PUGET SOUND FEDERAL TASK FORCE
ACTION PLAN
2022-2026
May 2022
FEMA ZUSGS ANRCS
science for a changing world I M I \ US Army
US Army Corps
of Engineersฎ
-------
Contents
1.0 Introduction 2
1.1 ...Integrating Federal Activities in the Puget Sound Action Agenda 2
1.2...Western Washington Treaty Rights at Risk Initiative 3
1.3...Regional and National Federal Coordination 4
2.0 Priority Federal Actions to Protect and Restore Puget Sound 4
2.1 ...Cross-cutting Actions 5
2.2...Habitat 5
2.2.1 Cross-cutting Habitat Actions 6
2.2.2 Nearshore and Shoreline 6
2.2.3 Floodplains, Riparian, and Estuaries 7
2.2.4 Fish Passage 8
2.3...Stormwater 9
2.4...Shellfish 11
2.5...Scienceand Monitoring 12
3.0 Puget Sound Federal Task Force Governance and Action Plan Implementation 13
Appendix A: Priority Federal Actions to Protect and Restore Puget Sound 2022-2026 14
Acronyms 75
l
-------
1.0 Introduction
On September 30,2016, the Managing Director of the Council on Environmental Quality, Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency, Under Secretary of the Department of the Army, Assistant
Secretaries of the Department of Transportation and the Navy, Commander of the U.S. Coast Guard,
and the Secretaries of the Department of Interior, Department of Commerce, Department of
Agriculture, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (2016 MOU) creating the Puget Sound Federal
Task Force (PSFTF). This was an update of an existing 2008 MOU.
This PSFTF Action Plan fulfills the 2016 MOU requirement to develop and approve a five-year action
plan that leverages and coordinates diverse programs on a specific suite of priorities.
This PSFTF Action Plan builds on past work1 and is informed by all available strategic, economic
development and other related plans, including the Puget Sound Partnership's Action Agenda. This
Action Plan is also informed by the Western Washington Treaty Rights at Risk Initiative; federal
administration priorities around climate and environmental justice; engagement with tribal, state,
and local partners; Salmon Recovery Plans; the Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program, and
other regional protection and recovery plans.
1.1 Integrating Federal Activities in the Puget Sound
Action Agenda
A key purpose of the Puget Sound Federal Task Force is to strengthen the early and ongoing
integration of federal activities and capabilities into the Puget Sound Action Agenda and its
implementation.
Integrating federal activities into the implementation of the Action Agenda is important because the
Action Agenda is our region's shared vision for Puget Sound protection and recovery. The Action
Agenda aims to concentrate efforts, energy, and investment on transformational changes that will
enable collective progress toward the statutory goals and system of ecosystem indicators, known as
Vital Signs, that guide Puget Sound recovery. The Action Agenda serves as the Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act.
This PSFTF Action Plan helps integrate federal activities into the implementation of the Puget Sound
Action Agenda in the following ways.
The PSFTF Action Plan is organized around the three Strategic Initiatives (habitat, shellfish,
and stormwater). The Strategic Initiatives lead specific Implementation Strategies to achieve
Action Agenda recovery objectives, which make them key mechanisms for aligning federal,
state, and local efforts.
The PSFTF Action Plan reflects high mutual interest and substantial coordination and
collaboration in several areas, including, for example: riparian protection and restoration; fish
1 See the PSFTF 2017-2021 Progress Report
2
-------
passage restoration; restoration project permit streamlining; green infrastructure and
stormwater; science and monitoring; and habitat protection and restoration.
Strategies, high-level actions, and key opportunities from the 2022-2026 Action Agenda were
systematically considered and meaningfully influenced this PSFTF Action Plan's Priority
Federal Actions to Protect and Restore Puget Sound.
The PSFTF and Puget Sound Partnership will use this PSFTF Action Plan and continue to work
togetherto improve understanding, recognition, and, alignment of federal Ongoing Programs
with Action Agenda implementation.
1.2 Western Washington Treaty Rights at Risk Initiative
Another key purpose of the PSFTF is to strengthen intergovernmental coordination of federal actions
with tribal governments, and, to contribute to fulfilling federal trust responsibilities.
One way that the PSFTF meets these purposes is through staffing and coordinating the reinforcing
Western Washington Treaty Rights at Risk Initiative.
The PSFTF and Western Washington Treaty Rights at Risk Initiative are reinforcing governmental
coordination efforts because:
they share an overall goal of supplementingfederal communication and coordination with
tribes through early, interagency, high-level, consideration of tribal rights, knowledge, and
interests
the staff, managers and federal leaders involved in the Puget Sound Federal Task Force are
involved in the Western Washington Treaty Rights at Risk Initiative
the benefits of many of the actions listed in this plan extend beyond the boundaries of Puget
Sound.
The Western Washington Treaty Rights at
Risk Initiative is a synchronizing
mechanism, accelerator for rights
protection, and refers to the July 2011
report from the treaty tribes of western
Washington, Treatv Rights at Risk:
Ongoing Habitat Loss, the Decline of
Salmon Resource, and
Recommendations for Change. This
report identifies the ongoing habitat loss
and declining salmon resource in the
Pacific Northwest and its associated
impact to the tribes' treaty-reserved
fishing rights.
In September 2011, CEQ directed regional leaders for NOAA, EPA, and USDAto co-lead an effort
to improve agency coordination and outcomes for salmon and their habitat. Since 2011, regional
leaders from NOAA, EPA, USDA, and the Army Corps of Engineers have met regularly and achieved
Regional Federal and Tribal Leaders Meeting, November 2021
3
-------
notable progress on non-point water pollution, marine shoreline and riparian habitat, hatcheries, and
vessel traffic.
Key meetings between regional federal leaders of
all 13 PSFTF member agencies and Western
Washington Tribal leaders in late 2021 and early
2022 updated agencies' understanding of tribal
priorities and established federal and tribal working
groups to focus efforts on five areas of work: Water
Quality, Toxics and Stormwater; Nearshore and
Estuary Protection; Riparian Habitat; and
Recreational Impacts.
1.3 Regional and National Federal Coordination
A third key purpose of the PSFTF is to strengthen the coordination among federal agencies and provide
for closer and more efficient coordination between regional and national federal leadership in the
setting and execution of federal priorities.
Current federal Administration priorities include infrastructure, climate, environmental justice, and
tribal issues.
On infrastructure, this PSFTF Action Plan includes a commitment to continue coordinating
member agencies toward effective and environmentally beneficial use of fundingfrom the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
On climate and environmental justice, the PSFTF is part of a whole-of-government effort.
Important climate and environmental justice priorities and policies, applicable to all federal
agencies, are included in Executive Order 14008 Tackling the Climate Crises at Home and
Abroad and Executive Order 13985 Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved
Communities Through the Federal Government.
On tribal issues at a national level, the PSFTF is engaged with and helping to execute new
Tribal Treaty Rights and Tribal Homelands initiatives led by the White House Council on Native
American Affairs.
The PSFTF will continue to provide for closer and more efficient coordination between regional and
national federal leadership consistent with protecting and restoring Puget Sound, one of the most
important estuary ecosystems in the United States.
2.0 Priority Federal Actions to Protect and Restore Puget
Sound
This PSFTF Action Plan's Priority Federal Actions to Protect and Restore Puget Sound (Appendix A) fulfill
the PSFTF 2016 MOU requirement for a five-year action plan that leverages federal programs across
agencies and serves to coordinate diverse programs on a specific suite of priorities.
For over a decade, Swinomish and
other tribes have provided specific asks
of our federal trustees to take action,
and yesterday that request was
couched in the urgent pleas that we are
running out of time. - Swinomish Indian
Community February25,2022 letter on the
draft PSFTF Action Plan
4
-------
The actions in this plan are actions that have been updated from previous Puget Sound Federal Action
Plans, were added by teams of federal staff based on their own experience and knowledge, added by
federal staff to align with the Action Agenda, and added to respond to tribal knowledge, expertise, and
interests.
The actions include agency and inter-agency efforts, ongoing programs, and certain projects. A focus
of the overall effort is on actions that benefit from interagency and inter-governmental coordination.
2.1 Cross-cutting Actions
Cross-cutting actions are multi-benefit, co-benefit, and/or address multiple priorities, for example,
EPA's National Estuary Program.
2.2 Habitat
Protecting and restoring habitat involves
identifying, protecting, and restoringthe
lands, waters, and ecological processes
essential to Puget Sound communities and
tribal treaty rights.
The Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission 2020 State of Our Watersheds
report and the Puget Sound Partnership
2021 State of the Sound report indicate
that vital signs of ecological health in
Puget Sound are generally static or are
getting worse. The Species and Food Web
indicators have not improved. Chinook
Salmon and Southern Resident Orcas are
far from their recovery targets and on
worsening trajectories. Many indicators
related to marine and freshwater quantity
and quality are also worsening, and the
impacts of climate change will further
hasten downward trends. A few indicators
are on an improving trajectory; "During the
past two years, conversion of forests and
ecologically important lands slowed down.
Investments in restoration continue to improve degraded habitats in many Puget Sound
watersheds. Salmon runs in Hood Canal are improving."
Salish Sea Bioregion Detailed Land Cover
Detailed Land Cover
Submerged and Intertidal veq
Cropland
Salish Sea Atlas, Aquila Flower, 2021
Priority federal actions to protect and restore habitat aim to achieve and accelerate positive trends
in habitat recovery and sustain the many beneficial uses of Puget Sound.
5
-------
2.2.1 Cross-cutting Habitat Actions
While the habitat actions are divided into three habitat types: nearshore and shoreline; floodplains,
riparian, and estuary; and fish passage; recovery must also be approached as an integrated system
at a watershed scale. Cross-cutting habitat actions reflect the integration of the recovery efforts in
these habitat types.
2.2.2 Nearshore and Shoreline
Protect and restore nearshore and shoreline habitat
Nearshore and shoreline habitats are some of the most productive ecosystems on earth because, for
example, they provide nursery and feeding grounds for numerous ecologically and economically
valuable fish and shellfish species.
From time immemorial to today the shores of Puget Sound have been integral to Native Americans'
lives and cultural practices. Nearshore and shoreline areas are also at the heart of early industry and
development, the backdrop for major cities, the location of many transportation corridors, and where
people make their homes, recreate, and explore nature.
Nearshore and shoreline habitat are particularly vulnerable to land use and development pressures
and have not been spared from the pressures of rapid population and economic growth, which is
expected to increase in the decades to come.
Priority federal actions to protect and restore nearshore and shoreline habitat include funding for
implementation of restoration projects in marine shorelines, monitoring and evaluation of these
projects, and policies or programs to protect and improve restoration.
Federal agencies support the PSP Shoreline Armoring Implementation Strategy and its key elements:
improve and expand incentives and education for property owners; increase and improve regulatory
implementation, effectiveness, and communication; increase and improve coastal processes-based
design and technical training; and improve long-term strategic planning.
Photos: WA Ecology Coastal Atlas
AFTER
6
-------
2.2.3 Floodplains, Riparian, and Estuaries
Protect and restore floodplains, riparian, and estuarine habitat
Floodplains include riparian habitat, streams,
and estuaries. These systems are dynamic and
diverse landscapes that provide invaluable
ecosystem services including critical habitat
for the health, growth, and survival of Pacific
salmon and steelhead, flood damage
mitigation, improved water quality, vital
habitat for myriad flora and fauna,
recreational opportunities, economically
valuable farmlands, and culturally important
lands for western Washington Tribes.
Middle Fork Snoqualmie River floodplain. Photo: King County
Riparian areas are adjacent to streams and
rivers. Riparian habitat performs many
functions includingshade forstream
temperature regulation, erosion and sedimentation control, stream flow regulation, woody debris
input, and food and nutrients for aquatic organisms and fish.
As population growth and the associated development continues to modify floodplains, the ability of
floodplain systems to provide ecosystem services becomes increasingly impaired, with potentially
adverse consequences to people, property, habitats, and the species that depend on floodplains. This
is further exacerbated by changing climate and ocean conditions that threaten salmon, tribal treaty-
reserved rights, wildlife habitat, and human well-being.
Priority federal actions to protect and restore floodplains, riparian and estuarine habitat
include funding for implementation of restoration projects; developing implementation strategies
and coordination efforts; and research, policies, and programs to protect habitat and improve
restoration in these systems.
Federal agencies partner with State agencies and other entities to implement the PSP Floodplains and
Estuaries implementation Strategy. The Implementation Strategy identifies three strategies to
increase and accelerate floodplain and estuarine habitat restoration: a Sound-wide strategy defining
regional integrated management support; a river-basin strategy describing integrated planning and
project implementation; and a risks and costs strategy defining the risk tolerance and cost subsidy
framework and analyses to advance regional and river-basin strategies. Federal agencies are
collaborating with Washington State and tribes on a shared strategy to protect and restore riparian
areas as part of a larger salmon recovery strategy.
7
-------
2.2.4 Fish Passage
Reconnect spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead.
Correcting salmon, steelhead and other native
resident fish migration barriers caused by
undersized culverts and other human-made
structures are key action items that reconnect
spawning and rearing habitat and restore
natural stream processes. Federal agencies with
land management or facilities management
responsibilities have identified numerous fish
migration barriers under their respective
jurisdictions and are working to correct high
priority sites. Multiple federal programs provide
technical assistance and help fund fish passage
barrier assessments and restoration projects. A
portion of those funding programs are utilized
as matching funding to state priority and funded
fish passage projects.
In general, this work undertaken by agencies will have a strong connection to recovery of federally
listed Chinook salmon and steelhead trout. In addition, the Action Plan sets a pathway for more
effective alignment of Federal fish passage programs to those of the State of Washington.
Photo: King County
8
-------
2.3 Stormwater
Reduce stormwater and wastewater pollution
Washington State's Department of Ecology has recently
evaluated toxic pollutant contributions to Puget Sound and
determined that "A variety of diffuse (nonpoint) sources appear
to account for the majority of contaminant releases in the Puget
Sound basin. In addition, surface water runoff during storms
was identified as the major delivery pathway for most
contaminants."2
Human population growth and development pressures are
accelerating trends toward land conversion. Exurban
development replaces forests, rangelands and
farmlands with roads, parking lots, buildings and similar
hardscapes that do not readily absorb rainfall, but shunt
rainwater into surface flows that mobilize and transport
contaminants to rivers, lakes, wetlands, and marine waters. The
Puget Sound region is expected to add more than 1.6 million
people by 2030 and exemplifies many of the challenges that
stormwater poses across socioeconomic sectors - e.g., growth
management, transportation, natural resource (e.g., salmon,
and Southern Resident killer whale) conservation, and
environ mental justice.
Stormwater problems are generally divided into two distinct but
related categories: water quantity and water quality. The
problems associated with high runoff volumes and public safety
(water quantity) have been well understood for decades and are
the basis for much of the "grey" infrastructure currently in place
in Puget Sound - e.g., storm drains, detention
ponds, underground conveyance systems, and outfalls.
Problems related to stormwater quantity are generally in the
civil engineering domain and include flooding (property
damage, transportation risks) and adverse physical impacts on
aquatic habitats via scour, sedimentation, and similar
hydrologic processes.
Relative to water quantity, the challenges associated with
stormwater quality can be much more complex, particularly in
urbanizing watersheds where runoff contains dynamic mixtures
Thecoho urban runoff toxicity syndrome.
Top panel: A westward view of typical
TRAFFIC ON SR520, THE SOURCE OF ROADWAY
RUNOFF FOR MANY NEP-SUPPORTED TOXICITY AND
GREEN INFRASTUCTURESTUDlES. RUNOFF IS
COLLECTED FROM DOWNSPOUTS TO THE NOAA
Northwest Fisheries Science Center (at
RIGHT IN PHOTO; CREDIT JULANN SPROMBERG,
NOAA). Middle panel: An adultcoho
RETURNING TO SPAWN IN A SMALL PUGET SOUND
stream (Photo credit: Ken King, USFWS}.
Focused stormwater science hasshown
THAT COHO ARE PARTICULARLY VULNERABLE THE
ACUTELY LETHAL EFFECTS OF UNTREATED URBAN
runoff. Bottom panel: Example of coho pre-
SPAWN MORTALITY IN A REPRESENTATIVE URBAN
STREAM (LONGFELLOWCREEK, WEST SEATTLE;
CREDIT JANA LABENIA, NOAA). KNOWN RATES OF
ANNUAL COHO LOSSES TO THE URBAN MORTALITY
SYNDROME ARE BASED PRIMARILY ON FIELD
COUNTS OFDEAD, UNSPAWNEDFEMALES.
2 https://apps.ecologv.wa.gov/publications/documents/1103055.pdf
9
-------
(i.e., changing in space and time) of thousands of distinct
compounds, the vast majority of which have not been
identified or characterized in terms of adverse
environmental effects. This represents a growing
challenge because major federal clean water statutes
have not kept pace with the 80,000+ chemicals currently
in production, a number that does not include
related transformational processes in the environment
(e.g., bacterial metabolism and abiotic photo-
modification) that can further change chemical structure
and potential toxicity. Thousands of these chemicals
originate from motor vehicles (brake pads, exhaust, tire
wear, leaking oil and grease, etc.), and thus stormwater
runoff from the transportation grid represents a major
emerging environmental health threat to salmon and
other keystone species in Puget Sound, such as marine
forage fish and Southern Resident killer whales.
Unlike temperature, sediments, nutrients, dissolved
oxygen, and other conventional water quality
parameters, there are at present several emerging pollutants (such as 6PPD~quinone) for which there
are no EPA criteria. Similarly, interactions between chemicals in numerically complex mixtures, or
interactions between toxics and parallel habitat stressors (pathogens, ocean acidification, surface
water warming) are largely unknown.
In the face of this uncertainty, and accelerating growth and development trends in the region, the
PSFTF is focused on identifying and implementing strategies to mitigate the adverse ecological
impacts of untreated stormwater, particularly in the form of green stormwater infrastructure methods
to capture and remove pollutants from runoff using biofiltration and similar methods.
Priority federal actions involving stormwater are generally intended to minimize flooding (water
quantity) and ecological decline (water quality). They involve the management of runoff on federal
facilities, using a combination of traditional grey and green infrastructure methods. Federal partners
are also funding state-level innovations in stormwater management, in close coordination with
Washington State agencies, tribes, and other regional stakeholders. Finally, federal scientists are at
the forefront of targeted research on stormwater toxicity and the effectiveness of pollution reduction
strategies.
Death by
pollution
Coho are dying
before they can
even spawn as
they encounter
the pollution in
urban streams.
