The Legislature this week voted to phase out cooper in brake pads, provided there are reasonable alternatives and that research continues to suggest that brake pads are contributing significant amounts of toxic copper. The bill is Senate Bill 6557.

This last point about research — about the need to know more about the alternate states of copper in the environment — was raised by Silverdale resident Bob Benze. I covered his questions and success in adding an amendment to the bill in the March 1 edition of the Kitsap Sun.

Even at low levels, an ionic form of copper has been shown to affect the sense of smell in salmon, which can lead to confusion and reproductive failure. It has become a major concern, especially in urban areas. Here’s a fact sheet from the Washington Department of Ecology.

Ivy Sager-Rosenthal of the Washington Toxics Coalition supports the Puget Sound Partnership’s call for a full assessment of toxic chemicals flowing into Puget Sound and an increased focus on eliminating sources of such pollution.

Last week, Ted Sturdevant, director of Ecology, testified before Congress about actions taken by state governments, generally because the federal government has been slow to act. He and 12 other state environmental officials are calling for reform of the federal Toxic Substances Control Act.

Washington was the first state to draft a formal policy phasing out persistent bioaccumulative toxics, or PBTs. This led to state laws phasing out mercury and toxic flame retardants. The latest legislation, finalized this week, will ban bisphenol-A in baby bottles and sports bottles.

Sturdevant spelled out three guiding principles for addressing persistent toxic chemicals:

“First: before you allow a substance to be put into widespread use and commerce, it makes sense to take all reasonable measures to first make sure it is safe.

“Second: if science tells us that there are toxic chemicals that pose an urgent and unacceptable threat, government should be able to protect the public and ban those chemicals.

“Third: if we know with reasonable certainty that a particular substance is dangerous to people or the food chain and doesn’t break down; and if we know that allowing continued use of that substance will spread it far and wide; and if there is an alternative substance that could perform the same task much more safely; then the right policy is simple: stop using the dangerous substance, and use the safer alternative.”

These chemicals are called “persistent” for a reason, and polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, are a shameful example of what can happen. The production of PCBs began in the 1920s. Despite their usefulness in a variety of applications, studies in the 1930s showed that this class of chemicals could be harmful to humans. Production increased, as did the problems, with few people paying attention to the long-term effects. In 1979, PCBs were finally banned, but even today they are still being found in animals, including humans.

PCBs are suspected of causing cancer and have been associated with developmental, reproductive and immune problems.

Sturdevant again:

“This is a critical point; when we put persistent toxics out into the world, they persist. And if they turn out to be a problem, then the problem becomes enormous, and largely unsolvable. Once out, we cannot ever truly put the PBT genie back in the bottle. This has been an expensive lesson that we all should learn from — when we uncork that bottle, let’s be as sure as we can that it makes sense to do so.”

Principles proposed by the 13 state environmental officials calling for reforms in the Toxic Substances Control Act:

Require Chemical Data Reporting. Chemical and product manufacturers should be required to develop and provide chemical health and safety information, as well as exposure and use data, including the presence of toxic chemicals in products and the associated chemical hazards and risks, to regulators, businesses, and the public.

Demonstrate Chemicals and Products are Safe. Manufacturers should provide the necessary information to regulators to conclude that new and existing chemicals and products in commerce are safe and do not endanger the public or the environment. The public has a right to expect that the products they use are safe.

Prioritize Chemicals of Concern. Government should identify and prioritize chemicals of concern in order to regulate the most problematic chemicals in commerce, and have the authority to take timely action to protect people and the environment. Sufficient resources should be made available to support these actions.

Protect the Most Vulnerable. Chemical regulation should be designed to protect the most vulnerable, including pregnant women and children.

Promote Safer Chemicals and Products. Based on green chemistry principles, manufacturers should be required to assess and identify safer alternatives to problematic chemicals of concern. Government should establish protocols for evaluating potential alternatives to chemicals of concern.

Address Emerging Contaminants. Emerging chemicals of concern, including nanoscale materials, need to be assessed for public and environmental safety before they go into widespread commerce and use.

Strengthen Federal Law & Preserve States’ Rights. States acknowledge the need for a strong federal chemical regulation system, while expressly preserving the authority of state and localities to implement measures to manage chemicals of concern.

Fund State Programs. Effective state-federal governance should enhance the role of states in TSCA implementation, promote data and information sharing, and provide sustained funding for state programs. The states are in a unique position to provide innovative, cost-effective solutions for chemicals of concern prioritization, interstate data sharing, and safer chemical alternatives assessments.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

In an e-mail to participants and supporters of the project, Castle again declared that Kitsap County is the “low-impact development capital of Washington,” as he did last April. See my Kitsap Sun story from April 7, 2009.

