Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08242009 City Council PacketSeward City Council Agenda Packet Cruising Alaska !! August 24, 2009 City Council Chambers Beginning at 7:00 p.m. 1963 1965 2005 The City of Seward, Alaska ;FPinerka li. d CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA {Please silence all cellular phones and pagers during the meeting} Note NEW time! August 24, 2009 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER Clark Corbridge 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor 3. ROLL CALL Term Expires 2009 4. CITIZENS' COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT Willard E. Dunham THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING. [Those who have signed in will be given the g first opportunity Vice Ma Mayor Y Term Expires 2010 to speak. Time is limited to 2 minutes per speaker and 30 minutes total time for this agenda item.] Robert Valdatta 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA [Approval of Consent Agenda passes all Council Member Term routine items indicated by asterisk (*). Consent Agenda items are not considered separately Expires 2009 unless a council member so requests. In the event of such a request, the item is returned to the Regular Agenda] Tom Smith Council Member Term Expires 2009 6. SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS A. Proclamations and Awards Betsy Kellar Council Member 1. National Preparedness Month Proclamation................Pg. 3 Term Expires 2009 2. Excellent Leadership And Dedicated Service Award Presented To Gregory Carpenter For His Service On The Seward Historic Preservation Commission. Jean Bardarson Council Member 3. Excellent Leadership And Dedicated Service Award Presented Term Expires 2010 To Betsy Kellar For Her Service On The Seward City Council. B. Borough Assembly Report Marianna Keil C. City Manager's Report Council Member D. Chamber of Commerce Report Term Expires 2010 E. Other Reports, Announcements and presentations. Phillip Oates I. Mono -filament Collection and Recycling Project Report by Matt Gray of RBCA. City Manager 2. Alaska Harbor Observation Network Report by Howard Ferren Jean Lewis 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None City Clerk Cheryl Brooking City Attorney City of Seward, Alaska Council Agenda August 24, 2009 Page I 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Vote and Appoint Russ Maddox or Robert Buck as a member to the Port and Advisory Board with a term to expire July 2012.........................................................................Pg. 6 9. NEW BUSINESS A. Resolutions * 1. Resolution 2009-078 Amending Minor Language Changes To Rule 35 Of The City Council Rules Of Procedures To Be Consistent With Past Changes..................Pg. 10 *2. Resolution 2009-079, Changing Rule 2 Of The City Council Rules Of Procedures To Reflect A Change In The Meeting And Adjournment Times For City Council Regular Meetings....................................................................................... Pg.15 3. Resolution 2009-080, Amending Rule 16 To Reflect Changes To The Evaluation Process For The City Manager, City Attorney And City Clerk ........................ Pg. 20 *4. Resolution 2009-081, Authorizing A No -Fault Settlement With Polar Equipment, Inc. In The Amount Of $27,865.32 Relating To An Electric Power Claim, And Appropriating Funds.......................................................................... Pg. 23 5. Resolution 2009-082, Increasing The Budget For Contracted Services For Water ($160,000) And Wastewater ($35,000) Engineering Services, And Appropriating Funds. ...... .................. ........................................................................... Pg.29 B. Other New Business Items * 1 Approval Of The August 6, 2009 Special City Council Meeting Minutes And The August 10, 2009 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes................................Pg. 31 2. Discuss Whether To Support Guidance Documents For The Issuance Of Preliminary Permits On The Outer Continental Shelf...................................................Pg. 44 10. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No action required) A. Pending work session memo.............................................................Pg. 79 B. City of Seward Financial Report Statement for June.................................Pg. 81 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS 12. CITIZENS' COMMENTS [5 minutes per individual - Each individual has one opportunity to speak.] 13. COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS 14. ADJOURNMENT City of Seward, Alaska Council Agenda August 24, 2009 Page 2 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, "National Preparedness Month" creates an important opportunity for every resident of Seward, Alaska to prepare their homes, businesses and communities for any type of emergency from natural disasters to potential terrorist attacks; and WHEREAS, September 11`n is a National Day of Service and Remembrance and all Seward citizens are encouraged to engage in some form of community service or preparedness activity; and WHEREAS, investing in the preparedness of ourselves, our families, businesses and communities can reduce fatalities and economic devastation in our communities and in our nation; and WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Ready Campaign, Citizen Corps and other federal, state, local, private and volunteer agencies are working to increase public awareness concerning the importance of preparing for emergencies and to persuade individuals to take action; and WHEREAS, emergency preparedness is the responsibility of every citizen of Seward and all citizens are urged to make preparedness a priority by taking four simple steps: 1. Get an Emergency Supply Kit; 2. Make a Family Emergency Plan; 3. Be Informed about the type of emergencies that can occur in Seward and 4. Get Involved with local preparedness efforts. WHEREAS, all citizens of Seward are encouraged to participate in citizen preparedness activities and to review the Ready campaign's web site at www.ready.gov as well as find local information and opportunities at www.kpvoluiitee_ r_ s org ; and, NOW THEREFORE I, Clark Corbridge, Mayor of the City of Seward, Alaska do hereby proclaim September, 2009 as National Preparedness Month and encourage all citizens and businesses to develop their own emergency preparedness plan and engage in volunteer service on September 1 lcn DATED this 241n day of August, 2009. Clark Corbridge, Mayor 3 KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH Office of Emergency Management 0 253 Wilson Lane • Soldotna, Alaska 99669 PHONE: (907) 262-4910 • FAX: (907) 714-2395 www.borough.kenai.ak.us/emergency DAVE CAREY BOROUGH MAYOR August 7, 2009 Johanna Dollerhide City of Seward Clerks Office 410 Adams St. Seward AK 99664 Dear Ms. Dollerhide, September is National Preparedness Month, and this year, September 11`h has been declared a National Day of Service and Remembrance. I am writing today to urge you to help residents in the City of Seward to understand the need to prepare for emergencies by declaring September National Preparedness Month. We also hope you will encourage Seward residents to participate in volunteer service on September I Ith. National Preparedness Month creates an opportunity for people to learn how to prepare for all types of emergencies from natural disasters to potential terrorist attacks. We hope you will partner with us to increase public awareness concerning the importance of individuals taking action to prepare for emergencies. Emergency preparedness is the responsibility of every citizen. We can make citizen preparedness a priority by taking four simple steps: get an Emergency Supply Kit; make a Family Emergency Plan; be informed about the types of emergency that can occur in our area, and; get involved with local preparedness organizations and efforts. The Ready Campaign and the Kenai Peninsula Borough Office of Emergency Management urge everyone to participate in citizen preparedness activities to make their families, their businesses and the community better prepared and more disaster resilient. For free information on how to get prepared, individuals can visit the Office of Emergency Management website at www.borough.kenai.ak.us/emergency or Ready campaign web sites at www.ready�ov and www.listo.eov. These activities, along with a vigilant public, contribute to an overall level of preparedness that is critical to the safety of our communities and the country. We hope you will join us in raising awareness for emergency preparedness by declaring September National Preparedness Month in the City of Seward. Please feel free to contact me with questions. Sincerely, Glenda Landua Program Coordinator Office of Emergency Management 253 Wilson Lane Soldotna, AK 99669 glandua ,borough.kenai.ak.us 907.262.2098 0 Memorandum Date: August 24, 2009 To: Mayor Corbridge, City Council Members From: Jean Lewis, City Cler6� Subj: PACAB appointment At the August 10, 2009 city council meeting, council postponed the appointment of the last member to the Port and Commerce Advisory Board until today, and asked the city clerk to advertise the position again. The position was re -advertised and appeared in the newspaper under "city calendar" on Thursday, August 13, 2009. No additional applications were turned in. --Jean [. Memorandum Date: August 10, 2009 To: Mayor Corbridge, City Council Members r1 From: Jean Lewis, City Cler t_� Subj: PACAB conflict of interest question It came to my attention that there was perception of a possible conflict of interest to appoint Robert Buck to the Port and Commerce Advisory Board because his wife is a harbor employee and takes the minutes. We referred this question to the city attorney, Cheryl Brooking and received the following advice. Generally speaking, there is no conflict. Although the staff member works with PACAB, they do not work directly for the Board, so there is no employee supervision involved. Brooking stated the city's conflict of interest ordinance did not apply to PACAB, but the common law conflict rules would still apply. This means, there may conceivably be a situation that would cause a board member to be recused. This could occur with any member. The Port and Commerce Advisory Board is not a decision making body but an advisory body to the city council. The Planning and Zoning Commission is held to a different set of standards because it has the authority to make final decisions for the City. This is the key distinction between the P&Z and other boards. 7 RECEIVED 3M 15 N UFFIGE OFE NAME: CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA APPLICATION FOR THE PORT & COMMERCE ADVISORY BOARD 0 STREET ADDRESS: 338 S I'JaS� MAILING ADDRESS: f5 Iaw ' HOME TELEPHONE: 76 0 7 BUSINESS PHONE FAX NUMBER: 0/61 LENGTH OF RESIDENCY IN THE SEWARD AREA: PRESENLY EMPLOYED AS: 5�(-� ��w+t✓Y�� y- List any special training, education or background you have which may help you as a member of the Board. T 5ewe,U V' rteet'o'N troy �v 014' C�►�ev�a.-. v��v��llvo�'t o_ SM(c f develermaif- 1S5'ves 6, S d {�,v- a h �j--et . Have you ever been involved in port operations? If so, briefly desbribe your involvement: h/e)_ I am specifically interested in serving on the Port and Commerce Advisory because: T ecw QA Qcfxc ,t i+ foc4(, 5e.� ,04Z� 110J > �4 Pa `Brig Mbe Have you ever served on a s milar board elsewhere? es r No Ie, A'/P- t (L" © C ✓hGY�q/mll ��R.1� csv. If so, where? See belQy And when? Gvyy`-' � " C" Are you available for meetings at noon (second Wednesday of each month)? If appointed, are you willing to travel occasionally? Ld44 _La —7 r ��—o 07 r� `c S�I/GO((Ny /kTUR)E� �yv/�������14,U DATE 54WA C _ 60-mootC411Ht'-" se er 8 ^ W CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA JUL 17 2009 APPLICATION FOR THE OFFICE OF THE FOR THE PORT & COMMERCE ADVISORY BOA CITY CLERK RO6EeT (3UCAA STREET ADDRESS: 10360 it' p,qw A Q MAILING ADDRESS: i�v)s 3q0 _ 56/A-Q,t i A L gg6bq HOME TELEPHONE: 22L4 — 6 4 f 5S BUSINESS PHONE: 22Lj -$O4 D FAX NUMRF.R • nl 1 y & LENGTH OF RESIDENCY IN THE SEWARD AREA:_ aj2 yrt S PRESENLY EMPLOYED AS: -TR.vC V\ Q E,1y6R List any special training, education or background you have which may help you as a member of the Board._I niILT--pLE acF, TN 4yp PcET Cyr S�wA�z AQ�A- Have you ever been involved in port operations? If cn_ hriefl-.7 ,ip—a— <.—l- I am specifically interested in serving on the Port and Commerce Advisory Board because: _DOc A HRvT?u � R -VA��Ly -( 1T ;�rLL 13-E ik�se.r g Tom._ _ .. +., G(-0A'6v\=CA1-,, sl3si �3sva�i� �nA ova , Have you ever served on a similar board elsewhere? Yes or T�o If so, where And when? Are you available for meetings at noon (second Wednesday of each month)?—yf-1— If appointed, are you willing to travel occasionally?--'- 5 SI NATURE DATE76 2 A LcN(r i ,4 '-1 Sponsored by: Clerk CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-078 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, AMENDING MINOR LANGUAGE CHANGES TO RULE 35 OF THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH PAST CHANGES WHEREAS, SCC 2.10.020 states the Mayor is to make all appointments as required of them; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2005, the City Council changed Rule 4 and Rule 29 which changed the language "shall" to "may" to allow each individual council the option of appointing a member to be a liaison for the Seward Planning & Zoning Commission and the Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development District and Port and Commerce Advisory Board at their annual organizational meetings; and WHEREAS, it was recently found that minor language changes to Rule 35 was needed to make it consistent with the above past changes to Rule 4 and 29; and WHEREAS, Rule 35 of the City Council Rules of Procedures Manual needs to be updated to reflect that resolution change made in 2005; and WHEREAS, the Clerk's office wishes to amend the City Council Rules of Procedure to appear as follows (stfike = deletions, bold italics = additions): COUNCIL RELATIONS WITH BOARDS COMMISSIONS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES RULE 3 5 (a) Generally. All statutory boards and commissions and council -appointed citizen advisory bodies shall provide the Council with copies of any minutes taken of meetings. Full agenda packets for each of the Council's statutory boards and commissions shall be provided to the council electronically. At the annual organizational meeting of the City Council in October the Mayor shall appoint a council liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to any other board(s) as the Council may desire, or designate a member of the Board or Commission to give periodic reports to the city council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: 10 CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-078 Section 1. The Seward City Council amends Rule 35 of the City Council Rules of Procedures to appear as follows: COUNCIL RELATIONS WITH BOARDS COMMISSIONS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES RULE 35 (a) Generally. All statutory boards and commissions and council -appointed citizen advisory bodies shall provide the Council with copies of any minutes taken of meetings. Full agenda packets for each of the Council's statutory boards and commissions shall be provided to the council electronically. At the annual organizational meeting of the City Council in October the Mayor shall appoint a council liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to any other board(s) as the Council may desire, or designate a member of the Board or Commission to give periodic reports to the city council. Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 24th day of August, 2009. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Jean Lewis City Clerk (City Seal) THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Clark Corbridge, Mayor 11 Agenda Statement Meeting Date: August 24, 2009 To: Mayor, City Council From: Jean Lewis, City Clerk Thru Agenda Item: Amend Rule 35 of City Council Rules of Procedure BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: Periodically the City Clerk's office finds conflicts between the Seward city code and the City Council Rules of Procedures booklet that did not get amended as codes changed. This change to Rule 35 merely reflects changes that occurred by the August 8, 2005 passing of Resolution 2005-071 (attached). INTENT: To update and keep the City Council Rules of Procedures current with changes previously made. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Where applicable, this agenda statement is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan and City Council Rules of Procedures. Other: FISCAL NOTE: None Approved by Finance Department: N Q CA-%.t Alone l : 1\ l 0 Pass and approve Resolution 2009-078, which updates minor language to City Council Rules of Procedure, Rule 35, to reflect past changes that were made but omitted here in 2005. 12 G�- 0. Sponsored by: Clerk CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2005-71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, AMENDING RULE 4 AND RULE 29 (c) OF THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURES TO ALLOW FOR COUNCIL LIAISON APPOINTMENTS TO BE OPTIONAL, INSTEAD OF MANDATORY WHEREAS, it is required by Charter 3.3 and Seward City Code (SSC) 2.10.020 that the Council have an organizational meeting 30 days after each regular city election; and WHEREAS, SCC 2.10.020 states the Mayor is to make all appointments as required of them; and WHEREAS, these minor language changes would not result in Charter or subsequent code changes; and WHEREAS, council liaisons are beneficial for communication, and build additional expertise for the council in various areas of city operations; and WHEREAS, changing the language "shall" to "may" will allow each individual council the option of appointing council liaisons at their organizational meetings; and WHEREAS, the Clerk's office wishes to amend the City Council Rules of Procedure to appear as follows (strike= deletions, bold italics = additions): RULE 4. The City Council must meet and organize not later than 30 days after each regular city election. At this organizational meeting, the council elects one of its members to act as Vice -Mayor in the absence of the mayor. In addition, the Mayor may appoints the council liaison to the Planning Commission and appeii4s the Council representative to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development District. RULE 29 (c) Council liaisons. In order to build additional Council expertise in various areas of city operations, the Presiding Officer shall may appoint one Council member to serve as liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission. These appointments shall be made at the Council's organizational meeting in October. If appointed, the Council representative to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development District shall serve as liaison to the Port and Commerce Advisory Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: 13 CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2005-71 Section 1. The Seward City Council amends Rule 4 of the City Council Rules of Procedures to appear as follows: RULE 4 The City Council must meet and organize not later than 30 days after each regular city election. At this organizational meeting, the council elects one of its members to act as Vice -Mayor in the absence of the mayor. In addition, the Mayor may appoint the council liaison to the Planning Commission and the Council representative to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development District. RULE 29 (c) Council liaisons. In order to build additional Council expertise in various areas of city operations, the Presiding Officer may appoint one Council member to serve as liaison to the Planning and Zoning Commission. These appointments shall be made at the Council's organizational meeting in October. If appointed, the Council representative to the Kenai Peninsula Borough Economic Development District shall serve as liaison to the Port and Commerce Advisory Board. Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 8th day of August 2005. THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Vanta Shafer, Mayor AYES: Branson, Valdatta, Amberg, Clark, Lorenz, Shafer NOES: Dunham ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: Jean Lewis, CMC City Clerk (City Seal) 14 Sponsored by: Clerk CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-079 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, CHANGING RULE 2 OF THE CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURES TO REFLECT A CHANGE IN THE MEETING AND ADJOURNMENT TIMES FOR CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS WHEREAS, on April 28, 2008, Ordinance 2008-007 amended sections 2.10.030 (a) (1), 2.10.031 (a), and 2.10.031 (c) of the Seward City Code to start city council meetings at 7:00 p.m. instead of 7:30 p.m. and set adjournment no later than 10:30 p.m. instead of 11:00 p.m.; and WHEREAS, was this ordinance was introduced, a public hearing occurred and was enacted on April 28, 2008; and WHEREAS, Rule 2 of the City Council Rules of Procedures Manual needs to be updated to reflect that ordinance change made in 2008; and WHEREAS, the Clerk's office wishes to amend the City Council Rules of Procedure to appear as follows (4 = deletions, bold italics = additions): COUNCIL MEETING TIME RULE 2 The regular meetings of the City Council are held on the 2°d and 4th Mondays of each month at 7:30 7:00 p.m. as specified in SCC § 2.10.030 (A)(1). All regular and special meetings of the Council must adjourn no later than 11:0810:30 p.m. The Council may not adjourn prior to 11- 00 10:30 p.m. unless all presentations and comments by members of the general public have been heard. [SCC § 2.10.031 ] NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: Section 1. The Seward City Council amends Rule 2 of the City Council Rules of Procedures to appear as follows: COUNCIL MEETING TIME RULE 2 The regular meetings of the City Council are held on the 2°d and 4th Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. as specified in SCC 2.10.030 (A)(1). All regular and special meetings of the Council must adjourn no later than 10:30 p.m. The Council may not adjourn prior to 10:30 p.m. unless all presentations and comments by members 15 CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-079 of the general public have been heard. [SCC 2.10.031 ] Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 24th day of August, 2009. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Jean Lewis City Clerk (City Seal) THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Clark Corbridge, Mayor 16 Agenda Statement Meeting Date: August 24, 2009 To: Mayor, City Council From: Jean Lewis, City Clerll,� Agenda Item: Amend Rule 2 of City Council Rules of Procedure BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION• Seward City Code was changed on April 28, 2008 adjusting the meeting and adjournment times for the city council meetings. This resolution changes Rule 2 of the City Council Rules of Procedures to merely reflect those changes from the passage of Ordinance 2008-007(attached). INTENT: To update and keep the City Council Rules of Procedures current with changes previously made to the Seward city code. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST• Where applicable, this agenda statement is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan and City Council Rules of Procedures. Other: FISCAL NOTE: None Approved by Finance Department: NO O It 1i C:�W A4,r" , Or, Pass and approve Resolution2009-079 which amends City Council Rules of Procedure, Rule 2, to reflect past changes to the council meeting and adjournment times that were made by an ordinance change in 2008. 17 001, Sponsored by: Clerk Introduction Date: April 14, 2008 Public Hearing Date: April 28, 2008 Enactment Date: April 28, 2008 CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA ORDINANCE 2008-007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, AMENDING SEWARD CITY CODE SECTIONS 2.10.030 AND 2.10.031 TO START CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT 7:00 P.M. AND SET ADJOURNMENT NO LATER THAN 10:30 P.M. WHEREAS, at the March 24, 2008 regular city council meeting, council discussed and directed staff to bring forward for consideration an ordinance to change the meeting time requirements to begin 30 minutes earlier, so city council meetings shall begin at 7:00 p.m. and adjourn no later than 10:30 p.m.; and WHEREAS, sections 2.10.030 (a) (1), 2.10.031 (a), and 2.10.031 (c) of the Seward City Code need to be amended to reflect this change; and WHEREAS, in addition to amending the Seward City Code, the Seward City Council Rules of Procedure will need to be amended by resolution following the enactment of this ordinance to implement this request; and WHEREAS, upon enactment of this ordinance, section 2.10.031 (a) is amended to further clarify the meeting adjournment requirements of the city. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: Section 1. The Seward City Code Title 2 is hereby amended to read as follows: (s+F'k t = deletions; hold italics = additions) Chapter 2.10. City Council 2.10.030. Meetings. (A) Open meetings. All regular and special meetings of the city council shall be public meetings and the public shall have reasonable opportunity to be heard. (1) Regular meetings. Regular meetings of the city council shall be held in the council chambers in the Seward City Hall, or at such other place as may be determined by the city council upon consideration of the reasonable accommodation of the public. Regular city council meetings shall be held on the second and fourth Mondays of each month at fir. 7.00 p.m.; provided that any regular meeting may be canceled by the affirmative vote of at least four councilmembers. [The remainder of SCC 2.10.030 is unchanged.] im CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA ORDINANCE 2008-007 2.10.031. Meetings --Time restrictions, uncompleted agenda. (A) The council shall take no official legislative or adjudicatory action or address any other item on the agenda after 11-00 prr.10.30p.m. and shall adjourn any regular or special meeting no later than 11 -:00 p.m: 10:30 p.m. The time for conclusion of legislative business and adjournment is mandatory. In the event that the legislative or adjudicatory business has not been completed by the time set herein, the council may adjourn the meeting to another day, call a special meeting to complete the agenda and adjourn, or adjourn. (B) If the meeting is adjourned without making other provision for completion of the agenda items, then such uncompleted matters shall be presented at the next regularly scheduled council meeting under the agenda section for unfinished business. (C) The council shall not adjourn prior to 1-1 00 p.m. 10:30 p.m. unless all presentations and comments by members of the general public have been heard. Section 2: This ordinance shall take effect ten (10) days following its enactment. ENACTED BY CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, this 28'h day of April, 2008. THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Clark Corbridge, Mayor AYES: Bardarson, Amberg, Kellar, Corbridge NOES: Valdatta, Dunham ABSENT: Smith ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: Jean Lewis City Clerk (City Seal) 19 Sponsored by: Clerk CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-080 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, AMENDING RULE 16 TO REFLECT CHANGES TO THE EVALUATION PROCESS FOR THE CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY CLERK WHEREAS, a work session was held July 13, 2009 to discuss changes to the evaluation process for the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk; and WHEREAS, consensus was to hold the evaluations annually instead of semi- annually, allow for the council to hold additional evaluations throughout the year if they felt necessary, stagger each executive session and do one appointed official each of the months of January, February and March of each year; and WHEREAS, the city council requested one page accomplishments and goals summaries be attached for review before the annual evaluations; and WHEREAS, Rule 16 of the City Council Rules of Procedures Manual needs to be updated to reflect the changes suggested; and WHEREAS, the Clerk's office wishes to amend the City Council Rules of Procedure to appear as follows (944ke ou = deletions, bold italics = additions): EVALUATION OF APPOINTED OFFICIALS RULE 16. The City Council shall evaluate the performance of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the City Manager semi-annually. Evaluations are usually done in executive sessions and can occur more frequently if the council determined them necessary. It would take a motion and a vote of four during a regular council meeting to add subsequent evaluations to an upcoming council agenda. The City Manager evaluation will occur the first meeting in January, the City Attorney evaluation will occur the first meeting in February, and the City Clerk evaluation will occur the first meeting in March. At the Septe-n h-eaf , c4' eav—AlHa4ion, The Council shall negotiate the salary for the Clerk and Manager so that this salary can be reflected in the budget adopted in December. At each evaluation, the Council shall set goals and priorities for its appointed officials. The City Clerk shall provide the necessary blank evaluation forms and completed list of annual accomplishments to the Council no later than Febpaafy ' 5th and ^,,. uat � December 15. The Mayor shall then appoint a member of the Council to receive the completed forms and tabulate the results prior to the formal evaluation sessions with the appointed officials. [See Appendix A-4 for City Manager Evaluation Form, A-5 for City Clerk all CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-080 Evaluation Form, and Appendix A-6 for City Attorney Evaluation Form.] NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: Section 1. The Seward City Council amends Rule 16 of the City Council Rules of Procedures to appear as follows: EVALUATION OF APPOINTED OFFICIALS RULE 16. The City Council shall evaluate the performance of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the City Manager annually. Evaluations are usually done in executive sessions and can occur more frequently if the council determined them necessary. It would take a motion and a vote of four during a regular council meeting to add subsequent evaluations to an upcoming council agenda. The City Manager evaluation will occur the first meeting in January, the City Attorney evaluation will occur the first meeting in February, and the City Clerk evaluation will occur the first meeting in March. The Council shall negotiate the salary for the Clerk and Manager so that this salary can be reflected in the budget adopted in December. At each evaluation, the Council shall set goals and priorities for its appointed officials. The City Clerk shall provide the necessary blank evaluation forms and completed list of annual accomplishments to the Council no later than December 15. The Mayor shall then appoint a member of the Council to receive the completed forms and tabulate the results prior to the formal evaluation sessions with the appointed officials. [See Appendix A-4 for City Manager Evaluation Form, A-S for City Clerk Evaluation Form, and Appendix A-6 for City Attorney Evaluation Form.] Section 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 24th day of August, 2009. AYES: NOES: THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Clark Corbridge, Mayor 21 Agenda Statement Meeting Date: August 24, 2009 To: Mayor, City Council From: Jean Lewis, City Clerkarl� Thru Agenda Item: Resolution 2009-080, To Amend Rule 16 of City Council Rules of Procedure BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: This Resolution was left off of the consent agenda in case the city council wished to amend it. These are changes the city council requested as a general consensus during a work session July 13, 2009, to update the evaluation process for the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk. The only conflict seen from the old change to the new change that isn't seamless, would be salary negotiation. The old way, these negotiations occurred during the budget cycle and before budget adoption. Now with a two-year budget cycle, and the occurrence of the evaluations, this procedure is not as `clean" meaning the timing between salary negotiations and the next budget year may be a challenge. New evaluation forms are still forthcoming for council approval at a later time. INTENT: To make annual evaluations for the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk annually instead of semi-annually, and set different procedures and times to accomplish this. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Where applicable, this agenda statement is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan and City Council Rules of Procedures. Other: FISCAL NOTE: None Approved by Finance Department: NO Approved by City Attorney: NO RECOMMENDATION: Pass and approve Resolution 2009-080, which amends City Council Rules of Procedure, Rule 16, to reflect changes made to the evaluation process. 22 Sponsored by: Oates CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-081 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, AUTHORIZING A NO-FAULT SETTLEMENT WITH POLAR EQUIPMENT, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,865.32 RELATING TO AN ELECTRIC POWER CLAIM, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS WHEREAS, the city experienced a series of electrical brownouts over a period of weeks during the spring of 2008, causing discontinuity in electrical service to the SMIC service area, and adversely impacting Polar Equipment, Inc. dba Polar Seafoods; and WHEREAS, Seward City Code 14.15.610 (a) Interruption of Service states that "The city will exercise reasonable care to provide adequate and continuous electric service. However, the city assumes no liability for injury, loss or damage resulting from system failure... unless such... damage results from the sole negligence of the city;" and WHEREAS, the City sent a letter to Polar Equipment, Inc. dated November 18, 2008, offering the terms of the settlement, which Polar Equipment, Inc. has agreed to, including: 1) agreement that said settlement represents a `no-fault settlement'; 2) providing evidence from their insurance company that the claim is not covered by insurance coverage in order to prevent a double recovery; 3) and agreeing that this settlement does not establish an expectation for future claims or establish a precedent; and WHEREAS, the City received a claim for damages from Polar Equipment, Inc. and as a result, the Seward City Council met in executive session on December 8, 2008 and discussed possible settlement terms; and WHEREAS, this settlement reflects a matter of good will and courtesy by the City in order to help this business offset costs incurred as a result of a particularly unusual circumstance involving a prolonged series of outages, a complex power problem, faulty fuses, and limited availability of engineers and technicians to resolve the problem. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: Section 1. The city manager is hereby authorized to pay Polar Equipment, Inc. the amount of $27,865.32 as settlement for costs incurred by Polar Equipment, Inc. Section 2. The Seward City Council hereby intends that this settlement agreement reflects no fault of the City, and is solely offered as a matter of good will and courtesy, and is not intended to set a precedent or establish an expectation of future claims. 23 CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-081 Section 3. Funding in the amount of $27,865.32 is hereby appropriated from the electric enterprise fund retained earnings account no. 501-0000-3050 to the miscellaneous account 501-5410- 5790. Section 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 24th day of August, 2009. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Jean Lewis. CMC City Clerk (City Seal) THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA Clark Corbridge, Mayor 24 Council Agenda Statement Meeting Date: August 24, 2009 To: Phillip Oates, City Manager From: Kristin Erchinger, Finance Director Agenda Item: Electric Settlement with Polar Equipment, Inc dba Polar Seafoods BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION• A series of electrical disruptions occurred in the spring of 2008, disrupting power to the SMIC area over a period of approximately two weeks. The City hired specialized engineers to assess the situation and determine the cause of the outages, since the cause was not immediately determinable by the City's electric crew. The ultimate cause of the failure was determined, repairs were completed, and consistent power was restored. During the period of disruption, two private businesses were adversely impacted by the power outages; Polar Equipment, Inc., dba Polar Seafoods, and Seward Ship's Drydock. Each of these businesses submitted a claim for damages to the City based on their need to supply backup power for their own operations. The City administration met with Council in an executive session on December 8, 2008, and received authorization to offer a settlement of the claims, despite the fact that the tariff specifically states that the City is not responsible for any costs incurred as a result of electric power issues unless they result from negligence on the part of the City. In this case, the offers to settle represent a matter of good will and courtesy, and are not to be used to establish a precedent for future claims. Polar Equipment, Inc. has signed a `no fault' settlement letter agreeing that the settlement of $27,865.32 constitutes a complete settlement of their claim. It has further verified from its insurance provider, that it is not covered for the extent of these claims. They acknowledge that the settlement reflects electrical generation costs that they would not have otherwise incurred. Based on the above recitals, the administration recommends settlement of this claim. INTENT: To settle a claim related to additional costs incurred by Polar Seafoods to provide their own power during a period of power blackouts. This settlement does not assign fault to the City and is not intended to set a precedent or an expectation of future claims. Rather, it reflects a matter of good will and courtesy extended by the City in order to help this business offset the costs they incurred as a result of a particularly unusual circumstance involving a prolonged series of outages, a complex power problem, and the availability of engineers and technicians to resolve the problem. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Where applicable, this resolution/ordinance is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan and City Council Rules of Procedures. FISCAL NOTE: Funding for this settlement will come from the Electric Enterprise Fund. Finance RECOMMENDATION: City Council authorize a settlement in the amount of $27,865.32 with Polar Equipment, Inc. 25 AUG-06-2009 THU 10:19 AM POLAR SEAFOODS — U7-50-U9;03:19PM; FAX NO, 9072248748 P. 02/04 CITY OF SEWARD M. BOX 167 SEWARD, AI.ASKA. 99664-0167 November 18, 2008 To: Mike Shupe, President Polar Equipment Inc. 1035 W. NOtiherr► Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99503 a• . main offica (907) 224.4051 . Police (907) 224.3338 e Harbor (907) 224-3130 e Fire (907) 224-3446 . city clerk (907) 224-4046 . Engineering (907) 224.4049 . Ullifies (907) 224.4050 . Fax (907) 224 OU Through: Philip Oates, City Manager Dear Mir. Shupe r recent claim for damages. As you know, the Citys insurance provider The City has reviewed youletermtrstion#VA loss or damage was not the result of AMIUJIA has denied the claim based as certain relevant prcYvisiorss of the Seward City the sole negligence of the OV, Code. Although the City is not responsible for any Costs Incurred as a result of elactricat CityyCCouncil thues at it experienced, as a matter of good will and cc f y= we are we d re recommend approYe a ent to you in full settlement 0f your claim We oiler this in an effort to help businesses Pam^' and to moog� the particularly unusual arcurtnstanoes that axuand succeed in our community tarn, the compiw* of the problem summer, Including the tt p of time to identity the P� the folowing setterent terms to availability of enginws and technicians. The City is o offer you l claim, as ofwhich must be met prior to any re�� nwti This settlement is due to 'No Foulf an WhO of tlhe Ct4r of Seward. exter►t this • Verification from your insrrranoe provider that you are not covered to the settlement for items submitted in the claim. (We are not w0ing to recommend to Council any payment of public funds that would result in a win W or double recovery.) Reimbursement will be in the amount of S27.W6.32-TbS amount mfeds eler3ric8t generation costs that you may not have of hwAe InOmrad- to a precederd or exQecvftn for future claims. This is not to be used or referenced City Council approval by resolution n below and we will take the necessary s"s to seek If you agree ra these setgeme t terms P� approval from the Seward City 26 AUG-06-2009 THU 10:20 AM POLAR SEAFOODS AUG-05-2009 WED 01t24 PM POLAR SEAFOODS JUL-al-2009 FRI 12,28 PM POLAR SEAFOODS . o>-��-on;uaitarM i • Pp07 srmoedr, ca.iw+e PciorOWA ha FAX NO, 9072248748 P. 03/04 FAX NO, 907 272 8542 P, 01 FAX NO, 9072248748 P, 02 ;irC)-la0-oa�� • Z� 6 t&0j DYr 1d, 2M 27 AUG-06-2009 THU 10:20 AM POLAR SEAFOODS FAX N0, 9072248748 P. 04/04 July 31, 2009 c Cliff Kohler Polar Equipment, Inc. 1035 W. Northern lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Cliff: PARKER I SMITH I FEEK On June 25, 2008 you contacted our office concerning a fluctuation of the power supply to your plant in Seward. The City of Seward had indicated that they would not have the part to fx the d not be able to start wasp fixed there@ until ouldobv obviously be la loss of nconce you lme to Polar Equipment. Aeration until this Dave and I reviewed your Package Policy through Firemans Fund and your property hPis Uldiryot through Landmark American. As neither policy provides boiler and machinery be a covered loss. Should you have any questions or need additional Information, please contact me. Sincerel PAR , S TH & FEW, INC. Marie Matetich Senior Account Administrator /mm Enc. Parker, Smith B reek geilevue 1133 1121h AVe- N.E. Dellovae, WA 98004 tel 025.709-3a00 rel 600.457-0210 fa• 0-561- 6 060 Anchorage 0000 Old Seward High -ay. Suite 200 Anchorage, AN 94501 lei 907•562.2225 fez 907-561Ap5t0, a www,p0in L6111, tit. 0015$651 po,lplenl oraw IAA lwo.O e16.Naa+oa L ^� . J Sponsored by: Oates CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA RESOLUTION 2009-082 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, INCREASING THE BUDGET FOR CONTRACTED SERVICES FOR WATER ($160,000) AND WASTEWATER ($35,000) ENGINEERING SERVICES, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS WHEREAS, the City's water and wastewater utilities are applying for grant funds to repair and replace existing utility infrastructure including pressure stations, controls, water tanks, etc., and it is important to have preliminary engineering completed on these projects in order to increase the likelihood of scoring higher on the competitive grant process; and WHEREAS, the 2009 Operating Budget did not include sufficient funding for contracted services in order to contract out the professional services necessary to proceed with engineering and permitting on these projects; and WHEREAS, the City has conducted studies aimed at prioritizing the infrastructure improvement needs of the water system, resulting in recommendations to upgrade controls (M.L. Foster Study — 2008) and conduct major upgrades on the Gateway water tank and Lowell Canyon water tanks (Wince-Corthell Bryson — 2005); and WHEREAS, funding for these engineering and contracted services will come from the water enterprise fund for the pressure station preliminary engineering ($20,000 est.), upgrade of controls ($20,000 est.), Gateway water tank ($60,000 est.) and Lowell Canyon water tank ($60,000), and from the wastewater enterprise fund for the Lowell Point wastewater treatment plan permit renewal ($15,000 est.) and the sludge pile disposal permitting ($20,000 est.). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA that: Section 1. Funding in the amount of $160,000 is hereby appropriated from the Water Enterprise Fund Unrestricted Net Assets account no. 701-0000-3050 to the contracted services account no. 701-7400-5390. Section 2. Funding in the amount of $35,000 is hereby appropriated from the Wastewater Enterprise Fund Unrestricted Net Assets account no. 703-0000-3050.to the contracted services account no. 703-7900-5390. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Seward, Alaska, this 24th day of August, 2009. 29 Council Agenda Statement Meeting Date: August 24, 2009 To: Phillip Oates, City Manager KY From: W.C. Casey, Public Works Director Agenda Item: Water and Wastewater Contracted Services Budget Amendment BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION: The staff of the Water and Wastewater Funds are moving forward with a number of capital projects which require professional assistance with regard to preliminary engineering and permitting. The goal is to have the engineering and permitting completed on a number of projects in order to score higher in the competitive grant process to secure grant funding. Where grant funding is not available, the City will need to provide the funding either through cash or capital financing, to complete the projects. The projects and their estimated costs are as follows: Water Fund projects: Pressure Station preliminary engineering ($20,000) Upgrading controls per M.L. Foster Study ($20,000) Gateway tank roof replacement (engineering only) per Wince-Corthell Bryson 2005 inspection ($60,000) Lowell Canyon tank repairs (engineering only) per Wince-CorthelL Bryson 2005 inspection ($60,000) Wastewater Fund projects: Lowell Point WWTP permit renewal ($15,000) Sludge pile disposal permitting ($20,000) INTENT: To engage the services of qualified engineering firms to provide preliminary engineering work so the City can improve its likelihood of qualifying for grant funds. CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST: Where applicable, this resolution/ordinance is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan and City Council Rules of Procedures. FISCAL NOTE: Funding of the contracted services accounts in the 2009 Budget was inadequate based on the level of activity in these accounts over the past few years. However, failure to fund this professional contract work will diminish the possibility of the City qualifying for grants to fund the capital projects. Funding is to come from the respective Water and Wastewater Enterprise Funds. Finance : �' iY�.� Ik { RECOMMENDATION: City Council authorize an increase in the contracted services budget for water and sewer engineering. Ca City of Seward, Alaska August 6, 2009 CALL TO ORDER City Council Minutes The August 6, 2009 special meeting of the Seward City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Mayor Willard Dunham. OPENING CEREMONY City Manager Phillip Oates led the pledge of allegiance to ROLL CALL There were present: Willard Dunham, presiding and Bob Valdatta Betsy Kellar comprising a quorum of the Council; and Phillip Oates, City Man Jean Lewis, City Clerk Kris Erchinger, Finance Jim Lewis_. nUkrutu. FiarF ABSENT — Clark CITIZENS' CO FOR PUBLIC Il last fal ; although'n had found th needed to be i Chamber belie for Resolution EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED Actin rEnt of the Chamber of Commerce, commented that the the S ^'basin was a good project and they were 100% behind it, but ney to them and tasked the chamber to do an economic study based on e was concerned this money was now being taken away and stressed e Chamber had spent months of efforts, worked with professionals, and more involved than anticipated. McDonald reported that video production and funds had been committed with contractors. Although he and the ly in finishing this project, he asked the city to look for other fund sources and keep the chamber marketing money in place. Jim Pruitt, was in favor of spending the dollars to do a study for the SMIC basin area and said it was a long time coming. He remembers it being 28 years ago the city would be putting lease incentives and infrastructure to bring people in and create jobs. Pruitt stated this never occurred because the project was never finished. He thought the people would come if this basin was ever finished. 31 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 6, 2009 Volume 38, Page DJ Whitman, expressed his gratitude for the administration bringing this forward. It was 23 years ago visionaries came up with the plan to have employment for the community and the Seward Marine Industrial Center. Whitman approved going forward with this TIGER grant for the future of the community. He stated this would bring in marine operators to a great seaport. He recommended council authorize the funding to have this grant written. Dan Oliver, was the Director of the Seward Marine Center Alaska Region Research Vessel (ARRV) project. He thought the develop the SMIC basin area and seeing its potential was a treme because of the nice homeport and all-weather facility for the ship forward.¢. APPROVAL OF AGENDA ct manager for the new ntinuing with plans to et for Resurrection Bay saw this as a great step version of Resolution by the Administration. ontractual Agreement ed $26,100.00, For The Economic Recovery dustrial Center Basin. 2009-077 tccount to money being n the city clerk's budget. Oates stated this project important and this grant to send a signal that the city was taking concrete steps and committing money to find a long term solution to moor the ARRV with competition to homeport the vessel heating up from both Kodiak and Juneau. He hoped to attract more ships, but the real issue was to provide adequate facilities for the ARRV. Oates noted the city did not have success in finishing this basin in the past because of the total dollars involved. He expressed this was a unique moment in time because of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA). This grant had to be submitted by September 15, 2009 and needed to be backed up by sound engineering and people that could devote their entire time formulating this grant. 32 City of Seward, Alaska August 6, 2009 City Council Minutes Oates agreed this train was moving fast, and time was of the essence. This project was on the state legislative priority list and a "Notice to Proceed" needed to be issued. Although there were not many options available in the budget, the clerk's office volunteered their funds, thus alleviating the need to pull it out of the marketing account. Keil was glad an alternate funding option was found. f Smith was concerned and wanted the contractor to know about thP= t gent dock basins and problems other harbors were having with wave action. He thou was important to be sure everything was located properly. He wished for this to be incud Y= request. �r Valdatta also was concerned with the older diagr uted must be upfront in the engineering discussion. �, qu. , Kellar appreciated the laydown version ark thankfiaal the administratio PP Fame up with the money from a different source. She was o osed i , , s money from the -marketing account because the Chamber was very important to the busiiies rnunity Bardarson concurred but City Clerk Jean Lewis had spoken' -': e city attorney in-between court hearings and stated the attorney wa _ We to givq.thi wae 1 very minimal review. , 4 x i M Dunham g- hte` got the bid. He thnught they were aware of the problems with the users of the doce im usage arid�ptoblems with the North dock. Valdatt�a wanted in G�TD didn't design the flawed dock in the first place. Cl Not": Noteoncuri� �` he council that final engineering on this project ultimately e conce e,entran this harbor to accomplish the goals to prevent wave action in ent doc ow unusable because of past wave damage. Motion a Unanimous COUNCIL C+ -vTc Valdatta wanted more dock space added and the wave barrier addressed. Oates told of the tragic accident on the Seward highway today where two Soldotna teenagers were killed and reminded everyone to drive safe on the highway. He also would be on vacation for two weeks but would have access to email. Dunham announced he had attended the Railbelt Utility meeting this week in Kenai and said talks had deteriorated. He thought hard times were coming and was anxious for the Silver Salmon Derby. 33 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 6 2009 Volume 38, Page CITIZENS' COMMENTS DJ Whitman spoke on behalf of all marine users when he thanked the council for the beginning steps to fund this basin. He said everyone who participated in a survey years ago wanted this project finished. Dan McDonald thanked everyone for finding an alternate Jim Pruitt stated this start was a long time coming city had spent in the last 30 years. He congratulated the cog right direction. Pruitt had been amazed the city had ney COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION Bardarson was also happy both projects we Ao ' gR Enterprise Fund Rate Review work session to be move t the best $25,000 the ion for the step in the •d. She asked for the time of the p.m. unham or 34 City of Seward, Alaska August 10, 2009 City Council Minutes Volume 38 Page CALL TO ORDER The August 10, 2009 regular meeting of the Seward City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Clark Corbridge. OPENING CEREMONY Police Chief Tom Clemons led the pledge of allegiance to ROLL CALL There were present: Clark Corbridge presiding and Jean Bardarson Bob Valdatta Marianna Keil comprising a quorum of the Council; and Kirsten Vesel, Assistant to the City Manager J L an ewe es, City Clerk Cheryl Brooking, City AttorheyM ABSENT — None 01 CITIZENS' COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT EXCEPT THOSE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC, HEARING Rob Bncl.was: one of the final two candidates for the Port & Commerce Advisory Board vacancy; and again stated he had lived in Seward 9'/2 years and was the father of two small girls. He was at a.point of his "life to give back to the community and was interested in the future of Seward. He noted no -special interests, thanked the council for their consideration, and wished Russ Maddox good luck. Russ Maddox was also applying for the Port & Commerce Advisory Board vacant seat and hoped for council consideration. On another note, he informed that DEC had accepted a permit from the Alaska Railroad to use pesticides. Maddox reminded this was opposed by the public and citizen advisory board a few years back, with the most recent time voted down being 2006. He stated every community and borough had a resolution against herbicide, and named the boroughs. He said Seward was opposed to this spraying in 2006 because of the proximity to city wells. Even with this opposition, Maddox informed that the University of Alaska Fairbanks had approved an herbicide test study, and the Seward railroad was then sprayed as a test site. He urged people to attend the Railroad's public hearing tomorrow on herbicides, and thus was compelled to apply for the PACAB vacancy so he could assist in getting information out to the public. 35 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10 2009 Volume 38, Page Dave Hamner, lived on 2nd Avenue and had applied for the Historic Preservation Commission appointment. He came before the body so council could put a face with the name and hoped for their approval. He had a strong engineering background, was a collector, enjoyed historical aspects and had purchased a 1908 Ed Ramsey home in Seward. His family had been wishing to move to Seward for decades because of the town's sense of history and historical presence. Hamner would enjoy working on this commission and thought it would be fun to be apart of. Paul Carter, spoke in support of the short-term lease with Godwin Glacier Tours. He noted some information and pictures had been sent which were not becoming, and said this came from competitors. Carter stated his company had applied for a long-term lease at SMIC as well and would not run any helicopters from the SMIC area. He said this area was needed for winter storage of gear from the glacier. He noted this company was a good community partner andmentioned they had recently teamed with the fire department, by saving lives and rescue missions This'company was willing to put their resources at risk to be a valuable member of the community and wished for a long-term lease after the 120 day lease. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Motion (Bardarson/Keil) Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda N Motion Passed Unanimous The following was added to the agenda: The City Attorney Report and a Railbelt Utility Update by Vice -Mayor Willard Dunham. Resolution 2009-071 was pulled,from the consent agenda and Resolution 2009-076 was added by unanimous consent to the consent agenda. the following approved consent agenda items: The July 13 'and July 26, 2009 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes Were Approved. L. David Hammer Was Appointed As A Historic Preservation Commission With A Term To Expire In May 2012. Resolution 2009-072, Accepting Reimbursable Historic Preservation Travel Grant And Appropriating Funds. Resolution 2009-073, Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A Grant Agreement Between The State Of Alaska And The City Of Seward For The Purpose Of Reconstructing And Installing Four Historic Planters In Hoben Park And Appropriating Funds. Resolution 2009-074, Accepting An Alaska State Library FY2010 Interlibrary Cooperation 36 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10, 2009 Volume 38 PaL, Follett Upgrade To Destiny Grant Agreement For $4300 For The Purpose Of Upgrading The Seward Community Library Catalog Software. Resolution 2009-0761 Authorizing A No -Fault Settlement With Seward Ships Drydock In The Amount Of $7,584.78 Related To An Electric Power Claim, And Appropriating Funds. SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS Proclamations and Awards A Memoriam Was Read For Devoted Alaskan Lu Young. Seward Was Awarded The "Preserve America Community" Certificate By President And First Lady Obama. A Proclamation Was Read For Founder's Day. A Lost Lake Breath Of Life Run In Support Of Cystic Fibrosis Proclamation Was Read. Borough Assembly Report. Borough Assembly Representative Ron Long —Not present City Manager's Report: Assistant to the City Manager Kirsten Vesel reported that Don Young's wife, Lu, had passed away August 2, 2009 and stated in lieu of flowers, donations could be made to Lu's charity, the'1u. Young Fund for Children of Families Fighting Cancer. The City Manager had suggested the city give a donation of $500 to her charity to be given at the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. Vesel also reported Dr. Bill Thomas, founder of the Greenhouse concept, wouldbe.intown August 24, 2009, and would talk about the new Seward Mountain Haven facility and theaive approach to elder care that he founded. The Grand Opening for Seward un Motain Haven would be held on'September 19, 2009 from 3:00-5:00pm. Several dignitaries from arouud`the country andwithin the _State of Alaska were invited to attend this momentous opening of the first Gregn House® Facility in Alaska. Vesel'also stated the Planning and Zoning Commission were continuing their hard work on the Seward City,Code Title 15 Code Updates which would be finished soon. Brent Nichols with the State of Alaska's Department of Homeland Security, had met with key City of Seward personnel on to discuss FEMA Mitigation and Eligibility grant opportunities and planning for the required update to Seward's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mr. Nichols had also worked closely on the City of Seward's Dairy Hill Drainage Improvement Grant Application. Other items of interest were: ➢ Library. Noted children's author and illustrator Adam Rex gave a presentation on August 1, 2009 to approximately 45 children and adults. Members of the Library Museum Building Executive Committee including; Chris Kowalczewski from Foraker Predevelopment, City Manager Phillip Oates, Finance Director Kris Erchinger, and Community Development Director Christy Terry met to discuss the next steps in moving the project forward. A 37 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10 2009 Volume 38, Page timeline would be created for project management services and utilizing the funds donated to the project to complete the 35% design was outlined. At the end of this report, Vesel notified council of the criteria and point system that would be used for the upcoming Project Management Services RFP to be due August 31, 2009. ➢ Harbor. The City of Seward had signed a contract with PND Engineers to develop and complete a Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant for capital investment in surface transportation projects. The City Iwas also endeavoring to submit a grant application that completed the breakwater and basin at the Seward Marine Industrial Center (SMIC), improve the North Dock facility, -and accommodate linear moorage for vessels larger than 60 feet in length. As a part of this grant, the City was also seeking to install transformers for providing shore -power, insulated pipes to deliver water, and a 5-ton crane for loading and offloading equipment for vessels using the basin and dock facility. This was estimated to be a $10 million dollar project. A port-a=potty was ordered installed at SMIC for users of the vessel storage and maintenance yard at a`cost of $1500 for the remainder of the year. This would be removed from,,the facility if"it was vandalized. Launch ramp annual passes and usage were up compared to this time last year. ➢ Public Works. Personnel had done another outstanding job Iirriiting damage to the Lowell Canyon Bridge during the high-water event on July 29, 2009. Repairs to the Lowell Canyon culvert system up Lowell Canyon Road were near completion. Public Works was