Scope of Work Section 3.0

2.0 Organization of the Watershed Planning Project - Phase 1

The organizational phase outlines the general information and actions needed to support the technical assessment, solutions evaluation, plan development, and implementation strategy.

2.1. Goal/ Purpose of the Watershed Management Project

The goals/purposes of the WRIA 1Watershed Management Project are defined by the RCW and other legal agreements such as the intergovernmental MOA signed in October 1998. In addition, the local interests and needs of the public participating in the project have also shaped the project goals. As the project evolves and new information is obtained, these interests/needs may be modified. A summary of the public interests is provided in Appendix G.

2.1.1 General Purpose/Goals of the Watershed Management Project

In general, the goal of the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project is to have water of sufficient quantity and quality to meet the needs of current and future human generations, including the restoration of salmon, steelhead, and trout populations to healthy and harvestable levels and the improvement of habitats on which fish rely (9).

2.1.2 Goals of the Watershed Management Project Components

More specifically, the Project will address the following specific goals/purposes for each of the four components identified in the Watershed Management Act and the intergovernmental MOA:

Water Quantity: The goal of the water quantity component is to assess water supply and use and to develop strategies to meet current and future needs (1). The strategies should retain or provide adequate amounts of water to protect and restore fish habitat (9)2, provide water for future out-of-stream uses and to ensure that adequate water supplies are available for agriculture, energy production, and population and economic growth under the requirements of the state's growth management act (1).
Water Quality: The goal of the water quality component is to ensure that the quality of our water is sufficient for current and future uses, including restoring and protecting water quality to meet the needs of salmon and shellfish (9)2, contact recreational uses, cultural uses, protection of wildlife, providing affordable, safe domestic water supplies, and other beneficial uses. The initial objectives of the water quality management strategy will be to meet the water quality standards (3).
Instream Flow: The goal of the instream flow component is to supply water in sufficient quantities to restore salmon, steelhead, and trout populations to healthy and harvestable levels and improve habitats on which fish rely (9)2.
Fish Habitat: The goal of the fish habitat component is to protect or enhance fish habitat in the management area (1) and to restore salmon, steelhead, and trout populations to healthy and harvestable levels and improve habitats on which fish rely (9)2.

The approach used in this project will explicitly recognize that the four project components are interconnected to a high degree. Actions intended to affect change in one component may affect one or more of the components. The approach will capitalize on the interrelationships between the four identified project components by systematically integrating the data collection and analysis efforts. The effort will be coordinated with other resource management efforts such as land use/resource planning, flood management, Salmon Recovery Project (NEAT/2496), and a myriad of other similar efforts.

2.2 Criteria for Evaluating Proposed Solutions

In order to achieve the above goals, the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project will initially develop a watershed management plan that identifies specific actions to address the water resource problems identified. It is anticipated that during the plan development, specific alternatives and recommendations will be considered. Specific criteria will be developed to assist in selecting the best alternatives. The following criteria are provided by the Guidance Manual and should be considered when establishing the criteria:

Effectiveness Criteria

Overall Effectiveness - Among the alternatives considered, which do the best job of addressing the issue at hand?
Cost Effectiveness - Which alternatives deliver "the most bang for the buck", even if they do not completely address the issues of interest?
Flexibility Over Time -Which solutions offer the ability to be readily modified over time, in response to changing conditions and new information?
Potential Side Effects - Do some of the potential solutions appear to create new problems, or exacerbate existing problems?
Equity Considerations-What are the differing effects on various groups and economic activities in the Management Area?

Feasibility Criteria·

Legal Authority - Do the implementing organizations have the authority to implement the proposed solution? If not, can ordinances or rules be adopted to provide that authority?
Approvals/permits - What approvals or permits will be required, especially by organizations not represented on the Planning Unit. Are those approvals or permits likely to be granted?
Cost and Funding Sources -How expensive is each alternative, and who will bear the cost? Will funding sources be available, both in the short-term and long-term?
Administration and Staffing -What organization will administer each solution? Do they have the capabilities to do the job? Will additional staff be required?
Integration with Related Program -How will each solution fit in with related programs and plans?
Acceptability - Are solutions acceptable to participants, elected officials, and key outside organizations (e.g., NMFS)?

