puget sound geographic funds update for the island county lio€¦ · 17/04/2019 · epa factors...

Puget Sound Geographic Funds Updatefor the Island County LIO

.April 17, 2019

Agenda

Introductions Review by Strategic

Initiative to dateQuestions/Discussion

Introduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish DiscussionIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish DiscussionIntroduction Stormwater Habitat ShellfishIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Introduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Stormwater: Derek Day

Habitat: Julie Watson Kirsten Feifel

Shellfish: Clara Hard

Strategic Initiative (SI) LeadsIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

How did we identify all these NTAs?


NTAs Solicited and Evaluated

LIO evaluation

of NTAs20%

Regional SIAT evaluation of

NTAs80%

FINAL TIER IN 2018 AA

April-May 2018

May-July 2018 August 2018


389

4765

107 96

11

10872 74

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450631 NTAs adopted in the 2018-2022 Action Agenda

NTAs address all Vital Signs and most Regional Priority approaches

NOTE: NTAs often address multiple VS – data reflects NTA selection of Regional Priority approaches.


NTAs by Vital Sign

160

14

11

5

15

18

23

12

5

10

13

0

48

34

65

46

113

79

24

20

11

46

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

SoundwideWhatcom

West CentralStraight of Juan de Fuca

South SoundSouth Central

Snohomish StillaguamishSkagit Samish

San JuanIsland

Hood Canal Regional

Local

LOCAL NTAs: 447 REGIONAL NTAs: 184


NTAs by Geography

Funding model structure and associated Puget Sound Geographic (NEP) funds


The Action Agenda serves as the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan under the authority of the National Estuary Program (NEP).

The EPA Puget Sound Geographic (NEP) funds: Must be used to implement NTAs or

identified critical gaps in the Action Agenda

The SI’s were established in 2015 to better align funding with the Action Agenda

Each SI is advised by a “Strategic Initiative Advisory Team” (SIAT)

SI funds primarily implement NTAs in the Action Agenda


Since SI leads have been identified we have funded NTAs from both the 2016-2018 and the newly adopted 2018-2022 Action Agenda

This current SI model builds on the Lead Organization funding model 7 Lead Organizations, 2011-2019,

organized by programmatic focus Solicited projects in alignment with

the Action Agenda

The starting point for all of the SIATs:

EPA factors to consider when awarding Puget Sound Geographic funds:

1. NTA tier is a place to start2. Focus on NTAs that have a relationship to a

critical priority pathway in an Implementation Strategy

3. Consider tribal priorities and treaty rights4. Priority science and monitoring gaps5. Cross-cutting or synergistic opportunities 6. Cost effective for results (bang for the buck)7. Pilot/priming/planning investments 8. Agency directives (fr. Congress/OMB/EPA)9. Non-capital projects that have fewer

dedicated funding sources 10. Other available sources of funding


Project distributionAll Strategic Initiatives (2016-18)

Research and monitoring

Education and outreach

Capital projects

Barriers, incentives andtechnical assistance

Operations

Plans and planning support

“Make non-capital project needs – such as science, monitoring, and education- outreach –the highest priorities for NEP funding across all three Strategic Initiatives;…”

-Leadership Council, 1/12/17

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Academic Local State Tribe Non-profit Other

Number of NTAs funded by owner typeAll Strategic Initiatives (2016-18)

2018 2017 2016

Regional$12,586,727

$815,611

$3,107,543

$900,750$2,827,914

$1,424,850 $1,792,850$1,470,400

$1,487,800

$3,909,361

$2,415,000

Local$20,152,079

Geographic distribution of NEP fundsAll Strategic Initiatives (2016-18)

San Juan

Sno-Stilly

Island

South Sound

Hood Canal

West Central

Strait

*Samish/Skagit

South Central

Whatcom

“Regional” is defined as any NTA occurring in two or more LIOs.