The following is a final assessment of the project, as listed in the summary, along with a map of low-impact development projects throughout Kitsap County. (Click on the pins for descriptions.)

“This project has met and/or exceeded all its goals. Every jurisdiction in Kitsap County has adopted the same LID Standards, The Kitsap County Low Impact Development Guidance Manual is well thought of for both how comprehensive it is and how current the information on low impact development — it’s modeling and use — is.

“The challenges that remain are transitional. While much progress has been made in Kitsap County with the engineering community, there are still some in both the public and private sector who have yet to acquire the technical knowledge to become comfortable in designing and/or reviewing projects that include low impact development.

“The PSP/WSU Technical Training Workshops are the most comprehensive and contain the most current technical information in the country. However, the quantity and quality of technical training opportunities needs to be expanded and supported for some time.

“The Kitsap Spreadsheet Modeling Tool (LID Calculator) will provide an “ease of use” element to meeting the sizing and use of LID features in new and retrofit projects… In our ‘Kitsap County Low Impact Development Guidance Manual’ workshops and Webinar, it should be noted that all the presenters are from Kitsap County…. These private and public sector individuals were selected to recognize the low impact development knowledge that Kitsap pubic officials and industry professionals have achieved and to show that Kitsap County has the knowledge, leadership, and technical expertise to successfully implement low impact development.

“As more and more new development, and commercial and homeowner retrofit projects are completed the increased aquifer recharge and the water quality benefit of natural treatment will result in significantly less pollutants in runoff reaching streams and water bodies. In addition, low impact development practices will result in less peak runoff caused erosion in stream channels.”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Now, after five years, the health district has released a report showing major improvements in water quality in all the major streams. See my story in today’s Kitsap Sun or check out the report (PDF 1.7 mb).

During the project, area residents were assisted in finding and repairing their aging septic systems in various parts of the watershed. Businesses were shown how to maintain nearby storm sewers and were encouraged to flush washwater down the sanitary sewers, not the storm drain. Even old sewer lines were inspected and repaired in some cases.

Here are some specific water-quality data on Dyes Inlet streams:

The first number is the average fecal coliform counts in 2006. The second is the average fc counts in 2009. Also listed is the percentage improvement during that short time.

- Enetai Creek: 116, 56, 52 percent
- Barker Creek: 89, 53, 40 percent
- Clear Creek: 137, 30, 79 percent
- Strawberry Creek: 52, 29, 45 percent
- Chico Creek: 19, 18, 5 percent
- Mosher Creek: 31, 14, 55 percent
- Ostrich Bay Creek: 212, 88, 59 percent
- Phinney Creek: 992, 364, 63 percent

A second report released by the health district is called the 2010 Priority Area Work List for the PIC Program (PDF 752 kb). It includes a rationale for why certain water bodies were selected for pollution investigations in the current year.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Today, I’d like to reflect on a couple of small hazardous waste cleanup projects and some juggling involving hundreds of millions of dollars in state cleanup funds.

In years past, the Washington Department of Ecology signed agreements with property owners dealing with hazardous chemicals that had leaked from underground tanks on their property. The owners were required to pay what they could, although some were not able to pay anything. Ecology might then lead the cleanup, using funds from the state’s Model Toxics Control Account. That account derives its funds from a tax on petroleum products, pesticides and other specific chemicals.

The federal economic stimulus program has provided $3.4 million for such leaking underground storage tanks in Washington state. As I reported in the Kitsap Sun this week, work is beginning on a renewed cleanup at Country Junction Store in South Kitsap while a proposed plan would clean up soil near Hansville Store in North Kitsap. These are both small, community stores whose owners signed consent agreements with Ecology years ago.

It just so happens that the Washington Legislature has been taking money out of the state’s toxics account to help balance the state’s general fund budget.

According to a report by Jim Brunner of the Seattle Times, lawmakers diverted $180 million last year and Gov. Chris Gregoire proposes to pull out $80 million this year.

All this comes on the heals of a report exploring ways to finance the cleanup of contaminated sites across the state. The report was requested by the Legislature when it became obvious that existing funds would not be enough to pay for hazardous site cleanup, especially when money is being taken out for the general fund. Quoting from the report, called “Model Toxics Control Act Remedial Action Grants – Alternative Financing Evaluation”:

Demand for MTCA funds is increasing. While the grants have supported closure of many sites, a stream of new smaller projects and a growing number of larger, more complex cleanup projects continues. Coupled with the recent downturn in the economy, these trends have created a gap between the availability of funds and the real need. This situation has increased the uncertainty surrounding the future availability of MTCA funds and the subsequent need to use these limited funds more effectively than the traditional cash grant program.

