Loading...
2012-10-30 Joint Work Session CITY COUNCIL — BOROUGH ASSEMBLY JOINT WORK SESSION AGENDA Tuesday, October 30, 2012 Assembly Chambers 7:30 p.m. (Borough Chairing) Joint work sessions are informal meetings of the Borough Assembly and City Council where elected officials discuss issues that affect both Borough and City governments and residents. Although additional items not listed on the joint work session agenda are sometimes discussed when introduced by elected officials, staff, or members of the public, no formal action is taken at joint work sessions and items that require formal action are placed on a regular Borough Assembly and /or City Council meeting agenda. Public comments at work sessions are NOT considered part of the official record. Public comments intended for the "official record" should be made at a regular Borough Assembly or City Council meeting. Public Comments (limited to 3 minutes each) Agenda Items 1. Garbage and Bear Issues 2. Fishery Update 3. Biosolids Disposal 4. Kodiak Island Community Reception Planning (Juneau Legislative Reception) • C -1 Halibut Catch Sharing Plan Final action October 5, 2012 The Council recommends Alternative 3 for Area 2C and Alternative 4 for Area 3A as its preferred alternative for the halibut catch sharing plan (CSP). The purpose of the proposed action is to create a halibut catch sharing plan that establishes a clear allocation, with sector accountability, between the charter and commercial setline halibut sectors in Areas 2C and 3A. To this end, the Council requests that the IPHC annually set a combined charter and setline halibut catch limit, to which the allocation percentage for each area will be applied to establish the domestic harvest targets for each sector. The Council also supports the IPHC implementation of separate accountability for the charter and commercial sectors such that wastage in the commercial sector is deducted from the commercial sector's catch limit and wastage in the charter sector is deducted from the charter sector's catch limit. This action also outlines Council intent to engage in an annual process for determining charter halibut management measures. Upon analysis, and through the Council process, the Council will select the management measure that best minimizes the difference between the annual projected harvest and target allocation, without exceeding the charter halibut allocation. This will allow the Council and public to engage in an effective and transparent process for considering both stakeholder input and the most current information regarding the charter fishery and its management. Annual management measures recommended by the Council will be provided to the IPHC for implementation during the subsequent fishing year. The Council recognizes that management measures are imprecise; therefore, a small variance can be expected to occur around the target allocation. The Council's expectation is that these variances will balance over time, to ensure IPHC conservation and management objectives are achieved, and that harvest projections will improve over time as fishery information improves. Under this action, in Areas 2C and 3A, there is no retention of halibut by skipper and crew while paying clients are on board. Element 1— Charter allocation Area 2C: At a combined charter and setline halibut catch limit of <5 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 18.3% of the combined charter and commercial setline halibut catch limit. When the combined charter and setline halibut catch limit is between >_5 million pounds and 55.755 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 0.915 million pounds. When the combined charter and setline halibut catch limit is >5.755 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 15.9% of the combined charter and setline halibut catch limit. Area 3A: At a combined charter and setline halibut catch limit of <10 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 18.9% of the combined charter and commercial setline halibut catch limit. When the combined charter and setline halibut catch limit is between >_10 million pounds and 510.8 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 1.890 million pounds. When the combined charter and setline halibut catch limit is between >10.8. million pounds and 520 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 17.5% of the combined charter and commercial setline halibut catch limit. When the combined charter and setline 1 halibut catch limit is between >20 million pounds and 525 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 3.5 million pounds. When the combined charter and setline halibut catch limit is greater than 25 million pounds, the charter allocation will be 14.0% of the combined charter and commercial setline halibut catch limit. Area 2C CCL(Mlbs) Charter Charter IFQ% MIbs 0- <5.000 18.30% 81.70% 5.000 — 55.755 0.915 >5.755 15.90% 84.10% Area 3A CCL(Mibs) Charter Charter IFQ% Mlbs 0 - <10.000 18.90% 81.10% 10.000 — 510.800 1.890 >10.800 - 520.000 17.50% 82.50% >20.000 - 525.000 3.500 >25.000 14.00% 86.00% Element 2 — Charter harvest data collection method Upon implementation of the halibut CSP, the Council recommends using Alaska Department of Fish & Game logbooks as the primary data collection method for charter harvest. Element 3 — Guided Angler Fish (GM) Individual charter halibut permit (CHP) holders will be allowed to lease commercial IFQ, in order to provide charter anglers with harvesting opportunities, not to exceed limits in place for unguided anglers. 