Day 2 | May 17

Go to Day 1 ScheduleDay 2 At-a-GlanceExpand Tracks
7:00 to 8:00am

Registration & Continental Breakfast

7:30 to 8:00am

Discussion of Washington's Participation in MS4 National Group

8:00 to 8:15am

Welcome & Keynote

Dr. John D. Stark, Director, Washington Stormwater Center

8:15 to 12:00pm

Conference TracksClick a Track below to expand.

Track 1: Big Picture Stormwater

Collaborating to Use Lessons Learned for Improved Stormwater Management

Blair Scott, King County; Doug Navetski, King County

Abstract

King County's Phase I Municipal Stormwater Permit is going to be reissued in 2018. Ecology is responsible for writing the permit and has a regulatory process they must follow for reissuance. During this process, public input on permit requirements has been done through a formal comment period after the draft permit is issued. This process has not allowed for in-depth conversations on permit requirements which would incorporate lessons learned from implementers into permit language. Some of the comments provided by King County in the past through the public comment period have been incorporated. Some comments were not incorporated by Ecology, and were important enough to litigate through the Pollution Control Hearing Board (PCHB). This process has missed out on opportunities to improve permit language and requirements and created dissonance among the stakeholders which included permit holders, Ecology and environmental advocacy groups. This drove a self-selected group of permit holders to discuss more effective ways to improve stormwater management programs through the permit with a collaborative approach to reissuance. This group wanted to work with the stakeholders to address issues prior to Ecology starting the 2018 permit writing process.

2018 Ad-Hoc committee development: The 2018 Ad-Hoc Committee was started as an informal group of Western Washington municipal Phase I and Phase II stormwater permittees discussing how to achieve two goals:

  1. Address problems prior to the drafting of permits: where changes, clarifications, and information sharing might lead to meaningful improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of stormwater management (reduce the appeal issues).
  2. Build Relationships: Develop an open and transparent process to discuss issues thereby improving communications and seeking common ground and collaboration among stakeholders (environmental advocacy groups, Permittees, and Ecology) who share an interest in protecting receiving waters from the impacts of polluted stormwater runoff.

Through this process suggestions to make the permit language more clear and effective were provided to Ecology prior to drafting permit language. Furthermore, stakeholders worked together in topic groups to address particularly complex and challenging elements of the NPDES Municipal Stormwater permit. For example:

  • For the watershed scale planning requirements, this topic group was able to distil a number of lessons learned and agree on the fact that the intent of the watershed planning requirement should be to end up with a tool to guide capital and programmatic stormwater actions. This group was also able to provide Ecology with useful feedback on prioritized actions that would provide discrete outcomes to work towards the suggested intent of watershed scale planning.
  • For the Structural Stormwater Controls topic group, there was an innovative idea put forward for addressing impacts from existing development. This topic group looked to develop standard methodologies for calculating tons of sediment removed by stormwater BMPs.

As a result of the 2018 Ad-Hoc committee process, Ecology has adapted their process to have additional focus group discussions (reconstituting the Ad-Hoc Committee topic groups) in addition to the required general public permit listening sessions.

Learning Objectives

Permittees will learn how to build lessons learned from implementers and adaptive management into the Municipal Permit process.

It is extremely important to work with stakeholders (Ecology, Permittees, Environmental advocacy groups, etc.) to share ideas, forge relationships, and build common ground. This is the most effective way to improve permit requirements and how they are implemented.

How Do You Know That Your Stormwater Program Is Working? Developing Measuring Sticks to Demonstrate Effectiveness

Art Jenkins, City of Spokane Valley; Aimee Navickis-Brasch, HDR

Outfall Elimination: Is it a cost-Effective Alternative?

Mathew Fontaine, Herrera; Teresa Reed-Jennings, City of Pasco

City of Poulsbo Liberty Bay TMDL Implementation Plan

Diane Lenius, City of Poulsbo; Phil Struck, Sealaska Environmental Services

Intersections for Action Connecting Stormwater Management, Urban Growth and Salmon Recovery

Andy Rheame, City of Redmond

Track 2: Stormwater Program Efficiencies Now

Cleaner. Water. Faster. Bi-state Interpretive Trail project

Jim Ekins, University of Idaho Extension; Aaron Clary, City of Spokane Valley

Abstract

Cleaner. Water. Faster. Bi-state Interpretive Clean Water Trail project is focused on protecting critical regional waterways through natural stormwater pollution treatment via native plant wetland and bioinfiltration swales and education. It is a catalyst for 24 partners along 60 miles of Lake Coeur d'Alene and the Spokane River in two states to provide coordinated, impactful clean water educational programming. This collaborative project is battling more than just stormwater pollution, but also widespread public perception of endless supplies of pristine water in the region.

The Lake Coeur d'Alene-Spokane River corridor is the physical thread connecting this geographically unique project. Science-based, well-engineered bio-swales and research-based impactful environmental education is the common intellectual thread. Stormwater treatment wetland/bioinfiltration swales, raingardens, and riparian buffers will be constructed with 1,000 locally-sourced new woody native shrubs as demonstration projects in highly visible areas along the corridor. The goal is to demonstrate the beauty, usefulness, and ecosystem services they provide!

Learning Objectives

Presentation will outline an innovative education and BMP implementation program that includes academic service-learning, interpretive signs, outdoor classroom, and projects in two states with 24 community partners. Stormwater permittees will find new insights into multi-stakeholder grant funded demonstration projects.