Next: quick review of the process SIATs underwent to develop the 2018 funding recommendations


Stormwater Strategic Initiative LeadIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish

Department of Ecology

Washington Stormwater Center

Washington Department of Commerce



Stormwater Strategic Initiative Advisory Team (SIAT)

Introduction Stormwater Habitat ShellfishIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Name Affiliation Focus Area

Emma Bolin Jefferson County Rural landuse planner- LID, forest conversions, hobby farmer

Mark Bozlee City of Tacoma Environmental chemist, exp. With street sweeping, source control

Wayne Carlson AHBL Landuse planner, code integration

Dana DeLeon City of Tacoma Urban stormwater, regional SW facilities

Paul Fendt Parametrix Urban retrofits, policy and planning, water resource engineer

Andy Gregory Puget Soundkeeper Alliance Behavioral change, pollution prevention

Robb Krehbiel* Defenders of Wildlife Rain garden campaigns, policy analyst, wildlife protection

Monte Marti Snohomish Conservation District Agriculture, buffers, partnerships, unmitigated awesomeness

Joy Michaud Herrera Env. Consultants Science, monitoring, PS Toxic Loading Study tech lead

Chris Montague-Breakwell Washington State Dept. of Ecology Stormwater regulations/policy

Jason Sullivan City of Bonney Lake Landuse planning and stormwater planning integration

Heather Trim Zero Waste Washington Policy, education and research, toxics and pollution prevention


Stormwater Strategic Initiative Funding Process


Constants…• Only funded NTAs

• Used EPA Funding Guidance

• SIAT Makes Recommendations

• Stormwater SI has funded the SIAT recommendation without changes

• LIOs Identify $100k projects


Factors to Consider • Start with the AA ranking

• Implementation Strategy critical pathways

• Source of funds

• Synergistic opportunities

• Bang for the buck

• Pilot/Priming/Planning Investments

• Biennial Science Workplan

• Significant gaps

EPA Funding GuidanceEPA provided the SI leads and the SIATs with funding guidance that we used to select projects for funding.

This guidance gave us sideboards for making funding recommendations that differed from the Action Agenda ranked lists.






Our funding process has been evolving based on feedback—and, changing circumstances• First Funding Iteration

• Second Funding Iteration

Round 1 & 2• 2016 AA

• 1-n NTA rank

• Nonexistent or Nascent ISs

• NTAs fit in one Strategic Initiative




Our funding process has been evolving based on feedback—and, changing circumstances• First Funding Iteration

• Second Funding Iteration

2018-19 Funding • New Action Agenda

• EPA funding guidance outlined criteria

• We have ISs, Freshwater Quality (BIBI) and Toxics in Fish

• Looked at every NTA

• Used IS to determine ‘Nexus’

• Used IS to sort priorities and set preliminary investment levels

SIAT DeliberationsNTA-by-NTA




SIL Staff mapped any NTA that fit to a SW results chain

SIAT checked the work

Achieves IS Outcomes

Y/N

Where are our greatest

opportunities?

Which NTAs standout?

What happens when we use the IS? Type 1 or 2 errors?Set investment

levels by opportunity

categoryIs a med. NTA in an important area better than a standout NTA outside

of a priority area?

Are we beginning to see gaps in important work? NTAs vs $s

NTAs by RC

Category

NTAs by

Merit

Ranked all projects

Turned best by category, and from top of

merit list into funding list

Triage(Y/M/N)

Triage(Y/M/N)

Implementation Strategy Approach

“On the Merits” Approach


Stormwater SIAT Funding RecommendationIntroduction Stormwater Habitat ShellfishIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

NTA Title Owner Budget SIAT Allocation How

2018-0402 Shelton Green Stormwater Infrastructure Program DevelopmentMason Conservation District $ 317,000 $ 317,000 SIAT Rank 7

2018-0708

Performance Evaluation of Engineered Hyporheic Zones for In-Stream Water Quality Improvement in Urban Creeks UW Tacoma $ 243,38 $ 243,387 SIAT Rank 6

2018-0792

Source Identification of Toxics Impacting Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Two Major Puget Sound Rivers

Department of Ecology $ 550,000 $ 550,000* SIAT Rank 4

2018-0769 Commercial Property Engagement through Parking Lot Retrofits Snohomish CD $ 100,000 $ 100,000 SIAT Rank 3

2018-0735 Integrated Mapping and Decision Tools for Land Use Planning in PSDepartment of Commerce $ 998,750 $ 100,000* SIAT Rank 2

2018-0658

Strengthening STORM for Improved Local Capacity to Manage Stormwater Programs King County $ 222,000 $ 222,000 SIAT Rank 12