' Blaine
Bellingham
Anacortes
Port*
Angeles
Sequim
Edmonds
Everett
Bremerton ซ
Seattle Bellevue
Predicted
mortality
Less than
10%
10 to 40%
I Greater
than 40%
Sources: Esri, NOAA Fisheries
Tacoma
Renton
'Kent
Olympia
A
N
MILES
MARK NOWLIN / THE SEATTLE TIMES
10
-------
2.4 Shellfish
Protect, Restore, and Re-open shellfish beds
Shellfish have been harvested for
thousands of years from Puget Sound. The
region's tribes rely on shellfish for cultural,
subsistence and commercial purposes,
Historically, Tribes created intertidal
habitats to grow clams and oysters.
Commercial scale farming has grown over
the past hundred years, and now supports
over3,200 jobs - many in rural communities
- and bringing in an estimated $180 million
to the region each year. Recreational
shellfish harvest also provides economic
benefits, as well as a strong sense of place
for residents of Washington, Shellfish play a
key role in our marine ecosystem. They are
at the base of the food web, provide habitat
and help filter and clean water.
But shellfish harvests are threatened by bacterial and chemical pollution that has closed more than
100,000 acres of Puget Sound beaches to human consumption. The health of our local shellfish beds
begins on the land. By reducing pollution from contaminated stormwater runoff, fixing failing on-site
sewage systems, and mitigating emerging threats to shellfish from microplastics to ocean
acidification, we can increase the health of shellfish populations.
Federal agencies are leading and funding work to restore native Olympia oyster populations and
to monitor and protect water quality in Puget Sound to help ensure shellfish are safe to
harvest. From examining the ecological functions of shellfish aquaculture, writing permits for shellfish
aquaculture to take place, conducting native shellfish genetic risk assessments to developing an
online story map about pathogenic Vibrio predictive models for shellfish harvesters,6 Puget Sound's
federal agencies are stepping up to the challenge.
Cockle spawning project at NOAA's Manchester facility
li
-------
2.5 Science and Monitoring
Fund and coordinate cutting edge science and monitoring
Credible and salient scientific
information, interpretation, and technical
support are needed at the regional, sub-
regional, and local levels to support
recovery planning and implementation
processes, address policy barriers, and
inform the best next steps for recovery.
Within the broader community of
partners, federal agencies have extensive
scientific expertise, capabilities, and
assets to support Puget Sound ecosystem
recovery, including planning,
implementation, and adaptive
management activities related to the
Puget Sound Federal Action Plan, the Puget Sound Action Agenda, salmon recovery plans, watershed
recovery and protection plans, and other related efforts. Federal agencies also have access to
extensive national and regional programs, assets, and human capital, collectively representing
significant potential fundamental science and monitoring capacity. In this context, the term "science"
encompasses the natural and social sciences, engineering disciplines and other relevant scientific and
technical disciplines engaged by federal agencies within the Puget Sound Federal Task Force.
The PSFTF recognizes the responsibilities of federal agencies to coordinate scientific activities and
priorities across federal agencies and with non-federal partners, including the National Estuary
Program Management Conference participants, the Puget Sound Action Agenda Strategic Initiative
Leads, State and Tribal partners, the Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program (PSEMP), and
others. While there are significant efforts to coordinate science and monitoring activities through the
Puget Sound Partnership Science Panel, the Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program, and other
forums, federal agencies have tended to engage as individual agencies in support of their respective
missions, often at the individual program or project level.
More strategic federal engagement that encompasses inter-agency coordination across national
programs, human capital, and science assets is expected to better support the implementation of the
PSFTF Action Plan and the needs of our non-federal Puget Sound recovery partners. In particular, the
PSFTF recognizes that improved inter-agency federal coordination of science and monitoring
activities and programs is essential to 1) meet broad federal responsibilities and goals supporting
Puget Sound ecosystem recovery and Tribal Treaty rights and 2) meet federal responsibilities and
goals to coordinate science and monitoring effectively with state, Tribal, and local partners.
Appendix A of this Action Plan tabulates high-priority on-going and planned federal science and
monitoring activities to support Puget Sound recovery, including activities to support planning and
implementation of the Action Agenda, the PSFTF Action Plan, salmon recovery plans, and other
12
-------
important recovery efforts. Appendix A also details collaborative efforts to improve science
coordination within the PSFTF and between Federal agencies and the non-federal Puget Sound
recovery science and monitoring community.
3.0 Puget Sound Federal Task Force Governance and
Action Plan Implementation
The Governance structure for the Puget Sound Federal Task Force and process for Action
Plan development and reporting is established in the 2016 Puget Sound Federal Task Force
Memorandum of Understanding.
Evaluation and Progress Reporting
The PSFTF MOU requires a "progress report" and evaluation aimed at modifying the Action Plan to
adapt to new circumstances and events. The PSFTF will continue to meet this requirement and will
continue to build on past work to improve the value of such efforts. The most recent Progress Report
discloses performance monitoring findings for 2017-2021. An overarching goal is to use a rolling-five-
year Action Plan-Progress Report process to set and execute the specific federal programmatic,
regulatory, incentive based and other actions that will truly drive recovery of Puget Sound.
The PSFTF MOU states that the Task Force will, "Outline implementation costs and ensure they are
achievable within available resources". The PSFTF will continue to collect information on federal
resources.
13
-------
A
Appendix A: Priority Federal Actions to Protect and Restore Puget Sound
2022-2026
14
-------
ID
Action Title
Plan
2022-2026
Section
Action #/ID
Lead Agencies
Other Agencies
Outcomes (why?): Change in environmental condition, behavior, or knowledge.
Outputs (what?): Federal products and/or service.
Resources: Federal human, financial, organizational resources, and (non-federal resources).
Crosscutting
2.1.1
EPA
PugetSound
National Estuary
Program
Outcomes: Improved implementation of the Puget Sound Action Agenda
Outputs:
Fund Strategic Initiative Leads, Tribal Lead Organization, Tribal capacity, the Puget Sound Partnership, and
Local Integrating Organizations
Support backbone coordination for Puget Sound Recovery
Approve the Puget Sound Action Agenda
Utilize increased EPA funding from the IIJA to support leveraging federal and state programs to accelerate
riparian habitat, climate resilience, environmental and tribal justice, and science.
Resources: ~$52M or more per year EPA Puget Sound Geographic Funds, depending on appropriations
Crosscutting
2.1.2
NOAA
Recovery Planning
for Threatened &
Endangered Species
Outcomes: Improved pace and effectiveness of recovery planning for ESA-listed species in Puget Sound
Outputs:
Evaluate the status and trends of imperiled species listed under the ESA that occupy Puget Sound
Update regional and watershed recovery plans meet federal standards and objectives
Resources: NOAA staff from the West Coast Regional Office, with science support from the Northwest Fisheries Science
Center
Crosscutting
2.1.3
Endangered Species
Act Regulation
Outcomes: Monitor and improve compliance with Endangered Species Act
Outputs:
15
-------
NOAA-WCR
Continue to ensure that federal actions including regulation of work in 'waters and wetlands of the United
States' are consistent with Endangered Species Act
Resources: NOAA staff time
Crosscutting
2.1.4
EPA, NOAA,
USFWS, FEMA,
USACE, USCG,
USFS, NRCS,
FHWA, FT A
Federal
Coordination -
Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act and other
funding
Outcomes: Effective and environmentally beneficial use of Infrastructure Law and other funds
Outputs:
Prioritize, leverage, and coordinate new funding in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
Direct inter-agency communication and coordination through meetings and associated supporting materials.
Capability to provide timely and accurate information to partners, such as the state and tribes and interested
entities.
Communicate preference toward natural infrastructure and multi-benefit approaches in the Puget Sound
Region toward more unified understanding across communities, project planners, and State agency staff
implementing delegated programs. (Follow example such as FEMA Guidebook on nature-based hazard
mitigation grants).
Develop/distribute/fund communication tools that reinforce what federal agencies are being asked to do by
the Administration re: climate change, environmental justice, tribal treaty rights, tribal consultation.
Collaborate and coordinate funding among agencies and the appropriate State agencies on the new Federal
Climate Adaptation Plans and connect these plans to Puget Sound recovery actions.
Collaborate on funding PSP, Tribes, LIOs, Comprehensive Planning for Regional Transportation Plans and
Regional Economic Strategies, and others to help ensure Puget Sound recovery goals are integrated into
federal infrastructure investments even if they are via "grey infrastructure" project development pathways.
Leverage existing federal expertise in reporting/piloting how artificial intelligence, crowdsourcing, smart
sensors, and other technologies could contribute toward accelerating Puget Sound recovery, water, and
climate solutions. (Follow example of Ecology's Grid Modernization and Smart Grid programs).
Resources: Federal staff time
Crosscutting
2.1.5
NOAA
Ecosystem Service
Quantification
Outcomes: Expand use of ecosystem services quantification toward practical application in a variety of environments.
Increased regulatory efficiency related to ESAand effectiveness of development actions
Outputs:
Develop methods to quantify impacts to threatened and endangered species to increase efficiency and
effectiveness of development regulation, so actions with impacts to ecosystems can efficiently compensate for
16
-------
(EPA)
those impacts by supporting recovery efforts. Current efforts are focused on quantification of shoreline
development effects, with efforts underway to expand tools for assessment of actions in estuaries and river
deltas.
Consider ecosystem service quantification products available in EPA ORD's Strategic Research Area Plans.
Resources:
Multiple workgroups from WCR/RC/NWFSC provide fractions of FTEs to develop and implement these efforts.
There are unmet needs to improve models, increase training in their use, increase science support, coordinate
with other regulatory authorities, and expand assessment tools to floodplains and stormwater impacts
Crosscutting
2.1.6
EPA, USACE,
FEMA, NOAA,
Coordinated
Technical Assistance
and Resources for
Most Vulnerable
Populations and
Community-Based
Organizations
Outcomes:
Improved water, hazard mitigation and climate resilience planning
Increased support toward Action Agenda Strategy "Protect human health, considering disproportionate
impacts on sensitive populations, through programs that educate communities and limit harmful exposures
from air and water contaminants"
Outputs:
EPA: Competitive funding for cross-agency integrated planning/engineering consultant contract that would
offer focused resilience planning resources and early technical support needed to be competitive for future
project funding (e.g., project feasibility and options analysis)
Use NEP granting or other federal funding to offer technical assistance for water, hazard mitigation and
climate resilience related planning efforts for communities at high risk for climate impacts, but without a
strong local tax base or planning staff.
Coordinate across federal programs to prioritize technical assistance support for climate-vulnerable
communities, (e.g., coastal/riverside towns experiencing storm surge and flood events, communities after
wildfire events)
Resources: EPA NEP funding, EPA, USACE, FEMA, and NOAA Staff time
Crosscutting
2.1.7
BIA
Tribal Fish, Wildlife,
and Recreation
Program
Outcomes: Continued/increased support for tribes' meaningful exercise of their treaty fishing, hunting, and gathering
rights through the Fish, Wildlife, and Recreation Program under the Rights Protection Implementation Plan
Outputs:
Maintain or improve performance of the following programs under the Fish, Wildlife, and Recreation Branch within the
Puget Sound Basin
17
-------
Wildlife and Parks Program
Fish Hatchery Operations & Maintenance Programs
Endangered Species Program
Tribal Management/Development Program
Rights Protection Program
FERC/Hydroelectric Licensing/Re-Licensing Program
Resources
Wildlife and Parks Program $230,221
Fish Hatchery Operations & Maintenance Programs $6,559,318
Endangered Species Program $1,405,980
Tribal Management/Development Program $3,160,263
Rights Protection Program $28,296,335.
Crosscutting
2.1.8
FTA, FHWA
(NOAA, USFWS)
Planning, Review,
and Fundingto
Reduce
Transportation
Impacts on the
Environment
Outcomes:
Reduced transportation impacts on the environment through the improvement of public transportation.
Supports Action Agenda by leading to smart development and protect intact habitats and processes by
channeling population growth into transit-oriented urban centers with easy access to natural spaces
Outputs
State/Metropolitan Planning. In coordination with FHWA, work with WSDOT and Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) in the Puget Sound region to develop short and long-range transportation plans that
encourage higher density, transit-supportive development through the implementation of increased
multimodal transportation options, including public transit, walking, and biking.
Environmental Review. Continue and improve environmental review of capital projects so that the design and
performance of public transportation infrastructure reflects the best available information. Partner with FHWA
and improve consultation with NOAA and USFWS regarding best practices to prevent or limit environmental
impacts and mitigation for any impacts that do occur.
Project Funding. Provide regular, ongoing federal investments in public transportation to support and
encourage low-impact land use development patterns that reduce overall environmental impacts. Continue
and expand weighting criteria in discretionary funding opportunities that promote projects supporting low-
impact, environmentally sustainable land use patterns.
Resources: FTAand FHWAstaff time and funding
18
-------
Crosscutting
2.1.9
EPA
(Environment
and Climate
Change Canada)
Implement the
Canada - U.S.
Cooperation in the
Salish Sea 2021-2024
Action Plan
Outcomes: Improved awareness at the federal level of respective federal initiatives and activities relating to Salish Sea
protection
Outputs
Senior Staff for the PSFTF and U.S. Chairof the SoC Working Group will meet regularly to implement U.S.
federal commitments under the SoC Action Plan
The PSFTF will track, maintain awareness, and focus implementation assistance - as requested by the SoC
working group - on commitments made under Salish Sea Action Plan PAI6 - federal-federal information
exchange.
Tracking commitments under PAI6 is primarily done through SoC Progress Reports.
Resources:
EPA staff time to share in the administration of the SoC Working Group
EPA funding for Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference
Crosscutting
2.1.10
USCG,EPA
Implement the
PugetSound Area
Contingency Plan
Outcome: Improved protection of public health, safety, and the environment
Outputs
Ensure coordinated, efficient, and effective support of the federal, state, tribal, local, and international
responses to significant oil and hazardous substance incidents within the USCG Thirteenth District Area of
Responsibility that is Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 compliant with respects to critical habitat or
endangered species.
The U.S. Coast Guard will maintain a robust Area Contingency Plan to better prepared and respond to oil and
hazardous substance incidents. The Puget Sound Area Contingency Plan provides for orderly and effective
implementation of response actions to protect the people, natural resources in the Pacific Northwest. It
promotes the coordination of and describe the strategy for a unified and coordinated federal, state, tribal,
local, responsible party, response contractor, response cooperative, and community response to a discharge
or substantial threat of discharge of oil or a release or substantial threat of a release of a hazardous substance
into the marine environment.
Regional planning, guidance, and coordination of preparedness and response actions are outlined in the
Northwest Area Contingency Plan managed by the Regional Response Team (RRT). The standing RRT is co-
chaired by EPA and USCG District 13 with participation of 16 federal agencies, three States and numerous
Indian Tribes. The role of the standing RRT includes evaluation of communication systems and procedures,
planning, coordination, training, evaluation, preparedness, and related matters on a region-wide basis. The
RRT also evaluates the use of dispersants, in-situ burning, and surface washing agents.
19
-------
Resources: Staff time
Crosscutting
2.1.11
USCG
(Canadian Coast
Guard, EPA,
NOAA,
Department of
Interior)
Coordinate
International
Cooperation for
Preparedness and
Response Activities
Outcomes: Improved habitat and species protection through improved transboundary oil spill response
Outputs
Work to ensure the response to marine pollution or threat of marine pollution is consistent with the Canadian
Coast Guard Marine Spills Contingency Plan - Pacific Region and the Northwest Area Contingency Plan (USCG
Plan and sponsor CAN USPAC Joint Response Team Exercise to be held in 2022
Contingency Planning, Transboundary Oil Spill Exercises, International/Interagency
collaboration/coordination
In the spirit of preparedness and ability to respond to oil spills that may impact, or initiate from Canada, the
U.S. Coast Guard will plan and prepare for transboundary oil spills with Canada. The U.S. Coast Guard will
identify specific processes whereby both the USCG and Canadian Coast Guard communicate, consult, and
coordinate in response to discharge or threat of discharge of pollution into the contiguous waters of interest of
both Canada and the United States.
The Canada - US Joint Marine Pollution Contingency Plan (JCP), and a Geographic Annex for the Pacific Coast,
also known as CANUSPAC, will present the basic information necessary to execute an efficient and effective
response operation in the contiguous waters to which the CANUSPAC applies to include Straits of Juan de
Fuca, Haro, and Georgia Straits as well as Boundary Passage. The CANUSPAC Joint Response Team (JRT)
members facilitate the movement of response personnel and equipment across the borders and can activate
other federal agencies as needed.
Maintain Indigenous Community Engagement (Tribes & First Nation) as a key objective of the CANUSPAC Joint
Response Team (Canadian CG & USCG), bi-annual exercises, meetings in/around Tribal/First Nation land,
inclusion and/or consultation during emergency/incident management.
Provide consultation on a case-by-case basis related to vessel traffic and emergency/incident management
impacts on usual & accustomed treaty areas.
Resources: -
Crosscutting
2.1.12
USCG
Vessel Traffic
Management
System
Outcomes
Improved prevention of collisions, groundings, maritime casualties and ensuing environmental damage
Increased visibility of vessels within the Vessel Traffic System allowing for greater awareness of operators in
congested waterways.
20
-------
(Canadian Coast
Guard)
Vessels that use Automatic Information System (AIS) will have better information for collision avoidance
decreasing the number of incidents and gain greater visibility of the locations of vessels that are carrying
Certain Dangerous Cargoes.
The addition of fishing vessels that carry AIS will help us identify potential conflicts for vessels operating in the
same area
Outputs
Continue to monitor Canadian Coast Guard Vessel Traffic System Marine Mammal Desk initiative intended to
protect Resident Killer Whales off Vancouver Island nearshipping lanes
The purpose of Vessel Traffic Service Puget Sound is to function as an integral part of the Coast Guard
waterways management efforts by facilitating the safe and efficient transit of vessel traffic to assist in the
prevention of collisions, groundings, maritime casualties and ensuing environmental damage.
Carefully trained military and civilian watch standers monitor and communicate with vessels in the Strait of
Juan de Fuca, San Juan Islands, and Puget Sound.
The Coast Guard will monitor the doubling the number of vessels required to use AIS carriage onboard vessels
that have previously not been required to broadcast AIS. This includes smaller passenger, towing, and fishing
vessels as well as dredging operations inside or nearshipping lanes.
Resources: USCG personnel time
Crosscutting
2.1.13
USCG
Towing vessel
inspection
regulations
Outcomes
Reduced pollution from towing vessels through greater oversight of vessel design and machinery.