Streamlining On-site Stormwater Management: Helping Municipalities Implement New Stormwater Requirements

Rebecca Dugopolski, Herrera; Jonathan Boehme, City of Port Angeles

Abstract

Implementing the new on-site stormwater management requirements in the state of Washington can be a challenging and often daunting task. The Phase I permittees (including Seattle, Tacoma, Pierce County, and King County) have started implementation of the new Minimum Requirement #5 in the Washington State Department of Ecology's (Ecology) Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington by developing and adopting their own stormwater manuals, which went into effect in 2016. Starting in January 2017, a majority of the 88 Phase II jurisdictions in Western Washington were required to implement either the on-site stormwater management requirements developed by Ecology or one of the Phase I jurisdictions. There is a huge learning curve for developers, designers, engineers, and plan reviewers for implementing this new approach to low impact development (LID). Applicants will be required to document the technical infeasibility of a specific LID best management practice (BMP) before moving on to the next potential BMP on the list. Proof of technical infeasibility may require on-site infiltration testing.

Several Phase I and Phase II jurisdictions have been developing implementation tools to help ease this transition for municipal staff and the development community. Examples of these implementation tools will be provided during this presentation including an infeasibility map that depicts spatial data including steep slopes, landslide and erosion hazard areas, and contaminated soils to show where infiltration is infeasible. Other examples include handouts summarizing the requirements for small projects, case studies documenting infeasibility criteria for example scenarios, factsheets outlining the post-construction soil quality and depth requirement, templates for simplified stormwater site plans and Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and calculators for selecting and sizing BMPs.

Through a variety of examples, attendees will discover ideas for streamlining and improving the implementation of LID BMPs in their jurisdictions, whether they are faced with similar regulatory requirements or simply have an interest in easing the application of LID in their own community.

Learning Objectives

A variety of implementation tools will be presented from several jurisdictions. Attendees (Phase I and Phase II permittees from Western and Eastern Washington) may discover ideas for streamlining and improving the implementation of LID BMPs in their own jurisdictions, whether they are faced with similar regulatory requirements or simply have an interest in easing the application of LID in their own community.

Practical Permeable Pavement

Veronica Sisseck, Pierce County Public Works

Abstract

Many Permittees are now responsible for the long term success of permeable pavement. As with any other roadway assets this success is based on appropriate design, installation, and maintenance. While guidelines and regulations have been established for stormwater facilities and for paved surfaces individually there are many unknowns when these facilities are combined. With the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington requiring permeable pavement if feasible and the 2004 Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington allowing porous pavement, it seems prudent to prepare for a potential future where permeable pavement is commonplace.

While infiltration rates of freshly installed permeable pavement were readily available, Pierce County staff found very little published information on infiltration rates over time or durability of pavement outside of laboratory conditions. Pierce County designed, installed, and continues to maintain several permeable pavement facilities with the intention of estimating and reducing life cycle costs. The facilities constructed include a cul-de-sac with a history of flooding, arterial roadway, road shoulder, sidewalk and parking lot. The county tested infiltration rates and performance of various cleaning methods to support development of a successful maintenance program.

This presentation will address the objectives of pervious pavement and the performance over time. Design and installation will be briefly discussed to share known parameters and the unexpected observations in the establishment of the test sites. The results of field testing with various types of equipment to clear particulate embedded in pavement will be presented. The county will share the lessons learned and suggestions on how to reduce life cycle cost.

Pierce County has more to learn on how to maintain pervious pavement. We are in the process of establishing a partnership with Washington State University Extension to publish maintenance guidelines.

Learning Objectives

This presentation aims to educate attendees on effective management of permeable pavement facilities. Attendees will learn about the requirements, risks, and rewards of permeable pavement both as a stormwater feature and as a hard surface. While the lessons learned are all sourced from a Phase I Municipal Stormwater Permittee's transportation infrastructure in the Puget Sound Lowlands, the presentation is intended to apply to permit requirements, environmental conditions and hard surface functions statewide. Lessons learned include pavement structural failure, infiltration rate degradation, and observations on several pavement cleaning methods. Attendees will leave with a baseline for developing a maintenance standard and budgeting for the life cycle of the facility.

Fitting Green Infrastructure in a Historic Neighborhood

Marcia Davis, City of Spokane

Abstract

The West Central Neighborhood is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Washington State. Two combined sewer basins within this neighborhood were identified for stormwater treatment and infiltration. Several alternatives were evaluated for constructability, impact to neighbors, and cost. The selected alternative will be presented with the reasons why it was the best choice.

Learning Objectives

This presentation will identify challenges of retrofitting stormwater BMPs in a historic neighborhood; discuss the lessons learned; and reveal the advantages of the selected alternative.

TAPE 101

Carla Milesi, Washington Stormwater Center TAPE

Abstract

Washington State Department of Ecology's Technology Assessment Protocol-Ecology (TAPE) is a peer reviewed certification process for stormwater treatment best management practices (BMPs). Certified BMPs are then included as an "Emerging Technology" in the stormwater management manuals for Western and Eastern Washington and can be employed to meet Phase I and Phase II permit requirements for new and redevelopment projects. The protocol is robust and rigorous, providing a standardized method for evaluating treatment BMPs, assurance in the quality and representativeness of the data, and confidence in any resulting certification. However, navigating the protocol can also be costly, prolonged, and confusing. The TAPE 101 presentation will detail the requirements of the TAPE program, provide estimates of costs and time involved in obtaining certification in Washington State, and highlight the suitability of the certification for BMP use in both Western and Eastern Washington.

