027-21 - Resolution - Washington State Dept. of Ecology's Water Restoration Draft PlanRESOLUTION NO. O27-2L
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, APPROVING
THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY'S WATER RESTORATION
AND ENHANCEMENT DRAFT PIAN FOR WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY AREA
15.
WHEREAS, since 2018, the City of Port Orchard's Public Works Staff have been actively
participating in the Water Resource lnventory Area (WRIA) 15 Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Com mittee (Committee); and
WHEREAS, the Committee was formed in response to state legislative action in January
20t8, which directed the Washington State Department of Ecology to develop Watershed
Restoration and Enhancement Plans for several WRIA's within Washington by June 30, 2O2L,
that will provide regulation for'non-permitted'or'permit-exempt domestic' wells, which have
proliferated in many areas and have been largely unregulated; and
WHEREAS, the Plans are intended to provide regulatory sideboards for permit-exempt
well withdrawals within each WRIA, providing an ecological benefit to each watershed by
ensuring that the water withdrawn from the watershed is offset by water returning; and
WHEREAS, the Committee, with the City's contributions, recently completed the
preparation of the Plan for WRIA 15, which: 1) sets the number of permit exempt wells that can
be expected in Kitsap County in areas not within a GMA area or a water system service area
(i.e., outside of the City of Port Orchard and other cities in the County), and 2) sets the amount
of water expected to be used by these exempt wells less the amount reintroduced to the
aquifers via septic systems (termed consumptive use in the documents); and
WHEREAS, in conformance with RCW 90.94.030, the Committee has requested that
each participating agency "approve" of the draft Plan prior to final adoption by the Department
of Ecology (which must occur by June 2O2L); and
WHEREAS, the Plan was discussed at both the Utility Committee and Land Use
Committee in February 2OZL, and at the March L6,2021, Work Study Session; now, therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ORCHARD, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES
AS FOLLOWS:
THAT: lt is the intent of the Port Orchard City Council that the recitals set forth above
are hereby adopted and incorporated as findings in support of this Resolution.
THAT: The City Council approves the Washington State Department of Ecology's
Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Draft Plan for WRIA 1-5, Kitsap Watershed
(Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.)
Resolution No. O27-2t
Page 2 of 2t
THAT: The Resolution shall take full force and effect upon passage and signatures
hereon.
PASSED bythe City Council of the City of Port Orchard, SIGNED bythe Mayor and attested
by the Clerk in authentication of such passage this 13th day of April2O2L.
Robert Putaansuu, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brandy nearson,MMC, City Clerk
Exhibit A to Resolution No. 027-21,
Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Draft Plan
WRIA 15
Kitsap Watershed
February 1",2O2L
FINAL DRAFT PLAN FOR LOCAT REVIEW
DEPARTMENT OI.
ECOLOGY
State of Washlngton
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
Publication lnformation
This document is available on the Department of Ecology's website at:
https://ecolosv.wa.eov/Water-Shorelines/Water-su pplv/Strea mflow-restoration/Strea mflow-
restoration-pla n ning
Cover photo credit
o Curley Creek Courtesy of Kenna Cox
Gontact lnformation
Water Resources Program
Address: 3190 160th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA 98008
Phone: 425-649-7000
Websitel: Washinston State Department of Ecolosv
ADA Accessibility
The Department of Ecology is committed to providing people with disabilities access to
information and services by meeting or exceeding the requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Washington State
Policy #L88. To request an ADA accommodation, contact Ecology by phone at 360-407-6872 or
email at WRpubs@ecy.wa.gov. For Washington Relay Service or TTY callTLt or 877-833-634L.
Language Access
The Department of Ecology offers free language services about our programs and services for
people whose primary language is not English. We can provide information written in your
preferred language and qualified interpreters over the telephone. To request these services, or
to learn more about what we can provide, contact our Language Access Coordinators by phone
at 360-407-6L77 or email at millie.oiazza@ecv.wa.sov. When you call, please allow a few
moments for us to contact an interpreter. Visit Ecology's website for more information.
I www.ecology.wa.gov/contact
WRIA 15 - FINAL DRAFT PLAN
February 2021-Page ii
WRIA 1.5 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
Acronyms
Acronym Definition
AE Application Efficiency
AF/yr Acre-Feet per Year
CFS Cubic Feet per Second
CU Consumptive Use
CUF Consumptive Use Factor
GPD Gallons per Day
GIS Geographic Information System
IR Irrigation Requirements
LID Low Impact Development
LIO Local Integrating Organization
MAR Managed Aquifer Recharge
NEB Net Ecological Benefit
PE Permit-Exempt
RCW Revised Code of Washinglon
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WRIA Water Resource Inventory Areas
WRIA 15 - FINAL DRAFT PLAN
February 2021Page vii
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
Acknowledgements
This watershed plan was written as a collaboration between the Department of Ecology, the
WRIA L5 Committee, and the technical consultants. We express our sincere gratitude to those
that supported the development of the plan and supplemental materials.