Greater oversight enabled by increased awareness of operations and condition of the towing vessel fleet.
Outputs
Continue to implement inspection standards and regulations for towing vessels, including requirements for a
Safety Management System.
Continue focus on Pilothouse Resource Management, including enhancing manning and increased mariner
credentialing.
Evaluate compliance levels in USCG Thirteenth District area of responsibility
Resources: No additional resources needed at this time
21
-------
Crosscutting
2.1.14
USFS, EPA
(USGS, NRCS,
NOAA, others)
Integrate the Green-
Duwamish Urban
Waters Federal
Partnership with
PugetSound
Recovery
Outcomes:
Increased integration between GDUWFP, other watershed scale programming (e.g., WRIAs), the National
Estuary Program, the Puget Sound Partnership, and other Puget Sound recovery efforts
Application of GDUWFP proven engagement and restoration programs across Puget Sound
Outputs
Involvement of 10-12 new organizations and communities in Federal Puget Sound recovery efforts.
6-10 new Federally funded upland efforts align practices to support Puget Sound recovery.
3-5 proven programs transferred from the Urban Waters Federal Partnership locations and applied to locations
across Puget Sound.
Resources:
$90,000 annually secured staff time, and some project funding. Additional project funding needed. Subject to
appropriations
(1:1 match identified from local partner sources)
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.1
NOAA - WCR/RC,
EPA, USACE,
FEMA, USFWS
Habitat Restoration
Regulation
Efficiency
Outcomes: Expedited, facilitated federal permitting for priority habitat restoration projects in the Puget Sound Basin
Outputs:
Continue work with the federal-state Multi-agency Regulatory Review Team (MART) permitting program on
beneficial nearshore projects
Expand the existing joint federal-state multiagency permitting process and program for expediting permits for
salmon recovery projects that qualify under the State's Habitat Recovery Pilot Program (HRPP) (2021 Act)
regarding streamlined permitting for habitat recovery projects (HB 1382). Federal permitting agencies partner
with State agencies involved in the HRPP to expedite federal permits for projects going through the HRPP.
Federal agencies work with state regulatory partners and local implementation partners to ensure that Puget
Sound recovery and resilience projects happen quickly and without unintended adverse consequences.
Implement continuous improvement of the MART permitting process
Assess and implement using the MART to permit multi-benefit projects, such as those funded by Floodplains
by Design
Develop a joint federal-state strategy to ensure that salmon recovery projects are permitted in compliance
with FEMA and State Flood Management regulations: RCW 86.16,44 CFR and Executive Orders 11988,13690,
and 14030. Use MART process to troubleshoot permitting issues and implement solutions to compliance of
floodplain management regulations for restoration projects.
22
-------
Support expected significant increases in federal funding for salmon recovery projects through expediting
permits for these projects.
Resources:
Dedicated 0.25 to 1 FTE from each federal agency: EPA, NOAA, USACE, and FEMAspecifically for permitting
restoration projects
(6-8 dedicated State funded regulatory staff dedicated to this new program)
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.2
NOAA
Pacific Coastal
Salmon Recovery
Fund
Outcomes: Restore critical salmon habitat to perpetuate survival of the imperiled species. Improved fish passage and
understanding of salmon populations.
Outputs:
Habitat restoration projects, population assessments and monitoring, and fish passage projects including
culvert upgrades per state and NMFS criteria.
Project management, funding, assessment, and monitoring
Fund salmon recovery efforts through local, state, and regional organizations and the Salmon Recovery
Funding Board
Resources: Annual Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund award to Washington State and Western Washington Tribes
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.3
EPA
Habitat Strategic
Initiative
Implementation
Lead
Outcomes: Improved identification, protection, and restoration of the lands, waters, and ecological processes
essential to Puget Sound communities, tribal treaty rights, and resources
Outputs:
Improve habitat protection regulations
Remove barriers to habitat protection and restoration efforts
Manage land development to prevent further degradation of local aquatic ecosystems and contributing
habitat loss.
Support development and funding of integrated actions identified in respective Vital Sign Implementation
Strategies
Resources:
EPA funding (state funding both leveraged and match)
23
-------
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.4
NRCS
Environmental
Quality Incentive
Program (EQIP)
Outcomes: Improved soil, water, plant, animal, air and related natural resources on agricultural land and non-
industrial private forestland.
Outputs:
Continue or increase provision of financial and technical assistance to landowners or operators in agricultural
or forest production to plan and implement conservation practices
Maintain or increase the funding levels for the next 5 years to improve fish habitat and riparian restoration.
Continue to have salmon habitat restoration initiative funding.
Continue funding for removal offish passage barriers.
Prepare and distribute annual reports at the end of each fiscal year showing levels of funding and
accomplishments.
USDA climate farming will promote climate resilient landscapes and rural economic systems to respond to
climate changes
USDA will coordinate to ensure resources are available for diverse urban communities and healthy food access
for residents.
Resources: Funding will vary by year. Activities can be annually forecasted but due to the voluntary nature of our
programs we cannot predict the exact level of participation in any given year.
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.5
USFWS
Washington Coastal
Program (aka. Puget
Sound Coastal
Program)
Outcomes: Increased protection and restoration of coastal habitats, including preventing invasive species, restoring
nearshore, protecting wetlands and upland habitats, improving fish passage
Outputs:
Fund 4 to 5 projects peryear (2 to 3 are within Puget Sound or Hood Canal) aimed to restore or preserve
aquatic habitats for Federal trust and at-risk species, including salmonids.
Partner to achieve voluntary habitat restoration on any land ownership, generally on coastal tidally influenced
habitats. For example, with FY2017 to FY2021 funds, USFWS supported: the protection of 0.4 riparian miles;
restoration of approximately 4 riparian miles; protection of 108 wetland acres; restoration of 328 wetland
acres; protection of 10 upland acres; and restoration of approximately 100 upland acres. USFWS supported
the removal of barriers to aquatic species by funding a portion of the deconstruction of the Nooksack Dam,
which opened miles of spawning and rearing habitat for bull trout and Chinook salmon, thereby
accomplishing an important Recovery Plan goal.
Provide technical assistance and funding for coastal riparian, wetland, and upland restoration/protection
projects as well as aquatic organism barrier removal projects.
24
-------
Resources:
Approximately $200,000 to $250,000 per year. USFWS usually funds 4 to 5 projects per year, and most funding
decisions are made in January and February.
Additionally, funds are annually allocated as pass-through funding to Long Live the Kings and the Hood Canal
Salmon Enhancement Group. In FY2021, for example, the USFWS passed through approximately $137,000 to
Long Live the Kings and the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group.
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.6
U.S.
Navy
Readiness and
Environmental
Protection
Integration (REPI)
Program
Outcomes:
Tens of thousands of acres for preservation of watershed and estuarine processes protected. In some cases,
working farms and forestlands preserved, while also protecting wetland functions, aquifer recharge areas, and
natural drainage courses.
Maintain land use compatibility with Navy mission.
Outputs: Continue U.S. Navy Region Northwest formal multiyear partnerships with the Trust for Public Land, Jefferson
Land Trust, the Washington Department of Natural Resources and the Great Peninsula Conservancy in Hood Canal and
Jefferson County, and the Whidbey Camano Land Trust in Island County, to conserve lands and protect waterways
adjacent to Puget Sound. The U.S. Navy's partnerships support working forests and helps further and develop local
agribusiness, while protecting the watershed and the U.S. Navy mission, the local economy and is consistent with the
visions of the local comprehensive land use plans and other programs that increase habitat recovery.
Resources
As of 2022, approximately $40M in Navy and DOD funds. (With an equal or greater cost share from partners,
collectively approximately $80M in the areas of Hood Canal, the Olympic Peninsula and Whidbey Island)
The Navy has approximately seven staff engaged in supporting this effort part time. (Partners with four land
trusts and one state agency also staff the transactions taking place and contribute funds. Of note, all property
owners must be willing to sell interests in their lands in support of these efforts.)
The Navy has requested approximately $14M to continue transactions in FY22. (Partners are applying for
grants and funding in approximately the same amount).
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.7
Readiness and
Environmental
Protection
Integration (REPI)
Program
Outcomes
First and only mitigation bank serving Kitsap and portions of Mason County.
Reduced uncertainty of compensatory mitigation success for Navy modernization of the PSNS by facilitating
the permitting process for in-water and near-shore work.
Increased financial resources, planning, and scientific expertise, not as available to many permittee-
responsible compensatory mitigation proposals.
25
-------
U.S.
Navy
Mitigation Bank
Partners
Outputs
Implement Navy-Waterman Mitigation Partners Sikes Act cooperative agreement.
Waterman Mitigation Partners will own, develop, and operate a regional mitigation bank in Kitsap and Mason
counties with credits available for any applicant within the service area
The Navy will have a reserved amount of credits available to purchase from the mitigation bank.
Pre-compliance mitigation bank that will create mitigation solutions to enable on time construction work for
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS) modernization and other work at NBK, with technical and legal
concurrence from regulatory agencies.
The bank will be available to non-federal applicants.
Resources
$5M in Navy / DOD REPI funding and staffing support through project realization. (Partnerfunding (4:1) up to
$21M, and primary staffing)
State, federal, and local regulators, as well as tribal entities, will be engaged in the development of the bank to
ensure that it meets requirements
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers serves as federal lead for the mitigation bank approval process and will engage
other agencies and tribes as appropriate through the Inter-agency Review Team.
Habitat
Crosscutting
2.2.8
USFS, NPS, FHWA
(USFWS)
Utilize flexibility
within the
Emergency Relief for
Federally owned
Roads(ERFO)
Outcomes: Reduce stream impacts and fish passage concerns, while preventing future road crossing failures
Outputs:
Utilize flexibility within the ERFO program to balance aquatic ecosystem and water quality needs with meeting
current road standards when repairing or replacing flood damaged roads or related structures on federal and
tribal owned roads and on publicly owned roads on the National Tribal Transportation Inventory.
Emergency Relief funds cover construction of replacement structures on roads that meet current standards as
an accepted practice when replacing flood damaged structures with Emergency Relief funds, as opposed to
only funding replacement to a level that meets out of date standards.
Provide similar flexibility when replacing flood damaged structures on National Forest System and National
Park roads with ERFO funds which would improve structure performance, reduce stream impacts and
potential fish passage concerns, and reduce the potential for the same site to repeatedly fail.
Additionally, Federal land management agencies and tribes can supplement ERFO funds to change the scope
of the ERFO eligible repairs
Identify road crossing and road failures eligible for funding. Project design to meet aquatic organism passage.
Project funding.
26
-------
Resources:
Emergency Relief funds
Additional resources necessary to fund modifications to improve structure performance will be dependent on
the number and magnitude of storm damage sites and annual congressional appropriations
Federal land management agencies and tribes can supplement ERFO funds to change the scope of the ERFO
eligible repairs.
Habitat
Nearshore and
Shoreline
2.2.2.1
USACE
USACE Puget Sound
Restoration Tiered
Implementation
Strategy
Outcomes: Completion of nearly 6,000 acres of nearshore restoration
Outputs:
Implementation of 12 projects under other Corps' authorities (Puget Sound and Adjacent Waters (ง544),
Continuing Authorities Program (ง206), and General Investigations). These projects were selected from the
2016 PSNERP Study of 500 sites and 2,500 miles of Puget Sound shoreline. Can be implemented without new
Congressional Construction Authorization.
Resources:
50-65% Federal share for each $3-$15M project depending on the project phase (state or entities shares
funding). Annual resource needs will vary
Habitat
Nearshore and
Shoreline
2.2.2.2
NOAA
Coastal Ecosystem
Resiliency Funding
Community Based
Restoration (NOAA
Restoration Center)
Outcomes: Increased functional lift for ecosystem and community
Outputs:
Fund community restoration projects. Fish access and habitat improvement in deltas, estuaries, and
floodplains via dike and levee breaching (e.g., Kilisut Harbor Channel restoration (~$550k in FY17), and delta
dike breaching in the Stillaguamish River (~$1M in FY16).
Support salmon and steelhead barrier correction projects through Coastal Ecosystem Resiliency funding,
Community Based Restoration Program
Resources: NOAA funding
Habitat
Nearshore and
Shoreline
Foster the
Development of a
Marine Conservation
Marketplace
Outcomes: Continued development and support of conservation marketplaces, including in-lieu fee and conservation
banks
Outputs:
27
-------
2.2.2.3
NOAA, EPA
Continue to develop conservation credit and debit system (i.e., nearshore Conservation Calculator) based on
nearshore habitat projects and impacts to salmonids
Foster growth opportunities for the development of conservation banks
Coordination of program with Tribes, regional conservation partners, agencies, and NGOs
Resources: TBD
Habitat
Complete the Salish
Outcomes: Nearshore/shoreline restoration that improves net ecological gain or at least provides no net loss for both
Sea Nearshore
direct and temporal loss of ecological functions due to repairs and replacement of existing structures and building of
Nearshore and
Programmatic ESA
new structures. This is a critical step toward preventing cumulative effects from occurring overtime and supports
Shoreline
Consultation
species recovery in the nearshore and estuary environment.
2.2.2.5
Outputs:
USACE, NOAA, USFWS work together to complete a Nearshore Programmatic tool that covers repairs and
USACE, NOAA,
replacement of existing structures and possibly building of new structures in Summer 2022
USFWS
USACE and NOAA implement the Nearshore Programmatic in 2022
NOAA: Nearshore Programmatic is complemented by development and implementation of appropriate
mitigation/offsets
Resources:
USACE staff
NOAA staff
USFWS staff
(Tribal staff)
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.1
Federal
Coordination on
Integrated
Floodplain
Management
Outcomes:
Improved coordination of the federal contribution to inter- and intra- agency floodplain management
Increased scale and efficacy of floodplain restoration for the benefit offish, farms, and flood hazard reduction.
Increased development of integrated floodplain efforts. For example, in the Nooksack, and Stillaguamish and
Snohomish watersheds.
Increased success of watershed scale planning efforts and faster implementation of better projects. Accelerate
funding and implementation of reach-scale plans.
Collaborative watershed planning and implementation, increased funding leverage through coordinated
investments, maintained and improved agricultural viability, improved ecological function and habitat quality,
and restored floodplains through integrated, watershed-wide strategies, funding, and project implementation.
28
-------
NOAA, USFWS,
NRCS, FEMA,
USACE, EPA
Outputs:
FEMA: Create and coordinate an Integrated Interagency Floodplain Management Working Group to address
impediments to above outcomes and develop collaborative strategies to support them.
USACE: Support integrated floodplain management and agency coordination in the working group.
NOAA: Support development of integrated floodplain management and agency coordination as a state-wide
standard to support fisheries, farms, and reduce flood hazard under climate change.
NRCS: Support, encourage, and engage in integrated corridor project planning and implementation that
increases floodplain connectivity, improves agriculture viability, improves instream and riparian habitat, and
increases the flood resilience of communities.
USFWS: Secure, restore, and manage adequate year-round aquatic habitat for Federal and at-risk species in
associated floodplain habitats. When and where possible, support, encourage, and engage in statewide
and/or regionwide floodplain restoration partnerships and efforts. Action from USFWS 2021 Strategic Plan.
Increase integration of Floodplains by Design (FbD) efforts with federal task force
Increase integration with Habitat SIL efforts, coordination of regulatory improvement efforts between MART,
FbD and Salmon Recovery groups.
Coordination between FEMA, USACE, and NOAA to de-silo floodplain efforts.
Prioritize integrated, multi-benefit projects when considering projects.
Consider and discuss mechanisms and opportunities for restoring natural processes when planning and
implementing emergency repairs of floodplain infrastructure such as levies.
Resources:
Support from two NOAA staff-TBD
Funding from USFWS is TBD
Support from 1.5 FEMA staff.
Support from two NRCS staff
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.2
Integration of ESA
Compliance into
Local NFIP
Floodplain
Management
Outcomes:
Improved local administration and enforcement of development standards designed to meet the
requirements of the 2008 NFIP Puget Sound BiOp (2006-00472)
Improved floodplain and riparian ecosystem functions
Increased federal engagement in and contribution to regional floodplain strategy
Increased federal collaboration with and support of local entities and tribes
Outputs:
29
-------
FEMA,
NOAA
Update and improve guidance documents on community compliance requirements.
FEMA staff and partners (NOAA, WA Dept. of Ecology) provide NFIP-participating communities in the Puget
Sound basin (122 total identified as of August 2021) with training and guidance, as well as implementation and
enforcement strategies, to administer floodplain management performance standards designed to avoid
jeopardy for threatened and endangered species and adverse modification of their habitat.
Leverage leadership support for improved data collection, RIT support to build interagency awareness.
Resources:
FEMA: 1 FTE
NOAA approx. 0.1 FTE; potential future increase subject to appropriations
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.3
NRCS, USFWS,
FEMA, USFS,
NOAA, EPA,
USACE
Federal
Coordination -
Riparian Habitat
Outcomes: Improved protection and restoration of riparian habitat
Outputs:
Contribute to the development of a coordinated state and federal shared riparian habitat restoration strategy
that will support salmon recovery and resilience to climate change.
Contribute to the development of a shared approach to incentivize and work with landowners to protect and
restore riparian habitat
Coordinate and leverage funding from EPA and NRCS (and other federal and state agencies) to increase
landowner participation in riparian conservation programs
Consider and address recommendations from the State-Tribal Riparian Protection and
Restoration Workgroup and local salmon recovery lead entities
Identify specific policy, science or program needs that, if addressed, would catalyze additional riparian
protection or restoration efforts across urban, agriculture and forested rural and wildland zones
Identify specific local watersheds where coordinated investment in riparian protection/restoration would
most benefit specific resource recovery objectives (Chinook, shellfish, etc.)
Resources:
Federal agency staff time. Approx. 0.1 - 0.2 FTE / agency. FEMA: 0.25
Base appropriations + Infrastructure Law funding
(State engagement from Commerce, ECY, DN R, PSP, RCO/GSRO, WDFW, WSCC, WSDA)
Habitat
Protection and
Restoration of
Outcomes: Permanent protection of riparian areas concentrated within prioritized agricultural stream reaches across
Puget Sound. Improved water quality for beneficial uses, such as Chinook salmon.