Learning Objectives
  • Understanding the level of cost and effort required to complete a full TAPE evaluation.
  • Are treatment BMPs evaluated in Western Washington appropriate to use in Eastern Washington?
  • Does the design of BMPs need to vary between Western Washington and Eastern Washington installations?
Track 3: Stormwater Research, Science & news

RSMP Effectiveness Study: Stormwater Retrofits for Treating Highway Runoff to Echo Lake

Carly Greyell, King County Water and Land Resources

Abstract

This presentation will cover the findings from the Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program (RSMP) Effectiveness Study: Effectiveness of Stormwater Retrofits for Treating Highway Runoff to Echo Lake. This study evaluated the treatment effectiveness of bioretention planter boxes and Filterra (for phosphorus treatment) installed as part of a stormwater retrofit along Highway 99 in Shoreline, Washington. These treatment installations receive runoff from a mix of highway, commercial and residential areas. Composite grab samples were collected over two storm seasons (2015-2017) from the inlet and outlet of the treatment installations. Parameters included total suspended solids, nutrients, bacteria, total and dissolved metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

This study is relevant to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permittees, because it was designed to address data gaps identified by the Washington Stormwater Work Group (SWG) on the effectiveness of stormwater treatment technologies being installed in the Puget Sound Region. NPDES permittees selected this project as one of the first-round RSMP Effectiveness Studies for funding.

This study provides valuable information for several reasons:

  1. This study evaluated bioretention installations that were more than three years old, whereas other local field studies have focused on newly-constructed bioretention installations. Treatment effectiveness may change as an installation ages, which makes the findings of this study valuable.
  2. The parameter list for this project is more extensive than most stormwater studies. In particular, PCBs are known to be a major concern in waterbodies throughout the state, with stormwater often being the key pathway. This field study provides information about the effectiveness of bioretention installations for removing PCBs from stormwater.
  3. Historical water quality data were available for the stormwater basin and receiving waterbody. These data, in combination with effectiveness of individual treatment installations, were used to consider whether the stormwater retrofit may have contributed to water quality improvements in the receiving waterbody.
  4. This project also identified several challenges in sampling bioretention planter boxes, and some maintenance activities that were required to keep the installations functioning. These findings will be presented and may benefit project managers of future effectiveness studies as well as stormwater program managers.

The final report is expected to be complete in the summer of 2017, and the collected data will be entered into publically available databases by the end of 2017.

Learning Objectives

The presentation will identify contaminants that were consistently reduced through the bioretention planter boxes and Filterra, and discuss factors that contribute to treatment effectiveness. The talk will also discuss how the design of the inlet to bioretention installations could influence maintenance requirements. These findings could help stormwater program managers in selecting appropriate treatment options for a particular stormwater basin.

IDDE Analysis: A Five-Year Study of Phase I Data

Dan Smith, Pierce County Public Works

Abstract

Municipal NPDES stormwater permits require the implementation of procedures designed to characterize, trace, and eliminate environmental threats posed by illicit discharges. However, merely documenting and recording individual Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) actions and activities alone do not make the bigger picture of stormwater management more clear. Consequently, in order to achieve a greater level of understanding, permittees should begin to seek answers to the following questions: What are the IDDE pollutants of concern within their jurisdictions? Where across the landscape are these incidents occurring and to what frequency? Are there identifiable trends? Can more detailed IDDE information be generated to improve the practicality, efficiency and/or effectiveness of IDDE efforts or other stormwater management programs?

Unincorporated Pierce County (population 380,000), is the second largest Phase I NPDES Municipal Stormwater permittee within the state of Washington; the County's Surface Water Management (SWM) division is charged with managing both the natural surface water systems and the stormwater collection and conveyance infrastructure situated within its 1,800 square mile service area. In an attempt to answer the questions posed above, Pierce County SWM has completed a study (independent of permit requirements) involving the analysis of IDDE records spanning a duration of five years (2012-2016).

The five year analysis summarizes, quantifies, and further examines in detail, the County's Municipal Stormwater Permit IDDE Program. After organizing and classifying more than 1,000 separate IDDE incidents that occurred across both urban and rural County settings during the study period, a subsequent assessment and evaluation of these data yielded a number of key findings, including: (1) an identification of stormwater IDDE pollutants of concern, (2) a demonstration of IDDE incident frequency within drainage basins, (3) the establishment of temporal trends, (4) a correlation between IDDE incidents, percent impervious coverage, and land use categories, and (5) measurable characteristics of IDDE operations and functions.

As a compliment to the broader Source Identification Information Repository (SIDIR) monitoring component required under each of the state of Washington Department of Ecology Phase I and Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit programs, the voluntary Pierce County IDDE Analysis clearly validates the critical importance of locally-produced IDDE information, and demonstrates how local and smaller geographic data sets are better suited in isolating and solving problems at the jurisdictional level. The County's study adds to the growing body of knowledge related to stormwater management, and it helps direct priorities and resources for adaptive management of these programs. Additionally, it fills a gap; the study sets a standard by establishing a framework for other municipalities to use in building their own IDDE analyses to measure performance.

