Staff is continuing to meet with Tyler staff to review business rules and processes. Staffing — We are still advertising for an accountant position. IT Department Exchange 2019 Upgrade — IT is working on upgrading our Exchange on premise server to 2019 and migrating it and the Borough mailboxes to a new resource Forest named Kodiak.gov. Rename kib.local to kodiak.gov — IT is researching a project to rename the kib.local Microsoft Windows forest to Kodiak.gov — this will align our systems with Microsoft best practices and provide a solid foundation for subsequent additional infrastructure and security measures. — currently in the early testing phase. GIS- Aggregating and simplifying tools for Borough and public use: i. Working on moving archival data to current GIS website for backwards compatibility. ii. Working on the Parcel Fabric (Basically making the parcel lines more accurate to reality through a long arduous process) — latest area is Old Harbor iii. Assisting Community Development with data for their Comprehensive plan. iv. Working on Documentation of our GIS Data and what's critical/how we edit it/why we edit it in this way. V. Working on Identification of Missing Parcel IDs within our system. vi. Creating maps for the Hazard Mitigation plan for Community Development. vii. Preparing for the resumption of the summer google street view project. Network Security - Ongoing efforts to improve overall network security. i. Active directory accounts review ii. Active Directory reorganization iii. Group policy review iv. Network device vulnerability scanning V. System Patch policy and enforcement vi. Ongoing efforts to upgrade server operating systems and switch infrastructure vii. Working on a comprehensive network diagram for documentation. viii. Reviewing different security software for user account and file access reporting ix. Reviewing endpoint and log management via an open source SIEM X. Reviewing other grants that are available to KIB for additional improvements and capabilities. A. Cleaning up network documentation of any username and passwords stored in plain text. Alaska State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program (SLCGP) – This is a grant from the state of Alaska that is focused on improving the network security of the State and Local governments in Alaska. It covers multiple years with multiple rounds of funding for security audits and follow up projects. i. Audit - IT is preparing for a security audit of the KIB systems that will be paid for via a grant via the State of Alaska Statewide Cybersecurity Strategic Plan (SCSP). This has been approved and will be advertised this week. ii. VPN Assessment — looking at improving the stability and usability of the Client VPN technology implemented at the Borough. Ideally the VPN technology will be automatic, and able to be used behind remote unmanaged firewalls. iii. IDS Review – IT currently uses DarkTrace for its IDS, however the SLCGP has kicked off a review of its capabilities vs other solutions which is ongoing. Hyper V Virtualization Testing – IT is setting up a Microsoft based virtualization platform utilizing old servers to test out Hyper -V and if it is a viable alternative to newly expensive VMWare licensing after Broadcom acquired VMWare earlier this year. Bayside Fire Department Personnel Activity / Professional Development / Training The Bayside Fire Department will be unveiling a new summer long recruitment drive for regular probationary firefighters and cadet firefighters (16- & 17 -year-old). The goal is to unveil the drive at Crab Fest. The initial focus of the Department for fall / winter 2023 and winter / spring 2024 was to retain and develop current staff, this was very successful, and the department was able to passively recruit 6 new members during that period. The Bayside Fire Department is in the initial fact-finding stages of a potential island wide public safety -oriented Explorer Post. This potentially would encompass youth between the ages of 14-21 and offer engagement with all facets of public safety including EMS, Fire, Law Enforcement, Search & Rescue, and Public Safety Telecommunications. Once fact finding is complete, the department will engage with public safety partners and present to Borough Staff & Assembly. • The Bayside Fire Department responded to a request for mutual aid from the Kodiak Fire Department on Tuesday the 231d in the early morning hours. This was for a occupied residential structure fire. The Bayside Fire Department provided Engine Co. 11 with 2 firefighters, a Driver Operator and Company Officer (Captain), Engine Co. 10 with a Firefighter, Driver Operator and Company Officer (Lieutenant). Additionally, a Bayside FD Chief Officer responded as well. Once again, the seamless operation of Kodiak FD, USCG FD, & Borough Fire Personnel under the Incident Command System and extremely competent leadership of KFD Deputy Chief Steel McNeil was instrumental in the fire being contained to the structure of origin with limited damage to a single exposure structure (less than 10 feet from the Fire Building) and no civilian injuries. It should be noted that adequate Fire & EMS protection was maintained in the Borough Fire & Rescue areas of responsibility via Bayside FD Personnel, Women's Bay FD Personnel, and Call Back Personnel from KFD and USCG FD. The Bayside Fire Department Responded to a gasoline fed fire at a salvage yard