If you recall, earlier this year environmental groups were proposing a higher fee on oil products to raise money to address stormwater problems throughout Puget Sound. Stormwater is considered the primary source of contaminants to the Sound, and holding back stormwater would effectively reduce toxics getting into the waterway.

Since then, the focus has shifted to tripling the existing MTCA tax of $7 per $1,000 on the wholesale price of hazardous substances. The new money — $13 per $1,000 — would go into other accounts, starting with 69 percent moved into the state’s general fund to help balance that out-of-whack budget. The rest:

• - 20 percent into a new account to address stormwater
• - 1.9 percent for oil spill prevention
• - 2.05 percent for the recovery of Puget Sound
• - 2.05 percent into a new State Clean Water Account
• - 5 percent into the Motor Vehicle Account for roads, trails and sidewalks

Under the current proposal, House Bill 3181, more of this new money would be shifted out of the general fund and into the stormwater fund each year — unless the Legislature changes its mind.

What we’re seeing is a lot of shifting of money as lawmakers try to plug a $2.7 billion hole in the state budget while offering environmentalists the hope of addressing Puget Sound cleanup in a meaningful way.

Let me know what you think about this shifty spending plan.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Last week, I wrote in the Kitsap Sun about two Bremerton public works projects — sewers in Gorst and a new Bremerton water-treatment plant. Together, they are using $13.5 million in federal stimulus funds.

It has been said that the $7.5 million in stimulus money for the Gorst sewer project is a lifesaver for that community, because local residents never could have afforded sewers without it. Public officials have been trying for years to finance that project. Every time someone added up the costs, it looked like low-income residents would be hit with sewer assessments in excess of $20,000 each. Now the hookups will cost them nothing.

Meanwhile, officials with Kitsap County Health District kept rushing around Gorst, forcing homeowners and businesses to put band-aids on their failing septic systems. This project will mean an end to that nonsense.

The $6-million Bremerton water project — required because of new rules from the federal Environmental Protection Agency — might have been possible with local dollars. But that would have required a sizable hike in utility rates among Bremerton residents. Remember, these are the same folks who already pay very high rates to finance more than $50 million in stormwater projects designed to prevent raw sewage from flushing into local waters during heavy rains.

After nearly 20 years, Bremerton can say it has addressed its combined sewage overflow problem — while Seattle and many other older cities are still struggling with the issue. See Water Ways Aug. 26, 2009.

This brings me to the state’s Public Works Trust Fund. If the Gorst sewer and Bremerton water projects were to be done locally, they would certainly need the low-interest loans provided by the trust fund. The fund was vital to financing Bremerton’s stormwater projects with local dollars. But the state’s budget crisis caused the Legislature to take most of the money — $368 million — out of the trust fund to pay for other government operations. And so public utilities statewide have put many projects on hold, though I can’t tell you how many would have been built in this time of economic uncertainty.

John Kounts of the Washington Public Utility Districts Association wrote about that funding shift in the WPUDA’s publication Connections (PDF 240 kb).

And so the federal stimulus money became extremely important for the Gorst sewer and Bremerton water projects. According to Bremerton documents, about 200 jobs will be created before the work is done.

Taking money out of the Public Works Trust Fund may have saved jobs in state agencies, but it must have cost some jobs in the public works sector, because of projects put on hold. I’m not sure about the net balance in job numbers.

Something I don’t understand, however, are statements by politicians who say the federal stimulus money has created no jobs. Yes, the federal government has borrowed money to run the program, but it seems clear that these grants have resulted in projects that would not be done anytime soon. That means a net surplus of jobs created.

Tomorrow: More shifting dollars

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Washington Department of Transportation has been improving its stormwater systems for new highways and a few older systems, but the latest federal stormwater permit issued by the Washington Department of Ecology did not go far enough, according to the group Puget Soundkeeper Alliance.

Represented by Earthjustice, Puget Soundkeeper Alliance appealed the permit to the Pollution Control Hearings Board. The settlement was not everything the environmentalists wanted, but it is a solid step in dealing with aging highways.