Learning Objectives

The Pierce County Surface Water Management IDDE Analysis clearly validates the critical importance of locally produced IDDE information, and demonstrates how local and smaller geographic data sets are better suited in isolating and solving problems at the jurisdictional level. It will set a standard by establishing a framework for other municipalities to use in building their own IDDE analyses to measure performance.

Illicit Discharge Detection and Eliminatin Data Evaluation for Western Washington

James Packman, Aspect; Greg Vigoren, City of Lakewood

Abstract

The NPDES municipal stormwater permits for both western and eastern Washington include requirements to have a program to "prevent, detect, characterize, trace, and eliminate illicit connections and illicit discharges into the MS4." As part of the Stormwater Action Monitoring program for western Washington (SAM, formerly known as the RSMP or Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program), a source control effectiveness study was developed to evaluate municipal efforts for controlling sources of stormwater pollution. One task of the study was to compile and evaluate illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) data as reported by permittees in 2014. As an adaptive management effort, the SAM program and the IDDE data evaluation are important for informing permittees and the Department of Ecology (Ecology) how the IDDE permit requirements are being implemented. With direction and guidance from the Source Identification (Source ID) subgroup of the SAM program, three objectives for the IDDE data evaluation were identified:

  1. Set priorities for municipal IDDE efforts to reduce sources of stormwater pollution and ensure consistent reporting of data.
  2. Identify the most commonly used and best methods to reduce or eliminate illicit discharges and connections.
  3. Inform regional funding decisions to address common source control issues.

The data evaluation objectives were addressed by collating and analyzing IDDE data, including identifying what data are being collected by permittees, how those data are reported, and reviewing the breadth and range of the types of IDDE-related stormwater pollution. In addition, the observed distributions of pairs of data fields were compared to random distributions using contingency tables and tested for significant differences with the maximum likelihood chi-squared statistic.

A total of 2913 records were reviewed and included 1269 records from six Phase I permittees and 1644 records from 71 Phase II permittees. One challenge was parsing the data from disparate sources into a common database. This required reviewing the notes from each record and developing methods for consistent coding of data. Another challenge was the high variability in the number of IDDE incidents reported by each jurisdiction, which ranged from one to over 700. This variability biased the evaluation toward the jurisdictions who reported the most incidents.

The results indicate that efforts to reduce or eliminate IDDE-related stormwater pollution should focus on the largest quantities of discharge, the most frequent occurrences, and the relative hazard the pollutants pose for water quality. Results also highlight the need to streamline IDDE reporting, and Ecology has already begun to investigate ways to reduce redundancy in permittees' pollution reporting. With the commonality of IDDE permit requirements in western and eastern Washington along with common land uses and potential pollution generating activities, the results from this evaluation help inform Ecology and permittees throughout the state what is the most useful, consistent, and efficient information to report for IDDE incidents.

Learning Objectives

There are three learning objectives for this presentation:

  1. Learn about the motivation and methodology of the regional IDDE data evaluation that was undertaken as part of Ecology's SAM program for adaptive stormwater management.
  2. Learn what IDDE incident types, pollutants, and resolution times were reported by western Washington municipal NPDES permittees along with the most common methods use for indicator detection, source tracing, and correction to achieve environmental compliance.
  3. Learn how the results from this evaluation are being used by Ecology to streamline IDDE reporting requirements.

Attendees will benefit from this presentation by learning how western Washington municipal NPDES permittees have addressed the IDDE permit requirements and what lessons have been learned from these efforts. With identical IDDE requirements in both eastern and western Washington, results from this data evaluation are informative to both Ecology and permittees statewide.

One key challenge this evaluation brought to light is the inconsistency of how IDDE incidents are reported by municipalities. A refined and focused list of data fields was identified through this evaluation that would meet NPDES requirements and improve sharing of information across agencies while decreasing redundant reporting efforts by permittees. Attendees will take away helpful information from this presentation about how to consistently and efficiently report IDDE incidents, including non-IDDE events reported through IDDE communication channels (e.g. pollution hotlines).

Statistical Assessment of Kitsap County's Macroinvertebrate and Streamflow Data

Joy Michaud, Herrera; Eva Crim, Kitsap County

Abstract

Kitsap County’s Watershed Health Monitoring program has collected streamflow, water quality, habitat, and macroinvertebrate data for over two decades. Since there is now a fairly robust dataset available, the County decided to capitalize on the years of effort and conduct a rigorous analysis of the data and the evaluation metrics. The overarching goal of the monitoring program is to be able to relate specific actions within a watershed (e.g. restoration, development, and adoption of new technologies) to biological outcomes for the purpose of informing adaptive management of the watershed. To achieve this goal, a rigorous, multifaceted statistical evaluation is being done for both macroinvertebrate and stream flow data. This evaluation is being done in two phases; the first phase of which has been completed and is the focus of this presentation.

The objectives of this first phase included:

  • Evaluate whether there are individual macroinvertebrate metrics that may perform better as early indicators for trend detection.
  • Assess whether there is evidence of long-term or short-term trends in the macroinvertebrate data.
  • Analyze continuous stream flow data to determine how much of the observed variation can be explained by precipitation, and how much might be the result of other factors such as watershed processes, land use changes, and restoration activities.
Learning Objectives

The assessment techniques we developed may be valuable for use by other entities who are collecting this data. By sharing these initial findings it may generate interest by others to test the findings and ultimately strengthen our understanding of these data.