2018-0615 Implementing Green Stormwater in Port Angeles: GreenLink Phase II Futurewise $ 248,700 $ 248,700 SIAT Rank 11

2018-0488 Template for Biennial Tracking Land Cover ChangeDepartment of Fish and Wildlife $ 205,000 $ 205,000 SIAT Rank 10

2018-0243

Development of Chemical Indicators to Detect, Track and Assess Treatment of Novel and Emerging Toxic Stormwater Pollutants

UWTacoma $ 241,937 $ 241,937

SIAT Multiple star project

2018-0321 Developing a Natural Resources Asset Management Program Kitsap County $ 375,000 $ 375,000SIAT Multiple star

project

2018-0221

Clallam County Stormwater Management Plan, Regulations, and Outreach Clallam County $ 100,000 $ 100,000 LIO pick

2018-0509

Measurement of Pharmaceuticals, Personal Care Products, and Perfluoroalkyl Substances in Budd Inlet and Port Gardner Bay sediments

Department of Ecology $ 104,018 $ 100,000 LIO pick


Paul Adamus Adamus Resource Assessment, Inc. Kirk Lakey WA Fish and Wildlife

Charlene Andrade WA Commerce John Lovey Private Consulting

Alan Chapman Private Citizen Susan Meyer EPA

Jessica Hamill Snohomish County Desiree Radice City of Tacoma

Colin Hume WA Ecology Michael Rylko EPA

Mariska Kecskes EarthCorps Stan Walsh Skagit River System Cooperative

Jay Krienitz WA Fish and Wildlife Ryan Williams Mason Conservation District

Habitat Strategic Initiative Advisory Team (SIAT)



631 NTAs

18+ NTAs (HSIAT)

Sideboards:• Approx. $4.2 million for SIAT funding

(includes savings from previous years)• $500k LIO-directed funding in Habitat SI

Unique features• Thinking of funding over time, including previous

investments and direction for future years

• Obtaining project-level detail for NTAs on short list

• Seeking and incorporating partner insight

Habitat Strategic Initiative Funding Process



“What story do we want to tell over time about the strategic use of Habitat Strategic Initiative NEP funds?”

To develop thematic narratives, the SIAT considered: Habitat Implementation Strategies Existing momentum of Habitat SI work/grants EPA guidance and Habitat SIAT values for NEP funding

Four thematic funding narratives emerged: Incentives and behavior change Monitoring and information Gaps Geographic multi-benefit planning Regulations and compliance

What is the FY18 piece of the story?

Approaching the new Action Agenda

Introduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish DiscussionIntroduction Stormwater Habitat ShellfishIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

VALUES FOR 2018 NEP FUNDING

Create a holistic, strategic funding package that builds on previous investments

Address key, non-capital needs by investing in enabling conditions, planning, and behavior change

Leverage funding to advance implementation of the Implementation Strategies

Funding Recommendation ProcessIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Process1. SIAT developed thematic funding narratives based on

EPA guidance and SIAT values

2. SIAT worked in sub-groups to develop and refine criteria for selecting NTAs to discuss (initial cut: 87 NTAs)

3. Each sub-group put forward a list of NTAs (39 combined), and the full SIAT chose via survey their top NTAs (27) for full-SIAT discussion

4. SIL collected information (owner and partner)

5. SIAT reviewed, discussed, and voted on each NTA to develop the recommendation


DRIVING QUESTIONS:

Is funding this NTA a strategic use of NEP dollars in relation to the broader Puget Sound funding landscape?

Is this NTA timely?