Bob Beckman, executive director of Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, explained the group’s position in a news release:

“Government agencies, businesses, and citizens are all working together to protect and restore Puget Sound, but the state’s department of transportation wasn’t carrying its share of the weight. There is a lot more work to be done, but we feel that this is a step in the right direction. The state highway system should not be held to a weaker standard than industries, local governments and the public.”

So what was included in the deal?

The stipulation signed by the parties (PDF 476 kb) calls for retrofitting an entire highway in environmentally sensitive areas when substantial new impervious surfaces are added, provided that the retrofits are “feasible” and “cost-effective.”

Retrofitting is deemed “feasible” if there are no physical site limitations such as steep slopes, soil instability or high groundwater tables.

Retrofitting is “cost-effective” if the cost of dealing with stormwater on the old pavement does not exceed 20 percent of the cost of addressing stormwater on the new pavement.

If retrofitting is not feasible or cost-effective, the transportation department must choose to spend 20 percent of the cost of new stormwater controls to deal with the old problems, retrofit on another site for that amount of money, or put the money into a separate fund for retrofitting old highways.

The agreement also includes provisions for increased consultation with federal wildlife agencies to protect endangered species, even when not required by federal law. The pact also contains provisions for limiting particular contaminants as part of an overall pollution-reduction plan by addressing total maximum daily loads, or TMDL.

Gene Johnson, a reporter for the Associated Press, does a nice job of putting the issue into perspective and explaining why it is important to manage highway runoff.

Gary Chittim of KING-5 News also covers the issue well. (See video below.)

For background information, check out the Washington Department of Transportation’s extensive information on stormwater management.

Washington Department of Ecology discusses stormwater permitting issues.

King County’s Science of Stormwater page also is informative.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

It is the best of streams. It is the worst of streams.

There’s been talk lately about Big Beef Creek in Central Kitsap, where a much-traveled bridge has been closed to heavy traffic because of a washed-out bridge abutment. It appears the bridge will be closed for a couple of weeks, beginning next week. See my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

There’s reason to believe we’ll be hearing a lot more about this stream in the future.

In my mind, Big Beef Creek is a beautiful salmon stream that has been much abused through the years. Despite a large population of people in the watershed, the creek has managed to hold onto its populations of salmon. Somehow, pollution has been mostly avoided.

For a reporting project, I once explored the entire reach of Big Beef Creek, talking to hobby farmers, backcountry residents and lakeside home owners. That story does not seem to be in the Kitsap Sun’s public archives, but I’ll see if I can track it down and post a link here later.

Big Beef Creek begins in an extensive wetland called Morgan Marsh and drains toward Hood Canal near Lone Rock, north of Seabeck. The creek’s origins in the marsh are just a short distance from the beginnings of the Tahuya River, which drains in the opposite direction into Southern Hood Canal outside of Belfair.

Big Beef Creek flows through a developed area, including Lake Symington. Migrating salmon are forced to navigate a fish ladder at the dam that impounds Lake Symington.

Development has been a problem for the stream, which has seen a decline in salmon. But the stream has been a problem for development, particularly for houses built too close to its meandering banks. During heavy storms, the stream has been known to take out private bridges. And in 1994 it wiped out a bridge on Holly Road. At least two homes have been abandoned below the dam, and others are threatened by its rushing waters.

Out of nearly 60 streams monitored by the Kitsap County Health District throughout Kitsap County, Big Beef Creek is the fifth cleanest in terms of bacterial pollution. Its waters sometimes show low oxygen levels — probably because the waters slow down as they pass through Lake Symington.

Near the mouth of the creek, the University of Washington operates the Big Beef Creek Research Station, where studies of salmon are taking place. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife manages a fish trap that catches adult salmon going upstream and juveniles going downstream. Those counts are used to help gauge the production of salmon for all of Hood Canal.

Big Beef Creek flows into an extensive estuary, where people often stop to watch bald eagles feeding in the spring before the salmon runs begin. The eagles often find midshipmen (bullheads) or else steal fish from the herons that congregate there. Some observers have counted up to 40 eagles at one time.

Seabeck Highway crosses the Big Beef estuary on a narrow strip of fill dumped there years ago when the road was built. The small bridge allows water to move between the upper and lower portions of the estuary. But high tides and rains can create a lot of flow through that tiny opening, which contributes to the risk of bridge failure.

The county’s chief road engineer, Jon Brand, told me that flows during the rains and high tides last week were the primary factors in undercutting the bridge abutment, and a log next to the bridge may have contributed to the problem.

There has been talk about removing some or all of the earthen causeway and building a much longer bridge. Biologists say that would dramatically improve estuarine habitat for juvenile salmon.