Case Study: Private Facility Inspection Program The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Nikki Guillot, City of Vancouver

Abstract

The City of Vancouver recently initiated a private stormwater facility inspection and maintenance project with grant funding from the Dept. of Ecology's Stormwater Financial Assistance Program (SFAP). For municipal agencies an inspection program can elevate baseline maintenance on private sites and encourage implementation of a more consistent standard to provide better water quality outcomes.

Private stormwater facilities designed to help remove oil, chemicals, metals and sediment from runoff before it is discharged must be maintained to achieve that function. Even simple mowed grass swales accumulate debris and pollutants from paved surfaces and must be periodically cleaned up to distribute flow and maximize pollutant removal. Accumulation of sediment over time blocks inlets, buries flow controls and reduces swale storage capacity. Of the initial 300 facilities inspected, Vancouver found that nearly 60% of common turf swales have deficiencies severe enough to inhibit function, twice our original estimate, and a considerable loss of water quality treatment.

A few challenges encountered in this project were a large number of previously undocumented private stormwater facilities discovered in the field, confusion from owners and property managers about jurisdiction and maintenance responsibilities, the absence of coordinated maintenance from homeowners' associations and undetermined private conveyances. Future work includes subsequent grant applications to address these time-consuming and more detailed activities with the goal of creating a comprehensive private facility inventory and improved treatment value from existing private facilities.

Learning Objectives

Learn the benefits of initiating a private facility inspection program on pre-permit required sites, what to expect in the start-up phase and how to integrate data collection into existing asset management frameworks. For most permittees, the effort to kick off an inspection program can be valuable to elevate baseline maintenance on private sites and encourage implementation of a more consistent standard, providing better water quality outcomes and more consistent standards, particularly in anticipation of high level oversight in emerging low impact development practices. This presentation will outline challenges in field recon, compliance rates and cooperation at residential facilities as well as lessons learned on approaching new stormwater “customers” and how to boost capacity with contractors.

12:00 to 1:00pm

Lunch (provided)

1:00 to 2:00pm

Conference TracksClick a Track below to expand.

Track 1: Big Picture Stormwater

Lake Whatcom Homeowner Incentive Program: Retrofits on a Watershed Scale

Eli Mackiewocz. City of Bellingham; Ingrid Enschede, City of Bellingham

Abstract

Lake Whatcom, the drinking water source for more than 100,000 Whatcom County residents, has seen a marked decline in water quality over the past 50 years. Excess nutrients generated by residential properties have caused a significant decrease in dissolved oxygen levels as well as seasonal algal blooms. In April, 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized the Lake Whatcom Total Maximum Daily Load study, which has set in motion a 50-year cleanup effort focused on reducing phosphorus inputs by nearly 87%. While local jurisdictions are implementing a capital retrofit program, much of the developed land lies outside of the reach of infrastructure projects, especially along the lake shore. Additionally, end-of-pipe treatment systems are both inefficient at phosphorus removal and prohibitively expensive, considering the price of acquiring land around Lake Whatcom.

The Homeowner Incentive Program (HIP) approaches the problem from a complimentary angle, providing technical and financial assistance to property owners to reduce phosphorus entering public infrastructure or the lake. Since its launch in 2011, the HIP has facilitated the completion of more than 180 private site retrofits, installing more than 420 P-reducing Best Management Practices. These BMPs include native landscaping, infiltration trenches, specially-designed rain gardens, permeable pavements, specialty filters, and accessory BMPs that reduce the impact of residential properties on the lake. The HIP has invested more than $1,000,000 into reimbursements to participating property owners, for expenses paid to more than 150 local businesses and contractors. Perpetual phosphorus reduction resulting from HIP projects is estimated at 25lbsP per year, an amount which would cost an estimated $3,500,000 to remove via capital projects designed, built, and maintained by the jurisdictions.

After a five-year pilot period, the HIP is re-launching as a permanent program funded through municipal budgets for the 50-year TMDL response. Extensive audience research and program redesign, including surveys, focus groups, stakeholder panels, and the creation of specialized technical and outreach materials, was completed in 2016. The improved HIP will roll out in early 2017, expanding to new areas, offering a more robust technical and financial support package, and engaging a larger portion of the private sector. HIP-specific improvements for 2017 include a re-branding effort, new design details and material specifications, design templates for each BMP, example landscape plans, a professional certification program, training and marketing support for material suppliers, and DIY workshops for homeowners.

With more than six years of experience operating, managing, and troubleshooting an incentive-based residential retrofit program that promotes specific LID BMPs on private properties for the benefit of the public at large, HIP staff would be honored to share our insights, lessons learned, success stories, and knowledge with and amongst others who are thinking about, developing, or implementing similar programs in their jurisdictions.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

This presentation will provide insight, lessons learned, and unique perspectives regarding residential-scale, incentive-based, LID programs for private properties within an impaired watershed. The Homeowner Incentive Program has just emerged from a five-year pilot phase and is relaunching as a permanent, locally-funded program in early 2017. The new and improved program will be a significant part of the Lake Whatcom TMDL response plan. This presentation will describe the pilot program, its successes and failures, and how the new program has been developed to overcome barriers to participation and other challenges. We addressed a diverse set of barriers, from technical design issues to communication best practices to streamlining permitting and construction methodologies. The program is an equal mix of education and technical assistance (along with a lot of administrative formalities and documentation), so we hope to provide perspectives that are helpful to many permittees throughout the state.