30
-------
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.4
EPA, NRCS
Riparian Areas in
Priority Reaches
Outputs:
Continue or improve protection of riparian areas using a reach scale restoration planning approach to salmon
recovery and sustainable farm management in priority agricultural landscapes
Continue to develop and improve modeling to support prioritization of reaches, buffer segments and parcels
Develop a competitive solicitation for a contractor who would identify focus areas for conducting reach scale
riparian planning and conservation implementation
Continue or increase permanent protection of riparian and associated wetland areas through a variety of
regulatory and incentive mechanisms
Explicitly connect the tasks above to 1) the State-Tribal Riparian Work Group process; and 2) local salmon
recovery lead entities
Resources:
EPA Puget Sound Geographic Funds, coordinated and leveraged with NRCS and otherfederal funds
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.5
USACE
PugetSound
Nearshore
Ecosystem
Restoration Project
Outcomes: Restores 2,100 acres of estuarine critical habitat to support salmon, Orca whales, and other species at three
authorized locations.
Outputs:
Continue to implement 38-acre Duckabush Estuary restoration project to reconnect the Duckabush River to its
floodplain and intertidal wetlands by removing and bridging existing causeway and bridges and elevating
Highway 101 onto a single spanning bridge. The project will restore tidal inundation and hydrology and
reconnect distributary channels to promote greater delta wetland habitat diversity. This project was selected
from the 2001 PSNERP Study of 500 sites and 2,500 miles of Puget Sound shoreline.
Continue to work towards implementing Nooksack River Delta, and North Fork Skagit River Delta projects that
have been authorized to be funded and constructed under this program. These projects were selected from
the 2001 PSNERP Study.
Resources:
Total authorized cost for PSNERP is $452M.
At the Duckabush, $4.94M in federal funding has been received through FY21
Habitat
Improve ecological
resilience through
climate change
Outcomes: Increased understanding of the trophic linkages among zooplankton, herring, and salmon and effects from
climate change
Outputs:
31
-------
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.6
NOAA, USFWS
science, modeling,
and response
NOAA and USWFWS continue using ecosystem models to study changes in the parts of the food web (including
zooplankton)
NOAA and USFWS continue engagement with, and support of, the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council.
NOAA continued engagement in reviews of project proposals, prioritization of work, and funding decisions.
NOAA continued statewide awards to match state funds to provide implementation resources for salmon
recovery actions and effectiveness monitoring.
Resources:
USFWS' Coastal Program awards up to approximately $200,000 to $250,000 per year for restoration work.
Federal staff time (TBD) waiting for allocations from Infrastructure Bill. Notified of successful grant award.
Additionally, funds are annually allocated as pass-through funding to Long Live the Kings and the Hood Canal
Salmon Enhancement Group.
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.7
NRCS
Address Natural
Resource Concerns
on a Watershed
Scale
Outcomes: Increased protection of riparian areas
Outputs:
Promote and develop a watershed management approach focused on both salmonid habitat and drainage
management in priority agricultural landscapes
Continue work with the Swinomish Tribe, the Skagit River System Cooperative, the Skagit Conservation
District, and local landowners to address riparian concerns in the Skagit River watershed
Consider and utilize watershed modeling tools from USGS and EPA
Continue working with Swinomish tribe, on identification of partners and landowners to establish the first mile
of river to riparian buffers.
Resources:
NRCS EQIP funding, will also need to include EPA GAP, and CWAfunding
NRCS to cochairthe riparian buffer work group with governor's representative
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
Pacific Coast
Salmon Recovery
Fund
Outcomes: Continued or increased funding to restore salmon habitat in Puget Sound and monitor effectiveness.
Outputs:
Continue NOAA's engagement with the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council
Continue NOAA's and USFWS engagement in restoration project funding reviews and prioritization
32
-------
2.2.3.8
USFWS, NOAA
Resources:
NOAA staff time, since 2000 averaged $74 million/year distributed to states and tribes through competitive
grants (leveraged $1.8 in non-PCSRF funds)
USFWS provides staff time
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.9
NOAA - RC
Restoration and
Resilience Awards
Outcomes: Promote high value restoration targets through community-based program funds
Outputs:
Competitive allocation of national community-based restoration program funds to high value restoration
targets.
Resources:
$l-2Mperyear
(Even as the maturity of the Puget Sound restoration system may secure 10-25% of national funding, 90% of
proposals are unfunded)
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.10
NOAA
Damage Assessment
and Restoration
Outcomes: Restoration funding is increased from settlement agreements with polluters
Outputs:
Collect damages for injuries to the public trust from oil spills and from toxic releases to support restoration
Continuing evaluation and advancement of damage claims and restoration in the Lower Duwamish
River/Elliott Bay, Commencement Bay, Port Gardner, Port Angeles, and Port Gamble. Damage assessment and
restoration planning can occasionally include various legal actions.
Resources:
NOAA staff time, variable; from FY2017 to FY2021, settlements generated approximately $70 million for
compensatory habitat restoration and damage assessment in these basins and resulted in the development of
an innovative, long-term stewardship program at Commencement Bay.
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
Ecosystem Grant
Coordination
Outcomes: Maximize efficiency and effectiveness of ecosystem recovery funding through coordination of state and
federal awards
Outputs:
Support state-federal alignment and coordination of funding over $250M/year of state and federal awards
through the Align Grant Coordination Workgroup to maximize efficiency and effectiveness.
33
-------
2.2.3.11
NOAA (EPA,
NRCS, FEMA)
Reduce administrative and financial burden to tribes and under-resourced communities by working with state
agencies distributing federal dollars to update scoring criteria of the programs to reflect federal match
waivers. For example, NOAA Community-based Restoration Program has statutory authority to waive match
yet it awards bonus scoring points for projects with additional leveraged funds. PSAR Large Capital funding
modified their scoring criteria to remove leveraged funds as part of its project evaluation.
Grow efficiencies across grant programs to reduce burden for multiple-benefit projects that are patchworking
funding from several agencies. Fully engage with State ALIGN grants work group to problem solve and pilot
solutions for chronic administrative challenges across federally delegated grant programs.
Increased alignment across competitive granting programs toward lowering the administrative burden for
multi-benefit projects.
Resources: NOAA - RC0.25 FTE
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.12
NOAA, USGS
Snohomish Estuary
Restoration
Evaluation
Outcomes: Improve effectiveness of nearshore and estuarine protection efforts and restoration projects in Snohomish
Estuary and Puget Sound (change in behavior) by improving understanding of estuary system salmonid use and
distribution and effects of changing conditions due to climate change (knowledge).
Outputs:
Continue facilitating Snohomish estuary condition and fish distribution monitoring program to inform
restoration.
Provide technical assistance to Counties and Tribes
Prepare reviewed, published manuscripts that: capture an assessment of changes to estuary conditions due to
climate change, share the results of a comparative evaluation of restoration in Nisqually, Snohomish, Skagit,
and Nooksack deltas.
Develop a forum through Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program (PSEMP) for coordination of restoration
science to inform cross-agency funding actions.
Coordinate/collaborate with State 2021 Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program (ESRP) estuary climate
change study
Resources:
~$200,000 per year, 0.5 FTE NOAA staff. Funding also through NRDA work in the system and the Veterans
Conservation Corps.
(Non-federal resources through partnership with Snohomish County and Tulalip Tribe)
34
-------
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.13
USFWS
National Coastal
Wetland
Conservation Grant
Program
Outcomes: Increased restoration and protection of coastal wetland habitats
Outputs:
Continue and increase grants awarded and managed. For example, in from FY2017 to FY2021, the National
Coastal Wetland Conservation Grant Program provided 23,935,531 million dollars to Puget Sound projects.
The National Coastal Wetland Conservation Grant Program acquires, restores, and protects wetland habitats.
For example, from FY2017 to FY2021, the USFWS, through the grant program, acquired, restored, and
protected over 5,000 acres in the Puget Sound basin.
Resources: Approximately $20 million nationally, up to $1 million per project.
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.14
NOAA - RC
Geographic
Technical Assistance
Outcomes: Increased local capabilities for watershed scale salmon recovery
Outputs: Focused staff engagement with watershed scale salmon recovery implementation to support local
capabilities
Resources: NOAA: 6 FTE
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian, and
Estuaries
2.2.3.15
USACE, NRCS
Skokomish River
Ecosystem
Restoration Project
Outcomes:
Improve and restore floodplain and salmon habitat in Skokomish River Ecosystem.
Restores natural geomorphic processes and provide critical fish passage at all flows. Approximately 18 miles of
habitat that will be opened during low flow.
Outputs:
Complete 277 acres of habitat restoration and restoration of year-round fish passage to the South Fork
Skokomish River.
Resources:
$13.6M in federal funds for construction received by USACE in 2019. Awaiting submittal of necessary real estate
from Mason County to proceed with construction.
35
-------
Habitat
Green/Duwamish
Outcomes: Restore lost habitat at up to 19 distinct sites along the degraded Green/Duwamish River
River Ecosystem
Floodplains,
Project
Outputs: Restore over 1,000 acres of riverine and wetland habitat supporting ESA listed species recovery
Riparian, and
Estuaries
Resources:
Total project cost of $260M.
2.2.3.16
$20M received to date for completion of 7 sites. 8 additional sites completed by others
USACE
Habitat
Agricultural
Outcomes: Land protected by agricultural land easements provides additional public benefits, including
Floodplains,
Conservation
environmental quality, historic preservation, wildlife habitat and protection of open space. Agricultural Land
Riparian and
Easement Program
Easements protect the long-term viability of the nation's food supply by preventing conversion of productive working
Estuaries
(ACEP)
lands to non-agricultural uses. Voluntarily Conserve agricultural lands and wetlands and their related benefits.
2.2.3.17
Outputs:
Continue to implement ACEP to provide financial and technical assistance to conserve agricultural lands and
NRCS
wetlands and their related benefits under two component programs: Agricultural Land Easements (ALE) and
Wetlands Reserve Easements (WRE)
Continue to offer ACEP ALE to non-governmental organizations to protect working agricultural lands and limit
non-agricultural uses of the land. Under ALE, NRCS provides a portion of the acquisition cost to an eligible
partner entity.
Prioritize ALE funding for conservation plans/easements that include protection or enhancement measures for
threatened and/or endangered species.
Continue or increase WRE funding to restore, protect and enhance enrolled wetlands. Under WRE, NRCS
provides 100% of the funding for easement acquisition and restoration cost.
Resources: Annual investments vary year to year
Habitat
Resource
Outcomes: Increased conservation of salmon habitat on agricultural lands. Ecosystem-wide process for targeting high
Conservation
priority areas to improve water quality and habitat for at-risk species, including Chinook salmon, bull trout, and
Floodplains,
Partnership Program
steelhead and shellfish resources downstream.
Riparian and
Estuaries
Outputs:
Continue water quality and habitat improvement contracts through NRCS financial and technical programs.
2.2.3.18
36
-------
NRCS
Continue providing financial and technical assistance to owners of land in agricultural production to plan and
implement conservation practices. Within focus areas, a farmer-to-farmer approach will be used to increase
participation and ensure buy-in from the local community.
Continue to work on fish barrier removal projects. 16 fish passage barriers were removed over last 5 years.
Continue financial and support for Nooksack Watershed Restoration project.
Resources:
The NRCS contribution is a portion of the total project cost for technical and financial assistance.
(Partner match leverages NRCS Farm Bill program dollars, at minimal of 1-1 match. Additional partnerships
could be secured dependent on partner proposal application process.)
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.19
USFS
Decommission and
Stabilize National
Forest System roads
Outcomes: Reduced adverse impacts from National Forest System roads
Outputs:
Continue decommissioning and/or stabilize 20 miles of roads that pose high risk to aquatic resources. Priority
watersheds for restoration are included in the Dungeness River, Suiattle River, Upper White River/ Greenwater
River, and NF Nooksack River.
Continue to use the Watershed Condition Framework (WCF) analysis tool to identify new priority watersheds
beyond those mentioned above. If funding allows, decommission and/or restore roads that pose high risks to
aquatic resources in new priority watersheds.
If funding allows, USFS may complete road decommissioning and stabilization in other non-Priority
Watersheds per shared stewardship actions items with Washington State DNR and WDFW as well as key
partnership work with Tribes.
There are 1,425 miles of forest roads on the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Olympic National Forests that pose
high risk to aquatic resources based on the recently completed Sustainable Roads Strategies (426 miles OLY,
999 miles MBS). The Forests are decommissioning unneeded roads and implementing corrective actions to
stabilize roads in Watershed Condition Framework (WCF) Priority Watersheds.
Resources:
Future appropriations TBD
The Olympic and Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forests will seek out funding to implement road
decommissioning and stabilization through USFS Great American Outdoor Act and National Asset
Management funding, Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP), Legacy Roads and Trails and related
programs under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and other grants with partners.
37
-------
Resources are subject to future appropriations matched with external partner grants and various types of
retained receipts.
Accomplishments will be proportional to available funding and our capacity to plan, design, and implement
projects. As restoration work is completed in the current priority watersheds and moves into new priority
watersheds there will be a need for additional resources to develop collaborative restoration action plans,
complete watershed-scale road assessments and NEPA documents, and design appropriate corrections so
they can be implemented on-the-ground. Specific projects to address the highest-priority problems will be
identified at that time.
Habitat
Floodplains,
Riparian and
Estuaries
2.2.3.20
USFS
Protect Aquatic
Habitat on National
Forest System lands
Outcomes:
Over the next 5-year period increase the National Watershed Condition Framework score from "FunctioningAt
Risk" to "Fully Functioning" for at least 1 Priority Watershed.
Over 80% of management activities meet Best Management Practices as reflected in the USFS BMP monitoring
program.
Outputs:
Continue to implement Forest Plans and the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) Aquatic Conservation Strategy to
protect and restore aquatic resources.
Partner with WRIA planning groups, Washington State, Tribes and NGO's in conducting targeted salmon
recovery and aquatic habitat restoration actions on the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Olympic National Forests.
Olympic and Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forests managed under their respective Forest Plans and the
NWFP Aquatic Conservation Strategy
Resources:
Resources are subject to future appropriations.
Appropriated agency funds provide support for aquatic specialists to provide input and monitor activities
effecting aquatic habitats.
The capacity of Forests to monitor watershed conditions, develop partnerships, and implement restoration
projects will be proportional to the funding and staffing available.
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.1
Collaborate with
Washington State
Brian Abbott Fish
Barrier Removal
Board (FPRB)
Outcomes: Increased number of barriers repaired as a means of restoring fish passage and improved coordination to
repair the highest priority fish passage barriers
Outputs:
Collaborate with the Brian Abbott FBRB and WDFW.
38
-------
NOAA, USFWS,
FHWA, NRCS,
Navy, USFS,
NPS, USACE,
FEMA, FTA
Emphasize fish passage related Federal funding programs and land and facility management actions to help
contribute to State strategic approaches and priorities, especially where overlap of such programs occurs with
recovery of Federally listed chinook salmon and steelhead trout.
To the extent feasible, Federal funding programs assist with matching dollars for Puget Sound FBRB priority
project implementation and barrier assessment efforts. Washington State's 2022 Supplemental budget
included $2.4 billion in new funds for fish passage and federal partners will coordinate with the State on
priority projects that provide the highest benefit to fish.
Implement and/or plan targeted fish passage restoration actions on Federal land and pertinent facilities.
Federal agency representation at FBRB meetings to stay informed of developing State strategies and priorities.
Continue PSFTF Fish Passage Subteam coordination, which include representatives from State and Federal
agencies managing fish passage related programs.
Resources
NOAA provides 0.1 FTE of effort {note: this function could be combined with fish passage efforts under the new
infrastructure bill described separately below}
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.2
NRCS
Collaborate with
WDFW Fish
Screening and
Passage Division
Outcomes: Increased capacity to Identify fish barriers on private property.
Outputs:
Continue or increase staff capacity and expertise to inventory stream crossings on private land using the
WDFW Barrier Inventory Protocol and entering results into State's Barrier Database.
Develop a new 5-year Contribution Agreement with WDFW in FY22 as funding allows to support fish passage
barrier correction or removal.
Resources: NRCS financial contribution: $850,000 overfive years
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.3
USFWS
National Fish
Passage Program
Outcomes:
Restore native fish and other aquatic species to self-sustaining levels by reconnecting habitat. Priority based
upon the benefits to species and the geographical area.
Reconnect and re-open habitat for fish and aquatic species.
Outputs:
Miles/Acres reopened to aquatic species. As of September 2021, two Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca
funded projects with FY2021 funds will open 17.6 miles of upstream habitat.
39
-------
Provide technical assistance on project development and funding for native fish and aquatic species barrier
correction projects
Funding aquatic organism passage projects in western Washington, including Puget Sound. Incorporates state
agency and other planning mechanisms, such as Lead Entity recovery planning and other partnership planning
tools, to inform and support passage and habitat improvements.
Provide technical assistance and funding for barrier correction projects.
Resources
Western Washington National Fish Passage Program typically receives $100K - $200K annually, dependent
upon Congressional allocations. (25% non-federal cost share requested). Funds for this can be used in all of
Washington not just Puget Sound. Allocated funds for fish passage projects are based on fisheries recovery
plans.
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.4
FHWA, NOAA
National Culvert
Removal,
Replacement, and
Restoration Grant
Program
Outcome:
Increased ecological baseline conditions by increasing habitat that is currently blocked
Streamline recovery efforts and ensure the highest priority projects are implemented first.
Outputs
Provide technical expertise to increase access to spawning and rearing habitats for ESA-listed salmonids
Coordination with state, tribal, and local government partners; and federal grant funds through the National
Culvert Removal, Replacement, and Restoration Grant Program. Program development: Federal funding via
matched grant funds (<80% NOAA) to priority fish passage barriers in Puget Sound
Prioritization methods synchronized with state barrier removal programs (e.g., FBRB, FFFPP, etc). (Later
metrics should include # barriers removed; and effectiveness results (# fish returning)
Resources
Starting in 2022 - National Culvert Removal, Replacement, and Restoration Program per the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act funding
Federal grant manager (awards and manages funding) (0.5 FTE), Federal technical coordinator (ensure
consistent methods) (0.5 FTE), Federal grants
Habitat
Fish Passage
Salmon and
Steelhead Barrier
Correction Projects
Outcomes: Improved fish passage
Outputs:
Exercise oversight over the Federal-aid Highway program.
40
-------
2.2.4.5
FHWA
on Federal-aid
Eligible Roadways
Removal offish barriers in Washington State, particularly the 818 barriers identified in the Tribal lawsuit
injunction for removal by 2030.
Resources: The Federal-aid program is funded through 2026. Washington State receives over $600M in Federal-aid
Highway funding annually. Additional Emergency Relief funds are provided in response to natural disasters.
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.6
FHWA
Fish passage barrier
correction projects
on roads that access
Federal and Tribal
lands and on roads
owned by Federal
and Tribal entities
(WFLHD)
Outcomes: Improved fish passage
Outputs:
Removal offish barriers on Federal, tribal, and publicly owned land.
