Source Identification Stormwater Work Group March 24, 2010

The Strategy Chapter  Source ID Monitoring is not only monitoring, but the monitoring informs the management action process  Source ID is a diagnostic tool with a feedback loop to locate sources, remove, confirm

Key Components 1. Evaluate existing data to determine stormwater problem sources/impairments 2. Prioritize Failed Endpoints/Impairments 3. Identify the Stressor 4. Set a Target for Source Reduction 5. Locate the Source(s) 6. Plan and Implement Source Removal Action(s) 7. Establish Follow-up “Monitoring” 8. Incorporate New Monitoring for Prioritization

EPA Stressor Identification

Implementation

Existing Information/Data  Prioritize on the WRIA scale  Develop a prioritization method via modeling or scoring (Ecology Watershed Characterization Project is a possibility) based upon resources, beneficial uses.  Info for prioritizing: TMDLs, 303(d), IDDE results, Industrial DMRs, Shellfish Protection Classification, Superfund/MTCA, etc.  There is a trigger to enter the Source ID Loop

Identify the Stressor  This can be a simple process or require research/extensive monitoring  Use EPA Causal Sequence  Biological-Weight of Evidence, Chemical-Work up the system  i.e. Shellfish bed downgrade in rural area, sample up the stream system. Identify farm with 100 stock animals and creek flowing through the pasture.  OR  i.e. B-IBI lower than biological potential, drill down to identify the cause. Aquatic Scientist analyzes peripheral data. Additional monitoring may be needed.

Nature of the Source  Each source will have a different framework for identification, monitoring, removal, and feedback  Copper-optimum control at regulatory level.  Fecal coliform-optimum control at the local level.

Set the Goal  Requires a QAPP or Recovery Plan, or implement existing program  Example: Low B-IBI score, what is the biological potential in that system?

Locate the Source(s)  Performed in the “plan”  Further monitoring, mapping, modeling, etc. may be required to refine the location of the source.  Move “upstream” in the system to refine the location.

Remove the Source(s)  Implement Management Actions, plans, existing programs.  Share successful source removal/reduction programs/activities Puget Sound-wide.  More effective IDDE screening parameters, programs that result in high illicit discharge detection.

Monitoring Requirements  Establish adequate monitoring for feedback  Establish “focused” monitoring to measure progress or determine problem locations  Monitoring will be unique for each stressor identified

Incorporate New Monitoring  S&T programs provide new information of failed endpoints/impairments  Effectiveness programs may provide new information of failed endpoints/impairments S&T Endpoint Indicator Source ID Process Failed Endpoint/Indicator

Hypothesis  Identification, prioritization and removal of stormwater sources result in improved targeted biological endpoints or impairments.  Receiving water S&T monitoring in targeted watersheds results in early source removal program implementation.

Timeline  Prioritization-2012  Plans-2013  Begin/continue management actions-2013  S&T Monitoring Year 1 and 2 results/analysis  2016-Work on new problem areas identified by S&T or local additional monitoring.

Roles and Responsibilities  Permittees-WRIA Lead, participate in prioritization, lead Source ID projects in their MS4 areas  Industrial and other NPDES Stormwater Permits- DMR data incorporated into prioritization  Ecology-SOPs, Review QAPPs, Plans,

Cost  Dependent on the Source/Stressor.  Many source removal programs are in place, but the monitoring, goals, and feedback loop needs to be implemented and in concert with the identified source.

The End