Track 2: Stormwater Program Efficiencies Now

Kendal Yards and more: Stormwater in the Eastern Region

Cynthia Wall, Department of Ecology; Shannon Petrisor, Department of Ecology; Brandy Reynecke, Department of Ecology; Dave Duncan, Department of Ecology

Track 3: Stormwater Research, Science & news

Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program/Stormwater Action Monitoring

Brandi Lubliner, Department of Ecology

Abstract

Stormwater Action Monitoring (SAM) is a collaborative, regional stormwater monitoring effort program that is funded by more than 90 cities and counties, the ports of Seattle and Tacoma, and the Washington State Department of Transportation. SAM's goal is to improve stormwater management to reduce pollution, improve water quality, and reduce flooding. We do this by measuring stormwater impacts on the environment and evaluating the effectiveness of stormwater management actions.

SAM creates a feedback loop to identify effective actions that to reduce pollution and flooding associated with stormwater. SAM's projects are developed in an open, coordinated, and shared manner that capture a regional understanding of how management actions can lead to results. The pooling of funds allows jurisdictions throughout the region – large and small – to benefit from projects designed to produce transferable findings. Any jurisdiction with science staff, expertise, and interest can participate in SAM projects. This presentation will broadly discuss the structure of SAM, transparent administration, active participation from stakeholders, and the active SAM projects.

Learning Objectives

Stormwater permittees and professionals will learn about the successful launch of the RSMP/SAM in western Washington. The presentation will cover the program structure, active projects, early findings and feedback loops for sharing findings.

2:00 to 2:15pm

Break

Light snacks and beverages will be served.

2:15 to 4:30pm

Conference TracksClick a Track below to expand.

Track 1: Big Picture Stormwater

Climate Change Impacts on Stormwater Management In Washington State

Guillaume Mauger, University of Washington

Abstract

Stormwater runoff affects water quality, human health, slope stability, and freshwater and marine habitat quality. Climate change is expected to exacerbate stormwater issues, in particular due to the dual impacts of sea level rise and more intense heavy rain events. This talk will review the state of the science on stormwater and climate change, providing information about ongoing research that may be of interest to attendees. Although the presentation will focus on these two principal drivers of stormwater impacts, the presentation will review other climate change impacts that may be of relevance to stormwater, and possible directions for future work.

Learning Objectives

State of the science on climate change implications for stormwater management. Information on data and tools that could be used to assess local impacts on stormwater.

Tacoma's Regional Facilities Program for NPDES Stormwater Treatment/Flow Control Requirements

Dana de Leon, City of Tacoma

Protecting Shellfish One Rain Garden at a Time

Brian Stahl, Kitsap Conservation District

Abstract

As development increases, there has been an adverse effect on shellfish growing areas throughout the Puget Sound Region due to increased stormwater entering our streams. Management of storm water through control of impervious surfaces becomes critical. Kitsap County has code requiring any development or redevelopment to meet Kitsap County Storm Water Drainage requirements, but what can be done to reduce runoff from existing developments or properties? Kitsap Conservation District (KCD), along with Kitsap County Public Works, Kitsap Public Health District, and Washington State University Extension formed a unique, nationally recognized program called Clean Water Kitsap. The Rain Garden element of this productive program, administered by the Kitsap Conservation District, has been successful because it offers cost share to help homeowners solve stormwater runoff issues using low impact development approaches (LID) such as rain gardens, pervious parking, and cisterns. The Kitsap Conservation District's Rain Gardens & More Program provides solutions to storm water management. The program is reaching the existing homeowners and providing technical assistance and incentive funds to make it possible for them to successfully retrofit their systems used to collect and transfer the runoff from their parcel.

In 2010, the first year of the program's outreach, 100 rain garden cost share applications were received from Kitsap County citizens. With this large influx of applicants in the beginning phase of the program, it became clear there would be a high interest in rain gardens, but only 13 projects were installed. We discovered barriers to installation when applicants either did not know who to contact to install their garden, did not know where to purchase the materials, or did not have enough experience in construction to get started. Due to those factors, Kitsap Conservation District launched "Dig Days" in 2012. "Dig Days" is a program where, once a cost share application is approved, KCD arranges for excavation of the rain garden site, delivers the rain garden soil mix, pipe, fittings and Zone 1 plants. These gardens are typically completed in just one day. Since inception of "Dig Days", KCD has installed over 220 LID practices and have a waiting list which exceeds next year's cost share budget. Kitsap Conservation District believes that sharing our experience with other agencies or groups will make a difference in our natural resource environment and stormwater management.

Learning Objectives

Kitsap Conservation District (KCD), along with Kitsap County Public Works, Kitsap Public Health District, and Washington State University Extension formed Clean Water Kitsap (CWK), a partnership to provide leadership and education to the county's residents. CWK is a unique, nationally recognized, multi-agency partnership created to reduce flooding, prevent pollution, and restore fish habitat through stormwater management activities. A significant portion of the funding is devoted to retrofitting existing facilities in target watersheds. With our non-regulatory pledge to private property owners, Kitsap Conservation District provided the link to retrofit stormwater systems on private properties. "Dig Days" was a program that turned the tide by increasing private property owner involvement.