Wednesday afternoon which was extending to storage laden intermodal containers. Squad Co. 11 (Fast Attack) arrived on scene and knocked down the fire utilizing the front bumper mounted monitor with Class B Foam with the Driver Operator never exiting the vehicle (Pump & Roll Capable). Engine Co. 11 Responded as well with a Driver Operator and Company Officer (Lieutenant). An Engine from KFD was requested due to the number of 911 calls and large volume of black smoke emanating from the area. It should be noted that weekday afternoons is the leanest time slice for response of Bayside FD Firefighters. BFD Leadership is looking at potential solutions via a task group for this staffing anomaly. Campus Upgrades and Maintenance — The final "touches" on the new Firefighter Day Room & Lounge in the Lower Apparatus Building are being completed. Firefighters have been working diligently to outfit a space in proximity to response apparatus for members to decompress, relax, and build morale and camaraderie. Once upgrades are complete, BFD Leadership will reach out to the Manager's Office to schedule a facility tour for the Assembly and Staff. "Stuff to Just Make You Happy" - Squad Co. 11, with Company Officer Lieutenant Shelby Bacus, recently hosted a NCAA Women's Final Four Watch Party at the BFD. The event was well attended, and the peripheral result was the Fire Station being staffed with an Engine, Tender, and Squad crew for day at no cost to the community. Thanks to Squad Co. 11 for hosting and Lt. Baucus for continued excellence in leadership! We hear rumors that Engine Co. 11 is planning to upstage Squad 11 with a NHL Stanley Cup watch party in the new lounge .... more to follow. Kodiak Island Borough - Fund/Department Listing Assembly Review Schedule Fund/Dept No. Fund Type - Fund Name Responsible Employee/Entity 100-115 GF - Borough Attorney Dora 3/14/2024 100-120 GF - Finance Department Dora 3/14/2024 10_0-125GF-Information Technology Fred 3/14/2024 100-165 GF - General Administration Dora 3/14/2024 100-190 GF - Education / Culture / Recreation Dora 3/14/2024 10_0-191 _ _ _ _ _ _GF - Non -Profit _Fun_ding: Kodiak Colleges & Librarie_s_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Aime_e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3/14/2024 100-192-110 GF - Non -Profit Funding: Health & Social Services Aimee 3/14/2024 100-192-120 GF - Non -Profit Funding: Education, Culture & Recreation Aimee 3/14/2024 10_0-135 GF - Engineering / Facilities 3/28/2024 _ 100-175 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GF -Emergency Preparedness _ _ _D_ave_ Dave_/Chri_ _ _ _ _ _ s _ 3/28/2024 220 SR - Building & Grounds Dave 3/28/2024 _____220-232 Borough Building _ 3/28/2024 220-233 - Mental Health Center 3/28/2024 220-234 -215 - Closed School - Larsen Bay 3/28/2024 220-234 -2_25 -Closed School-_Karluk_ 3/28/2024 220-235 -School Building Major Repairs 3/28/2024 220-237 - Chiniak School 3/28/2024 220-238_ -----220-241 -_Maintenance Building --_---------------------------------- -----Project 3/28/2024 Office 3/28/2024 220-247 - Egan Way Annex 3/28/2024 100-100 GF - Legislative Nova 4/11/2024 100-105 GF - Borough Management Aimee 4/11/2024 100-110 GF - Borough Clerk_ Nova 4/11/2024 210 _ _ _ _ _ SR - Land Sales - Resource_ Management _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Aimee/Dora _ 4/11/2024 100-000 GF - Revenues Dora/Aimee 4/25/2024 100-130 GF - Assessing Department Seema 4/25/2024 100-140 GF - Community Development Chris 4/25/2024 100-142 GF - Building Official Chris 4/25/2024 100-160 GF - Economic Development Chris 4/25/2024 100-172 GF - Parks & Recreation Dave/Chris 4/25/2024 100-186 GF - Animal Control Chris 4/25/2024 234 SR - LEPC - Emergency Planning Committee Chris 4/25/2024 30_0 SR -_ Debt Service- Schools Dora 4/25/2024 ________ 201 _ ____________________ SR - Education Support Fund ___________ Aimee 4/30/2024 240 SR - Womens Bay Road Service District Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 24_2 _ _ _ _ SR -_ Service No.1 Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 _ _ _ _ 244 _District _ _ _ SR - Monashka Bay Road District _ _ _ Board (due 3/31) _ _ 5/9/2024 246 SR - Bay View Road Service District Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 250 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SR -_ Fire _Protection No. 1_- Bayside_ Fire_ Station_ (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 252 _Area _ _ _ _ SR - Womens Bay Fire Department _ _ _Board _ _ _ Board (due 3/31) _ _ 5/9/2024 254 SR - KIB Airport Fire District Dora 5/9/2024 260_ SR -_ Woodland Lights_ Dora 5/9/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ 261 _ _Acre _ _ _ _ _ SR - Trinity Island Light District Dora 5/9/2024 262 SR - Mission Lake Tide Gate Board (due 3/31) 5/9/2024 273 SR -_Opioid_ Settlement Dora 5/9/2024 276 SR - Facilities Fund Dora 5/9/2024 277 SR - Tourism Development Dora 5/9/2024 278_ SR -_Commercial Passenger Vessel 5/9/2024 _ 530-731-701 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EF - Waste Disposal -Landfill _ _ _Dora_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dave/Dora _ _ 5/30/2024 530-731-702 EF - Waste Disposal - Leachate Plant Dave 5/30/2024 540 EF - Hospital Enterprise Fund Dave/Dora 5/30/2024 54_5 EF -_Long-Term Health Services_ 5/30/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ 555-758 _ _Care _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EF - KFRC -Research Facility _ _ _Dave/Dora _ _ _ _ _ Dave/Dora _ _ 5/30/2024 556 EF - Research Court Apartments Dave/Dora 5/30/2024 560 EF-_911_Service Dora_ 5/30/2024 _ _ _ _ _ _ 100-195 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GF - TranWer-sQMral Fund SR = Special Revenue Fund _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EFD&terprise Fund _ _ xx �O� Sa INVITED TO JO1N �S The Kodiak Fire Department 1: GROUND BREAKING CEREMONY On April 30'2024 2:00 P.M. (Parking Available at Kodiak Ice Rink) Followed by a reception At Koniag Bldg. Board Room 3:00 P.M. (194 Alimaq Dr.) Aimee Williams From: Taylor, Brooke D <BTaylor@pwsrcac.