waiting for a reply from the insurance company regarding the sand shed replacement/removal options, receiving quotes.to purchase salt and calcium chloride for the winter season, and busy with multiple projectsincluding the # 3,Lift Station electrical upgrade, wastewater treatment permitting issues (renewal);,, sludge piles, and grant preparation. ➢ Forest Acres Levee road project. The city was awaiting property appraisals on two remaining properties' for the North Forest Acres Levee Project, both of which were on the extreme -west end and eastends afthe levee project. In addition, one remaining property in the middleo�the project would be coming to council for purchase approval within the next rnontb. AdmiAistration hoped to have all property issues resolved by the end of September. Wort ":was continuing with Dryden & LaRue on engineering to relocate utilities in the proXinity once relocation plans were finalized. Other information and goals were: a. Phase I of the creek relocation project was complete. b. Phase II of the levee project was expected to involve installation of drainage on the east side of the Seward Highway, and working with the Alaska Railroad to finalize the engineering of that phase of the project. c. Have Request for Proposals out by the end of September in order to begin construction during the upcoming winter season. Vesel finished by notifying that the city intended to enter into a modified agreement with the Women's Division of Global Ministries related to the current lease of the Wesley building. The current plan was to vacate the building by October 15, 2009 with the Women's Division placing the property on the market for sale. K. City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10, 2009 Volume 38 Pag City Attorney Report. City Attorney Cheryl Brooking gave her report on activity through June of 2009 which consisted of giving advice and direction on contracts, leases, records requests, purchasing, personnel issues, bank qualified financing, employment issues, land use, zoning, building code enforcement and the levee road project. There were also questions answered on harbor compliance issues, moorage agreements, electrical employment and other contract items. Brooking briefed council on recent oral arguments in Resurrection Bay Conservation Alliance v City in Supreme Court. She stated the issue on appeal was the plaintiffs wanted the city to pay full costs and attorney fees. The City had cross -appealed on the discharge permit for industrial rain water runoff. There was no industrial activity therefore no permit. They would now wait for the 9th circuit court to rule. Other Reports, Special Presentations A Library/Museum Project Update was given by Kerry Martin. He notified of a $35,000 grant recently received, and was pleased to spe the !city awarded the "Preserve America" award, which was a stepping stone towards other grants. With city contributions and other donations topping $1 million dollars raised, and $450,000 spent on expenses to purchase the land, professional services and other plans. Martin stated the bond issue on the ballot was the pivotal point and notified a separate group would be formed to register with APOC. The committee would be transferring $50- $200,000 to get to a 35% design stage. This was also needed to confirm construction numbers and costs. Martin stressed if the bond passed, a full blown capital campaign program would be established to get the building built. y In response to questions, Martin stated aproject manager would be hired after the October election. He revealed the building committeewould move forward no matter what the results of the election were, and the`estiniated total>cost was still $10 million dollars. Railbelt Utility Update by Vice -Mayor Dunham. Dunham noted they had gone to two meetings continuing to discuss cornmon-needs. He was informed atone meeting in Cooper Landing, that Homer Electric was.talking abut ^severing their contract with Chugach Electric for power and hoped: o generate their own . Seward took a non -committal approach and he stated further work needed to be done. He spoke of the line ownership between Homer and Seward. The second meeting wasfor board members in Kenai which discussed whether to decide to stick together or not. Another meeting was planned for September and Dunham stressed Seward needed to talk about this important issue soon.ad make sure the city would always have power. Homer Electric ownership issues to generate their own power was discussed along with alternate plans to import gas to Alaska from British Columbia at a cheaper rate than could be bought. Dunham stated there were two utilities that did not want to give Seward two votes. He maintained Seward was entitled to full votes, with two utilities complaining because they were so much bigger than everyone else, and Homer Electric wishing to become self-sufficient. PUBLIC HEARINGS Resolution 2009-070, Authorizing Termination Of The Existing Lease With Christopher J. Thayse And Authorizing The City Manager To Enter Into A New Lease With Harbor 39 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10, 2009 Volume 38, Page Holdings, LLC For Lot 1, Block 8, Seward Small Boat Harbor Subdivision, Plat 2000-19, Seward Recording District, Third Judicial District, State Of Alaska. Motion (Bardarson/Kcil) Approve Resolution 2009-070 Assistant City Manager Kirsten Vesel stated Chris Thayse entered in a lease in 2004 and had now requested a termination to be effective at the time of sale of the building to Harbor Holdings LLC. The new lease would be in substantial form as presented withahe new owners. This agreement would expire by November of 2009 if the building sale did not go through not by then. She said there would be new appraisals done in 2010 and new rental rates next summer based on fair market values with annual adjustments based on the Anchorage CPI. Notice of the public hearing being posted and published as required by law was noted and the public hearing was opened. No one appeared to address the Council and the public hearing was closed. Motion Passed Unanimous Resolution 2009-071, Recommending The Kenai Peninsula Borough Approval Of The Preliminary Replat Of Lot 4A, Block 2,�Marina'Subdivision, Coast Guard Replat, Located South Of Port Avenue At Approximately 1509 X-Float Road, Within The Harbor Commercial Zoning District. Motion (Keil/Kellar)Approve Resolution 2009-071 Vesel notified this gave preliminary plat approval which created two lots and must be submitted to the Kenai Peninsula Borough with consent by the city council. This plat was in the harborcommercial zoning district therefore no subdivision agreement was required. Vesel stated Planning $c Zoning 66m&ssion had recommended approval and that this was being created for a planned�reloeation of the Cpast Guard facility on 4`" Avenue in the harbor and all other compelling findings m suppork.°of this, approval were attached in the packet. Valdatta was concerned with the loss of parking. In response to questions, Harbormaster Kari Anderson remarked there would be a relocation of a storm drain, but all utilities remained the same and no additional easements were needed. The harbor always had a concern over parking losses and the administration was seeking alternatives to obtain more parking in this area. The existing building would be relocated and parking for Coast Guard members needed to be incorporated within this plat. There were no plans to fence this property and there should be some public parking left. Motion Passed Unanimous 40 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10, 2009 Volume 38, PaQe Resolution 2009-075, Authorizing The City Manager To Enter Into A New Short Term Lease With Godwin Glacier, LLC For Lot 4, Block 3, Seward Marine Industrial Subdivision, Plat 97- 27, Seward Recording District, Third Judicial District, State Of Alaska. Motion (Bardarson/Smith) Approve Resolution 2009-075 Vesel stated the city was seeking a short-term lease for now, until a long-term lease could be worked out. This area would be used for connexes and storage and was valid only until November 28, 2009. Bardarson wanted all environmental issues Harbormaster Kari Anderson stated the looked over this plan and would be addressing si and a compliance plan in the long-term lease ax Motion Passed lease. canning & Gomng�,Commissipn had also as; waste disposal, Iervironmental issues, Bardarson, Smith, Dunham, Kellar, Keil, Corbridge No: Valdatta OTHER NEW BUSINESS Council Voted And Approve Either Robert Buck Or Russ Maddox As A Member Of The Port And Commerce Advisory Board With )k Term To Expire July 2012. Motion (Keil/Kellar) Postpone this vote and approval until August 24, 2009. Yes: Keil, Bardarson, Valdatta, Kellar No: Smith, Dunham, Corbridge Extend the application period to August 17, 2009 at 5:00 p.m. Yes: Keil, Bardarson, Kellar, Smith, Valdatta No: Dunham, Corbridge INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No action required) - None COUNCIL COMMENTS Keil had driven by Kawabe Park and expressed how beautiful the flowers were and thanked the Parks & Rec. Department for taking care of them. She urged everyone to go out and fish the derby and catch a bigger fish than 17 pounds. 41 City of Seward, Alaska City Council Minutes August 10 2009 Volume 38, Page Smith sat on the library building committee board and noted it was very important to get the language correct on the educational materials to be put out. He felt sorry for wasting people's time on the PACAB. Valdatta said a spot along Madison Street was looking like a used car lot. Dunham pleasantly reported he had harassed AT&T about their tower being put on Iron Mountain and stated Dave Brecky from AT&T had called and said their office in Redmond, Washington had relented and now would like to fast track this project to get it accomplished. Dunham had informed them to call the city if they needed any assistance. He notified the time and place of Lu Young's memorial and stated Senator Stevens would be in Seward for the "Fish for the Future" banquet. Dunham stated Governor Hickel's- 90th birthday would be acknowle4ged at this banquet and wished everyone good luck in the Silver Salmon Derby. Bardarson also wished everyone a success Lost Lake runners and Silver Salmon Derby partici and also best wishes to the Kellar thanked the local businesses for promoting Seward.` Corbridge asked and received unanimous consent to send $250 from the city council account to go to Lu Young's charity. w CITIZENS' COMMENTS - None COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS Keil notified she had received, a phone call from Sue McClure who was officially running for the Borough Assembly seat held by Ron Long. Dunham wanted a breakdown for electrical rates since 2003. He wanted this updated and made available for people. He had heard from an unhappy resident who wanted to build a hangar at the airport. FEMA, F&W,'DOT and other agencies were finding reasons he couldn't build this because of a flood zone,,along with the FAA failing to assist. Dunham asked if anyone could help with this. Valdatta wished to acknowledge the council member from Louisiana who was present in the audience and hoped he was enjoying the state. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. 42 City of Seward Alaska City Council Minutes August 10, 2009 Volume 38 Page Jean Lewis City Clerk (City Seal) Clark Corbridge Mayor 43 Memorandum Date: August 24, 2009 To: Mayor Corbridge, City Council Members From: Jean Lewis, City Cler L- Subj: Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) This was put on the agenda by Vice -Mayor Dunham. He is asking for a resolution of support to issue preliminary permits. The Federal Enera Regulatory Commission (FERC) ---- will oversee offshore projects that generate electricity from wave and tidal currents. Interior Department of Minerals Manaizement Service (MMS )---- jurisdiction over non - hydrokinetic offshore energy such as wind and solar energy projects. ➢ Both FERC and MMS issued a guidance document August 4, 2009 on regulation of hydrokinetic project development on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). ➢ This guide builds on the agencies' April agreement and clarifies the jurisdictional responsibilities for both agencies for regulating ocean energy projects on the offshore OCS. ➢ MMS also issued guidelines in April for leasing the OCS for renewable energy production. The Vice -Mayor is requesting discussion to see if the council should issue a resolution in support of FERC reviewing exploration. Attached is more information about this and more websites that highlight their guidance documents. 44 Page 1 of 1 FERC, Interior issue guide on Outer Continental Shelf hydrokinetics Close The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Interior Department issued a guidance document Aug. 4, 2009, on regulation of hydrokinetic project development on the Outer Continental, Shelf. The guide builds on the agencies' agreement in April that clarified the jurisdictional responsibilities of FERC and Interior's Minerals Management Service for regulating ocean energy projects on the offshore OCS. (HydroWorld 4/10/09) Interior also issued guidelines in April for leasing the OCS for renewable energy production. (HydroWorld 4/22/09) Under the agreement, the Interior Department has jurisdiction over non -hydrokinetic offshore energy, such as wind and solar energy projects, while FERC will oversee offshore projects that generate electricity from wave and tidal currents. However, the agreement provides that MMS has exclusive jurisdiction to issue leases, easements, and rights of way regarding Outer Continental Shelf lands for hydrokinetic projects. FERC will not issue a license or exemption for an OCS hydrokinetic project until the applicant first has obtained a lease, easement, or right of way from MMS for the site. FERC will not issue preliminary permits for OCS projects. "This guidance document is designed to provide information to applicants and stakeholders about the respective responsibilities of each agency and how to best navigate the process of obtaining a hydrokinetic lease and license on the OCS," the document said. The guide uses a format of frequently asked questions on the topics of: general requirements and definitions; provisions for obtaining a lease and license; municipalities and competition; lease and license terms; financial assurance requirements; fee structures; hybrid project considerations; "straddle" projects on the boundary between state waters and the OCS; and contact information. The guidance document, "MMS/FERC Guidance on Regulation of Hydrokinetic Energy Projects on the OCS," may be obtained from the FERC Internet site, under www.ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/indus-act/hydrokinetics/pdf/mms080309.pdf. Additionally, MMS issued "Guidance for the Minerals Management Service Renewable Energy Framework," which may be obtained from the MMS Internet site, under www.mms-gov/offshore/Renewab[eEnergyrndex.htm. o access this Article, go to: http./Avww. hydroworld-com/h rhrw/en-us/index/display/article-display.articles. hrhrw.hydroindustrynews.ocean-tidal- streampower.ferc_-interior issue. htm lhtm I http://www.hydroworld.com/index/display/article 45 ay/s-printArticle/s-articles/s-hrhrw... 8/10/2009 The Outer Continental Shelf Page 1 of 2 'Offshore Alternative, Energy Guide ® The Outer Continental Shelf ® Ocean Energy Resources ® Ocean Wave Energy ® Ocean Current Energy ® Offshore Wind Energy ® Offshore Solar Energy ® Hydrogen Generation el Platform Alternate Use ® Images © Maps © Links L J .• 1 Enter your e-mail address below to receive updates and announcements. 0 more info > :,JZ E-mail this page Print version The Outer Continental Shelf The U.S. Outer Continental Shelf consists of the submerged lands, subsoil, and seabed in a specified zone up to 200 nautical miles or more offshore from U.S. coasts. The Continental Shelf The continental shelf is the gently sloping undersea plain between a continent and the deep ocean. The continental shelf is an extension of the continent's landmass under the ocean. The waters of the continental shelf are relatively shallow (rarely more than 150 to 200 meters deep) compared to the open ocean (thousands of meters deep). The continental shelf extends outward to the continental slope where the deep ocean truly begins. Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the continental shelf. The width of the continental shelf around the U.S. varies from approximately 20 to 400 km. The continental shelf regions are important economically, primarily because their waters are the source of much seafood, and because of the energy these regions provide, both in the form of fossil fuels, such as oil and gas, and renewable energy resources. rigure is c.untmencai anen Source: Office of Naval Research The Outer Continental Shelf The U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) as defined by the Federal government consists of the submerged lands, subsoil, and seabed, lying between the seaward extent of the States' jurisdiction and the seaward extent of Federal jurisdiction. Federal jurisdiction is defined under accepted principles of international law. Generally, the OCS begins 3-9 nautical miles from shore (depending on the state) and extends 200 nautical miles outward, or farther if the continental shelf extends beyond 200 nautical miles. Figure 2 shows the extent of the U.S. OCS. The Federal Government administers the submerged lands, subsoil, and seabed of the OCS. 46 http:Hocsenergy.anl.aov/guide/ocs/index.cfm R/10/9M) The Outer Continental Shelf Page 2 of 2 Continental Shelf For More Information More information about the OCS is available on the MMS Gulf of Mexico Region Web site: htttp://www aomr mms aov/homeoo/whoism ms/whatsocs htmI Home I About the EIS i Getting Involved I Alternative Energy and Alternate Use I EIS Documents News i FAQs i E-Mail Services Contact Us i About Us i Privacy/Security i Site Index The use of pictures or diagrams on this Web site does not represent an endorsement by MMS. 0 http://ocsenergy.anLgov/guide/ocs/index.cfm 47 8/10/2009 OGS Report MMS 200"15 [f:] Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Executive Summary Introduction In response to President Obama's vision for energy independence for our Nation, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced on February 10, 2009, a four-part strategy for developing a new, comprehensive approach to energy resources of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS): (1) Extending the public comment period 180 days until September 21, 2009, on the Draft Proposed 5-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program announced by the previous Administration. (2) Development of a report by the Department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) and United States Geological Survey (USGS) on conventional and renewable offshore energy resources. (3) Hosting four coastal regional meetings in April (Atlantic Coast, Gulf of Mexico, Pacific Coast, and Alaska) to review the findings of the USGS/MMS report and to gather input from all interested parties on whether, where, and how the Nation develops its conventional and renewable energy resources of the OCS. (4) Expediting the Department of the Interior's (DOI's) renewable energy rulemaking for the OCS that was required under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), but which was never accomplished by the previous Administration. The OCS refers to 1.7 billion acres of Federal jurisdiction lands submerged under the ocean seaward of State boundaries, generally beginning 3 geographical miles off the coastline (for most States) and extending for at least 200 nautical miles to the edge of the Exclusive Economic Zone and further as the continental shelf is extended. As the Secretary explained in his announcement, the DOI should establish an orderly process that allows us to make wise decisions based on sound information, in a way that provides States, stakeholders, and affected communities the opportunity to provide input on the future of our offshore areas. This report is the result of the Secretary's directive to MMS and USGS, and has been prepared by the MMS in collaboration with the USGS. The report surveys information that is currently available regarding the nature and scope of offshore oil and gas and renewable energy resources on the OCS and identifies information regarding sensitive environmental areas and resources in the OCS. The report also identifies information gaps regarding available data on conventional and renewable resources on the OCS and environmental issues connected with OCS development. 