For now, a $79,000 study has been approved for the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group to develop a restoration strategy for the lower one mile or so of the stream. Stay tuned for further details and check out the study description on the Hood Canal Coordinating Council’s Web site.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Photo courtesy of Washington State Ferries

It’s worth mentioning here because Ecology is asking average people to photograph conditions related to the high tide and provide the exact time and location of the picture.

“The agency is interested in using these images to help document the coastal impacts our state is likely to face with increasing frequency as sea levels continue to rise,” Reeder says in a blog entry on EcoConnect.

Precise times for high and low tides vary by location, but one can get a pretty good estimate by going to the tide prediction Web site operated by the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration and drilling down to the closest community listed.

Pictures can be sent by e-mail to Ecology, placing “sea level rise” in the subject line. Folks are encouraged to include contact information, so Ecology can send a release form to allow publication of the photos.

Weather conditions, such as wind and rain, can affect localized flooding and related problems, which is one reason to get as many varied locations as possible.

Reeder’s blog states:

“Increases in global sea levels have been recorded by NOAA tide gauges for many years, and more recent observations have been collected by NASA satellites. The steady rise has been attributed to both a warming of the oceans and contributions from melting glaciers and land-based ice sheets. Climate modeling combined with these direct observations suggest sea level rise will continue well into the future with significant implications for Washington’s more than 3000 miles of marine coastline.

“Analysis conducted by the University of Washington’s Climate Impacts Group and the Washington State Department of Ecology show that increases in sea level in Puget Sound could be as high as 22 inches by mid-century, with upper estimates of more than four feet of rise by 2100.”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

His latest step is to set aside 100 acres of forestland in a conservation easement, promising to keep the land in a natural condition forever. One goal is to protect the water quality of Chico Creek, the most productive chum salmon stream on the Kitsap Peninsula. See my story in yesterday’s Kitsap Sun.

In a story I wrote three years ago, Ueland talked about protecting the Chico Creek watershed and putting 150 acres into conservation easements on part of the property and managing other parts for timber, forest products and mineral resources. See Kitsap Sun, Dec. 4, 2006.

I believe he still plans to set aside other areas in the future.

Residents who live along Northlake Way say the trouble with Craig Ueland is not his lack of concern for natural resources but that he does not care enough about people who would be affected by truck traffic going to and from a proposed gravel mine and series of rock quarries he wants to build on his property.

As one reader wrote in a comment on yesterday’s story, “I hope the trees, streams and salmon enjoy the neighborhood, because when Mr. Ueland gets finished with the neighborhood, no PEOPLE will want to live there anymore.”

Opponents of the project have raised many issues, but the overwhelming concern is heavy truck traffic on Northlake Way.

Ueland and his associates contend that Northlake Way is the only route the trucks can use to get the rock and gravel to market.

For environmental reasons as well as cost, Kitsap County planners have stated that they do not want him cutting a new route southward though steep slopes and a wildlife corridor to Werner Road — although residents say that is probably the only logical route that could keep the trucks off their roads.

As a condition of approval, Ueland may be required to pay for improvements to Northlake Way to address traffic-safety concerns. But residents realize that widening the road and adding sidewalks will only place the traffic closer to their homes.

With or without the gravel operations, Northlake Way has become a major route for residents heading out toward Seabeck and all points west of Bremerton. It is a shame that Northlake Way residents have been forced to endure dramatic changes in traffic through the years. With ongoing development out west, there appears to be no end in sight to the traffic, and residents say they are already facing danger every time they pull out of their driveways.

Is there another route that could get traffic from Seabeck Highway to Kitsap Way? Should the county start planning for major traffic improvements in the area? Are there other alternatives?

The next step in the Ueland saga probably will be a ruling by the Kitsap County hearing examiner. That decision is expected in February.

I think this may be a good time to review the stories of the past few years. For documents related to the gravel-mining project, go to the Ueland Tree Farm Web site.

