Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 120
02/14/2013 10:00 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Derelict Vessels on State Lands | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES
February 14, 2013
10:12 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Eric Feige
Representative Lynn Gattis
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bob Herron
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Kurt Olson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW: DERELICT VESSELS ON STATE LANDS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
WYN MENEFEE, Chief of Operations
Division of Mining, Land and Water (DMLW)
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided the overview on derelict vessels
on state lands.
MICHAEL LUKSHIN, State Ports and Harbor Engineer
Division of Statewide Design and Engineering Services
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOTPF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Contributed to the overview on derelict
vessels on state lands.
CARL UCHYTIL, Vice President
Alaska Assoc. of Harbormasters & Port Administrators (AAHPA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Contributed to the overview on derelict
vessels on state lands.
RACHEL LORD, Representative
Alaska Clean Harbors Program
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on derelict
vessels on state lands.
BRYAN HAWKINS, Harbormaster
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on derelict
vessels on state lands.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:12:16 AM
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Special Committee on
Fisheries meeting to order at 10:12 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Representatives Seaton, Kreiss-Tomkins, and Gattis;
Representative Feige arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^Overview: Derelict Vessels on State Lands
Overview: Derelict Vessels on State Lands
10:12:39 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the only order of business would be
an overview of derelict vessels on state lands.
10:12:51 AM
WYN MENEFEE, Chief of Operations, Division of Mining, Land and
Water (DMLW), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), said that
derelict vessels are a problem and can be found in a variety of
areas, which include: state submerged lands, state tidelands,
state shore-lands and inland on navigable freshwaters, general
state lands listed as multiple use, critical habitat areas, and
in state parks. The derelicts may be ship or dinghy sized and
can be defined in a number of ways, including: shipwrecks,
abandoned vessels, old float-homes, private vessels, and work
vessels. He reviewed the departmental authority, defined under
statute AAC 96.020, which covers boat anchoring but doesn't
provide for enforcement. Boats are allowed anchorage for 11
days without question, but after 14 days authorization must be
secured from DNR's Division of Mining, Land and Water (DMLW)
usually in the form of a lease, or right of way permit. He
pointed out that DNR lacks enforcement authority to fine
violators, or, under the land law, direct authority to seize or
take control of a derelict vessel. He explained that there is a
procedure that allows abandoned vessels to be dealt with by
following a lengthy public notice process. Under AS 30.30,
language does address abandoned and derelict vessels, placing
the issue under the purview of the Department of Transportation
& Public Facilities (DOT&PF); authority which has been delegated
in specific instances to DNR. Permitting for cleanup of
shipwrecks and vessels is authorized through DMLW.
10:17:10 AM
MR. MENEFEE stressed that pro-active, prevention measures are
not included under AS 30.30. There are no statutory means to
prevent vessels from becoming derelict and abandoned or to
provide a disincentive to boat owners, thus the focus is on how
to clean up after the fact. Generally owners don't have money
for removal, and disposal becomes a challenge. Abandoning a
vessel on state lands is cheaper than paying for
removal/disposal and boats are often scuttled in state waters
and then wash ashore. Scuttled vessels are a problem as they
often have contaminates aboard presenting an environmental
concern, they may drift below surface into navigation channels,
and they are expensive to remove. He provided a chart titled
"Shipwrecks and Abandoned Vessels Removed," to illustrate the
number of derelicts reported by DNR from 2004-2012, and the
number that the agency has removed. The department has a
backlog of 94 abandoned vessels identified on state lands, but
the scope of the issue expands far beyond the catalogued number.
He said removal costs vary according to the situation posed by
each derelict and the progress is slow but continuous.
10:21:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS noted the discrepancy between the
number of derelicts identified versus the number removed, and
said the gap seems to have widened in recent years. He asked if
there is a reason for the trend.
MR. MENEFEE responded that there is not a 1:1 relationship of
report and removal, due to departmental staffing and funding
abilities. He said it is not common to begin work on a cleanup
activity and in doing so identify several more derelicts in the
process.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS questioned why the discrepancy has
expanded.
MR. MENEFEE offered that in recent years the department has been
focusing on stewardship responsibilities that require additional
time in the field, which then leads to more discoveries of
derelicts.
10:23:00 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if there is a catalogue of abandoned vessels.
MR. MENEFEE said presently there are 94, with many more not
reported to the database. He said staff is being encouraged to
begin adding each new derelict to the catalogue. He underscored
that the scope of the problem is greater than the data
indicates.