Specific projects are chosen by the federal land management agencies, states, and tribes.
Resources:
FLTP is an available funding source for federally owned routes. FLTP projects compete for funding nationwide.
The Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) is an available funding source for a public road or transit system that
is located on, is adjacent to, or provides access to Federal lands, for which title or maintenance responsibility
is vested in a State, county, town, township, tribal, municipal, or local government. FLAP projects compete for
funding within the state (approximately $13M annually in Washington State).
The Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) is an available funding source for tribal owned and tribal designated
publicly owned roads. TTP projects are designated by the tribes.
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.7
USACE
(USFWS, NOAA)
Re-Authorize,
Design, and
Construct a new
downstream fish
passage facility at
Howard Hanson
Dam
Outcomes:
Restore the biological connection of the upper watershed (45% of total area) to the lower watershed via
salmon migration
Substantially increase salmon and steelhead productivity by providing over 100 miles of high-quality river and
tributary habitat
Increase ability of ESA-listed Chinook salmon to access substantially more spawning and rearing area - 221
square miles of undeveloped watershed
Provide access for coho salmon and ESA-listed steelhead to the 90% of their habitat area that was
disconnected by the dam
Expected to increase population of Chinook salmon, the primary food source for ESA-listed Southern Resident
Killer Whales
Restore ecosystem functions and values to a protected watershed; restoring salmon populations will provide
for bears, eagles, osprey, river otters, and dozens of other species
41
-------
The NMFS BiOp states that meeting performance standards will likely lead to abundant, self-sustaining
populations of Chinook and steelhead, dramatically improving the likelihood for recovery
Outputs:
Fish passage design at Howard Hanson is completed and reviewed by NMFS
Construction offish passage facilities is underway
Resources: Collaboration with NOAA, USFWS, State and Tribes on design and construction $220M received in IIJAfor
design and first increment of construction, additional funding required to complete construction
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.8
USFS
Correct salmon and
steelhead culvert
fish passage barriers
on National Forest
System roads
Outcomes: Fish passage culvert barriers that block passage for salmon and steelhead occur across National Forest
roads within the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie (MBS) with 2 anadromous barriers remaining on the Olympic (OLY) National
Forest. The barrier culverts limit upstream accessibility and production, including localized rearing opportunities in
smaller tributaries. The Forests are correcting barriers at undersized road crossings by replacing the defective
structures with appropriate fish passage designs or removing the structures permanently if they are no longer needed.
Barrier replacements are prioritized based on the amount of salmon and steelhead habitat that would be accessed and
sites within identified Priority Watersheds, which includes Lower Greenwater River (White River), Glacier Creek and
Hedrick Creek (NF Nooksack River). In addition, MBS and OLY NF's will continue to work with State and Tribal partners
on strategic fish passage restoration sites in other basins (Skagit, Stillaguamish, Elwha, etc.) which have high value to
chinook salmon, steelhead and bull trout recovery and overlap with State priorities.
Outputs:
Work with tribes and NGOs on implementing key fish passage projects.
Over the next 5-year period, the USFS aims to correct and/or permanently remove (via road decommissioning)
8 fish passage barrier culverts on salmon and steelhead streams undercurrent funding levels (1 barrier for the
OLY, 7 for the MBS).
Maintain and implement WCF Priority Watershed Restoration Action Plans (WRAPs), which include fish passage
restoration essential actions. For instance, Lower Greenwater River WRAP has 12 fish passage restoration
projects identified as part of a larger suite of essential actions to improve watershed condition with a total
estimated cost need of $2,150,000.
MBS will continue its Shared Stewardship work with Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) via
Good Neighbor Authority agreements that provide avenues to implement fish passage restoration projects.
Resources:
42
-------
Subject to future appropriations and staffing levels, $1,300,000 is needed to design and replace an AOP barrier
with a bridge on the Olympic and the other AOP barrier needing replacement would cost an estimated
$350,000 for design and implementation.
An estimated $1,720,000 is needed to correct 7 salmon and steelhead culvert barriers within the 5-year period
on the MBS.
Annual needs will vary depending on the specific projects selected, construction logistics, etc.
More recently, the Forests have sought out funding to implement fish passage culvert barrier corrections
through Great American Outdoor Act and USFS National Asset Management funding programs, FLTP, Legacy
Roads and Trails and related programs under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, conservation
finance, other grants, and key partnerships.
Additional funding to accelerate important fish passage restoration accomplishments would increase the rate
of barrier corrections. Accomplishments will be proportional to available funding and capacity to design and
implement projects.
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.9
NPS
Correct salmon and
steelhead culvert
fish passage barriers
on National Park
Service roads
Outcomes: Reconnect spawning and rearing habitat and reestablish natural stream processes.
Outputs
Culvert barrier project prioritization and planning project design, securing funding, project implementation.
There are eight priority fish passage culvert barriers that block passage for salmon and steelhead at Rainier
(MORA). Altogetherthe eight priority culverts limit accessibility and production from approximately 0.6 miles
of anadromous streams at MORA. The Park is working to correct culvert barriers by replacing the defective
structures with appropriate fish passage designs as funding allows.
Resources
Approximately $100K/year is needed to correct the 8 identified salmon and steelhead culvert barriers at MORA
within the 5-year period. Mount Rainier will pursue funding to implement fish passage culvert barrier
corrections provided through the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act, Federal Lands Transportation
Program, and grants from the Washington State Salmon Recovery Funding Board.
Accomplishments will be proportional to available funding.
Habitat
Fish Passage
2.2.4.10
Correct salmon and
steelhead culvert
fish passage barriers
on U.S. Navy
property
Outcomes: Reconnect spawning and rearing habitat, reestablish natural stream processes
Outputs:
Navy has compiled a list of habitat improvement actions for fish passage.
As funding becomes available, Navy will implement actions for fish passage.
43
-------
U.S. Navy
Projects undertaken will follow all state and federal regulatory requirements for in-water work, including in-water
work windows.
Resources: Staff time and funding to execute habitat improvement actions for fish passage.
Stormwater
2.3.1
NOAA, USFWS
(HUD, DOT)
Integrating
stormwater science
into ESA Section 7
compliance
Outcomes: Reduced stormwater pollution through improved incorporation of stormwater science in ESA Section 7
consultations
Outputs:
Work proactively across federal agencies to streamline and expedite stormwater-related consultations under
the Endangered Species Act, with particular emphasis on the Puget Sound regional transportation grid.
Respond to the priority concerns of tribal comanagers as they relate to stormwater, salmon conservation, and
community health, via the ongoing Treaty Rights at Risk government-to-government process.
Continue the long-term, NOAA-led research effort (20+ years) to understand the causes and consequences of
the urban runoff mortality syndrome for coho and Chinook salmon, as well as steelhead.
Develop new decision support and modeling tools to characterize stormwater risks more precisely to ESA-
listed marine mammals, rockfish, salmon, and steelhead in Puget Sound.
Evaluate the likelihood that toxic stormwater runoff upstream of existing fish passage barriers will undermine
the restoration goals of ongoing and future physical habitat restoration projects (e.g., culvert replacements).
Develop and standardize analytical methods for 6PPD/6PPD-quinone and other contaminants of emerging
concern, in coordination with federal, state, and academic partners.
Assess impacts of untreated runoff on keystone species for Puget Sound marine food webs, with an emphasis
on shore-spawning marine forage fish (Pacific herring, surf smelt). This work will more directly link NOAA
science on oil spills and urban stormwater runoff.
Determine the sublethal impacts of 6PPD-quinone on ESA-listed species, particularly steelhead and Chinook.
Investigate the interactive effects of multiple habitat stressors in Puget Sound, including stormwater toxicity
(as a consequence of regional growth and development) and thermal stress (as consequence of climate
change).
Resources:
NOAA staff time
Stormwater
2.3.2
PugetSound
Stormwater
Strategic Initiative
Funding
Outcomes: Prevent toxics from impacting Puget Sound aquatic life, protect and restore Puget Sound freshwater
streams, address nutrient pollution in Puget Sound. Achieve Puget Sound Action Agenda stormwater goals.
Outputs:
44
-------
EPA
Provide funding to operationalize the Toxics in Fish, B-IBI Freshwater Stream Quality, and Marine Water
Quality Implementation Strategies. This could include: green stormwater infrastructure; watershed planning
to consider climate change and hydrology; multi-benefit investments like stormwater parks; applied CEC or
toxics research; managing stormwater runoff and legacy contamination by improving regulatory frameworks
and incentives, using a comprehensive approach at the site and landscape scales; incentivize redevelopment
in areas associated with high loads of toxic chemicals; increase local stormwater management capacity
(including funding, staffing resources, and management tools and information); increase and stabilize funding
that supports actions, incentives, and local capacity to reduce nutrient loads; adjust stormwater permitting
requirements or other local government programs to address nutrients in stormwater from residential and
commercial lands; identifying priority hotspotssuch as wastewater sources, high loading land-uses, and
transportation corridors; increase the pace of clean-up of priority contaminated sites (information, planning,
funding, implementation, monitoring); New development and retrofits should prioritize GSI and biophilic
design elements; promote green and nature-based infrastructure as a stormwater, climate adaptation, carbon
sequestration, and human wellbeing solution.
Provide funding to support the maintenance of a Strategic Initiative Advisory Team (SIAT) to advise in
Stormwater Strategic Initiative decision-making.
Providing funding for Implementation Strategy Lead fortheToxics in Fish, B-IBI, and Marine Water Quality Vital
Signs and form technical and/or policy workgroups to develop, refine, adaptively manage, and operationalize
Implementation Strategies.
Providingfundingforthe Stormwater Strategic Initiative Lead to participate in the PSP and National Estuary
Program (NEP) Management Conference processes and work groups as well as proactively coordinate with
tribes and Local Integrating Organizations (LIOs) and tribal partners to accomplish stormwater and ecosystem
recovery work.
Consider and prioritize environmental justice and climate change impacts when allocating EPA stormwater
funds.
Resources:
~$5M or more peryear EPA Puget Sound Geographic Funds awarded to the Stormwater Strategic Initiative a
(coalition of the Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington Stormwater Center, and the Washington
Department of Commerce)
Stormwater
2.3.3
Stormwater
Treatment as Part of
Transportation
Projects
Outcomes: Infrastructure upgrades to manage stormwater flooding risks and reduce toxic runoff from the Puget Sound
regional transportation grid.
Outputs:
45
-------
FHWA
(NOAA, USFWS,
EPA)
FHWA federal-aid funding continues to support transportation projects which include stormwater retrofits and other
improvements to the Puget Sound highway system by WSDOT and local agencies. These activities are guided by
regional stormwater management strategies (e.g., the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual, the Ecology Stormwater
Manual) and informed by the emerging science on stormwater threats to salmon and green infrastructure solutions, as
well as environmental justice and climate change considerations.
NOAA and EPA will convene federal agencies, including FHWA, to partner with WSDOT, Ecology, WDFW, and
other agencies to proactively address stormwater pollution from the regional transportation system -
including stormwater treatment of the 1-5 Ship Canal Bridge (a major source of toxic loading to Puget Sound).
Update the existing programmatic ESA consultation between NMFS and FHWA to reflect current stormwater
science and provide appropriate conservation protections for fish and habitat.
ESA programmatic agreements with NMFS and USFWS are a key factor in FHWA's ability to deliver our Federal
aid Highway program in a way that protect salmonids and their habitat. They provide predictability and time
savings. They encourage minimization of impacts and require high standards for protection and mitigation.
We know that green infrastructure works. Federal agencies support green stormwater infrastructure in key
locations to mitigate toxic loading and road runoff.
FHWA and the Services work together with WSDOT to update existing programmatic agreements and to
complete the programmatics we are developing for Local Agency projects and Washington State Ferries
projects.
FHWA and WSDOT review transportation construction projects for stormwater implications.
Fish Passage coordination and prioritization Fed, State, Local - funding, permitting etc.
Support additional research to better understand the effectiveness of small footprint green stormwater
treatment and other bioinfiltration approaches such as filter strips along highways, as well as the cost and
feasibility of implementing these approaches at a large scale.
Clarify funding opportunities and project development pathways within transportation-focused federal
programs for performance incentives, green stormwater treatment, and innovation related to voluntary
retrofit/rollback of legacy pollution
Culvert replacements include stormwater treatment best practices as part of those earth-moving projects in
high priority salmon bearing streams. Federal agencies strive to ensure that poor upstream water quality from
road runoff does not undermine costly habitat restoration efforts like culvert removals by opening habitat with
poor water quality.
Resources
Washington State receives Federal-aid highway funds each year. Projects are chosen by WSDOT and local
public agencies to address safety and capacity needs on the highway and ferry systems. The FHWA decided
46
-------
more than a decade ago that FHWA needed a full-time biologist in the Washington Division. This is very rare in
FHWA Division Offices and illustrates our ongoing commitment to protection of Puget Sound listed species.
Infrastructure Law funding increases available funding for transportation projects and includes culvert
removal funds.
NOAA staff time for ESA consultations. NMFS is working closely with FHWA and WSDOT to integrate new
stormwater and toxics science - including 6PPD - into ESA consultations.
EPA staff time, plus potential for SRF or Puget Sound Geographic Funds, as appropriate and via Ecology
competition processes
Stormwater
2.3.4
EPA, NOAA,
USFWS
NPDES Stormwater
Permitting
Outcomes: Improved stormwater management on federal and tribal lands and facilities under EPA's CWA jurisdiction
Outputs
EPA complete the following NPDES permits and associated ESA consultations: Tulalip Tribes MS4; MS4 Permits
(3) for discharges to lower Puyallup River: WSDOT/Pierce Co./Tacoma; Joint Base Lewis-McChord MS4 (permit
renewal)
NOAA/USFWS completed ESA consultations
EPA collaborate with Puget Sound Tribes via CWA Sec. 401 certifications and govt-to-govt consultations
EPA collaborate with WA Ecology via CWA Sec. 401 certifications
Additional permits for municipal stormwater from Tribal or Federal lands may be necessary as a result of new
Urbanized Area boundaries based on Year 2020 Census.
Resources:
EPA staff (at least 2-4 FTE/annually) needed to manage and/or issue Stormwater permits in EPA's jurisdiction
USFWS/NOAA NMFS need significant additional staff resources to synchronize the timing of consultations to
allow the incorporation of reasonable and prudent measures into NPDES permits.
1-2 FTE/year, in the form of permitting and technical staff at EPA, and USFWS/NOAA to complete permit
development and technical analysis, including appropriate coordination, negotiation, and consultation with
all regulated entities.
~$250,000/year in grants or discretionary funding to assist regulated Tribal governments within the Urbanized
Area with capacity development and implementation of their local storm water management program.
47
-------
Stormwater
2.3.5
EPA, NOAA,
USFWS
NPDES Wastewater
Permitting for
Federal and Tribal
facilities
Outcomes: NPDES permits that are appropriately protective and restorative to Puget Sound.
Outputs:
NPDES permits for Tribal (e.g., Lummi, Suquamish, and Tula lip) wastewater treatment facilities that discharge
into Puget Sound.
NPDES permit for Naval wastewater treatment facilities that discharge into Puget Sound
NOAA/USFWS completed ESA consultations
Resources:
EPA staff (at least 2 FTE) needed to maintain permits within EPA's jurisdiction
USFWS/NOAA NMFS need significant additional staff resources to synchronize the timing of consultations to
allow the incorporation of reasonable and prudent measures into NPDES permits.
$200,000 - $500,000/year in grants or discretionary funding to assist regulated tribal governments with
capacity development and implementation of advanced wastewater treatment in a manner that is affordable
and equitable for their utility customers.
Stormwater
2.3.6
EPA
NPDES Permitting
state oversight
Outcomes: NPDES permits ensure state's mandatory standards for clean water and the federal minimums are being
met
Outputs: Real time review and Permit Quality Review Report of Washington Department of Ecology's NPDES Program
Resources: EPA staff time
Stormwater
2.3.7
EPA
Clean Water State
Revolving Fund,
Overflow and
Stormwater Grant
Program, Clean
Water Indian Set-
Aside Program
Outcomes: Support stormwater and wastewater infrastructure improvements to reduce pollutant loading to Puget
Sound
Outputs
EPA's Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) provides capitalization grants to Ecology to grow the State
SRF program which provide low interest loans to communities.
EPA's Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Reuse Municipal Grants (OSG) program is a new grant program which
provides grants to manage combined sewer overflows, sanitary sewer overflows, and stormwater flows.
EPA's Clean Water Indian Set-Aside (CWISA) funds wastewater systems upgrades for tribal communities.
Resources:
48
-------
Annual grants allocation to Washington State Department of Ecology, CWSRF SY21 was $27M, OSG FY21 was
$730K. EPACWISA FY 21 allotment for Idaho, Washington and Oregon was $1.3 M. Annual funding of these
programs is expected to continue.
In the past, over 50% of Washington's Clean Water SRF went to projects in Puget Sound
Additional funds through infrastructure law.
Stormwater
2.3.8
EPA, NOAA
Federal Oversight of
CZARA in
Washington State
Outcomes: Timely approval of Washington's Coastal Nonpoint Program facilitates shifting resources to
implementation
Outputs
Publish final approval of Washington's Coastal Nonpoint Program by Spring 2022
Continue to provide federal technical assistance to the state's voluntary clean water guidance development
process
Work with Ecology to better align specific actions to the CZARA Management Measures during major planning
and program updates such as during the State's next Nonpoint Source Management Plan update
Resources: EPA and NOAA staff time
Stormwater
2.3.9
EPA
CWA Section 319
and 106 Funding
Outcomes: Prevent nonpoint source pollution
Outputs:
EPA funding to state and tribes, for example, Puget Sound Nutrient forum work
Workplans are negotiated through PPA and individual tribes
Resources
Federal funding to state and tribes
(Centennial fund from state).
Stormwater
2.3.10
EPA
Human Health
Criteria
Outcomes: Strengthen clean water and ensure human health criteria (HHC) protect tribal members exercising treaty
subsistence fishing rights in the state of Washington, and other fisher communities
Outputs:
Issue a notice of a proposed draft rule to restore protective HHC for Washington State within nine months of
the Court granting EPA's request to "pause" the litigation (April 2022)
Finalize a federal rule within nine months of the date of the proposed rule (January 2023)
49
-------
Resources: EPA staff time
Stormwater
2.3.11
EPA
(NOAA, USFWS)
Aquatic Life Criteria
Outcomes: Establish new and updated aquatic life criteria for surface waters in Washington for pollutants where EPA
recommended criteria are available.