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 8:24 AM Subject: PWRCAC board meeting in Valdez, May 2-3 News release Prince William Sound RCAC board meeting and reception in Valdez, May 1-3 The Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council will hold several events in Valdez, May 2-3, 2024. They will include the council's annual board meeting and a public reception. These events are free and open to the public. Public reception: Wednesday, May 1 In conjunction with the board meeting, the board of directors for the Alaska Tanker Company, Hilcorp and the council will be co -sponsoring a public reception on Wednesday, May 1. The reception will be held outdoors from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Kelsey Municipal Plaza, at 412 Ferry Way (in the event of poor weather, the reception will be moved to the Valdez Civic Center). Board meeting: Thursday and Friday, May 2-3 The meeting will be held in the Valdez Civic Center, at 110 Clifton Drive. Those interested in attending the board meeting can do so in person, by teleconference (1-888-788-0099, meeting ID: 811 8669 6249) or videoconference (https://pwsrcdc.zoom.us/i/81186696249). Visual presentations given during the meeting can be streamed live through the Zoom link or accessed by download on the_council's website when available. The tentative schedule for the Thursday session is from 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. On Friday, the meeting is scheduled from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. The meeting is open to the public, except for executive sessions. Public comments are scheduled to be taken on Thursday starting at 8:40 a.m. Those wishing to speak during public comments are highly encouraged to sign up ahead of time by emailing Jennifer Fleming: fleming(@pwsrcac.org. The council will be conducting regular business during the meeting, including seating of established directors and committee members, election of new board officers and updates from council ex officio members, staff and committees. Other topics included on the agenda are: • An activity report by Alyeska Pipeline Service Company on the Valdez Marine Terminal and Ship Escort Response Vessel System operations, including an update on Alyeska's efforts to address concerns identified in the council's report "Assessment of Risks and Safety Culture at Alyeska's Valdez Marine Terminal." • A presentation on the Pikka Project as it relates to the Valdez Marine Terminal by representatives of Santos. • An update from council staff on work being done by the Alaska Regional Response Team's Regional Stakeholder Committee Task Force. • Consideration of a resolution requesting a voluntary vessel speed reduction by the Trans Alaska Pipeline System tankers submitted by Oasis Earth. • A summary of the council's monitoring of drills and exercises in 2023. • An update on community outreach activities done by the council over the past year. • A report from the council's legislative monitors and staff on political developments and prospects coming out of Washington, D.C. and Juneau. Anyone exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19, flu or cold should attend virtually. The meeting agenda is subject to change before or during the meeting. Council board meetings are routinely recorded and may be disseminated to the public by the council or by the news media. For more information, visit www.pwsrcac.or . KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH Meeting Type: AsSeWUqWvV.SL" L)W Date: � Please PRINT your name legibly Phone number ��Fl�zs-lam To Kodiak Island Borough Assembly: I would like to call your attention to the establishment of the Alaska Center for Marine Debris on East Point Dock. I only recently learned of this project and have questions about the suitability of the proposed site. This project seems to be happening very fast with little to no public input. This is going to be a heavy industrial business that I believe is unsuited for the dock that is basically located downtown. The article in the Mirror talks about a heavy duty shredder, called a quad shaft shredder, that will cut marine debris into 3/8 inch plastic. Does anyone have statistics about the decibel volume that will be generated? Has anyone seen one of these shredders working? I would much prefer this business be located in Gibson Cove where we already have Bio Dry. I am a supporter of ocean cleanup. It is necessary, and I appreciate the effort that has gone into starting this project. However, if this shredding process proves to be too noisy for the downtown site, who will be responsible for moving it? None of the businesses or home owners who would be potentially impacted were consulted. Thank you, Jan Chatto 900 Mission Road