Track 2: Stormwater Program Efficiencies Now

My Soil Won't Drain. Can I Still Use LID?

John Knutson, Aspect Consulting; Erik Pruneda, Aspect Consulting; Rob Buchert, City of Pullman

Abstract

This presentation illustrates some of the key considerations when designing and constructing LID retrofits in the City of Pullman which has low permeability soils, significant cold and snow prone conditions, and moderate precipitation levels. Topics will include cold and snow prone considerations, modified subgrade preparations, when and how to use liners and under-drains, how the feasibility of retaining and infiltrating the water quality storm into low permeability soil varies by the type of LID BMP, and the benefit of using LID even when under-drains are necessary. Lessons learned from the bidding and construction process will also be discussed. A couple important things came out of the Pullman LID retrofit project that are of interest to designers and permit compliance managers:

  1. It is sometimes feasible to effectively apply LID even in lower permeability soils, but the effectiveness of LID at treating and infiltrating the water quality storm varies by type of BMP. Permeable pavements (which do not concentrate runoff), may be able to infiltrate the entire water quality storm into lower permeability soils, while a bio-retention BMP (which handles concentrated runoff) may not. This has implications not just for selecting the preferred LID BMP based on soils, but also for assessing the overall feasibility of various BMPs to meet NPDES on-site retention requirements for larger events. Generally, BMPs that promote dispersed infiltration, rather than concentration of runoff will be able to infiltrate larger storm events into marginal soils.
  2. Credit for water quality and flow control benefits are still warranted even when under-drains are used with LID. However the reason for the credit, and level of flow control benefit vary by BMP. For example, permeable pavements which infiltrate at least the entire water quality storm event, should get full water quality credit and significant flow control credit, even if they cannot infiltrate the entire 10 year storm; while bioretention facilities which filter the water quality storm though porous media, but cannot infiltrate the entire water quality volume, should get full water quality credit, plus partial flow control credit due to impoundment of runoff in the facility and retention through soil moisture, both of which reduce the peak discharge to receiving waters.
Learning Objectives

This presentation provides the following learning opportunities for permittees: (a) applying LID in low permeability soils; (b) designing LID for cold and snow prone conditions; (c) using liners and under-drains; (d) how the soil and specific BMP interact to affect the feasibility of retaining and infiltrating the water quality storm; and (e) the benefit of using LID even when under-drains are necessary.

Solving Pollution at the Source: Seattle Public Utilities Source Control Program

Kevin Buckley, City of Seattle; Beth Schmoyer, City of Seattle

Pollution Prevention: Elements of an Effective Source Control Program

Laura Frolich, Snohomish County Public Works; Sean Hare, Snohomish County Public Works

Abstract

Snohomish County implements a source control program, performing an average of 600 site inspections annually, and over 6,000 total since the program began in 2007. The program focuses on working with commercial and industrial businesses and landowners to control pollution. County Pollution Prevention Specialists, inspect properties that perform activities that have a potential to pollute to surface waters. One of the goals during inspections is to prevent, detect and eliminate illicit connections and discharges from commercial and industrial properties. Routine and detailed site evaluations are designed to prevent unfortunate situations for businesses, the environment and the community. Using an education and outreach approach, the county successfully contributes to ensuring clean water while maintaining strong relationships with industry, agricultural and the general business community. Although meeting federal and state mandates is costly, this program is ranks well on its benefits to cost ratio.

Permittees will learn the basics of an effective source control program including: assessment of properties to determine a potential to pollute, generating a business inventory, effective BMPS for varying activity types and business sectors, critical information to track, elements of a database structure, communication techniques and progressive code enforcement strategies. Snohomish County developed creative and practical solutions for source control implementation that meets permit requirements. Snohomish County navigated issues such as; accessing private property, establishing outside agency partnerships (e.g. Conservation Districts, Health Districts), working with agricultural and livestock operations, and producing reports that clearly demonstrate compliance. Tools that Permittees will take away are structure and elements of a source control program, communication techniques with businesses, and the necessary software to support a program (GIS to research and analyze data and a database to store inspection information).

This presentation is relevant to all permittees who desire to have a source control program that focuses on providing technical assistance to private businesses. Source Control is required for all Phase I permittees and is incorporated into both Eastern and Western Washington Phase II permits under the illicit discharge detection and elimination requirements. Many Phase II’s choose to implement a local source control program to assist in fulfilling IDDE objectives. Those Permittees would benefits from learning how a county, with thousands of properties that generate pollution, execute their program. In addition, Permittee’s that seek to create a new program but need assistance with program development would benefit greatly as well. The county plans to continue to implement a comprehensive source control program. Our future plans include facilitating more creative partnerships, promoting regional stormwater campaigns, fostering more collaboration with the Phase II permittees in Snohomish County, and developing a business recognition program.

Learning Objectives

The outcomes and learning objections of this presentation include: the basics elements of an effective source control program; assessing properties to determine a potential to pollute, generating a business inventory, BMPS for each activity type and business sector, BMP manuals, critical information to document, elements of a database structure, and progressive code enforcement strategies.