Outputs:
In coordination with the State, evaluate the list of EPA recommended criteria and prioritize the highest need
based on the latest science
If needed, work with the State to adopt updated criteria and/or propose a rule promulgating federal aquatic
life criteria
NOAA and USFWS to work to prioritize and efficiently work through the ESA consultation processes
Resources:
EPA staff time
NOAA and USFWS consultation
Stormwater
2.3.12
EPA
Contaminants of
Emerging Concern
(CECs) in
Stormwater:
Technical Assistance
to States and Tribes
on Improved
Stormwater
Management and
BMP Effectiveness
Outcomes: Improve water quality through improved stormwater management.
Outputs:
Work with Region 10 state or tribal water quality programs on the best translation methods for including CECs
such as 6PPD-quinone in their implementation of the "No toxics in toxic amounts" narrative criteria to be used
in NPDES permits.
Work towards including monitoring requirements in permits such as monitoring for current green stormwater
infrastructure to assess how well existing infrastructure is working. Contribute to existing efforts to ground
truth green stormwater infrastructure BMP effectiveness in the short term and long term.
This approach could include:
Work towards whole effluent toxicity (WET) testing requirements to include acute and chronic effects to sensitive
species like coho.
Translation from an LC50 to an LC low to prevent acute impacts to coho (and other species, if and when data
become available) from wastewater.
WET testing for stormwater. In parallel, work towards screening level methods, incorporating benchmark
information into that process. These could include developing environmental assays on caged fish for
screening for impacts from stormwater and/or tire chemicals or collecting water and expose fish or
invertebrates in a lab setting to control for environmental factors.
50
-------
As we learn more about the methods, provide technical support to Region 10 states and tribes on developing
and implementingthem.
Work with Ecology to apply the results of BMP effectiveness data for6PPD-quinone and other tire chemicals
into the Ecology 2024 Stormwater Manual update. Specific activities could include refine and make specific to
tire wear particles/6PPD: source control, street sweeping, line cleaning, catch basin cleaning, etc.
EPA could assist Ecology to expand Washington state Technology Assessment Protocol - Ecology (TAPE) as
needed to formally evaluate new stormwater technologies for effectiveness.
Bioretention Media Testing: The EPA is conducting preliminary research to evaluate and test methods using
bioretention media to capture tire and road wear particles and limit the release of chemicals from them, such
as 6PPD-quinone.
Outputs:
EPA staff time
(state and tribal staff time)
Shellfish
2.4.1
EPA
Shellfish Strategic
Initiative funding to
reduce fecal
pathogens and
upgrade harvestable
shellfish beds
Outcomes: Net increase in harvestable shellfish acres in Puget Sound. Reduced fecal pathogens draining to shellfish
beds. Puget Sound shellfish beds are safe, open, and approved for commercial, recreational, tribal, and subsistence
uses. Achieve Puget Sound Action Agenda shellfish goals.
Outputs:
Support effective and sustainable local nonpoint pollution programs; improved farm waste management;
improved control of boater's waste; strengthened on-site sewage system management and repair programs;
better managed wastewater treatment plant outfalls to Puget Sound.
Agricultural BMPs and technical assistance to landowners to assist with long term manure management
strategies and solutions; outreach and education campaigns to maintain septic systems, clean up pet waste,
shoreline surveys and windshield surveys to support water quality monitoring efforts. Convene Pollution
Identification and Correction programs to share best practices and lessons learned, and work towards
sustainable funding.
Award and manage subawards to support the implementation of the Puget Sound Action Agenda with a focus
on operationalizing the Shellfish Implementation Strategy, and maintain a Shellfish Strategic Initiative
Advisory Team to advise in investment-related decision-making
Serve as Implementation Strategy Lead for the Shellfish Vital Sign and form technical and/or policy
workgroups to develop, refine, adaptively manage, and operationalize the Shellfish Implementation Strategy
Participate in PSP and National Estuary Program Management Conference processes and work groups as well
as proactively coordinate with Local Integrating Organizations and tribal partners to accomplish shellfish
51
-------
recovery work. See https://pugetsoundestuary.wa.gov/what-we-do/funded-projects/ for a list of projects
funded by EPA's Shellfish Strategic Initiative to date.
Resources:
Approximately $5 million peryear in EPA Puget Sound Geographic funds awarded to the Washington
Department of Health's Shellfish Strategic Initiative 2.0 (most of this funding is distributed as suba wards for on
the ground actions throughout Puget Sound).
Shellfish
2.4.2
NOAA
Implement ESAand
EFH aquaculture
regulatory
framework
Outcomes: Streamlined, transparent, resilient, and predictable administration of the Endangered Species Act and
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act consultation
Outputs:
Timely processing of individual ESA/EFH consultation and Conservation Planning under the jurisdiction of
NOAA Fisheries
Individual ESA Section 7(a)(2) and EFH consultations, and support for developing and processing Conservation
Plans under ESA Section 10 (a)l(B) of the ESA
Resources: $150,000 annually (Not all funds secured at this time)
Shellfish
2.4.3
NOAA
Ocean Acidification
Monitoring
Outcomes: Improved understanding of inorganic carbon chemistry of Puget Sound waters
Outputs
Maintain existing ocean acidification monitoring within Puget Sound and boundary waters
Advance the adoption of new subsurface ocean acidification monitoring technologies to better assess changes
in the oceanic source waters feeding into Puget Sound as suitable technologies are available
Promote modeling capabilities for seasonal forecasting of corrosive conditions within Puget Sound
Provide technical expertise to Washington entities and tribes to support ongoing monitoring of ocean
acidification in various habitats throughout Puget Sound
Data on inorganic carbon chemistry of source waters to Puget Sound provided to modelers of Puget Sound
chemistry, to improve forecasts and projections of ocean acidification conditions in Puget Sound shellfish
habitat
Data from Puget Sound and boundary waters provided to state and federal entities for assessing water quality
conditions
52
-------
Publications describing ocean acidification conditions and variability within Puget Sound for government and
academic audiences
Sustained monitoring, data quality assurance and synthesis, and advanced OA technology development
specific to the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem
Develop and deploy assessment (i.e., in situ measurements) and modeling tools to field-test OA mitigation
potential (e.g., growing seaweed alongside shellfish or restoration of natural eelgrass beds)
Resources:
NOAA financial and technical support for the development of the J-SCOPE forecast system for Washington and
Oregon coastal waters
Sustained-and for some activities additional-funding is needed to maintain and continue improving existing
observing and modeling capabilities.
(The Washington State legislature supports all parallel ocean acidification modeling and observing within
Puget Sound via funding to the Washington Ocean Acidification Center and the Washington State Department
of Ecology.)
Shellfish
2.4.4
NOAA
Harmful Algal Bloom
Detection and
Prediction
Outcomes:
Forecasting shellfish harvest closures and shellfish mortality due to increasing and high levels of HABs,
including phytoplankton that impact shellfish health are facilitated by community monitoring that conducts
siting of advanced technologies.
Early warning of events that cause closures of shellfish harvest and shellfish mortalities will optimize
commercial, recreational, and tribal management along the 2500 miles of Puget Sound shoreline.
Outputs
Real-time identification of HABs in Puget Sound through the SoundToxins partnership, managed by
Washington Sea Grant. SoundToxins is a partnership that provides real-time seawater sample collection and
analysis to allow mapping of HAB occurrence throughout Puget Sound and is critical to understanding the
environmental factors that play a role in HAB initiation, development, and decline.
Continue SoundToxins partnership management, a collaboration of shellfish growers, environmental learning
centers, researchers, and the public.
Conduct in-situ monitoring of phytoplankton and environmental variables to validate IFCB data
Collaborate with IFCB deployment sites across the US to compare data.
Report findings at national and international meetings.
53
-------
The SoundToxins, a partnership between tribal and local entities, is an early warning system that enables
shellfish to be harvested in advance of closures protecting shellfish and human health, thereby reducing
economic loss.
Resources:
SoundToxins is managed by WA Sea Grant but is unfunded (FY22) but requires ~100k annually for project
management and supplies.
IFCB non-NOAA labor aspects currently funded by NCCOS at $100-200k/year (through Aug 2024), NOAA labor
support: ~$600K annually through FY24. Funding beyond 2024 TBD.
EPA
Harmful Algal Bloom
Response
Outcomes:
Work with Region 10 state and tribal water quality programs on cyanotoxins methods development including
fish tissue analytical methods
Support states and tribes in identifying and responding to Harmful Algal Blooms, such as sharing information
on the latest science, and developing identification, training, and response materials for HABs in estuaries,
together with our partners at NOAA
Supporting state and tribal water quality programs with technical assistance in developing and implementing
their CWA programs to address HABs and stressors that result in HABs (such as nutrients)
Outputs: This approach could include:
Production of datasets to inform the development offish tissue analytical methods for cyanotoxins
Sharing information via webinars on the latest science on HABs toxins in fish and shellfish and connection to
environmental stressors
Summarizing datasets for further development of health effects support documents for HABs toxins.
Data analysis and technical assistance to support state and tribal development of thresholds related to excess
nutrients and other potential stressors/effects associated with HABs issues
Enhanced coordination including annual or more frequent calls among federal staff on HABs preparation and
response
Conducting research on and/or summarizing water quality improvement technology innovations, such as
BMPs for nonpoint sources, and stormwater and wastewater removal effectiveness, and how their application
on the landscape can help mitigate the potential effects of nutrients and other stressors on HABs and aquatic
life
Resources: EPA Staff Time
54
-------
Shellfish
2.4.5
NOAA
Pathogenic Vibrio
Detection and
Prediction
Outcomes: Reduction in shellfish bed closures and illnesses due to pathogenic Vibrios
Outputs:
Primary research and Predictive models of post-harvest vibrio growth aligned with WDOH vibrio management
plans, https://products.coastalscience.noaa.gov/vibrioforecast/pacificnw/default.aspx
Annual update of products to reflect changes in Washington DOH growing area risk characterization.
Daily provision and maintenance of products via NCCOS web. These tools are priority needs identified by the
Food and Drug Administration and the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference for the Pacific Northwest.
Primary research related to improved understanding of vibrio ecology and management.
Resources: NOAA NWS and NCCOS staff and IT services in collaboration with Washington Department of Health
Shellfish
2.4.6
NOAA
Conservation
Genetic Risk
Assessment
Outcomes: Evaluation of genetic risks to wild populations from native shellfish aquaculture.
Outputs:
Decision support and strategic guidance for native shellfish species
Science advice to Puget Sound Restoration Fund on genetics of native shellfish species
Technical support for various genetic analyses for native shellfish species
Resources: $150K/year is needed to support research and laboratory operations
Shellfish
2.4.7
NOAA
Habitat Value of
Shellfish
Outcomes: 1) Improved quantification of habitat value, both in the field and via tools used to assess habitat value for
shellfish aquaculture. 2) Improved understanding of eelgrass populations. 3) Potential carbon monitoring in shellfish
aquaculture habitats in nearshore areas (pendingfunding)
Outputs:
Host a workshop with scientific experts and regulators to share study results and state of the science resulting
in the development of consistent management strategies. 1) Strengthen tools used to inform decisions in
nearshore habitats. Documentation offish and invertebrate use of shellfish aquaculture habitat compared to
eelgrass habitat, including feeding behavior. 2) Manuscript describing the dynamic nature of eelgrass in space
and time. Preliminary information on genetic structure of eelgrass in Puget Sound and along the west coast. 3)
Partnership with shellfish growers and Tribes to monitor carbon sequestration and mitigation of ocean
acidification in nearshore areas associated with shellfish aquaculture practices (pendingfunding).
55
-------
Accurately quantifying the habitat value of shellfish and associated gear in the marine environment compared
to existing habitats is required for proper management. Currently multiple studies are underway comparing
shellfish aquaculture and eelgrass habitats.
Support research in technologies to efficiently and accurately survey and map eelgrass such as drone,
underwater ROV, sonar, and satellite technology
Assess ecosystem services provided by shellfish that potentially provide benefits to eelgrass such as improved
water clarity, reduced epiphytic loading on eelgrass blades, reduction in eelgrass wasting disease
Resources: $250K/year for five years (not all funds secured at this time)
Shellfish
2.4.8
NOAA
Native Shellfish
Hatchery
Outcomes: Rebuilt populations of native shellfish, including Olympia oysters and pinto abalone.
Outputs:
2,500 bags of Olympia oyster spat-on-shell seed to accelerate Olympia oyster recovery at priority sites.
Produce 10,000 juvenile abalone and 4 million larval abalone for out planting.
NOAA and the Puget Sound Restoration Fund are working with state, tribal and industry partners in
Washington to restore 50 acres of oyster habitat by 2025 and rebuild sustainable populations of pinto abalone.
The Kenneth K. Chew Center for Shellfish Research and Restoration produces the science and juvenile shellfish
required for this restoration.
Resources: $525K/year (funding for full time FTEs at $350K/year; continued operations and maintenance at
$175K/year). Northwest Fisheries Science Center needs $100K/yearto support ongoing maintenance of seawater
infrastructure and $150K/yearto support monitoring required for NPDES permit.
Shellfish
2.4.9
NRCS
Native Oyster
Restoration Projects
Outcomes: Habitat restoration and native Olympia Oyster fisheries improvements.
Outputs:
Continue to expand a collaborative effort with the Tribes, NGO Puget Sound Restoration Fund, WDFW, WSCC,
and the shellfish industry, Washington Shellfish Growers Association to implement the native Olympia Oyster
Restoration Plan.
Work with partners to further expand program to address additional concerns (i.e., Blue Crab, Ghost Shrimp,
eel grass restoration, etc.)
Resources: Annual request of ~$200k/year for funding of this program has been supported by NRCS through the EQIP
program and will continue
56
-------
Shellfish
Support Shellfish
Outcomes: Advancing shellfish aquaculture for both commercial and restoration applications, and enhance resiliency
Aquaculture
of shellfish aquaculture industry to impacts of climate change
Readiness
2.4.10
Outputs:
Implement elements of the Washington State Shellfish Initiative, Phase II goals, including Embracing strategies to
address ocean acidification's effects on shellfish, advancing shellfish research topics, restoring native shellfish,
NOAA
Educating the next generation about shellfish. Additional outputs: Building resilience to impacts of multiple
environmental stressors due to climate change. Mitigate genetic risks to native species. Presentations at regional and
national shellfish aquaculture meetings, peer-reviewed publications, and training of graduate students and post docs.
1.
Education, outreach & engagement
2.
Environmental and species interactions
3.
Develop co-culture system designs for seaweed and shellfish to optimize culture conditions.
4.
Advance precision aquaculture practices and consider opportunities forspecies diversification (of native
species) in commercial aquaculture
5.
Identify mechanisms associated with differential performance of diploids and triploid Pacific oyster in
response to multiple environmental stressors (Northwest Fisheries Science Center)
6.
Develop non-GMO methods to induce sterility in cultured shellfish to enhance performance of cultured
shellfish and mitigate genetic risks to native species (Northwest Fisheries Science Center)
7.
8.
Assess sensitivity of native and commercially important shellfish species to ocean acidification and parental
carryover effects (Northwest Fisheries Science Center)
Support the development of a 'restoration marketplace' where shellfish growers raise genetically appropriate
native shellfish species for commercial purposes and for restoration efforts
Resources:
$125k/yearto support an existing grant with the Pacific Shellfish Institute and the Puget Sound Restoration
Fund. The grant is effective through FY 2024. $210k/yearto support Northwest Fisheries Science Center NOAA
FTE research staff and one NRC postdoctoral associate through 2022.
$100K/yearfrom NOAA Ocean Acidification Program 2021-2023.
Shellfish
Microbial Source
Outcomes: Better informed Puget Sound Pollution Identification and Correction (PIC) programs
Tracking of Fecal
Pathogen Pollutions
(Laboratory
Support)
Outputs: EPA Region 10's Manchester Environmental Laboratory provides analytical support through microbial source
2.4.11
tracking for Puget Sound counties' Pollution Identification and Correction programs.
Local water quality teams sample streams and ditches and use DNA analysis (Microbial Source Tracking) methods to
EPA
help determine whether the fecal bacteria are more likely from dogs, humans, cattle, or other animals.
57
-------
This information sheds light on trouble spots, and helps the local governments hone their management actions (e.g.,
whether to focus on onsite sewage systems or pet waste).
Resources:
1.5 laboratory FTE
Increased resources for source tracking requested (e.g., 10 samples/year for WQ districts)
Shellfish
2.4.12
EPA
(NOAA, USFWS?)
Washington Sea
Grant European
Green Crab
Monitoring
Outcomes
Early detection and monitoring of European green crab in the Salish Sea
Scientific information to support management and reduction of populations of European green crab in the
Salish Sea
Outputs
Washington Sea Grant Crab Team - volunteer and partner-based early detection and monitoring at more than
50 sites in the Salish Sea from April - September
Scientific advice and technical assistance to WDFW, tribes and partners to support assessment and response
Resources:
Funding from EPA's Puget Sound Habitat Strategic Initiative through December 2022, and potentially other
federal funding
(Proposed short-term funding from Washington State Legislature through WDFW through June 2023)
Long-term federal and/or state funding needed
Shellfish
2.4.13
NOAA, USFWS
European Green
Crab Control - in
field
Outcomes: Control and reduce populations of European green crab in north Puget Sound
Outputs
NOAA WDVA Veterans Conservation Corps Fisheries Internship Program is a Washington-based internship
focused on marine science and stewardship of coastal resources. Through this program, NOAA supports the
Northwest Straits Commission to trap and remove green crab in partnership with the Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife and Sea Grant from locations in North Puget Sound.
USFWS staff, interns, and volunteers trap and remove green crab on Service lands. Trapping and removal
activities, protocols, and data are coordinated and shared with partners including WDFW and Washington Sea
Grant.
58
-------
Resources
25 - 50k/year - NOAA Restoration Center
1-2 Veterans Conservation Corps personnel forseasonal field work support
Standardized trapping and removal protocols and data
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.1
USGS, NOAA, EPA
(Navy, USFWS,
USACE, others)
Federal Puget Sound
Science
Coordination
Outcomes: Improved Federal inter-agency and intra-agency science planning, coordination, and resource allocation in
support of the implementation of the Puget Sound Federal Task Force Action Plan, the Puget Sound Partnership Action
Agenda, and salmon recovery plans.