WRIA 15 - FINAL DRAFT PLAN
February 2021Page viii
WRIA 1-5 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
WRIA 15 Committee Members - Primary
Representatives and Alternates
Dave Ward, Kitsap County
David Nash1, Kitsap County
Kathy Peters, Kitsap County
Commissioner Randy Neatherlin, Mason County
David Windom, Mason County
Dan Cardwell, Pierce County
Austin Jennings, Pierce County
Greg Rabourn, King County
Joe Hovencotter, King County
Eric Ferguson, King County
David Winfrey, Puyallup Tribe
Seth Book, Skokomish Tribe
Dana Sarff, Skokomish Tribe
Jeff Dickison, Squaxin lsland Tribe
Paul Pickett, Squaxin lsland Tribe
Erica Marbet, Squaxin lsland Tribe
Leonard Forsman, Suquamish Tribe
Alison O'Sullivan, Suquamish Tribe
Sam Phillips, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe
Paul McCollum, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe
Jacki Brown, City of Port Orchard
Thomas Hunter2, City of Port Orchard
Zach Holt, City of Port Orchard
Trent Ward, City of Gig Harbor
Brienn Ellis, City of Gig Harbor
Michael Michael, City of Bainbridge lsland
Christian Berg, City of Bainbridge lsland
Christy Carr2, City of Bainbridge lsland
Teresa Smith, City of Bremerton
Allison Satter, City of Bremerton
Mayor Becky Erikson3, City of Poulsbo
Joel Purdy, Kitsap Public Utility District
Mark Morgan, Kitsap Public Utility District
Bob Hunter, Kitsap Public Utility District
Brittany Gordon, Department of Fish and Wildlife
Nam Siu, Department of Fish and Wildlife
Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Department of Ecology
Russ Shiplet, Kitsap Building Association
Josie Cummings, Building lndustry Association of
Washington
Joy Garitone, Kitsap Conservation District
Nathan Daniel, Great Peninsula Conservancy
Sandra Staples-Bortner2, Great Peninsula
Conservancy
Larry Boltz, Mason Kitsap Farm Bureau (ex officio)
Shawn O'Dell, Washington Water Service (ex officio)
WRIA 15 Technical Consultant Team
Bob Montgomery, Anchor QEA
Burt Clothier, Pacific Groundwater Group
Chad Wiseman, HDR
HDR, Pacific Groundwater Group and Anchor QEA
Support Staff
Facilitation Team
Susan Gulick, Sound Resolutions
Angela Pietschmann, Cascadia Consulting
Additional support from Cascadia Consulting Staff
Department of Ecology Staff
Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Chair
John Covert, Lead Technical Support
Paulina Levy, Committee and Plan Development
Support
Stephanie Potts, WRIA 15 Alternate Chair
Ria Berns, Regional Section Manager
Bennett Weinstein, Streamflow Section Manager
M ugdha Flores, Strea mf low Commu nications Lead
Streamflow Section Technical Staff
Northwest Region Water Resources Section
WRIA 15 - FINAL DRAFT PLAN
February 2021Page ix
WRIA ]-5 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
Project Workgroup
Joy Garitone and Brian Stahl, Kitsap Conservation
District
Jon Turk, Aspect (Consultant to Skokomish Tribe)
Joel Massman, Keta Waters (Consultant to
Suquamish Tribe)
Alison O'Sullivan and John O'Leary2, Suquamish Tribe
Austin Jennings and Dan Cardwell, Pierce County
Brittany Gordon and Nam Siu, Department of Fish
and Wildlife
David Nashl and Kathy Peters, Kitsap County
David Windom, Mason County
Paul Pickett, Squaxin lsland Tribe
Sam Phillips, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe
Thomas Hunter2 and Zach Holt, City of Port Orchard
Brenda Padgham, Bainbridge lsland Land Trust
Greg Rabourn, King County
Seth Book and Dana Sarff, Skokomish Tribe
Bob Montgomery, Anchor QEA
Burt Clothier, Pacific Groundwater Group
Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Department of Ecology
Erik Steffens, Great Peninsula Conservancy
Joel Purdy, Kitsap Public Utility District
Technical Workgroup
Eric Ferguson, King County
Jon Turk, Aspect (Consultant to Skokomish Tribe)
Joel Massman, Keta Waters (Consultant to
Suquamish Tribe)
Alison O'Sullivan and John O'Leary2, Suquamish Tribe
Austin Jennings and Dan Cardwell, Pierce County
Brittany Gordon and Nam Siu, Department of Fish
and Wildlife
David Nash1, Kitsap County
David Windom, Mason County
Paul Pickett, Squaxin lsland Tribe
Sam Phillips, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe
Thomas Hunter2 and Zach Holt, City of Port Orchard
Joel Purdy and Bob Hunter, Kitsap Public Utility
District
Bob Montgomery, Anchor QEA
Burt Clothier, Pacific Groundwater Group
Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Department of Ecology
Thank you to the Committee members that
participated in short-term, ad hoc
workgroups.