This presentation benefits all permittees that seek to develop a fully effective municipal stormwater program, by teaching them the basics of a proactive source control program. In the Phase I permit, a specific source control program is fully described and required. In both Eastern and Western Washington Phase II permits, the illicit discharge detection and elimination requirements include aspects of source control. Many Phase II’s choose to implement a local source control program to assist in fulfilling IDDE objectives and may want suggestions on how to improve their programs. In addition, there are Permittee’s that seek to create a program but need assistance with program development. Tools that Permittees will take away are structure and elements of a source control program, communication techniques with businesses, and the necessary software to support a program (GIS to research and analyze data and a database to store inspection information).

This presentation will address the challenges involved in generating an accurate business/property inventory from a variety of records, accessing private property, establishing outside agency partnerships (e.g. Conservation Districts, Health Districts), working with agricultural and livestock operations, and tracking the right data to produce reports that demonstrate compliance. Snohomish County has learned what program implementation techniques work best and how to build a comprehensive program that is sustainable over the long term.

Many Permittees desire to have a source control program that focuses on providing technical assistance to private businesses, who are subject to penalties if they cause pollution. Snohomish County is pro-actively evaluating sites for pollution source control, which prevents unfortunate situations for businesses, the environment and the community. Preventing pollution is more cost effective for a jurisdiction than requiring mitigations and clean up through enforcement actions. Snohomish County focuses on education and outreach; a strategy enables the county to establish and maintain strong relationships with industry, agricultural and the general business community while ensuring clean water. Although meeting federal and state mandates is costly, this program is ranks well on its benefits to cost ratio.

Track 3: Stormwater Research, Science & news

South Park Water Quality Treatment: Testing the Waters

Sheila Harrison, Seattle Public Utilities; Vicki Sironen, HDR

Local Monitoring Can Yield Big Dividends in Evaluating Program Effectiveness

Larry Schaffner, Thurston County; Scott Collyard, Department of Ecology

Abstract

Thurston County, the City of Lacey, and the City of Olympia have been implementing programmatic and structural best management practices (BMPs) in the Henderson Inlet Watershed since the early 90s. In 2013-2014, a TMDL effectiveness monitoring study conducted by the Department of Ecology's Environmental Assessment Program (EAP) in the Henderson Inlet watershed indicate that bacteria and nitrogen levels are declining throughout watershed. These reductions occurred despite an increase in human population in this Thurston County watershed and an increase in parcel density within the urban growth areas. A comparison of projects implemented in the watershed and water quality suggests that stormwater retrofits, septic-to-sewer projects, and land acquisition projects are likely responsible for the majority of the fecal coliform declines. The study found that: "Many of the water quality improvements outlined in this report are the result of coordination between Thurston County and the Cities of Lacey and Olympia, up-front investments made in planning, and Thurston County's long-term monitoring program."

The "Thurston County's long-term monitoring program" mentioned in the report refers to a formal partnership between Thurston County and the cities of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater that has jointly develop and implement a coordinated monitoring program of water quality, stream flows, lake level, and precipitation to aid in the assessment of the health of regional water resources since 1991. The intended mission of this joint effort is to:

"Assess the health of regional water resources to inform the development of programs, policies and capital facility plans to protect those water resources for beneficial uses in perpetuity."

With the reissuance of the Western Washington Stormwater Permit in 2012 (Permit), ironically resources for this joint partnership came under strain. Tough choices had to be made as the local partnership simply did not have sufficient resources to continue to fully fund local efforts and meet the Permit's new monitoring obligations. As a result of needing to meet the new Permit obligation, funding for the local monitoring were slashed by over 40 percent. As a result, this partnership's ability to assess the health of our regional water resources to inform the development of programs, policies, and capital facility plans to protect those water resources had been compromised. The same could be said for any of EAP's future efforts in the region.

There is value in having and maintaining a large regional monitoring program to provide context for local efforts, yet it is still important to support and maintain local monitoring efforts in order to inform local adaptive management processes within a reasonable time frame. Can we do something to rectify these unintended consequences? The reissuance of the 2018 Permit certainly provides an opportunity to give it a try.

Learning Objectives

Foster stronger coordination and alignment between environmental assessment, water quality clean-up planning and implementation, and stormwater permitting efforts to support more effective outcomes statewide.

Detecting and Quantifying Road-Salt Run-off in Seattle Streams

Chapin Pier, Seattle Public Utilities; Danielle Rapoza, Seattle Public Utilities

Abstract

Throughout the winter of 2016-17 there were multiple applications of rock-salt on Seattle roads. The wash-off of this salt into several Seattle streams was quantified using data loggers, recording conductivity and temperature at one-minute intervals, 24 hours/day. These conductivity readings provide a measure to quantify level of salinity increases as well as an accurate method to quantify the timing and duration of the wash-off events. Conductivity readings spiked after temperatures increased above freezing and were associated with precipitation events. The conductivity spikes were between two and 100 times higher than average conductivity levels in Seattle streams. This monitoring approach collects data at a frequent enough time scale to describe transient events accurately while avoiding the requirement to make pre-storm judgment calls on sampling.

Learning Objectives

Provides a semi-autonomous method for monitoring storm impacts to streams, emphasizes the need to sample at a frequent time-scale and addresses the weakness of relying on grab samples to describe these events. Provides specific water quality data relevant to salmonid spawning and rearing in Washington streams. The presentation is both a methodology presentation and water quality impact presentation. This presentation provides a methodology for collecting data at a relevant time scale for evaluating water quality impacts to surface waters and potential impacts to biota.

4:30pm

Conference Concludes