Outputs:
Description of Federal science priorities for supporting Puget Sound Recovery and Tribal Treaty Rights at Risk
Regular engagement through the Puget Sound Federal Task Force Science and Monitoring Work Group
Engagement with the Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program, the Puget Sound Partnership Science
Panel, Action Agenda Implementation Strategy Teams, Tribal agencies, and other Puget Sound recovery
science partners
Support implementation of the Partnership's Science Work Plan for 2020-2024 (and its update for 2025-2028)
Resources:
Support for USGS and USFWS/NOAA through Interagency Agreement with EPA Region 10
Agency participation by EPA, NOAA, USGS, USACE, USFWS, US Navy, and other interested Federal agencies
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.2
USFWS, NOAA,
EPA
Stormwater Toxics
Studies
Outcomes: Improved understanding of the occurrence, fate, and transport, toxicity of tire degradation products
(6ppd-quinone) and other stormwater toxics to salmonids and other freshwater and marine aquatic life in Puget
Sound.
Outputs:
Scientific papers and technical memoranda that guide development of more effective management and
control strategies to reduce or eliminate toxic compounds or constituent elements.
Continue research, collaboration with agencies, scientists, and Ecology, and the Washington Stormwater
Center lab
Training for implementing agencies
Coordination with industry on alternatives
Studies and modeling of green stormwater infrastructure geographic priorities, best practices, and design
(e.g., EPAVELMAmodel, 6PPD, and othertoxics issues)
59
-------
Issues like source control, prevention, elimination, and treatment will be considered when designing and
funding relevant studies.
Resources: Support for USFWS, NOAA, and non-Federal partners through Interagency Agreement with EPA Region 10.
Potential for collaboration with USGS. EPA staff time.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.3
EPA
6PPD-quinone and
6PPD Toxicology
Research
Outcome: Learn more about which exposure pathways and biological modes of action result in harm to species, and
which species are harmed by 6PPD-quinone and 6PPD. If data allow potential development of species-specific
benchmarks for implementation.
Outputs: Test 6PPD and 6PPD-quinone in high throughput assay formats including fathead minnow larvae (to identify
mode of action information via transcriptomics and provide interim points of departure (e.g., LC10)), zebrafish (for
behavioral and developmental effects), and rat and human nervous cells (for developmental neurotoxic effects in
mammals).
Resources: EPA staff time, laboratory supplies.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.4
EPA
Convene
stakeholders and
researchers about
mitigating tire
particle pollution
Outcome: Support mitigation of tire particle pollution as a microplastic, including as a component of stormwater.
Output:
EPA's Trash Free Waters program will convene stakeholders and researchers to explore:
What barriers, opportunities, and needs are there to address the issue of tire particles and associated toxicants
more comprehensively and adequately in waterways?
What informational resources already address one or more of the needs?
Brainstorm products for needs not adequately addressed by existing resources
Summary report available to all stakeholders/public; including informational resources that will include the input from
the stakeholders.
Resources: EPA staff time, funding for contractor support.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.5
USGS, EPA
Coupled Monitoring
and Modeling of
Sediment Fluxes in
PugetSound
Estuaries
Outcomes: Improved understanding of sediment fluxes in the Snohomish Estuary, implications of sediment flux
dynamics and habitat responses for restoration project success, and importance of anticipated changes in sediment
fluxes and habitat responses due to future climate change and sea-level rise.
Outputs: Published sediment monitoring data and interpretation, calibrated sediment transport models for use by
partners, model outputs undersea level rise and climate change scenarios.
60
-------
Flow and sediment flux, transport, and dynamics studies in Snohomish Estuary
Compound (integrated river and storm-driven coastal) flooding model framework will be used to simulate the
processes that drive flow, sediment transport and extreme water levels across the estuarine/floodplain
systems.
Linkage to USGS Puget Sound CoSMoS model for marine-side boundary constraints
Resources: $900KoverFY21-FY23 from Interagency Agreement between USGS and USEPA Region 10.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.6
USGS, EPA
Puget Sound Coastal
Storm Modeling
System (PS-CoSMoS)
Outcomes: Ability to predict and visualize impacts of coastal flooding scenarios under scenarios of sea-level rise and
climate change through 2100 for Puget Sound shorelines at meter-scale resolution.
Outputs:
Model outputs for flood extent, depth, duration, and coastal wave energy
Model viewer for flood impact scenarios
High-resolution model development projects with local partners
Model development and use outreach through collaboration with Washington Sea Grant
Linkages to flood impact models on habitat, expected property damages, and other impacts
Resources:
Multiple funding sources for high resolution model development (King County, City of Bellingham, Whatcom
County, Tulalip Tribe, and others) for project-specific shorelines, in progress.
EPA Region 10 Interagency Agreement to support WA Sea Grant collaboration, FY19 - 22
Support for full implementation of CoSMoS to all remaining Puget Sound shorelines by USGS supported by
Interagency Agreement with EPA Region 10, FY22 - 24
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.5
USGS, NOAA, EPA
Puget Sound Herring
Research Program to
Support Recovery
Outcomes: Improved understanding of the status of herring populations and the drivers of herring survival, informing
how recovery tools could address those drivers.
Outputs:
Herring Recovery Program information base, assessment of present and future climate impacts to herring
survival, open water ecosystem sampling platform instituted, and on-going assessment of herring recovery
strategies.
USGS will establish a multidisciplinary Puget Sound Herring research program to support the recovery of
Puget Sound forage fish/herring, potentially in collaboration with NOAA, Tribes, WDFW, EPA, and PSP.
Collaborators will refine and implement a multi-party research approach and plan to for recovering pacific
herring. Integrate with Canadian First Nation and government efforts.
61
-------
With collaborators, establish a much-needed Puget Sound open water sampling platform for comprehensive
ecosystem monitoring. Use it to conduct annual herring surveys to obtain age distribution, life-history, and
mortality data to assess population trends. Leverage platform to perform juvenile salmon research and many
other ecosystem studies with partners.
Assess potential drivers of herring population abundance and distribution, including infectious and parasitic
diseases, predation, prey field shifts, and contaminants.
Perform an early study to determine the extent to which climate change and higher water temperatures
increase disease transmission rates and declines in herring survival. Results will improve our understanding of
climate>disease dynamics and their impacts on population stability for many species of Pacific Coast fish and
wildlife.
Partner with USGS Pacific Coast and Marine Science Center to predict the impacts of climate change-driven
coastal flooding on Puget Sound kelp and eelgrass habitat that is vital to forage fish survival (using CoSMoS).
Work with Puget Sound Tribes, First Nations, and others to assess the efficacy of transplanting herring to
healthy spawning habitats.
Resources:
Additional USGS funding of $400K needed annually over five years
Anticipated resources needed for partners, $1.25M annually over five years
USGS Fisheries Program will contribute $250K annually over five years
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.6
USGS, EPA
PugetSound
Salmon Habitat
Scenarios: Future
Stream
Temperatures,
Stream Flows, and
Salmon Habitat
Suitability Under
Climate Change
Outcomes: Improved understanding of potential climate change impacts to Pacific salmon populations in freshwater
from the reach to watershed scale by linking predictions of water temperature and flow changes with detailed
descriptions of salmon movements and habitat use.
Outputs:
Predictive models, mapped model outputs, scenario visualizations, and interpretive reports
Establish collaborative group for input to scenarios and to facilitate information exchange.
Track juvenile and adult salmon thermal habitat use and survival using active telemetry for multi-scale
monitoring of fish movement and survival.
Monitor and model water temperature and flow at required scales and times.
Using monitoring information and models, predict impacts to fish across habitat scales, seasons, species, and
life stages.
Develop a regional Toolkit for conducting assessments across all of Puget Sound.
Support management and protection of cold-water features.
Resources: Anticipated funding needed
62
-------
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.7
EPA, PNNL
Estuarine Pathogens
Modelling
Outcomes: Improved understanding of sources, transport, and fate of pathogens in Puget Sound estuaries through
modeling, with a focus on Portage Bay, Drayton Harbor, and Samish Bay.
Outputs: Predictive models, model outputs, and interpretive information
Resources: Support for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Salish Sea Model through Interagency
Agreement with EPA Region 10
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.8
USGS, EPA, PNNL
Updating and
improving nutrient
loading and source
predictions of Puget
Sound Rivers
Outcomes: Improved fresh, estuarine, and marine nutrient-related water quality using an updated compilation of
available data and new continuous nutrient load monitoring data at targeted key locations in rivers and streams
throughout Puget Sound.
Outputs:
Compile post-2012 water quality data, apply quality assurance procedures, assemble calibration database
Conduct model error assessments for newly calibrated USGS SPARROW and EPA VELMA models to identify
major contributors to prediction error
Use error assessment to determine optimal locations for new data collection
Conduct continuous nutrient/loading monitoring at selected sites
Re-calibrate SPARROW and VELMA to generate best available nutrient loading predictions for Puget Sound
rivers
Link to PNNL Salish Sea model for Puget Sound estuary predictions
Summarize management implications
Resources: Anticipated additional resources required
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.9
EPA, NOAA, USGS
Address the Health
ofPugetSound
Species by
Understanding the
Distinct and
Interacting Effects of
Contaminants and
Pathogens (Salmon
and tire dust; Orca
and PCBs)
Outcomes: Established cell lines for endangered Orca and other untestable species for current and future assessments
of chemical bioactivity in laboratory settings. Understanding of how PCBs or other high priority contaminants (e.g.,
6PPD) may result in immunosuppression in Orca and increased risk to local pathogens. Contribute data toward the
development of adverse outcome pathway for immunomodulation.
Outputs:
Preserved cell lines, benchmarks for management, potential immunological interventions
USGS has lab facilities with the needed levels of biosafety, enabling researchers to:
Determine the levels of toxicity of 6PPD that result in immunosuppression in salmon and other marine and
freshwater species to help EPA develop water quality benchmarks for monitoring, source control, etc.
Develop orca and other species cell lines to examine bioactivity in a laboratory setting
63
-------
Pilot use of the cell line to study the potential immunosuppressing effects of PCBs on orcas' skin, their primary
line of defense against many pathogens.
Resources: USGS will receive support through an Interagency Agreement with EPA Region 10 and will contribute in-
kind matching funds. NOAA is providing technical advice, in collaboration through the Storm Water science action
(Action 2.5.2).
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.10
EPA, NOAA, and
USGS
Development of
toxicity benchmarks
to support
protection and
recovery of
endangered Puget
Sound species
Outcomes: Development of a framework to establish toxicity benchmarks for untestable charismatic species of the
Puget Sound through the integration of New Approach Methods. These methods include but are not limited to
immortalized or primary cell lines for endangered Orca and other untestable species that can be used to examine the
bioactivity of legacy or emerging contaminants. Linkages between chemical concentrations in orca tissues, such as
feces and plasma.
Outputs:
Preserved cell lines, benchmarks for management
USGS and EPA have lab facilities with the needed levels of biosafety, enabling researchers to determine interim
in vitro points of departure for 6PPD and other legacy or emerging contaminants to support the development
of water quality benchmarks for monitoring, source control, etc.
Compare responses of cell lines in untestable species to points of departure and benchmark values to
ascertain the protectiveness of benchmarks established in testable surrogate species
Determine how concentrations in tissues (e.g., feces) that can be safely sampled in wild species (e.g., orca)
compare to points of departure determined in vitro or calculated in plasma to enhance the use of in vitro work
toward practical monitoring tools.
Resources:
EPA will provide in-kind staff expertise toward benchmark development. NOAA will provide technical advice and
support acquisition of samples from protected species. USGS will receive support through an Interagency Agreement
with EPA Region 10 and will contribute in-kind matching funds.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.11
EPA
Develop Analytical
Method for6PPD-
quinone
Outcome: EPA published method for 6PPD-quinone allows states, tribes, and others to measure 6PPD-quinone surface
water and storm waters in their watersheds.
Outputs:
Develop and coordinate a multiagency analytical method development and validation study for 6PPD-quinone
(EPA 1600 series surface water/stormwater method).
64
-------
EPA Region 10 convenes monthly roundtable calls to coordinate on 6PPD-quinone analytical methods
development and information sharing meetings with federal, state, and tribal laboratories and programs.
Resources: 0.5 FTE
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.12
EPA
6PPD Pollution
Prevention and
Alternatives Analysis
Outcome: Help to remove 6PPD from the supply chain by evaluating alternatives to 6PPD (once known) for
toxicological effects. Leverage Washington State's GreenScreen work on 6PPD alternatives.
Outputs:
Evaluate new compounds via new approach methodologies (NAMs) with supporting in wVo testing when
warranted of model aquatic species.
Convene conversations across EPA programs, including EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention, Office of Research and Development, and Office of Water to discuss opportunities for source
reduction.
Resources: TBD, EPAstaff time
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.13
USGS, USFWS
Adapting to Climate
Change with an
Aquatic Disease
Rapid Response
Program
Outcomes: An aquatic disease rapid response program using innovative, cost-effective, pathogen bio-surveillance
tools and high throughput screening strategies. The program will also leverage data produced to improve disease
intervention strategies, predict the future trajectory of disease, and ultimately build decision support tools for
managers. This Puget Sound program builds on a USGS national effort to catalog aquatic diseases and assess how
disease patterns are shifting in response to climate change (e.g., recently funded AquaDePTH project). Finally, as a
subcomponent, we will train tribal students to become part of the next generation offish health professionals.
Outputs:
New program for disease management with new field and laboratory screening tools, improved disease
intervention strategies and tribal students trained as fish health professionals.
Establish a cost-effective, rapid pathogen bio-surveillance and screening program using eDNA and next
generation equipment to improve the region's ability to identify, monitor and quickly address diseases of
concern in fish.
Develop collaboration with non-Federal partners, potentially including specific Tribes, NWIFC, and WDFW.
Pilot the program with a study of Myxozoan parasites that may be leading to high mortality of ESA-listed
Chinook, Coho, and Sockeye in the Lake Washington/Lake Sammamish basin.
Assess disease ecology and transmission from warmwaterfish and other invasive species to salmonids and
other species of concern and develop predictive decision support tools.
65
-------
Refine disease intervention strategies. Expand our suite of treatment options and account for the rise in
antimicrobial resistance in pathogens.
Establish a 3-year fish training program for interested tribal students to become certified fish health
inspectors. This would include an M.S. at the University of Washington with the thesis completed at WFRC and
internships occurring at the fish health programs at NWIFC and WDFW. It is anticipated that this person will be
the logical next hire for a fish pathologist position at these institutions.
Resources: USGS Western Fisheries Research Centerwould require $400k/year in additionalfundingoverfouryears.
USGS would provide $400k/yearto this program from base funding.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.14
EPA, USFWS, BIA,
NOAA, USGS,
PNNL
Improved Early
Detection and
Monitoring of
European Green
Crab in Puget Sound
Outcomes: Controlling the impact of the invasive European green crab population beginning to take hold in Puget
Sound/Salish through an improved, collaborative science, monitoring, prevention, and eradication strategy.
Outputs:
Convene interagency work group including Federal, State, tribal, and other partners to coordinate relevant
science activities to support the early detection, monitoring, modeling, forecasting, and control of European
Green Crab in Puget Sound (EPA)
EPA has funded, and potentially could continue to support, WDFW, Lummi Nation, SeaGrant, etc. green crab
monitoring, planning, trapping, etc.
EPA, and other federal agencies, will work with the Lummi Nation and other tribes as appropriate to identify
and address invasive species like European Green Crab.
Develop a EGC larval dispersal model for the Salish Sea, with simulation of management scenarios (PNNL
Salish Sea Model with EPA funding)
Use bioenergetic models for green and Dungeness crabs to assess invasion potential and vulnerabilities now
and under projected climate change and sea-level rise scenarios (USGS)
Contribute to collaborative efforts to refine the approach to incorporating eDNA sampling with traditional
sampling (USGS in collaboration with State-led partners)
The convened work group will attempt to secure and leverage long-term resources across multiple agencies to
develop and implement a robust integrated monitoring, prevention, and eradication strategy for controlling
European Green Crab in Puget Sound, building on the stated Outputs.
Resources: EPA Region 10 is supporting PNNL and USGS through Interagency Agreements, with USGS providing
matching funds for preliminary model and monitoring work. USGS, USFWS, and BIA are exploring potential resources
from DOI. Funding to WDFW from EPA's Puget Sound Habitat Strategic Initiative through December 2022. Support for
NOAA Fisheries at 250k annually (funds not secured at this time).
66
-------
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.15
NOAA, USGS
Population Effects of
Freshwater
Restoration
Outcomes: Improved understanding of the benefits of large-scale restoration actions at the watershed-scale with the
monitoring of the Elwha dam removals. Fundingforsalmonid monitoring, including SONAR for adult enumeration and
screw traps for juvenile outmigration. Current funding cycle of monitoring ceases 2022.
Outputs: Estimates of listed species including returning adult Chinook salmon and steelhead as well as Coho salmon
with the SONAR. Estimate of out-migrating Chinook salmon, steelhead, chum salmon, pink salmon, coho salmon, and
steelhead with the screw traps.
Resources: National Park Service and Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe currently funding fish-in/fish-out in the Elwha River.
Funding ceases in 2022. ~$200K peryear maintaining two SONARS and three screw traps.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.16
USGS, USFWS
Aquatic Visual
Ecology and
Artificial Light at
Night
Outcomes: Improved understanding of the implications of recent and significant increases in artificial light at night on
the aquatic visual ecology (e.g., survival and growth of aquatic species and the function of aquatic food webs), an area
of study that has been largely ignored.
Outputs:
Visual foraging models (VFMs) for key predators and other consumers (controlled experiments, e.g., Northern
Pikeminnow, Walleye, Basses, Salmonids).
Assessment of visual predation mortality and significant shifts in movement, distribution, behavior by
sensitive species, diagnose impediments to migration (field sampling, measurement, and modeling)
Measurements of the dynamic visual environment via in situ instrumentation and remote sensing (e.g.,
satellite and aerial imagery).
Estimates of species and community responses to changes in light, water transparency/turbidity, and
mediating effects of climate change, sea level rise, and other environmental on stratification (thermal, salinity,
hypoxia) that affect growth, movement, and interactions of species.
Resources: The USGS Western Fisheries Research Center would require $75k/year over four years. USGS would provide
$50k/yearto this program from base funding. USFWS would collaborate, TBD.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.17
USGS
Modeling and
Monitoring to
Support Instream
Flow and Water
Availability
Assessments in
Outcomes: Ability to assess instream flows within the Puget Sound basin, using models and monitoring approaches
appropriate to the support of the protection ofTreaty Rights.
Outputs:
Application of a Soil-Water-Balance (SWB) model to Puget Sound to assess vulnerability to stream depletion.
Model-based vulnerability assessment and consultation with tribes to identify areas where tribal treaty rights,
including water rights and the right to fish at usual and accustomed areas, are at greatest risk.