1 i • Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps The report's three main sections are: (1) renewable energy resources, (2) oil and gas resources, and (3) sensitive environmental areas and resources. They draw on information from technical reports and publications produced by the DOI bureaus, other Federal Agencies, academia, and the private sector. This document serves as a first step in summarizing information and identifying data gaps that may need to be addressed to make future informed decisions. The information collated in this report regarding oil and gas resources has been drawn primarily from the 2006 report prepared by MMS, as directed by the EPAct. Information on OCS renewable resources has been drawn from a variety of sources including data collected from the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) , and other sources. Information on environmental issues was synthesized by MMS and USGS scientists based on the decades of research that has been conducted by MMS and USGS, as well as other Federal Agencies, universities, private industry, and research institutions. As this report indicates, there are a number of important gaps in available data relating to all of these issues. The report, compiled in 45 days, does not purport to present new information or fill in existing data gaps. The primary purpose of the report is to present a survey of available data on the OCS so that the public and interested stakeholders can participate more effectively, and with greater access to potentially relevant information, in the public meetings on OCS development. Energy Resources on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953, as amended (Public Law, 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.), provides authority for mineral leasing on the OCS and guidance for balancing orderly oil and gas resource development with protection of the human, marine, and coastal environments. The OCSLA Amendments of 1978 established the requirement for developing an OCS oil and natural gas leasing program based on a 5-year cycle. Section 388 of EPAct amended the OCSLA, giving the DOI discretionary authority to issue leases, easements, or rights -of -way for activities on the OCS that produce or support production, transportation, or transmission of energy from sources other than oil and gas, except where activities are already otherwise authorized in other applicable law. This authority was delegated to the MMS, which was charged with developing regulations intended to encourage orderly, safe, and environmentally responsible development of renewable energy resources and alternate use of facilities on the OCS. The MMS has the lead role for developing wind energy on the OCS—leasing, exploration, development, production, and decommissioning. For hydrokinetic resources, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is the lead for issuing licenses authorizing construction and operation of generating facilities. The MMS's role for hydrokinetic resources is to provide appropriate input to FERC's licensing process and to issue necessary leases, easements, and rights -of -way. 2 50 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Renewable Energy Estimating the potential of a given resource is a fairly straightforward process. However, it is often difficult to estimate the amount of renewable energy that is extractable or developable given the many uncertainties in societal preferences, technological developments, environmental sensitivities, transmission capacity, grid connection availability, and potential space -use conflicts in the ocean environment. Additionally, while certain geographic locations may possess economically developable resources and adequate transmission and grid capacity, the ultimate development of that potential is dependent on citizen interest and local, State, and Federal governmental policies. Wind power is a renewable, low -carbon dioxide energy source located on the OCS that has the potential to become a significant source of electricity in the United States. Over the past two decades, land -based wind energy has seen a significant reduction in cost, making it a viable source for electric power generation in some areas of the United States. Offshore winds are typically stronger and more consistent than on land, and are frequently located near high-energy demand centers. Of the 48 contiguous States, 28 have a coastal boundary (including Great Lakes), and electric -use data show that these coastal States use 78 percent of the Nation's electricity. Offshore wind resources have substantial potential to supply a large portion of the Nation's electricity demand (Figure 1). According to estimates by the NREL, developing shallow water (typically 0-30 meters) wind resources, which are the most likely to be technically and commercially feasible at this time, could provide at least 20 percent of the electricity needs of almost all coastal States. wbn iEewN � Bbir Yb-0 mmMr•ndly� w•quC09mObw �tllmYmY 9M�AD8a aNnbaYar tM Mbwrweem bdminbebe w�gbbbt FMbYwW Yplb bwmyM�y, bbm rbmbw�rsOb !•EwNf�9wiYb �mbbm0atl WMA VD•b dYYi6COdp11 �"a wu Iwmw w.urow w aNbe• wnegr• �: Ohs felsWe R®b � w •GOm wY ®t M ipp-•pp M-1-0 Itd-qt •. Om• Im-m 1-0. 13 tY.y 6 Bi941 0➢0•M a-0-l0 W-AA � �. •00 9A- M n.9-w.I 1•w to-1+. v.x-0 _ MM 9,eOabrOmaWW k_," U.B. gMmdd D _. _ bieW D9ir•wa=�_ '. Figure I. United States Wind Resource Map (Source: NREL) 3 51 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Wave energy also is a potentially significant OCS renewable energy resource, but wave energy is in the developmental stage. Given the current state of technology, the proximity to dense population and high energy load centers, and initial interest by select States, it does not appear that wave power is likely to become a major contributor to the national energy picture in the near future. Development is most likely to be focused in areas along the Pacific Northwest or off the coast of Hawaii. Tidal energy technology development appears to be moving more quickly than wave energy technology development because its characteristics, such as predictable currents and location in shallow nearshore waters, make it more accessible to development. However, tidal projects typically occur close to the coast, within State boundaries. Relative to wind, wave, and tidal energy, the resource potential for ocean current power is the least understood, and its technology is the least mature. The most viable potential opportunities for ocean current energy development in the United States are located off the southeast coast of Florida, in the Gulf Stream. However, analyses are incomplete at this time, so there may be other areas that have potentially viable current energy resources as well. To date, there is no comprehensive nationwide estimate on the current energy resource potential. The Atlantic OCS has the greatest renewable energy potential relative to other OCS Regions in the Gulf of Mexico, Pacific, and Alaska. In the short-term (the next 5-7 years), this is most likely to be from offshore wind power. Substantial wind resources exist offshore the Atlantic Coast, near high-energy demand centers. Strong wind resources also exist offshore California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii, but it appears that the majority of this resource lies in deep waters where technology constraints are potentially significant. Alaska has outstanding ocean renewable energy resource potential. However, because of harsh weather conditions and significant distance from high-energy demand centers, it is not anticipated that these resources will be developed on the Alaska OCS in the short term. Oil and Gas Resources Oil and gas development in the OCS is, and will continue to be, an important component of our Nation's energy portfolio. In 2007, the OCS accounted for 14 percent (2,860 billion cubic feet) of the Nation's natural gas production and 27 percent (492,329,179 barrels) of its oil production. This production was from 3,795 production facilities on 8,124 MMS-administered leases, covering more than 43 million acres. This report summarizes the results of a regional assessment of the entire U.S. OCS that was completed by MMS in 2006, as well as assessments of new areas identified for inclusion in the 2010-2015 Draft Proposed Oil and Gas Leasing Program. It is important to recognize that estimates of undiscovered oil and natural gas resources are just that: estimates. Resource assessments are an attempt to quantify something that cannot be In 52 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps accurately known until the resource has been developed and essentially depleted. The estimates presented in this report should be considered general indicators and not predictors of the absolute volumes of petroleum potential of the areas. The MMS assessment of the hydrocarbon potential of the OCS is based on the analysis of published information and proprietary geologic, geophysical, and engineering data obtained by industry from operations performed under permits or mineral leases and furnished to the MMS. These estimates of undiscovered technically recoverable resources (UTRR) are subjected to a separate analysis incorporating economic and engineering parameters to estimate the undiscovered economically recoverable resources. Regional -level UTRR results from the 2006 National Assessment are shown in Table 1. The estimates are presented as a range of estimates, and include the mean estimate and the 95th and 5th percentile levels. This range of estimates corresponds to a 95-percent probability (a 19 in 20 chance) and a 5-percent probability (a 1 in 20 chance) of there being more than those amounts of petroleum present, respectively. The 95- and 5-percent probabilities are considered reasonable minimum and maximum values, and the mean is the average or expected value. Table 1. Undiscovered Technically Recoverable Resources of the OCS ALI Pacific OCS (Bbo) 6 2 21 7.55 Mean 26.61 3.82 44.92 10.53 F5 55.14 7.57 49.11 13.94 Natural Gas F95 48.28 14.30 218.83 13.28 (Tcf) Mean 132.06 36.99 232.54 18.29 F5 279.62 66.46 249.08 24.12 BOE (Bbo) F95 17.25 3.67 80.15 9.91 Mean F5 50.11 104.89 10.40 86.30 19.39 93.43 13.79 18.24 Total U.S. OCS 66.60 85.88 115.13 326.40 419.88 565.87 124.68 160.60 215.82 (Bbo-billion barrels of oil; Tcf-trillion cubic feet of gas; BOE-barrels of oil equivalent. F95 indicates a 95-percent chance of at least thP. 9mnimf licfori- FF ., a .. ­ _,__ _ _ _ -- -I ,,,.,.,..,,, di Irdsi me amount iistea. Unly mean values are additive.) The total hydrocarbon endowment of an assessment area is defined as the sum of historical production, current reserves, future reserves appreciation, and UTRR. As of the 2006 Assessment (Jan. 1, 2003, cutoff date), mean estimates of the OCS total hydrocarbon endowment were 115.4 billion barrels of oil (Bbo) and 633.6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of gas (a total of 228.2 billion barrels of oil equivalent [BBOE]). More than 18 percent of this total endowment (mean estimate barrels of oil equivalent [BOE]) has already been produced, and an additional 11 percent is contained within the various reserves categories, the 'source of near and midterm production. Notably, even after more than 50 years of exploration and development on the OCS, 70 percent of the mean BOE total endowment is represented by undiscovered resources. More than half of this potential exists in areas of the OCS outside of the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico. An economic analysis follows the assessment of the UTRR and represents the portion of the mean UTRR that is economically producible under given engineering, commodity price, and W 53 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps development cost scenarios. Results of this economic analysis are called Undiscovered Economically Recoverable Resources (UERR). For the 2010-2015 Draft Proposed Program, UERR's were generated using oil prices of $60/barrel (bbl), $110/bbl, and $160/bbl. Results are shown in Table 2 and indicate that approximately 53 percent of the total UTRR is economically recoverable on an oil -equivalent (BOE) basis, with an oil price of $60/bbl and corresponding gas price of $6.41/thousand cubic feet of gas (Mcf). This increases to about 78 percent with an oil price of $160/bbl and corresponding gas price of $17.08/Mcf. Table 2. Mean Undiscovered Economicallv Recoverable Resources of the OCS Region $60/bbl and $6.41/Mcf $110/bbl and $11.741Mcf $160/bbl and $17.081Mcf Oil Bbo) Gas (Tcf) BOE (Bbo) Oil (Bbo) Gas (Tc BOE Bbo) Oil (Bbo) Gas (Tc BOE Bbo Alaska OCS 4.45 7.20 5.73 11.45 30.01 16.79 15.46 50.78 24.50 Atlantic OCS 2.58 14.55 5.17 3.07 21.85 6.96 3.28 25.79 7.87 Gulf of Mexico OCS 36.75 165.94 66.28 41.04 203.43 77.24 42.56 214.87 80.79 Pacific OCS 8.38 13.16 10.72 9.29 15.14 11.98 9.49 15.60 12.27 Total U.S. OCS 1 52.16 1 200.85 1 87.90 1 64.85 1 270.43 1 112.97 70.79 1 307.04 1 125.42 (Bbo-billion barrels of oil; Tcf-trillion cubic feet of gas.) New areas in the Atlantic, Eastern Gulf of Mexico, Pacific, and Alaska OCS have been identified for inclusion in the 2010-2015 Draft Proposed Oil and Gas Leasing Program. Although leasing has not occurred in these areas for about 25 years, previous exploration has occurred in portions of these areas, and some of these areas contain active leases with producing oil and gas fields. Updated research and exploration regarding the likely location of energy resources and environmental impacts are necessary to fill in data gaps. Safety and the Environment Oil Spill Risks Oil spills are of major concern to the public, offshore industry workers, and Federal and State regulators. Spill prevention offshore is achieved primarily through required, extensive safety procedures and practices, and engineering requirements such as the use of downhole shut-off valves and blowout prevention devices. The record shows good results in preventing and minimizing spills. In 2003, the National Research Council reported (for the period 1990 through 1999) that offshore oil and gas development was responsible for only 2 percent of the petroleum found in the marine environment for North America. The MMS employs advanced oil -spill risk analysis to inform its environmental assessments of offshore activities. Spill prevention, mitigation, and response plans are required and tested frequently to maintain readiness offshore. 54 Survey ofAvailable Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Geologic and Meteorological Hazards Seafloor instability is the principle geologic hazard and, thus, engineering constraint to the emplacement of offshore bottom -founded structures. The MMS addresses and mitigates these hazards through the regulatory process. The MMS and USGS also conduct ongoing research that identifies and assesses hazards to offshore infrastructure. The integrity of offshore infrastructure is also subject to changing ocean conditions and extreme weather events that generate intense winds, strong ocean and tidal currents, large waves, and heavy storm surges. With a large portion of OCS production located in an active hurricane corridor, many changes in industry requirements have taken place due to the recent damages and curtailment associated with hurricanes. Global Climate Change Uncertainty exists about the potential effects of global climate change on energy production and distribution, in part because the timing and magnitude of climatic effects are uncertain. An overarching concern for all coastal and marine areas is how environmental factors such as temperature, sea level, availability of water from precipitation and runoff, wind patterns, and storminess will be affected. The Environmental Review Process The environmental review process for renewable energy or oil and gas development activities includes compliance with various laws and regulations. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 requires that all Federal Agencies use a systematic, interdisciplinary approach that will ensure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences in any planning and decision making that may have effects on the environment. The goal of the NEPA process is to help public officials make decisions based on an understanding of potential environmental consequences and take actions that protect, restore, and enhance the environment. The MMS evaluates all aspects of the marine, coastal, and human environments including a detailed oil - spill risk analysis. A tiered process has evolved for OCS oil and gas activities to evaluate the potential environmental consequences for each successive management decision starting with a proposed program, then individual lease sales, and finally project -specific plans. The 5-Year Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement analyzes the proposed leasing schedule, focusing on the size, timing, and location of proposed lease sales for the 5-year period identified in the proposed program document. Once the lease sale schedule is approved, more detailed environmental analyses are conducted for proposed lease sales in a given area. At that point, lease stipulations protective of the environment are identified and included in the leases granted to industry. After leases are issued, further environmental reviews of specific projects are conducted to ensure that the proper environmental protective measures are employed and site -specific mitigation measures are implemented. The mitigations may include, for example, VA 55 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps avoidance of sensitive biological communities and archaeological resources, or inclusion of specialized discharge requirements. It is anticipated that a similar tiered process will be used for renewable energy to ensure that each management decision has undergone an appropriate environmental review with input from stakeholders and the public. Biological Habitats and Environmental Resources Seafloor Habitats An understanding of seafloor habitats is an important consideration in making leasing decisions. Some information is available on seafloor habitats for portions of the OCS, but there are significant data gaps for a number of areas. In some cases, exploration seismic surveys for oil and gas production, followed by required site -specific high -resolution "hazard" surveys, could provide detailed information about the seabed with regard to drilling hazards as well as for evaluating benthic habitats. In other cases, additional detailed, high -resolution mapping may be necessary along with ground-truthing with sediment samplers, remotely operated vehicles, or even submersibles in order to verify community makeup to allow for mitigation and avoidance of habitats. Key challenges for renewable energy activities on the OCS are similar to those for oil and gas activities, such as evaluation for sensitive biological habitats. These activities are initially done through large-scale studies of a particular region using existing information if available, and subsequently site -specific higher -resolution mapping if necessary. Coastal Habitats Coastal habitats can be impacted by OCS development. In the Gulf of Mexico, for example, wetland losses have been associated with onshore energy infrastructure. Utilization of existing onshore facilities is a potential way to prevent further damage. Along the Pacific Coast, the heavily protected or developed coastline reduces options for pipeline or utility corridor sites required to support shore -based construction. While there are refineries and ports capable of supporting heavy industry, for the most part, the Atlantic region lacks existing onshore infrastructure geared to supporting offshore activity. Additionally, a significant portion of the coast, except portions of South Carolina and Georgia, are either developed or are State or federally protected shorelines. In Alaska, coastal environments are considered fragile; thus, it would be essential to accurately identify the sensitive habitats so they can be avoided by proper site selection and routing of support services. Fishery Resources Key challenges for oil and gas development that are common to all OCS areas include accidental oil spills, the threat of space -use conflicts, habitat alteration, and seismic surveys. The threat of oil spills and their direct and indirect effects on fisheries is central to the concerns about offshore oil and gas development. There is extensive information on the detrimental effects of oil on fisheries in coastal and ocean situations. Space -use conflicts, at the dock or offshore, and habitat alteration from pipeline installation are important challenges that should 56 Survey ofAvailable Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps be addressed by working closely with all interested stakeholders, encouraging multiple use of infrastructure and open consideration of alternative locations and routes. Seismic surveys are a challenge, as noise can negatively affect fishing activities and can limit access to an