(Table of Contents)

SECTION V: WATERSHED CONTROLS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

V.1 Regulatory Roles, Responsibilities and Authorities

A wide-range of regulations is in place that has a role, either directly or indirectly, in protecting water resources in the Nooksack Basin.  In some cases, the regulatory framework is provided via passage of federal environmental regulations that may then be administered by the state.  In other cases, the regulatory framework may be provided by the state and then administered on a local level.  Following is a brief overview of the existing federal, state, and local regulatory framework with the entities identified that have a role in implementing the regulation.

Federal Regulations and Programs

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA):

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted in 1980.  Passage of CERCLA created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provides broad federal authority to respond to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment.  CERCLA provides for establishing prohibitions and requirements on closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites, liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and establishes a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party can be identified.

Regulatory Authority: Federal Government

Implementing Entities: EPA

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act:

The focus of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) is to provide federal control of pesticide distribution, sale, and use.  Passage of FIFRA gave the EPA authority to study the consequences of pesticide usage and to require users (farmers, utility companies, and others) to register when purchasing pesticides.  Later amendments to FIFRA required pesticide users to become certified as applicators.  All pesticides used in the U.S. must be registered by EPA.

Regulatory Authority: EPA

Implementing Agencies: EPA, USDA, and Washington State Department of Agriculture

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA):

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) gives EPA authority to control hazardous waste from “cradle-to-grave”.  This includes generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of the waste.  RCRA also provides a framework for management of non-hazardous wastes.  In 1984, amendments to RCRA were passed – the Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments – that require phasing out of land disposal of hazardous waste, increased enforcement authority for EPA, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.

Regulatory Authority: EPA

Implementing Entities: EPA and Washington State Department of Ecology

Clean Water Act:

The Clean Water Act (CWA) is a 1977 amendment to the Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA) of 1972, which sets the basic regulatory structure for pollutant discharges to water of the United States.  The WPCA gives authority to the EPA to regulate industrial effluents and to set water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters.  The CWA makes it illegal for any person to discharge any pollutant from a point source unless a national pollutant discharge permit (NPDES) has been obtained.  In addition to providing funding for sewage treatment plants, the 1987 CWA reauthorization again focused on toxic substances, authorized a citizen suit provision, and provided for delegation of many permitting, administrative and enforcement aspects of the CWA law to state governments.  In states with the authority to implement CWA programs, the EPA retains oversight responsibilities.

Regulatory Authority: EPA

Implementing Entities: EPA and Washington State Department of Ecology

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act:

The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) amended CERCLA on October 17, 1986.  Changes and additions to the Superfund program  (CERCLA) resulting from passage of SARA focused on improving cleanup of hazardous waste sites; new enforcement authorities and settlement tools; increased state involvement in the Superfund program; and increased focus on human health problems associated with hazardous waste sites.  Passage of SARA also requires that the EPA revise the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) to ensure accurate assessment of the relative degree of risk to human health and the environment from uncontrolled hazardous waste sites that are placed on the National Priorities List (NPL).

The NPL is intended to serve as a guide for the EPA in identifying sites for further investigation, identifying what CERCLA-financed remedial actions may be appropriate, notifying the public of sites the EPA believes warrant further investigations; and serving as notice to potentially responsible parties that the EPA may initiate CERCLA-financed remedial action.  The identification of a site on the NPL is primarily informational.  It does not require owners or operators to undertake any actions and it does not assign liability to any person.

Regulatory Authority: EPA

Implementing Entities: EPA and Washington State Department of Ecology

Safe Drinking Water Act:

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) protects the quality of drinking water for all waters, surface or ground, which are being used or may be used for drinking water.  The SDWA authorizes the EPA to establish standards of purity and requires all owners or operators of public water systems to comply with primary (health-related) standards.  State governments, which assume this power from the EPA, also encourage attainment of secondary standards (nuisance related).

Regulatory Authority: EPA

Implementing Entities: EPA, Washington State Department of Health, Whatcom County Health Department, and local water purveyors and utilities

State Regulations and Programs

Shoreline Management Act:

The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971 establishes a policy for managing shorelines for protection of both water and terrestrial resources.  State jurisdiction of the SMA includes marine waters, lakes over 20 acres, and streams with a flow of 20 cfs or more.  The state SMA also provides for local government to prepare shoreline masters programs for all shorelines within the local government’s jurisdiction.  In Whatcom County, the SMA is administered on a state level by the Washington Department of Ecology.  Jurisdictions in the Nooksack Basin with shoreline management programs include Whatcom County, Ferndale, Everson and Lynden.