Strong objection

Meager support

Lukewarm support

Enthusiastic support

Decision:• Package received unanimous,

enthusiastic support from SIAT

Habitat SIAT Funding RecommendationIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Funded NTAs: 2018-0106 – Skagit River Ross Island Reach Restoration Acquisition Strategy 2018-0219 – Shoreline Restoration Effectiveness Monitoring 2018-0242 – Puget Sound Sand Lance Habitat Characterization and Mapping 2018-0249 – North Fork Stillaguamish Integrated Floodplain Management 2018-0265 – Implement incentives to encourage soft-shore protection techniques 2018-0266 – Development of a residential shoreline loan program 2018-0327 – Puget Sound Critical Areas Monitoring and Adaptive Management Program 2018-0409 – West Sound Eelgrass Monitoring Program 2018-0505 – Strategic West Central Water Type and eDNA Assessment 2018-0525 – Shoreline Monitoring Toolbox: Data Analysis and Interpretation 2018-0587 – Skagit HDM Priority Projects 2018-0613 – Developing tools for multi-benefit project selection and sequencing in the Snohomish River Basin 2018-0636 – Geomorphic Flood Hazard Risk on the Lower Skykomish River 2018-0641 – Improved Landowner Development Decisions to Protect Critical Areas and Manage Stormwater 2018-0697 – Status and trends of Skagit Chinook salmon abundance, life history diversity, and productivity 2018-0713 – Effectiveness monitoring of regulations regarding shoreline, critical areas, and stormwater requirements 2018-0715 – Integrating climate resilience into farm-fish-flood projects in Snohomish and Stillaguamish River Floodplain

= Funding package for $4.2 million


Habitat SIAT Funding RecommendationIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

LIO-directed funding:

Unique feature of funding package: Continuing the Habitat SI’s work to advance the Shoreline Armoring Implementation Strategy

Supporting transition of Shore Friendly to ESRP Governor’s budget includes one year of funding in ESRP ($810k) Habitat SIAT recommended collaborating with ESRP and bringing match funding to support

selected Shore Friendly programs associated with NTAs Supporting ECB-recommended revolving loan study Funding 8 cross-cutting NTAs (e.g. Habitat + Chinook or BIBI regional priorities)!


2018-0172 Expand South Sound shore Friendly Program2016-0196 Shore Friendly Kitsap2018-0218 Stillaguamish Floodplain Acquisitions and Restoration2018-0401 Regional Water Supply and Management Plan2018-0505 Strategic West Central Water Type and eDNA Assessment2018-0828 San Juan County Shoreline Armor Change Analysis ’09-19

Shore Friendly Story


Marine and Nearshore LO (collaboration

with ESRP)

Shoreline Armoring

Implementation Strategy

HSIL+PSP+Kitsap-hosted

workshop for ECB on funding

ECB decision leads to ESRP

adopting Shore Friendly

Habitat SI provides support

to ensure successful transition

… from NEP pilot funding, through Partnership boards engagement to resolve the issue identified because of the Implementation Strategy, to Habitat SI NEP funding aiding the transition of the program’s management via ESRP

The Habitat Strategic Initiative worked to steward this effort at every step!

The Habitat Strategic Initiative also…Introduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Leads Collaborates and supports the Partnership

Example: NTA camp! Advances research and board engagement to address

critical needs and gaps Participates on steering committees and programs

relevant to the Implementation Strategies Ensures grants include “broader impacts”

Builds networks Creates linkages between state, local, and federal

efforts across institutions Manages SIL website and blog Creates communication materials Increases agency engagement in Partnership activities


SIL WORKPLAN:

Build collaboration across the PS recovery community Fund and manage grants to maximize NEP funds Manage and implement the habitat Implementation Strategies Ensure adaptive management and climate change remain central to recovery strategies and funding Support locally driven funding

Shellfish Advisory TeamIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Michael See Skagit County Public Works Teri King University of Washington Sea Grant

Ron Cummings WA Ecology Chery Sullivan WA Agriculture

Catherine Gockel US EPA Julianne Ruffner Ecology

Jean Frost WA Health Art Starry Thurston County PublicHealth and Social Services

Abby Barnes WA Natural Resources Alan Chapman Independent

Shana Joy WA Conservation Commission Stuart Whitford Jefferson Public Health District

PSP Liaison: Heather Saunders Benson


-6,000

-4,000

-2,000

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

acre

sCurrent status: Puget Sound Net

Acreage Change

2007: +3202008: +1,0782009: +7272010: +2,5992011: -3,3402012: +1,3902013: +2642014: +3092015: +4662016: +9902017: +882018: +871

+5,762

Samish Bay (4,000 acres)

Portage Bay (800 acres)

Drayton Harbor (800 acres)

Overall, water quality is improving

Why are things improving?1. Creation of Shellfish Protection Districts, development and implementation of closure response plans.

Sustainability, long-term efforts.2. Effective pollution identification and correction programs.3. Development and implementation of on-site sewage system management plans.4. Implementation of agricultural best management practices.5. Control of boaters waste.

