1The Interagency Project Team is composed of representatives from Clark County, King County, Kitsap County,
Pierce County, Snohomish County, Thurston County and the Washington State Department of Transportation.
Recommendations for Improving Water Quality
Assessment and Total Maximum Daily Load
Programs in Washington State
Prepared for the
Interagency Project Team 1
July 29, 2014
701 Pike Street, Suite 1200
Seattle, WA 98101
Recommendations for Improving Water Quality Assessment and
Total Maximum Daily Load Programs in Washington State
Prepared for the
Interagency Project Team
July 29, 2014
iii
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
Acknowledgements
The Interagency Project Team (Team) would like to thank the state representatives listed below who
participated in the phone interviews and subsequent follow-up correspondence related to their
respective state water quality assessments (WQAs); total maximum daily load (TMDL) prioritization
and development; and TMDL implementation policies, regulations, and procedures.
California
Tom Mumley, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Executive Officer
Florida
Drew Bartlett, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Division of Environmental
Assessment and Restoration, Division Director
Julie Espy, FDEP, Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration, Environmental
Administrator
Jan Mandrup-Poulsen, FDEP, Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration, Environmental
Administrator
Ohio
Jason Fyffe, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) Division of Surface Water, Supervisor
of the Stormwater Unit
Trinka Mount, Ohio EPA Division of Surface Water, Supervisor of the TMDL, Lake Erie, and Inland
Lakes Program
Beth Risley, Ohio EPA Division of Surface Water, TMDL Development
South Carolina
Wade Cantrell, Department of Health and Environmental Control: Bureau of Water, Manager of the
303(d), TMDL and Nonpoint Source Pollutant Section
Matt Carswell, Department of Health and Environmental Control: Bureau of Water, 303(d) and TMDL
Coordinator
Jill Stewart, Department of Health and Environmental Control: Bureau of Water, Manager of the
Stormwater Permitting Section
Washington
Jessica Archer, Department of Ecology, Environmental Assessment Program
Susan Braley, Department of Ecology, Water Quality Standards Supervisor
Helen Bresler, Department of Ecology, Nonpoint Program and TMDL Development
Stephanie Brock, Department of Ecology, Environmental Assessment Program
Chad Brown, Department of Ecology, Water Quality Standards
Melissa Gildersleeve, Department of Ecology, Environmental Assessment Program Manager
Bill Moore, Department of Ecology, Stormwater Permitting
Paul Pickett, Department of Ecology, Environmental Assessment Program
Acknowledgements
Recommendations for Improving Water Quality Assessment and TMDL Programs in Washington State
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
Wisconsin
Aaron Larson, Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Water Quality, Impaired Waters
Coordinator
Mary Anne Lowndes, Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Watershed Management, Runoff
Management Section Chief
Kevin Kirsch, Department of Natural Resources, Statewide TMDL Development Coordinator
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. iii
List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vi
List of Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. vii
Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1-1
1.1
Background ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1-1
1.2
Project Objectives and Approach ……………………………………………………………………………….1-1
1.3
Organization of This Report ……………………………………………………………………………………….1-2
2. Methods ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2-1
2.1
Identification of States and Contacts …………………………………………………………………………2-1
2.2
Development of Interview Questions ………………………………………………………………………….2-1
2.3
Literature Review and Research ………………………………………………………………………………..2-2
2.4
State Interviews and Documentation …………………………………………………………………………2-2
2.5
Prepare Summary Matrix and Develop Recommendations ………………………………………….2-2
2.6
Coordination with Ecology …………………………………………………………………………………………2-3
3. Key Findings by State …………………………………………………………………………………………………………3-1
3.1
California …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3-1
3.2
Florida ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3-1
3.3
Ohio 3-2
3.4
South Carolina …………………………………………………………………………………………………………3-3
3.5
Washington ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3-3
3.6
Wisconsin ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3-4
4. Recommendations …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4-1
Recommendation 1: Establish a multi-stakeholder Standing Committee to improve
coordination and engagement with the regulated community…………………………4-2
Recommendation 2: Implement existing regulatory authority related to unpermitted and
nonpoint sources …………………………………………………………………………………………4-3
Recommendation 3: Refine water quality standards and water quality assessment
methodologies …………………………………………………………………………………………….4-5
Recommendation 4: Improve and employ consistent processes for collecting, assessing,
and utilizing credible data in WQA and TMDL development …………………………….4-7
Recommendation 5: Refine water quality assessment categories to improve clarity and
aid in defining priority water bodies ………………………………………………………………4-8
Recommendation 6: Update the current biological assessment and listing methodology4-9
Recommendation 7: Define TMDL prioritization methodology, timelines, and process for
public involvement …………………………………………………………………………………… 4-11
Recommendation 8: Define TMDL development methodology …………………………………. 4-12
Table of Contents
Recommendations for Improving Water Quality Assessment and TMDL Programs in Washington State
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
Recommendation 9: Develop consistent TMDL implementation expectations ………….. 4-14
5. Limitations ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5-1
6. References ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6-1