Regulatory Authority: Washington State Department of Ecology

Implementing Entities: Washington State Department of Ecology, Whatcom County, and Cities of Ferndale, Everson and Lynden

Stormwater Management:

Under the federal Clean Water Act, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are required for activities discharging wastewater to waterbodies.  The NPDES permitting process is administered through the Washington State Department of Ecology.  Stormwater discharges from industrial, commercial, or other sites meeting specific criteria require an NPDES permit (refer to Appendix C for program details).

Regulatory Authority: Washington State Department of Ecology

Implementing Entity: Washington State Department of Ecology

Local Regulations and Programs

Critical Areas Ordinance:

The Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) addresses specific topics as outlined in the state’s Growth Management Act of 1990.  The purpose of the CAO is to address issues and concerns associated with wetland degradation and loss, geologically hazardous areas, fish and wildlife habitat, flood plains, and aquifer recharge areas.  The CAO is administered on a local level by local jurisdictions.  All of the jurisdictions in the Nooksack Basin have state and locally approved CAO.  Table 49 includes a brief description of the sections of the CAOs for the various jurisdictions that govern activities within close proximity to streams and the Nooksack River.

TABLE 49. CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE HIGHLIGHTS

Jurisdiction

Stream/River Buffer Requirements

Allowed Uses

Other
Whatcom County
(Nov. 3, 1997)		 100 foot standard buffer to rivers, provided a 50-foot buffer to waterways not utilized by salmonid fish populations and do not directly flow into such waterways. Emergency construction for immediate preservation of public health, safety, and welfare, activities by diking or drainage districts (subject to Chapters 85.05 and 85.06 RCW), pesticide applications in accordance to WA Dept. of Agriculture, river gravel bar extractions within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Program, agriculture activities in compliance with Section 16.15.285. Projects shall avoid, minimize, or mitigate for adverse impacts to critical areas by either: avoiding the impact by refraining from action, mitigating the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources, monitoring the impact and mitigation project and taking appropriate corrective measures, and rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
City of Ferndale
(Nov. 17, 1997)		 100 foot buffer adjacent to Nooksack River. Pedestrian paths; noxious weed removal; storm drainage outfall; tree removal if threat to safety/property; fence construction; maintenance; other activities requiring hydraulic project approval from WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. A Critical Areas Permit is required for development. Erosion area plans must conform to City Development Standards Manual.
City of Everson
(No Date)		 Critical Areas Ordinance does not apply to streams and rivers in City limits (City of Everson, 1999). Single family dwellings, existing structure modification, trails, utilities, stream crossings.  
City of Lynden (Sept. 3, 1991) Minimum 25 foot buffer and maximum 100 foot buffer determined by Public Works. 15 foot buffer from eave to buffer's edge for commercial and industrial development. 5 foot buffer from eave to buffer's edge for residential development.   Developers must conduct a sensitive area study if within 10 feet of sensitive area to determine extent of buffer necessary to protect the area (unless within the Floodplains or subject to Shoreline Master Plan).

 

Stormwater Management Programs:

The purpose of local stormwater programs is to address issues related to impairment of water quality from surface water runoff.  Local stormwater management programs are in various stages of development, approval and implementation in the Nooksack Basin as outlined below:

Shoreline Management Program:

Local jurisdictions have prepared shoreline management programs as provided for under the state Shorelines Management Act.  The purpose of the shoreline programs is to manage shorelines for protection of both water and terrestrial resources.  Table 50 outlines the status of shoreline master programs with representative highlights for jurisdictions in the Nooksack Basin.

TABLE 50. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAMS FOR WHATCOM COUNTY JURISDICTIONS

Jurisdiction

Stream/River Buffer Requirementsa

Allowed Usesa

Restricted Usesa
Whatcom County
(May 12, 1998)

Applies to sections of the North, Middle, and South Fork Nooksack and the main stem of the Nooksack.

There are a variety of buffer requirements, allowed uses, conditional uses, and restricted uses that are defined within the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program. The requirements for each land use (i.e., agriculture, commercial, residential, etc.) are defined by the Shoreline Area Designation.

~ 25 ft chemical- and fertilizer- free buffer along OHWM of all water bodies for agricultural areas;

~ 100 ft. setback from OHWM for feedlots >50 animal units and manure storage facilities (prohibited in floodways);

~ Vegetative cover should be left within 25 ft of the OHWM of natural water bodies in agricultural areas;

~ Aquacultural uses located at least 600 ft from National Wildlife Refuge lands;

~ New/expanded industrial developments shall be buffered so as to not significantly detract from shoreline scenic qualities;

~ Landfills for sewage disposal drain fields must be outside floodways or 100 ft from OHWM, whichever is farther landward;

~ Conditional use permit may allow selective timber harvest within 200 ft of the OHWM.