area. Seismic survey mitigations for fisheries include timing and notification so that there is the least amount of interference with fishing; avoidance of fish spawning locations, spawning seasons, and areas of concentrated fishing activity; limitation to the smallest area possible for the shortest amount of time; modifying frequency and duration of air -gun noise emission for least impact; and ramping -up so that sound energy emissions are gradually increased. Key challenges for renewable energy development common to all OCS areas include offshore space -use conflicts, artificial reef effects, habitat alteration, noise from pile driving, and effects from electromagnetic fields (EMF). The MMS has funded research into the nature of space -use conflicts and offshore oil and gas structure siting, and is in the midst of a major study to delineate commercial fishing space -use conflicts for renewable energy. As with oil and gas, space -use conflicts for renewable energy activities are a challenge that should be addressed by working closely with all interested stakeholders. The artificial reef effect of offshore renewable energy structures will occur, and localized fisheries will likely change, becoming more or less attractive to fishermen. Noise from pile driving is localized, temporary, and potentially can be mitigated by the use of bubble -curtains, air gaps, and the quietest possible equipment and techniques. Habitat alteration, as power cables come ashore, potentially can be minimized by horizontal directional drilling and open consideration of alternative locations and routes. The subject of EMF continues to be studied globally, and MMS has an ongoing study to further address EMF. Mitigations for EMF include cable burial and proper shielding. Marine Mammals Overall, there is some baseline information available for predicting areas of likely presence and absence of marine mammals on the OCS. Information is available on some species (e.g., nearshore movements of baleen whales, bottlenose dolphins, and manatees) while data on other species are limited (e.g., offshore distribution of baleen whales, Arctic species). Effects for some activities are well understood (e.g., contaminants and marine debris, vessel strikes), while less known for others (e.g., anthropogenic noise, climate change). One of the major challenges for OCS energy development activities to coexist with marine mammals is the issue of anthropogenic sound. Sound is of vital importance to marine mammals, and anthropogenic sound can temporarily or permanently impair their ability to process and use sound. Potential threats from noise include seismic airguns, explosive removals of structures, and pile driving. It appears that the use of ramp -up as a mitigation tool may reduce or prevent the sudden exposure of marine mammals to maximum airgun output levels, and allows for them to leave the immediate vicinity. More data are needed regarding impacts on marine mammals as a result of noise produced by OCS energy activities. Behavior impacts have been documented from traditional and renewable energy activities, although these types of effects are still not well understood. Other threats to marine mammals include marine debris such as lines from ships and garbage, vessel strikes, oil spills, contaminants, and construction activities. C. 57 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Sea Turtles Sea turtles are highly migratory with a wide geographic range. The key challenges for both renewable energy and oil and gas development in relation to sea turtles are similar to those for marine mammals, and include anthropogenic sound resulting from the use of seismic airguns, explosive removals of structures, and pile driving; the release of marine debris such as lines from ships and garbage; vessel strikes; oil spills and contaminants; and construction activities that disturb the bottom floor. The available information on sea turtle behavioral responses to sound levels from anthropogenic activities indicates that individuals are likely to actively avoid ensonified areas. However, the biological importance of behavioral responses to construction noise is unknown, and there is little information regarding short-term or long-term effects of behavioral reactions on sea turtle populations. Marine and Coastal Birds Large oil spills from oil and gas development activities could have a large impact to birds. The prospects for near -term wind energy developments off the mid -Atlantic coast of the United States has created concern about potential impacts of wind turbines on marine and coastal birds. In addition to legally protected species, millions of migratory birds traverse the Atlantic Flyway twice each year, and thousands more either nest on the Atlantic coast of the United States or overwinter in nearshore and offshore waters of the Atlantic OCS. The challenge is to locate and operate wind energy facilities in such a way as to minimize bird mortality. Socioeconomics Socioeconomic effects of the OCS program have been studied by MMS and others over many years. In addition to substantial revenues generated by offshore oil and gas development, the offshore oil industry is comprised of a great number of enterprises that provide innumerable goods and services in support of the exploration, development, and production of offshore oil in U.S. waters and abroad. Overall, an adequate baseline of information exists to address the socioeconomic effects of the OCS oil and gas program and the renewable energy program for leasing decisions. However, predictions of future industry activities are best built on past industry behavior. Therefore, as the renewable energy industry develops, new data on OCS operations will be needed to improve MMS estimates of the economic and demographic consequences. Information Data Gaps As we move into an era of renewable energy in some areas and the continued development of more traditional energy sources in others, our information base is not always complete. Additional geographically -based, targeted research will be required in some areas and for some disciplines. The data and information gaps identified in this report must be viewed in terms of a broad range of decisions — over broad geographic areas - that will need to be made in the future. Note too, that data gaps identified in this report will be supplemented with input from stakeholders at the Federal, State and community levels as regional and project -level decision making proceeds. 10 Survey ofAvailable Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Renewable Energy Resources: Quantifying the potential offshore renewable energy resource is reasonably straightforward, and great strides are being taken to map the offshore wind, wave, and tidal resources. However, there is a high degree of uncertainty in estimating the actual extractable or developable amount of energy given the many uncertainties in societal preferences, technological developments, environmental sensitivities, transmission capacity, grid connection availability, and potential space -use conflicts in the ocean environment. Offshore renewable energy technologies are still developing, particularly for wave, tidal, and current power; and there is a need for standardized protocols and criteria in technical evaluation and design. Also, resource assessment methods for wave, tidal, and current energy are less developed compared to wind energy; resource assessments are incomplete; and the actual amount of developable energy is dependent upon a host of factors that need to be examined more closely. OR and Gas Resource Evaluation: Seismic surveys are the primary method of exploring for oil and gas. Most of the seismic data acquired in the potential new lease areas are more than 25 years old and may not be adequate for detailed prospect mapping or for lease sale bid formulation and evaluation, especially in geologically complex areas. New seismic and related data will likely be required for some areas (especially in the Atlantic OCS area and Eastern Gulf of Mexico) and is typically used by the oil and gas industry as part of their pre -leasing evaluation. Prior to acquisition of seismic data, NEPA and other environmental analyses may be required to better inform decisions. Sensitive Environmental Areas and Resources: Overall, an adequate baseline of information exists to address the environmental effects of the OCS oil and gas program and the renewable energy program in support of leasing decisions. A key challenge in many areas will be to gather and synthesize existing information. In addition, new information is continually being gathered by MMS, USGS, and others. Once specific areas are identified for development, additional information may be needed for some biological resources. Some of the key information needs follow. Seafloor Habitats: There are some areas with limited information, and additional site -specific high -resolution mapping may be required to allow mitigation and avoidance of sensitive biological habitats such as coral reefs. Coastal Habitats: While there is a large information base that provides a general understanding of coastal habitats, these efforts do not always reflect the most recent conditions of coastal shorelines, where severe weather conditions and changes in sea level may be altering the area. Marine Fish Resources: The key information need related to fisheries is that regarding potential space -use conflicts for commercial fishing, which requires identification of important fishing grounds. 11 59 Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps Marine Mammals: Key information needs include increasing our understanding o£ (1) specific life history traits and critical habitat areas for some key marine mammal species (i.e., important feeding, mating and nursing behaviors and habitat for baleen whales and Endangered Species Act -listed species); (2) potential effects from noise -producing activities; and (3) potential non - acoustic effects from renewable energy technologies (e.g., potential entanglement with anchoring array, large footprint of some facilities, and potential effects on migration). Sea Turtles: Little is known about the effect of noise on sea turtles in the marine environment. In particular, their basic auditory system and hearing mechanisms or the role of sound in their life cycle are not well understood. Marine and Coastal Birds: The existing information on seasonal distribution and abundance of marine birds is sparse. Such information is critical to understanding the potential for exposure to offshore wind energy developments and to analysis of collision risk. Conclusion While we continue to generate a vast majority of our electricity from fossil fuels, renewable energy sources appear more attractive as we look for ways to address environmental, economic, and energy security. The energy resources of the OCS, and specifically renewable energy sources, are particularly attractive options with significant resources located in close proximity to coastal population centers. The experience, knowledge, and tools exist to ensure that offshore energy is developed in a comprehensive and environmentally sound manner. By obtaining stakeholder input (locally and nationally); compiling existing information and acquiring new data, where needed; conducting objective analyses using monitoring data to manage adaptively; and applying the necessary mitigations and safeguards along the way, we can achieve our national energy, economic, and environmental goals. 12 DO] Survey of Available Data on OCS Resources and Identification of Data Gaps List of Terms Used in the Executive Summar Probability: A means of expressing an outcome on a numerical scale that ranges from impossibility to absolute certainty; the chance that a specified event will occur. Prospect: A geologic feature having the potential for trapping and accumulating hydrocarbons; a pool or potential field. Reserves: The quantities of hydrocarbon resources anticipated to be recovered from known accumulations from a given date forward. All reserve estimates involve some degree of uncertainty. Reserves appreciation: The observed incremental increase through time in the estimates of reserves (proved and unproved) of an oil and/or natural gas field as a consequence of extension, revision, improved recovery, and the addition of new reservoirs. Resources: Concentrations in the earth's crust of naturally occurring liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons that can conceivably be discovered and recovered. Total endowment: All technically recoverable hydrocarbon resources of an area. Estimates of total endowment equal undiscovered technically recoverable resources plus the EUR. Undiscovered resources: Resources postulated, on the basis of geologic knowledge and theory, to exist outside of known fields or accumulations. Undiscovered technically recoverable resources (UTRR): Oil and Gas that may be produced as a consequence of natural pressure, artificial lift, pressure maintenance, or other secondary recovery methods, but without any consideration of economic viability. They are primarily located outside of known fields. Undiscovered economically recoverable resources (UERR): The portion of the undiscovered technically recoverable resources that is economically recoverable under imposed economic and technologic conditions. 13 61 MMS / FERC Guidance on Regulation of Hydrokinetic Energy Projects on the OCS 1. Introduction 2. General Requirements and Definitions 1. Who should use this guidance? 2. What is the OCS? 3. What is a hydrokinetic project? 4. Who can operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS? 5. May I apply for an MMS lease or a FERC license if my proposed project is located in a National Marine Sanctuary, a National Park, National Monument, or Wildlife Refuge? 6. Do I need a lease and a license for a hydrokinetic project offshore from a U.S. territory or possession? 7. Can I operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS without a FERC license? 8. Can I test a hydrokinetic project on the OCS with a commercial lease? 9. Can I test a hydrokinetic project under a limited lease? 10. Can I convert a limited lease to a commercial lease? 11. If I have a license for a pilot project, can I transition to a standard license? 3. Procedures for Obtaining a Lease and License 1. What are the relevant regulations and where do I find them? 2. If I am a nonfederal applicant pursuing a hydrokinetic project on the OCS, do I need to pursue both an MMS lease and a FERC license? 3. How do I obtain a lease and a license for a hydrokinetic project on the OCS? 4. If I am seeking an MMS lease under the competitive lease sale process, when may I begin the FERC licensing process? 5. If I am seeking an MMS lease noncompetitively, when may I begin the FERC licensing process? 6. When do I need to submit a Site Assessment Plan (SAP) to MMS and how does it relate to FERC's Pre -Application Document (PAD)? 7. Do I need to prepare a Construction and Operations Plan (COP) for a hydrokinetic project? 8. Without a COP, how will I obtain an MMS easement for the project's transmission line? 9. How can I minimize the required number of environmental reviews or enhance the agencies' ability to cooperate on NEPA documentation? 10. How long does it take to obtain an MMS lease? A FERC license? 1 62 4. Municipalities and Competition i. I am a municipality under the Federal Power Act. How will that be factored into the lease/license decision? 2. How will FERC address competition following or during the leasing procedures? 5. Lease and License Terms L What are the preliminary, site assessment, and operations terms under a hydrokinetic competitive lease? 2. What are the site assessment and operations terms under a non-competitive hydrokinetic lease? 3. -How is the lease term determined or adjusted? 4. How is a FERC license term determined? 5. Can a leaseholder assign the lease? Can a licensee transfer the license? 6. Financial Assurance Requirements I. How will financial assurances be managed on the OCS? 2. What financial assurances do I need to provide MMS? 7. Fee Structures 1. What types of fees or annual charges will I have to pay? 2. How are MMS' payments determined? 3. How are FERC annual charges determined? 8. Hybrid Project Considerations 1. What is a hybrid project? 2. How do I pursue a hybrid project (e.g., wind -hydrokinetic)? 3. Can I modify my project to create a hybrid by incorporating another renewable energy technology? 4. Will MMS allow more than one type of activity on a lease? 9. Straddle Projects Considerations I. What are straddle projects? 2. Do I need a federal lease for a straddle project? 3. If I have a licensed project instate waters next to the OCS, do I have any priority to develop the neighboring site within the OCS? 10. Contact Information I. Who should I contact if I have questions? 2 63 Chapter 1— Introduction The staffs of the U.S. Department of the Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) are issuing this guidance as part of an ongoing effort to clarify jurisdictional responsibilities for hydrokinetic projects in offshore waters on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The goal is to develop a cohesive, streamlined process that will help accelerate the development of hydrokinetic (i.e., wave, tidal, and ocean current) energy projects, consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the U.S. Department of the Interior and FERC (executed April 9, 2009, see Attachment A). As recognized by the MOU, MMS has jurisdiction to issue leases on the OCS for hydrokinetic projects, and FERC has jurisdiction to issue licenses for these same projects. This guidance document is designed to provide information to applicants and stakeholders about the respective responsibilities of each agency and how to best navigate the process of obtaining a hydrokinetic lease and license on the OCS. It uses a format of frequently asked questions (FAQs) to address regulatory issues. The FAQs are divided into the following topic areas: general requirements and definitions; provisions for obtaining a lease and license; municipalities and competition; lease and license terms; financial assurance requirements; fee structures; hybrid project considerations; straddle projects; and contact information. This document is intended to explain and provide more detail about the roles of the MMS and the FERC in authorizing the use of the OCS for hydrokinetic activities: Information relating to design, construction, and operations requirements, as well as inspection and compliance procedures, is not included. Such information will be developed as hydrokinetic projects are authorized and subsequently may be incorporated as appropriate. This document is not a substitute for the statutes and regulations governing MMS renewable energy leases and FERC licenses. It is not intended to be a rule or regulation. MMS and FERC may later promulgate regulations if they find it necessary. Further, this guidance is not designed or intended to anticipate every possible scenario that could arise in developing hydrokinetic projects on the OCS. For specific guidance, prospective lessees, licensees, and other participants should rely on relevant statutes and regulations, and information and instructions provided by agency contacts, supplemented as necessary with your own source for legal advice. This document may be revised periodically, as warranted by statute and regulation or policy changes as lessons are learned during hydrokinetic development on the OCS. The dates of any revisions will be annotated in this document. The most current version is available on www.mms.gov and www.ferc.gov. Chapter 2 - General Requirements and Definitions 1. Who should use this guidance? Use this guidance if you are interested in developing a hydrokinetic project on the OCS. 3 �I Contact the agencies to discuss individual project proposals 2. What is the OCS? The OCS includes all submerged lands, subsoil, and seabed lying between the seaward extent of the States' jurisdiction (approximately 3 nautical miles from shore, or 3 marine leagues for Texas and the Gulf coast of Florida) and the seaward extent of federal jurisdiction (approximately 200 nautical miles or more from shore). If you wish to determine the exact boundary or coordinates of the OCS near your project area, contact the MMS office with authority for the area of interest and/or see http://www.nmls.gov/ld/maps.htm. 3. What is a hydrokinetic project? Hydrokinetic projects generate electricity from the motion of waves or the unimpounded flow of tides, ocean currents, or inland waterways. Hydrokinetic projects on the OCS would likely use wave- or ocean -current -based technologies. 