Appendix A: Interview Questions ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. A-1
Appendix B: Interview Transcripts …………………………………………………………………………………………….. B-1
Appendix C: Results Matrix ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..C-1
Appendix D: Ecology Comments on Draft Recommendations …………………………………………………….. D-1
List of Tables
Table 4-1. Recommendations Summary …………………………………………………………………………………….4-1
Abbreviations
Recommendations for Improving Water Quality Assessment and TMDL Programs in Washington State
vii
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
List of Abbreviations
biotic index
BIBI
Benthic Index of Biological Integrity
BMAP
Best Management Action Plan
BMP
best management practice
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CWA
Clean Water Act
CWC
California Water Code
DMA
designated management agency
Ecology
Washington State Department of Ecology
EIMS
Environmental Information Management
System
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
EPT
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera
FDEP
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection
GAO
U.S. Government Accountability Office
Integrated Report
load allocation
LOE
line of evaluation
MOS
margin of safety
MS4
municipal separate storm sewer system
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System
NPS
nonpoint sources
Ohio EPA Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
quality assurance
QAPP
Quality Assurance Project Plan
QA/QC
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
RCW
Revised Code of Washington
RIVPACS
River Invertebrate Prediction and
Classification System
Team
Interagency Project Team
TMDL
total maximum daily load
TSS
total suspended solids
WAC
Washington Administrative Code
WERF
Water Environment Research Federation
WisCALM Wisconsin Consolidated Assessment and
Listing Methodology
WLA
wasteload allocation
WQA
water quality assessment
WQP
Water Quality Policy
WQS
water quality standards
WSDOT
Washington State Department of
Transportation
ES-1
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
Executive Summary
The Interagency Project Team (Team) consists of staff from the surface water departments of Clark,
King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish and Thurston counties and staff from the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT). The Team was formed to improve implementation of the
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303(d) and total maximum daily load (TMDL) programs in Washington
State.
The Team evaluated the water quality assessment and TMDL programs in Washington State in
comparison to five other states in order to identify potential improvements. This report documents
the Team’s evaluation methods, key findings, and recommendations. It is intended to serve as a
starting point for discussions with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and policymakers regarding improvements in the
state’s 303(d) and TMDL programs.
During this report’s preparation, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a
comprehensive review of the nation’s TMDL program, including data and findings applicable to
Washington State. The report, Clean Water Act: Changes Needed If Key EPA Program Is to Help Fulfill
the Nation’s Water Quality Goals, concluded that serious water quality problems exist, even after
tens of thousands of TMDLs have been completed since 2002. GAO found that more lakes and rivers
are listed as impaired now than in 2002. The report states, “few TMDLs had helped water bodies
attain water quality standards,” and that “long-established TMDLs often do not contain features that
would help water bodies attain water quality standards.” GAO attributes most of these failures to
incomplete or poorly conceived 303(d) listing decisions and TMDLs, and lack of implementation of
nonpoint source controls. The GAO report contains recommendations to address these issues.
Despite these shortcomings, the Team views the 303(d) and TMDL programs, if effectively
implemented, as having potential for realizing significant benefits towards the protection and
restoration of water bodies.
After review of the state representative interviews, national reports, and key findings the Team
developed the following nine recommendations:
Recommendation 1: Establish a multi-stakeholder Standing Committee to improve coordination and
engagement with the regulated community
Recommendation 2: Implement existing regulatory authority related to unpermitted and nonpoint
sources
Recommendation 3: Refine water quality standards and water quality assessment methodologies
a) Use E. coli as the indicator bacteria.
b) Revise statewide listings to reflect current water quality conditions.
c) Improve transparency and completeness of methodology for water body de-
listing.
d) Define a critical condition or period of application for the water quality
assessment (WQA) of each water body-parameter combination.
e) Re-evaluate the potential benefits of the binomial probability distribution
function in WQAs.
Executive Summary
Recommendations for Improving Water Quality Assessment and TMDL Programs in Washington State
ES-2
Use of contents on this sheet is subject to the limitations specified at the end of this document.
Recommendation 4: Improve and employ consistent processes for collecting, assessing, and utilizing
credible data in WQA and TMDL development
a) Standardize and improve transparency of WQA and TMDL development
methodologies to be consistent with current and applicable EPA quality
related regulations, policy, and guidance.
b) Clearly define and apply appropriate quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) levels for WQAs and TMDL development.
Recommendation 5: Refine water quality assessment categories to improve clarity and aid in
defining priority water bodies
Recommendation 6: Update the current biological assessment and listing methodology
a) Employ a public process to help define the methodology and quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) protocols utilized for biologic monitoring
efforts.
b) Require stressor identification before listing…