Outstanding Issues:• Large downgrades in Samish and Portage bays impact potential to reach 2020 goal.• Agricultural barriers must be overcome to regain acreage losses in the northern sound.

NDZ (350 acres)

Washington State Department of Health | 35

Shellfish SI Investments in FY2016 and FY2017

35

Boating, $281,000

Ag, $2,006,557

PIC, $4,447,214

OSS, $703,508

Monitoring, $180,000

Other, $195,617

Boating Ag PIC OSS Monitoring Other

North Sound $ 1,225,757

Whatcom $ 1,015,000

Skagit $ 486,800

San Juan $ 289,130

Snohomish $ 500,000

Island $ 200,000

King $ 380,000

Kitsap $ 310,800

South Sound $ 1,232,914

Thurston $ 104,500

Mason $ 99,878

Hood Canal $ 444,500

Clallam $ 358,000

Soundwide $ 866,617


631 NTAs

71 NTAs

10 NTAs(+3 LIO recommended

NTAs)

Total• ~$3.3 million allocated for SIAT funding

(includes savings from previous years)• + $200k LIO-recommended NTAs (HC & Island)

Guidelines• Decisions guided by EPA Funding Guidance to SI

Leads• Shellfish Acreage target

• Consider previous and current funded projects

Link to full Recommendations

Shellfish Strategic Initiative Funding Process FY18


http://www.psp.wa.gov/strategic-initiatives-leads.php

Funding Recommendation ProcessIntroduction Stormwater Habitat Shellfish Discussion

Process1. SIAT developed plan to use EPA guidance and regional

priorities

2. SIAT selected cross-cutting NTAs to be considered

3. DOH restoration assessment provided to the team

4. 53 NTAs bucketed by each SIAT member into high priority (with top picks), medium priority and lower priority

5. SIAT reviewed, discussed, examined gaps and voted on top NTAs to develop the recommendation

6. Surveys for justification and rational


DRIVING QUESTIONS:

Does this NTA contribute to the Shellfish Beds overarching regional priorities and align with the EPA funding guidance? How does this NTA fit with previous and current funded projects?

Lower Priority Medium Priority High Priority Top Picks

Decision:• Unanimous support from SIAT

Shellfish Strategic Initiative - 2018SIAT - Recommended 2018 NTAs:

0171 – Whatcom County Enhanced PIC (partial) 0181 – Nutrient Management in North Sound Counties (partial) 0236 – Skagit County PIC Compliance Assurance Program (partial) 0479 – Skagit County Pasture Management Outreach and Tech Assistance (partial) 0270 – Skagit County O&M assistance for low-income residents (full) 0848 – Advanced Distillation Treatment (partial) 0458 – Thurston County PIC (partial) 0639 – Hood Canal PIC (partial) 0245 – Jefferson County OSS Repair/Abatement Program (partial) 0152 – Enhanced OSS in Clallam County’s MRA (full)

LIO - Recommended 2018 NTAs: 0324 – Coupeville Outfall Study (full) 0843 – Sound Horsekeeping – Camano Island (partial) 0386 – Hood Canal Shellfish Initiative (partial)

= Funding package for ~$3.5 million

Island County LIO funding from the Pathogens LO and Shellfish SI


*Note this excludes other non-NEP awards (Rec Shellfish, Swimming Beach, LMP funding etc)*Dollar amount listed is the amount awarded, some contract negotiations are pending/in process*Ag and Outfall Projects listed in 2018 were per Island LIO recommendation

Type 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Totals

NEP $ Pathogen Lead Organization Shellfish Strategic Initiative

PIC $400,000 $200,000 $600,000

OSS $81,400 $120,000 $100,000 $301,400

BEACH $2,800 $8,000 $17,800 $12,400 $12,200 $14,300 $27,200 $94,700

Ag $51,000 $51,000

Outfall $49,000 $49,000

Total NEP $1,096,100

1. What criteria or priorities would you advise the SIATs use when selecting NTAs for consideration for 2019 funding?

2. Are there any specific process changes for future funding recommendations you would like to see?

Forward looking feedback:


Questions and DiscussionPlease enter your questions into the chat box. We’ll take

questions first from Board and SRC members and then the public. Thank you!

puget sound geographic funds update for the island county lio€¦ · 17/04/2019 · epa factors...

Documents