10:24:08 AM
MR. MENEFEE reviewed the removal of two 62 foot vessels from
Jakolof Bay, near Homer, at a cost thus far of $250,000, which
included: raising, removal of hydrocarbons, stabilization, and
towing to Homer for placement in dry storage. It is possible
that some costs can be recovered through auction, or they may
increase if disposal is required. Last May, near Seattle, he
reported, a 140 foot sunken vessel cost Washington and the
federal government $5.4 million for cleanup and disposal, and
another recently reported sinking in the same area is expected
to cost over $1 million. He noted that Washington State has a
derelict vessel removal account funded by a $3.00 boat
registration fee, as a means to defray these costs.
10:27:36 AM
MR. MENEFEE directed attention to the committee packet handout
titled "Derelict Vessels and Shipwrecks on DNR managed lands,"
to illustrate the two Jakolof Bay cleanup sites, with color
photographs indicating the petroleum sheens around the submerged
vessels. The boats were in poor condition and had been denied
harbor entrance. Without access to tie up to a float, they were
anchored on state land, and eventually sank due to snow load.
10:28:50 AM
CHAIR SEATON said the committee now understands the scope of the
issue and can consider statutory measures. Proactive approaches
will require state agency coordination, he said, to avoid these
expensive removal projects.
10:29:58 AM
MICHAEL LUKSHIN, State Ports and Harbor Engineer, Division of
Statewide Design and Engineering Services, Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities (DOTPF), paraphrased from a
prepared statement, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
The State of Alaska has over 33,900 miles of
coastline, far greater than the total coastline of the
other remaining 49 states combined. Although the
number of abandoned and derelict vessels in Alaska is
unknown, these vessels are a public nuisance. Having
effective legislation is important in protecting the
environment and it will provide a significant public
benefit to property owners and the municipalities.
AS 30.30 was established in 1975. At that time, the
Department of Public Works (DPW) owned most of the
public harbors in the state. As such, it was not too
uncommon for the DPW to have to deal with sunken or
abandoned boats within these state owned harbors.
When DPW merged with the Department of Highways in
1977, DOT&PF inherited responsibility for AS 30.30
even though abandoned and derelict vessels are not a
core function of the department. AS 30.30 needs to be
updated to allow any State of Alaska department and
all municipalities to have these powers.
DOT&PF supports the statutory changes proposed by the
Alaska Association of Harbormasters and Port
Administrators. Since 1986, DOT&PF has transferred 75
percent of its state owned harbors to local
municipalities.
Prior to the FV Kupreanof and the FV Leading Lady, the
most recent similar Alaskan problem was the sinking
and raising of a 137-foot landing craft called the
Sound Developer in 2009 at the mouth of the City of
Cordova's harbor. The final bill for the effort was
over $5M. That was about the same cost ($5M) that the
State of Washington paid to deal with the clean-up
efforts after the FV Deep Sea sank right over Whidbey
Island's famed shellfish beds on May 12, 2012. On the
extreme end of the scale, it cost the Coast Guard ten
months and $22M to clean-up an abandoned 430-foot ex-
World War II Navy Liberty Ship called the Davy
Crockett that was being illegally scrapped and that
broke apart on the Columbia River in 2010. There are
an ever growing number of potential and real abandoned
and derelict vessels in Alaska's waters. Since there
are many older, less efficient boats still able to
float (especially old wooden boats), in addition to
boats removed from fishing due to rationalization and
the IFQ programs, this problem will not go away. The
suggested legislative changes to AS 30.30, if in
effect at the time, would have allowed DNR to act
immediately in the case of the Kupreanof and the
Leading Lady. The powers afforded in AS 30.30 need to
be shared with any state department and any
municipality.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether DNR has a dedicated
fund to handle the clean-up of a derelict vessel.
MR. LUKSHIN said that DOTPF does not have funds, and declined
response regarding the DNR budget.
10:35:49 AM
CHAIR SEATON inquired about the issue of documented and
undocumented vessels and asked how this aspect of concern is
handled.
MR. LUKSHIN deferred, suggesting it may fall under the purview
of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG).
CHAIR SEATON referred to the resolution from the Alaska
Association of Harbormasters and Port Administrators (AAHPA),
available in the committee packet, and suggested that it would
be necessary to understand the documentation aspect, if further
regulation or statute were to be considered. The state's
authority may not be any more inclusive and helpful than that of
a municipality for seizing derelict vessels.
MR. LUKSHIN commented that some municipalities have local codes
but the codes are not uniform across the state. He opined that
state statute could provide legal purview and suggested that it
should be extended to local authorities throughout the state,
including incorporated as well as un-incorporated areas.