Implementation Strategy/Status
A Technical Team will be established to help develop specific criteria.

2.3 Sub-basin Delineation and Prioritization

The Watershed Management Act requires that watershed planning be conducted for management areas consisting of one or more WRIAs. This does not require, however, that equal resources or focus be devoted to all areas within the management area. Within each WRIA, there may be sub-basins that have differing priorities for technical assistance and management actions (7).

The entire WRIA is being evaluated in the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project. Consistent with basic principals of effective watershed management, sub-basins are being delineated within the WRIA. The sub-basins will serve as geographic areas to gather and analyze information, solutions, and management actions. Prioritization of work by sub-basins will be considered as the planning process progresses and more information is obtained.

Many different sub-basin delineations have been completed previously by different organizations and planning efforts in WRIA 1. The USGS is developing a sub-basin map of WRIA 1 as part of their Phase I contract. The USGS delineations will be the foundation for defining appropriate sub-basins. The delineations will allow for changes and flexibility in designations as field verifications are completed and management implications are considered.

Implementation Strategy/Status

A Technical Team has been established to support the sub-basin delineation effort. The Team has developed a detailed work plan with products and a schedule. It is anticipated that a preliminary map will be available by the end of April 2000.

2.4 Linkage/Coordination with Existing and Potential Programs

A critical and required element of the watershed planning effort is to effectively use limited resources. To preclude a "reinvention of the wheel" and to avoid potential conflicts, the project participants will review, build upon, and coordinate with historic and current data, regulations, and programs (1,2). Tracking and providing input to potential new local, state, tribal, or federal regulations and programs that could affect the planning effort will also occur.

Historic, current, and potential new data, regulations, and programs should be considered in order to (7):

Coordinate data collection efforts - data collection is occurring through many different programs. The quality (accuracy) of these data need to be evaluated and this information should be used wherever possible prior to collecting additional data. When additional data are collected, efforts should be made to ensure that all parties needing the data are involved in the design of the data collection efforts and in ensuring that the quality is acceptable for all anticipated uses.
Understand potential constraints on management options that may exist due to local, state, tribal, and federal requirements. The watershed plan developed under the Watershed Management Act does not supersede other federal, tribal, state, or local requirements. However, a well-done watershed plan can provide a framework for federal, tribal, state, or local agencies to modify existing or pending actions.
Coordinate potential funding. In some cases one or more programs may need the same information that is needed for the watershed planning effort. Costs may be significantly reduced by adequate coordination with other programs.
Consider appropriate implementation tools. In some cases, solutions may be best achieved by modifications to existing programs. ·
Determine how to handle proposed new actions that could affect the watershed plan. During the course of the watershed planning effort new local, state, tribal, or federal actions may be proposed. A strategy for ensuring that these potential new actions are coordinated with the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project.

Some examples of the many programs and activities that need to be considered in developing a coordination strategy include: County-wide Planning Policies; Comprehensive Plans; Coordinated Water System Plans; Drinking Water Source Protection Plans; Shoreline Programs; Shellfish Protection Plans; Storm Water Programs; Ground Water Management; education and technical assistance programs, Salmon Recovery Plans; Instream Flow regulations; Critical Area regulations, and Flood Hazard Management Strategies.

Implementation Strategy/Status

Initial efforts were taken in 1999 to develop a strategy to ensure coordination and linkage between programs and actions. These efforts were placed on hold for several months for a number of reasons including pending revisions to the initial draft scope of work and the Whatcom Creek fire. Recently, a group has been meeting to discuss how to best coordinate these efforts. The group is not an official Technical Team under the Watershed Management Project however, their work may be used to help develop a strategy to ensure adequate linkage and coordination.

