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