67
-------
Support of Tribal
Treaty Rights
Prioritization of vulnerable areas to determine where to deploy additional water gaging and deployment of
gages.
Assessment and publication of assessment of the state of instream flow conditions in the context of Treaty
Rights.
Resources: Leverages existing USGS models, assessments, programs, and Puget Sound stream gage network. The
additional resources needed by USGS for new assessments, model use, and stream gage infrastructure and
deployment will be supported by EPA Region 10 through Interagency Agreement.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.18
NOAA
Salmon Life Cycle
Models to Identify
Priority Habitat
Restoration Actions
and Climate
Resilience Strategies
Outcomes: Implement existing Habitat Assessment and Restoration Planning Model to (1) identify high priority habitat
restoration actions for ESA-listed salmon and steelhead in Puget Sound river basins, and (2) evaluate alternative
habitat restoration scenarios to provide resilience to climate change. Goal is to implement the HARP Model
sequentially for major salmon and steelhead populations in Puget Sound. Stillaguamish and Snohomish River basin
analyses are in progress.
Outputs:
Modeled restoration potential for alternative salmon habitat restoration actions (e.g., barrier removal, riparian
restoration, wood augmentation, floodplain reconnection, beaver pond habitat, etc.) at basin and subbasin
scales, for identifying the most important restoration actions for Chinook salmon, steelhead, and coho
salmon.
Modeled future effectiveness of restoration actions under climate change.
Comparison of alternative restoration scenarios (suites of actions and locations), with or without climate
change, to identify strategies to increase salmon resilience to climate change.
Maps of restoration potential by subbasin, action type, restoration strategy, and climate period (current, mid-
century, late-century).
Resources: NOAA NWFSC requires $250,000/year (one river basin per year). NWFSC will complement these funds by
directing appropriations internally to this effort.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.19
NOAA
5-Year Biological
Review of Yelloweye
and Bocaccio
Rockfishes in Puget
Sound/Georgia
Basin
Outcomes: ESA-required 5-year update on the stock status of yelloweye and bocaccio rockfishes
Outputs:
A new catch reconstruction in Puget Sound for each of the above listed rockfishes
A new population dynamics model based on catch history and limited length data that updates the stock
status of yelloweye rockfish
Bocaccio remains too difficult to sample, and thus data-limited, to provide a stock status update
68
-------
Resources: This is a collaboration with NOAA/NMFS West Coast Region and the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife. Additional resources such as ongoing data collection and funding to support analyses of the data may be
required.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.20
USGS
Improved
Framework to
Determine how ESA-
Listed Species are
Responding to
Climate Change and
other Stressors
Outcomes: Develop and implement improved models of the thermal and foraging niche of ESA-listed or other
threatened species to identify and quantify the vulnerability or resilience of these species to climate change, invasive
species, emerging diseases, contaminant bioaccumulations, urbanization and changing land and water demands.
Also, implement bioenergetics models to assess the spread and impact of invasive species in the face of climate
change. Use Lake Washington as a test bed for models, then expand use throughout Puget Sound and beyond. Provide
results to managers to direct efforts.
Outputs:
New models and results that inform recovery decision making
Establish collaborative partner group, including WRIA 8, Muckleshoot Tribe, King County, and WDFW, and
others.
Using WFRCs state-of-the-art experimental wet lab facilities, parametrize models and corroborate species
metabolic and growth responses to stressors (e.g., temperature, food supply, salinity, dissolved oxygen,
turbidity, pH, pathogens, etc.)
Quantify current and predicted impacts of climate change and urbanization stressors on ESA-listed salmon
and other species of concern.
Quantify predicted impacts of climate change and urbanization stressors on the spread of invasive species and
their risks posed to other species via food web interactions.
Work with managers to incorporate results into decision-making frameworks. Consider new ecosystem
management frameworks such as RAD (Resist, Adapt, Direct) that is becoming more prominent when
considering climate adaptation.
Resources: USGS WFRC requires $150,000/year for four years (FY22-FY25). WFRC will match these funds by directing
appropriations internally to this effort.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.21
USGS
Puget Sound Fish
Disease Ecology
Program
Outcomes: Improved understanding of impacts of infectious disease, contaminants, and other environmental
stressors on the health of Puget Sound forage fish and steelhead populations.
Outputs: Collaborations with partners involving assets at the USGS Marrowstone Marine Fisheries Laboratory - the only
federal, state, or private marine biocontainment laboratory facility in the Puget Sound focused on wild fish health
69
-------
Resources: USGS Fisheries Program funding of $ annually; (Reimbursable partner funding of $ annually).
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.22
NOAA
Puget Sound Habitat
Status and Trends
Monitoring
Outcomes: Update monitoring metrics for large river, floodplain, delta, and nearshore salmon habitats, based on
monitoring protocols developed by NOAA NWFSC. These metrics should be updated every five years to assess trends in
salmon habitat conditions for the 5-year status reviews for salmon and steelhead listed under the endangered species
act. All monitoring protocols are based on aerial imagery interpretation and development/updating of geospatial data
sets.
Outputs: Updated GIS habitat data layers for comparison to baseline data, including
Updated delta habitat maps (distributary channels, tidal channels, tidal marshes)
Updated nearshore condition maps (shoreline riparian conditions, overwater structures)
Updated large river wood jam and riparian condition maps
Updated floodplain habitat maps (side channels, braids, backwaters)
Resources: NOAA NWFSC requires $180,000 to support GIS staff for aerial imagery interpretation and updating
geospatial data sets for the next five-year status review.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.23
NOAA
Estuarine Habitat
Equivalency Analysis
(HEA) Science
Development
Outcomes: Refine data inputs to estuary and nearshore HEA model based on best available science in the region. Data
inputs include improvements to fish-habitat relationships as well as effects of habitat impacts and benefits of
mitigation. Revise inputs based on existing science, compiled via meetings of science experts.
Outputs: Accurate model outputs evaluating proposed nearshore and estuarine habitat modifications and mitigation
actions. Completed app to facilitate accessibility with users.
Resources: $75K per year is requested to update model inputs and improve model accessibility.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.24
NOAA
Evaluating Benefits
of Estuary
Restoration
Outcomes: Improved science on how Puget Sound estuary wetland projects have facilitated juvenile growth, survival
and productivity for Chinook salmon and other species. Evaluation of cumulative effects of estuary restoration, and
causal modeling of benefits of estuary and nearshore restoration for Whidbey Basin stocks (Cumulative Effects
Evaluation).
Outputs:
Reports, publications, and information sharing of science findings from long-term monitoring studies
Data to parameterize HARP and HEA models (see above) on estuary-salmon habitat relationships and
responses to restoration.
Data to inform causal model of cumulative effects of restoration.
70
-------
Causal model that can be applied to other basins of Puget Sound.
NOAA work in close coordination with Tribes.
Resources: $100K per year is requested for CEE model development, data collection.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.25
USGS, USFWS,
NOAA, USFS
Puget Sound Culvert
and Forest Road
Science and
Monitoring
Outcomes: This action will provide guidance for identification, prioritization, design, and broad scale assessments of
the effectiveness of culvert removal and replacement throughout the Puget Sound region. This action will also help
identify culverts that indirectly affect fish and aquatic organisms by reducing flood plain connectivity, increasing water
temperatures, and affecting channel form and stream geomorphology. Finally, this action works to contextualize and
help prioritize culvert and forest road corrective actions based upon their aggregate impact to entire watersheds.
This action will inform several implementation activities within this plan, including: Habitat>Crosscutting>2.2.3 =
Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund; Habitat>Fish Passage>2.2.4.4 = National Culvert Removal, Replacement, and
Restoration Grant Program; Habitat>Fish Passage>2.2.4.8 = Correct salmon and steelhead culvert fish passage barriers
on National Forest System roads; Habitat>Fish Passage>2.2.4.9 = Correct salmon and steelhead culvert fish passage
barriers on National Park Service roads; Habitat>Fish Passage>2.2.4.10> Correct salmon and steelhead culvert fish
passage barriers on U.S. Navy property.
Outputs:
Guidance for updates to Washington State water crossing guidelines that are planned for completion in 2024.
This includes but is not limited to: guidance for large culvert thalweg design to emulate natural habitat and
ensure functional fish passage; for design to be more climate resilient, accounting for increased flow variability
and peak magnitude, and changes to sediment dynamics associated with climate change; support for ongoing
hydrodynamic modeling that USGS is providing to Washington Department of Fish Wildlife to access scenarios
and threshold effects; and results of a 10 yr and ongoing monitoring program evaluating in- and near-culvert
stream characteristics.
Guidance to help prioritize proposed culvert removal and replacement activities based on resiliency and
likelihood of long-term success for supporting fish passage, stream function, and transportation
infrastructure.
Guidance for considering and prioritizing specific culvert replacement and road service actions in the context
of entire watersheds, accounting for aggregate impacts to floodplain connectivity, stream geomorphology,
sediment runoff, and broader impacts to a watershed's hydrologic regime.
Regional implementation of low-cost, culvert identification and assessment tools for federal lands, including
"FLOwPER" and "RoadStr". This activity will collect data for a broader assessment of culvert impacts, beyond
fish passage.
71
-------
Development and implementation of key parameters for assessing culvert performance and low-cost tools
(e.g., eDNA, tiered gaging, etc.) to broadly monitor and assess the status of road-stream crossings, and efficacy
of culvert removal and replacement activities to determine at a regional scale whether significant investments
in culvert replacement are paying off.
Resources: Funding for federal personnel staff time and field operations.
Science and
Monitoring
2.5.26
NOAA, USGS
Science Centers and
Facilities -
Infrastructure
Outcomes: Sufficient science infrastructure to support cutting edge Fisheries science efforts to support the protection
and restoration of Puget Sound, addressing on-going facilities concerns at the listed Centers.
Outputs:
Leases for facilities
Communication of specific infrastructure/capability needs to all partners. Targeted messaging around specific
Fisheries science facilities issues.
Improvements and maintenance to address specific important needs.
The NOAA Northwest Fisheries Science Center is currently working with GSAon a potential lease of a new
Seattle-based laboratory because of the impending SR 520 reconstruction project. This, along with hoped for
investments in NWFSC research facilities at the NOAA Western Regional Center and the Manchester Research
Station will provide cutting edge science to support the protection and restoration of Puget Sound.
USGS Marrowstone Laboratory requires improvements and maintenance to continue to provide its unique role
as a marine biocontainment laboratory facility in the Puget Sound focused supporting wild fish health
research.
Resources: Contingent on Congressional appropriations.
Governance
4.1
PSP
PugetSound
Partnership and the
Action Agenda
Outcomes: Improved conditions necessary for restoration, conservation, or protection efforts to take place or succeed.
Outputs
Invite PSP Executive Director to PSFTF meeting annually
PSP and PSFTF staff regular meetings
PSP-PSFTF coordination aligns federal activities to support Action Agenda
Resources: PSFTF staff time
72
-------
Governance
4.2
Tribes
Treaty Rights at Risk
Outcomes: Improved consistency between federal action and honoring reserved treaty rights.
Outputs
Integrate and implement federal actions that are responsive to Tribal requests
Consult with tribes on the development and implementation of the Action Plan
Review federal priorities and receive input from the Tribal Management Conference annually
Support and manage the established national Treaty Rights at Risk CEQ/Federal issue elevation resolution
process
Resources: PSFTF staff time
Governance
4.3
ECB
PugetSound
Ecosystem
Coordination Board
(ECB)
Outcomes: Improved conditions necessary for restoration, conservation, or protection efforts to take place or succeed.
Outputs
EPA, USACE, NOAA regular ECB attendance
Provide updates to the ECB on PSFTF activities as well as raise ECB matters at PSFTF meetings
PSFTF/federal agency participation in development of ECB workplans
Resources: PSFTF staff and member agency staff time
Governance
4.4
Leadership
Council
PugetSound
Leadership Council
Outcomes: Improved conditions necessary for restoration, conservation, or protection efforts to take place or succeed.
Outputs
Coordinate with the Puget Sound Partnership as needed on Puget Sound Leadership Council business
PSFTF/federal agency participation in development of Leadership Council workplans
Resources: PSFTF staff time
Governance
4.5
PSSRC
PugetSound
Salmon Recovery
Council (PSSRC)
Outcomes: Increased assurance of appropriate federal agency policy, funding, and program alignment to support
salmon, steelhead and habitat protection and restoration.
Outputs
PSFTF/federal agency participation in development and implementation of PSSRC workplans
Resources: PSFTF member agency staff time
73
-------
Governance
Local Governments,
Outcomes: Improved conditions necessary for restoration, conservation, or protection efforts to take place or succeed.
Non-profit
4.6
Organizations, and
Outputs
Universities
PSFTF coordinate with local governments, non-profit organizations, and universities on the implementation of
Local, Non-
this Action Plan.
profits, and
PSFTF coordinate federal actions to support local government, non-profit organizations, and universities'
Universities
work to recover Puget Sound.
Resources: PSFTF staff time
74
-------
Acronyms
Action Agenda
Puget Sound Action Agenda
Action Plan
Puget Sound Federal Task Force Action Plan
ACEP
Agricultural Conservation Easement Program
AIS
Automatic Identification System
ALE
Agricultural Land Easements
AOP
Aquatic Organism Passage
AREMP
Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program
B-IBI
Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity
BIA
Bureau of Indian Affairs
BiOp
Biological Opinion
BMP
Best Management Practices
CAP
Continuing Authorities Program (ง206)
CEC
Contaminant of Emerging Concern
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
CFV
Commercial Fishing Vessel
CGP
Construction General Permit
CGVTS
Coast Guard Vessel Traffic System
CANUSPAC
Canada - U.S. Joint Marine Pollution Contingency Plan Pacific Geographical Annex
CEAP
Conservation Effects Assessment Project
CoSMoS
Coastal Storm Modeling System
CRP
NOAA Community Based Restoration Program
CRS
Community Rating System
CWA
Clean Water Act
CWSRF
Clean Water State Revolving Fund
75
-------
CWISA
Clean Water Indian Set-Aside
CZARA
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments
DoD
United States Department of Defense
DOH
Washington State Department of Health
DOI
United States Department of Interior
ECB
Ecosystem Coordination Board
ECY
Washington State Department of Ecology
EFH
Essential Fish Habitat
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
EQIP
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
ERFO
Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads
ESA
Endangered Species Act
ESRP
Estuary and Salmon Restoration Program
FbD
Floodplains by Design
FDA
United States Food and Drug Administration
FEMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FFFPP
Family Forest Fish Passage Program
FHWA
Federal Highway Administration
FLAP
Federal lands Access Program
FLTP
Federal Lands Transportation Program
FPRB
Fish Passage Removal Board
FTA
Federal T ransit Administration
FTE
Full Time Equivalent
FY
Fiscal Year
GMO
Genetically Modified Organism
GRP
Geographic Response Plan
76
-------
HAB
Harmful Algal Bloom
HARP
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Planning Model
HEA
Habitat Equivalency Analysis
HGMP
Hatchery and Genetic Management Plan
HHC
Human Health Criteria
HPA
Hydraulic Project Approval
HQ
Headquarters
IFCB
Imaging Flow Cytobot
LO
NEP Watershed Lead Organization
LCC
Landscape Conservation Cooperatives
LIO
Local Integrating Organization
MART
Multi-Agency Review Team
MBSNF/ MBS
Mount-Bake Snoqualmie National Forest
MS4
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
MSGP
Multi-Sector General Permit
MORA
Mount Rainier National Park
MOU
Memorandum of Understanding
MRC
Marine Resources Committee
NAMs
New Approach Methodologies
NCCOS/NOS
National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science/National Ocean Service
NCF
Nisqually Community Forest
NCWCGP
National Coastal Wetland Conservation Grant Program
NDZ
No Discharge Zone
NEP
National Estuary Program
NERR
National Estuarine Research Reserve
NF
National Forest
77
-------
NFIP
National Flood Insurance Program
NFPP
National Fish Passage Program
NGO
Non-governmental organization
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOAAMDP
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Debris Program
NOCA
North Cascades National Park
NP
National Park
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPS
National Park Service
NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRDA
Natural Resource Damage Assessment
NWAC
Northwest Area Committee
NWFSC
NOAA Northwest Fisheries Science Center
NWIFC
Northwest Indian Fish Commission
NWP
Nationwide Permit
OA
Ocean Acidification
OCNMS
Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary
OLY
Olympic National Park
ORD
EPA Office of Research and Development
OSG
Sewer Overflow and Stormwater Reuse Municipal Grants
PAWSS
Ports and Waterways Safety System
PCSGA
Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association
PIC
Pollution identification and correction
PNNL
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
PSAW
Puget Sound and Adjacent Waters (ง544)
PSEMP
Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program
78
-------
PSFTF
Puget Sound Federal Task Force
PSNERP
Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project
PSP
Puget Sound Partnership
PSRF
Puget Sound Restoration Fund
PSSST
Puget Sound Stormwater Science Team
PSSRC
Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council
PSVTS
Puget Sound Vessel Traffic Service
RAD
Restriction-site Associated DNA sequencing
RCPP
Resource Conservation Partnership Program
REPI
Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration Program
ROV
Remote Operated Vehicle
RSMP
Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program
RRT
Regional Response Team
SAM
Stormwater Action Monitoring
SI AT
Strategic Initiative Advisory Team
SLS
Sustainable Lands Strategy
SMA
Shoreline Management Act
STIP
State Transportation Improvement Program
sw
Stormwater
SRFB
Salmon Recovery Funding Board
TNC
The Nature Conservancy
TRAR
Treaty Rights at Risk
TTP
Tribal Transportation Program
USACE
United States Army Corps of Engineers
USCG
United States Coast Guard
USDA
United States Department of Agriculture
79
-------
USDOT
United States Department of Transportation
USFS/FS
United States Forest Service
USFWS
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS
United States Geological Survey
UW
University of Washington
VELMA
Visualizing Ecosystem Land Management Assessments
VTRA
Vessel Traffic Risk Assessment
VTS
Vessel Traffic Service
WA
Washington State
WAC
Washington Administrative Code
WDOH
Washington Department of Health
WDFW
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WDNR
Washington Department of Natural Resources
WDOL
Washington Department of Licensing
WFLHD
Western Federal Lands Highway Division
WFRC
USGS Western Fisheries Research Center
WFWO
USFWS Washington Fish and Wildlife Office
WRE
Wetlands Reserve Easements
WRIA
Water Resource Inventory Area
WSDOT
Washington State Department of Transportation
WDVA
Washington State Department of Veterans Affairs
WSU
Washington State University
80
------- |