2.5 Information/ Data Management Program

An important part of the Watershed Management Project is to establish a program to assist in the collection, storage, maintenance, retrieval, analysis, distribution, and display (e.g., maps and charts) of the information obtained. A Geographic Information System (GIS) will be a fundamental tool for organizing and displaying collected data. Additional elements that will be considered in developing the data management program include:

Hardware requirements and availability as in-kind contributions (4)
Software requirements (4)
Staffing needs and availability as in-kind contributions (4)
Techniques for providing remote access via Internet or other means (4)
Quality Assurance/Quality Control · Glossary (5)
Coordination as appropriate with other data bases
Consistency with Ecology requirements as noted in contract (2)

Implementation Strategy/Status

A Data and Information Management Technical Team will be formed to develop a comprehensive strategy to deal with the considerable data that will be compiled, generated, and analyzed in the Watershed Management Project and similar efforts. It will likely be necessary that a designated data management staff person be assigned for this project.

2.6 Public Education/Involvement Program

One of the purposes of the Watershed Management Act is to provide local citizens with the opportunity for maximum possible input concerning their goals and objectives for water resource management and development. (1) In order to achieve this purpose it is necessary to provide a mechanism for citizens to understand the process, translate technical documents into layperson terms, help citizens to understand the complex technical and policy issues that will be addressed through the planning effort, and provide opportunities for meaningful and substantive input. One of those opportunities is through participation on the Planning Unit, but others are needed as well.

In recognition of the critical importance of public involvement and education in the process, the Initiating Governments early in the process endorsed a conceptual plan for public involvement and education (8). The adopted goal of the plan was to:

Provide numerous opportunities for constructive public participation in the Watershed Management Project;
Assist and support the public involvement process under NEPA and SEPA;
Build incremental understanding of issues and throughout each of the phases of the planning process and, through this understanding, foster widespread community understanding of the final watershed management plan.

Implementation Strategy/Status

A technical team was formed during the summer of 1999 to help develop and implement actions related to public involvement and education. The team is developing a long-range plan to meet the goals noted above, however many education/information related actions have been needed in the interim. Some of the interim methods that have been and are being used to meet these goals include:

Establishing and maintaining a Website for the project

Setting up a telephone hotline

Providing support for caucus formation and function

Providing facilitation for the Planning Unit and consistent interaction/communication with the caucuses

Hiring a staff person to provide lead support to the Public Involvement and Education program

Providing monthly public forums (these were placed on hold due to low attendance)

Inviting the public to suggest participants for a 3-day Instream Flow Methods conference, attending the 3-day conference, and providing for public comment on the draft report.

Developing a resource kit on instream flows for the media and general public, holding open houses

Establishing a long-term education plan which includes a needs assessment of the major anticipated audiences (caucuses, general public, decision makers, etc), articulation of educational goals, the development and implementation of audience appropriate educational methods and products, and the use of evaluative tools to measure achievement of the stated educational goals. The long-range plan will also identify other elements of the scope of work where public input is needed, as well as opportunities for general public outreach

2.7 Process Flow Control Protocol

The WRIA 1 watershed planning process, and the implementation of the action elements thereof, shall be executed in a specific sequence of steps that have been established in order to maximize the chances of the plan's success. The sequence embodies and employs the principles of adaptive management. The sequence shall apply to each plan section for each sub-basin and each plan component.

2.7.1 Planning Process Flow Control Protocol

The planning process shall consist of the execution of each task within each section in this Scope of Work, in a sequence to be determined by the decision making logic set forth below. The planning process applies to each plan component (water quantity, water quality, instream flow, and fish habitat) within each sub-basin.

From time to time the planning process will likely be carried on simultaneously within more than one section. The process flow control protocol shall apply independently to each activity within each section; provided, however, that prior to the completion of Section 4.2, Select Best Solutions, all tasks in all prior sections shall be completed.