Thank you also to Tribal, city and county
staff, Kitsap Public Health District, and USGS
for providing resources and presentations
throughout this process.
lDavid Nash, formerly with Kitsap County, is now
deceased.
,No longer at entity,
3withdrew from Committee.
WRIA 15 - FINAL DRAFT PLAN
February 2021Page x
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
Executive Summary
ln January 2018, the Washington State Legislature passed the Streamflow Restoration law (RCW
90.94) to help support robust, healthy, and sustainable salmon populations while ensuring rural
communities have access to water. The law, as interpreted by the Department of Ecology
(Ecology), directs Ecology to lead local planning Committees to develop Watershed Restoration
and Enhancement Plans that identify projects to offset potential consumptive impacts of new
permit-exempt domestic groundwater withdrawals on instream flows over the next 20 years
(2018 - 2038) and provide a net ecological benefit to the watershed. While not all members of
the WRIA 15 Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee agreed with Ecology's
interpretations of the law, this Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Plan was written to
meet the guidance and policy interpretations as provided by Ecology.2
Ecology established the Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee to collaborate
with tribes, counties, cities, state agencies, and special interest groups in the Kitsap watershed,
also known as Water Resource lnventory Area (WRIA) L5. The WRIA L5 Committee met for two
and a half years to develop a watershed plan.
To allow for meaningful analysis of the relationship between new consumptive use and offsets,
the WRIA 15 Committee divided the watershed into seven subbasins. Subbasins help describe
the location and timing of projected new consumptive water use, the location and timing of
impacts to instream resources, and the necessary scope, scale, and anticipated benefits of
projects.
This watershed plan projects 5,568 permit exempt (PE)well connections over the 20-year
planning horizon. lf implemented as intended, the projects and policy recommendations in this
watershed plan can offset the consumptive water use from those 5,568 PE well connections.
The projected new consumptive water use associated with the new PE well connections is
766.4 acre-feet per year (1.06 cubic feet per second [cfs] or 684,1-50 gallons per day [epd]) in
WRIA 15, equal to L23 gpd per PE well connection. This watershed plan also sets an offset
target of L,2L8 acre-feet per year (equivalent to I77 gpd per connection) for project
implementation in order to benefit streams. That target is based upon a consumptive use of
195 gpd per PE well connection which equals 1.68 cfs and 1.087 million gallons per day.
This watershed plan includes projects that, if implemented as intended, provide an anticipated
offset of L,O66.7 acre-feet per year to benefit streamflows and enhance the watershed. The
WRIA L5 Committee set a goal of offsetting consumptive use estimates within each subbasin
and agreed that offsets should be as close to impacts as feasible. This plan falls short of the
WRIA 15 Committee's goal of meeting the offset need by subbasin (consumptive use is offset in
5 of 7 subbasins and the higher offset target is reached in 2 of 7 subbasins).
2 Some members of the WRIA l5 Cornmittee have different interpretation of RCW 90.94.030. Signing statements
and other documents provided in the Compendium provide more information on their interpretations.
WRIA L5 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 202LPage xi
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
Table ES-l presents a summary of the anticipated impacts and benefits by subbasin. Additional
projects in the plan include benefits to fish and wildlife habitat, such as several thousand feet of
streambed improvements, dozens of acres of restoration and protection, and many miles of
riparian restoration across WRIA 15.
Table ES-1: Consumptive Use and Project Benefits by Subbasin
Subbasin Consumptive
Use Estimate
(acre feet per
year)
Higher Offset
Target (acre
feet per year)
Offset Benefits
from Projects
(acre feet per
year)
Additional Benefits from Projects
North Hood
Canal
90.3 136.5 264 Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, protection and
restoration of habitat for fish
critical streams. Over 1,600 feet of
stream restoration are included
along with over ten acres of
habitat restoration.
West
Sound
183.9 277.9 36s Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, protection a nd
restoration of habitat for fish
critical streams. Projects include
over 2800 feet of stream
restoration, riparian restoration,
over 100 acres of land protection,
and over l-40 acres of habitat
restoration.