 ~ Maintenance or repair of existing structures;

~ Bulkhead construction;

~ Farming activities;

~ Owner built, single-family residence;

~ Dock construction;

~ Non-conforming development;

~ Aquaculture;

~ Utilities		 Depends on Shoreline Area Designation.
City of Ferndale
(Undated)

Applies to Nooksack River only.

 ~ 25 ft natural vegetative buffer between river and cultivated/pasture areas;

~ 25 ft buffer between water related industry and OHWM;

~ Subdivision not permitted within 100 ft of water's edge and shall be built above 100 year flood plain;

~ Commercial developments shall be built above 100 year floodplain.		 ~ Landfill creation;

~ Mining;

~ Single-family residences;

~ Bulkhead construction;

~ Emergency construction to protect property damage from elements;

~ Aquaculture activities.		 Pesticides, herbicides, and other chemicals capable of contaminating water are forbidden where they would leach into the waterbody.
City of Everson
(June 10, 1974)

Applies to Nooksack River only.

 ~ 200 ft buffer between river's edge and a structure;

~ Subdivisions must be built above the floodplain.		 ~ Agricultural uses;

~ Commercial development;

~ Residential development;

~ Aquaculture;

~ Port and water-related industry;

~ Mining;

~ Bulkheads;

~ Utilities;

~ Landfill;

~ Piers.		 Solid waste disposal
City of Lynden
(draft 1997- final plan still in approval stage)

Applies to the Nooksack River and Fishtrap Creek.

 ~ Application of agricultural fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides prohibited within 100 ft of OHWM;

~ Aerial spraying of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides prohibited within 200 ft of the OHWM;

~ Roads and railroads shall be adequately set back from water bodies.		 ~ Clearing and grading;

~ Stormwater management facilities and/or linear developments when no feasible alternative to location;

~ Landfills and bulkheads which do not impair fish habitat (exceptions may be granted);

~ Parking facilities (designed to prevent surface runoff from contaminating water bodies);

~ Utilities;

~ Rip-rap placement.		 ~ Release of hazardous materials into water bodies is prohibited;

~ Structures preventing migration of salmon;

~ Diking, flood walls and similar structures may be conditional use with restrictions to setbacks, timing, and vegetative management.

 

V.2 Existing Management Controls 

A number of local, state and federal programs are in place that can be categorized as source control programs.  The source control programs described below are those programs being implemented by agencies or entities, other than the City of Lynden or PUD, that have the greatest definition to them in terms of actions that effectively reduce contaminant loading.  These are programs in addition to the regulatory programs previously described.  It is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of all programs with potential to serve as source control programs.

Dairy Waste Management:

The new Dairy Nutrient Management Act requires that all dairies be inspected every two years to monitor compliance with water quality protection laws. The Act further requires that each dairy prepare and have certified by July 1, 2002 and implemented by December 31, 2003, a Dairy Nutrient Management Plan. The required elements of each plan are as follows:

1. Identify the sources of all nutrients produced on the farm
2. Identify how those nutrients are collected
3. Describe any treatment on those collected nutrients
4. Build and maintain, according to NRCS specifications, 180-day storage facilities
5. Describe all transfer systems and how they will be used
6. Record the utilization of those nutrients for crops on each field; utilization must meet NRCS agronomic rates.

As discussed in Section II, Ecology is in the process of inspecting all of the commercial dairies in Whatcom County.  The inspections have resulted in a number of corrective actions being taken on specific dairies.  These actions will reduce potential for manure to reach ditches and streams that drain to the Nooksack River.  In addition, the presence of two dairy inspectors in Whatcom County will lead to an improvement in on-farm waste management practices.

Source Control Program Addresses: This source control program addresses introduction of contaminants to source water including nutrients, bacteria, protozoa, and viral material associated with animal waste.

Portage Bay Closure Response Strategy:

The Portage Bay Initial Closure Response Strategy outlines five objectives intended to reduce or eliminate sources of fecal coliform in the Nooksack River and ultimately, Portage Bay.  These objectives include control of agricultural sources, control of stormwater sources, control of sewage treatment plant and on-site sewage sources, water quality monitoring, and education. 

Tasks addressing the agricultural sources involve technical and financial assistance to commercial and small farms for developing and implementing farm plans.  The agricultural source control objective also supports tasks identified in the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance and adoption of a Whatcom County Manure Management Ordinance.

The objective identified in the Closure Response Strategy for controlling stormwater sources emphasizes supporting existing county efforts to develop a Comprehensive Stormwater Program in compliance with state requirements.

Tasks associated with the objective of controlling sewage treatment plant (STP) and on-site sewage (OSS) disposal sources include, among other things, inventories of on-site systems in specific areas and financial support for corrective actions. Tasks for addressing STP sources include reviewing STP records and reports as it relates to compliance of NPDES permits, reviewing STP Q/A and Q/C plans and recommending improvements and reviewing Q/A and Q/C data of STP operations through closure response period.