The planning sequence shall follow the decision making logic below. It is also depicted in the WRIA 1 Watershed Planning Process Flow Sequence diagram (Figure 2).

Update the status of the planning process and collect any relevant new information (upper left box in Figure 2). New information could arise from any or all of the following sources: changes in statutes, contracts, agreements, court cases, initiatives and referenda; new developments in related projects public input; new discoveries from relevant science and engineering fields, including new modeling and simulation methodologies.

If any tasks within the pending section remain incomplete, or need to be updated based upon new information, then the pending section shall be addressed. After completing a section, return to the update (upper left box in Figure 2) process. If it is determined that there is no need to address the pending section, then the same decision making process shall be undertaken for each subsequent section, until Section 5.0, Approval, is reached.

If approval (upper right triangle in Figure 2) is achieved, implementation can begin.If approval is not achieved, return to the update process (upper left box in Figure 2).

2.7.2 Management/Implementation Process Flow Control Protocol

Provisions for adaptive management within the implementation phase (upper right shaded box of Figure 2) are discussed below. Adaptive management provisions are also depicted in the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Process Flow Sequence diagram (Figure 3).

During the implementation phase, for each project within each plan component, the implementing action shall be carried out, meanwhile data will be collected via established monitoring protocols to enable evaluation of the success of the project. The collected data will be analyzed by comparing actual results with expected results for the point in time at which the data are analyzed (middle diamond - "Objectives Achieved" - from Figure 3).

If the comparison is favorable, the project (and data collection) will continue without modification. If the project is failing to achieve its objectives, the question needs to be answered, is the project being done properly, that is, according to the specifications provided in the plan?

If the answer is no, then corrective action shall be taken by the implementing party(ies) to bring actions on the ground in line with project specifications. If the answer is yes, it implies that the project specifications themselves, hence the plan element, has a flaw that shall be corrected by returning to the planning process and amending the plan, based upon the results of the data analysis. The party(ies) responsible for reviewing and amending the plan shall be specified by the plan prior to its completion.

2.7.3. Process Flow Protocols

The intent of these Process Flow Control Protocols and their accompanying diagrams is to portray only general process flow. Specific, detailed process flow control protocols will be established, when and if needed, for particular sections or sub-sections of the planning and/or implementation process.

2.7.4. Implementation Strategy/Status Files

In order to provide a clear and easily accessible record of the progress of each planning activity within each section of this Scope of Work, project managers shall create and maintain files in a suitable and uniform electronic format that describe the current implementation status of each such activity.

2.7.4.1. Content

The content of each such status file shall contain at least the following:

File title: general format: sub-basin xyz water quality planning status.
Project personnel: list manager, other staff, roles; provide hot links to data such as: by whom employed; contact data.
Sub-basin Name, Number (as/if applicable).
Component: (water quantity, water quality, instream flow, fish habitat).
Sub-component: (as/if applicable; example: water rights study).
Sub-sub-component: (as/if applicable; example: paper rights investigation).
Current Status: For each SOW section, sub-section, sub-sub-section, as applicable, display section, sub-section, sub-sub-section number(s) and title(s), pass number (i.e., number of times subject activity has undertaken that Section, sub-section, sub-sub-section); title of activity; product(s) file(s) title, type, hot links to locations (if applicable and appropriate) and contents summary.

2.7.4.2. File Types

There shall be two such file types: Current Files, as described in Section 2.7.4.1, and Archive Files, which shall consist of the accumulation of previous Current Status Files, structured as a Last-in, First Out stack.

2.7.4.3. Implementation Strategy/Status Files Procedure

Each project manager of each planning activity shall update each activity's Current File at least each time one of the sections of this Scope of Work is completed for that activity, and may update the file more often as warranted.
Each time a project manager updates a Current File, authorized personnel shall update the associated Archive File.
In order to provide public access to the implementation status of each planning activity, both the Current and Archive Files will be made accessible on the WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project web site.

Back to Wria1 Project Documents Page