South Hood
Canal
155.0 223.4 13L Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, protection and
restoration of habitat for fish
critical streams. This subbasin
includes projects that will repair up
to three miles of riparian area.
Bainbridge
lsland
67.6 t02.2 68.2 Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, protection and
restoration of habitat for fish
critical streams.
Vashon-
Maury
lsland
50.7 72.9 56 Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, water rights
and land acquisition.
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021Page xii
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
To increase reasonable assurance of plan implementation and track progress, this watershed
plan includes policy and regulatory recommendations and an adaptive management process.
The 1-1 policy and regulatory recommendations are included to contribute to the goals of this
watershed plan, including streamflow restoration and meeting net ecological benefit. These
recommendations enhance water conservation efforts; improve research, monitoring, and data
collection; support beaver habitat conservation; plan for better drought response; and finance
plan implementation. The watershed plan describes an adaptive management approach, which
identifies (1) an ongoing implementation group and lead organization to support watershed
plan implementation, (2) a tracking and reporting structure to assess progress and adjust as
needed, and (3) a funding mechanism to adaptively manage implementation. Adaptive
management will be necessary to achieve the goal of meeting offset needs within each
subbasin and improving streamflow where this watershed plan currently falls short, through
the identification, development and implementation of projects throughout WRIA 15.
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021
Subbasin Consumptive
Use Estimate
(acre feet per
year)
Higher Offset
Target (acre
feet per year)
Offset Benefits
from Projects
(acre feet per
year)
Additional Benefits from Projects
South
Sound
2r3.8 394.6 175.5 Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, protection and
restoration of habitat for fish
critical streams. Projects include
up to nine miles of riparian
restoration.
South
Sound
lslands
5.2 7L,I 7 Projects would provide direct
streamflow benefit, protection and
restoration of habitat for fish
criticalstreams.
Totals 766.4 1218.7 1066.7
Page xiii
WRIA 1-5 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
I r,rnraAourlsry El F.rservatFn Lsnd
[--] a,our*n ;l_- ; co''rr
d flqtcld tuor{snp C!.r4d!.15 (n$s,
f I Coruprnr llre Ert[* / Ottot greo Sstrls '! '}rftdt , ,i!i!' Ofrd tf4rr /'Olra tdrtt 3i!rr tr ArLL,
FroFgl Eub0ornt.t
M8nagodAqudrr Rrfia{t
tJor$rroodcrn J
6i9 r,i0!
WI'FY .lnNrY
t3l aFf . t2rEv
C.ommunly Fora$
ll.ttsr Rtlrl.^o4lrrlllorti
R|Jrgarllor
th.llCr.cl Frrr
lmplBvaln!r!a
lllbl,0l trnpro€rianl
Aoleclg
Oordr tlootculo,t,tt8$illbrStraY -la,ruFy
??1^it.naFv
t{erlh tbod Crn l So$n }raod C{nd.
t btt ggutB.8r'rofl.rlN ld.nd
Vlrhor tllrat gar$S.um
A!
8iilbndg. rtLrd t/8rion Maury
Horlh tbod Ctn$ Soulh ltood C.hrt
tibrt 300fi1. g.tr0.i(l!lc rlsnd.
\bdron [leu'y. Sfir$ Souno
\h*ron M.6ry
AI
SoourSot ndr,092llilb
?..AE\/ _t Nry3tiAFt .2t0Ey
8dnlrr{ttr
Srbndgt6 16l|
68.4r:/ . tiFY
la) Ai.t . xasf
llb{t Sodrdt,rolrn|t
ta,A. Y . ttlAFY
t't' 4"v o 8l AF\l
ttt on. ill.o.yr.,hrNdl0ll urt'r.
5i tFY +5414
ITAFY.]|'FY
A
luoralilelrrdAndrrrorun Et,(.Dar&lrfd
36 trNlh
5tFY -|tFV
II
^FV
.'AFY
Figure ES 1: Summary of findings of the WRIA 15 Watershed Restoration and Enhancement
Plan, including estimates for new domestic PE well growth, consumptive use estimates, and
project offset benefits. Map prepared by HDR.
WRIA L5 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021Page xiv
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
Ghapter 1 - Plan Overview
1.1 WRIA 15 Watershed Plan Purpose and Structure
The purpose of the Water Resource lnventory Area (WRIA) 1-5 Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Plan is to identify projects and actions intended to offsetthe impacts of new
domestic permit-exempt (PE) wells to streamflows. The Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Plan is one requirement of RCW 90.94.030. Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Plans must identify projects to offset the projected consumptive impacts of new
PE domestic groundwater withdrawals on instream flows over 20 years (2018-2038) and
provide a net ecological benefit (NEB) to the WRIA. The WRIA 1-5 Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Plan (watershed plan) considers priorities for salmon recovery and watershed
recovery, while ensuring it meets the intent of the law, as interpreted by Ecology.3
While not all members of the WRIA 15 Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee
(Committee) agree with the Department of Ecology's (Ecology) interpretations of the law, this
watershed plan was written to meet the guidance and policy interpretations as provided by
Ecology. References to meeting the requirements of the law throughout this plan refer to
Ecology's interpretation of the law and may not encompassthe interpretations held by all
members of the WRIA 15 Committee.