4. Who can operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS? In order to operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS, you must be one of the following nonfederal entities as identified by the Federal Power Act: (1) a citizen of the U.S.; (2) an association of citizens of the U.S.; (3) a corporation organized under the laws of the U.S. or any State; (4) a State; or (5) a municipality. Certain federal agencies have their own federal authority to operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS, but will still need to obtain a lease from MMS before doing so. 5. May I apply for an MMS lease or a FERC license if my proposed project is located in a National Marine Sanctuary, a National Park, National Monument, or Wildlife Refuge? Neither MMS through its leasing authority nor FERC through its licensing. authority can approve a project in a National Park or Monument located on the OCS. For MMS, the same restriction applies to National Marine Sanctuaries and Wildlife Refuges located on the OCS. Depending on the individual authorization, FERC may be authorized to issue hydrokinetic licenses in such sanctuaries and refuges. Contact FERC with specific questions. 6. Do I need a lease and a license for a hydrokinetic project offshore from a U.S. territory or possession? The MMS does not have the authority to issue leases for hydrokinetic and other renewable energy resources in federal waters located offshore a U.S. commonwealth or territory. The OCS Lands Act restricts the MMS' leasing authority to OCS lands located offshore the coastal states. You will need a license to construct or operate a hydrokinetic project offshore from a U.S. territory or possession. 7. Can I operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS without a FERC license? Unless you are a federal agency, you must have a FERC license to operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS. A federal agency must still obtain a lease from MMS and follow MMS' regulations regarding construction and operation, as if the project were a non- 0 65 hydrokinetic project. 8. Can I test a hydrokinetic project on the OCS with a commercial lease? Yes, you may test a hydrokinetic project on the OCS with a commercial lease. Because you generally must have a license from FERC to construct and operate a hydrokinetic project on the OCS for the purpose of developing electric power, you may want to consider applying for a license for a pilot project, which is designed to allow you to test a hydrokinetic project, and to gather information on environmental and other effects of hydrokinetic devices. To be licensed as a pilot project, a proposed hydrokinetic project must be: (1) small; (2) short term; (3) not located in sensitive areas based on FERC's review of the record; (4) removable and able to be shut down on short notice; (5) removed, with the site restored, before the end of the pilot license term (unless a new license is granted); and (6) initiated by a draft application in a form sufficient to support environmental analysis. For more information on hydrokinetic pilot projects, consult FERC's white paper(http://www.ferc.gov/industries/hydrgpower/indus- act/hydrokinetics/pdf/white paper.pdf. However, in certain circumstances, you may conduct limited testing with a commercial lease without a license under your MMS Site Assessment Plan (SAP), if: (1) the technology in question is experimental; (2) the proposed facilities are to be utilized for a short period for the purpose of conducting studies necessary to prepare a license application; and (3) power generated from the test project would not be transmitted into or displaced from the interstate electric grid and would therefore not constitute "developing electric power" for purposes of the Federal Power Act (FPA) (See Verdant Power, 111 FERC ¶ 61,024, clarified at, 112 FERC ¶ 61,143 (2005)). 9. Can I test a hydrokinetic project under a limited lease? Yes, in certain circumstances, you may conduct limited testing without a license under an MMS limited lease, if: (1) the technology in question is experimental; (2). the proposed facilities are to be utilized for a short period for the purpose of conducting studies necessary to prepare a license application; and (3) power generated from the test project would not be transmitted into or displaced from the interstate electric grid. and would therefore not constitute "developing electric power" for purposes of the FPA (See Verdant Power, 111 FERC ¶ 61,024, clarified at, 112 FERC ¶ 61,143 (2005)). Although MMS' regulations provide for a short-term, limited lease to test devices and assess sites, if a FERC license is required, MMS would not proceed with a limited lease but would instead proceed with a commercial lease. 10. Can I convert a limited lease to a commercial lease? No. You must obtain a commercial lease. 11. If I have a license for a pilot project, can I transition to a standard license? Yes. If you have a license for a pilot project, FERC will consider your application for a license with standard terms as an application for relicense. DR. Chapter 3 — Procedures for Obtaining a Lease and License 1. What are the relevant regulations and where do I find them? The MMS regulations for hydrokinetic leases are found at 30 C.F.R. Part 285 and the FERC regulations for licenses are found at 18 C.F.R. Parts 4 and 5. 2. If I am a nonfederal applicant pursuing a hydrokinetic project on the OCS, do I need to pursue both an MMS lease and a FERC license? Yes. FERC will not issue a license to you unless you hold a commercial lease from MMS. 3. How do I obtain a lease and a license for a hydrokinetic project on the OCS? If MMS has not published a Request for Interest (RFI) for an area in whicli you have an interest in leasing, you may submit an unsolicited request for a lease following the requirements of 30 C.F.R. 285.230. You should include your particular area of interest, a description of your objectives and proposed facilities, a general schedule of f activities, any environmental or resource data available, a statement that your proposed activity conforms with State and local energy planning requirements, initiatives, or guidance, and documentation that you are qualified to hold a lease as set forth in 30 C.F.R. 285.213. You must also submit one copy of your Pay.gov confirmation receipt page that you will receive when you make your required acquisition fee payment, as specified in 30 C.F.R. 285.500. If MMS, in response to an unsolicited request or on its own, publishes an RFI in an area to determine whether competitive interest in an area exists or not, you should submit a response with the information required in 30 C.F.R. 285.213, including your particular area of interest, description of your objectives and proposed facilities, a general schedule of activities, any environmental or resource data available, documentation that you are qualified to hold a lease, and any other information specified in the RFI. If MMS issues a determination that there is no competitive interest for the site, you will need to submit a SAP within 60 days. A SAP describes the activities you.plan to perform for the characterization of your lease and includes the results of your physical characterization surveys and baseline environmental surveys. If there is competitive interest in hydrokinetic development on the described area, MMS will publish a Call for Information and Nominations (Call). Your response to the notice must include the information listed in 30 C.F.R. 285.213. Following the environmental review and documentation, MMS will announce the terms of the lease sale through publication of notices, and you will submit your bid to MMS according to,the specified requirements. Upon receipt of the required payments and properly executed lease forms, MMS will issue a lease to the successful bidder. If you receive the lease, you must file your SAP within six months of obtaining the lease. You will begin FERC's licensing process when you file a Pre -Application Document 3 67 (PAD), which includes all existing, relevant, and reasonably available information gained through consultation with federal, state, and local resource agencies, Indian tribes, non- governmental organizations, and members of the public (stakeholders). In the PAD, you must identify information and study needs for the proposed project, and provide a process plan or a schedule of upcoming licensing activities. Many of the requirements for the PAD are similar to the requirements for the SAP. After you have conducted your information gathering studies, you will file a final license application with FERC. Your application will contain general information about the project, and specific exhibits that include a thorough description of the proposed project and its operation, a draft environmental document, and necessary drawings and maps. For hydrokinetic projects, the FERC application takes the place of MMS' Construction and Operations Plan (COP). 4. If I am seeking an MMS lease under the competitive lease sale process, when may I begin the FERC licensing process? Under the competitive lease sale scenario, FERC will begin processing an application only after MMS has issued a lease, making it clear that you are the applicant with site access. Therefore, you should file your PAD with FERC after your lease has been issued. You may wish to file a PAD with FERC at the same time you submit the SAP to MMS (within 6 months of lease issuance) to enable the agencies to conduct joint public scoping, if appropriate, and you may proceed with licensing studies while MMS conducts its environmental review of the SAP, if necessary. We encourage you to discuss combining supporting documents with MMS and FERC. 5. If I am seeking an MMS lease noncompetitively, when may I begin the FERC licensing process? You may begin your FERC application process at any point following MMS' determination of no competitive interest. You may wish to simultaneously file your PAD with FERC and your SAP with MMS (within 60 days of MMS' determination), so that the agencies may conduct joint public scoping. You may proceed with licensing studies while MMS conducts its environmental review of the SAP, if necessary. You should be aware that by proceeding with both the lease and licensing processes simultaneously, you risk incurring costs prior to knowing whether you will receive a lease and what conditions will be part of the lease. Nevertheless, by streamlining the two processes, your overall process may be completed more quickly and efficiently. We encourage you to discuss with MMS and FERC early in the process what approach might be best for your proposed project. 6. When do I need to submit a Site Assessment Plan (SAP) to MMS and how does it relate to FERC's Pre -Application Document (PAD)? If MMS determines there is no competitive interest for the site on the OCS that you have requested, your SAP is due within 60 days from the date that MMS determines that there is no competitive interest. If you have been selected as lessee through the competitive lease process, your SAP is due within six months from the date the lease is issued. 7 E. The SAP and PAD have many common elements. For example, the information required to describe the overall project and the existing environment is very similar in a SAP and PAD. In meeting the requirements for the SAP and PAD, the common components may be combined. 7. Do I need to prepare a Construction and Operations Plan (COP) for a hydrokinetic project? No. COPS are not required for hydrokinetic leases that require a FERC license. Your FERC license application replaces the NMS COP for a hydrokinetic project. A FERC license will require compliance with the terms of the lease, and a license cannot be issued before the issuance of the lease. 8. Without a COP, how will I obtain an MMS easement for the project's transmission line? A hydrokinetic lease issued by MMS includes the right to one or more project easements for the purpose of installing transmission cables. After FERC issues the license for the project including the primary transmission line, FERC will inform MMS, and MMS will incorporate into your lease as an addendum an easement covering the portion of the project's primary transmission line located on the OCS. 9. How can I minimize the required number of environmental reviews or enhance the agencies' ability to cooperate on NEPA documentation? The number of NEPA reviews and environmental consultations will vary from case to case. When the MMS and FERC processes are aligned, the agencies will combine their NEPA processes, if possible. For non-competitive leases, a joint NEPA document may be possible if an applicant is prepared to file a complete license application and an MMS lease application simultaneously, as might be the case with a pilot project. Environmental consultations on the project also may be consolidated. For a competitive lease, elements of NEPA, such as scoping, may be combined for efficiency: When multiple NEPA documents are necessary, each document will build on relevant information in the prior documents, regardless of the lead agency. We encourage you to communicate with MMS and FERC early in the process if you have a project -specific proposal for combining NEPA documents and procedures. 10. How long does it take to obtain an MMS lease? A FERC license? If there is competitive interest in an area, MMS anticipates it will take 2 to 2.5 years to complete the lease sale process; this includes consultations and environmental review(s). If there is no competitive interest, MMS anticipates it will take 1 to 2 years to issue a lease, depending on the complexity of the activities proposed. FERC anticipates being able to issue a license 1-2 years after a complete hydrokinetic license application is filed. The amount of time it takes you to conduct studies under the FERC prefiling process and how thoroughly you satisfy the application requirements will be the primary factors in determining the total length of time required to obtain a FERC license. Pilot project licenses generally are expected to be issued as early as six months after submission of a complete application. Chapter 4 — Municipalities and Competition 1. I am a municipality under the Federal Power Act. How will that be factored into the lease/license decision? If you are seeking municipal preference for a FERC license, you should notify. MMS of your status in your unsolicited request or in response to the RFI or Call. If municipal interest is indicated, MMS may incorporate considerations such as "public benefit" or "State and local needs" into the auction format. Potential state and municipal licensees should be aware that FERC will only accept a license application from a leaseholder. 2. How will FERC address competition following or during the leasing procedures? Competition for an OCS site will occur during the lease sale process. FERC will only accept a license application from the leaseholder. Chapter 5 — Lease and License Terms 1. What are the preliminary, site assessment, and operations terms under it hydrokinetic competitive lease? If issued competitively, your commercial lease will have a preliminary term of 'six months beginning on the date of your lease to prepare and submit your SAP, a site assessment term of five years beginning on the date that your SAP is approved by MMS, and an operations term as provided in your FERC license. 2. What are the site assessment and operations terms under a non-competitive hydrokinetic lease? If issued noncompetitively, your commercial lease will have a site assessment term of five years beginning on the date of your lease and an operations term as provided in your FERC license. 3. How is the lease term determined or adjusted? Though MMS provides a baseline determination that commercial leases will have an operations term of 25 years, longer lease terms may be negotiated (see 30 C.F.R. 285.235(a)(3)) to correspond with the operations term in your FERC license or to accommodate the term for a relicense of a pilot project. Lease duration may be lengthened by an automatic extension for plan review (see 30 C.F.R. 285.235) or by a suspension (see 30 C.F.R. 285.415-421), and leases may be renewed (see 30 C.F.R. 285.425-429). Leases may be relinquished (see 30 C.F.R. 285.435) or cancelled (see 30 C.F.R. 285.437). . 4. How is a FERC license term determined? FERC license terms are set based on a number of factors, including size of the development and mitigation measures required under a license. Under the FPA, FERC can issue an original license for a term of up to 50 years, and a relicense for a term of between 30 and 50 years. Appropriate pilot projects may have short license terms of approximately five years in keeping with the early stage of the technology, expected small size of the projects, required safeguards, and the experimental nature of the efforts. 70 5. Can a leaseholder assign the lease? Can a licensee transfer the license?, Yes. Both MMS and FERC regulations require pre -approval for a lease assignment and a license transfer, respectively. A leaseholder must apply for an assignment from MM§ (see 30 C.F.R. 285.408) and a licensee must apply for a transfer from FERC (see 18 C.F.R. Part 9). Lessees and licensees are encouraged to consult with MMS and FERC staff before applying for a lease assignment or transfer. Chapter 6 - Financial Assurance Requirements I. How will financial assurances be managed on the OCS? On the OCS, the MMS requirements for financial assurance will apply for all activities under both limited and commercial leases, including pilot projects. 2. What financial assurances do I need to provide MMS? MMS' financial assurance requirements can be found at 30 C.F.R. 285.511-537. You will need to provide various amounts of financial assurance to MMS, depending on the types of activities you propose to conduct on your lease and the type and number of facilities you propose to construct and install on your lease. Generally, you will be required to provide a series of bonds over the life of your commercial lease. Prior to issuance of your lease, you will need to provide an acceptable form of security in the amount of $100,000. You may also be required to provide a supplemental.bond prior to approval of your SAP, depending on the activities that you will conduct during your site assessment phase. You may also be required to provide a supplemental bond .in an amount determined by MMS before FERC will issue a license for your project. Finally once facilities are installed or being installed on your commercial lease, you will be required to provide a decommissioning bond. Chapter 7 - Fee Structures 1. What types of fees or annual charges will I have to pay? While both MMS and FERC are required to assess fees or annual charges, the agencies will coordinate to ensure that the overall fees for OCS hydrokinetic projects are fair and appropriate. MMS is required to establish fees, rentals, bonuses, or other payments to ensure a fair return to the United States for any lease issued on the OCS for hydrokinetic projects (see 43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(2)). MMS has published regulations addressing fees at 30 C.F.R. Part 285, Subpart B — Issuance of OCS Energy Leases (200-238) and Subpart E — Payments and Financial Assurance Requirements (500-543). More information is available at htti)://www.mms.jzov/offshore/Renewab]eEnergy/index.htm. FERC licensees are required to pay reasonable annual charges for costs of administration of Part I of the FPA, and for use of tribal lands, government lands, and government structures (see 16 U.S.C. 803(e)). FERC has published regulations at 18 C.F.R. Part 11. 10 71 2. How are MMS' payments determined? You will be required to make initial, one-time payments to obtain a lease followed by on -going, annual payments when the term of the lease commences. The initial payments vary depending on whether you are submitting a request for a noncompetitive lease or responding to a competitive auction process. If you are seeking a noncompetitive lease, you must submit an acquisition fee, typically $0.25 per acre unless otherwise set by MMS, at the same time you submit the request for the noncompetitive lease. This acquisition fee will be applied to any bonus bid deposit you subsequently submit should MMS decide that the lease must be offered competitively. If you are interested in bidding on a competitive lease, MMS requires that you include a bid deposit at the same time you submit your bid package. If you win an auction, the balance of the bonus bid amount you offered is payable to MMS prior to issuing you a competitive lease. The on -going payments consist of annual rent and operating fees set by MM5:based on the terms associated with your non-competitive submittal or as an outcome of a competitive auction process. You will pay the annual rental rate from the date of lease issuance until project operations commence, at which time you will begin paying the annual operating fee. Annual rental payments for your transmission line easement become due once the FERC license is issued. When setting the rent and operating fee terms, MMS considers FERC's administrative charges and information (1) submitted with an unsolicited request for a noncompetitive lease, or (2) received in response to RFI and Call, and other notices published for competitive leasing. See 30 C.F.R. 285.210-232 for specific steps and information requirements in the competitive lease process. Leaseholders may request that MMS reduce or waive rent or operating fee payments (not to exceed six years of full operation) to encourage continued or additional activity (30 C.F.R. 285.510). 