1. Leasing commercial IFQ for conversion to Guided Angler Fish (GAF): • A CHP holder may lease IFQfor conversion to GAF for use on the CHP. • Commercial halibut QS holders may lease up to 10% or 1500 pounds of their annual Area 2C IFQ, whichever is greater, for use as GAF. Commercial halibut QS holders may lease up to 15% or 1500 pounds of their annual Area 3A IFQ whichever is greater, for use as GAF.' If a QS holder chooses to lease IFQ to a Community Quota Entity (CQE), the same limitations apply. • With regard to a CQE leasing its IFQ any quota which a CQE holds, regardless of origin, could be leased up to 100% to eligible residents of the CQE community as GAF. For The lease limits (10% or 1500 pounds of Area 2C IFQ, whichever is greater and 15% and 1500 pounds of Area 3A IFQ, whichever is greater) apply to the start year fishable IFQ pounds for an IFQ permit. Start year fishable pounds is the sum of IFQ equivalent pounds, as defined in regulations at § 679.2, for an area, derived from QS held, plus or minus adjustments pursuant to § 679.40(d) and (e) of this title. 2 example, a CUE may hold IFQ derived from purchase, leased from another qualified CQE, or leased from an individual, and then lease up to 100% of the quota it holds to eligible residents? If the CQE is leasing IFQ to an individual that is not an eligible resident to use as GAF, the CUE has the same limitations as other QS holders (i.e., up to 10% or 1500 pounds of their annual Area 2C IFQ, whichever is greater; and up to 15% or 1500 pounds of their annual Area 3A IFQ, whichever is greater.) • No more than 400 GAF may be assigned to a CHP endorsed for 6 or fewer clients. • No more than 600 GAF may be assigned to a CHP endorsed for more than 6 clients. 2. CHP holders harvesting GM while participating in the charter halibut fishery are exempt from landing and use restrictions associated with the commercial IFQ fishery, but subject to the landing and use provisions detailed below. 3. GAF will be issued in numbers of fish. Conversion of IFQ pounds to numbers of fish would be based on the average weight of GAF from the previous year for each area. In the first year of CSP implementation, the GAF weight -to -fish conversion factor will be based on the previous year's estimates of each area's average weight of halibut harvested in the charter fishery, or the most recent year without a charter halibut size limit in effect. 4. Except for CQEs as described above in provision 1, subleasing of GAF will be prohibited. 5. Unused GAF may revert back to IFQ pounds and be subject to the underage provisions applicable to their underlying commercial QS on September 1, with an automatic return 15 days prior to the end of the commercial halibut fishing season each year. 6. Charter operators landing GAF on private property (e.g., lodges) and motherships would be required to allow ADF &G and IPHC samplers /enforcement personnel access to the point of landing. 7. Commercial and charter fishing may not be conducted from the same vessel on the same day. 8. The skipper is responsible for ensuring that GAF are marked by removing the tips of the upper and lower lobes of the tail and reporting the length of retained GAF halibut to NMFS through the NMFS approved electronic reporting system. 2 With respect to a charter business that may be leasing IFQ from a CQE to use as GAF, the charter business is considered an eligible resident if it operates in the CQE community (e.g., charter trios begin and /or end in the community). 3 D -1(a) Council Motion - GOA Trawl PSC tools October 9, 2012 The Council approves the following purpose and need statement and goals and objectives for the Central Gulf of Alaska trawl PSC action: Purpose and Need Statement: Management of Central Gulf of Alaska (GOA) groundfish trawl fisheries has grown increasingly complicated in recent years due to the implementation of measures to protect Steller sea lions and reduced Pacific halibut and Chinook salmon Prohibited Species Catch (PSC) limits under variable annual total allowable catch (TACs) limits for target groundfish species. These changes complicate effective management of target and non - target resources, and can have significant adverse social and economic impacts on harvesters, processors, and fishery- dependent GOA coastal communities. The current management tools in the GOA Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (IMP) do not provide the Central GOA trawl fleet with