A water quality monitoring objective is also included in the strategy response plan that measures fecal coliform levels in the Nooksack Basin and in Portage Bay.

The final objective addresses the need for an education and outreach coordinator that will work with dairy producers, the general public, and agencies.

Source control program addresses: This source control program addresses introduction of contaminants to source water including nutrients, bacteria, protozoa, and viral material associated with animal and human waste.

Land Acquisition or Conservation Easement Programs:

The Whatcom Land Trust has successfully acquired lands, development rights, timber rights and other types of conservation easements on properties throughout the Nooksack Basin.  Within the Nooksack Basin, the Land Trust has successfully negotiated conservation easements on approximately 2,819 acres and acquired approximately 240 acres.  Two of the Land Trust easements or properties involved other partners: the Canyon Lake Creek Community Forest (2300 acres in the Middle Fork Basin on Canyon Creek) is a recent acquisition that involved Whatcom County, Western Washington University, and Crown Pacific and the Nesset Farm (106 acres on the South Fork Nooksack) involved Whatcom County Parks Department.  In addition to these two large parcels, the Land Trust has a conservation easement on 168.6 acres on the North Fork Nooksack River.  In the Lower Nooksack Basin, there are smaller easements including a 38.25 acre parcel on the Nooksack River just south of the City of Lynden.

In addition to the Whatcom Land Trust, the Lummi Tribe and Nature Conservancy have undertaken an effort to acquire and preserve commercial forest lands in the Arlecho Creek watershed, which drains to the South Fork Nooksack.  The Lummi Nation, Northwest Indian College, Crown Pacific, Ltd., and the Nature Conservancy of Washington State formed a partnership in 1995 to work collaboratively to secure funds necessary for transferring title of the 2,240 acre watershed, which includes 672 acres of old growth forest, to the Lummi Nation.  Additionally, a Letter of Agreement between the Lummi Nation and Crown Pacific provides for cooperative management strategies on the adjoining 8,500 acres of forestlands in the South Fork of the Nooksack Basin owned by Crown Pacific.

Source Control Program Addresses: Reduction of contaminants from land use activities that would be allowed under existing zoning.

Timber Management Practices:

Forest landowners, tribes environmental groups, and state natural resource agencies developed a watershed analysis process to investigate the combined effects of forest practices on watersheds over time.  Watershed analysis assesses a watershed’s resources and the activities and elements that affect the condition of the resources.  The primary goals of a watershed analysis are: 1) to address the cumulative effects of two or more forestry practices on public resources such as fish and water and 2) to protect and restore the public resources and fish habitat adversely affected by forest practices while maintaining a viable forest products industry.  The process for conducting a watershed analysis involves evaluating slope stability, erosion, riparian areas, water flow patterns, and stream channel conditions.  The level one assessment requires a team of qualified individuals in forestry, forest hydrology, forest science or geology, fisheries science, and geomorphology.  An inventory of the watershed is performed, which includes surveying and mapping the WAU with the condition of fish, water, and capital improvements.  Adverse changes to the condition of the resources by one forest practice or cumulative effects are assessed.  Areas of resource sensitivity are identified in the level one assessment.  The level two assessment completes tasks that weren’t fulfilled in the level one assessment.  Prescriptions, designed to help protect and allow recovery of the public resources, are determined from the watershed analysis.  A watershed analysis has been performed, is underway, or is planned for a number of WAUs in the Nooksack Basin: Skookum, Hutchinson, and Wanlick Creeks have been completed, Acme WAU is underway, Howard Creek has a #1 priority ranking for purposes of completing a watershed analysis, and Clearwater, Deming, Porter, and Canyon-Kenney Creeks are on the priority list but not within the top 20.

Source Control Program Addresses: Implementing the watershed analysis programs may address soil erosion, total suspended solids, organic and inorganic contaminants, and phosphorus loading to source water resulting from improper forest practices.

V.2.1 Written Agreements/Memorandum of Agreements

The City of Lynden has written agreements with surrounding municipalities and districts for assistance in case of an emergency.  In addition, City personnel have developed a written procedure for use by the Lynden Police Department in case of an emergency with potential for affecting water operations.  Additionally, Lynden has agreements with industries in their jurisdiction related to emergencies that may occur that have a potential to impair operation of the water treatment facility.

The City of Lynden and PUD will develop a Memorandum of Agreement for purposes of updating the NSPP in the year 2006.  In addition, Memorandum of Agreements may be developed for purposes of implementing recommendations outlined in Section V.3.

V.2.2 Land Use Restrictions and Regulations

The City of Lynden’s ability to restrict or regulate land use within the Nooksack Basin for purposes of source protection is limited to the City’s jurisdictional boundaries.  Within these boundaries, land use restrictions and regulations in place that manage activities with potential to impair water quality include the Critical Areas Ordinance and the stormwater standards for development.  In addition, when approved, the Shoreline Management Program will also work to protect source water quality. 