Pumping from wells can reduce groundwater discharge to springs and streams by capturing
water that would otherwise have discharged naturally, thereby reducing flows (Barlow and
Leake 2OL2). Consumptive water use (the portion not returned tothe aquifer)reduces
streamflow, both seasonally and as average annual recharge. A well pumping from an aquifer
connected to a surface water body can either reduce the quantity of water discharging to the
river or increase the quantity of water leaking out of the river (Barlow and Leake 2072).
While this watershed plan is narrow in scope and not intended to address all water uses or
related issues within the watershed, it may provide a path forward for future water resource
planning.
[Language to be included when appropriate]:The Committee, by completing the watershed
plan, has developed, and come to consensus on, a technically and politically complex issue in
water resource management. That success will set the stage for improved coordination of
water resources and overall watershed health in our WRIA.
This watershed plan includes seven chapters:
1. Plan overview;
2. Overview of the watershed's hydrology, hydrogeology, and streamflow;
3 Some members of the WRIA l5 Committee have different interpretation of RCW 90.94.030. Signing statements
and other documents provided in the Compendiurn provide more information on their interpretations.
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2O2IPage 1"
WRIA 1-5 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
3. Summary of the subbasins;
4. Growth projections and consumptive use estimates;
5. Description of the recommended projects to offset the future PE domestic water use in
WRIA 15 and meet NEB;
6. Explanation of recommended policy, monitoring, adaptive management, and
implementation measures; and
7. Evaluation and consideration of the NEB.
1.1.1 Legal and Regulatory Background for the WRIA 15 Watershed
Restoration and Enhancement Plan
ln January 20L8, the Washington State Legislature passed Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill
(ESSB) 6091- (session law 2018 c l-). This law was enacted in response to the State Supreme
Court's 2016 decision in Whatcom County vs. Hirst, Futurewise, et al. (commonly referred to as
the "Hirst decision"). As it relates to this Committee's work, the law, now primarily codified as
RCW 90.94, clarifies how local governments can issue building permits or approve subdivisions
for homes intending to use a PE well for their domestic water supply. The law also requires local
watershed planning in fifteen WRIAs across the state, including WRIA 15.4
1.1.2 Domestic Permit-Exempt Wells
This watershed plan, the law that calls for it, and the Hirst decision are all concerned with the
effects of new domestic PE water use on streamflows. Several laws pertain to the management
of groundwater PE wells in WRIA 15 and are summarized in brief here for the purpose of
providing context for the WRIA 15 watershed plan.
Washington State follows the doctrine of prior appropriation, which means that the first users
have rights senior to those issued later. This doctrine is called "first in time, first in right." lf a
water shortage occurs, senior rights are satisfied first and junior rights are curtailed. Seniority is
established by priority date - the original date a water right application Was filed, or the date
that water was first put to beneficial use in the case of claims and the groundwater permit
exemption. Although groundwater PE uses do not require a water right permit, they are always
subject to state water law. ln some instances, Ecology has had to regulate PE water users when
they interfere with older, "senior" water rights, including instream flow rules. More information
is available on Ecology's website: https://ecolosv.wa.eov/Water-Shorelines/Water-
su pplv/Water-availa bilitv.
4 ESSB 6091 includes the following: "AN ACT Relating to ensuring that water is available to support
development; amending RCW 19.27.097, 58.17.110, 90.03.247, and 90.03.290; adding a new section to
chapter 36.70A RCII; adding a new section to chapter 36.70 RCW; adding a new chapter to Title 90
RCW; creating a new section; providing an expiration date; and declaring an emergency." (p. 1)
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2O2tPage 2
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
RCW 90.44.050, commonly referred to as "the Groundwater Permit Exemption," establishes
that certain small withdrawals of groundwater are exempt from the state's water right
permitting requirements, including small indoor and outdoor water use associated with homes.
Although these withdrawals do not require a state water right permit, the water right is still
legally established by the beneficial use. Even though a water right permit is not required for
small domestic uses under RCW 90.44.050, there is still regulatory oversight, including from
local jurisdictions. Specifically, in order for an applicant to receive a building permit from their
local government for a new home, the applicant must satisfy the provisions of RCW 19.27.O97
for what constitutes evidence of an adequate water supply.