the ability to effectively address these challenges, especially with regard to the fleet's ability to best reduce and utilize PSC. As such, the Council has determined that consideration of a new management regime for the Central GOA trawl fisheries is warranted. The purpose of the proposed action is to create a new management structure which allocates allowable harvest to individuals, cooperatives, or other entities, which will eliminate the derby -style race for fish. It is expected to improve stock conservation by creating vessel -level and/or cooperative -level incentives to eliminate wasteful fishing practices, provide mechanisms to control and reduce bycatch, and create accountability measures when utilizing PSC, target, and secondary species. It will also have the added benefit of reducing the incentive to fish during unsafe conditions and improving operational efficiencies. The Council recognizes that Central GOA harvesters, processors, and communities all have a stake in the groundfish trawl fisheries. The new program shall be designed to provide tools for the effective management and reduction of PSC and bycatch, and promote increased utilization of both target and secondary species harvested in the GOA. The program is also expected to increase the flexibility and economic efficiency of the Central GOA groundfish trawl fisheries and support the continued direct and indirect participation of the coastal communities that are dependent upon those fisheries. These management measures shall apply to those species, or groups of species, harvested by trawl gear in the Central GOA, as well as to PSC. This program will not modify the overall management of other sectors in the GOA, or the Central GOA rockfish program, which already operates under a catch share system. Goals and Objectives: 1. Balance the requirements of the National Standards in the Magnuson Stevens Act z. Increase the ability of the groundfish trawl sector to avoid PSC species and utilize available amounts of PSC more efficiently by allowing groundfish trawl vessels to fish more slowly, strategically, and cooperatively, both amongst the vessels themselves and with shore -based processors 3. Reduce bycatch and regulatory discards by groundfish trawl vessels 4. Authorize fair and equitable access privileges that take into consideration the value of assets and investments in the fishery and dependency on the fishery for harvesters, processors, and communities 1 • 5. Balance interests of all sectors and provide equitable distribution of benefits and similar opportunities for increased value 6. Promote community stability and minimize adverse economic impacts by limiting consolidation, providing employment and entry opportunities, and increasing the economic viability of the groundfish harvesters, processors, and support industries 7. Improve the ability of the groundfish trawl sector to achieve Optimum Yield, including increased product retention, utilization, landings, and value by allowing vessels to choose the time and location of fishing to optimize returns and generate higher yields 8. Increase stability relative to the volume and timing of groundfish trawl landings, allowing processors to better plan operational needs as well as identify and exploit new products and markets 9. Increase safety by allowing trawl vessels to prosecute groundfish fisheries at slower speeds and in better conditions 10. Include measures for improved monitoring and reporting 11. Increase the trawl sector's ability to adapt to applicable Federal law (i.e., Endangered Species Act) 12, Include methods to measure the success and impacts of all program elements 13. Minimize adverse impacts on sectors and areas not included in the program 14. Promote active participation by owners of harvest vessels and fishing privileges The Council requests that staff provide a discussion paper that outlines various catch share options for the Central GOA trawl sector that may be available to meet the above objectives, and how other comparable programs have considered and applied the LAPP provisions in the MSA to meet similar objectives. The Council adopts a control date of December 31, 2012. Any catch history after this date may not be credited in any allocation system when designing a future fishery management system. 