The PUD does not have land use authority and therefore is not able to implement or administer regulations.

V.2.3 Public Education and Voluntary Programs

There are a variety of education and voluntary programs being carried out throughout Whatcom County by a number of different entities.  Following is a representative list of entities, excluding the City of Lynden and PUD, that implement programs in the Nooksack Basin and the type of program they are associated with:

City of Lynden Education Programs:

In addition to the programs identified above, the City of Lynden implements programs targeting Lynden residents and Lynden water customers.  Programs being implemented by the City include:

V.3 Recommended Management Controls

The City of Lynden and PUD have identified a set of objectives to assist in the identification and prioritization of source control recommendations.  The objectives listed below reference two types of contamination: chemical contamination and microbial contamination.  Microbial contamination includes bacterial, viral, and protozoan contaminants (contaminants generally affiliated with water-borne diseases).

The City of Lynden and Whatcom County Public Utility District #1 (PUD) have identified chemical contamination as their priority concern for the following reasons:

Objectives for Nooksack Source Protection Recommendations:

1)  Identify and describe potential sources for both chemical and microbial contamination and classify in 1, 2, 5, and >5 hour travel times.

2)  Create a system for monitoring changes in the watershed that may increase the potential for microbial and chemical contamination to impair source water.

3)  Improve emergency response of water systems for chemical contamination by:

4)  Improve access to Nooksack Basin water quality data by:

5)  Structure a process that facilitates long-term observation of water quality trends in the Basin by:

Source Protection Recommendations

1.  Address Emergency Preparedness for Rail Transportation Incidents [Meets Objective(s) #2 and 3]

A review of the traffic flow for materials transported through the Nooksack Basin via rail indicates there is transport of hazardous material through the Basin.  Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) is expected to complete their revised System Preparedness Plan in June 1999.  Both the material transport summary and the BNSF revised System Preparedness Plan should be reviewed by local emergency management personnel, incident responders, and water purveyors to determine if a) existing emergency response plan procedures are in place to adequately address the types of material being transported via rail through the Nooksack Basin; and b) the BNSF preparedness plan meshes with or integrates well with local Emergency Management Response procedures.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Effort: Whatcom County Emergency Management Services

Interim Date(s):

July 1, 2000 - Obtain BNSF revised System Preparedness Plan and circulate to incident responders and water purveyors for review.

September 1, 2000 – Proposed date by which EMS convenes a meeting with City of Lynden and PUD to discuss results of EMS review of the BNSF revised System Preparedness Plan and to identify procedures water purveyors should incorporate into its emergency response plans.

Schedule for Completing: November 1, 2000

EMS meeting with the City of Lynden and PUD should be recorded and a summary of proposed revisions, if any, to water operations plans and procedures prepared by the completion date.  Depending on the nature of the revisions, the purveyors can determine additional tasks or undertake the revisions as part of the 2005 NSPP update.

2. Active Participation in Review Process for New and Re-Issued NPDES Permits [Meets Objective(s) #2, 3, and 4]

There are currently over 80 NPDES permits in the Nooksack Basin.  These permits fall into two categories: general permits (i.e., sand/gravel, dairy, and stormwater) and individual permits (specific to a facility).  The general permits are written to cover several facilities with similar discharges.  These permits have discharge and monitoring standards set as part of the general permit.  Individual permits take into account the specific operation of the facility requesting the permit.  The City of Lynden and PUD should take a more active role in reviewing applications for NPDES permits in the Nooksack Basin; particularly for the individual permits.  It is recommended that an agreement be established between the Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office and the PUD and Lynden that outlines a process for the water purveyors to meet and discuss applications for NPDES permits in the Nooksack Basin.  The intent of the agreement is to provide the water purveyors an opportunity to meet directly with Ecology to provide comments on the applications.  This opportunity is in addition to any opportunities the City and PUD have for commenting on applications through the normal public process.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Effort: City of Lynden

Interim Date(s):

June 1, 2000 – Draft final agreement between Northwest Regional Office of the Department of Ecology and Water Purveyors (City of Lynden and PUD)

August 1, 2000 – Final agreement between parties.                 

Schedule for Completing: Ongoing Program. 

Agreement and NPDES Review Program will be evaluated as part of the NSPP update in 2005 for purposes of determining relative effectiveness and identifying modifications, if any, to the agreement between Ecology and the water purveyors.