RCW 90.94.030 adds to the management regime for new homes using domestic PE well
withdrawals in WRIA 15 and elsewhere. For example, local governments must, among other
responsibilities relating to new PE domestic wells, collect a 5500 fee for each building permit
and record withdrawal restrictions on the title of the affected properties. Additionally, this law
restricts new PE domestic withdrawals in WRIA 15 to a maximum annual average of up to 950
gallons per days (gpd) per connection, subject to the 5,000 gpd and lz-acre outdoor irrigation of
non-commercial lawn/garden limits established in RCW 90.44.050. Ecology has published its
interpretation and implementation of RCW 19.27.097 and RCW 90.94 in Water Resources POL
2094 (Ecology 20L9a). For additional information, readers can review those laws and policy for
com prehensive details a nd agency interpretations.
1.1.3 Planning Requirements Under RCW 90.94.030
While supplementing the local building permit requirements, RCW 90.94.030(3)goes on to
establish planning criteria for WRIA 15. ln doing so, it sets the minimum standard of Ecology's
collaboration with the WRIA l-5 Committee in the preparation of this watershed plan. ln
practice, the process of plan development was one of broad integration, collectively shared
work, and a striving for consensus described in the Committee's adopted operating principles,
which are further discussed below.
ln addition to these procedural requirements, the law (and consequently, this watershed plan)
is concerned with the identification of projects and actions intended to offset the anticipated
impacts from new PE domestic groundwater withdrawals over the next 20 years and provide a
NEB.s ln establishing the primary purpose of this watershed plan, RCW 90.94.030 (3) also
details both the required and recommended plan elements. Regarding the WRIA 1"5
Committee's approach to selecting projects and actions, the law also speaks to "high and lower
priority projects." The Committee understands that, as provided in the Final Guidance on
Determining Net Ecological Benefit (Ecology 2019b), "use of these terms is not the sole critical
factor in determining whether a plan achieves a NEB... and that plan development should be
5 The planning horizon for achieving a NEB is the 20 year period beginning with January 19, 2018 and
ending on January 18, 2038. The planning horizon only applies to determining which new consumptive
water uses the plan must address under the law. The projects and actions required to offset the new uses
must continue beyond the 2)-year period and for as long as new well pumping continues. (Ecology
2019b;page7)
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021Page 3
WRIA 1-5 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
focused on developing projects that provide the most benefits... regardless of how they align
with [these] labels" (page 12). For WRIA 15, this watershed plan recognizes the goal of
protecting water quantity as the primary component of habitat for fish populations and aquatic
life. ln order to provide a benefit to the greatest length of stream channel, the highest priority
projects are those in that provide protection or restoration of headwater streamflows.
1.2 Requirements of the WRIA 15 Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Plan
Streamflow Restoration law RCW 90.94.030(3)
(b) At a minimum, the plan must include those actions
that the committee determines to be necessary to
offset potential impacts to instream flows associated
with permit-exempt domestic water use. The highest
priority recommendations must include replacing the
quantity of consumptive water use during the same
time as the impact and in the same basin or tributary.
Lower priority projects include projects not in the same
basin or tributary and projects that replace
consumptive water supply impacts only during critical
flow periods. The plan may include projects that
protect or improve instream resources without
replacing the consumptive quantity of water where
such projects are in addition to those actions that the
committee determines to be necessary to offset
potential consumptive impacts to instream flows
associated with permit-exempt domestic water use.
(c) Prior to adoption of the watershed restoration and
enhancement plan, the department must determine
that actions identified in the plan, after accounting for
new projected uses of water over the subsequent
twenty years, will result in a net ecological benefit to
instream resources within the water resource inventory
a rea,
(d) The watershed restoration and enhancement plan
must include an evaluation or estimation of the cost of
offsetting new domestic water uses over the
subsequent twenty years, including withdrawals
exempt from permitting under RCW 90.44.050.
(e) The watershed restoration and enhancement plan
must include estimates of the cumulative consumptive
water use impacts over the subsequent twenty years,
including withdrawals exempt from permitting under
RCW 90.44.050.
RCW 90.94.030 of the Streamflow
Restoration law directs Ecology to
establish a Watershed Restoration and
Enhancement Committee in the Kitsap
watershed and develop a watershed plan
in collaboration with the WRIA L5
Committee. Ecology determined that the
intent was best served through collective
development of the watershed plan, using
an open and transparent setting and
process that builds on local needs.
At a minimum, the watershed plan must
include projects and actions necessary to
offset projected consumptive impacts of
new PE domestic groundwater
withdrawals on streamflows and provide
a NEB to the WRIA.