Story list:

Owner to Discuss Strategy for 1,700 Acres, Dec. 4, 2006

Planned Rumble of Gravel Trucks Triggers Grumbles, Dec. 11, 2006

Tree Farm Plans Continue to Root, March 27, 2007

Sustainable Logging Planned for 1,700-Acre Tree Farm, June 21, 2007

Gravel Mine Proposed on Land Near Kitsap Lake, Oct. 2, 2007

Meeting Held on Plan for Tree Farm, Nov. 8, 2007

Gravel, Rock Mining Operation Proposed West of Kitsap Lake, Dec. 14, 2007

Review for Proposed Gravel Pit Begins, July 3, 2008

Gravel and Rock Operation Near Kitsap Lake Under Review, March 2, 2009

Gravel Project Undergoes Environmental Review, March 26, 2009

Alternative Route to Proposed Gravel Operation Deemed Unworkable, Aug. 25, 2009

County Planners Endorse Large Gravel Mine West of Kitsap Lake, Oct. 16, 2009

Hearing on Proposed Ueland Gravel Mine Is Today, Nov. 6, 2009

Neighbors Argue Against Proposed Kitsap Lake Gravel Mine, Nov. 9, 2009

Kitsap Lake-Area Residents Continue Fight Against Proposed Gravel Mine, Dec. 14, 2009

Ueland Agrees to Preserve 100 Forested Acres Near Kitsap Lake, Dec. 22, 2009

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Following a review, Gregoire’s supplemental budget now includes $10 million for such projects, including a new bridge over Carpenter Creek, as I describe in a story in Saturday’s Kitsap Sun. The Carpenter Creek bridge, a high-priority project for years, turns out to be the most expensive item on the list from the Puget Sound Partnership.

What I did not report in my weekend story was the remainder of the projects. They include work on stormwater projects in Bremerton and Seattle, restoration work on the Nooksack River in Whatcom County and the Dungeness River in Clallam County, removal of pilings at the Asarco site in Ruston, and various other projects.

The Legislature always has the option of adding more money to pick up projects further down on the priority list or else cutting some or all of the money proposed. Here are descriptions of projects that made the $10-million cut:

Nooksack Tribe, Whatcom County, $746,508: Construction of stable log jams in the South Fork Nooksack to form deep pools with complex cover to improve holding and rearing habitat [Todd Creek reach phase 2 and River Farm Reach phase 1 phase 2]

Pierce County or Department of Natural Resources, $1.03 million: Removal of 2,300 pilings would allow for completion of in-water remediation of the Asarco Superfund site, Ruston. The Docks are on state-owned tidelands. This will improve substantially the shoreline habitat by removing 1.6 acres of over-water shading, removing substantial quantity of creosote from the environment and allow sediment capping to be completed, thereby making clean substrate available to the benefit of the aquatic life and also the community who will for the first time in 100 years have access to this mile long waterfront free of contamination.

Kitsap County (sponsor), $2.78 million: Carpenter Creek estuary restoration; remove blocking culvert, restore tidal function.

Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe, Clallam County, $1.03 million: Build engineered log jams in Dungeness River from river mile (RM) 2.7 to 18.8 and in the Gray Wolf River from RM 0.0 to 1.0. Project would ultimately build approximately 120 stable log jams in 20 miles of main stem river.

Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association, Whatcom County, $185,400: Barrier removal / Provide passage to 1.4 miles / large woody debris placement / 41 acres of riparian planting along 2,900 linear feet of stream and several adjoining wetlands.

Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association, Whatcom County, $381,100: Middle Fork: Install 6 Large woody debris structures along 1.5 miles of Middle Fork in vicinity of Porter Creek; North Fork: Augment 20 large woody debris structures on 5 channel islands between Maple Falls and Welcome.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Puget Sound, $1.03 million: Preliminary engineering and property assessments for a portfolio of priority nearshore restoration opportunities. This project will complete preliminary design work for a portfolio of projects that would be eligible for federal funding through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Seattle Public Utilities, King County, $824,000: Use low impact development techniques to reduce stormwater runoff and achieve TMDL implementation objectives in the most important subbasin of Seattle’s Piper’s Creek. Project will significantly benefit water quality, wet weather flow reduction, and salmon survival in the watershed. Implements action item Urban 4 from Washington State’s nonpoint plan.

City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, $1.34 million: Retrofit of streets and drainage systems in “ultra urban” downtown Bremerton using permeable paving, biofiltration, and bioretention low impact development strategies to reduce runoff to 303d-listed Sinclair Inlet. Demonstrating effectiveness and providing thorough documentation will offer guidance to future efforts in Bremerton and other regions. Project implements action item Urban 4 from Washington State’s nonpoint plan.

Various sponsors, various counties, $647,000: Department of Ecology selects the most ready-to-go projects from Ecology’s 2010 Supplemental Clean-Up Toxics and Puget Sound Remedial Action Grants list. All projects on Ecology’s list support Action Agenda near-term priority action C.5(1): “Continue to implement ongoing, high-priority remediation and cleanup projects”

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post