3. Survey Potential Hazardous Waste Generators within a One and Two Hour Time of Travel of Water Intakes [Meet Objective(s) #1,2 and 3]

There are 35 entities in the Nooksack Basin listed in the RCRA database as falling within the threshold of RCRA’s definition of a hazardous waste generator.  In addition to the 35 entities, a number of small businesses and potential cottage industries were identified through the field inventory that are involved in operations that may generate or store hazardous materials.  These additional facilities, may or may not fall within the threshold of RCRA’s reporting criteria.  A survey of all facilities within a one-hour time of travel of the intakes will serve several purposes: 1) educate and raise awareness of RCRA requirements in the event that they apply to the facility; 2) educate and raise awareness of source protection issues; 3) identify materials that may be stored or generated on site for purposes of water purveyors’ emergency response or preparedness plan; and 4) identify what, if any, plan is in place for the facility in the event there is a spill on-site. 

Prior implementing this task, City of Lynden, PUD, and Whatcom County Health Department representatives should meet to discuss tasks involved with the recommendation and to determine regulatory responsibility for implementation.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Effort: City of Lynden and Public Utility District #1 (Interlocal Agreement)

Interim Date(s):

April 1, 2000 – Lynden, PUD and Whatcom County Health Department meeting to discuss tasks and determining regulatory responsibility.

Schedule for Completing:  December 31, 2000 – Proposed date for completing survey.

 

4. Track Whatcom County Dairy Inspection and Effectiveness of the Dairy Management Act [Meets Objective(s) #2]

Use GIS to monitor and track the status of Whatcom County dairies inspected by the Department of Ecology.  (The GIS program should be compatible with Whatcom County’s system.) Tracking enforcement activities related to dairies under the Dairy Management Act is intended to complement current and future water monitoring efforts in the Nooksack Basin.  Improving the information base on potential sources of contaminants and corrections to those sources will assist in developing a trend analysis on the Nooksack River.  This activity will require coordinating with the Department of Ecology, Nooksack Field Office and Whatcom Conservation District to obtain information on inspections, fines, and correction notices issued to local dairies for purposes of mapping the information.

The PUD and Lynden should meet with the Whatcom Conservation District to assess the process currently being used to track the status of dairies inspected by the Department of Ecology.  Depending on the outcome of the assessment, a system that tracks dairy inspections as outlined above should be pursued.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Effort:  PUD

Interim Date(s):

May 1, 2000 – Identify scope of project based on outcome of meeting with Whatcom Conservation District.

Schedule for Completing: April 2, 2001

The meeting convened by the Conservation District with the City of Lynden, PUD, and Ecology should be recorded and, prior to the completion date, a summary of the meeting prepared identifying the results of the review.  Modifications to the program, if determined to be needed, should be considered upon completion of the task.

5. Coordinate with Existing Source Control Programs

     Several programs are underway to address contaminant loading to the Nooksack River and associated waterbodies.  City of Lynden and PUD should be involved with these programs including the Department of Ecology’s TMDL Advisory Committee, the Portage Bay Shellfish Advisory Committee and the WRIA Planning Process.  For the following programs, specific recommendations have been made:

A) Participate in the Implementation and Evaluation of the Portage Bay Initial Closure Response Strategy [Meets objective(s) #2 and 4]

The closure response program is an existing effort that identifies five objectives intended to reduce or eliminate fecal coliform contributions to the Nooksack River and Portage Bay.  Although the closure response strategy is intended to address shellfish closures in Portage Bay, the potential sources of contamination raised in the closure response plan are also ones which have the potential to affect source water for purposes of providing safe drinking water (i.e., contributions of bacterial contamination to source water).  Since the City of Lynden and PUD are required by DOH to address source protection in the Nooksack and the contaminants that will be addressed are similar, the potential exists for duplication of efforts to occur between the NSPP and the Portage Bay Closure Response Program.  Therefore, to maximize staff and financial resources, Whatcom County Government should dedicate a position on the Portage Bay Shellfish Advisory Committee to be filled by either a representative from the City of Lynden or the PUD. 

    Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation:  City of Lynden

        Schedule for Completion: June 30, 2000

     B) Participate in the Washington State Department of Ecology TMDL Process for the Nooksack River [Meets objective(s) #2 and 4]

The goal identified in the Nooksack River Fecal Coliform Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation and Surface Water Nutrient Characterization Study draft quality assurance project plan prepared by Washington State Department of Ecology is to recommend bacteria discharge limits for point and nonpoint sources in the Lower Nooksack basin.  A local advisory committee including representatives from the Nooksack and Lummi Tribes, Whatcom County Health Department, Whatcom Conservation District, and local Department of Ecology staff was created to assist in the Nooksack TMDL development process.   The City of Lynden, a surface water purveyor drawing water from the Nooksack River, was contacted when the process was initiated.  Neither the City of Lynden nor the PUD, as water purveyors, has been involved in any aspect of the program including representation on the advisory committee.  As with the shellfish closure response program, the TMDL program is an existing effort to address coliform contributions to the Nooksack River.  Without regard to the factors that initiated these programs, recommendations intended to reduce or eliminate microbial contaminants may be similar to programs that water purveyors would recommend for purposes of source water protection.  Therefore, to make the most efficient use of existing staff and financial resources the Department of Ecology should include a representative of the surface water purveyors as an active participant in the TMDL process including the implementation and evaluation of program recommendations.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation:  Public Utility District #1