Ecology issued the Streamflow
Restoration Policy and lnterpretive
Statement (POL-2094) and Final Guidance
on Determining Net Ecological Benefit
(GUID-2094) in July 2019 to ensure
consistency, conformity with state law,
and transparency in implementing RCW
90.94. The Final Guidance on Determining
Net Ecological Benefit (hereafter referred
to as Final NEB Guidance) establishes
Ecology's interpretation of the term "net
ecological benefit," lt also informs
planning groups on the standards Ecology
will apply when reviewing a watershed
plan completed under RCW 90.94.020 or
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021Page 4
WRIA 1-5 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
RCW 90.94,030. The minimum planning requirements described by Ecology in the Final NEB
Guidance include the following (pages 7-B):
L. Clear and Systemic Logic. Watershed plans must be prepared with implementation in
mind.
2. Delineate Subbasins. [The Committee] must divide the WRIA into suitably sized
subbasins to allow meaningful analysis of the relationship between new consumptive
use and offsets.
3. Estimate New Consumptive Water Uses. Watershed plans must include a new
consumptive water use estimate for each subbasin and the technical basis for such
estimate.
4. Evaluate lmpacts from New Consumptive Water Use. Watershed plans must consider
both the estimated quantity of new consumptive water use from new domestic PE wells
initiated within the planning horizon and how those impacts will be distributed.
5. Describe and Evaluate Projects and Actions for Their Offset Potential. At a minimum,
watershed plans must identify projects and actions intended to offset impacts
associated with new consumptive water use. Offset benefits must continue as long as
the anticipated consumptive use impacts, which are assumed to be in perpetuity.
The WRIA 15 Committee prepared the WRIA l-5 watershed plan with the intent that the plan,
including all projects, is fully implemented. The law requires that all members of the Committee
approve the plan prior to submission to Ecology for review. Ecology must then determine that
the plan's recommended streamflow restoration projects and actions will result in a NEB to
instream resources within the WRIA after accounting for projected use of new PE domestic
wells over the 20-year period of 20L8-2038.
RCW 90.94.030 (6). This section [90.94.030] only applies to new domestic groundwater
withdrawals exempt from permitting under RCW 90.44.050 in the following water resource
inventory areas with instream flow rules adopted under chapters 90.22 and 90.54 RCW that do
not explicitly regulate PE groundwater withdrawals: 7 (Snohomish); 8 (Cedar-Sammamish); 9
(Duwamish-Green); 10 (Puyallup-White); 12 (Chambers-Clover); 13 (Deschutes); L4 (Kennedy
Goldsborough); and 15 (Kitsap) and does not restrict the withdrawal of groundwater for other
uses that are exempt from permitting under RCW 99.44.050.
1.3 Overview of the WRIA 15 Committee
1.3.1 Formation
The Streamflow Restoration law instructed Ecology to chair the WRIA L5 Committee, and invite
representatives from the following entities in the watershed to participate in the development
of the watershed plan:
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 202LPage 5
WRIA ].5 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
Each federally recognized tribal government with reservation land or usual and
accustomed harvest area within the WRIA.
o
o
a
a
Each county government within the WRIA.
Each city government within the WRIA.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
The largest publicly owned water purveyor providing water within the WRIA that is not a
municipality.
The largest irrigation district within the WRIA.
Ecology sent invitation letters to each of the entities named in the law in September of 201-8
Note that WRIA 15 does not have an irrigation district.
The law also required Ecology to invite local organizations representing agricultural interests,
environmental interests, and the residential construction industry. Businesses, environmental
groups, agricultural organizations, conservation districts, and localgovernments nominated
interest group representatives. Local governments on the WRIA L5 Committee voted on the
nominees in order to select local organizations to represent agricultural interests,
environmental interests, and the residential construction industry. Ecology invited the selected
entities to participate on the Committee.
Committee members are listed in Table l-. This list includes all of the members identified by the
Legislature that agreed to participate on the WRIA 15 Committee.6
Table 1:WRIA 15 Committee Participating Entities
6 All participating entities committed to participate in the process and designated representatives and
alternates to sit on the WRIA 15 Committee. A roster with the names of the representatives is available in
Appendix A. The City of Poulsbo originally participated in the process but withdrew from the Committee
in October 2020.