2 Final Council motion C -3 Observer Program October 6, 2012 The Council recommends that the 2013 ADP be revised to reflect a priority for monitoring vessels managed under PSC limits in the trip selection pool. The Council recognizes that this would necessarily modify the equal probability sampling design such that higher observer coverage rates are provided in the trip selection pool, and lower rates in the vessel selection pool, compared to what is currently in the draft ADP. The Council also asks NMFS to reconsider the continuous 3 -month deployment for selected vessels in the vessel selection pool. NMFS should implement a 2 -month deployment for selected vessels. The Council requests that NMFS provide a strategic planning document for electronic monitoring (EM) that identifies the Council's EM management objective of collecting at -sea discard estimates from the 40' — 57.5' IFQ fleet, and the timeline and vision for how the EM pilot project in 2013 and future years' projects will serve to meet this objective, including funding. The Council forwards the following AP recommendations: The Council requests that NMFS and the BSAI Pacific cod catcher vessel trawl fleet work together to develop a mechanism to allow 100% observer coverage for the 2013 season, with the additional costs to be borne by the vessel owners. The Council also recommends that all trawl fleets in the Gulf of Alaska have the option to voluntarily carry 100% observer coverage at some times in the seasons, also with additional costs to be borne by vessel owners. I. <Outreach> Recommend that NMFS clarify how a release from observer coverage is granted, if the observer provider is unable to provide an observer. 2. <Outreach> Recommend that NMFS reconsider the timing requirements for requesting a release from observer coverage, and inspecting a vessel that has made that request. 3. <First year review> Recommend that NMFS consider that vessels in the vessel selection pool should either have the option to go into the trip selection pool OR all vessels should be in the trip selection pool. 4, The Council reaffirms its intent that crew members should not be displaced by the requirement to have an observer onboard. 5. <First year review> Recommend that the difference between coverage in the vessel and trip selection pods be evaluated. 6. <First year review> Request that NMFS provide information on catcher vessels that operate as catcher processors for a portion of the year. 7. <First year review> Recommend that NMFS insert cost effectiveness measures into the deployment plan, to prevent expensive deployments to remote areas for insignificant amounts of catch. Council motion - Observer Program, October 2012 8. <First year review> Request that NMFS report to the Council on whether there are issues related to observer availability as a result of this program. 9. <Outreach> Clarify the procedure for releasing and acquiring observers for vessels that turn around trips on short notice. 10. <First year review> Recommend that NMFS report to the Council on other EM options that may be appropriate to replace or supplement human observers. 1I, <First year review> The Council requests that the agency, during its first year review, identify detailed programmatic costs, and in addition, that the agency identify possible cost reductions as they relate to programmatic and deployment options. The Council requests that the OAC and NMFS provide a discussion of recommended performance measures for this program. Council motion - Observer Program, October 2012 °f `` Kodiak Island Borough • ` 7 f � , 1 Office of the Borough Manager ' 1 � A. I 710 X11 Bay Road t /a4 j) t n G_'U Kodiak, ,1laska 99615 " " . '• � 1 (, qr Phone (907) 486 -9300 i-A06 ` T� r ift ... entail: rgirrocRiPkodiakak.us June 5,2012 Aimee Kniaziowski, City Manager 710 Mill Bay Road Kodiak, Alaska 99615 Re: Biosolid Disposal at KIB Landfill Dear Ms. Kniaziowski: Thank you for attending our meeting of June I, 2012 to discuss issues related to the Borough challenges related to sludge placement in the landfill. As the landfill nears its permitted capacity. it becomes problematic to accept sludge. The landfill has experienced increased volumes of sludge recently causing a backlog. This condition creates operational difficulties at the active face of the landfill. The city has indicated that it has not yet fully developed alternative disposal options for biosolids. As the Borough transitions its municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal operations to the soon to be constructed expansion cell, we anticipate a period of one year when the Borough will he unable to accept any sludge. In accordance with the MOA between the City of Kodiak and Kodiak Island Borough dated 8- 14 -07, consider this the required six month notification that the Borough will he unable to accept sewage sludge at the landfill after December 15, 2012. In the interest of cooperation, the Borough agrees to work around the operational challenges and accept the increased volumes of sludge experienced recently. If the Borough can be of any assistance in your efforts to develop alternative options for disposal of sewage sludge, please contact Woody Koning, Director Engineering & Facilities at 486 -9343. Sincerely, XODJAX ISL4NNU�BOROUGH Ric % r d / Borough Man ger G:Ijw ,c: Woody Koning, Director Engineering & Facilities Bio -Solid Project Update October 30, 2012 1) Met with ADEC on Tuesday, October 16 in Anchorage, a. Peter Olsen, QDC, submitted his permit application for the composting project on October 10` b. ADEC wants a clear separation between temporary solution (stockpiling) and area under consideration for composting permit. c. They clearly stated that we need to find a separate location if any temporary stockpiling of bio- solids is needed. d. ADEC suggested we talk to USCG for possible temporary location. e. ADEC will provide approval for the temporary stockpile plan and location. 