3. How are FERC annual charges determined? The lessee/licensee begins paying annual administrative and land charges to FERC either when project construction begins (for non -municipal entities) or when the project begins operating (for municipal entities). For all projects over 1.5 megawatts, including those on the. OCS, FERC assesses administrative annual charges by dividing its calculated fiscal year program costs among all the licensees according to licensees' installed capacity. FERC collects FPA Part I costs of other federal agencies based on an allocated share of the other agencies' documented fiscal year program costs. For projects occupying federal land, FERC assesses onshore government lands charge on per -acre charges established by the Forest Service on a county -by - county basis and set forth at Appendix A of 18 C.F.R. 11. FERC does not have a method for assessing charges for off -shore land. For projects using a government structure, charges are set at a graduated rate set forth at 18 C.F.R. 11.3. For projects that occupy tribal land, charges are set on a case -by -case basis. 11 72 Chapter 8 — Hybrid Project Considerations 1. What is a hybrid project? A hybrid project, for the purpose of this guidance, is a project that includes technologies that generate electricity from more than one form of renewable energy, one of which is hydrokinetic (e.g., wind- and wave -generation under the same lease). 2. How do I pursue a hybrid project (e.g., wind -hydrokinetic)? As in a single hydrokinetic lease situation, you would need to acquire a lease from MMS that covers both technologies. MMS will issue a public notice to determine whether competitive interest exists in the potential lease area, and may proceed with either the competitive or noncompetitive lease issuance process. You must submit a COP to NMS for the construction and operation of the non -hydrokinetic component of your project. A FERC license (but not a COP) is required for the hydrokinetic component of your project. 3. Can I modify my project to create a hybrid by incorporating another renewable energy technology. If during your lease term, you or another applicant wishes to pursue activities that are not covered by the existing lease, you or the other applicant would be required to request a separate lease, and MMS would evaluate whether or not it conflicts with existing uses prior to making a decision about whether to offer the area for additional lease(s). If joint use ofan area is acceptable to both MMS and FERC, MMS will initiate the leasing process to authorize both activities (hybrid). A FERC license is required for any nonfederal hydrokinetic project on the OCS. 4. Will MMS allow more than one type of activity on a lease? A lease for renewable energy activities may be held for one type of activity (e:g., wind) or for various activities (e.g., wind, wave, ocean current, etc.). MMS will determine.the scope of renewable energy activities that may be allowed on a lease and issue a public notice to determine competitive interest. This notice will clearly state the scope of the lease under consideration. If MMS determines that there is no competitive interest, MMS will follow the non-competitive lease process. If MMS determines that there is competitive interest, MMS will clearly state the scope of the lease offering early in the process and in the subsequent Proposed and Final Sale Notices. If MMS decides to limit competition to one type of activity (e.g., ocean current), MMS will not consider bids for any other type of activity, and the lease will be limited to that activity. If MMS decides to open competition to more than one type of activity or to the full set of hybrid activities, it will consider bids for the individual activities or set of activities identified, and the lease may authorize one or more of those activities. If you submit an unsolicited application, you must define your intended activities because the lease is specific to the type of project. 12 73 If you are a nonfederal applicant, you must submit to FERC a license application for the hydrokinetic component of your hybrid project and a COP to MMS for the construction and operation of the non -hydrokinetic component of your project. MMS and FERC will coordinate the interrelated reviews. Chapter 9 - Straddle Project Considerations 1. What are straddle projects? These are hydrokinetic projects that straddle the boundary dividing state waters and the OCS. 2. Do I need a federal lease for a straddle project? Yes. You must obtain a lease from MMS for the OCS portion of your straddle project. A FERC license is required for both the OCS and State waters portion of a straddle project. Early process planning will be essential for the successful execution of straddle projects. FERC would prefer to license the entire project as a whole, which is feasible if the applicant consults with FERC and MMS early in the planning process. 3. If I have a licensed project in state waters next to the OCS, do I have any priority to develop the neighboring site within the OCS? No. The neighboring OCS waters are subject to the competition requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Chapter 10 - Contact Information 1. Who should I contact if I have questions? If you have additional questions or are planning to apply for a lease and license for a project on the OCS, please contact MMS per the Notice to Lessees, Operators and Applicants for Federal Renewable Energy Leases and Grants and Alternative Use Grants on the Outer Continental Shelf, NTLA No. REN-NO1, effective June 22, 2009 at http://www.inms.gov/offshore/RenewableEneIM/index.htm and/or Edward Abrams or Stephen Bowler at FERC: Edward.Abramsnferc.gov, (202)-502-8773; or Stephen.Bowlernferc.gov, (202)-502-6861. 13 74 Attachment A Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of the Interior and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 75 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION I. PURPOSE The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) (jointly, Participating Agencies) enter into this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to clarify jurisdictional understandings regarding renewable energy projects in offshore waters on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), in order to develop a cohesive, streamlined process that would help accelerate the development of wind, solar, and hydrokinetic (i.e., wave, tidal, and ocean current) energy projects. II. COMMITMENTS OF THE PARTICIPATING AGENCIES The Participating Agencies agree as follows: A. The Participating Agencies recognize that: (1) the DOI's Minerals Management Service (MMS) has exclusive jurisdiction with regard to the production, transportation, or transmission of energy from non -hydrokinetic renewable energy projects on the OCS, including renewable energy sources such as wind and solar; (2) MMS has exclusive jurisdiction to issue leases, easements, and rights -of -way regarding OCS lands for hydrokinetic projects; and (3) the Commission has exclusive jurisdiction to issue licenses and exemptions for hydrokinetic projects located on the OCS. B. MMS will issue leases, easements, and rights -of -way for hydrokinetic projects to be located on the OCS pursuant to Section 8(p) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. § 1337(p) (2006), and will conduct any necessary environmental reviews, including those under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), related to those actions. The Commission may, at its discretion, choose to become a cooperating agency with respect to the MMS's preparation of an environmental document for any OCS hydrokinetic project. C. The Commission will not issue preliminary permits for hydrokinetic projects located on the OCS. D. The Commission will issue licenses under Part I of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 792-823a (2006), and exemptions from licensing under Sections 405 and 408 ofthe Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, 16 U.S.C. §§ 2705 and 2708 (2006), for the construction and operation of hydrokinetic projects on the OCS, and will conduct any necessary analyses, including those under NEPA, related to those actions. The Commission's licensing process includes the active involvement of relevant federal land and resource agencies, including the DOI. MMS may, at its discretion, choose to become a cooperating agency with respect to the Commission's preparation of an environmental document for any OCS hydrokinetic project. If MMS becomes a 76 cooperating agency, it will not conduct "off-the-record" communications relevant to the merits of the Commission's licensing or exemption proceeding, including such communications with staff of other non -cooperating DOI agencies regarding preparation of the preferred alternative or about preparation of any recommendations, terms or conditions, or prescriptions filed under Sections 4(e), 10, and 18 of the FPA (16 U1 S.C. § § 797(e), 803, and 811 (2006)). MMS Is participation as a cooperating agency in a Commission -led NEPA review for an OCS hydrokinetic project shall not preclude DOI from intervening, on the behalf of other DOI agencies including, but not limited to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of htdto, Affairs, in the licensing or exemption proceeding for that project. E. The Participating Agencies will coordinate to ensure that hydrokinetic projects meet the public interest, including fire adequate protection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish, wildlife, and marine resources and other beneficial public uses. Further, the Participating Agencies will coordinate to ensure that any licenses or exemptions issued by the Commission, and all operations regulated by the Commission, with respect to a lease, easement, or right-of-way shall be consistent with the provisions of Section $(p) of the OCSLA and other relevant provisions of that Act, the FPA, and other applicable law. F. MMS may attach terms and conditions to leases, easements, and rights -of -way issued for hydrokinetic projects located on the OCS. The Commission will include in any license or exemption issued for such projects a requirement to comply with all terms and conditions of any OCS lease, easement, and right-of-way. G. The Commission will not issue a license or exemption to an applicant for an OCS hydrokinetic project until the applicant has first obtained a lease, easement, or right-of- way from MMS for the site thereof. H. MMS will provide in all leases, easements, and rights -of -way for OCS hydrokinetic projects that construction and operation of the hydrokinetic project cannot commerce without a license or exemption from the Commission, except in circumstances where the Commission has notified MMS that a license or exemption is not required. I. The Commission may inspect OCS hydrokinetic projects it authorizes to ensure compliance with the terms of its licenses or exemptions. MMS may inspect OCS hydrokinetic projects to ensure compliance with the provisions of any lease, easement, and right-of-way it issues. The Participating Agencies will coordinate inspections through the development of joint policies or regulations, as appropriate. J. Each Participating Agency shall use its own appropriations to carry out its responsibilities under this MOU. 77 III. ISSUANCE OF POLICIES AND REGULATIONS The Participating Agencies agree to work together to the extent practicable to develop policies and regulations with respect to OCS hydrokinetic projects to carry out the purposes of this MOU. This will include, among others, processes to address hybrid (wind/hydrokinetic) projects and projects that straddle the boundaries between state waters and the OCS. IV. MISCELLANEOUS This MOU is strictly for internal management purposes, does not expand or alter the scope of the Participating Agencies' respective authorities, and shall not be construed to create any legal obligation on the part of either agency or any private right or cause of action for or by any person or entity. V. PRINCIPAL CONTACTS Each party hereby designates the following as the initial principal contacts for the agency. These contacts may be changed at the Participating Agency's discretion upon written notice to the other Participating Agency. DOI: MMS Deputy Director Commission: Director of the Office of Energy Projects VI. TERM OF THE AGREEMENT This MOU shall take effect on the date of the last approving signature specified in Section VII, below. The MOU may be modified only upon the written agreement of the Participating Agencies. The MOU may be terminated 120 days after a Participating Agency provides written notice to the other Participating Agency. VII. SIGNATORIES U.S. Department of the Interior by: KS Date: Ken Salazar APR 0 9 2M Secretary Federal Energy Reinilatory Commission by: c •�`i Date: GUi J [, 4, e ' Jon ghoff Chairtltan IV Memorandum Date: August 24, 2009 To: Mayor Corbridge, City Council Members From: Jean Lewis, City Cler6.j Subj: Future Work Sessions Schedule List At the August 14, 2009 regular city council meeting, the council asked for a list of upcoming work sessions. That list is as follows: ENTERPRISE FUND RATE REVIEW --Re-scheduled for Tuesday, September 15 beginning at 4:30 pm. BUDGET WORK SESSIONS --Monday, September 14 at 6:00 p.m. Budget kick-off work session --October 13 through 20, at 6:30 p.m. Nightly budget work sessions as needed --October 21 Council budget direction to administration (Budget calendar attached) EVALUATION FORMS The city clerk will draft and put before council .......hopefully soon? TITLE 15 Procedure outlined in the city manager's report this week. RFP AND TITLE 6 Best after budget?? RAILBELT UTILITIES To be scheduled for late September after their last meeting. (Will need a memo or bullet points explaining the issues for council to read beforehand.) 79 City of Seward 2010/2011 Biennial Budget Calendar August 14, 2009 Transmit budget directions and forms to department managers September 1, 2009 Department budgets due to finance department September 14, 2009 @_ tn',00 i "^ Council Budget Kick -Off Work Session - Presentation of City's financial condition, general assumptions of the budget process, identification of major policy questions, Council input on desired programs and services September 14 - 21, 2009 Finance department prepares preliminary budget based on Council input and department requests September 18 - 25, 2009 City manager and finance director meet with department managers to discuss budget requests September 26 — Oct 2, 2009 Finance department develops revenue projections and determines estimated costs of insurance, administrative fees to enterprise funds, cost - allocations, debt service, vehicle leases from the Motor Pool, etc. October 7, 2009 PACAB Budget Presentation - (Harbor, SMIC, Legislative) — Noon October 8, 2009 P&Z Commission Budget Presentation (Legislative) — 6:30 p.m. October 12, 2009 City Council Meeting (brief budget introduction and distribution to City Council) October 13,14,15,16,20 Council budget work sessions 10�30 Pm October 21, 2009 Council budget work session to give direction to administration October 21, 2009 Historic Preservation Budget Presentation (Legislative Division) 6:30 p.m. November 9, 2009 Council Meeting - Public hearing and adoption of budget {Note: Alaska Municipal League Conference will be held November 16- 19, 2009. } Updated: 8/14/09 CITY OF SEWARD Budgeted Summary Revenue and Expense/Expenditure by Fund For the Month Ending June 30, 2009 (Through June, 50.0% of the year has expired) Through June Annual 2008 2009 Actual Variance YTD Budget Budget Variance Annual Budget % of Budget Revenue General Fund Small Boat Harbor Enterprise Fund $ 3,402,966 $ 1,360,432 $ 2,852.066 $ 1,487,902 $ (550,900) $ 4,855,122 $ (2,003,056) $ 9,710,244 29.4% Parking Enterprise Fund $ 90,127 $ 66,183 $ $ 127,470 $ 1,350,713 $ 137,190 $ 2,701,425 55.1% S.M.I.C. Enterprise Fund $ 415,072 $ 436,251 $ (23,944) 21,178 $ 131,100 $ 417,794 $ 64 ) (8,457 o Electric Fund Water Enterprise Fund $ 4,550,051 $ 4,992,202 $ 442,151 $ 5,132,310 $ $ (140,108) $ $ 835,5877 10,264,620 52.2% 48.6% Wastewater Enterprise Fund $ 471,103 $ 494,722 $ 455,597 $ 483,453 $ $ (15,506) $ 596,859 $ (13 ,603) $ 1,036,111 (11,270) $ 518,056 $ (34,603) $ 1,036,111 46.2% 46.7% Expenses General Fund General Government Mayor and Council General Fund Legal $ 185,871 $ 170,830 $ (15,041) $ 177,168 $ 6,338 $ 354,336 48.2% City Manager 52,489 405,445 37,437 476,391 (15,052) 70,947 $ 67,500 $ 535,963 30,063 135,000 27.7% City Clerk 103,658 111,099 7,441 $ 127,496 59,572 16,397 1,071,926 44.4% Finance Administration General Services 300,030 302,823 2,793 $ 348,127 45,303 254,992 696,253 43.6% 43.5% Contributions 46,610 95,443 33,478 180,591 (13,131) 85,148 $ 57,429 $ 150,691 23,951 114,858 29.1% Total General Government $ 1,189,545 $ 1,312,650 $ 123,104 $ 1,464,373 $ (29,900) 151,723 $ 301,381 2,928,746 59.9% Public Safety 44.8% Police Department Fire Department 1,019,188 1,102,169 82,981 $ 1,191,154 88,985 2,382,308 46.3% Engineer/Utility Manager 249,548 34,104 267,582 19,197 18,035 (14,907) $ 282,422 $ 37,929 14,839 564,843 47.4% Building Inspection 61,774 44,720 054) $ 68 242 18,732 23 522 0 Total Public Safety(17 $ 1,364,614 $ 1,433,668 40 69,054 $ 1,579,746 $ 14078 $ 36,857 1484 3,159,492 32.8% 45.4% Public Works Roads and Streets City Shop 523,761 425,267 (98,495) $ 504,769 79,502 1,009,537 42.1% Municipal Building 151,872 127,867 170,067 120,500 18,194 $ 143,654 (26,413) 287,308 59.2% Total Public Works $ 803,501 $ 715,834 $ (7,367 (87,667) $ 144,693 $ 793,115 $ 24,192 77,281 289.385 41.6% $ 1,586,230 45.1 o Parks & Recreation Library $ 513,837 $ 179,791 $ 511,081 $ (2,756) $ 618,073 $ 106,992 $ 1,236,146 41.3% Debt Service $ 224,138 $ 183,225 $ 139,838 $ $ 3,434 $ 197,406 $ 14,181 $ 394,812 46.4% (84,300) $ 343,537 $ 203,699 $ 687,074 20.4% Total General Fund $ 4,275,426 $ 4,296,296 $ 20,870 $ 4,996,250 $ 699,954 $ 9,992,500 43.0% Small Boat Harbor Enterprise Fund Parking Enterprise Fund $ 1,691,806 $ 54,288 $ 2,011,474 $ 319,668 $ 1,830,679 $ (2,011,474) $ 3,661,358 54.9% S.M.I.C. Enterprise Fund $ 529,709 $ 51,007 $ 489,892 $ $ (3,282) $ 247,960 $ (51,007) $ 495,919 10.3% Electric Fund Water Enterprise Fund $ 4,177,827 $ 5,349,896 $ (39,817) 1,172,069 $ 556,706 $ 4,926,564 $ (489,892) $ (5,349,896) $ $ 1,113,412 9,853,127 44.0% 54.3% Wastewater Enterprise Fund $ 482,797 $ 416,057 $ 391,750 $ 428,627 $ $ (91,048) 12,569 $ 665,070 $ (391,750) $ 1,330,139 29.5% $ 521,970 $ (428,627) $ 1,043,939 41.1% June_ Financial -Report Council.xls 8� Date Printed: 8/18/2009 12:36 PM Page 1 of 1 September 2009 6:OOpm CC Budget Kick -Off Work 7:OOpm Ci y of Meeting 7:OOpm City Council Meeting 7:30pm P&Z Meeting 4:30pm CC Work Session (Enterprise Fund Rate Review) Historic Preservation Meeting September 2009 S M T W T F S 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 11:30am 9:OOam Social Security Rep October 2009 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 1617 18192021222324 25262728293031 ?AN 291 301 { 1 Nand Richey ' tl/1U/ZUU9 8:58 AM 82 October 2009 October2009 November2009 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 18 19 2021 22 23 24 22 23 2425 26 27 28 25 26 27 28 29 3031 29 30 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday October 1- 5 Election Da SetupElection Da 12:00pm PACAB Meeting `� 12:OOpin'. 7:30pm P&Z Meeting 12 7:00pm City Council Meeting 6:30pm'Council Budget Work 4 6:30pm Council Budget 1 9:0,06m Social Security 6:30pm Council Budget Session Work Session Work Session 6:30pm Council Budget Work Session 19 6:3bpmt 'Council Budge 21 2.00pm ` 22 2 Work Session 6:30pm 6:300m; 6:30pm Historic Preservation Meeting 7:66pm City Council 27 28 ` 29 3' Meeting KI-i D'I.e.. V' 3 83 8/20/2009 8:58 AM I November 2009 City Council Meeting 6:30pm 7:00pm City Coy Meeting 12:00pm'PACAB W 12:00pm 6:30pm Historic Preservation Meeting November 2009 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2223 24 25 2627 28 2930 7:30pm P &Z Meeting 9:00am Social Rep 1 301 I I II December 2009 S M T W T F S 6 7 8 910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27282930 31 .arn.. eau icy 8/20/2009 8:17 AM 84