Tributary Strategy Workgroup Policy
Assessing New and Innovative Approaches
for Nutrient and Sediment Reductions
(Approved: October 2003, Latest Revision: April 2004)
The Tributary Strategy Workgroup acknowledges the difficulty jurisdictions have reaching current
nutrient and sediment cap loads relying solely on the approved list of watershed model (WSM) BMPs.
The workgroup supports and encourages new ideas and innovative uses of current practices. Successful
cost-effective approaches benefit everyone.
However, the workgroup also has a responsibility to ensure that the nutrient reduction "credit"
associated with a practice is based upon peer reviewed research values and best professional judgment.
All WSM BMP efficiencies went through this type of review when first established and have recently
been subject to an extensive re-evaluation process to ensure their reduction efficiencies are consistent
with the latest research. The workgroup can ask no less of any new practice or innovation.
This paper describes the TSWG policy for new BMPs or innovative uses of current BMPs. It is
intended to define the responsibilities of the TSWG, the jurisdiction or workgroup proposing new
BMPs, the necessary documentation, and the review process.
Jurisdictions will not receive nutrient or sediment reduction credit in the watershed model during
annual progress runs for BMPs that have not been through the review process and obtained Nutrient
Subcommittee approval. Incorporation of new BMPs during tributary strategy development is
encouraged and does not need TSWG review and approval prior to incorporation and use.
Although the TSWG itself can propose a new BMP or innovative use, it is more likely an action initiated
by a jurisdiction or CBP technical workgroup. However, if the TSWG does propose a new BMP or
innovative methodology, the same criteria and review process applies. The "reviewer" will be the
Nutrient Subcommittee or a group representing them.
The private sector usually develops innovative technologies. However, they should not expect direct
TSWG review or endorsement. Technologies and innovative approaches must earn support at the
jurisdiction or workgroup level first to ensure interest and to minimize the TSWG workload. When a
technology is worthy of consideration, a jurisdiction or workgroup will sponsor the BMP through the
review process.

-------
New BMP Procedure
September 12, 2003
TWSG and Jurisdiction Responsibilities
1.	It is the responsibility of the jurisdiction or workgroup initiating the proposed BMP to provide the
documentation needed for evaluation. This is not a routine assignment of the NSC support staff.
Staff involvement requires prior agreement from the chairs of the Tributary Strategy Workgroup and
Nutrient Subcommittee.
2.	It is highly recommended that the sponsor begin the review process through the appropriate NSC
technical workgroup. Support from the technical workgroup is critical for TSWG approval.
2.	Jurisdiction/workgroup responsibilty is to provide the following minimum evaluation materials:
-	BMP Name/Title
-	Detailed Definition
-	Recommended N/P/sediment efficiencies w/peer reviewed references
-	Landuses to which BMP is applied
-	Conditions under which BMP works
(Is this a seasonal practice)
-	Units of measure (ft, acres)
-	Locations within CB basin where applicatible/ not applicatible
-	Useful life, maximum implementation level
-	Cummulative or annual practice
3.	TSWG responsibilities:
-	provide timely technical review
-	determine best method for incorporating into the watershed model
-	determine when the BMP is incorporated
4.	Once a BMP is approved for use by Nutrient Subcommittee, it is available for use basin-wide.
Page 2 of 2

-------