10:37:52 AM
CARL UCHYTIL, Vice President, Alaska Association of
Harbormasters and Port Administrators (AAHPA), paraphrased from
a prepared statement, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
The Alaska Association of Harbormasters and Port
Administrators in our Resolution 2012-02 strongly urge
support to proposed changes in Chapter 30.30 for
Abandoned and Derelict Vessels. AAHPA believes
delegation of authority under State Statute to the
local municipalities is a step in the right direction
in turning the tide of abandoned and derelict vessels
in the State.
The condition of vessels operating in the State Waters
of Alaska is diverse. [Ranging] from modern yachts
and well maintained 80-yr. old wooden trollers to
relatively new but decrepit live a-boards to turn of
the century abandoned tug boats. The Harbormaster is
consistently looking for tools to help best manage his
harbor facility while keeping a vigilant eye on
vessels which encroach on tidelands which they may or
may not have authority to act on.
This proposed authority is necessary, throughout the
state, but especially in smaller coastal communities,
where legal and enforcement resources are not readily
available to deal with the liabilities and hazards of
abandoned and derelict vessels. The construction and
operations of harbors by the AK Department of
Transportation shortly after statehood resulted in
regulations which empowered only ADOT to effectively
deal with troublesome vessels. Expanding the language
to include not only ADOT but other state agencies and
municipalities would appear to be sound legislation.
This proposed delegation of authority to the local
municipality will help to refine the relationship
between state and city/borough responsibilities and
will enable harbormasters in communities with limited
legal resources or limited local ordinances to act
with confidence in prosecuting derelict and abandoned
vessels.
The modifications to Chapter 30.30 appear to have in
place, sufficient authority which encourages the state
or municipality to act in a timely manner and before
the vessel is in extremis. This is important because
of the disposal cost associated with a vessel that
afloat is a small fraction of what it cost once a
vessel takes on water, is submerged or discharges fuel
or oil.
The Alaska Association of Harbormasters and Port
Administrators thank you for your consideration of
this important issue to the Alaskan coastal
communities.
10:41:29 AM
MR. UCHYTIL, responding to a question from the committee chair,
opined that the City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ) has sufficient
authority to act strategically and tactically to deal with
derelict vessels, but small communities don't have regulatory
ordinances or the resources necessary to clean up tideland
areas. The proposed change to AS 30.30 would help the smaller
communities immensely, and also eliminate the ambiguity
regarding the responsible agency.
CHAIR SEATON asked about the need to include language regarding
the handling of hazardous waste associated with the vessels.
MR. UCHYTIL concurred that such language would be helpful.
CHAIR SEATON offered to receive further suggestions from AAHPA
for inclusion in the proposed legislation, and he asked about
information regarding the ability for the USCG to seize
documented vessels.
MR. UCHYTIL suggested that the USCG has purview over vessels
that are in open water; undocked. The CBJ has the ability to
impound abandoned vessels at the docks.
10:44:24 AM
RACHEL LORD, Representative, Alaska Clean Harbors Program,
stated support for the proposed legislation, and said that the
age of the fishing fleet may begin to coincide with the
appearance of more derelicts in the coming decade. The Alaska
Clean Harbor Program is working with legal counsel to develop a
working database of the derelict and abandoned vessels in harbor
areas.
10:46:20 AM
BRYAN HAWKINS, Harbormaster, said Homer has regained 1,400 feet
of moorage space through the removal of derelict vessels. He
said the work was accomplished with the help of local
contractors, to break-up vessels with an average length of 90
feet. The bottom line is that dealing with derelict vessels
could be called the hot potato management plan, as no one wants
to handle it; however, it should be a proactive endeavor.
Recognizing the problem and developing a plan is necessary, and
a revenue source will need to be identified. He cited a bill
being proposed in Washington State which stipulates that vessel
past a certain age would require approval by authorities as fit
for resale, to ensure maintenance has kept the vessel viable.
10:49:35 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Fisheries meeting was adjourned at 10:49
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| News articles on Derelict vessels in Alaska.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| AAHPA-Resolution-No-2012-02.doc |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| Draft Language - Derelict vessels - for discussion purposes.doc |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| Seattle Times article on Derelict vessel issue in Washington State.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| Washington State Derelict Vessel Program Brochure.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| Derelict Vessel Letter - Sitka.docx |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| Abandoned and Derelict Vessel Removal USCG.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| SignedUSCG_USACE_MOU_Obstructions.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessel |
| Derelict Vessels Presentation.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Derelict Vessels |
| Derelict vessels.pdf |
HFSH 2/14/2013 10:00:00 AM |
derelict vessels |