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021
o
a
Entity Name Representing
Kitsap County County government
King County County government
Mason County County government
Pierce County County government
Puyallup Tribe Tribalgovernment
Skokomish Tribe Tribalgovernment
Squaxin lsland Tribe Tribal government
Suquamish Tribe Tribal government
Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Tribalgovernment
Page 6
Entity Name Representing
City of Port Orchard City government
City of Bremerton City government
Citv of Gis Harbor CitV government
City of Bainbridge lsland City government
Kitsap Public Utility District Water utility
Department of Fish and Wildlife State agency
Department of Ecology State agencV
Kitsap Buildine Association Residential construction industry
Kitsa p Conservation District Agricultura I interest group
Great Peninsula Conserva ncy Environmental interest group
Mason-Kitsap Farm Bureau - ex officio Self
Washington Water Service - ex officio Self
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
The WRIA L5 Committee invited the Mason-Kitsap Farm Bureau and the Washington Water
Service to participate as "ex-officio" members. Although not identified in the law, the ex-officio
members provide valuable information and perspective as subject matter experts. The ex-
officio members are active but non-voting participants of the WRIA L5 Committee.
The law does not identify a role for the Committee following development of the watershed
plan.
1.3.2 Committee Structure and Decision Making
The WRIA L5 Committee held its first meeting in October 2018. Between October 2018 and
January 2O2L,the WRIA 15 Committee held 28 Committee meetings.T All Committee and
workgroup meetings were open to the public. The WRIA 15 Committee met monthly and as
needed to meet deadlines. From March 2020 through April 2O21,,the Committee met virtually
due to the global pandemic.
The two and a half years of planning consisted of training, research, and developing watershed
plan components. Ecology technical staff, WRIA 15 Committee members, and partners
presented on topics to provide context for components of the plan, such as an overview of
WRIA 15 hydrogeology, water law, tribaltreaty rights, salmon recovery, and local planning
processes.
Ecology staff chaired the WRIA 15 Committee and provided administrative support and
technical assistance. Ecology contracted with consultants to provide facilitation and technical
support for the Committee. The facilitator supported the Committee's discussions and decision-
making and coordinated recommendations for policy change and adaptive management. The
technical consultants developed products that informed Committee decisions and development
7 This includes regular Committee meetings and special Committee meetings where most representatives attended.
This does not include project workgroup, technical workgroup, or one-time workgroup meetings.
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 202LPage 7
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN - FINAL DRAFT
of the plan. Examples include working with counties on growth projections, calculating
consumptive use using multiple methods, preparing maps and other tools to support decisions,
and researching project ideas. The technical consultants brought a range of expertise to the
Committee including hydrogeology, geographic information system (GlS) analysis, fish biology,
engineering, and planning. The technical consultants developed the technical memorandums
referenced throughout this watershed plan.
The WRIA 1-5 Committee established two workgroups to support planning efforts and to
achieve specific tasks:
o The TechnicalWorkgroup focused on preparing recommendations for PE well
projections and consumptive use estimates.
e The Project Workgroup focused on developing and reviewing projects within the
Committee's project inventory (additional workgroups that met only one time covered
topics such as beaver management, policies, and adaptive management).
The workgroups were open to all WRIA L5 Committee members as well as non-Committee
members that brought capacity or expertise not available on the Committee. The workgroups
made no binding decisions but presented information to the Committee as either
recommendations or findings. The Committee acted on workgroup recommendations, as
deemed appropriate.
During the initial WRIA 15 Committee meetings, members developed and agreed to operating
principles.s The operating principles established a process for meetings, participation
expectations, procedures for voting, structure of the Committee, communication, and other
needs in order to support the Committee in reaching consensus on a final plan.
By statutory design, this planning process brought a diversity of perspectives to the table.
Therefore, it was important for the Committee to identify a clear decision-making process. The
WRIA L5 Committee strived for consensus, and when consensus could not be reached, the chair
and facilitator documented the Committee members' positions. The Committee strived for
consensus because the authorizing legislation requires that all members of the Committee
approve the final watershed plan prior to Ecology's review (RCW 90.94.030[3] "...all members
of a Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Committee must approve the plan prior to
adoption"). Therefore, consensus on the foundational decisions during plan development
served as the best indicators of the Committee's progress toward an approved plan.
All consensus and dissenting opinions were documented in meeting summaries that were
reviewed and agreed upon by the Committee. The Committee recognized that flexibility was
needed in terms of timeline, and if a compromise failed to reach consensus within the
identified timeline, the Committee agreed to allow the process for developing the plan to move
8 Complete operating principles can be found on the WRIA l5 Committee EZ View webpage and in Appendix B:
https://www.ezview.wa.gov/site/alias_1962137327lwatershed restoration_and_enhancement--_wria 15.aspx
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 2021Page 8
WRIA 15 WATERSHED PLAN _ FINAL DRAFT
forward while the work towards consensus continued. The Committee agreed to revisit
decisions where consensus was not reached.
WRIA 15 - Final Draft Watershed Plan
February 202IPage 9