2) Stockpiling of Bio - Solids a. Met with KIB staff October 24 to update them on permitting progress. Borough staff indicated there should not be any zoning issues if City is successful in obtaining permission to temporarily stockpile on USCG property. b. If not able to use USCG property, KIB staff discussed a process the City would follow to stockpile at Gibson Cove if necessary, recognizing December 15 stop date for land filling bio- solids. c. City needs to submit for ADEC approval of stock piling location and method. d. KIB staff will share results of landfill survey with City as soon as results are available. 3) Process Agreements in Place a. City Council approved entering into agreement between City and QDC to process bio- solids from the wastewater treatment plant into compost. b. Peter Olsen finalized the site lease agreement this last week. c. Peter Olsen finalizing agreement to obtain wood materials needed for composting process (Peter to address). 4) Permit Timing a. ADEC was not able to provide a definite timeframe when they can issue the permit. However, they did agree to review the permit right away and, if the application is complete, the permit could be issued by mid- January. (City estimate only) CH2MHill (Cory Hines) talked to Lori Aldridge with ADEC following our trip to Anchorage. She had some questions about the permit, but thought ADEC might be able to get the public notification process started soon. b. ADEC recommended contacting nearby neighbors immediately and prepare them for the public comment period, which Peter Olsen has been doing. City staff has provided copies of the results of the City's composting pilot project to Peter to distribute to neighbors, the landowner, and others who are interested. c. ADEC recommended getting information out to the newspaper which has also been happening to help with public outreach. ' -�°� ic , Kip o cam.. _ u i 1y \ ` , ,! U Ov6' K 4 :} , 14 ASO Kodiak Island Borough City of Kodiak 710 Mill Bay Road, Rm. 101 710 Mill Bay Road, Rm. 220 Kodiak, AK 99615 Kodiak, AK 99615 907.486.9310 907.486.8636 January 17, 2012 Dear: The past few years, the Kodiak Island Borough and the City of Kodiak have jointly held Legislative Receptions in Juneau. Due to tight budgets, both entities have eliminated funding for this event in their 2012 Budgets. Instead, the Borough and the City are seeking business partners who are interested in being featured as sponsors for a Kodiak Island Community Reception. Usually, more than one -half of the Legislature attends, as well as Commissioners, administrative personnel, and occasionally the Governor. This is an excellent opportunity to be visible with Alaska's decision makers and help represent the Kodiak Island and to discuss projects and business ventures. The event is scheduled on March 21, 2012, 6 to 8 p.m., at the Treadwell Ballroom of the Baranof Hotel. Sponsors will be featured with signs and are welcome to bring a poster board size display of a requested project or information about your business. A budget for this reception is enclosed. We are seeking both cash and seafood sponsors from the seafood industry. The type of seafood and quantity is based on last year's reception and is listed in the enclosed budget. Since the donations are to the City and Borough, they are tax deductible contributions and a letter of receipt will be issued by the Kodiak Island Borough. If you wish to participate in this event, please inform the Borough Clerk's Office at 486 -9310. We anticipate that the 2012 reception will showcase the very best that Kodiak Island has to offer and the entire community will benefit from the goodwill and friendships generated at this event. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I / . il 0 4 .. _. _, r ge__24,,tec,- __ i, t, _____________ ,..„. Jerome M. Selby, Mayor Pat Branson, Mayor Kodiak Island Borough City of Kodiak Encl. Cost Estimate 2012 JUNEAU LEGISLATIVE RECEPTION COST ESTIMATE Seafood Lbs. Cost King Crab 250 $5,000 Halibut 100 $1,200 Scallops 50 $ 800 Salmon 100 $ 800 Subtotal VAN Other costs: Freight $ 600 Food Preparation Cost $1,200 Hors d'oeuvres $2,500 Room rental, gratuity, etc. $1,200 Total $13,300 Legislative Reception Income /Expenses - 2012 - Project 99999 Expenses Income APS shipping /seafood $ 365.03 Old Harbor Native Organization $2,500.00 Alaska Glacier Seafoods seafood $ 1,112.50 Koniag $ 4,200.00 Mark Hickey food /misc. $ 368.35 Afognak Native Corporation $ 500.00 Westmark food /room $ 5,306.46 100 - 100 - 450 -XXX -99999 TOTAL $ 7,152.34 $7,200.00 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH t u ' iJ 6egg L 1� Regulars/eating of: i t713o /o0 p,, Please PRINT your name Please PRINT yo \ \ `acv ‘ ‘IN \.< \\) 7 Cs V \VA tiA