Schedule for Completion:  June 1, 2000

6. Emergency Response and Preparedness Training for Incident Responders [Meets objective(s) #3]

Organize and facilitate emergency response and preparedness training for City of Lynden Fire Department personnel, Whatcom County Fire District personnel, water system operators and other emergency responders.  The Environmental Protection Agency offers training on a local level for different levels of emergency response.  Prior to organizing the training, a needs assessment of local responders and water operators should be conducted in order to identify the specific needs of local responders.  Conducting a needs assessment prior to the training will enable the training program to be tailored specifically to meet the needs of the local community.  If there are items identified through the needs assessment that the EPA does not cover in their training program, outside private contractors should be contacted to address those areas of emergency response.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: City of Lynden

Interim Date(s):

June 1, 2000 – Proposed date for completing needs assessment.

 July 1, 2000 – Proposed date for convening a meeting with PUD, EMS, and other responders to identify topics for training program.  Needs assessment and information from should form the basis of a significant part of the discussion leading to the design of a training program.

Schedule for Completion: January 2001

7.  Review/Modifications to Emergency Response Plans [Meets objective(s) #3]

Upon completion of Recommendations #1, 3, and 6 the emergency response plans of water purveyors and emergency response personnel should be reviewed and a determination made of whether modifications need to be made to the local emergency response procedures.  In addition to information gained through completion of the three recommendations, information on response time to the most recent emergency response incidents (the Olympic pipeline and the Lake Samish spills) should be considered in that review process.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: Public Utility District #1

Interim Date(s):

January 1, 2001 – City of Lynden and PUD review results of Recommendations #1, 3, and 6.

February 1, 2001 – Convene meeting with Whatcom Emergency Services and other emergency responders to review procedures and develop work plan

Schedule for Completion: June 30, 2001

8. Evaluate Water Quality Impairment Potential from Operations with NPDES Permits [Meets Objective(s) #1 and 2]

Obtain information on NPDES permits issued for facilities in the Nooksack Basin and evaluate the information for purposes of determining potential impairment to source water quality from these facilities.  Given the number of NPDES permits in the Basin, priorities for reviewing permits should be based on a 1, 2, 5, and >5 hour time of travel criteria.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: Public Utility District #1

Schedule for Completion: December 30, 2000

9.      Evaluate Potential Impairment of Nooksack Tribal Landfill on Source Water Quality

The Whatcom County Health Department does not have jurisdiction over landfills on tribal lands.  The Nooksack Tribe has a landfill in close proximity to the South Fork Nooksack River.  For landfills within Whatcom County’s jurisdiction, the County Health Department places monitoring requirements on the operators of the facility.  In addition, when the County permits facilities, an expiration date is placed on the permit.  To remain in operation, the permits must be renewed providing opportunities for the County to modify operational or monitoring requirements placed on the facility.  Although County Health Department staff had information on the location of the tribal facility, it was limited in terms of providing an indication of whether the facility presents a potential risk to source water quality.  Evaluation of the facility operation in terms of types of material accepted for disposal and monitoring program, if any, for leachate is recommended to determine potential impairment to source water quality.  The Environmental Protection Agency is recommended as the appropriate agency for implementing this recommendation recognizing the Tribe’s sovereign status as a government.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: Environmental Protection Agency

Interim Date(s):

June 1, 2000 – Proposed date for obtaining concurrence with EPA to implement agreement.

Schedule for Completion: September 1, 2000

Upon completion of EPA’s evaluation of the potential impairment of source water quality from the landfill, EPA should meet with the City of Lynden, PUD, and Whatcom County Health Department to provide an assessment of source control measures, if any, that may need to be implemented to protect source water.

10. Operational Review of Commercial, Institutional, and Community On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems in Priority Areas.

There is a greater potential for surface water quality to become impaired from a failing commercial, institutional or community on-site sewage disposal system than there is from failure of a residential system.  The increased potential comes from the larger loading of microbial organisms that would occur with a multi-user system.  A review of records for system installations and reported failures of commercial, institutional, and community systems within the 1-hour time of travel should be made to determine two things: 1) the age of the systems and 2) past or current failure rates.  Record review should go back to 1980 for purposes of determining the age of systems within the 1-hour time of travel.  The age of the system along with historic and current failure rates, will provide information on the type of source control measures – regulatory, voluntary, or educational – needed to address this potential source of contaminants to the Nooksack River.

The PUD and Lynden should meet with Whatcom County Health Department to further assess the scope of implementing this recommendation and, based on the results of that assessment, assist the Health Department in obtaining the resources required to implement the recommendation (i.e., pursue grant funding). In addition, the recommendation should be coordinated with efforts that may be taking place under the Portage Bay Shellfish District related to this potential contaminant source.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: Whatcom County Health Department

Interim Date(s):

May 1, 2000  - Proposed date for PUD, Lynden and Whatcom County to have met to assess the scope of the work necessary to implement this recommendation.  Results of this assessment will determine the remaining schedule for project implementation.         

Schedule for Completion:

Findings of the final report will be reviewed by the City of Lynden and Public Utility District for purposes of identifying, if necessary, source control programs.

11.  Involvement of Commercial Forest Land Owners in Assessing Source Water Impacts from Forest Practices

A number of state and federal programs are in place that outline and require best management practices for forest harvesting and associated activities.  Although the programs are effective, there is still the potential to impair source water quality.  There are currently less than half a dozen landowners that comprise the majority of ownership for forestry lands in all of the basins.  These landowners should be included in a process to develop a collaborative, basin-wide monitoring program designed to establish long-term water quality trends in the Nooksack.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: Public Utility District #1

Schedule for Completion:  Concurrent with Recommendation #13

12. Review SWPPP for Facilities in the 1-Hour Time of Travel of Intakes

Under the Washington State Department of Ecology’s general permit for industrial stormwater permits, stormwater pollution prevention plans (SWPPP) are required and must be submitted and approved by Ecology prior to issuance of the permit.  The SWPPP includes creating a pollution prevention team, performing a site assessment, developing a site map, developing best management practices, implementing the plan, and evaluating the progress of the plan.  Stormwater monitoring is not required by the permit, yet it is encouraged in order to evaluate the progress of the plan.  There are 20 general stormwater permits issued in the Lower Nooksack Subbasin for industrial facilities.  The facilities located in the 1-hour time of travel to the City of Lynden and PUD intakes should be identified and the SWPPP reviewed to determine potential for impairing source water quality.  In addition to providing information on potential impairment to source water quality from facilities that discharge directly to local streams and ditches, the SWPPP review will provide the City of Lynden an opportunity to verify the information in their files regarding potential pollutants discharged to the sanitary sewer system by those facilities permitted to do so.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation:  Public Utility District #1

Schedule for Completion:  December 31, 2000

13. Comprehensive Nooksack Basin Monitoring Program [Meets objectives(s) #2, 4, and 5]

A comprehensive monitoring program for the Nooksack River that enables local governments to make management decisions that are supported by scientifically-based water quality data is recommended.  Data collection efforts to date have not been undertaken in a manner that provides for a consistent and uniform database that can be used to assess long-term water quality trends on the Nooksack River and its forks (North, South, and Middle Forks).  A collaborative monitoring program that includes local and state agencies involved in data collection efforts in the Nooksack Basin is an efficient and effective mechanism for establishing a locally maintained database that can confidently be used for purposes of making land management decisions.  The collaborative monitoring program will be part of a comprehensive monitoring approach that includes a QAPP-based monitoring network and database and an electronic and paper document library of source water information and materials.  The resource library is proposed for housing at the Whatcom County reference library.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: WRIA #1 Planning Unit and City of Lynden

Interim Date(s):

July 1, 2000 – Draft work plan for approach to implementing recommendation.

August 1, 2000 – Prepare Interlocal Agreements if needed

December 31, 2000 – Finalize work plan and present interim progress report to City of Lynden and Public Utility District

March 1, 2001 – Proposed date for draft comprehensive monitoring plan; setup library for water resource documents and database.

Completion Date: June 1, 2001

 14. Annual Meetings of Surface Water Users and Others Involved in Resource Programs [Meets         objective(s)#5]

Organize and facilitate an annual meeting for water purveyors and individuals involved in resource programs such as the Portage Bay Closure Response Program, WRIA #1, ESA, and others to share water quality information, identify water resource needs, and share other information relevant to source protection and resource management.

Lead Entity for Coordinating Recommendation: Public Utility District #1 and City of Lynden

Completion Date: June 30 of each year between 2000 and 2005

V.4 Process for Implementing and Updating the Nooksack Source Protection Plan 

An interlocal agreement between the City of Lynden and Public Utility District #1 of Whatcom County will be established for purposes of implementing and updating the Nooksack Source Protection Plan.  The process will include the following:

(Section VI)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[1]Per telephone communication with City of Ferndale personnel.
[2]Per telephone communication with City of Everson personnel and consulting engineer.
[3]Whatcom County Development Standards, August 19, 1996.

PUD 1 Home        PUD Contacts        Links